Outstanding. I like this point especially. "All ideas, purported facts, hypotheses and theories need to subjected to rigorous interrogation. It's a good practice to regularly expose yourself to ideas with which you disagree, so you can challenge your own beliefs and understanding. You should also subject the ideas with which you agree to scrutiny by searching for facts that contradict them, or alternative explanations." I think that human pride can swell like a toad. I think group think is much stronger through time than we wish to believe. When tremendous sums of money align with friendly scientific interests frequently bad drives out good thinking. And sticks around badly training the next generation into thinking truth is not as important as naked self interest -strictly in a professional way of course this following the leader of the pack.
Yes, always question, because assumptions are the mother of all Fups.
And yes, we all make mistakes, but we all need humility to be able to accept this, to fix the mistake, and to ensure similar behaviour does not happen again.
Fantastic essay (as always). I'm not sure if you are familiar with the work of fellow Australian, permaculturalist Patrick Jones (https://artistasfamily.is/). He is stressing the importance of heterodox thought in general and specifically in the permaculture movement - rather split now when the co-founder David Holmgren dared to question the covid narrative.
The blurb for this video is: "Patrick examines the role of heterodox thinking both broadly and within more marginal cultural milieus. He is curious whether the myth of the turned money tables has real currency in this moment and whether permaculture in Australia is falling into wrong story by adopting the neoliberal guerrilla tactics of censorship and divisive behavioural strategies that include the creation of a contagion-scapegoat class in order to stifle dissent or debate."
Why a woman? No strong reason, or rather, the strongest reason is guesswork or just a gut feel, which is unsatisfying, so let me try others to see if they fit.
- Anonymity might be more valuable to a woman. I am also convinced the 'turtles all the way down' authors are all women.
- There is a particular bluntness or lack of nurturing which I claim to notice in myself and other men. AMD shows the opposite. She talks about deep consideration of how her writing will affect the reader, and describes a long history of nurturing and caring for vaccine injury victims while remaining a doctor, and just observing then forgiving their religious faith in maiming kids. Myself and the men I know would have been itching for action or been kicked out of the profession long ago.
- She (claims) being focused on the victims for decades - the opposite of what people say about men wanting to solve the damn problem and move on, which I feel I have in spades compared with the women I know.
- The effort at long responses to the comment section, and the specificity with which she chooses her words. Not always more feminine traits (I aim for the same), just traits that I recall noticing which probably shaped my guess.
- The anecdotes she writes about - trips to see a friend, or colleagues she collaborated with, thought patterns or situations she has found herself in seem more likely to be the behaviour's of a woman or effeminate man somehow.
I'll still laugh when we later find out the whole AMD substack is some CIA psyop or something.
Interesting article, I always understood "the story" to be Keys cherry picked his data to prove an hypothesis. This sheds a different light, maybe his research was hijacked by other interests and misinterpreted for other reasons.
As I’ve said before, I think AMD is a woman or one of them is if they are a group. I also enjoy her stack but differ quite significantly from certain opinions eg. Antidepressants can be life saving not only causing side effects( which they certainly can) . AMD and others are haters of SSRIs. I am 95% over to the No Virus position and can provide good sources if anyone is interested. I categorically state that all jabs are bad and that all Convid jabs are bioweapons
Hi Robyn, Thanks for another excellent article. No scientist despite a degree that suggest I should be, I have been rattling around the 'heart disease' issue for nearly 40 years. I came to the conclusion nearly 10 years ago that while many things may be contributing to cardiovascular issues the link to Diabetes, type 2 in particular, was worth researching. Onto the scene came the data gathered by a Chicago hospital Pathologist, Dr Joseph Kraft, who with his team over from memory 1978-1994 or thereabouts conducted 14380 or so Fasting Blood Glucose tests taking blood at intervals throughout a 3 hour period AND most importantly an Insulin assay concurrently. Please don't scream at me if I present this incorrectly BUT the major conclusion Kraft came to was that some 80% of all North Americans were Diabetic, nothing 'pre ' about it, with a large number completely unaware. What has this to do with Heart issues? People diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes have repeatedly been found to be about 8 x more likely to suffer a Coronary event within the next 5 years and 4 x more are likely to die of a coronary event than general population. To me that yells whatever increases the Diabetic risk is likely a MAJOR factor in Coronary outcomes, meaning common, and I am very sure it has little to nothing to do with Cholesterol. And it just may link to Liver and Pancreatic cancers. After 70 years of poking about with Cholesterol and Fats maybe a different approach is needed. I have a book of Kraft's results which is not easy reading but 'Bing' the light bulb went on. Something interesting here me thinks.
Robyn, a most gracious review of a fraught battlefield. My instinct tells me that a simplistic, one size fits all (statins) is asking for trouble. I have been on statins since 2014 and am very much looking forward to a robust discussion with my cardiologist. Thank you for the education to help my discussions.
Exactly. Trust no one. Check the facts and evidence. Listen to both sides of the argument. The fact that most so called freedom fighters don't seem to do this leaves me a bit despondent. But I used to be more gullible and attached to my beliefs (thinking they were facts), so maybe we can teach the art of healthy scepticism . .
How about the "egoistic attachment" to contagious viral theory? Or is that still off limits verboten? The last time I brought it up here, you accused me of recycling "the same tired talking points" instead of dealing with the methodological and logical invalidity of that whole field.
As an aside, I am currently writing Part 5 of my Clean Energy Series because I was too soft on Simon Michaux’s report and it needs some major correcting!
I found the fabled exchange, 600 comments down. She Big Lebowski'd Robyn (and the whole concept of nutrition). Lebowski'd = "that's just, like, your opinion, man". Something which annoys me no end if i've gone to the trouble of being referenced and objective.
I clicked on link about your 'altercation' with AMD but it didn't work . Sadly, I have to confess that this is too highbrow for me. As an aside, and I rarely click on links to sources, apparently ChatGPT invents links :) So even 'IT' wants to be appear to be right :) I do like AMD, but often don't bother to spend the 20 mins or so reading his stuff (I was most interested in his writings about the snallpox protests in the 1700s !) but then again, during lockdown, I had more time to read. I'm not sure why anyone would this post offensive.
Outstanding. I like this point especially. "All ideas, purported facts, hypotheses and theories need to subjected to rigorous interrogation. It's a good practice to regularly expose yourself to ideas with which you disagree, so you can challenge your own beliefs and understanding. You should also subject the ideas with which you agree to scrutiny by searching for facts that contradict them, or alternative explanations." I think that human pride can swell like a toad. I think group think is much stronger through time than we wish to believe. When tremendous sums of money align with friendly scientific interests frequently bad drives out good thinking. And sticks around badly training the next generation into thinking truth is not as important as naked self interest -strictly in a professional way of course this following the leader of the pack.
good article.
Yes, always question, because assumptions are the mother of all Fups.
And yes, we all make mistakes, but we all need humility to be able to accept this, to fix the mistake, and to ensure similar behaviour does not happen again.
Fantastic essay (as always). I'm not sure if you are familiar with the work of fellow Australian, permaculturalist Patrick Jones (https://artistasfamily.is/). He is stressing the importance of heterodox thought in general and specifically in the permaculture movement - rather split now when the co-founder David Holmgren dared to question the covid narrative.
The blurb for this video is: "Patrick examines the role of heterodox thinking both broadly and within more marginal cultural milieus. He is curious whether the myth of the turned money tables has real currency in this moment and whether permaculture in Australia is falling into wrong story by adopting the neoliberal guerrilla tactics of censorship and divisive behavioural strategies that include the creation of a contagion-scapegoat class in order to stifle dissent or debate."
https://youtu.be/Gg7ZrN2fd2k
Why a woman? No strong reason, or rather, the strongest reason is guesswork or just a gut feel, which is unsatisfying, so let me try others to see if they fit.
- Anonymity might be more valuable to a woman. I am also convinced the 'turtles all the way down' authors are all women.
- There is a particular bluntness or lack of nurturing which I claim to notice in myself and other men. AMD shows the opposite. She talks about deep consideration of how her writing will affect the reader, and describes a long history of nurturing and caring for vaccine injury victims while remaining a doctor, and just observing then forgiving their religious faith in maiming kids. Myself and the men I know would have been itching for action or been kicked out of the profession long ago.
- She (claims) being focused on the victims for decades - the opposite of what people say about men wanting to solve the damn problem and move on, which I feel I have in spades compared with the women I know.
- The effort at long responses to the comment section, and the specificity with which she chooses her words. Not always more feminine traits (I aim for the same), just traits that I recall noticing which probably shaped my guess.
- The anecdotes she writes about - trips to see a friend, or colleagues she collaborated with, thought patterns or situations she has found herself in seem more likely to be the behaviour's of a woman or effeminate man somehow.
I'll still laugh when we later find out the whole AMD substack is some CIA psyop or something.
Interesting article, I always understood "the story" to be Keys cherry picked his data to prove an hypothesis. This sheds a different light, maybe his research was hijacked by other interests and misinterpreted for other reasons.
As I’ve said before, I think AMD is a woman or one of them is if they are a group. I also enjoy her stack but differ quite significantly from certain opinions eg. Antidepressants can be life saving not only causing side effects( which they certainly can) . AMD and others are haters of SSRIs. I am 95% over to the No Virus position and can provide good sources if anyone is interested. I categorically state that all jabs are bad and that all Convid jabs are bioweapons
Hi Robyn, Thanks for another excellent article. No scientist despite a degree that suggest I should be, I have been rattling around the 'heart disease' issue for nearly 40 years. I came to the conclusion nearly 10 years ago that while many things may be contributing to cardiovascular issues the link to Diabetes, type 2 in particular, was worth researching. Onto the scene came the data gathered by a Chicago hospital Pathologist, Dr Joseph Kraft, who with his team over from memory 1978-1994 or thereabouts conducted 14380 or so Fasting Blood Glucose tests taking blood at intervals throughout a 3 hour period AND most importantly an Insulin assay concurrently. Please don't scream at me if I present this incorrectly BUT the major conclusion Kraft came to was that some 80% of all North Americans were Diabetic, nothing 'pre ' about it, with a large number completely unaware. What has this to do with Heart issues? People diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes have repeatedly been found to be about 8 x more likely to suffer a Coronary event within the next 5 years and 4 x more are likely to die of a coronary event than general population. To me that yells whatever increases the Diabetic risk is likely a MAJOR factor in Coronary outcomes, meaning common, and I am very sure it has little to nothing to do with Cholesterol. And it just may link to Liver and Pancreatic cancers. After 70 years of poking about with Cholesterol and Fats maybe a different approach is needed. I have a book of Kraft's results which is not easy reading but 'Bing' the light bulb went on. Something interesting here me thinks.
Robyn, a most gracious review of a fraught battlefield. My instinct tells me that a simplistic, one size fits all (statins) is asking for trouble. I have been on statins since 2014 and am very much looking forward to a robust discussion with my cardiologist. Thank you for the education to help my discussions.
Exactly. Trust no one. Check the facts and evidence. Listen to both sides of the argument. The fact that most so called freedom fighters don't seem to do this leaves me a bit despondent. But I used to be more gullible and attached to my beliefs (thinking they were facts), so maybe we can teach the art of healthy scepticism . .
How about the "egoistic attachment" to contagious viral theory? Or is that still off limits verboten? The last time I brought it up here, you accused me of recycling "the same tired talking points" instead of dealing with the methodological and logical invalidity of that whole field.
As an aside, I am currently writing Part 5 of my Clean Energy Series because I was too soft on Simon Michaux’s report and it needs some major correcting!
Alas, the link to the acrimonious exchange doesn’t work.
$5 on AMD being a she.
I found the fabled exchange, 600 comments down. She Big Lebowski'd Robyn (and the whole concept of nutrition). Lebowski'd = "that's just, like, your opinion, man". Something which annoys me no end if i've gone to the trouble of being referenced and objective.
I clicked on link about your 'altercation' with AMD but it didn't work . Sadly, I have to confess that this is too highbrow for me. As an aside, and I rarely click on links to sources, apparently ChatGPT invents links :) So even 'IT' wants to be appear to be right :) I do like AMD, but often don't bother to spend the 20 mins or so reading his stuff (I was most interested in his writings about the snallpox protests in the 1700s !) but then again, during lockdown, I had more time to read. I'm not sure why anyone would this post offensive.