Chief Twit

[Screwdriver]

that's a bigger issue in modern media than all these accusations of censorship.

It's the crux of the whole matter IMO.

Taking the FBI as just one easy example...we should remember that the report which found, quote, 'no collusion', also found it likely that the Russian state did indeed interfere in the 2016 election chiefly through electronic means. So you could just as easily argue that the FBI would be remiss if they didn't have a heavy presence at social media firms in 2020.

That ^^^ is just a different interpretation of the same set of fairly sparse facts.

Similarly everyone is sure that the media is being silenced and yet everyone knows about it. So it's some pretty shoddy silencing. Or maybe just a biased interpretation.

The truth usually lies on average in the middle and is far more due to random uncoordinated acts than people in the shadows.

The problem is not big tech, big pharma or big government. It's little people being taken in and falling down rabbit holes way too easily.

No it is nothing like the situation you describe. It is easy to blame Russia for everything but it was used as an excuse to hide extremely damaging information about the proposed new president, right before the election. None of the excuses for censorship were true and the source of those allegations was some chap sponsored by Hilary Clinton.

It was a made up story from the start and the "reasons" for burying the Hunter Biden laptop have been changed over the years that the FBI have sat on it. Initially it was because "it bore all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign". I put that in quotes because it is WORD FOR WORD the exact phrase trotted out by the mainstream media. It is hilarious to watch YouTube video compilations of all the legacy media channels saying EXACTLY the same thing. Talk about singing from the same song sheet.

But the biggest issue is not the unfairness or even the veracity of big tech, social media censorship backed up by the legacy media, it is the fact that it is so partisan. Completely one sided. That is dangerous and is leading us (all) down the road to totalitarianism.

[Screwdriver]

I say it in every one of these threads, but I'll say it again anyway

Conspiracy theories gain traction primarily, IMO, because they allow you to assign blame and cause to random events. They're very much like religion in that way really.

I am curious then. Are you suggesting that my precis of one of many reports which criticise the secrecy behind the Pfizer campaign and extreme lobbying is a conspiracy theory? Am I wrong to point to Pfizer as an example of global corporate greed because to do so is the same as saying "it's a conspiracy". Actually what I am in fact saying is it's a monopoly...

There was a debate recently in the EU Parliament (??) where the complainant was holding up a report they had demanded from Pfizer (who refused to attend a hearing) where you could see the ENTIRE document had been "redacted". Was that a conspiracy thing also?

Do you see conspiracy theories everywhere?

[DefTrap]

The only person suggesting ALL the data is you. You are arguing against a point I have not made.

Really? Because it feels like you're swerving it, always falling back on "I didn't say that" and pulling out the strawman as a trump card to avoid engaging. Your rationale holds no water. The subsequent bullshit pharma ranting just shows you'd far prefer to move on to something else.

Yes pharma need to make money but Pfizer are making a killing. Literally. By maintaining a monopoly on a drug developed by another company they bought up to secire the patent, restrict access to 3rd world countries in order to hold the world to ransom. Their actionsare despicable and the profit margin on this particular drug I have read is something like 4000%. Or was that insulin for diabetics?? I can't remember. Who cares, four thousand percent markup is indefensible...

Waffle and really beside the point but as you insist. Again - R&D costs of failed meds needs to be returned somehow or they would go out of business after the first failed trial. So you can't just throw around "indefensible markup" as if your fag-packet calculation of manufacturing cost price vs retail is a justification. If there wasn't profit in it, it wouldn't get done, simple as that.

But they do not merely defend it, they spend MILLIONS on "lobbying" various governments to make their jab compulsory. On top of that they spend millions advertising, lobbying, dictating propaganda in mainstream media to vilify anyone who would dare question the absolute necessity for this drug. To the extent that people get fired etc. Then there's the question of forcing it onto children...

Well you've drifted from a BMJ report over the non-availability of covid data to a textbook scattergun attack of wild accusations regarding Big Pharma, so it's fairly obvious the agenda here.

[Mr. Dazzle]

But the biggest issue is not the unfairness or even the veracity of big tech, social media censorship backed up by the legacy media, it is the fact that it is so partisan. Completely one sided. That is dangerous and is leading us (all) down the road to totalitarianism.

I don't really care that much about Biden or Trump or Pfizer or any of that, they're all just symptoms of the same thing...lending way too much credence to just one POV and interpretation of facts. You say "look I was right all along see"...but well, you're just not. Your interpretation fits but so do 50 others.

If the whole of social media is so obviously partisan how did Trump propel himself to the presidency? I think even the most staunch Twitter hater would have to admit he couldn't have done it without social media.

How do so many people know about these stories that are supposedly buried?

How is everyone so aware of the profits Pfizer make and why is vaccine hesitancy high again?

Either this path were on doesn't exist, or the person leading us down it is doing a really shit job. Or perhaps most likely of all, the trends you see are a result of how groups of people just are, nothing to do with a controlling external influence.

[Screwdriver]

The only person suggesting ALL the data is you. You are arguing against a point I have not made.

Really? Because it feels like you're swerving it, always falling back on "I didn't say that" and pulling out the strawman as a trump card to avoid engaging. Your rationale holds no water. The subsequent bullshit pharma ranting just shows you'd far prefer to move on to something else.

Yes pharma need to make money but Pfizer are making a killing. Literally. By maintaining a monopoly on a drug developed by another company they bought up to secire the patent, restrict access to 3rd world countries in order to hold the world to ransom. Their actionsare despicable and the profit margin on this particular drug I have read is something like 4000%. Or was that insulin for diabetics?? I can't remember. Who cares, four thousand percent markup is indefensible...

Waffle and really beside the point but as you insist. Again - R&D costs of failed meds needs to be returned somehow or they would go out of business after the first failed trial. So you can't just throw around "indefensible markup" as if your fag-packet calculation of cost vs price is a justification. If there wasn't profit in it, it wouldn't get done, simple as that.

But they do not merely defend it, they spend MILLIONS on "lobbying" various governments to make their jab compulsory. On top of that they spend millions advertising, lobbying, dictating propaganda in mainstream media to vilify anyone who would dare question the absolute necessity for this drug. To the extent that people get fired etc. Then there's the question of forcing it onto children...

Well you've drifted from a BMJ report over the non-availability of covid data to a textbook scattergun attack of wild accusations regarding Big Pharma, so it's fairly obvious the agenda here.

I think I have tried to remind you to stick to what I have actually said by referring to my actual post in every single reply. That's not a swerve.

You are the only person saying a company cannot reveal ALL of the commercially sensitive or personally identifying data as if it is something I have said when it is not. That is a classic straw man argument which you then top off by claiming to be an expert in the field being "suitably personally qualified" to rubbish my opinion. That is an argument from authority, a rather lame tactic people use when they don't have a rational argument.

I look at some of the other responses in despair. Yeah, don't drink bleach. Some rubbish about pile ointment and other irrelevant nonsense.

Well you're in luck. I give up. I thought it was hilarious that after so many months of being hailed a conspiracy theorist because I made a post regarding the Hunter Biden laptop affair, the truth finally emerges and my opinion on the matter was correct after all. It's all still there in black and white (probably in a locked thread).

The left are in a frenzy over what to do about Elon Musk exposing Twitter for what it became; a propaganda machine for the Democratic party in the US. I recall being vilified again for daring to suggest such state sponsored censorship existed. Now it is common knowledge.

I appreciate that many people here will not recall much of what I have said but I do. Frankly, I am sick and tired of being so harshly and personally criticised for voicing an opinion especially when people like you @DefTrap deliberately misrepresent my argument and argue against something I have not said.

[Ant]

You know when you've been ClapTrapped.

[DefTrap]

I think I have tried to remind you to stick to what I have actually said by referring to my actual post in every single reply. That's not a swerve.

Which you've yet to back up.

being "suitably personally qualified" to rubbish my opinion. That is an argument from authority, a rather lame tactic people use when they don't have a rational argument.

I have some experience yes, I give you the benefit of it as you clearly have none other than carefully sifted snippets of conjecture from unqualified sources. I thought it worth mentioning so you understood, and I gave you plenty of clear evidence and referenced the law. I can quote you fda regulations and UK statutory instruments if you like.

I look at some of the other responses in despair. Yeah, don't drink bleach. Some rubbish about pile ointment and other irrelevant nonsense.

Which I never even mentioned, but yeah.

Well you're in luck. I give up. I thought it was hilarious that after so many months of being hailed a conspiracy theorist because I made a post regarding the Hunter Biden laptop affair, the truth finally emerges and my opinion on the matter was correct after all. It's all still there in black and white (probably in a locked thread).

The left are in a frenzy over what to do about Elon Musk exposing Twitter for what it became; a propaganda machine for the Democratic party in the US. I recall being vilified again for daring to suggest such state sponsored censorship existed. Now it is common knowledge.

I'm thrilled you're so pleased with yourself but yet to see really any verifiable proof other than in your head. And certainly nothing that proper media thinks worth giving air time to. The reason I raised your covid argument again was because it was so full of holes and I actually do have some at the coal face knowledge to share. But you just retreated into the defensive and swerved into the more comfortable area of wishy washy conspiracy.

[Horse]

Who cares, four thousand percent markup is indefensible...

If there wasn't profit in it, it wouldn't get done, simple as that.

I wonder what the markup is on homeopathic remedies?

Cheaper than chips raw materials and fark all R&D to cover.

Now that ought to be worth a rant.

[DefTrap]

I wonder what the markup is on homeopathic remedies?

Cheaper than chips raw materials and fark all R&D to cover.

Now that ought to be worth a rant.

Like I said, my sister-in-laws homeopathic chinese tea which was guaranteed a wonderful cleanser, made her shit her pants.
She doesn't read chinese (I'm pretty sure I can say that with some authority) so she quite possibly took 17000 times the recommended dose. But what do doctors know anyway? Just government collaborators preventing us curing ourselves with their science nonsense and half-arsed rules.

[wheelnut]

Governor Benito Newsolini of California recently signed a new law that makes it illegal for medical professionals to talk about any Covid treatment (including potential treatments) that aren't backed by the CDC.

He’s made doctors accountable to the state medical board if they spread misinformation about covid/covid treatments.

Isn’t that a good thing? Shouldn’t they be professionally accountable?

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/ ... at-we-know

[Mr. Dazzle]

Hasn't it always been against the Dr's Rules to give out advice which isn't backed up by someone. Isn't that part and parcel of having medical licences?

[Horse]

makes it illegal for medical professionals to talk about any Covid treatment (including potential treatments) that aren't backed by the CDC.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/ ... at-we-know

From the link:

- California Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation that would allow the state medical board to discipline physicians and surgeons who spread misinformation about COVID-19 during patient care.

- Misinformation is defined in the legislation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”


So 'would allow ... discipline' Vs 'illegal' and 'false information' Vs 'treatments that aren't backed by the CDC'

And we wonder how and why apparently intelligent people spread conspiracies.

[Ant]

Misinformation = I don't want you to have this conversation.

All he's done, is made it illegal to not line the pockets of others with money, first.

[mangocrazy]

Misinformation = I don't want you to have this conversation.

All he's done, is made it illegal to not line the pockets of others with money, first.

I tried running this through Google translate, but it appears there's no plug-in for gibberish.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Have you tried a non partisan search engine?

[DefTrap]

Or a less Marxist one?

[Screwdriver]

I think I have tried to remind you to stick to what I have actually said by referring to my actual post in every single reply. That's not a swerve.

Which you've yet to back up.

being "suitably personally qualified" to rubbish my opinion. That is an argument from authority, a rather lame tactic people use when they don't have a rational argument.

I have some experience yes, I give you the benefit of it as you clearly have none other than carefully sifted snippets of conjecture from unqualified sources. I thought it worth mentioning so you understood, and I gave you plenty of clear evidence and referenced the law. I can quote you fda regulations and UK statutory instruments if you like.

I look at some of the other responses in despair. Yeah, don't drink bleach. Some rubbish about pile ointment and other irrelevant nonsense.

Which I never even mentioned, but yeah.

Well you're in luck. I give up. I thought it was hilarious that after so many months of being hailed a conspiracy theorist because I made a post regarding the Hunter Biden laptop affair, the truth finally emerges and my opinion on the matter was correct after all. It's all still there in black and white (probably in a locked thread).

The left are in a frenzy over what to do about Elon Musk exposing Twitter for what it became; a propaganda machine for the Democratic party in the US. I recall being vilified again for daring to suggest such state sponsored censorship existed. Now it is common knowledge.

I'm thrilled you're so pleased with yourself but yet to see really any verifiable proof other than in your head. And certainly nothing that proper media thinks worth giving air time to. The reason I raised your covid argument again was because it was so full of holes and I actually do have some at the coal face knowledge to share. But you just retreated into the defensive and swerved into the more comfortable area of wishy washy conspiracy.

OK. Fuck it. For the last time then. Here is what you object to, a post I made a month ago in some other thread (Stealth Omicron: viewtopic.php?p=198833#p198833)

I said: I don't believe the numbers because they consistently refuse to provide the actual data those numbers are made up from. Secondly, there are plenty of "stories" about the veracity and quality of the trials themselves, again, most of that data is withheld.

Which is a precis of the BMJ report which in summary states:

Summary box
Data transparency has become a well-established norm in biomedical research, and is especially important for broadly used public health interventions like COVID-19 vaccines.

Tax payers helped fund COVID-19 vaccine trials and should have the right to access the results.

There is inadequate availability of COVID-19 vaccine trial documents and data; individual participant data will not be available for months, perhaps years, for most vaccines.

Widespread use of interventions without full data transparency raises concerns over the rational use of COVID-19 vaccines.

Trial transparency must start early and be continuous. Trial protocols should be released once finalised, before trial results are reported, and should be accompanied with the release of trial documents and data before clinicians and the public make decisions regarding product use.

I would hope that "backs up" what I actually said and not what you imagine I must have meant.

"I give you the benefit of it as you clearly have none other than carefully sifted snippets of conjecture from unqualified sources." Christ, argument from authority and deeply patronising. You're on a roll. Is the BMJ (that is the British Medical Journal by the way ) an "unqualified source"? Are you really such an expert in this field you out qualify the BMJ?? <swoon>

I did not realise we were in such august company. How is it then that you are so completely ignorant of this well known issue of secrecy and obfuscation being perpetrated by Pfizer, above and beyond the usual cinc norms? Actually, don't answer that. I have no interest in anything you have to say. Bye.

[DefTrap]

I said I have experience, more than you that is. is that patronising? less than a hobbyist coming on here and claiming they were right all along. Nothing in that bmj report is indicative of wrongdoing, that's just how it is. Maybe it will change in the future and become the law, maybe not. That change might be driven by this very report into covid data.

[ZRX61]

From the link:

- California Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation that would allow the state medical board to discipline physicians and surgeons who spread misinformation about COVID-19 during patient care.

- Misinformation is defined in the legislation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”


So 'would allow ... discipline' Vs 'illegal' and 'false information' Vs 'treatments that aren't backed by the CDC'

And we wonder how and why apparently intelligent people spread conspiracies.

Good grief, you believe Newsom?? He's still blaming a drought for all the reservoirs being empty after he drained 78% of the water into the ocean. Odd that all the natural lakes are full...

[ZRX61]

I said: I don't believe the numbers because they consistently refuse to provide the actual data those numbers are made up from. Secondly, there are plenty of "stories" about the veracity and quality of the trials themselves, again, most of that data is withheld.

Calizuela still counts everyone who ever had covid & didn't die as still having covid. You can find the actual numbers of people who recovered, but the State (& LA County) won't publish that number.
If you catch it 2 or 3 times, you're counted as 2 or 3 people.