Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Overturning Zika: The Pandemic That Never Was Kindle Edition
“Thirst was made for water; inquiry for truth." C.S. Lewis
To Caesar’s "I came, I saw, I conquered", Zika might add, "I disappeared, – but nobody noticed," ... until now.
Overturning Zika investigates (now-overshadowed) pandemic Zika-microcephaly: from improbable but terrifying arrival -- to immediate disappearance. Overturning Zika illuminates facts ignored at the time: for instance, in 2015 Brazil clinical Zika-testing didn’t exist; none were performed on “mild dengue” patients reclassified as novel “Zika”; nor during or after the microcephaly-birth pregnancies. These unfortunate moms were diagnosed through later telephone questionnaires.
Zika-microcephaly, the world's largest medical news story in 2016, brought shock, fear, and panic throughout the tropics – coincident with Brazilian assertions' casting the eternally harmless Zika-virus as the ultimate danger to pregnancy: potentially rendering hundreds of millions of women in pregnancy but one mosquito-bite away from irrevocable damage to the cherished life within. The WHO acknowledged and aggrandized this worldwide threat, uniquely amongst all the many mosquito-borne illnesses, as a "public health emergency of international concern".
Public health officials immediately took center stage, issuing travel advisories and recommending indefinite abstinence from pregnancy for certain populations. The relief of a vaccine was promised but never delivered. The WHO predicted four million cases of Zika in the Americas and numbers worldwide that would add one million cases of microcephaly per year.
It's a complete blessing that none of this occurred: not in 2016, nor any year subsequently. As soon as stricter measurements for both Zika and microcephaly came into existence, neither was found to show medical significance or mutual association. Zika and microcephaly have long existed independently of each other: the one harmless, the other tragic but rare – and they will continue to do so.
Why has the “good news” of both Zika’s and microcephaly’s disappearance been buried? Overturning Zika is no conspiracy-tale, but elucidates secondary interests and forces that keep narratives (however flimsily constructed) active, when serving political or institutional goals.
“Overturning Zika shows, with great clarity, the scientific negligence used for economic and political ends and perhaps to create careers for researchers not interested in scientific truth as much as fame and recognition through "discoveries". " -- Robin Kaczmarczyk
“Although the Zika panic was confined largely to Brazil, many, if not most of the signs were there for spiraling panic.
- Identification of a novel virus without legitimate scientific proof of its novelty? “Check”
- Sound-bite promotion of a narrative without legitimate and independent verification? “Check”
- Use of the public square as a means of promotion of a specific hypothesis? “Check”
- The use of the panic to enhance the careers of specific scientists? “Check”
-- Wilton Alston
“With Overturning Zika, physician Randy Bock lights a fuse under a powder keg of questions that threaten to blow up the entire official narrative of the Zika pandemic, from the unknown number of Zika cases to their unsubstantiated role in microcephaly, while exposing the politicized and sloppy science that provoked unnecessary fear and suffering in millions of expectant mothers in tropical regions worldwide.” Steve Templeton, Ph.D.,
Prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association JAMA's chief editors were given a shorter version, early 2020 -- without disputing the facts presented here; nonetheless, they demurred, not wanting to undercut the public health establishment’s credibility, pending COVID. Read here what they wish you can’t, while you can.
- LanguageEnglish
- Publication dateApril 3, 2022
- File size36013 KB
Customers who bought this item also bought
Product details
- ASIN : B09X4YDYC3
- Publisher : Drivestraight Inc., (April 3, 2022)
- Publication date : April 3, 2022
- Language : English
- File size : 36013 KB
- Simultaneous device usage : Unlimited
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Not Enabled
- Word Wise : Not Enabled
- Print length : 241 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,678,879 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #765 in Public Health (Kindle Store)
- #2,820 in Public Health Administration
- #2,941 in Science History & Philosophy
- Customer Reviews:
Customer reviews
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star5 star82%18%0%0%0%82%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star4 star82%18%0%0%0%18%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star3 star82%18%0%0%0%0%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star2 star82%18%0%0%0%0%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star1 star82%18%0%0%0%0%
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
Pandemic in Perspective
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
In comparison, also reported by the CDC, there were 1,752,735 new cancer cases reported in 2019 and 599,589 people died of cancer. The total budget for the National Cancer Institute (excluding AIDS research) was approximately $6.2 billion or a little more than $3500/case. The very real diagnosis of cancer also compares with the estimated diagnosis of Zika, indistinguishable from dengue. Further, the correlation between Zika and microcephaly is also inconclusive.
The subtitle of the book by Dr. Randall Bock explains the result of the potential for an incompletely characterized virus that was richly funded. Major news outlets such as the New York Times raised the concern about Zika and its effects and they continue to do so. The director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Dr. Anthony Fauci, fueled the concern. These two forces supported the funding outlined above. In addition, in Brazil where the majority of potential Zika cases were reported, researchers were supported with grants from the World Health Organization (WHO), outside governments, and non-governmental organizations. Of note, all participants received material benefit from the funding (NIAID in funding, clinical researchers in Brazil through grants, and the New York Times through advertising). US-funded research continues, both in Brazil and in the United States.
Dr. Bock suggests,
Our knowledge of viruses and their effects on human populations must be based on scientific fact, not media sensationalism. If there really was a Zika-caused microcephaly epidemic in Brazil in 2016, let the science show it. The current general consensus on the matter lacks adequate scientific backing.
He further states that people “were forced to make life-altering decisions [such as contraception and abortion] based on claims that had not been verified in almost all aspects.”
The facts in Overturning Zika show that there truly was no pandemic. Dr. Bock also concludes that
Science has two underlying definitions, both a set of certain knowledge and facts – as well as the process by which those are determined, and thereafter presumably continually questioned. Questioning science is science.
Was Zika a pandemic? Not by definition. It was endemic to specific areas for a short period of time, if the distinction from dengue is real. Overturning Zika is a book that had to be written. It is also a book that has to be read if we are to understand the effects that public policy and media coverage have on scientific inquiry. This is an important work and Zika is an important example for policy makers at both global and local levels.
Roy Wallen, Directional Healthcare Advisors
Reviewed in the United States on April 27, 2022
Top reviews from other countries
Do you think we are going to get such an apology? Or do you think we are more likely to get: “The next outbreak is not a matter of if, but when.”
Randall Bock has extensively studied this issue and in his recent book, Overturning Zika, The Pandemic that Never Was, he investigates and documents the facts, among them:
• In 2015 a Brazilian husband-and-wife team of virologists concluded that a Zika virus pandemic was sweeping the country, (even though at the time, no reliable testing for Zika virus was available in Brazil).
• At about the same time, based upon a handful of personal observations, a regional Brazilian neuropediatrician became concerned that there might be a pandemic of microcephaly.
• And in a grand sweep worthy of Robert Gallo, a regional general practitioner and epidemiologist, declared that the microcephaly pandemic was caused by the Zika virus pandemic (even though Zika had never been known to cause human illness).
How could this happen? Is it the fault of the clinicians making observations and having ideas? No, the starting point for scientific inquiry is observation and hypothesis. But one could criticize them for announcing their concerns to the world by a press conference, rather than submitting them to scientific scrutiny.
Of greater concern, what are we to make of the fact that within four months of the news conference, the World Health Organization declared, ex-cathedra, a Zika-microcephaly pandemic? What does that say about the priorities of our world scientific leadership?
And even when it became clear there never was a Zika pandemic, nor a microcephaly pandemic, nor a relationship between the two, public health officials and research grant recipients can’t bring themselves to say, “It was all a misunderstanding. What we get instead is “the next outbreak is not a matter of if, but when”?
Want to understand the issues? Think it might have some relationship to other events you have observed? Read the book and decide for yourself. -John Cunnington MD





