What?

in FreeSpeech2 months ago (edited)

Just... What?

Screenshot 2022-12-02 at 19-29-57 Rochelle Walensky MD MPH on Twitter.png

This tweet is a few days old now, but it was only just brought to my attention, and I can't even with this. To hell with these ivory tower holier-than-thou control freaks and their disingenuous talk of "sacrifice."

If you don't know what this is all about, click here for historical context. This is just one example of why so many people don't trust their claims to "ethical research and practice" in the first place. The "trust the science" crowd has a long history of treating people as science experiment subjects without their knowledge or consent.

Of course, none of this proves, or even necessarily supports, any current conspiracy theories regarding COVID, mRNA vaccines, chemtrails, etc. but it does discredit any insistence that conspiracies just don't happen, or would be quickly revealed to the public if they existed, or that people would be properly held accountable once such injustice is uncovered.

Just remember that while not everything a government functionary says is necessarily a lie, a lot is half-truth and deflection. Additionally, sometimes they are outright lying to you, and not for your own good.

dizzy d20 128.png

HIVE | PeakD | Ecency

If you're not on Hive yet, I invite you to join through PeakD. If you use my referral link, I'll even delegate some Hive Power to help you get started.

Sort:  

Narration is more important than facts. And narration is in the hands of the Few.

But for now society survives in spite of governments.

Trusting the "official" word is as useful as gouging out your own heart with a spoon. There is no truth anymore, just layers of lies in an ever self defeating cycle that will eventually end in societal collapse.

Those poor men and their families deserve far more than the catty words of some WEF puppet. So many cases of medical malfeasance over the years and we are only aware of a few of the countless. Look at Henrietta Lacks.

I'm a bit conflicted on the HeLa cell line scandal. The biopsy was medical treatment she sought, unlike the fraud of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. As medical waste which proved useful, I'm not sure how it using them is morally distinct from dumpster diving. I haven't looked into how they were used, but I wouldn't be surprised if some tests were unethical. There are also some strange legal complications around patents and DNA that don't pass my sniff test. Corporate profits are often more a matter of political plunder than market mutual benefit. [/incoherent 2:25 AM rambling insomniac reply]

Medical malfeasance has been a problem forever. The military performed numerous experiments on troops and there have been countless experiments conducted on people in institutions, against their will. As long as we have medicine as a for profit endeavor there will always be the problems of greed trumping humanity. It's not profitable to cure people.

As long as we have medicine as a for profit endeavor there will always be the problems of greed trumping humanity. It's not profitable to cure people.

I fundamentally disagree here. Profit is not fundamentally corrupting. Make the same argument regarding agriculture and feeding people, or mechanics and repairing machinery. In the market, profit is a signal that people have needs and wants to fill. It isn't exploitation to make a mutually-beneficial exchange, and where there is demand far in excess of supply, profits signal market actors to reallocate resources to meet that demand.

There is a widespread assumption that removing the market incentives of profit also removes corruption, but the basic economics of price controls guarantee shortages and suffering. In addition, public choice ec0nomics describes how the incentives of political power 8nterfere with the once tives of satisfying wants. No one likes the DMV. Why would anyone want medicine to work like that?

However, it is entirely valid to criticize the model of corporate cartels protected from competition by bureaucratic interference in the market. The system we have today is called "free market," but that is mislabeling one of the most heavily-controlled sectors of the economy today.

Wow.

Sacrifice via consent is one thing, but to see this spun like that is more than a bit, off putting.

Not surprising though. Sigh.

Thanks for sharing yet another example of just because people are in charge doesn't mean they should be or know what's best for others. Yee.

!PIZZA

Modern medical "science" is about as scientific as Scientology, at least in the US. This is partially because the whole of academia has been corrupted by the anti-empirical "standpoint theory," which was introduced way back in 1970. Funny story, when my father (who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry) asked me what standpoint theory was, I told him "it is the idea that the identity of the scientist somehow has a bearing on the validity of the research," he immediately started laughing and replied "like Fauci saying 'I am the science,' then!" That's not exactly what standpoint theory is, but I didn't want to ruin the moment. My point is that "science" no longer means what it once did, it has been reduced to a buzzword to brow-beat anyone who questions the anointed representatives of the cathedral.

On a similar note, I think we need to start referring to medical doctors as "physicians" again. Despite bearing the title of "doctor," they are not trained as scientists, but as specialist medical technicians, and are at a much lower level than any holder of a doctorate in a scientific field. "Doctor" Fauci (who hasn't even practised medicine in the past 40 years, he's been too busy glad-handing with politicians) deserves about as much reverence as "doctor" Kent Hovind.

At least Hovind isn't trying to control society.

So he claims; besides, I made that comment purely as a reference to the level of scientific illiteracy that those two display, not in reference to whatever designs on wider society they may have.

Considering what my father does for a living, it may interest you to know that he and his colleagues have beef with Fauci that goes back WAAAAY before the pandemic; the prevailing opinion among all of them is that Fauci "should have retired 20 years ago."

Sorry if the whole thing made me seem a little hot under the collar; mere mention of Fauci causes my father's blood pressure to rise, and I think it may have rubbed off on me a bit.

🍕 PIZZA !

I gifted $PIZZA slices here:
@generikat(9/15) tipped @jacobtothe (x1)

Please vote for pizza.witness!

Many people are very passionate about this problem, some die not because of Covid, but die because of the injection of the vaccine itself, many sufferers of Covid also die because of the interaction of several trials.