What's up ladies and gentlemen boys and girls around the world I would like to welcome you back to the real talk with Zubi podcast now today's episode is a much awaited episode.

We are going to be talking to Dr. Martin Caldorf who is a bio statistician. He's an epidemiologist and he is a professor of medicine at Harvard University.

He's also one of the co authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. Welcome to the show Martin. How you doing?

Thank you sir. I'm doing great. How are you doing?

I'm doing fantastic. I'm really honored to have you on the show. So thank you for accepting the invitation.

It's all my pleasure. So thank you for inviting me.

Awesome. So I've done a brief intro there, Martin, but for people who are not familiar with who you are and your background, can you please tell them a little bit more about who you are.

Well, for a couple of decades, I have worked on disease surveillance developing new methods and applying them for how to quickly detect disease outbreaks and how to monitor them.

I've also been working a lot on methods for vaccine safety to see how.

How can quickly detect I was elections if there are any after vaccines.

So that's my background and then when the pandemic hit, I was very surprised because the official narrative was very different from what I thought was the best approach as an infectious disease.

What was the first thing that struck you when this all began that you felt wasn't right in terms of your own work and knowledge?

Well, there were two things that struck me early on the first was as soon as the COVID hit Italy and Iran, which were the two first countries out of China that was the hit quite badly.

It was clear that this would be a well well pandemic that we could not avoid. It wasn't spread to the rest of the world sooner or later.

The other thing that struck me that was not discussed was was that while anybody can get infected, it was very clear already from the data out of the one in China that this was very different in terms of the risk of mortality by age.

So that there's more than a thousand or difference between the oldest and the youngest member of society.

So the natural thing to do then, which is the activity in all the pandemic preparedness plans that countries have prepared years before.

What you want to protect the older, high risk people, because they are the one who are dying from this COVID, while not limiting the lives of children and young adults who are minuscule risk in terms of death from this disease, they can get it and they do get it, but in terms of mortality, they are at the minuscule risk.

And why do you think that seemingly obvious point, which we've known for a long, a long time now, why do you think that that still continues to be largely ignored and has been routinely ignored over the past 18 to 20 months now?

I don't know, it surprises me, it doesn't make any public health sense, doesn't make scientific sense.

And we're still living with that because right now there's a lot of emphasis on vaccine children or pre mandates on working as adults, while there are still older people who have not gotten the vaccine, who needs it, both in the United States, as well as in other parts of the world, where there's still a vaccine shortage.

So the emphasis should be to vaccinate those remaining older people who have not yet been vaccinated and who have not had COVID.

...