Casey Means being nominated as Surgeon General exposes how hollow and performative the taxpayer-funded role has become
Speaking to Chris Hume of The Lancaster Patriot about the latest symptom of the 'public health' problem
I was happy to speak with Chris Hume of The Lancaster Patriot this morning about the nomination of Casey Means to U.S. Surgeon General.
You can read his full article - which incorporates my comments as well as
’s investigative work - here.
I was critical of both the nomination and the existence of the position — and raised broader questions I consider important for all Americans to ponder in the wake of the COVID scam:
Jessica Hockett, a researcher with a PhD in educational psychology from the University of Virginia, provided her perspective on the nomination in an interview with The Lancaster Patriot. “The nomination of influencer Casey Means as U.S. Surgeon General exposes just how hollow and performative this taxpayer-funded role has become,” Hockett said. Having studied COVID-19 policies since 2020, she argued that the surgeon general position and many federal public health roles are “superfluous and unserious.” She stated, “I really think it and many federal ‘public health’ roles should go away and have no rightful place,” acknowledging her view is unpopular but defensible.
Hockett questioned the constitutional basis of federal public health authority, asserting, “Public health, as conceived and practiced, overreaches—pretending to care while claiming dominion far beyond biblical bounds.” She urged Americans to consider, “Who has authority over the body—and in what circumstances?” adding, “Civil government has a role, but it is limited, not lordly. Our bodies are temples, not state property.” Reflecting on COVID-19 policies, Hockett said they revealed the need to “right-size the role of ‘public health’” at the federal level. She encouraged people, particularly Christians, to examine biblical teachings on sickness and wellness, suggesting that Means’ nomination highlights the questionable legitimacy of centralized health authority.
Secretary Kennedy said today, “The Surgeon General is a symbol of moral authority who stands against the financial and institutional gravities that tend to corporatize medicine.”
I disagree. It’s symbol of waste and overreach.
The position should go away and every federal thing related to "public health" downsized to its Constitutionally-defensible duties and roles, or eradicated.
As I said when Jay Bhattacharya was nominated to NIH Director, I never gave public health agencies or positions a second thought until they muscled their way into my consciousness and exposed themselves as morally bereft and perfectly willing to lie about a new cause of death, restrict freedom of movement, and push for violations of bodily autonomy.
More about Chris Hume
I was first introduced to Chris Hume through his May 2020 book Essential Service: Coronavirus and the Assembly of the Saints, a speedy read and strong stance against churches closing their doors in response to unconstitutional government decrees.
I endorsed the follow-up, Scattering the Sheep: A Jeremiad Concerning the Closing of the American Church in 2020, as a “resounding, Scripture-rooted call to repentance for any American pastor or elder who reacted to unconstitutional orders by closing their church doors to in-person worship for even one Sunday.”
Chris’s latest - Seven Statist Sins: The Capital Vices of Civil Government in American Society - I have not yet read but ordered today because it sounds very much up my alley.
You can follow him on X at @ChrisHume1658 and check out The Lancaster Patriot podcast at https://www.thelancasterpatriot.com/category/media/
The whole concept of health being public has to go. There's no such thing as collective health any more than there's a collective brain. Health is one of the most personal, individual attributes of any human being. What does that even mean, to say "the public's" health? An aggregate? An average? A mean? Any way it's defined it's meaningless, one of those stupid terms people use as an approximation and assume they understand, but which, when examined, completely falls apart.
While the concept doesn't have a real meaning it does have a real function, which is to give the government a reason to interfere in people's decisions and to hook them on "aid," which gives the government even more reason to interfere, since it's holding the purse strings.
Also a good read: “Shepherds for Sale” about leftist infiltration into churches.
Public health might have a legitimate role if it wasn’t so corrupted. As it stands, I agree with you completely get rid of it.