He says that when people criticize Dr. Anthony Fauci they are really criticizing science. Because I’m science.”
It’s quite arrogant.
Fauci must be a great scientist. Fauci was an old friend of my brother, who worked at the National Institutes of Health. He is highly respected.
Fauci, however, has been given lots of power.
His department invested tax dollars in the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat virus modification.
When Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) Fauci asked Fauci about how to fund “gain of functionality” research. This is research that aims to find out more about a condition by making it easier for patients. MoreFauci dismissed the possibility of contagious disease or death as dangerous, saying that “Sen. Paul” doesn’t understand what he was talking about.
It turns out, Paul knew what he was talking to.
Fauci’s Wuhan experiments did not cause COVID-19. Because the modified viruses have a different molecular structure, we know this.
Gain-of-function research, however, is dangerous and merits public debate.
Paul is a great example of a person who, like many others, encourages that kind of discussion. He says that he conducts this discussion because it is important to “not only assess what happened, how it occurred, but also making sure it does not happen again.”
Originaly, experts claimed that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan’s animals sold in the Wuhan wet markets. However, experts now believe COVID-19 could have been created in a laboratory.
Paul says, “This is so divided that it’s easy to be either in the same boat as Fauci or totally opposed to Fauci.” “Nobody wants to find out the truth or see that it can happen again.
Paul tells me what his opinion is on Fauci’s dismissal of critics.
Paul responded, “That is an incredibly arrogant position.” It’s reminiscent of the medieval church [where] the government representative decided what was science….Any time you have government dogma saying they are science, or government bureaucrats who claim that ‘this is the one and perfect truth’…we should run headlong away.”
Our government today wants to make vaccines mandatory in private offices. This is because the government claims not enough people are being vaccinated.
Paul called that “big lies.”
We aren’t stupid. Collectiveivism is the idea that humans are too stupid for their own decision making. People will take rational decisions.
I resist. “Some people Are stupid. Does the government have any right to forbid a vaccine?
Paul states, “I don’t foresee anyone forcing them to get medical care.”
Consider the children?
Paul notes that “the death rate in children due to seasonal flu” is much lower. We never required that children be vaccinated against the seasonal flu. [even though they get] like 49 different vaccines. We must give parents and children the option of choosing.
It is possible, but I will push you back. It could be airborne Ebola. Is government responsible? EverydayHave the right to state, “You must use this medicine.”
Paul replies, “No,” “Once the government has access to these decisions, it makes onerous decisions.”
I’m a libertarian. I would like to live without government.
An epidemic, however, is a rare situation where government intervention may prove necessary. A disease that is contagious and vicious can be treated with a medication. This will reduce the spread of the disease. I would like government to help me protect myself from criminals.
However, America does not need a vaccine mandate. There has been too much government involvement in this pandemic.
It is good to challenge the government’s policies. Paul’s actions are a blessing.
When it comes to infectious diseases, however, I’m not going to say never.
JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.