Mr. Caulfield, Let's Have a Respectful Conversation

For the Benefit of Allowing the Public Access to the Full Spectrum of Science

I just received an invitation from someone willing to serve as an objective moderator for a discussion between myself and Mr. Caulfield. This moderator firmly believes in the benefit of highly respectful discussions between dissenting experts about complex science; for the greater public good. I have accepted the invitation and the ground rules that were proposed to ensure that such an exchange would be collegial…

Invitation to Mr. Caulfield via Twitter

Dear Mr. Caulfield,

I know that you have previously had reservations about interacting with dissenting experts because “Science proves to be messy on the fly”. However, SARS-CoV-2 seems to have become endemic. All who wanted a ‘vaccine’ have got it. So, the acute phase of concern has passed. There is time to pause, take a deep breath, and begin deep evaluations of how the scientific community performed.

As public servants, I think it would be in the best interest of the public to begin to allow experts with different opinions to be heard in respectful exchanges about COVID-19. This would help the public sort through the vast array of complex scientific data.

I am not entrenched in any points of view. In fact, I was quite ‘pro-narrative’ in the beginning. As a vaccinologist, I loved that vaccines appeared to be the way out of this mess and I even approved of early treatment regimens being downplayed. I changed my opinions on both counts as I followed the accumulating data; something that I would love to share with you.

I am more than willing to change my opinions on anything related to COVID-19, provided that I can be shown that the overall weight of the scientific evidence, adjusted for its quality, lies elsewhere.

In all honesty, I look forward to being able to chat with you.

Sincerely,

Byram

---