Harvard Fires Professor For Telling Truth About COVID Mandates

Harvard University, like so many other formerly "elite" institutions, embarrassed itself during COVID. 

Universities, ostensibly devoted to searching for truth and fact, revealed a long-formenting truth in 2020: they no longer viewed themselves as truth-based instructional organizations. Instead, their sole focus and goal is indoctrination. Pushing an ideological message, promoting progressive activism and ensuring that identity and nonsensical anti-truth is privileged over objective reality.

That concerning shift in priority has been underway for decades, but rose to the forefront rapidly in 2020, shoved by necessity and opportunity. Harvard, as well as their ideological allies in the media, demanded conformity with prevailing narratives over the pursuit of truth. Because the "wrong" people could potentially be correct.

And even 4 years later, after the prevailing narratives conclusively being proven wrong on masks, lockdowns, school closures and a host of other COVID-related issues, they're still cracking down on anyone who spoke out against the abandonment of their core principles. 

In March 2024, that's taken the shape of punishment for Dr. Martin Kulldorff, an esteemed professor of medicine at Harvard. And one of the few people since 2020 at the disgraced university to live up to the once-valued concept of searching for truth.

CAMBRIDGE, MA - AUGUST 30:  A Harvard University building on August 30, 2018 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The U.S. Justice Department sided with Asian-Americans suing Harvard over admissions policy.  (Photo by Scott Eisen/Getty Images)

Dr. Martin Kulldorff Fired For Being Right When Harvard Was Wrong

Kulldorff revealed Monday that he'd been let go as a professor of medicine at Harvard because he told the truth. In a lengthy expose of the intellectual rot at the core of the university, he discussed how his early opposition to obviously incorrect policies like school closures led to anger and consternation among his peers and superiors at the university.

As one example, when Stanford University's Scott Atlas correctly advocated for open schools, citing Sweden's example that there was little danger and immense benefits from getting kids back in classrooms, he was criticized by 98 of his university coworkers. Kulldorff wrote a letter published by the student run Stanford Daily backing Atlas and offering to debate any of his critics.

"None of the 98 signatories accepted my offer to debate. Instead, someone at Stanford sent complaints to my superiors at Harvard, who were not thrilled with me," he wrote. 

Of course they weren't thrilled; Harvard had no interest in allowing dissenting views, no matter how accurate they were. 

Kulldorff also correctly identified flaws in the COVID vaccine authorization process, posting on Twitter in 2021 that, as the vaccine trials weren't designed to make determinations that other so-called "experts" espoused, they did not need to be used by everyone.

"Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should. COVID vaccines are important for older high-risk people and their care-takers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Nor children," he wrote at the time.

For that and other vaccine-related "crimes," he was censored by Twitter and eventually disciplined by the CDC.

Pursuit Of Science Abandoned In Favor Of ‘Religious Dogma’

Kulldorff requested an exemption to the university's vaccine mandate, on the grounds that he'd already had COVID and recovered from it, leading to superior natural immunity. Unsurprisingly, like so many others who attempted to counter the "religious dogma" of vaccine mandates, he was denied.

"Having had COVID disease, I have stronger longer lasting immunity than those vaccinated (Gazit et al). Lacking scientific rationale, vaccine mandates are religious dogma, and I request a religious exemption from COVID vaccination," he said.

Around the same time, in an all-too-perfect example of the perverse incentives during COVID, he represented his positions, articulated in the Great Barrington Declaration, about opening up society. Sure enough, his views were then attacked by Rochelle Walensky, another Harvard professor. 

"Rochelle Walensky, a fellow Harvard professor who had served on the advisory council to NIH director Collins, engaged me in a one-directional 'debate.' After a Boston radio station interviewed me, Walensky came on as the official representative of Mass General Brigham to counter me, without giving me an opportunity to respond. A few months later, she became the new CDC director."

Kulldorff was punished for being right, Walensky was promoted for being wrong. It's hard to be more Harvard than that.

Debate Has Disappeared In Modern Science

Kulldorff offered to debate those in the scientific community at Harvard over their differing views on COVID.

No one took him up on it. 

And as he says, "The public should not trust scientists, even Harvard scientists, unwilling to debate their positions with fellow scientists." But that's exactly what's happened over the past decades, culminating in the "expert" community's horrifying, dangerous, malicious performance during the pandemic.

Harvard scientists do not believe they have to debate anyone with differing views. Their views are correct, because of who they are. Opposition and fact finding are not done in the pursuit of truth, in their minds, but in service of an incorrect ideology. One that they label "anti-science," ignoring that the abandonment of debate and unquestioning acceptance of incorrect, manufactured consensus is the true "anti-science."

Kulldorff was proven right, repeatedly, both in his advocacy for open schools, age-specific policies and vaccine-related issues. His reward, even four years later, has been demonization and now punishment. 

Meanwhile, Walensky reaps endless rewards of her inarguable failure. Both in terms of recognizing the flaws in her opinions and her disastrous tenure at the CDC. When those who are wrong are never forced to admit it, their ideology becomes even more hardened, closed and narrow-minded. 

Pretty much sums up the modern Harvard experience perfectly. "Veritas" indeed.