It's quite incredible the cognitive dissonance shown in this article. I couldn't help but hear the "vaccines are safe and effective" mantra spewing as I was reading the article.
1) These are NOT vaccines, as they do not resemble any previous vaccines in history. Calling them a vaccine is a red herring. Because people "know" vaccines are safe, and this is a vaccine, so it's got to be safe right? The right term is THERAPY, not vaccine.
2) VAERS data is up 100x (or more) the combined data for every other vaccine in history. I'm going to assume you'll chalk this up to "just a coincidence".
3) There's a not-so-surprising correlation between high vaccination rate and high case rate. The more a country has been vaccinated, the more cases it has had. That's because vaccination lowers your immune system making you far more prone to being infected.
4) Gee, I wonder how come you did not mention the fact, which is an outright scam, that to be put in the "vaccinated" pile you must have finished a full vaccination course (14 days). So if after the first does you die, you're still considered an "unvaccinated" death. You're going to tell me this is all fair and square, right?
And then we come to the final point: all said and done, the vaccine is supposed to make less people DIE, right? That's the end goal. Yet there's been MORE deaths WITH the vaccine, than WITHOUT, when comparing e.g 2020s to 2021. Excess mortality is through the roof. That can't possibly be the vaccine, correct? Which have a 95% efficacy rate? Ah sorry, it's 75%... Oops, actually 50%... actually, for Omicron is more like 35%.
Regarding Malone, I don't care what he says. The data is out there for all to see. I believe the earth is round no matter who tells me that information, because the source of the information does not change the fact. So get a grip...
Part of your criticism about Malone having baited the public with his own version of fear porn is based on his criticism of the Federal govt “pulling all of the regular monoclonals”. You go on to describe how this began on Dec. 29 and was retracted on Dec. 31, but Malone's statement took place on Dec. 30, and his criticism was fairly described at the time. In all fairness, it is your criticism of his criticism that is taken out of context.
Malone was far more careful in his language in the beginning of his protest against the covid response. The mass formation psychosis and “they” talk all started more recently. Sorry I couldn’t get through your whole article as it reads like an Atlantic hit piece. I did try. Best of luck to you.
If I got three shots, I'd probably excuse myself by crying too. Lancet and BMJ are the good guys and incorruptible. You probably haven't read about any of their botched studies.
The vaccine cheerleaders were apparently so eager for such a report that they didn't notice that it was brought to them by a completely meaningless study. But even this is not unprecedented. For example, remember Donald Trump recommending hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a cure for COVID? Everyone laughed at him and the media around the world printed articles to the point of exhaustion about what a delusional man he is. There was a great demand among progressives of all countries for the result that "HCQ doesn't work". Lo and behold, a few weeks later, an article did indeed appear in the prestigious Lancet showing, in a huge multicentre study (almost 100,000 patients!), that HCQ not only doesn't work, but actually increases the likelihood of heart problems. The article hit the "political-academic demand" perfectly. The results went around the world, many HCQ studies were immediately stopped on the basis of it, and the authors of the Lancet study became global celebrities.
A few weeks later, however, the paper was quietly retracted because it was found to be a colossal fraud. In the meantime, quite a bit of evidence has indeed been bought that HCQ is not a miracle cure for COVID, but the falsified articles have at least slowed down and invalidated the research.
A few weeks later, however, the article was quietly retracted because it was found to be a colossal fraud. In the meantime, quite a bit of evidence has been accumulated that HCQ is not a miracle cure for COVID, but the falsified articles have minimally slowed and invalidated the research.
I point out that sooner or later, our high tolerance for fraud in science is going to come back to bite us and kill a lot of people. That the US CDC of all places would be drowning in the murky waters of "fake science", however, is something I wouldn't dream of.
One of the dumbest long things I’ve ever read, and couched in some of the loftiest, most condescending language I’ve run into recently.
The heart of your your case boils down to: Malone doesn’t act like a scientist or doctor. Whew, I find that devastatingly convincing. Not.
Even so: Are you not aware that among scientists and doctors flashing credentials is as common as shaking hands? “How seriously should I take you?” is a question they’re forever implicitly testing each other with, and are responding to.
Also: how can you be unaware of how common powerful egos (to the point of arrogance) are among the science-and-medicine crowd? Once you remove these people from their faculty-club debate settings and get a drink or two in them, you’d be amazed by what comes out of them. As someone who’s known and interviewed a fair number of scientists and doctors, I find that Malone’s informality, frankness, directness and self-confidence don’t set off alarm bells in me. On the contrary, they inspire confidence in me. In fact, I find him, by comparison to most scientists and medical persons, remarkably un-arrogant. Could be wrong, of course. But still: tastes in manner and tone of voice will differ, of course, but so much in any case for the first half of your piece.
As for your beefs with Malone on a few matters of fact, I suggest you get a little more familiar than you apparently are with the dissident position on a lot of these questions. There are thousands of doctors and scientists (not to mention sensible, bright people generally) who are on the Malone side of these debates. Many have found ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine helpful, for instance. Many others have found the establishment response to the COVID crisis to be peculiar, bizarre and even sinister. Fwiw, I’m a retired researcher and reporter, and in this case my own alarm bells have been set off by Fauci, Daszak and the CDC a lot more often than they have been by the likes of Dr. Malone.
No idea why you felt the need to expend such time and energy defending the establishment position here, come to think of it. Aren’t you aware that the establishment already has a lot of people on their payroll doing p-r for them?
Ok, I definitely need to get writing today. I'll try to have my piece out by this weekend, and I will cite this piece. This is definitely a topic that interests me. I have a piece on my substack and another one coming in a few days, though neither are terribly interesting (the next one is a workplace advice column) just trying to start the habit.
The edgy stuff is catnip for some people. I see this with a bunch of other things: the keto diet, sports, identity politics. Constant posturing edginess instead of providing the evidence.
Great article btw, and anyone who disagrees is paid off, duh.
Kudos for writing a refutation of Malone's claims, rather than just yelling "misinformation" and calling for him to be shut down. I will leave it to others to argue whether or not the refutation is successful. It strikes me that the "pro/anti Malone/Fauci/vax" space is already pretty crowded (and pretty entrenched).
It seems to me that Team Mainstream has run afoul of Carl Sagan's observation that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. When you are turning people's lives upside down, you should be prepared to clearly explain why it must be done, and why there are no alternatives. Appeals to "a volatile, changing situation" do not inspire much confidence. And especially not when what actually happens turns out to be substantially different from what was predicted. Public health officials should look in the mirror if they wonder why people like Malone can claim a large audience. If he is selling "bullshit" and people are buying, it is a failure of the public health establishment.
I look forward to more commentary on our society, where we are, how we got here, and where we are going.
Here's good science, by good scientists (same team just published in Nature, though this study is still pre-print), showing that mRNA vaccination is more likely vs covid infection to cause myocarditis that hospitalizes/kills you: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full
One thing that the author of this piece misses, I think, is that for many people it’s completely irrelevant that many scientists are looking into incidence of myocarditis among young men or into whether vaccination soon after recovering from a Covid infection is a good idea. Why? Because, in the midst of uncertainty on these questions, many Americans are still finding themselves compelled to get the vaccine themselves or to have their male children vaccinated, and face dire consequences for doing the very risk-weighing our author recommends. And the folks compelling them are citing The Science as the basis for doing so. The author suggests that parents of boys and young men themselves are correct to weigh the risks of the vaccines, but she fails to confront the fact that many literally cannot do this because the decision has been taken from them by authorities imposing a vaccine mandate. From their perspective, it is patently obvious that their concerns aren’t being taken seriously in a way that actually makes a difference for them. Is it any wonder the my start looking to folks like Dr Malone for answers? And should it surprise anyone that the fact that there are scientists looking into these issues would be small consolation?
I laughed when I realized that all that this meant -
'Keep in mind Brandolini’s Law: “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than is needed to produce it.” This is a long one.'
- is that the comments refuting the bullshit in this article would be a magnitude longer than the article itself [I bet the author didn't extrapolate to apply it to themself; just because something is long doesn't mean it's correct or more correct, I guess that fits in a similar vein of size doesn't matter if you don't know how to use it], if anyone's going to bother wasting so much time - though a few people were compelled enough to pick a few specific points to counter.
Interesting, I have had my suspicions as well. I still think he has a lot of interesting things to listen to but when people flock around an expert like he is a god, it makes me stand back and think. Whether it is Fauci or Malone, these people shouldn't be idolised but instead listened to and their information debated.
Jan 23, 2022·edited Jan 23, 2022Liked by The 21st Century Salonnière
The public health establishment lost my confidence when they promoted "contact tracing" as a way to contain infection. They recommended states and cities hire armies of contact tracers. This is what works, we were told.
Yes, it works to contain Ebola in African villages. A contact disease that kills so quickly it will usually burn itself out.
How could anyone believe that contact tracing would work on an airborne virus in NYC? Yet there was Andrew Cuomo in his inspiring briefings selling exactly that, at the behest of public health officials. I know that my state did scramble to hire thousands of contact tracers, as did many others.
I know that data can change the picture when dealing with a new phenomenon. But this was known to be an airborne respiratory virus from very early on. How was contact tracing ever a serious recommendation for containment?
It's quite incredible the cognitive dissonance shown in this article. I couldn't help but hear the "vaccines are safe and effective" mantra spewing as I was reading the article.
1) These are NOT vaccines, as they do not resemble any previous vaccines in history. Calling them a vaccine is a red herring. Because people "know" vaccines are safe, and this is a vaccine, so it's got to be safe right? The right term is THERAPY, not vaccine.
2) VAERS data is up 100x (or more) the combined data for every other vaccine in history. I'm going to assume you'll chalk this up to "just a coincidence".
3) There's a not-so-surprising correlation between high vaccination rate and high case rate. The more a country has been vaccinated, the more cases it has had. That's because vaccination lowers your immune system making you far more prone to being infected.
4) Gee, I wonder how come you did not mention the fact, which is an outright scam, that to be put in the "vaccinated" pile you must have finished a full vaccination course (14 days). So if after the first does you die, you're still considered an "unvaccinated" death. You're going to tell me this is all fair and square, right?
And then we come to the final point: all said and done, the vaccine is supposed to make less people DIE, right? That's the end goal. Yet there's been MORE deaths WITH the vaccine, than WITHOUT, when comparing e.g 2020s to 2021. Excess mortality is through the roof. That can't possibly be the vaccine, correct? Which have a 95% efficacy rate? Ah sorry, it's 75%... Oops, actually 50%... actually, for Omicron is more like 35%.
Regarding Malone, I don't care what he says. The data is out there for all to see. I believe the earth is round no matter who tells me that information, because the source of the information does not change the fact. So get a grip...
Part of your criticism about Malone having baited the public with his own version of fear porn is based on his criticism of the Federal govt “pulling all of the regular monoclonals”. You go on to describe how this began on Dec. 29 and was retracted on Dec. 31, but Malone's statement took place on Dec. 30, and his criticism was fairly described at the time. In all fairness, it is your criticism of his criticism that is taken out of context.
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/yah-it-happened?justPublished=true
Malone was far more careful in his language in the beginning of his protest against the covid response. The mass formation psychosis and “they” talk all started more recently. Sorry I couldn’t get through your whole article as it reads like an Atlantic hit piece. I did try. Best of luck to you.
If I got three shots, I'd probably excuse myself by crying too. Lancet and BMJ are the good guys and incorruptible. You probably haven't read about any of their botched studies.
The vaccine cheerleaders were apparently so eager for such a report that they didn't notice that it was brought to them by a completely meaningless study. But even this is not unprecedented. For example, remember Donald Trump recommending hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a cure for COVID? Everyone laughed at him and the media around the world printed articles to the point of exhaustion about what a delusional man he is. There was a great demand among progressives of all countries for the result that "HCQ doesn't work". Lo and behold, a few weeks later, an article did indeed appear in the prestigious Lancet showing, in a huge multicentre study (almost 100,000 patients!), that HCQ not only doesn't work, but actually increases the likelihood of heart problems. The article hit the "political-academic demand" perfectly. The results went around the world, many HCQ studies were immediately stopped on the basis of it, and the authors of the Lancet study became global celebrities.
A few weeks later, however, the paper was quietly retracted because it was found to be a colossal fraud. In the meantime, quite a bit of evidence has indeed been bought that HCQ is not a miracle cure for COVID, but the falsified articles have at least slowed down and invalidated the research.
A few weeks later, however, the article was quietly retracted because it was found to be a colossal fraud. In the meantime, quite a bit of evidence has been accumulated that HCQ is not a miracle cure for COVID, but the falsified articles have minimally slowed and invalidated the research.
I point out that sooner or later, our high tolerance for fraud in science is going to come back to bite us and kill a lot of people. That the US CDC of all places would be drowning in the murky waters of "fake science", however, is something I wouldn't dream of.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine
https://www.the-scientist.com/features/the-surgisphere-scandal-what-went-wrong--67955
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22446-z
One of the dumbest long things I’ve ever read, and couched in some of the loftiest, most condescending language I’ve run into recently.
The heart of your your case boils down to: Malone doesn’t act like a scientist or doctor. Whew, I find that devastatingly convincing. Not.
Even so: Are you not aware that among scientists and doctors flashing credentials is as common as shaking hands? “How seriously should I take you?” is a question they’re forever implicitly testing each other with, and are responding to.
Also: how can you be unaware of how common powerful egos (to the point of arrogance) are among the science-and-medicine crowd? Once you remove these people from their faculty-club debate settings and get a drink or two in them, you’d be amazed by what comes out of them. As someone who’s known and interviewed a fair number of scientists and doctors, I find that Malone’s informality, frankness, directness and self-confidence don’t set off alarm bells in me. On the contrary, they inspire confidence in me. In fact, I find him, by comparison to most scientists and medical persons, remarkably un-arrogant. Could be wrong, of course. But still: tastes in manner and tone of voice will differ, of course, but so much in any case for the first half of your piece.
As for your beefs with Malone on a few matters of fact, I suggest you get a little more familiar than you apparently are with the dissident position on a lot of these questions. There are thousands of doctors and scientists (not to mention sensible, bright people generally) who are on the Malone side of these debates. Many have found ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine helpful, for instance. Many others have found the establishment response to the COVID crisis to be peculiar, bizarre and even sinister. Fwiw, I’m a retired researcher and reporter, and in this case my own alarm bells have been set off by Fauci, Daszak and the CDC a lot more often than they have been by the likes of Dr. Malone.
No idea why you felt the need to expend such time and energy defending the establishment position here, come to think of it. Aren’t you aware that the establishment already has a lot of people on their payroll doing p-r for them?
Ok, I definitely need to get writing today. I'll try to have my piece out by this weekend, and I will cite this piece. This is definitely a topic that interests me. I have a piece on my substack and another one coming in a few days, though neither are terribly interesting (the next one is a workplace advice column) just trying to start the habit.
The edgy stuff is catnip for some people. I see this with a bunch of other things: the keto diet, sports, identity politics. Constant posturing edginess instead of providing the evidence.
Great article btw, and anyone who disagrees is paid off, duh.
Kudos for writing a refutation of Malone's claims, rather than just yelling "misinformation" and calling for him to be shut down. I will leave it to others to argue whether or not the refutation is successful. It strikes me that the "pro/anti Malone/Fauci/vax" space is already pretty crowded (and pretty entrenched).
It seems to me that Team Mainstream has run afoul of Carl Sagan's observation that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. When you are turning people's lives upside down, you should be prepared to clearly explain why it must be done, and why there are no alternatives. Appeals to "a volatile, changing situation" do not inspire much confidence. And especially not when what actually happens turns out to be substantially different from what was predicted. Public health officials should look in the mirror if they wonder why people like Malone can claim a large audience. If he is selling "bullshit" and people are buying, it is a failure of the public health establishment.
I look forward to more commentary on our society, where we are, how we got here, and where we are going.
Here's good science, by good scientists (same team just published in Nature, though this study is still pre-print), showing that mRNA vaccination is more likely vs covid infection to cause myocarditis that hospitalizes/kills you: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full
How much did you get for this article?
One thing that the author of this piece misses, I think, is that for many people it’s completely irrelevant that many scientists are looking into incidence of myocarditis among young men or into whether vaccination soon after recovering from a Covid infection is a good idea. Why? Because, in the midst of uncertainty on these questions, many Americans are still finding themselves compelled to get the vaccine themselves or to have their male children vaccinated, and face dire consequences for doing the very risk-weighing our author recommends. And the folks compelling them are citing The Science as the basis for doing so. The author suggests that parents of boys and young men themselves are correct to weigh the risks of the vaccines, but she fails to confront the fact that many literally cannot do this because the decision has been taken from them by authorities imposing a vaccine mandate. From their perspective, it is patently obvious that their concerns aren’t being taken seriously in a way that actually makes a difference for them. Is it any wonder the my start looking to folks like Dr Malone for answers? And should it surprise anyone that the fact that there are scientists looking into these issues would be small consolation?
This pisses me all the way off.
I laughed when I realized that all that this meant -
'Keep in mind Brandolini’s Law: “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than is needed to produce it.” This is a long one.'
- is that the comments refuting the bullshit in this article would be a magnitude longer than the article itself [I bet the author didn't extrapolate to apply it to themself; just because something is long doesn't mean it's correct or more correct, I guess that fits in a similar vein of size doesn't matter if you don't know how to use it], if anyone's going to bother wasting so much time - though a few people were compelled enough to pick a few specific points to counter.
Thanks for making the effort to write this piece. It was an enjoyable and informative read.
Interesting, I have had my suspicions as well. I still think he has a lot of interesting things to listen to but when people flock around an expert like he is a god, it makes me stand back and think. Whether it is Fauci or Malone, these people shouldn't be idolised but instead listened to and their information debated.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/
The public health establishment lost my confidence when they promoted "contact tracing" as a way to contain infection. They recommended states and cities hire armies of contact tracers. This is what works, we were told.
Yes, it works to contain Ebola in African villages. A contact disease that kills so quickly it will usually burn itself out.
How could anyone believe that contact tracing would work on an airborne virus in NYC? Yet there was Andrew Cuomo in his inspiring briefings selling exactly that, at the behest of public health officials. I know that my state did scramble to hire thousands of contact tracers, as did many others.
I know that data can change the picture when dealing with a new phenomenon. But this was known to be an airborne respiratory virus from very early on. How was contact tracing ever a serious recommendation for containment?
I really appreciate what you're doing, but it's not credible to me to hand wave off off-patent early treatments: https://c19early.com/.