WND's Coronavirus Conspiracies: Even More Bad Takes

From mindless Fauci-bashing to declaring that a vaccine would be the mark of the beast, WorldNetDaily's columnists have been busy spreading fear and bogus claims about COVID-19.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 3/4/2021

As the pandemic has ground on, WND has as well, with its columnists continuing to dish out bad takes on COVID. Let's look at some of the stranger, and medically misleading, things they have claimed.

Mark of the beast

A coronavirus vaccine didn't even exist until December, yet WND has spent months fearmongering about it. For instance, a June 22 "news" article stated:

As the Trump administration expresses optimism about the development of a vaccine for the coronvirus, a religious-liberty group is warning that the top vaccines under development are made with "aborted baby cell lines."

The vaccines are not from aborted fetuses but from aborted baby cell lines used by researchers, says Liberty Counsel, which is running a campaign urging members of Congress and governors to oppose a government plan to force vaccinations.

"As an American citizen who loves my country, my Constitution and my right to refuse forced vaccinations, I urge you to end all consideration of mandatory vaccinations," Liberty Counsel says.

Strangely, neither the WND article or the Liberty Counsel report it's based on offered any proof that this is the case; Liberty Counsel cited only "reports." Nevertheless, WND uncritically reported how "Liberty Counsel Chairman Mat Staver is concerned that the top five vaccine research companies are 'using aborted baby cell lines to fuel their research and build their vaccines.'"WND also gave to Liberty Counsel to forward a conspiracy about drugmakers wanting a vaccine to make money:

The Liberty Counsel campaign points out vaccinations are big money for pharmaceutical companies.

[...]

Liberty Counsel said vaccines developed using aborted baby cells are easier to research and therefore cheaper to develop, increasing profitability for the pharmaceutical companies and their investors.

"And what better opportunity to make those profits skyrocket than to demand mass vaccination of the entire population … even though COVID-19 is now known to have just a 0.26% death rate, roughly the same as the average annual flu," the group said.

"It is absolutely imperative that we stop this push for mandatory vaccinations before it goes any further. Religious exemptions for vaccinations MUST stand. ALL people must be free to decide for themselves whether to take a vaccine – without the heavy pushing of multi-billion-dollar profiteers abusing our political system to remove those choices."

In fact, that 0.26 percent number -- which came from a report by the Centers for Disease Control -- comes from a range of estimates and is subject to change, and the actual death rate is in all likelihood higher. Also, coronavirus is much worse than the flu.

Scott Lively spent a July 27 column freaking out over the remote possibility that the Supreme Court could mandate a vaccine, adding that "the only hope I can see for avoiding mandatory vaccines is a Trump reelection accompanied either by 1) full GOP control of Congress, or 2) a quick flip of SCOTUS to a conservative majority." This being the gay-hating Lively, he also took a detour to rant about gay marriage.

As vaccine candidates moved closer to approval, the fearmongering has continued. Barbara Simpson ranted in her Sept. 25 column that the idea a vaccine will "suddenly fix everything" couldn't be "further from the truth," citing relatively rare cases in Africa where some people have caught polio from the vaccine. From there, it was quickly onto Bill Gates conspiracy territory:

It doesn't help that there are some big names associated with the program. The vaccine being used in Africa comes from the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) – which is supported and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Interesting, isn't it, that news media have ignored this growing catastrophe. Is it because it's in Africa – or because of the name "Gates"? You decide. Despite the failures, the vaccine campaign continues.

[...]

In fact, the Gateses also fund the GAVI Vaccine Alliance, which is running COVID-19 vaccine human trials in South Africa along with the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, which is also another Gates-funded institution.

My question is, given the result of the failure of the polio vaccine in Africa, why isn't there more pressure being put on the Gates people, and indeed the U.N. and WHO, concerning the safety of a COVID-19 vaccine?

Daniel Joseph served up an Oct. 2 video asking the question, "Is a forced COVID vaccine the Mark of the Beast?" His answer appears to be yes, declaring that "this has the Antichrist written all over it." (Disclosure: We didn't sit through the entire tedious hour-and-a-half-long video to find out the full answer.)

Brent Smith's Oct. 9 column went anti-vaxxer, declaring that "if your diseased child doesn't negatively affect me or my family, it isn't my problem," adding: "The science is all there. Any parent can research the safety and warnings of vaccines and make an educated decision to vaccinate their children and themselves, or not. This may seem rather selfish, but that's the price of freedom, and your stupidity and fear shall not trump my liberty."

This followed up on a column Smith wrote in August declaring that getting the vaccine is a matter of "My Body, My Choice." He invoked both Saul Alinsky and Chinese "social credit" schemes in the process, the concluded by claiming: "They're already taking away our right to choose how we vote. Soon, I fear, we may have to make a hard decision to choose, or not, to be vaccinated. And if we choose the latter, there will be consequences, as we move closer to the Chinese model."

Imaginary grand jury

Joel S. Hirschhorn began his Sept. 29 WND column by claiming this:

With a grand jury approach, the revealing of evidence herein shows that Dr. Anthony Fauci has deliberately ignored massive amounts of data showing that hydroxychloroquine is a safe, cheap and effective remedy for COVID-19. By ignoring his ethical responsibility as a physician to first do no harm, his behavior continues to cause preventable pain, suffering and death. Evidence also vindicates what President Trump said and did early on to inform Americans about the benefits of hydroxychloroquine.

Hirschhorn's bio gives him the "Dr." honorific, but he's not a medical doctor. He may have a Ph.D., as indicated by his claim to have been a "full professor" at the University of Wisconsin, but any relevant medical experience is limited to claiming that he Has "a long history of working on health issues" and was "an executive volunteer at a major hospital," whatever that means.

Hirschhorn's "grand jury approach" to "indicting" Fauci includes a lot of cherry-picked studies promoting hydroxychloroqine's alleged efficacy, whining that Fauci is a "tyrant" whose purported insistence on randomized control trials "has been sharply debunked," and summarily declaring: "In sum: Every single day people are suffering and dying unnecessarily because Fauci refuses to accept HCQ facts. Instead, in endless media statements and appearances he pushes masks, lockdowns and vaccines. Anthony Fauci benefits from incorrect views of HCQ in the mostly leftist press."

An actual grand jury -- not the one-man version residing in Hirschhorn's fevered brain -- would consider all evidence, not merely construct straw men for the purpose of easily knocking them down. Unsurprisingly, Hirschhorn arrived at his predetermined conclusion:

For this grand jury proceeding, substantial evidence supports the indictment of Fauci on these counts:

A. Violating his physician oath to first do no harm.

B. Using his substantial influence to block widespread use of the proven safe, cheap and effective HCQ and, consequently, causing preventable pain, suffering and death for many thousands of Americans directly and through crippling lockdowns with their own negative health impacts.

C. Blocking traditional medical freedom and preventing physicians from using their best judgment in selecting for their patients the best treatment for COVID-19.

Shockingly, this is not the most extreme thing Hirschhorn written about Fauci, and just as shockingly, it didn't happen at WND. In an August column at some obscure website, Hirschhorn called Fauci a "war criminal" and claimed the Chinese "intentionally decided to spread the virus worldwide" so they "could make huge sums by selling the inevitably needed personal protective equipment (PPE) and, eventually, possible drugs and vaccines." He concluded by ranting that "until Fauci is knocked off his lofty pedestal they will continue to lose the war on the pandemic."

More Fauci-bashing

An Oct.. 12 column by Elizabeth Lee Vliet -- a doctor affiliated with the fringe-right Association of American Physicians and Surgeons -- once again shilled for hydroxychloroquine, asserting: "The failed Fauci model –telling patients to go home, self-quarantine, do nothing and go to the ER if they get sicker – exacerbated by the FDA's statements discouraging HCQ use, has caused the U.S. COVID death rate to be in the world's top 10."

This was followed by an Oct. 16 rant by Brent Smith:

How does Dr. Anthony Fauci still have a job? He's part of the Inside-the-Beltway Deep State and has attempted to undermine the president since he was elevated to the position of Doctor COVID Know-it-All. And here is just another example.

Many of us have seen clips of what Trump said at a recent rally – that he loves and appreciates the support he's gotten so much that he wanted to go into the crowd and kiss everyone.

He added that he could do this because he is now immune from getting the coronavirus.

For this, CNN pounced all over him and invited the nation's top "expert" on everything coronavirus, Dr. Fauci, to join Jake Tapper in the Trump bashing.

Still basking in the glow of his 15 minutes of fame, Fauci, I'm sure, gladly accepted.

Tapper asked Fauci whether Trump was right to say he was immune. Yet even before Fauci answered, the chyron across the bottom of the screen said, "Trump Falsely Claims He's immune, Defends White House Event."

Fauci answered, in his usual condescending way: "The problem with the word immune, it means different things to different individuals."

No, Dr. Fauci, it doesn't – not this time. Not if you listened to what the president said immediately following his declaration. Trump was actually quite clear, but evidently Tapper wasn't interested in providing any context, and Fauci had no interest in asking for any.

Smith waited until after asserting that "Trump was actually quite clear" to actually directly quote what he said, declaring that "Trump went on to do what a leader should – instill confidence, not fear, and trust in the American people." And he wasn't done with his Fauci-bashing:

Jake Tapper knows he has an ally in Dr. Fauci. And Fauci continues to have no appreciation for the man, President Trump, who, in effect, made him a household name.

I marvel at the fact that Fauci still holds the position he does and why Trump hasn't fired him. For a man who build a television career on firing people, it's a mystery to me that Fauci, this bureaucrat, has been spared the ax.

Since then, of course, it was Trump who has been fired, not Fauci.

Misleading about masks

A Dec. 1 WND column by Barry Shaw began by claiming:

Around the world there is a manic mask mandate on steroids. But do masks stop the spread of COVID-19?

The answer depends on who you ask. That's science for you. It's precociously contrarian at a time you want definitive answers.

If you had followed the American experts, from the Centers for Disease Control to Dr. Anthony Fauci, you would have seen a 180-degree swing in statements about masks. And yet, despite the bold certainty of both that masks prevent the spread of COVID-19, there are studies that cast doubt on that certainty.

A Danish mask study, a 4,800-person randomized trial that took place in the spring and early summer, found little statistical difference in infection rates between a group that wore masks and a group that didn't.

Ultimately, 42 of 2,393 people (1.8%) in the mask group and 53 of 2,470 (2.1%) in the no-mask group became infected.

Shaw then wrote:

Dr. Christine Laine, editor-in-chief of the Annals of Internal Medicine, said masks "are not a magic bullet."

"There are people who say, 'I'm fine, I'm wearing a mask.' They need to realize they are not invulnerable to infection," she said.

But Laine also pointed out that the Danish study was inconclusive.

From there, Shaw moved onto another favorite right-wing narrative:

Sweden is a country that defied both mask-wearing and lockdowns.

Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist for the Swedish public health authority, has relied heavily on the public adopting a strategy of herd immunity to allow them to build up antibodies. Although admitting that the use of masks could be considered when visiting busy and confined places, he has been against mass mask mandates.

"The evidence is weak," he told Science magazine. "Countries that have masks are not doing the best right now. It is very dangerous to try to believe that masks are a silver bullet."

Swedish authorities actively discouraged people from wearing face masks which, they said, would spread panic, are often worn the wrong way and can provide a false sense of safety.

In Sweden, they took active steps to prevent fear from influencing their open society to the extent that individuals, particularly medical professionals, were punished for wearing a mask.

And what was been happening in Sweden around the time Shaw's column was published? Coronavirus cases hit record levels, prompting folks to rethink the whole discouraging-masks thing.

Shaw then descended into the usual right-wing anti-Fauci and pro-hydroxychloroquine rants:

Fauci, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director, said about Remdesivir on April 29: "Remdesivir has a clear-cut significant positive effect in diminishing time to recovery for patients with COVID-19. This will be the standard of care. A drug that can block this virus."

We can trust science, can't we? Well, apparently we can't.

A month later, Dr. Peter Breggin released a report titled "Fauci's Remdesivir: Inadequate to Treat COVID-19 and Potentially Lethal." His opening statement read, "We have found that Remdesivir is a failed antiviral drug that will probably do more harm than good for many coronavirus patients."

As Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a New York state physician who has treated thousands of COVID-19 patients, told me in August: "For early stage COVID-19 patients Hydroxychloroquine is much safer than Remdesivir. Remdesivir causes dangerous cardiovascular problems such as atrial fibrillation (6%), hypotension (8%), and cardiac arrest (1%). Remdesivir also causes hepatic toxicity (23%), kidney damage (19%), and serious lung damage (10%) such as ARDS."

So whose science are we supposed to follow? Certainly not that of Dr. Fauci.

Breggin's article on remdesivir was published on his own website in May and has apparently never been peer-reviewed. Actual scientists doing actual research, meanwhile, have found some benefits for remdesivir in treating coronavirus. Zelenko, of course, is the doctor whose unverified claims about hydroxychloroquine WND has previously promoted.

Shaw concluded by scaremongering about a coronavirus vaccine: "Are there long-term side effects? Nobody knows."

'Orchestrated' economic collapse

Patrice Lewis began her Dec. 11 WND column by stating, "I'm going to be quoting a lot of sources in this column rather than writing much original content. That's because there are so many others saying things better than I can." Unfortunately, most of those sources are fringe-right conspiracy websites ranting about the coronavirus pandemic and asserting that all the chaos surrounding it has been planned, because this is the conclusion she came to:

Make no mistake, we're in the throes of an orchestrated economic collapse. Orchestrated. Got that? Orchestrated. It's not about controlling a virus; it's about controlling people. Even Rush Limbaugh is calling this a "plandemic."

One person commented: "I remember thinking when the lockdowns started – don't they know this is going to destroy the economy? And then reality hit me, and I knew that this is their end game and that it's all been planned."

[...]

"Science," in other words, usually means whatever a political tyrant wants it to mean. We all know Trump rallies are "superspreader" events, but BLM or Antifa protests or Biden celebrations are fine, just fine.

Lewis then described the economic fallout for her business: "Our wholesale woodcraft business that has supported us for nearly 30 years absolutely tanked during 2020. Thirty years of building up a business, and now it's gone." After citing a few more fringe people, Lewis concluded: "OK, my rant is over. But the economic misery for millions of people continues. Folks, the pain isn't worth the cost."

Strangely, Lewis never identifies who specifically is behind this conspiracy beyond a shadowy "they."

'I don't believe' in COVID variants

Bad takes on coronavirus by WorldNetDaily columnists went into the new year, as evidenced by this Jan. 1 column by Brent Smith, headlined "Sorry, but I don't believe in the 'new strain' of coronavirus":

But just when people are beginning to breathe a sigh of relief, there are reports of a new, even worse, strain of the coronavirus.

In years gone by I doubt I would have questioned the validity of such a claim made by the "experts."

But, after all the misstatements, half-truths and outright lies we've been fed, not only scientifically and medically, but politically, in regards to the election, I'm finding it increasing difficult to believe that a new, mutated strain of the virus has been discovered, just as the vaccine is being widely distributed.

This "new strain" may be entirely legitimate, but after all we've been fed this year, I'm sorry, but I just don't believe it. I can't – at least not at first blush. Give me a better reason than it's what some expert says, and maybe I'll believe.

Why should I? This is a classic, virtually textbook demonstration of the Boy who cried Wolf.

How many times do they think we will just sit here and believe one tall tale after another before it just becomes too much.

I know I sound like some unhinged, conspiracy moron, but again, why should I believe the same "experts" who have been consistently feeding us wrong information about every measure regarding this pandemic?

And believe me; I don't want to be that guy, that outlier. But I have to – hell, we all must. Look at what they've put us through, made us do, not do and forced us to endure. And look at what it has done to improve our lives. Absolutely nothing!

Juxtapose that with all they've done to erode away any confidence we had in these "experts" to practically nothing.

[...]

After all this, at best we must conclude the experts to be incompetent, or at worst, just plain bad people, manipulating the ignorant for their own gains.

And now we are expected to believe them once again – that by sheer happenstance, and just as we can begin to see a possible end in sight, they've discovered a new strain!

And let me guess. The vaccines just developed at lightning speed are completely ineffective, and any happy thoughts we had of opening up America again? Just put those thoughts back in the lock box.

This new strain may be totally legit, but you'll have to pardon me if I'm just a bit skeptical.

Meanwhile, in the real world, facts don't care about Smith's feelings -- coronavirus variants exist and are more transmissible than the original strain.