Google FB et are all very centre right. So is the democratic party of America and so where Obama and Hillary.

Bernie Sanders was an actual left wing politician, but the establishment in USA were never going to let an actual left wing politician get near the presidency.

Fox news seems to confuse people, Fox is a very hard right media organisation, you can be very left of Fox but still be on the right.

Now the entire medical industry is in on the scam and yet again none that are credible have come forward to share the details of how all the doctors were anti-vaxx. Obviously your research in your family (I assume all anti-vaxx) is as good as a peer reviewed study in the Harvard Medical study, so this should be yet another easy request for you to fulfill that for some reason you will not be able to fulfill .

You genuinely think you are informed on this stuff rather than realizing you are a mundane conspiracy derp? That is pretty funny.

All the best.

Ok thanks! I need to digest this- and double check That would make all media headlines talking about leftists agenda and liberal domination rushish.

Its perfectly possible to be liberal and centre right.

Liberalism is pretty much the anti thesis of the collectivism of hard left politics.

Liberal has to be one of the most abused words in the English language, mostly due to Yanklandians.

If you were like me, surrounded by thousands of people who got failed by the indsutiral medical complex, doing this kinda job for a living you would understand it as I do. But you dont!

The problem is you are relying your health on a company and you cant do that. A company that has business model to make money, not to help you first, but help them. That kind of business model is prone to abuse. There is a major conflict of interest in almost every instance

I put you on 48-52 of age. Am I right? Thats when you will start to run to the doctors office more and more frequently and some
day you will realize thats not how it works. You cannot be treated like a car in a car shop. But thats the exact model of modern medicine & pharmas.


A business wants to grow and treat humans as cars. At the top nobody cares, thats how humans are. They just want to advance at every price. Everyone just wants to make a lot of money with you. You are the victim in that equasion. Its kinda of a ponzi scheme. Period. Bottom line.

I can vouch for the above. I'm 64 now, and I think of my doctor's waiting room as my "home away from home."

I no longer take any psychotropics, and I will only take a prescription medication short-term (such as when I need to take an antibiotic for a week, for example).

Mostly I rely on vitamins, not medications.

Depends about which meaning of the word you use.

Liberal in Europe used to imply a political ideology that emphasized individuality, freedom and limited government, and after a while also came to include free market ideology and a move to the to the right side of the political axis.

Liberal in the US in modern political history has been used as a broad brush about "the progressive left".

Though these days liberal seems to be used both by US progressives and US conservatives as a pejorative. For the progressives it seems to mean someone who speaks the right words but does nothing, for the modern day conservative it seems to refer to a person on the political axis that exists from Lenin to Mitt Romney.

RINO = Marxist

yeah thats good. You should never give away the resposibility of your health to someone who is gaining from your disease or sickness. You are your own best doctor. Doctors are mostly good for acute stuff not for preventative, thats all you. Although there are some doctors that are really good. But you really have to look hard.

thats pretty interesting.

So, you personally know thousands of people who were failed by the "industrial medical complex?" Wow, you know a lot of people and all of them were screwed in this way! Perhaps they helped launch the LOLmillions of lawsuits!

Nah, I am just having fun with a mundane conspiracy derp about his latest derp conspiracy. Nothing more then that in the end. Next week you will be onto some other weird thing that goes nowhere.

Nah, you missed on your guess, and sorry to annoy you but I have been to a doctor 1-2 times in my adult life (other than routine bloodwork etc). One time was to remove a growth on my leg and the doctor said we can freeze it but here is a better idea and he jabbed it with a needle squeezed it really hard until the stuff exploded out. Perhaps I should have filed a lawsuit to join the billions of ones you personally know about, but in the end it did work!



Nah. That's standard conspiracyderp talk, nothing more. That's why your stuff never gets any traction anywhere, and people basically say you are doing a washoe again. I always hope it will be entertaining, and in that regard you are indeed more entertaining than your posting twin Cuppee, so keep up that good work!

All the best.

I was trying to be funny, but I do actually think I have already seen some claims to that effect.

I do think the term "libtard" at this point might refer one of the broadest "coalitions" of political ideologies ever put into one category.

You don't think this issue of who 'Trusts the science' has become polarized on both the Right and Left and you think it is only really a Right thing?

I would disagree.

I think we see a hair type trigger, mostly from the left, that any question of released science makes one a "Science denier'. Beyond that i think even scientists who offer their view against the prevailing or even consensus science are attacked as 'deniers'.


I have written before how I think this is one of the most harmful aspects of this issue falling into the culture wars.

And make no mistake as I do think the Right is way worse and there general reflexive anti science is a grave threat to everyone in the US (society will really be really ****ed if a much more deadly virus than Covid appears as anti science derps refuse all measures to contain it), but what has arisen on the left to counter the craziness of the right is very dangerous too.

Science not only needs skepticism but is made better by it. There are so many areas of 'consensus science' that are not settled and decided upon a 'preponderance of evidence' and every time a skeptic tests his belief in an alternative theory and fails, that failure actually goes to help substantiate the consensus. As Sherlock Holmes notably said "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" and everytime a skeptics theory is eliminated it speaks to the 'truth' of the consensus theory being more substantiated.


(and i am not arguing all skepticism is equal as obviously I have highlighted how the right reflexive skepticism is not)

Jahahahaaa!! So you must be 42-48. Oh boy. You never had anything serious and THATS why you are talking all cocky and stupid.

Trust me, once you had a serious condition, which I hope you wont, but its just a matter of time actually, you will be talking just as me or my clients.

You will have run from pontius to pilatus and will get so frustrated by the many differenting doctors opinions and f ups that will want to put a bullet in your head or smash somehting, but dont do that. Then you might remember me. I had people litereally crawling to me becuase they ran to so many doctors and through so much bs medicines.

Then you will know, not now. Now you are being a cocky know-it-all because you never went though any of this. Once you went to excrutiating pain as me and my clients and experienced what a messed up system this is you will know.

And by the way I went though this myself or I wouldnt have that edge of knowledge on this subject. I went 2 years to the best doctors in the western hemisphere and guess what. They couldnt help me nor anyone else.

No, it is because your posting history here is nonsense conspiracyderp stuff. Whether I am 21 or 91 does not matter in that regard. Its about your at times amusing (and at times kinda disgusting) outlook on things. This is just the latest topic of dozens or more you have done the derpy YouTube deep dive into, and all of them end up going nowhere.



I do not trust a single thing you say about anything, which is the correct approach for someone like you. Why would I, or why would anyone trust you given your silly history on topics.



Sure, whatever. You had thousands of people crawl to you before filing millions of lawsuits against evil pharma. Then you tackled UFOs. Then you went out for dinner and uncovered something sinister about the restaurant industry. That's called Tuesday for you .


Then you will know, not now. Now you are being a cocky know it all because you never went though any of this. Once you went to excrutiating pain as me and my clients and experienced what a messed up system this is you will know.




Congrats on your sample size of one contained within your paranoid personality.

Anyway, your posting twin entered the thread so try to work with him in some regard. That could be entertaining!

All the best.

Sure agreed mostly on the left being more skeptical of corporations but I do not agree we recognize the extent and depth of what is happening in terms of "people being bought", meaning the 'scientists', 'their science' and the 'Professors' and their 'universities'.

I think there is a strong desire to 'trust the science' and 'scientists' and 'professors' and 'Universities' that the Corporations have recognized and realized if they can coopt those channels and buy or force their work to be represented by these groups then it gains near automatic acceptance by most of the left who do not want to be accused of being a 'science denier'.

I will repost my prior post in this area which is more appropriate for this thread.

My prior post which garnered near zero interest or discussion despite how incredibly important awareness of this topic is.



---------------


My fear is that the settled science composition is increasingly being targeted and infiltrated by corporate influence. They know they have captured gov't and it has paid massive returns for them. And now they are focused on capturing all the over sight bodies and decision bodies within gov't and the Politicians are increasingly opening the door. We all know that how you frame an investigation, what you look for and what you choose not to look for can give you very different results. YOu can present science that is true and accurate but purposely, by its deseing, exclusionary.


I believe this will be one of the biggest challenges we, as a society will have going forward as no one wants to doubt the doctor or the science. It is just so troubling to need such help and then to doubt the provider or the research. This will lead individuals to very harsh criticisms of any who voice such doubts. 'How dare they...'. 'Science denier!!! ' so that they can maintain their faith. And as I said prior a big segment of society sees medicines as almost a panacea for all their anxieties and troubles. They seek out pills or treatments and even if proscribed placebo by their doctors who suspect they just need 'something', they then find relief. these people will be very unforgiving and not understanding of someone who holds the opposite view and wants no meds unless absolutely critical.

And despite some scientists, and others sounding these types of alarms we almost never hear it in the MSM.

A topic like this would have lead the news a few decades back and yet now it is kind of expected and accepted as inevitable. Big Pharma using the threat of directing their massive money to other places (exclusionary pressures) is one thing and that is bad if they think some researchers are acting against their interests but their use of litigation, winnable or not, is a massive threat. Few medical research groups want to get into massive battles in court with Big Pharma.


And under this lens I think it is very predictable to say the general public will remain unaware and increasing shout 'SHUT UP and take any Meds once they tell you to.'

Am i wrong?

Am I over thinking or over reacting to this?

Would society be better if people like me stepped back or were more silent on our questions and sketicism?

When you have corporates take over the wheel of health and medicine, like it did happen now, we are super ****ed.

You are letting a company dicate you what you have to take, when you have to take it, while they are making profit of this whole mess? And we silence every oppostion. How dumb can we be?

Havent we learned anything from history? Companies are evil, especially pharmas.

Of course not, the pharma lobby is way too mighty and powerful. All or most doctors are corrupted by it and stand in some dependancy relation with them. If they open their mouth its carreer in the trash can.

Some CEO at MSN, get probably a million dollar yacht ride vacation every year with the chief pharma pimps, or the yacht gifted by these bastards. These doctor and pharma bastards go on vacations and meeting around the world every year doing coke and orgies while laughing at us.

Thats how the world works- money money money...

I think this take is overly dramatic. Let's focus specifically on academic pharmaceutical research (much of what you say doesn't apply even a little in other scientific disciplines). I think this narrative is a combination of characterizations that are false in the sense of being very rare, or things that are actually reasonable things.

Academics have quite a different incentive structure than industry drug developers, although there is some level of partnership between the two (my brother is an industry drug developer who works with teams of academics on their baseline research). Academics are the place in society where a tonne of this baseline research occurs and they largely give it away for free, because of the different incentive structures. For example an academic pharmaceutical researcher in Canada is almost certainly funded by CIHR which is what pays for their research, and their main incentive is to publish a lot of papers in big journals to continue getting funded/promoted/etc. Most of that research is non-patented (and the parts that are are protected legally by the university system).

While spinoffs do happen, for the most part university research isn't aiming to be the thing that actually develops a drug and goes through a 50 million dollar approvals process with stage 3 human trials. They are more about idea generating, like look at the cool properties of this particular model in these mice experiments. And that is published in a journal that anyone can then use the ideas for. My brother's company isn't paying professors directly (they can't!), but they can do things like pay for the extremely expensive clinical trials that now the academic researchers have a new avenue to explore. So there is a sort of synergy here between what things industry is best at executing and what things academic is best at executing. Something like "ghost writing" can be done badly, but also a lot of the time when my brother co-authors a paper with an academic partner in a baseline research project it isn't scandalous, it is the system working well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming the system is perfect nor free from any scandals (thinking back to the now-banned templates in the 90s where drug industry would pay a doctor to go on vacation and then that doctor starts prescribing the companies drug). But I think you are being overly dramatic. I've only scratched the surface, so I think if you wish to progress any further you should be very clear about what specific mechanisms you are opposing as to these sort of broad brush criticisms.

Cant think of anything more right wing than than corporate media using its influence to protect corporate pharma.

Lol.

Who do you want to take over the wheel of health and medicine?

I don't do that; do you?

One thing I've learned is that the word "evil" sure gets tossed around a lot these days. Your neighbor voted differently than you? "He's evil." Someone makes an amount of money you think is too much? "He's evil."

"The industry spent more than $62 million in the 2016 congressional elections"
https://www.americanprogress.org/art...day-americans/




Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare is a book by Peter C. Gøtzsche
3 links to the same book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly...rganised_Crime

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046551/

https://www.proquest.com/docview/1810274994


How Big Pharma Grew Addicted to Big Profits

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/12/b...ld-posner.html

Is Big Pharma really more evil than academia?


https://www.theguardian.com/science/...-evil-academia

Perspectives: The Drug Industry Is Still Getting Away With Murder, Now It’s Just With The President’s Help

https://khn.org/morning-breakout/per...esidents-help/


"I get to say this about the drug companies, now that President Biden has said that Facebook is killing people because it was allowing people to use its system to spread lies about the vaccines. There is actually a better case against the drug companies."
https://cepr.net/the-drug-companies-are-killing-people/


"Who Killed Honey and Barry Sherman: Investigating The Unsolved Billionaire Murders"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesd...h=6338865365e0

nobody and especially never anyone who is a known scammer.