Those we once looked up to

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:

Ali Mokdad- The Researcher Behind Shady IHME Coronavirus Study and US Policy – Was Forced to Retract Major Study for CDC over Computational Errors

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:

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.


14 comments for “Those we once looked up to

  1. Mona
    April 14, 2020 at 1:54 pm

    You missed this little gem from ZH –“If you think that by going for a picnic in a rural location no one will find you, Don’t be surprised if an officer appears out of the shadows! We are covering the whole country.” From, Central Community Team ,Beds, April 2020…

    • April 14, 2020 at 2:04 pm

      Cheers for that extra. It’s pretty clear to me that we’re not buying any of this bollox.

      • April 16, 2020 at 6:45 am

        Let’s hope we remember it when this is all over. I certainly won’t forget.

  2. Voice of Reason
    April 14, 2020 at 6:58 pm

    “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.”

    I can only assume, since you are referring to my quote, that you mean How you would come to the conclusion that it is ‘moneyed’ is beyond me. It is a blog, with contributors who are mostly doctors, but include a retired chiropractor, a lawyer, a former naturopath, and an undergraduate computer science major. They contribute for free, and the Patreon account pays the basic fees.

    • April 14, 2020 at 7:19 pm

      The comments stand. The publication is suspect, the drawing of categorical, blanket conclusions in that manner by a journal at this stage is premature, plus the conclusions are erroneous.

      In short, it’s bollox.

      What has come out though is that it works better with those with no underlying conditions which complicate it. On the relatively healthy who contract Cv, it works much better.

  3. Valentine Gray
    April 14, 2020 at 8:49 pm

    Considering Covid 19 may not be a naturally evolved (mutated) but an engineered virus designed for a specific purpose, if so its emergence as a chloroquine resistant virus would be expected and I believe may have a less detectable companion virus which may be an added stressor to a percentage of patients. The deliberate release of this infection into the world population requires some very urgent investigation.

    • April 14, 2020 at 9:24 pm

      Except it’s not resistant to it when used the way the LA doctor recommended. I can’t seem to get through to people that only one side is allowed out in a plethora of studies, facilitated, while the case by case reports say it’s been useful.

      The very fact that ‘studies’ have been trotted out this early and so vehemently is a huge red flag.

      Of 2,171 physicians surveyed from 30 countries, 37 per cent said it was the ‘most effective therapy’ for the virus.

      The poll conducted by Sermo – a ‘virtual lounge’ for doctors, found the tablets were most widely used for COVID-19 in Spain, where 72 per cent of physicians said they had prescribed them.

      Certainly there are side-effects with some patients with certain conditions and it’s therefore a balanced discussion between sufferers and attending doctor[s] which is the crucial thing, not some competing surveys of highly doubtful authenticity.

      As a heart attack victim, this is so with all drugs given, which is why ameliorating drugs are given together with the medicines. This is just Medicine 101, this is where doctors themselves make the call, not Boris bloody Johnson.


      As if on cue, on Tuesday, Democrat Michigan State Rep. Karen Whitsett breaks ranks and gives an interview on how she was almost out for the count and agreed to let it be used, as did 18 others, and she described how it worked.

      The point is not whether it works for everyone or not – that’s what doctors are for, to go through patients’ histories with them and reach a balanced decision whether to or whether not to. There is certainly evidence it works for at least some – but blanket blocking of it by people like Johnson I’d say is a crime.

  4. April 15, 2020 at 6:17 am

    Wednesday – OANN reports on 8 studies the MSM is not reporting on:

    That runs counter to the line taken by WHO, Gates’s CDC and umbrella organisations e.g. Global Taskforce pushing vaccination. The bottom line is not if dots can be joined but why a publication (quoted above) calling itself Science can validly categorically state NO evidence, when there is 1. evidence it most certainly works with at least some and 2. there is a concerted effort on the part of the entire MSM to shut out one set of results and only go with the other.

    That is, go with recommendations which can only keep the thing going, e.g. among family groups within a hothouse family home. The alternative explanation is that the PTB have a vested interest in continuing people off work. Now why would that be?

    Oasis and Warehouse are two of the latest, haulage firms are reported as close because it serves the fear narrative that supplies will not reach shops. In other words, the panic buying had stopped but way too soon for the narrative, which needs this going into the summer.

    Why? To ensure collapse to as many already tottering firms as poss, plus putting new ones into either collapsing or needing bailouts. Which has a secondary effect of keeping people housebound, which is that same vicious cycle, over and over.

    That’s a fair way from whether HQ works or not but that original question is very much tied into not allowing anything which could possibly work being available – not to patients to decide on but to doctors.

    And in the US, it’s also tied into Trump, in election year, coming down on the side of giving it a try, based on some encouraging results. Who are you, a layman, to bureaucratically step in and deny doctors the choice? Johnson did, Trump has not denied that choice for doctors.

    As for numbers and counter numbers – which are lies, which are counter lies and which damned statistics when there is a clear narrative going on, on one side only?

  5. April 15, 2020 at 6:23 am

    Now, Valentine’s point about it being designer, not natural. The reports across the counter MSM have it that it was a virus which was taken and mutated in a lab, then somehow it got out. The MSM is not against that notion, just whether it was in a US or a Wuhan lab.

    Which supports Valentine’s contention that these people need arresting, pending investigation … at a minimum. Fat chance. And who would carry out that investigation? CDC commissioned health professionals?

    How many have looked at the 2 minute mark of this:

    … and how widespread is the knowledge? It’s just one of many indicators that this whole global medicine thing, from HIV to this Cv, stinks. Plus big diverted money on top of the medical considerations.

  6. April 15, 2020 at 9:06 am

    Via haiku:

    On this post, Chuckles writes:

    In this case, Kary Muldis is a VERY bright fellow, and most certainly knows what he’s talking about, and this article certainly is worth flagging as a reference. Pity about the ‘slightly’ breathless tone.

    What almost no member of the public will register, or even pause to consider is that all these talking-heads are not doctors.They are bureaucrats and politicians, at best ‘epidemiologists’ (which has NOTHING to do with studying medicine) but certainly not someone you’d use for advice on anything.

    Secondly, that tests almost never directly ‘test’ for something, they test for markers or co-factors and such, and ALL those ‘tests’ for things have sensitivities and specificities and the real numbers would make you laugh.

    See Briggs on the subject,endlessly.

    Unfortunately modern ‘medicine’ which is just clerks pretending to be doctors following a checklist depending on the symptoms you report to them, and then reading which tests they need to schedule off the list. – the complete madness called ‘Evidence Based medicine’


    So much for tests and surveys. Chuckles one more time:

    And ALL of the ‘official’ reporting on CV is political, not medical, so breathlessly swallowing today’s numbers, is pointless.

    So I come back to my original comments on that so-called journo ‘study’ – utter bollox.

    Do you detect an edge to my tone above?

  7. Mona
    April 15, 2020 at 8:56 pm

    Ever considered that the vaccine industry may have tampered with H-Chloroquine during production somehow, Just thinking ?.

    • April 16, 2020 at 5:54 am

      Not much we can do.

      Just saw this at the Wail:

      Anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine does NOT speed up coronavirus recovery, Chinese study finds

      More of the same:

      1. China says;
      2. The Wail posts it.

      The disinformation is astounding.

Comments are closed.