Part one – ‘evidence’ based medicine
There’s an agreement here not to quote Gatestone and methinks with some reason but in this case, I must, as that’s where the article was:
On Thursday, Dr. Ali Mokdad, a rep for the Bill Gates-funded IHME dodged questions about the low Coronavirus cases in Japan despite not doing “across the country lockdowns” like the U.S.
The IHME keeps revising their models because they have been WAY off — the latest projection model was revised downward from 2,000,000 projected deaths to about 60,000 deaths.
If even part of that is so, and in the light of everything else going on, we’re either being lied to for an agenda or else there is gross incompetence in stats being trotted out or both. Or else it’s jumping to that mysterious island of Conclusions before it is valid to.
At OoL, there is a wonderful and esteemed, longterm teacher reader of a certain political persuasion who put up a study showing that using hydroxychloroquine etc. at best does nothing and at worst, harms. Nothing of course about the doctors now reporting that they find it effective in combination with zinc and the usual things required for a healthy body.
There are a few things to be said about that. Firstly, that slick, moneyed publication, which I explored, had so many red flags attached by its use of the word Science as some sort of in-yer-face declaration of factuality. Secondly, they trotted that out within such a short time, relatively, of the outbreak whilst doctors were still in the middle of evaluating – which brings us to whether doctors have the right anyway to evaluate and treat based on what they are finding.
And that’s a major sticking point these days in Evidence Based Medicine – the bureaucratic ‘one-narrative-fits-all-people’s-conditions’ … versus the old way in which a doctor relies on training, signs and symptoms, plus second opinions at point of treatment, plus new literature on such conditions, plus sheer general experience, in order to try treatments.
Th evaluation in medical journals some months down the track has always been welcomed. But the operative word is sometime down the track.
For those not up on all this, a good starter is Dr. Bruce Charlton’s publication:
My own take is that when bureaucracy binds doctor’s hands in a sense never done before, and on quite questionable grounds, then there is at least cause for great caution.
Even the word Evidence itself, used as if it is a sober and logical panacea for every ill, combined with the clear agenda of the Global Fund and Global Task Force on immunisation run by quite shady characters, combined with the interests of Big Pharma, then I’d go so far as to say we’re in some trouble, good people.
Part two – the march through the institutions
Digressing, there is this idea still prevalent in certain Russians’ minds that foreign institutions over here must, by definition, be better and more corruption free and therefore, when I mention, for example, Gates, Johns Hopkins and Event 201 – to attack the reputation of Johns Hopkins is beyond the pale in their eyes.
My friend is pro-Jewish, so if he reads the article linked at the top of this post, plus he watches Polly here, it’s apparent that, at a minimum, one should be far more cautious, however much good something like Johns Hopkins has been touted as being in the past on epidemia.
What we have here is that certain friends in other countries might well not be au fait with what we’ve been doing for months and years – me via this blog for example – might not be up on developments, might be relying on our MSM in the west as something different and altogether more wholesome than their MSM, an easy error to make. For any who do think that, I’d present these clips as evidence that our MSM is far from squeaky clean:
The only people who were mad about this were the ones called out or those who think it’s acceptable to politicize a pandemic when Americans just want straight info on what to expect with their livelihoods and chance at contracting the virus. https://t.co/P1wC8eEYh2
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) April 13, 2020
CNN and MSNBC were so outraged at clips of themselves downplaying coronavirus, Maggie Haberman defending his China travel ban, and Govs. Cuomo and Newsome praising his response to the crisis that they left the briefing.
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) April 13, 2020
— 🇺🇸Eric Carmen🇺🇸 (@RealEricCarmen) April 14, 2020
Part three – the arming of one’s BS-o-meter
Social media today, for us, is our version of the old Samizdat for those in other countries to determine what actually is … and what is not.
But we too have issues – some readers categorically say ‘Twitter’, including anything at all stated by anyone, including anything I post, is rubbish, end of.
Yet all major players use it as a noticeboard to get news out quickly, and then it’s simply down to whom you allow on your timeline and for what purpose you use the platform. In other words, you use it to serve you, not to blindly follow as gospel.
An example is this below [screenshots only from the weekend’s archive]:
I’m not saying in the least that Twitter as a platform is gospel – it’s not, it’s a noticeboard – but many good things do slip through and are the only way today to get instant global feedback in order to then explore more widely.
Add to those things fed to your own personal network from your own trusted sources, bypassing any sources you are ‘meant’ to be seeing as gospel.
Readers of this sort of blog know this already, you’ve been at this thing a long time now and your BS meter is in good working order – but some outside our western hothouse, whilst providing a refreshing alternative, really should be reviewing their sources for western developments. CNN, Sky, the NYT and the BBC just do not cut it for us over here any more.