date:20200731

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:04 PM Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:48 AM Jason Resch  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:43 PM Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jason Resch 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:13 PM Bruce Kellett 
 wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

 On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:

> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>
>> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked
>> at giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed 
>> HCQ was
>> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>>
>> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those
>> where it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease 
>> shifts
>> from the viral replication phase to an immune system
>> dysregulation phase
>> 
>> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some 
>> effectiveness even
>> when it is given late.
>>
>> Given the well-established safety
>> 
>> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>>
>> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
>> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20
>> wasted per patient
>> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0
>> wasted per patient
>>
>> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness,
>> the decision is clear.
>>
>
>
> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>
> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself?
> Just be prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>
> But contact them
>

 Find out what from the WHO?

>>>
>>> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they
>>> should re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your
>>> table and the website. PGC
>>>

>>>
>> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible
>> (and have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness 
>> is
>> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>>
>> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
>> value.
>>
>
>
> Your table above presents a false dichotomy.
>

 It either works or doesn't. That's two options. Unless you can point
 out a third one that I missed.

>>>
>>> It is a false dichotomy, because it misses the nuance that it might be
>>> useful with early administration, but is not a cure, and does not save
>>> lives.
>>>
>>
>> I see. I would count that as "Doesn't work" for the purposes of the table.
>>
>>
>>>

> There is no evidence that use of HCQ is effective as a cure for
> COVID-19.
>

 "No evidence" is a rather poor way to describe "*100% of scientific
 studies that have investigated it's early administration*" (see:
 https://c19study.com/ )

>>>
>>> Having lots of studies does not prove that something works. They may not
>>> present any evidence at all for efficacy as a cure.
>>>
>>
>> True, but not a single study is on the side that it doesn't work when
>> given early. So then what should the scientific consensus be? I only say
>> that it remains uncertain.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It was only ever suggested that it might act prophylactically, or in
> relief of some early stage symptoms. Decision theory is only useful if you
> don't misrepresent the facts
>

 What is misrepresented by the table? Either it works or it doesn't.

>>>
>>> False dichotomy, as explained.
>>>
>>
>> Take "works" in my table to mean "saves lives".
>>
>
> That is the problem with your table -- works can mean a multitude of
> things besides "saves lives". There is, of course, another problem that you
> have not taken into account. This is that if there is a widespread belief
> that HCQ cures COVID-19, then many people might take it in this mistaken
> belief, and consequently fail to take reasonable precautions against
> infection. This could easily lead to a greatly increased death toll -- many
> more people get infected than would otherwise be the case, and for none of
> these does HCQ cure their disease

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread Bruce Kellett

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:48 AM Jason Resch  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:43 PM Bruce Kellett 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jason Resch  wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:13 PM Bruce Kellett 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch 
 wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>>>
 On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ 
> was
> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>
> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those
> where it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease 
> shifts
> from the viral replication phase to an immune system
> dysregulation phase
> 
> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some 
> effectiveness even
> when it is given late.
>
> Given the well-established safety
> 
> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>
> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20
> wasted per patient
> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0
> wasted per patient
>
> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness,
> the decision is clear.
>


 https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19

 Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself?
 Just be prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.

 But contact them

>>>
>>> Find out what from the WHO?
>>>
>>
>> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
>> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table 
>> and
>> the website. PGC
>>
>>>
>>
> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
> have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>
> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
> value.
>


 Your table above presents a false dichotomy.

>>>
>>> It either works or doesn't. That's two options. Unless you can point out
>>> a third one that I missed.
>>>
>>
>> It is a false dichotomy, because it misses the nuance that it might be
>> useful with early administration, but is not a cure, and does not save
>> lives.
>>
>
> I see. I would count that as "Doesn't work" for the purposes of the table.
>
>
>>
>>>
 There is no evidence that use of HCQ is effective as a cure for
 COVID-19.

>>>
>>> "No evidence" is a rather poor way to describe "*100% of scientific
>>> studies that have investigated it's early administration*" (see:
>>> https://c19study.com/ )
>>>
>>
>> Having lots of studies does not prove that something works. They may not
>> present any evidence at all for efficacy as a cure.
>>
>
> True, but not a single study is on the side that it doesn't work when
> given early. So then what should the scientific consensus be? I only say
> that it remains uncertain.
>
>
>>
>> It was only ever suggested that it might act prophylactically, or in
 relief of some early stage symptoms. Decision theory is only useful if you
 don't misrepresent the facts

>>>
>>> What is misrepresented by the table? Either it works or it doesn't.
>>>
>>
>> False dichotomy, as explained.
>>
>
> Take "works" in my table to mean "saves lives".
>

That is the problem with your table -- works can mean a multitude of things
besides "saves lives". There is, of course, another problem that you have
not taken into account. This is that if there is a widespread belief that
HCQ cures COVID-19, then many people might take it in this mistaken belief,
and consequently fail to take reasonable precautions against infection.
This could easily lead to a greatly increased death toll -- many more
people get infected than would otherwise be the case, and for none of these
does HCQ cure their disease. So there will still be the same proportion of
deaths but a greatly increased absolute number. You have no provision in
your table for the possibility that mistaken beliefs might actually cost
lives.

Br

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:35 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 7/31/2020 5:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>>>


 On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>
> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where
> it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from
> the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase
> 
> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness 
> even
> when it is given late.
>
> Given the well-established safety
> 
> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>
>
> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted
> per patient
> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted
> per patient
>
> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
> decision is clear.
>


 https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19

 Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be
 prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.

 But contact them

>>>
>>> Find out what from the WHO?
>>>
>>
>> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
>> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and
>> the website. PGC
>>
>>>
>>
> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
> have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>
> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
> value.
>
>
> No, there is not.  The trials show some improvement for ill persons.
>

One study found early use reduced hospitalizations by 84% deaths by 80%.
That's hardly insignificant.

What's the downside risk, as you perceive it?


> It doesn't show there would be no harm in using it as a preventative in
> well persons.
>

That has been established by the 60 year history of use by tens of millions
of people. See the CDC link I gave, it's safe even for pregnant and nursing
mothers.

Jason


>
> Brent
>
>
> The very link you provided says they only cancelled only the late stage
> testing. They are continuing early and prophylactic use tests.
>
> "This decision applies only to the conduct of the Solidarity trial in
> hospitalized patients and does not affect the possible evaluation in other
> studies of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized
> patients or as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19."
>
>
> Jason
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUiQtZttiHSVszjVzUWyjZf60wUTPJwS8AYVFytgjj-gYQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/50c6dc2f-23a7-dad7-d47b-2fa503cbc348%40verizon.net
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhzgvwrx1xMWp7NGDgogDZCCLSR5bq88Ro6G6_wrxKfnQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List

On 7/31/2020 5:49 PM, Jason Resch wrote:

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC > wrote:

On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC wrote:

On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests
that looked at giving it early in the disease, or
prophylactically, they showed HCQ was beneficial. This
site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/

The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective
are those where it is given late in the disease
progression (when the disease shifts from the viral
replication phase to an immune system dysregulation
phase

(see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown
some effectiveness even when it is given late.

Given the well-established safety

record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:

HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
HCQ widely dispensed10,000s of thousands of lives
saved $20 wasted per patient
HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless
deaths $0 wasted per patient

Even in the face of impartial information on its
effectiveness, the decision is clear.

https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19

Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee
itself? Just be prepared to wait as I believe they are
somewhat busy.

But contact them

Find out what from the WHO?

Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they
should re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives,
with your table and the website. PGC

It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
mixed, the science on its safety is clear.

Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
value.

No, there is not. The trials show some improvement for ill persons. It
doesn't show there would be no harm in using it as a preventative in
well persons.

Brent

The very link you provided says they only cancelled only the late
stage testing. They are continuing early and prophylactic use tests.

"This decision applies only to the conduct of the Solidarity trial
in hospitalized patients and does not affect the possible
evaluation in other studies of hydroxychloroquine or
lopinavir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized patients or as pre- or
post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19."

Jason
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUiQtZttiHSVszjVzUWyjZf60wUTPJwS8AYVFytgjj-gYQ%40mail.gmail.com
.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/50c6dc2f-23a7-dad7-d47b-2fa503cbc348%40verizon.net.

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:43 PM Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jason Resch  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:13 PM Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:

> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

 There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
 giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ 
 was
 beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/

 The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those
 where it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease 
 shifts
 from the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation
 phase
 
 (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness 
 even
 when it is given late.

 Given the well-established safety
 
 record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:

 HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
 HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20
 wasted per patient
 HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0
 wasted per patient

 Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
 decision is clear.

>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>>>
>>> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just
>>> be prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>>>
>>> But contact them
>>>
>>
>> Find out what from the WHO?
>>
>
> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table 
> and
> the website. PGC
>
>>
>
 It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
 have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
 mixed, the science on its safety is clear.

 Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
 value.

>>>
>>>
>>> Your table above presents a false dichotomy.
>>>
>>
>> It either works or doesn't. That's two options. Unless you can point out
>> a third one that I missed.
>>
>
> It is a false dichotomy, because it misses the nuance that it might be
> useful with early administration, but is not a cure, and does not save
> lives.
>

I see. I would count that as "Doesn't work" for the purposes of the table.


>
>>
>>> There is no evidence that use of HCQ is effective as a cure for
>>> COVID-19.
>>>
>>
>> "No evidence" is a rather poor way to describe "*100% of scientific
>> studies that have investigated it's early administration*" (see:
>> https://c19study.com/ )
>>
>
> Having lots of studies does not prove that something works. They may not
> present any evidence at all for efficacy as a cure.
>

True, but not a single study is on the side that it doesn't work when given
early. So then what should the scientific consensus be? I only say that it
remains uncertain.


>
> It was only ever suggested that it might act prophylactically, or in
>>> relief of some early stage symptoms. Decision theory is only useful if you
>>> don't misrepresent the facts
>>>
>>
>> What is misrepresented by the table? Either it works or it doesn't.
>>
>
> False dichotomy, as explained.
>

Take "works" in my table to mean "saves lives".   Or if you want to
redefine works as minimizing symptoms, then you can make another table that
shows tens of thousands of people who would experience reduced symptoms.
The conclusion is the same.

Jason


>
> Bruce
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQF8zgJS0D-a6BsHjm1j3xWs8voQjpDAcCvgAMpqe8Gvw%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop rece

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread Bruce Kellett

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jason Resch  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:13 PM Bruce Kellett 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch  wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>>>
 On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
>>> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
>>> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>>>
>>> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those
>>> where it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease 
>>> shifts
>>> from the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation
>>> phase
>>> 
>>> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness 
>>> even
>>> when it is given late.
>>>
>>> Given the well-established safety
>>> 
>>> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>>>
>>> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
>>> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted
>>> per patient
>>> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0
>>> wasted per patient
>>>
>>> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
>>> decision is clear.
>>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>>
>> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just
>> be prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>>
>> But contact them
>>
>
> Find out what from the WHO?
>

 Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
 re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and
 the website. PGC

>

>>> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
>>> have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
>>> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>>>
>>> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
>>> value.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Your table above presents a false dichotomy.
>>
>
> It either works or doesn't. That's two options. Unless you can point out a
> third one that I missed.
>

It is a false dichotomy, because it misses the nuance that it might be
useful with early administration, but is not a cure, and does not save
lives.

>
>
>> There is no evidence that use of HCQ is effective as a cure for COVID-19.
>>
>
> "No evidence" is a rather poor way to describe "*100% of scientific
> studies that have investigated it's early administration*" (see:
> https://c19study.com/ )
>

Having lots of studies does not prove that something works. They may not
present any evidence at all for efficacy as a cure.

It was only ever suggested that it might act prophylactically, or in relief
>> of some early stage symptoms. Decision theory is only useful if you don't
>> misrepresent the facts
>>
>
> What is misrepresented by the table? Either it works or it doesn't.
>

False dichotomy, as explained.

Bruce

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQF8zgJS0D-a6BsHjm1j3xWs8voQjpDAcCvgAMpqe8Gvw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:13 PM Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

 On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:

> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>
>> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
>> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
>> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>>
>> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those
>> where it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease 
>> shifts
>> from the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation
>> phase
>> 
>> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness 
>> even
>> when it is given late.
>>
>> Given the well-established safety
>> 
>> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>>
>> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
>> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted
>> per patient
>> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted
>> per patient
>>
>> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
>> decision is clear.
>>
>
>
> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>
> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just
> be prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>
> But contact them
>

 Find out what from the WHO?

>>>
>>> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
>>> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and
>>> the website. PGC
>>>

>>>
>> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
>> have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
>> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>>
>> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
>> value.
>>
>
>
> Your table above presents a false dichotomy.
>

It either works or doesn't. That's two options. Unless you can point out a
third one that I missed.


> There is no evidence that use of HCQ is effective as a cure for COVID-19.
>

"No evidence" is a rather poor way to describe "*100% of scientific studies
that have investigated it's early administration*" (see:
https://c19study.com/ )


> It was only ever suggested that it might act prophylactically, or in
> relief of some early stage symptoms. Decision theory is only useful if you
> don't misrepresent the facts
>

What is misrepresented by the table? Either it works or it doesn't.

Jason


>
> Bruce
>
>>
>> The very link you provided says they only cancelled only the late stage
>> testing. They are continuing early and prophylactic use tests.
>>
>> "This decision applies only to the conduct of the Solidarity trial in
>> hospitalized patients and does not affect the possible evaluation in other
>> studies of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized
>> patients or as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19."
>>
>>
>> Jason
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQcsQkAu08HJMY%2BHN9xG6NDx-vc57o_FoSCLV%3DU2Z70MQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUjjG7YX3Hq029uyUVcU2HROt7HUrmnfo%2BEL4S7ovexyhg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread Bruce Kellett

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 10:49 AM Jason Resch  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>>>
 On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>
> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where
> it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from
> the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase
> 
> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness 
> even
> when it is given late.
>
> Given the well-established safety
> 
> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>
> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted
> per patient
> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted
> per patient
>
> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
> decision is clear.
>


 https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19

 Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be
 prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.

 But contact them

>>>
>>> Find out what from the WHO?
>>>
>>
>> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
>> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and
>> the website. PGC
>>
>>>
>>
> It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and
> have demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is
> mixed, the science on its safety is clear.
>
> Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected
> value.
>


Your table above presents a false dichotomy. There is no evidence that use
of HCQ is effective as a cure for COVID-19. It was only ever suggested that
it might act prophylactically, or in relief of some early stage symptoms.
Decision theory is only useful if you don't misrepresent the facts

Bruce

>
> The very link you provided says they only cancelled only the late stage
> testing. They are continuing early and prophylactic use tests.
>
> "This decision applies only to the conduct of the Solidarity trial in
> hospitalized patients and does not affect the possible evaluation in other
> studies of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized
> patients or as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19."
>
>
> Jason
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQcsQkAu08HJMY%2BHN9xG6NDx-vc57o_FoSCLV%3DU2Z70MQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:37 PM PGC  wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:

 There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at
 giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
 beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/

 The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where
 it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from
 the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase
 
 (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even
 when it is given late.

 Given the well-established safety
 
 record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:

 HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
 HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted
 per patient
 HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted
 per patient

 Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
 decision is clear.

>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>>>
>>> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be
>>> prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>>>
>>> But contact them
>>>
>>
>> Find out what from the WHO?
>>
>
> Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should
> re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and
> the website. PGC
>
>>
>
It's purely a decision theory problem. They WHO is not infallible (and have
demonstrated that recently), the science on HCQs effectiveness is mixed,
the science on its safety is clear.

Given that there is a clearly optimal decision with a higher expected value.

The very link you provided says they only cancelled only the late stage
testing. They are continuing early and prophylactic use tests.

"This decision applies only to the conduct of the Solidarity trial in
hospitalized patients and does not affect the possible evaluation in other
studies of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized
patients or as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19."


Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUiQtZttiHSVszjVzUWyjZf60wUTPJwS8AYVFytgjj-gYQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread PGC



On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 2:26:40 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC > 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at 
>>> giving it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was 
>>> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>>>
>>> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where 
>>> it is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from 
>>> the viral replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even 
>>> when it is given late.
>>>
>>> Given the well-established safety 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>>>
>>> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
>>> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted per 
>>> patient
>>> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted 
>>> per patient
>>>
>>> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the 
>>> decision is clear.
>>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>>
>> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be 
>> prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>>
>> But contact them
>>
>
> Find out what from the WHO? 
>

Why they discontinued the treatment arm and why you think they should 
re-establish it (again btw) to save thousands of lives, with your table and 
the website. PGC

>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1030b5a6-b100-4377-b2c1-fbbbc28cc3cfo%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:20 PM PGC  wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>>
>> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at giving
>> it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
>> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>>
>> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where it
>> is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from the 
>> viral
>> replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase
>> 
>> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even
>> when it is given late.
>>
>> Given the well-established safety
>> 
>> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>>
>> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
>> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted per
>> patient
>> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted per
>> patient
>>
>> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
>> decision is clear.
>>
>
>
> https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
>
> Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be
> prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.
>
> But contact them
>

Find out what from the WHO?

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUgr44E7y3_qc6XA1v6K%2Bv4H348oRj%2BRxCXpVE4e2%2BmQWg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread PGC



On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 1:12:49 AM UTC+2, Jason wrote:
>
> There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at giving 
> it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was 
> beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/
>
> The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where it 
> is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from the 
> viral 
> replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase 
> 
>  
> (see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even 
> when it is given late.
>
> Given the well-established safety 
>  
> record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:
>
> HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
> HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted per 
> patient
> HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted per 
> patient
>
> Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the 
> decision is clear.
>

https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-07-2020-who-discontinues-hydroxychloroquine-and-lopinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19

Why not find out from the WHO or the steering committee itself? Just be 
prepared to wait as I believe they are somewhat busy.

But contact them if you feel the need. PGC
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3aec74a0-08c9-4b92-b784-62d3abd223e6o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

2020-07-31 Thread Russell Standish

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 07:42:28PM +, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
> Yeah, I am sure the competent hand of Joe Biden will solve everything...   You
> haven't cited what Germany and Australia are doing differently than the US
> either. Can you please list what these lands are doing so well?  

I think in Australia's case, our "Trump mini-me" government finally
grew a brain and listened to the health experts, after their total
mishandling of the bushfire debacle over summer.

It also helps that we're a little more likely accept restrictions for
the sake of the common good than our American friends. Not as much as
some Asian cultures, though.

And finally, being an "island continent" makes it easier to shut our
borders and control who comes into the country.

Cheers
-- 

Dr Russell StandishPhone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
  http://www.hpcoders.com.au

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/20200731231632.GA17238%40zen.

Re: Sharpiegate

There have been 65 studies on HCQ. Of all the tests that looked at giving
it early in the disease, or prophylactically, they showed HCQ was
beneficial. This site summarizes them all: https://c19study.com/

The only studies that have shown HCQ to be ineffective are those where it
is given late in the disease progression (when the disease shifts from
the viral
replication phase to an immune system dysregulation phase

(see page 2)). Even then, 61% of studies have shown some effectiveness even
when it is given late.

Given the well-established safety

record of HCQ, this is the dilemma we face:

HCQ works HCQ doesn't work
HCQ widely dispensed 10,000s of thousands of lives saved $20 wasted per
patient
HCQ use restricted 10,000s of thousands of needless deaths $0 wasted per
patient

Even in the face of impartial information on its effectiveness, the
decision is clear.

Jason


On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 5:52 PM PGC  wrote:

>
>
> On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 3:58:02 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30 Jul 2020, at 22:59, PGC  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 10:52:09 PM UTC+2 Brent wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/30/2020 1:02 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
>>>
>>> Refute this Telmo-
>>> https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
>>>
>>> https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext
>>>
>>> One viewer here indicated this was not a study-but it is a study indeed
>>> concluding the benefits of Hydro.
>>>
>>> Now what do I think? If it works it works, and if it doesn't it doesn't.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's just false.  Some things work on some infections in some people
>>> using some protocols of care.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed. Ongoing large scale international clinical trials are what they
>> are. Nobody claims that they or the papers in their wake are perfect, but
>> to pretend that a few tiny studies are "in need of refutation" or that the
>> world's epidemiological community is orchestrating conspiracies without
>> evidence like some on Twitter and on social media tend to peddle, is naive
>> or evidence of the effectivity of disinformation, *not evidence of
>> effectivity of medication*.
>>
>>
>> OK in principle. But we can also look at the map of the evolution of the
>> virus in country using it and not using it. My own country has used it,
>> France has used it, then change its mind, a number of time.
>> We can also take into account that the US FDA has lied about “not
>> evidence of effectivity of cannabis” since about a century. It is only very
>> recently that it has admit its effectivity for some disease in some public
>> way (it accepted it more discreetly for some rich patients since long
>> though).
>>
>>
>>
>> But if Telmo and/or Mitch need, they can always get in touch with their
>> closest epidemiologists/docs and ask for the data and emails, and inform
>> the coordinating committee of their findings and worries, citing who they
>> wish. While data of the majority of ongoing trials and appropriate
>> epidemiological discourse may not be accessible on the net or published
>> ("ongoing" being somewhat relevant...), it isn't classified or anything. PGC
>>
>>
>>
>> I have done that a little bit, but it is hard to interpret. A biologist
>> friend of mine seems to believe that the Canadian studies showing that
>> Hydroxychoroquine is better than Remdesevir is rather serious. The amount
>> of money hidden in the pharmaceutical debate is so big that the
>> misinformation is perpetual. But you are right: it is not classified, and
>> even just googling on the net shows that hydroxychloroquine, when used
>> convenably, *might* be better than some other medication, and perhaps
>> cannabis is still better (as more and more studies seem to show).
>>
>
> If you, Mitch, Telmo, your biologist friend, or Trump have data concerning
> effectiveness of HCQ with significant sample sizes in randomized
> placebo-controlled trials, and can demonstrate that said trials are free of
> epidemiologists' long lists of possible issues/bias, then the only thing
> stopping you guys from stepping forward and making world history as
> non-professionals is your own minds. PGC
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/84ac1e66-92eb-4cf8-85e7-0f9e74f1c3ceo%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Ev

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread PGC



On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 3:58:02 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 30 Jul 2020, at 22:59, PGC > wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 10:52:09 PM UTC+2 Brent wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 7/30/2020 1:02 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
>>
>> Refute this Telmo- 
>> https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
>>
>> https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext
>>
>> One viewer here indicated this was not a study-but it is a study indeed 
>> concluding the benefits of Hydro. 
>>
>> Now what do I think? If it works it works, and if it doesn't it doesn't. 
>>
>>
>> That's just false.  Some things work on some infections in some people 
>> using some protocols of care.  
>>
>
> Agreed. Ongoing large scale international clinical trials are what they 
> are. Nobody claims that they or the papers in their wake are perfect, but 
> to pretend that a few tiny studies are "in need of refutation" or that the 
> world's epidemiological community is orchestrating conspiracies without 
> evidence like some on Twitter and on social media tend to peddle, is naive 
> or evidence of the effectivity of disinformation, *not evidence of 
> effectivity of medication*. 
>
>
> OK in principle. But we can also look at the map of the evolution of the 
> virus in country using it and not using it. My own country has used it, 
> France has used it, then change its mind, a number of time.
> We can also take into account that the US FDA has lied about “not evidence 
> of effectivity of cannabis” since about a century. It is only very recently 
> that it has admit its effectivity for some disease in some public way (it 
> accepted it more discreetly for some rich patients since long though).
>
>
>
> But if Telmo and/or Mitch need, they can always get in touch with their 
> closest epidemiologists/docs and ask for the data and emails, and inform 
> the coordinating committee of their findings and worries, citing who they 
> wish. While data of the majority of ongoing trials and appropriate 
> epidemiological discourse may not be accessible on the net or published 
> ("ongoing" being somewhat relevant...), it isn't classified or anything. PGC
>
>
>
> I have done that a little bit, but it is hard to interpret. A biologist 
> friend of mine seems to believe that the Canadian studies showing that 
> Hydroxychoroquine is better than Remdesevir is rather serious. The amount 
> of money hidden in the pharmaceutical debate is so big that the 
> misinformation is perpetual. But you are right: it is not classified, and 
> even just googling on the net shows that hydroxychloroquine, when used 
> convenably, *might* be better than some other medication, and perhaps 
> cannabis is still better (as more and more studies seem to show).
>

If you, Mitch, Telmo, your biologist friend, or Trump have data concerning 
effectiveness of HCQ with significant sample sizes in randomized 
placebo-controlled trials, and can demonstrate that said trials are free of 
epidemiologists' long lists of possible issues/bias, then the only thing 
stopping you guys from stepping forward and making world history as 
non-professionals is your own minds. PGC



  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/84ac1e66-92eb-4cf8-85e7-0f9e74f1c3ceo%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

THC, like alcohol is a powerful agent, and does have some medicinal effects as 
noted. There are medical reasons pro and con to apply or avoid any drug. I am 
more impressed by the 50 thousand physicians around the globe who take it as a 
preventative, or at treatment for patients. If we lose sight over what may be 
effective, over ideological loyalty, then all we do is say, My religion won't 
allow it because Orange man Bad! If it doesn't work, then the hell with it, 
onward to better treatments and vaccines. 

-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2020 9:19 am
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate



On 29 Jul 2020, at 14:00, John Clark  wrote:
The following is from the July 10 issue of the journal Science and shows just 
how far Donald Trump is willing to corrupt science just so he doesn't have to 
admit he was wrong: 
NOAA watchdog chides agency for how it handled Hurricane Dorian’s ‘Sharpiegate’
And meanwhile just yesterday Trump was back on national television pushing a 
quack cure for COVID-19 (hydroxychloroquine) on millions of Americans and using 
as his "very impressive evidence" testimony of a doctor who believes facemasks 
are unnecessary, and many illnesses are caused by people having sex in their 
dreams with demons and witches, and the COVID-19 vaccines in development are 
made of DNA from space alien's demon sperm to make people less religious.  

The good doctor also believes the US government is not run by human beings but 
by creatures called "reptilians"... come to think of it ... she may not be 
entirely wrong on that last point.




Hmm… you might need to be more careful on this, because it is invalid to say 
that A is false because P asserts it using the fact that P said (many) false 
statements. You can certainly doubt it for that reason, but sometimes, some 
liars can say some truth.
About hydroxychloroquine, by taking an entire afternoon a while ago to Google 
on "countries, hydoxychloroquine chloroquine coronavirus covid-19", my current 
position is that the studies made in cannada might be right, and they 
corroborate most statements made by Didier Raoult in Marseilles ( guy who 
published 2000 papers and is well seen and listen by its peers). 
Hydroxychloroquine is not a panacea at all, but it eems slightly better than 
Remdesevir (used in the US). Also cannabis seems to be slightly better than 
hydroxychloroquine.It does seem that the countries using hydroxychlroquine (in 
fact almost all) manage better the crisis than those who did not, but it is 
hard to conclude anything definite, as many others factors are in play. I have 
no real opinion on this, but some talk like if they knew the “obvious truth”.
About Cannabis, the work by Mechoulam (the discovers of THC and of its agonist 
in the brain/immune system) shows that it is an immune-stimulant, as opposed to 
alcohol which is known since long to be an immune-depressant, in which case it 
is criminal to not inform the people on this during a pandemic. It is time to 
switch the recreative use of alcohol and cannabis!
I certainly doubt any statements about medication made by the FDA. They lie too 
much since too long, and indeed, I think that they are the one responsible for 
the arrival of Trump and that type of bandits who don’t even tray to hide their 
criminal conducts.
Brno





John K Clark
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3NTtouiP6tPBLKTFpYcWbtWWCzhabKgxK%2BmvcGpZHUow%40mail.gmail.com.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/363F62C0-B1DD-4319-8172-A83CF3671DC2%40ulb.ac.be.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2129704503.8581548.1596233298474%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

You really must read up on your history more Bruno, That term comes from the 
nazis and not I. Here is a 2015 Scientific American article reviewing a book by 
Philip Ball,  The Struggle for the Soul of Physics. 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-2-pro-nazi-nobelists-attacked-einstein-s-jewish-science-excerpt1/
I am accusing the politicization of medical science and the observations of 
physicians who have claimed that hydro can be helpful. I  have no opposition to 
anything that can help, whether Donald Trump likes it or not? The opposition 
here is more concerned with defeating the president in the election, blaming 
him for democrat arson and looting, so as to secure the election for their 
leaders, Kamala Harris, the real presidential candidate, and Joe Biden, their 
figurehead. Thus, if orange dude recommended aspirin as a blood thinner for 
suspected heart attacks, those here, would oppose it vehemently.


-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2020 9:30 am
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate



On 30 Jul 2020, at 20:17, spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:
Actually it is a summary. The conclusion is that Hydro can be efficacious is 
50-70% of the cases. This is now a time AAAS Science's opinion aside (pharma 
funded?) when most experts regarding covid have been proven wrong, and perhaps 
deliberately on their part. Politicized science is not science at all. 

Right. Like politicised religion is not religion at all. In fact those get 
transformed, when politicised, into tools to prevent researches in the domain, 
and combat any concurrent ideas.


Whether it's Jewish Physics, or Lysenko's biology, 

Lyssenko’s biology was state authoritarian biology. It has led to the death of 
30 millions of people in the USSR (the biggest famine due to "human error”).
I have no clue what you mean by Jewish Physics. Einstein?

Bruno


or even threats of climate collapse. To quote Galileo, It Moves, Still. Its 
either true or not? Who is ever president notwithstanding.


-Original Message-
From: Lawrence Crowell 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 7:57 am
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:04:07 PM UTC-5 spudb...@aol.com wrote:

Again, regarding, Hydroxychloroquine, please refute:  

https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7330574/



I am not near enough of a bio-medical scientist to comment on these papers and 
what might be wrong with these. The last is just the NIH listing of papers and 
their abstracts or briefs. This is not an endorsement of the results. I am just 
aware results or claims of such results showing an efficacy for 
hydroxychloriquine are a minority report. The at large verdict is opposite.
LC 
-Original Message-
From: Lawrence Crowell 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2020 7:55 pm
Subject: Re: Sharpiegate

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:01:12 AM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

The following is from the July 10 issue of the journal Science and shows just 
how far Donald Trump is willing to corrupt science just so he doesn't have to 
admit he was wrong: 
NOAA watchdog chides agency for how it handled Hurricane Dorian’s ‘Sharpiegate’

It is a case of how people become sycophants for t'Rump. 

And meanwhile just yesterday Trump was back on national television pushing a 
quack cure for COVID-19 (hydroxychloroquine) on millions of Americans and using 
as his "very impressive evidence" testimony of a doctor who believes facemasks 
are unnecessary, and many illnesses are caused by people having sex in their 
dreams with demons and witches, and the COVID-19 vaccines in development are 
made of DNA from space alien's demon sperm to make people less religious.  

It is my understanding that double-blind tests of hydroxycholoroqune have shown 
no efficacy for this and can't be judged an effective treatment of Covid-19. 
This is in contrast to the other links sent in this thread. Don-the-Con t'Rump 
bought shares of stock from a company in India back when he was met with PM 
Modi. Hey, wait! He violated the emoluments clause, but then again who pays 
attention to that old rag called the Constitution these days?
The Lizard men or Saurians from outer space! This has been around for a while. 
I remember running into this about 20 years ago. It is a crazy idea spun by a 
British media sports reporter. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilian_conspiracy_theory  

LC 


The good doctor also believes the US government is not run by human beings but 
by creatures called "reptilians"... come to think of it ... she may not be 
entirely wrong on that last point.

John K Clark
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ever

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

No they haven't Bruno. Dems are closed mouthed regarding riots looting arson. 
It is all happening in their cities, it it tolerated, at least, if not 
endorsed. 

All democrats politicians have condemned the violence in the street. In 
Portland we have seen many videos showing that “police” attacked the peaceful 
protesters, and provoked them. It was an operation of the type “adding oil on 
the fire”.The very look of that “police”, and the way they acted is quite 
worrisome. Doubly so when it comes from a guy who has been mean with almost all 
leaders of a democracy, and never about Putin, MBS (Saudi), Young, … Trump is 
fighting against the Democracies and against the US constitution.



-Original Message-
From: Bruno Marchal 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2020 7:52 am
Subject: Re: Trump suggests delaying the election



On 30 Jul 2020, at 20:33, spudboy100 via Everything List 
 wrote:
Eh! Derangement syndrome again. Yet, its democrat politicians encouraging the 
Vanguard of the Proletariat to burn and loot your center cities, to say, damage 
the economy, so orange man won't be elected.

?
All democrats politicians have condemned the violence in the street. In 
Portland we have seen many videos showing that “police” attacked the peaceful 
protesters, and provoked them. It was an operation of the type “adding oil on 
the fire”.The very look of that “police”, and the way they acted is quite 
worrisome. Doubly so when it comes from a guy who has been mean with almost all 
leaders of a democracy, and never about Putin, MBS (Saudi), Young, … Trump is 
fighting against the Democracies and against the US constitution.




 There is strong evidence of mail ballots mysteriously gone missing, so I doubt 
if the members of the postal union can be trusted to deliver ballots.

They should use e-mails. That is the safer, both for the health of people, and 
it is easier to make most people voting, and voting only once. I am not sure 
why they don’t do that.




 What I suspect is that beyond legal challenges that are sure to occur, 
whomever appears to win. Thus, what was the US will descend into open civil 
conflict. It's not about the orange real estate dude, it's about the rest of 
us. For instance, I am not a social conservative at all. I hold that your Alcor 
bet might be a smart one, or that your estimation that humanity  will cause the 
development of Matrioshka brains, eventually, accurate. As of now, the Vanguard 
Proles are causing discouragement with the archetypal Hillary voter (2016) and 
causing a drop out for Biden, (Kamala) because they really don't wish 
BLM-Antifa governance. Since the police pulled out of the Millwaukee 
convention, I suspect that NOI's Fruit of Islam will do the policing there. 
Call it  a precursor. 


I agree that the left is blind on “islamism” coming from the Middle East, which 
is not islam, but comes directly from the German nazi propaganda, and the fact 
the Europeans and Americans after the WW II have subtracted Al Husseini and the 
Muslim Brotherhood from the Nuremberg trial. The conflict in the Middle-East is 
a conflict agains nazis, not again Islam nor again Arabs. Here the left is very 
often blind, and more homophobia, antisemite, etc,  than the right. I agree 
that Trumps politics is better (for the poor) than the left one. But the way 
Trump implement it makes it hard for the latinos and the black, and the 
consumer of medications, to get any of the benefits, and Trump seems to work 
hard to add chaos and to generate a civil war, if only to distract us from the 
rest, and keep his (authoritarian) power. Trump is both a con artist and a 
pervert narcissist. He is, Imo, extremely dangerous. He is shifting the 
left-right debate into an extremist-moderate fight. 
Bruno




-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 9:56 am
Subject: Trump suggests delaying the election

Trump just Tweeted:
"With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will 
be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great 
embarrassment to the USA, Delay the Election until people can properly, 
securely and safely vote???"

Trump floats delaying election despite lack of authority to do so

John K Clark-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2UrSCmDARGdS09gcNu-4JRvHQT9GPWQXD2Ex7QD_7c_g%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web v

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

Yeah, I am sure the competent hand of Joe Biden will solve everything...   You 
haven't cited what Germany and Australia are doing differently than the US 
either. Can you please list what these lands are doing so well?  

-Original Message-
From: John Clark 
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2020 5:31 am
Subject: Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 6:34 PM Mr. Spudboy via Everything List 
 wrote:

> I have to note is that democrat mayors and governors are letting their cities 
> burn, and doing mostly nothing. [...] Are there riots, arson, and mayhem, yes 
> or no?
 Mr. Spudboy, you need to keep things in perspective. All the "riots arson and 
mayhem" from all the "democrat mayors and governors letting their cities burn" 
produced a grand total of 2 deaths, meanwhile Trump's astoundingly incompetent 
response to the COVID-19 pandemic has so far killed 155,285 Americans and the 
numbers are growing fast; yesterday alone 1,465 died. As of today you'd need 
77,643 more riots to equal the virus death toll, by tomorrow you'd need more. 
In comparison yesterday in Germany only 4 died of the virus and only 9,221 
during the entire pandemic.

If you want to talk money all the "riots arson and mayhem" combined produced 
500 million dollars in property damage, and that's just a rounding error on the 
scale of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, But Trump's bungling of the 
pandemic caused the GDP to decline by 34.3% or 2.15 million million dollars, 
you'd need 4,300 more riots to equal it. By comparison Germany's GDP declined 
by 10.1%, Australia's GDP declined by 0.3%, and China's GDP increased by 3.2%. 
You know what, I'm starting to think Trump may not be making America great 
again.

John K Clark-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2QR1--MEaj3i8PRwD%3D6ZgzKwGsu3b5K9eya34P8gKKWQ%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/252802096.404649.1596224548417%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

Choke holds out are ok with me, now will the local dems cease and desist crime, 
murder & arson in their zones? Look to Lighfoot as an eample.

-Original Message-
From: Alan Grayson 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 9:48 pm
Subject: Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

If the republican Senate can't illegalize choke holds, maybe it's time to burn 
down a few federal courts to send a message. AG

On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 4:40:38 PM UTC-6, spudb...@aol.com wrote:

Its happening everywhere the democrats run the center cities, everywhere. Not 
just Chicago, or Detroit, but everywhere the dem klan rules. Team dem is good 
with fire and smoke, and perhaps unless your are involved with the DNC Planning 
Committee (?) the dems at governor and city level are doing what appeal to the 
democrat voter. Alinsky's Rule 6Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. 
"If your people aren't having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong 
with the tactic."
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all 
events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the 
development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the 
opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your 
advantage."
Orange Man didn't fall for the DNC Kent State/Jackson State replay of May 1970. 
Dude's quite calculating indeed!

-Original Message-
From: Alan Grayson 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 4:21 pm
Subject: Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

You've been drinking the kool-aid. I've never heard one democratic politician 
advocating violence. Not one; never. Yet you claim to be a mind reader, by 
referencing radical Black Panthers of the 1960's as if that represents the BLM. 
Democrats know that violence will discredit the BLM movement. You want to do a 
broad-brush denigration of a righteous movement. There are always fringe 
elements that want violence, but it's people like you who buy Trump's BS and 
support depriving the vast majority of Americans their First Amendment rights, 
as what happened in Lafayette Square a few weeks ago. It was patently obvious 
that the unmarked police were inciting violence. I saw it as it was happening! 
If DiBlasio isn't doing enough in NYC to curtail violence, he should be called 
out for it. But this isn't what you're doing. Did it ever occur to you, that 
there would be less violence if the republicans in the Senate would pass a 
police reform bill, but they refuse even to outlaw the choke hold? Neither does 
Trump endorse it. AG
On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 1:47:24 PM UTC-6, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
Alan, especially relying on mere words, over rational actions, (we're talking 
95% lawyers who are politicians here) we can see the policy is. It's a rehash 
of the Eldridge Cleaver's statement of "Burn Baby Burn!," circa 1965 Watts and 
Detroit "race: riots. I do remember LA 1992 Riot Fan and provocateur, Rep 
Maxine Waters, saying similar things last week. When Orange Man says things 
like "beautiful," I smile and nod because, just because we all were born upon a 
night, it wasn't last night. Not standing up to people (say, DiBlasio) 
arresting arsonists and looters on the spot, speaks intent, even, repeated 
across every democratic party zone (Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, NYC, 
Louisville, LA, Denver..etc). The kind of lying about intent was also seen 
60-70 years ago during the genuine civil rights marches and integration, Favus, 
George Wallace, oh, yes and democratic party KKK Kleagle, Senator Robert Byrd 
from West Virginia. If you need me to, I can look up some dem statements 
endorsing or sympathizing with rioters, looters, arsonists, and now terrorists 
(Smells like Weatherman Faction SDS, Symbionese Liberation Army revived, also 
Black Panthers). I do wonder what Bruno will think when we start breaking 
apart? Will he have expected this, from such "crazy Ami's," or will it be a 
shock? Interesting, huh?
-Original Message-
From: Alan Grayson 
To: Everything List 
Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 2:53 pm
Subject: Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

Strong evidence? What is it? Which democrat politicians are encouraging 
looting? I can't recall a single one advocating that. Not one! AG

On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 12:33:24 PM UTC-6, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
Eh! Derangement syndrome again. Yet, its democrat politicians encouraging the 
Vanguard of the Proletariat to burn and loot your center cities, to say, damage 
the economy, so orange man won't be elected. There is strong evidence of mail 
ballots mysteriously gone missing, so I doubt if the members of the postal 
union can be trusted to deliver ballots. What I suspect is that beyond legal 
challenges that are sure to occur, whomever appears to win. Thus, what was the 
US will descend into open civil conflict. It's not about the orange real estate 
dude, it's about the rest of us. For instance, I am n

Re: Sharpiegate

2020-07-31 Thread Lawrence Crowell

There is a huge range of quackery in medicine, and the 1970s claim that 
apricot pits cure cancer, or there is some compound extracted from them, 
persists to this day. It is similar and bigger than the quasi-physics that 
plagues the web. I tend to consider the source for claims and whether the 
claim is indeed a zombie. I am not sure if hydroxychloriquine is a zombie 
treatment for Covid, but it appears to be heading that way. The problem 
with zombies, is they can be killed, but they come back. It is a bit like 
shooting ducks in a carnival shooting gallery; they can be shot, but they 
pop back up. A person who promotes zombie science, such as Fred Singer who 
denies CO2 warming, just cannot be taken seriously. After somebody has 
demonstrated a history of this sort of thing you just ignore them.

LC

On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 9:21:27 AM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:19 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>
> >  it is invalid to say that A is false because P asserts it
>
>
> There is more to intelligence than just deduction, there is also induction 
> which is at least as powerful. If everything P has asserted in the past has 
> been shown to be false and now P asserts A then you can conclude that A is 
> probably, although not certainly, also false. That's why most intelligent 
> people wouldn't accept medical advice from somebody who in the past has 
> asserted that vaccines are made from space alien sperm to make people less 
> religious, and ovarian cysts are caused by woman dreaming about having 
> sex with deamons. But Trump is fine with taking such advice because Trump 
> is not intelligent.
>
> John K Clark
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/11925d39-763d-4c8c-a621-cdc9b0aec4d5n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: soul swap

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 6:45 AM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

*> Essentially it is a magical idea. This is being done by a genie, which
> is a magical*

OK if you wanna call it that, but this is the sort of magic that works and
can be repeated, there is a name for that type of magic, it's called
"science".

*>  being on par with angels and the like. *

No, angels use a different type of magic, the type that doesn't work worth
a damn.

*> If the brain were a hard wired systems it might make sense that a mind
> could be downloaded as a set of files and programs and transferred to
> another brain. However, brains physically adapt and change according to
> learning.*

And computers physically change whenever you load a new file into one, parts
in the memory that previously had no Electrical charge now have one, and
other parts that previously had an Electrical charge no longer have one,
and Electrical charge is physical. An array of switches is physical too,
and that is basically what the Internet is. So I failed to see the
distinction you're trying to make.

John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0F_Ou_hbgajt3iDiryoExghM%2Bd-%2Bb4YugfE%3DzPMqC-mg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: soul swap

2020-07-31 Thread 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List

On 7/31/2020 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Equality means, at least in my mind in this discussion, equality of
right. It is the idea that everyone obeys to the law, especially at
the top who has to give the example. It means same amount of money for
the same amount of work, independently of the genre, colour skin, etc.

It does not mean “freedom of religion” which is an apparently nice
idea, but in practice it is the legalisation of moral harassment, the
legalisation of lies, etc. In fact, freedom of religion is almost the
same as the interdiction to use reason in theology, and is the main
trick of most tyrants and pressure groups.

Equality of right is what should normally prevent the “extremely
equal” setting, when we are asked to forget how different we really are.

As I would expect of a logician, you avoid the operational meanings. A
right, must be something one has the power to do or refrain from doing,
and society defends this choice. So it is quite different from
"everyone obeys the same law" and "gets the same pay for the same amount
of work". In many cases it is a freedom from laws. I think that was
the great advance of the Enlightenment, the rejection of the medieval,
theocratic idea that there was a only one (holy) way to do everything
and the idea of sin extended into every facet of life, even into
thought. The Enlightenment and the U.S. Constitution built in the
concept of a private realm and a limited public/government realm.

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/88a1adfd-e084-3df7-7764-89d0b5397bef%40verizon.net.

Re: Sharpiegate

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:19 AM Bruno Marchal  wrote:

>  it is invalid to say that A is false because P asserts it


There is more to intelligence than just deduction, there is also induction
which is at least as powerful. If everything P has asserted in the past has
been shown to be false and now P asserts A then you can conclude that A is
probably, although not certainly, also false. That's why most intelligent
people wouldn't accept medical advice from somebody who in the past has
asserted that vaccines are made from space alien sperm to make people less
religious, and ovarian cysts are caused by woman dreaming about having sex
with deamons. But Trump is fine with taking such advice because Trump is
not intelligent.

John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv20eCO7JVkP%3DtxybWGkiMzQ53xeYBWgnHhPFGiRCuD58g%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Sharpiegate

> On 30 Jul 2020, at 22:59, PGC  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 10:52:09 PM UTC+2 Brent wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/30/2020 1:02 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
>> Refute this Telmo-
>> https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study 
>> 
>> 
>> https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext 
>> 
>> 
>> One viewer here indicated this was not a study-but it is a study indeed 
>> concluding the benefits of Hydro. 
>> 
>> Now what do I think? If it works it works, and if it doesn't it doesn't.
> 
> That's just false.  Some things work on some infections in some people using 
> some protocols of care.  
> 
> Agreed. Ongoing large scale international clinical trials are what they are. 
> Nobody claims that they or the papers in their wake are perfect, but to 
> pretend that a few tiny studies are "in need of refutation" or that the 
> world's epidemiological community is orchestrating conspiracies without 
> evidence like some on Twitter and on social media tend to peddle, is naive or 
> evidence of the effectivity of disinformation, not evidence of effectivity of 
> medication. 

OK in principle. But we can also look at the map of the evolution of the virus 
in country using it and not using it. My own country has used it, France has 
used it, then change its mind, a number of time.
We can also take into account that the US FDA has lied about “not evidence of 
effectivity of cannabis” since about a century. It is only very recently that 
it has admit its effectivity for some disease in some public way (it accepted 
it more discreetly for some rich patients since long though).

> 
> But if Telmo and/or Mitch need, they can always get in touch with their 
> closest epidemiologists/docs and ask for the data and emails, and inform the 
> coordinating committee of their findings and worries, citing who they wish. 
> While data of the majority of ongoing trials and appropriate epidemiological 
> discourse may not be accessible on the net or published ("ongoing" being 
> somewhat relevant...), it isn't classified or anything. PGC

I have done that a little bit, but it is hard to interpret. A biologist friend 
of mine seems to believe that the Canadian studies showing that 
Hydroxychoroquine is better than Remdesevir is rather serious. The amount of 
money hidden in the pharmaceutical debate is so big that the misinformation is 
perpetual. But you are right: it is not classified, and even just googling on 
the net shows that hydroxychloroquine, when used convenably, *might* be better 
than some other medication, and perhaps cannabis is still better (as more and 
more studies seem to show).

Bruno

>  
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/7b0f1042-5393-4803-a0ed-0267dce99170n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/89274F3F-2275-47B2-8B8C-7425EB8A4C43%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Sharpiegate


> On 30 Jul 2020, at 22:23, Lawrence Crowell  
> wrote:
> 
> I am not going to pass judgment on this. I can't really do that. I can only 
> say that this is a minority report. The general consensus I am hearing

… in the US. Not in Europe and Asia, who use hydroxychloroquine. It is not seen 
as a panacea, but as less dangerous than Remdesvir, and slightly better. But 
the hydoxychoroquine needs to be used with a precise protocol, before some 
organ are infected, or more aptly, destroyed by an immune-reaction of the 
patient itself. Once the lungs are destroyed, it seems that there is no more 
virus in the body of the patient. Most death by the covid-29 are due to 
“allergic” type of reaction.



> is that a compound that changes the pH of blood in a way that slows the 
> progress of a protistan responsible for malaria has no influence on a corona 
> virus.

OK. But that is not an argument to say that it does not work (better than other 
medication in use).

It is a complex debate, but when I find logic error in negative argument, I 
decide to be very vigilant, on both sides of the issue.

Bruno



> 
> LC
> 
> On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 3:02:12 PM UTC-5 spudb...@aol.com wrote:
> Refute this Telmo-
> https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study 
> 
> 
> https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext 
> 
> 
> One viewer here indicated this was not a study-but it is a study indeed 
> concluding the benefits of Hydro. 
> 
> Now what do I think? If it works it works, and if it doesn't it doesn't. Do 
> the opponents of the old drug in question care if it works? Seemingly no, 
> they are just foaming at the mouth because Orange Dude endorsed it. If it 
> doesn't work, screw it. If it can help some people, keep it at hand. What 
> does John Clark care about? Orange Man Bad!  This has zero to do with 
> fighting the Wuhan flu. For the opponents of Orange Man nothing else matters. 
> Civil (US) Conflict? Next stop! Take care.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Telmo Menezes  >
> To: John Clark  >; 'Brent Meeker' via 
> Everything List  >
> Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 2:28 pm
> Subject: Re: Sharpiegate
> 
> 
> 
> Am Do, 30. Jul 2020, um 17:16, schrieb John Clark:
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 11:27 AM Telmo Menezes > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> > I disapprove of Trump and everything he stands for as much as you do. I 
>> > detest him. He is an incompetent narcissist, and his election as the 
>> > president of the USA was a nightmare come true.
>> 
>> Truer words were never spoken! 
>> 
>> > I think that the current extreme political polarization of all things is 
>> > doing damage to science. A symptom of this is that the epistemological 
>> > status of things such as the efficacy of hydroxychloriquine became 
>> > impossible to determine for those not deeply involved in the field, even 
>> > if scientifically literate and able to follow the papers.
>> 
>> Crackpots, and in that I would include Trump supporters and 
>> thehydroxychloroquine cure COVID-19 people, don't just dispute well 
>> established theories, they dispute the raw data itself. I've had otherwise 
>> intelligent people tell me that every epidemiologist in the world is wrong, 
>> and the entire scientific community is wrong, and even insist every bit of 
>> data we have about COVID-19 is wrong. Why would they do that? Because if the 
>> data was right they would have to radically change their worldview and face 
>> the fact that Donald Trump is not doing a good job. Changing one's worldview 
>> is quite painful for some people.
>> 
>> Nobody can be knowledgeable about everything, so if the vast majority of 
>> expert specialists in the world on a very complicated subject like 
>> epidemiology, agrees on something, people who have spent their life studying 
>> the subject, then I think they are much more likely to be correct then you 
>> or I are after we've only been studying the matter for 20 minutes or so. 
>> That's why people read scientific journals and believe that what they say is 
>> probably true even if they haven't personally carried out the experiments 
>> described in them. People that we trust, because they have proven to be 
>> right in the past, judge new research and if they think it's not valid they 
>> don't publish it in their journals, and if they think it is valid then they 
>> do. It's a web of trust, it's what the cryptographic program PGP uses to 
>> ensure that a public key really belongs to the person that it claims to. And 
>> history has shown the system, although not perfect, works pretty well most 
>> of the time, which is a hell of a lot better than most things work.
>> 
>> And by the way, I don't think Trump has spent even 20 minutes studying viral 
>> epidemiology or statistical theory in his entire life. 
> 
> I more or less agree with everything you say

Re: Sharpiegate


> On 30 Jul 2020, at 20:28, Telmo Menezes  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Am Do, 30. Jul 2020, um 17:16, schrieb John Clark:
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 11:27 AM Telmo Menezes > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> > I disapprove of Trump and everything he stands for as much as you do. I 
>> > detest him. He is an incompetent narcissist, and his election as the 
>> > president of the USA was a nightmare come true.
>> 
>> Truer words were never spoken! 
>> 
>> > I think that the current extreme political polarization of all things is 
>> > doing damage to science. A symptom of this is that the epistemological 
>> > status of things such as the efficacy of hydroxychloriquine became 
>> > impossible to determine for those not deeply involved in the field, even 
>> > if scientifically literate and able to follow the papers.
>> 
>> Crackpots, and in that I would include Trump supporters and 
>> thehydroxychloroquine cure COVID-19 people, don't just dispute well 
>> established theories, they dispute the raw data itself. I've had otherwise 
>> intelligent people tell me that every epidemiologist in the world is wrong, 
>> and the entire scientific community is wrong, and even insist every bit of 
>> data we have about COVID-19 is wrong. Why would they do that? Because if the 
>> data was right they would have to radically change their worldview and face 
>> the fact that Donald Trump is not doing a good job. Changing one's worldview 
>> is quite painful for some people.
>> 
>> Nobody can be knowledgeable about everything, so if the vast majority of 
>> expert specialists in the world on a very complicated subject like 
>> epidemiology, agrees on something, people who have spent their life studying 
>> the subject, then I think they are much more likely to be correct then you 
>> or I are after we've only been studying the matter for 20 minutes or so. 
>> That's why people read scientific journals and believe that what they say is 
>> probably true even if they haven't personally carried out the experiments 
>> described in them. People that we trust, because they have proven to be 
>> right in the past, judge new research and if they think it's not valid they 
>> don't publish it in their journals, and if they think it is valid then they 
>> do. It's a web of trust, it's what the cryptographic program PGP uses to 
>> ensure that a public key really belongs to the person that it claims to. And 
>> history has shown the system, although not perfect, works pretty well most 
>> of the time, which is a hell of a lot better than most things work.
>> 
>> And by the way, I don't think Trump has spent even 20 minutes studying viral 
>> epidemiology or statistical theory in his entire life. 
> 
> I more or less agree with everything you say. That is exactly why I worry 
> that incidents such as the Lancet retraction are damaging to the web of trust.

Personally, the lancet retraction augment the evidence that it is serious. They 
correct their mistake. The initial paper is more like what is the shame, and 
not all journal retracts their papers when they are disproved.

Personally, I will remain cautious about any “governmental talk on a 
medication” as long as prohibition exist.

Health should be separated from the state for the same reason than religion has 
to be separated from the state, at least in the democracies.

>From the accessible excerpt from the book by Mary Trump (Trump’s niece), I am 
>afraid that Trump has not spend even one minute to study anything. I think he 
>is con artist period, escaping forward a life of lies. He has nothing to lose. 
>November will be hot.

Bruno



> 
> Telmo
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/777296fb-a76b-4b8a-aef6-f8bb70c45aa4%40www.fastmail.com
>  
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6D064CB0-5D10-4E60-897A-B80C7404CC59%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Sharpiegate


> On 30 Jul 2020, at 20:17, spudboy100 via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Actually it is a summary. The conclusion is that Hydro can be efficacious is 
> 50-70% of the cases. This is now a time AAAS Science's opinion aside (pharma 
> funded?) when most experts regarding covid have been proven wrong, and 
> perhaps deliberately on their part. Politicized science is not science at all.

Right. Like politicised religion is not religion at all. In fact those get 
transformed, when politicised, into tools to prevent researches in the domain, 
and combat any concurrent ideas.


> Whether it's Jewish Physics, or Lysenko's biology,

Lyssenko’s biology was state authoritarian biology. It has led to the death of 
30 millions of people in the USSR (the biggest famine due to "human error”).

I have no clue what you mean by Jewish Physics. Einstein?


Bruno


> or even threats of climate collapse. To quote Galileo, It Moves, Still. Its 
> either true or not? Who is ever president notwithstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Lawrence Crowell 
> To: Everything List 
> Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 7:57 am
> Subject: Re: Sharpiegate
> 
> On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:04:07 PM UTC-5 spudb...@aol.com wrote:
> Again, regarding, Hydroxychloroquine, please refute:  
> 
> https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study 
> 
> 
> https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext 
> 
> 
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7330574/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not near enough of a bio-medical scientist to comment on these papers 
> and what might be wrong with these. The last is just the NIH listing of 
> papers and their abstracts or briefs. This is not an endorsement of the 
> results. I am just aware results or claims of such results showing an 
> efficacy for hydroxychloriquine are a minority report. The at large verdict 
> is opposite.
> 
> LC
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: Lawrence Crowell >
> To: Everything List >
> Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2020 7:55 pm
> Subject: Re: Sharpiegate
> 
> On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:01:12 AM UTC-5 johnk...@gmail.com <> wrote:
> The following is from the July 10 issue of the journal Science and shows just 
> how far Donald Trump is willing to corrupt science just so he doesn't have to 
> admit he was wrong: 
> 
> NOAA watchdog chides agency for how it handled Hurricane Dorian’s 
> ‘Sharpiegate’ 
> 
> 
> It is a case of how people become sycophants for t'Rump.
>  
> 
> And meanwhile just yesterday Trump was back on national television pushing a 
> quack cure for COVID-19 (hydroxychloroquine) on millions of Americans and 
> using as his "very impressive evidence" testimony of a doctor who believes 
> facemasks are unnecessary, and many illnesses are caused by people having sex 
> in their dreams with demons and witches, and the COVID-19 vaccines in 
> development are made of DNA from space alien's demon sperm to make people 
> less religious.  
> 
> It is my understanding that double-blind tests of hydroxycholoroqune have 
> shown no efficacy for this and can't be judged an effective treatment of 
> Covid-19. This is in contrast to the other links sent in this thread. 
> Don-the-Con t'Rump bought shares of stock from a company in India back when 
> he was met with PM Modi. Hey, wait! He violated the emoluments clause, but 
> then again who pays attention to that old rag called the Constitution these 
> days?
> 
> The Lizard men or Saurians from outer space! This has been around for a 
> while. I remember running into this about 20 years ago. It is a crazy idea 
> spun by a British media sports reporter. 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilian_conspiracy_theory 
>   
> 
> LC
>  
> 
> 
> The good doctor also believes the US government is not run by human beings 
> but by creatures called "reptilians"... come to think of it ... she may not 
> be entirely wrong on that last point.
> 
> John K Clark
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <>.
> 
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2567cd39-1c22-4cc8-8a5f-5a0173c29471n%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivi

Re: Sharpiegate

> On 29 Jul 2020, at 14:00, John Clark  wrote:
> 
> The following is from the July 10 issue of the journal Science and shows just 
> how far Donald Trump is willing to corrupt science just so he doesn't have to 
> admit he was wrong: 
> 
> NOAA watchdog chides agency for how it handled Hurricane Dorian’s 
> ‘Sharpiegate’ 
> 
> 
> And meanwhile just yesterday Trump was back on national television pushing a 
> quack cure for COVID-19 (hydroxychloroquine) on millions of Americans and 
> using as his "very impressive evidence" testimony of a doctor who believes 
> facemasks are unnecessary, and many illnesses are caused by people having sex 
> in their dreams with demons and witches, and the COVID-19 vaccines in 
> development are made of DNA from space alien's demon sperm to make people 
> less religious.  
> 
> The good doctor also believes the US government is not run by human beings 
> but by creatures called "reptilians"... come to think of it ... she may not 
> be entirely wrong on that last point.

Hmm… you might need to be more careful on this, because it is invalid to say 
that A is false because P asserts it using the fact that P said (many) false 
statements. You can certainly doubt it for that reason, but sometimes, some 
liars can say some truth.

About hydroxychloroquine, by taking an entire afternoon a while ago to Google 
on "countries, hydoxychloroquine chloroquine coronavirus covid-19", my current 
position is that the studies made in cannada might be right, and they 
corroborate most statements made by Didier Raoult in Marseilles ( guy who 
published 2000 papers and is well seen and listen by its peers). 
Hydroxychloroquine is not a panacea at all, but it eems slightly better than 
Remdesevir (used in the US). Also cannabis seems to be slightly better than 
hydroxychloroquine.
It does seem that the countries using hydroxychlroquine (in fact almost all) 
manage better the crisis than those who did not, but it is hard to conclude 
anything definite, as many others factors are in play. I have no real opinion 
on this, but some talk like if they knew the “obvious truth”.

About Cannabis, the work by Mechoulam (the discovers of THC and of its agonist 
in the brain/immune system) shows that it is an immune-stimulant, as opposed to 
alcohol which is known since long to be an immune-depressant, in which case it 
is criminal to not inform the people on this during a pandemic. It is time to 
switch the recreative use of alcohol and cannabis!

I certainly doubt any statements about medication made by the FDA. They lie too 
much since too long, and indeed, I think that they are the one responsible for 
the arrival of Trump and that type of bandits who don’t even tray to hide their 
criminal conducts.

Brno

> 
> John K Clark
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3NTtouiP6tPBLKTFpYcWbtWWCzhabKgxK%2BmvcGpZHUow%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/363F62C0-B1DD-4319-8172-A83CF3671DC2%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

> On 30 Jul 2020, at 20:33, spudboy100 via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Eh! Derangement syndrome again. Yet, its democrat politicians encouraging the 
> Vanguard of the Proletariat to burn and loot your center cities, to say, 
> damage the economy, so orange man won't be elected.

?

All democrats politicians have condemned the violence in the street. In 
Portland we have seen many videos showing that “police” attacked the peaceful 
protesters, and provoked them. It was an operation of the type “adding oil on 
the fire”.
The very look of that “police”, and the way they acted is quite worrisome. 
Doubly so when it comes from a guy who has been mean with almost all leaders of 
a democracy, and never about Putin, MBS (Saudi), Young, … Trump is fighting 
against the Democracies and against the US constitution.

> There is strong evidence of mail ballots mysteriously gone missing, so I 
> doubt if the members of the postal union can be trusted to deliver ballots.

They should use e-mails. That is the safer, both for the health of people, and 
it is easier to make most people voting, and voting only once. I am not sure 
why they don’t do that.

> What I suspect is that beyond legal challenges that are sure to occur, 
> whomever appears to win. Thus, what was the US will descend into open civil 
> conflict. It's not about the orange real estate dude, it's about the rest of 
> us. For instance, I am not a social conservative at all. I hold that your 
> Alcor bet might be a smart one, or that your estimation that humanity  will 
> cause the development of Matrioshka brains, eventually, accurate. As of now, 
> the Vanguard Proles are causing discouragement with the archetypal Hillary 
> voter (2016) and causing a drop out for Biden, (Kamala) because they really 
> don't wish BLM-Antifa governance. Since the police pulled out of the 
> Millwaukee convention, I suspect that NOI's Fruit of Islam will do the 
> policing there. Call it  a precursor. 

I agree that the left is blind on “islamism” coming from the Middle East, which 
is not islam, but comes directly from the German nazi propaganda, and the fact 
the Europeans and Americans after the WW II have subtracted Al Husseini and the 
Muslim Brotherhood from the Nuremberg trial. 
The conflict in the Middle-East is a conflict agains nazis, not again Islam nor 
again Arabs. Here the left is very often blind, and more homophobia, 
antisemite, etc,  than the right. I agree that Trumps politics is better (for 
the poor) than the left one. But the way Trump implement it makes it hard for 
the latinos and the black, and the consumer of medications, to get any of the 
benefits, and Trump seems to work hard to add chaos and to generate a civil 
war, if only to distract us from the rest, and keep his (authoritarian) power. 
Trump is both a con artist and a pervert narcissist. He is, Imo, extremely 
dangerous. He is shifting the left-right debate into an extremist-moderate 
fight. 

Bruno

> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Clark 
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thu, Jul 30, 2020 9:56 am
> Subject: Trump suggests delaying the election
> 
> Trump just Tweeted:
> 
> "With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 
> will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a 
> great embarrassment to the USA, Delay the Election until people can properly, 
> securely and safely vote???"
> 
> Trump floats delaying election despite lack of authority to do so 
> 
> 
> John K Clark
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2UrSCmDARGdS09gcNu-4JRvHQT9GPWQXD2Ex7QD_7c_g%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> .
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1350147095.8086094.159613370%40mail.yahoo.com
>  
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and sto

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

> On 30 Jul 2020, at 15:56, John Clark  wrote:
> 
> Trump just Tweeted:
> 
> "With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 
> will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a 
> great embarrassment to the USA, Delay the Election until people can properly, 
> securely and safely vote???"
> 
> Trump floats delaying election despite lack of authority to do so 
> 

Trump knows that he has not the authority to change the date of the elections, 
but he is just telling us that he will contest the result of the election (in 
case Biden win), and that might work, when you see the senate republicans 
acquitting him by dismissing the first hand witnessing (after compiling that up 
to that moment it was only second-hand witnessing).

I am afraid that the Republican Senators (minus Mitt Romney) have already made 
Trump into a dictator. He has no reason to listen more to the election result 
that to the coronavirus death statistics.

I hope we will be able to see the Trump’s tax return before the election. If 
democracy survives, it would be nice to make the release of the taw return 
mandatory to be eligible. Also, an impeached president should not be eligible 
at all. I think.

Bruno

> 
> John K Clark
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2UrSCmDARGdS09gcNu-4JRvHQT9GPWQXD2Ex7QD_7c_g%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/654E814B-C97D-486E-BF1C-0AED87278004%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: soul swap

> On 25 Jul 2020, at 01:38, PGC  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Friday, July 24, 2020 at 3:53:36 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
>> On 24 Jul 2020, at 00:17, PGC > wrote:
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> playing early stage strategy games purposefully NOT pursuing objectives too 
>> ambitiously to maximize later degrees of freedom... and philosophically 
>> questioning individuality with equality in the sense of "doesn't equality 
>> mean more degrees of freedom for individuals generally?" that intrigues 
>> yours truly these days. With a strong notion of equality, any cheater is as 
>> visible as the unfair advantage obtained. PGC
> 
> 
> Equality in the social domain means equality of right. I am not sure what you 
> mean by “strong equality”, and very generally, I don’t think there is a mean 
> to make all cheater visible.
> 
> In a more equal setting, the folks forcing us to acknowledge or suffer the 
> effects of the fantastic length of their giant yachts, degrees of power, 
> influence, money etc. would be harder to hide, which is a circumstance not 
> afforded in the current setting that fetishizes freedom and individuality in 
> order to gain large unfair advantages that translate into toxic effects for 
> communities. The visibility of certain types of questions such as: "Do you 
> really need a yacht that is 20 km in length? Why? Don't you need a therapist 
> if you get that thing based on an empire in which you underpay folks?" would 
> be more pronounced.

OK.

> 
> Good gardening implies a form of equality: if I focus all efforts on the 
> success of a couple of singular roses, then I get a toxic piece of earth. If 
> I pay attention to the whole, affording equal opportunity for life to thrive, 
> then cheating may not be entirely eliminated but again... some invasive 
> species taking up lots of territory would stand out. Same in music: if 
> everything is geared to a single soloist, or a musician in some orchestra 
> tries to be more equal than the others... then most of us know we're either 
> getting payed for the nonsense or they are overplaying.

We can expect that, especially in an era where human sciences has been 
separated from the exact science, making them both inexact, and inhuman. Now, 
in a democracy we can change that, probably by voting sometimes for the left, 
sometimes from the right, and by denunciating and fixing the powers in place. 
Today, the separation of powers leak a lot, and we have regressed globally at 
the political level. 
We will see if the democracy will survive or not Trump and the “republicans”, 
but it seems to me that Trump has already win the election when the senate 
acquitted him for its (quite plausible) cheating on this. Why would Trump 
listen more to the result of the election than he is listen to its medical 
experts, or to anyone for that matter. 
Trump has many powerful allies (not just Putin, Kim-Young-Un, etc.). When Barr 
defends Trump, he is defending the "deep state” (which I define by the 
prohibitionists, to make it simple).

> 
> Equality appears relevant if we want some form of increase in personal 
> degrees of freedom not based on the ignorance or exclusion of others.

OK.

> I argue the crazy, radical, unrealistic forms of equality: that starving, 
> sick, or suffering people receive the same degree of care and attention 
> afforded to the privileged among us. The insane notion that we don't kill 
> each other, or spend large amounts of resources to prepare to do so in order 
> to control each other in some kind of childish psychological personal 
> fantasy. The crazy idea that we don't abandon each other while maintaining 
> agility of freedom or that we don't ascribe more intrinsic value to some 
> lives as we do to others... for whatever reason.

I am not sure I understand what you say here. I tend to find rather well the 
idea that we should not kill the others, unless legitimate self-defence, but I 
guess this is trivia. 

> Foremost, it is a question which I want to see taken to extremes by various 
> discourses to study what emerges. What would it mean to live in a social or 
> philosophical setting that would be extremely equal?

Equality means, at least in my mind in this discussion, equality of right. It 
is the idea that everyone obeys to the law, especially at the top who has to 
give the example. It means same amount of money for the same amount of work, 
independently of the genre, colour skin, etc.

It does not mean “freedom of religion” which is an apparently nice idea, but in 
practice it is the legalisation of moral harassment, the legalisation of lies, 
etc. In fact, freedom of religion is almost the same as the interdiction to use 
reason in theology, and is the main trick of most tyrants and pressure groups. 

Equality of right is what should normally prevent the “extremely equal” 
setting, when we are asked to forget how different we really are. 

> Some would try to be more equal than others :) but jokes aside even though

Re: soul swap

> On 24 Jul 2020, at 20:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/24/2020 6:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> A pandemic is global and international. This is a case where we can make 
>> money for nothing, and invest it in fixing the economical problem. The 
>> entire world should use the pandemics as an opportunity to give to everyone 
>> a universal allocation, and then let everyone becoming as rich as they want,
> 
> That sounds good, and it would be fine if rich people simply indulged their 
> personal tastes.  But money is also a form of power and inevitably some of 
> the ultra-rich use their money to buy influence thru media (Ruper Murdoch 
> comes to mind)

That should be made illegal, and severely punished.

I would also condemn the financial lobbying. A Russian said once that it is 
legal con-artistry.

No doubt that a lot of improvement can be done. In europa financial lobbying is 
more regulated, but not enough.

> and political campaigns to (a) make themselves richer

Yes, money can be used to make more money. That is not necessarily a problem, 
unless it involves lies and “fake speculation”.

> and (b) to infect society with their crackpot ideas (Sheldon Adelson comes to 
> mind).

We have to combat this. Advise: never publish a paper in a journal asking 
money. 
Similarly, never give money to a sage...

> 
> ...
>> 
>> Equality in the social domain means equality of right.
> 
> But what rights. 

The human right.

> Rights are human inventions.

Yes, a rather natural but positive one, which gives hope.

In a pandemic like today, it makes sense to build money, as it is an investment 
in Health and the Future(s).

Optimistically, this could help to introduce the universal allocation. It is 
just a matter to put the threshold of poverty higher, and restore human dignity 
and values. Then people should be able to become as rich as they want, as long 
as it is done honestly. Well, maybe some form of super-obsessive richness 
should be treated as a medication addiction.

> 
> Brent
> The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as
> the poor, to sleep under the bridges, to beg in the streets, and
> to steal bread. -- Anatole France

Which is OK, if the state manage to help those who lack money to have a roof, 
to have some food and water if hungry and thirsty, etc. Good ideas are good 
only if they are well managed and enough realistic to be sustainable.

Bruno

>
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b813192b-990d-7d7d-cc1d-7fe40c31305f%40verizon.net.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/61192B3E-596E-4AE6-B0CC-E1143C924CD3%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 5:56 AM smitra  wrote:

*> Trump knows that he doesn't have the authority to do this*


It's well known that Trump is a big fan of totalitarians and I think he
believes what Mao Zedong believed, that authority comes from the barrel of
a gun, he's already sent federal storm troopers into the hearts of American
cities as practice for the big day in November.

John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv0%2BrhxmxvfwzDg1AqFw_ar48j%3DetYwwWjkvVVFiAHMGMA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election

2020-07-31 Thread smitra


On 30-07-2020 15:56, John Clark wrote:

TRUMP JUST TWEETED:

"_With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good),
2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It
will be a great embarrassment to the USA, Delay the Election until
people can properly, securely and safely vote???_"

Trump floats delaying election despite lack of authority to do so

John K Clark


Trump knows that he doesn't have the authority to do this, so his real 
plan must be something different. I suspect that what he really aims at 
is for Republican governors to decide that a popular vote cannot be held 
due to the pandemic and because in their opinion mail-in vote is 
unreliable, that the legislature will instead vote on who wins the 
State. Many states where Biden is way ahead have a Republican governor 
and a Republican Legislature, as well as courts dominated by 
conservative judges.


Conservative judges tend to set the bar very high for overturning a 
decision that was arrived at using constitutionally correct procedures. 
In the end the SCOTUS may end up upholding an election result based on 
Republican Legislatures having voted for Trump when the population at 
large supported Biden.


Saibal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/aa890e25c06d2f3c1b372ebeb378520e%40zonnet.nl.

Re: Trump suggests delaying the election