How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Use this forum to discuss the May 2024 Philosophy Book of the Month, Neither Safe Nor Effective (2nd Edition): The Evidence Against the COVID Vaccines by Dr. Colleen Huber
Post Reply
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 2366
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by Sushan »

This topic is about the May 2024 Philosophy Book of the Month, Neither Safe Nor Effective (2nd Edition): The Evidence Against the COVID Vaccines by Dr. Colleen Huber



maxresdefault.jpg




In the quieter aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the philosophical and ethical considerations surrounding public health interventions, such as vaccinations, offer a fertile ground for discussion. Dr. Colleen Huber's book critically assesses the risk-benefit analysis applied during the height of the pandemic, questioning the broad acceptance of vaccines and highlighting the potential adverse effects overlooked by mainstream narratives.

This ongoing dialogue extends beyond the immediate crisis management of the pandemic to a broader reflection on the principles guiding public health decisions today.

Public health ethics, a discipline at the intersection of medical ethics and public policy, emphasizes the balance between individual liberties and the welfare of the community. Key concepts include:

- Utilitarianism: This principle advocates for actions that maximize well-being for the greatest number of people. In the context of vaccinations, this might justify widespread immunization programs as they prevent disease spread and protect vulnerable populations.

- Deontological Ethics: This school of thought focuses on adherence to a set of duties and principles, regardless of the outcome. From this perspective, respecting individual autonomy and informed consent in medical decisions, including the choice to decline vaccination, is paramount.


The philosophical debate often centers on how to weigh the tangible benefits of preventing disease against the potential risks associated with medical interventions. This becomes particularly complex when the risks are uncertain or unevenly distributed across different populations.

Historical Examples:

- Smallpox Eradication: The global smallpox vaccination campaign is a historical example where the benefits of vaccination were deemed to outweigh the risks, leading to the eradication of a deadly disease.

- Polio Vaccination: Polio vaccination efforts have significantly reduced the incidence of the disease worldwide. However, early versions of the vaccine had complications, leading to debates about risk versus benefit.

- Thalidomide Tragedy: The thalidomide incident in the 1960s, where a drug prescribed for morning sickness caused birth defects, highlighted the importance of rigorous risk assessment and informed consent in medical treatments.

Reflecting on these examples, how should we navigate the balance between community health and individual rights, particularly when the direct threat of a pandemic has subsided?

What ethical considerations should guide us when the benefits of a public health policy are clear but the risks are uncertain or potentially serious?

In a world where public health decisions can have profound personal impacts, what measures can ensure that these decisions are both scientifically sound and ethically justifiable?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3370
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by JackDaydream »

It is a very difficult area, as health incorporates so many factors, including the physical and psychological. The policies play a critical role in the way in which health and welbeing, and its deficits are considered.

Some aspects of public health may be negotiable, such as restrictions on diet. However, there are questions about monitoring and restrictions. For example, there is an issue of potential curbing of sugar control. This may be important for balancing health, with issues of carbohydrate consumption.

The underlying philosophy issue may be about individual and state control in thinking about diet and health promotion. Risks may be 'real' as actual physical health risks; but there is the question of how such risks should be perceived., and to what extent are these risks physical, or aspects of psychological understanding?
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 2366
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by Sushan »

JackDaydream wrote: May 28th, 2024, 3:18 pm It is a very difficult area, as health incorporates so many factors, including the physical and psychological. The policies play a critical role in the way in which health and welbeing, and its deficits are considered.

Some aspects of public health may be negotiable, such as restrictions on diet. However, there are questions about monitoring and restrictions. For example, there is an issue of potential curbing of sugar control. This may be important for balancing health, with issues of carbohydrate consumption.

The underlying philosophy issue may be about individual and state control in thinking about diet and health promotion. Risks may be 'real' as actual physical health risks; but there is the question of how such risks should be perceived., and to what extent are these risks physical, or aspects of psychological understanding?
Your points about the complexities of public health policies and their impact on individual health choices are well taken. The intertwining of physical health, psychological wellbeing, and societal regulations indeed adds layers of complexity to what might otherwise seem like straightforward public health decisions.

Taking the example of dietary restrictions and sugar control you mentioned, it highlights a broader issue of how public health initiatives can sometimes tread into areas that significantly affect personal choice. This balancing act between state intervention and personal autonomy is a recurring theme in health policy debates. While these measures are often intended to curb public health expenses and prevent diseases, they also raise questions about the limits of state influence over personal habits.

Moreover, your mention of the perception of risks—whether they are seen as immediate physical health threats or longer-term psychological or societal impacts—adds another layer of complexity. This is particularly relevant in discussions about vaccinations and other preventive measures, where the perceived versus real risks can influence public attitudes and compliance.

Continuing from this point, it seems critical to consider not only the scientific and ethical dimensions but also the communicative aspect—how health policies and risks are communicated to the public. Misunderstandings or mistrust in this area can significantly undermine effective public health measures.

So, in navigating these waters, how do we ensure that public health policies are both respectful of individual autonomy and effective in managing community health? Are there specific strategies or frameworks you think could help in balancing these often competing priorities more effectively?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
LifeUnboxed
Posts: 8
Joined: May 30th, 2024, 9:02 am

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by LifeUnboxed »

Weighing risks and benefits in public health involves evidence-based decision-making, proportionality, equity, transparency, and the precautionary principle. Steps include identifying the health issue, gathering and analyzing data, assessing risks and benefits, considering alternatives, engaging stakeholders, making a decision, and implementing and monitoring. This systematic approach ensures effective, ethical, and equitable interventions, balancing public health protection with minimizing harm.
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 2366
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by Sushan »

LifeUnboxed wrote: May 30th, 2024, 9:05 am Weighing risks and benefits in public health involves evidence-based decision-making, proportionality, equity, transparency, and the precautionary principle. Steps include identifying the health issue, gathering and analyzing data, assessing risks and benefits, considering alternatives, engaging stakeholders, making a decision, and implementing and monitoring. This systematic approach ensures effective, ethical, and equitable interventions, balancing public health protection with minimizing harm.
Thank you for your detailed response. I appreciate your emphasis on a systematic, evidence-based approach to public health decision-making. The steps you outlined—identifying health issues, gathering and analyzing data, assessing risks and benefits, considering alternatives, engaging stakeholders, making decisions, and implementing and monitoring—are crucial for ensuring that interventions are both effective and ethical.

Your mention of proportionality and equity is particularly important. Ensuring that public health measures do not disproportionately affect certain groups is essential for maintaining public trust and achieving equitable health outcomes. Transparency in communication also plays a critical role in fostering public trust, especially when addressing the risks and benefits of health interventions.

However, I would like to delve deeper into a few points to explore this topic further:

1. Evidence-Based Decision Making: While this is the cornerstone of public health, the rapid pace of the pandemic often led to decisions being made with incomplete data. How can we better handle such situations in the future to ensure that decisions are both timely and based on the best available evidence?

2. Stakeholder Engagement: Engaging with the public and other stakeholders is essential, but it can be challenging during a crisis. What strategies can be employed to ensure that stakeholder engagement is both meaningful and efficient, particularly when quick decisions are necessary?

3. Transparency and Trust: As you mentioned, transparency is vital. The challenge is balancing the need for clear, concise messaging with the complexity of scientific data. How can public health authorities improve their communication strategies to maintain transparency without causing confusion or fear?

4. Ethical Justification of Precautionary Measures: The precautionary principle is essential, especially when dealing with uncertain risks. However, how do we ensure that precautionary measures are not overly restrictive or infringe too much on individual liberties?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
LifeUnboxed
Posts: 8
Joined: May 30th, 2024, 9:02 am

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by LifeUnboxed »

Certainly! Here's my response to delve deeper into each of the points you've raised:

1. Evidence-Based Decision Making: Rapid decision-making during a pandemic often necessitates acting with incomplete data. To better handle such situations in the future, we can implement several strategies. Firstly, investing in robust surveillance systems and data collection mechanisms can provide real-time information to inform decision-making. Additionally, establishing interdisciplinary expert panels that can rapidly review emerging evidence and provide recommendations can help guide policy decisions. Furthermore, fostering international collaboration and sharing of data can enhance the pool of available evidence and improve the quality of decision-making.

2. Stakeholder Engagement: Effective stakeholder engagement is crucial for building trust and ensuring the acceptability of public health measures. During a crisis, it's essential to employ strategies that facilitate meaningful and efficient engagement. This includes utilizing diverse communication channels to reach different stakeholder groups, such as social media, community forums, and stakeholder advisory committees. Moreover, involving stakeholders in the decision-making process from the outset, providing clear explanations of the rationale behind decisions, and soliciting feedback can enhance engagement and promote buy-in.

3. Transparency and Trust: Balancing transparency with clear, concise messaging is indeed challenging. Public health authorities can improve their communication strategies by prioritizing clarity, consistency, and honesty in their messaging. This involves using plain language to convey complex scientific concepts, providing context to help the public interpret data accurately, and acknowledging uncertainties when present. Moreover, adopting a proactive approach to communication, addressing misinformation promptly, and engaging in two-way dialogue with the public can foster trust and mitigate fear.

4. **Ethical Justification of Precautionary Measures:**
While the precautionary principle is essential for protecting public health, it must be balanced with considerations of individual liberties. To ensure that precautionary measures are ethically justified, decision-makers should adhere to principles of proportionality, necessity, and least infringement. This involves conducting thorough risk assessments to weigh the potential benefits and harms of interventions, involving stakeholders in decision-making processes, and implementing measures that are evidence-based and proportionate to the level of risk. Additionally, safeguarding individual rights through clear legal frameworks, oversight mechanisms, and regular review of measures can help prevent excessive restrictions on liberties.

By addressing these key areas, public health authorities can strengthen their response to future crises and foster trust and resilience within communities.

However, if we were to entertain this hypothetical situation, it might look like a dystopian society characterized by authoritarian control, erosion of civil liberties, and pervasive surveillance.

In such a scenario, the government and pharmaceutical companies, working in collusion, could implement strict surveillance measures under the guise of public health protection. This could include widespread monitoring of citizens' movements, communications, and activities, justified by the need to track and contain perceived threats to public safety.

The issuance of vaccine certificates could serve as a means of social control, with access to essential services and freedoms contingent upon compliance with mandated vaccination programs. Dissent or refusal to comply could result in marginalization, exclusion, or even punitive measures.

The Hegelian dialectic method could be employed to manipulate public opinion and justify authoritarian policies. Crisis situations, real or manufactured, could be exploited to create a sense of urgency and justify the imposition of increasingly draconian measures in the name of public safety and security.

Ultimately, the goal of such a regime would be to consolidate power and control over the populace, paving the way for the establishment of a new world order governed by a select elite. This could involve the centralization of authority, suppression of dissenting voices, and the imposition of a uniform ideology or worldview.

However, it's important to emphasize that this portrayal is purely speculative and not grounded in mainstream understanding. It's essential to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives before accepting or propagating these posibilities.
LifeUnboxed
Posts: 8
Joined: May 30th, 2024, 9:02 am

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by LifeUnboxed »

While I may not be an expert in pandemic studies, I might have my personal insights to share on how to navigate these challenging times. To enhance transparency and mitigate profit-driven biases in public health and research, several steps can be implemented:

1. Third-Party Oversight and Stronger Regulations: Implementing robust oversight mechanisms and stronger regulations on disclosure practices can help hold pharmaceutical companies and researchers accountable for their actions. Third-party organizations, such as independent review boards or regulatory agencies, can provide oversight and ensure transparency in research conduct, data reporting, and financial disclosures. Strengthening regulations to mandate transparent reporting of conflicts of interest, funding sources, and potential biases can also help address concerns related to profit-driven motives.

2. Public Education and Critical Evaluation: Educating the public to critically evaluate research and health information is essential for promoting informed decision-making. This includes teaching individuals to assess the quality and reliability of scientific studies, recognize potential biases or conflicts of interest, and discern between credible sources of information and misinformation. Public health campaigns and educational initiatives can provide tools and resources to help individuals navigate complex health information and make evidence-based decisions.

3. Protection of Academic Freedom: Ensuring academic freedom and protecting the rights of doctors and researchers to speak on public platforms is crucial for promoting open discourse and scientific inquiry. Banning well-educated professionals from sharing their expertise stifles debate, limits the exchange of ideas, and undermines public trust in scientific institutions. Upholding principles of academic freedom encourages intellectual diversity and fosters a culture of transparency and accountability within the scientific community.

While there may be legitimate questions about the origins and management of the pandemic, attributing motives of intentionality requires rigorous investigation and substantiated evidence. Engaging with reputable sources, critically evaluating information, and considering multiple perspectives are essential practices in navigating complex and contentious topics like the COVID-19 pandemic.
User avatar
Sushan
Book of the Month Discussion Leader
Posts: 2366
Joined: February 19th, 2021, 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: How Should We Weigh Risks and Benefits in Public Health?

Post by Sushan »

LifeUnboxed wrote: June 3rd, 2024, 7:23 am Certainly! Here's my response to delve deeper into each of the points you've raised:

1. Evidence-Based Decision Making: Rapid decision-making during a pandemic often necessitates acting with incomplete data. To better handle such situations in the future, we can implement several strategies. Firstly, investing in robust surveillance systems and data collection mechanisms can provide real-time information to inform decision-making. Additionally, establishing interdisciplinary expert panels that can rapidly review emerging evidence and provide recommendations can help guide policy decisions. Furthermore, fostering international collaboration and sharing of data can enhance the pool of available evidence and improve the quality of decision-making.

2. Stakeholder Engagement: Effective stakeholder engagement is crucial for building trust and ensuring the acceptability of public health measures. During a crisis, it's essential to employ strategies that facilitate meaningful and efficient engagement. This includes utilizing diverse communication channels to reach different stakeholder groups, such as social media, community forums, and stakeholder advisory committees. Moreover, involving stakeholders in the decision-making process from the outset, providing clear explanations of the rationale behind decisions, and soliciting feedback can enhance engagement and promote buy-in.

3. Transparency and Trust: Balancing transparency with clear, concise messaging is indeed challenging. Public health authorities can improve their communication strategies by prioritizing clarity, consistency, and honesty in their messaging. This involves using plain language to convey complex scientific concepts, providing context to help the public interpret data accurately, and acknowledging uncertainties when present. Moreover, adopting a proactive approach to communication, addressing misinformation promptly, and engaging in two-way dialogue with the public can foster trust and mitigate fear.

4. **Ethical Justification of Precautionary Measures:**
While the precautionary principle is essential for protecting public health, it must be balanced with considerations of individual liberties. To ensure that precautionary measures are ethically justified, decision-makers should adhere to principles of proportionality, necessity, and least infringement. This involves conducting thorough risk assessments to weigh the potential benefits and harms of interventions, involving stakeholders in decision-making processes, and implementing measures that are evidence-based and proportionate to the level of risk. Additionally, safeguarding individual rights through clear legal frameworks, oversight mechanisms, and regular review of measures can help prevent excessive restrictions on liberties.

By addressing these key areas, public health authorities can strengthen their response to future crises and foster trust and resilience within communities.

However, if we were to entertain this hypothetical situation, it might look like a dystopian society characterized by authoritarian control, erosion of civil liberties, and pervasive surveillance.

In such a scenario, the government and pharmaceutical companies, working in collusion, could implement strict surveillance measures under the guise of public health protection. This could include widespread monitoring of citizens' movements, communications, and activities, justified by the need to track and contain perceived threats to public safety.

The issuance of vaccine certificates could serve as a means of social control, with access to essential services and freedoms contingent upon compliance with mandated vaccination programs. Dissent or refusal to comply could result in marginalization, exclusion, or even punitive measures.

The Hegelian dialectic method could be employed to manipulate public opinion and justify authoritarian policies. Crisis situations, real or manufactured, could be exploited to create a sense of urgency and justify the imposition of increasingly draconian measures in the name of public safety and security.

Ultimately, the goal of such a regime would be to consolidate power and control over the populace, paving the way for the establishment of a new world order governed by a select elite. This could involve the centralization of authority, suppression of dissenting voices, and the imposition of a uniform ideology or worldview.

However, it's important to emphasize that this portrayal is purely speculative and not grounded in mainstream understanding. It's essential to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives before accepting or propagating these posibilities.
LifeUnboxed wrote: June 3rd, 2024, 7:43 am While I may not be an expert in pandemic studies, I might have my personal insights to share on how to navigate these challenging times. To enhance transparency and mitigate profit-driven biases in public health and research, several steps can be implemented:

1. Third-Party Oversight and Stronger Regulations: Implementing robust oversight mechanisms and stronger regulations on disclosure practices can help hold pharmaceutical companies and researchers accountable for their actions. Third-party organizations, such as independent review boards or regulatory agencies, can provide oversight and ensure transparency in research conduct, data reporting, and financial disclosures. Strengthening regulations to mandate transparent reporting of conflicts of interest, funding sources, and potential biases can also help address concerns related to profit-driven motives.

2. Public Education and Critical Evaluation: Educating the public to critically evaluate research and health information is essential for promoting informed decision-making. This includes teaching individuals to assess the quality and reliability of scientific studies, recognize potential biases or conflicts of interest, and discern between credible sources of information and misinformation. Public health campaigns and educational initiatives can provide tools and resources to help individuals navigate complex health information and make evidence-based decisions.

3. Protection of Academic Freedom: Ensuring academic freedom and protecting the rights of doctors and researchers to speak on public platforms is crucial for promoting open discourse and scientific inquiry. Banning well-educated professionals from sharing their expertise stifles debate, limits the exchange of ideas, and undermines public trust in scientific institutions. Upholding principles of academic freedom encourages intellectual diversity and fosters a culture of transparency and accountability within the scientific community.

While there may be legitimate questions about the origins and management of the pandemic, attributing motives of intentionality requires rigorous investigation and substantiated evidence. Engaging with reputable sources, critically evaluating information, and considering multiple perspectives are essential practices in navigating complex and contentious topics like the COVID-19 pandemic.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. You've made some excellent points about the complexities of public health messaging and the need for a balanced approach.

I agree that public health authorities need to strike a balance between urgency and reassurance. The challenge is ensuring that the public remains vigilant without inducing unnecessary panic. Your suggestion of focusing communication efforts on those who are open to listening, rather than trying to persuade those who are deeply skeptical, is a pragmatic approach. It's similar to the idea of "preaching to the choir," but in this case, it means reinforcing and supporting those who are already inclined to follow public health advice.

One thing that could enhance this strategy is the involvement of community leaders and influencers who have the trust of their communities. For example, during the Ebola outbreak, local leaders and healthcare workers played a crucial role in disseminating information and encouraging compliance with health measures. This approach could help bridge the gap between public health authorities and the general population, fostering a more cooperative atmosphere.

Moreover, transparency remains key. Ensuring that all information, including uncertainties and potential risks, is communicated openly can help build trust. People are more likely to follow guidelines if they feel they are being treated as intelligent partners in the public health process, rather than being coerced through fear.

What are your thoughts on involving community leaders more directly in public health campaigns? Do you think this could help improve compliance and trust?
“There is only one thing a philosopher can be relied upon to do, and that is to contradict other philosophers”

– William James
Post Reply

Return to “Discuss "Neither Safe Nor Effective (2nd Edition): The Evidence Against the COVID Vaccines" by Dr. Colleen Huber”

2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...
by Indignus Servus
November 2024

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age
by Elliott B. Martin, Jr.
October 2024

How is God Involved in Evolution?

How is God Involved in Evolution?
by Joe P. Provenzano, Ron D. Morgan, and Dan R. Provenzano
August 2024

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters
by Howard Wolk
July 2024

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side
by Thomas Richard Spradlin
June 2024

Neither Safe Nor Effective

Neither Safe Nor Effective
by Dr. Colleen Huber
May 2024

Now or Never

Now or Never
by Mary Wasche
April 2024

Meditations

Meditations
by Marcus Aurelius
March 2024

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

The In-Between: Life in the Micro

The In-Between: Life in the Micro
by Christian Espinosa
January 2024

2023 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021