Skip to main content

Star Tribune Editorial

By July 19, 2021Commentary

The Star Tribune published an op-ed I wrote today on their recent column on Andy Slavitt’s book.  I have had a lot of unkind things to say about the Strib over the course of the epidemic, but I am appreciative of their willingness to publish contrary opinions, and I am especially grateful to Doug Tice, who has been very good and decent to work with.  (Strib Op-ed)

Join the discussion 10 Comments

  • Barb says:

    Excellent commentary Kevin. You have been the voice of reason, and continue to be!

  • Colonel Travis says:

    Reading the comments is interesting. With most, it shows you how one-sided their, ah, information gathering has been for a year and a half. They have never seen a contrarian view to their own. Instead of pondering a different position, they dig their heels in further. It’s sad. I’m glad you were published by them, maybe it can open some eyes.

  • Chuck says:

    Great editorial Kevin! The comments posted by the paid Star Tribune subscribers is telling!!!! Most are hilarious!!!

  • David Eastwood says:

    Thank you for writing this, Kevin, and thanks to the Strib for actually publishing it.

    It’s interesting (and entirely predictable) that those commenters questioning your credentials would have no trouble accepting, hook, line and sinker anything from Bill Gates, John Kerry, Al Gore or any of the other climate change charlatans.

    Always the same – attack the messenger, and ignore the inconvenient truths in the message.

  • Kevin Roche says:

    which is especially ironic since Andy Slavitt has less relevant experience and credentials than I do

  • Joseph Lampe says:

    I strongly suspect that Andy has read less than 3 or 4% of the research that you have during the past 18 months.

  • Peggy A Lewis says:

    I spent some time in the early part of the pandemic, before finding Kevin, reading and responding to the ST comment section. I realized that there is an uncanny volume of posts from the same 15 authors. All disputing ANYTHING and all things anti lock-down, pro children (Yes. These are people who literally want children to suffer so the elderly live on) and constantly refer back to what “Trump did…Trump said…Trump. Trump. TRUMP!

    I started feeling anxious about reading those comments then realized we aren’t 1.5 years ago in time and they are in their own echo chamber. Probably NOT really doing all or any of the things they are requiring of the gen pop or are indeed DOING them and we know them as the ones driving down Lake, alone, with a mask.

    What I am able to discern though, is that they have numbers. Those numbers, at least in MN, is what drove the ridiculous policies foisted on everyone ultimately by Walz but advised by MDH, Slavitt and Osterholm. Those outrageous predictions landed us in a heap of a mess and now the response it crickets. Or the most we get is: Information changed as does the science. It makes me throw up to hear that come out of someone’s mouth because its psychopathy in its most raw form.

    I hope we can gain common sense back…I dearly hope.

  • Kate says:

    Any more info on the transmissibility of the Delta variant? I see this quote everywhere (from F. Perry Wilson/Yale): “It’s actually quite dramatic how the growth rate will change,” says Dr. Wilson. “Delta is spreading 50% faster than Alpha, which was 50% more contagious than the original strain of SARS-CoV-2”. I looked at the study you referenced in Coronamonomania #85 (the PHE brief of 6/25/21), and you say the secondary attack rate is a potential indicator of transmissibility (and only slightly higher than Alpha). Does that jibe with what the ubiquitous quote from Dr. Wilson claims?

  • Kevin Roche says:

    this people are panic mongers who never look at actual data. Alpha, B117, turned out to only be slightly more transmissible, Delta is the same thing. Data is data, the data from England, where Delta has been established for a long time, shows only slightly higher transmission.

Leave a comment