re: The Atlantic really mad at Twitter. They have no answer for #DiedSuddenly.

quote:

---

A lot of skeptics are going to say something like "even if I concede those are valid ways of distinguishing, why should I feel confident that medical authorities are looking to make the distinctions in relevant cases?"

---

Well, I tend to think that if they are willing to write off the entire profession of individuals, all of whom have their own motivations, including self-interest, then there is no method of convincing them through logos that would convince a physician. That there are self-interested parties who would love to make such a link, which if repeated, would make their careers and promise them opportunities they wouldn't likely get in the extremely competitive academic job market, I don't know what else there is. I would absolutely drop everything if such an opportunity presented itself, because the potential gains from making such a link would be, from the physician-scientist perspective, incredible. The potential pushback could be negotiated if the work is appropriately limited in its claims, the results are reproducible and especially if you have some level of institutional support.

quote:

---

Any ways to increase public confidence that the right kinds of assessments are being in the right cases?

---

Well, in a market-oriented system, one would think that a researcher's self-interest would be significant enough, as if vaccination is producing injury patterns that affect only the vaccinated, then the cross-section of researchers who are vaccinated who are self-interested is going to be rather large. Outside of the profession, I don't think people realize how contentious academic publishing is. There are several controversial articles published in major magazines with every issue, but those controversies are limited to the niche subset of interested parties. There is much less consensus on big ideas than people think, especially as it relates to immunology, as we still don't have a full description of plasma cell homeostasis, nor do we have a complete understanding of immune-related injury patterns and what triggers them.

The fact that this job market is so competitive and downright vicious doesn't seem to inform the possibility that there is a willing population ready to do research which would be controversial. Their conviction is so great of the regulatory capture of the entire industry that they are placing a consensus on ideas which don't have them, and undermine the motivations of self-interested humans in a way that makes me wonder if they actually interact with people.

quote:

---

I think it’s curious that you read my post as a defense of Malone or anybody else, other than to point out that if they’re wrong they’re still as accurate as most of the information the experts have been feeding us.

---

I don't know who this consensus of experts is, other than the same appeal to the public health institutions which are prime examples of regulatory capture by biotech and pharmaceuticals, a capture to which no one is actually interested in undoing.

quote:

---

Yep, when people do that they lose credibility and we should be skeptical.

---

Plenty of people on both sides of the argument have, and are still quoted without thought. I don't think this is what this pandemic has shown.

quote:

---

Their conviction is so great of the regulatory capture of the entire industry that they are placing a consensus on ideas which don't have them, and undermine the motivations of self-interested humans in a way that makes me wonder if they actually interact with people.

---

Right, I don't know if the intuition about self-interest doesn't occur to people or perhaps if it does but the accompanying heuristic of "the chances that a planet-full of self-interested scientists would fail to identify serious vaccine harms with a n probably now >billion of doses is not large enough to warrant belief" just isn't compelling enough abstractly.

I wonder if it could be improved with education and having people see scientists in action from a young age. I suspect people have such relatively little experience with science that they don't identify with it, don't feel they can put themselves in the scientist's shoes, aren't able to intuit the incentives that scientists are experiencing.

quote:

---

At THIS point in the game, it's not about what you know and being able to post a lot of lofty, overly technical shite that most laymen will never understand, it's about ACKNOWLEDGING that too many self-proclaimed experts FLAT OUT LIED and that NOW we are engaged in a war of INTEGRITY and veracity, NOT just competing theories.

---

What does integrity look like? I don't know how to convince you other than to say that the hospital floor doesn't lie.

quote:

---

If I KNOW someone is a liar, I assume they are a liar in all things and THAT is what Covid exposed.

---

So I'm right to disregard anti-vaccine people because I think they are being less than honest?

quote:

---

Without a mass "mea culpa" from huge swaths of the Medical Industry,Pfizer, the Govt, the Media etc., any further "talk" is meaningless.

---

Lol

quote:

---

Lol

---

God complex....thanks for the admission....

quote:

---

I wonder if it could be improved with education and having people see scientists in action from a young age. I suspect people have such relatively little experience with science that they don't identify with it, don't feel they can put themselves in the scientist's shoes, aren't able to intuit the incentives that scientists are experiencing.

---

You are placing much weight and attempting to give the group cache to "never be wrong", but as I see the discussion from one end, I think you two would argue with a wall if you thought it didn't just give you a free pass on whatever you chose to utter.

quote:

---

God complex....thanks for the admission....

---

Haha, I'm laughing at the idea that a 'mea culpa' would be all it took. It wouldn't.

quote:

---

I don't think this is what this pandemic has shown.

---

I said that SHOULD make people skeptical, I didn’t say that 100% of the population will be.

quote:

---

You are placing much weight and attempting to give the group cache to "never be wrong", but as I see the discussion from one end, I think you two would argue with a wall if you thought it didn't just give you a free pass on whatever you chose to utter.

---

Well, it would be one thing if I was making very large claims, but it is another when I'm repeating very basic aspects of pathology and immunology and asking that we adhere to those things. My claims are always limited, and in several posts I saw 'I don't know,' which isn't something I see very many people post. You can hold me to account for things I've said, but generally this doesn't happen.

quote:

---

I said that SHOULD make people skeptical, I didn’t say that 100% of the population will be.

---

But what has occurred here is that people are completely divorced from things people have said, and are more interested in those things serving as proxies for how they feel about the pandemic in general. Nothing about this situation makes me believe that any real portion of the population will retreat to empiricism, other than those who use the empirical model for how they interact with the world more broadly.