literature published was biased and politically spun during the pandemic. Recall in September and October 2020 the opinion pieces published by Nature, NEJM, Science and Scientific American that were glaringly biased politically. That was unprecedented. Since then we have seen a worsening tilt toward narrative based “science” while studies looking for truth in science atrophy. The question is what are we going to do about it?
I suspect money is at play here with the BMJ. Who funds the BMJ? The BMJ claims it is only about 7% industry funded. However, that does not include classified advertising such as Pharma drug ads appearing in medical journals (which I think is considerable). Pushing the COVID fear narrative such as masks, lockdowns, exaggerated death tolls, helps push people into embracing lightly tested medical products such new vaccinations and drugs such as Paxlovid. I think money factors into the BMJ's bias as does progressive ideology.
RE the verbiage, “ . . . . thinking that if we all wore n95s for 3 weeks covid would vanish . . . .”. I think Vinay is dosing us with intentional but irresponsible hyperbole here. I remember nobody in power stating this hypothesis of VANISHING the ongoing covid pandemic. I do indeed recall that we had to endure various gub-ment “themes”, like the really corny one called “Flatten the Curve” etc. Dr. Prasad weakens badly his exegesis and dilutes his impact by engaging in hyperbole that allowed a Straw Man to be erected and (of course) then shot down in one blast. He may as well have told us that various campaigns like masking or staying home or vaccination were advertised to eradicate erectile dysfunction in 100% of men over age 50 but then did not deliver when the truth was assayed carefully in retrospect. Please Vinay, do turn down the knob on your machinery that carries the label “Convenient Hyperbole”.
“ . . . . thinking that if we all wore n95s for 3 weeks covid would vanish . . . .”.
The first part of the sentence was true..."would vanish" is a reductio ad absurdum conclusion ....based on what the powers implied would happen...
That`s actually what happened..where were you?
Its called sarcasm...
Your bizzare masking/erectile dysfunction analogy was truly weird, especially after waffling about strawmen...as well as using the word "verbiage" without blushing...
Thank god most (other)Phd`s can recognize sarcasm when its used to make a point...that you somehow missed..
SAGE is the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. Here's an illustration of their want of sagacity: In Dec 2021, as omicron was just starting in the UK, SAGE recommended the UK government enforce strict shut down measures. SAGE forecasted 600 deaths/day (best case) to 6000 deaths/day (worst case). The PM at the time, Boris Johnson, had other things on his mind, and listening to his back benchers did not take SAGE's advice. With NONE of their fear-based measures in place, UK topped out at a mere 250 deaths/day in January 2022.
Naturally, their failure was not covered in the MSM. One Member of Parliament pressed a SAGE member about their terrible advice. He offered the lame "my pencil made me do it" excuse: No apology, of course, but only the explanation that "the forecasts, and consequent advice, were based on our computer models".
Maybe we should stop using the word progressive. Its meaning has changed from forward-thinking to righteous thinking. It may be semantics, but those who disagree with progressives are labeled as ignorant and backward thinking, i.e., against progress.
Lenin’s gang was the “progressive elite” of its day. Look how that turned out.
Nothing new here. We knew medical
literature published was biased and politically spun during the pandemic. Recall in September and October 2020 the opinion pieces published by Nature, NEJM, Science and Scientific American that were glaringly biased politically. That was unprecedented. Since then we have seen a worsening tilt toward narrative based “science” while studies looking for truth in science atrophy. The question is what are we going to do about it?
Thanks for sharing this pre-printed! As usual, a clever approach to understanding what is going on by John Ioannidis!
Fear mongering has been a universal way to control the masses for centuries. It fools a LOT of people, sadly even me from time to time.
I suspect money is at play here with the BMJ. Who funds the BMJ? The BMJ claims it is only about 7% industry funded. However, that does not include classified advertising such as Pharma drug ads appearing in medical journals (which I think is considerable). Pushing the COVID fear narrative such as masks, lockdowns, exaggerated death tolls, helps push people into embracing lightly tested medical products such new vaccinations and drugs such as Paxlovid. I think money factors into the BMJ's bias as does progressive ideology.
RE the verbiage, “ . . . . thinking that if we all wore n95s for 3 weeks covid would vanish . . . .”. I think Vinay is dosing us with intentional but irresponsible hyperbole here. I remember nobody in power stating this hypothesis of VANISHING the ongoing covid pandemic. I do indeed recall that we had to endure various gub-ment “themes”, like the really corny one called “Flatten the Curve” etc. Dr. Prasad weakens badly his exegesis and dilutes his impact by engaging in hyperbole that allowed a Straw Man to be erected and (of course) then shot down in one blast. He may as well have told us that various campaigns like masking or staying home or vaccination were advertised to eradicate erectile dysfunction in 100% of men over age 50 but then did not deliver when the truth was assayed carefully in retrospect. Please Vinay, do turn down the knob on your machinery that carries the label “Convenient Hyperbole”.
“ . . . . thinking that if we all wore n95s for 3 weeks covid would vanish . . . .”.
The first part of the sentence was true..."would vanish" is a reductio ad absurdum conclusion ....based on what the powers implied would happen...
That`s actually what happened..where were you?
Its called sarcasm...
Your bizzare masking/erectile dysfunction analogy was truly weird, especially after waffling about strawmen...as well as using the word "verbiage" without blushing...
Thank god most (other)Phd`s can recognize sarcasm when its used to make a point...that you somehow missed..
SAGE is the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. Here's an illustration of their want of sagacity: In Dec 2021, as omicron was just starting in the UK, SAGE recommended the UK government enforce strict shut down measures. SAGE forecasted 600 deaths/day (best case) to 6000 deaths/day (worst case). The PM at the time, Boris Johnson, had other things on his mind, and listening to his back benchers did not take SAGE's advice. With NONE of their fear-based measures in place, UK topped out at a mere 250 deaths/day in January 2022.
Naturally, their failure was not covered in the MSM. One Member of Parliament pressed a SAGE member about their terrible advice. He offered the lame "my pencil made me do it" excuse: No apology, of course, but only the explanation that "the forecasts, and consequent advice, were based on our computer models".
Maybe we should stop using the word progressive. Its meaning has changed from forward-thinking to righteous thinking. It may be semantics, but those who disagree with progressives are labeled as ignorant and backward thinking, i.e., against progress.
Lenin’s gang was the “progressive elite” of its day. Look how that turned out.