We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
This is why you should not suppress conspiracy theories Never say “no more debate”.
Fluoride in drinking water at twice safe limit linked to lower IQ in children, the Guardian (yes, that Guardian) reports.
Probably many of those who were against fluoride were against it for irrational reasons. But a great many people were against them for irrational reasons. If this report pans out, look again at hydroxychloroquine.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
The protocol developed by Dr Vladimir Zelenko, prior to the Oxford trial, which contributed to the interest in Hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid19, was as follows. As soon as a patient presents, give a normal Malarial dose of Hydroxychloroquine , with Zinc for five days, follow this with an antibiotic. Based on previously published research on other Corona Viruses, Dr Vladimir Zelenko’s hypothesised that this protocol prevented the virus from replicating. As the normal Hydroxychloroquine dose for Malaria had few side effects it would be unlikely to do any harm, even if it was not effective.
The Oxford trial, treated patients with Hydroxychloroquine only after they were hospitalised with Covid19; and no Zinc was given. The dosage of Hydroxychloroquine was five times the Malarial dose, which was known to be near lethal for some people. If I have reported the facts correctly, what is one to think?
Is one to think that there are several serial killers at large and that there needs to be a murder investigation?
I remember early on during the covid craziness a virologist (I don’t recall the name) swore by the use of a combination of ivermectin, zinc and vitamin D as a prophylactic. He said it was the zinc that made the combination effective.
The smear campaign against Early Treatments for Covid (look up such groups as America’s Front Line Doctors for the specifics – it is more complicated than just a single medication) could well be considered mass murder – or at least manslaughter.
People such as Tony Fauci knew very well that Early Treatments could save many lives (NOT all lives – but many) – but they wanted emergency authorisation for Covid “vaccines” (under the new definition of the word “vaccine”) and that could only be granted if their were no effective treatments for the disease – so they pretended (yes pretended – i.e. dishonestly claimed) that there were no effective Early Treatments for Covid.
As David Roberts points out this was NOT just Tony Fauci – this was an international campaign to discredit (smear) effective Early Treatments – in order to push a commercial and POLITICAL agenda.
The terrible corruption of the world existed long before Covid – but Covid, or rather the reaction to it, has removed the mask and shown the true (terrible) face of the international establishment. How they will do anything, anything at all, to push their agenda of control.
As for fluoride – I do not know enough to comment on the science, other than to make the general point that the foundation of science is free debate. As soon as someone says “the science”, as a settled dogma, and punishes dissent – then it is obvious we are not dealing with science, we are dealing with a cult.
’debate. As soon as someone says “the science”, as a settled dogma, and punishes dissent – then it is obvious we are not dealing with science, we are dealing with a cult.’
This, a thousand times this!
As there is no doubt that average IQ is decreasing in western nations, the Jolly Heretic has been pointing this out for some time in his highly entertaining YouTube videos, it should be possible to link pretty much anything to falling IQ and obtain grant-worthy results……..and guardian articles.
However, examples like this are of a different level of magnitude to the evil and manipulative “settled science” responsible for immeasurable global harm in respect of climate change and early stage COVID treatments.
There was forthright discussion on this very blog at that time.
But, it’s with some regret, that I’ve heard that Fauci has caught ‘West Nile’ virus, and even more regret that he is reported to be recovering at home.
Oh dear, how sad, never mind 😉
John – yes indeed Sir.
So if we took fluoride out of water even more kids would be bright enough for university?
pete – these days very few universities like, or even tolerate, students who are independent thinkers, students who critically examine Collectivist narratives.
’debate. As soon as someone says “the science”, as a settled dogma, and punishes dissent – then it is obvious we are not dealing with science, we are dealing with a cult.’
Generally, but not always. No amount of “research” is going to overturn cell theory or evolution or heliocentrism or plate tectonics, or germ theory and so on.
There’s a difference between saying to someone “I don’t think there’s much point researching that but, hey, it’s a free country – knock yourself out”, and “you can’t research that because we say so”.
WindyPants – correct.
It doesn’t matter how much research is done or not done. The point is, it’s not getting published except in some non-peer reviewed journal or via vanity publishing. You aren’t getting a paper debunking heliocentrism or saying the four humors theory of illnesses published in PNAS or Nature no matter what your evidence or conclusions. Why? Because sometimes the science is actually settled.
But the science about the surface of the Earth was very much settled, until the 1960s. That’s when someone raised the really weird idea of plate tectonics.
“peer reviewed journal”.
It is unlikely that science would have advanced had “peer reviewed journals” had the stranglehold in the past that they have in the present.
‘Scientists’ are only human, and it takes a very exceptional person indeed to rise above their own prejudices, preferences or beliefs. And the proportion of such exceptional persons is no different in the subset of ‘scientists’ than it is in the population at large.
History is littered with tales of scientific certainties which turned out to be mistakes, hoaxes or downright frauds. And I don’t mean the mistaken beliefs of our ignorant forebears, but the boldly-asserted truths of supposedly-skilled and independent scientists. N-rays. Piltdown Man. Duodenal ulcers. As previously mentioned, plate tectonics. The Blish phenomenon. Cold fusion. The list is endless, and is filled with errors both monumental and mundane.
And yet we are asked continuously to apply the Gell-Mann amnesia effect to scientific pronouncements, even as, time after time and more and more often, they turn out to be mistaken, misleading, incomplete or just downright frauds. And we wonder that trust in scientific endeavours is not rising, but falling? As in so many other fields, from a noble cause, to a business, to a racket.
llater,
llamas
llamas – yes, and this is why freedom to dissent is so vital.
How can one tell who the “bad guys” are in life? The bad guys are the people who will use force against you if you speak against their narrative.
They may claim to be “good people” who support “tolerance, diversity and inclusion”, but if they use threats and force against people who speak against their doctrines – they are the bad guys.