Wednesday, May 20, 2020

The "evidence" rhetoric

A socialgalactician observes scientistic rhetoric in action.
Me:“here is anecdotal evidence hcq works”
Scientist friend: “so we agree there’s no evidence hcq works”
The devotees of scientistry always, Always, ALWAYS rely upon on rhetoric, specifically, upon a false definition of “evidence”. Their rhetorical redefinition is limited, ironically enough, to “published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence”, which statistical analysis has proven to be less reliable than a coin flip.

Labels: ,


Blogger God Emperor Memes May 20, 2020 8:03 AM  

If hcq is good enough for TGE, it's certainly good enough for me.

Blogger JACIII May 20, 2020 8:05 AM  

Lawyer lies. Straight up weasel words.

The one I see often lately is "has not been shown to be" to make people think "isn't". As in HCQ "has not been shown to be" an effective, safe treatment.

Blogger Gettimothy May 20, 2020 8:06 AM  

That apple falling on Newton's head is anecdotal.

Blogger Geoff May 20, 2020 8:22 AM  

I've always wondered if scientists believe anybody had any knowledge prior to peer review.

Blogger Erynne May 20, 2020 8:24 AM  

I've also had someone question the reputation of the published, peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Blogger Iskander Magnus May 20, 2020 8:52 AM  

"What is Truth ?"quibbled Pontius Pilate. We may ask "What is Evidence", and it this "Scientist Friend" is a woman, it would be nice to point out that in Islam her testimony is worth half of a man's. That should get the rhetorical ball rolling.

Blogger Iskander Magnus May 20, 2020 8:56 AM  

Or posit the old adage "my P-value is smaller than your P-value".
It is very infuriating to see the crooked-mindedness of those who insist that everything must be tested by a Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial (RCT) before evidence can be forthcoming. The centuries of scientific and medical advancement prior to our own decadent age were not built upon this materialistic reductionism. That's even before we get to the awesome critiques of the "scientist" methodologies to which Vox alludes.

Blogger pyrrhus May 20, 2020 8:57 AM  

Not to mention that hcq has been used worldwide, and there are two major scientific papers explaining that it works and why....

Blogger Stilicho May 20, 2020 9:20 AM  

>Lawyer lies. Straight up weasel words.<

Even lawyers don't usually lie so obviously and disprovably. It's a matter of professional pride.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 May 20, 2020 9:21 AM  

Modern science is a stagnant priesthood that probably features more problems with pedophilia than the Catholic Church ever did.

Blogger rumpole5 May 20, 2020 9:30 AM  

Could you favor with a cite to the "why" paper? It obviously works in some cases, but the descriptions of how and why that I've seen have been all over the map. When something is politicised it is hard to get back to reasonable facts.

Blogger Feurfeur May 20, 2020 9:36 AM  

The debate about HCQ was completely crazy here in France. I don't know much about how it goes in the US but over here HCQ was defended by Prof. Didier Raoult, from the "Méditerrannée Infection" Institute in Marseilles, who had against him pretty much the whole parisian medical establishment and the media (a sure sign that).
It also revealed truckloads of "intellectual idiots" who took much pleasure in pointing out that Raoult's studies were worthless because they were not peer-reviewed or published in "big" scientific journals or because he decided to treat his patients instead of using them as guinea pigs in placebo-controlled studies.
As for the HCQ, the crazy thing is that a molecule used for decades was suddenly described as "toxic" by the media, the establishment and the intellectual idiots who were cherry-picking pharmacovigilance data. It was really baffling.
As of now, I don't know if Raoult's protocol works or not but given the asymetrical risks, you'd really have to be an idiot not to try it if you're infected.

Blogger thethirdcoast May 20, 2020 9:43 AM  

The pro-hysteria/pro-vaccine crowd are also trying to suppress HCQ by citing junk studies that:

1) Leave out the Zinc, Z-pak, and Vitamin C portions of the regimen

2) Administer HCQ as late as possible when all the indications to the contrary are that HCQ is most effective as a prophylactic/early on in the infection cycle.

To me it is clear that everyone involved in suppressing HCQ's value is pure evil, motivated by avarice and hatred.

Blogger Storm Rhode May 20, 2020 9:46 AM  

A friend of mine brought up hcq yesterday. He thought it was a dangerous drug with many side effects. Its been around a long time and people generally don't have problems with it. I took it years ago when I went to Honduras for a few weeks. No problems. When I trained at University, science was evidence based when it came to researching drugs. In the past few decades I think science has gotten away from inquisitive research to find answers, to biased research used to confirm arbitrary end points. Be it climate change, vibrant diversity good or hcq bad; it seems like scientists have an agenda now. An agenda which vibes with the journalist pc/sjw agenda. I suspect following the money will lead to explanations. It always seems to.

Blogger megabar May 20, 2020 9:50 AM  

@2: "has not been shown to be" to make people think "isn't"

Yup. The hilarious part is when it's used to argue against proper investigation into something. This doesn't happen in one conversation, because it's too obvious.

But if "has not been shown to" is repeated a few times, it turns into "does not", and that can be used to deny investigation.

Blogger Gracie May 20, 2020 9:54 AM  

It's deadly rhetoric too. You'll also get this if you are ever unfortunate enough to decide to step outside of mainstream medicine. My husband took Plaquenil (HCQ) for (I'm guessing) 6 months or so for chronic lyme, no side effects. Lyme literate drs use a cocktail of drugs. Were the any studies for that? maybe or not. The HCQ didn't cure the lyme but helped. I think it was CBD oil that finally did the trick. Any studies for that? one that I know of.

Blogger Doktor Jeep May 20, 2020 9:55 AM  

Warp drive is not going to be discovered by scientists.

Blogger Tars Tarkas May 20, 2020 10:09 AM  

Alt Hype did a pretty good video looking at peer-review:

These people like to pretend that peer-review has been immune from SJW influence. This crap has even made its way into mathematics. A bunch of wamman become upset with someone and found out he had a paper that was about to be published in a math journal and they bombarded the journal with letters, telephone calls and emails. Of course, the journal cucked.

Blogger Up from the pond May 20, 2020 10:20 AM  

The old wheeze that every researcher used to know is that "data" means a group of anecdotes. We don't have many researchers like that anymore; they have been replaced by ill-educated fedora-tippers.

Blogger MichaelJMaier May 20, 2020 10:22 AM  

Vox, thank you again for this blog. Years ago, you pointed out that intelligence is often misused to buttress rationalization and other manner of self-delusion.

I made it a point after that to watch for it, esp. in my own behaviors. It has proven a very useful thing to be mindful of.

Blogger Nate May 20, 2020 10:24 AM  

Our local pharmacy stocked up on hcq back in February specifically because of the studies that showed its effectiveness. These people are liars.

Blogger Krymneth May 20, 2020 10:26 AM  

The devotees of scientistry always, Always, ALWAYS rely upon on rhetoric

The devotees of scientistry have had their ability to do dialectic systematically stripped from them, so rhetoric is all they have.

One of the things I've noticed related to that is...

pyrrhus wrote:Not to mention that hcq has been used worldwide, and there are two major scientific papers explaining that it works and why....

... an inability to understand what sampling is and what it is used for. When my kids were young, sometimes they'd have a bad cough, sometimes enough to vomit. So I would give them cough medicine.

Since I was a child, cough syrup has been removed from the Officially Acceptable list of things to give a child. So I looked for the "why" online. The answer is, there isn't a reason. There just hasn't been a RCT that proves it is safe, and of course, who wants to fund one for something as cheap and unpatentable as cough syrup? So there never will be.

But... a RCT would by its very nature be a tiny sample across a short time frame. By contrast, in the real world we have effectively 100% of the people who have used it above a certain age. While simply looking out in the world does not prove there is absolutely, positively no negative effect, you can derive an upper bound for how bad it can be. Due to its incredibly widespread usage, that upper bound is very small. It obviously can't be killing every other person who used it, or you know, we'd see that.

A proper understanding shows that evidence is multiple orders of magnitude above the level of confidence any RCT could possibly produce. We've seen RCTs fail to pick up small-but-real effects many times. Most notably in the significant number of drugs approved to treat weight problems, which passed their RCTs, but when they got out to the real world revealed significant negative side effects that caused them to be pulled. There is no conceivable argument that it is not safe to give children cough syrup not outweighed by this massive pile of evidence.

But because there hasn't been any RCTs, millions of children suffer through coughs they have no particular need to suffer through, because scientistry advocates simply can not process the idea that not only are RCTs not the only way to obtain evidence, they aren't even the best. (The costs of putting everyone on an intervention are unacceptable in the general case, but if it has already been done for some specific case, the evidence is massively stronger than an RCT.)

HCQ, like cough syrup, has had more field testing than any RCT could ever hope to replicate for safety. Efficiaciousness against #Coronachan or any other particular disease is a valid matter for RCT. But not mere safety; with the body of evidence as it is, if an RCT produces the result than HCQ is not safe, that is essentially proof the study was done incorrectly or maliciously!

Blogger nyan May 20, 2020 10:29 AM  

The counter I keep making for this is to quote Richard Feynman: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." If people are placing belief in experts, the proper counter is to cite an even more prestigious expert that tells them to stop doing that.

Feynman is a treasure-trove of proper philosophy-of-science who comprehends that the cornerstone of science is skepticism of science. "Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers of the preceding generation."

Blogger The Lab Manager May 20, 2020 10:29 AM  

Of course, if the Magic Negro were up at the podium, the press would be on their knees each day fellating him over his every word.

I used to work as a staff person in academia. The only accomplishment, if you can call that, of most Phd's is getting the Phd. After that, I can count one hand the number that are worth anything. Some do become good instructors, but the research has much to be desired.

Blogger Uncle Maffoo May 20, 2020 10:35 AM  

Peer-reviewed publications are really only documentary evidence anyway.

Blogger Evstratios May 20, 2020 10:36 AM  

It is completely bizarre. Took 5 seconds to find this one:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

This morning a writer at the Toronto Star calling the GE "stupid". I became infuriated over it. I spent 3 minutes through publicly available channels and found the amount of information available about HCQ and its specific inhibitory effects against corona-type viruses to be both well researched by North American scientists and also for those useless pustules, peer-reviewed.

Completely leaving the decades of efficacious use in other areas alone, there is incontrovertible evidence available. It's not even under paid portal.

Really can't wait to fight for freedom.

Blogger Silly but True May 20, 2020 10:41 AM  

They're playing word games to feed the institutionalized clinical medical industry. When Fauci says "beware hqc because while everyone felt it worked for SARS, there were no clinical trials," he means that everyone felt it worked because it worked, despite the absence of years/decades-long clinical trials used to comprehensively isolate its specific benefits and drawbacks under a rigorous series of controlled laboratory experiments.

When people say that hqc works, it's because hqc works: there is direct evidence because their patient is better and symptoms less severe when they took it vs. when they don't.

Blogger Daniel May 20, 2020 10:45 AM  

Not to dumb-shame, but they are morbidly obtuse.

Blogger Ken Prescott May 20, 2020 10:47 AM  

Given that Corona-chan attacks hemoglobin in a similar manner to malaria, it makes sense that an anti-malarial drug would be a useful tool.

It's similar to how you treat dysentery: keep giving fluids and electrolytes (what plants crave!) to the patient until the infection runs its course. Because the dysentery doesn't kill you, the deranged electrolyte balance and/or dehydration kills you.

Treat the symptoms, and you treat the disease.

Blogger Aeroschmidt May 20, 2020 10:48 AM  

So everyone agrees that gasoline doesn't make a car run, while pointing to a study where they put gas in the wiper fluid reservoir.

Blogger Blondie Callahan May 20, 2020 10:57 AM  

My 73 year old mother took it (plaquenil) for 15 years for RA and Lupus. It worked wonders for her. She did quit taking it a few years back as the LONG TERM side effects starting effecting her vision. I'm gonna have to say it's safe in the short term. The media never really seemed concerned about men dropping dead of heart attacks while taking boner pills...

Blogger Shane Bradman May 20, 2020 11:02 AM  

Peer review is silly. Somebody switched out a dozen words from a Hitler speech and got it peer reviewed in some sociology journal. Nutritionists have many peer reviewed studies that show that eating chocolate will help you lose weight more than if you ate nothing. Very, very stupid and completely unhelpful.

Blogger R Webfoot May 20, 2020 11:05 AM  

My Vitamin D supplements have a disclaimer saying any claims to their health effects have not been evaluated by the FDA. So much for the FDA.

Blogger Shane Bradman May 20, 2020 11:05 AM  

HCQ definitely works. It does harm to your internals, as do many medications. Alexander Tschugguel, the guy who threw the Pachamama idol into a river, said that he was given an HIV medication which helped, but that it was his prayers that truly made him recover. Medication is good, but don't underestimate miracles.

Blogger Jack Aubrey May 20, 2020 11:19 AM  

This reminds me of how much I miss Spacebunny ripping Twitter idiots over the difference between evidence and proof.

Blogger Yossarian May 20, 2020 11:35 AM  

Are there any peer reviews showing that anecdotal evidence is not evidence?

Blogger Crew May 20, 2020 11:44 AM  

The media is crazy to be bringing attention to President Donald John Trump taking HCQ and Zinc ... even though they pretend to be concerned about him (the lying assholes).

Not only is Donald Trump risking his family fortune for We The People, he is risking his life for us as well.

I do not think it is blasphemy to compare him to the one who risked his life for our salvation!

Blogger John Regan May 20, 2020 11:57 AM  

Questions of what constitutes "evidence" and how, or whether, evidence can justify claiming knowledge, are questions of epistemology, not science. And there's no reason to believe a scientist knows anything about epistemology.

Here's a pretty good outline of the basics, too. "Scientists" should read it.

Blogger John Regan May 20, 2020 12:14 PM  

And let's not forget that "scientists" were onboard with mass tonsillectomies performed in public school gymnasiums, because tonsils were "vestigial". Because evolution.

And who can forget thalidomide?

Blogger R Webfoot May 20, 2020 12:25 PM  

"Anecdotal evidence" is better termed "front-line reports from boots on the ground."

Blogger Nym Coy May 20, 2020 12:37 PM  

Where is the RCT for social distancing? I volunteer for the control group!

Blogger MichaelJMaier May 20, 2020 12:57 PM  

Even better, Dr. Fakey himself was pushing it as a cure for one of the fake epidemics in the mid 2000s.

Blogger thethirdcoast May 20, 2020 1:07 PM  

You've touched on a point that I was thinking about regarding another word game the media are playing.

The game is based on the old saw that, "(an) anecdote is not data."

The game is to conflate the meaning of "data" with the meaning of "evidence."

Individual and collected anecdotes are perfectly valid evidence. This is why we have witnesses testify in court.

Collected anecdotes are also a form of data, such as Studs Terkel's oral history of WW2.

The individual anecdote is not data because it is a single data point or datum.

So, the media is practicing a bit of newspeak when they try to deny anecdotes as evidence and pretend that there is only one source of anecdote for the efficacy of HCQ, ignoring the reality physicians around the world are reporting success.

It is a fairly subtle, yet highly effective form of intellectual dishonesty.

Blogger An Orthodox Christian May 20, 2020 2:00 PM  

Every drug has contraindications:Aspirin-history of GI bleed/ulcers, Tylenol-liver disease. Ibuprofen-heart disease, GI bleed/ulcers and are considered dangerous in those populations. Yet all are safe enough to be over the counter. HCQ is dangerous in people with certain heart rhythm problems or in combination with other drugs that can affect heart rhythm. Otherwise it's safety profile is well established in those taking it long term. But with COVID, it is 5 days therapy and those at risk for adverse reactions can be easily screened out by patient history and an EKG if warranted. Therefore even anecdotal evidence of HCQ's potential benefit in the treatment of Kung Flu far outweighs the fearmongered risk.

Blogger An Orthodox Christian May 20, 2020 2:05 PM  

Oh snap. I just posted dialectic in a thread about rhetoric. Back to Voxiversity I go. Mea culpa.

Blogger tublecane May 20, 2020 2:20 PM  

@38- Modren philosophy is pretty loopy on epistemology, so scientists would feel comfortable throwing their hands up and declaring: "Who cares?"

No doubt some have heard of Hume and his forks, and a few may have twisted their brains into puzzles with Herr Kant.

Any sort of knowledge of course comes down to epistemology ultimately. However, what conventionally constitutes evidence need not go to that level. We can simply stop at facts tending to show the truth or validity of a thing.

Blogger Robert Schecter May 20, 2020 2:54 PM  

Yet they ignore the science saying kids can't be used to transmit the virus and keep the schools closed.

Blogger Pierre May 20, 2020 3:33 PM  

Evstratios wrote:It is completely bizarre. Took 5 seconds to find this one:

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

It works in vitro but these results can only apply in vivo if the actual HCQ concentration in the lungs is enough to get therapeutic effect. It seems the actual concentration achieved by safe doses is not enough. I've read a few articles about this, all of remarkably low quality. It's quite disappointing.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd May 20, 2020 3:38 PM  

Robert Schecter wrote:Yet they ignore the science saying kids can't be used to transmit the virus and keep the schools closed.
Good for the kids at least.

Blogger pyrrhus May 20, 2020 3:50 PM  

"Our local pharmacy stocked up on hcq back in February specifically because of the studies that showed its effectiveness. These people are liars."
Here and in California, per my CA doctor, the elites were stocking up to the extent that pharmacies were running out, so there was an informal ban on prescriptions without symptoms...He knew it worked, and said he would prescribe hcq for me if I so much as sneezed....

Blogger BalancedTryteOperators May 20, 2020 4:02 PM  

How old is a kid? Maybe elementary and middle schools should reopen but high schools should remain closed.

Blogger eclecticmn May 20, 2020 6:11 PM  

NN Taleb writes about progress being due to stochastic tinkerers not the Harvard/Soviet top down model of progress.

I remember when Bill Murray said "Back off, I'm a scientist" in Ghost Busters. Back then it was funny and people laughed. Now they are serious when they say it.

Blogger Nihil Dicit May 20, 2020 6:35 PM  

tonsils were "vestigial". Because evolution.

One is reminded of Chesterton's parable of the gate. And what relies more upon "anecdotal" evidence than TENS?

A mathematician, a biologist and a physicist are sitting in a street cafe watching people going in and coming out of the house on the other side of the street. First they see two people going into the house. Time passes. After a while they notice three persons coming out of the house.
The physicist: "The measurement wasn't accurate.".
The biologist: "They have reproduced".
The mathematician: "If now exactly one person enters the house then it will be empty again."

Blogger thethirdcoast May 20, 2020 7:43 PM  

I thought these articles were a nice adjunct to this topic:

The United States’ Research Attempts Need to Change

U.S. scientific advancements lack diversity, equity, and inclusion, says Parthasarathy

Of course, they both get it exactly wrong.

DIE-versity is precisely the reason the US is falling behind in innovation.

Blogger eclecticmn May 20, 2020 8:13 PM  

I'd like to know how many MDs are taking the HCQ. They have skin in the game.

Blogger eclecticmn May 20, 2020 8:27 PM  

If you want to see lefty heads explode tell them the lock down is class war.
PEGGY NOONAN, The Lockdown Class War.

Blogger AbnEng May 20, 2020 10:41 PM  

In the past, I’ve gone on record against helicopter rides: the cost is considerable compared to sharpened stakes, and the shorter sharpened stakes can provide hours of fun for the entire studio audience. That said, all the discussion of double blind trials has brought something to my attention.

As you can tell from my handle, I’m a former paratrooper. WE NEVER CONDUCTED DOUBLE BLIND TRIALS TO PROVE THE EFFICACY OF PARACHUTES! I’ve got about 30 jumps; I propose that Fauci and 29 other SJW’s should exit aircraft without parachutes at 800 – 2,000 feet AGL, and we should see if parachutes are truly effective. Of course, if journals don’t approve the article for publication, we may need to find additional SJW’s and repeat the experiment.

Blogger map May 21, 2020 12:43 AM  


During the Vietnam War, all 550,000 US soldiers were taking HCQ on Sundays and Chloroquine every day for a whole year as a prophylactic against malaria.l

According to these scientists, the Army should've been dropping like flies giving out this dangerous drug.

Blogger Avalanche May 21, 2020 8:19 AM  

@24 "Of course, if the Magic Negro were up at the podium,..."

Yeah, anyone seen that negro head of HHS at the briefings lately? He's made a few mis-steps in his "see, diversity works in healthcare, too!" job... so is he being kept out of view?

NOT that I care...

I often succeed, when trying to awaken friends to "don't risk your child's health with a negro doctor" by pointing out:

"Do you know what they call the person who graduates 500th in a 500-person med school class?

"They call him doctor.

"Try to imagine ANY med school anywhere flunking their *highly recruited because "skin!"* student when s/he is entirely unable to fulfill any class requirements to pass? Do they flunk 'em out?

"They do not. They dare not because: guaranteed-to-lose lawsuit. So, should you take your child to a negro doctor, knowing that med school CANNOT flunk out any magic-negro student(s)?"

That cogdis almost always works. If need be, you can thrown in the sop that: "yes, it's unfair as hell to the VERY FEW actually qualified magic-negro-doctors; but which do you care about more? Your child's health-and-safety/medical care, or the feelings of some probable affirmative-action alleged-MD?"

Blogger John Regan May 21, 2020 8:20 AM  


For the most part, that's my point. On the practical level, there's no reason to deviate from the epistemology of Aristotle. In fact it's extremely destructive to do so, both to one's sanity and to others, to the extent you have power or influence over others.

Yet what we are increasingly dealing with in public debates are epistemological claims. That is, not so much arguments about the subject itself as meta-arguments about legitimacy. Certain positions - skepticism about vaccines or "climate change", for example - are not addressed directly but ruled out of bounds ab initio due to an alleged epistemological insufficiency or defect.

But the "meta-arguers" are completely out of their depth. They are raising objections that lead down a rabbit hole from which no one ever returns.

That's probably their goal, though they knoweth it not.

Blogger Avalanche May 21, 2020 8:32 AM  

@27 "When Fauci says "beware hqc because while everyone felt it worked for SARS, there were no clinical trials"

And are we to expect actual carefully done clinical trials for remdesivere and the new hoped-for (but not by me!) "vaccines"? Since they have been unsuccessful creating a vaccine for "classic" SARS how-many-years later ... are we to expect the 'rush-rush-rush' not-quite-well-tested SARS2 vaccines to be safe and effective?

I kinda-sorta understand why The God Emperor is NOT rearing up and forcing the issue... sorta. He is showing he trusts HCQ+ enough; and if it means lots of old folks die because some idiot governor outlaws HCQ+ or some orthodox-doc refuses to learn / try or some pharmacist refuses to dispense it... well eggs / omelettes: lots of mostly old folks were going to die anyway.

MPAI and cannot / will not take control of their own health care. It takes time and study to decide what to ... roll your own treatment dice on ... when you're getting ill. It takes prepping to do that and then also to identify a doctor and maybe pharmacist who will work with you on your determined treatment design.

Blogger Avalanche May 21, 2020 8:42 AM  

@34 "HCQ definitely works. It does harm to your internals, as do many medications."

ALL drugs have "effects" -- we just like and benefit from some of the effects, so they get approved; and "we" try to balance the desired / good effects against the undesired / not-so-good or deadly effects in deciding to if it should be denied.

The term LD50 is the "lethal-dose for 50%" of the animals, obviously, that a drug / treatment is tested on. So the gamble is: what percentage of LD, or other truly horrific 'effect' are "we" willing to accept?

Note carefully the phrasing: NOT truly horrific *side* effect! What effect(s) out of all the effects this drug causes are "we" willing to accept in a cost-benefit, i.e., injury-health, comparison. Consider the huge damage chemo causes: is that damage worth the possibility of "curing" someone's cancer? Are the undesirable effects worth the desired effects?

Blogger Avalanche May 21, 2020 9:16 AM  

Peak Prosperity's 'Dr.' Chris Martenson did a great 'investigation' of HCQ; I believe here:
(Sorry Vox, I can't find a transcript.)

Orthodoxy and MSM are saying the HCQ can damage hearts. Chris goes over all the trails he followed looking for ANY evidence of heart damage related to HCQ -- and it's just. not. there.

Sixty-five percent physicians across the United States said they would prescribe the anti-malaria drugs chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat or prevent COVID-19 in a family member, according to a new survey released today by Jackson & Coker, one of the country's largest physician staffing firms.

Only 11 percent said they would not use the drug at all.

Meanwhile, 30 percent of the surveyed doctors said they would prescribe the medications to a family member prior to the onset of symptoms if they had been exposed to COVID-19, a highly contagious virus that causes a pneumonia-like infection of the lungs.

Blogger eclecticmn May 21, 2020 7:37 PM  

A comment from Manhattan Contrarian. Clever writing

Peter Divey
Already the narrative is being prepared..."We followed the science".
Here in the UK the cry of Lockdown! Lockdown!! Locckdown!!! is akin to the siren used by the Morlocks. So conditioned and frightened are the majority of Brits that they are acting like the Eloi. Marching steadily toward doom, even as a few enlightened souls are desperately trying to break the reverie...

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts