‘Believe the science’ requires that the science itself stands on a firm foundation. . . so what happens when those very foundations are endangered and being eroded by corruption?
For years we have watched people with political agendas try to put an end to all political debate with those for magical words, ‘the science is settled’.
We could go into a litany of reasons why that argument is a dangerously foolish standard to build any government policy upon, ranging from logical fallacies, to is/ought questions, to enormous peer pressure to conform even to a flawed thesis among the scientific establishment, to a correct understanding of the role of scientific inquiry as an endlessly unfolding process itself and being our educated ‘best guess’ for explanations at any given time.
But since the argument is ‘believe the science’, what the left has ultimately been doing is that we accept as ‘gospel truth’ any proclamation that is handed down to us through scientific journals.
The very people who pride themselves as skeptics who scoff at the notion of anyone trusting the word of sacred texts handed down by holy leaders from a variety of religious traditions holds almost that exact same devout reverence for texts handed down by men and women in lab coats.
That devotion is the difference between objective scientific inquiry and the pseudo-religious zeal Scientism. The cult of scientism leads down some dark paths which can leave the public open to dangerous large-scale manipulation.
Of all the peer-reviewed Scientific Journals, few names are so respected and renowned as the medical journal ‘The Lancet’. But what happens to that trust in their ‘scientific objectivity’ if The Lancet itself were ever shown caving to political pressure or worse, ordinary corruption?
Like the media before them, that trust IS their currecncy. And if they lose it, we will all be royally screwed, because our anchor points for what can be known to be objectively true will crumble, and we will have no way of telling how far back the corruption has gone.
One of China Global Television Network’s most recent ads on Facebook is of an interview that the state-controlled propaganda network conducted about the coronavirus pandemic with the editor of The Lancet, one of the world’s top medical journals.
The editor, Richard Horton, largely praised the Chinese government’s response to the pandemic while blasting the U.S. in the May 2020 interview, which garnered around 900,000 impressions at a cost of around $500, according to Facebook data.
“I think we have a great deal to thank China for, about the way that it handled the outbreak,” Horton said in the interview.
Horton, who is British, also criticized U.S. politicians for “being so openly critical” of China and the World Health Organization.
“The U.S. has wasted the whole of February and early March, said Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet,” reads the caption from CGTN, which the U.S. government requires to register as a foreign agent of China. –DailyCaller
This same Richard Horton received a ‘Friendship Award’ from an organization that oversaw China’s ‘thousand talents program’, and the cited DailyCaller article goes on to detail a number of other ways in which Horton is compromised by CCP influence.
The Lancet’s role in COVID is an interesting one.
No less a source than the Lancet had published a French study showing early indications that people who had been taking the antimalarial drug known as HCQ had an unusually high survival rate.
Trump made explicit reference to the LANCET’S OWN study — literally looking to the science for optimistic signs when the news was so busy selling panic and blame. Offering the public indications of hope.
He even made arrangements to secure millions of doses in case this treatment option checked out as a way to save American lives.
We all saw what happened next. Praise from OrangeManBad became the kiss of death for that treatment option. HCQ became instantly demonized. The decades-long track record of amazing safety was slandered as this cheap and readily available drug was suddenly demonized.
CDC adjusted their guidance in April of 2020 — after the FDA authorized the use of HCQ — to specifically state that it was not listed as approved for use as either a treatment or a therapeutic.
The Lancet helped push that anti-HCQ narrative by releasing a study that recommended against the use of HCQ to treat COVID-19, one of those reasons included allegations that the drug was potentially dangerous.
The medical journal The Lancet on Thursday retracted a large study on the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 because of potential flaws in the research data. The study, published two weeks ago, found no benefit to the drug — and suggested its use may even increase the risk of death.
Thursday’s retraction doesn’t mean that the drug is helpful — or harmful — with respect to the coronavirus. Rather, the study authors were unable to confirm that the data set was accurate.
…”After publication of our Lancet article, several concerns were raised with respect to the veracity of the data and analyses conducted by Surgisphere Corporation,” the study authors wrote in their retraction.
The study authors said they launched an independent review to confirm the findings, but said the company would not provide access to all of the data.
“Based on this development, we can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources,” the authors wrote.
…”The amount of patients that were included in a given country or given continent was almost more or a very high proportion of the total number reported in that geographic area, as if they were including more cases than possible,” said Dr. Daniel Culver, a pulmonary and critical care expert at the Cleveland Clinic who was not involved with the research. —NBCNews
The retraction was in early June, but the stigma had already stuck.
All references to that medical treatment were banned from social media. YouTube videos banned it. Doctors in many regions were forbidden to prescribe off-label use of this medication, despite a lack of any superior life-saving treatments being available.
Doctors that publicly claimed to have had saved countless lives by treating their patients with this alternative were not asked to produce anonymized medical records for oversight committees to look at, they were publicly ridiculed as quacks. Pharmacies refused to offer this treatment.
The November election came and went, and then with ‘OrangeManBad’ out of the picture, this happened.
The American Journal of Medicine now (Jan. 2021) recommends Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and Zinc for the treatment of Covid 19 outpatients.
The irony is this is the treatment that former US President, Donald Trump promoted last year. The timing, right after the election, is interesting. —PrincipiaScientific
How many people died because of this coordinated Democrat/Media/BigTech dogpile against the use of HCQ?
How much of this was influenced by blind faith in the integrity of scientists like those in the Lancet whose objectivity we now have good reason to question whether they have been corrupted by political considerations?
While the Democrats wag their fingers and tell us to ‘believe the science’, should not the only fair answer be — which ones?
After all, this isn’t the first time that Peer Reviewed Journals have been shown to be compromised.
James Lindsey has been working with others to expose this issue for years.
The Effeminization Of The American Male
by Doug Giles
Doug Giles, best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog, ClashDaily.com, has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity. That is, if the man-child will put down his frappuccino; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely and tornadic tome. Buy Now:The Effeminization Of The American Male