HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022_02_17 KGould_Access to MeetingsFrom:Kincaid Gould
To:Board of Health
Subject:Access to Meetings
Date:Thursday, February 17, 2022 3:20:18 PM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not openattachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear Board of Health,
I believe that this is the second (maybe third) time that I have been unable to deliver an oral public
comment at a BOH meeting via phone. I have not been successful in using Zoom, either. I'm notsure what the problem is, so I'll describe it briefly here on the off-chance that someone can help
me. I can hear the audio just fine, and I was able to raise my hand by pressing *9. When it has
worked in the past, I have heard an automated voice instructing me to press *6 or telling me to
unmute, but I did not hear that today; after pressing *6, I heard nothing. Additionally, I pressed *9
at the start of the public comment period and was told that my hand had been raised. I did not
subsequently hear that my hand had been lowered, so I was surprised that I had to raise my hand
again after the last commenter presented. I am once again requesting that these meetings (and
BOCC meetings, and really all public meetings) be held in person (with an option for off-site
commenting available, if that's feasible). My desire for this is compounded by the fact that my
comment today addressed Dr. Berry.
I have a question that I would like to ask any knowledgeable member of the board: does Dr. Berry
receive and, if so, is she required to read through public comments sent to the board via email
(such as this one) before each meeting like all of the other members? I'm only asking because I
don't know if Dr. Berry is technically a member of the board or not (her name does not appear on
the list of members of the board on the board's webpage).
Here is (roughly) what I planned on saying, edited slightly for email format:
Good afternoon Dr. Berry and Board of Health members,
Dr. Berry, at Monday's BOCC meeting, you said that it is a common piece of misinformationthat more people died in the vaccinated group than in the unvaccinated group of one of thePfizer trials. However, you then went on to say that more people died in the vaccinated groupthan in the unvaccinated group.
To me, this is a troubling statement, because you claim that it is misinformation and then saythat it is actually true, and it is statements like these--and the claim that there are no peer-reviewed papers showing efficacy of ivermectin, for example--that severely undermine theconfidence I have in public health.
You also noted that it is important to remember that this is all-cause mortality, not COVID-19mortality. You actually said “when you look at the COVID-19 mortality, that was actually97% reduced between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.” As far as I can tell--andplease correct me if I’m wrong on this or anything else--there were, among participantsselected for analysis of the primary efficacy endpoint (i.e., infections), 2 COVID-19 deaths inthe placebo group and 1 death from COVID-19 pneumonia in the treatment group, giving anAbsolute Risk Reduction of 5 thousandths of a percent or a Relative Risk Reduction of justunder 50%, neither of which is any where near 97%.
You said that it is expected that the vaccine didn’t prevent death from all other causes in life.You are, of course, correct. The heart of the issue is whether or not a reduced COVID-19mortality outweighs the possibility of an increased chance of other causes of death, especiallyif an individual is posed little risk by the disease. If I had been conducting that trial, moredeaths in the treatment group (even if I believed them to be unrelated to the treatment) wouldhave prompted me to start over. I certainly would not have gone ahead and told everybodythey should get it regardless of their individual medical status and regardless of whether or notthey were part of a demographic not included in the trial, and I absolutely would not haveencouraged mandating the product for everybody at the penalty of losing their job, not beingallowed to leave the country, not being allowed to further their education, not being allowed togo to a restaurant, etc.
You said that no valid concerns had been raised about Pfizer's clinical trials. The article“COVID-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial,”published by the British Medical Journal, runs counter to that claim. Here’s an excerpt:
“For researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during thatautumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety. A regionaldirector who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told theBMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trainedvaccinators and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase IIItrial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume ofproblems they were finding.”---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your attention to these issues,
Sincerely,
Kincaid Gould