Harvard Tramples the Truth

In this article, Martin Kulldorff, a former professor of medicine at Harvard University and Mass General Brigham, criticizes the university's decision to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for students, despite their prior infection with the virus. He argues that such mandates are unethical and go against 2,500 years of science on acquired immunity. Kulldorff also highlights the lack of scientific rationale behind the vaccine mandates and notes that most Harvard faculty diligently pursue truth in a wide variety of fields but have failed to do so when it comes to COVID-19. He calls for academic freedom with open, passionate, and civilized scientific discourse, zero tolerance for slander, bullying, or cancellation, and for Harvard to find its way back to academic freedom and independence.Kulldorff's arguments are based on several premises:1. Prior infection with COVID-19 provides superior immunity compared to vaccination, particularly for older people.2. The scientific consensus since 430 BC has been that those who recover from an infection are protected if and when they are re-exposed.3. Vaccine mandates are unethical and go against 2,500 years of science on acquired immunity.4. The lack of scientific rationale behind the vaccine mandates undermines their credibility.5. Academic freedom and open scientific discourse are essential for restoring public trust in science and academia.6. Harvard's failure to prioritize academic freedom and independence has contributed to its loss of credibility.Kulldorff's arguments challenge the conventional wisdom on COVID-19 vaccination and highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to immunity and public health policy. By advocating for academic freedom and open scientific discourse, he emphasizes the importance of evidence-based decision-making and the value of diverse perspectives in the pursuit of truth. His critique of Harvard's leadership and policies serves as a reminder that institutions of higher learning have a responsibility to prioritize academic freedom and intellectual curiosity over dogmatic thinking and political agendas. Ultimately, Kulldorff's arguments underscore the need for a more balanced and evidence-based approach to COVID-19 policy, one that takes into account the complexities of immunity and public health while prioritizing academic freedom and open scientific discourse.