Algorithms are from Mars

April, 16, 2021 | 8 Comments

Comments

  1. Perseverance, nicknamed Percy, is a car -sized Mars rover designed to explore the crater Jezero on Mars as part of NASA ‘s Mars 2020 mission.

    Patrick D Hahn Retweeted

    Scott jenkins @Sc0ttJenkins

    If I knew that I would be lying on the bed suffering the consequences of medication that I took as prescribed 2 decades ago, I never would have taken it in the first place. I was 17 when a dr prescribed me Seroxat and diazepam, the initial diagnosis was a chemical imbalance.

    I continued to take medication for 2 decades until my body couldn’t take it any more. Now the chemical imbalance “theory” is no longer supported by rpsych The makers of Seroxat were fined 3 billion for hiding the fact that their drug caused children to commit suicide.

    And now diazepam ( benzodiazepine) has just recently recieved a black box label after 50 years. So excuse me if I don’t have much faith in pharmaceutical companies.

    Yay science!

    Yay science!

    The Progressive Dream of the Percy’s went off the rails when Shelley Jofre ‘Laid Bare’ and nobody took a blind bit of notice so Venus is Rising has a lot going for it…

  2. It never ceases to amaze me that in the real world, in the here-and-now, we fight for the same things. We fight for the people we love, and for the strangers near and far who we know are just as worthy of love, against the forces that see them as nothing more than sources of profit. And fond as we are of the beasts of the field, we consider ourselves — all of us — just a wee bit more than cattle.

    Sometimes we have the nerve to dream that we have “rights.” Perhaps we are even humans, with “human rights.” God forgive us, sometimes we even imagine ourselves to be not subjects or serfs, but citizens! We begin to feel that it might not be a sin after all, to raise our tiny voices and speak our piece as to what sort of world we should live in. Maybe we could even do it together. It might make for a better world in a tiny sort of way.

    At any rate, the death of any one of us for the sake of someone else’s wealth and power strikes the rest of us as a tragedy, and a moral question that actually matters. We are not ashamed of feeling that way; we’re actually kind of proud of it. Thoughts and feelings like that, we figure, give our dumb little lives some meaning, as long as we act on them.

    99% of the time, David, I could swear you feel the same way.

    And yet over and over again you mourn for the days of feudalism, of the serf and the slave and the divine right of kings. But whatever moral system our rulers had in those (not so) good old days, it wasn’t motherly! If there were any covenant between man and God, only the most miniscule fraction of humanity — those of royal blood, the propertied and titled (and mainly the male ones) — were in on it. The rest of us were mere objects. And if those exalted beings thought of anything as having Transcendent Value, it sure as hell was not us. We could be slaughtered on a whim, for convenience’s sake, out of habit.

    Our deaths did not even rise to the level of being a moral question, really. Possibly, to a few monastic scholars, it was a moral question (if a tiny one) where George Floyd would spend eternity. But in this life? Whether he could breathe or was crushed to death was of little importance to his “betters.” As long as he died in a state of grace — as long as the Church bureaucrats could tick their boxes — all was right with the world. George’s duty and ours was to die patiently. First for the kings, then for the bosses.

    So no, I don’t miss the “justice and beneficence” of the monarchs. Nor do I miss the days when I was the chattel of my father or brother, when it was not only their right but their sacred duty to slit my throat if I “disgraced the family name” by copping the wrong attitude or speaking to the wrong boy. And when they too could be disemboweled or drawn and quartered for a single disrespectful word to the lordly lords whose divine right it was to rape me on my wedding day.

    Mind you, I don’t want to be lorded over by the drug companies or their bio-ethicists either. But I don’t think their problem is the “original sin” of trying to dream up systems and procedures. OK, clearly those four “principles” of modern bioethics won’t solve all our problems, cranking out right answers like a machine. And yeah, probably it is arrogant to think they could.

    But the real problem is not the bioethicists’ Sin of Pride in drawing up formulas. It is that those bioethicists are bought and paid for — literally selling “ethical clearance” on a contract basis to the highest bidder. They are bound to the corporations as surely as the priests before them were bound to King and Church. They can’t begin to ask whether the products we are offered are actually “a good for this person,” or whether they do “more harm than good.” And they can’t begin to offer us a “right to decide” while tying a blindfold on us. So they have reduced their own “principles” to garbage from the start.

    If Remdesivir (or Lexapro) actually did save lives, it might be a “moral dilemma” whether to buy some and save a few dozen people from Covid, or spend that money on clean drinking water for the kids in Flint, Michigan. But if Remdesivir doesn’t save anyone, and probably harms quite a few people, then handing that money over to Gilead is simply a crime–both against the kid in Flint AND her daddy in the ICU. And we’d be naive to think of it as an abstract philosophical crime. It’s a straight-up financial one.

  3. Antidepressants:

    “Who dares say then that we might now have a public health crisis with 15+% of the population on them and mostly unable to get off them”?

    This implies that, – – (unless unknown policies dictate otherwise) – – perhaps ??? a significant percentage of armed police officers might (hypothetically) have been given antidepressants.

    If so, might the resultant, potential, disinhibition and risk of akathisia impact upon their decision making?

    It is of course possible that operational policy and procedures ensure that this could not take place.

    • “it is no part of the College’s function to ‘police’ such debate”

      Such gross ethical transgressions are unique for psychiatry; they are not even possible in other specialties. If a cardiologist loses an academic discussion, or his colleague has exposed his fraud, it won’t help him to suddenly claim that his opponent got a heart attack.

      By

       Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD

      April 26, 2021

      False information on withdrawal from UK psychiatrists

      https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/04/mental-health-survival-kit-chapter-2-part-8/

      What this illustrates is: We already knew that drug companies don’t care about patient safety if it could harm sales.4,51 We now know that psychiatric leaders also don’t care about patient safety if it could threaten their own reputation, the guild they represent, or the flow of money they receive from drug companies. This corruption of a whole medical specialty also permeates our authorities, which rely heavily on specialists when issuing guidelines.

      Tom Jefferson: The UK turns to Witty, Vallance, and Van Tam for leadership: revolving doors?

      December 6, 2017

      https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2017/12/06/tom-jefferson-the-uk-turns-to-witty-vallance-and-van-tam-for-leadership-revolving-doors/

      In my view it is time that the government and the public took a close look at what is going on in the upper echelons of healthcare planning and delivery in this country and considered imposing a substantial time moratorium on hiring workers with close ties to industry. Should such senior appointments not be subject to parliamentary committee scrutiny?

      https://study329.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/2013-06-14-RIAT-to-GSK.pdf

      June 14, 2013

      Dear Christopher Gent, Andrew Witty, and Patrick Vallance,

      Unpublished trials and misreported trials distort the public medical knowledge base and undermine the basis for rational use of healthcare interventions.

      And so it started – the Data Wars…

  4. TO CANADIANS

    David Carmichael writes: If COVID cooperates, I’m going to be starting a KNOW YOUR DRUGS Cross-Canada Tour on July 1 (Canada Day) in Halifax that will end in Victoria on November 6 (Know Your Drugs Day); the 7th anniversary of Vanessa’s Law (Protecting Canadians from Unsafe Drugs Act) becoming a federal law.

    During the tour, I’ll be facilitating public discussions about prescription drug safety. At each event, I’ll also be promoting KnowYourDrugs.org and delivering a presentation to help prevent SSRI antidepressant-induced suicides, which could increase significantly as Canadians deal with the economic fallout triggered by the pandemic by visiting their doctors and being falsely told they are depressed because of a chemical imbalance in their brain, and that Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil or another SSRI will correct it.

    If you live between Halifax and Victoria and might be interested in helping me organize/promote a public discussion about prescription drug safety in your community, please join the KNOW YOUR DRUGS TOUR private Facebook group, or send me a private message. Thank you.

    Know Your Drugs Tour

  5. Volte-face …

    Chair – Sir Patrick Vallance

    Preparedness Partnership Member – Sir Andrew Witty

    No10 convenes panel of top scientists chaired by Sir Patrick Vallance in hope of slashing time it takes to create and deploy vaccines to fight Covid variants to just 100 days

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9489321/Experts-meet-cut-vaccine-development-time-face-new-pandemics.html

    Who are the pandemic preparedness partnership (PPP) members?

    Sir Patrick Vallance (chair) – UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser
    Sir Andrew Witty – CEO, United Health Group
    Sir John Bell — Regius Professor of Medicine, University of Oxford and member of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Scientific Advisory Committee
    Martin Landray — Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases and Global Health at the University of Oxford
    Dame Anne Johnson — Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology UCL
    Lord Jim O’Neill — Former Chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management & Former Commercial Secretary to the Treasury
    Baroness Minouche Shafik — Director LSE and former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England
    Aurelia Nguyen — Managing Director Office of the COVAX Facility, Gavi
    Sir Jeremy Farrar — Director Wellcome Trust & Chair of the Scientific Advisory Group of the WHO R&D Blueprint.
    John-Arne Rottingen — Co-chair ACT-A, member of the G20 High Level Independent Panel (HLIP) on financing for pandemic preparedness and response & ambassador for Global Health, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
    Peter Sands — Executive Director – Global Fund
    Richard Hatchett — Chief Executive Officer CEPI
    Sergio Carmona — Acting Chief Executive Officer and Chief Medical Officer FIND
    Soumya Swaminathan — Chief Scientist WHO
    John Tsai — Head of Global Drug Development and Chief Medical Officer, Novartis
    Sir Mene Pangalos — Executive Vice President Biopharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca
    Mikael Dolsten — Chief Scientific Officer, Pfizer
    Paul Stoffells — Vice Chairman and Chief Scientific Officer, J&J
    Roger Connor — President Global Vaccines, GSK
    June Raine — Chief Executive, MHRA 

    “The 100,000 people who work for GSK are just like you, right? I’m sure everybody who reads the BMJ has friends who work for drug companies. They’re normal people… Many of them are doctors”. Sir Andrew Witty

    No Mars – Bar …

  6. I’m a bit confused about who is the best Priest there needs to be some sort of Priest league table that gets published. I’m just reading Bill Brysons The Body and that is very good, it is tricky to decide who is best at Priesting.

    https://youtu.be/TBrKxF3bnUY

Leave a Reply