You know him as the mainstream media’s go-to guy when it comes to all things vaccination and immunology. But what lies behind Professor Luke O’Neill’s motivation to promote the unquestionable greatness of Science to the Irish public?
Those who don’t have the energy to sift through his latest offering entitled Never Mind the B#ll*cks — Here’s the Science, published at the height of the pandemic, will be glad to see a summary of some of its important contentions posted here.
Covid-19 plays a central role in the book, but with chapter titles such as Why are you wrecking the planet? or Why are you working in a bullshit job?, O’Neill also provocatively looks at the bigger questions plaguing society today, sounding like a kind of Irish Yuval Noah Harari. He even tries to make the material more accessible by adding in the odd pop cultural reference (cool things like the Simpsons, or Bill Hicks!). In the introduction, he declares
“Science is the antidote to fake news, so we need it now more than ever…My goal is to get as close to the truth as I can on all of these topics, using science as my only guide.”
For the most part, he gives an impersonal overview of the latest scientific developments, weighing up various arguments without taking a clear side. But occasionally his own opinions rise to the surface. These opinions offer important insights to help us consider the social, economic and political implications of such a worldview. Below you will find key quotes taken from the book.
Non-vaccination should be illegal
“Internet-based advocacy against vaccination is likely to sow fear and doubt. Should vaccinating your child be a legal requirement, as it was in the early twentieth century for smallpox? Some argue this infringes human rights, but others state we do this kind of thing already in different contexts. Seatbelts are compulsory, even though they might harm you by rupturing your spleen. It is public health for the public good, just like the drink-driving laws.”
Yes, he just compared wearing a seatbelt with getting forcibly vaccinated. This bit is key:
“If all else fails, we might need to make it illegal not to vaccinate. In the US, parents have to get an exemption, on medical or religious grounds, if they want to send their unvaccinated child to school. This has been shown to definitely increase the rate of vaccination. France has made 11 vaccines mandatory in order for children to be enrolled in school. Although draconian, perhaps that is the best way to protect our children. COVID-19 will make this all the more likely, given the devastation it has wreaked, both for human health and the world economy. The consequences of a serious infection for which there is no vaccine are now obvious — mass isolation, disruption of normal activities and an enforced but accepted cessation of human rights for the common good.”
Doctors should manipulate the emotions of parents to get their children vaccinated
When discussing how doctors should deal with ‘vaccine hesitant’ parents, he had this suggestion:
“Personal stories should be shared as these can create an emotional resonance. Roald Dahl, the beloved children’s writer, described how his seven-year-old daughter caught measles. He wrote about how she seemed to be recovering, sitting up in bed. He began teaching her how to make farm animals from pipe cleaners, and then he noticed how she had trouble coordinating her finger movements. One hour later, she was unconscious, and 12 hours later she was dead. This happened a year before the measles vaccine was developed. Telling parents this story or showing them the essay Dahl wrote after her death, is likely to work more effectively than facts on those more likely to respond to fear than to reason.”
People should be free to put any drug they want into their bodies
“Should we turn again to Bill Hicks, who said: ‘What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, or take into my body as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet? And for those who are having a little moral dilemma in your head about how to answer that question, I’ll answer it for you. NONE of your fucking business. It’s not a war on drugs, it’s a war on personal freedom.’ Do we need laws to protect us from ourselves?”
O’Neill concludes the chapter with:
“perhaps one day we will reach a point where society will have obtained a level of maturity where we can make up our own minds as to what we put in our bodies, with safeguards and supports in place to protect the young and those who are vulnerable to addiction.”
Bodily autonomy only when it comes to recreational drugs, but not vaccines, of course.
Politicians are liars, Scientists are truth tellers
“there is the Irish proverb ‘A man should never make a decision without consulting a woman.’ Another version might be ‘without consulting a scientist’. My wife Margaret is an outstanding biochemist. I often consult her on scientific issues (smart of me, huh?). Science tries to provide clarity for decision-making by using statistics, verifiable sources and conclusions based on evidence. Compare this to politicians, who might just write something on the side of a bus.”
Science is true, politics is a dangerous game and politicians shouldn’t be listened to. They just write stuff on the side of a bus. And yes, of course he took the opportunity to mention Trump:
“Donald Trump’s championing of the drug hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 gives us another egregious example of what can happen when politics and science meet.”
While there is widespread disillusionment with politicians in this country, as there is in many western democracies, if we abandon our democratic processes, who will be in control? The scientists, of course!
Getting rid of jobs is good!
“A final interesting aspect of the idea of a universal basic income concerns the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of the mass unemployment that the pandemic brought, governments actually provided a basic income to many in order to stave off personal economic disaster, as well as social unrest.”
His bottom line on this chapter states:
“you can avoid or escape a bullshit job and lead a full and rewarding life. And won’t that make your time on earth worth the hassle? And who knows, the COVID-19 pandemic might change our working lives and how we view different jobs forever — and for the better.”
Yes, that better world where SMEs are decimated, and the only real power workers have to protect and improve their living conditions — the ability to withdraw their labour — is taken away under the guise of Universal Basic Income. Trade Unions were largely responsible for the vast improvements to living standards over the last century, but who can the UBI masses collectively bargain with? That’s right, nobody.
The philanthropic work of elites is good for us all
The chapter on charity does talk about the philanthropic activities of the worlds elites, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. But it is completely void of any serious criticism. Ultimately, he suggests that their efforts are for good. No mention of the criticism foisted on the likes of Gates, whose charitable efforts serve to merely funnel investment into projects he is already involved with.
“Through history there have been numerous critiques of charity, which persist today. One thing Oscar Wilde was well known for (other than his poetry and plays) was an essay he wrote entitled ‘The Soul of Man Under Socialism’. In it, he calls charity ‘a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over the poor’s private lives’. He was of the view that charity prolongs the ‘disease’ of poverty, rather than curing it. Oscar got it wrong, although perhaps one of his goals was to urge governments to do more. What else should rich people do with their money other than help humanity? And the same applies to all of us.”
Science is our One True Friend
“It’s only through dialogue and challenges that we make progress. And I hope you feel more positive about the future — a future where we are all headed, with science as our one true friend.”
Aside from the fact that this statement is a bit rich coming from a man who has disabled the comments feature on his own Twitter account, how can challenges be made when qualified doctors and scientists who question the mainstream Covid narrative with evidence keep losing their jobs? Science, our one true friend, doesn’t seem to give a damn about that.
Reviewer Laura Kennedy pointed out in the Irish Times that
“Never Mind the B#ll*cks looks at two integral questions about knowledge — “what do we know?” and “how might we use this knowledge”, but it neglects to ask how we know what we know.”
Kennedy goes on to say:
“knowing something does not mean understanding it, and with the increase in good or true information has come an equal onslaught of specious and “fake” information. This is precisely the b#ll*cks that O’Neill’s book seeks to cut through.”
According to her, the book “misses an opportunity” to equip people “to understand how to tell good information from bad for themselves.”. Apparently, telling people how to think (in terms of what they determine as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ information) is a very important endeavour, and it’s unfortunate that O’Neill missed his opportunity to do it. This is the height of the media criticism he has received.
The title of the book, deriving text and image from the Sex Pistols iconic 1977 album, has allowed O’Neill to construct a punk rock image of himself to rebel against an ‘anti-science’, ‘conspiracy theorist’, bigoted, religious and/or conservative mindset. Instead of safety pins and rudimentary guitar playing, he is ‘rebelling’ by speaking in favour of that radically subversive discipline known as Science.
As a public figure who has been given every possible opportunity to appear — unchallenged — in every major media outlet in the state, O’Neill does not speak against the actual status quo. Rather, he functions as a highly effective agent who will help usher in the new status quo — that of a scientific technocracy.
