rigorousintuition.ca

Jeff » Thu May 15, 2008 3:46 pm wrote:

cptmarginal wrote:
One thing we do know for certain is that the 9/11 conspiracy culture (and its argument based on physical evidence) works exactly the same as the JFK conspiracy culture. My prediction is that the 9/11 debate will continue in an isomorphic fashion to that of the JFK situation - people who are "on the fence" will probably be persuaded by whichever "expert" gives the most convincing explanation to them (since most people are laymen in the fields necessary). Many will be blamed, much will be claimed, many things revoked - but none of the real perpetrators will be revealed.

Absolutely. I'm looking forward to the 40th anniversary, to see how far we've come.

From a 2005 blog post:


My fear for the "9/11 Truth Movement" is that it is making the same missteps the Kennedy assassination researchers made 40 years ago when there was still a chance for something like justice.

Philadelphia lawyer Vincent Salandria was one of the earliest and best critics of the Warren Commission. Immediately after its Report was issued, he wrote a highly detailed critique for The Legal Intelligencer analyzing how the trajectories and ballistics were all wrong. In 1975, as Gaeton Fonzi was preparing for work as a government investigator on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he visited Salandria, whom he found dejected about the fruits of a dozen years of research.

Fonzi quotes Salandria in his important book, The Last Investigation:

I'm afraid we were misled. All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don't you think the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: "We are in control and no one not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official - no one can do anything about it." It was a message to the people that their government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message....

The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but repression. I suggest to you that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down.

Belligerent Savant » Thu Apr 28, 2022 12:51 pm wrote:.

Applicable with covid and other crises, current and future:

Jeff » Thu May 15, 2008 3:46 pm wrote:

cptmarginal wrote:
One thing we do know for certain is that the 9/11 conspiracy culture (and its argument based on physical evidence) works exactly the same as the JFK conspiracy culture. My prediction is that the 9/11 debate will continue in an isomorphic fashion to that of the JFK situation - people who are "on the fence" will probably be persuaded by whichever "expert" gives the most convincing explanation to them (since most people are laymen in the fields necessary). Many will be blamed, much will be claimed, many things revoked - but none of the real perpetrators will be revealed.

Absolutely. I'm looking forward to the 40th anniversary, to see how far we've come.

From a 2005 blog post:


My fear for the "9/11 Truth Movement" is that it is making the same missteps the Kennedy assassination researchers made 40 years ago when there was still a chance for something like justice.

Philadelphia lawyer Vincent Salandria was one of the earliest and best critics of the Warren Commission. Immediately after its Report was issued, he wrote a highly detailed critique for The Legal Intelligencer analyzing how the trajectories and ballistics were all wrong. In 1975, as Gaeton Fonzi was preparing for work as a government investigator on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he visited Salandria, whom he found dejected about the fruits of a dozen years of research.

Fonzi quotes Salandria in his important book, The Last Investigation:

I'm afraid we were misled. All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don't you think the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: "We are in control and no one not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official - no one can do anything about it." It was a message to the people that their government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message....

The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but repression. I suggest to you that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down.

CDC and FDA 'altered' Covid guidance and even 'suppressed' findings while under political pressure, bombshell report suggests: Whistle-blower employees say they feared 'retaliation' if they spoke up

Federal investigators interviewed top-level directors and managers at agencies

They also opened a hotline for employees to report 'political interference'

Government Accountability Office uncovered widespread allegations of this

They raised fears that Covid guidance may have been 'altered or suppressed'

GAO warned none of the agencies had systems in place for reporting allegations

Said they had failed to train staff in how to report and spot political interference

Follows allegations White House waged a war on science early in the pandemic

What GAO Found
The four agencies GAO reviewed do not have procedures that define political interference in scientific decision-making or describe how it should be reported and addressed. These agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR).

The absence of specific procedures may explain why the four selected agencies did not identify any formally reported internal allegations of potential political interference in scientific decision-making from 2010 through 2021. Through semi-structured interviews and a confidential hotline, employees at CDC, FDA, and NIH told GAO they observed incidents that they perceived to be political interference but did not report them for various reasons. These reasons included fearing retaliation, being unsure how to report issues, and believing agency leaders were already aware. HHS could strengthen its desired goal of sustaining a culture of scientific integrity by developing procedures for reporting and addressing political interference in scientific decision-making. Such procedures would ensure that employees know how to report allegations, and that HHS's agencies have a clear, consistent process for investigating and addressing such allegations. To help reduce employees' fear of retaliation and encourage appropriate reporting, agencies could include information on whistleblower protections, and clarify any reporting requirements for employees who believe they observed potential political interference in scientific decision-making.

...

The epidemiological relevance of the COVID-19-vaccinated population is increasing

Günter Kampf

The Lancet Regional Health - Europe

Volume 11, December 2021, 100272

High COVID-19 vaccination rates were expected to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in populations by reducing the number of possible sources for transmission and thereby to reduce the burden of COVID-19 disease. Recent data, however, indicate that the epidemiological relevance of COVID-19 vaccinated individuals is increasing. In the UK it was described that secondary attack rates among household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases was similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% for vaccinated vs 23% for unvaccinated). 12 of 31 infections in fully vaccinated household contacts (39%) arose from fully vaccinated epidemiologically linked index cases. Peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type [1]. In Germany, the rate of symptomatic COVID-19 cases among the fully vaccinated (“breakthrough infections”) is reported weekly since 21. July 2021 and was 16.9% at that time among patients of 60 years and older [2]. This proportion is increasing week by week and was 58.9% on 27. October 2021 (Figure 1) providing clear evidence of the increasing relevance of the fully vaccinated as a possible source of transmission. A similar situation was described for the UK. Between week 39 and 42, a total of 100.160 COVID-19 cases were reported among citizens of 60 years or older. 89.821 occurred among the fully vaccinated (89.7%), 3.395 among the unvaccinated (3.4%) [3]. One week before, the COVID-19 case rate per 100.000 was higher among the subgroup of the vaccinated compared to the subgroup of the unvaccinated in all age groups of 30 years or more.

In Israel a nosocomial outbreak was reported involving 16 healthcare workers, 23 exposed patients and two family members. The source was a fully vaccinated COVID-19 patient. The vaccination rate was 96.2% among all exposed individuals (151 healthcare workers and 97 patients). Fourteen fully vaccinated patients became severely ill or died, the two unvaccinated patients developed mild disease [4]. The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identifies four of the top five counties with the highest percentage of fully vaccinated population (99.9–84.3%) as “high” transmission counties [5]. Many decision makers assume that the vaccinated can be excluded as a source of transmission. It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.

stickdog99 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:01 pm wrote:

Source (see page 3): https://www.walgreens.com/businesssolut ... -index.jsp

Pfizer’s Covid-19 Pill Failed Study Testing Its Preventive Use
The Covid-19 pill from Pfizer Inc. failed to prevent symptomatic infections in adults who had been exposed to the pandemic virus, a late-stage study found.

Pfizer said Friday that the drug, named Paxlovid, failed the study’s main objective of meaningfully reducing the risk of confirmed and symptomatic Covid-19 infections in adults who were exposed to the virus by someone in their household.

Paxlovid was cleared for use in December by U.S. health regulators to treat people 12 years and older early in the course of their disease who are at high risk of developing severe Covid-19.

U.S. Seeks ‘Urgent’ Data on Covid Relapses After Using Pfizer’s Drug
U.S. government researchers are planning studies of how often and why coronavirus levels rebound in some Covid patients who have completed a five-day course of treatment with Pfizer Inc.’s Paxlovid.

“It is a priority,” said Clifford Lane, deputy director for clinical research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, calling the issue “a pretty urgent thing for us to get a handle on.” The agency is discussing a variety of possible epidemiological and clinical studies to examine post-Paxlovid rebound with scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, he said.

. . .

Little is known about the rebound cases, including how frequently they occur and whether the highly transmissible omicron variant plays a role. While there’s no proof it’s caused by the drug, doctors say they need more information about what action to take when the virus surges in someone who’s just been treated.

drstrangelove » Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:05 am wrote:

U.S. Seeks ‘Urgent’ Data on Covid Relapses After Using Pfizer’s Drug

U.S. government researchers are planning studies of how often and why coronavirus levels rebound in some Covid patients who have completed a five-day course of treatment with Pfizer Inc.’s Paxlovid.

“It is a priority,” said Clifford Lane, deputy director for clinical research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, calling the issue “a pretty urgent thing for us to get a handle on.” The agency is discussing a variety of possible epidemiological and clinical studies to examine post-Paxlovid rebound with scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, he said.

. . .

Little is known about the rebound cases, including how frequently they occur and whether the highly transmissible omicron variant plays a role. While there’s no proof it’s caused by the drug, doctors say they need more information about what action to take when the virus surges in someone who’s just been treated.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... fizer-drug

Harvey » 29 Apr 2022 23:20 wrote:

stickdog99 » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:01 pm wrote:

Source (see page 3): https://www.walgreens.com/businesssolut ... -index.jsp

Okay, but just add up the percentages in the the above graph and look at the total. Am I missing something?

The main finding of this study concerns with increases of over 25% in both the number of CA [cardiac arrest] calls and ACS [acute coronary syndrome] calls of people in the 16-39 age group during the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Israel (January-May, 2021), compared with the same period of time in prior years (2019 and 2020). Moreover, there is a robust and statistically significant association between the weekly CA and ACS call counts, and the rates of first and second vaccine doses administered to this age group. At the same time there is no observed statistically significant association between COVID-19 infection rates and the CA and ACS call counts. This result is aligned with previous findings which show increases in overall CA incidence were not always associated with higher COVID-19 infections rates at a population level, as well as the stability of hospitalisation rates related to myocardial infarction throughout the initial COVID-19 wave compared to pre-pandemic baselines in Israel. These results also are mirrored by a report of increased emergency department visits with cardiovascular complaints during the vaccination rollout in Germany as well as increased EMS calls for cardiac incidents in Scotland.