In my opinion, I feel the "psychopath" and "antichrist" labels are quite extreme - a product of serious cognitive bias, dogmatically-religious tunnel vision, and an incapacity to see the bigger picture...

While I do by no means agree with what may have appeared to be a self-appointment to global health tzar, I would give him the benefit of the doubt that there are good intentions behind his giving - yet with fundamentally flawed approaches - a byproduct of human fallibility and the systematic inefficiency of where we've been at in our collective evolution.

It's a tough situation to assess objective, because most of the info we've gotten access to is either biased on the side of the good he's done or critiquing the bad. Both sides surely have their distortions.

The anti-Gates mob may point to evidence of failures of his initiatives where there have been injuries, deaths, and unintentional collateral damage - and it's not clear upfront how many of those figures have been amplified for effect, the narratives they've been placed into debunked. Meanwhile, bear in mind that Gates is not the one man responsible for it all - surely, the foundation works with some of the top scientists in the field and partners with local governments who must bear an equal responsibility for program outcomes...

The story of what happened in India with the polio vaccine - a strain of the virus from the vaccine mutating, getting out again and targeting those not vaccinated - was more likely an unforeseen, unfortunately side effect of the developmental process. However, I'd encountered something recently saying that the matter was learned from - the "failure" steering new developments such that it'd be less likely / impossible to happen again. Meanwhile, they did achieve the result of eliminating polio in the country. So it's hard to say without the full range of data and understanding of how to interpret it what the net result was - yes, there were people who suffered along the way of trials, but how many people have been saved in the end? And how many lives have been saved from other programs in Africa where people were dying by the thousands of diseases preventable by safe vaccines? (I honestly don't know those figures.)

It was interesting to learn that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - who has been strongly calling out Gates - is actually pro-vax. His issue, as it seems on the surface, is more with the safety measures - which several programs Gates has been involved in have appeared to be not taken as seriously as might be expected.

Though it that intentional, or merely an effect of a flawed institutional system? I'd say, more likely the latter.

...

In regards to the common "Bill Gates is not a public health expert" argument...

One logical fallacy I've witnessed again and again:

Most "anti-vaxers" repeatedly say how doctors receive practically zero proper education on vaccines in their 7 years of college study. However, Gates apparently reads & studies insane amounts of niche material. Thus, it's perfectly reasonable to assume *he would in fact know a shit ton more than most "health experts" on the particular matter of vaccines...

And, as mentioned before, surely the foundation has been working with / employing top professionals in the field. Gates is not operating as a single man in any of this, but rather has built a strong team for the foundation to partner with leaders, institutions, and governments. Without question, the "public health experts" critics insist he is not are partners and advisors.

However, that does not mean that all their expertise, data, modeling, theories, etc are 100% correct.

Nor does that excuse a track record of doing parts of their research & development on public populations. Though again, I'm not sure it'd be fully realistic to place 100% of the blame on Gates alone, as there are surely teams of advisors, management, and partnerships with other organizations and governments whom have equal responsibility.

And thus, the "witch hunt" to project all wrongdoing onto him is perhaps a bit delusional, whereas the larger objective truth may be more along the lines of that the conventional institutional models and scientific/medical paradigms our societies may not be serving us most effectively.

Gates is a key figure in the whole domain. Yet, the amount of hate that's been directed at him alone may merely equate to scapegoating, when the entire matter is one of complexity science at play in our world's organizational networks and models.

...

Sigh. Look at how you manage to pull information out of me! LOL.

Ok, I wasn't done yet, so the rest may just have to wait as expanding upon what's here as an entirely new post of its own soon...