984 replies to this topic

[Hip]

Personally, I like Churchill's take on the matter: "If you're not liberal when you are young, you have no heart; if not conservative when older, you have no brain".  

 

Yes, that's very true. 

 

 

These days, in our era of identity politics, where every special interest group thinks they are right (even if their values clash with other special interest groups), we see that governments are much less in charge, and the general public now steers much of the debate and setting of policy.

 

But the funny thing is, when you get different groups of the general public clashing, both groups blame the government, rather than fighting out amongst themselves. 

 

If the general public are now calling much of the shots, in terms of how to steer our society, then this public should be sorting out their differences amongst themselves, not with the government.

 

 

For example, in the pandemic, you have one special interest group who believe that the rules and restrictions placed on the public during the pandemic were excessive, and they are opposed to those rules. This group blames the government for imposing too many rules and restrictions.

 

Then you get an equally vociferous group who believe that not enough rules and restrictions were placed on the public, resulting in the death of their loved ones, and this group blame the government for imposing too little rules and restrictions!

 

So the government cannot win, because whatever the government does, there will always be a special interest group who oppose the government action! 

 

I would never go into politics myself these days, because governments are shouted at and criticised from all possible angles. 

 

 

 

I say we let these special interest groups fight it out between themselves. We can take members from both groups, and let them fight it out in a large sports stadium, using fisticuffs! It would be a great sport to watch, and you could make lots of money selling tickets to such passionate events!

 

I am joking of course, but this joke does reflect a serious question: if the public are now in charge of the decisions and direction we take as a society, who to you hold accountable when things go wrong? Who takes the blame for disastrous results, when the public are in charge?

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 23 December 2023 - 05:24 PM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

I would like to propose that LongeCity add a new rating: "Totally Clueless". Sometimes "Ill Informed" just doesn't fill the bill.

[Hip]

I would like to propose that LongeCity add a new rating: "Totally Clueless". Sometimes "Ill Informed" just doesn't fill the bill.

 

And "Too autistic to understand the wider world" would be a useful rating too. 

[Hip]

We should have a Christmas truce over trading insults — and then resume the dogfight once this holiday is over!

[Dorian Grey]

We should have a Christmas truce over trading insults — and then resume the dogfight once this holiday is over!

 

I don't know Hip, the front line Brits & Germans tried this on the Western Front back in 1914, and found they didn't hate each other nearly as much as they previously thought they did.  They very nearly ruined a truly great world war!  

 

I actually value your (and Florin's) input more than I let on.  It's quite fascinating to ponder how fairly well educated and studied minds can form two radically opposite camps on a particular topic.  

 

I'm active on other forums, and believe we help sharpen each other's points with our back & forth, circular arguing, & I wouldn't be here if I didn't enjoy it.  

 

I am sorry about the incessant red flags you get.  They are not from me!  I am able to simply disagree and then share a pint down at the pub.  I hope you and the others in our small circle feel the same way. 

 

Happy Christmas mate, & I look forward to debates to come in 2024.  

[Mind]

More CYA from the incompetent people who led the destructive and ineffective COVID response. Francis Collins now says he was myopic when creating pandemic policies.

 

This is just another provable and obvious lie from the health bureaucrats in the US. FOIA emails show that Collins and Fauci were actively trying to destroy anyone who disagreed with their policies (which were destructive and useless). They weren't being "myopic". They were active shutting down discussion and ignoring advice from a wide range of world-renowned extensively-published, health experts, epidemiologists, virologists, doctors, bioethicists, etc...

[Daniel Cooper]

More CYA from the incompetent people who led the destructive and ineffective COVID response. Francis Collins now says he was myopic when creating pandemic policies.

 

This is just another provable and obvious lie from the health bureaucrats in the US. FOIA emails show that Collins and Fauci were actively trying to destroy anyone who disagreed with their policies (which were destructive and useless). They weren't being "myopic". They were active shutting down discussion and ignoring advice from a wide range of world-renowned extensively-published, health experts, epidemiologists, virologists, doctors, bioethicists, etc...

 

Some of the emails of Collins that were revealed though FOIA requests and the way he went along with some of the questionable policy decisions always puzzled me. I had followed Collin's career for some time prior to covid and he always seemed like a guy with a decent sense of morality and a pretty level headed approach.

 

I suppose he's a demonstration that even people that are essentially moral and intelligent can get caught up in the panic of the moment like he describes. Of course if someone like him can succumb to these things, image what a life long political maneuverer and bureaucrat like Fauci will do.

 

At least Collins seems to be having some genuine second thoughts and regrets.

 

Also he's spot on with the public health mindset - "If it saves just one life it's justified". Of course, the world doesn't work like that and no one really believes it. Don't believe me? How many people would advocate a universal 25 mph (40 kph) speed limit on all automobiles? Basically no one in spite of the fact it would save hundreds of thousands of lives per year just in the developed world. We judge that we're not willing to pay the price required in delay and inconvenience. And that's just from driving somewhat slower.

 

We always weigh costs vs. benefits and arrive at some equilibrium.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 31 December 2023 - 09:50 PM.

[Mind]

An extraordinary article about the anti-science cabal led by Peter Hotez. He is actually calling for everyone who disagrees with him to be censored. It is unbelievable that people like Hotez are allowed allowed to influence public health. If you refuse to hear any alternative viewpoints, you are not a "scientist". You are a cult leader.

[Mind]

Russel Brand illuminates the widespread propaganda that was used during the COVID panic. The media coordination  - funded by big pharma - was incredible. I am embarrassed to admit that I fell for some of the propaganda early in the COVID panic, even though I am well versed in human cognitive biases. I take solace in the fact that a lot of people smarter than me were also fooled. 

[Hip]

Russel Brand illuminates the widespread propaganda that was used during the COVID panic. The media coordination  - funded by big pharma - was incredible. I am embarrassed to admit that I fell for some of the propaganda early in the COVID panic, even though I am well versed in human cognitive biases. I take solace in the fact that a lot of people smarter than me were also fooled. 

 

Russell Brand is one of the biggest dickheads Britain has ever produced. He's never said anything intelligent; he just criticises every aspect of the establishment, and thinks such constant anti-establishment criticism makes it look like he is smart. But any idiot can stand up a criticise the establishment. In fact, it's often idiots that do precisely that; it makes these idiots feel smart to criticise, even when they are not that bright. 

 

Russell Brand is currently being investigated for alleged rape and sexual assault. He's certainly a shallow sex addict, having sleep with thousands of women, by his own admission. 

 

His most active organ is his dick, not his brain. 

Edited by Hip, 06 January 2024 - 07:19 PM.

[joesixpack]

Russell Brand is one of the biggest dickheads Britain has ever produced. He's never said anything intelligent; he just criticises every aspect of the establishment, and thinks such constant anti-establishment criticism makes it look like he is smart. But any idiot can stand up a criticise the establishment. In fact, it's often idiots that do precisely that; it makes these idiots feel smart to criticise, even when they are not that bright. 

 

Russell Brand is currently being investigated for alleged rape and sexual assault. He's certainly a shallow sex addict, having sleep with thousands of women, by his own admission. 

 

His most active organ is his dick, not his brain. 

As usual, no facts to counter Brand's message, just ad hominem attacks against the messenger, complete with mud slinging and profanity.

[Hip]

As usual, no facts to counter Brand's message, just ad hominem attacks against the messenger, complete with mud slinging and profanity.

 

Brand does not have a message; his comments are just inflammatory clickbait — which unfortunately millions of intellectually limited anti-establishment individuals online have become addicted to. Brand was making £1 million a year from his YouTube videos, which are just filled with his fast-paced shrill anti-establishment tripe. But YouTube stopped payments once the sexual allegations appeared some months ago. For me he's just a sex addicted loudmouth.  

 

Brand has a spiritual dimension to his personality, and normally I like spiritually oriented people. But Brand is so hedonistic, such a pleasure-seeking playboy, that I find him more vulgar than mystical. 

Edited by Hip, 06 January 2024 - 09:16 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Russell Brand is one of the biggest dickheads Britain has ever produced.

 

Come on now Hip - in Britain's long and storied history they've certainly produced bigger dickheads than Russel Brand.

[Hip]

Come on now Hip - in Britain's long and storied history they've certainly produced bigger dickheads than Russel Brand.

 

Maybe, but I cannot think of a contemporary celebrity who irritates me more that Brand. The funny thing is, 20 years ago in the naughties, Brand became the darling of the left. No doubt because of his anti-establishment views. Some even saw him as a modern day Oscar Wilde. But he's a million miles from the literary class of Wilde. Just a vacuous loudmouth.

[Daniel Cooper]

Maybe, but I cannot think of a contemporary celebrity who irritates me more that Brand. The funny thing is, 20 years ago in the naughties, Brand became the darling of the left. No doubt because of his anti-establishment views. Some even saw him as a modern day Oscar Wilde. But he's a million miles from the literary class of Wilde. Just a vacuous loudmouth.

 

With respect to Brand - he's still anti-establishment. The right is no longer the establishment. That's the left. The left is no longer the counter-culture. That's the right. These definitions change as which side is the dominate power shifts. Probably why Brand moved right. He wasn't comfortable becoming the establishment. 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 07 January 2024 - 05:11 AM.

[Hip]

With respect to Brand - he's still anti-establishment. The right is no longer the establishment. That's the left. The left is no longer the counter-culture. That's the right. These definitions change as which side is the dominate power shifts. Probably why Brand moved right. He wasn't comfortable becoming the establishment. 

 

I agree that the right is now the counter-culture, and the left is the establishment. 

 

Regarding Russell Brand: he's now turned away from the mainstream left, and towards right wing conspiracy theory material, which is probably why the left and the TV media dropped him, and why he had to go online, where he can entertain the millions of conspiracy loving wackos that live online. 

[Mind]

Russell Brand is one of the biggest dickheads Britain has ever produced. He's never said anything intelligent; he just criticises every aspect of the establishment, and thinks such constant anti-establishment criticism makes it look like he is smart. But any idiot can stand up a criticise the establishment. In fact, it's often idiots that do precisely that; it makes these idiots feel smart to criticise, even when they are not that bright. 

 

Russell Brand is currently being investigated for alleged rape and sexual assault. He's certainly a shallow sex addict, having sleep with thousands of women, by his own admission. 

 

His most active organ is his dick, not his brain. 

 

As usual, attack the messenger, an obvious sign that Brand is on to something.

 

I fell for the anti-science propaganda very early, but soon went back to analyzing the data. Because of this, I didn't fall for the media and US government propaganda that there was "no such thing as natural immunity", that HCQ and IVM were "dangerous", that the IFR from COVID was 3.4%, that there was "no chance that the new virus originated from a lab in China", etc... and much more.

 

There are many cognitive biases that were in play during the COVID panic. Many people smarter than me were fooled as well.

 

Another thing that people often don't realize they fall prey to is Gell-Mann Amnesia - where you see a report, you realize it is erroneous or a lie, but then you still trust the same source for other information. Dr. Fauci, the CDC, FDA, and many within the US public health establishment lied, hid data from the public, and made numerous mistakes during the COVID panic. Because of this no one should trust what they say, unless you can independently verify it.

[Hip]

Another thing that people often don't realize they fall prey to is Gell-Mann Amnesia - where you see a report, you realize it is erroneous or a lie, but then you still trust the same source for other information.

 

Does that apply to the misinformation you have often posted, such as the vaccines are not effective? Or that the COVID vaccines are not even vaccines? 

Edited by Hip, 08 January 2024 - 12:20 AM.

[Hip]

As usual, attack the messenger, an obvious sign that Brand is on to something.

 

What Brand is onto is obvious: that if he pumps out conspiracy theory videos on YouTube, he can make £1 million a year from them. There's often more money to be made in misinformation than there is in truth. Just ask Alex Jones, who was happy to profit from victimising the Sandy Hook parents as fakers and actors. 

Edited by Hip, 08 January 2024 - 12:27 AM.

[Mind]

As if anyone needs anymore evidence that the public health leaders during the COVID panic had no clue what they were doing, Dr. Fauci testifies when asked about the 6-foot distance rule, he said "it just sort of appeared."

 

At the time the social distancing rules were implemented, many asked if there was any science to back it up. There was none. There is still none. The distance was totally arbitrary. Yet, public health authorities enforced it with an iron fist. Talk about anti-science.

 

It is similar to the masking rules and many other utterly ineffective, tyrannical, and destructive public "health" measures.

 

Prior to the COVID panic, both the WHO and the CDC studied masking as a pandemic response and concluded it would be ineffective and even stated so in their public guidance documents. Yet we still got tyrannical masking rules that did nothing to stop the spread of COVID in any country of the world. Talk about anti-science.

 

Remember how small businesses were forced to close while corporate behemoths like Walmart were allowed open. Nothing scientific about that.

 

Remember how liquor stores were allowed to open but gyms were forced to close. For a healthier population, they should be going to the gym instead of getting drunk.

 

A group of economists in Australia calculates that the lockdowns were 30 to 35 times more costly to society than they ever could have delivered in benefits (for a disease with a proven IFR of less than ONE TENTH OF ONE PERCENT! (peer-reviewed)

 

New (peer-reviewed) study, demonstrates the the lockdowns had near zero impact on the spread of COVID. According to the data from 6 northern European countries, the "success" that some people attributed to the lockdowns was really just seasonality.

 

The evidence of the complete failure of the COVID policies is so widespread and so obvious - yet we are not getting any change in public health leadership. The world could be in real trouble in the near future if the same anti-science incompetent bureaucrats remain in positions of power.

[Florin]

As if anyone needs anymore evidence that the public health leaders during the COVID panic had no clue what they were doing, Dr. Fauci testifies when asked about the 6-foot distance rule, he said "it just sort of appeared."
 
At the time the social distancing rules were implemented, many asked if there was any science to back it up. There was none. There is still none. The distance was totally arbitrary. Yet, public health authorities enforced it with an iron fist. Talk about anti-science.

 

Not quite. There was some evidence that droplets travel about 6 feet based on experiments done in the 1930s and 1940s. The assumption that didn't have evidence to back it up was the idea that droplets and fomites caused most or all transmission.

 

These people still don't know what they're doing as the WHO, CDC, and the rest of the public health establishment still seem to think that droplets and fomites cause significant transmission of common transmissible respiratory diseases such as the flu and common cold.

 

Prior to the COVID panic, both the WHO and the CDC studied masking as a pandemic response and concluded it would be ineffective and even stated so in their public guidance documents. Yet we still got tyrannical masking rules that did nothing to stop the spread of COVID in any country of the world. Talk about anti-science.

 

Nope. The WHO did mention that masking might be a good idea as a pandemic response in one of its 2019 policy docs. I linked to it in an old comment that I'm not going to bother trying to find.

 

 

[Mind]

Not quite. There was some evidence that droplets travel about 6 feet based on experiments done in the 1930s and 1940s. The assumption that didn't have evidence to back it up was the idea that droplets and fomites caused most or all transmission.

 

These people still don't know what they're doing as the WHO, CDC, and the rest of the public health establishment still seem to think that droplets and fomites cause significant transmission of common transmissible respiratory diseases such as the flu and common cold.

 

 

Nope. The WHO did mention that masking might be a good idea as a pandemic response in one of its 2019 policy docs. I linked to it in an old comment that I'm not going to bother trying to find.

 

Nope: In this 2020 guidance the WHO clearly states over and over that "the use of a mask (even when used correctly) is insufficient"

 

This was the point where many reasonable scientists started wondering why the WHO stated this plain fact (bolstered by a century of RCT and observational data), and then went on to recommend masks anyway. It made no sense, but then none of the pandemic response made much sense, and as we see from Dr Fauci's testimony, they were making it up as they went along.

 

This 2020 doc was an update from their previous guidance which was even less supportive of masking. If I can find it again, I will post it. 

Edited by Mind, 12 January 2024 - 07:48 PM.

[Florin]

Nope: In this 2020 guidance the WHO clearly states over and over that "the use of a mask (even when used correctly) is insufficient"
 
This was the point where many reasonable scientists started wondering why the WHO stated this plain fact (bolstered by a century of RCT and observational data), and then went on to recommend masks anyway. It made no sense, but then none of the pandemic response made much sense, and as we see from Dr Fauci's testimony, they were making it up as they went along.
 
This 2020 doc was an update from their previous guidance which was even less supportive of masking. If I can find it again, I will post it.

 
Yup.
 

RECOMMENDATION:

Face masks worn by asymptomatic people are conditionally recommended in severe epidemics or pandemics, to reduce transmission in the community. Disposable, surgical masks are recommended to be worn at all times by symptomatic individuals when in contact with other individuals. Although there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission, there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure.
 

Population: Population with symptomatic individuals; and general public for protection

When to apply: At all times for symptomatic individuals (disposable surgical mask), and in severe epidemics or pandemics for public protection (face masks)

 
Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza
https://iris.who.int...1516839-eng.pdf

[Mind]

No one should be shocked by this...Scientific American was lying to people to "inoculate" them against misinformation. The CDC admitted to lying. Dr. Fauci brazenly lied in public and to Congress. The CDC and WHO flipped their position on masking without any ne RCT evidence....etc...

 

As if lying to the public throughout the COVID panic wasn't enough, the FDA and CDC have been hiding data. They have to be forced by the courts to release information that is supposed to be public. Even the New York Times called out the CDC for hiding information about the COVID injections. Now at least, the CDC has been ordered to release the V-safe case-level data. If the COVID injections are super safe and effective, THERE IS NO RERASON TO WITHHOLD this data from the public. Will the CDC defy the courts and continue to hide information about the "vaccine" safety? Being they are so desperate to hide this information from the public, do you think they will alter or erase the data?

Edited by Mind, 14 January 2024 - 07:04 PM.

[Florin]

No one should be shocked by this...Scientific American was lying to people to "inoculate" them against misinformation. The CDC admitted to lying. Dr. Fauci brazenly lied in public and to Congress. The CDC and WHO flipped their position on masking without any ne RCT evidence....etc...

 

Again, the WHO didn't flip its position on masking. See my previous comment.

 

As for the CDC, you need to reference a policy doc about masking in pandemics that contradicted its advice. Maybe it followed the WHO policy (see page 3) to not mask in a "moderate" pandemic and switched to masking when it determined that the pandemic was of high severity.

Edited by Florin, 15 January 2024 - 06:58 PM.

[Mind]

Yet another variant of SARS-CoV2 is concerning "experts", These same experts have been crying wolf for two years now, about every other month. Remember the "winter of severe illness and death" that never happened. The "experts" failed miserably during the COVID panic. I am unsure why these "experts" are still given a platform.

[Daniel Cooper]

Yet another variant of SARS-CoV2 is concerning "experts", These same experts have been crying wolf for two years now, about every other month. Remember the "winter of severe illness and death" that never happened. The "experts" failed miserably during the COVID panic. I am unsure why these "experts" are still given a platform.

 

I remember at the end of last summer it was the health experts and the media touting the "triple threat" of covid, influenza, and RSV as we went into the fall.

 

That never seemed to materialize.

[Mind]

The whole "believe the anointed experts always and everywhere" was one of the more detrimental aspects of the COVID panic. We were told to not review the evidence, reject years of peer-reviewed evidence, and just obey Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez. Here we have a dissection of Hotez's most recent book and its illogic.

[Daniel Cooper]

The sad thing is that the health bureaucracy and the media managed to terrify some people to the extent that some are still living as virtual shut-ins.

 

You can find some of these people in odd corners of social media - predicting that we're all fools for letting our guard down, mingling in public, no longer masking, not keeping up with every booster recommendation. Unfortunately I think the fear mongering may have permanently broken some of these souls.

 

I still see the proverbial lone masked person in a car every now and then. Not so much as a few years ago, but they're still out there. I wonder if these people will ever go back to normal. We're in year four now. How long do people think these sorts of things normally last?

[Hip]

You can find some of these people in odd corners of social media - predicting that we're all fools for letting our guard down, mingling in public, no longer masking, not keeping up with every booster recommendation. Unfortunately I think the fear mongering may have permanently broken some of these souls.

 

There is a good chance that in 10 or 20 years time, we may discover that chronic defective SARS-CoV-2 infections eventually lead to multiple different chronic illnesses. So people who continue to try to avoid SARS-CoV-2 may not be as crazy as you think. I have to admit that if I were healthy, I would not be taking precautions such as masking. But people who do might prove to be the smart ones in the end.

 

The fact that SARS-CoV-2 can cause long COVID suggests this virus is able to linger on, in defective form, in the body organs. That then opens lots of opportunities for causing chronic disease. 

 

 

If you consider defective enterovirus (aka non-cytolytic enterovirus), this virus linked to a dozen chronic diseases:

 

Persistent defective enteroviral infections have been found in:

• The brain, muscle and stomach tissues of myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome.
• The heart muscle in murine and human coxsackievirus B chronic myocarditis.
• The heart muscle in dilated cardiomyopathy (a sequelae of myocarditis).
• The cerebrospinal fluid and spinal cord tissue of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (a motor neuron disease).
• The brainstem in Parkinson's disease.
• The salivary gland epithelial cells and lymphocyte infiltrates in primary Sjögren's syndrome.
• The cerebrospinal fluid in post-polio syndrome.
• The murine pancreas and human pancreas, which has implications for type 1 diabetes.
• The intestines in ileocecal Crohn's disease.
• The heart valve tissues in valvular heart disease.
• The calf muscle in peripheral arterial disease.
• The stomach tissues in functional dyspepsia and chronic gastritis.

Source here.

 

You will have to admit, that's a pretty extensive portfolio of diseases for just one genus of virus, the enteroviruses.

 

 

Remember, RNA viruses like enterovirus and SARS-CoV-2 cannot normally form chronic infections, because RNA viruses cannot enter latency (only DNA viruses can create latent states leading to persistent colonisation of the body). 

 

BUT, when RNA viruses transform into defective forms (meaning part of their genome gets deleted), they can change into another virus which can form chronic infections — chronic intracellular infections of pure naked viral RNA. 

Edited by Hip, 17 January 2024 - 12:45 AM.