M
Mr D
Why is every infowars cut and paste in this thread full of links to the mainstream media?
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
:::::::INFOWARS News Thread:::::::
- Thread starter pipeline
- Start date
- Status
Why is every infowars cut and paste in this thread full of links to the mainstream media?
I have reason to believe you guys are not interested in this forum do discuss cannabis. You have come here to spread lies. I have reason to believe you are paid keyboard warriors of George Soros and the corrupt establishment. Its going on all over the place. I'm not stupid... I'm also not wasting my time with you anymore. I see. I understand whats going on here. You're here to trick people, not to debate or help grow a cannabis forum. Its obvious guys! You can leave if you aren't wanting to contribute and grow a cannabis forum. This is just a side thread and its all you do? I see. 
Frylock Joined Jan 2019 Posts:https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557434
Frylock Album: https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=79409
Mr. D Joined Jan 2019Posts https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557449
Frylock Joined Jan 2019 Posts:https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557434
Frylock Album: https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=79409
Mr. D Joined Jan 2019Posts https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557449
White Beard posts: https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557486
audiohi joined Jan 2009 posts: https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557527
audiohi album: https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?u=76168
audiohi album: https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?u=76168
F
Frylock
I have reason to believe you guys are not interested in this forum do discuss cannabis. You have come here to spread lies. I have reason to believe you are paid keyboard warriors of George Soros and the corrupt establishment. Its going on all over the place. I'm not stupid... I'm also not wasting my time with you anymore. I see. I understand whats going on here. You're here to trick people, not to debate or help grow a cannabis forum. Its obvious guys! You can leave if you aren't wanting to contribute and grow a cannabis forum. This is just a side thread and its all you do? I see.
Frylock Joined Jan 2019 Posts:https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557434
Frylock Album: https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=79409
Mr. D Joined Jan 2019Posts https://www.icmag.com/ic/search.php?searchid=17557449
You caught me.... Deep state exposed and all.... Pipeline is on the money
Please inform me which 'lies' i have posted?
Screw rude what about the opinion that the Constitution can be trampled?
Pipeline wanted facts and avoided addressing them.
He also claimed spending 700 billion on "defense" (while we fail to deal with homelessness and hunger while living without adequate medical care )was good.
What would Jesus do?
He also claimed spending 700 billion on "defense" (while we fail to deal with homelessness and hunger while living without adequate medical care )was good.
What would Jesus do?
Show me your papers!!!
*1930's German accent*
*1930's German accent*
https://www.infowars.com/elon-musks-brain-interface-company-neuralink-to-make-big-announcement/
Elon Musk’s Brain Interface Company Neuralink To Make Big Announcement
Corporation’s goal is to connect human brains directly to artificial-intelligence
Kelen McBreen | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
The secretive brain-interface company Neuralink, founded by Elon Musk in 2017, is set to make its first public announcement on Tuesday night.
The presentation will be live-streamed on the company’s website at 8 PM PT (11 PM ET) on Tuesday.
Initially, Neuralink’s goal was to figure out how brain-interfaces could help alleviate chronic pain for those suffering from chronic medical conditions.
After two years of stealth work, little is known about the top-secret technology being developed, but the MIT Technology Review has some interesting hypotheses.
“A look at the available evidence suggests Neuralink will show off a ‘high-bandwidth’ connection to a monkey brain—one able to extract lots of information by recording the activity of many neurons at once, using ultrathin flexible electrodes,” they write. “That could be used to do something cool, like get a monkey to play a video game with its mind.”
The overall consensus from tech outlets is that the corporation is getting close to connecting the human brain to computers, possibly using computer chipsets to wirelessly send brain data to AI or even as a way to send signals back into the brain.
In September 2018, Musk appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience and said Neuralink had “something interesting to announce in a few months that’s at least an order of magnitude better than anything else, probably better than anyone thinks is possible.”
Musk has voiced his concerns about artificial intelligence (AI) in the past, and it appears Neuralink is attempting to equip humans with the technology he says is needed to keep up with increasingly powerful AI.
Speaking with Axios in November 2018, Musk said, “The long-term aspiration with neural networks would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence, and to achieve a democratization of intelligence such that it is not monopolistically held in a purely digital form by governments and large corporations…”
“How do we ensure that the future constitutes the sum of the will of humanity? If we have billions of people with the high-bandwidth link to the A.I. extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart,” he continued.
It’s unclear as to whether Musk’s proposed technology would offset an AI takeover, but perhaps the upcoming announcement will shed light on what to expect.
Elon Musk’s Brain Interface Company Neuralink To Make Big Announcement
Corporation’s goal is to connect human brains directly to artificial-intelligence
Kelen McBreen | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
The secretive brain-interface company Neuralink, founded by Elon Musk in 2017, is set to make its first public announcement on Tuesday night.
The presentation will be live-streamed on the company’s website at 8 PM PT (11 PM ET) on Tuesday.
Initially, Neuralink’s goal was to figure out how brain-interfaces could help alleviate chronic pain for those suffering from chronic medical conditions.
After two years of stealth work, little is known about the top-secret technology being developed, but the MIT Technology Review has some interesting hypotheses.
“A look at the available evidence suggests Neuralink will show off a ‘high-bandwidth’ connection to a monkey brain—one able to extract lots of information by recording the activity of many neurons at once, using ultrathin flexible electrodes,” they write. “That could be used to do something cool, like get a monkey to play a video game with its mind.”
The overall consensus from tech outlets is that the corporation is getting close to connecting the human brain to computers, possibly using computer chipsets to wirelessly send brain data to AI or even as a way to send signals back into the brain.
In September 2018, Musk appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience and said Neuralink had “something interesting to announce in a few months that’s at least an order of magnitude better than anything else, probably better than anyone thinks is possible.”
Musk has voiced his concerns about artificial intelligence (AI) in the past, and it appears Neuralink is attempting to equip humans with the technology he says is needed to keep up with increasingly powerful AI.
Speaking with Axios in November 2018, Musk said, “The long-term aspiration with neural networks would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence, and to achieve a democratization of intelligence such that it is not monopolistically held in a purely digital form by governments and large corporations…”
“How do we ensure that the future constitutes the sum of the will of humanity? If we have billions of people with the high-bandwidth link to the A.I. extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart,” he continued.
It’s unclear as to whether Musk’s proposed technology would offset an AI takeover, but perhaps the upcoming announcement will shed light on what to expect.
https://www.infowars.com/new-white-...-congressional-investigation-into-ilhan-omar/
New White House Petition Demands Congressional Investigation Into Ilhan Omar
“Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America is in serious doubt”
Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
A new petition uploaded to the WhiteHouse.gov site is demanding an immediate Congressional investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar.
President Trump is currently engaged in a war of rhetoric with Omar and three other Congresswomen after he asked, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came?”
The petition is titled ‘Conduct an Immediate Congressional Investigation Into Rep. Ilhan Omar’ and reads as follows;
Earlier today it was revealed that the House will pass a resolution condemning Trump’s “racist” tweets.
Those Tweets were NOT Racist. I don’t have a Racist bone in my body! The so-called vote to be taken is a Democrat con game,” Trump responded.
“Republicans should not show “weakness” and fall into their trap. This should be a vote on the filthy language, statements and lies told by the Democrat Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country,” he added.
https://www.infowars.com/medical-journals-suppressing-vaccine-studies-report/
Medical Journals Suppressing Vaccine Studies – Report
Scientific partners routinely blocking meaningful science while fabricating misleading studies on vaccines
Children's Health Defense - July 16, 2019 Comments
Image Credits: DarkoStojanovic / Pixabay.
[Note: This is Part IX in a series of articles adapted from the second Children’s Health Defense eBook: Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health. The first eBook, The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, described how children’s health began to worsen dramatically in the late 1980s following fateful changes in the childhood vaccine schedule.]
The vaccine industry and its government and scientific partners routinely block meaningful science and fabricate misleading studies about vaccines.
They could not do so, however, without having enticed medical journals into a mutually beneficial bargain. Pharmaceutical companies supply journals with needed income, and in return, journals play a key role in suppressing studies that raise critical questions about vaccine risks—which would endanger profits.
The Truth Behind The Flu Vaccine The Mom Street Journal’s Lori Gregory joins David Knight to discuss the trend behind the flu vaccine, stem cells, and her experiences working to stop the mandatory vaccines.
An Exclusive and Dependent Relationship
Advertising is one of the most obviously beneficial ways that medical journals’ “exclusive and dependent relationship” with the pharmaceutical industry plays out. According to a 2006 analysis in PLOS Medicine, drugs and medical devices are the only products for which medical journals accept advertisements. Studies show that journal advertising generates “the highest return on investment of all promotional strategies employed by pharmaceutical companies.” The pharmaceutical industry puts a particularly “high value on advertising its products in print journals” because journals reach doctors—the “gatekeeper between drug companies and patients.” Almost nine in ten drug advertising dollars are directed at physicians.
In the U.S. in 2012, drug companies spent $24 billion marketing to physicians, with only $3 billion spent on direct-to-consumer advertising. By 2015, however, consumer-targeted advertising had jumped to $5.2 billion, a 60% increase that has reaped bountiful rewards. In 2015, Pfizer’s Prevnar-13 vaccine was the nation’s eighth most heavily advertised drug; after the launch of the intensive advertising campaign, Prevnar “awareness” increased by over 1,500% in eight months, and “44% of targeted consumers were talking to their physicians about getting vaccinated specifically with Prevnar.” Slick ad campaigns have also helped boost uptake of “unpopular” vaccines like Gardasil.
Advertising is such an established part of journals’ modus operandi that high-end journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) boldly invite medical marketers to “make NEJM the cornerstone of their advertising programs,” promising “no greater assurance that your ad will be seen, read, and acted upon.” In addition, medical journals benefit from pharmaceutical companies’ bulk purchases of thousands of journal reprints and industry’s sponsorship of journal subscriptions and journal supplements.
In 2003, an editor at The BMJ wrote about the numerous ways in which drug company advertising can bias medical journals (and the practice of medicine)—all of which still hold true today. For example:
Industry-Funded Bias
According to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), nearly three-fourths of all funding for clinical trials in the U.S.—presumably including vaccine trials—came from corporate sponsors as of the early 2000s. The pharmaceutical industry’s funding of studies (and investigators) is a factor that helps determine which studies get published, and where. As a Johns Hopkins University researcher has acknowledged, funding can lead to bias—and while the potential exists for governmental or departmental funding to produce bias, “the worst source of bias is industry-funded.”
In 2009, researchers published a systematic review of several hundred influenza vaccine trials. Noting “growing doubts about the validity of the scientific evidence underpinning [influenza vaccine] policy recommendations,” the authors showed that the vaccine-favorable studies were “of significantly lower methodological quality”; however, even these poor-quality studies—when funded by the pharmaceutical industry—got far more attention than equivalent studies not funded by industry. The authors commented:
[Studies] sponsored by industry had greater visibility as they were more likely to be published by high impact factor journals and were likely to be given higher prominence by the international scientific and lay media, despite their apparent equivalent methodological quality and size compared with studies with other funders.
In their discussion, the authors also described how the industry’s vast resources enable lavish and strategic dissemination of favorable results. For example, companies often distribute “expensively bound” abstracts and reprints (translated into various languages) to “decision makers, their advisors, and local researchers,” while also systematically plugging their studies at symposia and conferences.
The World Health Organization’s standards describe reporting of clinical trial results as a “scientific, ethical, and moral responsibility.” However, it appears that as many as half of all clinical trial results go unreported—particularly when their results are negative. A European official involved in drug assessment has described the problem as “widespread,” citing as an example GSK’s suppression of results from four clinical trials for an anti-anxiety drug when those results showed a possible increased risk of suicide in children and adolescents. Experts warn that “unreported studies leave an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the risks and benefits of treatments.”
Debased and Biased Results
The “significant association between funding sources and pro-industry conclusions” can play out in many different ways, notably through methodological bias and debasement of study designs and analytic strategies. Bias may be present in the form of inadequate sample sizes, short follow-up periods, inappropriate placebos or comparisons, use of improper surrogate endpoints, unsuitable statistical analyses or “misleading presentation of data.”
Occasionally, high-level journal insiders blow the whistle on the corruption of published science. In a widely circulated quote, Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of NEJM, acknowledged that “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” Dr. Angell added that she “[took] no pleasure in this conclusion, which [she] reached slowly and reluctantly” over two decades at the prestigious journal.
Many vaccine studies flagrantly illustrate biases and selective reporting that produce skewed write-ups that are more marketing than science. In formulaic articles that medical journals are only too happy to publish, the conclusion is almost always the same, no matter the vaccine: “We did not identify any new or unexpected safety concerns.” As an example of the use of inappropriate statistical techniques to exaggerate vaccine benefits, an influenza vaccine study reported a “69% efficacy rate” even though the vaccine failed “nearly all who [took] it.” As explained by Dr. David Brownstein, the study’s authors used a technique called relative risk analysis to derive their 69% statistic because it can make “a poorly performing drug or therapy look better than it actually is.” However, the absolute risk difference between the vaccine and the placebo group was 2.27%, meaning that the vaccine “was nearly 98% ineffective in preventing the flu.”
Trusted Evidence?
In 2018, the Cochrane Collaboration—which bills its systematic reviews as the international gold standard for high-quality, “trusted” evidence—furnished conclusions about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine that clearly signaled industry bias. In May of that year, Cochrane’s highly favorable review improbably declared the vaccine to have no increased risk of serious adverse effects and judged deaths observed in HPV studies “not to be related to the vaccine.” Cochrane claims to be free of conflicts of interest, but its roster of funders includes national governmental bodies and international organizations pushing for HPV vaccine mandates as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation—both of which are staunch funders and supporters of HPV vaccination. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s president is a former top CDC official who served as acting CDC director during the H1N1 “false pandemic” in 2009 that ensured millions in windfall profits for vaccine manufacturers.
Two months after publication of Cochrane’s HPV review, researchers affiliated with the Nordic Cochrane Centre (one of Cochrane’s member centers) published an exhaustive critique, declaring that the reviewers had done an incomplete job and had “ignored important evidence of bias.” The critics itemized numerous methodological and ethical missteps on the part of the Cochrane reviewers, including failure to count nearly half of the eligible HPV vaccine trials, incomplete assessment of serious and systemic adverse events and failure to note that many of the reviewed studies were industry-funded. They also upbraided the Cochrane reviewers for not paying attention to key design flaws in the original clinical trials, including the failure to use true placebos and the use of surrogate outcomes for cervical cancer.
In response to the criticisms, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library initially stated that a team of editors would investigate the claims “as a matter of urgency.” Instead, however, Cochrane’s Governing Board quickly expelled one of the critique’s authors, Danish physician-researcher Peter Gøtzsche, who helped found Cochrane and was the head of the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Gøtzsche has been a vocal critic of Cochrane’s “increasingly commercial business model,” which he suggests is resulting in “stronger and stronger resistance to say anything that could bother pharmaceutical industry interests.” Adding insult to injury, Gøtzsche’s direct employer, the Rigshospitalet hospital in Denmark, then fired Gøtzsche. In response, Dr. Gøtzsche stated, “Firing me sends the unfortunate signal that if your research results are inconvenient and cause public turmoil, or threaten the pharmaceutical industry’s earnings, …you will be sacked.” In March 2019, Gøtzsche launched an independent Institute for Scientific Freedom.
In 2019, the editor-in-chief and research editor of BMJ Evidence Based Medicine—the journal that published the critique of Cochrane’s biased review—jointly defended the critique as having “provoke[d] healthy debate and pose[d] important questions,” affirming the value of publishing articles that “hold organisations to account.” They added that “Academic freedom means communicating ideas, facts and criticism without being censored, targeted or reprimanded” and urged publishers not to “shrink from offering criticisms that may be considered inconvenient.”
The Censorship Tsunami
Another favored tactic is to keep vaccine-critical studies out of medical journals altogether, either by refusing to publish them (even if peer reviewers recommend their publication) or by concocting excuses to pull articles after publication. In recent years, a number of journals have invented bogus excuses to withdraw or retract articles critical of risky vaccine ingredients, even when written by top international scientists. To cite just three examples:
The viewpoints expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Infowars.
https://www.infowars.com/peter-thiel-woke-google-employees-prefer-communist-china-to-america/
Peter Thiel: “Woke” Google Employees Prefer Communist China to America
Aiding in transfer of AI technology because of their “woke” anti-American politics
Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
Billionaire investor Peter Thiel says one reason for Google aiding in the transfer of AI technology to the Chinese military in favor of America is that “woke” Google employees are anti-American and prefer China to the U.S.
Thiel appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show following his call on Sunday for Google to be federally investigated for allowing itself to be infiltrated by the Chinese and the “treasonous decision” to hand them secretive technology.
Peter Thiel says Google employees are aiding the Chinese military in the transfer of advanced technology because of their progressive politics.
Asked why Google was working with the Communist Chinese military on breakthrough AI technology, Thiel said one explanation was the fear that China would acquire the technology anyway via the back door if it was not given to them.
However, according to Thiel, another explanation is the far-left political environment that dominates Silicon Valley.
“There’s probably a broad base of Google employees that are ideologically super left wing, sort of woke, and think that China’s better than the U.S. or that the U.S. is worse than China – it’s more anti-American than anything,” said Thiel.
New White House Petition Demands Congressional Investigation Into Ilhan Omar
“Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America is in serious doubt”
Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
A new petition uploaded to the WhiteHouse.gov site is demanding an immediate Congressional investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar.
President Trump is currently engaged in a war of rhetoric with Omar and three other Congresswomen after he asked, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came?”
The petition is titled ‘Conduct an Immediate Congressional Investigation Into Rep. Ilhan Omar’ and reads as follows;
We ask the President to initiate a Congressional investigation into Rep. Ilhan Omar’s background to determine if she should face expulsion from Congress.
Rep. Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America is in serious doubt.
Omar made light of the September 11 terror attack by referring to the atrocity as “some people did something”.
Omar was recorded laughing about and making light of Islamic terrorism and the Al-Qaeda threat.
Omar refused to condemn the terrorist attack by a self-described Antifa member, who tried to firebomb an ICE facility in Washington State.
Omar also defended jihadists in her state who chose to join ISIS, saying they should get lighter punishments.
There are also severe allegations concerning the question of whether Omar married her own brother.
Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution details the measures necessary to initiate an expulsion of a sitting member of Congress, which requires the concurrence of two-thirds of the members. Rep. Omar’s oath of loyalty to the United States of America is in serious doubt.
Omar made light of the September 11 terror attack by referring to the atrocity as “some people did something”.
Omar was recorded laughing about and making light of Islamic terrorism and the Al-Qaeda threat.
Omar refused to condemn the terrorist attack by a self-described Antifa member, who tried to firebomb an ICE facility in Washington State.
Omar also defended jihadists in her state who chose to join ISIS, saying they should get lighter punishments.
There are also severe allegations concerning the question of whether Omar married her own brother.
Earlier today it was revealed that the House will pass a resolution condemning Trump’s “racist” tweets.
Those Tweets were NOT Racist. I don’t have a Racist bone in my body! The so-called vote to be taken is a Democrat con game,” Trump responded.
“Republicans should not show “weakness” and fall into their trap. This should be a vote on the filthy language, statements and lies told by the Democrat Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country,” he added.
https://www.infowars.com/medical-journals-suppressing-vaccine-studies-report/
Medical Journals Suppressing Vaccine Studies – Report
Scientific partners routinely blocking meaningful science while fabricating misleading studies on vaccines
Children's Health Defense - July 16, 2019 Comments
Image Credits: DarkoStojanovic / Pixabay.[Note: This is Part IX in a series of articles adapted from the second Children’s Health Defense eBook: Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health. The first eBook, The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, described how children’s health began to worsen dramatically in the late 1980s following fateful changes in the childhood vaccine schedule.]
The vaccine industry and its government and scientific partners routinely block meaningful science and fabricate misleading studies about vaccines.
They could not do so, however, without having enticed medical journals into a mutually beneficial bargain. Pharmaceutical companies supply journals with needed income, and in return, journals play a key role in suppressing studies that raise critical questions about vaccine risks—which would endanger profits.
The Truth Behind The Flu Vaccine The Mom Street Journal’s Lori Gregory joins David Knight to discuss the trend behind the flu vaccine, stem cells, and her experiences working to stop the mandatory vaccines.
An Exclusive and Dependent Relationship
Advertising is one of the most obviously beneficial ways that medical journals’ “exclusive and dependent relationship” with the pharmaceutical industry plays out. According to a 2006 analysis in PLOS Medicine, drugs and medical devices are the only products for which medical journals accept advertisements. Studies show that journal advertising generates “the highest return on investment of all promotional strategies employed by pharmaceutical companies.” The pharmaceutical industry puts a particularly “high value on advertising its products in print journals” because journals reach doctors—the “gatekeeper between drug companies and patients.” Almost nine in ten drug advertising dollars are directed at physicians.
In the U.S. in 2012, drug companies spent $24 billion marketing to physicians, with only $3 billion spent on direct-to-consumer advertising. By 2015, however, consumer-targeted advertising had jumped to $5.2 billion, a 60% increase that has reaped bountiful rewards. In 2015, Pfizer’s Prevnar-13 vaccine was the nation’s eighth most heavily advertised drug; after the launch of the intensive advertising campaign, Prevnar “awareness” increased by over 1,500% in eight months, and “44% of targeted consumers were talking to their physicians about getting vaccinated specifically with Prevnar.” Slick ad campaigns have also helped boost uptake of “unpopular” vaccines like Gardasil.
Advertising is such an established part of journals’ modus operandi that high-end journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) boldly invite medical marketers to “make NEJM the cornerstone of their advertising programs,” promising “no greater assurance that your ad will be seen, read, and acted upon.” In addition, medical journals benefit from pharmaceutical companies’ bulk purchases of thousands of journal reprints and industry’s sponsorship of journal subscriptions and journal supplements.
In 2003, an editor at The BMJ wrote about the numerous ways in which drug company advertising can bias medical journals (and the practice of medicine)—all of which still hold true today. For example:
- Advertising monies enable prestigious journals to get thousands of copies into doctors’ hands for free, which “almost certainly” goes on to affect prescribing.
- Journals are willing to accept even the most highly misleading advertisements. The FDA has flagged numerous instances of advertising violations, including ads that overstated a drug’s effectiveness or minimized its risks.
- Journals will guarantee favorable editorial mentions of a product in order to earn a company’s advertising dollars.
- Journals can earn substantial fees for publishing supplements even when they are written by “paid industry hacks”—and the more favorable the supplement content is to the company that is funding it, the bigger the profit for the journal.
Industry-Funded Bias
According to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), nearly three-fourths of all funding for clinical trials in the U.S.—presumably including vaccine trials—came from corporate sponsors as of the early 2000s. The pharmaceutical industry’s funding of studies (and investigators) is a factor that helps determine which studies get published, and where. As a Johns Hopkins University researcher has acknowledged, funding can lead to bias—and while the potential exists for governmental or departmental funding to produce bias, “the worst source of bias is industry-funded.”
In 2009, researchers published a systematic review of several hundred influenza vaccine trials. Noting “growing doubts about the validity of the scientific evidence underpinning [influenza vaccine] policy recommendations,” the authors showed that the vaccine-favorable studies were “of significantly lower methodological quality”; however, even these poor-quality studies—when funded by the pharmaceutical industry—got far more attention than equivalent studies not funded by industry. The authors commented:
[Studies] sponsored by industry had greater visibility as they were more likely to be published by high impact factor journals and were likely to be given higher prominence by the international scientific and lay media, despite their apparent equivalent methodological quality and size compared with studies with other funders.
In their discussion, the authors also described how the industry’s vast resources enable lavish and strategic dissemination of favorable results. For example, companies often distribute “expensively bound” abstracts and reprints (translated into various languages) to “decision makers, their advisors, and local researchers,” while also systematically plugging their studies at symposia and conferences.
The World Health Organization’s standards describe reporting of clinical trial results as a “scientific, ethical, and moral responsibility.” However, it appears that as many as half of all clinical trial results go unreported—particularly when their results are negative. A European official involved in drug assessment has described the problem as “widespread,” citing as an example GSK’s suppression of results from four clinical trials for an anti-anxiety drug when those results showed a possible increased risk of suicide in children and adolescents. Experts warn that “unreported studies leave an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the risks and benefits of treatments.”
Debased and Biased Results
The “significant association between funding sources and pro-industry conclusions” can play out in many different ways, notably through methodological bias and debasement of study designs and analytic strategies. Bias may be present in the form of inadequate sample sizes, short follow-up periods, inappropriate placebos or comparisons, use of improper surrogate endpoints, unsuitable statistical analyses or “misleading presentation of data.”
Occasionally, high-level journal insiders blow the whistle on the corruption of published science. In a widely circulated quote, Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of NEJM, acknowledged that “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” Dr. Angell added that she “[took] no pleasure in this conclusion, which [she] reached slowly and reluctantly” over two decades at the prestigious journal.
Many vaccine studies flagrantly illustrate biases and selective reporting that produce skewed write-ups that are more marketing than science. In formulaic articles that medical journals are only too happy to publish, the conclusion is almost always the same, no matter the vaccine: “We did not identify any new or unexpected safety concerns.” As an example of the use of inappropriate statistical techniques to exaggerate vaccine benefits, an influenza vaccine study reported a “69% efficacy rate” even though the vaccine failed “nearly all who [took] it.” As explained by Dr. David Brownstein, the study’s authors used a technique called relative risk analysis to derive their 69% statistic because it can make “a poorly performing drug or therapy look better than it actually is.” However, the absolute risk difference between the vaccine and the placebo group was 2.27%, meaning that the vaccine “was nearly 98% ineffective in preventing the flu.”
Trusted Evidence?
In 2018, the Cochrane Collaboration—which bills its systematic reviews as the international gold standard for high-quality, “trusted” evidence—furnished conclusions about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine that clearly signaled industry bias. In May of that year, Cochrane’s highly favorable review improbably declared the vaccine to have no increased risk of serious adverse effects and judged deaths observed in HPV studies “not to be related to the vaccine.” Cochrane claims to be free of conflicts of interest, but its roster of funders includes national governmental bodies and international organizations pushing for HPV vaccine mandates as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation—both of which are staunch funders and supporters of HPV vaccination. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s president is a former top CDC official who served as acting CDC director during the H1N1 “false pandemic” in 2009 that ensured millions in windfall profits for vaccine manufacturers.
Two months after publication of Cochrane’s HPV review, researchers affiliated with the Nordic Cochrane Centre (one of Cochrane’s member centers) published an exhaustive critique, declaring that the reviewers had done an incomplete job and had “ignored important evidence of bias.” The critics itemized numerous methodological and ethical missteps on the part of the Cochrane reviewers, including failure to count nearly half of the eligible HPV vaccine trials, incomplete assessment of serious and systemic adverse events and failure to note that many of the reviewed studies were industry-funded. They also upbraided the Cochrane reviewers for not paying attention to key design flaws in the original clinical trials, including the failure to use true placebos and the use of surrogate outcomes for cervical cancer.
In response to the criticisms, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library initially stated that a team of editors would investigate the claims “as a matter of urgency.” Instead, however, Cochrane’s Governing Board quickly expelled one of the critique’s authors, Danish physician-researcher Peter Gøtzsche, who helped found Cochrane and was the head of the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Gøtzsche has been a vocal critic of Cochrane’s “increasingly commercial business model,” which he suggests is resulting in “stronger and stronger resistance to say anything that could bother pharmaceutical industry interests.” Adding insult to injury, Gøtzsche’s direct employer, the Rigshospitalet hospital in Denmark, then fired Gøtzsche. In response, Dr. Gøtzsche stated, “Firing me sends the unfortunate signal that if your research results are inconvenient and cause public turmoil, or threaten the pharmaceutical industry’s earnings, …you will be sacked.” In March 2019, Gøtzsche launched an independent Institute for Scientific Freedom.
In 2019, the editor-in-chief and research editor of BMJ Evidence Based Medicine—the journal that published the critique of Cochrane’s biased review—jointly defended the critique as having “provoke[d] healthy debate and pose[d] important questions,” affirming the value of publishing articles that “hold organisations to account.” They added that “Academic freedom means communicating ideas, facts and criticism without being censored, targeted or reprimanded” and urged publishers not to “shrink from offering criticisms that may be considered inconvenient.”
The Censorship Tsunami
Another favored tactic is to keep vaccine-critical studies out of medical journals altogether, either by refusing to publish them (even if peer reviewers recommend their publication) or by concocting excuses to pull articles after publication. In recent years, a number of journals have invented bogus excuses to withdraw or retract articles critical of risky vaccine ingredients, even when written by top international scientists. To cite just three examples:
- The journal Vaccine withdrew a study that questioned the safety of the aluminum adjuvantused in Gardasil.
- The journal Science and Engineering Ethics retracted an article that made a case for greater transparency regarding the link between mercury and autism.
- Pharmacological Research withdrew a published veterinary article that implicated aluminum-containing vaccines in a mystery illness decimating sheep, citing “concerns” from an anonymous reader.
The viewpoints expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Infowars.
https://www.infowars.com/peter-thiel-woke-google-employees-prefer-communist-china-to-america/
Peter Thiel: “Woke” Google Employees Prefer Communist China to America
Aiding in transfer of AI technology because of their “woke” anti-American politics
Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com - July 16, 2019 Comments
Billionaire investor Peter Thiel says one reason for Google aiding in the transfer of AI technology to the Chinese military in favor of America is that “woke” Google employees are anti-American and prefer China to the U.S.
Thiel appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show following his call on Sunday for Google to be federally investigated for allowing itself to be infiltrated by the Chinese and the “treasonous decision” to hand them secretive technology.
Peter Thiel says Google employees are aiding the Chinese military in the transfer of advanced technology because of their progressive politics.
Asked why Google was working with the Communist Chinese military on breakthrough AI technology, Thiel said one explanation was the fear that China would acquire the technology anyway via the back door if it was not given to them.
However, according to Thiel, another explanation is the far-left political environment that dominates Silicon Valley.
“There’s probably a broad base of Google employees that are ideologically super left wing, sort of woke, and think that China’s better than the U.S. or that the U.S. is worse than China – it’s more anti-American than anything,” said Thiel.
https://www.infowars.com/big-tech-execs-head-to-capitol-hill-for-antitrust-hearing/
Big Tech Execs Head to Capitol Hill For Antitrust Hearing
House Judiciary Committee to discuss probes of tech giants
Reuters - July 16, 2019 Comments
Image Credits: LIONEL BONAVENTURE/AFP/Getty Images.
Executives from tech giants Apple Inc, Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc and Alphabet’s Google go before the House Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel Tuesday to discuss competition in online markets.
The committee is likely to discuss antitrust probes of the four companies under way at the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission, as well as allegations that the companies seek to thwart nascent competitors.
Adam Berry/Getty Images Democrats, in particular, are expected to press Facebook about a proposed $5 billion settlement between the company and the FTC to resolve allegations that the company violated a 2011 consent agreement by inappropriately sharing information on 87 million users with the now-defunct British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica.
Read more
https://www.infowars.com/tucker-antifa-has-the-support-of-the-respectable-left/
Tucker: Antifa has the support of the ‘respectable’ left
Antifa praises member who was killed during attack on detention center in Tacoma
Fox News - July 16, 2019 Comments
Antifa praises member who was killed during attack on detention center in Tacoma
Big Tech Execs Head to Capitol Hill For Antitrust Hearing
House Judiciary Committee to discuss probes of tech giants
Reuters - July 16, 2019 Comments
Image Credits: LIONEL BONAVENTURE/AFP/Getty Images.Executives from tech giants Apple Inc, Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc and Alphabet’s Google go before the House Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel Tuesday to discuss competition in online markets.
The committee is likely to discuss antitrust probes of the four companies under way at the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission, as well as allegations that the companies seek to thwart nascent competitors.
Read more
https://www.infowars.com/tucker-antifa-has-the-support-of-the-respectable-left/
Tucker: Antifa has the support of the ‘respectable’ left
Antifa praises member who was killed during attack on detention center in Tacoma
Fox News - July 16, 2019 Comments
Antifa praises member who was killed during attack on detention center in Tacoma
F
Frylock
Do you buy Alex's little 'Super Alpha Mega Macho Pimp Juice' potions?
https://www.infowars.com/soros-runn...migrants-they-will-get-free-stuff-in-the-usa/
Soros Running Ads In Central America Telling Migrants They Will Get Free Stuff In The USA
“They say if we come to the United States we can find work,” one illegal confesses
Infowars.com - July 15, 2019 Comments
Illegal immigrants tell a local news reporter they came to the United States because they saw advertisements online, in newspapers and on TV talking about the loads of free handouts that await them in the United States.
“They say if we come to the United States we can find work,” one man tells KGBT CBS4 reporter Sydney Hernandez, who recently witnessed close to 300 illegals cross the border in a single night.
“Yes,” another illegal confirms, “we’ve been told that, we read it on our newspapers. That’s why we’re here.”
Hernandez says every illegal immigrant she interviewed says they came to the US “because free American services and assistance are being advertised in their home countries.”
Rob Dew @DewsNewz
If you are wondering why so many people think they will get free shit when they cross the border, watch this video. If you are wondering who is buying all this advertising of free shit ... #SOROS
Soros Running Ads In Central America Telling Migrants They Will Get Free Stuff In The USA
“They say if we come to the United States we can find work,” one illegal confesses
Infowars.com - July 15, 2019 Comments
Illegal immigrants tell a local news reporter they came to the United States because they saw advertisements online, in newspapers and on TV talking about the loads of free handouts that await them in the United States.
“They say if we come to the United States we can find work,” one man tells KGBT CBS4 reporter Sydney Hernandez, who recently witnessed close to 300 illegals cross the border in a single night.
“Yes,” another illegal confirms, “we’ve been told that, we read it on our newspapers. That’s why we’re here.”
Hernandez says every illegal immigrant she interviewed says they came to the US “because free American services and assistance are being advertised in their home countries.”
Rob Dew @DewsNewz If you are wondering why so many people think they will get free shit when they cross the border, watch this video. If you are wondering who is buying all this advertising of free shit ... #SOROS
You guys know how suppliments make you healthy. Ever heard of cannabis hemp?
Please refer to the articles being posted. Thanks!
https://www.newswars.com/trump-admin-announces-major-crackdown-on-migrant-surge-at-southern-border/
Trump Admin Announces Major Crackdown on Migrant Surge at Southern Border
President moves to end asylum entitlements for most migrants
Image Credits: David Peinado/NurPhoto via Getty Images.
By Dan Lyman Monday, July 15, 2019
The Trump administration has announced new asylum policies that would effectively end asylum entitlements for the vast majority of migrants reaching the southern border.
The “Third-Country Asylum Rule” issued in a bulletin by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) signals a major crackdown on asylum claims along the Mexican border.
The new rule to be published imminently in the Federal Register reads as follows:
“This IFR uses the authority delegated by Congress in section 208(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance the integrity of the asylum process by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States. Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States.”
(1) an alien who demonstrates that he or she applied for protection from persecution or torture in at least one of the countries through which the alien transited en route to the United States, and the alien received a final judgment denying the alien protection in such country;
(2) an alien who demonstrates that he or she satisfies the definition of “victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons” provided in 8 C.F.R. § 214.11; or,
Brain Force Plus - Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind!
(3) an alien who has transited en route to the United States through only a country or countries that were not parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967 Protocol, or the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Attorney General William Barr has acknowledged the full legality and necessity of the rule.
“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum,” reads Barr’s statement in the bulletin. “The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border.”
“This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”
The southern border continues to be inundated with hundreds of thousands of migrants from all over the world, including a surge from African countries such as the Congo, which is currently in the midst of a historic Ebola outbreak.
Trump Admin Announces Major Crackdown on Migrant Surge at Southern Border
President moves to end asylum entitlements for most migrants
Image Credits: David Peinado/NurPhoto via Getty Images.
By Dan Lyman Monday, July 15, 2019
The Trump administration has announced new asylum policies that would effectively end asylum entitlements for the vast majority of migrants reaching the southern border.
The “Third-Country Asylum Rule” issued in a bulletin by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) signals a major crackdown on asylum claims along the Mexican border.
The new rule to be published imminently in the Federal Register reads as follows:
“This IFR uses the authority delegated by Congress in section 208(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance the integrity of the asylum process by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States. Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States.”
Three key restrictions to the rule are explained as follows:(1) an alien who demonstrates that he or she applied for protection from persecution or torture in at least one of the countries through which the alien transited en route to the United States, and the alien received a final judgment denying the alien protection in such country;
(2) an alien who demonstrates that he or she satisfies the definition of “victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons” provided in 8 C.F.R. § 214.11; or,
Brain Force Plus - Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind!
(3) an alien who has transited en route to the United States through only a country or countries that were not parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967 Protocol, or the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Attorney General William Barr has acknowledged the full legality and necessity of the rule.
“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum,” reads Barr’s statement in the bulletin. “The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border.”
“This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”
The southern border continues to be inundated with hundreds of thousands of migrants from all over the world, including a surge from African countries such as the Congo, which is currently in the midst of a historic Ebola outbreak.
F
Frylock
Do you think Trump was being deceitful telling troops that they were getting their fist raise in 10 years when they get a raise every year?
Or maybe he just misspoke?
I will leave your thread alone from now on....
Or maybe he just misspoke?
I will leave your thread alone from now on....
'Papers?! - We ain't got no stinking papers!'
*1930's Mexican accent.
Treasure of the Sierra Madre - Humphrey Bogart and all.
Settle down lads/laddette's - diversity of opinion is what a good debate should be about - so lets not get so personal.
*1930's Mexican accent.
Treasure of the Sierra Madre - Humphrey Bogart and all.
Settle down lads/laddette's - diversity of opinion is what a good debate should be about - so lets not get so personal.
Last edited:
- Status
