Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

COVID-19

CDC Quietly Admits to Covid Policy Failures

Published

2 years ago

7 minute read

From the Brownstone Institute

BY Harvey RischHARVEY RISCH 

Instead of admitting policy error that the Covid vaccines do not much control virus spread, our public health administration doubled down, attempting then to compel vaccination on as many more people as could be threatened by mandates.

In so many words—and data—CDC has quietly admitted that all of the indignities of the Covid-19 pandemic management have failed: the masks, the distancing, the lockdowns, the closures, and especially the vaccines; all of it failed to control the pandemic.

It’s not like we didn’t know that all this was going to fail, because we said so as events unfolded early on in 2020, that the public health management of this respiratory virus was almost completely opposite to principles that had been well established through the influenza period, in 2006. The spread of a new virus with replication factor R0 of about 3, with more than one million cases across the country by April 2020, with no potentially virus-sterilizing vaccine in sight for at least several months, almost certainly made this infection eventually endemic and universal.

Covid-19 starts as an annoying, intense, uncomfortable flu-like illness, and for most people, ends uneventfully 2-3 weeks later. Thus, management of the Covid-19 pandemic should not have relied upon counts of cases or infections, but on numbers of deaths, numbers of people hospitalized or with serious long-term outcomes of the infection, and of serious health, economic, and psychological damages caused by the actions and policies made in response to the pandemic, in that order of decreasing priorities.

Even though numbers of Covid cases correlate with these severe manifestations, that is not a justification for case numbers to be used as the actionable measure, because Covid-19 infection mortality is estimated to range below 0.1% in the mean across all ages, and post-infection immunity provides a public good in protecting people from severe reinfection outcomes for the great majority who do not get serious “long-Covid” on first infection.

Nevertheless, once the Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out, with a new large wave of the Delta strain spreading across the US in July-August 2021 even after eight months of the vaccines taken by half of Americans, instead of admitting policy error that the Covid vaccines do not much control virus spread, our public health administration doubled down, attempting then to compel vaccination on as many more people as could be threatened by mandates. That didn’t work out too well as seen when the large Omicron wave hit the country during December 2021-January 2022 in spite of some 10% more of the population getting vaccinated from September through December of 2021.

A typical mandate example: in September 2021, Washington Governor Jay Inslee issued Emergency Proclamation 21-14.2, requiring Covid-19 vaccination for various groups of state workers. In the proclamation, the stated goal was, “WHEREAS, COVID-19 vaccines are effective in reducing infection and serious disease, and widespread vaccination is the primary means we have as a state to protect everyone…from COVID-19 infections.” That is, the stated goal was to reduce the number of infections.

What the CDC recently reported (see chart below), however, is that by the end of 2023, cumulatively, at least 87% of Americans had anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to and thus had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, this in spite of the mammoth, protracted and booster-repeated vaccination campaign that led to about 90% of Americans taking the shots. My argument is that by making policies based on number of infections a higher priority than ones based on the more serious but less common consequences of both infections and policy damages, the proclaimed goal of the vaccine mandate to reduce spread failed in that 87% of Americans eventually became infected anyway.

In reality, neither vaccine immunity nor post-infection immunity were ever able fully to control the spread of the infection. On August 11, 2022, the CDC stated, “Receipt of a primary series alone, in the absence of being up to date with vaccination* through receipt of all recommended booster doses, provides minimal protection against infection and transmission (3,6). Being up to date with vaccination provides a transient period of increased protection against infection and transmission after the most recent dose, although protection can wane over time.” Public health pandemic measures that “wane over time” are very unlikely to be useful for control of infection spread, at least without very frequent and impractical revaccinations every few months.

Nevertheless, infection spread per se is not of consequence, because count of infections is not and should not have been the main priority of public health pandemic management. Rather, the consequences of the spread and the negative consequences of the policies invoked should have been the priorities. Our public health agencies chose to prioritize a failed policy of reducing the spread rather than reducing the mortality or the lockdown and school and business closure harms, which led to unnecessary and avoidable damage to millions of lives. We deserved better from our public health institutions.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

  • Harvey Risch

    Harvey Risch, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a physician and a Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His main research interests are in cancer etiology, prevention and early diagnosis, and in epidemiologic methods.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Food / 3 hours ago

Canada Still Serves Up Food Dyes The FDA Has Banned

Addictions / 4 hours ago

Manitoba Is Doubling Down On A Failed Drug Policy

Alberta / 4 hours ago

Net Zero goal is a fundamental flaw in the Ottawa-Alberta MOU

COVID-19

FDA says COVID shots ‘killed’ at least 10 children, promises new vaccine safeguards

Published on November 30, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

“This is a profound revelation. For the first time, the US FDA will acknowledge that COVID-19 vaccines have killed American children”

At least 10 children have died because of the COVID shots, according to a recently publicized email from Trump Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials.

“At least 10 children have died after and because of receiving COVID-19 vaccination,” FDA Chief Medical Officer Vinay Prasad wrote on Friday in an email to staff, obtained by The Daily Caller.

“This is a profound revelation. For the first time, the US FDA will acknowledge that COVID-19 vaccines have killed American children,” Prasad said in the memo.

The finding corroborates that of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which recently linked at least 25 pediatric deaths to the COVID shot, via information from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Both counts likely significantly underestimate the real number of pediatric deaths from the shots, considering that studies have found vaccine injuries have been seriously underreported to VAERS.

In his Friday memo, Prasad ripped the Biden administration for pressuring the injection of these experimental mRNA shots into children.

“Healthy young children who faced tremendously low risk of death were coerced, at the behest of the Biden administration, via school and work mandates, to receive a vaccine that could result in death,” wrote Prasad.

“In many cases, such mandates were harmful. It is difficult to read cases where kids aged 7 to 16 may be dead as a result of covid vaccines.”

The disturbing admission by the Trump administration’s health agency highlights the silence of the Biden administration about these deaths and raises further questions about its integrity or lack thereof.

“Why did it take until 2025 to perform this analysis, and take necessary further actions? Deaths were reported between 2021 and 2024, and ignored for years,” wrote Prasad. He acknowledged that the vaccines potentially killed more children on balance, considering that they had virtually no risk of dying from COVID.

The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) will reportedly strengthen its safety protocols for vaccines, including by requiring more clinical trials as opposed to relying on antibody laboratory studies, modifying the annual flu vaccine release, and examining the effect of administering multiple vaccines in one round.

This year, the CDC removed COVID shots from its recommended “vaccines” for healthy children. A CDC panel had voted in 2022 to add the COVID shots to the childhood immunization schedule despite their experimental nature and the fact that they were produced in a fraction of the time ordinarily required to bring a vaccine to market.

The push for COVID shots for children was spearheaded at least in part by CBER Director Peter Marks, who pushed for full approval of the COVID shots even for the young and healthy and laid the foundation for COVID shot mandates.

A large, growing body of evidence shows that the mRNA shots were dangerous to human health in a wide variety of ways and caused deaths at a rate far exceeding usual safety standards for vaccines. As Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, an ear, nose and throat specialist in Houston, Texas, explained to Tucker Carlson in April:

Normally, the FDA will put a black box warning on a medication if there have been five deaths. They will pull it off the market if there have been 50. Well, according to VAERS, (the) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System – and it’s vastly under-reported, which I have seen firsthand – there have been 38,000 deaths from these COVID shots.

That number has since increased, according to VAERS, which now reports 38,773 deaths, 221,257 hospitalizations, 22,362 heart attacks, and 29,012 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis due to the COVID shot as of August 29, among other ailments.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canadian government seeking to destroy Freedom Convoy leader, taking Big Red from Chris Barber

Published on November 27, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Crown claimed that ‘Big Red’ is an ‘offence-related property’ relating to Chris Barber’s involvement in the 2022 protests against Canada’s COVID mandates.

The Canadian government is still going after Freedom Convoy leader Chris Barber, this time hoping to seize his very livelihood.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has reported that it represented Barber during a November 26 hearing about the Crown’s attempt to take “Big Red,” Barber’s semi-truck. The Crown claimed that the vehicle is an “offence-related property” relating to Barber’s involvement in the 2022 protests against Canada’s COVID mandates.

Barber’s truck, a 2004 Kenworth long-haul, which he uses for business, was a focal point in the 2022 protests. He drove it to Ottawa, where it was parked for an extended period of time, but he complied when officials asked him to move it. 

Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas, said the Crown’s attempt to take away Barber’s livelihood is “not” in the spirit of laws in place regarding forfeiture.

“The impact of the forfeiture of ‘Big Red’, which is an essential part of the operation of Mr. Barber’s trucking business and is relied upon by Mr. Barber, his family, as well as employees, is not what Parliament had in mind when enacting those forfeiture provisions,” she said as per a JCCF press release.

“Especially considering the context of a political protest where the police told Mr. Barber where to park the truck and when Mr. Barber moved the truck after being asked to move it.”

The Freedom Convoy leader has talked about his truck, saying that, “Big Red is how I put food on the table.”

“I followed every instruction police gave me during the protest, and I never imagined the government would try to take the very truck I rely on to earn a living,” Barber continued.

A ruling regarding the Crown’s wish to seize Barber’s truck is expected to appear on December 19; however, the court case could drag into the new year.

On October 7, 2025, after a long trial, Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey sentenced Tamara Lich and Barber to 18 months’ house arrest. They had been declared guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the 2022 protest against COVID mandates, and as social media influencers.  

Lich and Barber have filed appeals of their own against their house arrest sentences, arguing that the trial judge did not correctly apply the law on their mischief charges.

Government lawyers for the Crown have filed an appeal of the acquittals of Lich and Barber on intimidation charges.

Lich and Barber were declared guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the protest against COVID mandates in April 2022, and as social media influencers. The conviction came after a nearly two-year trial despite the non-violent nature of the popular movement.

Continue Reading

Trending

X