Tuesday, 23 November 2021

Great Barrington Declaration: update letter from the authors

 Dear Friends,


From the depth of our hearts, a belated thank you for signing the Great Barrington Declaration. With over 850,000 signatures, together we opened up the pandemic debate. While many governments continued with their failed lockdown and other restrictive policies, things have moved in the right direction. For example, most schools have re-opened, most countries prioritized older people for vaccination and Florida rejected restrictions in favor of focused protection without the negative consequences that lockdowners predicted.


While occasionally censored, we have not been silenced. Since authoring the Declaration in October 2020, the three of us have actively advocated for focused protection through social media, op-eds and interviews on, for example, vaccine passports and natural immunity.


We have also launched Collateral Global, a charity staffed with academics from across the world to document and disseminate information about the collateral damage of the restrictive measures so that we don’t repeat the mistakes of this pandemic and are able to inform future policy with evidence and analysis. Collateral Global is crowdfunding so that this work can be done to the highest possible standards. You are welcome to join us and help us in those efforts at www.collateralglobal.org, as well as follow us on Twitter, etc. We are also planning an initiative on scientific freedom soon.



With enormous gratitude,


Jay Bhattacharya    Sunetra Gupta    Martin Kulldorff


Twitter: @gbdeclaration@collateralglbl


Facebook: GreatBarringtonDeclaration

LinkedIn: Jay BhattacharyaMartin Kulldorff


PF: a reminder, that the “Great” in the Declaration doesn’t refer to the Declaration, but to the place it was signed and published, Great Barrington in Massachusetts. 

Jay Bhattacharya is a professor of Medicine at Stanford University 

Sunetra Gupta is a professor of epidemiology at Oxford University

Martin Kulldorf is a professor of Medicine at Harvard

I mention their titles to make the point the these are not some random rubes. They are people who know whereof they speak. They did not advise let it rip as they were falsely mischaracterised; they advocated “focussed protection”, which always, to me, this random rube, did seem the logical way to proceed. And which, as they indicate above, seems to be the way countries are moving.

Perhaps the most silly thing I heard to justify lockdowns was that you couldn’t just protect the elderly because that would be “age apartheid”. So instead, lockdown the whole population!