Trump’s big fat abject lie …and why he keeps telling it.

[rattlesnake]

1 hour ago, Globalres said:

Yes, once upon a time facts told us that the earth was flat.  How long time did it take humans to finally see the light?  
Who is the “alternative”, Fox News or CNN.  Guess it’s in the eye of the beholder. 

So called scientific facts today based on large trials costing millions of dollars are generally paid for by the company hoping to reap the financial benefits from the positive outcome.  These trials are called the gold standard so all gullible people believe it without even questioning HOW the trial was run.  How was the control group treated? With saline? Or with something else that would guarantee a favourable outcome for the investor? 

When they finally did the trial on Ivermectin, the experimental group  were given half the recommended dose AND that was initiated on the 5th day off covid, rather than the first day.  Of course they had to show that Ivermectin was useless otherwise the vaccine would never have seen the light of day.  The world of drugs today has become a dirty business, sadly.

 

When one studies what actually happened in the aftermath of Luther's Reformation, one concludes that the political forces, bodies and interests which were behind the invention and promotion of the heliocentric model were the same ones behind the invention and promotion of the pharmaceutical paradigm, using the same means.

 

Humans did not "see the light" regarding the shape of the Earth, they imposed a different model for ideological and political purposes.

[gamb00ler]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

What you are refering to is ENGINEERING based on SCIENCE. Science is never settled. The more that is learned, the more questions which are revealed.

use whatever terms you're comfortable with.  Many industries are applied science, especially chemical and electrical firms.  That science is settled.  In case you forget the comment that started this conversation stated "Science is never settled" (my bolding) which is obviously not true.  That trope is constantly bandied about by science deniers as gospel.

[jimmybcool]

2 hours ago, Dan O said:

Nope if I remember correctly  you were required to have a pretravel RT-PCR  test within  72 hours before travel. You had to present the docs at airport check in and again on arrival  they were checked and then you went to quarantine had to take daily temp and got tested there too before release. I think it was first for 10 or 14 days and then down to 7 days    later with a vaccine you didn't need to do pre test but had to show your vaccine records.

Yes in 2020 one could enter without vaccine BUT meant 10 day quarantine.  Alternative is vaccine and one night test with return for retest in 7 days.  I went through that one.  Not sure who in their right mind would accept 10 days quarantine versus the vaccine but your point it was not mandatory appears to be true. 

[Dan O]

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

The rules changed during the pandemic on a regular basis country by country!

It was very difficult to know what you needed at what particular time wrt any particular country!

I fairly positive of what i wrote as being accurate

[gamb00ler]

12 minutes ago, Dan O said:

I fairly positive of what i wrote as being accurate

In Sep 2020 we moved to CM from US.  Vaccines were not yet available.  I needed PCR test results no older than 72 hours before departure, a Fit to Fly letter from a Dr, a 2 week quarantine booking starting on my arrival date.  After setting those up we could book seats on one of the rare flights from US to Thailand.  My Thai wife need the same except for the PCR test.  She did need permission to return on her expired passport.

[rattlesnake]

On 12/18/2024 at 10:56 AM, Lacessit said:

When COVID first loomed on the horizon in Thailand, I was in the most vulnerable cohort. My GF  is 23 years younger than me.

 

I got myself vaccinated with what was available at the time, Sinovac and AZ. My GF refused to do so, thanks to Thai social media and her circle of friends.

 

When we both developed COVID, I was over it in 2-3 days. Sore throat and runny nose, finish. OTOH, my much younger GF was very ill for 11-12 days. QED.

 

IMO social media has a lot to answer for, when, in the name of free speech, it allows totally unqualified quacks and deranged wingnuts to spread misinformation which puts  people's lives in danger.

 

Your girlfriend is smart.

[rattlesnake]

17 hours ago, xylophone said:

 

 

Agree with what's been said above, but what I truly can't understand is how people are so naive as to believe these conspiracy theories and the charlatans who promote them.

 

Measles, for example, is something that I and people of my age were vaccinated against when we were kids and now it's reared it's ugly head again, this especially as it can kill children, and RFK Jr has suggested that the measles vaccine itself may have caused the measles outbreak in Samoa which saw more than 5700 infected and 83 die (many of them young children) stoking vaccine scepticism which doesn't bode well for the future for this island nation.

 

Are the people who believe this conspiracy theory nonsense devoid of working grey matter? And if you want a perfect example, then I refer to the "Sandy Hook Massacre" lie which was spread by Alex Jones, when he said that it was a government set up and that no children were killed, which resulted in people visiting the homes of the parents of the deceased children, knocking on their doors and demanding to see the children, which of course was impossible because they were dead. Just how dim/stupid/gullible can some people get?

 

Now the whole vaccination subject is being brought to the fore again and the nut job RFK Jr will stoke up the anti-VAX rhetoric and will no doubt find a few supporters on AN who wish to believe this idiot, when the very people whom we have selected, trusted, trained, tested and provided with the knowledge and tools to study and improve medicine in order to treat humankind, are being ignored.

 

For the record I have had three Covid shots and although I did get a fairly mild case, it was over and done with in a matter of days. In addition I and probably many others on here, will have had countless vaccinations against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, yellow fever, cholera and countless tetanus jabs over the years (including one of immuno globulin before leaving to work in Africa) and have lived to tell the tale– – I'm just so thankful that there were not any anti-VAX twerps around years ago when I had my jabs.

 

[Airalee]

39 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

I’ll see your Rachel Levine and raise you one Virgie Tovar…

 

https://nypost.com/2024/12/18/health/fat-positivity-expert-hired-by-san-francisco-dept-of-health-to-consult-on-weight-stigma/

 

 

[Dan O]

4 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Your girlfriend is smart.

It was her choice to make, which is what everyone should have done based on their own personal situation. There is or was no blanket right choice for everyone.

[mikebike]

13 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

use whatever terms you're comfortable with.  Many industries are applied science, especially chemical and electrical firms.  That science is settled.  In case you forget the comment that started this conversation stated "Science is never settled" (my bolding) which is obviously not true.  That trope is constantly bandied about by science deniers as gospel.

Please enlighten me then. Which scientific theories are "settled" by chemical and electrical firms?

 

Words have meaning, not "whatever you are comfortable with" 🤣

[rumak]

5 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

 

It's as plain as day !     

[rumak]

4 hours ago, Airalee said:

I’ll see your Rachel Levine and raise you one Virgie Tovar…

 

https://nypost.com/2024/12/18/health/fat-positivity-expert-hired-by-san-francisco-dept-of-health-to-consult-on-weight-stigma/

 

 

 

hahaha    good one !   

[gamb00ler]

3 hours ago, mikebike said:

Please enlighten me then. Which scientific theories are "settled" by chemical and electrical firms?

 

Words have meaning, not "whatever you are comfortable with" 🤣

I never claimed that the firms "settled" any theories.  I said they applied the science that is settled by researchers.  The central core of many aspects of science is "settled" well enough that we entrust it with our lives.

 

Is that well enough settled for you?  I bet there are at least dozens of technologies that depend on the correct explanation of phenomena that you trust your life to.

Can you deny that?

[Lacessit]

On 12/20/2024 at 11:12 AM, mikebike said:

Please enlighten me then. Which scientific theories are "settled" by chemical and electrical firms?

 

Words have meaning, not "whatever you are comfortable with" 🤣

The science is settled that smoking causes lung cancer.

 

The science is settled that anthropomorphic emissions of carbon dioxide are causing global warming.

 

The science is settled that asbestos causes mesothelioma.

 

The science is settled that fluoridation of water reduces dental caries.

 

The science is settled that vaccinations prevent deaths and serious disability.

 

Need I go on?

[rattlesnake]

6 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The science is settled that fluoridation of water reduces dental caries.

 

The science is settled that vaccinations prevent deaths and serious disability.

 

We'll see.

[Lacessit]

14 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

We'll see.

Compare the incidence of dental caries in Hawaii, where fluoridation was stopped in 1966, with that of mainland USA.

 

The only places that still need iron lungs for polio patients are Pakistan and Afghanistan, due to vaccine hesitancy caused by ignorance. Polio is still endemic there.

 

QED.

 

[rickudon]

10 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

We'll see.

So would you vaccinate your children against measles? Only kills about 100,000 people (mainly young children).

 

And do you use a fluoridated toothpaste?

[Red Phoenix]

38 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The science is settled that vaccinations prevent deaths and serious disability.

 

That one definitely belongs in the Long List of Lies They Told You.

 

 

[scottiejohn]

11 minutes ago, rickudon said:

So would you vaccinate your children against measles? Only kills about 100,000 people (mainly young children).

 

And do you use a fluoridated toothpaste?

I think you should have asked "when did you change the tin foil over your hat"!

[NoDisplayName]

20 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

...

The only places that still need iron lungs for polio patients are Pakistan and Afghanistan, due to vaccine hesitancy caused by ignorance. Polio is still endemic there.

 

QED.

 

 

Ignorance?

 

A White House official says the CIA will no longer use vaccine programs as cover for spy operations, answering health experts' complaints that it had hurt international efforts to fight disease.

 

The CIA famously used a vaccination program as a ploy to gain information about the possible whereabouts of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. That effort didn't succeed, and the doctor involved was sentenced to a prison term. But the revelation had immediate effects — particularly in the fight against polio.

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/05/20/314231260/cia-says-it-will-no-longer-use-vaccine-programs-as-cover

 

 

 

[Lacessit]

21 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

That one definitely belongs in the Long List of Lies They Told You.

 

 

Funny thing, I am 81 and would not be here without medical science on my side.

 

Don't worry, RFK will fix it for you.

 

I'll just put you down as one of the hysterical ratbags who infest social media. Have a nice life, and watch out for Bill Gates's nanochips.

[Lacessit]

30 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Ignorance?

 

A White House official says the CIA will no longer use vaccine programs as cover for spy operations, answering health experts' complaints that it had hurt international efforts to fight disease.

 

The CIA famously used a vaccination program as a ploy to gain information about the possible whereabouts of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. That effort didn't succeed, and the doctor involved was sentenced to a prison term. But the revelation had immediate effects — particularly in the fight against polio.

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/05/20/314231260/cia-says-it-will-no-longer-use-vaccine-programs-as-cover

 

 

 

The ignorance is related to the mullahs in both countries, who for religious reasons reject any Western technologies as contaminating.

 

Although they do seem to be comfortable accepting Stinger missiles.

[jimmybcool]

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

The science is settled that smoking causes lung cancer.

 

The science is settled that anthropomorphic emissions of carbon dioxide are causing global warming.

 

The science is settled that asbestos causes mesothelioma.

 

The science is settled that fluoridation of water reduces dental caries.

 

The science is settled that vaccinations prevent deaths and serious disability.

 

Need I go on?

 

Science is never settled.  Those theories however have massive data results confirming them and the possibility of new data overturning them is remote.  Still, if new data DID emerge then the science would reset it's result.  That is why people say the science is never settled.  I agree it is nit picking.

 

[Lacessit]

14 minutes ago, jimmybcool said:

 

Science is never settled.  Those theories however have massive data results confirming them and the possibility of new data overturning them is remote.  Still, if new data DID emerge then the science would reset it's result.  That is why people say the science is never settled.  I agree it is nit picking.

 

To use just one example, it would take one hell of a turnaround for lung cancer to vary from the current ratio of 20 smokers to a single non-smoker, and probably a century to do it.

 

Confounding variables, such as air pollution per se, might change the statistic.

[rattlesnake]

6 hours ago, rickudon said:

So would you vaccinate your children against measles? Only kills about 100,000 people (mainly young children).

 

And do you use a fluoridated toothpaste?

 

No and no.

[jimmybcool]

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

To use just one example, it would take one hell of a turnaround for lung cancer to vary from the current ratio of 20 smokers to a single non-smoker, and probably a century to do it.

 

Confounding variables, such as air pollution per se, might change the statistic.

 

Yeah it would take a significant dataset.  Some theories will never be overturned. 

[Lacessit]

6 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

 

Yeah it would take a significant dataset.  Some theories will never be overturned. 

I am not sure how the ratio of 20:1 lung cancer in smokers vs non-smokers is a theory. It's a fact, with huge populations of data assembled over 50 years to support it.

I suppose one could argue smoking causes lung cancer is a theory, if one is employed by a tobacco company.

[uncletiger]

On 12/21/2024 at 8:30 PM, Lacessit said:

To use just one example, it would take one hell of a turnaround for lung cancer to vary from the current ratio of 20 smokers to a single non-smoker, and probably a century to do it.

 

Confounding variables, such as air pollution per se, might change the statistic.

 

The other thing, which could change it quicker, is finding out that papers/data you trusted are in fact fraudulent. Don't underestimate the seriousness of scandals, such as those involving prestigious university professors and even Stanford University's presidents being fired when the truth is uncovered that they submitted fraudulent or "seriously flawed" research papers in the past.

 

Sadly, more science than anyone cares to admit is being manufactured in order to justify grant money.  This never used to be a problem, but as big money has poured into R&D, doing science for science's sake has taken a backseat to science as a business. So while this may not be terribly relevant to older studies like lung cancer, we need to be more skeptical of new studies during the last 30 years or so. Fraud and fabricated data rarely gets caught in peer review, but modern AI is already finding a lot that was missed.

[jimmybcool]

1 hour ago, uncletiger said:

 

The other thing, which could change it quicker, is finding out that papers/data you trusted are in fact fraudulent. Don't underestimate the seriousness of scandals, such as those involving prestigious university professors and even Stanford University's presidents being fired when the truth is uncovered that they submitted fraudulent or "seriously flawed" research papers in the past.

 

Sadly, more science than anyone cares to admit is being manufactured in order to justify grant money.  This never used to be a problem, but as big money has poured into R&D, doing science for science's sake has taken a backseat to science as a business. So while this may not be terribly relevant to older studies like lung cancer, we need to be more skeptical of new studies during the last 30 years or so. Fraud and fabricated data rarely gets caught in peer review, but modern AI is already finding a lot that was missed.

 

I think this is a particular issue in "climate change" research.  Most use "models" with numerous variables that can be tweaked to get different results.  Probably better discussed in the CLimate Change thread just started.

[rattlesnake]

17 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I am not sure how the ratio of 20:1 lung cancer in smokers vs non-smokers is a theory. It's a fact, with huge populations of data assembled over 50 years to support it.

I suppose one could argue smoking causes lung cancer is a theory, if one is employed by a tobacco company.

 

Of course smoking can cause cancer. Just as lack of swimming skills can cause drowning. I would say those notions have more to do with common sense than science.