Stanford epidemiologist and Great Barrington Declaration legend Dr. Jay Bhattacharya has met with Twitter CEO Elon Musk to discover why his ‘dangerous’ opposition to the COVID-19 lockdowns led to him being blacklisted by Twitter. The Mail has the story.
Epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was placed on a blacklist held by the social media platform after he argued Covid lockdowns would harm children.
On Sunday, Bhattacharya revealed how he spent Saturday at Twitter’s San Francisco HQ after being invited to meet with Musk and uncover more about the blacklist he was added to.
“Twitter 1.0 placed me on the blacklist on the first day I joined in August 2021,” the professor tweeted. “I think it was my pinned tweet linking to the @gbdeclaration that triggered the blacklist based on unspecified complaints Twitter received.”
Twitter 1.0 refers to the firm’s censorious initial incarnation, before free-speech fan Musk bought it earlier this year.
Bhattacharya is a tenured professor at Stanford, who previously co-authored a letter in 2020, the Great Barrington Declaration, which stated how the lockdowns were damaging.
The Stanford professor joined Twitter in 2021, a year after he wrote the controversial letter together with Indian-born British infectious disease epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta and former professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, Martin Kulldorff.
The letter addressed the pandemic and its implications from a global public health and humanitarian perspective with a focus on how COVID-19 strategies were forcing children, the working class, and poor to carry the heaviest burden.
At the time Bhattacharya explained how he Kulldorff had requested verification from ‘Twitter 1.0’, but was rejected because they were not notable enough.
“Twitter 1.0 rejected requests for verification by me and @MartinKulldorff. Each time the reasoning (never conveyed to us) was that we were not notable enough. They should have asked Francis Collins – he would have vouched for our standing as ‘fringe epidemiologists’,” Bhattacharya continued.
“It will take some time to find out more about what led Twitter 1.0 to act so imperiously, but I am grateful to @elonmusk, who has promised access to help find out. I will report the results on Twitter 2.0, where transparency and free speech rule,” he tweeted.
Musk later responded in kind tweeting: “Thank you for your rigorous adherence to science.”
In October 2020, Bhattacharya together with professors from Harvard and Oxford Universities published the Great Barrington Declaration, which championed herd immunity – the notion that Covid would stop spreading after everyone had contracted it. [The statement actually says it is the “the point at which the rate of new infections is stable”.]
The White House supported the paper, and used it to try and push for schools and businesses to be allowed to open back up.
But Dr. Anthony Fauci dismissed the concept of herd immunity as “total nonsense” and “ridiculous”, adding that it would “lead to hospitalisations and deaths”.
However, when reflecting on the decision to close schools, Dr. Fauci told ABC News last month: “we should realise, and have realised, that there will be deleterious collateral consequences when you do something like that. That’s the reason why I continually would say on any media appearances I’ve had: ‘We’ve got to do everything we can to keep the schools open.’ The most important thing is to protect the children.”
He has also repeatedly insisted that Covid did not leak from a lab in China.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Philip Magness and David Waugh have written in detail about the blacklisting of Dr. Bhattacharya and the Great Barrington Declaration in AIER.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So as the dominos continue to slowly fall and vaccine compensation and ongoing treatment bills rise who’s going to be the first to revoke the indemnity given to these companies?
Starmer has an open goal as he could say that he was only supportive based on the (limited) information the Tories were passing on.
Also if depopulation is the long term agenda what better way of achieving it than bankrupting major drug producers by passing on these bills
There appears to be a red arrow troll on this site.
I believe Starmer, with the WHO and Blair far up his b******* would instigate harsher lockdowns and “vaccine” mandates at the drop of a hat come the next “pandemic” of fear.
Bankrupting, although I prefer the word liquidating, all of bigpharma would imho, actually benefit the whole of mankind – especially the so called civilised west.
I believe that too. The whole system is broken and corrupted and the so called ‘regulators’ like MHSA need to be shut down and rebuilt from scratch.
How about shut down and not rebuilt?
100% of all government and its agencies are influenced and corrupted for the benefit of an interest group. Every single one Without exception.
The fewer of them we have the better.
I’m sure he would…
However the “political” decision here and now is to revoke it and blame it on the Tories…
Agreed, and so would the Raven Pub Landlord in Bath. Starmer showed unwilling to listen to his concerns despite just citing official CFRs.
I suspect Starmer and his hench women were as fully informed as Ministers.
I agree. Given that they all shit in the same pot it is unreasonable to believe otherwise.
Of course they were. The Leader of the Opposition is briefed on any significant risk.
“…if depopulation is the long term agenda what better way of achieving it than bankrupting major drug producers by passing on these bills.”
Which implies that drug producers provide major health benefits to society. As far as I am concerned we are now at the point where the jury is out on that point.
So all of us who were branded anti vaccers (i spell it that way) and conspiracy theorists were right all along. A common theme.
Covid 19 and the response to it is the most important event to happen in the world in the last decade,and politicians are almost entirely silent about it during a general election campaign.
Andrew Bridgen has been a lonely and brave voice in Parliament. His reward was expulsion from the Conservative Party. He deserves our support as an independent in North West Leicestershire.
It seems difficult but hopefully not impossible for independents like him to win seats, but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.
With reference to my reply to D J, if Bridgen can take his seat as an independent it will be a heartening sign that things are going to get better for us. And if he loses it to some Labour or Conservative cut out, then it’ll be a bad sign.
One to watch for sure.
If Andrew Bridgen loses his seat it will be confirmation of massive vote rigging. It does happen and only idiots believe otherwise.
Good two hour interview with AB. Resistance GB. Interesting when he talks about losing his properties to HS2 and the scam that is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pidSG5nMkW8
Thanks Ron. Yes a good interview, so good in fact that I watched it end to end in one sitting.
Confirmation if any were needed of the appalling level of corruption in which this country is mired.
Last decade?
Let’s see what the legacy of it is, but to me it’s looking like the most important event to happen in the world since WWII, whichever way things go.
It either marks the end of liberal democracy and the beginning of a global totalitarian era or it’s a moment of awakening that propels us to a more advanced state of freedom and self governance.
Impossible to see at this stage which way it’s going. But what you can be sure of is that things are not going to settle back into what they were before covid. That’s for sure.
Quite likely true, although it might depend on where one is – e.g. across the pond they would (perhaps) take into account Vietnam. That said, re Bridgen, the only other MP that achieved an independent in such circumstances was Martin Bell, in Knutsford, who won in 1997 – the rest of that year’s election is obviously well known.
Regulators aren’t there to protect the public. They are there to promote the interests of the industry they are regulating.
And you know what, I don’t want the government to protect me. Whenever it pretends to do so, it usually does the exact opposite.
Thanks but I can protect myself.
The free market generally does a perfectly good job of weeding out bullshit products and services and making the good ones thrive. And the beauty of a free market that is allowed to function normally is that it cannot be manipulated by a company.
We don’t need any regulators. We just need the free market to be left to function properly.
The sewage & water systems need regulation, or more competition. They are in a real state in some places and have seen sewage in fields myself.
For Pfizer any settlement will take years and will simply be accounted for as a cost of doing business. They made $100bn in a year from the clot shot so even a $1-2bn settlement (dragged out for a decade) probably won’t unduly worry them. Only serious jail time for senior execs will make them think twice next time
Absolutely true.
But a court decision against them would be very useful for arguing against the whole covd response and in general for the future.
Civil suits to follow against politicians and bureaucrats?
That won’t be allowed. The whole charade would collapse.
If we choose, and pay, there is no way to legally stop it. However “they” would find ways to make it impossibly expensive.
I would suggest there may be enough evidence for a criminal case against the Directors. After all they would have “signed off” the corporate stance on these issues knowing full well they were not being truthful.
“Regulators and public health bodies are no longer protectors; increasingly, they are the enemies of patient safety.”
Yes. And they seem to be proud of that fact. June Raine, head of the MHRA and supposed to protect the public from dangerous medical products, boasted that the so-called Regulator was now an ENABLER for Big Pharma.
“In Dr Raine’s words, this is how she deliberately set out to transform the MHRA’s role (my bold): ‘We tore up the rule book, and we allowed companies to immediately start juxtaposing not sequential phases of clinical trials, but overlapping, beginning the next one before the previous had been finished. And that large-scale manufacture being prepared, at risk. We did not know if any of these vaccines would be effective.
She should be charged with Malfeasance in Public Office.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-doctor-who-turned-her-health-watchdog-into-a-covid-vaccine-lapdog/
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-mhra-the-watchdog-covering-up-the-truth-about-vaccine-deaths-and-injuries/