We'll get to the harsh assessment from Dr. Nicole Saphier, a prominent physician and Fox News Contributor, in a bit -- and it's a deserved one. If you missed it, go back and read my post detailing some of the latest high profile contradictions misfires from public health officials, including a muddled message on whether a negative test is necessary to emerge from a COVID-related quarantine. The CDC recently announced they had decided to cut their advised isolation period in half, without any requirement for testing at the tail end. They defended this decision by noting that many tests could continue to deliver positive results for weeks on end, long after infected people are no longer risks to others (this has been the case for some time). But then Fauci indicated that testing after five days is, in fact, reasonable and advisable -- suggesting that the official guidelines would be shifting yet again, and openly admitting that this was driven by "blowback." Those comments came alongside Dr. Rochelle Walensky conceding that the shortened quarantine time frame was heavily driven by what officials believed would be 'tolerated' by the public, which is not a medical or scientific finding.
Questions abound: If the CDC officially reverses itself on its recommendations for post-isolation testing (and it looks like they're going to), that development will make its way into all sorts of formal policies at various institutions. How can a negative test be secured if tests are not easily available, as they are not in many places? How is it possible that in 2022, we are still dealing with testing shortages reminiscent of spring 2020? Where did all the money go from the Democrats' massive $1.9 Trillion COVID relief bill (packed with all sorts of unrelated spending), considering that the Biden administration's belated scramble to order more tests still hasn't launched? Is it true that the White House rejected a robust testing production plan because they calculated that it might hamper their efforts to strong-arm vaccine holdouts into getting their shots? Remember, this is a president who won, in large measure, on a promise to shut down the virus and restore normalcy. And while we're at it, why has CDC said five days of quarantine is sufficient for adults, but still suggests ten days for children, who face massively lower health risks from the disease? Our Special Report panel last night was full of criticisms of what Hugh Hewitt called an "erratic" and "incoherent" mess made by the public health establishment:
On my radio program, Dr. Saphier teed off:
Dr. Saphier: My Faith That Fauci et al Have Had No External Influence On COVID Decisions Is ‘Obliterated’ | ?@GuyBensonShow? https://t.co/iEz5mKVAhg
— Nicole Saphier, MD (@NBSaphierMD) January 4, 2022
"You can see messaging is changing. Maybe that’s because we’re in a dire worker shortage. Maybe it’s because midterms are coming up. I don’t know. I once was so optimistic that Dr. Fauci and the others had no external influence and would only be speaking on science. But I can tell you at this point my faith in that is obliterated, and I don’t know what the impetus is behind his changing messaging..."
I'll leave you with Saphier's straightforward guidance on hugely mitigating the risk of severe outcomes, as the current wave is getting everyone:
It’s not a matter of when you will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2, it’s a matter of if you get severe Covid-19 when you do. The best way to avoid that, is by getting vaccinated and losing weight.
— Nicole Saphier, MD (@NBSaphierMD) January 3, 2022
By the way, the screen grab of Saphier is from last May. We've known that pediatric "COVID" hospitalizations are vastly inflated by incidental positive tests for months, but it's a talking point that Fauci is only now coming around to really embracing.
