Rand Paul Was NOT "Very Resistant" to Mandates from "the Very, Very Beginning"

...but the lab-leak-focused Senator's words & actions in spring 2020 may help explain his persistent claim that GoF research gave the world a pandemic.

Politicians engaging in historical revisionism around their own words & actions is typical and expected, but Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is suffering from serious memory loss about what he did and said in the first two months of the pandemic/federal emergency declarations.

In a recent conversation with RFK Jr., Senator Paul proclaimed he was always pro-liberty, casting himself as an “OG” anti-mandate champion rather than as a proponent of the government taking drastic and harmful actions against the populace.

Early in the dialogue, Paul - who is also a medical doctor (ophthalmologist) - said,

I was very resistant from the very, very beginning to the mandates on behavior. The idea that masks — I come from the medical profession — and I was aware of the studies on influenza showing that for respiratory viruses influenza you know they wanted to know if wearing masks in the hospital would prevent the doctors and nurses from getting sick. This been studied for decades and all the studies really haven't shown that it that it helped and it didn't help in public wear. So I was aware of that and resistant to that [mask mandates] and closing the schools early on but as far as the origins of the virus it took me a year.

Because Senator Paul used not just one but two “verys,” I consider late February/early March 2020 a fair starting point for his active participation in “lockdown”¹ and pandemic-substantiation activities.

“Very, Very Beginning” Timeline

A Paul-oriented timeline through April 22, 2020 follows:²

• 26 February 2020: Senator Paul’s wife purchases stock in Gilead Sciences on the same day the company formally announced late-stage studies with use of its drug Remdesivir with COVID-19 patients.

• 7 March 2020: Senator Paul attends a fundraiser in Louisville, Kentucky.

• 11 March 2020: WHO declares a pandemic.

• 13 March 2020: U.S. declares a National Emergency and activates the Stafford Act for all 50 states.

• 15 March 2020: Two people who attended the Louisville event test positive for COVID-19.³ Multiple state officials who were at the event say they have been tested and/or are isolating as a precaution.

• 16 March 2020: U.S. declares 15 Days to Slow the Spread.

• 17 March 2020: Senator Paul publishes “We Will Get Through This Crisis” (Richmond Register).

• 18 March 2020: Senator Paul votes against an emergency stimulus package.

• 19 March 2020: Senator Paul publishes “VITAL Act Would Remove Red Tape from Labs Creating Diagnostic Tests” (Nelson County Gazette)

• 22 March 2020: Senator Paul announces he’s tested asymptomatic positive for COVID-19, making him the first Senator and third member of Congress to do so. The decision to test is reportedly due to extensive travel.⁴ A spokesperson also says Paul decided to test as a precaution and because he had surgery in 2019 that removed part of his lung, putting him “in a higher risk category as it relates to pulmonary issues.” Staff emphasizes the Senator is isolating, versus interacting with others in public.⁵

• 23 March 2020: Local and national media react to Senator Paul’s positive test with scrutiny over his choice to not isolate himself while awaiting results. The Independent calls him “a cautionary tale.”

• 25 March 2020: Senate passes $2.2 trillion CARES Act. (Senator Paul absent due to self-quarantine.)

• 7 April 2020: Senator Paul’s “recovery” from asymptomatic COVID is announced. Paul says he tested negative and has “started volunteering at a local hospital to assist those in my community who are in need of medical help, including Coronavirus patients.”

• 22 April 2020: Senator Paul publishes “Reopening of Economy Should be Gradual, Guidelines Should Vary by Location” (Bowling Green Daily News).

The record of Rand’s activities in the “very, very beginning” makes clear he was averse to overspending on a purported emergency, yet supportive of the testing regime and remarkably susceptible to endorsing the sudden and illegal revocation of civil liberties.

On one hand, it isn’t surprising that an MD would embrace mass testing and believe in the idea of “controlling” respiratory pathogens, because it’s what medical schools & the healthcare industry teach, promote, and reward. On the other hand, a doctor should’ve rejected the testing of a non-sick person as wasteful, if not utterly pointless, because a test is only needed when it aids diagnosis and (more importantly) is needed to inform treatment of symptoms/illness.

A libertarian(ish) Senator submitting himself to the burgeoning testing regime - and endorsing the funding of a full-scale launch thereof - sends a very powerful message to Americans and healthcare professionals: Dr. Rand Paul is doing the right thing - a thing all Americans should want to do, including Libertarians!⁶

Senator Paul may have had a specific definition of “mandates on behavior” when speaking to Mr. Kennedy, but even his most ardent fans would be hard-pressed to look back at his March 17 and April 22 op-eds and say he was standing up for fundamental freedoms.

Below I’ve linked and copied each essay with comments. (I advise first reading Senator Paul’s articles in their original forms.)

---

March 17, 2020: “We Will Get Through This Crisis” by Rand Paul

It is important to approach the current Coronavirus pandemic with equal measures of prudence and hope. Practical solutions to stop the spread of a novel disease are not new. They have worked in the past, and they do not need to lead to fear or panic. In fact, looking at our history of fighting and winning against so many diseases should give us optimism. [There was and is no proof a novel virus or disease was spreading. Paul uses an “Us vs. This Illness” paradigm, and cites non-specific past events to galvanize the reader.]

My life has been spent mostly as a physician and scientist. My current life is that of a member of the Senate, including on the committee dealing with Health Care. I’ve spoken to many in and out of government in the past week, and these are my conclusions. [Paul invokes his background/credentials: “Trust me, I’m a doctor and know what I’m talking about,” and wants constituents to have faith in the the recent conversations he’s had with “many in and out of government.”]

Let’s start with prudence. This virus seems to spread very easily — think of the way the common cold spreads like wildfire every year — but it is more serious and potentially lethal. That’s a bad combination, and we should take it seriously. We must calmly and clearly implement as much social distancing as we can in the coming weeks. The six-foot rule is a good one. [Spread/transmission dynamics had not been — and still have not been — demonstrated. Paul compares “the coronavirus” to a common cold and admonishes the reader to take it seriously. In the context of “stay home” directives, “social distancing” was also an endorsement of healthy people quarantining. The six-foot rule was ridiculous and arbitrary.]

Stay home when possible and call your doctor or hospital before you go if you are symptomatic so that they can advise you of best practices. Avoid as many group gatherings as possible. [Arguably, this advice is promotes fear and is not consistent with what would normally be told to people with flu symptoms.]

The CDC has advised that at-risk groups remain entirely at home if they can. These include older Americans and anyone with comorbidities that put them more at risk, especially chronic respiratory conditions. [Paul is pretending the Federal government isn’t trying to pull off an illegal mass quarantine order.]

But even young people should be paying attention to this. You might think you’re safe, and you probably are. But your parents, grandparents and others may not be. The virus is spreading from asymptomatic people, and you could not even know you are doing it. [This paragraph & the previous two previous are endorsements for locking down/locking up, the idea that young people are at risk and are obliged to keep older people from getting sick - even at their own expense - and asymptomatic spread.]

The Governor of Kentucky has joined many other states in closing down public schools for a few weeks. I think that’s a good decision and one we will not regret later, which cannot be said of staying open. The Governor may be required to take additional actions as the situation develops, which is why I have personally sent a letter to President Trump urging his prompt consideration of any future possible requests from the Governor asking for federal assistance for the Commonwealth's COVID-19 response efforts. [This is a lockdown/school closure endorsement and contradicts Paul’s claim to RFK that he was resistant to closing the schools early on.]

I personally have instructed my staff to work from home. I want to set the right example for those who can follow suit. I realize that’s not everyone, but every bit helps. During this period, however, we are still available to handle the needs of Kentuckians and government. Anyone with a federal issue can still contact our office as before, and we will be happy to provide assistance. [This is a lockdown endorsement.]

If you’re a member of a Church, community group, HOA, Rotary, service organization or similar, I encourage you to both practice what I’ve said here, but also to reach out to the most vulnerable in your community to make sure they’re okay and if you can help keep them that way, perhaps by running errands for them or bringing them food and supplies if they choose to isolate more completely. [This is a lockdown endorsement.]

If you are sick — no matter what you think you have — I urge you to stay at home for the duration of your illness, especially with a fever above 100.5. [To my knowledge, no state is allowed to issue a general order of quarantine, including on the basis of a fever. Staying home when sick is a good thing because it aids the recovery of the sick person, but a government official shouldn’t be in the business of telling a sick person he/she can’t go out.]

Obviously, the more prevalent this is in your own community, the stricter you will need to be. [This is an endorsement for differential mandates that restrict human behavior.]

As this public health crisis unfolds, there will surely be some hardships for people. Some will fall ill. Unfortunately, some already have and more will succumb to this disease. [Which disease?] But while we are implementing these steps to mitigate the spread, I want to also take a moment to remind everyone of the triumph of modern medicine over all sorts of diseases. [“These steps” as in pseudo-federal quarantine order delivered on a post card?]

One hundred years ago, 1 in 5 children didn’t even survive childhood due to viruses and bacteria. Our life span was shorter. The list of viruses and bacteria that could kill you was long and dangerous. The world was a much more dangerous place than it is right now.

From Cholera to Polio, from Small Pox to Measles, we beat them, with antibiotics, antivirals and vaccines. History tells us we can do it again. It tells us not to let our fear get the best of us, not to think the end is near, and to approach this pandemic without unnecessary levels of alarm. [These are all things Rand Paul learned in medical school, professional practice, and government life that aren’t the whole story. It’s ironic to tell people not to fear or be alarmed simultaneous to federal and state officials taking unprecedented actions against a cold.]

Be safe, be prudent. Be respectful of those who might need greater protection in an outbreak like this by being disciplined in the coming weeks. [Message: Something is spreading. Obey the government.] There are resources available with information, including Kentucky’s own website: kycovid19.ky.gov

But remain hopeful that our modern medical system, if given the time, can treat and beat this. This is a time for us to come together as people. To show the world what Americans can do. Together, we will weather this crisis. [No crisis had been demonstrated, nor any emergency shown to exist.]

---

April 22, 2020: “Reopening of Economy Should be Gradual, Guidelines Should Vary by Location” by Rand Paul

The title alone makes obvious Senator Paul isn’t issuing a clarion call for universal restoration of civil liberties. He starts by supporting the claim that a contagious pathogen is wreaking havoc and implies that some kind of response was warranted — just not the response that took place.

What if I had told you a month ago that some sort of contagion would be unleashed upon our country that would cause 20 million people to lose their jobs and for us to go $6 trillion further into debt?

Many pundits would have likely responded, “That’s crazy. It could never happen.”

And yet it did – the economic calamity didn’t come from the coronavirus directly, but from our response to the contagion.

Paul is admirably irked by the Federal government spending $6 trillion but accepts that “the coronavirus” is now killing people. Saying a contagion was “unleashed upon our country” is an interesting choice of words for someone who told RFK, Jr. that he didn’t entertain the lab leak hypothesis until 2021 — and a strange allusion to an act of God/Mother Nature, if that was the intent.

The virus has now caused more than 40,000 deaths in the U.S. and hundreds of thousands have been infected. The tragedy is a personal one if you lost a loved one or if you’re a doctor or nurse in the coronavirus trenches of New York’s hospitals.

Few experts will argue that New York did not react aggressively enough. Some will argue that it would have been worse had the government not enacted significant quarantines.

Yet others will argue that the viral course in New York, to a significant degree, progressed independent of any governmental response, that it spread rapidly in New York because of the density of the population, the vast subway system and the thousands of international travelers who traverse New York City on a daily basis.

Senator Paul implicitly affirms the WHO and CDC assertion that a new cause of death had come on the scene and was attributable “the virus” or “the coronavirus”. There is no condemnation of “significant quarantines,” nor any recognition that an illegal federal quarantine edict had been issued.

Paul also believed/was led to believe a pathogen attacked New York City and had spread quickly and efficiently from person to person, aided by population density, subway system, and international travel.⁷

Note the euphemisms he used to characterize for unlawful actions against the populace:

Monday morning quarterback analysis of our response to this virus will become the national sport for the next few years. (Hopefully, we will also be allowed to go back to cheering for real sports also). “Experts” will debate the necessity of extreme closings of the economy in future pandemics, the long-term impact and whether a one-size-fits-all quarantine is the best approach to pandemics. Some will argue for extreme quarantine, and some arguing for less will point to population centers and rural areas around our country that fared better than New York but without as aggressive a quarantine.

Some unnamed force or authority is going to have to “allow” sports to resume. “Extreme closings of the economy” and “one-size fits-all quarantine” would be debated in/for future pandemics,” but not now, because six weeks into the loss of fundamental rights was apparently TOO SOON for a libertarian-leaning official to take a hard stand. 🙄

Paul did say “quarantine” not “lockdown,” which I appreciate because (as far as I know) lockdown has no legal meaning in federal or state communicable disease codes. But he either misses or willfully ignores that the mass quarantine of healthy people was occurring outside the bounds of the law.

His foresight about and comparisons with New York suggests he knows whatever happened there will be controversial, and yet he doesn’t seem to understand the scale and magnitude of death in America’s largest city — or wonder if it makes any sense.

Next, he goes after Congressional spending without alluding to his abstention (which was due to having taken a test, under political pressure, when he wasn’t sick):

Congress, never one to let debt get in the way of anything, has gone on a spending spree that includes hundreds of billions of dollars that will never be traced or repaid. The Federal Reserve has printed dollars and bought up investments in even larger numbers than it did in the 2008 bailout.

In total, our reaction to the virus may turn out to be worse than the virus itself if we don’t change course and do it soon. We will look back in 10 years and see the ruin of small businesses and jobs everywhere.

Six weeks into the farce, Paul’s prediction about “our reaction” being worse than the virus itself isn’t particularly prescient, nor is it a strong stance. I’m not hearing him lament the shutdowns - and there is no real sense of urgency in his view on reopening.

I’ve been asked to be part of the president’s task force on reopening the country. I think his instincts on this are good, so here are some of my ideas and metrics for how we do it.

First, any federal plan should be in the form of guidelines and suggestions to local officials, not mandates. Our system of federalism does not empower the nation’s capital to dictate to state and local officials how to run their business.

Why did Senator Paul think the federal government needed to put a plan together? He said something true - “Federalism does not empower the nation’s capital to dictate to state and local officials how to run their business” - and yet said nothing about the 15-Day executive fiat (which became an additional 30 days). He also had no remarks about legality or wisdom of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) being granted authority to determine a “critical infrastructure industry” (essential v. non-essential) in an alleged disease-spread emergency.

If “The President’s Coronavirus Guidelines for America” wasn’t the federal government telling state and local officials what to do, then why were these postcards (image of backside below) sent to millions of households?

As for “guidelines and suggestions,” we all know how that worked out: Governors turned them into illegal, harmful orders. How is it a suggestion when the Feds say, “halt social visits to nursing homes,” “school operations can accelerate the spread of the coronavirus,” and that states with “evidence of community transmission” should close schools, bars, restaurants, gyms, and indoor recreation?⁸

Rand Paul only had so much power, of course, but he couldn’t even advocate for the freedoms of every Kentucky resident:

Second, just as every city didn’t need the same degree of quarantine, every city has an individually different ability and need to reopen. Our governor is making a mistake by treating extremely different places across Kentucky with a one-size-fits-all approach, and I urge him to change course. A 2,000-person megachurch in Louisville might not be able to socially distance the way a 100-person church in Russellville can."

Laying aside the question of whether a free society should ever be able to restrict freedom of movement for anyone who is actually-sick with a certain disease or illness - let alone for anything that isn’t proven to be “spreading” from person to person - what is the basis for saying the cities “need” different degrees of quarantine, with each having “an has an individually different ability and need to reopen”? Is that code for “keep the higher-density cities with poor minorities closed”? Because that’s what it sounds like to my ears.

And how was it not an endorsement of unconstitutional directives at the state level when Senator Paul implied that a 2,000-person megachurch should probably stay closed because it can’t “social distance” while a 100-person church can and could therefore open?

Regardless, he clearly doesn’t understand quarantine laws and the limits of power afforded by Commonwealth law with regard to issuance and enforcement.⁹

In the end, the best way to handle many of the decisions on reopening should lie with us. The restaurant owner may choose to open at half capacity but still be open. The church may choose to meet outside or with appropriate social distance. Stores can open, and many will choose to have people wearing masks or limit the number of customers at one time.

People who are at greater risk may choose to stay home longer than is mandated. There is no reason when a mandatory stay-at-home order is lifted that everyone has to suddenly resume their normal lives.

He’s right about choice, but his restaurant, church, and store examples are obnoxious virtue signals and tacit endorsements of the “mandates on behavior” he told RFK Jr. he resisted from “the very, very beginning.”

By saying “mandatory stay-at-home order,” Senator Paul approves that which he now claims he opposed. He also mentions “resumption of normal life” in his article without pushing for that to occur, and implies it might be dangerous in some places to “re-open.”

Paul then invokes his medical credentials to propose what he thinks needs to be done:

As a doctor, I’ve been seeing patients with this disease. It’s a serious matter and we must urgently keep working on treatments and vaccines to get it under control.

We need to expand testing, as this will be key for many communities. We need both greater PCR testing for active disease as well as serology tests for antibodies.

We also need to reopen local doctors’ offices and hospitals. Many hospitals and doctors’ offices are at such low usage due to the shutdown that they are laying off staff or closing. This will get worse, with dire long-term consequences to local health care.

I find it strange that Dr. Paul - an ophthalmologist - says he has been “seeing patients with this disease” and does not name the disease. He claims “it’s a serious matter” but gives no sense of how or why. He also doesn’t say what was out of control that needed to be brought “under control” but is clear about the key to control: Testing.

Like most officials at every level of government in those days, he promoted PCR tests and antibody tests as the tools for managing “the coronavirus.” Because the Senator later became known for his pro-choice stances, it’s unfortunate he did not see where the push for testing and a vaccine would lead.

The Senator calls for doctors’ offices and hospitals to reopen but never says they shouldn’t have closed and says nothing about the banning of visitors from healthcare facilities and nursing homes. He admits hospitals aren’t full. Was it occurring to him that empty hospitals probably meant no pandemic and no emergency, or did he view it as a sign the government did the right thing and was “slowing the spread”? Did he wonder if people were using telehealth services? Or thinking about state and local ambulance protocols? (EMS in New York and Pennsylvania were told to keep people away from hospitals. Was that true in Kentucky too?)

I suppose the Senator would say I’m playing Monday-morning quarterback, and yet the above questions fairly intuitive & straightforward for a medical professional who holds a very high federal office to be investigating if he wanted people to be set free from behavioral mandates.

Here’s Paul’s wrap-up, with two key words in bold [my emphasis].

Gradual reopening is not ignoring or minimizing the problems with this disease.

By the time any order is lifted it will have been nearly two months of people isolating at home, which is enough to flatten the curve so that hospitals are not overwhelmed by the sick. Some will need longer, and that’s OK. Our system of local government will and must allow that to happen.

I look forward to helping get our country back to work, back to school and ready to reopen soon.

“GRADUAL” (not sudden).

“SOON” (not now).

A modern-day Patrick Henry this was not.

There’s no “I call on every Governor in this country starting with my own to immediately restore every liberty egregiously stolen in a massive human rights heist six weeks ago! And leave Kemp alone, Mr. Trump!!!”

Instead, Senator Paul’s position is that orders will be lifted, in due time, as governors et al decide that places are ready. In practical terms, this means (for example) the kids on free/reduced lunch in Jefferson County Public Schools will stay out of classrooms and on screens longer, larger churches/religious-gathering places are shamed into streaming their services, the Zoom Class is getting paid to stay home, and people can’t meet at the bar to talk about how awful their elected leaders are. (Distilleries can keep making bourbon though - because that’s “essential” to the collection of sales tax and to keeping folks placated…)

What “problems” with “this disease” Rand Paul, MD, was saying couldn’t be ignored or minimized isn’t clear, nor is how his expertise in advanced eye care & surgery equipped him to do anything with coronavirus patients beyond observing their eye color. The fact that he thought two months would be enough to “flatten the curve” proves the tagline was perfect fit for whatever principles & politics were guiding him at the time.

---

What Does Rand Paul in Spring 2020 Have to Do with Rand Paul in Summer 2024?

Fast forward past what feels like a million performative & theatrical hearings with Rand Paul and Anthony Fauci to summer 2024, and we can maybe see more clearly why Senator Paul picked up the Gain-of-Function football and is still trying to score a touchdown that he’s convinced will end the game.

His August 12, 2024 tweet quotes former CDC Director Robert Redfield (of all people) but nevertheless fits his own persistent claim that GoF research gave the world a pandemic.

In The Rand Paul Paradigm, it isn’t enough to be right about the U.S. funding GoF research in China and elsewhere; there must be a link between that research and the thing called SARS-CoV-2 “leaking” or being “released” from the labs and spreading in order to justify and excuse his actions/inactions in 2020 and turn him into a hero for proposing and passing legislation that will save the world from any future pandemics wrought by Mad Scientists.

For not only Rand but for most officials who held office in early 2020, the *GoF-Begets-Lab Leak/Release* scenario is an even better excuse for the globally-coordinated COVID response than the ridiculous wet market/zoonotic-leap tale. The populace is more sympathetic to the notion of their leaders trying to protect them from a dangerous bioweapon than from bat or civet droppings.

• “They probably knew it was a bioweapon!”

• “It could’ve been worse! IT WILL BE WORSE WHEN THEY DO IT AGAIN!”

• “The field hospitals weren’t used but better to be safe than sorry! Good practice for the real thing/next time!”

There’s a lot riding on the idea that 2020 could’ve been prevented if only GoF had been stopped in its tracks and, since it wasn’t, the federal government may have overreacted but their heart was in the right place. Given his early support for drastic measures against an “invisible enemy,” it’s no surprise Rand Paul is sticking with that story.

None of this means the Senator hasn’t rendered Americans a good service. Here’s my view on that, as a Q&A:

Q: Were labs conducting GoF research?

JH: Yes.

Q: Is GoF research ethical?

JH: Absolutely not.

Q: Can GoF research result in a pandemic involving a coronavirus spreading from person to person?

JH: No, per examination of actual scientific literature and common sense.

Q: Should GoF be banned immediately?

JH: Of course. (The U.S. passing a law doesn’t do the trick though. Like

Robert Kogon

said recently, international agreements are needed.)¹⁰

Rand Paul deserves a few slow claps for being The Guy Who Got to Grill Gain-of-Function, but his “heroics” on that front don’t change the fact that he was NOT very resistant from the very, very beginning to mandates on behavior.¹¹

Was he better than most of his Senate colleagues on matters COVID? Yes, but that’s not saying much when all 100 fell far short of the high standard set by their oaths. Whether duped, coerced, bribed, and/or eager about realizing the Hollywood-inspired Virus War plotline, many representatives abandoned their posts for personal protection, political purposes, and/or profit.

Ideally, Rand Paul and the rest of the pro-lockdown, still-not-really-sorry Senators from March 2020 should apologize to Americans and the rest of the World and, if still in office, step down and let people with a better grasp of fundamental freedoms take their places.

1. As far as I can tell, “lockdown” has no legal meaning in any U.S. federal or state communicable disease laws/codes. Prior to 2020, the common and appropriate term for “lockdown” was in reference to a building or hyper-local area being cordoned off for a brief period of time due to threatening situations like active shooters, unruly prisoners, escaped convicts, and similar threats. Some might say it’s a euphemism for martial law. I view the federal government’s decrees in March 2020 as illegal mass quarantine of healthy people, unlawful shutdown of the economy, & egregious mis-use of the Department of Homeland Security & other executive branch agencies - aided & abetted by a federal proclamation to states about what they "should" and must do.

2. Suggestions for additional relevant events or changes are welcome.

3. https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/03/15/louisville-coronavirus-cases-museum-speed-ball-guest-tests-positive/5054435002/

4. Implied: He might spread it to others.

5. Jake Tapper’s March 22, 2020 thread is a good summary.

6. Medical Nemesis also posed some provocative questions about the purposes served by Senator getting tested. Re-reading media reactions now, with the benefit of hindsight, I note stories about officials being exposed to COVID and getting tested usually mentioned how the U.S. didn’t have enough tests. It’s not hard to imagine that these high-profile individuals were (without realizing it) commercials for the launch of the mass testing and the results that suddenly lit up dashboards in March & April 2020.

7. Because this storyline is virtually unchallenged even by anti-mandate & health freedom Americans, I’m almost forced to admire its sticking power and those who crafted and disseminated it by leveraging media and bystander academics. I remain open to explanations for the NYC death event that attempt to account for time-series data of multiple kinds.

8. It’s also worth mentioning that CMS and HHS issued directives to nursing homes and hospitals for locking down facilities, locking up patients, and locking out third-party witnesses/advocates. So the “Trump Never Locked Anyone Down!” crowd needs to read some documents and take a look at where most excess deaths in spring 2020 occurred.

9. In many states, orders of quarantine or isolation must be formally issued by the county to individuals and are subject to due process.

10. FWIW, this note in response to

Debbie Lerman

includes some of my views related to the nature/novelty of SARS-CoV-2, bioweapons, etc.

11. A follower on X highlighted this August 2021 op-ed in which Senator Paul correctly refers to “crushing and overbearing lockdowns and mandates that were based on junk science.” What I don’t see is the Senator acknowledging the part he played in advocating those lockdowns and mandates. Moreover, his proposed amendment (eliminating the NIH director position) isn’t a solution to the lockdown/mandate problem.