Posted on 03/06/2025 8:04:56 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Yesterday, the academic physician (full Professor at Stanford, no less) once vilified by former NIH Director Francis Collins as a “fringe epidemiologist”, Director of NIH nominee Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, testified before the Senate in a confirmation hearing.
Having listened to various clips and read commentary from both mainstream media and alternative media, I am convinced that not only will Dr. Bhattacharya sail through the committee hearing, but the Senate will also promptly confirm him.
In his opening remarks, Dr. Bhattacharya stated that “a culture of coverup, obfuscation, and a lack of tolerance for ideas that differed from theirs” had characterized the official federal COVID response. He promised to create an agency that would tolerate and even encourage dissent. Elaborating on the point, he said: “Dissent is the very essence of science,”
Please listen:
In response to questioning about his stance on vaccines, Dr. Bhattacharya stated that he fully supports children being vaccinated for diseases like measles. When further questioned about the link between autism and vaccination, he remarked, “I don’t generally believe there is a link, based on my review of the literature.” He then added that the NIH should fund research to prove or disprove the theory conclusively.
Senator Jost Hawley: And I just want to ask you about that. In my remaining moments here. I had the opportunity to question one of the co-authors of the now infamous proximal origin paper, Dr. Robert Gary is the individual who I had the opportunity to question.
He wrote that paper on March 17th, 2020. You probably remember, doctor, this is the paper that infamously stated, and I'm going to quote it now, that the “SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a manipulated virus.” Under questioning by me, Dr. Gary admitted he actually had no knowledge of that at the time.
He wrote that in March of 2020. He had no evidence to suggest that was the case. This was in fact a piece of purist propaganda.
He has since had many of his research products withdrawn from peer-reviewed journals because he hasn't followed appropriate peer-reviewed standards. This effort, this propaganda effort, and that paper, as you remember, was used as the basis of government-directed censorship to those in the scientific community like yourself to millions of ordinary Americans.
The net effectiveness was a tremendous loss in confidence by the American people in the NIH and in our public health officials. You and I discussed the vital importance of restoring some of that credibility. Talk to us about how you see going about doing that:
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya: Senator, that episode is a low point in the history of science. The top officials of the NIH abused their position to hide the support for research that may have caused the pandemic. And I commit to making sure that all of the activity at NIH, not just going backward, but also going forward, are transparent and open to the American people to Congress. That's vitally important for the future of the NIH and for the future of science itself. Thank you.
Bernie Sanders: “Will you help lead that movement?”
Senator Bernie Sanders led the questioning and comments on the issue of children and junk food.
My friend Rav Aurora points out that in the clip below, there was a spectacular moment of bipartisan unity, where Senator Sanders and Dr. Bhattacharya seem to agree to work together on clamping down on junk food in some capacity.
Senator Sander’s tone at the confirmation hearing suggests that he knows Dr. Jay Bhattacharya will be confirmed and that he might even vote for him! Sander’s tone and body posture were light years away from the synthetic, manufactured and harmonized attacks he aimed at HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy during his confirmation hearing!
Even Stat News, the progressive and mainstream medical lay press mouthpiece that primarily represents the POV of Boston biopharma, and which attacks President Trump whenever possible, quoted important scientists singing his praises, writing that:
Now, if confirmed by the Senate, Bhattacharya will be entrusted with directing the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the biggest funder of biomedical research in the world — and if you ask many of his collaborators about him, a very different Bhattacharya emerges. “I do think Jay is a reasonable person, not an ideologue,” said Mark Hlatky, a Stanford professor of health policy and medicine.
“If there’s anyone I wanted to be making the case to the president about the value of science to solve problems and contribute to economic prosperity, it would be Jay Bhattacharya right now,” said Dana Goldman, director of the University of Southern California’s Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics.
I am hopeful that he can implement his shared vision of a more efficient, transparent, and less authoritarian National Institute of Health with the right staff.
To conclude: Dr. Bhattacharya did a fantastic job yesterday. I can't wait to see what he accomplishes as Director of NIH once confirmed!
“a culture of coverup, obfuscation, and a lack of tolerance for ideas that differed from theirs” had characterized the official federal COVID response. He promised to create an agency that would tolerate and even encourage dissent. Elaborating on the point, he said: “Dissent is the very essence of science,”
—-
Perfect.
One of the most important tenets of science is the ability to conduct skeptical inquiries regarding any and all scientific pronouncements.
If that’s not allowed, then you’re dealing with a cult.
I am a fan of Dr. Malone, and I value his opinion. Thank you for posting this.
Fetal Tissue Research
Nominee Dr Jay Bhattacharya also responded to a question from Senator Josh Hawley
said that he would oppose the use of aborted fetal tissue in research,
that it is essential to respond to ethical concerns from the public
and that there are alternatives in scientific research.
Nice looking man.
There were many FReepers who were not fans of Dr. Battacharya’s ideas. I gathered this from reading the numerous threads here during the Covid-19 lockdown.
He co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for focused protection of vulnerable populations while allowing those at lower risk to resume normal activities. This approach aimed to build herd immunity through widespread infection among low-risk groups.
It is still a very controversial view and many FReepers opposed it ( although not in the country of Sweden, which was one country that never locked down ).
NIH is a horrid waste of taxpayer’s money.
90% of their budget could be slashed—with a net benefit to the American people.
That was what I thought from nearly the very beginning. I work in healthcare, and have enough knowledge to know the difference in various groups with respect to risk and vulnerability (and treating those different groups differently) and also once a virus gets out the door, locking down won't protect it from spreading.
The Great Barrington Declaration just seemed like common sense to me, but not everyone sees it that way, apparently.
The Emergency Use Authorization could not recognize other protocols, yes?
Like pretty much anyone from Stanford and Hoover, Jay’s a compromising, go along to get along, type despite his occasional controlled-opp feigning of a “brave” position.
It’s a technicality, I guess. I’m not sure about EUAs, but protocols would not be approved if there was already a treatment. That doesn’t mean they can’t be used they just would have to meet a higher burden to get FDA approval. But for many months there were no approved treatments. They still tried to silence people who has other ideas that showed promise; basically the Ivermectin/Hydroxychloroquine plus Zinc, C, D and antibiotics. It was all rationally and scientifically sound and showed promise when used properly but there was a concerted effort to muddy the waters with fake studies that did not adhere to the protocols eg just giving IVM or HCQ without Zinc, and giving it to people who were already very sick for weeks/months when everyone with a lick of sense (not just doctors and scientists) knows the sooner you intervene the better the outcome. All of that was done on purpose to make the IVM/HCQ protocols look bad, and knowing that these $500 billion worth of jabs was coming down the pike. They didn’t want to lose that opportunity so they came down hard on doctors and pharmacists and media who dared to talk about those treatment options.
Those seven words should be inscribed on every college science building and/or posted in every classroom.
Science vs $cience.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.