Independent Science, Indepent Research, Reclaimed Community
Monthly Archives: September 2021
“It’s absolutely foolish to think that you, a non-expert who lacks the very scientific expertise necessary to evaluate the claims of experts, are going to do a better job than the actual, bona fide experts of separating truth from fiction or fraud.”
— Ethan Siegel, Sr. Contributor, Forbes Magazine, “You Must Not ‘Do Your Own Research’ When It Comes To Science,” July 30, 2020
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
— Marcia Angell, Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption, The New York Review of Books magazine, Jan 15 2009
This blog is dedicated to figuring out the cognitive dissonance between the two quotes above.
Thank you for visiting and looking for answers together.
New Yorkers Adjust Their Thinking – Anti-Davos & Anti-Lockdown Protest
On a gray Sunday before Thanksgiving a group of about seventy or more descended onto Washington Square with cries for people to turn off the mainstream media and look into Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF), and his latest treatise: Covid 19: The Great Reset.
Some were provocative, calling for people to take off their face diapers. ‘Just do you!’ they encouraged, and converged at the center of the fountain where they burned their face masks.
Others were intent on not antagonizing anyone. “I don’t blame those who are fearful, or whose best instincts are being used and manipulated against them,” a lady bearing a Polish and an American flag explained her point of view.
The people in the vicinity responded understandably in traumatized wonder, cynicism, and some disgust. After months of masking and laying low, they were facing what seemed exotic and reckless creatures. A young regular of the park kept circling on his skateboard, double checking that he had just seen Trump supporters in the middle of Greenwich Village. Others passed by and gave the finger. The group wearing Make Americans Great Again hats and Blue Lives Matter hats, also young, and mostly of color, didn’t skip a beat. They yelled back their own taunts and walked quickly towards the offenders. Within a few minutes they seemed to be having a civil conversation.
This seemed to be as revolutionary an act as any one could wish for. For people from all sides of the political spectrum to be having a discourse.
The protestors got on with their task bravely. It was hard not to sound like nut job conspiracy theorists in such a climate of fear and anxiety, even as so many outlandish projects were in the works. The speakers at the open mike delved into the topic of the vaccines, their possible relation to tracking and chips, a cashless society, leading into the 4th Industrial Revolution, where we will be immersed in, as Klaus Schwab put it, “technology that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.”
Leaders throughout the world have been echoing Klaus Schwab’s refrain, describing the pandemic as a great opportunity to ‘reset’ the entire failed system, ostensibly for the benefit of the greater good. But even as Schwab’s book, co-written with Thierry Malleret, adopts a reasonable tone of looking at all the different advocates’ points of view, it still presumes that these technologies are inevitable, and that we simply have to figure out the most equitable way to use them.
And the technologies of the 4th Industrial Revolution, AI and virtual reality, 5G, 6G, and all its 100,000 new satellites, despite all the investment and preparation, should, for the sake of all life on the planet, not be considered inevitable.
This technocratic vision of the world requires an all-encompassing densification of digital infrastructure, with a world built around ‘smart’ sensors and wireless communications that will envelope us all into the Internet of Everything. And if we look at it plainly, without the politically correct rhetoric, this kind of civilization would be just as extractive of the resources of the planet, if not more so, as the system it is purporting to improve. And it does not steer clear of our bodies. In its most mature embodiment it adopts highly intrusive injectable technology and biometric ID systems tied with our financials and other essentials of life, raising multiple questions on privacy, surveillance, and our autonomy. If you think this all sounds crazy, just take a look at Klaus Schwab’s writings, where he outlines all the details of this brave new world:
“Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies will not stop at becoming part of the physical world around us—they will become part of us. Indeed, some of us already feel that our smartphones have become an extension of ourselves. Today’s external devices—from wearable computers to virtual reality headsets—will almost certainly become implantable in our bodies and brains. Exoskeletons and prosthetics will increase our physical power, while advances in neurotechnology enhance our cognitive abilities. We will become better able to manipulate our own genes, and those of our children. These developments raise profound questions: Where do we draw the line between human and machine? What does it mean to be human?”
— Klaus Schwab, Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Any concerns over privacy and accountability will require “adjustments in thinking,” we are told, and we must learn to give over complete trust to the data and algorithms used to make decisions. (Schwab, The Fourth Industrial Revolution)
At the 2020 WEF meeting CEPI, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, a public private partnership between the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust and the WEF, announced it would be activating its old and new partnerships to tackle the current pandemic emerging out of Wuhan, China. Moderna, which had never brought a vaccine to market before, was one of those old partners and became a favored front runner for a Covid-19 vaccine. It was said that it took them, along with the National Institutes of Health, who was a co-patent holder, all of two days to design and finalize the vaccine based on the sequence of the virus that the Chinese had provided.
Now, ten months later, they were on the verge of applying to the FDA for emergency use authorization for its mRNA-1273 vaccine which they claimed was 94.1% effective at preventing Covid-19 and 100% effective at preventing severe cases of the disease. The short duration of the trial was waved away by the fact that these companies had already been working on m-RNA technology and on a corona virus vaccine for close to a decade. Some of the wilder claims, for instance, the idea that there could be any kind of chip in this or any of the other new pharmaceuticals was easily ridiculed, yet the mainstream had not really spent any time looking at what these old CEPI partnerships consisted of, nor at what kind of boundaries CEPI was pushing, as it states it aims to do in its corporate mission.
Many of these programs were run out of the United States Defense Department and its Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), along with the NIH, with additional funding by the Gates Foundation. Most of the pursued technologies were not chips, as we know them, other than Profusa‘s biointegrated sensor, but in fact much more sophisticated ways of monitoring biological markers and transmitting data from within the body. Prometheus/Predicting Health and Disease and the development of In Vivo Nanoplatforms are just a couple of the programs that are working to realize DARPA’S dream of “creating a national, web-based database of preemptive diagnoses” available via smartphone. Bombshell independent journalist Whitney Webb quickly made us more familiar with a lot of this work.
Webb is careful to state that even if these elements are not in the current vaccine, the arc of this technology can very easily lead us to this kind of medical intervention somewhere down the road. And with vaccine mandates on the horizon, the lack of transparency in the clinical trials, the very newness of these endeavors–would our regulators even know how to regulate them?–and the actual vaccines currently being rolled out, these questions are more urgent than ever. And they have to be posed by somebody, as the media has pretty much stopped asking, as have so many of the pre-existing counter movements, including Occupy Wallstreet and the traditionally anti-Davos crowd.