I agree with this generally, but not in this case. Was such a total and catastrophic epistemic failure, has to be owned for credibility to be retained. Not like we disagree about whether tariffs are a good idea.
Discussion
I haven't seen his opinions on covid but if he came out and said he was wrong about his views on covid, would you change your mind about his books?
More than “wrong” but owned his shilling of the mRNA poison with sufficient contrition, then yes I would consider whatever he had to say.
Assuming he does all these things, nothing has changed regarding the content/value of his books. So why not just take the good and leave the bad?