When will this shit end?

[zahidf]

America is screwed

 

 

 

[Matt42]

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

America is screwed

 

 

 

News funded by big corporations who want to reduce their losses and send their workers back to work. Branded as patriotism. Let’s all line up, wear the american flag, and take it in turns walking into the furnace singing the national anthem. That will show the experts and the libs!

Edited May 5, 2020 by Matt42

[Crazyfool01]

all countries closing borders to the US then ? 

[gizmoman]

1 hour ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Guilty as charged - I haven't read any of his stuff.  However, I'm reasonably up to speed on the main anti-vaxxer debate and, as with climate change, I'm pretty sure that (1) the anti-vaxxers have distorted the science and (2) their claims that mainstream science is prejudiced against them doesn't make sense - the scientific method is all about proposing a null hypothesis, using the data to support/refute it whilst everything is being overseen by public peer-review.  This doesn't leave any room for shady vested interests.

Have you read any of the above links to the mainstream scientific critique of this guy?

 

Edit: was curious about your claim that the concept of 'conspiracy theory' was invented to discredit anyone doubting the official JFK assassination report.  Theres an interesting article about this on Snopes:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/03/16/did-the-cia-invent-the-term-conspiracy-theory/

Clearly "invented" was the wrong word, but the term became widely used after JFK. Read the articles, all by writers rather than medics, the first guy clearly totally pro-vaccine having written a book from the point of view of parents who suffered having not vaccinated their children. Kennedy is a lawyer who represents children who have been "injured" by vaccines so of course not neutral either. Found it strange he went straight into the finances of not using vaccines, Kennedy makes the opposite point re: the financial motive for the big drug companies to promote vaccination. In an ideal world medicine would be run by people with no financial interests but that is far from reality.

Goldacre's quote,

"Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analysed using techniques which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that favour the manufacturer. When trials throw up results that companies don't like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug's true effects. Regulators see most of the trial data, but only from early on in a drug's life, and even then they don't give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government. This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted fashion. In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps, colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies – often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups. And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies, without disclosure"

is pure "conspiracy theory"! In fact it is pretty much what Kennedy says about the testing of vaccines, in the end it comes down to who you believe, it is very hard for a layman to make sense of the complex technical terms used so it sometimes comes down to a gut instinct as to who and what you believe, not very scientific and not always right.

 

 

 

[jparx]

I feel deeply concerned about those in the US, particularly key workers on the lowest income levels. It's incredibly worrying to see what different states are planning. Just seen that Indiana will be having pro wrestling shows with crowds next month. It seems inevitable they're heading for a horrific amount of deaths, but I really do hope they somehow dodge it. 

[zahidf]

What if the real virus was the friends you made along the way?

[Toilet Duck]

1 hour ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Ben Goldacre is my preferred expert when it comes to debunking bad science.  My earlier comment wasn't that there's no room for shady vested interests in big pharma - it was that there's no room for shady vested interests in the scientific process with public peer-review.  As soon as you give up trust in that process, the tin foil hat beckons and the dodgy vested interests can manipulate you into believing anything.

Ah, I get you! Some publishers aren’t as scrupulous as their reviewers though, I’ve rejected papers only to see them in press (the other reviewers have also had the same reservations). I just don’t review for the journal again. In general though, the better journals have pretty transparent peer review processes (Some of the Nature journals have the original submission, all the peer reviews and the author response all published along side the final article...definitely the way forward!)...

[stuartbert two hats]

1 hour ago, Woffy said:

Used pejoratively rather than invented. As a term it'd been around for a century or two.

That's what they want to to think.  Wake up man.

[zahidf]

[Toilet Duck]

1 hour ago, gizmoman said:

Goldacre's quote,

"Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analysed using techniques which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that favour the manufacturer. When trials throw up results that companies don't like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug's true effects. Regulators see most of the trial data, but only from early on in a drug's life, and even then they don't give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government. This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted fashion. In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps, colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies – often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups. And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies, without disclosure"

is pure "conspiracy theory"! In fact it is pretty much what Kennedy says about the testing of vaccines, in the end it comes down to who you believe, it is very hard for a layman to make sense of the complex technical terms used so it sometimes comes down to a gut instinct as to who and what you believe, not very scientific and not always right.

I'm a big fan of Goldacre's, but when you present it like this, he does make it seems like every single scientific and medical endeavour is tainted by controversy, when it's not the case (he takes issue with patient selection as well, but that's the entire basis of precision medicine and I don't buy the criticism at all, it's misrepresentation of what the trial set out to explore...most drugs are trialled in appropriate patients and in sufficient numbers to draw meaningful results). The bit in bold and italics above is a good example. Every paper I write has a disclosure in it, any decent, reputable journal would require this and every talk I give at a conference has a disclosure at the outset as well. It allows those reading your work or listening to your talk to make a judgement on whether you are biased in what you are reporting. Those listening or reading are well qualified to make that call (I don't write papers that can be understood by everybody, only those who can criticaly evaluate them, I use other channels of communication for non-qualified experts). The methods are also transparently described, so that others can repeat what you did...It's unrealistic to think that we don't work with industry, otherwise the things we do would never leave the lab. However, it's not accurate to say that it's all fabricated (I agree there are many things about clinical trials that could be improved though). 

[JoeyT]

This gives me hope.

[steviewevie]

Posted this the other day...but some might have missed it. Alternative/independent SAGE discussion...bunch of experts going on and on about stuff.

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

[Crazyfool01]

It’s ok though we are world leading at being able to count .... some head scratching going on it Priti patels office !! 

[zahidf]

43 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Posted this the other day...but some might have missed it. Alternative/independent SAGE discussion...bunch of experts going on and on about stuff.

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

Whilst it was interesting, it did start getting into austerity and politics. Which I agree with, but I dont think it's a massive help at the moment as a SAGE alternative 

[Crazyfool01]

what odds Boris ducking PMQs tomorrow ? no sign of him today ... cant think why !!

[ModernMan]

Dunno where to post this but finding everything a little tough and confusing at the mo. 
 

Feeling ridiculously bummed out about Glastonbury with the upturn in weather and the absence of the usually obsessive build up. With it also being the 50th, like everyone my group were really excited. But also as I had a particularly big year ahead with work and a big holiday at the end of summer. Unofficially it was kind of a big fun year ahead of potentially trying for a baby in the autumn. Neither of us are getting any younger and although all of our plans have now shifted to 2021, it kind of feels like a big hit and full of uncertainty about kids and all that. Even whether any plans for 2021 will be able to go ahead. 
 

Sorry, this is very rambly, but unsure where else to put my thoughts at the moment. 

[steviewevie]

Ramble away ModernMan...it's a rough time for many people.

(why don't you spend lockdown trying for a baby?!).

[ModernMan]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Ramble away ModernMan...it's a rough time for many people.

(why don't you spend lockdown trying for a baby?!).

Haha! I know it sounds utterly ridiculous but I guess worried about all of this going on, and it would probably mean my other half not coming to Glastonbury and forgoing our planned holiday next august. Obviously doable and that’s why it’s all confusing I guess, I’m younger than her and don’t want her to feel too old or have problems ya know 

[Crazyfool01]

10 minutes ago, ModernMan said:

Dunno where to post this but finding everything a little tough and confusing at the mo. 
 

Feeling ridiculously bummed out about Glastonbury with the upturn in weather and the absence of the usually obsessive build up. With it also being the 50th, like everyone my group were really excited. But also as I had a particularly big year ahead with work and a big holiday at the end of summer. Unofficially it was kind of a big fun year ahead of potentially trying for a baby in the autumn. Neither of us are getting any younger and although all of our plans have now shifted to 2021, it kind of feels like a big hit and full of uncertainty about kids and all that. Even whether any plans for 2021 will be able to go ahead. 
 

Sorry, this is very rambly, but unsure where else to put my thoughts at the moment. 

As above ... perfect place for rambling and a very decent supportive community ... the build up will only vary slightly it will just be a year delayed ... 

[ModernMan]

9 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

As above ... perfect place for rambling and a very decent supportive community ... the build up will only vary slightly it will just be a year delayed ... 

This is a fantastic forum, I love it. I only just read for so long and never posted! 

[efcfanwirral]

3 hours ago, Cream Soda said:

So if a test comes back negative they are still counted as a probable case?

 

I think it is less about who coined the term itself and more about them having a strategy of targeting and discrediting anyone questioning the official story of what happened (which the CIA document clearly shows).  Does it prove anything?  No not really.  If it was a conspiracy then of course they would want to shut up the "conspiracy theorists" but if it wasn't then they still might try to use such a strategy to shut down the spread of false information. @gizmoman is right in saying it all boils down to who and what you believe at the end of the day.

I do think its a shame that the terms "conspiracy theorist" and "tin foil hat" etc are thrown around so easily because it discourages people from asking certain questions and that can't be a good thing imo.  I mean someone was asked where their tin foil hat was earlier in this thread because they dared to question why the government would choose such a shit app that seems to most of us to be utterly pointless.  We all just want to know what's really going on and to see those responsible do their jobs properly (and be held to account when they don't).  Maybe if we targeted them more instead of each other we would actually get somewhere.

That was me and my tinfoil hat is fitting nicely 😂. I'm a definite conspiracy theorist and I know most of what I say is pretty mental and likely untrue - misguided devil's advocate a lot of the time.

The government are there for business and that's how the Western world works - theres nothing we can do about it and I'm not naive enough to think I can to be honest.

We need a vaccine, and there's nothing we can do about that either. There won't be microchips or any kind of tracking devices in in it, it'll just get us back to normal...the unequal and unethical normal we have here in the west. The type that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. Not good, just how it is  

Edited May 5, 2020 by efcfanwirral

[Bisque]

@ModernMan what type of baby do you want?

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Bisque said:

@ModernMan what type of baby do you want?

@ModernMan you even get baby trading  

[efcfanwirral]

24 minutes ago, ModernMan said:

Haha! I know it sounds utterly ridiculous but I guess worried about all of this going on, and it would probably mean my other half not coming to Glastonbury and forgoing our planned holiday next august. Obviously doable and that’s why it’s all confusing I guess, I’m younger than her and don’t want her to feel too old or have problems ya know 

Had a similar situation in the past - age gaps can be tough! 

On a side note- your username got the Arcade Fire song in my head and I'm going to put The Suburbs on while making dinner! (Assuming that's where the name came from??)

Edited May 5, 2020 by efcfanwirral

[ModernMan]

6 minutes ago, Bisque said:

@ModernMan what type of baby do you want?

Preferably one owner, good solid runner. 

4 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

@ModernMan you even get baby trading  

Haha!