Are you LOOKING for evidence that masking impairs the speech development of babies? It takes time for the evidence to show up. Widespread masking for prolonged periods has not occurred in recent US history. I am confident that evidence will be abundant and decisively conclusive and the naysayers outed as the imbeciles that they are.

Expand full comment

Truly…. I think you might be one of the last trustworthy doctors. If i asked you a question that mattered about my child, when it mattered the most…. I KNOW i could trust the basis of your answer is sound. Thats rare these days, and so is humility.

Expand full comment

You want to create a new Federal Agency to protest kids when FDA,CDC,Fauci and Birks and all the rest failed to do this? Talk about doing the same old thing and expecting a different result!

Expand full comment

The American Academy of Potty Training is the name my pediatrician husband uses. They don't take a stand on anything important, and when they do, there is seldom science to back it up.

Expand full comment

Actually there is an organization that lobbies on behalf of kids but it is (in my opinion) unfairly demonized and ignored. That is Children's Health Defense - childrenshealthdefense.org, run by RFK Jr. If you read a couple of their articles to the end, you will see that they are not the extremists the media paints them as.

Expand full comment

Agree, I discontinued my membership this year. Their position on gender issues is also very politicized. A nightmare for children and parents.

Expand full comment

Dr. Prasad, I have been following you for over a year now (YouTube). Excellent work and thanks for breathing some sanity into the bad air emanating everywhere about basic things. I am particularly concerned about the pediatric angle. Are you available for consulting on a related legal matter?


Expand full comment

Wonderfully written!! I also love the video you made on YouTube. 👍🏼💓

Expand full comment

Someone send a heart monitor to Taylor Nichols and Ryan Marino! Might need to go on life support if they keep on having no answers to this!

Expand full comment

“You have to be honest about uncertainty.” I swear that’s almost all I have wanted for the last two years!! Thanks for continuing to be such a thoughtful and well reasoned progressive voice. It is so rare.

Expand full comment

You had it right until you suggested a governmental agency be tasked with issuing prospective guidance. Your Sanders/Warren crush destroys your argument. The government has consistently been the biggest part of the problem, but you want to double-down and trust them more? Otherwise, this was a wonderful piece you've written. Keep up the good work, and turn away from those who think government will solve our problems. Hint: They won't.

Expand full comment

I have to comment on this tweet by Dr. Prasad:

"It is now undeniable. Vaccine can cause more myocarditis in men < 40 than Covid-19"

Is there somehow no overlap between the vaccinated and those who got covid? What happened to breakthrough infections???

For purposes of comparing the risk of mycarditis, you have to look at four groups: 1) the naive unvaccinated, 2) the naive vaccinated, 3) the vaccinated who got covid, and 4) the unvaccinated who got covid.

Let us suppose, hypothetically, to make the point clear, that there is no risk of myocarditis in the naive groups--that the only risk is from covid. Let us assume the following facts:

6 cases of myocarditis in the vaccinated who got covid

4 cases of myocarditis in the UNvaccinated who got covid


10 total cases of myocarditis in those who got covid

The myocarditis risk value for the vaccinated who got covid is 0.6, which seems to be a benefit.

The myocarditis risk value for the UNvaccinated who got covid is 0.4, which is an even greater benefit.

So, no matter whether you get vaccinated or not, there is benefit? I think not.

The proper comparison is between the vaccinated who got myocarditis following covid and the unvaccinated who got myocarditis following covid. In that case, the risk for the vaccinated is 1.5, which shows that the vaccine increases risk in this hypothetical case.

Now let's expand this a tad and consider the naive groups. So, for the unvaccinated, we take risk statistics for myocarditis from the men <40 in the pre-covid population. And we use the recorded statistics for the naive vaccinated from public health. We then compare total vaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid-infected) with the total unvaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid infected) to get the true risk of myocarditis from vaccination relative to the unvaccinated.

You never compare the risk of myocarditis from vaccines to the risk of myocarditis from covid because the two groups are not exclusive.

Expand full comment

I like your idea about scoring impact on kids but who is to say that the scoring agency wouldn't also be captured?

Expand full comment

You go Dr Vinay 🙌🙌🙌

I’m so thankful for you.

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2022·edited Aug 29, 2022

2021 US mortality changes by age (preliminary statistics)

85+ DOWN 14%

35-44 UP 36%

25-34 UP 28%

15-24 UP 21%

45-54 UP 21%

55-64 UP 11%

65-74 UP 7%

75-84 DOWN 2.8%

5-14 UP 3.5%

1-4 DOWN 2.5%

less than 1 DOWN 11%

When you compute the stats, working age deaths are up 17.5%--137,500 people.

2021 changes in US stats by cause of death

heart disease UP 1%

cancer DOWN 1.7%

stroke UP 5.4%

chronic respiratory disease DOWN 12.4%

Alzheimer's DOWN 4.5%


How is it that deaths from the Big Three elderly killers are relatively level from 2020 but 85+ y.o. mortality is DOWN 14%? There ought to be a decline in the Big Three, but there isn't. So what group is likely to fill in the void left by lack of deaths in the 85+ y.o. group? Isn't it the working age group where deaths were up 17%?

Could this all be due to coincidence? Let's Go Brandon! and Let's Go Fauci! and Let's Go AAP! and Let's Go FDA!

Expand full comment

Thank you for your writings, Vinay.....and your podcasts.

Expand full comment