Brownstone Journal

Brownstone Institute

Daily readings from Brownstone Institute authors, contributors, and researchers on public health, philosophy, science, and economics.

  1. 11h ago

    George Orwell's Warning to Britain

    By Mike Fairclough at Brownstone dot org. Great Britain, where I live, once prided itself on eccentricity, irreverence, and the right to say unpopular things. Today, people living in my country have been arrested over social media posts and other digital communications. Some have been imprisoned. Online censorship has become more sophisticated, surveillance technology continues to advance, and cancel culture has taught millions of people that expressing the wrong opinion can carry severe consequences. As a result, people are self-censoring out of fear of reprisals. Books have a particular role to play here. They give people permission to explore ideas away from the noise and intimidation of social media. A reader can encounter something privately, consider it, question it, disagree with it, return to it, and perhaps find the confidence to openly express an opinion they had previously been afraid to voice. This is why my publishing house, Free Speech Press, is launching with a reprint of George Orwell's 1984. For this special edition, I asked the British writer and broadcaster Neil Oliver to write a new prologue. Neil travelled back, intellectually and geographically, to the circumstances in which Orwell created his final novel. What follows is an extract from that prologue: George Orwell was dying when he wrote 1984. Like the setting sun, he had travelled into the west: to Jura, the Deer Island in the Inner Hebrides off Scotland's west coast. George Orwell was his nom de plume – Eric Arthur Blair is on the stone over his clay in the churchyard of All Saints' Church in Sutton Courtenay, in Oxfordshire – and 1984 would be his swan song. As well as dying (he did not know it then) he was grieving the loss of his wife. It was with his sister Avril then, that he arrived at the lonely farmhouse of Barnhill in the north of the island in May of 1946. Eileen Orwell had died the year before, during a hysterectomy, and the couple's son Richard joined father and aunt, along with housekeeper Susan Watson later that summer. Barnhill was remote and on the point of being reclaimed by the elements, until the infusion of life, lives saddened, and from an unlikely source. Jura can be hard to love. Sparsely populated then as now, a place of blanket bog and bare rock. Getting to Barnhill was a matter of two ferries – first to Islay, second to Jura – then 20 miles by motor vehicle until the road dwindled and the last four had to be covered on foot. Food, fuel and the rest had to be carried along with everything else required. "Extremely un-get-atable" is how Orwell described their billet, and he loved it. He was middle-class – a literary type, obviously – and while he had written about the travails of the workers – including the degraded and degrading lives of coal miners and their families in Lancashire and Yorkshire in The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) – and had put in time in self-inflicted poverty as a Down and Out in Paris and London (1933) – by 1946 he still hankered after the hardship of other men's lives, and the possibilities of a life lived far from the madding crowd. If it sounds as though I am being unkind, it is not my intention. 1984 was a book I was given to read at school and along with many I have had reasons to think about George Orwell over and over in the years since. Most recently, when it has seemed for all the world as though his last novel is received and used less as dire warning of totalitarianism and more a must have How To handbook for would-be dictators everywhere, I have learned to see the author as nothing less than a seer. That he was drawn to the Deer Island for the writing of it says to me that his last months and years were ordained for a vision, or a dreary dream the telling of which was nothing less than a calling, or perhaps a penance. It is Highland tradition that deer, the Red Deer, are portents of death. When the deer come down out of the hills and walk the streets of human habitations, their fleur-de-lis hoov...

  2. 1d ago

    What Did Fauci Mean by "Game On?" "Jan. 26, 2020 – GAME ON!!!"

    By Jeffrey A. Tucker at Brownstone dot org. The release of the Fauci diaries has filled in some missing pieces. They help elucidate how the years of hell unfolded in Fauci's own mind. Working with military intelligence and pharmaceutical companies, Fauci and his colleagues eventually hatched an audacious plan to delay natural immunity for a full ten months as they awaited both the November election and the viable release of the injectable product called a vaccine – all in the hope that it would be given credit for fixing the problem they created in the first place. This scheme, however, was Fauci's personal Plan B. Plan A is revealed in the diaries. It was to bury the existence and spread of the virus in question within a broader fabric of a bad flu season. This might have worked too. With the overwhelming fatality threat falling nearly entirely on the aged and infirm, the deaths from Covid in particular could have been overlooked completely. This was his preferred outcome, or, rather, the best that he could come up with given the panic of the first weeks of January 2020. The problems all began much earlier. Whenever the lab leak occurred, it had become apparent to military intelligence following the Military Olympics of October 18-27, 2019, held in Wuhan. In this high-profile event, 9,308 athletes from 109 countries competed in 329 events in 27 sports. It is highly likely that Covid was already known to be there, judging by how strict the Chinese authorities were in managing exposure. We have testimony from US participants that they came back with an unusual flu that US military authorities were keen to keep quiet with extended quarantines of the sick. Fauci was surely kept apprised of this through intelligence channels. He knew that he had a problem on his hands. It was only a matter of waiting to see whether news of this leak would go public. For him, the bad news arrived on January 3, 2020 when the diary entry reads: "Also 44 unusual cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, China over the past couple of days. Etiology still unknown. Said to be a "viral pneumonia''of unknown etiology. Flu ruled out. Cases linked to a seafood market. No human-to-human transmission documented at this time." Just above that, however, we see the origins of Plan A. January 2 and 3 we find the first mention of a bad flu year. It was his first attempted cover story. "Did TV interview with Cox TV this year's influenza situation. Interviewed by Samantha Manning." And: "Jan. 3, 2020 – Influenza is heavy in the media. Did an interview with Elizabeth Cohen of CNN for her Blog. Also, did a live radio interview with John Catsimatidis for his 'Cats Roundtable' from NYC." His flu-themed Plan A continued and stepped up over the coming days. Keep in mind that the China situation was not yet public. He knew, but the public was not alert to it. There was still a chance that it could be kept under wraps. Jan. 7, 2020: "Did TV interview with Canadian TV (CTV) on the viral outbreak in Wuhan, China. Did interview (print) with HealthDay on the influenza season." Jan. 10, 2020 (Friday): "Influenza is hot and heavy. Vaccine match is OK for H1N1, but not so good for B and H3N2. Did WUSA local TV on flu as well as interview with Elizabeth Cohen of CNN that went on her blog with multiple references to our conversation." That same day, Fauci writes in bold print, alarmed and now newly aware that his scheme might not work: "Chinese publish sequence of the virus on public data base." Now, it is the weekend. Fauci reports the following: "Barney Graham ordered the constructs using credit cards," meaning he bought the sequence. Who is Barney Graham? He is the professor of microbiology at Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, home of the CDC. He is formerly the deputy director of the Vaccine Research Center (VRC), part of Fauci's NIAID. Graham is holder of 38 patents related to immunization, in particular US10960070B2, "Prefusion coronavirus spike proteins and their use" granted in ...

  3. 1d ago

    Staying Human: Introduction

    By Thomas Harrington at Brownstone dot org. [The following is the Introduction to Thomas Harrington's book, Staying Human: In a Soul-Shredding Age.] It began spontaneously on an unusually warm day in the Fall of 2021 when, after exchanging the generally muted pleasantries in the way one does in such situations, I locked onto the tired visage of the overheated and masked woman behind the supermarket check-out counter and asked, "Are you staying human?" Suddenly her previously somnolent eyes became focused, indicating a desire to confirm that she had heard me right, a signal to which I responded with a soft restatement of the initial query. Given the chance to step out of her assigned role as a human automaton, viewed by the executives of company that pays her as a more costly and less reliable version of the bank of self-service scanners 15 feet away from where we stood, she confessed demurely that staying human was "really hard" for her these days. But seconds later her face lit up as she told me about her three babies at home and the classes she was taking fulltime at night to get her LPN degree. When I expressed amazement at her ability to manage all she had on her plate, she shot me a smile that was an equal mix of determination and resignation and said, "What are you going to do? You just got to keep your head up, right?" She wanted to continue, but after seeing the impatient looks on the faces of the customers behind me, she knew our little tête-a-tête needed to end. She understood all too well that she was there not to cultivate human warmth, affection, or even humor, but to swiftly and accurately register the store's revenue flows. And so I grabbed my bags and, turning round once more to face her and say thanks, headed for the door. I have continued to ask the same simple question intermittently and in various social settings since then. At times I am met with blank stares, and occasionally outright hostility. But more often than not people are delighted, and in many cases clearly relieved to have been approached in this way, reactions that, in turn, tell me that much is amiss in the ways we are currently conducting our daily lives. For most of my life, it would have never occurred to me to conjure up such a question, never mind serially pose it to others. Being human was for me, and I suspect for many others fortunate to grow up in the glow of the US postwar prosperity, a highly stable category, different in its particular qualities but akin in its ontological stability to things like trees, rocks, or dogs. But the happenings of the last six years have conspired to expel me from that zone of conceptual complacency. I am now increasingly convinced that becoming and staying human is not, as I once believed, a simple matter of remaining alive, but the fruit of an intense and highly self-conscious effort to align ourselves, as Lincoln famously said, with "the better angels of our nature." To believe in angels, even metaphorical ones, is to admit that there are forces in our lives that transcend the scope of our tools of rational analysis, and that we are, in some mysterious way, subject to their powers. It is also to suggest, moreover, that there are mental concepts, such as love, beauty, and dignity, that, while impossible to fully capture, explain, or quantify, are absolutely central to human flourishing. The idea that every human is condemned to hosting a perpetual struggle between their material and ethereal selves is, of course, not new. What is relatively new is the belief that such a struggle need not exist because, as that great scholar of metaphysics, the singer Madonna, announced to us back in 1984, "We are living in a material world" where anything worth having or knowing can be apprehended through the senses of hearing, sight, and touch. To accept that we are and always have been mere seekers of material comfort and gain is to erase the aspiration that we humans can be something different and better than the...

  4. 2d ago

    You Didn't Get Sick. You Got Enrolled.

    By Josh Stylman at Brownstone dot org. Pills to wake, pills to sleep Pills, pills, pills every day of the week Pills to walk, pills to think Pills, pills, pills for the family – St. Vincent Is the world losing its mind, or is everyone just on something? I look around and I sincerely can't tell anymore. Your kid can't sit still, so the doctor writes a script before asking what he eats or how many hours he stares at a screen. He's not broken. He's a seven-year-old boy. Your buddy can't get it up, so he reaches for the blue pill instead of putting down the beer and chips. Your sister-in-law wants the influencer body, so she injects herself into a thinner version of being sick. A different disease, dressed up as discipline. Can't sleep? Ambien. Anxious? Xanax. Sad for more than a week? Antidepressant. It's easy: a fifteen-minute appointment, prescription in hand before you've finished saying what's wrong with you. And the commercials. Twenty seconds of a couple holding hands in a field, followed by 40 seconds of a voice listing the ways the drug might hurt or kill them. Stroke. Suicidal thoughts. Sudden death. Ask your doctor. And people do. I was twenty-nine when I visited my family doctor on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. The kind of reputable MD with a month-long wait. I went for a routine checkup and some bloodwork. He told me my cholesterol was "borderline high." This was years before I learned that most of the discourse around cholesterol is a pharma marketing campaign doing cosplay in a lab coat. At the time I simply trusted the man. I asked what to do. He said, take this pill. I asked for how long. He said, the rest of your life. Given your family history, we can't be too safe. My father had picked up smoking in his thirties to cope with the stress of a pre-existing condition. Four packs of Marlboro Reds a day. Several heart attacks later, it eventually killed him. That was the family history my doctor was referring to. I asked the name of the drug. He said Lipitor. Then I looked down at his prescription pad. It said Lipitor. I looked at the pen in his hand. It also said Lipitor. I slowly walked out of the room backwards and never saw him again. In fact, I pretty much stopped seeing doctors after that. Not out of principle (not yet anyway). Just out of the feeling that something in the room hadn't been on my side. Generalizations can be hard. For what it's worth, I happen to know some great doctors who are absolutely trustworthy. And, of course, lots of people walk into a doctor's office because they're actually sick and the right medicine might benefit them. It's the rest I'm talking about. Someone walks in tired. Or a little distracted. A bit sad in February. A kid who fidgets or a wife who's quieter than she used to be. There's no disease, there's a life. And the system that used to help tell the difference now turns life into a subscription. And it compounds. The SSRI flattens you, so they add the stimulant to wake you up. The stimulant winds you up, so they add the benzo to take the edge off. The benzo wrecks your sleep, so they add the Ambien. Every new prescription is treating the last prescription's side effect. At some point you stop being the patient and become the side effect. Many of these drugs were studied for mere weeks and then prescribed for decades. There's no off-ramp because the on-ramp was never built for the duration. Try to stop the antidepressant and you find out your brain has rewired around it. Try to stop the benzo and you can have seizures. The script renews itself. You churn or you stay. Your wife agrees. Your mother agrees. Your brother agrees. The doctor went to school for this. You should listen to him. What, you think you know better? The credential isn't on the wall anymore. It's in every conversation you have with the people who love you. "I won't talk to him unless he's on his meds." I look around at the people I love and I'm not always sure who I'm talking to anymore. Half of them...

  5. 3d ago

    Chaos and the Birth of Order

    By Charles Krblich at Brownstone dot org. Growing up, I never cared for Mathematics. It was too logical, bland, boring, difficult, and when contrasted against the stories, battles, wars, glory, destruction, growth, and exploration that was History, I never gave it a fair chance. So it was one of the little ironies of life, that I came to do Mathematics for a living. Focused study softened the difficulty, and armed with growing knowledge, bland and boring transformed to mildly charming. With new perspective, I discovered what has since become my favorite toy, a Galton Board. The toy is a small window into our experience over the last several years in which our free and independent lives have clashed broadly against arcane, top-down rules conceived by bureaucrats. The phrase Standard of Care had already filtered into everyday health decisions made by healthcare providers. As with any bureaucratic phrase it is itself an equivocation — the deliberate use of ambiguous language in order to mislead, deceive, or conceal the truth. The Pandemic was a view into how Standards of Care are often decided simply by the opinion of unelected, unaccountable, and lifelong federal bureaucrats. My favorite toy, on the other hand, takes an opposite approach, and yet it reveals a hidden fact about life. In plain view, but unseen by all those around us: chaos produces spontaneous order. The creator of my toy, Sir Francis Galton, has a mixed and fascinating history. He was the originator of eugenics, popularized the phrase "nature versus nurture," developed the first weather map, introduced the use of questionnaires and surveys for collecting data on human communities, and he also developed the statistical concept of correlation. Most importantly, he developed my favorite toy. Galton's Board is just a simple vertical board with interleaved rows of pegs. At the top is a small container storing a mass of small, spherical beads, and at the bottom are bins to collect the beads after they fall through the pegs. That doesn't sound too fancy, and it is not. The magic happens when the beads are released from their container at the top of the board. Gravity is applied to the Potential Energy of the beads in the container. The energy becomes Kinetic. In fact, for a few moments, there is mass pandemonium. The beads are falling everywhere. The pegs they hit violently redirect their motion into other beads, other pegs, and finally into the bin where the bead finds its final resting place. The result of the violent and random clashing of the beads is always — always — the same thing: A Normal Distribution. I know of scarcely anything so apt to impress the imagination as the wonderful form of cosmic order expressed by the Law of Frequency of Error. The law would have been personified by the Greeks and deified, if they had known of it. It reigns with serenity and in complete self-effacement amidst the wildest confusion. The huger the mob, and the greater the apparent anarchy, the more perfect is its sway. It is the supreme law of Unreason. Whenever a large sample of chaotic elements are taken in hand and marshalled in the order of their magnitude, an unsuspected and most beautiful form of regularity proves to have been latent all along. —Francis Galton, Natural Inheritance, 1889 The naive among us may attribute it to being simply a nifty, mathematical trick, but the evidence is all around us in our everyday lives. I remember one time I was on vacation with my wife in Key West, FL. They have a fairly ugly landmark that is colorful and marks the Southernmost Point in the United States. We were walking down the road and were surprised to find a line. Neatly queued up along a sidewalk, no business or event to indicate anything unusual to line up for, no authorities managing the line, nor enforcing it, yet there was the neatly ordered line: everyone, without any discussion, naturally queued up waiting their turn to take a picture at the landmark. Maybe you'll say that ...

  6. 4d ago

    What's Happening with the MMR Vaccine? Vaccinated Individuals Are Being Diagnosed and Counted as Clinical Measles Cases Vaccination Status and Outcomes in Colorado Outbreak Enhanced Detection through Urine Sampling Contact Tracing and Resource Constrain

    By James Lyons-Weiler at Brownstone dot org. In a recent opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal, CDC Principal Deputy Director Ralph Abraham argued that "framing measles as an American policy failure is inaccurate and misleading," asserting that resources including vaccines and therapeutics have been surging nationwide and that the current measles situation reflects broader global trends rather than a uniquely domestic policy breakdown. Citing a recent Measles, Mortality Weekly Report article, Abraham hinted that something else was failing. He fell short of mentioning waning immunity or vaccine failure. The fact that 44.4 percent of secondary measles cases in the Colorado outbreak occurred in individuals who had received two documented doses of MMR vaccine stands in stark contrast to the expected vaccine failure rate. The MMR vaccine is widely cited as having ~94 percent effectiveness after two doses, meaning that only 6 percent of fully vaccinated individuals are expected to remain susceptible under typical exposure conditions. A breakthrough rate approaching 45 percent suggests either disproportionate exposure intensity, selection bias in testing or detection, or non-representative denominator dynamics, not a random sampling of the vaccinated population. Without exposure denominators, the proportion of vaccinated cases cannot be directly interpreted as a failure rate—but its magnitude exceeds baseline expectations and underscores the need for more rigorous denominator tracking, as well as attention to waning immunity, viral load dynamics in vaccinated individuals, and enhanced surveillance sensitivity (e.g., the use of urine RT-PCR). Publicly available Colorado Department of Public Health data for all 36 measles cases in Colorado during 2025 (which includes but is not restricted to the outbreak described in the MMWR) shows the age distribution for those 36 cases as: 0–4 years: 6 cases 5–17 years: 9 cases 18+ years: 21 cases Total: 36 cases, of which 15 (42 percent) were children under 18. Since the MMWR outbreak accounted for 10 of those cases, this broader Colorado surveillance suggests that children made up a substantial fraction of measles cases in the state in 2025 overall, though the exact number of children within the specific outbreak cluster described in the MMWR isn't published directly in that report. For more than two decades, measles surveillance in the United States and other high-income countries has operated in what might be called the vaccination era. Endemic transmission was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000, and routine immunization with two doses of measles-containing vaccine became the cornerstone of prevention. In this context, a persistent source of public confusion has re-emerged with each new outbreak report: vaccinated people are sometimes diagnosed with measles and are formally counted as confirmed clinical cases. This article explains why that observation is real, why it is epidemiologically unsurprising, and why misunderstanding it distorts both scientific interpretation and public discourse. The core fact is simple and verifiable. Under current public-health surveillance rules, measles case definitions are agnostic to vaccination status. If an individual meets the clinical criteria for measles and laboratory evidence confirms infection, that individual is counted as a measles case regardless of whether they received zero, one, or two doses of measles-containing vaccine. This is not an anomaly or a loophole in the system; it is a deliberate design choice rooted in how infectious-disease surveillance functions. To understand why vaccinated cases appear in official counts, it is necessary to begin with how measles cases are defined and confirmed. Measles surveillance relies on a standardized clinical and laboratory framework. Clinically, a suspected measles case is defined by a febrile illness accompanied by a generalized maculopapular rash and at least one of the classic prodro...

  7. 5d ago

    Who Owns the Pandemic Record? A Hearing in Washington, Consequences Everywhere Imported Certainty The Cost of Outsourced Judgment A Pandemic Decision Ledger Dissent Must Carry Duties as Well as Rights The Record Belongs to the People Who Bore the Conseq

    By Colleen Aldous at Brownstone dot org. On July 29, 2026, we watched Dr. Anthony Fauci's appearance before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which was coerced via Congressional subpoena after he declined to appear voluntarily. The hearing reopened a deep wound. Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, we were part of a minority group that fought for the science of early outpatient multidrug treatments for Covid-19 based on repurposed medications with an excellent safety record, including but not limited to hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. Other minority groups advocated for the truthful investigation of other equally important matters such as the cost/benefit calculation of the lockdown policies, vaccine safety, the ethics of vaccine mandates, and the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We were all marginalized by several government public health agencies and by the downstream institutions that deferred to government public health policies and recommendations. At the tail end of the Covid-19 pandemic, the persecution by medical and/or certification boards of medical doctors who pioneered early outpatient treatments for Covid-19 intensified and in many parts of the world it continues unabated. Most of the major news media, participating in The Trusted News Initiative, continue to disparage the scientists who spearheaded alternative ideas and continue to refuse to engage honestly with inconvenient truths and the accumulating research evidence. At the same time, we have also seen an increasing public awareness about alternative treatments and Covid-19 vaccine injuries. The failures of Covid-19 pandemic-era policies are now more widely recognized by an increasingly skeptical segment of the public. The hypothesis of a possible laboratory-associated origin of the SARS-CoV-2, which was once disparaged as a fringe conspiracy theory, has now been acknowledged as credible by several US intelligence agencies. Minority viewpoints about Covid-19 treatments and Covid-19 vaccine safety concerns are increasingly supported by scientific evidence published in the peer-reviewed literature. Nevertheless, rather than moving towards a resolution, current views about the Covid-19 pandemic are increasingly bifurcating. While the minority view gains increasing credibility, many of the institutions that represented the prevailing institutional orthodoxy have been intensifying their attacks against heterodox viewpoints and have continued to consolidate their stranglehold for institutional and political power. In the United States, for several years, Dr. Fauci was the public-facing representative of these powerful institutions. This was the underlying setting when Dr. Fauci appeared, unwillingly, on July 29, 2026 before the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs to answer questions about the policies that he advocated for throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. After an opening statement, he invoked the 5th Amendment 111 times on the advice of counsel and refused to engage with any of the questions that were posed to him. It was a stark contrast, seeing the public face of our public health agencies, suddenly humbled by refusing to speak his "truth" under oath. This was, after all, the same man who lectured us that he represented science; the man who proclaimed the boundaries of scientific truth and acceptable discourse about government policies; the man who advocated for severe lockdown policies until the deployment of a vaccine, shifting mask wearing guidance, and the arbitrary 6-foot distancing rule; the man who assured us that Covid-19 vaccines were safe and effective; the man who proclaimed that there was insufficient evidence in favor of early outpatient Covid-19 treatments based on hydroxychloroquine and/or ivermectin multidrug protocols. This same man chose, for the first time, to be silent after reading his opening statement from a piece of paper that he was holding with trembling hands. ...

  8. 6d ago

    'Climate Emergency' Scepticism in Eight Charts Climate Complexity Makes Attribution Challenging Replace Excitable Exclamation Marks with Sceptical Question Marks The Political Cost-Benefit Equation Doesn't Compute, for Rich or Poor Countries The 'Climat

    By Ramesh Thakur at Brownstone dot org. Canary in a Climate World: Climate Realism vs. the Net Zero Myth (2026) is the third book in the Canary in a Covid World/Climate World series. The first was Canary in a Covid World: How Propaganda and Censorship Changed Our (My) World (2023) and the second was Canary in a (Post) Covid World: Money, Fear and Power (2025). As the titles suggest, the three books trace the changed contours of the world under the impact of the twin crises alleged to have confronted humanity with existential threats. Intriguingly, both narratives seem also to be unravelling in tandem. My own chapter in the final book describes the many parallels in the two official narratives, including the willing co-option of the media to parrot and amplify the narrative. The institutional failure of the media as a safety guardrail against the abuse of entrusted power by political and health authorities is not news to the Brownstone community. After all, many members were themselves targeted by the censorship industrial complex. Three American and Argentinian researchers looked at the reporting of climate change stories by ten leading US and British media outlets, five left-leaning (BBC, Guardian, Independent, New York Times, Washington Post) and five right-leaning (Daily Mail, Fox News, New York Post, Telegraph, Wall Street Journal). Their study was published by the National Bureau of Economics Research as Working Paper No. 35216 in May 2026. A total of 116,045 full-text articles from the ten media outlets covering all five IPCC Assessment Reports were scrutinised to observe patterns of how reporters, editors, and columnists selected, framed, and presented stories to governments and the public. The study found a consistent bias towards emphasising higher-impact magnitudes within the ranges reported by the IPCC, a validation of the journalistic adage that if it bleeds, it leads. Geological records show that warming and cooling periods go through extended cycles with no clear pattern to the intensity, severity, and timing of the cycles. Natural disasters have always been with us and climate change is another constant. The relationship between climate and natural disasters is anything but clear. An IPCC assessment found only weak links between human-induced climate change and droughts, wildfires, floods, and hurricanes. Notwithstanding this, legacy media just cannot seem to help themselves when it comes to shoehorning climate alarmism into disaster stories. On 23 July, writing about the worst dengue fever outbreak in a decade in Sri Lanka, a BBC report by Kelly Ng and Sampath Dissanayake commented that 'as temperatures rise worldwide, these disease-carrying mosquitos are now moving into new areas, including Europe and the Mediterranean.' They cited a WHO report that the number of cases had surged globally from around 500,000 in 2000 to 14.4 million in 2024. I decided to check this out. I am confident you will gasp in shock to learn that the BBC was cherry-picking data to fit the narrative. As Figure 1 shows, the global trajectory is a jagged line with peaks and troughs. The global number of dengue fever infections (not cases) fell from 10 million in 1998 to 3.7 million in 2000, upturned, and stood at 37.5 million in 2023. But the slope of the global rise almost precisely parallels the rise in Latin America and the Caribbean, from 2 million in 2000 to 27.5 million in 2023. Unless the BBC is prepared to inform us ignorant deplorables just why the temperature rise is global but the dengue infections is restricted mainly to this one region, BBC Verify should call them out on this. But don't hold your breath. Climate change is the narrative that must not be challenged. Furthermore, on dengue fever deaths, the global slope broadly follows the Asian curve (Figure 2), suggesting that dengue mortality might correlate more to Asiatic poverty, that energy intensity is the key to alleviating and then eradicating poverty, and that foss...

Ratings & Reviews

4.8
out of 5
17 Ratings

About

Daily readings from Brownstone Institute authors, contributors, and researchers on public health, philosophy, science, and economics.

You Might Also Like