Love, kindness, honesty, respect, creativity and freedom are necessary for human flourishing. Sadly, many still embrace the mask as if it is the only truth that exists. If society is to change, all will need to see and peel away the polish. Then, we will have to work together to replace the emptiness it covers with a society rooted in genuine morality and positive human values.
We need a hero. Who will break through the wall of secrecy erected by the national security/military/intelligence community around the Covid response and provide the American public with the information that should so obviously be ours for the asking?
As the FDA submission discussed by Latypova makes clear, several other categories of preclinical testing were simply omitted altogether. These include so-called safety pharmacology studies, which, per 2005 WHO guidelines, are intended to investigate the effects of a candidate vaccine on “physiological functions (e.g. central nervous system, respiratory, cardiovascular and renal functions) other than those of the immune system.”
BioNTech (Not Pfizer) “Brazenly” Dodged Safety Testing of C19 Vax Read More
We need something more than rational scepticism. We need a new ideology – something like a religious movement of our own – one that’s more optimistic about the future of humanity, that places a little more faith in the ability of people to do their own risk assessments and voluntarily adjust their behaviour if necessary.
Although the CDC acknowledged playing a role in the growing distrust in science, none of their professed forms of atonement, such as promising to share data faster and doing a better job of translating science into policy will restore trust without a process that includes honest debate.
The deceptive description of the policy proposed in the GBD as a “let it rip” strategy was fueled by the purposeful – or perhaps recklessly ignorant – mischaracterization of the GBD by Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci. Prof. Bhattacharya calls not for letting the virus “rip,” but, instead, for Focused Protection. Focusing resources, attention, and care on those persons who are vulnerable while rejecting the utterly unprecedented practice of locking down whole societies is emphatically not a “let it rip” strategy.
We face the question of how to purity test our leaders—both official and unofficial—in light of all the devastation we’ve witnessed during the response to COVID-19. If you believe, as I do, that the importance of this issue presently eclipses that of any other, then every step should be taken to select for leaders who opposed lockdowns as early and as vocally as possible.
How Long Did It Take Them Realize that Human Rights Matter? Read More
We have a choice: either we continue to passively accept institutional false information or we resist. What are the checks and balances that we must put in place to reduce conflicts of interest in public health and research institutions? How can we decentralise the media and academic journals in order to reduce the influence of pharmaceutical advertising on their editorial policy?
If some website offered a deal to users – you post pics of lunch, cats, and flowers, and we give you ads – and it worked, fine. That’s normal terms of use. That’s not what is going on. Via explicit and implicit pressure, combined with irresponsible management, Facebook turned over its entire business model to government to deploy on behalf of regime interests. The customers and stockholders were the victims.
Facebook Is Dead Unless You Post Something that Does Not Matter Read More
Emanuel and the lockdown crowd he caucuses with lament that the return of freedom to the Chinese people “could have been done responsibly.” Too much freedom too fast according to Emanuel et al. He writes that rather than gradually giving it back with experts like him fully in charge, “China ended zero Covid in the most dangerous way possible – precipitously.”
Covid Controls Removed in China but Persist in the US Read More
The first known mention of the idea that the coronavirus may have originated in a Chinese lab appeared on January 9th 2020 in a report by Radio Free Asia (RFA). This was just days after the virus had first entered public consciousness, and at the time, no deaths had yet been reported and few people were worrying about the virus – including, it seems, the Chinese, who were claiming it wasn’t even clear whether it was spreading between humans.
Outrageous government policies are often shrouded by fogbanks of bureaucratese and political deceit. But a snappy sentence can sometimes puncture the veil and spur the ridicule that policy-makers richly deserve. Following is a round-up of verbal harpoons I flung at Leviathan last year.
