Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 192

[ecosophia]

We are now in the fourth year of these open posts. When I first posted a tentative hypothesis on the course of the Covid phenomenon, I had no idea that discussion on the subject would still be necessary more than three years later, much less that it would turn into so lively, complex, and troubling a conversation. Still, here we are. Crude death rates and other measures of collapsing public health are anomalously high in many countries, but nobody in authority wants to talk about the inadequately tested experimental Covid injections that are the most likely cause; public health authorities government shills for the pharmaceutical industry are still trying to push through laws that will allow them to force vaccinations on anyone they want; public trust in science is collapsing; and the story continues to unfold.

So it's time for another open post. The rules are the same as before:

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry and its government enablers are causing injury and death on a massive scale. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its wholly owned politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here. 
 
3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue. 

4. If you plan on making off topic comments, please go away. This is an open post for discussion of the Covid epidemic, the vaccines, drugs, policies, and other measures that supposedly treat it, and other topics directly relevant to those things. It is not a place for general discussion of unrelated topics. Nor is it a place to ask for medical advice; giving such advice, unless you're a licensed health care provider, legally counts as practicing medicine without a license and is a crime in the US. Don't even go there.

5. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. Also, please don't drag in current quarrels about sex, race, religions, etc. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules. 

6. Please don't just post bare links without explanation. A sentence or two telling readers what's on the other side of the link is a reasonable courtesy, and if you don't include it, your attempted post will be deleted.

Please also note that nothing posted here should be construed as medical advice, which neither I nor the commentariat (excepting those who are licensed medical providers) are qualified to give. Please take your medical questions to the licensed professional provider of your choice.

With that said, the floor is open for discussion. 

Comments

Re: 24-5 flu vaccine study

[(Anonymous)]

Well, not exactly the same for aspirin. That miracle drug got a serious test run on an unsuspecting populace in 1918 during the Spanish flu epidemic. Various US military departments, copycating one after another, endorsed giving lethal doses of aspirin as treatment for that influenza epidemic. Unsurprisingly, such lethal doses of aspirin induce the exact terminal spiral that was instead attributed to the Spanish flu, namely drowning in one's own lung fluids.

As Scotlyn wrote, had doctors, patients, or family paid attention to what they were witnessing, they could easily have figured out what was causing the spate of sudden deaths. Alas, due to quarantining, family was not allowed to witness enough details to put two and two together, while the patients were either too poisoned or eventually too dead to remember the details. It was the good doctors who failed to draw the obvious conclusions, which they were in the best position to witness and deduce, all because so-called "authorities" had given them unquestionable "health protocols" to blindly follow.

Were that walk down memory lane to remind you a little too closely of the covid ventilator scandal, where intubated patients ended up having a much lower survival rate than those left to breathe on their own, your unease could easily be explained away. You see, everyone is supposed to put their unwavering trust in so-called "authorities", thereby ignoring any life experiences they were actually around to witness. On the one hand, it's called memory holing; on the other hand, it's called acting like a good doctor. Obedience to sacred "protocols" (such as randomized control trials) is what sets scientists and doctors so far above the rest of us poor plebs, who are left outcast in the darkness to rely on our paltry observations and unquantifiable remembrances, a dreaded excommunication... which many of us have now grown quite fond of.

As for aspirin, you’re quite correct; it was indeed just obvious that it worked... at certain doses. It was equally obvious that it killed at certain other doses, but for some unknown reason none of the trusted “authorities” could arrive at that painfully (or perhaps even deadly) obvious conclusion. And that was long before those “authorities” could be publicly shamed into greater lockstep conformity by flagellating them with reams of randomized control studies. The glamour of protective “protocols” handed down by unquestionable so-called “authorities” [read: Dogmas] is nothing new in ersatz religions; it’s more of a hackneyed cliché, in fact. Our Dogmas kill as effectively in the age of covidiocy as they did in 1918, the allure of randomized control studies notwithstanding.

— Christophe