The Limits of Science

[conniption]

The most important event took place in 2000, when I met Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer.

The guy who reckons modern medicine is a Jewish plot again st Western European Civilisation?

Yeah...well, that's what they say, alright. It took me days of wading through Hamer smears and ridicule before I finally stumbled upon the website on German New Medicine® (Germanic New Medicine®) honoring his work. I don't know much about Hamer or GNM, but it certainly looks to be worth exploring when time allows.

Anyway, here's a bit on Hamer from the WHALE website.

One thing I do know, if you are an alternative healer or practitioner - you never ever say you have found a cure for cancer.

Joe >>

The relationship between the brain and bodily health is complicated.

Bioflora are vital. Your body is like a planet colonised with bacteria and other microbes. Their health and your health are intertwined. Unhealthy bacteria are associated with unhealthy people.

To be sure...

Excerpt from here: https://www.globalresearch.ca/our-speci ... es/5763670

Chapter I

The Microbiome and The Virome

In this chapter, we will discover that, contrary to what Western allopathic medicine has been teaching us for over a century, viruses are not here to attack our cells or harm us in any way. In fact, rather than being our mortal enemies, viruses are actually our friends.

Does this assertion sound too outlandish to be true? If your answer is “yes,” I wouldn’t be surprised. But I believe if you were to study the intricate ecosystem of microorganisms that make up the microbiome and delve into the fascinating world of the virome, you would come to the same realization I finally did: We are literally swimming in a vast sea of viruses, which, from the beginning of time, have been essential for life to form and flourish on this precious earth. The information communicated by these viruses helps all species of life survive—even thrive.

The Microbiome

The microbiome (derived from the Greek words micro, meaning “small,” and biotikos, meaning “pertaining to life”) is a massive ecosystem consisting of trillions of microorganisms. Incredibly, some 40,000 species of bacteria, 300,000 species of parasites, 65,000 species of protozoa, and between 3.5 million and 5 million species of fungi inhabit the environment around us and live in or on the human body. This complex world of microorganisms continually secretes a sea of viruses, which serve as a communication network for the bacteria, parasites, protozoa, and fungi. And, as we will discover shortly, these viruses have always been here to help us, not hinder us. In other words, they are life-affirming, not death-inducing.

Here’s a hint of the microbiome’s intricacy, incredible diversity, and infinitesimal size: The number of genes within the fungal kingdom is at least 125 trillion! The human genome, by comparison, consists of a mere 20,000 genes. A fruit fly has 13,000 genes, a flea 31,000. Thus, in terms of genetic complexity, the human genome has just a tiny fragment of genetic information compared to the vast world of genomic information contained within the microbiome.

One intriguing aspect of the microbiome is its symbiotic communication network, which allows the transmission of protein information from one microorganism to one another. For example, the mycelial network (a matrix of fine white filaments) in fungi allows the fungi to communicate with each other over distances that can stretch to several kilometers. These mycelial structures are capable of transferring mineral and protein resources more than a kilometer. How? They use light energy and electrons that flow through the pathways within the soil system. In this way, the microbiome helps plants and other multicellular life forms flourish. It is no exaggeration to call the mycelial network in the fungal kingdom the literal “brain” of the planet. Incidentally, all of the tiny, intelligent organisms that make up the microbiome are powered by the biophotonic energy of the sun.

Hard as it is to fathom, at least 1.4 quadrillion bacteria and 10 quadrillion fungi live inside the human body. Within the human colon alone are 3.8 x 1013bacteria cells. Every single organ in the body, including the brain, has its own microbiome. The purpose of the bacteria and fungi in our bodies is to nourish and nurture our cells, keeping us healthy and in equilibrium with the larger microbiome surrounding us.

The Virome

The virome is the immense world in which Mother Nature’s messengers exist. It is composed of trillions upon trillions of viruses produced by the aforementioned microbiome’s bacteria, parasites, protozoa, and fungi. The average adult human body contains 1 x 1015 viruses. By contrast, in the air enveloping the earth there are 1 x 1031viruses; in the earth’s soil there are 2.5 x 1031 viruses; and in the earth’s oceans there are 1.2 x 1030 viruses. To provide some perspective on these awe-inspiring numbers, 1 x 1031is 10 million times greater than the number of known stars in the entire universe.

Simply put, a virus is genomic information, either DNA or RNA, wrapped in a protein envelope. The small strands of protein protruding outward from the outer surface of a virus’s protein envelope are called spike proteins. Viruses are not living organisms. They do not produce their own fuel. They have no metabolism for producing energy. And they cannot reproduce.

Viruses have been traveling globally, above the atmospheric boundary layer, for millions of years, long before machines for air travel were invented. Their genetic codes have been blanketing the earth for eons, creating biodiversity and allowing for adaptation throughout the ecosystem. By adaptation, I mean that viruses are always seeking to adapt their genetic codes for the purpose of creating resilient health in all of the planet’s life forms. It is ridiculous to suggest that, in order to travel from one region of the globe to another, a virus must hop on an aircraft, as RAND’s National Security Research Division would have us believe.

Furthermore, viruses—including coronaviruses—do not come in waves and then disappear without a trace, only to miraculously reappear later in the same spot or a different one. Instead, viruses never leave, never expire. They inhabit every element in the environment around us. In short, they are omnipresent and ever-present.

Our relationship with particular viruses can change as a consequence of our harmful actions toward nature. Whenever humans poison and pollute the air, soil, and water, they create an imbalance between humanity and the virome—an imbalance that can cause us to come into disequilibrium with a particular virus.

Unfortunately, the allopathic medicine regime, which plutocrats John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie forced on most of the world with their 1910 Flexner Report, still has a large segment of the scientific community believing that bacteria, fungi, and viruses are our enemies.

The foundation of Rockefeller’s allopathic medicine scheme is Louis Pasteur’s flawed “germ theory,” which claims that outside microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses attack, invade, and infect the body, thereby causing disease. Though he had no formal education in science, most of the Western world credits Pasteur (1822–1895) with playing a fundamental part in establishing what we call “modern medicine”—a paradigm that traces the origin of each disease to a single germ. Without Pasteur’s theory, most modern drugs would never be produced, promoted, or prescribed—a fact that explains why today’s medical establishment and its codependent pharmaceutical industry refuse to recognise their flaws or own up to their ineffectiveness.

By contrast, “terrain theory,” which was initiated by Claude Bernard (1813–1878) and later built upon by Antoine Béchamp (1816–1908), alleges that the terrain—that is, the internal environment of the body—and not an external germ determines our health or lack thereof. What Béchamp referred to as “terrain” is very close to what modern medicine has now termed the innate immune system. As we will see in the following paragraphs, Béchamp was definitely on the right track in discovering how the human body really interacts with the outside environment.

Unlike Pasteur, Béchamp did have an academic background in science. He believed disease to be a biological result of the changes that take place in the body when its metabolic processes become imbalanced. When the body is in a state of imbalance, Béchamp alleged, germs become symptoms that in turn stimulate more symptoms, which eventually lead to disease.

Although Béchamp was moving in the right direction with his terrain theory, Rockefeller’s germ-dependent pharmaceutical tyranny has prevailed, due largely to substantial infusions of money, which Rockefeller and Carnegie gladly supplied in the form of grants to universities, hospitals, and medical research facilities. Their “philanthropic” largess, which easily exceeded $100 million ($2.9 billion in current dollars), enabled them to influence the policy of the entire US medical establishment and eventually most of the Western nations, steering them toward an exclusively chemical-based allopathic regime.

I contend in this book that, contrary to what Rockefeller medicine has been teaching us for over one hundred years, viruses are not here to attack our cells or to harm us in any other manner. On the contrary, the DNA and RNA genetic molecular information contained within the viruses are literally the building blocks of life on earth. To use a modern analogy, we can think of a virus’s information stream as a software update carrying important molecular intelligence that can be uploaded, when required, to any cell of a living multicellular organism—including any one of the 70 trillion cells contained in the human body. Our cells regulate which new genomic information is received and which information is not received. The viruses are simply seeking to adapt to the cells for the purpose of creating resilient human health.

Innate and Adaptive Immunity
A word here about the immune system. There are two kinds of immunity: innate and adaptive...continues...

https://www.globalresearch.ca/our-speci ... es/5763670

The entire book is worth reading.

[MacCruiskeen]

This is a wonderful interview:

The Machine Model Of Biology, Denial of The Mystery, Biological Reductionism, And The Scientist Who Tried To Warn Us:
Interview With Richard Strohman

Celia Farber
Jun 20

“If we think that the world of organisms is a world of machines, we will begin to treat each other as machines. That is the huge danger of this whole mechanistic model of organisms. That's this terrible nightmare coming true.

My worry there was the worry expressed by William Blake: ‘What seems to be is, to those to whom it seems to be, and is productive of the most dreadful consequences to those to whom it seems to be.’ “

—-Richard Strohman, PhD

[...] Richard Strohman, emeritus professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California at Berkeley, died on July 4, 2009, at the age of 82.

I felt deeply grateful I had had the chance to interview him, on two occasions, in the last decade of his life. He was one of the most poignant elder scientific voices I ever came across, in what I have come to call the “lamenting” tradition of science, which contrasts with the revolutionary, zealous, lucrative.

Strohman, 2003, on the failure and danger of genetic determinism.

Strohman had been chair of the Zoology Department at UC Berkeley from 1973 to 1976, and Director of Berkeley's Health and Medical Sciences Program from 1976 to 1979. He studied “…cell and tissue growth regulation and cellular differentiation using molecular and cell approaches.” He was one of the first signatories to the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis, and referred to the HIV/AIDS paradigm as “disastrous.”

After his retirement from UC Berkeley, he traveled the world lecturing on the dangers of genetic determinism and biological reductionism.

In 2000, on assignment for TALK Magazine, I interiewed Professor Strohman for the first time. [...]

https://celiafarber.substack.com/p/the- ... ogy-denial

[Belligerent Savant]

[drstrangelove]

Taken from Impact of Science on Society (1953) by Bertrand Russell, the full text of which can be read Here. The emboldened text is relevant, the rest can be skipped if you are short on time, as we all are these days.

Physiology and psychology afford fields for scientific tech- nique which still await development. Two great men, Pavlov and Freud, have laid the foundation. l do not accept the view that they are in any essential conflict, but what structure will be built on their foundations is still in doubt.

l think the subject which will be of most importance polit- ically is mass psychology. Mass psychology is, scientifically speaking, not a very advanced study, and so far its professors have not been in universities: they have been advertisers, politicians, and, above all, dictators. This study is immensely useful to practical men, whether they wish to become rich or to acquire the government. lt is, of course, as a science, founded upon individual psychology, but hitherto it has employed rule-of-thumb methods which were based upon a kind of intuitive common sense. Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called "education." Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part.

What is essential in mass psychology is the art of per- suasion. If you compare a speech of Hitler's with a speech of (say) Edmund Burke, you will see what strides have been made in the art since the eighteenth century. What went wrong formerly was that people had read in books that man is a rational animal, and framed their arguments on this hypothesis. Wc now know that limelight and a brass band do more to persuade than can be done by the most elegant train of syllogisms. lt may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the Stare with money and equipment.

This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship. Anaxagoras maintained that snow is black, but no one believed him. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. lt is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.

Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen. As yet there is only one country which has succeeded in creating this politician's paradise.

[drstrangelove]

Keep in mind I am posting these out of a context, which could be argued presents these ideas as forewarnings.

Impact of Science on Society (1953) by Bertrand Russell:

More important than these metaphysical speculations is the question whether a scientific dictatorship, such as we have been considering, can be stable, or is more likely to be stable than a democracy.

Apart from the danger of war, I see no reason why such a regime should be unstable. After all, most civilized and semi- civilizcd countries known to history have had a large class of slaves or serfs completely subordinate to their owners. There is nothing in human nature that makes the persistence of such a system impossible. And the whole development of scientific technique has made it easier than it used to be to maintain a despotic rule of a minority. Whcn the govern- ment controls the distribution of food, its power is absolute so long as it can count on the police and the armed forces. And their loyalty can be secured by giving them some of the privileges of the governing class. I do not see how any internal movement of revolt can ever bring freedom to the oppressed in a modem scientific dictatorship.

But when it comes to external war the matter is different. Given two countries with equal natural resources, one a dictatorship and the other allowing individual liberty, the one allowing liberty is almost certain to become superior to
the other in war technique in no very long time. As we have seen in Germany and Russia, freedom in scientific research is incompatible with dictatorship. Germany might well have won the war if Hitler could have endured Jewish physicists. Russia will have less grain than if Stalin had not insisted

upon the adoption of Lysenko's theories. In is highly probable that there will soon be, in Russia, a similar governmental incursion into the domain of nuclear physics. l do not doubt that, if rherc is no war during the next fifteen years, Russian scientific war technique will, at the end of that time, be very markedly inferior to that of the West, and that the inferiority will be directly traceable to dictatorship. l think, therefore, that, so long as powerful democracies exist, democracy will in the long run be victorious. And on this basis l allow my- self a moderate optimism as to the future. Scientific dictator- ships will perish through not being sufficiently scientific.

For these various reasons, I do not believe that dictatorship is a lasting form of scientific society-unless (but this proviso is important) it can become world-wide.

[drstrangelove]

See they have a problem. They need the internet to syncronise communication cross-culturally to create a world culture. Yet this technology carries counter propaganda that undermines the institutions required for world governance. It would be interesting to see what is being done in regards to domain name seizures or regulation of server technology. The internet is our last bastion of hope. This very site, for instance, would not exist if access to an IP address required a license in the current climate.

[MacCruiskeen]

Spencer Latu @spencerlatu 19 hrs ago

Just like in Nazi Germany, people align with political movements they rationally and ideologically align with. Doctors made monstrous political alliances in Nazi Germany and are doing the same today with multinational pharmafia. There is no fake disease [i.e., no "mass formation psychosis"] to blame; these people are simply acting in their own self interest.

It is advantageous for doctors, pharmacists, journalists to collaborate with our current fascist oligarchs. These alliances of middle class sycophants with ruling class oligarchs are in the interests of the ruling class as well.

Why did so many German doctors join the Nazi Party early?
Omar S. Haquea, Julian De Freitas, Ivana Vianic, Bradley Niederschulte, Harold J.Bursztajn
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Volume 35, Issues 5–6, September–December 2012, Pages 473-479
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... via%3Dihub




https://twitter.com/spencerlatu/status/ ... 2257238017

[alloneword]

2.2. Valuing the prevention of contamination

As a means of preventing illness and disability, the Nazi Party framed
the extermination of the Jewish population as a health necessity in its
own right, a sure way to ward off contamination (and death). Given
the core value that prevention of contamination plays across almost
all strata of medical practice, this kind of mission would have been par-
ticularly salient to members of the German Medical Society. This could
even be cast as a way of doing good—a fulfillment of ethical imperatives.
A key tactic Hitler employed to simultaneously heighten the per-
ceived threat of contamination and assign responsibility for this threat
to one ethnic group was the moralization of disgust. Made out to be un-
clean by Nazi propaganda, the Jewish population was framed as a
constant danger to the average German citizen's health, inspiring dis-
gust as an aversion response. A clear divide was therefore formed be-
tween the German Jewish “other” as disgusting and dangerous, and
the Gentile German “us” as pure and clean. Hitler employed varied tac-
tics to instill this essentializing, discriminatory distinction into the psy-
che of the German population, thus maliciously recruiting the basic
human revulsion of filth and pestilence into a force for dehumanizing
Jews...

https://sci-hub.st/https://doi.org/10.1 ... 012.09.022

(Worth reading in full).

Mac, the concept of 'Mass Formation' is not some attempt to pathologise or excuse anything.

It's a useful tool for understanding certain aspects of this shitshow, the 'psycho-social physics' that is turning good people into fucking monsters. Not to excuse them, but to subvert them. Right now, we need to use everything at our disposal.

Sure, there are those that misuse the term, using it as you suggest, without much understanding of the idea behind it. I would certainly say Malone is in that camp... you can often spot them, as they tend to casually tack the word 'Psychosis' on the end.

That's not to say that there isn't evil intent at the heart of Covidianism, steering, enabling, facilitating and incentivising.

I've spent a lifetime trying to answer the question of what happened in Germany in the '30s, picking away at the scabs of inter-generational trauma. I feel that Desmet's ideas have brought me a little closer to understanding.

[Belligerent Savant]

Mac, the concept of 'Mass Formation' is not some attempt to pathologise or excuse anything.

It's a useful tool for understanding certain aspects of this shitshow, the 'psycho-social physics' that is turning good people into fucking monsters. Not to excuse them, but to subvert them. Right now, we need to use everything at our disposal.

Sure, there are those that misuse the term, using it as you suggest, without much understanding of the idea behind it. I would certainly say Malone is in that camp... you can often spot them, as they tend to casually tack the word 'Psychosis' on the end.

That's not to say that there isn't evil intent at the heart of Covidianism, steering, enabling, facilitating and incentivising.

I've spent a lifetime trying to answer the question of what happened in Germany in the '30s, picking away at the scabs of inter-generational trauma. I feel that Desmet's ideas have brought me a little closer to understanding.

Agreed with the above take, and echo the nod to Desmet. His interviews are a worthwhile listen.

[MacCruiskeen]

Thanks, it's very late and I'm too tired to think, so I'll try to get back to this in the next couple of days. I understand (and share) the impulse to say "Everyone's gone nuts", but there are some important things that need untangling here.

[Belligerent Savant]

...there are some important things that need untangling here.

ever thus.

"would that it were so simple"

[MacCruiskeen]

^^Thanks for that. Yes.

[conniption]

Off-Guardian
(embedded links)

Harmless Untruths Our incurious faith in infallible science

Julien Charles
Jan 14, 2022

In Kurt Vonnegut’s classic novel Cat’s Cradle, the deadpan realist from the Midwest–the 20th century’s Mark Twain–delivers an instructive review of the way in which Americans hold scientists in exceedingly high esteem—and the perils therein.

One of his characters is scientist Felix Hoenikker. Hoenikker is a partial reflection of Robert Oppenheimer, who led the team that invented the atomic bomb, but was later distraught by the use of his invention to exterminate whole urban populations in Japan.

At the successful detonation of the bomb Little Boy in New Mexico, he recalled a verse from the Bhagavad Gita, when Krishna tells Arjuna, “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.”

After Oppenheimer witnessed the fruit of his labor in Nagasaki, he became an advocate for the banning of nuclear weapons, but was, to put it mildly, a day late and a dollar short.

After materializing in Washington to air his views on nukes, Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson, the fanatical anti-communist and inspiration behind the Cold War, said of the man who might have done more to enable American military hegemony than anyone, “I don’t want to see that son of a bitch in my office ever again.”

Vonnegut’s Hoenikker is comparable. Consumed by his task, he is somewhat near-sighted and does not at first perceive the larger interest of humanity that might be imperiled by his work and invents a solution that freezes anything it touches: Ice Nine.

Once he contemplates the staggering potential of his brainchild, he attempts to hide Ice Nine, and is increasingly troubled by the implications of his invention. His children discover his creation later and cannot resist the power it offers. The world is destroyed.

Vonnegut seems to suggest some scientists are perhaps morally naive regarding the possible uses of their work—as in most any innovative profession—and that their moral faculty emerges too late to mitigate their achievements, particularly after their inventions have fallen into the corrupt clutches of bought politicians or pharmaceutical executives beholden to an ever-needful bottom line.

A disturbing enough question in its own time, it now seems the world has evolved in a darker direction. Our scientists are no longer mere bystanders in the use of their work, no more are they unwitting accomplices to inscrutable ends.

Rather they are more likely the purveyors of those ends, having infiltrated political power and gained extraordinary influence within a caudillo of private drug monopolies and global health institutions.

Who are the power players in the modern world?

Bill Gates commands a multibillion-dollar foundation (BMGF) the express purpose of which is ‘a decade of vaccines’ and population control, among other global “health” initiatives. The foundation has its tentacles in every major media empire, in numerous global health institutions, leading pharmaceutical firms, and in novel NGOs designed to advance its agenda.

Gates has conceded that although he runs an ostensible foundation committed to the global good, he has never seen an industry with such stupendous return on investment. At the beginning of 2019, he enthused on Twitter about the prospects for vaccines, “…one of the best buys in global health.”

According to author and independent researcher Jacob Levich, GAVI is a Gates-created, Gates-funded, and Gates-controlled organization explicitly designed to connect major independent global institutions such as the WHO, UNICEF, and the World Bank with Big Pharma (Pfizer, Merck, Janssen).

Ostensibly launched to save the world’s children through vaccination, it seems more likely the organization is committed to the traditional goals of the white man’s burden, namely profit and power, with a kicker of population control.

Anthony Fauci, a beneficiary of Gates’ largesse, controls a $6B annual budget at the sprawling National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). His bequeaths to colleges and universities, labs and research centers, gives him immense influence over the aim and direction of those entities.

In 2017, Fauci warned on Twitter that the Trump administration would have to deal with an infectious disease outbreak before its term was finished.

For its part, dependent on the BMGF and US aid, the WHO delivers edicts adopted by dozens of nations worldwide. Public health is big business, and it is now the conduit through which Big Pharma ‘markets’ its latest innovations under the guise of rescuing humanity from a fell pathogen.

These WHO-stamped recommendations, seconded by nations and sometimes mandated, achieve what Obamacare sought to deliver—a government-mandated medical product largely paid for by the government. In other words, a risk-free, federally backed slush fund for health monopolies. Is it any surprise that Big Pharma is Washington’s largest lobby and that its front man and facilitator, the BMGF, is global health’s largest patron?

What has precipitated this shift? We can reasonably assume a shift has occurred. In 1976, distribution of the vaccine for the bogus swine flu epidemic was halted after just 53 deaths. Lawsuits concerning vaccine injury abounded after the 2009 swine flu pandemic.

In 2010, the Indian government halted an HPV vaccine program to investigate the death of seven girls who had received the vaccine. And yet earlier this summer the same government waived the need for clinical trials and batch testing for Covid19 vaccines if they had been tested in the country of origin.

Today there are said to be more than 30,000 deaths and five million adverse reactions that followed vaccination across the West, yet the hectoring campaign to immunize the planet goes rollicking along. Fauci has now suggested the definition of full vaccination may now include booster shots, meaning a never-ending regime of shots as they are tweaked to address new variants (identified genetic sequences).

Or, as is evidently the case with current boosters, they are just pushing overstock to drain inventory and reach sales targets. The apocalyptic predictions are the same, the dodgy data the same, vaccine injury problematic.

The difference? One likely candidate is the influence of profiteering on the institutions of public health. There is much evidence these institutions have fallen prey to the same fate as other critical public agencies: agency capture, or the process by which special interests pervert the true purpose of institutions until they serve the interests of private financial patrons rather than public constituencies.

We’ve seen the deleterious influence of elite capital on Wall Street’s regulatory agencies, the Bretton Woods institutions, and of course both houses of Congress.

In some sense politicians have been latter-day sophists, creating novel rationalizations for the abdication of their ethical duty to serve the public. Yet they serve corporate interests with fewer and fewer efforts to disguise the obvious.

The truth of their subservience to corporate capital is an open secret. Their mandate is now to free capital, even if it shackles labor. In fact, the former is rarely possible without the latter.

The larger public these institutions ostensibly represent are troubling afterthoughts that require a frightful media narrative to manufacture their consent for policies that thwart their interests. The narratives follow a threadbare but effective plotline: we must be protected from a dangerous enemy.

The enemies are numberless: a demented collectivist ideology bent on world domination, a rogue nation ruled by a tinpot dictator, a cabal of terrorists building jerry-rigged IEDs, a traitorous president taking orders from abroad, or a lethal virus using us to kill our loved ones.

It makes little difference. The plotline is always the same: the government, staffed by earnest public servants, desperately strives to protect a vulnerable public against an aggressive enemy. Behind closed doors, the opposite takes place: the enemy is often manufactured for purposes of avarice and power, not to mention paranoia (regrettably many in power believe their own propaganda).

The monies to protect national security usually come from the public till. This rhetorical sleight of hand is rationalized by a compromised Congress and Oval Office, and by many other institutions of similar ilk.

As the pandemic emerged, we as a people were woefully unprepared to assess the pronouncements of our deeply troubled health officials, bent gravely over their mics like a scene from Contagion. Despite 1976 and 2009 and excellent reportage by independent journalists about the growing capture of public health by foundation and pharmaceutical money.

Nor were we ready for the subsequent mandates, delivered from the pulpit of the unsmiling state, this more like a scene from 1984. We had little awareness that money had corrupted science as much as it had foreign policy and war, as much as it had domestic economic and social policy.

And so, we swallowed the bitter pill of ‘sheltering in place’ and soon rolled up our sleeves for the public good.

Would we have acted differently had we known that this ‘fatal virus’ script has been used before, step for deceitful step?

This is an enlightening thread on the 2009 swine flu in Ireland. It shows that the unfolding of the vaccine narrative was identical with that of Covid19 and just as flawed.

It begins with the hyping of an uncontrollable and terrifyingly lethal virus. Then it hypes the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the wonder vaccines. Then we see an outbreak of adverse reactions unexpected by the population because they had been reassured of the vaccine’s “safety profile,” which turns out to be a sequence of half-truths as suspect as the computer-generated sequence of Covid19. “Safety profile” being one of the emerging terms in our new Orwellian medical lexicon.

Then come more alarming signals, in that case a “narcolepsy epidemic,” the signs of which were subsequently shown to have existed during the trial period but were covered up by public health officials and the vaccine manufacturers.

Note that the separation between “church and state,” in this case between corporation and state, is illusory. The virus mortality claims, the clinical studies, all fall apart on investigation, which comes woefully late. The trials, of course, are run by the companies desperately dependent on their success.

Finally, lawsuits are filed as the narrative of protecting the people unravels. More than 80 suits emerged in Ireland related to the vaccine. But the corporations and the state continued to push the vaccine on the population, using the standard tool kit of manufactured fear to shape behavior.

Have a look at the ease with which scientific journals are paid by the pharmaceutical industry, compromising their impartiality. In fact, “The average ‘in hand’ payment in 2014 alone was US$27,564, plus research funds.”

The interesting part of this article is that it begins with the line, “It’s no secret that scientists can be corrupted.” But this isn’t a popularly known reality. A significant percentage of the population seem to place their faith in doctors with the most unscrupulous ease.

In some sense, doctors are the modern priests. Priests were society’s original father figures. Scientists in white lab coats have replaced prelates in black vestments. It seems that humans cannot escape the childhood desire to trust an authority figure absolutely. To their own detriment.

We soon learn our parents are fallible. We finally learned the church was an imperfect vehicle of spiritual wisdom. We have yet to understand that the scientific community is corrupt and serves interests larger than the pristine pursuit of truth, a comical conceit that rarely exists in an intensely capitalist society, or anywhere for that matter.

This article takes on Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), another Orwellian concept of the modern age. Consider:

Research is almost always paid for by pharmaceutical companies. But studies done by industry are well known to have positive results far more frequently. Trials run by industry are 70% more likely than government funded trials to show a positive result.”

Stanford’s John Ioannidis famously penned a well-documented article arguing that most published research findings were simply false. Inbuilt biases and external influence threaten to undermine the perceived sanctity of scientific research, the modern paradigm of impartiality.

Yet it may be that that research capture and trial capture should become as common as the notion of ‘regulatory capture.’ Documentarian of antiquity James Burke once suggested, every generation thinks it knows the truth, and so the next generation comes along and overturns all the established “truths” and creates new ones, which are eventually dispensed with in their turn. Our truth is evidence-based medicine. We await our comeuppance.

Part of the reluctance to vaccinate in the black community has not only to do with cynicism over the official narrative but cultural memory of their historical treatment by the government.

Notable here is the Tuskegee Experiment, which baited black men into a study with the promise of free health care and pretended to treat their venereal diseases.

In fact, they were handing out placebos to track the progression of diseases like syphilis. For most of this 40-year study penicillin was available to treat STDs, but the involved government health ministry declined to offer it to suffering participants. This was at a time when:

Major medical journals argued that blacks were inclined to have certain defects, especially sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis, because of their prodigal behavior and lack of hygiene.”

Here is a perfectly clear example of how the medical field is debased by a pernicious ideology, be it racist eugenics or an uncompromising profit motive. Do we really think we are beyond such gross abuses?

In case we protest, “But that was before civil rights,” it might be worth watching the following video:

https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/anti- ... -control:0

It describes the inclusion of anti-fertility drugs in a tetanus vaccine being distributed in Kenya in this century. Of course, this video is on the Odysee platform because YouTube regularly censors videos that challenge the official vaccine narrative.

There can be no dissent when faced with life-threatening enemies; it is the same with the virus as when the public rallies around the president in the face of a military threat. The amplification of the threat is the crucial element in attaining a degree of consensus, or at least the appearance of it.

We’ve also seen the perversion of science in other fields, and its application to this pandemic. Consider the playbook of Big Pharma’s forerunner in the practice of regulatory capture, Big Tobacco. The strategy to combat the cancer-cigarette connection was a clever one: pretend to embrace the science but fund your own studies and control the results.

In other words, obfuscate and contradict existing science that undermines your business goals. We’ve seen this same blueprint employed by Big Ag as it muddied the waters of research on glyphosate and other GMO products.

The effort to sell the Covid19 pandemic to the public involved even more, namely the coordinated campaign from Big Pharma (running the fast-track trials), corporate media (scaremongering the public and suppressing evidence of alternative treatments), and global health institutions and allied governments (launching the narrative of the global pandemic and providing an official stamp of approval for media hysteria).

The much-repeated phrase about not learning from history applies again, but perhaps more to the point is the fact that we need to know history before we can learn from its mistakes. Ignorance of history also promises its repetition, too.

Knowledge makes a difference. Had we known all this, we’d perhaps not have behaved so obsequiously before the injunctions of the all-knowing corporate medical community and its state shills. We’d have perhaps not spoken so arrogantly about, “following the science.” Although many would still have happily preferred to forego meaningful critique in favor of the false security of absolute faith.

There is probably some sort of evolutionary selection pressure that encourages this sort of behavior. Perhaps we can generally function more efficiently without the complications of uncertainty and distrust. But I haven’t got a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial to deliver unimpeachable certainty of that theory. So, it must be a conspiracy.

Is it any wonder, though, that Robert Malone, one of the inventors of mRNA technology, warns of Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), or that the inventor of the PCR test, Nobel laureate Dr Kary Mullis, frustratedly pointed out that his invention was not a diagnostic tool? That it can be manipulated to find “almost anything.” Like Oppenheimer and the fictional Hoenikker, these men of some genius scramble to reign in the dangerous use of their inventions after the fact, to little or no avail.

As Cat’s Cradle illustrates, we treat science as our ancestors treated religion: with reverence, with faith, and with an almost joyful abandonment of our critical faculties to authority, which is a kind of backdoor plea for authoritarianism.

We listen eagerly for the latest proclamation, then scurry back to our debased lives reassured that the powers that be are handling things on our behalf, our debasement a necessary measure regretfully enacted by our betters. Like a child or puppy set loose on a playground, secure in the knowledge he can always clamber back to the safety of the parental embrace.

There’s something freeing in this sort of abdication. But also, something treacherous. The medical profession is the modern church, a population of hypochondriacs its laity.

Pills are the new sacrament. The vestments of the modern prelate are lab coats and scrubs. But no institution is infallible, whether its credo is an ancient testament or a clinical study.

Vonnegut uses religion as a lens through which to comment on human fallibility. He includes a rhyme-making religious prophet named Bokonon to smuggle in his wry view of our longing for the kind of certainty only omniscience could provide.

Bokonon encourages people to live by the “foma” that keeps them healthy and happy. Foma are “harmless untruths.”

Vonnegut’s tale slyly draws the distinction between harmless untruths and those untruths that cause grave harm.

It is no small irony, considering the corruption of science, that the Hippocratic Oath admonishes, “First, do no harm." Almost the first act of corrupt medicine appears to be harming those to whom it ministers, all while delivering narcotic reassurances.

A limerick from Bokonon summarizes the abject state we find ourselves in, hustling to don our face nappies before entering a store and barking at the unmasked as they dare pass within six feet of us. This from the Book of Bokonon:

Tiger got to hunt,
Bird got to fly;
Man got to sit and wonder, “Why, why, why?”

Tiger got to sleep,
Bird got to land;
Man got to tell himself he understand.

If only we did understand, truly. It was the French philosopher Blaise Pascal who famously abandoned his scientific studies after a powerful conversion to Christianity, performing something not unlike the widespread abdication of criticism we see today.

But it was also Pascal who noted that:

There are only two kinds of men: the righteous who think they are sinners and the sinners who think they are righteous.”

The latter at times seem to be a community of stethoscope sophists hectoring their lessers to bare their arms for the good of the state. Or perhaps it is rather the shadow cast over the medical profession that we should unmask.

If it is true what Camus said, that the welfare of the people is the alibi of tyrants, then we must ask what looms behind these self-appointed saints in white coats.
_______

Julien Charles is a concerned citizen hoping to call attention to the authoritarian drift of states across the Western world, and the disingenuous narratives promoted to gain consensus for such measures.

comments

One of many comments:

https://off-guardian.org/2022/01/14/harmless-untruths/#comment-472472
Janey B
Jan 14, 2022 9:30 PM

Yes, “evidence based medicine” is another fallacy that is coming undone.

Here’s Dr Leemon McHenry on the subject:
The Illusion of Evidence Based Medicine - https://www.brighteon.com/f7e21aa0-2327 ... 37c506698e

The good news is; these people are going down.

Trial of the Century – https://www.brighteon.com/6b340e9f-db36 ... 812c278d7a Coming soon -

https://off-guardian.org/2022/01/14/harmless-untruths/

[MacCruiskeen]

Iain McGiilchrist's enormous new book has had rave reviews:




Summary, table of contents, reviews and interviews at his website:

https://channelmcgilchrist.com/the-matter-with-things/

[Belligerent Savant]

^^^ good book recommendation. Adding it to my queue.


The below image may be better suited in a thread focusing on the role of Pharma/overreliance on Prescription Drugs & Medicine and impact on society.

For now, I place it here. The color codes explain much of the current malaise.