I agree that people like to feel clever, because they have learned the "secret" hidden dimension. I am also thinking that because people want to protest the lockdowns, masks, mandates, passports, vaccine injuries etc. they feel that if only they can do away with a real virus and real illness, it will be easier to make their case. I don't believe this is really true; one can hold in one's mind the knowledge that there was an actual virus and actual illness, and also that the pandemic policies are wrong and that the vaccines are dangerous, but people like to have their arguments made simpler. They dislike nuance and complexity.
At the same time, certain nuanced understandings latch on, become memes, often they are not even correct - they're kind of like Darmok memes. But not after 2016 - now people just download whatever the TV says to think, or believe the opposite. So I think that's led to intellectual stasis, the smart people believe dumb things because it is "smart to believe what smart people believe." At a certain point, maybe this just switches.
Yes. Unfortunately, far too much time and energy is spent by many barking up wrong trees: "the virus doesn't kill"; "the virus doesn't exist"; "PCR is all false positives"; "PCR results are just spurious correlations".
The appropriate reaction to the absurdities of the last 3 years is not a set of countervailing absurdities we can call our own. To me, this smacks of people who oppose the (idiotic) COVID policies wanting a free lunch: "nothing bad would have happened had we done nothing at all". The correct answer is, in fact, that bad things would happen regardless of the choice of policy response (or lack thereof); but that doing things with high immediate costs and consequences we don't understand is probably worse than doing nothing at all.
This is an active area of discussion and disagreement, but what I find most disconcerting is the lack of constructive engagement from the authors (Engler & Hockett) re. the evidence that Covid-19 ARDS is unique and distinct in several important ways from bacterial pneumonia ARDS. I pointed to this evidence on the unabridged substack version and that evidence was dismissed as having been 'debunked' - a comment liked by Neil and Hockett and approved of by Engler in a reply which didn't appear to make much sense to me. I asked for evidence of the 'debunking', pointing to McCullough supporting the unique clinical pathology of Covid-19 but the response from the commenter was that McCullough was wrong. That was it. No further constructive engagement either from the authors or that dismissive commenter. Not really helpful.
John Cullen has been showing very clearly how large waves of P&I death suddenly, and in a way that was not at all organic, became Covid-19 deaths. This was clearly one aspect of the operation. Covid the virus, and a particularly bad wave of influenza, co-existed and are convoluted in time. Jikkyleaks is not in my view a guy just "farting around" on twitter.. in fact he is helping to lead an important dialogue with a previously normie USC scientist Phillip Buckhaults as it relates to the E-coli DNA plasmid contamination in the process II Pfizer jabs.
I am serious about understanding viruses to the extent that I want to be able to manage my own health. Based on the success of the original Zelenko protocol, I added a 5-day course of Azithromycin to my regimen when managing my one and only (likely Omicron) infection 14 months ago. With early Ivermectin, HCQ, melatonin, and high Vitamin D sufficiency, I never even had a fever or a sore throat. Almost everyone could have had this same experience if the truth and availability of early treatment had been available to all. People on ventilators were given Remdesivir, not antibiotics.
Have you read Expired: Covid, The Untold Story by Dr Clare Craig? I think she presents a fair representation of what happened, but I would be interested in your opinion.
Aug 31, 2023·edited Sep 1, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
I'm not trying to be a contrarian here, but your theory runs counter to what I saw in patients, both pre and post Pneumonia development, that were given antibiotics for their positive SARs-CoV-2 test results and symptoms, versus what I saw in COVID patients who were not given antibiotics.
I saw a higher survival rate in patients given the antibiotics, both before & after pneumonia development. Now this is not a huge number I personally witnessed; but the outcomes were so strikingly disparate, that I find the secondary infection hypothesis quite plausible.
In that case, all published papers regarding treatment in the US also run counter to the same, since that is all that my argument is based on. That's not to dismiss your observations, just to make it clear that my argument isn't supplying or asserting the evidence it is based on.
The assumption that the RT-PCR is a reliable clinical diagnostic tool is not supported nor I beleive supportable. Th assumption that a short string of genetic code assembled by a computer modelling ACTUALLY accurately describes something directly related to a claimed viral substance is not supported not supportable. Forced ventilation in the New York hospital region is associated with a 90-95% death within days result. I am guessing Brian that yiou are also convinced the so calle Spanish Flu outbreak from 1918 was ONLY a viral contagion without a scrap of verifiable evidence to support such a conclusion.??
Everything up to "result" is a litany of dogmas and can only be called an argument in a very tenuous sense. It certainly doesn't address anything I wrote in my post.
I say in this post at two points that bacterial pneumonia was observed to follow influenza primary illness and precede death in 1918. The later attribution of the 1918 flu pandemic to H1N1 virus was summarized here in part 1 of https://unglossed.substack.com/p/oas-review-timeline and was not done "without a scrap of verifiable evidence." It was done with swine flu, experiments with swine, ferrets, and mice, and human sera from people alive at the time of 1918 and born afterward; the conclusion was not universally accepted at the time but became accepted when later changes to H1N1 flu resulted in similar observations, over and over and over, all the way to 1957. If you aren't phrasing your argument against the attribution in terms like "Well when Shope mixed swine snot with newborn blood and it protected mice from death, but with one-year-old blood and it didn't, this wasn't because of antibodies but rather because X," then you don't have an argument against the attribution. Likewise for any modern writers bandying theories about vaccines etc.
Have you tackled the book 'Turtles All The Way Down' ??
Vaccine theory in my view remains just that, a self fulfilling argument with supporters providing their own evidence and methodologies. The whole seems to be very much a dogma like so much else. The PCR so called positives arw highly questionable and depends upon both the Ct involved AND the highly questionable reference 'genetic code' or part thereof used.
Not the robust, provable 'evidence' that the Pandemic responses required.
About why patients, who got a positive test for C19 first, went home, and then later returned with symptoms and had themselves treated - this is a human decision, and there really being something different for it to happen is not necessary, just the _belief_ that it is so, is sufficient. Like when one is shelled 24/7 with fear porn. So someone develops sysmtomps, remembers and gets sprayed anew with all the horrible info, and thinks "uh damn, it's happening to me, better get treated", but at other times, might not have made that decision. And then, they got maltreated. Because propaganda worked.
How much weight that has for all of this, I can't say, too tired to hold it all in mind right now ^^
I linked this post over at "where are the numbers", let's see whether they see it & are interested.
I doubt this explains the many anecdotes of narrative-doubters winding up in the hospital after being denied early treatment in summer 2021. Some collected by Kirsch's own survey which likely means they are a fair percent of all closest-relation-deaths among narrative doubters. https://unglossed.substack.com/p/the-american-unvaccinated-holocaust
Aug 31, 2023·edited Aug 31, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Interesting analysis.Two over 70 year old extended family members sent home with positive test no early treatment told to wait until symptoms develop were found gasping for air both died on the ventilator protocols. One 95 year old sent to hospital test positive spent all day in triage room with other lady no food or water then rescued on the advice of her grandadaughter a nurse discharged with a DNR bracelet. Older, healthy friend spent nearly 2 weeks with worsening breathing afraid of ventilators finally went to Doctor prescribed antibiotics and recovered in less than a week.
I agree that people like to feel clever, because they have learned the "secret" hidden dimension. I am also thinking that because people want to protest the lockdowns, masks, mandates, passports, vaccine injuries etc. they feel that if only they can do away with a real virus and real illness, it will be easier to make their case. I don't believe this is really true; one can hold in one's mind the knowledge that there was an actual virus and actual illness, and also that the pandemic policies are wrong and that the vaccines are dangerous, but people like to have their arguments made simpler. They dislike nuance and complexity.
At the same time, certain nuanced understandings latch on, become memes, often they are not even correct - they're kind of like Darmok memes. But not after 2016 - now people just download whatever the TV says to think, or believe the opposite. So I think that's led to intellectual stasis, the smart people believe dumb things because it is "smart to believe what smart people believe." At a certain point, maybe this just switches.
Yes. Unfortunately, far too much time and energy is spent by many barking up wrong trees: "the virus doesn't kill"; "the virus doesn't exist"; "PCR is all false positives"; "PCR results are just spurious correlations".
The appropriate reaction to the absurdities of the last 3 years is not a set of countervailing absurdities we can call our own. To me, this smacks of people who oppose the (idiotic) COVID policies wanting a free lunch: "nothing bad would have happened had we done nothing at all". The correct answer is, in fact, that bad things would happen regardless of the choice of policy response (or lack thereof); but that doing things with high immediate costs and consequences we don't understand is probably worse than doing nothing at all.
This is an active area of discussion and disagreement, but what I find most disconcerting is the lack of constructive engagement from the authors (Engler & Hockett) re. the evidence that Covid-19 ARDS is unique and distinct in several important ways from bacterial pneumonia ARDS. I pointed to this evidence on the unabridged substack version and that evidence was dismissed as having been 'debunked' - a comment liked by Neil and Hockett and approved of by Engler in a reply which didn't appear to make much sense to me. I asked for evidence of the 'debunking', pointing to McCullough supporting the unique clinical pathology of Covid-19 but the response from the commenter was that McCullough was wrong. That was it. No further constructive engagement either from the authors or that dismissive commenter. Not really helpful.
The latest from Dr. Jessica Rose which ponders data suggestive of the idea that pneumonia vaccines may actually inhibit Covid-19.
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/a-follow-up-on-pneumonia-story?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
She concludes, "Maybe COVID-19 is pneumonia."
Brian is a bit out in the weeds here... I lean more toward Jikky and the "three tablets" POV.
If you are serious about understanding viruses you are in the weeds. Anything else is just farting around on twitter for mentions to RT
John Cullen has been showing very clearly how large waves of P&I death suddenly, and in a way that was not at all organic, became Covid-19 deaths. This was clearly one aspect of the operation. Covid the virus, and a particularly bad wave of influenza, co-existed and are convoluted in time. Jikkyleaks is not in my view a guy just "farting around" on twitter.. in fact he is helping to lead an important dialogue with a previously normie USC scientist Phillip Buckhaults as it relates to the E-coli DNA plasmid contamination in the process II Pfizer jabs.
I am serious about understanding viruses to the extent that I want to be able to manage my own health. Based on the success of the original Zelenko protocol, I added a 5-day course of Azithromycin to my regimen when managing my one and only (likely Omicron) infection 14 months ago. With early Ivermectin, HCQ, melatonin, and high Vitamin D sufficiency, I never even had a fever or a sore throat. Almost everyone could have had this same experience if the truth and availability of early treatment had been available to all. People on ventilators were given Remdesivir, not antibiotics.
They were given antibiotics as well.
An interesting read.
Have you read Expired: Covid, The Untold Story by Dr Clare Craig? I think she presents a fair representation of what happened, but I would be interested in your opinion.
I'm not trying to be a contrarian here, but your theory runs counter to what I saw in patients, both pre and post Pneumonia development, that were given antibiotics for their positive SARs-CoV-2 test results and symptoms, versus what I saw in COVID patients who were not given antibiotics.
I saw a higher survival rate in patients given the antibiotics, both before & after pneumonia development. Now this is not a huge number I personally witnessed; but the outcomes were so strikingly disparate, that I find the secondary infection hypothesis quite plausible.
In that case, all published papers regarding treatment in the US also run counter to the same, since that is all that my argument is based on. That's not to dismiss your observations, just to make it clear that my argument isn't supplying or asserting the evidence it is based on.
The assumption that the RT-PCR is a reliable clinical diagnostic tool is not supported nor I beleive supportable. Th assumption that a short string of genetic code assembled by a computer modelling ACTUALLY accurately describes something directly related to a claimed viral substance is not supported not supportable. Forced ventilation in the New York hospital region is associated with a 90-95% death within days result. I am guessing Brian that yiou are also convinced the so calle Spanish Flu outbreak from 1918 was ONLY a viral contagion without a scrap of verifiable evidence to support such a conclusion.??
Everything up to "result" is a litany of dogmas and can only be called an argument in a very tenuous sense. It certainly doesn't address anything I wrote in my post.
I say in this post at two points that bacterial pneumonia was observed to follow influenza primary illness and precede death in 1918. The later attribution of the 1918 flu pandemic to H1N1 virus was summarized here in part 1 of https://unglossed.substack.com/p/oas-review-timeline and was not done "without a scrap of verifiable evidence." It was done with swine flu, experiments with swine, ferrets, and mice, and human sera from people alive at the time of 1918 and born afterward; the conclusion was not universally accepted at the time but became accepted when later changes to H1N1 flu resulted in similar observations, over and over and over, all the way to 1957. If you aren't phrasing your argument against the attribution in terms like "Well when Shope mixed swine snot with newborn blood and it protected mice from death, but with one-year-old blood and it didn't, this wasn't because of antibodies but rather because X," then you don't have an argument against the attribution. Likewise for any modern writers bandying theories about vaccines etc.
Have you tackled the book 'Turtles All The Way Down' ??
Vaccine theory in my view remains just that, a self fulfilling argument with supporters providing their own evidence and methodologies. The whole seems to be very much a dogma like so much else. The PCR so called positives arw highly questionable and depends upon both the Ct involved AND the highly questionable reference 'genetic code' or part thereof used.
Not the robust, provable 'evidence' that the Pandemic responses required.
About why patients, who got a positive test for C19 first, went home, and then later returned with symptoms and had themselves treated - this is a human decision, and there really being something different for it to happen is not necessary, just the _belief_ that it is so, is sufficient. Like when one is shelled 24/7 with fear porn. So someone develops sysmtomps, remembers and gets sprayed anew with all the horrible info, and thinks "uh damn, it's happening to me, better get treated", but at other times, might not have made that decision. And then, they got maltreated. Because propaganda worked.
How much weight that has for all of this, I can't say, too tired to hold it all in mind right now ^^
I linked this post over at "where are the numbers", let's see whether they see it & are interested.
I doubt this explains the many anecdotes of narrative-doubters winding up in the hospital after being denied early treatment in summer 2021. Some collected by Kirsch's own survey which likely means they are a fair percent of all closest-relation-deaths among narrative doubters. https://unglossed.substack.com/p/the-american-unvaccinated-holocaust
Interesting analysis.Two over 70 year old extended family members sent home with positive test no early treatment told to wait until symptoms develop were found gasping for air both died on the ventilator protocols. One 95 year old sent to hospital test positive spent all day in triage room with other lady no food or water then rescued on the advice of her grandadaughter a nurse discharged with a DNR bracelet. Older, healthy friend spent nearly 2 weeks with worsening breathing afraid of ventilators finally went to Doctor prescribed antibiotics and recovered in less than a week.
". . .everything has a secret dimension which once discovered allows one to feel clever."
You could sum up the entirety of human history for the last ~200 years with that quote. Or maybe 20,000.