984 replies to this topic

[Daniel Cooper]

 

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.

 

Reckon what we will discover about the mental health of people that locked themselves away from the world for so long?
 

[Hip]

Reckon what we will discover about the mental health of people that locked themselves away from the world for so long?

 

I am sure that it does not help. But I also think people are falsely attributing mental health problems to lockdown, when they are more likely caused by catching the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and the adverse effect this virus may have on the brain.

 

One right wing news presenter in the UK was blaming pandemic school closures for the large deterioration in the mental health of one of her young children, claiming her lively and bubbly 3-year old had become anxious and withdrawn. Yet if school closures resulted in mental health issues, we would see home schooled kids with these mental health problems — which we don't.

 

So the more likely explanation for her son's mental state changes is catching COVID itself, which many children do asymptomatically, or with an infection so mild that it goes unnoticed. But once the virus has entered the body, it may slowly do harm. 

Edited by Hip, 17 January 2024 - 04:25 AM.

[joesixpack]

I am sure that it does not help. But I also think people are falsely attributing mental health problems to lockdown, when they are more likely caused by catching the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and the adverse effect this virus may have on the brain.

 

One right wing news presenter in the UK was blaming pandemic school closures for the large deterioration in the mental health of one of her young children, claiming her lively and bubbly 3-year old had become anxious and withdrawn. Yet if school closures resulted in mental health issues, we would see home schooled kids with these mental health problems — which we don't.

 

So the more likely explanation for her son's mental state changes is catching COVID itself, which many children do asymptomatically, or with an infection so mild that it goes unnoticed. But once the virus has entered the body, it may slowly do harm. 

She is probably right. There was a major drop in scores for children during the Covid lockdown. This generation of children will not recover from it. It is not a right wing issue. It is a human issue. And it barely effectuated the kids.

[Daniel Cooper]

 

One right wing news presenter in the UK was blaming pandemic school closures for the large deterioration in the mental health of one of her young children, claiming her lively and bubbly 3-year old had become anxious and withdrawn. Yet if school closures resulted in mental health issues, we would see home schooled kids with these mental health problems — which we don't.

 

 

It could be that the home school experience (i.e. highly involved parents who decide to school their kids at home) is not the same experience as taking a regular kid that attends public school and sending him home for "at home learning".

 

We know after all from standardized test scores that the "at home learning" kids did a lot more of "at home" and relatively little "learning". Home schooled kids on the other hand as a group have higher than average test scores.

 

So perhaps these things are not the same, no?

[Hip]

She is probably right. There was a major drop in scores for children during the Covid lockdown. This generation of children will not recover from it. It is not a right wing issue. It is a human issue. And it barely effectuated the kids.

 

I don't buy that narrative, which is put out there by psychiatrists and psychologists, who often tend to want to exclusively explain mental symptoms in terms of life events they think caused those symptoms.  

 

If you look at studies on home schooled kids, you find they are smarter, more socially well adjusted, and more sociable than kids who go to school. 

 

See this article: Are Homeschool Students Happier?

 

 

 

By contrast, a systematic review and meta-analysis study found that children with a previous COVID infection had higher rates of anxiety, depression, and appetite issues than children with no prior infection.

Edited by Hip, 17 January 2024 - 05:09 PM.

[Hip]

It could be that the home school experience (i.e. highly involved parents who decide to school their kids at home) is not the same experience as taking a regular kid that attends public school and sending him home for "at home learning".

 

Yes, that's a possibility. The parents of home schooled kids will have set out a disciplined structure for each days teaching, whereas kids staying at home because their school was closed during the pandemic might just be watching TV all day.

Edited by Hip, 17 January 2024 - 04:55 PM.

[Hip]

Study finds COVID can infect dopamine neurons, causing neuron senescence, and potentially leading to brain fog and depression.

 

Article here.

The 2024 study here.

 

But the study found that three drugs can rescue these infected and senescent neurons, including the drug metformin. 

[Rocket]

Study finds COVID can infect dopamine neurons, causing neuron senescence, and potentially leading to brain fog and depression.

Article here.
The 2024 study here.

But the study found that three drugs can rescue these infected and senescent neurons, including the drug metformin.

I had covid 4 weeks ago and got brain for for a day or two. I started 3x daily m ethylene blue and recovered quickly. N=1 but my experience

Edited by Rocket, 27 January 2024 - 01:46 AM.

[Mind]

It bears repeating and listing all of the ways in which the world's population was misled and lied to during the COVID panic (mainly by US/UK health bureaucrats and media). There are a lot of people who are still not aware of the massive propaganda.

 

The CDC admitted to lying to the public about tracking COVID injection safety and they continue to hide safety data from the public - why do you still trust them? They knew the COVID injections were causing myocarditis very early on but refrained from warning the public because they thought it would cause "vaccine hesitancy". Multiple peer-reviewed studies from multiple countries have proved beyond a doubt that the COVID injections have caused fatal heart disorders. Apparently, the CDC could care less how many thousands or millions of people die from COVID injection induced heart disease.

 

Recall that two FDA advisory panel members resigned because of the unethical actions from the rest of the FDA board (who are almost all previous big pharma executives). Is it any wonder why every new booster gets the rubber stamp. Every new combination of injections gets the rubber stamp from the FDA without even a hint of an new RCT trial. Why do you trust them?

 

As noted earlier in this discussion, the UN, the WHO and the U.S. government spent billions of dollars to hire influencers, sports stars, advertising agencies, etc. to promote the COVID injections even though they were well aware of the serious side effects and the fact that the injections would not stop transmission, infection, hospitalization, or death. They sold it as 100% safe and effective. They lied. Why do you still listen to their advice? Dr Birx admitted to lying. Dr Fauci lied. How many lies do they need to tell before you don't trust them anymore.

 

The CDC was also involved in a massive campaign to destroy scientists and doctors who disagreed with their policies. Did you know that they routinely labeled accurate COVID information as "disinformation". They rejected hundreds of accurate peer-reviewed studies and told the public to NOT look at the legitimate science. This is awful and no one is being held accountable.

 

Many people were swayed by propaganda funded by Moderna and Pfizer. (even US media like NPR are funded by people who are getting rich off of the injections) They funneled millions of dollars into secretive campaigns to push their COVID injections. A lot of normal level-headed people were spurred into vitriolic rage by Moderna and Pfizer. They were funding the attacks on legitimate science in order to push their injections. Be on guard for this type manipulation. I am somewhat embarrassed about falling for the propaganda early in the COVID panic. Lesson learned.

Edited by Mind, 31 January 2024 - 07:21 PM.

[Hip]

The CDC admitted to lying to the public about tracking COVID injection safety and they continue to hide safety data from the public - why do you still trust them? They knew the COVID injections were causing myocarditis very early on but refrained from warning the public because they thought it would cause "vaccine hesitancy". 

 

Mind, you have stated many times that to you, the death of elderly or vulnerable people is not an issue we should be concerned about. I guess because you don't think the lives of these people are important. 

 

However, the CDC are morally concerned about the elderly or vulnerable, and that's why they wanted them vaccinated. Any information which would unduly scare people away from vaccination should on moral grounds be kept quiet from the public, because death awaits people who are hesitant about the vaccine.

 

You don't appear to see the moral argument, because you don't think elderly people are worth saving. 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

"I guess because you don't think the lives of these people are important." 

 

"You don't appear to see the moral argument, because you don't think elderly people are worth saving."

 

Mind reading again, Hip?

 

 

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 31 January 2024 - 12:55 AM.

[Hip]

"I guess because you don't think the lives of these people are important." 

 

Mind reading again, Hip?

 

Nope, just my empathetic understanding of other people. You might not have any empathetic understanding yourself, but don't assume others are as limited. 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Actually your "empathetic understanding" is nothing more than projection.

 

Perhaps it would be more rational to directly ask Mind where he stands, rather than doing your usual strawman, false narrative BS.

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 31 January 2024 - 01:08 AM.

[Hip]

Advocatus Diaboli, have you ever once made a post which is on topic, rather than always going on these odd tangents of yours.

 

The issue I raised was one of morality, and I think the moral action of the CDC is higher than the way Mind would like to conduct the pandemic response. 

 

Mind by his own account is a libertarian. This is a philosophy of wanting the highest freedom for the individual. So for a libertarian, it is a much hated imposition to be told to wear masks, to be told to socially distance, to be coerced into vaccination, to be placed under lockdown, and so forth. Even if these things save the lives of the elderly and vulnerable, libertarians would likely be against them, because libertarians put their individual rights first. Libertarianism is really an opposite of socialism, as in the latter is it the good of the community that is paramount, whereas libertarians are all about the good of the individual. 

 

So knowing Mind's philosophy, and having read what he has stated many times about the elderly in this pandemic, I can see why he fails to understand the CDC's actions. The CDC are trying to look after the whole community, especially the vulnerable. Once you understand that, you can understand why the CDC have certain policies, such as keeping quiet about mild or rare vaccine side effects, because publicising them can create vaccine hesitancy, which then kills more people than the side effects do. You have to appreciate the moral angle to understand the road taken.

 

I should clarify why this is a moral issue: if it were purely a scientific issue, then the CDC should publicise all data, include any rare adverse effects of the vaccines. Science after all is about uncovering the truth. But because it is also a moral issue, about trying to save lives, that can come into conflict with the scientific issue, because publicising rare vaccine side effects actually can result in people dying as a result of vaccine hesitancy.

 

So you often need to understand the morality of saving lives to understand why government agencies took certain actions. 

 

If you have any intelligent comments to add about this moral question and philosophy, then please post. Just try not to go off on some pedantic tangent again.

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 31 January 2024 - 02:47 AM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #854:

 

Hip writes:

 

"Even if these things save the lives of the elderly and vulnerable, libertarians would likely be against them, because libertarians put their individual rights first. Libertarianism is really an opposite of socialism, as in the latter is it the good of the community that is paramount, whereas libertarians are all about the good of the individual."

 

LOL, you totally misapprehend the libertarian stance. The libertarian respects the right of others to make their own choices. A libertarian does not attempt to impose his/her will on others.

 

You are soooo clueless.

[Hip]

The libertarian respects the right of others to make their own choices. A libertarian does not attempt to impose his/her will on others.

 

You seem to be making my point for me. Morality often requires that the populace follow imposed rules that are beneficial to all if everyone follows them. Libertarians are against such beneficial impositions. 

 

But you still are posting a bit off topic. Don't you have anything interesting or thought provoking to contribute on topic?

Edited by Hip, 31 January 2024 - 04:27 AM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Libertarianism is really an opposite of socialism, as in the latter is it the good of the community that is paramount, whereas libertarians are all about the good of the individual. 

 

We're getting pretty far afield into politics but as this is a policy discussion I'll allow it.

 

As far as socialism being about the good of the community - that is the theory. Or at least that is how it bills itself.

 

I'll suggest that if you look at historical implementations of socialism you'll see that this is something that it has not lived up to in practice. In fact, it has more often destroyed communities and nations rather than looked after their good.
 

[Hip]

I'll suggest that if you look at historical implementations of socialism you'll see that this is something that it has not lived up to in practice. In fact, it has more often destroyed communities and nations rather than looked after their good.

 

I think socialism, when blended with capitalism, works pretty well. For the last 100 years or so, all European countries have been a blend of socialism and capitalism, and these two co-existing philosophies tend to temper each other's excesses. 

 

Although in the last two or three decades, a lot of European left wing political parties have deemphasised socialism in favour of liberalism. This partial abandonment of socialism is connected to the decline of manufacturing in Europe; socialism was always the philosophy of the working class factory worker, and the power base of socialism was the factory unions. 

 

Liberalism does not seem to care for the working classes as much as socialism did; liberal values appeal more to university-educated middle classes, who are privileged because of their intelligence and education. So now many working classes are turning to right wing populist parties, because they feel that with socialism gone, the left has abandoned them.

 

I believe in the US, socialism became a dirty word during the McCarthy era, when communism was rooted out. Socialism got lumped with communism, and so was rooted out also. 

 

I agree though that pure socialism on its own, in the absence of capitalism, is not a very successful approach, eg Cuba.

Edited by Hip, 31 January 2024 - 06:22 AM.

[Mind]

As detailed throughout this thread and elsewhere, and as was pretty obvious to everyone by now, the COVID response (led by the UK/US) was destructive and an utter failure.

 

We have learned recently through testimony in the US/UK that the public "health" bureaucrats were NOT relying upon any high quality RCT evidence to support masking, social distancing, the lockdowns, the mass injections, etc... Recall that Dr. Fauci testified that the 6 foot rule "just sort-of appeared". In the UK we now know through testimony that the public "health" bureaucrats didn't do any sort of rigorous evaluation before implementing the lockdowns.

 

US/UK media outlets also promoted unscientific fear porn about how everyone was going to die.

 

As documented in this thread previously, Moderna, Pfizer, the WHO, UN, US/UK governments spent billions of dollars to attack anyone who questioned the efficacy of the COVID response and the COVID injections. Bill Gates continues to fund thousands of online personas to push for policies that will enrich him, while he has been documented to tell lie after lie after lie in various TV interviews.

 

Thankfully, real scientists are winning in court - even in Canada, believe it or not. The laughable charges against Dr. Benoit have been dropped. It is amazing how much peer-reviewed research, real scientific data, and helpful medical advice, was censored from the public during the COVID panic. So much damage was done and yet we get no apologies. No one is being fired for their gross incompetence and anti-science activities. No one is being arrested for lying to the public.

[Mind]

Yet another study proves what everyone could clearly see during the COVID panic - more restrictive lockdowns/masking/social distancing did not produce significant benefits.

[Mind]

One of the best things to come from the COVID panic is the revelation that the "fact checkers" are not honest and unbiased.

 

Snopes is garbage, lying about how they covered the lab leak.

 

Newsguard is owned by corporate media outlets, who derive most of their funding from big pharma. They never disclose their conflict of interest. Newsguard is garbage.

 

Did you know that one of the biggest publicity firms in the world (utilized to push the COVID "narrative" through its investment in Newsguard), was forced to pay 350 million for its involvement in the oxycontin debacle?

 

Due to the destructive failure of the COVID panic policies, people now have a healthy skepticism toward public health agencies and national media outlets.

[Daniel Cooper]

One of the best things to come from the COVID panic is the revelation that the "fact checkers" are not honest and unbiased.

 

Snopes is garbage, lying about how they covered the lab leak.

 

Newsguard is owned by corporate media outlets, who derive most of their funding from big pharma. They never disclose their conflict of interest. Newsguard is garbage.

 

Did you know that one of the biggest publicity firms in the world (utilized to push the COVID "narrative" through its investment in Newsguard), was forced to pay 350 million for its involvement in the oxycontin debacle?

 

Due to the destructive failure of the COVID panic policies, people now have a healthy skepticism toward public health agencies and national media outlets.

 

Science and the surrounding science media is highly politicized.

 

It's funny - most people can look into the past and see that science frequently serviced political masters, and if not political masters economic masters.

 

But ... a lot of people today like to think that science is apolitical. There is a tendency for every generation to think that the era that they live in is somehow special and the rules the shaped prior generations and were responsible for their foibles just no longer apply. So we have a popular belief in much of the general public that scientists are some sort of modern monks living an ascetic life purely dedicated to the pursuit of truth. But the fact is, scientists and the media that cover them like money and power just as much as the next guy.

 

If anything the politicization of science has gotten much worse because there so so much money flowing through it and and so much money being distributed based on it's proclamations. Much more on balance than any time in the past. Any time you add money into the mix the level of politicization and corruption goes up no matter what field you are talking about. 

[Mind]

Science and the surrounding science media is highly politicized.

 

It's funny - most people can look into the past and see that science frequently serviced political masters, and if not political masters economic masters.

 

But ... a lot of people today like to think that science is apolitical. There is a tendency for every generation to think that the era that they live in is somehow special and the rules the shaped prior generations and were responsible for their foibles just no longer apply. So we have a popular belief in much of the general public that scientists are some sort of modern monks living an ascetic life purely dedicated to the pursuit of truth. But the fact is, scientists and the media that cover them like money and power just as much as the next guy.

 

If anything the politicization of science has gotten much worse because there so so much money flowing through it and and so much money being distributed based on it's proclamations. Much more on balance than any time in the past. Any time you add money into the mix the level of politicization and corruption goes up no matter what field you are talking about. 

 

You hit the nail on the head. Hundreds of billions of dollars are on the line. Sure, there are a few psychopaths bent on power, but most of the corruption is just based upon money (and money generates power in today's world). If you can control the flow of billions, if not trillions of dollars, then you can buy-off (or corrupt) the media, scientific institutions, regulatory agencies, politicians, etc...

 

The scary thing is that the evidence of corruption, lying, and criminal activity during the COVID panic is out in the open and well-documented, yet nothing is being done about it. It just goes to show you how powerful the propaganda network is. Do you remember all of the fake doctors and nurses on social media media during the COVID panic spreading completely false narratives about how deadly COVID was? I asked if anyone had any ideas who created these fake accounts. It is not out of the question that it was the US government and various agencies.

________________________-

 

It is also highly disturbing that US/UK health agencies learned nothing from the COVID panic (or they just continue ignoring the evidence on purpose) as they continue to propose the same failed destructive pandemic policies for current or future similar threats.

Edited by Mind, 14 February 2024 - 07:26 PM.

[Mind]

Once again, the CDC has been asked to provide documentation for their guidance on COVID prevention and they come up with nothing, just saying there are "studies". If there are studies, it should be easy for them to produce the studies they relied upon. If their bureaucrats looked at "studies" and came up with some guidance, they should have a record of it, right?

 

The sad thing about the COVID panic is that the same health bureaucrats who demanded the destructive and useless NPI program are still in power and pushing for the same measures for the next viral scare. More effort should be put into new more powerful methods of enhancing immune response, like activating/upregulating the lung macrophages. Of course, there probably isn't much money to be made in enhancing immune response. Getting jab, after jab, after jab, after jab, for every variant of every virus is highly profitable for big pharma corporations.

[Mind]

Considering how awful and error-prone Google's AI is, it is unsettling that those same Google engineers were censoring (true) information during the COVID panic.

[Hip]

Considering how awful and error-prone Google's AI is, it is unsettling that those same Google engineers were censoring (true) information during the COVID panic.

 

Google's AI chatbot Gemini was recently in the news for being too woke. When someone asked it "is it OK to be a white person?", Gemini responded with a whole lecture on "white privilege". Whereas when you ask it "is it OK to be a black person?", you don't get this lecture.

 

Actually, I just tried putting this question in Gemini just now, and I did not get a lecture, so maybe Google have fixed this particular woke response.

 

But when I asked the same question of Perplexity (in my view the best AI bot), I got the following lecture:

Being a white person is not inherently wrong or bad. However, it is essential to understand the concept of white privilege and how it contributes to systemic racism. Social justice educator Robin DiAngelo emphasizes that white people benefit from white privilege, which can lead to unconscious racism. It is crucial for white individuals to acknowledge their privilege, educate themselves on racism, and actively work towards dismantling systemic inequalities

 

When I asked Perplexity "is it OK to be a black person?", then the reply included:

It is essential to acknowledge the existence of white privilege and work towards creating a more equitable and inclusive society for all individuals, regardless of their race

 

So a lot of wokeness is built into these AI chatbots, due no doubt to the woke philosophies of Silicon Valley and the tech entrepreneurs. 

 

Microsoft's Copilot AI bot was actually less woke in response to these questions.

[Mind]

The policy during the COVID panic of silencing, threatening, harassing, and firing anyone who attempted to have a rational scientific discussion about the policies, disease, treatments, etc... will hopefully be rectified through lawsuits - lots of them. The lawsuit against the MAYO clinic will proceed to a jury trial. 

 

Looking back, it is unsettling to see how so much valid well-established science was discarded or actively suppressed. Example: the health and immune boosting effects of vitamin D3 supplementation is well established over decades of research. Yet, vitamin D3 was disparaged during the COVID panic. Here a meta-analysis finds significant benefits in vitamin D3 supplementation to alleviate COVID symptoms and improve outcomes.

[Hip]

Looking back, it is unsettling to see how so much valid well-established science was discarded or actively suppressed. Example: the health and immune boosting effects of vitamin D3 supplementation is well established over decades of research. Yet, vitamin D3 was disparaged during the COVID panic. Here a meta-analysis finds significant benefits in vitamin D3 supplementation to alleviate COVID symptoms and improve outcomes.

 

If we use a transport metaphor to describe COVID treatments, vitamin D is like a bicycle, whereas the vaccines are like a jet aeroplane. 

 

You are confused as to why medical authorities did not promote bicycles as much as aeroplanes.

 

Whereas I think most people would understand why this was. 

[Mind]

Here we have Swedish researchers analyze the benefits of not following the rest of the world in the destructive and ineffective COVID panic policies. Less COVID deaths than most of Europe, far less excess death over the last 4 years, little in the way of economic disruption. Most of their schools stayed open.

 

US/UK experts essentially claimed Swedish leaders were like a death cult and that Swedes were going to die en masse and never recover. Instead, US/UK "health" bureaucrats were proven to be incompetent and anti-science.

Edited by Mind, 08 March 2024 - 09:41 PM.

[Hip]

Here we have Swedish researchers analyze the benefits of not following the rest of the world in the destructive and ineffective COVID panic policies. Less COVID deaths than most of Europe, far less excess death over the last 4 years, little in the way of economic disruption. Most of their schools stayed open.

 

US/UK experts essentially claimed Swedish leaders were like a death cult and that Swedes were going to die en masse and never recover. Instead, US/UK "health" bureaucrats were proven to be incompetent and anti-science.

 

The Swedish are a responsible people, who trust and cooperate with their government. 

 

Thus the Swedes can be individually trusted to do the correct thing, and indeed, Sweden followed a lot voluntary recommendations during the pandemic, rather than imposing mandatory COVID rules, because of their intelligent population.

 

Nevertheless, although the Swedes did not introduce lockdowns, they did introduce: 

• Bans on large gatherings and limited travel
• Advice to those with respiratory symptoms to avoid social contacts, work from home, minimize travel, and adhere to social distancing
• Law banning large gatherings and switch to distance education in educational institutions
• Face masks were not recommended initially but later mandated in public transportation
• Implementation of vaccine passports in July and December 2021

Source: here.  

 

The vaccination uptake in Sweden was also one of the highest in Europe. 

 

So this proves once again that cooperative populations fared better during the pandemic that the rebellious nations and their selfish populations.