The corruption of medical science is surges on
The modern basis of medical research in the dark age
Three stories this past week clearly illustrate that the field of medical science — based on the philosophy to always seek the truth no matter where it leads — is now teetering on the edge of death, and might already have died.
First we have the revelation that a major 2006 paper on the roots of Alzheimer’s disease is likely fraudulent, its results fabricated.
The investigation uncovered evidence suggesting several instances of image manipulation in the work of Sylvain Lesné, a researcher working at the University of Minnesota and an author of the 2006 study. The paper, which is cited by more than 2,200 academic papers as a reference, launched interest in a specific protein called Aβ*56 [a beta-amyloid] as a promising target for early intervention in Alzheimer’s disease.
…Whistleblower Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist at Vanderbilt University, first flagged his concerns about the images to the NIH on January 2022. Science asked two image analysis experts to review Lesné’s published work. They echoed Shrag’s concerns. They identified a total of 20 “suspect papers” authored by Lesné, 10 of which had to do with Aβ*56, per Science.
This discovery might also explain why there has been a 99% failure rate for all Alzheimer drug trials. Most of that work was based on Lesné’s work, specifically on his paper that pointed to amyloids.
One wonders how Lesné’s image fabrication was not noticed during peer review. One also wonders why no one ever tried to independently confirm his results, something that used to be a requirement before any new discovery was considered firm. Instead, his paper was accepted, and the medical field immediately dedicated two decades and hundreds of millions of dollars of research, based on his paper and all worthless.
This lack of scientific rigor smacks strongly of the lust for money, rather the seeking of truth, as the fuel for all this Alzheimers research. The paper gave scientists a result they could use to generate research grants. Who cares that the paper wasn’t confirmed and could be wrong.
Next we have the unilateral decision by Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director of WHO, to declare the recent and relatively insignificant outbreak of monkeypox a “global emergency,” over-ruling the WHO committee of scientists who voted 9 to 6 against such a declaration.
“We have an outbreak that has spread around the world rapidly, through new modes of transmission, about which we understand too little,” pointing out that cases are increasingly occurring countries where it is traditionally not found, as well as the growing risk to human health, Tedros added that “for all of these reasons, I have decided that the global monkeypox outbreak represents a public health emergency of international concern.” [emphasis mine]
This declaration was made even though the very health officials with whom WHO is supposed to rely said it was a bad idea. Moreover, the highlighted language above is fundamentally wrong. Monkeypox is not spreading through “new modes of transmission.” New peer-review research unequivocally confirms it remains a sexually transmitted disease almost exclusively limited to the homosexual community, a fact that has been known for years.
Finally, monkeypox has been and continues to be is almost never lethal and is very treatable. There is no reason to declare any emergency at all.
Though this declaration has little legal enforcement power, it is without doubt aimed at conjuring up another panic that health officials and politicians worldwide can then use for their own gain. In reporting this story the Medical Press let the cat out of the bag:
This declaration of a global health emergency will probably not lead to much change in control activities in the most affected counties outside of Africa. However, it may stimulate those countries that have seen few cases so far to ensure their health systems are better able to manage if the infection does spread within their countries. Hopefully, it may also stimulate funding for research and improvements in the capacity in endemic countries to manage the disease. [emphasis mine]
Like the misguided and disastrous response to the Wuhan flu, this monkeypox declaration is not intended to encourage a proper response to the disease, but to instill a panic that might generate more funds and power to the medical community.
Once again, the lust for money rather the seeking of truth is fueling the policies of the scientific community.
Finally, we had this ridiculous story in of all places the journal Science: “As Omicron rages on, scientists have no idea what comes next“.
The emphasis on the word “rages” is mine. It illustrates in one word the article’s mindless devotion to panic, emotion, and anxiety about the numerous new strains of COVID, as well as the dominance of Omicron since 2021. This quote is typical:
Even if Omicron is not replaced, its dominance is no cause for complacency, says Maria Van Kerkhove, technical lead for COVID-19 at the World Health Organization. “It’s bad enough as it is,” she says. “If we can’t get people to act [without] a new Greek name, that’s a problem.”
Even with Omicron, Van Kerkhove emphasizes, the world may face continuing waves of disease as immunity wanes and fresh subvariants arise. She is also alarmed that the surveillance efforts that allowed researchers to spot Omicron and other new variants early on are scaling back or winding down. “Those systems are being dismantled, they are being defunded, people are being fired,” she says.
Nowhere in the article is it mentioned why the surveillance efforts are being dismantled and are winding down. The new strains of COVID are all almost completely harmless, the equivalent of a cold for almost everyone. It can’t even do any serious harm to Joe Biden, a 79-year-old whose health is hardly robust.
Thus, there is no reason to panic, no reason to impose heavy surveillance of the infected population, no reason to spend gobs of money aggressively researching these strains. COVID has evolved like all previous new flu strains, becoming nothing more than a cold. Right now, the general response from doctors should be, “Take two aspirins and drink a lot of water.”
And yet, the journal Science sees no reason to mention this fundamental fact, that Omicron and the new strains are harmless. Instead, it publishes a screed designed to instill fear (“As Omicron rages!”) in order to lobby for more funding.
Once again, the lust for money rules, rather than the search of truth.
This pattern first began to appear in the climate field in the 1990s, when pursuing reliable data became less important than proclaiming disaster through unproven models. Such proclamations served the needs of both politicians and government scientists, who used the manufactured crisis to garner power and funding, even though the science itself remained (and still remains) incredibly uncertain.
This pattern has now spread through many fields of science. The three stories above illustrate starkly how it now controls the medical field.
Boris Badenov: Emblematic of today’s medical community.
The seeking of truth was the foundation of western civilization since the Enlightenment. It was what made the word of scientists so deeply trusted. You knew they were trying to tell you the truth.
No more. That trust is gone. Scientists today too often lie, as illustrated by the stories above.
For ordinary citizens desiring of honest, objective medical treatment, this corruption bodes very badly for the future. How can you trust your doctor if you know that his entire field now puts fund-raising and the wielding of power above obtaining honest and trustworthy results?
You can’t. And until the medical community itself takes action to clean up its act, things will only get worse.
Now available in hardback and paperback as well as ebook!
From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.
Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.
“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.
All editions are available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all book vendors, with the ebook priced at $5.99 before discount. The ebook can also be purchased direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit, in which case you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.
Autographed printed copies are also available at discount directly from me (hardback $24.95; paperback $14.95; Shipping cost for either: $5.00). Just email me at zimmerman @ nasw dot org.
Biden is taking a statin drug, Crestor, along with The Pfizer medication Paxlovid and several other medications. He is in more danger from the side effects of and drug interactions between the statin drug and Paxlovid then he is at risk from covid.
Also of interest, the “infamous” Dr. Brix just released her new book, which many people are calling a confessional, since she admits that they knew all along that the mRNA “vaccines” would not prevent transmission and contraction of covid. She then went on FOX news with Neil Cavuto to shill for Pfizer and Paxlovid which studies up to this point reveal that is has no discernable, beneficial, impact on covid cases.
The corruption will not change until people start going to jail.
That would never happen “In a Democracy”. (Sarcasm)
When they called for the second shot I knew that the first did not do anything. And then they called for a booster just 2 months later. Basically a third shot.
Its the new flu.
“Monkeypox is not spreading through “new modes of transmission.” New peer-review research unequivocally confirms it remains a sexually transmitted disease almost exclusively limited to the homosexual community, a fact that has been known for years.” Well, that explains why it’s an international crisis – it predominately affects a sacred minority. Remember Michael Fumento being denounced as a bigoted idiot when he wrote “The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS”……”The belief that AIDS is poised to break out widely among non-drug-abusing heterosexuals is a myth created by the media and public health officials, charges Fumento. This former AIDS analyst for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights contends that estimates of the number of infected people, and of the risks to heterosexuals, have been grossly exaggerated, arguing further that the epidemic appears to be peaking. According to Fumento, two groups have fueled the alarmist myth: prudish conservative moralists and liberal “democratizers” eager to demonstrate that AIDS is not a “gay plague.” His allegation that AIDS research has drained funds from the fight against cancer will outrage activists who want more federal dollars spent on AIDS. Among this polemic’s more controversial or startling contentions is the assertion that the incidence of AIDS in Africa has been greatly overstated, and the claim that bisexuality among U.S. blacks and Hispanics, far more than that among whites, has played a major role in AIDS transmission.”
Cotour: I appreciate reading your wit and analysis here, thank you.
pzatchok: There will never be an end to the vaxxes and boosters, if not for covid it’ll be for monkey pox or something else, until the people say “Enough!” and put an end to this nonsense. Unfortunately, there are enough “sheeple” that will go along with the “program” that it could very well take a while. It will be interesting to see how many people have to get hurt before something is done.
From opiates, to SSRI’s, to Alzheimer’s drugs to the mRNA poison, Tucker sums up all of the big pharma graft over the years very well in his monologue tonight.
Also: What You Don’t Know Could Hurt You: Novavax’s ‘Loud-and-Clear’ Nanoparticle Adjuvant . . .
This is the “New” vaxx with “Matrix M”
From the beginning they knew D3 would prevent or mitigate COVID. Current research shows as blood levels of D go to 50 ng/ml COVID goes to zero. Being above 60 is a good margin of safety. Fauci accidently let out he has been taking 6,000 IU of D3 from the beginning. For $10-12 a year (cost of 10,000 IU capsules on Amazon) everyone could have been protected. Their response has been criminal and it would be fair to go as far as saying they are accessories to mass murder.
One also wonders why no one ever tried to independently confirm his results, something that used to be a requirement before any new discovery was considered firm.
Actually, they did. There have been studies come out over the last 2 decades saying they don’t think beta-amyloids were the problem. They then seem to get steam-rolled and the “culprit” is once again the focus of every piece of drug research.
“new modes of transmission.”
Well, they’re new if you mean “human with human sex” instead of “human with monkey sex”. I think that is what is hinted at with “areas where it is traditionally found.”
Also, there’s now “adult with child sex” possibly. So, sorta new modes.
Once again, the lust for money
Actually, I think “power” is more the aim on that one. (But, in the corrupt corporatism we currently have, power leads to money. Which leads to more power.)
“If we can’t get people to act [without] a new Greek name, that’s a problem.”
Here, again, it’s the power that is desired. For most of them it’s the power to act as benevolent dictators, guaranteeing the safety of all humans so they can… [insert path to progressive utopia here]. Some just want the power because (as above) it leads to more money, which leads to more power, which leads to more money….
“Take two aspirins and drink a lot of water.”
Or, “Here’s your HCQ and zinc. Make sure you take the whole course of it.”
Instead, it publishes a screed designed to instill fear
Because they have indoctrinated the people into Safetyism, one of the pillars of Progressivism. “We can – with SCIENCE! – stop all sickness and death!” It’s a way of making themselves gods, since they are the ones providing immortality.
July 26, 2022 at 3:32 am
For $10-12 a year (cost of 10,000 IU capsules on Amazon) everyone could have been protected.
Not just that, but HCQ and zinc is a cheap treatment. Of course, it has no patent on it, so it makes no real money for anyone. And who wants that when we have a Brand New Disease out there? (Even though coronaviruses regularly infect children and thereby help build their immune systems as they grow.)
I wonder if Fumento ever heard of the AIDS Highway…I think truckers spread that off-shoot…no bubonic-resistant genes? Medical fields generate the most retractions-every person is different. Gays hated Fauci…but meds were more simple then. I wonder about biting flys…
As a peer reviewer, I’ll note that what I’m reviewing is the submitted manuscript, not the raw data. And in the time frame allotted for the review, a request for the data (which is typically only triggered if there’s something seriously amiss in the methodology or the findings) likely won’t be fulfilled until well after the review deadline (if the data is even shared – which in a truly functional system would trigger automatic rejection if it isn’t, but it doesn’t always work that way). Also, most of the figures and images in a typical review manuscript are of a detail that wouldn’t typically reveal manipulation.
The bigger problems are: 1. “studies” designed in a way as to inevitably lead to the desired conclusion through invalid control groups or comparisons, or declining/refusing to look at important factors, and 2. favoritism in the review committee; e.g. good studies rejected prior to peer review because the conclusions contradict the opinions or “consensus” of the research committee. And if you are impertinent enough to keep pointing this out, eventually you’re not getting manuscripts of that type for review anymore, or you’re “dropped” from the review pool.
Not surprised that no one tried to replicate the Alzheimer’s study. It doesn’t pay, both literally and metaphorically. Almost two decades ago, an up-and-coming molecular biologist studying Parkinson’s told me that negative results don’t get published and don’t generate grants. That is, demonstrating that a line of research or a hypothesis is wrong, and scientists need to look elsewhere, may seem important and worthwhile to a layperson but is a disaster for the lab researcher. He spent months running some experiments only to confirm that the mechanism he was looking at was not involved in Parkinson’s. And now was faced with the results not being publishable and a stalled career progression before it even really began. And his experience also explains the temptation of fraud to a more desperate and less scrupulous researcher–massage the data to get positive results to get published which will lead to getting grants and moving up the career ladder.
Well I thought I remembered from several of Michael Fumento interviews on Coast To Coast AM…….Here is a pdf of his article:
Michael Fumento: Why is HIV So
Prevalent in Africa?
Sep 19, 2013 — Massive airdrops of condoms, won’t stop African AIDS. Ninety-nine percent of AIDS and HIV cases in Africa come…….
And his experience also explains the temptation of fraud to a more desperate and less scrupulous researcher–massage the data to get positive results to get published which will lead to getting grants and moving up the career ladder.
But I was told that in our social technocracy, such Men of Science …. as long as they are not on the payroll of an entity that publicly states its intent to make a profit … are immune to the profit motive, and therefore more noble and trustworthy than the known profit-seekers!
Where is Sarah Hoyt’s shocked face when you need it ???
EVERYONE is susceptible to the profit motive … from the researcher described above, to the activist who moves the goalposts and sensationalizes their “cause” to keep the donations flowing in, to the bureaucrat firmly in the grip of Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy and is focused upon the care-and-feeding of his specific empire at the expense of the mission of his agency.
Putting the “non-profit” on a pedestal is one of the fallacies underlying our social technocracy.
Jester Naybor observed: “Putting the “non-profit” on a pedestal is one of the fallacies underlying our social technocracy.”
I do not think there is anything inherently wrong with altruistic motives. And if those motivations require funding; sure. But please keep in mind that your desires require excess effort (beyond requirements) on the part of others. Maybe a little more humility, here.