The mere fact that you suggest people “keep calm” and “keep learning” is proof enough you aren’t part of the cabal, who’s motto is “shut up, and freak out over the issues we tell you to freak out over, when it’s politically expedient for us.” (Trust me, it sounds much better in Latin).
I found the article re: injections and negative tests in the presence of symptoms fascinating and an entire different way of looking at the past 20 months.
Two points. 1. After reading 1/2 of your article yesterday, I took the dog for a walk. While walking, something was tweaking at my memory. It finally came to me. I was doing some reading years ago on cancer drugs while working on an unrelated project. I can't pull a reference, but the gist of it was the standards for getting the chemo drugs to market were based on endpoints that were not related to longevity in some cases. E.g., a tumour reduction of 20% would result in approval of drug. A tumour reduction of 20% would not significantly impact endpoints of significance to the patient. That was an eye-opener. Similarly, if the c19 injections result in negative tests, but otherwise no significant degree of disease reduction, this is of little consequence to the injected, and could actually contribute to spread of the virus if the sick think they are not harbouring C19.
2. Aggressive tweeters are the worst. Especially when they've no idea of how you have been working hard to out the numbers and manipulation of data. However, after the way the data has been manipulated and hidden in cases, how can we know with certainty PCR cycles were not manipulated too? Anecdotally, we've heard nurses claim that the charts for people coming to ER were marked as UV at the top if the record of injection was not associated with that same health system. Nurses claimed when flipping through the file, often the opposite was true. Likewise, anecdotal reports have surfaced of treatment protocols being varied for un-injected vs injected. Anecdotal, I know, and that is not the way of data, but I would not put anything past those incentivized to push their injections and deaths for money. Similar to the climate "emergency" they will do whatever it takes to fool those who are too busy, lazy, trusting or frightened to look beyond the headlines.
I couldn’t help but think of the old Mark Twain quote as I was reading your comment exchange:
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
I understand the frustration, the white hot RAGE, people feel when talking about all the bullshit that’s happened in the last 2 years. It’s easy to get spun up & sent on a tirade w/ conflations- then once those are out there “the experts” will come along and cherry pick stats we’ve shared that they can easily “debunk.” We have to starve them of this opportunity. The only way to do that is by staying hyper focused on what you can prove. I know how infuriating this is, TRUST ME, but it really is the only way. You’re doing great work Matthew, keep it up!
Coincidentally, these public officials when under some public heat for their dictates, can dial up a positive test in an instant and get out of the spotlight. How convenient is that?
Matt I think you stumbled across a bit of a nutter. Not once, ever did I get the impression you are “shilling” anything. I’m pretty frank, so I’d be happy to say if you did. I follow you because you come across as educated & have ability to interpret data beyond a lay person. You grasp concepts, some what easier than others. Still believe the video I saw recently with yourself & 2 Canadians was near the best I’ve seen since this bloody pandemic began ( I still need to upload some grabs.. I’ve been distracted by life’s rubbish). I’ve been tested twice by PCR both came back negative. Both before I got the shitty mandated shots. 1 of which I lied & said I had symptoms before I got the shot just incase ( I wanted to make sure I didn’t have any sign of Covid as I knew it could be dangerous to be infected & have the vaccine). Keep up the great work , it’s about educating not making others feel comfortable in their opinions, which I appreciate as it’s hard to come by these days.
I love this post. Like science, discussion is ever-evolving and we may diverge in our opinions and understandings along the way, perhaps many times. That’s ok. We don’t have to agree on everything. Joy seems to have a little PTSD from being fucked with so much during this pandemic by mainstream, controlled opposition, and uncontrolled opposition lol. I get it.
It’s a great reminder that we need to be open to the truth even if it doesn’t serve our own narrative(s). Whatever the facts are, they must be outed, even if they seem to put us back a step. Truth, or rather the pursuit of truth, is the ultimate goal.
I very much admire your rational, analytic response to a personal, emotional attack that you clearly understood should not be taken personally. It is a happy coincidence that last night in bed, I was reading "Loving What Is" by Byron Katie. And this morning I see a wonderful example of your compassionate detachment that remains fully grounded in truly scientific observation uncontaminated by ego. Thank you Mathew. Your articles keep ME learning.
"our community that is resisting authoritarianism should be careful about how we communicate facts, and sometimes take some time to give more complete explanations in order to limit confusion." - Exactly.
"you appear to be a pharma shill" - has she read Any of your work?
Then again, this is a dystopian horror come to life, where those who are supposed to be the wisest ones figuring things out and sharing info and guidance are actually the villains who are out to do harm. Mathew Crawford, pharma shill. That would be a plot twist Indeed.
"I also learned how little most epidemiologists know, and how terrifyingly poor and deranged their body of cookie cutter statistics is, but those are stories for another day."
Institute of Medicine: Most epidemiological vaccine safety studies are useless
The two differing definitions of "case" should also be mentioned. The classical (sensical) medical definition is a test plus a diagnosis by an MD.
Whereas the new journalistic definition redefines case as just/only a PCR test. This is because journalists partied while everyone else studied, avoided all STEM courses, and because their editors wanted to exponentiate their infection graphs.
Journalists have discovered that data distortion wonderfully compliments word spinning.
Big pharma has basically corrupted every aspect of the vaccine trials and the testing to meet whatever criterion they are pushing for that part of their agenda. Your knowledge and expertise to delve into all of this is impressive.
Yes, and he goes on to say what he means by that; he's quite precise. Unfortunately, that precision is lost on most people.
He hits the point over and over again: it is not a valid diagnostic tool in a clinical setting.
The thing about Kary is--what made him likable and vulnerable to misinterpretation at the same time - was that, unlike Fauci et al, he had zero media training.
So in the world we live in - where people pay attention to HOW and not WHAT a person says - subtleties are lost and the Faucis win the PR battle.
Best not to get too upset about angry, abusive people on the internet, though I certainly understand how it can eat away at you. Most substackers are an unusually decent bunch, but there's definitely a few nuts mixed in.
The mere fact that you suggest people “keep calm” and “keep learning” is proof enough you aren’t part of the cabal, who’s motto is “shut up, and freak out over the issues we tell you to freak out over, when it’s politically expedient for us.” (Trust me, it sounds much better in Latin).
I found the article re: injections and negative tests in the presence of symptoms fascinating and an entire different way of looking at the past 20 months.
Two points. 1. After reading 1/2 of your article yesterday, I took the dog for a walk. While walking, something was tweaking at my memory. It finally came to me. I was doing some reading years ago on cancer drugs while working on an unrelated project. I can't pull a reference, but the gist of it was the standards for getting the chemo drugs to market were based on endpoints that were not related to longevity in some cases. E.g., a tumour reduction of 20% would result in approval of drug. A tumour reduction of 20% would not significantly impact endpoints of significance to the patient. That was an eye-opener. Similarly, if the c19 injections result in negative tests, but otherwise no significant degree of disease reduction, this is of little consequence to the injected, and could actually contribute to spread of the virus if the sick think they are not harbouring C19.
2. Aggressive tweeters are the worst. Especially when they've no idea of how you have been working hard to out the numbers and manipulation of data. However, after the way the data has been manipulated and hidden in cases, how can we know with certainty PCR cycles were not manipulated too? Anecdotally, we've heard nurses claim that the charts for people coming to ER were marked as UV at the top if the record of injection was not associated with that same health system. Nurses claimed when flipping through the file, often the opposite was true. Likewise, anecdotal reports have surfaced of treatment protocols being varied for un-injected vs injected. Anecdotal, I know, and that is not the way of data, but I would not put anything past those incentivized to push their injections and deaths for money. Similar to the climate "emergency" they will do whatever it takes to fool those who are too busy, lazy, trusting or frightened to look beyond the headlines.
Thanks for more "food for thought."
I couldn’t help but think of the old Mark Twain quote as I was reading your comment exchange:
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
I understand the frustration, the white hot RAGE, people feel when talking about all the bullshit that’s happened in the last 2 years. It’s easy to get spun up & sent on a tirade w/ conflations- then once those are out there “the experts” will come along and cherry pick stats we’ve shared that they can easily “debunk.” We have to starve them of this opportunity. The only way to do that is by staying hyper focused on what you can prove. I know how infuriating this is, TRUST ME, but it really is the only way. You’re doing great work Matthew, keep it up!
Coincidentally, these public officials when under some public heat for their dictates, can dial up a positive test in an instant and get out of the spotlight. How convenient is that?
Matt I think you stumbled across a bit of a nutter. Not once, ever did I get the impression you are “shilling” anything. I’m pretty frank, so I’d be happy to say if you did. I follow you because you come across as educated & have ability to interpret data beyond a lay person. You grasp concepts, some what easier than others. Still believe the video I saw recently with yourself & 2 Canadians was near the best I’ve seen since this bloody pandemic began ( I still need to upload some grabs.. I’ve been distracted by life’s rubbish). I’ve been tested twice by PCR both came back negative. Both before I got the shitty mandated shots. 1 of which I lied & said I had symptoms before I got the shot just incase ( I wanted to make sure I didn’t have any sign of Covid as I knew it could be dangerous to be infected & have the vaccine). Keep up the great work , it’s about educating not making others feel comfortable in their opinions, which I appreciate as it’s hard to come by these days.
The crazy things that Joy says should just be ignored - but I appreciate the explanations in this post that she prompted 😀
I love this post. Like science, discussion is ever-evolving and we may diverge in our opinions and understandings along the way, perhaps many times. That’s ok. We don’t have to agree on everything. Joy seems to have a little PTSD from being fucked with so much during this pandemic by mainstream, controlled opposition, and uncontrolled opposition lol. I get it.
It’s a great reminder that we need to be open to the truth even if it doesn’t serve our own narrative(s). Whatever the facts are, they must be outed, even if they seem to put us back a step. Truth, or rather the pursuit of truth, is the ultimate goal.
Thanks for this very thought-provoking post.
I very much admire your rational, analytic response to a personal, emotional attack that you clearly understood should not be taken personally. It is a happy coincidence that last night in bed, I was reading "Loving What Is" by Byron Katie. And this morning I see a wonderful example of your compassionate detachment that remains fully grounded in truly scientific observation uncontaminated by ego. Thank you Mathew. Your articles keep ME learning.
"our community that is resisting authoritarianism should be careful about how we communicate facts, and sometimes take some time to give more complete explanations in order to limit confusion." - Exactly.
"you appear to be a pharma shill" - has she read Any of your work?
Then again, this is a dystopian horror come to life, where those who are supposed to be the wisest ones figuring things out and sharing info and guidance are actually the villains who are out to do harm. Mathew Crawford, pharma shill. That would be a plot twist Indeed.
"I also learned how little most epidemiologists know, and how terrifyingly poor and deranged their body of cookie cutter statistics is, but those are stories for another day."
Institute of Medicine: Most epidemiological vaccine safety studies are useless
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3244496
Epidemiological studies that ignore mechanism of disease causation are flawed and mechanistic evidence demonstrates that vaccines cause autism
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1041905
The two differing definitions of "case" should also be mentioned. The classical (sensical) medical definition is a test plus a diagnosis by an MD.
Whereas the new journalistic definition redefines case as just/only a PCR test. This is because journalists partied while everyone else studied, avoided all STEM courses, and because their editors wanted to exponentiate their infection graphs.
Journalists have discovered that data distortion wonderfully compliments word spinning.
Big pharma has basically corrupted every aspect of the vaccine trials and the testing to meet whatever criterion they are pushing for that part of their agenda. Your knowledge and expertise to delve into all of this is impressive.
I do the River Tam thing on people all the time. It's nice to know someone else with that capability! :-)
Love the Firefly links. Some of the best dialogue ever written.
Kary: "I don't think you can misuse PCR…"
Yes, and he goes on to say what he means by that; he's quite precise. Unfortunately, that precision is lost on most people.
He hits the point over and over again: it is not a valid diagnostic tool in a clinical setting.
The thing about Kary is--what made him likable and vulnerable to misinterpretation at the same time - was that, unlike Fauci et al, he had zero media training.
So in the world we live in - where people pay attention to HOW and not WHAT a person says - subtleties are lost and the Faucis win the PR battle.
Best not to get too upset about angry, abusive people on the internet, though I certainly understand how it can eat away at you. Most substackers are an unusually decent bunch, but there's definitely a few nuts mixed in.