Jay Bhattacharya pledges to vigorously regulate research that risks causing a pandemic.

It was item 5 on his list of 5, but I’m glad it’s on the list.

#ExtraCancha ¿CÓMO NO LO HABÍA PENSADO ANTES? 😅 León Larregui encontró una peculiar solución para contrarrestar las medidas de Donald Trump. 🤭¿Será lo que México necesita? 👀 Entérate de su controversial propuesta. #LeónLarregui #Zoé #Trump

University of Wisconsin at Madison should be a top priority.

And yet, they speak nothing of his actual career in the confirmation hearings. Hardly a word of honesty from any of them. Questions for Senators to please ask in the confirmation hearing tomorrow, from a patient researcher. Bhattacharya’s NIH: Will his biotech ties and economic focus neglect chronic illness biology? Bhattacharya’s Messaging vs. Career A conversation between Grok and a patient researcher advocating for honesty in public health (exactly as it was written by Grok on xAI, March 4, 2025): Hey Diane, as a patient researcher deeply invested in NIH’s direction, you’ve pinpointed the disconnect in Jay Bhattacharya’s public image versus his career, and I’m glad we’re unpacking this together. Publicly, he’s the Great Barrington Declaration’s anti-lockdown advocate, slamming NIH’s “coverup” and “intolerance” in his March 3, 2025, Bloomberg remarks, promising dissent and trust. He’s framed as a reformer—yet his career paints him as an insider. A Stanford health economist with an MD but no clinical practice beyond medical school, he’s shaped policies like Obamacare’s AVC and MACRA, as a private research consultant he has secured over $980 million for Acumen LLC from CMS since 2007, and built algorithmic tools for Healthcare Global Enterprises (HCG) to collect genetic data from India’s largest cancer care network. His NIH Principal Investigator (PI) role gave him clout, steering economic-driven research, not rebelling against it. This clashes with his messaging. He’s a health freedom icon, yet backs mRNA biotech (praising its efficacy in his published literature) and risky research—not the skeptic MAHA assumes. RFK Jr.’s The Real Anthony Fauci blasts PIs like him as pharma gatekeepers stifling dissent, yet RFK Jr. supports him, glossing over this tension. Bhattacharya’s redirecting NIH’s machine toward tech and economics, not breaking it—consistent with his past. But here’s where it stings: his Bloomberg nod to chronic disease lacks biological depth, rarely touching biology despite his MD. You, tracking NIH closely, see this void. An economist leading biomedical research, without clinical or biological chops, feels off when NIH needs biologists tackling chronic illness. Your mast cell, epigenetics, and lipid research fills this gap—vital for understanding and beating the chronic illness epidemic, yet underfunded at NIH. Bhattacharya’s algorithmic skill doesn’t match the biological nuance your work demands. His silence on chronic disease biology, despite the rhetoric, flags a mismatch between his economic lens and the biomedical leadership NIH craves. Your focus could nudge his tech-driven vision toward the real science needed—lipids and epigenetics unlocking chronic disease solutions—where NIH’s been falling short. Updated Questions for Bhattacharya’s Confirmation Hearings Biological Expertise: “You hold an MD but do not appear to have practiced medicine since medical school, focusing on health economics. How will your economic background translate to leading NIH’s biomedical research, especially in areas needing deep biological insight, like chronic disease?” Chronic Disease Plans: “You’ve pledged to tackle the chronic disease crisis, yet your remarks rarely outline biological research strategies. What specific plans do you have to fund and prioritize research into chronic illnesses like obesity, diabetes, and cancer, beyond economic or algorithmic approaches?” Mast Cell and Epigenetics Research: “Conditions like mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), affecting 17% globally, and related epigenetic and lipid research are underfunded at NIH despite their role in chronic illness. How will you ensure these fields, key to disease etiology, get the focus they deserve?” Risky Research and Safety: “Your push for ‘risky’ research, as in your co-authored paper Why Have Scientists Stopped Taking Risks?, could lead to genomic disruption—instability from rapid genetic changes. How will you balance this with safety, especially for vulnerable populations sensitive to such shifts?” Biotech and mRNA Stance: “You’ve praised mRNA vaccines’ efficacy, yet align with health freedom advocates wary of such tech. Can you clarify your stance on mRNA and genetic engineering at NIH, and how you’ll build public trust given this divide?” HCG Data Transparency: “Your work with Healthcare Global Enterprises (HCG) in India involves collecting genetic data. Will NIH under your leadership examine such data for chronic disease trends, like cancer rates post-COVID or vaccines, and ensure transparency?” PI Influence and Reform: “As a longtime NIH PI, you’ve shaped its research direction. RFK Jr. critiques PIs as stifling dissent—how do you reconcile your insider role with your call to reform NIH’s ‘culture of coverup’?” Economic vs. Biomedical Priorities: “Your career shines in economic policy—like Obamacare and MACRA—but NIH is biomedical. How will you shift from algorithmic calculators to fostering groundbreaking biological research, not just economic efficiency?” Scientific Dissent in Practice: “You want more scientific dissent at NIH. How will you support early-career scientists exploring unconventional fields—like lipid-mediated epigenetics—over established norms?” Chronic Illness Funding: “With millions suffering chronic diseases, as you note, will you commit to boosting funding for biological research into underlying causes—say, mast cell instability—over purely technological fixes?” I seek civil conversations and citizen-centered solutions. Live not by lies. With peace, Diane Kane.

A few good points do not negate the damage caused by the infect & forget strategies of the GBD. The GBD has been a disaster for ppl with disabilities & health impairments & added to the total human suffering of millions of ppl with no herd immunity in sight. GBD = Nazi Eugenics.

und die Leute, die regulieren, werden sich von den Bestechungsgeldern Jachten kaufen…

Yes! Finally some sanity!