Let’s all vow to always remember the real lesson John Snow taught us, that orthodoxy and consensus are the worst public health menaces of all.

“Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right.” — author Michael Crichton

 

This is an invitation for those who want to take the time and effort to read a good story,    I am not the writer ,  so if interested you can go to Jeff Childer's  substack .  C&C   The story is about the Cholera epidemic in the 1830's

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/no-consensus-friday-october-17-2025/comments?utm_source=post&comments=true&utm_medium=web

 

The "anti-vaxxers"  here  will understand the story that is told .    The laugh emoji types will probably not bother to read it,  same as the other articles

that they find "ridiculous".   (meaning too much trouble to bother with something that might make sense ) . 

The John Snow story and today’s anti-vaccine stance are fundamentally different because science itself has changed.

 

In the 1850s, medicine lacked microbiology, germ theory, sanitation standards, and the modern scientific method as we know it. When Snow proposed that cholera spread through water, there was no laboratory evidence, no microscopes capable of identifying the pathogen, and no established process for peer-reviewed replication.

 

Today, the scientific method is systematic, transparent, and globally collaborative. Vaccine safety and efficacy are tested through controlled trials, independent replication, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and public data scrutiny involving thousands of researchers across nations - not by the opinion of a single government board.

 

Science is no longer a closed club run by a few bureaucrats; it’s an open, evidence-driven ecosystem designed to correct itself through replication and peer review. The lesson from Snow’s era isn’t that “scientific consensus is dangerous,” but that consensus must be based on evidence - and when new, verified data emerges, it evolves. The difference is that modern consensus is built on mountains of verifiable data, not speculation or authority. To reject that consensus today without comparable evidence isn’t heroic scepticism; it’s regression to the pre-scientific thinking that Snow himself fought against.

 

 

As far as the The Coffee & Covid piece itself is concerned - Well, its a well-known anti-vax site so extreme bias is expected and very self evident - and the comments on Snow are loosely based on fact but heavily politicised. It turns Snow’s story into an anti-establishment parable about “scientific consensus” rather than a balanced history of how scientific understanding evolves.

 

There is plenty of exaggeration and distortion within the article...  

- The claim that Snow was “destroyed by science” or “persecuted by government” is overblown.

- He wasn’t “ruined” - his career and reputation were respectable, and he was known for pioneering anaesthesia as well as epidemiology.

- He wasn’t targeted by the government or a conspiracy; his ideas were simply ahead of their time and lacked microbiological proof.

- The Lancet did criticise Snow’s conclusions, but not as a malicious campaign - the journal reflected the prevailing miasma view, which most scientists believed reasonable then.

- The Board of Health didn’t reject Snow to protect profits or political funding; it rejected him because germ theory hadn’t been developed, and there was no evidence yet of bacteria causing disease.

- The piece projects modern politics onto the 1850s, suggesting parallels with COVID debates, censorship, and “Big Science.” That comparison is rhetorical, not historical.

- There’s no evidence that Snow died “disgraced” or “penniless.”

- He died of a stroke at 45, still a member of respected medical societies and with published scientific papers.

- The notion that “scientific consensus kills people” is philosophical spin, not history.

- Consensus in science changes over time - it’s not the same as political suppression.

 

 

I asked AI  for a synonym for confirmation bias and it said ...... Richard Smith 

Thanks @rumak for posting this interesting article about the 1800's cholera epidemic in UK. 

Note that it is not so much about 'scientific consensus' although that is also part of the story, but rather about the phenomenon of government organizations becoming bureaucratic molochs whose main purpose becomes growing and enriching the bureaucrats governing it.  And like in this case not only forgetting about their core mission to curb cholera but pushing their narrative in spite of the evidence that their solutions are worsening the situation multifold. 

The parallel with the current 'accepted narrative' that vaccines are the greatest medical invention ever is stunning, and just like in the 19th century no stone is left unturned to ridicule, smear and destroy those that have the audacity to uncover inconvenient facts about the whole vaccine scam.

Worth a read > https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/no-consensus-friday-october-17-2025

16 minutes ago, rumak said:

I asked AI  for a synonym for confirmation bias and it said ...... Richard Smith 

 

Yes, let's turn to AI here for help on the credibility of this C&C blog in the OP. And predictably, another typical non-medical, non-science misinformer:

 

 

--AI assisted

 

Jeff Childers - another COVID denying anti-vaxer nonsense purveyor:

 

"Premiered Apr 6, 2022

"In this episode of Theology Applied, Pastor Joel Webbon is joined once again by Jeff Childers (Author of “Coffee & Covid”). Childers provides clear statistics for why our elites’ reaction to Covid was more harmful than Covid itself. Childers also issues a chilling warning of what we may soon discover as the true costs of the vaccines." [emphasis added]

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAapPyjF4mY

 

Oh really Jeff?

COVID-19 pandemic deaths

"There have been reported 7,101,788^[4] (updated 15 October 2025) confirmed COVID-induced deaths worldwide. As of January 2023, taking into account likely COVID induced deaths via excess deaths, the 95% confidence interval suggests the pandemic to have caused between 19.1 and 36 million deaths."  [emphasis added]

 

COVID-19 pandemic is the worst worldwide calamity experienced on a large scale (with an estimated 7.1 million confirmed deaths) in the 21st century. The COVID-19 death toll is the highest seen on a global scale since the Spanish flu and World War II.

...

An analysis published in The Lancet in March 2022 by Wang et al. suggests up to 18 million lives may have been lost to the pandemic.^[17][18] Such deaths also include, for example, deaths due to healthcare capacity constraints and priorities, as well as reluctance to seek care (to avoid possible infection)."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_deaths

 

12 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, let's turn to AI here for help on the credibility of this C&C blog in the OP. And predictably, another typical non-medical, non-science misinformer:

 

 

--AI assisted

 

Thank you for once again POINTING OUT  that A! which is programmed by google, is just another FAKE SOURCE  of information .     Same as wikileaks.

Anyone with half a brain knows that 

22 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

The parallel with the current 'accepted narrative' that vaccines are the greatest medical invention ever is stunning, and just like in the 19th century no stone is left unturned to ridicule, smear and destroy those that have the audacity to uncover inconvenient facts about the whole vaccine scam.

 

exsctly ........

Ai  is faster than the human eye

a bit like hong kong phooey.

Several off-topic posts commenting on fellow forum members have been removed, pursuant to the forum's rules:

 

31. You will not publicly discuss other members...

 

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Jeff Childers (Author of “Coffee & Covid”). Childers provides clear statistics for why our elites’ reaction to Covid was more harmful than Covid itself. Childers also issues a chilling warning of what we may soon discover as the true costs of the vaccines.

 

Thank you for posting what more and more people are waking up to as being the truth .    

AI, wikileaks,  and Mainstreet media are now being proved to be the real sources of misinformation . 

Viewership on CNN, ABC ,  CBS   is way, way down .   Proof that their narrative is not the one believed by those who previously followed like sheep

11 minutes ago, rumak said:

AI, wikileaks,  and Mainstreet media are now being proved to be the real sources of misinformation . 

Viewship on CNN, ABC ,  CBS   is way, way down .   Proof that their narrative is not the one believed by those who previously followed like sheep

Since the disbanding of the censorship imposed during the covid scamdemic, normal everyday people have been discovering other valid sources and points of view, and by nature the human mind is curious to understand as much information as possible though unfortunately many are lazy and continue to submit to being herded in an insulated uniform comfortable security environment bubble.

10 hours ago, rumak said:

John Snow taught us

His most famous sentence is here:

'The winter is coming"

(Game of thrones)

44 minutes ago, novacova said:

Since the disbanding of the censorship imposed during the covid scamdemic, normal everyday people have been discovering other valid sources and points of view, and by nature the human mind is curious to understand as much information as possible though unfortunately many are lazy and continue to submit to being herded in an insulated uniform comfortable security environment bubble.

 

Tis true .   I still think , and hate to say it ,  that a vast majority still place most of their decisions ......medical, political,  even hair / beard styles..... on what the "consensus"  is .   

Sure, that changes a bit as times (slowly)  change .   Unfortunately,  mass media is so pervasive nowadays...... that the individual . and those willing to go against or speak out, are pretty much drowned out by the loudest narratives (ie. govt and the PTB ) .   The optimimum word being POWER.    And of course,  power is bought by MONEY.

2 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Thanks @rumak for posting this interesting article about the 1800's cholera epidemic in UK. 

Note that it is not so much about 'scientific consensus' although that is also part of the story, but rather about the phenomenon of government organizations becoming bureaucratic molochs whose main purpose becomes growing and enriching the bureaucrats governing it.  And like in this case not only forgetting about their core mission to curb cholera but pushing their narrative in spite of the evidence that their solutions are worsening the situation multifold. 

The parallel with the current 'accepted narrative' that vaccines are the greatest medical invention ever is stunning, and just like in the 19th century no stone is left unturned to ridicule, smear and destroy those that have the audacity to uncover inconvenient facts about the whole vaccine scam.

Worth a read > https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/no-consensus-friday-october-17-2025

 

and remember.... the "accepted narrative"  will not be displaced easily .   As you say, no stone is left unturned .   Censorship, mandates,  and the ongoing lies and bias still blaring from the airwaves .   Or most recently ...blaring from AI . 

 

Goliath is alive and well ......... 

51 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

His most famous sentence is here:

'The winter is coming"

(Game of thrones)

 

"The cool season is coming" 

senor Rumak

( not my most famous sentence)

 

 

John Snow............A powerful testament to the scientific approach we now use as standard for healthcare.

 

He mapped the incidents, put forward a hypothesis, tested it and ..........problem "solved.

 

What a wonderful example of how scientific rigour, rather than Tik Tok videos and YouTube conspiracy theorists help mankind.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

John Snow............A powerful testament to the scientific approach we now use as standard for healthcare.

He mapped the incidents, put forward a hypothesis, tested it and ..........problem "solved.

What a wonderful example of how scientific rigour, rather than Tik Tok videos and YouTube conspiracy theorists help mankind.

 

Except of course that the medical establishment at that time did everything in their power to discredit John Snow's hypthesis, and continued for +10 years to worsen the cholera outbreaks before another doctor proved John Snow right. 

The term 'conspiracy theorist' was not yet invented in the 19th century, otherwise that label would have also been out on him on top of the 'disinformation' and 'not qualified in the specific discipline' smears that the had to endure.   

21 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

John Snow............A powerful testament to the scientific approach we now use as standard for healthcare.

 

He mapped the incidents, put forward a hypothesis, tested it and ..........problem "solved.

 

What a wonderful example of how scientific rigour, rather than Tik Tok videos and YouTube conspiracy theorists help mankind.

 

 

Indeed!

 

"John Snow (15 March 1813 – 16 June 1858^[1]) was an English physician and a leader in the development of anaesthesia and medical hygiene. He is considered one of the founders of modern epidemiology and early germ theory, in part because of his work in tracing the source of a cholera outbreak in London's Soho, which he identified as a particular public water pump. Snow's findings inspired fundamental changes in the water and waste systems of London, which led to similar changes in other cities, and a significant improvement in general public health around the world."

 

Qualifications?

 

"In 1837, Snow began working at the Westminster Hospital. Admitted as a member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England on 2 May 1838, he graduated from the University of London in December 1844 and was admitted to the Royal College of Physicians in 1850. Snow was a founding member of the Epidemiological Society of London which was formed in May 1850 in response to the cholera outbreak of 1849. By 1856, Snow and Greenhow's nephew, Dr. E.H. Greenhow were some of a handful of esteemed medical men of the society who held discussions on this "dreadful scourge, the cholera"."

 

And he was recognized for his significant accomplishments, albeit belatedly in some cases:

 

"In 2013 The Lancet printed a correction of its brief obituary of Snow, originally published in 1858: "The journal accepts that some readers may wrongly have inferred that The Lancet failed to recognise Dr Snow's remarkable achievements in the field of epidemiology and, in particular, his visionary work in deducing the mode of transmission of epidemic cholera."  [emphasis added]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Snow

 

 

1 minute ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Except of course that the medical establishment at that time did everything in their power to discredit John Snow's hypthesis, and continued for +10 years to worsen the cholera outbreaks before another doctor proved John Snow right. 

The term 'conspiracy theorist' was not yet invented in the 19th century, otherwise that label would have also been out on him on top of the 'disinformation' and 'not qualified in the specific discipline' smears that the had to endure.   

 

 

And why did they do that?......because of their staggering ignorance of the scientific method.......see the parallel???????????

11 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The John Snow story and today’s anti-vaccine stance are fundamentally different because science itself has changed.

 

In the 1850s, medicine lacked microbiology, germ theory, sanitation standards, and the modern scientific method as we know it. When Snow proposed that cholera spread through water, there was no laboratory evidence, no microscopes capable of identifying the pathogen, and no established process for peer-reviewed replication.

 

Today, the scientific method is systematic, transparent, and globally collaborative. Vaccine safety and efficacy are tested through controlled trials, independent replication, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and public data scrutiny involving thousands of researchers across nations - not by the opinion of a single government board.

 

Science is no longer a closed club run by a few bureaucrats; it’s an open, evidence-driven ecosystem designed to correct itself through replication and peer review. The lesson from Snow’s era isn’t that “scientific consensus is dangerous,” but that consensus must be based on evidence - and when new, verified data emerges, it evolves. The difference is that modern consensus is built on mountains of verifiable data, not speculation or authority. To reject that consensus today without comparable evidence isn’t heroic scepticism; it’s regression to the pre-scientific thinking that Snow himself fought against.

 

 

As far as the The Coffee & Covid piece itself is concerned - Well, its a well-known anti-vax site so extreme bias is expected and very self evident - and the comments on Snow are loosely based on fact but heavily politicised. It turns Snow’s story into an anti-establishment parable about “scientific consensus” rather than a balanced history of how scientific understanding evolves.

 

There is plenty of exaggeration and distortion within the article...  

- The claim that Snow was “destroyed by science” or “persecuted by government” is overblown.

- He wasn’t “ruined” - his career and reputation were respectable, and he was known for pioneering anaesthesia as well as epidemiology.

- He wasn’t targeted by the government or a conspiracy; his ideas were simply ahead of their time and lacked microbiological proof.

- The Lancet did criticise Snow’s conclusions, but not as a malicious campaign - the journal reflected the prevailing miasma view, which most scientists believed reasonable then.

- The Board of Health didn’t reject Snow to protect profits or political funding; it rejected him because germ theory hadn’t been developed, and there was no evidence yet of bacteria causing disease.

- The piece projects modern politics onto the 1850s, suggesting parallels with COVID debates, censorship, and “Big Science.” That comparison is rhetorical, not historical.

- There’s no evidence that Snow died “disgraced” or “penniless.”

- He died of a stroke at 45, still a member of respected medical societies and with published scientific papers.

- The notion that “scientific consensus kills people” is philosophical spin, not history.

- Consensus in science changes over time - it’s not the same as political suppression.

 

 

 

Thank you, Richard, for a very well expressed explanation detailing the important role, process and evolution of credible evidence-based science and public health.... as opposed to nonsense misinformation and factual distortions.

 

It probably was much more than was deserved by the OP post and its non-credible source.

 

 

 

Sure. New ideas can take time to be accepted because evidence takes time to produce but it would be good for you to address the fairly compelling counter arguments above - whether they come from AI or not. Otherwise you might come across as opening a topic but being closed minded about that topic. I mean surely there's been time to clearly show that vaccines are bad - or a particular vaccine is bad - if that's your point. There is a touch of irony too - as others allude too - that the winner in the argument had the scientific credentials and background that some here seem to give so little weight. 

11 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The John Snow story and today’s anti-vaccine stance are fundamentally different because science itself has changed.

 

In the 1850s, medicine lacked microbiology, germ theory, sanitation standards, and the modern scientific method as we know it. When Snow proposed that cholera spread through water, there was no laboratory evidence, no microscopes capable of identifying the pathogen, and no established process for peer-reviewed replication.

 

Today, the scientific method is systematic, transparent, and globally collaborative. Vaccine safety and efficacy are tested through controlled trials, independent replication, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and public data scrutiny involving thousands of researchers across nations - not by the opinion of a single government board.

 

Science is no longer a closed club run by a few bureaucrats; it’s an open, evidence-driven ecosystem designed to correct itself through replication and peer review. The lesson from Snow’s era isn’t that “scientific consensus is dangerous,” but that consensus must be based on evidence - and when new, verified data emerges, it evolves. The difference is that modern consensus is built on mountains of verifiable data, not speculation or authority. To reject that consensus today without comparable evidence isn’t heroic scepticism; it’s regression to the pre-scientific thinking that Snow himself fought against.

 

 

As far as the The Coffee & Covid piece itself is concerned - Well, its a well-known anti-vax site so extreme bias is expected and very self evident - and the comments on Snow are loosely based on fact but heavily politicised. It turns Snow’s story into an anti-establishment parable about “scientific consensus” rather than a balanced history of how scientific understanding evolves.

 

There is plenty of exaggeration and distortion within the article...  

- The claim that Snow was “destroyed by science” or “persecuted by government” is overblown.

- He wasn’t “ruined” - his career and reputation were respectable, and he was known for pioneering anaesthesia as well as epidemiology.

- He wasn’t targeted by the government or a conspiracy; his ideas were simply ahead of their time and lacked microbiological proof.

- The Lancet did criticise Snow’s conclusions, but not as a malicious campaign - the journal reflected the prevailing miasma view, which most scientists believed reasonable then.

- The Board of Health didn’t reject Snow to protect profits or political funding; it rejected him because germ theory hadn’t been developed, and there was no evidence yet of bacteria causing disease.

- The piece projects modern politics onto the 1850s, suggesting parallels with COVID debates, censorship, and “Big Science.” That comparison is rhetorical, not historical.

- There’s no evidence that Snow died “disgraced” or “penniless.”

- He died of a stroke at 45, still a member of respected medical societies and with published scientific papers.

- The notion that “scientific consensus kills people” is philosophical spin, not history.

- Consensus in science changes over time - it’s not the same as political suppression.

 

 

Amen and thank you ! 🙏 

4 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Thanks @rumak for posting this interesting article about the 1800's cholera epidemic in UK. 

Note that it is not so much about 'scientific consensus' although that is also part of the story, but rather about the phenomenon of government organizations becoming bureaucratic molochs whose main purpose becomes growing and enriching the bureaucrats governing it.  And like in this case not only forgetting about their core mission to curb cholera but pushing their narrative in spite of the evidence that their solutions are worsening the situation multifold. 

The parallel with the current 'accepted narrative' that vaccines are the greatest medical invention ever is stunning, and just like in the 19th century no stone is left unturned to ridicule, smear and destroy those that have the audacity to uncover inconvenient facts about the whole vaccine scam.

Worth a read > https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/no-consensus-friday-october-17-2025

 

Some lives in twilight zones and do not understand themselves how privileged they are to exists at all! 

2 hours ago, rumak said:

 

Thank you for posting what more and more people are waking up to as being the truth .    

AI, wikileaks,  and Mainstreet media are now being proved to be the real sources of misinformation . 

Viewership on CNN, ABC ,  CBS   is way, way down .   Proof that their narrative is not the one believed by those who previously followed like sheep

Wiki, google and ai can potentially make people more smart, and the funny part, the hoaxes and conspiracies some hang on to comes from where? 

 

We all lives in our own reality where most agree what is right or wrong while others do choose to go against. 

 

How did humans survive ? In societies that evolved with science or against science? Where was the drive to survive coming from ? By continuously do things better than last time, and looking back from today, I would say we did very well on some few critical areas, and maybe not so good on others. Seems like the missing link will be education on realism and how science works. 

 

 

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

It probably was much more than was deserved by the OP post and its non-credible source.

 

As is , one hundred times the case,  with the trite stuff you keep putting up on this site.     Just the same biased, paid for sources ... over and over

53 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Wiki, google and ai can potentially make people more smart, and the funny part, the hoaxes and conspiracies some hang on to comes from where? 

 

We all lives in our own reality where most agree what is right or wrong while others do choose to go against. 

 

How did humans survive ? In societies that evolved with science or against science? Where was the drive to survive coming from ? By continuously do things better than last time, and looking back from today, I would say we did very well on some few critical areas, and maybe not so good on others. Seems like the missing link will be education on realism and how science works. 

 

 

 

well , you got your sources....... and I've got mine .     Right or wrong is how the pudding comes out .     My health is really, really good for 75 . 

 

I am taking only one allopathic drug ...... an eye drop .   Which i hope to find the way to do away with .

 

The main contributors on this site who did not believe the "covid experts"  withstood the pressure and name calling ........ and all of us are extremely healthy and happy with our decision.   

 

Also much more capable of expressing our views and giving our credible sources ... according to US , then the people who can barely do more than copy and paste from the same paid for sources .    What i posted today (about John Snow)  is a great parable to what is happening with the covid narrative.

6 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, let's turn to AI here for help on the credibility of this C&C blog in the OP. And predictably, another typical non-medical, non-science misinformer:

 

 

--AI assisted

 

 

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed – if all records told the same tale – then the lie passed into history and became truth.
–George Orwell, 1984

3 hours ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

And why did they do that?......because of their staggering ignorance of the scientific method.......see the parallel???????????

 

Yes thanks, I clearly do see the parallel with the biased and staggering ignorance of the bought white-coats and bureaucrats. 

10 hours ago, rumak said:

Thank you for once again POINTING OUT  that A! which is programmed by google, is just another FAKE SOURCE  of information .     Same as wikileaks.

Anyone with half a brain knows that 

 

Everything is fake to you - mainstream media, science, and now AI - unless it happens to agree with you. Well, not you exactly, since it’s quite obvious none of your “information” is anything you’ve actually processed or understood. It’s just the usual copy-and-paste drivel from fringe anti-vax sites, echoing endlessly in that empty chamber you mistake for independent thought.

 

I gave your article a moment’s credibility - the John Snow reference was at least a novel entry in the otherwise tired vaccine debate, but your response swiftly reminded me why that was generous.

 

You’ve repeatedly proven yourself entirely incapable of handling the discussion with any real comprehension.

 

That’s why most of my replies to you are brief and dismissive: not because I’m arrogant, but because there’s nothing substantial to engage with. You interpret that as superiority, which makes sense - from a position of such intellectual poverty, even basic reasoning must look like arrogance.

 

I did pause for a moment, debating whether to honour your copy-and-paste contribution with a properly considered reply, but then I remembered how these exchanges usually end...