Login
On Jan. 29, The BMJ published an op-ed by Lucinda Hiam of the Commonwealth Fund. The op-ed — “Public health must bridge the divide with groups who mistrust science” — specifically referenced Children’s Health Defense (CHD).
Using the online “Rapid Response” form provided by The BMJ, I replied to Ms. Hiam’s call to “bridge the divide.” I said I agreed and invited her to engage with CHD.
In my response, submitted Feb. 3, I wrote:
“Let’s have an adult conversation about science, vaccination, informed consent, vaccine injury, and civil rights. I invite Ms. Hiam to engage in a public dialogue on CHD’s public platform CHD.TV, or anywhere else, to debate these critical issues.”
Despite Ms. Hiam’s stated goal to “bridge the divide,” we have received no response from her, and The BMJ has not published our “Rapid Response” to her op-ed.
As a result, The BMJ and the Commonwealth Fund have only driven the divide deeper — by failing even to afford the courtesy of a reply.
This is the pattern: critics of CHD and those advocating health freedom engage in ad hominem attacks, evade scientific questions, and fail to accept invitations to debate, so we can “bridge the divide.”
Dr. Peter Hotez has declined the offer of literally millions of dollars from Joe Rogan to debate on vaccines. Dr. Paul Offit, a spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics, has for decades declined to debate while defaming people with whom he disagrees.
By contrast, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has agreed for years to debate anyone on vaccines.
My offer to Ms. Hiam to debate stands.
Science and law share the truism that truth emerges through the clash of ideas — through contest, through the cauldron of debate.
Those, like The BMJ and the Commonwealth Fund, who not only shun debate but pretend to seek it, show themselves to be the ones who “mistrust science” — because they are afraid to defend their long-held position that universal vaccination mandates that deny prior, free and informed consent, are scientific.
Ms. Hiam’s editorial concluded, “Listening, without capitulating to misinformation, may be one of the few tools left to bridge the divide.”
We’re still listening, Ms. Hiam.
