The Brownstone Institute, an Austin, Texas based libertarian think tank that has gained a huge following since being founded in 2021. Founded by provocative thinker Jeffrey Tucker, the institute was born from the grassroots anger over draconian, unnecessary COVID-19 lockdowns and policies. Billions of dollars are flooding in from dark money donors, pumping cash into a 17,000+ member, rapidly increasing network of ideological donors. Most of these advocates are small-dollar donors, and collectively they’re remaking health policy conversations around the country.
Brownstone Institute is especially well-known for its “Supper Club” series, held in metro areas across the country. These dynamic events foster rigorous debate on the free market perspective. They foster a healthy distrust of government entities, including public health departments. The institute’s associates have expressed controversial perspectives on vaccines and pandemic responses, igniting debates about public health and government transparency.
Funding and Influence
Judging by Brownstone Institute’s tax filings, we know its financial backing is largely shrouded in darkness. This secretive approach has led to growing concerns that the movement behind this funding is not what it seems. Critics suggest that these undisclosed contributions can sway the institute’s agenda and overall public messaging on critical health policy issues.
Regardless of the financial controversy that’s hounded it, Brownstone Institute has drawn an impressive and novel cast of speakers and thinkers. Familiar names are heavily represented among them. So far, this includes Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health and Vinay Prasad, senior advisor at the FDA. Human Rights Watch Their participation has raised alarm over potential conflicts of interest due to their connections with legacy public health institutions.
“For the first time in a long time we are issuing objective, evidence-based immunization recommendations through ACIP with honest and transparent discussion of the benefits, risks, and uncertainties.” – Vinay Prasad
The institute’s critics say that its fellows frequently go onto unfriendly turf to advance radical claims about vaccines. Dorit Reiss, a law and public policy professor at the University of California, Hastings, said Brownstone hosts the work of people who have been anti-vaccine. She stated, “They’ve been willing to publish articles of some very extreme anti-vaccine people.”
Events and Public Discourse
The Brownstone Institute presents the “Supper Club” series. This unmatched forum invigorates, excites and engages attendees in dynamic debates on the most controversial and complicated public health policy issues. Each event creates incredible dialogue among attendees who are all united in their skepticism of how government has typically responded to the pandemic.
Ashley Grogg, a registered nurse and founder of Hoosiers for Medical Liberty, addressed the crowd. Sadly, this has led to the silencing of dissenting or alternative voices—even in a democratic society. Jeffrey Tucker emphasized the importance of allowing a range of opinions to flourish:
“I think Brownstone has a moral obligation to care for dissidents and create settings in which they’re able to test their ideas against people with whom they disagree.” – Jeffrey Tucker
Tucker continued by emphasizing the importance of difficult conversations in developing the narrative around public health. He remarked, “I don’t think being an extremist is a good basis on which to shut somebody’s thoughts down. We need provocations.”
This attention to anti-establishment or dissenting viewpoints has earned criticism, such as allegations that Brownstone Institute pushes harmful misinformation. Critics point out that recasting these discussions as legitimate discourse opens the door to giving too much credibility to far-out theories on vaccines.
Ties to Established Health Authorities
The ties between Brownstone Institute and well-respected health experts make its position a confusing one to those in professional spaces. Other well-known people affiliated with the institute are Retsef Levi of MIT. Robert Malone, another regular speaker at Brownstone sponsored events, is similarly tied to it. Their participation poses serious risks to public health messaging that must be closely examined.
Catherine Stein, an epidemiologist at Case Western Reserve University, published an excellent piece at Brownstone. In it, she zealously argues for ceasing all vaccine mandates at universities. This position is emblematic of the dominant libertarian ideology adopted by many of the Club’s rank and file.
Brownstone’s power is increasing by the day. Public health advocates are sounding the alarm, saying that its frequently alarmist messaging erodes public trust in vaccines. Martin Kulldorff emphasized the risks associated with certain claims made by the institute:
“In the randomized trial, there were four times as many birth defects in children born to mothers receiving the Pfizer COVID vaccine during pregnancy compared to the placebo-receiving control group.” – Martin Kulldorff
Kulldorff’s comments, I think, reveal the visceral fear that lies under the surface when vaccine safety data is openly discussed outside the normal scientific consensus.
