Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Computers and social media Medicine

The “Disinformation Dozen” vs. public health

A new report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate shows that nearly two thirds of antivaccine disinformation on social media comes from 12 sources, dubbed the “disinformation dozen.”

Those of us who’ve countered the antivaccine movement for a long time (and I’ve been at this for nearly two decades) know that, not only is there nothing new under the sun when it comes to antivaccine tropes and tactics of spreading fear of vaccines, but that there are certain “super spreaders” of antivaccine disinformation out there. Back in 2005, when the antivaccine movement and antivaccine disinformation became a much bigger focus of my blogging and online discussions, the major purveyors of antivaccine disinformation included Andrew Wakefield (of course!), Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (whose conspiracy theory-laden article for Salon.com and Rolling Stone pushed countering antivaccine disinformation way up my list of blog priorities) the père et fils team of Mark and David Geier, Dr. Rashid Buttar, and J.B. Handley (and his group Generation Rescue), soon to be joined by David Kirby, Jenny McCarthy, and various groups, such as the antivaxxers at Age of Autism, SafeMinds, and others. (Wow, what a blast from the past!) Of course, at the time, there was no “social media” (at least not as we know it now), but rather blogs and websites; so the reach of these nodes of antivaccine disinformation was much more limited. Things have changed, though, as a new report demonstrates that the vast majority of antivaccine disinformation on social media comes from relatively few sources, namely the “Disinformation Dozen”:

Before its “disinformation dozen,” we’ve encountered the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) before. A couple of months ago, the CCDH published a report on an online conference held by antivaxxers, in which attendees learned which messages to promote to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about COVID-19 vaccines and, indeed, all vaccines. CCDH’s report on the Disinformation Dozen can be found here.

One can’t help but note that this phenomenon is very similar to another phenomenon. Specifically, when it came to disinformation about the 2020 election having been “stolen,” again, it was a relatively few sources that were responsible for the vast bulk of the disinformation being spread.

One also can’t help but notice a couple of prominent antivaxxers not listed in the Disinformation Dozen. First is Mike Adams, who, in addition to his quack empire, is rabidly antivaccine, to the point of blaming vaccines for mass death as part of a global depopulation agenda that he calls the “Oblivion Agenda.” The second is Del Bigtree, who with Andrew Wakefield produced that 2016 antivaccine ur-conspiracy film disguised as a documentary, VAXXED. I rather suspect that the reason these two aren’t in the Disinformation Dozen, knocking off two of the lower lying members, is because they had already been deplatformed on the social media platforms studied before the start date of the period examined by the CCDH, February 1 to March 16, 2021. The sole exception is that Del Bigtree is still on Twitter, which likely isn’t enough to get him into the Disinformation Dozen. Still, I bet it irks Bigtree and Adams not to be included in this list!

Notable absences from the Disinformation Dozen aside, Facebook, despite its promises to do better cleaning up antivaccine disinformation on its platform and to adjust its algorithms so that antivaccine disinformation doesn’t spread as easily, is still doing a pretty lousy job, given that the Disinformation Dozen still thrives there. Indeed, I can’t help but relate a little story about what happened to me. In brief, over the weekend, I found myself where so many science and vaccine advocates have found themselves before: In Facebook jail.

Basically, on Sunday morning I received a notification that I was banned from posting or commenting for 24 hours because Facebook had a post of mine from a week ago about a dubious treatment for COVID-19 called Healight. The post was shared on the Science-Based Medicine Facebook page, and, two days later, Facebook tagged it as “spreading COVID-19 misinformation,” even though it did nothing of the sort—quite the opposite, in fact:

Hardly the "Disinformation Dozen"
This is hardly an example of the “Disinformation Dozen.”

Of course, my post about Healight was, as you might expect, a discussion of a clinical trial of a highly dubious treatment for COVID-19. Worse, the Facebook ban was based on two “violations” of FB community standards. It turns out that, back in July, I got tagged for “hate speech” because I wrote a sarcastic post that, let’s just say, denigrated the intelligence of Americans based on some anti-lockdown and antivaccine protests that were going on then. Facebook interpreted that as “hate speech.” I appealed, but FB didn’t reverse the decision. I note that a few FB friends of mine got tagged for “hate speech” for making jokes about Canadians. I kid you not.

Now here’s the kicker. Facebook actually did reverse its decision because one of the other moderators of the SBM FB page disagreed with the ruling. The post is there now:

Despite this reversal, this “second violation” still counts as a “violation”! Again, I kid you not. I now have two Facebook “violations of community standards” on my record, which makes me wonder how long I’ll be thrown in Facebook jail the next time (and a next time seems inevitable, given the messed up algorithm and AI that Facebook uses that can’t tell real hate speech from sarcasm and can’t distinguish debunking bad COVID-19 science from spreading misinformation about COVID-19). It’ll probably be a week if and when it happens again.I note that this isn’t the first time FB’s defective algorithms tagged a post of mine as “COVID-19 misinformation.” It happened last month, when Barry Karr tried to post a post by me to his Skeptical Inquirer Facebook page and it got rejected by Politifact for “sharing COVID-19 misinformation.” It was actually debunking COVID-19 misinformation. Again, Facebook ultimately reversed its decision and the post is back, but still…

As a result of these experiences, I’m seriously thinking of not posting anything about COVID-19 on Facebook any more, at least for a while, lest I once again run afoul of Facebook’s messed up algorithms. Meanwhile, antivaxxers, COVID-19 deniers/minimizers/antimaskers, and cranks and quacks of all stripes manage to keep using FB to spread their disinformation with seeming impunity. Meanwhile, the Disinformation Dozen continue to spread antivaccine and COVID-19 minimization and denial throughout Facebook.

But enough of a diversion to my experience. Let’s look at the report some more. These accounts are not as influential on Twitter, but still very influential:

My guess is that this is because Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube allow for the creation of pages that can amass thousands and thousands of subscribers, members, or Likes, making them perfect niduses for the Disinformation Dozen to use to seed their disinformation, there to be spread by the many members of their pages or people who’ve Liked the pages. Twitter, on the other hand, is more decentralized.

Now let’s look as some of the bad actors in the Disinformation Dozen.

The first thing that surprised me about the report is that Dr. Rashid Buttar is relevant again! Seriously, Dr. Buttar is a quack whose use of chelation therapy to treat autistic children and whose cancer quackery I was discussing 15 years ago, but of late I don’t recall his being a huge force in quackery any more, even as I realize that he never really went away. (Truly, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a perfect opportunity for washed up quacks to get their grift on again.) So I went to that section of the report first: It didn’t really have a lot to say about him other than:

Rashid Buttar is an osteopath physician and conspiracy theorist known for videos posted to his YouTube channel.

Example Violations 

In this Facebook post, Buttar claimed that Covid vaccines cause infertility.

In this video posted to Facebook, Buttar claims that COVID-19 tests have living microorganisms (discouraging people from getting government-approved tests).

I note that the post is gone, but the video remains:

I didn’t watch the entire video, but I can say that the introduction was nauseatingly overblown, with Dr. Buttar’s fake “certifications” being touted as evidence that he’s one of America’s 50 “top doctors,” and the rest of what I skimmed was basically the same sort of run-of-the-mill COVID-19 and antivaccine conspiracy theories that I’ve been debunking for over a year now. I was surprised that he was so popular. Indeed, I was rather surprised that Dr. Buttar even made the list of the Disinformation Dozen.

Moving on, regular readers are very familiar with RFK Jr., “Dr.” Joe Mercola, Ty & Charlene Bollinger (who are, like Dr. Buttar, cancer quacks, too), Sherri Tenpenny, Sayer Ji, Kelly Brogan (who, appropriately enough, is married to Ji), Christiane Northrup, and Erin Elizabeth (who, appropriately enough, is Mercola’s longtime girlfriend and originator of one of the most hilarious conspiracy theories of all, that alternative practitioners are being “murdered” secretly to stop them), my having written about them on a number of occasions.

I didn’t recognize Rizza Islam, who’s #5 on the list, but it didn’t take much of a guess to realize that he’s affiliated with the Nation of Islam, now a wholly owned subsidiary of the Church of Scientology, and I’ve written about the alliance between the Nation of Islam and antivaxxers like RFK Jr. and Del Bigtree, particularly through the Rev. Tony Muhammad. I’m surprised that Rizza Islam himself never came up before in my blogging, but maybe I just lumped him in with general Nation of Islam fear mongering and conspiracy theories about vaccines designed to stoke fear of vaccines among Blacks. I will admit to being amused by the way Rizza Islam attributes vaccines to Satan, though.

I will also admit to not being as familiar with Ben Tapper and Kevin Jenkins, who are apparently both up-and-comers in the antivaccine movement. Tapper is—surprise! surprise!—a chiropractor whom I’ve seen on Twitter from time to time, who, if his beard and hairstyle are any indication, looks as though he’d be right at home among the Proud Boys. Kevin Jenkins, on the other hand, is just an activist whose grift is propelling him into the top levels of antivaxxers. Apparently, Jenkins has been involved with America’s Frontline Doctors, the COVID misinformation outfit that gave us Stella “Demon Sperm” Immanuel and is co-founder of Freedom Airway & Freedom Travel Alliance, a pandemic grift that involves helping paid members travel around the world without those pesky masks, quarantines, or vaccines.

I’m definitely going to have to pay more attention to Rizza Islam, Ben Tapper, and Kevin Jenkins. The grant applications and general interference of my regular work with my blogging over the last couple of months has clearly kept me from being as up-to-date on the latest COVID-19 and antivaccine conspiracy theorists rising in the griftosphere.

It’s also amusing to see those in the Disinformation Dozen react to the CCDH’s report and list:

Poor Ji. He can’t help but use a really silly antivax trope, the “appeal to the package insert.” Also, why is Sayer Ji still on Twitter? That rather shows what CCDH is talking about, doesn’t it?

Finally, it appears to be a general principle in the algorithm social media era that, more than ever, relatively few grifters drive the vast majority of the harmful disinformation out there, be it about vaccines, elections, or other conspiracy theories. It is equally clear that the social media platforms, particularly Facebook, appear reluctant to act too harshly. For instance, I wonder why Facebook and Twitter have never deplatformed RFK Jr., and I can’t help but wonder if it’s the Kennedy name. Be that as it may, the CCDH report is a warning. Will Twitter, Facebook, and Google heed the warning? I’m not optimistic.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

292 replies on “The “Disinformation Dozen” vs. public health”

I don’t know if you saw it, but Congress had a hearing about disinformation this week, in which they asked social media CEOs about many things, including the disinformation dozen. The answers were not promising. Here is one article. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/big-tech-congress-squared-frustration-was-palpable-rcna507

And the thing is, as you’re saying, these people are already violating their policies. They’re just not facing enforcement.

“You’re about as wrong as can be.”

Q isn’t even wrong. Being wrong is an achievement few kooks attain.

Are you sure Q-ball isn’t being sarcastic? That COVID Light Therapy is so incredibly quacky that I doubt even Q-ball believes it works…

“so incredibly quacky”

There is no quack therapy (nor, indeed, any nonsensical idea) that doesn’t have its believers. Often more than one might like to imagine. Grifters get rich on this stuff. Your own trove of articles is testament to this.

Sarcasm and true belief can appear frighteningly similar. Only Q-ball knows which it is.

start promoting some real covid solutions like the following

If that site isn’t a deliberate parody, it’s the next best thing.

It’s particularly cute that the link to “current scientific research being done across the globe” is 404.

That is not “cute”. CF is breaking the web… Which I consider an extention of my body. I can feel it, I can feel it. Daisy…

As I noted elsewhere, anti-vaxxers/ alt med providers are terribly unhappy about being de-platformed: they despise these companies, their CEOs and their business models- none of which which concerned them at all when these outlets allowed them to advertise/ network for free. But removals remain uneven: Del is available @ highwire talk and Kennedy @ his eponymous account as well as CHD’s**. Some list alternatives like gab, telegram, MeWe etc or use alternate names to get around bans. BUT Wikipedia remains a constant bete noire..

I notice that new comments on other threads fail to update: can it be that relentless trolls have bogged them down irrevocably? I enjoy reading BS and vicious attacks on reality. It’s why we’re here.

** perhaps his name is his talisman. .

“I notice that new comments on other threads fail to update:”

Ohh, goody again. It’s not just me. Paradoxically, if it was to save bandwith, repeatedly refreshing the page to see if it updated works against that. I’ve gone 2 days with it stuck, only to comment “dit” and they all appear even though I’m in moderate.

The workaround is just to make a comment on the ‘stuck’ page and it will unstick for you — try to make it as irrelevant as possible like posting something like this:

https://twitter.com/UAHSWIRLL/status/1375264456075190278

or

https://youtu.be/evXfzh43ym4?t=1

There have been some glitches in the web server. But I am also seeing weird behavior clicking on comment links in Chrome. maybe it’s a caching issue, but newer comments wills sometimes disappear from the comment list when i click on a previous comment.

Has anyone heard from the Boy Wonder of the antivax league lately? He’s taken down his blog and Twitter account, and he hasn’t posted anything to his blog’s twitter account in a while. Oh, well, back to things that matter…

I noticed that as well. I think he’s gone to ground….or his parents took away his Internet privileges.

I’ve read here and there that a significant number of medical professionals are hesitant in getting the mRNA vaccines. I don’t know if they are concerned whether there may be cascading effects from manipulating polypeptides and glycols, but there are doctors online concerned about a antibody enhancement something or other that causes an severe autoimmune response. There is data from Europe concerning the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines which notes thousands of deaths and around a hundred thousand serious complications.
I thought there was a lot of misinformation concerning therapeutic solutions involving the prophylactic and early protection offered by Zinc ionophores such as HCQ as well as Ivermectin. A recent American Journal of Medicine reaffirmed the effectiveness of HCQ.
A recent University of Oxford study mentioned success in preventing 90% of serious complications from Covid 19/SARS2 using Asthma/COPD inhalers containing Budesonide.
Back in March of 2020, MIT published an article based on the autopsies of Covid 19/SARS2 that reported hypercoagulation in internal organs and at IV/catheter sites. They suggested a study using the clot busting tPA. Mt. Sinai used tPA in a study, but found it had to be supplemented by Heparin or similar compounds. Previous ARDS studies pre-Covid 19/SARS2 found that Aspirin >320 mg effective in healing. I thought to myself the old fashioned advice of taking 2 Aspirin and calling the doctor in the morning may be apt in Covid 19/SARS2 treatment.
Effective therapeutics should be as available as flu medicines and cold remedies in our drug and grocery stores in battling Covid 19/SARS2.
There are horror stories concerning vaccines for sure, yet good ones have saved millions of lives – as have therapeutics. Time will tell about the increasing dangers from vaccines currently available. The paranoid anti-vaxxers should not always be ignored because they are trying to fulfill important public watchdog duties. With age, we have witnessed several alarming scares concerning Alar and other foods or substances that were later proven unfounded. HCQ has been used widely for 65 years and the alarmists may have cost hundreds of thousands of deaths due to Covid 19/SARS2 because of the political hubbub mounted against its use.

There is data from Europe concerning the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines which notes thousands of deaths and around a hundred thousand serious complications.

No there isn’t.

Most of the concern in Europe is over whether there are side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-benefits-still-outweigh-risks-despite-possible-link-rare-blood-clots

We are talking of less than 100 serious complications that are most likely not related to the vaccine.

I had the AZ vaccine last Saturday. Mildly sore arm, thirty six hours or so of feeling a bit meh. Hmm, possibly some ear ache and a bit of an upset stomach, no idea if it’s related. On the other hand, fire spouted out of my partner’s arse and, just as she rose above the height of the surrounding houses, her head exploded and her arms fell off.

Ouch, rs. Too soon. Still, arms aren’t supposed to just fall off.

Musk’s tweet aside that the crater was were it was meant to be, that thing was shredded and scattered over several thousand feet. Not much on the pad itself; but the nose cone was close. FTS? — this flyover video does not show engines (they had been already collected?) but the landing legs far over and behind the tank farm is not a good look.

https://youtu.be/CPHh3NPgLEw?t=224
https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM?t=1

cjones: The AJM did not “reaffirm the effectiveness” of HCQ for treating CoViD-19. It allowed a letter to the editor to be published, which was refuted by another letter to the editor. As far as therapeutics, most flu and cold therapeutics only treat mild symptoms and can be used to treat similar mild symptoms in CoViD patients (except as contraindicated).

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-hydroxychloroquine-journal/fact-check-the-american-journal-of-medicine-has-not-endorsed-hydroxychloroquine-to-treat-covid-19-idUSKCN2AU2MR

Jake had a Linked In account that included his title, epidemiologist, sojourn at U Texas, Epoch Times and other stuff ( his skills) but it has been quite streamlined and you now need to be a member to see it all. Listed as living in “Ponte Vedra, FL”- his mother’s home .

You know, I really shouldn’t gloat…
..
BUT about 10 years ago, Jake came to RI to argue: we ( I and several other regulars) challenged his anti-vax beliefs and asked if he thought that his extreme position and internet activities would poison his chances for a real career in epi.
I asked him if it were more likely that the scientific community, governments and media around the world were all compromised by pharma plots/ loot in a mind-shatteringly immense conspiracy OR that one doctor CHEATED,

Of course, he went with the CT.
He wrote in Epoch Times, had a blog, worked for Trump’s election, did “research”, somehow acquired an MPH and started a doctorate at Texas and left.
I’ve followed his Linked In and it now seems stripped down ( I’m not a member so I can’t see as much as was previously available but the general link shown is less).
So I imagine he has no career and didn’t return to any university.

Not that he needs to work since his mother and uncle inherited a great fortune from his grandfather ..

Maybe he got tired of you hypocrites cyber-stalking him.

Jake? He only had one regular commenter.

Given Young Master Crosby’s proclivity for gang-stalking, it is far more likely that he is now under a restraining order.

From the linked CBC story: “Tenpenny also has other ways of making money from her students, selling additional courses and even getting a referral commission from a private lab that gives her $10 for every $100 spent on vitamin-deficiency tests, a fact she mentions in one of her seminars.”

Interesting, in light of a federal law passed in 2018 dealing with kickbacks from clinical laboratories. It was designed to address abuses associated with opioid addiction treatment, but according to the following link applies to improper clinical lab referrals in general.

http://ebglaw.com/news/the-support-for-patients-and-communities-act-part-1-new-federal-anti-kickback-law-eliminating-kickbacks-in-recovery-act-of-2018/

There are however exceptions to the law which conceivably might apply in this instance.

I saw both topics straightaway in the Times this morning–both on front page. I knew Orac would cover one of them, but I see he has taken it from social media and not NYT. Anyway, NYT gives five free articles per month and also allows access to forwarded links–this seems to work with messaging but not email, but I don’t know if that’s everyone’s experience. I think it’s a terrible situation that the “paper of record” is behind a paywall. These two articles need to spread as virulently as all the bunk.

What is really distressing is that both articles seem to think this information is brand new–as do most of the comments.

The New York Times included an article titled “Far-Right Extremists Move From ‘Stop the Steal’ to Stop the Vaccine” today. It’s behind a pay wall, but you can get the drift from the subheading “Extremist organizations are now bashing the safety and efficacy of coronavirus vaccines in an effort to try to undermine the government.”

You can look forward to QAnon/Trump cultists like Michael Flynn and Sidney Powel to release the Kracken at anti-vaxx rallies soon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/26/us/far-right-extremism-anti-vaccine.html

As it happens, I got a call from a neighbor of mine today wanting to inform me about the dangers of masks and vaccines. i told her I would probably disagree, but gave her my email and asked to go ahead and email me the link.

The link goes here, to lifesitenews.com which has apparently been kicked off of YouTube, but is hosting videos on their own website.

They apparently had some conference back in late February or early March featuring Sherri Tenpenny, Teresa Deisher, Christina Parks and various others. Fortunately there are transcripts so you don’t have to sit through the videos.

https://lifefacts.lifesitenews.com/unmasking-covid-19-videos/

Unfortunately, the transcripts don’t include link to any of the references for various claims, such as

The only randomized control studies that
have ever been done on mask show that they don’t work.

and

25,000 students that
were studied out of Germany. And what they found was that 68% of these kids that were
interviewed had some type of impairment.

and there are claims like this

If God wanted us to have a mask, he’d have built one into us and we
don’t need one.

And it only takes them 10 minutes into the first video to get to the Nazi analogies.

I’ll probably just send her a link to my blogpost from last spring and offer to answer any questions she has.

I assume your neighbor opposes hearing aids, glasses and pants, since God didn’t build those into us either.

I’m not sure she believes everything on that website. But she’s definitely into the healthy foods / gluten-free/ etc.

I’ll probably just let it pass.

I am in an intimate relationship with your ‘neighbor’ and would also like explanations — though, none really have anything to do with epidemiology.. She’s a goer, that one; Quite the firecracker, really.

It is weird. When I gassed up the MIPS whilst passing though in 1993, I was left with the impression that the locals were all assholes.. Maybe just the ones along interstate gas stations? Sometimes stereotypes break down, I guess.

GBFEL-TIE! Stuff that costs alot, doesn’t scale down to portable, but gives good job security forever on.

Actually, some very good things came out of that project. It was classified then, but not now. Sodium layer; who knew? Now ground-based astronomy can “take the twinkle out of the stars”.

Were you of the mindset to preserve the Desert Tortoise or did you say “fuck it” and lisened to them pop under your tires??

I nearly ran off the road a couple days ago over a possum eating worms after the storms. I get it.

Do you guys get urges sometimes to censor Mercola, who happens to be a Jew? Then yes, we are getting into Nazi territory. Do you happen to have white privilege as well? Hello, nazi high potential.

Nice ad hominem there. And I’d like to point out that a lot of the people Orac has called out over the years aren’t jewish. Claiming that calling out somebody who is jewish is automatically antisemitic is laughable, especially in the case of Orac, who got his start refuting holocaust denial.

Not how it works, Quisling. Mercola is treated the same as any other prominent anti-vaxxer/science denialist on this site, without regard to creed or colour. Report back to your Nazi masters and let them know you failed.

Q-ball babbled, “Do you guys get urges sometimes to censor Mercola, who happens to be a Jew?”
.
Citation?
.
Mercola is an Italian name… You know, the place where the Vatican is located?
Most Italians are Roman Catholic, almost by default.
Link to a source of unknown (to me) credibility:
https://www.bionity.com/en/encyclopedia/Joseph_Mercola.html
“Mercola was raised as a Catholic. Later in life he switched to evangelical Christianity, but now calls himself spiritual rather than religious. Dr. Mercola was formerly a member of the Christian Medical Society but stopped his membership in 2002.”
.
Nice try at using ethnicity as a weapon. You know what they call that, don’t you?
Racism.
You tried to paint this site as racist only to prove it is you who is the racist.
.
This site is a science based site so the anti-vaccinationist refutation/bashing is without regard to race, creed, color, national origin, or sexual orientation.
(Personally, I want to censor Dr.Paul Thomas, who happens to be asian. He keeps it well hidden but he is indeed a crypto-Asian American. /sarcasm)

Citation?

I’m sure Quaballs will pony up a picture of Mercola sporting a kippah in no time and that Joe will be closing up shop for Pesach.

@ Q-ball

Apparently you don’t know that a frequent commenter on this blog, Dorit Rubenstein Reiss, is an Israeli Jew. And I am also someone who comments, though less frequently, am Jewish, including having lived in Israel for six months in 1978. As with any other group, Jews range from right to left, from scientific to charlatans, from honest contributors to crooks. Really stupid to ignore what is written about Mercola’s unscientific/harmful but very profitable business and bring up something totally irrelevant.

@joel

bringing up Mercolas million dollar profits while ignoring the billiondollar profits of big pharma is the best example of cherrypicking I have seen in a while. Are you by any chance a brilliant scientist?

Orac has mentioned before that he doesnt get paid by big pharma despite all the shilling he does. It baffles me.

P.S. the big bang theory is disinformation

Speaking of “getting into Nazi territory”, I have urges to censor RF Kennedy Jnr, because he collaborates with Nazis.

I would agree that the big bang theory is disinformation. There’s no way that IRL physicists spend so little time on paperwork.

@Joel

Mercola’s unscientific/harmful but very profitable business

So basically youre saying that he has huge profit margins? Bigger than big pharma?
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223

In an unregulated industry with no barrier of entry to competitors because of patents, year in and out?

Looks like you have found the exception that proves in capitalism, outsized profits do not always attract competitors. Mercola must be a genius.Being censored everywhere yet still making $$$$$$ with higher margins than big pharma and no competition.

@Numberwang
Im not refering to the tvshow, the theory is disinformation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
its the biggest grift in science after big pharma as this no name physicist explains (who ripped-off my idea I believe)
https://asiatimes.com/2020/11/the-big-bang-never-happened-but-fusion-will/
its simply fake news. black holes dont exist, so we never took a picture of a black hole, gravity waves have never been measured. Theory of relativity is nonsense.

That log axis on the surface brightness plot is a hoot. If you want to complain about inflation, which is what you’re really doing, you need to explain isotropy, among other things.

Something tells me that you’re way out of your depth.

@rs

kudos, ad hominems prove to me youre a real scientist.

@narad,

gravitational waves or gravy waves?
https://www.holoscience.com/wp/gravitational-waves/
The evidence is incontrovertible. ergo, ceterus paribus.
It seems you cannot distinguish pseudo-science from real science, sadly.

These same computer models are used to model covid….nuff said.

gravitational waves or gravy waves?

Attempt to change the subject duly noted. And that Lerner shit is ancient.

Then again, you’re just trolling, so it doesn’t really matter.

@Narad

We need to look at all the data. and the below data points to aliens
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14449080/tic-tac-ufos-four-us-navy-destroyers-california/
and it also means that our physics is simply wrong. These feats are not possible with relativity being true or the Big Bang, or black holes or gravity waves. lightspeed is not a limit. Weve been hoodwinked. Wake up.

If those conspiracy guys are right its even worse. not aliens, but demons, in concert with big pharma and Bill using covid to depopulate the earth and enact the endtimes. But I am a scientist, I wont speculate.

@QBall Your link says nothing about detection of gravity waves. It is just because I cannot understand something, it cannot be true.
Nobody have ever captured a real UFO. When this happens, one can speculate their effect to physics,

Your link says nothing about detection of gravity waves. It is just because I cannot understand something, it cannot be true.

Gravitational radiation was effectively demonstrated by Hulse & Taylor long before LIGO. Like I said, he’s just trolling.

Gads but Facebook is awful for this sort of thing; another part of the phenomena is that it’s become largely populated by Boomers and above for some reason (at any rate, it’s the social media site most popular with them), who tend to be the most gullible when it comes to anything on the Internet. Which is funny, because, as this tweet mentions:

“Your parents in 1996: Don’t trust ANYONE on the Internet.

Your parents in 2016: Freedom Eagle dot Facebook says Hillary invented AIDS.”

And yeah, social media moderation is terrible. Somehow it almost always misses actual hate and instead gets people who are arguing with Nazis, or getting mad at people who are abusing them and throwing slurs at them, for instance. I’m not on Facebook all that much these days (I actually deleted my account and started a new one at one point) – I drop in and post now and then, and do some scrolling to see friends’ kids and whatnot – but I’ve noticed that their ban-hammer has gotten a lot more sensitive, and for weird stuff. I’ve never even run afoul of it before, but a little while back I got a message telling me I was banned from “going live or advertising for 30 days” (which, like, okay, lol) because of a Jefferey Dahmer joke meme I posted back in Novemeber, around Thanksgiving. Yet all the anti-vax crap and political misinformation is just hunky-dory, apparently.

“because of a Jefferey Dahmer joke”

The preparation and presentation of the perfect boneless feetloaf is no joke.

Ha. Yes, it was a joke similarly in bad taste (haha), but harmless, but apparently fell under “glorifying terrorism/mass murder/etc.” A friend of a friend posted it as an experiment – apparently that goofy widely shared meme just got marked for some reason – and got slapped as well. Go figure.

Well, to be fair, it does require a modicum more than two feet for the average family of four; The dicken tenders are the way to maximize salience and protein but they are quite out of my price reach.

Now that I think about it, there was something really wrong with that guy; No practical grocer sense whatsoever.

Actually, I guess I was truamatized (??) as a young child. I had seen part of some late-night movie {maybe with Sammy Davis (jr?) } where some fat guy was fed some ground up dude through a funnel.

I was too embarrassed to tell my parents why they always had to drag me kicking and screaming to some ‘fancy’ restaurant but I had got it into my head that they were serving people — I think most {normal, or otherwise} people have a natural revulsion to cannibalism.

I laugh and joke about the cheezy 80’s movies but there was another one that really did bite hard and sticks to my ribs — that one supposedly based on a true story about the soccer team crashed in the mountains and they ate each other. Well, only the dead team mates. For the most part.

“apparently that goofy widely shared meme just got marked for some reason”

I’m curious. Was it plain text or an image? That is, are they blocking links or actively filtering words? I made an account a few years ago to check some profiles: As soon as the email was flooded with “wanna be friends with this person” I was out. I ‘assume’ that the peeps I was lurking on also got a message and in one instance that would be a bad thing.

I do wish they had considered good old fashioned anti-vaccine books (both paper and e-books) by anti-vaccine physicians in their analysis. Both Thomas and Sears have sold a ton of their anti-vaccine books to parents who will never be convinced to vaccinate. These books are in libraries as well. Plus Thomas’ YouTube channel has 1.4 million followers and he now has his own bi-weekly online show that appears to be popular as well. Then again, it’s even harder to “de-platform” a book.

They’re the Center for Countering Digital Hate. Their focus is online misinformation. That’s not to say books aren’t important, but it’s not their sphere.

Their part is digital. If they can help there, that’s a lot.

There are certainly other influencers they’re not targeting at this point.

Sorry Dorit…I’m just being crotchety this morning. It is very true that a lot of people are getting scared out of COVID-19 vaccine by what’s on social media by the 12 listed.

Hi Dr. Hickie, I agree, I have some quarrels with the CCDH’s methodology too. But they have succeeded in bringing the issue to a larger arena than ever before, in my opinion.

would you people be so supportive of this post if, the NRA, GWPF, Kock Foundation etc. called for the de-platforming of their opponents for misinformation ? (I mean how many of you were told by gun control groups that the Boulder shooter had an AR-15 rifle, fyi he had a pistol).

The New York Times actually denied science when it claimed that ‘greenland’ was never green.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/us/politics/senator-ron-johnson-has-spread-misinformation-on-the-virus-the-election-the-capitol-riot-even-greenlands-greenness.html

But a science paper published a week before the NYT article that denied science, was published proving greenland was green, you know trees and stuff.

https://phys.org/news/2021-03-scientists-stunned-beneath-mile-deep-greenland.html

Would you advocate that the NYT be de-platformed for misinformation.

So if you de-platform the opposition ‘science’ to conform to only ‘acceptable’ how long will your science be acceptable or unacceptable or will your now ‘acceptable’ science change. What’s next unacceptable things book, well……Dr. Seuss, movies, well…. Dumbo ,TV shows, well ……..
Big Bang Theory.

“Appeasement is feeding the alligator and hoping he eats you last.”

SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL

It’s not that difficult to see why people who witnessed the Boulder shooter in action might’ve thought he had a rifle. The AR-556 isn’t exactly your typical household defense weapon.

https://ruger.com/products/ar556Pistol/models.html

As for dumbass analogies, when gun control advocates (some of whom admittedly can be prone to false hype and misuse of data) start approaching antivax levels of deceit and reap $$$ in doing so, social media platforms will be justified in cracking down on them as well.

I read a couple summaries of gun control results recently but couldn’t find the links. One point was that the Clinton era ban on assault rifles and large magazines was starting to show a benefit by reducing the number of deaths per shooting incident. This was because enough time had passed that people buying guns weren’t able to get large magazines for them.

The other point was that large capacity magazines (which could be used on rifles like the AR-15, machine pistols like the AR556, and more regular automatic pistols as well) were a bigger predictive factor in the number of deaths than the use of an assault rifle.

“This was because enough time had passed that people buying guns weren’t able to get large magazines for them.”

“At the time” being the key phrase. Now, it is nothing to 3-d print a lower or a simple bullet bucket. see: Cody Wilson

https://youtu.be/6i-nMWgBUp0?t=6

that the Boulder shooter had an AR-15 rifle, fyi he had a pistol

(check that the AR-556 pistol is)
A machine pistol. A subcategory of submachineguns.
At least half the models are chambered for assault rifle ammo (NATO 5.56 mm). The other models sport a hunting rifle caliber.

Show me a picture of you wearing such a “pistol” into a shoulder holster, then we can talk about proper terminology.

Also, for someone who berates us for not caring about people suffering, you seem utterly flippant about mass shooting.

(check that the AR-556 pistol is)
A machine pistol. A subcategory of submachineguns.

No, it’s semi-auto off the shelf, hence the simple purchase.

There seems to be a gun nerd definition involving the basic structure of the chamber and it’s relationship with the barrel? Seems a bit like saying ‘Hah, they said he was stabbed with a katana but the joke’s on them, it was a nodachi’.

Deplatforming disinformation dozen is not about antiscientific statements. It is about endangering public health.

Eye-witnesses reported to CNN that he had a weapon that looked like an AR-15. He had an AR-556, which looks a lot like an AR-15, and there are similar reasons for gun control advocates to object to it. Wrong in detail, but not like they were claiming he had an AR-15 when he actually had a hunting knife, which is a closer analogy. (On the other hand, they should make the effort to correct themselves moving forward).

The NYT articles are not contradictory. They article does not claim that Greenland was never at any point in geologic history green, merely that it was named Greenland as a marketing ploy. The timescales of the two articles differ by several orders of magnitude. No science denial present.

Further, de-platforming is not being called for when simple errors or isolated instances of being wrong occur. It’ is for when there is a concerted and deliberate effort to pump out misinformation that can cause significant harm.

And I have no problems if similar left-leaning organizations got de-platformed for legitimate reasons. Occupy Democrats, for example, has a long history of misinformation and would be a prime candidate.

Winston Churchill is not someone who I would quote admiringly even if he had said that, which he didn’t, he was a poor historian, sexist, racist, and believed Britain should retain it’s empire. His role in winning WWII is vastly overstated, his aides had to stop him attempting to micromanage the business of fighing the war, which would have been catastrophic as his ideas would have cost huge numbers of lives with no chance of success. Oh and he was incredibly vain. I could go on.

There’s also the little matter of at least exacerbating to an extreme level the Bengal famine, resulting in the deaths of millions itself. “Well, if they didn’t breed like rabbits…” Yes, pretty racist, agreed. The hero worship is unwarranted IMO.

Somebody just shared this with me. Mike Yeadon and “America’s Frontline Doctors” fearmongering about the COVID-19 vaccines.

But all the other people, those in good health and younger than 60 years, perhaps a little older, they don’t perish from the virus. In this large group, it’s wholly unethical to administer something novel and for which the potential for unwanted effects after a few months is completely uncharacterized.

“In no other era would it be wise to do what is stated as the intention.

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/exclusive-former-pfizer-vp-to-aflds-entirely-possible-this-will-be-used-for-massive-scale-depopulation/?fbclid=IwAR2w0C9hFIqqUDthnvrsK0LgUENnn_CtLa_XsKIqTWOj__jaZqnrzIkptE4

I’m puzzled by the absence of correlation between the ramping up of childhood and adult vaccination programs in recent decades, and the lack of “massive-scale depopulation”. World population continues to grow albeit at lower rates than in the past (currently increasing just over 1% a year).

If we’re to turn the corner and experience actual depopulation on even a submassive scale, we’re going to need a helluva lot more vaccines.

Thankfully there are thousands of new ones (millions?) in the Pharma pipeline, so eventually global business elites will succeed in their sinister plan to make quadrillions more dollars by eliminating their customer base.

Based on personal experience with COVID-19, I have choice words for those Fartline DogTurds and their dangerous lies.

No what-about-ism to my post. It was a simple question, with a couple of examples of groups or news items that were not true, that by the standards set forth in this post, should be de-platformed, if it weren’t for double standards some people would have no standards. My nym, I believe that is the abbreviation for the New York Mets. I hope for your sake RS isn’t your name or maybe you live in Gielinor.

Dorit You posted on the last page/post that ICAN took in over 3 million dollars in donations as if that were a mark of some how corrupt they were. Just two gun control groups take in over 40 million dollars Momsdemandaction, Everytown for gun safety and in just this one gun incident produces the same level of deceit.

As to squirrels point, knives kill more people then rifles (ar-15 etc). The real reason gun deaths have gone up is due to a law from 1970, that made the importation of cheap small caliber hand guns illegal (Saturday Night Specials and gang made Zio guns, usually made from car antennas). Those gun were of a small caliber shorter barrel and wildly inaccurate and less lethal. Since that time only higher caliber guns were available, with barrels of a longer length making the gun more accurate and more lethal, the newer guns were 3 times as expensive and were stolen more often with the influx of illegal drugs added to the availability of the new deadlier guns with the money fueling the gun trade, gangs made more money and needed to protect their turf an escalation of guns was the natural outcome. If you are so inclined, a quick search of the FBI UCR will show the homicide rate exploding following the passage of that law. The law of unintended consequences.

@ Scott Allen

Lots of things happened from date law past. For those who attribute autism to increase in vaccines, two websites found correlation between increase in autism diagnoses and both increase in sales of organic foods and use of cell phones. The world is more complex. In China a mad man attack a mass of people with a hatchet, not died as they could get away, fend off attack, etc. Yep, small guns are involved in killings,, knives as well; but mass killings involve some sort of assault weapon. And many killings and suicides aren’t planned; but moment of anger or depression and a gun at home. Less likely such incidents would often occur if no gun around, some, of course, but much fewer.

By the way, do you understand the 2nd Amendment. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Some people believe they need weapons to fight against an oppressive government; but the Constitution gives Feds authority to call up the militias against domestic insurgence, which has actually happened.
Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

And it says the “right to bear arms.” Well, I did quite a search and “to bear arms” only refers to militia, today national guard and military. I’ve never heard a sheriff call a posse, “come on boys, let’s bear arms and get those bank robbers.” Or someone calling a friend and saying “lets bear arms and get us a deer.” So, if one takes the term literally, ignoring the first part “A well-regulated militia”, then Americans should have a right to hand grenades, 50 calibrate armor piercing machine guns, surface to air missiles, antitank bazookas, even chemical weapons, etc. All included in phrase “arms race.”

And in colonial times various townships prohibited keeping gunpowder in town, bringing rifles into churches, etc. And if someone did bring a weapon, often couldn’t use because of wet gunpowder or inaccurate or, at best, kill a couple of people before overwhelmed. I doubt anyone at time could have imagined someone getting up in a room in a Las Vegas hotel and killing 60 or more and wounding even more.

The fact is that on a per capita basis the U.S. outranks all technologically advanced democracies in killings by far. We are a violent people and guns make it easier. Having, for instance, background checks on all gun sales is just plain common sense. Currently, someone just released from prison or a mental hospital can go to a gun fair or order online or in some communities purchase over-the-counter with a half-assed background check.

So gun control groups campaigning for REASONABLE controls on type of weapon and who sold to is quite different from ICAN, a group who totally ignores science and if they got their way we would return to days with far more deaths, disabilities, medical costs, economic costs, etc, all more or less reduced or completely controlled by vaccines. So, reasonable gun control legislation vs antiscoience, anti public health, stupidity. Oops, I guess that includes you.

To start off with what part of the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” is ambiguous to you? It is not ambiguous to the Supreme Court, that the right, is for the individual person to be armed. And just as there are limits/exceptions to the other 10 amendments, (the 1st and the 4th and the 5th are not absolute. You can’t yell ‘fire in a movie theater, the police can search your house without a search warrant, the police don’t need to advise you of your miranda warnings, I am sure that Dorit can advise you of that) so too are there limits to the 2nd amendments (and it might come as a surprise to you that some citizens are allowed to possess those weapons you mentioned).

ALL gun purchases are subject to a FBI back ground check, you are not allow to purchase a firearm on the inter net (again you were mislead by gun control groups) but you must go thru a FFA licensed dealer, just as you are required at a gun store. You can not sell a firearm to anyone (private sale) without going thru a FFA licensed dealer (as they will conduct a FBI background check for you) you can not buy a firearm for a friend (its call a straw man purchase and is a federal crime, you can only give a gun to wife/husband or son or daughter). If you were just released from prison you would fail a FBI background check as your arrest record will show up in the federal data base. As to your argument about a mental institution most states have enacted what is called a “red flag” laws that allows states attorney generals to flag the FBI system to prevent or hold your back ground check up to 15 days to review it. However some civil liberality groups are challenging that under HIPPA.

To your point on the FBI back ground check, the suspect in Boulder and the Islamic shooters in Florida and California were both being watched by the FBI but that speaks more to the incompetent of the FBI than anything.

Yes the County Sheriff does have the authority to gather people to form a posse. It is written in federal code call the “posse comitatus act” and was enacted in 1878 one of its provision is to authorize local sheriffs to form ‘posses’ to enforce state and local laws, The law also forbids federal troops to enforce laws. I will quote from the law ‘From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws’ this law has been upheld several times and supersedes your Clause 15 and 16 by none other then the US Supreme Court. You should be happy that the ‘posse comitatus act’ exist as it is the law that prevented Trump from calling out US troops in Portland and other cites. As to your claim that you have never heard of a sheriff calling out a posse, it would probably surprise you to know that most sheriffs keep an up to date list of qualified persons who are trained to assist law enforcement.

As you are arrogant, I have waited to use your own words for over a month at this moment after more and more states have ended the lock down, mask mandate, crowd control etc. Cases and deaths are down not up,I quote you

“ Though, except for like you, the rest of us can’t make absolute claims; but if Osterholm is right, which I happen to agree, and we have an explosion of cases starting in March, perhaps, even doubling the now 500,000 deaths, I doubt you will post a comment admitting you were wrong.

Again, a simple question: If a surge develops that kills and causes long COVID in a huge number of people, will you admit you were wrong? Simple question ASSHOLE!”

So are you willing to admit you were wrong? So are you willing to do the walk of shame and I won’t call you names.

Dorit said, too, that officers took 800 000 to themselves. Seems like Pierre LeWayne to me, though the scale is smaller.

It looks like a lot of people are bringing guns to the knife fight.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

Knives lead rifles but the top 3 categories from 2019 were:

handguns …. 6368
Firearms type not stated …. 3281
Knives or cutting instruments … 1476

Then we get to Other, Personal weapons, and Blunt objects followed by:

Rifles ………. 364
Shotguns ….. 200

and various other categories.

Since the Democrats are in control of the government, it looks like the CDC and NIH are finally going to do some significant research on gun violence in the U.S.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/27/us/politics/gun-violence-research-cdc.html

The agencies are now financing nearly two dozen studies, though backers of the research say the money is a pittance compared with the breadth of the problem.

“Millions of dollars have been put forth trying to figure out how do we eradicate cancer; we’ve got to be able to do the same with gun violence,” said Representative Lucy McBath, Democrat of Georgia, who won election in 2018 by promising to end gun violence after her 17-year-old son was shot and killed.

“We’ve got to be able to give the C.D.C. and the N.I.H. the ability to study the implications and get that raw data, the grave implications of gun violence,” she added, “just like we do in any other public health crisis.”

@ Q-Ball

You write: “bringing up Mercolas million dollar profits while ignoring the billiondollar profits of big pharma is the best example of cherrypicking I have seen in a while. Are you by any chance a brilliant scientist? Orac has mentioned before that he doesnt get paid by big pharma despite all the shilling he does. It baffles me.”

First, I agree that Big Pharm’s profits are exorbitant. Actually I’ve been a member of Public Citizen for over 30 years, a non-profit group founded by Ralph Nader, who have gone after Big Pharma for both obscene profits and sometimes presenting data to FDA that is incomplete, i.e., hiding data that, for instance, includes serious side-effects. However, Big Pharma also markets many medicines that benefit us, e.g., insulin, chemotherapy, monoclonal antibodies, etc. Still, their costs are outrageous; but they still benefit us. Mercola is just one person, so, while Big Pharma represents a huge number of employees, directors, research units, and stock holders, on a per capita basis, Mercola does quite well. According to some accounts he is worth $100 million. And his profit margin is huge because he doesn’t run expensive clinical trials to get through the FDA and his manufacturing costs are minimal. No FDA requirements for purity, dosage, contaminants, etc. And what he sells, at best is harmless; but in many cases where someone with a disease could have been saved, they die or, at least, suffer longer before taking their doctors’s advice.

Perhaps Orac should write about some of the drugs that have been marketed and later taken off the market or some that are questionable today; but his choice of focus doesn’t in any way, shape, or form mean he is shilling for anyone. If a police department has a valid arrest record for drug dealers selling to minors would you criticize them for not dealing with corrupt companies marketing items that hurt and, possibly kill people. I would prefer they go after both. Orac doesn’t need to shill for anyone. He is tenured faculty at a medical school, a cancer surgeon who I’m sure makes good money, well-earned money. He also supervises interns and residents, writes grants, and has, by a quick a dirty search of PubMed 48 articles in peer-reviewed medical journals.

However you choose to think, he focuses on medical science and his papers on this blog show beyond any reasonable doubt that purveyors of alternative medicines, naturopathy, etc. are offering nothing but hype and worthless remedies. By the way, he isn’t alone on this, he is one of many who write attacking unscientific claims and antiscientific claims, both regarding alternative meds and antivaccinationists.

If you don’t like his focus, why bother following this blog? Do you actually carefully read what he writes, including sometimes checking out the links???

In any case, you’ve already demonstrated what a jerk you are by claiming antisemitism and even getting it wrong about Mercola being Jewish. MORON!

I have been writing articles supporting vaccines for many years. Each article often takes me days to do the research, collect the articles, and write. I do it because I believe in in. So, it would be great if someone actually was willing to pay me to do what I choose to do. Unfortunately, just living on Social Security. Oh well.

People will always cling to information and ideas that align with their own personal dogmas, including each one of us if we’re completely honest with ourselves. I am in complete agreement with discrediting misinformation with thoughtful and substantive logic and facts, but this obsessive desire to ban, cancel, deplatform, or whatever the verb du jour happens to be, borders on crazed Torquemada-like tactics. All we can and should do is continue to advance truth and allow others the freedom to hold their own views; however errant they may be.

Yep, next thing you know, they’ll be torturing and burning antivaxers at the stake.

No one ever expects the Spanish Inquisition. 🙁

John you have obviously stumbled on the wrong website if you wanted “substantive logic and facts” and for this little tid bit you posted and you will be labeled an anti vaxxer, ‘All we can and should do is continue to advance truth and allow others the freedom to hold their own views; however errant they may be.”
You want a sample of past postings by this enlightened crowd.

“Keeps the little children from pointing and saying “eww”.

Though in your case it might help to wear 2 diapers.

How’s your cat?.

The Washington Times is engaged in exactly the kind of cherry-picking propagandizing you’d expect from a Trumpy right-wing rag infamous for science-denial on just about every topic. (note the article was from MSNBC news)

Do your own homework.

If you sharply launch a plastic straw at approximately 70 degrees at 5 feet or more, so that it sails in front of the cat, he may leap after it which will improve greatly with practic

Which, of course, is why you’re just repeating the same shit with nothing to say about the post itself.
I suppose “multitasking” means being able to troll while having one hand in your pants.

You make the same mistake that most who don’t understand public health, namely, that one variable is explanatory.

(which is SOP in science) was the be-all and end-all of scientific knowledge on the subject.

Polling data? Clap, clap, clappity clap. What are the error bars? Are the data sets commensurable?

Not very scientific, deary.

Here’s the thing, you dissembling jaqoff…..weaponizing it against its propounders in order to advance your own unsubstantiated bullshit as “fact”.

Because your putty brain seems to believe that if the other party’s answer is wrong….You are a malicious, mendacious sack of crap, attempting to put folk here on the backfoot so they’ll make tactical debating errors which you can then attack. So here’s a better proposition for you: how about you piss off

Narcissistic types don’t care about anyone but themselves. I think Gerg’s shitposting here speaks volumes to just how empty and worthless his real life is.

it’s a pile of fetid dingo kidneys

Though, except for “geniuses” like you,
You don’t have a bet with me, shithead.

You are pathetic. And as I’ve written to Natalie White on other exchanges, I could care less about you as an individual; but you represent a large portion of our population; that is, people who really don’t understand the basics of science or critical thinking; but are ready to attack. By the way, were you supporting the January 6 assault on the Capitol? Wouldn’t surprise me.

It’s hard to believe anyone could be as stupid as you seem

Fuck you.… You are just a pathetic asshole who wants to irritate people and there is every reason to be angry with you, simply you ignore reason and continue to spout bullshit.

Do you have self-carnal knowledge of Sophie?

a meat-smoking, sickly-twisted, soulless lying sack of shit deserving of some rough FTC backdoor love

Welcome to JAQing off Sunday

That is the dumbest motherf*cking self-defensive non sequitur that I have seen in all my natural-born days,

You don’t have a bet with me, shithead

You are pathetic

It’s hard to believe anyone could be as stupid as you seem.

Fuck you

Again, a simple question: If a surge develops that kills and causes long COVID in a huge number of people, will you admit you were wrong? Simple question ASSHOLE!

“I really think it was more the Flying Bonobo Squad’s trying very incompetently to start a land war in Asia, Christine.”

“you have the choice of being pointed and laughed at, or told to fuck off all the way home to Fuckoffsville and die in a fire.”

“Just how STUPID are you?”

Of course it it is, you snivelling little rat-faced git.”

Micelle is all like r/dontstickyourdickinthat

I hope he (Tiger Woods) gets amputated

One can’t help but wonder whether the analogy between a needle and a certain male body part applies too closely to Mr. Heckenlively.”

These were all cut and pasted to this post from a collection over the past 4-5 months. Very intellectual wouldn’t you say?

Indeed. I feel so enlightened by the abundance of wisdom that seems to be so regularly dispensed by my fellow readers. That was quite a collection of quotes. Kudos to you for all the cut and pasting you had to do.

Oh, G-d, Spotts is down to reruns. I’m going to drag out the Twister/HJE Craigslist post if the frottage keeps up.

It’s hard to believe anyone could be as stupid as you seem

I am left wondering whether this remark was made by two different people or whether you just incompetently included it twice in your list of bad sayings.

Tone trolling rarely goes down well here. This blog discusses science, pointing out the deception of grifters, the idiocy of anti-vaccine loons and the incoherence of alternative medicine theories.

What you are after is the “Mommy, someone said rude words to me on the internet today” blog, which is three doors down. The one with the low handle.

Honestly, “John G” isn’t fooling anyone. Yet another slimy antivax circlejerker jUsT bEiNg ReAsOnAbLe, and feigning offense when we don’t huff their gaslighting.

@John G: “but this obsessive desire to ban, cancel, deplatform, or whatever the verb du jour happens to be, borders on crazed Torquemada-like tactics”

LOL. Whatever happened to freedom of association? Or accepting consequences of one’s actions?

Although, yes, I can understand how the entitled mob of raging narcissists would believe it is their Fundamental Right to do whatever they like to anyone they like, and no-one is allowed to tell them otherwise.

Nobody is preventing the loons from standing on their own soapboxes screaming into the void. All we’ve done is tell them they are not welcome on ours, and honestly, to hear them howl, you’d think we’d stomped on their puppies or something.

Because this is how abusers work. By traumatizing their victims—the rest of us—into believing that we’re the ones in the wrong, and that we should apologize to them.

You might want to reflect on that before deciding whose flag you wave.

You are lacking self awareness and the irony is very obvious to everyone, except you.

“Nobody is preventing the loons from standing on their own soapboxes screaming into the void. All we’ve done is tell them they are not welcome on ours, and honestly, to hear them howl, you’d think we’d stomped on their puppies or something.”

The last two posts by Orac are exactly that, preventing people standing on their own soapboxes, by “deplatform, the disinformation dozen”

The last two posts by Orac are exactly that, preventing people standing on their own soapboxes, by “deplatform, the disinformation dozen” [sic]

You’re really not very bright, Spotts. Do you think these people own FB, Twattter, and Yootoob? If the Health Deranger can self-host, so can they.

@ Scott Allen

Yep, surge in deaths didn’t occur in March, though there has been an increase in certain parts of nation. And I’m glad; but wrong? I based my prediction on a lifetime of experience in infectious diseases and epidemiology; but I NEVER claimed absolute certainty and the pandemic isn’t over yet; but I would be extremely happy if it ends and no more lives are lost, neither more suffering from long covid.

As for the Supreme Court, it has a long history of decisions that twist and bend the Constitution. I actually had three undergraduate courses in Constitutional Law many years ago. My undergraduate major was Political Science with a minor in Social Psychology. The Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that Corporations have the same rights as people. The very fact that the two political parties fight for their choice for the Court should say it all, justices don’t rule based on the Constitution; but bend it to their pre-existing ideologies. I could name numerous Court cases that most people today would find reprehensible. My take on the 2nd Amendment is a dozen books on its history and probably a hundred articles, including notes from Framers of Constitution, not what partisan Justices decide.

And you obviously are too stupid to have understood my simple argument, that is, as several of the few decent Supreme Court Justices have said, “The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact, so reasonable gun control is just that. You missed the point that “bear arms” refers to military, not civilians; but if taken literally would mean anyone could own any type of weapon.s

You write: “Yes the County Sheriff does have the authority to gather people to form a posse. It is written in federal code call the “posse comitatus act” and was enacted in 1878 one of its provision is to authorize local sheriffs to form ‘posses’ to enforce state and local laws.” Where did I say he didn’t? I am quite aware of the posse comitus act. All I said is he doesn’t say: “let’s bear arms boys.” I was simply pointing out that civilians never use phrase “bear arms.”

How stupid are you? Don’t you actually read what others write or, perhaps, just don’t understand it???

So, waiting to tell me I was wrong about surge is really stupid, again, I made NO absolute statement; but based my prediction on understanding viruses, infectious diseases, and epidemiology. And science is based on probabilities, not absolutes; but, again, there are a number of COVID variants that are more transmissible and some appear to be more virulent, so, while I would love to be wrong, I’ll wait and see. There have been cases where a doctor had a patient dying, couldn’t do any more and the patient went into spontaneous remission, perhaps, permanently, doesn’t mean the doctor was wrong; but despite best medical knowledge, would be great if patient lives.

In the meantime, I was a volunteer in the Moderna COVID vaccine trial, found out in January I received placebo, got the shots, and now every four weeks I donate plasma for use with COVID hospital patients. Before I was a whole blood donor. I was told each plasma donation can help up to four patients, so, though 75, in good health, hope to donate 10 times or more this year and continue as long as I can. Have you ever donated blood or done anything for others???

Thank you for continuing to prove you ignorance, that you don’t understand what people write. Nope, I didn’t say Sheriffs can’t call out a posse. Nope, I didn’t make any absolute claims regarding the pandemic.

Thank you for reinforcing my fears that many Americans lack understanding and jump to conclusions.

You claimed “Well, I did quite a search and “to bear arms” only refers to militia, today national guard and military. I’ve never heard a sheriff call a posse, “come on boys, let’s bear arms and get those bank robbers.” Actually during this summers riots many sheriffs did exactly that and put those on the list to be on 24 hours notice. And if you have never heard a sheriff call out a posse you have never read history of the US.

You then went on to bang on the Supreme court for past decision, I have not agreed with a few myself, the right to an abortion comes to mind and the justice who wrote the decision used the ‘right to privacy” (there are probably 5 or 6 other ways they could have held up the law that were more applicable). By using that tortured way they opened a pandoras box of other legal challenges based on ‘right to privacy’. But then you could check with Dorit on the better ways to get the “right to an abortion” approved.And just to be clear I think abortions should be legal.

As to you reading notes from the framers I don’t believed you read James Madison one of the writers of the constitution from the federalist #46. Instead you chose to read people who were writing long after Madison and Jefferson were dead.

And here are a few quotes from other people who wrote the constitution.

“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”
– George Washington,

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
– Thomas Jefferson

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
-Benjamin Franklin

“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”
– George Mason,

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry

Those people who actual wrote and approved the constitution said the right to bear arms was a right given to the people.

And again with the insults and I am still waiting for you apology for being wrong or are you waiting for the 6 or 7 wave as I didn’t misinterpret what you wrote, I actual copied what you wrote.

And you might want to quite playing the martyr, some of us have had the real vaccine since September and are subject to the frequent blood lettings, The difference is you wear it as a shield, the rest of do it as our duty, you know the saying about BS, “cows sh*& too they just don’t brag about it.”

As to your other statements on the background check, being able to get a mail order gun or get a gun on the internet or get a gun at a gun show with out a back ground checks or just released felons being able to buy a gun etc. it is obvious you have not fully read the science and the laws so with all the misinformation you posted, probably from gun control groups and website, you and they should be banned from facebook, twitter and google should de-platform all of you. But then you will come up with some excuse about how you were a little bit right or it was my fault because I read what you wrote wrong.

Scott Allen: “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
– Thomas Jefferson

This is a spurious quote. https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/laws-forbid-carrying-armsspurious-quotation

Yeah, but also, those Founding Fathers thought that less than half of the adult American citizens should be allowed to vote, so I’m not going to blindly follow what they thought about guns.

Especially given that they used muskets and cannons, not rifles, rifled hand guns, or weapons with magazines.

It’s interesting that the quotations from the originators of the second amendment mention things like ‘well regulated’ and ‘disciplined’. Two things that don’t seem to apply to the most visible gun owners.

“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”
– George Washington,

I didn’t realize Scott was for gun control.
That’s a perfect argument for regulation, by George Washington himself.

You write: “Yes the County Sheriff does have the authority to gather people to form a posse. It is written in federal code call the “posse comitatus act” and was enacted in 1878 one of its provision is to authorize local sheriffs to form ‘posses’ to enforce state and local laws.” Where did I say he didn’t? I am quite aware of the posse comitus act.

My head is going to explode. The Posse Comitatus Act forbids (most) use of federal forces for state law enforcement. That’s it.

Is it possible to ignore dumb tangents? Please?

Actually, the Posse Comitatus Act “specifically applies only to the United States Army and, as amended in 1956, the United States Air Force.” The Department of the Navy has regulations that generally make the act apply to the Navy and Marines.

Each state probably has its own regulations that allow law enforcement officers to temporarily deputize civilians to form a posse for special situations, but that process is seldom used these days.

the forming and training of local militias for defense purposes goes all the way back to Alfred the Great, but their practical value was limited in the American Revolution and they were eventually superseded by the formation of State National Guard units.

Perhaps Dorit can advise us, but I found this discussion of the second amendment to be interesting.
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-ii/interps/99

Notwithstanding the lengthy opinions in Heller and McDonald, they technically ruled only that government may not ban the possession of handguns by civilians in their homes. Heller tentatively suggested a list of “presumptively lawful” regulations, including bans on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, bans on carrying firearms in “sensitive places” such as schools and government buildings, laws restricting the commercial sale of arms, bans on the concealed carry of firearms, and bans on weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.” Many issues remain open, and the lower courts have disagreed with one another about some of them, including important questions involving restrictions on carrying weapons in public.

You can also make a reasonably evidence-based argument that we should work on limiting access to firearms by people who have committed domestic violence and perhaps cruelty to animals.

“specifically applies only to the United States Army and, as amended in 1956, the United States Air Force.” The Department of the Navy has regulations that generally make the act apply to the Navy and Marines.

I’m probably confused but In The Beginning it was supposed to be a no-no to have a standing army within our nation but required to have an active navy.

It’s all so smeared together now. We have military bases and their influence and CID exude into surrounding communities. IMHO, not usually in a good way.

The Marines were meant as “expeditionary and amphibious operations” for incursions onto foreign soil to clear a path for the Army. But there they are pulling up pot and doing general drug interdiction all over the US.

Delta Force is not supposed to assassinate people on US soil but there was Bo Gritz testifying before the Senate that they had been doing just that {poor Vicky Weaver}.

Joint task forces are, ?? But seem to be a workaround so that one may have encountered soldiers along I-10 just taking people’s stuff and calling it asset forfeiture.

Border patrol, ICE, DEA, local police are all so militarized now that they are a defacto standing army and the greatest current threat; The dumbest, most vicious, most malicious, and most self-serving of all other ‘forces’.

The CIA? I have no clue but that they seem to serve as the ‘muscle’ for corporate interests; running around starting shit all over the world, the only return for the american people being oil, blood, and cheap bananas in hand.

Space Force? We’ll see, but it does not sit right with me: “This is an unauthorized suborbital flight. Prepare to be blasted.”

I can hardly wait for Joe Mercola’s forthcoming blockbuster book, “The Truth About Covid-19”, due out next month.

The book is co-authored by Ronnie Cummins, the co-founder of the Organic Consumers Association, which combines anti-GMO fearmongering with rabid antivaccine advocacy. A sample of Cummins’ wisdom:

“But perhaps you think we shouldn’t worry so much (about Covid-19), since a blockbuster lineup of anti-COVID vaccines are on the way, funded by the Chinese government, Big Pharma and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, likely including some of the same gene engineers who weaponized COVID-19?”

“Never mind that Bill Gates*, Monsanto, the Gene Giants and Big Pharma appear quite willing to join up with Facebook and Google to implement a 24/7 totalitarian medical surveillance state, with everyone injected with a mandatory and expensive COVID-19 vaccine, while the world’s dictators, corporate criminals and billionaires hunker down in their underground mansions and bunkers.”

“Never mind that most flu vaccines up until now don’t work that well, especially against constantly mutating viruses like COVID-19**, or that they’re routinely laced with aluminum adjuvants and mercury preservatives.”

Nevermind.

Oh, and RFK Jr. has written a foreword for the book, since it wouldn’t be a genuine collection of crazy without an RFK Jr. foreword.

*Mercola has gone Full Hysteria Jacket with ravings about Bill Gates. His website currently proclaims that Gates “is hell-bent on undermining life in all of its forms”. It’s a dirty job, but somebody’s gotta do it. 🙂
**not sure what to make of this bizarre non-sequitur.

“is hell-bent on undermining life in all of its forms”

That explains why ET hasn’t yet paid us a visit: Gates frightens them. The dinosaurs learned that the hard way after they outlawed Windows.

“His website currently proclaims that Gates…”

Presumably his Griftware ™ runs on Linux.

I am starting to wonder whether it is a proper anti-vaccine screed unless RFK, Jr writes the forward.

@ Scott Allen

PART 1

You write: “You claimed “Well, I did quite a search and “to bear arms” only refers to militia, today national guard and military. I’ve never heard a sheriff call a posse, “come on boys, let’s bear arms and get those bank robbers.” Actually during this summers riots many sheriffs did exactly that and put those on the list to be on 24 hours notice. And if you have never heard a sheriff call out a posse you have never read history of the US.”

I wrote: “And it says the ‘right to bear arms.’ Well, I did quite a search and “to bear arms” only refers to militia, today national guard and military. I’ve never heard a sheriff call a posse, “come on boys, let’s bear arms and get those bank robbers.” Or someone calling a friend and saying “lets bear arms and get us a deer.” Did the Sheriff’s last summer actually say: “Let’s bear arms?”

And if the 2nd Amendment were intentioned for individual possession of firearms, why does it start with “A Well-Regulated Militia”

You really are STUPID. It is quite clear that I was referring to what a sheriff said when calling up a posse, not whether he could call a posse or not. Are you really that stupid???

In any case, I’ve included a list of articles and books on the 2nd Amendment. See end of this comment.

You write: “(and it might come as a surprise to you that some citizens are allowed to possess those weapons you mentioned).”

I wrote: “So, if one takes the term literally, ignoring the first part “A well-regulated militia”, then Americans should have a right to hand grenades, 50 calibrate armor piercing machine guns, surface to air missiles, antitank bazookas, even chemical weapons, etc. All included in phrase “arms race.”

So, you are saying that individual private citizens can own surface to air missiles, hand grenades, and even chemical weapons, e.g., nerve gas. Really? If one takes “bear arms” literally, then they should be able to own anthrax and even tactical nuclear weapons. You just get stupider and stupider.

And as I already pointed out, the Constitution allows Federal government to call up militia to put down an insurrection.

So, you refer to James Madison and Federalist Paper #46. He writes: “This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. . . . Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.” Obviously he is ignoring Constitution Clause 15 and 16, though admittedly he refers to Americans being armed more than any other people; but, this is before the 2nd Amendment was even written and ignores “A Well-Regulated Militia”:

Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

In any case, as dealt with below, this is the only quote that has any validity.

You wrote: “ALL gun purchases are subject to a FBI back ground check, you are not allow to purchase a firearm on the inter net (again you were mislead by gun control groups) but you must go thru a FFA licensed dealer, just as you are required at a gun store. You can not sell a firearm to anyone (private sale) without going thru a FFA licensed dealer (as they will conduct a FBI background check for you) you can not buy a firearm for a friend (its call a straw man purchase and is a federal crime, you can only give a gun to wife/husband or son or daughter). If you were just released from prison you would fail a FBI background check as your arrest record will show up in the federal data base. As to your argument about a mental institution most states have enacted what is called a “red flag” laws that allows states attorney generals to flag the FBI system to prevent or hold your back ground check up to 15 days to review it.” AND then: “As to your other statements on the background check, being able to get a mail order gun or get a gun on the internet or get a gun at a gun show with out a back ground checks or just released felons being able to buy a gun etc. it is obvious you have not fully read the science and the laws so with all the misinformation you posted, probably from gun control groups and website, you and they should be banned from facebook, twitter and google should de-platform all of you.”

Once more WRONG about background checks:

The following describes content of two Bills passed in House; but probably will be blocked in Senate. All the same, it contradicts what your wrote.

“Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021 would close the “Charleston loophole,” a gap in federal law that lets gun sales proceed without a completed background check if three businesses days have passed . . .The other bill passed Thursday, H.R. 1446, is linked to a shooting in 2015 in Charleston, South Carolina, where a white supremacist used the loophole to obtain firearms he used to kill nine Black people during a Bible study at Mother Emanuel AME Church. The bill would extend the initial background check review period from three to 10 days. . . H.R. 8, a background checks package meant to enhance reviews of those seeking firearms, would not create a registry or other federal mechanisms for review. Instead, the legislation would expand the cases in which a background check is required for the sale or transfer of a firearm, including for private individuals and groups, closing the “Gun Show Loophole.” The requirements would apply to online sales. The bill would make it illegal for anyone who is not a licensed firearm importer, manufacturer or dealer to trade or sell firearms to another person; current federal law requires background checks only for licensed gun dealers. . . Nonlicensed individuals who would like to sell or trade weapons could do so through a licensed firearms dealer who would run the necessary background checks.”

Do you understand what a “loophole” is? Why would they pass a Bill to extend background checks for private individuals . . . [to close] “Gun Show Loophole”. And “to apply to online sales”? And the Bill includes “Nonlicensed individuals who would like to sell or trade weapons could do so through a licensed firearms dealer who would run the necessary background checks.” So, you are WRONG about just about everything. However, one can debate whether 3 days is enough or not; but doesn’t change you are just plain WRONG.

H.R. 8 Available at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22hr+8%22%5D%7D&r=1&s=2

Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021 Available at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1446

Matthew Brown (2021 Mar 11). House passes bills to expand background checks for gun sales and close ‘Charleston loophole’. USA Today. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/11/house-passes-bill-expanding-background-checks-gun-sales/6923667002/

@ Scott Allen

PART 2

And again you write: “I am still waiting for you apology for being wrong or are you waiting for the 6 or 7 wave as I didn’t misinterpret what you wrote I actual copied what you wrote above: “As you are arrogant, I have waited to use your own words for over a month at this moment after more and more states have ended the lock down, mask mandate, crowd control etc. Cases and deaths are down not up,I quote you

“ Though, except for like you, the rest of us can’t make absolute claims; but if Osterholm is right, which I happen to agree, and we have an explosion of cases starting in March, perhaps, even doubling the now 500,000 deaths, I doubt you will post a comment admitting you were wrong. Again, a simple question: If a surge develops that kills and causes long COVID in a huge number of people, will you admit you were wrong? Simple question ASSHOLE!” So are you willing to admit you were wrong? So are you willing to do the walk of shame and I won’t call you names.”

Once more you miss that I clearly stated: “the rest of us can’t make absolute statements.” As I explained, science is based on probabilities. When the National Weather Service predicts 70% chance of thundershowers in a specific area, if they don’t occur, should they apologize? Prediction models can NEVER take into account all possible variables affecting something; but good ones are much more likely to be right than not. Do you understand the difference between absolute black and white claims and science based probability models.? And from two days ago: “The nation is recording a seven-day average of about 57,000 new Covid-19 cases per day, a 7% jump over the last week, Walensky said. From Berkeley Lovelace Jr. (2021 Mar 26). warns of possible Covid surge as U.S. cases increase by 7%. CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/26/cdc-director-warns-of-possible-covid-surge-as-us-cases-increase-by-7percent.html

As I wrote before, I would be delighted if the pandemic ends; but based on having studied pandemics going back to the Middle Ages, understanding viruses, and epidemiology, and with the advent of new variants, we are NOT out of the woods yet; but it is stupid to expect an apology. Next time the weather report is wrong in your local newspaper, do phone them and ask for an apology.

You write: “And you might want to quite playing the martyr, some of us have had the real vaccine since September and are subject to the frequent blood lettings, The difference is you wear it as a shield, the rest of do it as our duty, you know the saying about BS, “cows sh*& too they just don’t brag about it.”

Actually I was and am a volunteer in the Moderna COVID clinical trial. Last September received my first shot, then second in October. Pretty sure I got the placebo. When FDA approved they called us in in January and we got the real shot, second shot in February. I waited two weeks, enough time for antibodies to build, and donated plasma at local blood center. Four weeks later, today, made second plasma donation, and intend to continue every four weeks as long as able to. I am 75. They tested my plasma and antibody count HIGH, so will be used by up to four hospitalized patients. And having agreed to be in the Moderna study for 25 weeks, get called in for blood tests, fill in questionnaire weekly, and every four weeks, nurse phones with questions. So, not a martyr; but as an epidemiologist who believes in public health and preventive medicine, I volunteered and as someone who believes in helping others, I have donated whole blood almost 100 times and now plasma. And now that I am confident I have high antibodies, I phoned several Food Banks and soup kitchens offering to volunteer.

As for my critique of the Supreme Court, it is based on three semesters of undergraduate Constitutional Law courses as well as reading numerous Supreme Court histories, books and law review articles. There is an excellent 6-part series on Netflix entitled: Amend: The Fight for America. It describes just a few Supreme Court outrageous decisions; e.g., Dred Scott 1857, Slaughter-House 1873, Cruikshank 1876, Civil Rights 1881, Plessy vs Ferguson 1896, Buck v Bell 1923 and more. But, as I already wrote, the Supreme Court’s decision, the vast majority, “interpreted” the Constitution to favor wealth over people, government over people, etc. There have been a few good Justices and decisions; but the overwhelming majority NO. And I just learned that something called “Shadow Dockets” are cases that the Supreme Court takes on in secret, renders an unsigned decision with NO discussion of legal precedents or justification and worse, that while seldom used in the past, the current Court dominated by Trump appointees is using on a regular basis. Yikes! Secret decision.

Lawrence Hurley, Andrew Chung, Jonathan Allen (2021 Mar 23). The ‘shadow docket’: How the U.S. Supreme Court quietly dispatches key rulings. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-shadow-insight/the-sha…-the-u-s-supreme-court-quietly-dispatches-key-rulings-idUSKBN2BF14U

Here are just three books in my collection:

Kermit L. Hall (1992). The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court. Oxford University Press. Reuters. Available at:

Peter Irons (1996). A People’s History of the Supreme Court. Viking.

Geoffrey R. Stone (2004). Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime. Norton.

Just one example from Stone. When we entered World War I Wilson had two laws past, Espionage and Sedition Acts. People were actually thrown in prison for simply saying publicly that World War I was just to enrich the corporations and the Supreme Court upheld this. The most important Amendment to the Constitution to ensure Democracy is the 1st. If one can’t dissent from government, then no democracy. Book is a great read.

As for abortion, something we may agree on. I actually wrote an OpEd on it. You might find it of interest: Joel A. Harrison (2020 Feb 24). Reader’s Editorial: Abortion is a 1st Amendment Issue. East County Magazine. Available at: https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/reader’s-editorial-abortion-1st-amendment-issue

However, I also agree with “The Right to Privacy”. One could start with the 3rd Amendment which prohibits housing of military in private homes; but if one doesn’t have privacy in ones home or over ones own body then what type of freedom do we have? The right to privacy and 14th Amendment apply to gays in their bedrooms, birth control, and more.

@ Scott Allen

PART 3

Now for your quotes about personal ownership and guns from the Founding Fathers.

First, I pay NO attention to Jefferson. He was main author of Anti-Federalist papers, against establishment of a Federal government, so obviously he would want States to determine. In addition, he wasn’t even elected President by free white votes; but one based on electoral college which, in turn, was based on the 3/5 vote given to slaves, written into our Constitution and only requiring 650,000 dead, Civil War, to amend. And, while Adams and his son boarded a ship sailing for France in midwinter Atlantic, very dangerous, and when a British frigate was spotted stood on deck with loaded muskets, when Federal troops nearby Jefferson fled.

You quote: “A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”
– George Washington,

According to the National Archives site Founder’s Online, during his Jan. 8, 1790, speech to Congress, Washington said: “A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.” “The context of Washington’s speech, given in January 1790 to Congress, focused on the establishment of national defense and the idea that the new nation shouldn’t have to depend on foreign entities for its defense.”

Tonyaa Weathersbee (2020 Jun 20). Fact check: George Washington didn’t say citizens should arm themselves against government. USA Today. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/20/fact-check-washington-quote-second-amendment-taken-out-context/3222186001/

You quote: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
-Benjamin Franklin

Wikiquote: “Widely attributed to Franklin on the Internet, sometimes without the second sentence. It is not found in any of his known writings, and the word “lunch” is not known to have appeared anywhere in English literature until the 1820s, decades after his death. The phrasing itself has a very modern tone and the second sentence especially might not even be as old as the internet. Some of these observations are made in response to a query at Google Answers.”

Wikiquote. Benjamin Franklin. Available at: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin#Attributed

You quote: “To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason,

“Forty years ago, when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them . . . Why should we not provide against the danger of having our militia, our real and natural strength, destroyed?

[George Mason] Debate in Virginia Ratifying Convention (1788 Jun 14) Available at: https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_12s27.html

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry

From the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1788
“Among other things: Henry lays out his concerns: 1) the Preamble is ordained by “We the People,” and not “We the States,” 2) the Constitution departs too far from the Articles of Confederation, 3) representation in the House is inadequate, 4) the rights of the people are not properly protected by a bill of rights from “the commands of tyrants” and “disciplined armies,” 5) the amendment process in Article V is flawed since it requires more than a majority to amend, 6) Article I, Section 8 supports a standing army and unlimited taxation, 7) the delegates in Philadelphia exceeded their authority, 8) the people of Virginia are unable to change their form of government, 9) there is “the probability of the President’s enslaving America,” and 10) there is “no true responsibility” in the Constitution, specially since Congress will probably fix the elections.” So, not only was Patrick Henry against the Constitution but maybe a bit nuts claiming President would enslave populace.

Teaching American History. Day-by-Day Summary of the Virginia Ratifying Convention. Available at: https://teachingamericanhistory.org/resources/ratification/virginiatimeline/

In any case, you post quotes, either fake, or taken out of context. Good for you, just one more example of your inability to do the homework, just grab at anything that supports your position.

So, let’s summarize:

You continue to misread what I wrote concerning right to bear arms, not ability of sheriff to call a posse.

You claim some citizens can own hand grenades, surface to air missiles, etc. Really?

You cite James Madison Federalist # 46; but ignore that he was writing to get the Constitution accepted, ignored its clauses on the militia, and was written prior to adoption of Bill of Rights, including 2nd Amendment, “A well-regulated militia”

You makes claims about background checks, e.g., gun show purchases, private party purchases, online purchases that are just plain WRONG

You continue to ask for an apology of my prediction of a surge of COVID cases in March, which I clearly stated wasn’t an absolute position; but based on probabilities developed from knowledge of viruses, infectious diseases, and epidemiology. And there has recently been an increase in cases. Weather reports are also based on science and probabilities, and aren’t always right, no one ever requests an apology from a meteorologist. I hope the pandemic ends as I value human life; but it is too early to tell.

You partly agree that Supreme Court sometimes rules wrongly; but based on three courses in Constitutional Law and many books and articles, you are wrong, they have ruled by bending and twisting the Constitution based on their own “morals” and biases.

And you give several quotes from Founding Fathers on “individual right to gun ownership:” but one totally fake, others taken out of context.

So, if you were a student in any course I taught, YOU WOULD FLUNK!

Note. I highly recommend the first two articles!

The Second Amendment & Militia
Articles and Books

Articles:

Carl T. Bogus (1998 Winter). The Hidden History of the Second Amendment. U.C. Davis Law Review; Vol. 31 (No. 2): 309-408. Available at: http://malvinartley.com/PDF%20Files/THE%20HIDDEN%20HISTORY%20OF%20THE%20SECOND%20AMENDMENT.pdf

Keith A. Ehrman & Dennis A. Henigan (1989). The Second Amendment in the Twentieth Century: Have You Seen Your Militia Lately? University of Dayton Law Review; Vol. 15 (No. 1). Available at: https://amgoa.org/legal-reviews/Henigan-2nd-Amend-in-20th-Cent-anti-gun.pdf

Alexander Hamilton (1788 Jan 10). Federalist Paper No. 29. Available at: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0186

James Madison (1788 Jan 29). Federalist Paper No. 46. Available at: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0261

Books:

Osha Gray Davidson (1993). Under Fire: The NRA & the Battle for Gun Control. Henry Holt.

Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz (2018). Loaded: A Disarming History of the Second Amendment. City Lights

Dennis A, Hennigan, E, Bruce Nicholson, David Hemenway (1995). Guns and the Constitution: The Myth of Second Amendment Protection for Firearms in America. Aletheia Press.

Tanya K. Metaska (1997). Safe not Sorry: Keeping Yourself and Your Family Safe in a Violent Age. Harper Collins. [Executive Director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action]

Pete Shields (1981). Guns Don’t Die—People Do. Priam Books.

Josh Sugarman (1992). NRA National Rifle Association: Money, Firepower, Fear. National Press Books.

Franklin E. Zimring & Gordon Hawkins (1987). The Citizen’s Guide to Gun Control. Macmillan.

I only know who the first four are & I was already antivaccine before I knew about any of them.

Nobody fed me “disinformation” that made me “turn antivax”; I’m antivax because I started searching on pubmed, because my daughter died less than 24 hours after vaccines & my son’s brain swelled after vaccines & he regressed. When I first started searching, I still wasn’t antivax. That process took about a decade, after learning about Immunogenomics, Vaccinomics (Poland), cytokine profiles (SIDS., ASD, SCZ, ALZ), increased infant mortality after vaccination (Aaby), etc.

My first experience finding epidemiological flaws wasn’t even in a study about vaccines, it was in the CREST study. Then the tobacco industry studies. Then comparing those to the vaccine studies. It took years. Now I’m antivax. (I hadn’t seen a Wakefield or Grier study until the last few years).

If it makes you feel better to think that people are antivax because of some “dozen” that can be blamed, then have at it I guess but stopping them won’t make a difference.

@ Christine Kincaid

As I wrote before, though I find it unlikely a vaccine was responsible for what happened to your twins, as opposed to you, given so many possible factors that could play a role, maybe, given your twins extreme low birthweights and prematurity, I accept the vaccine may have been a contributing factor; but you, instead of looking at your twins as outliers, that maybe additional research will add extremely low birthweight and prematurity to contraindication for vaccinating, you are antivax. In other words, you ignore the history of vaccines, the risks from natural infections, the overwhelming research around the world that vaccines are one of the safest products on the market. Yep, as with anything, there are rare, albeit real risks; but compared to risks from natural diseases, vaccines are the best bet.

And I left out that you may have also passed on the genetic problems you mentioned long ago to your twins.

So, what makes you despicable is your absolutist overgeneralized stance on vaccines.

Why don’t you find another blog to keep saying the same thing. You are pathetic.

And, by the way, I’ve refuted numerous of your guesses at what happened; but you ignore, e.g., that platelets reduced risk of inflammation. Nope, they increase risk of inflammation and on and on it goes.

I think you’re giving much too much in suggesting any vaccine had anything to do with her daughter’s death, classified as SIDS and, if I recall correctly, after she, Christine, stopped her oxygen supply. Vaccines aren’t linked to SIDS.

@Joel Harrison: “Why don’t you find another blog to keep saying the same thing.”

Because Christine gets her #PoorPersecutedMartyr complex fed here. Copiously.

If you were hoping to achieve a “Mr Creosote” inflexion point, forget it. Narc appetites are endless.

Maybe if y’all put her on a starvation diet instead?

Eh, it’s just another example of how she constantly changes her story. You’ll notice this time around she’s leaving out how her mommy told her it was the vaccines.

“My first experience finding epidemiological flaws”

The hubris involved in that one statement……

@Christine Kincaid. You just repeat things shown wrong:
a) Aaby worked in a developing country with high mortality. You should compare apples with apples
b) ALZ have nothing to do with cytokines, Plaques form without microglia
c) ASD is caused by massive differences in the brain. Glial pruning of lack of it cannot explain that
d) For SCZ you can show a citation
e) For SIDS, vaccines actually seems prevent it
Tobacco studies were actually brave mavericks challenging consensus. Very similar than antivax scientists. There were smoking beagles, which was purposefully bad animal study.

@ has:

I think you’re correct. DFTT
Anti-vaxxers have emotional reasons to continuously assail SBM, Orac and us with their ‘science’:
they want to DISCOUNT vaccine supporters who “caused” their children’s problems and
PROVE that they have superior knowledge, wisdom, research that therefore cancels SBM and elevates them instead..

HOWEVER their frenzied scrubbing of medical data bases somehow omits research that
makes the vaccines-cause-autism hypothesis EXTREMELY HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
In 2001, my cousin worried about vaccines- he had a newborn child who arrived after many years of waiting and asked me because he knew I studied relevant science. I said that I doubted the current climate of fear because of research about development of the brain. He vaccinated his son but was surprised when Andy was actually struck off.

Anti-vaxxers- be they alt med entrepreneurs, activists or garden variety trolls- scour the internet but entirely miss important research that reveals the genetic and pre-natal origins of ASDs. It’s a huge field that includes how genes set up what happens in the PFC in the second and third trimesters and subsequent development, using imaging studies,
comparative biology, how meds/ infection/ nutrient deficiency interfere with normal development and enhanced early observation of infants that can predict later dx of ASD.
I’ve often mentioned researchers and universities engaged in this work**:
This is NOT new stuff. A few of the scientists have been working for 20, 30 or 40 years.100s of studies.
Again, they’re primarily about prenatal events NOT what happens at age1 or 2.

** Eric Courchesne, Ed Lein, Sally Ozonoff, Kristina Aldridge and their many associates and students at UCSD, UWashington, UMissouri UCLA Also institutes devoted to this research in CA, MA, WA. Various lectures and presentations available by them that are easy to find on the internet ( esp Courchesne and Ozonoff). ..

..

The sheer number of antivax memes Christine has promoted on RI (comparing tobacco industry “science” to published studies on immunization, flogging Peter Aaby etc. etc. ad nauseum) makes it obvious that she glommed onto them from antivaccine websites. Those sites in turn got most or all of them from the Disinformation Dozen and/or similar preachers of antivax nonsense.

Anyone who claims to have done unbiased “research” by looking up articles on PubMed would have been exposed not only to the likes of Peter Aaby and the Geiers, but also the vastly greater number of quality studies validating the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

It’s not credible that Christine made a good faith effort to uncover the facts. She looks for anything that seems to confirm her prejudices and disregards the rest, while acquiring a grievously warped misunderstanding of epidemiology, immunogenomics and other fields.

@ Dr Dangerous:

Exactly
Our resident anti-vaxxers behave very similarly to alt med proselytisers: they disregard salient facts including whole areas of investigation, they mis-represent research to fit their models, they feign expertise, inflating their CVs and making EGREGIOUS mistakes repeatedly

I often refer to PRN’s CEO discussing the great Italian artist he calls “TITAN”, not “Titian”, his anglicised name or “Tiziano”, in the original Italian- but “TITAN” ! He brags about his expertise in art history and repeats the same error many times which illustrates that he sloppily misread the name as a more familiar word. Similarly, he struggles with names from physiology or chemistry- although he’s an ‘expert’- and can’t pronounce foreign names although he “has” a PhD when most candidates need to learn at least one language to pass through. I doubt he studied any of these topics formally.

They give themselves away.
When simple facts, quotes, general knowledge and easily checked details are handled so miserably and cavalierly, can we trust anything they say about health or vaccines? Sceptics don’t need a science degree to see BS.

. ,

You’re kinder than I am, saying it was simply not a good faith effort. If she went looking at studies in 2005 and somehow didn’t run across a Wakefield study until the last few years, when his study was done in 1998 and not retracted until 2010, then basically, she’s either admitting she can’t do a basic lit. search or…. She lying. Again.

Very curious…all of these people making these claims about what happened to her twins without having access to their medical records and without having been there to witness what happened.

They know these things through nothing but the power of their faith. No wonder anti-vaxxers liken these mental delinquents to religious nuts! Add to that their puerile sycophancy and boot-licking to their morally deficient host, and it further clarifies their status.

And the amount of gas-lighting involved is truly astounding! All of the claims that what was seen and witnessed by the mother could not have possibly happened. Blaming the victim at it’s not-so-finest.

I’m not about to trust the claims of a woman who made the weirdly racist claim that her son’s hair texture is a vaccine injury.

ck has been commenting on this site for years and shared many details of what happened to her baby and the problems her autistic son has had. Various commenters have tried to offer her sympathy and suggestions but these have generally been rebuffed. The one major success that I can recall is that she signed up for Spark for Autism, which is a genetic research organization that has identified several distinctive forms of autism based on Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP’s) or de novo mutations. They have also identified a large number of genes that are more prevalent in people with ASD’s but are not individually causative.

But most of us don’t try to engage with her on substantive matters either because her response is always on the lines of “my post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning trumps all the efforts of scientists to try to figure out if this is really the cause or not.”

As an aside, although Aaby is one of her favorite researchers because his Guinea-Bissau research showed possible problems with the DTP vaccines used there, I wouldn’t put him in the same category as the Geiers or Wakefield. His research is methodologically sound as far as I can tell. He has made a career out of mining the medical records regarding the introduction of various vaccines around the world to look for possible secondary or indirect effects. He was a co-author on a paper that indicated a secondary benefit of the MMR vaccination in reducing deaths from other infectious diseases for a year or two after the vaccination.

But since all this research is based on small data sets in countries with generally poor health care systems and possibly different versions of the vaccines, it has to be taken with a large grain of salt.

@ Dorit,

Why do you say “Christine cut off her oxygen supply”, as if I personally pinched off her tubing? The doctor ordered a study & the respiratory therapists came to my home, did a study that I didn’t believe was thorough enough (no sleep study) & took her tanks away with them when they left.

@ Joel,

No I did consider the other factors. I kept vaccinating & I was still vaccinating 11 years later when my son had his adverse reaction. It was the science that changed my mind & none of those “disinformation dozen” had anything to do with it. The science supports that SIDS is immune-mediated based on abnormal cytokine profiles involving interleukins & tnfa found upon autopsy; research that was not findable to a layperson in 1994 but was accessible in 2005 (via pubmed online) after my son’s injury.

A. You’re right, I misspoke and should not have phrased it that way. It was accusatory, inaccurate, and no doubt hurtful. I apologize; if I could edit the comment I would remove it.

But the fact remains that your child’s oxygen was reduced just before – and you blame vaccines.

B. Science shows vaccines don’t cause SIDS. https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccines-and-other-conditions/vaccines-sudden-infant-death-syndrome-sids

Or autism, which is your child’s disability. https://sites.nationalacademies.org/BasedOnScience/vaccines-do-not-cause-autism/

@ Christine

Yep, there are some studies relating SIDS to abnormal cytokine profiles, only some studies; but if a vaccine triggers SIDS, what do you think a full-blown natural infectious disease would do? I have NOT found any good evidence that vaccines cause an abnormal cytokine profile to end in SIDS. Just speculation on your part; but if your infants lived and were exposed to common colds or worse, flu, or even, because pockets of low immunization for measles, exposed to measles, how do you think their abnormal cytokine profiles would have reacted? Maybe you think during childhood they would never have been exposed to colds and flu?/Users/joelaharrison/Desktop/Miller (2021 Mar 19). There’s Only One State Where Falling Behind on Rent Could Mean Jail Time. That Could Change. — ProPublica.pdf

And do you even have any idea of what the world was like without vaccines? When our population was half was it is, measles alone resulted in around 50,000 hospitalizations, 500 deaths and 1,000 children with permanent disabilities; yet, numerous studies of MMR find it extremely safe, not perfect. If a half dozen children have serious adverse reactions to it, how does that compare with our larger population with 100,000 hospitalized, 1,000 deaths, and 2,000 permanent disabilities?

Seatbelts save lives and prevent serious injury, about 50%; but people have been injured by seatbelts, e.g., ruptured bladder, damaged kidney, and a couple of deaths. So, to prevent a few injuries and rare deaths should we stop using seatbelts?

You speculate. You speculated that platelets reduced inflammation when exact opposite, so now it abnormal cytokines.

What should parents whose kids die from SIDS blame if no vaccine preceded???

And, as I’ve written, it is your absolute certainty that is despicable. You aren’t a deity and even the best scientists don’t speak in absolute terms. I despise people who confuse medical science with religious absolutism.

I really should just ignore you as I get the impression that you are a very unhappy individual attention-seeker!

@ Dorit

No, vaccines aren’t linked to SIDS based on numerous studies; however, even the best study can’t account for something that might occur one time in 50 million. And so far we can only attribute causes to a percentage of SIDS cases. If one considers just how complex genetics, epigenetics, etc are, anything, albeit extremely rare is possible. As I explained to CK, I highly doubt a vaccine played a role; but, as opposed to her and other antivaccinationists, I refuse to make an absolute statement. No, the vaccine perse didn’t cause her infants SIDS; but, though I doubt it, may have contributed. Her infant was extremely low birthweight, extremely premature, and probably inherited her genetic disorders, so anything, regardless of how trivial may have been the straw that broke the camels back. Simply any vaccine elicits a physical response, a slight inflammation. But a tiny scratch may have done the same. In any case, Christine has shown in previous comments that she understands risks from infectious diseases, e.g., COVID; but, as I pointed out, even if, though highly unlikely, the vaccine contributed, it would be because of her infants extremely rare circumstances, so why is she generalizing to all vaccines for all children? Why, given she is aware of infectious diseases, does she ignore what vaccines prevent?

I have an hypotheses, only an hypotheses. Maybe she is focusing on the vaccine to divert attention, guilt, from her own behavior/actions during pregnancy that may have contributed to such extreme prematurity and very low birthweight. She doesn’t appear to be a very stable individual.

Just to repeat, I refuse to make absolute statements. And if I or a friend had infants like Christines, I would give vaccine or recommend to friend; but in a world of seven billion people, rare events that go against overwhelming evidence may occur.

Maybe she is focusing on the vaccine to divert attention, guilt, from her own behavior/actions during pregnancy that may have contributed to such extreme prematurity and very low birthweight.

That’s kind of mean and presumptuous. I have always thought it’s more of a grief thing and that she can’t move on from her tragic loss. I am sorry for her. If she would listen, learn and embrace real answers, I think she might move toward recovery a little better. I will condemn her persistence in the face of massive evidence to the contrary, but as a mother, I feel deeply for her loss. She seems to desperately need an explanation, but I’m not going to leap to blaming her personally. Maybe others here know more about than I–I don’t always read her comments.

In other news CBC news has learned that that the National Advisory Committee on Immunization has suspended the use of Astra Zeneca….

Perhaps the press announcement tipped them off. In other news, the halt only applies to people under 55.

@Kay West: Which part of “temporarily” is giving you the trouble, dearie?

If only antivaxxers followed the same #PrecautionaryPrinciples as real medicine does, they might at least shut up for five minutes now and then. But I suppose that would spoil their rhythm: those ebil vaccines won’t blame themselves for every imagined condition!

@ Kay West – Your link is for Quebec, which while part of Canada, the Provincial Health Ministry makes their own decisions. Just what can you cite that the National Advisory Committee on Immunization is anti-vaxx? Oh PEI, Manitoba have also suspended. All for age 55 and under.

@ Kay West

The news article you link to states:

“Quebec said it is suspending the use of AstraZeneca, also known as Covishield, pending an investigation into whether the vaccine is linked to the very small number of blood clots that have been reported among Europeans who received a dose.In Quebec, 111,000 doses of Covishield have been administered so far. The Health Ministry said there have been no reported cases of thrombosis in Canada among anyone who has received the vaccine.” [CBC News (2021 Mar 29). Quebec suspends giving doses of AstraZeneca to those under 55, though no issues reported in Canada.]

At the same time, the European Union, after a careful review, has approved the vaccine:

“AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine is not associated with an increased risk of blood clots, the European Medicines Agency announced March 18. That’s the conclusion of an investigation conducted by an EMA safety committee into reports of blood clots in some vaccinated people.

Starting March 11, many countries, mostly in Europe, began suspending use of a COVID-19 vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford because of concerns it could be linked to blood clots. Of more than 17 million people vaccinated in the European Union and the United Kingdom, there were around 470 reports of blood clots in the days after getting the shot. That rate is lower than how often people normally develop blood clots in daily life,

One possibility is that some vaccinated people might have previously had COVID-19, which can also cause blood clots

But some uncertainties remain over a few rare case reports.

The World Health Organization also investigated reports of blood clots after vaccination with AstraZeneca’s jab and similarly concluded that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risk, according to a March 19 statement. “In extensive vaccination campaigns, it is routine for countries to signal potential adverse
events following immunization,” the health agency said in a statement March 17. “This does not necessarily mean that the events are linked to vaccination itself, but it is good practice to investigate them.” [Erin Garcia de Jesus (2021 Mar 18). AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine isn’t tied to blood clots, experts say: Reports of blood clots in people who received the shot had raised concerns. ScienceNews. Available at: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-astrazeneca-vaccine-blood-clots-safety-experts ]

So, as usual, you jump to conclusions. First, no medical treatment is perfectly safe; but one has to weigh the benefits vs the risks. Besides 550,000 deaths from COVID, another several hundred thousand survivors suffer from Long Covid and COVID causes blood clots in many cases, one of its hallmarks. And the article you refer to mentions clearly that among 111,000 doses, not a single case of a blood clot, which given how many blood clots occur in populations, is actually low.

And according to the Canadian National Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices:

“Health Canada authorized two manufacturers to produce the vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University: AstraZeneca and Serum Institute of India (SII). NACI has not specifically reviewed evidence for the SII vaccine, but Health Canada has deemed SII and AstraZeneca vaccines to be comparable.” [National Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (2021 Mar 16). Recommendations on the use of COVID-19 vaccines] Nothing on website about suspending vaccine.

And you do know that Quebec so far has total deaths from COVID of 10,651. If they have available enough of the other vaccines, fine; but if not, new variants of COVID have been found to be more contagious and more severe, so they could experience potentially a surge in deaths. So, even if valid that vaccine causes rare serious blood clots (treatable), the potential number of deaths could be exponentially greater than a few rare cases,

I was in the Moderna COVID vaccine trials and am now a regular convalescent plasma donor every four weeks. One donation can help up to four hospitalized patients. If I had NOT gotten the Moderna vaccine and they were offering the Astra-Zeneca, I wouldn’t hesitate to get it and I am in my mid-70s.

Seatbelts reduce deaths and serious injuries by 50%; but there have been ruptured bladders, damaged kidneys, and a couple of deaths, so, do we go with saving 10s of thousands of lives per year or stop using seatbelts to prevent rare injuries and even rarer deaths?

Simple questions: Do you have a basic understanding or immunology and infectious diseases? Without it, no way you can even understand how and why vaccines work? Do you know the history of the vaccine-preventable diseases; e.g., deaths, disabilities, suffering before and after vaccines?

I just copied to a link that quoted the article that sourced ‘National Advisory Committee on Immunization’ and that they were stopping vaccination for people under 55.
You posted about seat belts and safety, have you heard of the Peltzman Effect.
You claim expertise in so many fields, you took 3 classes about law and now you are an expert on courts and court rulings.
You read books about guns and now are an expert on gun control.
You give blood and feed the starving.
You give expert psychological opinions
I haven’t seen anything you can’t do
The pope should make you a saint or are you are just a besserwisser.

@Kay West – so what happened to “But they are science deniers and anti vaxxers at heart”

@ Kay West

I wrote that I took three courses in Constitutional Law, not how many courses I took in law. Over the years I have attended seminars and audited sections of courses when I could. I don’t claim to be an expert on Court rulings, but why do I have to be, I found valid court cases refuting what Scott wrote. What level of expertise does one need to use appropriate search words, find the cases, and cite them?

As for gun safety, as an epidemiologist I have attended a number of seminars and, if you actually read my comment above, I gave just a sample of the books I’ve read. In addition, I had several collegial friends who were active researchers on gun safety. I’ve also read probably 200 articles or more.

As for the Peltzman Effect, the overwhelming actual empirical studies/research makes it clear that seatbelts and other car safety features have had a significant effect on deaths and injuries. Yep, some studies found that when people wear seatbelts, they tailgated, etc.; but still, deaths and serious injuries found to be significantly lower. All you have to do is look at miles driven per capita over past 7 decades, per capita automobile serious accidents, and death and injury statistics. Typical you would refer to one person without actually looking into empirical studies.

And, as for psychology, I probably didn’t explain; but in Sweden, a professional psychology diploma is a totally separate program from a research PhD program. I did both, took all professional clinical psych courses, did workshops, seminars, and a one year internship at the major hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden’s psychiatric clinic, supervised by both a board certified psychologist and a board certified psychiatrist, and while finishing my research degree, continued to work part-time as LICENSED psychologist in Sweden.

What you fail to understand is that, while others socialized, partied, got married, had kids, I worked, attended seminars, audited courses until recently. Nope, don’t claim to be an Einstein; but I have a PhD, four Masters degrees, have lived in five other nations, and a prestigious 3-year Post-Doctoral research fellowship from the National Institutes of Health.

There are lots of things I can’t do. Can’t fix a car, plumbing, electricity, though my dad could and as a kid I loved to assist him. Though I’ve read books and had intro course, I wouldn’t claim to know chemistry, physics; but I am currently proof-reading and editing for a colleague her next edition of an undergraduate microbiology book. And I’m always reading something on totally different subjects. Just finished book Paris 1919 on the Peace Conference that ended World War I and currently reading Pulitzer Prize book: The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. I also have bookmarked a number of websites that I check regularly for interesting articles, download and read.

Oh, there is one other thing I used to do quite well, play guitar and sing. In the 1960s played in band, did high school and Jr. college dances, spring festivals, and illegally, underage, played at lounges. Later, people would invite me to parties, didn’t have to provide food, drink, just me and guitar; but a few years ago, due to arthritis in hands, had to give it up. So, I did some socializing; but far less than most and I live alone, so lots of time.

Am I an expert on gun control? Depends what you mean by expert. I have looked at numerous studies, not only in U.S.; but comparing U.S. to other nations. What is an expert in your opinion? A lawyer, epidemiologist, psychologist??? Looking at gun violence is one of the things that epidemiologist do and a long time ago I was being considered for a position in the section of CDC looking at gun violence when the Republicans cut their funding.

And my donating blood and volunteering for Food Banks, actually I feel guilty I haven’t done more in my life. Sainthood? Nope; but all the world’s religions basically teach the same thing, care about ones fellow human being, so I’m just trying to do my part. What do you do for others??? It is true that only about 5% of Americans are regular blood donors; but that is still a rather large group that I belong to. When I lived in Sweden, they called me “hustomten” sort of a daily Santa Claus because if anyone who I knew was sick or injured I would check on them and offer to do their grocery shopping. I knew a number of single mothers who couldn’t afford a baby sitter, so I would, with a woman friend, watch their kid(s) so they could go out and on a couple of occasions was called late at night that someone was sick, husband, wife, could I watch the kids, so hopped on my bike, sometimes temperature 15 degrees, got to their home. Husband or wife already taken to hospital by ambulance, so when i got there, spouse could follow. I guess that makes me a bad person in your eyes?
Rabbi Hillel, a contemporary of Jesus in Palestine wrote: “Who will be for me if I’m not for myself? But if I am only for myself, what am I?” If not now, when?”

You don’t like it; but did you actually read my three part refutation of Scott Allen? Did you find any flaws in my reasoning. I doubt it as I do my homework. Doesn’t matter what you think of my level of expertise, did I back my comments with logical argument and valid papers?

One of my all time favorites authors was a longshoreman with a high school diploma. Still have his book, read it several times: Eric Hoffer “The True Believer” incredibly insightful.

I just checked National Advisory Committee on Immunization’s website. Yep, you are right; but if you notice, they must have just posted, look at order of dates, so wasn’t up when I checked. However, they are being cautious for those under 55; but as I wrote and you ignore, even if it turns out to be true that the vaccine causes very rare cases of thrombosis, almost all can be successfully treated, and if they don’t have enough of the other vaccines, if there is a surge, the number who die or develop long COVID could be exponentially higher, something you refuse to even accept.

I believe I asked you before; but I’ll ask again: Do you understand the basics of immunology, infectious diseases, e.g., virology, and epidemiology? If not, what do you base your anti vaccine position on? Do you know the history of vaccine-preventable diseases, before and after vaccines?

So, you attack me with no substance to your comment. If you don’t like what I write, then actually refute it with logic, science, and not just one or two cherry picked references. I think you just don’t like it that the positions you take can so easily be challenged because you seem incapable of critical thinking and really developing an argument.

@Kay West: “I just copied to a link that quoted the article that sourced ‘National Advisory Committee on Immunization’ and that they were stopping vaccination for people under 55.”

Except that’s not what the linked article stated:

Quebec joined other provinces Monday in temporarily suspending use of the AstraZeneca-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine in people under the age of 55, pending further investigation about whether it causes blood clots.

Ministry officials said no incidents of suspected blood clots have been reported among those who have received the vaccine.

“The priority is caution,” Health Minister Christian Dubé, 63, said in a tweet after Quebec’s decision was announced.

I mean, if you’re going to lie to us, at least link to a reliably dishonest source. That way we’ll have to work a bit harder to disprove you than just reading the article you so helpfully provided yourself.

@ Kay West

Just want to make something very clear. Doesn’t matter what level of expertise I have or others, unless want to work and need a license. What matters is what I write. Is it logical, is it backed by valid papers? Even if I had never had a single course in Constitutional Law, I know how to question, do web searches, and, of course, to read carefully. As I wrote, Eric Hoffer only had a high school diploma; yet, his book is a masterpiece. Instead of doing what I did with Scott, point by point refuting with logic and backed by references based on web searches, you just write a meaningless comment. As I pointed out with Scott, for instance, he cited alleged quotes by our Founding Fathers; but actually probably found them on a pro-gun website and didn’t bother researching further. I simply searched to find not just the quotes; but, for example, the entire speech and circumstances. No, not an expert on history; but so what? Didn’t need to be, didn’t need a degree in history, just ask the right questions and use different combinations of web searches. Same with gun control, etc. I can search PubMed, Google Scholar, find books in library, before bothering to read, do web search for reviews of books, not just one review, then borrow from library or purchase from Amazon and find research articles that my expertise in epidemiology comes in handy. And on and on it goes. And I don’t have a degree in immunology or microbiology; but have audited courses, and have collegial friends who I can ask when not certain. One actually said he was pleasantly surprised at just how much I knew. So, when it comes to vaccines, I understand the epidemiology, trained in that, and have a strong basic understanding of immunology and microbiology; and my knowledge of epidemiology I’ve applied to reading many research studies of guns.

You, Scott and others are pathetic. I have no idea what you innate intelligence is; but it is clear you don’t apply it.

Oh, I started to work on Part 4 refutation of Scott. He didn’t get Posse Comitatus Act right. Does even allow use of army in some circumstances, and doesn’t prohibit use of national guard, plus there are other statutes he probably isn’t aware of. How do I know? Spent time doing web searches. I’m tired, so don’t know if I will finish writing Part 4 or not.

Well since you claim to be ‘Santie Clause’ I am voting for saint hood.
May be you can save us from the ‘DOOM: DOOOOOOOM, I TELLS YOU, DOOM’ I think Homer Simpson or was that William Miller, said that or was that that the director of the CDC that is telling us we are headed too.

@ Kay West

And you keep attacking me, not anything I’ve written. What is wrong with helping others? And I know people who have done much more than me, for instance, peace corps, job corps, etc. You use the word “expert.” Don’t think taking courses or lots of reading allows one to form a valid opinion. My high school teachers mostly had Bachelor degrees; but taught courses both based on their major and their minor, though I had one teacher with a Masters in Math. Were they experts? Over the years I’ve taken a few courses at community colleges. Most instructors had Masters degrees, a few PhDs. Which of them were experts? And at university instructors all had PhD; but some were Assistant Professors, some Associate Professors, some Full Professors. Which were the experts? And actually the higher up one goes, often the more narrow ones area of expertise is. MDs in internal medicine are fairly knowledgeable about a range of medical conditions; but specialists, after many years, great at their specialty; but most don’t keep up with other areas of medicine. And how does one become an “expert?”

Oh, I left out one other area I have read a lot about, climate change. Starting in mid 1980s i tried to read every article in Scientific American related to it, read half dozen books, and have seen many documentaries. The best documentary was series “Years of Living Dangerously”. Watched it twice. Found out second season, may purchase DVD from Amazon. Also, read number of articles in Nature and Science magazines.

You continue to attack me; but have NEVER explained how you have developed your position on vaccines and other areas, why you appear to be so confident. Perhaps, like our former President Trump, you don’t need to read anything, to consult with scientific experts, you just consider yourself an “intuitive genius”.

So, keep on attacking me, ignoring any attempt to actually respond to what I have written, just showing what an absolute despicable moron you are.

Yep, horrible that I have tried to help others. You are absolutely right. You wouldn’t happen to be a relative of Donald Trump’s, a malignant self-serving narcissist? Or, if not a genetic relative, at least, a spiritual one.

You do know that this blog and its sister blog, Science-Based Medicine are both based on science and critical thinking, things you apparently lack, so why are you posting here.

Allgemeine Schweizerische Militärzeitschrift, Nr. 12, Dezember 2001, S. 8-11.
Das Nazi-Waffengesetz und die Entwaffnung der deutschen Juden
Stephen P. Halbrook*

The greatest nonsense that could be made in the occupied eastern territories
is The greatest nonsense that could be made in the occupied eastern territories is to give arms to the subjugated peoples. History teaches that all master nations perished after they had granted arms to the peoples they had subjugated. Adolf Hitler 1
The German gun laws and the hysteria that sparked against Jewish gun owners, however, played an important role in laying the foundation stone for the extermination of German Jews in the Holocaust. “The right of the people to own and carry arms” 2 reflects an all-encompassing and historical power of the people to resist tyranny in a republic, 3 was ignored in the German Reich.
The chaotic conditions after the First World War led to the introduction of the first comprehensive German arms legislation in 1928 by the liberal Weimar Republic. The Nazis then seized power in 1933. This was consolidated by the widespread search and seizure of firearms from political opponents. After five years of suppression and extermination of dissidents, Hitler signed a new weapons law in 1938, which favored party members and groups, but withheld weapons from the enemies of the state. Later that year, the Jews were disarmed in a cruel blow, on the “Reichskristallnacht”. Without any possibility of self-defense, the Jewish population could easily be deported to the concentration camps for the final solution.
* Fairfax, Virginia USA. Author of “Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews,” Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 483-532 (2000), http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf; Target Switzerland: Swiss Armed Neutrality in World War II (1998) (Switzerland in sight and La Suisse encerclée). Translation by Ferdinand Hediger, CH-Lenzburg.
1 Hitler’s table talks in the Führer Headquarters 1941-1942 (1963), p. 272. 2 Constitution of the USA, 2nd additional article.
3 See Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (2000); Freedmen, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Bear Arms (1998)

The 1928 Firearms and Ammunition Act4 required a license to manufacture, manipulate, or repair firearms, and even reload cartridges. A license was also required for the commercial trade in firearms. The acquisition of firearms and ammunition required a weapons or ammunition license from the police. Carrying firearms required a gun license.
Introduced by a liberal government, this law ensured that the police could register all arms purchases (at least legal ones) and that the possession and use of arms had to be approved by the police.
Adolf Hitler was proclaimed German Chancellor on January 30, 1933. The Nazi regime immediately began a campaign to disarm and eliminate all enemies of the state, who were always referred to as “communists”
The following report from the New York Times shows that the Nazis’ urge to confiscate weapons was in part a ruse to conduct house searches, arrests and harass selected people:
“With the complaint that Prof. Albert Einstein has a huge amount of weapons and ammunition in his remote house in Caputh, the Nazi Socialists sent their brown-shirted men and police to a search today. The closest thing they found to a weapon was a bread knife. ”6
Nazi policy made it possible for citizens in general to be banned from possession of “military” weapons. An SA chief warned:
“The associations of the national insurrection, SA, SS and Stahlhelm give every innocent German man the opportunity to fight in their ranks. Anyone who does not belong to one of the above-mentioned associations and still keeps his weapon unjustified or even hides it must be viewed as an enemy of the national government and will be ruthlessly called to account with the full severity
Apparently hoping to brand the Jews as subversives by des
4 Reichsgesetzblatt 1928, I, p. 143. Reichskommissar Kuenzer, “The Law on Firearms and Ammunition”, Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, April 13, 28, p. 1.
5 “Charges against 9 Communists”, Der Völkischer Beobachter, 4.3.33.
6 “Nazis Hunt Arms in Einstein Home”, New York Times, March 21, 333, p. 10.

7 Regarding the regulation of the provisional bayer. Minister of the Interior from 24.3.33. through military associations. BHStA, LRA Bad Tölz 133992, No2501c51.
2

illegal possession of weapons, searches and arrests were carried out on April 4, 1933.8 “A large contingent of police, reinforced by Nazi auxiliaries, raided the Jewish quarter in East Berlin, where weapons and papers were searched for everywhere. ”
“The time of the ghetto is overfulfilled – major raid in the Scheunenviertel. Countless weapons finds ”.9“ During the search, which was carried out very carefully, the search teams found a whole series of weapons. Furthermore, a lot of treasonous pamphlets were confiscated. ”
The Nazi suppression measures against the Jewish gun owners were facilitated by the Weimar Gun Act. In it the “unreliable” persons were banned from possessing weapons:
“Wroclaw, April 21st – The police chief of Wroclaw decreed that” all persons who are now or earlier of Jewish faith and who have a gun license or a shooting license must hand them over to the police immediately. ”
After the Jewish population “cannot be regarded as trustworthy”, it was said that in future no weapons certificates will be issued to them. “10
In the meantime, Wilhelm Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior, wrote to Hermann Göring, Minister of the Interior of Prussia and head of the state police there: The import of pistols has increased tenfold. “For reasons of public safety, we cannot tolerate the unrestrained import of such huge quantities of weapons.” 11 Accordingly, Frick imposed a ban on the import of handguns.12
In mid-1933 Frick wrote to the other members of the cabinet: “After the victory of the national revolution, I believe that a fundamental review of the Firearms Act would be necessary8 “Raid on Jewish Quarter”, New York Times, 5.4.33, p. 10.
9 “Major raid in the Scheunenviertel”, Der Völkische Beobachter, 5.4.33.
10 “Permission to Possess Arms Withdrawn From Breslau Jews”, New York Times, April 23, 33, p. 1.
11 The Reich Minister of the Interior, Re: Import of firearms, I A 8310 / 24.4 (31.5.33). Federal Archives Berlin (BA Berlin), R 43 II / 399.
12 Reichsgesetzblatt 1933, I, p. 367.
3

initiates … “13 In the autumn a draft was circulated.14 An analysis of the proposal stated:
“The Reich Minister of the Interior considers the point in time for a new regulation of the entire weapons law to be given only when the penetration of the German people with National Socialist ideas is so advanced that armed excesses of anti-people and subversive elements on a significant scale are no longer to be expected . “15
In fact, the 1928 Weimar Weapons Act, which was still in force, allowed the police to issue or not issue weapons acquisition and carrying permits to the police at will. The Gestapo ordered late in 1935 that no gun licenses may be issued to Jews without the approval of the Gestapo:
“In principle, only in a few exceptional cases will one not be able to raise any objections against the issuing of gun licenses to Jews. As a rule, it must be assumed that firearms in the hands of Jews pose anot inconsiderable danger to the German population. ”16
As introduced, the 1938 Hitler / Frick Arms Act combined many elements of the 1928 Act with NS innovations. A license was required for the manufacture, processing, or repair of firearms and ammunition, or for the reloading of cartridges. “A permit should not be granted if the applicant, or the person who becomes the commercial or technical manager of the company or trade, or one of them, is Jewish” .17
A license was also required for the trade in firearms. The Jews were again excluded.18 The arms trade was prohibited at fairs, rifle festivals and other occasions
13 The Reich Minister of the Interior, Re: Firearms Act, I A 6310 / 19.6, 7.7.33. BA Berlin, R 43 II / 399.
14 The Reich Chancellor, The Reich Minister of the Interior, draft of a law to amend the firearms law, Re: I A 6310/4, 11.11.33. BA Berlin, R 43 II / 399.
15 Regarding Reichsministerialache, subject: Reichsminister of the Interior: Draft of a law to amend the firearms law, 1.12.33. BA Berlin, R 43 II / 399.
16 Bavarian Political Police, gun licenses to Jews, 5.2.36. BHStA, B.Nr. 51722. 17 Reichsgesetzblatt 1938, I, 265, § 3.
18 A.a.O., § 7.
19 A.a.O., § 9.
4th

A firearms acquisition license was required to purchase a handgun.20 Exceptions were “Reich authorities”, various government offices and “departments and subdivisions of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party designated by the Führer’s deputy.” 21
Carrying a firearm required a firearms license.22 The ordinance also stipulated:
“(1) Weapon acquisition licenses or weapons licenses may only be issued to persons whose reliability there are no concerns, and only if there is evidence of a need.
(2) The grant is particularly refused in the case of 3. Gypsies. …
4. Persons against whom the admissibility of police supervision or loss of civil rights has been recognized, for the duration of the admissibility police supervision or loss of civil rights.
5. Persons who have been convicted of treason or high treason, or who are against the facts that justify the assumption that they are acting in a state hostile manner. 6. Persons who have been legally sentenced to imprisonment of more than two weeks … for resisting state authority … “23
For the officially surrendered firearms, neither a weapon nor a weapon acquisition license was required from the members of the armed forces, the police, members of the SS reserve groups and the SS skull and crossbones associations, 24 as well as the following:
“Unterführer of the NSDAP, from the Ortsgruppenleiter upwards, the SA, SS and the NSKK as well as the Hitler Youth from the Bannführer upwards, who are granted the right to carry firearms by the deputy of the Führer or the agency designated by him …” 25
The possession of any kind of weapon could be forbidden. “In individual cases, a person who has acted hostile to the state or who has acted as a threat to public security
20 A.a.O., § 11.21 A.a.O., § 12. 22 A.a.O., § 14. 23 A.a.O., § 15. 24 A.a.O., § 18. 25 A.a.O., § 19.
5

acquisition, possession and carrying of firearms and ammunition as well as cutting and stabbing weapons are prohibited. “26
It was forbidden to manufacture or own firearms that could be folded or pushed together, shortened, or quickly dismantled – beyond the normal dismantling for hunting or sporting use.27 Firearms with silencers or searchlights were prohibited. Finally, .22 rimfire cartridges with hollow point bullets were also banned.
The Völkische Beobachter, Hitler’s newspaper, had the following to report on the revised weapons law:
“The new law is the result of a review of the gun law according to the direction which simplifications compared to the previous legal situation are justifiable in the interest of the German arms industry without any danger to the maintenance of public security.” 28
The Berliner Börsenzeitung published identical comments, but added the following in rather ominous language:
“The prerequisite for any relaxation of the applicable weapons law had to be that the police force remained in a position to relentlessly prevent unreliable persons from acquiring or possessing weapons. The new law is intended to enforce the obvious principle that enemies of the people and the state, as well as other elements that endanger public safety, have no weapons
On November 7, 1938, Herschel Grynszpan, a 17-year-old refugee, a German Jew whose father had been deported to Poland, went to the German embassy in Paris with the intention of shooting the ambassador. Instead, he shot Ernst von Rath, the third secretary of the embassy, ​​and mortally injured him. Ironically, this was under surveillance by the Gestapo for opposing anti-Semitism and Nazism.
On the morning of November 9th, the headlines of the German newspapers announced
26 A.a.O., § 23.
27 A.a.O., § 25.
28 “A New Arms Act”, Der Völkischer Beobachter, March 22, 38.
29 Berliner Börsenzeitung, March 22nd, 38, p. 1. The weapons law was explained not only in the newspapers, but also in two legal commentaries: Fritz Kunze, Das Waffenrecht im Deutschen Reiche (1938) and Werner Hoche, Waffengesetz (1938).
6th

differently “Raid on Jewish weapons”, 30 “Disarmament of the Berlin Jews” 31 and “Arms levy of the Jews in Berlin” .32 The reports contained essentially the same text, as follows:
“In view of the Jewish assassination attempt in the German Embassy in Paris yesterday, the Police President of Berlin [Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf] announces the preliminary result to the public, the general police disarmament of the Jews of Berlin, which has been tackled in recent weeks , has had so far.
In order to maintain public safety and order in the Reich capital, the President of the Police saw himself compelled to carry out a weapons check on the Jewish population of Berlin on the basis of individual cases. This has recently been brought to the attention of the Jews by the police stations, whereupon – with a few exceptions where an express prohibition on the possession of weapons had to be issued – the weapons previously in Jewish possession are available to the police from Jews who do not have a weapons license , were given voluntarily.
The preliminary result clearly shows what a vast amount of weapons were and still are among the Jews of Berlin.
To this day, the operation has secured 2569 stabbing and cutting weapons, 1702 firearms and around 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Unless a Jew after the end of the weapons campaign
is found in possession of a weapon, the police chief will proceed with the greatest severity in each individual case. ”
Von Rath died on November 9th, coincidentally on “Movement Day”, the anniversary of the failed coup by Hitler in the beer hall in Munich in 1923. reported. One heard that Hitler said “the SA should be allowed to let off steam”. The telephone order to the chief of staff of the SA Group North Sea, Roempagel, and his superiors was contained in a secret report of the SS, which was drawn up the following year. “All Jews are to be disarmed. In the event of resistance, they must be shot immediately. ”33
After 11:55 p.m. on November 9, SS-Standartenführer Heinrich Müller sent an urgent telex message from the Gestapo headquarters in Berlin to every police office in the federal states in the Reich, with which they were alerted “that demonstrations against the Jews, and especially against their synagogues , would take place very soon. ”“ Should, during the actions that are soon to take place,
30 The attack, 11/9/38, p. 14.
31 Der Völkischer Beobachter, November 9th, 38.
32 Berliner Börsen Zeitung, 11/9/38, p. 1.
33 Gerald Schwab, The Day the Holocaust Began (1990), pp. 20-22
Jews are found in possession of weapons, the strictest measures are to be applied. ”34
On the morning of November 10th, the following decree was published in newspapers across Germany:
“No weapons for Jews – otherwise 20 years of protective custody – Munich, November 10th (1938) The Reichsführer SS and chief of the German police issued the following order:
Persons who are considered Jews according to the Nuremberg Laws are prohibited from possessing any weapons. Offenders are transferred to concentration camps and placed in protective custody for a period of 20 years. ”35
Now real hell broke loose. “Nazis beat everything up, loot and burn Jewish shops and temples – until Goebbels orders a halt.” 36 In Berlin and throughout Germany, thousands of Jewish men, mainly leading figures, were taken from their homes and arrested.
Viktor Klemperer served honorably in the German armed forces in World War I and was retired as a university professor in 1935. As a resident of Dresden, his acclaimed diary contains the following entry regarding the Reichskristallnacht:
“On the morning of November 11th, two policemen came accompanied by a“ resident of Dölzschen ”. – Do you have any weapons? – Definitely my saber, maybe even my bayonet as a war souvenir, but I have no idea where these are. – Then we have to help them find her. – The house was searched for hours … They rummagedthrough everything, boxes and wooden fixtures that Eva had made, were broken into with an ax. The saber was found in a suitcase on the floor. The bayonet did not come out. ”37
On November 11, Interior Minister Frick announced the ordinance against the possession of weapons by Jews.38:
34 “To all Stapo agencies and Stapo control centers, Berlin No. 234 404 9.11.2355”, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal (1995), Vol. 25, p. 377.
35 Der Völkischer Beobachter, 11/10/38.
36 New York Times, 11/11/38, p. 1.
37 Victor Klemperer, I Will Bear Witness 1933-1941 (1999), p. 275. 38 Reichsgesetzblatt 1938, I, p. 1571.
8th

“Jews (§5 of the first ordinance of the German citizenship laws of November 14, 1935 …) are prohibited from acquiring, possessing or carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as cutting and stabbing weapons. Those who now have weapons and ammunition must hand them over to the local police immediately. ”
“Anyone who intentionally or negligently violates Section 1 will be punished with imprisonment and a fine. In particularly severe cases of deliberate violation, a prison sentence of up to 5 years is canceled. “” Due to the strict prison and penal sentences, the state discourages all Jews from violating the enacted laws in order to protect the German people. . . . “39

The American Consulate in Stuttgart reported to the U.S. Ambassador Hugh R. Wilson in Berlin on November 12th that “the Jews of south-west Germany have suffered a change during the past three days that seemed incredible for someone living in an enlightened country in the 20th century …” ” Men who had been found old, rusty revolvers in the last few days shouted loudly that they would never dare to go back to their homes or businesses. ”40
A Swiss newspaper report from Berlin read under the headline
“Numerous arrests? :
The Gestapo have been arresting Jews in Berlin and other German cities since last night. They are mostly respected personalities from Judaism. The Reich Propaganda Minister presented the V
He was denied liability, but on a later request it was announced that the arrests were measures in connection with Himmler’s decree that Jews are not allowed to own weapons. It is stated that the Jews had withheld weapons, although the last decree of the chief of the German police threatened them with a sentence of twenty years of protective custody. ”41
One month after the pogrom, the Gestapo wrote a message to the police, the commissioners and mayors etc. regarding the regulation according to which the Jews had to surrender their weapons:
“A list of all weapons from Jewish possession must be made and sent by 5.1.1939. The weapons are well packaged and if the number is small, as a postal parcel,
39 “Explanatory Notes on the Ordinance Against Gun Possession”, Der Völkische Beobachter, 13.11.38.
40 The Holocaust, Vol. 3, The Crystal Night Pogrom, John Mendelsohn ed. (1982), pp. 183-84. 41 Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 11/13/38, p. 2.
9

in the case of a larger number than freight, to be sent to. “42
The disarmament of the Jews made individual or collective resistance
impossible. Today the Basic Law of Germany contains the following provision: “Against anyone who undertakes to remove this order, all Germans have the right to resist if other remedial measures are not possible.” 43 If the Nazi experience taught anything, then that totalitarian governments will try to disarm their subjects (people) in order to stamp out any possibility of resisting crimes against humanity.
42 Secret State Police, State Police Headquarters Munich, To Police Headquarters Munich and others, Subject: Arms delivery by Jews. 12/19/38. BHStA, B.Nr. 39859/38 II G Ma.
43 Basic Law, Art. 20, § 4.
10

Well it is interesting, “shot Ernst von Rath, the third secretary of the
embassy, ​​and mortally injured him. Ironically, this was under surveillance by the Gestapo for opposing anti-Semitism and Nazism.”

Do we have some people in the US who were under FBI surveillance who committed mass murders???

So how did this gun control, registration work out?

Great mangled bowl of copypasta, Spotts. Do you know what “off topic” means? F*cking onanist.

@ Scott Allen

Well done. Orac has an international readership. This confirms to us that you are an absolute nut.

@ Joel:

” What matters is what I write.” Amen.

As sceptics we should always remember that degrees aren’t the final word if we do not ground our assertions in evidence- although in some cases, acquiring the degrees involved learning how to support your position adequately.

One of the anti-vax mothers I follow, Katie Wright, has two graduate degrees and yet engages in egregious speculation on twitter: she hangs with RFKjr who has a law degree plus. Orac writes about doctors who support woo, anti-vax and other crap, resting on their supposed laurels to prove their points.

In fact, some woo-meisters inflate their own, spurious, bogus or unrelated, degrees to convince readers/ listeners of their unassailable correctness: they posture ostentatiously displaying braggadocio grandiosely as they critique SBM and insult truly expert writers like Orac, Drs Novella, Barratt, Hall et al.

Sceptics shouldn’t be frightened if an altie/ troll claims many degrees which they then try to use as a shield against criticism. Wikipedia is their bete noire because it is based upon outside, reliable, multiple sources and it drives them mad. A woo-meister ( PRN) critiques GsoW’s Susan Gerbic because she isn’t an “expert” ( says someone with a mail order degree) but only a “picture hanger” ( she owned a gallery). She trains sceptics based on evidence not reliance upon authority- actual or feigned. I have no idea what her education is but she is able to slay woo efficiently and teach others how to edit..

Sceptics can use their formal education to delve into the mysteries of bio/ med/ psych but those without this background still have an avenue addressing pseudo-science from common sense, logic and pure information and aren’t left out..

You are a role model for sceptics and do great work. . .

@ Denice

Thanks; but actually the role model is Orac. Don’t know how he does it. Full time cancer surgeon saving lives, supervising interns and residents, writing grants, and publishing. Then finding articles, etc. of things going on and writing about them, linking to valid sources. I’ve asked him if he is a clone, e.g., multiple Orac’s. He’s never replied.😀

Maybe he is a visitor from outer space with superhuman abilities, including little need for sleep?

I saw some big news yesterday that New Mexico, with 3927 total deaths, has gone 2 days in a row with no Covid-19 deaths!!!

Our cases are flattening out but still trending down at 8%.

Most counties are below 10 cases per 100K and only one small population county is over 30.

This is the result of careful and cautious use of controls like a mask mandate and a slow opening of restaurants.

But much of this is the benefit of leading the nation in vaccine rollouts with 37.5% now having at least one shot and 23.1% fully vaccinated.

And the Indian Health Service which runs clinics on the Navajo Reservation as well as in Albuquerque is on track to administer 1 million doses by the end of the month!

https://www.abqjournal.com/2374889/tribal-communities-expand-vaccine-access-ex-ihs-vaccine-task-force-doctor-says-they-are-on-target-to-administer-1-million-doses-in-march.html

@ squirrelelite

Glad to hear it. Unfortunately, just in today’s local newspaper, surges are developing in other areas of the nation.

Many years ago I actually interviewed for job at New Mexico State. Chair of Department of Health Education wanted me because courses in Epidemiology and Biostatistics were being taught by people with Masters degrees in Health Education, so, he was outvoted and they hired another person with a degree in Health Education. Chair wanted me because they were pushing to start an MPH program. As it turned out, no MPH program, so just as well. I do remember that my eyes were almost burning the air was so so dry. I’ve also been to Albuquerque and drove up to Santa Fe, beautiful nature.

In other anti-vax news…

Mike Adams warns that demons are apparently involved in the new vaccines, the entertainment industry and Nike shoes.
Mikey has been recording hour- plus long rants recently in support of Trump, Jesus, Taiwan and natural foods – daily informative updates
He knows his target audience… .

“Mike Adams warns that demons are apparently involved in the new vaccines, the entertainment industry and Nike shoes.”

Note that he uses the subterfuge “Corporations like Nike” so that he can dodge the fact that the shoes in question are being marketed by a fringe rapper*, not Nike.

The vaccine stuff is alarming though.

“Vaccine companies, meanwhile, are announcing the start of vaccine medical experiments on six-month old infants using vaccines made with aborted human fetal tissue, which is one way that Satan worshipers are able to “claim” children for Satan.”

Dang, whenever we get a really juicy evil plan underway, Adams has to try to ruin it.

*in a limited edition of 666. Better act now…

Idk, I wouldn’t really call Lil Nas “fringe”; “Old Town Road” is/was quite the sensation. One of the only real rap/country crossovers I know of. And he’s big enough that a lot of people are having a real conniption fit over a video that came out recently where he’s twerking on Satan’s lap (he then does proceed to snap his neck; so I have heard, I haven’t seen it.)

Funny fact: the last time my testosterone level was checked, it was 666. I found it amusing, anyway.

@ Scott Allen

Wow! First, no response to my refuting your previous comments? So, now more stupidity.

You do realize that at the time the French army was considered the best in the world, tanks (in fact, some of their tanks were better than the Germans), figher planes, well-trained and well-armed troops; yet, Nazis defeated them in five weeks. And before that, they defeated the Polish army and for a year slaughtered the Russian army. So how would Jews, many children and old people, owning a pistol or rifle have stopped the well-armed well-trained SS?

Do you really think submitting a huge comment of bullshit impresses anyone or proves your point?

By the way, I grew up knowing Holocaust survivors. My parents used to have barbecues on Sundays and I noticed numbers on forearms, asked my parents what they were. I was probably 7 or 8. In Sweden, basically I was adopted by several Jewish families. Gothenburg had a small Jewish community and some were sole survivors of families. I have read probably 20 books and hundreds of articles on the Holocaust and even, when I lived in Israel, met 2nd in command of Warsaw uprising, which did repel police but ended abruptly when Nazis sent in tanks. Oh, I guess Jews should not only have owned guns; but bazookas.

Fascinating how you depict confidence that you are making valid point when, in reality, YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT. Are you even capable of critical thinking or just forming an opinion and cherry-picking papers that confirm it? You really are an ASSHOLE. Did you even read my three part response???

I guess I’ll have to waste some more time and do Part 4 proving you were wrong about Posse Comitatus Act.

Here are two recent articles:

Samantha Putterman (2019 Apr 8). No, gun control regulation in Nazi Germany did not help advance the Holocaust. PolitFact. Available at: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/apr/08/viral-image/no-gun-control-regulation-nazi-germany-did-not-hel/

Jeffrey Salkin (2018 Apr 12). Could armed Jews have prevented the Holocaust? Religion News Service. Available at: https://religionnews.com/2018/04/12/jews-guns-holocaust/

You do realize that the Jews held off the German army from the 19th of april to the 16 may. the Germans found less than a dozen rifles and about 75 pistols plus a hundred hand grenades after it was put down. The only reason the uprising came to an end was the Nazis burned the ghetto down. I will quote Hitler ‘The greatest nonsense that could be made in the occupied eastern territories is to give arms to the subjugated peoples. History teaches that all master nations perished after they had granted arms to the peoples they had subjugated. Adolf Hitler’ The Jews lasted almost as long as the well armed well fed French army.

I post a scholarly well written research paper that described the creeping campaign to disarm the Jews to make it easier to round them up and deport/dispose of them. If you can not see the moves in this country that parallels those moves in Germany then that is on you.

I am well aware of the eugenics movement in the US and how its founders are celebrated by liberals and yes I know that the Germans/Nazis actually copied them. The eugenics movement in the US was backed by universities like Stanford, leading scientist, and multimillionaires. Does any of this strike you as what is transpiring in the modern world. Does it not concern you that 40% of abortions are on women of color and most abortion clinics are located in black neighborhoods and the barbaric practice of selling aborted babies, how can anyone with a conscious condone that. But that is way off topic.

The attempt to silence/de platform opposition now is very similar to campaigns of the past. You post claims I am cherry picking but you post opinions of books you have read, is different like how? You use op ed pieces which are just opinions not facts. You use science not to further human knowledge/understanding but in hopes of beating your opposition.

You parade your virtues, education and book reading and resort to name calling when you so called logic fails.

Well I served 29 years under the US Attorneys office, assigned to a Federal Task Force, I am well aware of how our government works. I spent 18 months in Iraq, for a company that had a contract with the US State Department to identify issues in Iraq. I came back with 5 foot lockers of video, hard drives, photos and a 200 pages of fully footnoted (43 pages to be exact) report. Only to be edited by others down to 43 pages and no footnotes and the whole tone of the report was changed. I have been vaccinated beyond any and all rational and participated in 3 drug trials including Moderna and have given blood for the better part of 40 years (once ever 90 days and 9 times in Iraq, I have AB-) , now the weekly donation of 2 purple tops the woman we call the vampiress, since September.

I have attempted to engage you and others on this site to learn but am met with:

“MORON

As for dumbass analogies

Do you get the urge constantly to huff butane cans?

What you are after is the “Mommy, someone said rude words to me on the internet today” blog, which is three doors down. The one with the low handle.

YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT

You really are an ASSHOLE.”

I have never used this language in a post at this or any other site, if this is any way to claim intellectual superiority you have failed.

Oh and US troops can only be used by permission of the governor, and Washington DC is not a state.

On a note just to Joel my great great grandfather came to America in 1848 from Poland, a Jew. My grandmother was from Puerto Rico and my S.O. is the great grand daughter of former slave from Jamaica. So take your racism somewhere else, or put it where it feels the best for you.

Spotts has managed to find a “quote” that appears on exactly one site. The enclosed porch took on about a quarter-inch of water during a storm tonight, though, so the rest is left as an exercise for the reader.

Had you read the research paper I copied and pasted, you would have found that quote and the footnote where the quote was obtained from. The book is called “Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944 His Private Conversations” Authorized Recorded conversations with Hitler and various persons and transcribed into French and English from the original German.

@ Scott

So, first, I applaud your blood donations, perhaps more than me? I have also participated in several clinical trials as volunteer. From 1975 to 1977 I taught undergraduate courses on U.S. Naval vessels in Western Pacific. With end of draft they offered enlistees chance to take college course even at sea. Before first deployment, went down corridor and got dozen vaccines, including yellow fever, typhoid/paratyphoid, etc. That night aboard ship both arms really sore and low level fever. Got aspirin from corpsman and was fine. I’ve also had smallpox shot three times, and every shot offered here, in Sweden, and in Canada. Most recently, Shingrix a couple of years ago and Fluad Quadrivalent last fall.

Did you read my article on abortions? Since the one thing we seem to agree on, I thought you might find it of interest. If you read it, you would understand that I emphasize that abortion is a last resort for people who can’t afford decent health care, etc. As a nation the U.S. helps working class and poor people far less than many other nations. In Sweden, if a poor family has a child, top prenatal care, monthly check per child, quality state sponsored daycare so you can continue to work, even rent subsidies to move into larger apartment. France also has similar programs. So, no, I am not happy at how abortions carried out in U.S. and who gets them. As my article points out, we don’t have “choice”. If having a child means losing ones job, or leaving with potentially untrustworthy care, or substandard prenatal and postnatal, etc. not much of a choice. Read my article!

It wasn’t racism that I described myself as Jewish, it was to emphasize that the Holocaust has haunted me my entire life and that I have devoted a lot of time and effort into learning about it. And going back to my undergraduate years I was involved in campus protests against the Vietnam War and against segregation and discrimination. In fact, as a Jew, I was friends with a Palestinian, several other Moslem students, and Arabs and, in fact, last year I found my Palestinian friend’s e-mail address, sent him an e-mail, and received a reply. He is a retired Professor at Bir Zeit University, at the time on the West Bank, which I visited when I lived in Israel. And together with him and other Palestinians, we had meetings with Israeli Jews, all who wanted one nation, separation of church and state. Found out later that many Shin Bet, Israel FBI, attended meetings and I am probably on their list, just as my roommate led draft card burnings during Vietnam War and two FBI agents came to home, tried to interview us, so I’m probably on their list deep in archives.

Before the lockdown I attended for over 15 years a local YMCA, swimming, stationary bikes, light weight-lifting, great facility; but more important, people from all over the world, including an Iraqi Jew, Iraqi Chaldean Christian, and several Iraqi Moslems, people from West and East Africa, lots from Mexico, Central American, Brazil, and even from the People’s Republic of China. We often, after workouts would drink coffee and sometimes go to lunch. I loved it and would delight to have any of them as next door neighbors. One incident was rather amusing. There was someone I would nod to, smile, for several months. One day he walked up to me, started speaking German. I had German as undergraduate more than 50 years earlier, so I said if he spoke slowly I would try to respond. But he didn’t look German, so I asked. He answered he was from Afghanistan but had been in Germany 10 years and was just learning English. In any case, after that we would spot each other. Oh, as kid my father had fellow workers who were black. When we had barbecues, they were invited, would play ball with me, etc. and then at 8 years of age I joined the YMCA, at the time a few blacks and hispanics. We played together and sometimes I was invited to their homes and they to mine. So, calling me a racist just one more strike against you!

And I refuted much more than your claim of gun control and the Holocaust, including your taking quotes from Founding Fathers that were either completely faked or taken out of context. Yet, no response from you.

You write: “I post a scholarly well written research paper that described the creeping campaign to disarm the Jews to make it easier to round them up and deport/dispose of them. If you can not see the moves in this country that parallels those moves in Germany then that is on you. . . You post claims I am cherry picking but you post opinions of books you have read, is different like how? You use op ed pieces which are just opinions not facts.”

One “scholarly” well written paper. Your comment reads like a stream of thought, no paragraphs, no comments, just quote after quote after quote. And “one scholarly written paper.” Wow! I can give you dozens written by racists with extensive bibliographies. You don’t like that I have read dozens of books, hundreds of articles, attended seminars, etc.; but you can cite one paper. I guess I should have directly quoted from the books rather than summarizing in my own words. Would that have made a difference. Do you know what cherry picking/confirmation bias is? Included in the list of books I gave above is one written by higher up in NRA. I try to read as varied papers as time allows. In economics I’ve read Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek (founder of Libertarian economics), Galbraith, etc. entire range.

So, you are a lawyer. Not trained in science, in scientific methodology, in epidemiology. I could list dozens of well-researched peer-reviewed articles on guns and violence, including comparisons with other nations; but it wouldn’t change your opinion.

You write: “History teaches that all master nations perished after they had granted arms to the peoples they had subjugated. Adolf Hitler’ The Jews lasted almost as long as the well armed well fed French army.

Yep, I am aware the Warsaw Ghetto held off small units of soldiers; but what you fail to realize is that it was a small group hiding in buildings, moving around and the German army was mainly involved with the Soviets. How does this compare to Gestapo and SS breaking into individual homes? And again, you resort to one anecdote. And the Polish underground and others who were better armed than the Warsaw Ghetto Jews did do some damage but most were eventually killed by the Germans or their allies. So, yep, if Jews had been armed, some Germans would have been killed; but the end result would have been the same. Do you also understand that it wasn’t just the Germans, the Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians, Romanians, etc. attacked the Jews. In fact, the Romanians went on such a rampage that the Germans had to rein them in. On the other hand, Bulgaria, an ally of the Germans, refused to allow Bulgarian citizens who happened to be Jewish taken by the Nazis and almost all Bulgarian Jews survived the war. And during the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, they begged for help from the Polish underground, got little to none. And you ignore that the Nazis defeated Polish army, French, and almost the Soviet; yet believe that individual Jews could have resisted. Yep, they burned down the Ghetto; but also entered with tanks. And towards the end of the war, Polish underground attacked, begged for help from approaching Soviet army; but no help arrived and Germans crushed them.

So, it is one thing for a few people in a mass of building and underground sewers to hold out, another for armies. And the French lost 160,000 killed in just five weeks, so it wasn’t a walk over; but the French army wasn’t completely defeated. They could have withdrawn South where mountains, valleys, etc existed and fought on; but if they did Hitler would have leveled Paris, their sacred city, which is way up north in France. Though not the same thing, American Civil War, the South was well-armed, went against the Federal government, a government they thought was oppressing them, and was defeated and, actually, if the North had had competent Generals, the war would have been short-lived. Many other nations have stricter gun laws, Sweden, Germany, France, Canada, New Zealand; yet, in many respects they are freer than we are. Streets safer, not always, but more than here. Higher voter turnouts. No nation is perfect; but this one ranks near the bottom when it comes to mass murders, police and government brutality, compared to other modern industrialized democracies, literally highest per capita murder rate. Four percent of world’s population and 25% of imprisoned. An estimated 100,000 totally innocent; but a “criminal” justice system bent on not admitting errors. Sometimes takes 10 – 15 years for innocence projects to get one freed, even if clear evidence in first appeal. Yep, I’ve followed this since pre-teen years when in 1957 watched TV series Court of Last Resort, true stories of innocent people convicted and how difficult it was to overturn convictions. Still own paperback and have read dozens of books and 100s of articles on such cases. And for some years was active member of ACLU in Houston.

You write: “I am well aware of the eugenics movement in the US and how its founders are celebrated by liberals and yes I know that the Germans/Nazis actually copied them. The eugenics movement in the US was backed by universities like Stanford, leading scientist, and multimillionaires. Does any of this strike you as what is transpiring in the modern world. Does it not concern you that 40% of abortions are on women of color and most abortion clinics are located in black neighborhoods and the barbaric practice of selling aborted babies, how can anyone with a conscious condone that. But that is way off topic.”

Stanford, at the time, was a bastion of Whites, as far as I can find, no black students, few or no Jews. And where do you get “its founders are celebrated by liberals?” Going back to my undergraduate years, none of my history instructors, political science instructors, or classmates who knew about it did anything but were appalled. However, it was promoted by what today would be called “evangelical Christians.” You do know how immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe and Jews were treated? You do know about the Immigration Act of 1924? As I wrote, “the exception proves the rule,” so I’m sure some people that were liberal in some respects did support eugenics; but one of the groups of scholars against it were Jews, who, though some Jews are Conservative, most are considered Liberals. Jews were also active in Civil Rights movement. Martin Luther Kings first attorney was Jewish.

I realize that you, just like Kay West, think reading books doesn’t confer any real valid understanding; but here’s some of the books I’ve read on the Eugenics movement, well, only certain chapters, entire books devoted to history of genetics and one specifically on eugenics. By the way, you do know that Eugenics was started by Francis Galton, Darwin’s cousin? An upper class WHITE BRIT:

Carl Zimmer (2018). She Has Her Mother’s Laugh: The Powers, Perversion, and Potential of Heredity. Dutton.

Siddhartha Mukherjee (2016). The Gene: An Intimate History. Scribner.

Edwin Black (2003). War Against the Week: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race. Four Walls Eight Window.

And PBS has a great program: “The Eugenics Crusade”

So, maybe I shouldn’t cuss; but, as pointed out above, when I refuted what you wrote, you just practice the Gish Gallup, come up with more things, so not really entering into a civil dialogue.

You attack Gun Control groups for being radical without actually reading what controls they want. You claim already need to have background check for private sales and online sales, etc; but not the case. You rely on papers put out by the Gun Lobby. I suggest you read one or two books:

Osha Gray Davidson (1993). Under Fire: The NRA & The Battle for Gun Control

Josh Sugarman (1992). NRA National Rifle Association: Money Firepower Fear.

So, I’ll try not to cuss, call you names; but won’t change what I think of you, though again, great that you are blood donor, great that you participate in clinical trials, and we seem to agree on one topic, so read my paper. But, I have found over my life that even people who I vehemently disagree with, do some things that I agree with. People usually aren’t unidimensional, usually.

Ooh, I missed this one:

Does it not concern you that 40% of abortions are on [sic] women of color and most abortion clinics are located in black neighborhoods

False.

Well I served 29 years under the US Attorneys office, assigned to a Federal Task Force,

Aw, it’s darling. Remember back when Spotts claimed he was actually a collective of commenters?

I am well aware of how our government works. I spent 18 months in Iraq, for a company that had a contract with the US State Department to identify issues in Iraq.

Kiddo, I know people who actually served, as opposed to claiming to be minor functionaries who nonetheless have been granted deep insight.

I came back with 5 foot lockers of video, hard drives, photos and a 200 pages of fully footnoted (43 pages to be exact) report. Only to be edited by others down to 43 pages and no footnotes and the whole tone of the report was changed.

We (tinw) already know that you’re a bad writer. How the f*ck did you manage to gather 43 pages of footnotes while sitting around in Iraq?

I just want to see some local perspective and pics of the damned volcano.

Also, Scott; if you drop your keys in that lava then just let them go because, man, they are gone.

@ Scott Allen

Part 4

You write: “federal code call the “posse comitatus act” was enacted in 1878. The law forbids federal troops to enforce laws. I will quote from the law ‘From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws’ this law has been upheld several times and supersedes your Clause 15 and 16 by none other then the US Supreme Court. You should be happy that the ‘posse comitatus act’ exist as it is the law that prevented Trump from calling out US troops in Portland and other cites. As to your claim that you have never heard of a sheriff calling out a posse, it would probably surprise you to know that most sheriffs keep an up to date list of qualified persons who are trained to assist law enforcement.”

First, you don’t seem to even have a basic understanding of the difference between the Army of the United States and the militia, replaced nowadays by the
National Guard. In any case, as shown below, President can even call out army under special circumstances, and, or course, the National Guard.[Note. whenever I refer to a Wikipedia article, I first check out references for accuracy, often download them; but easier to just give Wikipedia than a list of articles easily found in their reference section] So far you haven’t gotten anything right; but I’m sure you will continue to display your incredible stupidity or, perhaps, you really don’t have a real position, just a miserable unhappy person whose only joy is irritating others!

From Wikipedia Posse Comitatus Act:

“The Act specifically applies only to the United States Army and, as amended in 1956, the United States Air Force. . .In the mid-20th century, the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower used an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, derived from the Enforcement Acts, to send federal troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, during the 1957 school desegregation crisis.

In the summer of 2020, the George Floyd protests in Washington, D.C. generated controversy when National Guard troops were called in to suppress protests, without President Trump invoking the Insurrection Act (though he threatened to do so). One set of troops, the District of Columbia National Guard, has historically operated as the equivalent of a state militia (under Title 32 of the United States Code) not subject to Posse Comitatus Act restrictions, even though it is a federal entity under the command of the President and the Secretary of the Army. National Guard troops from cooperative states were also called in at the request of federal agencies, some of whom were deputized as police. Attorney General William Barr cited 32 U.S.C. § 502(f)(2)(a) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/32/502#f_2_a), which says National Guard troops may engage in “support of operations or missions undertaken by the member’s unit at the request of the President or Secretary of Defense.”

So, one can ask why Trump didn’t call out National Guard in certain cases. Perhaps, because local and state authorities protested against use, though Trump did send in Federal Marshalls who clearly overstepped their authority by arresting people away from specific structures they were supposed to protect, etc.

From Wikipedia Insurrection Act of 1807:

“The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law[1] that empowers the President of the United States to deploy U.S. military
and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, or rebellion. The act provides a “statutory exception” to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878,

Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/254) requires the President to first publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse. As part of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, these provisions are now codified as amended.”

See also Wikipedia The Enforcement Acts

The citation said that abortion rate is about two times higher among blacks. This does not mean that black women get 40% of abortions . Do your math.

@ Kay West

Just to make clear [Note. whenever I refer to a Wikipedia article, I first check out references for accuracy, often download them; but easier to just give Wikipedia than a list of articles easily found in their reference section], Wikipedia Risk compensation [discusses Perelzman Effect]:

“A 1994 research study of people who both wore and habitually did not wear seatbelts concluded that drivers were found to drive faster and less carefully when belted . . However, a 2007 study based on data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concluded that between 1985 and 2002 there were “significant reductions in fatality rates for occupants and motorcyclists after the implementation of belt use laws”, and that “seatbelt use rate is significantly related to lower fatality rates for the total, pedestrian, and all non-occupant models even when controlling for the presence of other state traffic safety policies and a variety of
demographic factors”.[24] A comprehensive 2003 US study also did “not find any evidence that higher seat belt usage has a significant effect on driving behavior.” Their results showed that “overall, mandatory seat belt laws unambiguously reduce traffic fatalities.”

There’s a strong contender for today’s Lying Sack of Manure, Antivax Division.

James Lyons-Weiler is promoting on Twitter the fantasy that state authority to mandate vaccination derives from the 1927 Buck v. Bell decision granting states the authority to sterilize inmates of mental institutions (vaccination = eugenics, y’know).

Our self-proclaimed “objective, pro-vaccine rational scientist” overlooks the fact that the Supreme Court precedent relevant in this instance is Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), which upheld the state’s right to mandate smallpox vaccination.

Buck referred to Jacobson. I addressed it in a law review article. I said: “While Buck is a stain on our jurisprudence and a very, very problematic case,126 it is not Jacobson; modern sensibilities are rightly outraged by forced sterilization,127 but there is—appropriately—overwhelming support for vaccines that protect children from diseases and save lives.128 Jacobson is maintained as a leading case in public health where Buck v. Bell has long been relegated to the dustbin of historical embarrassments because Jacobson protects important interests.” The numbers are footnotes.

https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1674&context=jcl

I also addressed it shortly here. https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/jacobson-v-massachusetts-reiss-part-two

@ Dorit

I am quite aware of Jacobson; but my point was and is that our Supreme Court has a long history of more decisions hurting us than benefiting us.

By the way, you are probably aware that Nazi Germany based their first sterilization laws on ours, even some Americans from the Eugenics league visited and conferred with the Nazis.

And one of the charges not made during the Nuremberg War Crimes trials was the Nazis sterilization program because we had also done it.

Let us not forget the late Ken White, who has gone to the great Twitter in… Twitter.

Now I have to finish dealing with the quarter-inch of water on the porch floor. Jesus, you take a quick nap and all hell breaks loose.

@DB: “James Lyons-Weiler is promoting on Twitter the fantasy that state authority to mandate vaccination derives from the 1927 Buck v. Bell decision granting states the authority to sterilize inmates of mental institutions (vaccination = eugenics, y’know).”

That’s pretty funny coming from people who torture autistics to make them behave “normal”.

It’s even more “hilarious” when it comes from antivaxers who support eugenics (sometimes overtly).*

Ignoring a Supreme Court decision that established valid grounds for state vaccination mandates and instead invoking a subsequent, flawed decision on an entirely different matter because it referred to the earlier case, and claiming that the later decision led to vaccine mandates is thoroughly dishonest.

*I don’t recall L-W invoking eugenics-type arguments against vaccination, but I’ve seen it crop up when antivaxers are confronted with the consequences of their beliefs, i.e. injuries and deaths among those with immune deficiencies, cancer and other disorders that predispose to severe outcomes from vaccine-preventable diseases. We’re better off without those weaklings diluting the gene pool, y’know.
Not long ago, Del Bigtree contemptuously dismissed those especially vulnerable to Covid-19 as fatties with bad lifestyle choices who deserve their chronic diseases, but who unreasonably expect paragons of health like_him_ to take precautions against coronavirus spread.

@ Scott Allen

You write: “On November 7, 1938, Herschel Grynszpan, a 17-year-old refugee, a German Jew whose father had been deported to Poland, went to the German embassy in Paris with the intention of shooting the ambassador. Instead, he shot Ernst von Rath, the third secretary of the embassy, and mortally injured him. Ironically, this was under surveillance by the Gestapo for opposing anti-Semitism and Nazism.

One more thing you got wrong. From Wikipedia Ernst com Rath:

“On the morning of 7 November 1938, Polish-German Jew Herschel Grynszpan, 17, went to the German embassy in Paris and asked to speak with an embassy official. After he had learned of the deportation of his parents from Germany to the Polish frontier, Grynszpan assassinated Ernst vom Rath, the third secretary of the German embassy in Paris.[3] He shot the 29-year-old vom Rath five times, mortally wounding him with bullets to the spleen, stomach and pancreas.

Adolf Hitler himself sent his two best doctors, personal physician Karl Brandt and surgeon Georg Magnus, to Paris to try to save vom Rath’s life. Hitler promoted vom Rath, who had been a junior officer at the embassy, to the rank of Legal Consul, First Class (Gesandtschaftsrat I. Klasse) hours before vom Rath’s death on 9 November at 17:30 (5:30 p.m.).[6] Kristallnacht was launched within hours.

Why Grynszpan, who had fled from Germany to France in 1936, chose vom Rath is not known with certainty, although he was upset over the news that his family was being deported from Germany back to Poland. As far as it can be established, Grynszpan and Rath did not know each other. Most accounts of the shooting state that Grynszpan did not ask for vom Rath by name but only asked to speak to a member of the diplomatic staff. The records were falsified in 1942, and the Germans spread propaganda that Grynszpan’s intention was to kill the ambassador, Count Johannes von Welczeck.

So, he didn’t go with intention of killing German ambassador and Hitler used it as excuse for Kristallnacht, plus no mention of surveillance by Gestapo, And you copy and pasted a number of items of individual cases of Jews who had weapons. Have you ever heard the phrase: “the exception proves the rule.” The Gestapo and/or SS would burst into Jewish homes and apartments at all hours. Even if some had weapons, what were they to do? Sit up all night when loaded gun in hand and what would that have accomplished? Kill a couple of Nazis, then being killed by others in squad with them and then future breaks in would be prepared, well-prepared, perhaps with shields, whatever. Do you know the difference between anecdotes of individual cases and what happened or could have happened in general?

Though I find you incredibly stupid and despicable, at the same time, it confirms that in my mid-70s I still am capable of searching and building valid arguments, of opposing ASSHOLES like you.

By the way, did you even bother to read my OpEd that I linked to on Abortions? I doubt it. The one thing we “may” agree upon. But, as they say: “a broken clock gets the time right twice a day” so bound to agree on something.

@ Scott Allen

So, you like quoting Hitler. You do know that when his Generals asked to withdraw troops at Stalingrad to more defensive positions, he refused, stating win or die. You do know that towards the end of the war when it was obvious they were losing that he began a process of destroying Germany, not to slow the allies; but punishment because he believed the German people had failed him. He was both highly intelligent and mad, so relying on his thoughts a mixed can of worms. And, again, one man.

And you don’t like that I referred to two papers on gun control. First, did you actually read them? I doubt it. Second, I made clear they were only examples. And as I’ve written before, I could list dozens of studies of gun use in U.S. and comparisons with other nations; but I doubt it would have any effect on you at all.

Who needs the antivax disinformation dozen to extend the pandemic when you have Republicans? The conservative-Republican-majority Wisconsin State Supreme Court just struck down the Democratic Governor’s mask mandate, as case numbers in the state are already rising.

The case challenging the mask mandate was brought by Jere Fabick, a major Republican donor in Wisconsin… In 2016, Fabick gave $20,000 to conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley. Fabick is a board member and policy advisor for The Heartland Institute, [i.e. The Koch Brothers]

Idle late March speculation about alt med and anti-vax believers… why not?.

We know about crank magnetism ( Hoofnagle) and often observe that believers in alt med/ anti-vax maintain more than one crank-y belief in life science and/ or general information including politics, history, social science, crypto-zoology, alien lore, supernaturalism etc BUT
do we ever try to ascertain if they maintain islands of realistic beliefs?

If people accept woo-fraught hooey or CTs across the board, it might reflect general problems with thought and reality BUT suppose they are anti-vax ,supplement fanatics or 911 Truthers and still manage NOT to deny germ theory or the efficacy of some medical interventions or particular reality based material? Psychologists used to discuss ‘conflict-free zones’ that are unaffected by mental conditions in contradistinction from conflicted areas fraught with emotional distress and fantasy. Our absent friend, F.68.10, once suggested that perhaps we can approach naysayers through subject matter where they just might still hang on to reality a little.

Consider that the Grand Woo-meister of PRN – who most likely is beyond ANY redemption- STILL accepts that SBM is great for emergency medicine only- if you get shot or crushed in an accident, doctors can fix you up really well but for just about everything else, they are useless or even dangerous. Of course, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about because medicine cannot be NEATLY divided into compartments of emergency/ non-emergency, SBM is rather holistic that way. Care of acute and chronic conditions is based upon the same general facts- there is no magical dividing line- he has to give reluctant credit to SBM in these extreme cases because who can argue with re-attaching severed limbs or transplanting organs?

Arguing with a loon like him would of course be fruitless but in other cases perhaps not: we might try to enlighten anti-vaxxers who haven’t gone totally woo that they accept the findings of research about say, heart disease, injury, infection or allergy, which are subject to the same experimental rules. publishing restrictions and institutional controls as are vaccines – so they accept some of medicine The same supposed powers-that-be rule over cardiac meds as they do over vaccine production. Journals are not only run to promote vaccines: yet they might follow some of their advocacy for conditions outside of vaccines
If however they are totally into natural health, THEN ALL BETS ARE OFF… .

Whilst I’m here:
Large studies by Matthew Hornsey et al , U Queensland
2018- vaccine sceptics more likely to believe in conspiracy theories APA
2021- people who believe in Covid-19 CTs more concerned about self rather than others’ welfare and less willing to take the vaccine. Eur.J. of Soc Psy
” troubling implications for public health” they remark.

@ Scott Allen

You write: “I post a scholarly well written research paper that described the creeping campaign to disarm the Jews to make it easier to round them up and deport/dispose of them. . .Had you read the research paper I copied and pasted, you would have found that quote and the footnote where the quote was obtained from. The book is called “Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944 His Private Conversations” Authorized Recorded conversations with Hitler and various persons and transcribed into French and English from the original German.”

Yep, downloaded and read it. First, Stephen P. Holbrook is a long-time lawyer for the NRA. I listed two books on history of NRA that I would highly suggest you read. Second, besides quotes from Hitler, not exactly the most reliable of people, the article you referred to gives a quote from Felix Frankfurter that was specifically regarding the 4th Amendment, searches and seizures, not the 2nd Amendment. A number of his footnotes are to other works by himself. Some “HItler’s Secret Conversations” and many from newspaper articles, e.g., Reichsgesetzblatt (single largest group of footnotes), DEUTSCHE ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, New York Times, VÖLKISCHE BEOBACHTER (official organ of Nazi Party), and several other newspapers. Halbrook, Stephen P (2000). NAZI FIREARMS LAW AND THE DISARMING OF THE GERMAN JEWS. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law. No. 3: 483-535. Wow, a journal I’ve NEVER even heard about, doubt it is cited very often. As for “well-written”, being well-written doesn’t say anything about its validity. And he also gets wrong about killing of Ernst vom Rath, going along with Nazi propaganda that target was Ambassador. Interesting also, that no trial because defense lawyer pointed out that vom Rath was homosexual and claimed Grynzpan killed him because of being molested. Not true regarding Grynzpan; but true that vom Rath was homosexual. I actually downloaded a dozen papers by Stephen P. Holbrook, may attempt to read a few more; but bottom line is you apparently trust/rely on NRA for much of your position.

Somewhere above you wrote I would be surprised at how many of weapons I mentioned as military “bearing arms” in civilian hands, so I’ll ask again, which one: hand grenades, bazookas, surface-to-air missiles, poison gas, tactical nukes, biological weapons, etc? And what do you mean by “civilian hands”? Kept in homes? Or, civilians that are in reserves and kept on military bases?

And again, you asked several times for an apology for my prediction of a surge in March. As I explained, not an absolute; but based on good science, a probability. And as an analogy, I used meterologist predicting weather, based on probabilities, e.g., 70% chance of showers. Should they apologize every time they are wrong? And actually the past week has seen an uptick in cases of COVID-19, especially in some areas with variants that have been found to be more contagious and severe. Not as many dying; but more experiencing long COVID.

You claim to only be trying to engage in a conversation; but when I have refuted claims made by you, you ignore.

And, as for your videos from Iraq, no idea what you are talking about. What are they about?

In any case, I have a number of boxes of books in closets. Found one with some of books I have on law, Constitution, etc. I know I have more; but don’t feel like going though more boxes. Most were used in my undergraduate courses, old but classics.

My Books on the Law and Constitution

Henry J. Abraham (1962). The Judicial Process. Oxford University Press.

Bernard Bailyn (1992). The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Enlarged Edition). The Belknap Press of Harvard University. [currently reading]

Benjamin N Cardoza (1921).The Nature of the Judicial Process. Yale University Press.

Jerome Frank (1930). Law and the Modern Mind. Anchor.

Carol Haas (1994). The Consumer Reports Law Book: Your Guide to Resolving Everyday Legal Problems. Consumer Report Books. [use for reference]

Kermit L. Hall (1992). The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court. Oxford University Press. Reuters. [use to look up specific cases or read sections]

Peter Irons (1996). A People’s History of the Supreme Court. Viking.

Robert A. Kagan (2001). Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law. Harvard University Press. [fascinating book makes strong case that American legal system, civil and criminal has outcomes far less justice than number of other legal systems and explains why]

Anthony Lewis (1964). Gideon’s Trumpet. Vintage Books.

Edward H. Levi (1948). An Introduction to Legal Reasoning. University of Chicago Press.

Jack N. Rakove (1996). Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution. Knopf.

Victor G. Rosenblum (1955). Law as a Political Instrument. Random House.

Geoffrey R. Stone (2004). Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime. Norton.

joel

we have tried to keep up with your ever changing focus. As many of your post jump from one subject to the next, gun control, abortions, vaccinations, public health, history, global warming or climate change, your many claims to expertise in every subject including navel warfare, law, infections, global warming and how it relates to your selflessness to others.
To get away from abortions, Hitler, Jews etc. and back to gun control, you write of books you have read and just in your last post refer to an NRA lawyer as if that is somehow disqualifying on the history of Hitler and gun control. you cite about 30 (more or less) books on opposition to personal ownership (etc.) of guns, but fail to recognize that those people who wrote those books and op-ed pieces were opposed to guns.
As to your somewhat ironic statement of civilian ownership of military grade hardware and munitions. The ATF allows civilians to possess FULLY AUTOMATIC firearms, provided they pay the required tax.
As to your post about other weapons, obviously there is a limit but SAM’s, RPG’s etc are legal to own as long as certain parts are removed, but using the correct technology could be made to work again. Right now there are 10 of thousands of pounds of C4, HME’s (think Timothy McVey, you and your neighbor both have the chemicals needed to make HME’s), det caps etc, in civilian hands, plus an unknown quantity of black powder, gun powder etc. If the people who owned guns right now were the problem, the problem would be worse than you could imagine. Guns are not the problem people are the problem, in the US there are about 90 guns per 100 person, in Switzerland there are 46 guns per 100 person and they only have one hundredth the gun crime the US does. Civilian ownership is not the problem, possession in the wrong hands is the problem.
The insurgence in Iraq mostly used HME made with fertilizer and nitric acid.
If you want to really scare yourself, obtain a “warning placard” reader from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and then look at what the truck next to you is carrying. Then tell me you are worried about someone with a 15 round magazine in his semi auto rifle.
Being educated does not equate to intelligence, common sense or how many things you have read.

We forgot to include this, which overrules your copious book readings and op-eds. On a side note most of the books you cite were written prior to this decision and the Chicago decision. Now you can dismiss the Supreme Court if you like, but it is the law of the US.

“Many early 19th-century state cases indicated that the Second Amendment right to bear arms was an individual right unconnected to militia service, though subject to certain restrictions.”

“The Loyal Georgian (Augusta) on February 3, 1866, assured blacks that “[a]ll men, without distinction of color, have the right to keep and bear arms to defend their homes, families or themselves.”

“This holding is not only consistent with, but positively suggests, that the Second Amendment confers an individ­ual right to keep and bear arms”
but to your point ”

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.”

Your books are outdated and thus your starting position is wrong, but seeing you past post you will never admit that you were wrong or how racist it is to prohibit poor people (mostly people of color) the right to defend themselves, no matter what weapon they choose.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

So can we get back to Orac’s 2 posts that it is ok to de-platform, silence or ban their books of people we disagree with?

Thanks for the trip down memory lane! I started “researching” vaccine safety in 2006, realized pretty quickly that the antivaxx movement was nonsense, then found your blog (could have saved myself a lot of time if I’d reversed those steps!!). I don’t think I realized it was so new at that point. Remember that NYC pediatrician? Half of my friends used him… Palevsky!! Ah, the good old days.

He’s out and about: in fact , I heard him the other day on PRN.fm’s noon-time woo hour.
He’s been busy testifying in Connecticut, mis-informing the Orthodox in NY state and branching out into Covid denialism as well.

@ Scott Allen

Yep, I’ve talked about a number of subjects; but the main point is I’ve refuted every claim you have made. The following is a summary with some additional points. I gave above much more detailed explanations:

Your quotes from Founding fathers on 2nd Amendment. One completely bogus, the others taken out of context.

Your wrong use of Posse Comitatus. Even forbidding of US Army has exceptions and doesn’t cover National Guard, which has been used numerous times.

You were wrong about the assassination of Ernst vom Romm. Herschel Grynszpan didn’t target the German ambassador. And you write: “Ironically, this was under surveillance by the Gestapo for opposing anti-Semitism and Nazism.” Nope. No evidence that he opposed anti-semitism or nazism, except the probably from same propaganda developed afterwards by Nazis that Halbrook unquestioning used.

You cite a paper by Stephen Halbrook as well-written. You also criticized some of my choices of papers; but didn’t seem to notice that the majority of his references were Nazi newspapers or affiliates. So when you write: “in your last post refer to an NRA lawyer as if that is somehow disqualifying on the history of Hitler and gun control. you cite about 30 (more or less) books on opposition to personal ownership (etc.) of guns, but fail to recognize that those people who wrote those books and op-ed pieces were opposed to guns.” You miss the point that, yep, he is extremely biased; but even more so, his so-called well-written paper is based on mainly Nazi propaganda. Very few other references. And the books I cite do not oppose complete personal ownership of guns; but ownership by certain classes of people, e.g., ex-cons, mentally ill and certain classes of guns. You really think you make an intelligent argument by grossly exaggerating or, maybe, just plain lying. Basically you attack any of my references, automatically labelling them gun control extremists; but your references are clearly and unambiguously NRA or NRA supporters. The pot calling the kettle black. One more on Stephen Halbrook. It isn’t only that he works for and is strong supporter of NRA; but, now having read half dozen of his papers, he cherry picks references that support his position. As I wrote earlier, I have even read books by members of NRA; but two books on their history and often when I write articles I include what they write and explain why I disagree. And, the fact that you rely mainly on one author says a lot.

You refuse to even understand that if Jews in Germany had had guns would have made little difference. Yep, they would have killed a few Germans; but literally the Nazis could have used hand grenades, tanks, flame throwers, and just shot into the apartments and homes, etc. And you missed that those who in colonial times talked about arming everyone in case of a tyrannical government would have not applied to the Jews in Germany. Jews were a tiny minority, perhaps a few percent. Imagine what would happen in U.S. if, say, a couple of million tried to overthrow our government. They would fact world’s foremost military, national guard, state and local police. It would be a nightmare with many dead and injured; but they would lose.

You asked me for an apology for making a scientifically, probability-based, prediction. Ridiculous.

What Timothy McVeigh did was horrible; but how many times has something similar happened compared to the mass killings occurring on a regular basis? So, because of Timothy McVeigh I should worry about every truck I see and ignore the quite frequent gun killings. Yep, I also worry when walking my dog during rain storm of being hit by lightening or the rare event where a driver, heart attack, drunk, runs up on the sidewalk. Nope! Could happen; but then again a meteorite or perhaps part of plane could hit my home. I stay up at nights worrying.

You talk about bombs in Iraq; but leave out that our attack on Iraq was clearly war crimes. First, Saddam Hussein didn’t have weapons of mass destruction. Bush’s State of Union talked about Hussein purchasing type of uranium from Africa which had been debunked by International Atomic Energy Commission a year earlier and Bush was informed. UN weapons inspectors found no evidence and continued, even protesting against Bush. Osama ben Laden had fatwa to kill Hussein. So, claiming they were working together plain insane. Yep, Hussein was not a nice man; but he had a Christian Vice President, Jews worked as doctors in main hospitals, women attended university and even medical school, for a 3rd world nation, a good infrastructure, etc. So first war crime, attacking someone without being attacked. Second type of war crime, targeting civilian infrastructure. We bombed their electric power plants, water treatment plants, some hospitals, etc. When Paul Bremer appointed our representative, he literally fired all Sunni members of military. He chose a radical Shia as Prime Minister. Shia hit squads went into Sunni areas, murdering people in mosques, market places, on the streets. So, no electrical power, polluted water with 10s of thousands of deaths, mass unemployment among Sunnis and Shia hit squads and, voila, we created ISIS. So, even prior to ISIS, we killed directly and through, among other things, polluted water, according to credible estimates, up to 200,000 Iraqis. So, don’t bring Iraq into this discussion.

You called me a racist simply because I explained how being Jewish, knowing about the Holocaust at an early age, knowing many Holocaust survivors has been a nightmare for me my entire life and I have, thus, read dozens of books and hundreds of articles, attended seminars, and seen many documentaries. How does that make me a racist? Or, I’m a racist because I want guns taken out of hands of blacks. Where did I say that?. As a lawyer have you heard the phrase: “facts not in evidence?” I want background checks for any purchase of guns, whether on the net, gun shows, between private parties, etc. AND I want to reduce as much as possible the private ownership of military grade firearms, e.g., large magazines, semi-automatics that can easily be converted to automatic; but I have NO problem with owning rifles and shotguns for hunting and handguns for defense; but would also require taking gun safety course.

No one needs military grade weapons for self-defense, they are offensive weapons. Yep, maybe some extremely rare occasion that a gang is storming a residence; but for every rare situation, they are used many times over in mass murders. And you fail to understand that in colonial times even if one carried two loaded weapons they were inaccurate, slow to load, and powder could be wet, so anyone who tried to kill others would be quickly overpowered. I doubt they anticipated modern weapons.

You write: “Civilian ownership is not the problem, possession in the wrong hands is the problem.” Exactly; but you deny that all that most gun control advocates want is two things: a. background checks for any and all sales of guns, which you wrongly claim already exists and b. limit on firepower. The man in Las Vegas hotel did quite a bit of damage “Between 10:05 and 10:15 p.m. PDT, he fired more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition from his 32nd floor suites in the Mandalay Bay Hotel, which killed 60 people and wounded 411, with the ensuing panic bringing the injury total to 867” (Wikipedia. 2017 Las Vegas shooting). Yep, Timothy McVeigh “killed at least 168 people injured more than 680 others” (Wikipedia. Oklahoma City bombing). But think about it, if you are capable of such, a couple of rifles, lot easier than setting up bomb in truck and how many truck bombs have we had in past 30 years or more? In 2018, last year data available, “38,390 deaths by firearms, of which 24,432 were by suicide and 13,958 were homicides” (Wikipedia. Gun violence in the United States).

“According to the Pew Research Center, 48 percent of gun owners say they
own a gun mainly for protection. But for years, experts have been divided over how often people actually use guns in self-defense. The numbers range from the millions to hundreds of thousands, depending on whom you ask. The latest data show that people use guns for self-defense only rarely.” [Samantha Raphelson (2018 Apr 13). How Often Do People Use Guns In Self-Defense? WSIU NPR]

And from Harvard Injury Control Research Center “Gun Threats and Self-Defense Available at: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/

The following headings are followed by brief descriptions and detailed references to studies (note I have boxes full of related articles):

Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating
arguments, and are both socially undesirable and illegal

Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense

Guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime

Adolescents are far more likely to be threatened with a gun than to
use one in self-defense

Criminals who are shot are typically the victims of crime [read the explanation]

Few criminals are shot by decent law-abiding citizens

You write: “Guns are not the problem people are the problem, in the US there are about 90 guns per 100 person, in Switzerland there are 46 guns per 100 person and they only have one hundredth the gun crime the US does.” Wow! You don’t even make sense. That is exactly the point of gun control, to reduce the number of guns, thus reducing the number of gun crimes. Maybe it is too late; but some people have hope for a better future. International studies comparing United States with other industrially advanced democracies, all with some form of gun control, finds us an outlier in murders because much more difficult to kill someone with knife, baseball bat, etc. and especially multiple persons. A study conducted years ago comparing violence in Vancouver and Seattle found same amount of, for instance, bar room fights; but in U.S. went out to car/truck got gun and returned, so deaths exponentially higher. Study photocopied and in box in closet.

You write: “As to your somewhat ironic statement of civilian ownership of military grade hardware and munitions. The ATF allows civilians to possess FULLY AUTOMATIC firearms, provided they pay the required tax.” Wow! You really don’t seem to understand English. I made clear that the phrase “to bear arms” referred only to military. So, yep, one can allow automatic weapons under certain circumstances; but “arms” as a military term represents any and all military weapons. So, again, can an individual own a surface to air missile, hand grenades, flame throwers, etc? Nope. But “A Well-Regulated Militia” can. And the fact that people can get around this by assembling parts that then can be assembled doesn’t mean that is what the 2nd Amendment legally allowed. Our laws forbid a number of crimes; but people commit them, so does that mean they should be OK? Rather than entering into an intelligent civil exchange you continue to resort to the exception proves the rule. Well, there is NO perfect solution to any problem; but old saying: Don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect. Simply reasonable gun control measures can potentially reduce gun-related deaths and suicides, NOT END THEM. You represent, unfortunately, too many people who see world in black and white, absolutes.

You write: “Your books are outdated and thus your starting position is wrong, but seeing you past post you will never admit that you were wrong.” First, I am quite aware of Heller. But the point I made in a previous comment is that our Supreme Court is NOT an unbiased group who simply interprets our Constitution; but specifically chosen because of their “ideologies”. There have been a few good Justices; but most reflected some political position. And claiming Original Intent is a joke. Among the books I have and those I don’t own but read, what is meant by Original Intent? One can look at notes taken during Constitutional development. One can look at Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers. One can look at newspaper editorials and State ratification debates. And even some of Founding Fathers quite clearly said as times change so must the law. Heller was decided when a majority of Court were Republican Conservative nominees. And I included in my list of books one by Robert Kagan “Adversarial Legalism” which makes a compelling case that U.S. legal system, both criminal and civil, results in far fewer just outcomes than several other systems. Read it if you dare. My books on legal reasoning are NOT outdated. Court decisions change; but the theoretical underlying reasoning doesn’t, even if Justices ignore it. I wrote in a previous comment on Supreme Court using “Shadow Dockets”, quite simply, in secret deciding a case, issuing a simple unsigned ruling and that the recent Republican dominated Court has done this far more times over a few years than other Courts over decades. So, yep, our Constitution gives Court a lot of power; but that doesn’t make it right. And when have you ever admitted you were wrong. Just look at this current list.

And finally, you write: “Had you read the research paper I copied and pasted, you would have found that quote and the footnote where the quote was obtained from. The book is called “Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944 His Private Conversations” Authorized Recorded conversations with Hitler and various persons and transcribed into French and English from the original German.”

Have you ever heard of the “HItler Diaries?” It took a while; but finally discovered they were fraudulent. See Wikipedia. Hitler Diaries. Well, guess what? Well, maybe “Table Talks” not completely fraudulent, some parts more credible than others; but:

“In this article I will show how Oxford’s former Regius Professor of Modern History, Hugh Trevor-Roper, consistently through his career kept critical information regarding famous Hitler documents that he authenticated, information that could have seriously damaged the credibility of the sources he validated, from his readers.1 The documents in question are two well-known sources of Hitler’s utterances during the Second World War, namely Hitler’s Table Talk (henceforth: Table Talk), published for the first time in 1953 (second edition in 1973), and The Testament of Adolf Hitler (henceforth: The Testament) in 1961.2 Many, if not most, historians have used the Table Talk when writing about Hitler and the Second World War, and it has been accepted as genuine even though the translation into English is known to be flawed. Nevertheless, the authenticity of the original manuscripts (both currently missing, but there are two German versions in print based on them) has never been established conclusively, and many doubts still remain both about their claims to reliability and about how well they convey Hitler’s words. [Nilsson, M (2016). Hugh Trevor-Roper and the English Editions of Hitler’s Table Talk and Testament. Journal of contemporary history]

See also Wikipedia. Hitler’s Table Talk.

“Not one of Hitler’s table talk conversations were recorded or captured by audio, film, or broadcast on radio. According to H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler refused to admit any mechanical recorder into his room. Hitler reluctantly allowed Martin Bormann to pick stenographers (Heim, Piker) to record the conversations.” [Walker, Jim (2009 Jul 3). Hitler’s table talk – Germany
and the Jews – who knew what and
when]

I have more; but it is clear that Hitler’s Table Talk may include some valid and some non-valid parts.

Some of your statements seem almost delusional, e.g., gun control wants complete elimination of private gun ownership. I’m sure there are those who want this; but not the mainstream.

Oh, I guess you still haven’t read my paper on abortion and Narad refutes your claim that most carried out on poor blacks.

And finally, you write: “we have tried to keep up with your ever changing focus. As many of your post jump from one subject to the next, gun control, abortions, vaccinations, public health, history, global warming or climate change, your many claims to expertise in every subject including navel warfare, law, infections, global warming and how it relates to your selflessness to others.”

I already discussed “expertise” in comment above; but bottom line, just like you I post comments, usually with references. As I wrote, one of my all-time favorite authors was a high school graduate, Eric Hoffer who wrote “The True Believer” one of the best non-fiction books ever. I don’t jump from subject to subject. All of the above I’ve written more developed OpEds with extensive reference lists and even those, open-minded people not you, who disagree have complimented me on making a well-developed argument. As for vaccinations and public health, that was my profession. And gun injuries and deaths also fall under epidemiology and I have had colleagues who actually did such research and attended seminars. As for abortion, I guess you haven’t tried to read my paper. You might find it extremely well-developed nuanced argument. I worked years ago with women’s groups and ACLU, not a lot; but did try to help. And I’ve already written that since mid 80s I’ve read almost every article in Scientific American on climate change, many in Nature and Science Magazine, complete reports of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, National Science Foundation, etc. attended seminars and watched many documentaries, best was series “Years of Living Dangerously.” Am I an expert? I am a well-informed reasonably intelligent person. The point is, rather than question my expertise, why not focus on what I actually write. Oh, you can’t and when you do, as with Posse Comitatus, quotes from Founding Fathers, Gun Control (paranoid delusional absolutist belief), etc. you just are plain wrong.

September 2019 I lost my oldest and one of my all time closest childhood friends, 63 years from month we met in 5th grade. He was basically adopted by my parents and grandparents. And he was life-time member of NRA, in high school member of, forget actual name, but shooting club. Owned a number of very expensive pistols and we went to police firing range on occasion and he was a long time Libertarian. We agreed on some thing, compromised on others, and agreed to disagree; but our discussions on a range of subjects were alway actual discussions, listening to each other and then responding. He was also the last of my childhood friends. However, he kept his pistols locked in a safe and for home self-defensive he had a pump action shot gun. Reason? Simple. Can’t miss, pumping may scare away many, and will stop intruder but, as opposed to high power pistol won’t continue across street and, perhaps, hurt some innocent person. As lifetime member of NRA, he supported gun control measures and ALL of his weapons were registered. He probably was more intelligent than me, especially computers, theoretical physics, and military history. While I own maybe 4,000 books, he owned 10,000, wall to wall book shelves and he was always reading on different topics.

In any case, this has taken up too much of my time. I promised a colleague to proof read and edit next edition of undergraduate microbiology book, almost 900 pages, a lot of work. And I’m reading book “Ideological Origins of the American Revolution” and an Introduction to Islam. I have a pile of books on various subjects, don’t know which ones will be next. And I bookmark a number of websites, check every few days, and download articles to read. One website I really like is The Atlantic Monthly; but have some Conservative websites as well.

While I will try not to respond anymore, I have a few questions:

Are you member of NRA?

Do you own firearms? If so, how many and what types?

Did you vote for Trump?

Are you currently employed and, if so, doing what?

I don’t expect you to answer; but would be nice if you read my article on abortion; but doubt you will.

Not a member of NRA.
Not that its any of you business, but I gave my 4 guns to my 3 daughters over 10 years ago.
Sorry we were in Afghanistan for the first one, and the last one lets just say, “out of the country”
I hold a TS/SCI/ FSP so I can choose which jobs I accept and for how long.

As to your post and past posts, most all of your statements are you OPINION or INTERPRETATION of others opinion.

As to Narad I responded with two articles from the Guttmacher Institute (not a right wing anti abortion group)
https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2008/08/abortion-and-women-color-bigger-picture
https://www.guttmacher.org/infographic/2017/abortion-rates-race-and-ethnicity

To which he responded to me with this comment
“you overweening little shit.”
So you’re correct he really knows how to refute an argument.

AGAIN ALL YOUR ‘RESEARCH’ IS JUST YOUR OPINION. you really use ‘wicky’ for research.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/shocker-wikipedia-co-founder-says-says-site-badly-biased-toward-left/
or a quick read from Psychology Today ‘Suppressed findings, selective reporting, and citation biases.’

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser/202001/how-create-scientific-myths-without-really-trying

“As sceptics (sic) we should always remember that degrees aren’t the final word if we do not ground our assertions in evidence…… inflate their own, spurious, bogus or unrelated, degrees to convince readers/ listeners of their unassailable correctness: they posture ostentatiously displaying braggadocio grandiosely”

I think they might be referring to you

How does a composite of 10 people have 3 daughters?

Or were you lying about that whole “I am actually 10 people” thing?

Why do you feel compelled to lie?

@ Scott Allen

I really should just ignore you, If you really read what I’ve written, I made it clear that I always check the references in Wikipedia, even download many of them and I do my own search; but since Wikipedia overlaps with my search, easier to just refer to it as a summary. And what one of the Wikipedia founders say is just that, what one person says. He could be bitter about break, could have moved his politics to right, etc. One person’s opinion. Oh, that’s right, if it is my opinion, then one person’s opinion, regardless of how well thought out you just attack. And my late Libertarian friend and his other Libertarian friends often used Wikipedia articles. For someone who relies on mainly one person, Stephen P. Halbrook, whose articles you refer to mainly use German Nazi newspapers and newsletters as references, you really are a dishonest hypocrite.

As for Guttmacher and abortions, Narad’s link was also a paper by Guttmacher. Guess you didn’t notice it; but, in all fairness, something you wouldn’t understand, I should have read it more carefully as all it said was where clinics located, not in black areas. So, you haven’t bothered to read my paper on abortion, but you really keep attacking me without knowing my more developed position.

Joel A. Harrison (2020 Feb 24). Reader’s Editorial: Abortion is a 1st Amendment Issue. East County Magazine. Available at: https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/reader’s-editorial-abortion-1st-amendment-issue

As I’ve already written and you ignored, I support good prenatal and postnatal care for ALL pregnant women, regardless of race, ethnic group, or marital status, etc., other types of supports so they can have a decent life, e.g., decent living quarters (apartments), decent food, if they work, quality affordable daycare. I would NEVER recommend someone like you as a lawyer since you often resort to “facts not in evidence” and ignore those that are. This nation bails out crooked bankers, pays for weapons that our military leaders have testified before Congress that they don’t want nor need, has a health care system paid for by taxpayers, then turns it over to for-profit sector who are responsible for more than 30 cents on the dollar, delayed health care, lack often of continuity, etc. The only health care system in world designed for-profit, not for people and international studies, immense number, show that we rank poorly on all measures of health care, process, and outcomes. Yep, we have some excellent doctors, excellent health care centers, and some people do get excellent care; but I’m talking about the entire system.

And I went through an entire list of refutations of claims you made, a number not found through Wikipedia and you haven’t admitted to one.

The papers and people you refer to who discuss their take on the Holocaust are pro-gun, so, obviously they will try to show that gun ownership could have changed Holocaust; but as I’ve made clear, with just plain logic, no way. I could have a 50 caliber machine gun in my home. If police or military wanted me, they would get me. You continue to resort to anecdotes, relying on the exception proves the rule. Yep, a Jewish group escaped to forest in Byelorussia and did some damage; but didn’t stop Holocaust (see movie Defiance), yep, there was a breakout at Sobibor, yep, a handful held out for a short time in Warsaw Ghetto. So what? If I had been there, would have loved to take a few Germans and Poles with me and would have tried; but it would NOT have changed things.

And I found in Wikipedia several articles of international comparisons of guns and murders. They link to original source, which I checked and they are highly credible. I don’t remember exact numbers; but basically on per capita basis, the U.S. has four times the murder rate compared with UK, France, Canada, Sweden, and many other nations and actually around four times more guns. And you ignore the Harvard studies I referred to.

You criticize me for a bias, for reading a lot; but I see no indication that you come close to exploring various subjects to the extent I do, only cherry-picking to confirm your bias. And besides reading a lot, when younger, attended multiple seminars on many topics. I remember years ago, girlfriend at time pissed at me because we were supposed to go to party; but found out nationally known scholar on Russian Revolution was giving a free two hours seminar nearby, so told her I would meet her at party. Explains part of reason I live alone with dog; but, though it was over 30 years ago and she is happily married, she still phones and e-mails me on occasions. I am much better as friend than boyfriend. Why the Russian Revolution? I was working as epidemiologist on Medical faculty at time. Because I’m interested in a wide variety of things. When I was working on my doctorate, always had a book on some other subject, history, science, economics, politics, and tried to read 1/2 hour a day and during holidays, a bit more.

The 2nd Amendment is a poorly worded Amendment, actually the most poorly worded one; but it starts with “A Well-Regulated Militia” and used strictly military term “bear arms”. Search long enough and one can find support for just about any position; but if one reads a lot of early American history, including writings of Founding Fathers, many understood that the Constitution wasn’t written in stone, not like 10 Commandments, that as times change, as society changes, interpretation changes. Unfortunately, anyone who reads history of Supreme Court and especially looks at it today, except for a few Justices, decisions are based on their biases and prejudices. Scalia actually said on several occasions that he couldn’t live with himself if he didn’t see what was immoral. Well, the Constitution doesn’t discuss morality. Morality is often based on ones religion. So, Scalia’s approach to gays, abortion, etc. was based on his conservative Catholicism. And there have been so many Court decisions that one can find precedent for just about anything. Relying on the Supreme Court to support your position, while ignoring all the research, for instance, on how guns major reason for high murder rate in U.S. says more about you than the ambiguity of 2nd Amendment and seldom used for self-defense. Currently, not counting books, I have almost 125 papers in folder on computer on 2nd Amendment, many from law journals.

And I listed one journal article that makes a strong case it was pushed so Southern States could be armed to deal with slave uprisings. I have several such articles. But, I listed the one above and you won’t read it. Why should you read something that may, in a well-developed, well-researched paper contradict what you chose to believe. And a fascinating book by Robert Kagan “Adversarial Legalism” that makes a well-thought out case that the American system of justice, civil and criminal isn’t a very good one.

There is a defense mechanism in Psychology, projection, someone projecting their unacceptable behaviors, in your case, relying on limited resources, ignoring over and over what others write, onto others. Yep, what I write is my opinion, just as what anyone does; but I back it up with extensive, in many cases, education, reading, and experience. Doesn’t guarantee I am always right; but certainly that it isn’t just a bias based on little to no questioning. As I wrote, I go out of my way to read as many sides as possible. So, once again, read my paper on abortion.

Guns don’t kill people, people do; but limiting guns, not to paranoid schizophrenics, to ex-cons guilty of violent acts, and sundry other unreliable people, limiting magazine capacity, could save lives, something you don’t seem to care much about, given your take on masks, physical distancing, based on Times of India and cherry picked government documents with NO UNDERSTANDING OF IMMUNOLOGY, INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND EPIDEMIOLOGY.

By the way, though I hope it doesn’t happen, we are seeing, perhaps, the beginning of a 4th surge, probably fewer deaths; but more with long COVID, including younger, healthier people because of variants (mutations) of COVID. We’ll see. Will you apologize if we really get a BIG SURGE?

As I said before, you aren’t commenting on this blog to learn. I would bet you are an extremely unhappy individual and get your jollies irritating others. So, why do I do it? I’m an old man, sheltering-in-place with a great dog I got from a rescue group, A shelter was going to euthanize him and I nursed him back to health. I can only concentrate so long on proof-reading and editing colleagues manuscript for next edition of undergraduate microbiology text, and focus on other reading; but people like you just remind me of what is wrong with world. Like I explained, my long time childhood friend was life-time member of NRA, long time Libertarian, and extremely well-read; yet we could have good discussions, sometimes agreeing, sometimes meeting half way, and sometimes agreeing to disagree. And he supported some gun control and limits of types of weapons and, if you look at history of NRA, so did they at one time; but as with you and many in U.S. no middle road, just polarization, black and white as with your claiming gun control groups want to eliminate guns.

Here is some friendly advice, Scott. thegatwaypundint is shit. Epochtimes is shit. thesun is shit. You reveal yourself to be a ‘freeper’ if only ‘unwittingly’.

Leave Todd Herman, EIB microphone, and FR alone for awhile and see if that doesn’t rectify your atrotious golf swing and bad bowels and ugly ex-wife and fucked up kids that were afraid to admit to inhalation because daddy told them not to.

https://youtu.be/_WyD94vNqWg?t=43

As to Narad I responded with two articles from the Guttmacher Institute (not a right wing anti abortion group)

Um, no, one. And why in G-d’s name you were trying to drag me into another of your off-topic pet issues, which I haven’t commented on in the first place, is anybody’s guess.

Oh, wait, you’re a bonehead.

Also,

I hold a TS/SCI/ FSP so I can choose which jobs I accept and for how long.

Do you get to wear a shoe phone and use the Cone of Silence?

This may be good news if I am interpreting it correctly:
AoA, today: Kim bemoans the once-thriving “bio-med community” diminishing as a B12 lollipop company goes out of business as Facebook and Yahoo groups fade.
I personally have noted a dearth of anti-vax content except for the really Big Guns ( RFK jr, Del, Tenpenny, PRN, Mercola etc)

Not surprising, if you consider that woo-beliefs exist primarily to perform psychological functions that are generally only loosely related or even unrelated to the manifest subject matter of those beliefs. You’ve referenced some of these functions in your recent citations of research. Broadly speaking, for example, we might talk about a lot of this stuff as addressing a need to seek “empowerment” in a world that otherwise feels out of control and reduces the individual to a mere object buffeted by random winds.

Since the un-relatedness of the content to the underlying psychological need is a feature, not a bug, providing a shield against exposing the real hurt, I would make sense that woo-ists develop investments in those content particulars, and tend to stick with them. But an even somehow more functional narrative may pull adherents from another. Or, when push comes to shove, any number of other conspiracy-related narratives can perform the functions formerly addressed by a narrative that has become somehow problematic. E.g. all the Flat Earther web traffic seemed to disappear as followers went over to Q-Anon, and now a lot of former Q-followers are going over to antivax.

I have the feeling that allegiance to less apocalyptic forms of woo as found in alt-med circles might been even more open to fluidity…

So, if “the once-thriving bio-med community” is diminishing, I’d guess they’ve most likely just gone elsewhere, which might even be bad news given the number of potential landing spots these days that have far darker than lollipop vibes.

Something similar might also be happening with participation in the long-standing antivax locations like AoA. Not necessarily an abandonment of antivax, but maybe a migration to other forms and forums (?). One of the corollaries of the Disinfo Dozen story is that if only a handful of folks are originating AV content, then a heck of a lot of folks would seem to be circulating it (including, apparently, Russian intelligence agencies). So even if all the “Big Guns” got de-platformed, I’m not sure antivax traffic, or antivax influence, would decrease.

You may be right. I think she’s discussing mothers she knows who try to “cure” autism through various supplements, diets and treatments ( that aren’t SB psychology/ education).

Many of the anti-vax/ woo sites who have been black listed by social media are switching over to MeWe, gab, telegram and other darker places. I know for certain that some anti-vaxxers in CA have become quite friendly with the “freedom’ movement, even calling themselves “freedom angels”, opposing vaccine mandates and other governmental intrusions on sovereignty…
Peter Hotez reports about groups in Texas that oppose vaccines, support health freedom and other more political right wing/ religious attitudes and dispense disinformation on a grand scale: he’s written articles and appeared on television about this unholy alliance: Mike Adams, also in TX, would feel quite at home with these people.

You and I probably live in the most blue areas but still, I worry about the total effect on society of these trends..

@Denice Walter

Telegram should be neutral. Or, at least, not visible. It is a protocol that promises (falsley??) to be private communication. You are right, though, that these other platforms want to blast it loud and proud and that they are kind of scuzzy.

Check out Voat {it’s like reddit but way worser}. Or maybe don’t do that if you just ate fish or tend to have a weak stomach in general.

Scandal in the world of homeopathic research: a British homeopath is being condemned for misconduct for having tried to circumvent blinding of participants in a trial to evaluate efficacy of the homeopathic drug carcinosin* for chronic fatigue syndrome. From the Times Higher Education website:

“At the time of the University of Sheffield study, published in 2004, Dr (Clare) Relton was working as a homeopath who had contact with some of the 103 participants given either a homeopathic remedy known as carcinosin or a dummy drug. Although the study found no statistically significant clinical improvements among those taking homeopathic treatments compared with those on a placebo, it led Dr Relton to complete a PhD on how clinical trials test homeopathy and she has since published widely on the issue.

At a homeopathy conference in June 2019, however, she told an audience that she realised there was “a cunning way of circumventing the blinding” of the trial, which ensured both participants and practitioners were unaware of who was receiving a placebo, by giving all her clients a dose of the drug in question.

In its new paper, the journal recounts how Dr Relton explained in the talk – which is available online – that she believed that if trial participants came back at the second appointment with no change in symptoms, “then we know they are on the placebo”.

Homeopaths should use their “amazing skills” such as “deep listening, deep understanding of what we know is toxic in our systems, about diet and counselling” and “don’t bother doing all that trying to find the right remedy”, she added.

On the issue of giving placebos to patients, she added: “We’re trained to treat people. I’m not trained to be deceiving people.””

Oh, the irony.

You could argue that this is a relatively small instance of misconduct, but since it’s homeopathic, the effect is magnified greatly.

*as you might have guessed, carcinosin is a homeopathic remedy (actually, a _miasmatic_ one) prepared from cancerous tissues, typically of the breast (attention Orac!). It has a variety of uses by homeopaths, including but not limited to treating cancer, bronchitis, immune dysfunction, to counteract toxicity due to vaccines and to treat psychosis in people having a “cancerous heredity”. Intriguingly, efficacy seems to depend in part on the personality of the patient, as explained in this revelatory link:

http://nesh.com/the-new-england-journal-of-homeopathy/vol-5-no-4-fall-1996/the-cycle-of-carcinosin/

Leave it to Joel to first, appeal to his authority, as he is qualified entomologist/virologist/epidemiology , then his appeal to his vast knowledge of everything in this world from criminal law, to navel tactics, his superior knowledge the supreme court, add in abortion and you have the perfect person to run everyone’s life, while he’s ” I’m an old man, sheltering-in-place” of course expecting others to expose themselves to covid. With his added defense of the human shields of the homeless, the recipients of his frequent blood donation, drug trial participant. when those human shields don’t work, throw in his saving the sick animal shelter dog and tug at the emotional side of his argument. To protect him from the gun control issue, he had a friend who was an NRA member ( I did miss the one about him have a black friend or a Hispanic or Arab friend to show that he is not a racist) more human shields.

For as well read you claim to be, you glossed over a pro-vaxxers description of you, without a comment.

“As sceptics (sic) we should always remember that degrees aren’t the final word if we do not ground our assertions in evidence…… inflate their own, spurious, bogus or unrelated, degrees to convince readers/ listeners of their unassailable correctness: they posture ostentatiously displaying braggadocio grandiosely”

“but limiting guns, not to paranoid schizophrenics, to ex-cons guilty of violent acts, and sundry other unreliable people,”
We already do those things.
“as with your claiming gun control groups want to eliminate guns”.
And actually that is what most gun control groups want, they are willing to accomplish this in a step by step process, Starting with the oldest gun control group “The Coalition To Stop Gun Violence” which they called gun ownership “the dangerous insurrectionist ideology”

@ Scott Allen

You are either extremely stupid and/or delusional and/or just a plain liar. Yep, I discussed my background; but I also explained clearly that I look at as many sides as possible, then explain why I disagree with them and that I do extensive searches. And with public health, and vaccines, my profession. And what I learned from my studies was to use critical thinking, something you obviously lack. And, please explain why someone who, in depth, tries to learn about something, is only just an opinion; but you, who cite a few references and devote most of your time to repeating my background and not refuting what I write should have any credence at all? I’m beginning to doubt anything you say, including blood donations, participating in clinical trials, etc. And, you still haven’t read my paper on abortion where just one example of my nuanced thinking backed with references. You can Google my name and find some of my peer-reviewed articles and many other papers I’ve written where I took some time to develop them, write them, etc. Can you claim the same?
In fact, I have two papers on Orac’s sister blog, Science-Based Medicine.

So, you just keep on with your DISHONEST POSTS. You are truly one despicable individual.

I’m quite confident that most people following this blog, including Orac, side with logic, critical thinking, etc. as displayed by me, NOT YOU!

@ Scott Allen

You write: “For as well read you claim to be, you glossed over a pro-vaxxers description of you, without a comment. “As sceptics (sic) we should always remember that degrees aren’t the final word if we do not ground our assertions in evidence…… inflate their own, spurious, bogus or unrelated, degrees to convince readers/ listeners of their unassailable correctness: they posture ostentatiously displaying braggadocio grandiosely”

Except for the “degrees” just an example of projection on your part. As I’ve explained over and over, I use logic, critical thinking, extensive reading, etc to develop my opinion and many find what I write quite good. Haven’t seen anything by you?

You write: “To protect him from the gun control issue, he had a friend who was an NRA member ( I did miss the one about him have a black friend or a Hispanic or Arab friend to show that he is not a racist) more human shields.”

Nope, one of my best friends was a life-time member but I have known a number of NRA members, including several in his circle of Libertarians. Just one more example of your using “facts not in evidence.”

And, nope, not one Black friend, one Hispanic friend, one Arab friend; but several, going back to early childhood. And I didn’t think of them based on aforementioned categories; but just as people I liked. And, as I mentioned, I belonged to local YMCA for over 15 years, interacted, drank coffee, went to lunch, etc with all of the above and more. Once more you use “facts not in evidence.”

As an undergraduate participated in demonstrations against Vietnam War and for Civil Rights. It wouldn’t matter if I could provide witnesses, etc. because your goal isn’t a civil dialogue but just to prove, and this is intentional, that your are an ASSHOLE ON STEROIDS. You can’t even admit that the quotes from Founding Fathers you used were a mistake.

And, if you worked for Justice Department, I wonder why you left and what your record actually was.

Joel:
I notice that scott quotes me a few times, edited, as if to imply that I am critiquing you but nothing could be further from the truth.

I believe degrees ALONE are not enough and that WOO-MEISTERS frequently parade their faux credentials and crappy degrees to disguise their lack of data
..
Your degrees reflect a lifetime of learning and originate from respectable institutions. I often observe that we have areas of overlapping studies in psychology and biology. Educatiis a start but doesn’t mean that you automatically have carte blanche to say whatever you will but most times, you learn – especially in SB fields like those mentioned- how to cite research, understand statistical analyses and come to conclusions.

I don’t respect Orac ONLY because of his degrees but because of how he utilises them .: he criticises people who have medical degrees but who fall prey to unsubstantiated hypotheses and misuse of research data.

I show how alt med mis-informs and suggest more SB approaches as well as enlightening readers about little known aspects of social psych/ cognitive psych research that are meaningful for sceptics. I present in a totally different manner than you do but my aim is ultimately quite similar, . :

How does a composite of 10 people have 3 daughters?

Or were you lying about that whole “I am actually 10 people” thing?

Why do you feel compelled to lie?

@ Natalie White:

You write:

Natalie White
says:
April 2, 2021 at 10:53 am
Dr. Robert Redfield needs to be added to the list for spreading disinformation. He thinks the Rona has its origins in Wuhan? https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-if-the-former-cdc-director-is-right-about-the-wuhan-labs/2021/04/01/9fe1d658-9329-11eb-9668-89be11273c09_story.html

NOTE. I don’t give URLs to referenced articles. Just cut and paste title into Google and you should easily find them.

Before directly addressing the above, some background info. I’ve been following the current pandemic since middle of January. I should mention that I currently have in a folder with many subfolders on my desktop over 2,000 papers on COVID and also corona viruses, probably read over half and skimmed the rest. First thing I did was to refresh my knowledge of corona viruses, starting with chapter in what is considered the bible of virology, Field’s two volume Virology, plus downloading a number of papers. When the claims of escaping from a Chinese lab first developed, I did my own search. Several studies carried out in China several years before the current pandemic found that fruit bats had several thousand variants of the corona virus and blood samples from Chinese found a significant number had antibodies to some of the bat corona viruses.

REFERENCES:

Ge, XY et al. (2013 Nov 28). Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature; 503: 535.

Hu, Dan et al. Genomic characterization and infectivity of a novel SARS-like coronavirus in Chinese bats. Emerging Microbes & Infections; 7: 154.

Menachery VD (2015 Dec). A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence. Nature Medicine: 21(12): 1508.

Wang N et al. (2018). Serological Evidence of Bat SARS-Related Coronavirus Infection in Humans, China. Virologica Sinica; 22: 104.

And I’m sure you are aware that the current COVID virus already has a number of mutated variants, also known potential of corona viruses.

REFERENCES:

Anderson KG et al. (2020 Mar 20 online). The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine

Cheng VCC (2007 Oct). Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus as an Agent of Emerging and Reemerging Infection. Clinical Microbiology Reviews: p. 660.

Morens D and Breman JG (2020 Sep 9). Coming to terms with the real bioterrorist behind Covid-19: nature. STAT.

Note that I have more of above and number of papers discounting possibility came from accidental lab breach.

And at least some evidence indicates it was in U.S. earlier “before the disease was even identified in China . . . The study researchers, from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), analyzed more than 7,000 blood donations collected by the American Red Cross in nine states between December 13, 2019 and Jan. 17, 2020.

REFERENCES:

Rettner R (2020 Dec 2). It Now Looks Like COVID-19 Was Already in The US in December 2019. Science Alert.

Now, let’s look at Robert Redford. To start with Wikipedia. Robert R. Redfield lists a number of controversies he was involved in: The Fake Graph and HIV vaccine research and evangelical group connections (you can check it out yourself). The following are, of course, only news articles, not scientific papers; but we know that he was appointed by Donald Trump, not a fan of scientists and playing up to Evangelicals.

REFERENCES:

Berkowitz B (2020 May 18). The CDC’s Dr. Robert Redfield’s “Christianity” Vs. Science Leadership During Coronavirus Pandemic. Buzzflash.

Choma R (2020 Mar 7). Trump’s CDC Director Has a History of Controversial Opinions on Controlling Viruses: Robert Redfield has long allied himself with conservative politicians and their pet theories about disease. Mother Jones.

Holmes K et al. (2020 Jun 5). CDC woes bring Director Redfield’s troubled past as an AIDS researcher to light. CNN Politics.

Merlin1962 (2020 Mar 7). Warning Signs About Trump Appointee Dr. Robert Redfield To CDC Starting To Be Proven True. Daily Kos.

So, could it possibly still have accidentally emerged from a lab in Wuhan? Yes, though highly unlikely. We have had a number of breaches of biosafety labs in U.S. and some of them could have resulted in infections among general public.

REFERENCES:

Mohney G (2014 Jun 20). Anthrax Scare Is Latest CDC Lab Security Lapse. ABC News.

Mongilio H (2019 Nov 24). CDC Inspection Findings Reveal More about Fort Detrick Research Suspension. The Frederick News-Post, Md.

NBC News (2014 Dec 24). CDC Reports Possible Ebola Exposure at Containment Lab: A mistake at a CDC biocontainment lab may have exposed one lab technician, and possibly more, to the Ebola virus, federal health officials said. NBC News.

Young A (2016 Jun 2). Newly disclosed CDC biolab failures ‘like a screenplay for a disaster movie’. USA Today.

Young A (2017 Jan 4). CDC keeps secret its mishaps with deadly germs. USA Today.

And this nation has conducted “gain-of-function” research as China did, basically making microbes either more transmissible and/or deadly and any one of these could have broken out (see for instance Wikipedia. Gain of function research)

So, though everything known about corona viruses, the large number of variants in fruit bats in China, evidence of antibodies in humans, and capability of mutating, the probability is extremely high that nature is the terrorist; but, since I go with science, there is a very low; but possibility that did escape from lab. However, Robert Redford and other conservative Republican claims are not very credible. Of course they want to blame China.

One last point. The worst pandemic of modern times can be partly attributed to, guess who, the United States. When AIDS broke out, just as experts tried to get President Trump to act, experts tried to get President Reagan to act: “it wasn’t until September 1985, four years after the crisis
began, that President Ronald Reagan first publicly mentioned AIDS.”
And when the WHO began it work to stop AIDS in Africa, “President Reagan prohibited funding for condoms”

REFERENCES:

Bennington-Castro (2020 Jun 1). How AIDS Remained an Unspoken—But Deadly—Epidemic for Years. http://www.history.com

Cueto M et al. (2019). The World Health Organization: A History. Cambridge University Press. page 209.

So, as opposed to people who want to see things in black and white, I go with the science and so far, though not impossible, the science says did not escape from Wuhan lab; but given biosafety lab breaches in U.S. not impossible; but, again, I want the science, not claims by right-wing Republicans for political gain. And, if in the end it turns out it did result from a breach in Wuhan lab, what would be gained to blame the Chinese when another microbe could easily have breached our biosafety labs?

At best, given everything I’ve read, the Chinese delayed informing world by max two weeks; but once informed, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand took precautions that saved lives and prevented lockdowns, while we delayed acting for a much longer time. In fact, Trump is not alone to blame. In 2008 or 9 (too lazy to look up) Republican President George W Bush established a dozen National Strategic Stockpiles, basically acre large warehouses stocked with N95 masks, face shields, other personal protective equipment, antivirals, antibiotics, ventilators, portable hospital beds, and even tents for emergency hospitals. When it came time to renew, Obama was President, and, if you remember, the Republicans, especially Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, pledged not to cooperate with Obama, so when the Stockpile was up for renewal, it wasn’t. And during first three years of Trump administration, he was encouraged several times to renew; but did nothing. And in States where Republicans rule, funding for public health was reduced. Unfortunately, Public Health is the step child of medicine. Out-of-sight, out-of-mind. For a few years after a pandemic, we fund it, the especially the Republicans; but some Democrats also complicit, we don’t. Yet, just as when we eat at restaurants and don’t get food poisoning because they are regularly inspected by local public health departments, not realizing just how well they work, so goes it. The stockpiles could have provided up to three months supplies to hospitals!

So should Robert Redfield be added to list of spreading disinformation? I’m not sure. As I wrote, is a small; but real possibility; but he certainly is grossly exaggerating his case. Oh well.

Let’s not overthink it: the “Wuhan labs” narrative has nothing to do with plausibility and everything to do with these racist chud suckers wanting someone to blame.

Because, the confluence of Mother Nature and human activities is not global wet lab enough. Stupid and ignorant AF on top of bigoted; quelle effing surprise.

Nobody gives a crap what you believe, Nutty; only what you can prove. And the only thing you’ve proved is you’re a dumb bigoted bag of shit, so absolutely no change there.

Well done, Nuts. You have an easy opportunity to back up your “COVID was created in/escaped from a Chinese lab” claim with evidence, yet the best you can bring is a weak ad-hom—thereby proving you’ve got none.

Not that anyone is surprised, mind. It’s just a bit boring when we never have a chance to disprove you ’cos you insist on disproving yourself first.

@ Natalie White

I totally agree that gain of function experiments should stop and that includes the United States. As to what you choose to believe, obviously you ignored what I wrote as your belief system TRUMPS science. I devoted some time to actually explaining what we actually know, including not only the large number of corona virus variants in fruit bats, including a few with ability to attach to human ACE2 cell receptors, the percentage of Chinese found with antibodies to coronaviruses long before current pandemic and the number of more serious variants that have developed in the current COVID-19. So, mother nature is the odds on favorite to be the terrorist. And I made it clear that given the aforementioned the probability, though not zero, that it was a Chinese lab breach, extremely low. But, as usual, with NO basics of immunology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, and, despite what I wrote, your beliefs TRUMP everything else.

It is a waste of time to respond to your comments as you are completely closed-minded. Unfortunately, you represent a large, hopefully minority, segment of American populations, that is, those who lack understanding of science, lack critical thinking skills, and, thus, undermine the basic idea of a democracy, that is, a government based on the INFORMED CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

I totally agree that gain of function experiments should stop and that includes the United States.

Despite the impact on vaccine development? I’m with Racaniello.

@Narad,

Good paper.
I’m hoping TWiV discusses the GoF issue since it seems to have become a political talking point.

Blocking this research sounds like a good idea, but may he hard to define in practice and prevent or inhibit a lot of important research.

Nat, I realise that religious people have difficulty in determining the difference between belief and established fact but do you? Do you realise that what you believe isn’t necessarily true?

Also, why? What exactly is your problem with mother nature producing something that has the capacity to f#ck us over? I mean, have your heard of funnel web spiders? Taipan snakes? Ebola? Earthquakes? Cape buffalo? Salt water crocodiles?

@ Natalie White

Why are you linking to something to do with space?

Imagine that a pandemic arose from the U.S. We do gain-of-function studies, have had numerous breaches of biosecurity labs, and our government has lied to us numerous times. Imagine the exact same circumstances, a virus with thousands of variants in U.S. animals, antibodies to some of them in Americans. And, the Chinese and other nations ignoring the high probability of nature as the terrorist and blaming the U.S, What would your belief be? I would be willing to bet on nature as the terrorist.

When the current pandemic began, you posted comments questioning how serious COVID was, questioning masks, questioning physical distancing, etc. and you have continued to do so. Well, currently we have 650,000 dead and probably another 200,000 with Long COVID. And the numbers are probably an undercount. If someone with mild congestive heart failure dies at home highly unlikely blood will be screened for COVID; but without COVID infection, odds are he/she would have lived longer, And, while hopefully not, we may have a 4th surge with variants that are more contagious and more serious with potential to harm a lot more younger people. Probably not killing; but Long COVID. With vaccine rates increasing, there will still be pockets with high levels of unvaccinated people.

In 1957 there was a series on TV entitled Court of Last Resort. You can actually find episodes on YouTube. I watched and bought paperback, still have. I learned at an early age how easily some innocent people were convicted and how our system bends over backwards to not admit errors, preferring to keep an innocent person in prison or even execute. Since then I have followed innocence projects, read probably dozen books and hundreds of articles. One was a young man convicted of rape/murder. He had an alibi, when fellow workers came to work, he had already moved with forklift amount of stuff that would have taken at least two hours, time when woman raped/murder; but he had same blood type. Years later DNA proved he was innocent. First appeal court’s ruling, he didn’t rape woman; but held her down. No evidence in trial that there were two perpetrators; but, so what? The appeals court didn’t want to admit someone wrongly convicted. I can give numerous such cases.

I would hate to have you on a jury. If you decided defendant guilty or innocent you would ignore either DAs evidence or defense attorney’s evidence. And if you voted for death penalty and person executed or long prison sentence and new evidence TOTALLY proved innocent, you would not agree. I’m sure you would come up with some conspiracy theory. After all, your beliefs are all that count.

Do you know what the Dunning-Kruger Effect is? Simply, research has found numerous times that the less people know the more certain they are they are right. Look it up in a Google search.

Even before the internet, people believed absurd things; e.g., that President Eisenhower was working with Soviet Union. And now with internet, one can find anything and everything, regardless of its validity. As I wrote above, based on my strong science background the probability of the current COVID-19 being a result of nature’s terrorism is extremely high; but, though probability extremely low, it could have been a breach of a Wuhan lab. So, which do I go with? The science and high probability. Which do you go with, rejection of science and sticking to your beliefs. Just as your beliefs that COVID not so serious, etc. I wonder if we have a 4th surge and approach one million dead if you will change your mind? I doubt it.

And I doubt anything will change your mind. I have one suggestion. You live in Bay Area. Walk across any nearby lake with press coverage and from then on I will ignore the evidence and trust your beliefs; but, despite your believing in your own stupidity, I’ll stick with science. While it isn’t always right,it usually is and it is self-correcting, based on observations that can be challenged by other competent scientists, etc.

@ Narad

First, I have bookmarked “This Week in Virology” AND virology blog, both by Racaniello and regularly check them and read various articles. And if you checked the reference list to his article you would find an overlap with references I gave above.

Yep, gain-of-function can produce valuable knowledge; but in the article you link to Racaniello writes: “Although there have been recent lapses in high-containment biological facilities, none have resulted in harm, and work has gone on for years in many other facilities without incident. I understand that none of these arguments tell us what will happen in the future, but these are the data that we have to calculate risk, and it appears to be very low.” As I wrote above, biosafety lab breaches have occurred much more often than we are aware because our government lies and/or withholds things from us. And, yes, so far the risk appears quite low; but in risk math one multiplies the risk probability by the seriousness of the event. As we see with COVID-19, though the overwhelming evidence is not a breach of a Wuhan lab, if it had been, no matter how low the prior probability was, the result has been catastrophic.

So, perhaps a compromise is in order. Only allow such experiments to be conducted in a few well-regulated level 3 or 4 biosafety labs with high level oversight, random, unannounced visits, etc. And there would have to be an independent oversight committee. I am all for the advancement of knowledge; but don’t trust people, even researchers. Besides our government, we can’t be sure there wasn’t breaches that were hushed up by researchers without notifying any government agency. A separate example is President Reagan’s firing of air-traffic controllers. There weren’t any collisions; but an investigation showed a market increase of near, very near misses compared with when experienced air-traffic controllers were working. More luck than anything else.

We can learn a lot from carefully conducted research; but the fact we have had so many breaches calls for a crackdown and serious improvements. It will only take one serious breach to cause damage potentially outweighing the benefits. While there are no guarantees in life, I would support such research under strict enforced guidelines.

And keep in mind that our government has been lax, actually corrupt when it comes to many things, e.g., water pollution, air pollution, sales of foods, pharmaceuticals (over 25 approved by FDA later withdrawn because of serious adverse events, including a number of deaths), though not vaccines, despite what some believe because the regulations and oversight for vaccines is much much higher than for any other pharmaceutical or medical device and much more research is conducted around the world.

Oh, I forgot that we already had in place a stop on gain-of-function research in United States.

In misinformation deplatforming news:

Peter Bowditch is gleefully reporting today that the Australian Vaccination-risks Network, formerly the Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network, once known as the Australian Vaccination Network* has had its YouTube channel removed for “severe or repeated violations” of YouTube policies. The group will still have an online video presence on Mike Adams’ Brighteon and has stuff up on something called Rumble.

Earlier this year the AVrNers stomped off Facebook in a huff because they were being “shadow-banned and suppressed”, evidently meaning that Facebook was removing antivax glurge links they were posting.

Thus the heavy, faux leather jackboots of the Vaccine Overlords stomp another set of brave freedom fighters into semi-oblivion. 🙁

In other sad news, Australian antivaxers evidently flopped in their attempt to flood Parliament. The recent West Australian elections, in which antivaxers contested all 59 Parliament seats found the Stop Mandatory Vaccination Party getting approximately 1.6% of the vote, running well behind the frontrunning Labor and Liberal parties and failing to take any seats. They did however outpoll the Australian Christians, Legalise Cannabis and Shooters Fishers Farmers parties, so that’s something.

*The original change of the organization’s misleading name under threat of government sanction to the Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network was at the time viewed as an attempted thumb in the eye to actual skeptics, but AVSN members chafed over being associated with nasty skeptical people, hence the re-renaming to the AVrN.

The AVrN has been irrelevant for sometime now. After they were forced to change their name and semi-imploded when the press stopped contacting them for opinions.

It is amusing that they have departed from facebook. We used to have a page dedicated to those that had been banned from the AVN’s facebook page.

@ Denice Walter

Scott doesn’t just misquote us, he ignores most of what we write and just cherry picks stuff taken out of context. He also makes stuff up, attacking based on “facts not in evidence.” And, as I over and over pointed out to him, it isn’t my degrees, it isn’t who I am, it is simply my use of critical thinking, my willingness to look at all sides and to explain why I disagree with some, it is what I write. Does it make sense? Do I back it up with references? All my references according to him are “liberal”, despite from numerous sources; but when he cites one lawyer who has worked for the NRA for 30 years, one source; but not biased??? Basically “liberal” for Scott is anything he doesn’t agree with, regardless of how based on irrefutable facts. At this point I don’t believe anything he says and he certainly isn’t interested in a dialogue. If he has had such a great career, why isn’t he working now and why is he devoting so much time to trying to attack others? I know my career wasn’t very successful. I traveled too much. Lived too many places, etc. In some ways I’m a much better student than professional. If I had more energy, I’d probably in my mid-70s take some courses on a variety of subjects. But I try to keep busy. Currently proof-reading and editing next edition of undergraduate microbiology book, almost 900 pages. And I’m not a microbiologist, not a single course; but have auditing sections of courses, gone to seminars, and read half dozen textbooks and many 100s of articles in Scientific American and elsewhere. I’m sure that gives ammunition for Scott to attack me. Oh well. And reading Intro to Islam and Pulitzer Prize winning book, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Really boring; but some interesting things. Way too much detail. Probably take me a month to get through it, 10 – 15 pages a day is all I can take.

I’m torn about signing up for the AutismOne Virtual Conference in September.

On the one hand, if I fork over $59 for a conference pass now, I can beat the (virtual) crowds.

But if I pay up now I won’t know who the speakers are. Without being assured that the top names in disinformation like Del, Judy, Andy etc. will be presenting at the conference, I could be stuck with a bunch of no-name losers.

Come to think of it, I wouldn’t expect some of the top-flight antivaxers to consent to be part of a virtual event, given that they don’t believe in SARS-CoV-2 being dangerous and/or causing the pandemic. Del Bigtree wants us all to “catch that cold” for the sake of immunity, and Judy Mikovits has claimed the actual cause of Covid-19 is a retroviral contaminant from flu shots, and since no good antivaxer would be caught dead getting a flu shot, they should have nothing to fear from it or each other.

They have a different danger to contend with. When you pack that much stupidity into a small space it can go critical and explode. The debris from the explosion isn’t dangerous to anyone else but it smells bad.

@ Natalie White

You write: “Joel writes, “Oh, I forgot that we already had in place a stop on gain-of-function research in United States.” Wrong. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-08837-7“. Good for you. You ignore almost everything I write and find one error. You ignore what I wrote about allowing such research; but with much better oversight. You ignore my question to you, given in the U.S. we have had numerous breaches in biosecurity labs and most either lied to about or just withheld, what would your response be if small but real probability that a pandemic arose in this country? You do know that the 1918 flu pandemic, according to most researchers, began in the United States? And that we were under Reagan Presidency a major contributor to development of AIDS pandemic? So, I was wrong about the ban being lifted; but still my suggestions are reasonable, not as people like you think, black and white, all or none.

And no response to my pointing out your early and continued discounting of seriousness of COVID-19?

So, you just continue to prove that you are incapable of entering into a civil discourse, that, as with Scott, you are a despicable excuse for a human being.

HAVE A BAD DAY!

That is some ego you got going for you how many sherpas does it take to carry that around for you, is there anything you haven’t done ? I have always found that people who brag the most, have actually done the least.

You use people of color/sex as human shields it doesn’t matter, just so you can claim YOUR victim hood and your valor. You claim to have interacted, drank coffee and had lunch with them, but now you freely use your past associations with them as a shield.

You frequently refer to abortion and cite numerous editorials and drivel you write, Why in the world would I care what you pontificated about abortion an on line newspaper, your straw person is silly. What does that even have to do with de-platforming people, other than to silence any opposition or to display your ‘brilliance’ (?) in op ed writing.

After 29 years I retired. You don’t like guns don’t buy one, you want to get the vaccine, get one, you want an abortion get one. but its my body and my choice (sound familiar). Want vaccine passports great, BMI passport would be an even better idea, I mean overweight people are the number 1 health cost in the US, think of the cost savings in airline fuel use alone…….

As to my quotes, none were made up as you claim, I cited and quoted the Supreme Court and you dismissed them as republicans. I copied a research paper who cited German newspapers published at the time and you dismissed them, on what grounds, who knows?

Well, while you were out living in a nice, dry room, getting 3 meals a day, protesting, drinking or getting high and whining about how bad you had it, I was sharing a foxhole in a far off land dodging bullets and mortar shells and sharing what little food we got and listening to my buddies scream in agony after losing arms or legs hoping the Huey could get there in time. Nobody cared what color they were or took the time too, we never took a tally on what color the person was that got wounded. But then you’ll probably tell us some harrowing tale of your sacrifice or how you “dodged sniper fire in Bosnia or some other cow poop, story or about someone you know who served and you comforted then when they got back.

When my unit came back state side we had puke bags like you call us “baby killers” and spit on us. So go ahead and claim your valor and claim you victim hood and brag about how everyone else should listen to you because you are so educated but…..education does not equate to intelligence or common sense.

So you sir, are the “ASSHOLE ON STEROIDS”.

I was sharing a foxhole in a far off land dodging bullets and mortar shells

Sure thing, Spotts. Which land would this be? When? How does one “dodge” anything in a freaking foxhole?

Chris you must have missed it (on tone)

I was quoting a post from Joel “ASSHOLE ON STEROIDS”

@ Natalie White

Just to make absolutely clear how we differ, I have NO problem admitting mistakes. When I read article Narad linked to it reminded me what I already knew, that is, before your comment. When I write papers I take my time, double check, and even then, being human, though seldom, later find valid information that differs from something I wrote. When I write comments to a blog, I often write them on the spur of the moment. But, stating that there should be a ban on gain-of-function research went against how I view things. There is an old saying: “Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.” So, I corrected my mistake and suggested a reasoned balanced approach to gain-of-function research, an approach that balances the benefits with the risk. While one can never completely eliminate risks, one can certainly have policies that severely reduce them. We don’t live in a perfect world. And, though you don’t understand immunology, infectious diseases, etc. anyone who does understands the benefits of such research; but also the minuscule; but real risks. For you the world is black and white, either or. In the real world, people capable of critical thinking and actually delving into things understand that we don’t live in a perfect world, that seeing things in black and white would rule out any progressi any improvement of medical treatments, etc.

I can imagine you on a jury. The prosecutor presents irrefutable DNA evidence because chain of custody verified and Prosecutor and Defense Attorney given samples to send to their choice of labs. The prosecutor presents 12 point fingerprints, again, chain of custody and both Prosecutor and Defense Attorney have their respective experts look at. And Prosecutor presents five witnesses. The Defense hires best detective firm and for four of the witnesses they cannot discredit them; but the detective firm discovers the 5th witness is nearsighted and his glasses were in the repair shop at the time. So, on closing all the Defense can do is discredit one witness, not the DNA, not the fingerprints, and not 4 of 5 witnesses. That is you in a nutshell. You can’t refute, don’t even try, almost everything i write, just find one error, a minor one at that.

So, I am human, occasionally make mistakes, especially if spur of the moment actions and I accept that and I don’t base my comments or papers on my education alone, not the facts that I learned; but the skills, the critical thinking, that involves delving into subjects, including opposing arguments, and working through them. And sometimes even incorporating some or agreeing with some of the opposing arguments. The world is quite complex, so in economics, for instance, I have found valid points in writings of Conservative economists, Libertarian economists, and, of course, Liberal economists. Same in Psychology where I’ve found valid points in Behavioral and Cognitive Behavioral, Cognitive, and, though rare, in Psychoanalysis, mainly that childhood experiences have major impact on later life; but not how they explain such experiences and treat them.

Maybe you should link up with Scott. He also sees the world in black and white. He found one gun control group that, for him, proves gun control wants to eliminate privately held guns; but he fails to understand that many other nations, e.g., France, Germany, Canada, Sweden, Australia, etc. also have gun control laws, reducing chances that mentally ill or violent criminals get hold of and eliminating some types of weapons; but still their populations do own guns; but on average on a per capita basis, 1/4 what Americans own, and 1/4 murder rates. Again, not black and white, reasonable gun control contributes to reducing murders; but doesn’t eliminate them. We don’t live in a perfect world. So, like Scott you find one error or one group that confirms your position, regardless of the bigger picture. I guess I should cite Westboro Baptist Church as what Christianity is all about???

So, as I wrote previously, unfortunately you represent a large, hopefully not majority, of Americans, people incapable of actually understanding more than one or two points, people who just are incapable of independent thought, of critical thinking. So, I repeat, you are truly a despicable excuse for a human being.

@ Scott Allen

First, I thank you for your service; however, serving nobly in the military doesn’t make your opinions on other issues valid. Some of those who on January 6 stormed the Congress also served nobly.

You write: “That is some ego you got going for you how many sherpas does it take to carry that around for you, is there anything you haven’t done ? I have always found that people who brag the most, have actually done the least.”

And, as usual, you keep ignoring the main point, that is, if you disagree with what I write, then explain in a logical manner with more than one or two citations. Interesting how you have opinions on many topics; but my opinions aren’t accepted because everything I cite, papers, etc. are “liberal,” and what do you mean by “liberal”? They don’t agree with you. Talk about arrogance, wow, making yourself the litmus test for what is “liberal”.

You write: “You use people of color/sex as human shields it doesn’t matter, just so you can claim YOUR victim hood and your valor. You claim to have interacted, drank coffee and had lunch with them, but now you freely use your past associations with them as a shield.”

Actually, I didn’t claim any valor. In a previous comment I stated quite clearly that I was too chicken to join those working in the South. What victimhood? Growing up Jewish knowing Holocaust survivors, being called a dirty Jew by some fellow students; but others came to my aid. You called me a racist without any evidence and I gave some examples of how going back to early life I have had friends and acquaintances of many different racists, ethnic groups, and religions. You are either extremely stupid or delusional as what you write doesn’t represent my comments. How did I use them as “human shield?” Are you crazy???

You write: “You frequently refer to abortion and cite numerous editorials and drivel you write, Why in the world would I care what you pontificated about abortion an on line newspaper, your straw person is silly. What does that even have to do with de-platforming people, other than to silence any opposition or to display your ‘brilliance’ (?) in op ed writing.”

So, you call what I write “drivel” without even reading it. Wow! And the point I made wasn’t whether I was brilliant or not; but that if you read my article on abortion you might actually even agree with some or most of the points I made, see how I make a nuanced argument. However, thanks for the above comment, proves that you are CLOSED MINDED. “Drivel” without even reading. As I pointed out in another comment, when I write OpEds, I take my time, double check references, use a lot of references, as opposed to spur of the moment comments, though, since I already have devoted time and energy to a number of topics, most right on target.

You write: “You don’t like guns don’t buy one, you want to get the vaccine, get one, you want an abortion get one. but its my body and my choice (sound familiar). Want vaccine passports great, BMI passport would be an even better idea, I mean overweight people are the number 1 health cost in the US, think of the cost savings in airline fuel use alone…….”

You see the world in black and white and often based on misinformation and/or paranoid delusions. You claimed that background checks were required for gun show sales, etc. I gave clear examples not the case. Asked you if you understood what a “loophole” is. You posted in a comment that Switzerland had fewer guns and fewer murders; yet apparently didn’t understand what you wrote. I pointed out that numerous other nations have various gun controls; but still private parties own guns; yet far fewer murders. In your world of black and white you find some extremous group that apparently wants to eliminate gun ownership, ignore all the other groups and legislation, ignore gun control in other nations, and keep up with you slippery slope paranoid delusions. We have laws against driving under the influence and speeding, guess first steps to eliminating peoples’ right to own cars.

You write: “As to my quotes, none were made up as you claim, I cited and quoted the Supreme Court and you dismissed them as republicans. I copied a research paper who cited German newspapers published at the time and you dismissed them, on what grounds, who knows?”

Above at: Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
says:
March 28, 2021 at 10:02 pm

One of the quotes you cited was debunked by the National Archives and the others were taken out of context. As for Supreme Court, I wrote that the Court has throughout its history ruled most of the time against the average citizen in favor of corporations, the rich, and the government. I then went on to point out that if the Supreme Court was experts only basing their decisions on the Constitution that there wouldn’t be such a partisan fight to get Justices on the Court and currently they are right-wing Republicans. Yep, I do dismiss them and for good reason; but you ignore, as usual, everything else I wrote about the Court. This is what you do, you focus on some things I write, usually taking out of context. Just more examples of your inability to actually enter into an intelligent dialogue. Either you do this intentionally and/or you are too delusional to understand.

As for you copied a research paper, yep, one paper by a lawyer who has worked for and is a strong supporter of the NRA. You attack me for using “liberal” biased papers from multiple sources; but use one paper clearly with a bias and, yep, he cited mainly Nazi propaganda papers. If you ever read some of my papers you would see they cite from many diverse sources, even ones who disagree with me; but then I explain why I disagree with them. And, though you think it wrong that I have devoted time and energy into learning about the Holocaust, I made it clear by common logic that if the Jews of Europe had owned guns, the outcome would have been the same, though at least more German Nazis would have died. That would have been nice. You reject this based on your need to defend guns and one biased paper. You are sick sick sick!

You write: “When my unit came back state side we had puke bags like you call us “baby killers” and spit on us. So go ahead and claim your valor and claim you victim hood and brag about how everyone else should listen to you because you are so educated but…..education does not equate to intelligence or common sense.”

As far back as the Vietnam War I made it clear that the majority of American military personnel were just doing their duty, though a number did commit atrocities. My energy was directed at the government who lied to us and misused our noble warriors. I’m sure some groups did verbally attack returning Iraq vets; but it is also clear that our military, not the majority; but some were guilty of horrid war crimes. Even the second attack on Iraq was a war crime. They did NOT have weapons of mass destruction and were NOT allied with Osama ben Laden. He had a Fatwa out on Sadam Hussein. Hussein was a megalomanic and if threatened was brutal; but on the whole Iraqis enjoyed a good infrastructure, good health care, good education, women went to university, worked as doctors, could go out on their own, not covered, Jews, Sunni, Shia, Christians (his vice President was a Christian) did well. We blew up electric power plants, water treatment plants, and hospitals, clearly civilian targets and war crimes. But, again, I claim no valor, never had, so once more you are delusional. I have NEVER NEVER NEVER claimed being brave, having done anything to remotely be able to claim such. You just keep on with your delusions, your “facts not in evidence”. Did you actually go to law school???

And quite honestly I’m not sure what you did in Iraq. Justice Department, foxholes???

So, you are either an extremely mentally disturbed individual, delusional, or you are an extremist who defends his indefensible position by ignoring most of what I write, rejecting the rest without even reading it, thus an ASSHOLE ON STEROIDS. If the former not so; but then you really need help!

One last thought. We live in communities, often dense communities. Thus, we have rights; but not unlimited. Can’t blast music at 2 am. In my town, can’t store certain chemicals in garage, can’t pour down int sewers, Can’t drive with a license. And, yep, some people do; but most don’t and that is how a civilized society functions. You used Timothy McVeighs truck bomb; but I pointed out the sniper in Los Vegas did almost as much damage with a couple of rifles and ammo and we’ve only had one McVeigh; but hundreds of mass killings since 1995 and thousands of gun murders of innocent people. We live in communities with rights; but not unlimited! ! !

@ Scott Allen

I forgot to mention a few other things about me that I’m sure you will blow way out of proportion:

I started learning guitar at age 11. In my senior year in high school we had moved to Chicago and I played in a rock group, base and rhythm guitar and did much of the singing, especially slow ballads. We played at the Holiday and Embassy Ballrooms, two regular ballrooms that had dances with Disc Jockeys and live bands for teenagers on Friday evenings. Played at high school and community college dances, cocktail lounges (lied about our ages), and once at a spring festival where we backed Brian Hyland, famous for, among other things, Sealed With A Kiss. During my 10 years in Sweden, I was often invited to parties, didn’t have to bring food or drink, just me and my guitar. I played folk music, rock, Broadway tunes, and some pop, many sing alongs. And I took piano lessons and could play first movement of Moonlight Sonata, chords for many songs to sing, and, of course, the theme song from Exodus. Nope not claiming to be a great musician, not even very good; but adequate and it was fun and enjoyable and I guess people appreciate it or they would not have continued to invite me to their parties.

I also took Opera voice lessons for two semesters as undergraduate. I had to work my way through college; but my uncle passed and left me $2,000, enough in those days, living in an old house with seven roommates, mattresses on floor, to not work one year, so joined drama club. University of Hawaii had a great theater with revolving stage, East West Center. A dorm adjoined where students from U.S. would spend one year then on to live in nations in Asia, including Indonesia, and students from Asia spent one year, then on to universities in U.S. mainland. I worked in East West Center cafe; got to know lots of them, would visit in evening their dorms. Year I was in theater group mainly did scenery, between acts would change; but did have a few bit roles, e.g., in Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, West Side Story, Beckett. Oh, before took one semester acting class and one semester History of Theater. Nope, not great actor, not great singer, not even close; but it was fun.

I’ve also enjoyed theater. Went to Shakespearian festivals, etc. One time in London, 1968, went to two plays a day for a week. At the time was very inexpensive. Saw Man of La Mancha, one of my all time favorites, still own the two record full play; but unfortunately no record player.

And, as I mentioned in previous comment, at Loyola University of Chicago I was in ROTC for Freshman and Sophomore years. Worst part was once a week wearing extremely itchy wool pants, part of uniform. Got straight As and we went to rifle range, did fairly well, and could take apart and put back together an M1. Nope not great sharpshooter; but not bad. And being in ROTC is not claiming to be a hero, to be brave, etc. It was classroom learning and some marching.

Just a few more things that I’ve done in my life, not claiming expertise or being great at; but I’m sure you will in a later comment add how I bragged about my musical and acting abilities. It’s what you do!

@ Narad writes, “How does one “dodge” anything in a freaking foxhole?” Really? I’ll break it down for you….one goes into the foxhole for protection from mortars, etc…Duh!

@ Natalie White

Actually you are partially right; but main protection is against rifle and machine gun fire. More difficult to hit a foxhole; but not impossible. And if multiple mortars sent in one direction??? Foxholes give some protection; but only some; but, once again, you focus on insignificant things, ignoring the more important ones. Typical of you, someone who can NOT use critical thinking, who has a limited ability to take in multiple pieces of information. Oh well.

Gnats, foxholes are protective offensive positions. And you can’t f*cking scamper around in them to “dodge” things.

“foxholes are protective offensive positions.” They could be somewhat defensive early, I guess. In this day and age? Line the top with microphones, get a ten-foot 1×2 with cardboard effigies on each end, lift pole horizontally, the gunshot origin location software is run on a laptop and fed to the turret.

When the turret is done doing it’s thing then get out and do yours before the mortars pop. But if one of those Boston Dynamics robodogs gets in there, idk, hit ’em on the nose?

offensive/defensive hybrid?

Foxholes can be both offensive AND defensive positions:

fox·hole
/ˈfäksˌhōl/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: foxhole; plural noun: foxholes; noun: fox hole; plural noun: fox holes

1.
the den or burrow of a fox.
2.
a hole in the ground used by troops as a shelter against enemy fire or as a firing point.
a place of refuge or concealment.

There are different types of mortars as well.

I do so love it when people are forced to resort to online dictionaries.

Oh, wait. Screw off, Gnats.

@ Natalie White

I just found: “The Mortar is a long range launcher which fires Mortar Shells over obstacles. It can only be fired from a crouched or prone position. It is best used against fortifications, such as Foxholes, Pillboxes, Gun Turrets, and Half-tracks.” FOXHOLE.wiki

“A mortar is a weapon that fires explosive projectiles onto a target. . . Mortars enable crews to fire at targets behind hills or in field fortifications such as foxholes and trenches” GlobalSecurity.org

So, looks like NARAD was right. Since mortars explode overhead, foxholes don’t provide protection. I should have done a search before writing my previous comment and also, though it was over 50 years ago, we did study things like Foxholes when I did my 2 years of undergraduate ROTC.

So, you weren’t even right about this. You are pathetically amusing

Not so good against airburst munitions but logically some protection against the shrapnel of a nearish mortar hit. Not that it really matters. I was more interested in the use of the term Huey. Do US forces still call helicopters Huey’s? I know armed forces can be a bastion of tradition but they stopped making them thirty odd years ago. It made me imagine Scott as a pensioner Rambo.

@ Natalie White – You remind me of the quip of Bertrand Russell that the “fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”

Also writing SARS-CoV2 as “the Rona” is disrespectful to the dead, while trying to be cute diminishing the severity of the disease, dehumanizing. Besides, Rona is a large Canadian home improvement chain or female given name.

@ Ross Miles

Thanks for quote from Bertrand Russell. You might want to check out the Dunning-Kruger effect, e.g., Wikipedia, etc. Actual research that found the less people know the more certain they are.

@Joel A. – Your welcome and I keep a copy of the original Dunning-Kuger paper on my computer.

Since this has become an open thread, and to try to return to a normal discourse, way back up wherever it is, you went too easy on Scalia. Just as an opening salvo, Scalia lacked judgment, was arrogant, and stupid. In order: Scalia was a DMT2 who was rotund, his exercise tended to max out lifting a fork full of pasta to his mouth, and then the world wonders how he had a heart attack. He shortened his own life while claiming the sanctimony of life. Arrogant because as an “originalist” he presumed he knew what was in the mind of the Framers, gave them the foresight which is not close to realistic, and then takes the circle route when practical reality catches up. You may remember when asked at a seminar, if a shoulder mounted missile launcher, fell under his definition of “right to bear (carry) arms he answered yes. Stupid, and I use the definition of Carlo M. Cipolla , a professor of economic history at the University of California, Berkeley, who in 1976, published an essay part of which says, outlining his 5 fundamental laws, where Law 3 is “A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.” Scalia in my view, carries the weight of killing thousands with his constitutional view and not only of guns.

@ Ross Miles

Yep, Scalia was an ass; but also best friends with Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Opposites attract??? Now we have on Court Justice from an extremely right-wing fundamentalist sect, Amy Coney Barrett and already have Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito; but as I wrote above, the Supreme Court for most of its existence has not been on the side of the average American and now, more than ever, passes decisions on cases in secret with no signature and not even an attempt to justify with precedent, Shadow Dockets. However, one can find precedent to back almost any decision and Original Intent is a joke. First, what was it? Diaries from Constitutional Convention, letters and documents from Founding Fathers, Federalist papers, editorials during ratification, debates in States, etc. And even many of Founding Fathers admitted that the future was unpredictable and change may be necessary; but I love how easy it was to Amend the Constitution. Just 650,000 dead and an equal number crippled just to get rid of the 3/5th clause, well Civil War did more than that; but all the same.

I downloaded Cipolla five basic laws and found a book on Amazon, only 96 pages. Will see first if public library has a copy. I’m running out of space.

If you really are interested in law, I strongly recommend Robert Kagan’s “Adversarial Justice”

Ross writes, “Your welcome and I keep a copy of the original Dunning-Kuger paper on my computer.”

Hey man, if you want to sound authoritative and all, learn to spell…

Dunning-Kruger and you’re welcome.

Good day.

@ Natalie White

It isn’t enough that you ignore most of what people write, that what you write is pointed out to be wrong over and over again; but now you focus on typos. When I write papers I double check for typos and send to friends; but some still slip by. In fact, I’ve found typos in peer-reviewed journal articles, textbooks, etc. Big deal. Finding a typo doesn’t in any way, shape, or form indicate your intelligence is above the developmentally challenged. Way to go MORON!

HAVE AN EXCEPTIONALLY BAD DAY

Narad whines,

“I do so love it when people are forced to resort to online dictionaries. Oh, wait. Screw off, Gnats.”

Cheeky! That’s it? My last attempt to keep it simple and easy for you to understand. You don’t seem like the type who’s ever spent time in the military. However, I do like the nickname…just surprised it took you so long.

Good day AND good health to you!

@ Natalie White

Keep on fixating on the trivial since you are incapable of actually any type of critical thinking; however, it was you who said foxholes were to protect against mortar, then you write:

Foxholes can be both offensive AND defensive positions:

fox·hole
/ˈfäksˌhōl/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: foxhole; plural noun: foxholes; noun: fox hole; plural noun: fox holes

1.
the den or burrow of a fox.
2.
a hole in the ground used by troops as a shelter against enemy fire or as a firing point.
a place of refuge or concealment.

There are different types of mortars as well”

First, even when used offensively as a firing point, still for protection. One doesn’t need a hole in the ground to fire a rifle. In ROTC we practiced in prone position, kneeling, and standing; but foxhole confers protection against opposing fire; but not mortars. Once start shooting from foxhole will draw enemy fire. A simple concept you apparently don’t understand. Yep, there are different types of mortars; but all have same purpose, to get at enemy behind hills, in holes, etc. So, you posted a comment that said absolutely NOTHING. Wikipedia has an article that describes history of mortars, different types, and various purposes; but probably too long for your attention span. Wikipedia. Mortar (weapons)

You never cease to amaze. In fact, calling you stupid is a compliment as you make ordinary stupid people seem intelligent.

Oh, I was wrong previously when I wrote that COVID-19 has already killed 550,000 and probably 200,000 more suffering from long COVID. Recent reports estimate those suffering from Long COVID as high as 800,000. But, from the start you have downplayed the risk of COVID, so I doubt even if we have a severe 4th surge you will change your mind. After all, you are a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Note, correct spelling as if that changes the point being made. By the way, did you know that some geniuses suffer from dyslexia? Doesn’t change their intelligence level. In fact, some evidence geniuses have higher rate of dyslexia.

HAVE AN EXCEPTIONALLY BAD DAY

@Joel A – “Yep, Scalia was an ass; but also best friends with Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Opposites attract???” Not really, as Ginsberg had worse judgement than Scalia. At least Scalia had the decency to die and get a like minded replacement. Ginsberg would not retire, even when obvious (to the medical community at least) her days were numbered, and the system would allow choosing a “liberal” judge. She really lost me when in an interview, that during her illnesses her work kept her going. Ginsberg could not understand some things are greater than the individual, like country, without having to die for it. Also, it is really stupid to allow your life’s work to get undone. Then she has the fervent wish that a replacement not be chosen until after the election, when she knows she is not going to be around.

Agree that some USSC members are a mess, but not uniquely among countries as I have always struggled to understand the legal mind, and think I have never surpassed the rudimentary stages, despite having several lawyer friends, including judges, and by circumstance that arose, dealing with an opposing counsel, and even retained counsel that acted more like opposing. Being Canadian and living in Canada, US law only gets my attention with major events, and I do read some judgements of the Canadian Supreme Court, and in many instances am surprised I have not created a bald spot with their “head scratchers”.

Anyway, so far off topic, should thank Orac for not turning his blinky lights back on, and booting us.

@ Ross

There is NO perfect system; but some are much worse than others, namely, the American, both civil and criminal.

I lived in Canada for two years, got Master in Social Psych from Carleton U in Ottawa, 1970. Have been back for visits and friends visited me. Unfortunately, I’ve outlived all of them. Lived in Sweden almost 10 years. I have always been interested in law, not as a profession. In any case, once more I highly recommend Robert Kagan’s “Adversarial Legalism,” inexpensive from Amazon.com

Oh, I was in Canada around time Canadian Medicare began. And was in Sweden just after they implemented 7 kronor reform (copay for medical). The U.S. is the only health system in world paid for by taxes; but turned over to for-profit private sector. I have a half dozen books on Canadian health care system, including histories and read biography of Tommy Douglas and several hundred papers and a number of international comparative studies. No system is perfect; but, on the whole, I would choose Canada or Sweden over the U.S. any time.

@ Natalie White – ” want to sound authoritative and all, learn to spell…” And now it is time to find the punctuation error in addition to the typo. Please be thorough when you voluntarily act as my editor.

@ Joe, aka “prompter hoc”, writes, “Finding a typo doesn’t in any way, shape, or form indicate your intelligence is above the developmentally challenged.” No, but it sure is fun! So, are you implying Ross is developmentally challenged? LOL! You are cracking me up over here! Thank you for the laugh. I really needed it today ; )

Good day Joel and good health to you!

@ Natalie White

So glad that a typo cracks you up. Given that they are so ubiquitous, must keep you laughing all day. And as Ross wrote, do find every punctuation and grammatical error. After all, when writing comments people should take their time, perhaps, as I do with papers, set aside a couple of days to look with fresh eyes, etc. Nope, would be the end of comments.

The point is that you don’t actually address/refute what others write,

HAVE AN EXCEPTIONALLY BAD DAY!

@ Natalie White

You write: “Foxholes can be both offensive AND defensive positions.”
1.
the den or burrow of a fox.
2.
a hole in the ground used by troops as a shelter against enemy fire or as a firing point.
a place of refuge or concealment.
There are different types of mortars as well.

Really, “burrow for a fox” What does this have to do with military?
As for offensive, yep; but still for protection. In ROTC we learned to fire rifles from prone position, kneeling, and standing, so why would one dig a hole, if only for firing? Well, maybe, just maybe, so that once one starts firing, to be protected from enemy returning fire. Yep, there are many different types of mortars; but they all have the same function, to get at enemies not in the line of fire, e.g., behind hills, in fox holes, etc. See Wikipedia. Mortars (weapon)

And NARAD is making a valid point, that is, dictionaries give short answers, often not nuanced and resorting to copying and pasting a simple dictionary answer is clear evidence of someone not really investigating something.

You write in response to NARAD: “That’s it? My last attempt to keep it simple and easy for you to understand. You don’t seem like the type who’s ever spent time in the military.”

Given your history of commenting on this site, that is, no in-depth explanations, no indication you understand the complexities of the real world, keeping things “simple” just is evidence that you are a SIMPLETON.

As for commenting on whether someone served in military or not. Rather foolish. It doesn’t take someone who has served in military to look up information on the purpose of mortars, when and how foxholes used, etc. Did you serve in military? And, if so, were you in the infantry? And why are you commenting on COVID and vaccines? Are you trained in infectious diseases, epidemiology, immunology?

And just to make clear, you wrote: “@ Narad writes, “How does one “dodge” anything in a freaking foxhole?” Really? I’ll break it down for you….one goes into the foxhole for protection from mortars, etc…Duh!”

But as I clearly pointed out above, foxholes do not confer any protection against mortars. You ended with “Duh!” Implying this was so obvious and you were absolutely certain you were right. Yep, Dunning-Kruger Effect on steroids.

It never ceases to amaze me how people like you function. I will, in the future, try not to call you stupid because that is an insult to stupid people, who, if one explains something clearly for them, usually accept the explanation. I and others have over and over clearly refuted what you have written, including your downplaying of the COVID pandemic and rejection of vaccines. So far 550,000 deaths and latest report as many as 800,000 with Long COVID, e.g., reduced lung capacity, heart arrhythmia, etc. And the deaths probably an undercount because if someone with mild congestive heart failure dies of heart attack at home unlikely blood will be tested for COVID and that person could have lived for years. Despite the numbers, you haven’t admitted you were wrong and I would be willing to bet that if, I really hope not, a 4th surge due to the variants that are more contagious and severe were to occur, and the number of dead and Long COVID were to increase significantly, you still wouldn’t change your mind. By the way, if 4th surge occurs, probably fewer dead because more at high risk have been or are being vaccinated; but more young will suffer from Long COVID.

HAVE AN EXCEPTIONALLY BAD DAY

Want to respond to Orac? Here's your chance. Leave a reply!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.