A major problem is reliance on and trust in authority instead of the Enlightenment ideal of reliance on one's own perceptions, intuitions, and reasoning. We have a word for those who wish to exert authority: authoritarians. But do we have a word for those who are obedient to authority or depend on authority, or love authority? I'm in the process of providing one, as well as providing an analysis of our current Weltanschauung (world-view) that allows for authoritarianism to flourish. This world-view just needs a nudge to get it over the tipping point that would allow for the WEF's schemes to flourish; luckily we still have enlightenment-style thinkers around who are fighting back.
So the question is, what's the one weapon that all citizens should be armed with in order to check and balance the power of organizations and institutions, in order to prevent the inevitable abuse of power that will follow if these powerful organizations and institutions are unchecked? The answer, in a nutshell, is to question everything and take nothing on faith or authority.
Perhaps now we can see how and why true individualism is being attacked everywhere and why we're being admonished not to spread unauthorized information. It's about shifting our Weltanschauung from an Enlightenment perspective to one of non-questioning obedience, and the reward for this shift will be oodles of entertainment, beer, drugs, and sexual freedom. All you have to do is sell your integrity, and this will be made easier by appealing to the very problematic idea of "the greater good."
After the recent RCTs of HCQ and Ivm (obviously designed to fail), I told friends who were convinced by the studies that the trials were no different than testing umbrellas for ability to keep a user dry but not actually opening the umbrellas when walking in rain. Result: umbrellas do not keep a user dry.
The CDC has long used models to estimate influenza-related deaths, and the results have always been questionable. Peter Doshi points out that some of the observational studies of flu vaccines estimate up to 50% reduction in all-cause deaths after flu vaccination, which is an impossible result since flu isn't responsible for that many deaths.
The CDC is using the flu model on covid, which takes advantage of the subjectivity in determining cause of death, especially in cases involving pneumonia. And since the pathogen involved in pneumonia deaths is determined in less than half of all cases, this is easy to do.
Note that the FDA just met to discuss the strain selection process for covid vaccines - only flu vaccines use this process currently, and any vaccines made for the approved strains don't require any clinical data.
They are clearly making covid into the new flu, but much more profitable for the companies selling those new vaccines.
Apr 23, 2022·edited Apr 23, 2022Liked by Mathew Crawford
"We do not run RCTs to find out the ranges of safe temperatures for the preparation of babies as a food."
Maybe not anything that obvious, but we do run RCTs to find the ranges of "safe" dosages of new immunotherapies for terminal cancer patients after they've been forced through standard of care procedures that destroy their immune system.
The denial of terminal cancer patients the right to try experimental therapies has been going on since the late 1960s in the US, and about 600,000 terminal cancer patients die every year in the US alone.
People have been tolerating their status as slaves to the state for many decades.
So many people are fond of self-righteously proclaiming, "Our ancestors died for your right to vote!"
But what they really mean is, "Our ancestors voted for your right to die."
The narrative works because pharma plays the victim and the real victims of the jab still think, "we are in this together and we are helping science solve this mystery of covid"....they are proud of themselves for "helping" science so jab away....it makes a lot of people feel important and special...sort of how it felt when you got picked first in gym class....EVERY time there is an injury, or death, I always hear that it is definitely NOT the vaccine from people I work, live next to and socialize with.....it all made more sense this morning when I read this...this is the kind of messaging that sells and keeps people "hopeful" for a "cure"........https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/04/19/1093052484/despite-effective-treatments-hiv-drags-on-experts-warn-covid-may-face-the-same-f
The most shocking thing to me is how easily they have convinced so many people to accept unquestioningly what otherwise begins to appear like a deliberate, gradual population drawdown.
With respect to Osgood, he sort of fell off my radar about a year ago when it seemed like he was starting to tow the physician approved narrative that HCQ did not work and that the vaccines did. And, as I recall, he was beginning to backpedal on ivermectin at roughly around that time. Still, he did do early preventative treatment, so you have to thank him for that - it was more than most, which is truly an indictment of the profession.
The continued required genuflection of physicians in the general direction of the vaccines is very discouraging and is practiced by those that I otherwise admire for taking courageous stands on other matters, such as early treatment or the harm of mask mandates and social isolation. Such is the pressure on them by their paymasters. Such is the state of corruption in western health care, the Hippocratic oath notwithstanding.
As for parachute studies, it is clear after reading the Fauci book that he has perfected the art of the closely timed two foot drop. Terminating clinical trials at an early stage before negative safety signals can appear is a longstanding practice of the good doctor. He did it with AZT back in the day and continued this legerdemain with remdesivir and the Covid 'vaccines' in our more enlightened age.
As Nicholson's Jake Gittes said in Chinatown, "it is manslaughter if anyone wants to know, which they don't".
Thanks for a great laugh, there's a reason we for several years now have had the IgNobel prize awards. Seems no need to keep the old Nobel prize around somedays, even.
That pyramid is upside down by the way, maybe that's the problem? I wasn't taught to think of the process as a pyramid but as a funnel, starting with a general idea and then through induction and deduction and other forms of -duction and testing and retesting and having coffee-induced psychotic breaks in the faculty lounge and... you get the picture.
And maybe, just maybe in a blue moon one would eventually have distilled some minuscule new fact.
Such as that (random example) Austrian/Chicago or Keynesian economics looks great on paper (what econ theory doesn't?) but that reality is too complex, chaotic and varied as to say anything other than that the validity will vay with the example chosen - yay. Science! Or in pol sci... oh gawd. Why is Norway at the top of the heap and Venezuela at the bottom? Both have colonial pasts, both were poor, both struck black gold, Venezuela is a shithole and Norway is the golden standard. Why? Well, there's this little thing called race&culture... Anathema! Heresy! All humans are equal in wrth and dignity! Oh-kay. So why aren't someafrican people about a 1 000 years ahead of everyone else then? And so on with the PC blinders firmly nailed through the temples in the temple of Science!
Meanwhile, reality asserts itself like the Juggernaught it is. Hypothesis: scientists/researchers tend to prove those theories which generates the most personal wealth, status and influence. But how to test it?
To my mind the mRNA COVID vaccines seemed like a bad idea based on a priori reasoning alone. Like, why would you make a vaccine that invades your cells like the virus itself? What benefit is there to that? The whole point of a vaccine is to use a piece of virus that DOESN’T invade human cells! And it’s supposed to be less dangerous because of the pseudouridine substitutions but that just means that (if it works correctly) it evades the immune system so well that your body learns to mistake the spike protein for a self-antigen. The main benefit to making your body manufacture the antigen instead of a factory seems to be that it’s quicker and cheaper for the manufacturers. If the pseudouridine thing works out, then it’s safe (in the short term) but not very effective. If it doesn’t, then it’s probably effective but unnecessarily dangerous in the short term. You shouldn’t have needed to test it in order to know that it wouldn’t be safe and effective. And if a study says otherwise, your own common sense should be able to tell you that it’s bullshit, just like if a study came out telling you that it’s safe to take a bath in cyanide to get rid of typhus lice. I found a song (written in 2020; I swear it was written about the Warp Speed project) that articulates this point quite well: https://youtu.be/HjdKaUvUSd8
Suggest a branch of the RCT needs to involve those older than 44 at CDC/FDA be repeatedly injected with the mRNA substances at some frequency. Maybe something tied to a biological process, like each time they need to use the restroom. I expect a toilet could be designed to do this efficiently. All for The Science you know.
Disclaimer: Don't try any of this at home. Any of it.
Ha ha! I had no idea that last line was coming! Thank you!!
A major problem is reliance on and trust in authority instead of the Enlightenment ideal of reliance on one's own perceptions, intuitions, and reasoning. We have a word for those who wish to exert authority: authoritarians. But do we have a word for those who are obedient to authority or depend on authority, or love authority? I'm in the process of providing one, as well as providing an analysis of our current Weltanschauung (world-view) that allows for authoritarianism to flourish. This world-view just needs a nudge to get it over the tipping point that would allow for the WEF's schemes to flourish; luckily we still have enlightenment-style thinkers around who are fighting back.
So the question is, what's the one weapon that all citizens should be armed with in order to check and balance the power of organizations and institutions, in order to prevent the inevitable abuse of power that will follow if these powerful organizations and institutions are unchecked? The answer, in a nutshell, is to question everything and take nothing on faith or authority.
Perhaps now we can see how and why true individualism is being attacked everywhere and why we're being admonished not to spread unauthorized information. It's about shifting our Weltanschauung from an Enlightenment perspective to one of non-questioning obedience, and the reward for this shift will be oodles of entertainment, beer, drugs, and sexual freedom. All you have to do is sell your integrity, and this will be made easier by appealing to the very problematic idea of "the greater good."
After the recent RCTs of HCQ and Ivm (obviously designed to fail), I told friends who were convinced by the studies that the trials were no different than testing umbrellas for ability to keep a user dry but not actually opening the umbrellas when walking in rain. Result: umbrellas do not keep a user dry.
I'm with Mr. Swift. If babies weren't meant to be eaten why do they look like roly-poly dumplings? 🤔
The CDC has long used models to estimate influenza-related deaths, and the results have always been questionable. Peter Doshi points out that some of the observational studies of flu vaccines estimate up to 50% reduction in all-cause deaths after flu vaccination, which is an impossible result since flu isn't responsible for that many deaths.
The CDC is using the flu model on covid, which takes advantage of the subjectivity in determining cause of death, especially in cases involving pneumonia. And since the pathogen involved in pneumonia deaths is determined in less than half of all cases, this is easy to do.
Note that the FDA just met to discuss the strain selection process for covid vaccines - only flu vaccines use this process currently, and any vaccines made for the approved strains don't require any clinical data.
They are clearly making covid into the new flu, but much more profitable for the companies selling those new vaccines.
Here's one of Doshi's papers:
https://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f3037
"We do not run RCTs to find out the ranges of safe temperatures for the preparation of babies as a food."
Maybe not anything that obvious, but we do run RCTs to find the ranges of "safe" dosages of new immunotherapies for terminal cancer patients after they've been forced through standard of care procedures that destroy their immune system.
The denial of terminal cancer patients the right to try experimental therapies has been going on since the late 1960s in the US, and about 600,000 terminal cancer patients die every year in the US alone.
People have been tolerating their status as slaves to the state for many decades.
So many people are fond of self-righteously proclaiming, "Our ancestors died for your right to vote!"
But what they really mean is, "Our ancestors voted for your right to die."
The narrative works because pharma plays the victim and the real victims of the jab still think, "we are in this together and we are helping science solve this mystery of covid"....they are proud of themselves for "helping" science so jab away....it makes a lot of people feel important and special...sort of how it felt when you got picked first in gym class....EVERY time there is an injury, or death, I always hear that it is definitely NOT the vaccine from people I work, live next to and socialize with.....it all made more sense this morning when I read this...this is the kind of messaging that sells and keeps people "hopeful" for a "cure"........https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/04/19/1093052484/despite-effective-treatments-hiv-drags-on-experts-warn-covid-may-face-the-same-f
I had to stop Joel Smalley’s Requiem midway to breathe.
The most shocking thing to me is how easily they have convinced so many people to accept unquestioningly what otherwise begins to appear like a deliberate, gradual population drawdown.
With respect to Osgood, he sort of fell off my radar about a year ago when it seemed like he was starting to tow the physician approved narrative that HCQ did not work and that the vaccines did. And, as I recall, he was beginning to backpedal on ivermectin at roughly around that time. Still, he did do early preventative treatment, so you have to thank him for that - it was more than most, which is truly an indictment of the profession.
The continued required genuflection of physicians in the general direction of the vaccines is very discouraging and is practiced by those that I otherwise admire for taking courageous stands on other matters, such as early treatment or the harm of mask mandates and social isolation. Such is the pressure on them by their paymasters. Such is the state of corruption in western health care, the Hippocratic oath notwithstanding.
As for parachute studies, it is clear after reading the Fauci book that he has perfected the art of the closely timed two foot drop. Terminating clinical trials at an early stage before negative safety signals can appear is a longstanding practice of the good doctor. He did it with AZT back in the day and continued this legerdemain with remdesivir and the Covid 'vaccines' in our more enlightened age.
As Nicholson's Jake Gittes said in Chinatown, "it is manslaughter if anyone wants to know, which they don't".
Thanks for a great laugh, there's a reason we for several years now have had the IgNobel prize awards. Seems no need to keep the old Nobel prize around somedays, even.
That pyramid is upside down by the way, maybe that's the problem? I wasn't taught to think of the process as a pyramid but as a funnel, starting with a general idea and then through induction and deduction and other forms of -duction and testing and retesting and having coffee-induced psychotic breaks in the faculty lounge and... you get the picture.
And maybe, just maybe in a blue moon one would eventually have distilled some minuscule new fact.
Such as that (random example) Austrian/Chicago or Keynesian economics looks great on paper (what econ theory doesn't?) but that reality is too complex, chaotic and varied as to say anything other than that the validity will vay with the example chosen - yay. Science! Or in pol sci... oh gawd. Why is Norway at the top of the heap and Venezuela at the bottom? Both have colonial pasts, both were poor, both struck black gold, Venezuela is a shithole and Norway is the golden standard. Why? Well, there's this little thing called race&culture... Anathema! Heresy! All humans are equal in wrth and dignity! Oh-kay. So why aren't someafrican people about a 1 000 years ahead of everyone else then? And so on with the PC blinders firmly nailed through the temples in the temple of Science!
Meanwhile, reality asserts itself like the Juggernaught it is. Hypothesis: scientists/researchers tend to prove those theories which generates the most personal wealth, status and influence. But how to test it?
To my mind the mRNA COVID vaccines seemed like a bad idea based on a priori reasoning alone. Like, why would you make a vaccine that invades your cells like the virus itself? What benefit is there to that? The whole point of a vaccine is to use a piece of virus that DOESN’T invade human cells! And it’s supposed to be less dangerous because of the pseudouridine substitutions but that just means that (if it works correctly) it evades the immune system so well that your body learns to mistake the spike protein for a self-antigen. The main benefit to making your body manufacture the antigen instead of a factory seems to be that it’s quicker and cheaper for the manufacturers. If the pseudouridine thing works out, then it’s safe (in the short term) but not very effective. If it doesn’t, then it’s probably effective but unnecessarily dangerous in the short term. You shouldn’t have needed to test it in order to know that it wouldn’t be safe and effective. And if a study says otherwise, your own common sense should be able to tell you that it’s bullshit, just like if a study came out telling you that it’s safe to take a bath in cyanide to get rid of typhus lice. I found a song (written in 2020; I swear it was written about the Warp Speed project) that articulates this point quite well: https://youtu.be/HjdKaUvUSd8
"The Control: We inject them with a saline solution marked "Comirnazi"" 😅😅
The smart asses, the truth tellers wi win. This Vox fascinates me.
I recognize someone cooler than me, instantly. And he's one of the very few on planet earth
https://video.thesetruths.com/Su7rhdh/shoot-any-booster/
Suggest a branch of the RCT needs to involve those older than 44 at CDC/FDA be repeatedly injected with the mRNA substances at some frequency. Maybe something tied to a biological process, like each time they need to use the restroom. I expect a toilet could be designed to do this efficiently. All for The Science you know.