Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent return for a wide-ranging conversation about the state of public health, vaccine policy, and the consequences of ideas they've been documenting since the early days of We Want Them Infected.

They begin with reports of additional measles deaths and the continued spread of the disease among under-vaccinated communities. From there, Jonathan and Wendy examine Andrew Wakefield's appearance at the Children's Health Defense Summit, RFK Jr.'s comments about vaccines, AI, and chemtrails, and growing tensions within the MAHA movement.

The conversation also turns back to COVID. Jonathan highlights research on COVID vaccination in young children and repeat infections, while the pair revisit the BMJ's pandemic-era coverage—including arguments that encouraged childhood infection—and contrast it with more recent scrutiny of vaccine safety monitoring.

They also discuss Jay Bhattacharya's leadership at the NIH, his reported resistance to efforts to politicize NIH grant funding, his addition to the NIH "Hall of Heroes," and his previous support for allowing lower-risk populations to face COVID infection.

Finally, Jonathan and Wendy examine FDA leadership, changing childhood vaccine policy, and reports of major staffing losses and program cuts at the CDC.

The episode closes where it began: with measles once again causing preventable illness and death—and the unsettling realization that many of the public-health consequences Jonathan and Wendy warned about are no longer hypothetical.

• New measles deaths and the consequences of declining vaccination

• Andrew Wakefield and the Children's Health Defense Summit

• RFK Jr.'s comments on vaccines, AI, and "medical tyranny"

• Chemtrails and conspiracy theories entering public-health discussions

• Growing divisions within the MAHA movement

• Corporate influence and the MAHA Summit

• Research on repeated COVID infections and chronic health conditions

• Evidence on COVID vaccination and severe disease in young children

• Vaccine-associated myocarditis and the risk-benefit discussion

• The BMJ's pandemic-era arguments about childhood COVID infection

• Jay Bhattacharya, NIH funding, and Harvard

• The NIH "Hall of Heroes"

• The Great Barrington Declaration and infection-based pandemic strategies

• FDA leadership and questions surrounding the MMR vaccine

• Staffing losses and program cuts at the CDC

• Why Jonathan and Wendy remain concerned about the return of vaccine-preventable diseases

Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent open with new evidence on myocarditis risk among vaccinated and unvaccinated young people, revisiting how vaccine-associated myocarditis was amplified while the cardiac and mortality risks of infection were minimized. They then turn to the resurgence of measles, the consequences of falling vaccination rates, and the gap between public-health leadership and the urgency of the moment.

The heart of the episode is a wide-ranging critique of the lab-leak movement. Howard and Orent outline why they believe the available molecular, epidemiological, and geographic evidence supports a zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2. They argue that the debate has too often become a political weapon aimed at scientists and public-health officials, while zoonotic spillover, wildlife trade, habitat disruption, and pandemic preparedness receive less attention.

The conversation focuses especially on the contradiction between expressing intense concern about the first infection while partnering with or defending figures who promoted herd immunity through widespread infection. Through discussions of Matt Ridley, Alina Chan, Richard Ebright, Bryce Nickels, Jay Bhattacharya, and others, the hosts describe what they call "toxic apathy": treating the origin of infection number one as paramount while overlooking the preventable infections, hospitalizations, and deaths that followed.

• Why infection itself—not vaccination—was associated with the highest myocarditis, pericarditis, and mortality risk in the study discussed

• How fear-driven messaging about rare vaccine side effects may have shaped decisions among young people and parents

• The expanding measles crisis, falling MMR coverage, and the threat of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE)

• Why the hosts believe public-health leaders must communicate far more forcefully about measles vaccination

• The molecular, evolutionary, geographic, and epidemiological case the hosts present for zoonotic emergence

• Why secrecy by Chinese authorities does not, by itself, establish that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a laboratory

• How lab-leak advocacy became intertwined with attacks on Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins, and other scientists

• The rhetoric used against researchers who support a zoonotic origin and the consequences of turning a scientific question into a loyalty test

• Matt Ridley's 2020 advocacy for infection-derived herd immunity and the claim that student infections could protect older adults

• Alina Chan's collaboration with Ridley and the hosts' critique of separating origin claims from pandemic-era policy positions

• Why knowing the origin of SARS-CoV-2 would not erase the need to prepare for both laboratory accidents and zoonotic spillover

• The episode's central warning: origin narratives should never become an excuse to abandon mitigation during the next pandemic

The hosts contend that pandemic preparedness requires more than assigning blame for how SARS-CoV-2 first entered the human population. It requires confronting misinformation, protecting people from preventable infection, supporting vaccination, preparing for multiple pathways of emergence, and judging public-health leaders by real-world outcomes.

• CIDRAP reporting on mRNA vaccination and myocarditis risk in teens and young adults

• The Great Barrington Declaration

• Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19 by Alina Chan and Matt Ridley

• Science-Based Medicine

• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — Measles

We Want Them Infected examines the doctors, academics, pundits, and political movements that promoted widespread infection during the COVID-19 pandemic—and the lasting consequences of those ideas for public health.

Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts, share this episode with someone who follows public health and pandemic policy, and leave a review to help more listeners find the show.

This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. The views expressed are those of the speakers. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional regarding personal medical decisions.