"At the moment, he is suffering from delusions of adequacy." -Walter Kerr Source: The Mentally Ill Hero: How the Tick and Dirk Gently give Unbalanced "Sidekicks" Center Stage Sometimes it's not quite as funny as an episode of The Tick. I know that it bugged some readers that I pulled my article about Kyle Sheldrick's attack on Paul Marik's research earlier this week. I'm happy to give a full explanation, and then to repeat the exercise, but with respect to the actual methodology in
Mar 26, 2022·edited Mar 26, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
Like Kate, I have neither the interest nor the comprehension level, nor the attention span to verify all of this math, but there are multiple ways to know these people are full of shit. You approach such problems from a mathematical angle. I approach them from mechanistic ones.
I haven't kept track of the modern personalities, but this is a saga that goes back many decades.
Big Oil Medicine requires being constantly propped up by psychopaths, and probably at least 40% of the population is now onto the game. Only the university graduates and other useful idiots are still true believers in it at this point.
The ruse has been going on for a century and cannot go on much longer, both because too many people are onto the fraud and because the con is so huge that it's beginning to hurt themselves. They've been at this game for a LONG time and have typically been successful.
But I believe we're reaching the endpoint now. (Perhaps I'm deluded and hope simply springs eternal.)
If you're interested in a short story about the orchestrated takedown of vitamin C and Linus Pauling many decades ago by Gorski types, I wrote a short story with dozens of peer-reviewed references about that. I provide this for historical reference with regard to the utility of vitamin C in treating other diseases.
I have to say that much of your critique of Kyle Sheldrick is beyond my interest and comprehension level, but that’s okay because I can conclude his opinions are worthless just by considering his tweet at the beginning of the article and that he put Mr. Marik’s name in quotation marks.
Full disclosure: my math skills just about allow me to balance my checkbook, but not much more, but your skill at explaining complex math is incredible. The one thing that has puzzled me throughout all of this manufactured controversy about HCQ and IVM is that I would think that, if these drugs were so dangerous at worst and ineffective at best, those who were either harmed or not helped by them would be sounding the alarms themselves. Knowing how much the MSM is opposed to these drugs, I would also think those victimized, or their survivors, would gladly be given a forum to tell their stories. Yet I don't hear of them. Puzzling. It's not a surprise that those helped have no viable means to share their success - even Joe Rogan's story is called into question. Where is a regular Joe supposed to go to tell his? But someone who died in their sleep after taking Ivermectin? Haven't heard of one yet.
“Why would anyone fake a nonessential aspect of a paper like this?”
I think his thinking is that the imagined fraudsters didn’t understand why their non-balanced study design “wouldn’t default to balance” (when in fact it would, though not this much, though an “unlikely” level of balance is actually more likely than a likely one as you point out).
It really is surprising that he didn’t consider just thinking about the issue on an intuitive level or just checking some other unpaired related diagnosis cohort study examples. That was the first thing I did, to make sure I wasn’t crazy. I think confidence in the fraudulence of the paper (the main finding is certainly hard to swallow) led him not to consider the null hypothesis. What a cringey nightmare.
I just looked through your list of substacks and found the paper that you wrote which is included in the book on the results of early treatment in Imperial County CA. There is an great interview with you and George and Bryan which I have posted many places.
Thank you for this ongoing dialogue on micro clots and in particular their relation to long Covid.
Several of the comments have recommended various treatments like IVM, HCQ, supplements, etc.
First a question: if a patient is given early treatment and does not go to the hospital, will they NOT get long covid?
In particular, given that the doctors in Imperial County have treated 10,000 covid patients (treated before day 7 of getting covid) and none have gone to the hospital, do you know what percent have long covid? Are the results better when treatment is given in “the golden 72 hours” after covid begins?
If you don’t know the the results in Imperial Valley, it would be easier for you to find out than a layperson like me. Here is an excellent interview. When book written they were at 7,000 successful treatments and no hospitalizations.
There are many early treatment protocols. My favorites are from flccc.net. Is there any data that if a person uses these as preventative treatment, then if they do get covid, they have a lower chance, or possibly they avoid all together getting long haul covid?
Reply
JoelSHirschhorn
March 24, 2022
You ask some great questions, but I have not seen any data indicating whether people who get good early treatment end up with long COVID; but I suspect that such early treatments that stop viral replication early probably prevent long COVID. We surely need some research on this issue. "
Yesterday I sent this to George Fareed.
Can something be learned from the experience in Imperial Valley with early treatment?
God bless you! You and Kirsch and the good folks at FLCCC have kept me sane during the last 2 years. Your keen intellect and dedication to scientific integrity is appreciated.
You think he’s gonna meet you for a debate after this sizzling dunk? Thanks for distilling stats from a few different perspectives, I think I’m finally starting to understand some of it. At least that Dr. Rollergater run-on joke on twitter about p values is making a lot more sense.
Very good write-up, unfortunately as we all already know the level of statistical knowledge in the field of medical research is abysmal and the average "yeah bro" researcher buddies of Kyle won't understand 1% of what you wrote here. I have tried having discussions about the flaws in the statistical interpretations of people like the fool running this ironically title website: https://forbetterscience.com/ (LEONID SCHNEIDER) which appears to be a shameless copy of this similarly ironically titled website: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ (seems to be the baby of David H. Gorski).
The one thing both of these sites have in common is that they are run by people that think (or at least pretend) to know complex statistical concepts, but turn out to only know some slang, acronyms and amusing oversimplified rules to follow without knowing why. When confronted online they go into circular arguments that eventually turn into name-calling and appeal to authority.
I have specifically wasted many hours of my life on such discussions about the vitamin C for sepsis studies - amazing how the same strategies were employed to discredit it as with repurposed drugs for COVID.
"If Sheldrick weren't such a douchenozzle"
Always appreciate the use of technically accurate terminology!
Universal Mathematical functions will be (re)defined by the ministry of truth To generate a better collective understanding.😜
Like Kate, I have neither the interest nor the comprehension level, nor the attention span to verify all of this math, but there are multiple ways to know these people are full of shit. You approach such problems from a mathematical angle. I approach them from mechanistic ones.
I haven't kept track of the modern personalities, but this is a saga that goes back many decades.
Big Oil Medicine requires being constantly propped up by psychopaths, and probably at least 40% of the population is now onto the game. Only the university graduates and other useful idiots are still true believers in it at this point.
The ruse has been going on for a century and cannot go on much longer, both because too many people are onto the fraud and because the con is so huge that it's beginning to hurt themselves. They've been at this game for a LONG time and have typically been successful.
But I believe we're reaching the endpoint now. (Perhaps I'm deluded and hope simply springs eternal.)
If you're interested in a short story about the orchestrated takedown of vitamin C and Linus Pauling many decades ago by Gorski types, I wrote a short story with dozens of peer-reviewed references about that. I provide this for historical reference with regard to the utility of vitamin C in treating other diseases.
https://themariachiyears.substack.com/p/modern-ignorance-and-ancient-wisdom-8c1?s=w
I have to say that much of your critique of Kyle Sheldrick is beyond my interest and comprehension level, but that’s okay because I can conclude his opinions are worthless just by considering his tweet at the beginning of the article and that he put Mr. Marik’s name in quotation marks.
Full disclosure: my math skills just about allow me to balance my checkbook, but not much more, but your skill at explaining complex math is incredible. The one thing that has puzzled me throughout all of this manufactured controversy about HCQ and IVM is that I would think that, if these drugs were so dangerous at worst and ineffective at best, those who were either harmed or not helped by them would be sounding the alarms themselves. Knowing how much the MSM is opposed to these drugs, I would also think those victimized, or their survivors, would gladly be given a forum to tell their stories. Yet I don't hear of them. Puzzling. It's not a surprise that those helped have no viable means to share their success - even Joe Rogan's story is called into question. Where is a regular Joe supposed to go to tell his? But someone who died in their sleep after taking Ivermectin? Haven't heard of one yet.
Thank you for this! The people behind these attacks vex me the most. They are the banality of evil. Using their gifts for harm rather than good.
Ouch, what a takedown. This is a real war of information and knowledge, and I sure am glad Mathew is on our side.
“Why would anyone fake a nonessential aspect of a paper like this?”
I think his thinking is that the imagined fraudsters didn’t understand why their non-balanced study design “wouldn’t default to balance” (when in fact it would, though not this much, though an “unlikely” level of balance is actually more likely than a likely one as you point out).
It really is surprising that he didn’t consider just thinking about the issue on an intuitive level or just checking some other unpaired related diagnosis cohort study examples. That was the first thing I did, to make sure I wasn’t crazy. I think confidence in the fraudulence of the paper (the main finding is certainly hard to swallow) led him not to consider the null hypothesis. What a cringey nightmare.
I wish you had been my math teacher.
Great stuff Mathew, glad you came back to it!
I just looked through your list of substacks and found the paper that you wrote which is included in the book on the results of early treatment in Imperial County CA. There is an great interview with you and George and Bryan which I have posted many places.
https://trialsitenews.com/meet-the-author-overcoming-the-covid-darkness/
A recent paper in Trial Site News is on Long Covid.
"COVID Pandemic Lives on as Long COVID Ailment"
https://trialsitenews.com/covid-pandemic-lives-on-as-long-covid-ailment/
Here is what I asked the author and his response:
" DonMidwest
March 24, 2022
Dear Dr. Hirshhorn,
Thank you for this ongoing dialogue on micro clots and in particular their relation to long Covid.
Several of the comments have recommended various treatments like IVM, HCQ, supplements, etc.
First a question: if a patient is given early treatment and does not go to the hospital, will they NOT get long covid?
In particular, given that the doctors in Imperial County have treated 10,000 covid patients (treated before day 7 of getting covid) and none have gone to the hospital, do you know what percent have long covid? Are the results better when treatment is given in “the golden 72 hours” after covid begins?
If you don’t know the the results in Imperial Valley, it would be easier for you to find out than a layperson like me. Here is an excellent interview. When book written they were at 7,000 successful treatments and no hospitalizations.
https://trialsitenews.com/meet-the-author-overcoming-the-covid-darkness/
There are many early treatment protocols. My favorites are from flccc.net. Is there any data that if a person uses these as preventative treatment, then if they do get covid, they have a lower chance, or possibly they avoid all together getting long haul covid?
Reply
JoelSHirschhorn
March 24, 2022
You ask some great questions, but I have not seen any data indicating whether people who get good early treatment end up with long COVID; but I suspect that such early treatments that stop viral replication early probably prevent long COVID. We surely need some research on this issue. "
Yesterday I sent this to George Fareed.
Can something be learned from the experience in Imperial Valley with early treatment?
I hope you have forwarded this to Dr Marek.
God bless you! You and Kirsch and the good folks at FLCCC have kept me sane during the last 2 years. Your keen intellect and dedication to scientific integrity is appreciated.
You think he’s gonna meet you for a debate after this sizzling dunk? Thanks for distilling stats from a few different perspectives, I think I’m finally starting to understand some of it. At least that Dr. Rollergater run-on joke on twitter about p values is making a lot more sense.
Good job, and thanks
Very good write-up, unfortunately as we all already know the level of statistical knowledge in the field of medical research is abysmal and the average "yeah bro" researcher buddies of Kyle won't understand 1% of what you wrote here. I have tried having discussions about the flaws in the statistical interpretations of people like the fool running this ironically title website: https://forbetterscience.com/ (LEONID SCHNEIDER) which appears to be a shameless copy of this similarly ironically titled website: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ (seems to be the baby of David H. Gorski).
The one thing both of these sites have in common is that they are run by people that think (or at least pretend) to know complex statistical concepts, but turn out to only know some slang, acronyms and amusing oversimplified rules to follow without knowing why. When confronted online they go into circular arguments that eventually turn into name-calling and appeal to authority.
I have specifically wasted many hours of my life on such discussions about the vitamin C for sepsis studies - amazing how the same strategies were employed to discredit it as with repurposed drugs for COVID.