youtube will probably delete soon, so, instead:
Thanks R! Keep 'em coming!
Have you seen the reaction at TLN?
Very weird behaviour; quite Orwellian.
I can understand why Dan gets frustrated. He’s seeing people actually die from this day in and day out. As for the general culture there, it’s always been my experience that TLN hounds any view they perceive to be heterodox.
Many good people got banned or left in disgust at the mob mentality.
Cheers
On the left generally, it’s not realized that much of the opposition to the corporate Covid-19 narrative has appeared ‘right wing’ because on matters of scientific political controversy, the left has uniformly abdicated the anti-corporate space it lived in.
How useless are these political labels left and right when it comes to science - one poster underneath the Simone Gold presentation thinks ‘the Great Reset’ is a communist agenda!
On Dan’s frustration - yes I think that’s partly it, and it’s helped blind him into not being able to see what a toxic outfit he presides over on Covid, and now actively leads. Though the toxicity set in long before Covid.
It is toxicity. A little example; two weeks ago someone who posted on Media Lens and TLN for 15 years came on TLN and asked about another person who had been posting on ML and TLN for 15 years, but got an unpleasant and dismissive answer from a third person who was on ML and TLN for 15 years. A fourth person who had been on ML and TLN for 15 years who runs the site then misled the person who asked the question about why the person he was asking about was no longer posting. Ironically he claimed and probably believes this was because he was accused of censorship, though the ban came about expressly as he effectively banned discussion of early covid treatments that would likely have saved him from his ordeal, and those of most of his ICU patients as well.
All the doctors who didn’t question the narrative are frustrated, and many have resorted to attacking their dissenting colleagues. Repeated across the western world, it’s a split of almost biblical proportions. I hope they (somehow) start listening to their colleagues soon. Even if the vaccine is successful, the situation will get grimmer long before that.
2 Likes
Interesting video @rippon. I have a few nitpicks, but overall I thought she made some good points. The question of an immune overreaction is a big one and, as the good doctor rightly pointed out, had not been answered yet. The question of fertility is also worrying and would certainly make me think long and hard before recommending it to young women.
Really this is why developing vaccines takes multiple years. Rushing it through with a hope and a prayer feels very reckless. Especially as it would take almost no effort to do whatever trials are required to precisely determine whether some combo of existing meds (the usual suspects now, vit C/D, HCQ, Ivermectin, heparin and steroids) can really save a lot of illness and ultimately, lives.
@Evvy_dense, this is a great observation. I think the climate change debate really set the scene here. The left got used to championing the science of climate change against the right wing corporate denialism. This is one reason why there is such a distressing (to my mind at least) overlap between covid sceptics and climate change deniers. They didn’t believe scientists then, and they damn well don’t believe them now 
This seduces lefty thinkers (and I’ve been guilty of this myself) into knee-jerk dismissal of the current sceptical voices. It also leads to a certain kind of smugness (I did say I was talking about myself, right?) that the science is all clear cut, and only an idiot could disagree!
That kind of smugness permeates the vaccine debates too. Right up until someone chooses to take a long hard look at what constitutes “the science” and has a rude awakening.
Anyway. One of the things I personally find frustrating is how little give there is from either side in this issue. Each side had made up it’s mind (face masks, for example) and then no amount of evidence will change anyone’s mind. (Just in case you were wondering, I don’t know how well face masks work, but I wear them anyway in case…)
So. People are stressed, the gov is clearly failing. Restrictions are getting tighter and who knows what the hell to think. And in the meantime the NHS is brought to the brink of total collapse with all the untold suffering that entails for both patients and staff.
In other news, I’m taking my mum to get her vaccinated tomorrow. I’m really hoping against hope that the concerns around ADE turn out to be unfounded…
Good luck to all of us, I say.
Cheers
PS: This point:
Is another really important one and has led to the bizarre witch-hunt like behaviour of scientists writing open letters attacking their colleagues, or shaming them on Twitter. There is no way that this is ultimately anything but very bad for genuine scientific progress…
2 Likes
Fate has been unkind to dan at the Leaky: Working in London, where – both last Spring and this Winter - the covid waves have been particularly bad, it seems; frustrated with the constant assaults by damned politicians on the NHS, and its consequent under-preparedness; and consequent on that, being desperately ill for weeks himself, with the bitterness of long-term damage, all because of these political crookeries. In those circumstances, you really don’t want to hear that you might have protected your own health, and saved a lot of unnecessarily-dead patients, if you’d paid a bit more attention to the on-the-hoof results that other frontline doctors were getting by trial and error of their intuitions, using readily-available, well-tried treatments.
You can see why he’s slipped off his trolley. But the unilateral censorship is getting out of hand: deleting Simone Gold and substituting the Magic Roundabout. How is that rational and courteous discussion? How is it judicious ‘moderation’?
I suspect that dan is beginning to feel at the back of his mind that he and all the others who took at face value the original presentation of covid as a TDS-worthy horror pandemic “that will kill millions (this time…)” have been suckered into making fools of themselves, despite the best of intentions. No wonder they don’t want to hear the truth-seekers!
Dipping back into that nail-sick, foundering craft to check Rippon’s reception there, I feel reassured that leaving was the right move. Unhandy skippering, and a riotous crew unchecked by basic naval discipline, have brought it to this low.
2 Likes
Maybe he’s checked out its drug references and he knows this won’t happen:
Time for Hydroxychloroquine and zinc, said Zebedee…
While the ‘Frontline Doctors’ were able to see the reality for themselves Dan’s in a worse position right at the furnace - even if he does discover that those early treatments will help he’ll be aware it won’t help him directly - in fact the realization might bring him a load more trouble.
1 Like
Agreed. However, many of the doctors speaking out especially on the vaccine issue bring up an interesting point. Doctors (certainly in the US, if not here), are taught all about “the protocols”. They have absolutely no training in analysis, they void their insurance if they use “off book” treatments, and they generally do not have time to read up on new practices and research after they have been brainwashed (er qualified). So, as in Dan’s case apparently he can’t see the wood for the trees because that’s how he was trained.
Many off the US doctors speaking out have used “off book” treatments or have had sufficient curiosity to investigate for themselves.
Rough highlights/transcript of Simone Gold’s Talk
[Comments in square brackets; any emphasis is mine]
HCQ unsafe is a lie - we need to understand how big this lie is.
Boss threatened to fire her for prescribing HCQ because the hospital’s biggest insurer didn’t like it - this was in writing.
Oregon Dr’s licensed pulled without the due process. But SG is also a lawyer!
Covid lies. Tried to get HCQ policy changed. Majority would have stopped living in fear. Failed but arranged thru Frontline Doctors website for HCQ to be available to anyone.
Now people consumed with fear and weariness.Asking for the vaccine just to get life back.
But it won’t.
Chance of surviving covid.
CDC. Under 20. 99.997%.
20-49, 99.98%.
50-69 99.5%.
70+ nearly 95%.
With early treatment it’s asymptomatic or mild symptoms. Except for frail elderly…
Politicians had no problem throwing away the frail elderly:
Governor Kuomo - “Got to protect the elderly, Got to protect the elderly…”, ruled that patients from Nursing Home going to hospital with C19, ready to be discharged to NH but the NH was not allowed to ask if they were positive or negative. Ie, could intermingle with the other patients. [Says there are thousands of empty beds in hospitals]. Like an executioner.
Lancet HCQ retraction buried in media, hence deliberate. The damage was still done [WHO banned it, then many countries followed].
‘Vaccine’ not approved; investigational stages.[Says it should be called the experimental vaccine]
Failure of previous coronavirus vaccines; sars cov1.Failed, can’t do safely due to human bodily hurdles that I’ll mention later. There’s no indept. animal studies/data. Can’t do reliable vaccine studies without them.
Known complications. Antibody Dependent Enhancement (comes under immune enhancement…other names) . Explains…
This is well known to scientists - not fringe, it’s known and real. Ferrets that had done fine died when exposed to the real virus.
Also neurological issues, GBS [mentions others], other serious outcomes possible.
Potential fertility problems. [10 Drs worked for a month to put together this research].
Not a conspiracy - as a scientist, I’m telling you we don’t know. Balance this against the survival rate of 99.98%.
Pharma is immune from compensation - makes them less careful.
Effectiveness. No proof experimental vaccine stops transmission. Like a joke. Surgeon admitted this on Good Morning America
[Also eg Arthur Reingold in California, annoying link https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/12/18/coronavirus-vaccines-are-proven-to-prevent-disease-but-what-about-transmission/]
With the rubella vaccine, race and ethnicity were shown to affect the antibody responses at a higher level.
With the measles virus they also had the same experience; with pertussis, the same. With the innuit, Haemophilus influenza. And pertussis. [Maybe rewrite this bit, which starts around 36m].
The hepatitis vaccine also had a similar response amongst races.
White boys 64% less likely to have autism diagnosis than non-white when they gave the hepatitis vaccine to babies.
Literally as a physician I did not know this. Here we have examples well documented in the scientific literature of 6 different vaccines that were affecting people differently depending on their races. When you read the language the govt is putting about trying to prioritize the vaccine/experimental agent they are making an overt and covert attempt to push this heavily on blacks and browns.
Some specific language (shocking). The CDC is telling the public at large that getting an experimental vaccine is a good thing. But it is telling the black people that getting the vaccine is racial justice, and it’s an advantage for them.
[Link is https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2020/200819-vaccine-allocation.pdf. ]
How is it racial justice to sign up for an experiment first? For a biological agent that we dont know?
Quotes again from this:
" The ultimate safety of an approved vaccine is not completely knowable until it has been administered to millions of people . During clinical trials, tens of thousands of individuals will receive the vaccine but that may fail to show safety concerns that occur with less frequency, such as 1 in a million. This can be a concern for particularly severe adverse effects. It is also possible that certain adverse effects may occur more frequently in certain population subgroups, which may not be apparent until millions are vaccinated. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and other pharmacovigilance systems [SG inserts: track and trace] will provide critical information in the roll out that may inform adjustments to the optimal allocation."
This is in the same document as Let’s give it to black folks first.
"We must prioritize “blacks and latinos to reflect fairness and justice”…
Incredibly offensive. We know exactly who falls from Covid-19. It’s nursing home patients, it’s people with 2.6 co-morbidities. People over 75, thes1 should get the vaccine first if you believe the vaccine is safe and effective. That’s it!
The first people they will be targeting will be my friends, all the black nurses in the ERs because I’ve always worked in the inner city. They’ll be told to line up and take this but they’re in good health and 45-50 years old why should you be prioritized, there’s no actual risk to the health worker. We know who has the risk, it’s not your 45-y-o nurse, it’s not your 35-y-o cop.
[continues with the document…] " will focus on vaccine safety and efficacy, and target key populations and communities to ensure maximum vaccine acceptance."
Quotes the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation about how to manipulate the media and silence opposition to it. Aims to use celebrities like Obama [as they did].
If you take the vaccine you’ve enrolled into a medical trial, fine if you want to be a good-hearted individual, altruistic. Very few people do that. Most people aren’t aware that’s what they are doing. The Pharmacovigilance system [PhV? 
] tracks you for 2 years it’s set up by the Department of Defence - it was handed off to Oracle and Google to put the data together - why do people want to sign up for this system and how is it fair to give it to black people first?
Once I started reading these documents (“pure racism”) it kind of made clearer to me why we were hearing so much about racial issues of Covid-19; in my experience as an ER doctor I didn’t see any real racial issues at all, we saw white people black people latino people basically you got it if you were old and frail. .
It’s true there are many areas where black people are disproportionately affected by covid-19 eg Norlands? Lousiana, blacks were 31% popn but made up 70% of the covid hospital patients. On the left they were saying this was because of racism. But in the data it does not appear race is an independent risk factor. We know what makes people really sick, it’s diabetes and obesity primarily, and then other serious medical problems. Also living in a very crowded area, working in a very crowded area…the reason I don’t think this is ever going to be shown to be a race problem, is things you just know from common sense - it’s been all over the world, all races. Also where there are high risk factors (diabetes, obesity…) and the group risk factors like living and working in tight quarters, it’s not black people that get it at a higher rate it’s those people in those situations. So in Lousiana it was black people but in the UK it was middle eastern and east Asian. Now the people living in these crowded dense areas, it didn’t matter what the race was, just whether you had those risk factors. The irony of saying this is a racial problem, is looking at Africa - the one continent that’s been spared. Except South Africa, but the rest of Africa. One of my fav talks (it’s on the website?) is one we gave on sub-Saharan Africa. So in America the death rates are in the like 800 per million, In India 70 per million. 10% because they have a very liberal hydroxychloroquine policy. In sub-Saharan Africa, the poorest places in the world - no social distancing, no masks, no ICUs - they have a death rate of 1% of the Western nations. One percent. One percent. I think it’s because of widely available hydroxychloroquine I don’t think you can explain it otherwise. But even if there’s another reason you certainly can’t say this affects black people worse (emotional pause).
When we doctors came together we thought we would really come out and say what our opinion was. A lot of people told us not to do that but we felt it was really important.
You have the CDC, the FDA and the NIH all not helping you. We came out with our own recommendations about the vaccine and they’re pretty strong.
If you’re under age 20 the experimental vaccine is prohibited in our opinion. We simply don’t know enough about the effects on fertility and we do know this virus essentially is irrelevant to young people. If you’re 20-50 if you’re healthy we strongly discourage. We had a little debate and I was in the ‘prohibited’ group but we agreed ‘strongly discouraged’. Because there’s still an exceedingly low risk of death from Covid-19, there’s unknown risk from the experimental vaccine of causing auto-immune disease, of priming ADE and an unknown risk of lifelong infertility.
From age 50 to 70 if you’re healthy, we also strongly discourage.
Age 50-70 with serious co-morbid conditions, we discourage. We say that because we feel the experimental vaccine is higher risk than early or prophylactic treatment with long established medications such as hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. From age 70 and above if you’re healthy, we tell people it’s just your own personal risk assessment - we believe an experimental vaccine is less ideal than old established medicines but we say leave it up to the person.
Over 70 with serious co-morbid conditions such as [in?] nursing homes we call it to personal risk assessment, we again stand with hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin as being safer in this population, but we don’t think it’s irrational to take it if you’re over 70 living in a nursing home. We’re not trying to say all vaccines are unsafe in all circumstances. We don’t believe anybody over any age should be pressured and especially people over 70 who don’t have advocates being pressured into this (we already know of many cases like that) but we don’t want people to be overly worried that .we are saying it’s definitely unsafe. We’re saying we don’t know. At least if you’re over 70 with medical conditions you have some risk of dying from this thing so it’s not fundamentally irrational to decide to take it.
But under 50 we strongly discourage. I tell everybody I would never let a woman of child-bearing age take this, until this placenta question is answered.
I always like to leave people with a bit of a call to action.
We intend to fight the urge to mandate the experimental vaccine that’s sweeping the globe. Not just the govt. Airlines, employers…It’s just like the mask, you can’t avoid their mandate. We intend to talk to them. We want to be armed with 1m signatures saying they won’t do business with companies who mandate vaccines.
Before we get to that point, we are going to be at their mercy if we don’t get ahead of them. That bad decision…. Quantas airlines have already said they will do this.
Stopmedicaldiscrimination.org. Also share with everyone. Don’t be shy, this is your life. Can you travel, can you advocate if you can’t go on a plane? Each of you should try to get a thousand signatures. Facebook, Twitter, everywhere. This is critical, critical.
If you’re in a union, bring this as a humanitarian or HR issue. The union hasn’t even heard the facts. This isn’t anti-vax. I’ve been vaxd for everything as have my kids. Always use the word ‘experiments’ - win the language battle.
All of this is on our website[https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/] and the above site.
I found nothing in this talk that was or seemed untrue; nothing to raise above the level of ‘nitpick’. She made mostly strong points in my view. I agree 100% with everything she said about HCQ. She said we need to realize just how big a lie is the claim that it’s unsafe. It’s significance is immense - not just in terms of needless serious illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths but in terms of whatever was the intent whether this was commercial gain (widespread treatment would have scuppered the profitability of most vaccines), commercial+political - or commercial, political and further dark motives as well.
Her outline of the vaccine decision is fair - stats seem correct, but given its experimental nature, Drs should not be pushing it while suppressing known treatments.
(Edit, comment) Though for those with who are elderly and/or with co-morbidities it becomes one of the rational choices on an experimental basis. Of course people can make their own choices anyway but a corollary is that with the information on offer people are not able to make the ‘informed choice’ that sticklers will tell you is medically or legally required to be offered. People are clamouring for the vaccine because those they trust have served up a deafening but misleading drumbeat of no-alternative-vaccine-saviourism (End of Edit)
And I think it’s reasonable for it to be termed experimental, for the reasons she gave - as opposed to the Only Solution.
Her outline of the vaccine risks and outcomes was revelatory - not because it was all new to me, but because she said she didn’t know most of them.
That means…that most doctors, health professionals, politicians and journalists don’t know most of them either. Almost all policy, commentary, news, everything written in the mainstream is from a position of ignorance.
Important as this detail is, Dr Gold has mainly been criticized for being anti-vax and conspiratorial. So this is notable:
"This isn’t anti-vax. I’ve been vaxd for everything as have my kids. "
1 Like
Nice summaries there ED. I also didn’t find much above the level of nitpicking to moan about. Overall, as I said, I think she made some good points.
Cheers for putting in the work to transcribe
Incidentally, here is the pamphlet that they are handing out at the GP to those who are getting the Astrazeneca vaccine (pdf):
Notice the very sharp difference between discussions here about Dr. Gold’s remarks: quiet, reasonable, fact-based, and couched in mutually-polite inoffensive language; and the howling menagerie that set on it - mainly without even giving it a hearing, it seems - at the Leaky.
Which ship is the better berth…? Better skippered? Better officered?
An object lesson, innit?
1 Like
Finally got round to watching the video and reading the thread.
Yes @RhisiartGwilym its good to have some sensible opinions, without the ad hom.
And as for HCQ, from the very moment it dissapeared from French pharmacies almost overnight, when it had been available without prescription over the counter for many years, anyone with more than half a brain cell would have smelt a rat.
Excellent speaker (thanks @rippon) but couldn’t find the same video on the Frontline Doctors website, and sadly on Youtube. Too many hits and it will be taken down.
Yes, that’s my experience too, both on LTN (or TLH as per the new lingo) and among acquaintances. There’s a tendency to minimize the effects of shutting down the economy and much of society, which is so surprising given how the traditional left puts employment high on the list of priorities, understanding that unemployment leads to all sorts of inequalities and problems (including health). Also strikes me there’s so little desire to discuss and understand what the WEF etc. is really pushing and how much influence they have with governments.
1 Like