Accusations were made–many without evidence–against Dr. Vinay Prasad, as part of a campaign against him speaking at a conference. It took less than a day for his invitation to be rescinded.
Im a Zweig and Prasad groupee. Anyone that is a sincere truth seeker, no matter where it may lead has my unwavering support. Prasad will be victorious. This is a long game, afterall.
There's a powerful memetic conflict between Prasad, who demands evidence, especially careful evidence in the form of empirical trials, and his critics, who are largely authority-driven. Welcome to the world of deep memetic conflict. When you allow evidence to speak more loudly than the boss, you are asking for a large shift in social structure. And that never goes down easily with the folks in charge, OR their minions.
This is as unconscionable an action as I have ever seen. We should find some members of this organization and see if a mass resignation can be promoted. This is so low as to be unforgivable, really.
Prasad, for all of his flaws, has been one of the rare truth speakers/truth seekers during this entire mess that has managed to not be suppressed like this. UCSF deserves many kudos for not doing so...it is out of character for them, but hooray anyway. But he deserves accolades for often standing alone against impossible pushback...not opprobrium for being right and irritating some shrieking harridans who would not recognize right if it hit them over the head because they want The Narrative, not the truth.
I will see how much bad press I can have rained down on this organization. They will deserve it all.
I'm looking forward to the day when these fanatics get a taste of their own cancel culture medicine. Something is really wrong with you if you are afraid to hear Dr. Vinay Prasad speak.
The demonization of dissent in scientific discourse is certainly a fascist tactic and, ironically, is perfectly displayed in this woman's letter. It is time to call these people out before the next generation of scientists believe this is normal behavior. Forget defense, where is the offense? Dr. Prasad should sue.
VP served as a beacon of free speech and open questioning during covid. His plain language and often non-edited responses provided a rarely seen authenticity during the past few years. Aside from appreciation of Dr Prasad, the refusal to have open debates has been a serious problem in recent times. As an observant Jew and older adult I think he was spot on in his reference and comparisons to totalitarianism and to the Third Reich. My husband and I agree and are totally NON-offended. To the contrary, he through his clear non sugarcoated statements, was not only helpful but steadying. I held my breath many times fearful that he’s be fired for his brutal honesty and cheered UCSF when he not only wasn’t fired but promoted!He is a prolific writer and sounds like a great doctor and teacher. We need more like him!!
The "contrarian view" that Prasad is most often attacked, is his claim that the vaccine isn't necessary for young, healthy people, and that cost/benefit analysis shows it is best for elderly and at-risk populations. As you allude to David, this is precisely the view the rest of the world has now moved towards (with the exception of the US, Canada, and Austria). On Paul Offit's stack a month ago I posted a google sheet with a list of each country recommendation and links you can find here, as many followers of his were dumbfounded how he too, could dare go against the CDC.
Yesterday I came across a lesser known substacker (re-stacked by higher stackers I follow - if that is the right "lingo") who put together a handy "Red Flags of Misinformation", and then used Prasad as example of someone seeking "financial gain", "unwilling to admit error", etc, contrasted to Katelyn Jetelina aka "Your Local Epidemiologist" who the writer cited as an antidote to the "Red Flags" of Prasad.
As someone who has read and reviewed nearly every one of her 1,000+ posts the last 3 years, I knew this was complete and utter bullshit. While I enjoy her writing and compassion, she, more than perhaps any other Covid Influencer, has leveraged her messaging as a financial windfall. She has also on record stating numerous views which were proven wrong (cloth masks work, children are at high risk of covid and will overrun PICU, highly vaccinated countries have lower covid cases than less vaccinated countries, South Korea "did it right" while Sweden was a failure, etc, etc), yet not once offered a "Ok I got that wrong" that the author cited as critical for trust, as I detailed in my critique:
Interestingly of the ACCP, it already appears perhaps they are consumed by their own mob. President Elizabeth Farrington wrote this (largely banal) piece August 30th
And is already prostrating to the crowd for wrongthink:
In a world with more time and money to burn than warrants, it would be fascinating David if you could register for the ACCP conference (I assume like most medical conferences they merely want your money, not caring of credentials for 95% of it) and do some "boots on the ground" investigative journalism, networking, interviewing, and drinking (there is always lots of drinking at these things of course) to get a story of what the actual attendees views are, rather than the minority "offense archeologists" who dominate Social Media and flood petitions believe.
I would hope Vinay does this himself, attends the conference anyway, and just talks to people.
Everyone needs to learn about metaphors and hyperbole.
Well put. Prasad is not some wild-eyed 'science denier'. Lichvar withdrew because she disagreed with him and wanted to dress that up with overblown language, and the conference shamefully went along with it.
I've followed Prasad throughout the pandemic. He understands and explains health issues with greater clarity than most of our public officials. It's too bad that some "experts" are threatened by that.
Lichvar proves out any light or heavy comparison to Nazi censorship, as does the decision of the ACCP. Dare go against ze officiale narrative...what irony. Twisted.
There's a trend of unwillingness to engage with critics in any depth, and that's certainly what seems to be going on here. People will lob grenades on social media, but run away from direct, sustained argument.