“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
People have been getting scared by the seemingly coordinated yet mysterious disasters in food production facilities. It seems like some kind of scary “phenomenon”. We suspect a human hand, but there seems to be none. It’s as if some mysterious organization like “SPECTRE” or “KAOS” is behind it. Some people have even postulated “DEWs” (directed energy weapons). That’s when I start smelling “disinformation” – likely being planted by allies of actual arsonists and saboteurs. Or is the entire thing just a media effect? Is the Fake News media just playing up “normal” industrial accidents, as a means of “information terrorism” that the media is so skilled at performing for their corporate masters?
Or maybe some of BOTH?
The first time I heard about an egg-laying facility in super-progressive New Zealand catching fire, I realized things were getting very REAL, and potentially UNREAL at the same time. Because of the years of extreme fakery and lies coming from the Ardern regime, I figured something might be up – real or not.
The second time I heard about that egg-laying facility catching fire, a thought fully formed.
I think it's coordinated employment of "climate" and "animal rights" activists who've managed to sneak into operations globally. Same mentality as the ones who attack paintings, but those attacks are a diversion. I think this was coordinated with WEF by radical groups.
I know from certain sources that the FBI was, at one time, very heavy in following the “animal rights” groups and protesters. Ironically, because FBI is extremely woke now, and because agents at a certain level pick their own cases, this enforcement has languished.
Just ask Gail Combs about the tolerance of climate and animal activists by the regime (see comments below, and references to prior posts). They are used in a one-sided war against independent operations and small farmers, on behalf of government and large corporate interests.
Part of the reason governments are not responding well to these arsons of food processors, IMO, is because they are ideologically aligned with the arsonists.
Take Canada, for instance, ruled by “Baby Castro” Trudeau – who is WEF incarnate.
The Government is hiring 'Environmental Enforcement Officers' that will be armed with batons, pepper spray, and handcuffs. This looks like a police force ready to execute search warrants if you don't follow the Government's climate laws. https://t.co/YqB2Donjfd#BowRiver#cdnpolipic.twitter.com/ZaH0RousuY
These government agencies are not looking out for us. They’re looking out for the hoaxy, insane, climate narrative, and those who benefit from it.
Anyway, I am creating this post, in part to create a nice tweetable LINK to advance the theory of INFILTRATION AND SABOTAGE/ARSON OF FOOD PROCESSING FACILITIES – likely by climate commies and animal rights activists, in coordination with WEF’s climate and “EAT ZEE BUGS” agendas.
Please feel free to add anything you’d like in the comments. I want to make sure that there is a strong PUSHBACK on these dangerous climate ninnies and their fellow animal rights crazies. Not to mention the evil, insane, and dangerous World Economic Forum, and the evil forces behind it.
If they win, we won’t just be eating bugs. We’ll be eating grass – like my mother did in World War II.
In cases of religious mass suicide/homicide, such as Jonestown, Heaven’s Gate, and Aum Shinrikyo, it is very difficult to regain a humanitarian understanding of the key participants after the infamy of defining events sears the conscience and redefines reality. Even more difficult, however, is the opposite – to BEGIN to think the unthinkable and speak …
How Two Fallen Theories of Medicine May Herald the Fate of Global Warming / Climate Change
Bad science does not stand forever, but it may stand long enough for people to make a lot of money on it. THAT will be the THEME of the three huge science scandals I’m going to discuss.
In case you’re short on time, the TLDR…..
TL;DR – Two fresh scandals showing how industry money and scientific misconduct kept bad theories “alive” for decades, may explain why the bad science behind politically useful climate alarmism persists.
I. Serotonin Uber Alles
The “serotonin scandal” is very diffuse, which is why it’s in many ways analogous to “climate change”. The bottom line is that what the pharmaceutical industry tells patients about antidepressants, and what scientists know about antidepressants, are not the same thing.
It’s best to start off with the following Tucker Carlson video.
An extremely important selling point of antidepressants, used by both doctors and the pharmaceutical industry, is the idea that people who are depressed, and therefore “need” to take them, actually have some kind of chemical imbalance in their brain that needs to be fixed. More often than any other chemical alleged to be “imbalanced” is serotonin – and hence the emergence of SSRIs, meaning serotonin-selective reuptake inhibitors.
Carlson’s centerpiece is a recent metaanalysis of antidepressant research which showed there is little or no evidence for this “chemical imbalance” assertion.
Antidepressants may work in some people, and thank God they do, but IF they do, and WHEN they do, the simple “chemical imbalance theory” is probably not the reason why.
There is a very good explanation of the study HERE:
No evidence that depression is caused by low serotonin levels, finds comprehensive review
After decades of study, there remains no clear evidence that serotonin levels or serotonin activity are responsible for depression, according to a major review of prior research led by UCL scientists.
The new umbrella review – an overview of existing meta-analyses and systematic reviews – published in Molecular Psychiatry, suggests that depression is not likely caused by a chemical imbalance,and calls into question what antidepressants do. Most antidepressants are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which were originally said to work by correcting abnormally low serotonin levels. There is no other accepted pharmacological mechanism by which antidepressants affect the symptoms of depression.
Lead author Professor Joanna Moncrieff, a Professor of Psychiatry at UCL and a consultant psychiatrist at North East London NHS Foundation Trust (NELFT), said: “It is always difficult to prove a negative, but I think we can safely say that after a vast amount of research conducted over several decades, there is no convincing evidence that depression is caused by serotonin abnormalities, particularly by lower levels or reduced activity of serotonin.
“The popularity of the ‘chemical imbalance’ theory of depression has coincided with a huge increase in the use of antidepressants. Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults in England and 2% of teenagers now being prescribed an antidepressant in a given year.
“Many people take antidepressants because they have been led to believe their depression has a biochemical cause, but this new research suggests this belief is not grounded in evidence.”
Just for the record, I am personally NOT a fan of these sorts of “metaanalysis” papers. In my opinion they tend to be QUASI-OPINIONS with a veneer of science. However, in my own opinion, metaanalyses can be useful when highly conclusive or by reinterpreting data – but should be trusted even less than normal observational science.
Now – it is important to point out that this metaanalysis is not actually telling us anything NEW. Most scientists in the field ALREADY KNEW from all the various studies that were looked at by the metaanalysis, that the simple “chemical imbalance” idea was a load of crap. They’ve known this for YEARS.
REALLY? Yes. Really.
A good description of the state of things is here:
A Popular Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” by a New Review
The title is a bit deceptive – at least more so than the link which adds “it got debunked years ago”. Ah, the techniques of clickbait!
Anyway, the title could rightfully say:
A Still-Popular But Unproven Old Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” By A New Review – It Was Simply Confirmed To STILL Be Unsupported By The Data, Despite Being Pushed For Decades By Doctors And Big Pharma Who KNEW It Wasn’t True
Please click the link if you want all the details, but my proposed title says it all. People kept using the theory as a sales and prescription gimmick. Big Pharma “suggested” the theory to doctors, and doctors “suggested” the theory to patients, to get them to take a kind of drug that patients are sometimes very resistant to taking.
Remember – antidepressants do, in fact, work for many patients – particularly for very serious cases of depression. Many people who in the past had to be hospitalized, can now live happy, functional lives in society because of these drugs.
It’s understandable that doctors try to convince patients to take the drugs they think will work to treat their problems.
But should your kids be getting antidepressants because of “school trouble”?
A whole ‘nuther question.
Because THAT is the end result of the little white lie that “people can have an imbalance that needs these drugs.”
We NORMALIZED antidepressents by NORMALIZING an ABNORMALITY that didn’t even exist.
ANYWAY – if the very fact that a WRONG THEORY has been KNOWINGLY spoon-fed to you by “the experts” for DECADES, is not giving you ideas about “climate change” – particularly in the post-COVID world…..
BUT WAIT.
Not quite yet. We have ANOTHER scandal to look at, first.
II. It’s Bush’s Beta Amyloid’s Fault!
This scandal is at the opposite end of the spectrum, from the above one, in which an entire industry and all of medicine KNOWINGLY told a little white lie to the public.
In this case, ONE SCIENTIST tipped the scales inappropriately, sending the entire world, including the rest of science, on a wild goose chase.
The LIE was only caught after years, and almost accidentally.
This is a rather long and interesting story, and I’m not going to recount it all here. But I will give you links and extensive quotes. It’s FASCINATING.
One of the best quick summaries is in, of all places, The Daily Kos.
Last month, drug company Genentech reported on the first clinical trials of the drug crenezumab, a drug targeting amyloid proteins that form sticky plaques in the brains of Alzheimer’s disease patients. The drug had been particularly effective in animal models, and the trial results were eagerly awaited as one of the most promising treatments in years. It did not work. “Crenezumab did not slow or prevent cognitive decline” in people with a predisposition toward Alzheimer’s.
Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) narrowly approved the use of Aduhelm, a new drug from Biogen that the company has priced so highly that it’s expected to drive up the price of Medicare for everyone in America, even those who never need this drug. Aduhelm was the first drug to be approved that fights the accumulation of those “amyloid plaques” in the brain. What makes the approval of the $56,000-a-dose drug so controversial is that while it does decrease plaques, it doesn’t actually slow Alzheimer’s. In fact, clinical trials were suspended in 2019 after the treatment showed “no clinical benefits.” (Which did not keep Biogen from seeking the drug’s approval or pricing it astronomically.)
Over the last two decades, Alzheimer’s drugs have been notable mostly for having a 99% failure rate in human trials. It’s not unusual for drugs that are effective in vitro and in animal models to turn out to be less than successful when used in humans, but Alzheimer’s has a record that makes the batting average in other areas look like Hall of Fame material.
And now we have a good idea of why. Because it looks like the original paper that established the amyloid plaque model as the foundation of Alzheimer’s research over the last 16 years might not just be wrong, but a deliberate fraud.
This story is fantastic, and so I recommend starting with the above Daily Kos article.
Before going into more detail, let me begin to give you my perspective on Alzheimer’s drugs.
I’ve watched a lot of drug classes accumulate new and improved drugs over nearly half a century of interest in the topic, but the TWO categories that have stood out to ME as the WORST in terms of success have been antivirals and Alzheimer’s drugs.
Antivirals first.
As you have seen over the last two and a half years, antivirals are not impossible to find, and while they don’t work 100% of the time, they’re still sometimes VERY helpful.
What has been more shocking to me is that it’s clear that the pharmaceutical industry frequently and reliably OPPOSES successful antivirals, when they can’t make money off them. The industry wants NEW antivirals they can patent, and they are willing to DEFAME and DENY old antivirals, even SUPERIOR and SAFER antivirals, just to create a market for new ones.
New antivirals that may be CRAP, and dangerous as hell. And they will even LIE to the Commander In Chief about them.
But set the antivirals aside for now, knowing that the situation is corrupt.
Anti-Alzheimer’s drugs are even worse, because THEY JUST DON’T WORK. They’re notorious for not actually working. They’ve never worked. In desperation, the FDA occasionally approves these worthless drugs, if only for investigation, but they are “mercy punts”. The drugs get approved, as long as they don’t show too many side effects, because they are “better than nothing”. But that’s it.
The drugs out there for dementia, senility and Alzheimer’s are WORTHLESS.
A LOT of people thought this was suspicious. I was one of them. Every once in a while, when researchers would reveal just how BAD the next drug actually was – how terrible and limited the results were – I would “go back to my mental drawing board” and ask the question:
“Why don’t these drugs work? Maybe the theory behind them is wrong. What could the truth possibly be?”
HA! I had no idea! No clue!
NOBODY – and I mean nobody – suspected that it was because of FRAUD.
At least, not until recently.
So let’s move on to the fraud in more detail. SCIENCE MAGAZINE.
I am including a long segment which is just the beginning of the article. Please note an important point – the investigator was actually looking at a DIFFERENT fraud in the same field of Alzheimer’s research, when he found this one.
BLOTS ON A FIELD?
A neuroscience image sleuth finds signs of fabrication in scores of Alzheimer’s articles, threatening a reigning theory of the disease
In August 2021, Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist and physician at Vanderbilt University, got a call that would plunge him into a maelstrom of possible scientific misconduct. A colleague wanted to connect him with an attorney investigating an experimental drug for Alzheimer’s disease called Simufilam. The drug’s developer, Cassava Sciences, claimed it improved cognition, partly by repairing a protein that can block sticky brain deposits of the protein amyloid beta (Aβ), a hallmark of Alzheimer’s. The attorney’s clients—two prominent neuroscientists who are also short sellers who profit if the company’s stock falls—believed some research related to Simufilam may have been “fraudulent,” according to a petition later filed on their behalf with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Schrag, 37, a softspoken, nonchalantly rumpled junior professor, had already gained some notoriety by publicly criticizing the controversial FDA approval of the anti-Aβ drug Aduhelm. His own research also contradicted some of Cassava’s claims. He feared volunteers in ongoing Simufilam trials faced risks of side effects with no chance of benefit.
So he applied his technical and medical knowledge to interrogate published images about the drug and its underlying science—for which the attorney paid him $18,000. He identified apparently altered or duplicated images in dozens of journal articles. The attorney reported many of the discoveries in the FDA petition, and Schrag sent all of them to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which had invested tens of millions of dollars in the work. (Cassava denies any misconduct [see sidebar, below].)
But Schrag’s sleuthing drew him into a different episode of possible misconduct, leading to findings that threaten one of the most cited Alzheimer’s studies of this century and numerous related experiments.
The first author of that influential study, published in Nature in 2006, was an ascending neuroscientist: Sylvain Lesné of the University of Minnesota (UMN), Twin Cities. His work underpins a key element of the dominant yet controversial amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer’s, which holds that Aβ clumps, known as plaques, in brain tissue are a primary cause of the devastating illness, which afflicts tens of millions globally. In what looked like a smoking gun for the theory and a lead to possible therapies, Lesné and his colleagues discovered an Aβ subtype and seemed to prove it caused dementia in rats. If Schrag’s doubts are correct, Lesné’s findings were an elaborate mirage.
Schrag, who had not publicly revealed his role as a whistleblower until this article, avoids the word “fraud” in his critiques of Lesné’s work and the Cassava-related studies and does not claim to have proved misconduct. That would require access to original, complete, unpublished images and in some cases raw numerical data. “I focus on what we can see in the published images, and describe them as red flags, not final conclusions,” he says. “The data should speak for itself.”
A 6-month investigation by Science provided strong support for Schrag’s suspicions and raised questions about Lesné’s research. A leading independent image analyst and several top Alzheimer’s researchers—including George Perry of the University of Texas, San Antonio, and John Forsayeth of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)—reviewed most of Schrag’s findings at Science’s request. They concurred with his overall conclusions, which cast doubt on hundreds of images, including more than 70 in Lesné’s papers. Some look like “shockingly blatant” examples of image tampering, says Donna Wilcock, an Alzheimer’s expert at the University of Kentucky.
The authors “appeared to have composed figures by piecing together parts of photos from different experiments,” says Elisabeth Bik, a molecular biologist and well-known forensic image consultant. “The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”
Early this year, Schrag raised his doubts with NIH and journals including Nature; two, including Nature last week, have published expressions of concern about papers by Lesné. Schrag’s work, done independently of Vanderbilt and its medical center, implies millions of federal dollars may have been misspent on the research—and much more on related efforts. Some Alzheimer’s experts now suspect Lesné’s studies have misdirected Alzheimer’s research for 16 years.
“The immediate, obvious damage is wasted NIH funding and wasted thinking in the field because people are using these results as a starting point for their own experiments,” says Stanford University neuroscientist Thomas Südhof, a Nobel laureate and expert on Alzheimer’s and related conditions.
Lesné did not respond to requests for comment. A UMN spokesperson says the university is reviewing complaints about his work.
To Schrag, the two disputed threads of Aβ research raise far-reaching questions about scientific integrity in the struggle to understand and cure Alzheimer’s. Some adherents of the amyloid hypothesis are too uncritical of work that seems to support it, he says. “Even if misconduct is rare, false ideas inserted into key nodes in our body of scientific knowledge can warp our understanding.”
This article goes deeply into the fraud. It’s a great detective story. It raises a whole bunch of tangential issues.
For starters, the fact that you are even hearing about this is because the investigator (Matthew Schrag) didn’t wait for NIH to do anything – particularly after it AWARDED MORE MONEY TO THE FRAUDSTER.
Yes – you got that right.
He [Lesné] became a leader of UMN’s neuroscience graduate program in 2020, and in May 2022, 4 months after Schrag delivered his concerns to NIH, Lesné received a coveted R01 grant from the agency, with up to 5 years of support. The NIH program officer for the grant, Austin Yang—a co-author on the 2006 Nature paper—declined to comment.
Notice how the “revolving door” nature of the science is on display. “Insiders” who are buddies with and coworkers of “outsiders”, give those outsiders the precious grants.
However, Schrag was not caught with his pants down by NIH “Comeyism” (failure to discipline friends). Schrag had also taken his evidence to Science magazine. SMART MOVE. But then, it appears that Schrag was raised by Mennonites, home-schooled, and in the military. Interesting.
More from the Science article:
IN HIS WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT to NIH about Lesné’s research, Schrag made its scope and stakes clear: “[This] dossier is a fraction of the anomalies easily visible on review of the publicly accessible data,” he wrote. The suspect work “not only represents a substantial investment in [NIH] research support, but has been cited … thousands of times and thus has the potential to mislead an entire field of research.”
The agency’s reply, which Schrag shared with Science, noted that complaints deemed credible will go to the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity (ORI) for review. That agency could then instruct grantee universities to investigate prior to a final ORI review, a process that can take years and remains confidential absent an official misconduct finding. To Science, NIH said it takes research misconduct seriously, but otherwise declined to comment.
See how that works? Seriously – you CANNOT trust NIH, any more than you can trust Anthony Fauci.
NOW – things are starting to get interesting as all this news is hitting the mainstream media.
Gil00 brought me a link, in which the most famous coworker of the fraudster, Karen Ashe, finally responded to inquiries. Meanwhile, the fraudster has remained silent publicly. NOTE that in Schrag’s investigation (see below), Ashe was found innocent. ONLY in papers working with Lesné, were any of Ashe’s papers ever found to contain fraudulent images. Ditto for other authors. Lesné was the nexus of the fraud.
BUT the problem WAS spotted long ago, and yet this knowledge never bubbled up to a level of effectiveness in mainstream science. An early French coworker of Lesné found his images suspect, and refused to work with him after that.
From the Science article:
Questions about Lesné’s work are not new. Cell biologist Denis Vivien, a senior scientist at Caen, co-authored five Lesné papers flagged by Schrag or Bik. Vivien defends the validity of those articles, but says he had reason to be wary of Lesné.
Toward the end of Lesné’s time in France, Vivien says they worked together on a paper for Nature Neuroscience involving Aβ. During final revisions, he saw immunostaining images—in which antibodies detect proteins in tissue samples—that Lesné had provided. They looked dubious to Vivien, and he asked other students to replicate the findings. Their efforts failed. Vivien says he confronted Lesné, who denied wrongdoing. Although Vivien lacked “irrefutable proof” of misconduct, he withdrew the paper before publication “to preserve my scientific integrity,” and broke off all contact with Lesné, he says. “We are never safe from a student who would like to deceive us and we must remain vigilant.”
Schrag spot checked papers by Vivien or Ashe without Lesné. He found no anomalies—suggesting Vivien and Ashe were innocent of misconduct.
SO – what does Karen Ashe have to say?
University of Minnesota scientist responds to fraud allegations in Alzheimer’s research
While defending results, U researcher said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images.
A senior University of Minnesota scientist said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images to prop up research, but she defended the authenticity of her groundbreaking work on the origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
Dr. Karen Ashe declined to comment about a U investigation into the veracity of studies led by Sylvain Lesné, a neuroscientist she hired and a rising star in the field of Alzheimer’s research. However, she criticized an article in Science magazine that raised concerns this week about Lesné, because she said it confused and exaggerated the effect the U’s work had on downstream drug development to treat Alzheimer’s-related dementia.
“Having worked for decades to understand the cause of Alzheimer disease, so that better treatments can be found for patients, it is devastating to discover that a co-worker may have misled me and the scientific community through the doctoring of images,” Ashe said in an e-mail Friday morning. “It is, however, additionally distressing to find that a major scientific journal has flagrantly misrepresented the implications of my work.”
I’m undecided about this lady. This is a bit of a tangent, but it may be significant.
I trust her to some extent, based on the fact that Schrag found Ashe’s work CLEAN when it was NOT associated with Lesné. In my opinion she’s innocent.
AND YET, Ashe’s background is PERFECT for a two-stepper ChiCom, potentially brought to America as the child of secret socialist sleepers. [NOTE: “Two-steppers” are basically bi-generational spy families, with extreme cover used on the parents to throw off suspicions on the second generation as plants.] Ashe’s background – similar to that of the notorious Vindman twins, is also almost identical to several classic Chinese two-steppers in American media and politics, including relentless Trump character assassin, Weijia Jiang.
Video: Disenguous, pathetic stuff from @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang, questioning the President's testing motives as suppressing them so as to tamp down case numbers and death tolls and then suggest he's playing politics with reopening state economies while Democratic governors aren't pic.twitter.com/acjiINrXxX
Video: @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang came back for round two, bashing Trump for talking about testing like it's a "global competition" when so many are dying. Trump replies that she should ask China that question. So the media want Trump to ramp up testing, then hit him when he does?! pic.twitter.com/YYF13b3JrS
And don’t think this is just aimed at Karen Ashe – that I’m just blaming the innocent victim, which she may very well be. Let’s look at Sylvain Lesné. Let’s do a deep dive on the possibility that he was intentionally sabotaging science for more than just personal advancement.
This is just a theory to add to the pile of theories. But it’s a very intriguing theory, with enormous consequences, like – oh, say – “climate change”.
French communists, both agrarian and urban, are THICK in Normandy – where Sylvain Lesné grew up and went to university. The urban centers of Caen, Le Havre, and Rouen are communist strongholds.
You can see that Caen leans even further to the left than “worker’s paradise” Le Havre, where bleak Stalinist architecture rules. The vote against Le Pen was strong in Le Havre, but even stronger in Caen.
There is a reason why communism is persistent in Normandy. Not only is there a regional historical tradition of Jacobin thought – there was aggressive spread of Soviet-style communism to the area by Stalin, both before World War II and afterwards, in the devastation of the Allied liberation.
This was a significant part of the motivation for the Marshall plan – to not let the war feed Stalin’s slow but relentless ambitions, already at work in post-war France.
We already know that French “above-ground” communist Agnès Buzyn, who is weirdly allied with “conservative” Emmanuel Macron, was indicted for a plethora of COVID-19 “mistakes”, in which she seemed to aggressively “do the wrong thing” as COVID-19 began spreading into France.
We here in America are more familiar with one of these aggressive scientific mistakes – the “hiding” of hydroxychloroquine from the public by changing it from OTC to prescription only. (Please note that this “error” was at the bottom of the list, and is not even mentioned around the time of the indictment, which focused more on Buzyn’s downplaying of COVID dangers.)
Now – it’s very instructive to see how the French media (particularly the left-media, but all of it, really) has aggressively covered up for Buzyn on this point, with “fact-checking” in the Snopes style, where there are both clickbait strawmen and evasion on technicalities.
While the FORMAL reclassification of the drug HCQ from OTC to prescription occurred in January of 2020, which would make it seem more vindictive against Didier Raoult, and reactive against the treatment of the disease, that was merely the date of the effective reclassification.
The connection to Didier Raoult is a bit of a red herring, provided largely by his fan base. That is a typical irony useful to disinformation.
It turns out that the reclassification action itself took place in November of 2019. This point is then alleged by the fact-checkers to prove Buzyn’s “innocence”. As we now know, the deepest players in the COVID scam KNOWINGLY took many actions in September, October, and November of 2019.
Thus, in my opinion, these “fact checks” attempting to exonerate Buzyn’s scientific misconduct are in fact even more indicting, and indicative of her premeditated criminality.
Thus, if an analogous theory is correct, that Sylvain Lesné was intending to prop up bad science for more than just his own advancement, then there must be some VALUE in doing so.
Gil00 provided a possible answer to this – in thinking that perhaps there was an immunological connection to the scandal. THAT jumped out at me like a red flag. An immunity connection in Alzheimer’s is not only a known competitor of the beta amyloid theory – it fits in with my recent belief that the entire depopulation plot is connected to and being implemented through a very intentional and surreptitious set of actions leading to a decrease of individual human immunity, to make us EACH more vulnerable.
Thus, Lesné’s actions, which sent the majority of Alzheimer’s research down a primrose path to nowhere, may have been a DIVERSION away from the immunological origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
You know – an origin such as VACCINES.
Yes. Timing is everything.
NOW – even if Ashe and Lesné are completely innocent (and that would include brainwashing by communists), I think this is an EXCELLENT time to look at Alzheimer’s AGAIN, as a potential product of things like viruses and vaccines, which we KNOW can have neurological effects.
Yes. Vaccines which “go wrong” can affect the BRAIN through autoimmune actions.
Just sayin’.
III. Could Global Warming Concern in the Face of an Imminent Mini-Ice Age and an Incipient Full Ice Age Actually be Some Kind of Really Bad Science?
It should now be totally apparent that BAD SCIENCE on a global scale is not just possible – it’s EASY. This is without even bringing in the COVID debacle.
PLANET VULCAN, ANYONE?
You’ve seen it here in part I. BILLIONS of dollars have kept LIES alive and well in pharmaceutical science.
If it pays everybody to tell people there is a chemical imbalance that means they need a drug, it will be done, to sell the drug, or to tell the patient that there is hope. The bad information will be forwarded to doctors, and then to patients, to make those patients feel OK taking the drug. Eventually, it just becomes part of Fake Normal.
Consider (part II) that even a single author on a single scientific paper, followed by a few more images from that author on maybe a few dozen more papers, carrying subtle but convincing false evidence, can send BILLIONS of dollars, maybe tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, down a blind alley.
Not only that – the system will try to keep that money flowing in the same way, even when it is KNOWN by government bureaucrats to be based on faulty data.
Is it impossible that this kind of ERROR could extend to TRILLIONS of dollars?
I mean, who would actually WANT trillions of dollars?
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.
There is NOTHING in “anthropogenic global warming” or “climate change”, explained by the current theories, that cannot be explained equally well by the idea that a carbon dioxide prediction boondoggle (remember COVID models?) has occurred, as the result of BAD SCIENCE.
Indeed, the multiple and long-running FAILURES of the climate field would seem to this “poor” scientist to be rather similar to the FAILURES in anti-Alzheimer’s drugs. This kind of failure SHOULD point to severe theoretical problems in any NORMAL science situation, once freed from TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS of bad economic bets by politicians and financiers.
I remember – PERSONALLY – when we scientists were told by the leadership of the American Chemical Society that “anthropogenic global warming” was “settled science”. I knew MANY scientists in all branches of science – who were all SCIENTIFICALLY AFFECTED by this idea – who were still very actively debating the topic – and who like me were not convinced of AGW being real, true, or important, even if it did exist. The entire enterprise seemed HASTY and WRONG.
It seemed TOP-DOWN. It seemed IMPOSED. It seemed to contradict everything we knew about how science was supposed to operate – with major ideas normally taking YEARS if not DECADES of FIGHTING INSIDE SCIENCE to become crystal clear.
And OH YES – we had TIME.
SO – after reading about these two incidents of WRONG science being perpetuated by industry or academia, both knowingly and unknowingly, I do NOT think that “climate change” should be granted a pass.
I think the whole question of climate needs to “go back to the people”. That includes both SCIENTISTS who tell us WHAT IS FOUND, and THE PEOPLE who tell us WHAT MATTERS, once we find the truth.
Everybody else – the money, the media, the “leaders”, the shills, and the malevolent liars – need to get out of the way.
In particular, the MEDIA that pushes scientists’ opinions around with their “fake normal” and “fake science news” needs to STFU.
Don’t “trust the science”.
LET SCIENCE DISTRUST ITSELF.
And maybe, in fact definitely, YOU THE PEOPLE can help US, THE SCIENTISTS to DISTRUST SCIENCE……
The title is a simple question that I am finding has much power to explain things.
I’m going to leave this a little bit “loose”, so that everybody can “jiggle it into place”.
If I just say “that guy was a crisis actor!” as evidence, or even just “potential evidence”, we get away from the real point, even if it’s TRUE that the guy WAS a “crisis actor”.
Or even more shockingly, WAS NOT.
See what I mean? (Bill Aldenberg was put in charge of Durham’s “spygate” investigations.) Sometimes the TRUTH becomes even more shocking LATER, when we pursue it, leading to MORE TRUTH.
If I say “they’re giving saline injections for [REASON X]”, what if I’m wrong and it’s [REASON Y]? Or what if “saline injections” is as much of a distracting and discrediting psy-op as “magnetic injections”?
Or what if – “AND” LOGIC – it’s BOTH?
BUT – if I “come in from the TOP”, and say this….
What if the reason Democrats and China and Bill Gates and Fauci are “collaborating” on their phony plague to introduce a weird uterus-flushing “vaccine” is actually some kind of “world crisis response” to a problem these people are certain is a world-destroying threat?
(Listen for the “admission”…..)
Video Player
Media error: Format(s) not supported or source(s) not found
What if Democrats don’t just posit and “react” to their phony alleged crises in the open, but also by secret programs that are a lot harder to get rid of, or turn off?
It sure would explain why leftists in government have to keep making these ridiculous public statements about “threats” that absolutely don’t appear to have any validity to normal people – nor even to scientists who are “cut out of the loops” – both the loops of being “informed” AND of being “under control”.
And OH YEAH, there is a lot of POLITICAL ADVANTAGE in doing that, because of CLASSIFICATION automatically providing COVER and a kind of built-in legitimacy by mere existence as a ‘classified’ matter.
You can talk back to a bill moving through Congress. You can’t talk back to a classified program.
That would even apply to the freaking HOAX against Trump. Not to say WHICH HOAX.
In my opinion, the sleazy Democrats HAVE to be doing this. And if CHINA is involved, at the deepest levels, “because it’s a global problem” – well, yeah.
Kind of explains why all the opposition to TRUMP – right?
“OH, NOES! Our classified save-the-world ‘baby’ is gonna END!”
The easiest way to get people to commit ERROR is to convince them that it is for GOOD.
The easiest way to make sure the error STICKS is to make it SECRET FROM THE GIT-GO.
I’m not saying that everybody has the same motivations in a giant project – especially a “secret” project – THEY DON’T.
Some people get into it for MONEY. Some get in for POWER. Some people just GO ALONG. Many people are just excited to be IN ON IT. And some people just want to have some fun.
Some people – and SCIENTISTS routinely fall for this crap – get involved because they’re FLATTERED. They butter up easily, and once they’re in, they don’t like to admit that they made a mistake. That is a big part of how the Chinese “Thousand Talents” program works, to get world scientists to switch their professional allegiance to CHINA.
Now CHINA is very smart, and prefers – like Obama – to “lead from behind”. We make fun of that Obama statement, but it’s actually a power statement to those who understand that Obama is “foolin’ ya” when he says he’s “leading from behind”.
“Leading from behind” works like this.
Posit a problem.
Get somebody else to accept that there is (or even might be) a problem.
Hint toward a solution.
Get somebody else to “come up with” your solution.
Praise them for YOUR solution they think is theirs.
Encourage them to carry out that solution.
Encourage others to find similar solutions.
This is a total euphemism for very sneaky and deceptive leadership. And it IS leadership.
So when China talks about “soft power”, understand that “soft power” is more akin to saying “we’re gonna cut off all avenues of exit”, rather than “we’re gonna be nice about things”.
You starting to see how this works? They love to UNDERSTATE.
Now – there seem to be ways to spot these projects.
leaders make phony political virtue signals to these problems that make no sense to normies
the projects make “committing moves” where people get into potential trouble that makes them double or triple down
“good” people do weird things that seem both stupidly wrong and out of character when they get caught
In my mind, the reason we see these things is that the leftists are ABUSING classification. It’s one thing to hide intelligence or defense matters. It’s quite another to hide some creepy “create gun problems to end gun problems” program.
The beauty of this kind of program is that it is basically “training wheels for conspirators”. You can’t convince most people to take part in a program to spread a virus that creates an avenue to sterilize people – THAT is just “no way”.
But if I came to you, and said “your country needs your skills to help save the world”, would you resist?
Don’t just be afraid of China’s “Thousand Talents” program. Keep an eye out for Obama’s “Million Talents” program. I think it’s there, and I think there are more than just one or two of them.
W
The media controls the science, no matter what scientists think they know.
PS
I want to thank Aubergine for THIS COMMENT which motivated me to “finish” my thoughts on this into a publishable form. You can go to that link to read the full context, but the more general point which Aubergine posited, is to ask if maybe the incidents of people “accidentally” getting “saline injections” instead of the COVID jabs they thought they were getting, might in fact be of a scientific nature.
These “saline jabs” are a real thing – some people getting saline instead of actual COVID jabs. The question is – HOW OFTEN? There have indeed been a few documented instances. Obviously in a huge project, one expects accidents. Forgetting to pump injectable saline into the lyophilized (freeze-dried) vaccine before injection is an understandable error, and should happen accidentally NO MATTER WHAT.
BUT – I have read about TWO instances where nurses who administered saline gave excuses when CAUGHT. In one case, the nurse said they were opposed to the COVID vaccines. Clearly THAT would be malpractice. People are entitled to get the drug they want – even if it’s risky.
In the other case, the nurse said that they had accidentally SPOILED a lot of vaccine, and rather than risk giving the spoiled vaccine, they covered up by administering saline.
I’m not sure I believe that second one, and I’m not even a 100% believer of the first.
Once a person lies, I become suspicious even of their corrected admission. This policy works well for everybody from naughty children to probable Chinese spies.
Deplorable Patriot has posited that the saline jabs are being used to help cover up vaccines that are showing too many side effects. That is not entirely unbelievable. I have an upcoming article on new developments in COVID vaccines, and the way that the tech is developing, leads me to believe that they are moving in ways that will reduce side effects, but (and this is very important) THEY ARE NOT ADMITTING THIS.
Let me repeat that. It’s scientifically obvious that the industry is responding to the dangers of the vaccines, but they are not admitting that this is the motivation for their response.
Yes. The industry is moving toward different vaccine technology that seems likely to have fewer side effects, AND possibly less OVERALL (systemic) immunity. BUT at the same time, that technology will require MORE vaccinations. So it’s SMART if you’re the industry. AND it’s actually smart science.
But the point is, the industry is reacting in the same way that they would be if CDC was secretly instructing “read-in” administration centers to give saline to the riskier patients as a kind of temporary “mid-stream correction” to an overly aggressive vaccine, WITHOUT scaring people away from vaccination, which seems to be a [WRONG-HEADED] “prime directive” at CDC. CDC has already lied to us about people getting the disease after vaccination, when CLEARLY the terrible PCR test is picking up the vaccine itself – which it MUST in theory. And which it does for quite a while, because the vaccine itself turns out to be WAY more persistent than it SHOULD BE – a fact that they HID.
The “COVID after vaccination” thing is not just an obvious lie, when vaccine RNA should set off PCR tests – it is such a fundamental flaw in the protocol, it simply has to be intentional at SOME level in the controlling bureaucracy.
And we KNOW there are people in the controlling bureaucracy, like Rick Bright, who ABUSE their positions based on AGENDA. It turns out that Rick Bright not only sabotaged HCQ – he sabotaged EIDD-2801, a new drug which is orally active, unlike remdesivir. He was so “behind” the vaccines that he threw monkey wrenches into early treatments of all kinds.
Bottom line – CDC can’t be trusted. BUT they seem to be motivated by the left’s morality, which is that “lying is OK, as long as it’s for the good of the listener”. So – the only thing we really need to change to make “saline injections” understandable, and BELIEVABLE, is to give them a positive moral raison d’être used on participants at SOME level.
That is where Aubergine’s idea hit me like lightning. Even if it is not strictly true that they are “studying” people “in the wild” with saline controls, THAT is the exact clinical mentality of a secret project, once it is underway. That is how you COULD get people to do such things.
But then once that morality is on the table, Dep Pat’s idea makes sense, too.
I COULD EVEN ARGUE IT MYSELF FOR THE CDC, PRETENDING TO BE NEUTRON NANCY (“Radium” Rod Rosenstein’s sister, Nancy Messonnier, who just retired, by the way, thank goodness).
“The vaccine is too strong. People will be getting boosters later. They will be getting safer, second-generation vaccines. We can’t increase vaccine hesitancy by admitting the full spike protein is too strong. FOR NOW, for the riskiest patients who want a vaccine but are contraindicated, just give them saline. The numbers of reactions will also fall, and that is a benefit. Remember – vaccine hesitancy is the MOST IMPORTANT THING. It must be avoided at ALL COSTS.”
Of course, if one did this, one might also feel, based on MORALITY, that one would have to recommend continued mask wear, “to do all one could”, lest the “saline-vaccinated” get the ACTUAL disease and expire.
Make sense now? “Positive leftist deception morality” explains quite a bit. One only needs to ask WHICH LEVEL OF COMPROMISE people are “bought in”. Nursing Home Killer is obviously bought in at a higher level – probably “overpopulation” – where “more bodies now” may be necessary to “fix the terrible problem”, rather than just a few “white lies”.
See? This is for their own good! I should get a secret medal from Obama!
*ROLLS EYES*
Yeah. That is where we are now.
Making sense? It does to me. Lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.
“For our own good.”
And made “acceptable” by BLESSED SECRECY.
SO – in my opinion – we may have more luck positing the left’s deceptions as “morally righteous” than “wickedly insidious”.
Although, I will admit, sometimes “wickedly insidious” is more fun.
I just realized that @POTUS's EOs on the assets of corrupt organizations will apply to the #ClimateFraud sponsors, too. Carbon sister Greta's "manager mister" will be one of the first in line.
