Retreat to Sanity

I’m new to the work of Dr. Malcolm Kendrick but a skim of his blog suggests he has many wise things to say and has written several books that I intend to read.

I was unable to find many videos with Dr. Kendrick, and some that were on YouTube have been deleted by censors, but I did very much enjoy this must watch November 2020 discussion on Covid19.

Today’s essay by Dr. Kendrick may be the best I’ve read on Covid19 and nicely articulates how I’ve been feeling of late.

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2021/09/03/i-have-not-been-silenced/

Despite Dr. Kendrick’s expertise, intelligence, curiosity, and determination, he has been unable to determine what is true about Covid19, and has decided to retreat to sanity.

My self-appointed role within the COVID19 mayhem, was to search for the truth – as far as it could be found – and to attempt to provide useful information for those who wish to read my blog.

The main reason for prolonged silence, and introspection, is that I am not sure I can find the truth. I do not know if it can be found anymore. Today I am unsure what represents a fact, and what has simply been made up. A sad and scary state of affairs.

… So, I have given up on COVID19. It is a complete mess, and I feel that, without being certain of the ground under my feet, I have nothing to contribute. I too am in danger of starting to make statements that are not true.

… faced with a situation where there are almost no facts that can be relied upon, from anywhere, I have officially removed myself from all discussions on the matter of COVID19.

Instead, I shall return to other areas where, whilst the truth is constantly battered and bruised, and lying in a bruised heap the corner, it is still breathing … just about alive. Sometimes it is capable of weakly raising its head and whispering quietly into my ear. I shall let you know what it says.

Before departing the arena Dr. Kendrick summarized what he believes is true about Covid19:

  • SARS-CoV2 probably resulted from gain of function research in the Wuhan lab, but we’ll probably never know for certain.
  • The current versions of SARS-CoV2 are a bit more deadly than our modern influenzas with an infection fatality rate (IFR) of about 0.15%.
  • None of the test data can be trusted.
  • It is impossible to compare the effectiveness of various strategies using available data.
  • Misinformation exists on all sides of the debate.
  • Everyone has an agenda including the fact-checkers.

I’m going to try to follow Kendrick’s lead and return my focus to the many much more important overshoot issues that are grounded in reliable science that we collectively deny.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

150 Comments

AJ
AJ
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 21, 2021 2:24 am

I read the whole Pettis article. It was illuminating. It also shows how dire our overshoot problems are. China is addicted to growth, just as the world is, but only more so. They are trying to get politically correct growth and just not debt fueled bubble growth. How we would transition to de-growth or anything more sustainable doesn’t seem to be a question that is getting asked. It appears China’s leadership is focused on short term control of their society and ascendancy over the West. Denial of overshoot appears to be rampant in their leadership too. This won’t end well.
AJ

Martin
Martin
Reply to  AJ
September 21, 2021 9:12 am

And here is an interesting overview of the – increasing – environmental problems China is facing: https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-08-30/china-2049/

Not sure if they have a plan to somehow address all this.

Shawn
Shawn
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 21, 2021 5:27 am

I wonder however if any of the economic ideas developed during the period of rapidly increasing fossil fuel energy production (Dr. Nate Hagens has provided this insight) will be applicable, as energy production declines and involuntary degrowth begins.

In some of this traditional economic thinking, there are a few who now think the central banks and specifically the Federal Reserve can keep assets prices up indefinitely through money “printing, ” until the point at which hyperinflation takes hold and utterly destroys the value of the currencies. Presumably asset values collapse at that point in any case. However, equities, relative to some other assets, might retain more value as sources of dividend distributions in whatever future currency is put in place.

But, logically speaking, in world of negative growth, equities should have should have very little value. The theoretical value of equities depends upon projected revenue growth and the discounted cash flow of an increasing stream of profit distributions to shareholders into the future, usually 20-25 years. So in negative growth equities should be worth like, zero, or near to it. (Oil companies now only retain value today be telling a good story, and cutting capital investment expenses (cap ex) and borrowing to pay dividends.)

However, if we are in fact now on the path to negative growth in industrial production as in the LTGrowth BAU scenario, some strange things could happen not predicable the usual economic theory.

Here is a speculation on one possible unusual near term future for equities: As the world of involuntary degrowth comes into view, most stock markets decline massively in aggregate value, after a financial or geopolitical crisis of some kind. BUT, the stocks of a few winner-take-all companies, like tech stocks Apple, Google, some industrial stocks, some agricultural stocks, retain some relative value as the “chosen ones,” as governments move their economies more towards a state sponsored industrial system and an electronic surveillance and population control state. Maybe we are already seeing that in development?

Maybe we get 10 years of that kind of future before breakdown of that system from further resource shortages and environmental stress. As I said, just speculation. The future usually spills out differently from what I think will happen. I suffer some cognitive dissonance almost every day when friends and family tell me about how much their 401K accounts have increased in value, and what they are going to be doing with all that money in their retirement.

David Pursel
David Pursel
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 20, 2021 7:13 pm

Yeah, however most of us here know that Fauci, Daczak et al are “too big” to be charged, convicted and imprisoned (or otherwise punished) for these criminal, exceptionally harmful activities. And most of us here also know that gain-of-function research should have never been allowed/approved. Alas, it is all too human.

BTW, I’ve finally read most of the dieoff.com material and it’s been brutal (if in a “good”, reality-based, un-Denial way) for me. Especially the excerpt from Tadeusz Borowski’s “This Way for the Gas, Ladies and Gentleman” –> https://dieoff.com/page226.htm. It’s been a long time since I’ve read something that shook me that deeply and I feel somewhat ashamed (or maybe sad, or something) that I hadn’t read it before now. It should be required reading for every human so that we might better understand our immense capacity for evil (and how banal it can be).

Ken Barrows
Ken Barrows
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 20, 2021 7:55 pm

Get with the program, China! You must keep increasing debt faster than income. This is not a worry because there is infinite, cheap energy to generate the activity needed to pay off said debt. Don’t make life difficult.

gwb
gwb
Reply to  Ken Barrows
September 20, 2021 9:09 pm

This movie classic is as relevant today as it’s ever been.

smokie
smokie
September 13, 2021 2:07 pm

Noam Chomsky says, “people who refuse to accept vaccines I think the right response for them is not to force them to but rather to insist that they be isolated”…

I’m sitting in the corner with my pointy hat as I type this.

smokie
smokie
September 13, 2021 1:41 pm

I apologize for copying the entire article (paywall) but I found it worth the read. I did my best.

‘The woke don’t give a reason for their faith. It’s different rules of engagement’

After ten years trying to do the job he loved, Peter Boghossian describes writing his resignation letter as brutal. He always felt that it was his professional duty as an assistant professor of philosophy to apply the same spirit of rigorous interrogation that underpins his own discipline to the “dominant moral orthodoxy” on campus: wokeism.

He ruf­fled feathers. He was repeatedly investigated by his university’s “global diversity and inclusion of­fice”. He really upset many of his fellow academics by writing spoof research papers and placing them in social science journals to highlight questionable academic standards in fields such as gender studies.

Boghossian — the name comes from his paternal grandparents, who emigrated from Armenia to the United States — was thrust into the national spotlight this week by his letter accusing Portland State University in Oregon of becoming a “social justice factory” where students are “being trained to mimic the moral certainty of ideologues” rather than think for themselves.

The attack reverberated across academia and seemed to sum up much that is going wrong in an era when the clash of ideas seems to have been quashed by a conformity of thought.

“That letter truly was the hardest thing I ever wrote, and I’ve written a ton of stuff,” says Boghossian, 55, in a phone interview from his home in Portland. “And then when I hit ‘send’ I never felt so free. I wasn’t going to be complicit in the system any more, a system that was ostensibly set up to help people but has betrayed the public trust. I just couldn’t bear it any more.”

He has been inundated with emails of support from academics, students, “people I don’t even know”, as well as media requests. In the US, however, the interest has all been from one side of a polarised nation.

“There’s been a feeding frenzy to get me on conservative news shows,” says Boghossian, who backed Andrew Yang, a maverick entrepreneur, in the Democratic primary, and who told an interviewer a few years ago that he had never voted Republican. “I don’t consider myself a conservative! Not a single liberal or left-of-centre show has invited me. And I put out a message [on Twitter] saying I would love to have a conversation.”

During a long and varied career, he has co-written a book called How to Have Impossible Conversations. That’s not what academia appears capable of doing at the moment, he says. He believes the kind of Socratic dialogue that he tried to teach students from day one is being purged from campus. As he put it in his letter, rather than a “bastion of free inquiry” the university had become a place where the “only inputs were race, gender, and victimhood and whose only outputs were grievance and division”.

He may have found freedom but sounded exasperated and exhausted on the phone. “We need to have these conversations,” he said. “We are talking about our engines of knowledge production. We are talking about our university system.”

How did it come to this? It’s complicated, he says. The high cost of university in the US may have contributed, with a fear of not of­fending the student customer or making them feel unsafe lest they take dollars elsewhere.

“I think that is a little part of it but it is a problem that has many parts. There is not just one answer to how we got into this mess. The fact that universities have become a business, that is part of the problem. But I don’t think it plays that much of a role because you’re talking about true believers here.”

Once upon a time the edgy malcontent was a feature of most university departments, beloved by students even if they were a thorn in the side of the administration. The accolades Boghossian has received on ratemyprofessors.com generally sing his praises. “You will not find another prof like him. He critiques what academics are too scared to and of­fers an insightful and eye-opening perspective,” says one (all reviews are anonymous).

“Peter is one of the coolest teachers I have had. I think his critical thinking class could be one of the most helpful classes I will take in my college experience,” says another.

A third student writes: “I personally am a bit of a social justice warrior and am very liberal, queer, and feminist, and I really appreciate what Peter is bringing to the table. It is unfortunate that he has been painted as a villain — he isn’t. If you really listen to him, you’ll see he is on your side.”

Another notes: “The only downside is that his real passion these days is anti-wokeness, and it seeped into most lectures in the form of mini-rants.”

Boghossian’s crusade against the dominance of grievance culture on campus led to a steady accumulation of recriminations. They became unbearable. In 2016 he faced a formal inquiry into a series of baseless accusations from a former student. “Students of mine who were interviewed told me the investigator asked them if they knew anything about me beating my wife and children. This horrifying accusation soon became a widespread rumour.”

The global diversity and inclusion of­fice eventually concluded that there was “insuf­ficient evidence that he violated PSU’s prohibited discrimination and harassment policy”. Nevertheless, he was no longer “allowed to render my opinion about ‘protected classes’ or teach in such a way that my opinion about ‘protected classes’ could be known”. Protected class is a legal term covering groups based on sex, race, creed and other categories, or, as Boghossian puts it, “a protected class is somebody whose ancestors have been historically oppressed”. He believes it was meant to stop him challenging campus orthodoxy. “If somebody says, ‘Do you think African-Americans should be enslaved?’, I’m not allowed to render my opinion about that. It’s crazy.”

“Examples that would come up in ethics class: should there be separate bathrooms for men and women? Should there be reparations based on historical injustices? If you want to do ethics in any meaningful way, they have to come up in an ethics class.” He felt he was being prevented from doing his job. Even so, in an act of rebellion as much as scholarship, he continued to stir things up with a campaign to publish bogus social science papers, saying that he “became convinced that corrupted bodies of scholarship were responsible for justifying radical departures from the traditional role of liberal arts schools and basic civility on campus”.

The first, The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct, was published in Cogent Social Sciences. It argued that penises were products of the human mind and responsible for climate change. He immediately revealed it was a hoax and why he did it. Swastikas began appearing on campus written with his name on them. “They also occasionally showed up on my of­fice door, in one instance accompanied by bags of faeces.”

He prepared 20 more hoax papers with two co-authors to “shake the university from its madness”. Seven were published, including one that argued there was an epidemic of dog rape at dog parks and proposing “that we leash men the way we leash dogs”. He said: “Our purpose was to show that certain kinds of scholarship are based not on finding truth but on advancing social grievances.”

It meant another university inquiry. Some colleagues accused him of harassment for tweeting about them; in one case Boghossian highlighted an article entitled “Math is racist” based on a book examining how algorithms and big data were “targeting the poor, reinforcing racism” that was shared by a fellow academic with students. The tweet was picked up by conservative media, which ridiculed the academic as woke. More questions from the global diversity and inclusion of­fice.

He defended his use of Twitter to stir debate in a letter to the Chronicle of Higher Education, saying: “Extramural criticism is one of the few avenues left now that academic journals have become echo chambers that reinforce and promote specific ideological lenses.”

Boghossian said that he tried to engage with his campus critics but to no avail. “I invited my colleagues from the women, gender, and sexuality studies department to join me on stage . . . and then again at an on-campus public event days later. They declined or ignored the invitations.” He says that non-engagement with critics is one of the defining traits of wokeism. “I teach the arguments for the existence of God. But I’m an atheist, I don’t believe those arguments. So I try to bring in people who believe those arguments. That’s what education should be.

“It is built into the Bible in 1 Peter 3:15 that you should be able to give a reason for your faith. It is exactly the opposite with the woke. It is baked into their ideology that you don’t talk to Nazis. Even having a conversation is looked at as empowering. And so there’s no point in having a conversation with someone, particularly if they’re privileged . . . They have dif­ferent rules of engagement.”

He does not have high hopes that the rot, as he sees it, can be reversed. “To teach in this country you need a teaching certificate. You have to go through teacher education. The problem is that virtually all of our [teacher training] institutions have been indoctrinated into social justice ideology, the woke mindset.”

Boghossian, who was born and grew up in the Boston area before heading over to the west coast “for love”, also spent some time living in London before taking up his appointment in Portland. He would go along to Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park to listen to debate and was alarmed to hear that a woman was slashed with a knife there in July. “I’m not that familiar with the structures of [British] universities and the safeguards you have in place but my guess would be that it’s coming, it is only a matter of time. It’s just a guess, I could be wrong.”

The relentless investigations sapped his desire to continue. He has set up a charitable foundation, the National Progress Alliance, “to promote free expression and civil discourse in the current culture war through grants, partnerships, educational material, and incubation of emerging organisations and influencers”. It is little more than a website at the moment but he has been encouraged by support from across the academic world.

“I love teaching but slowly the university made it impossible for me to do the thing I was hired to do,” he says. “I don’t teach maths, I teach reason. I teach ethics, I teach critical thinking, and there will be issues that come up in those classes that some people simply won’t like. If you’re teaching accounting and you put the number 54 in a ledger, nobody’s going to tell you they’re of­fended about that. But philosophy should challenge your thoughts, that’s what Socrates did, that’s what all philosophy has been, it has been a history of examination and challenging and questioning. But the university didn’t allow me to do that.”

His new crusade is to promote “cognitive liberty”, the freedom for students to reach judgments based on the battle of ideas rather than measure them against the moral certitude of wokeism. “The problem is you have people who don’t see the university as a symposium, as a place where people come for a dialectic and a conversation, they view the university as a kind of church,” he says. “And they have the right answers to moral questions. And anybody who doesn’t agree is a heretic who needs to be silenced. That is an injustice to our students. FIN

smokie
smokie
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 14, 2021 10:41 am

Boghossian is on rung one or two of the ladder of awareness according to Paul Chefurka. I would venture a guess that more than 7.78 billion people are hanging out with this guy. No surprise there given that education is now a business: We must have “conformity of thought” in order to get the students through the system.

“Socratic dialogue” is gone (Yes, I’m referring to Ugo Bardi’s blog and to my “favorite” troll – links below). How does one even attempt to climb higher on that ladder of awareness when “our engines of knowledge production … become echo chambers that reinforce and promote specific ideological lenses”? Even doomers fall prey to this. As the saying goes, at the end of the day it all boils down to we are nothing more than an evolutionary oopsie. Or as William Catton said pond scum.

On another note, Hagens (Reality Blind) explained one of our limitless fantasies: “These are prices set by markets of buyers and sellers, and markets bounce up and down because they’re based not just on ‘supply and demand,’ but the belief of buyers and sellers of where ‘supply and demand’ will be in the future. These prices do not directly reflect the costs of extracting and producing oil.”

Limitless fantasies and stories. Gather around children for I have another story to tell….

The comment (apneaman nee moresoma – https://thesenecaeffect.blogspot.com/2021/07/when-ice-will-be-gone-another-kind-of.html#comment-form

The response – https://thesenecaeffect.blogspot.com/2021/08/consensus-building-art-that-we-are.html

theblondbeast
theblondbeast
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 14, 2021 11:31 am

Good point – I’d rejoinder that if any of your list are actually possible to address it seems like great unity of action will be required. This unity of action could perhaps come from totalitarianism, or perhaps from cooperation. It seems to me like we’ll get the worst of both worlds – woke totalitarianism, committed to impossible goals, in universal denial.

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 19, 2021 6:58 am

Rob,
Re: Boghossian. You’ve mentioned a few times your frustration at how logic and facts have failed you in conversations with friends. In “How to Have Impossible Conversations” Boghossian details how and why this happens and offers solutions on how to seek truth collaboratively. I’ve read his book twice and I’m still a novice at this. The first rule is about facts. Bad facts, bad! Not everyone forms their beliefs on evidence or facts. As you are painfully aware, most of us do a crap job of basing our beliefs on evidence and we tend to seek out confirming evidence.

Here are a few tips from his book you might find helpful. Ask disconfirming questions such as “what facts or evidence would cause you to change your mind?” or “under what conditions could that belief be false?” or try using a scale “where do you place your confidence in that belief on a scale of 1-10?” If someone states their beliefs are not disconfirmable then you know you’re in trouble & dealing with an ideologue and it’s really about values.

So if you give them a fact about overshoot and the need for pop reduction they reply with“you just don’t care about children” or “you’re a misanthrope – you hate humanity.” Value differences are at the core of most impossible conversations. These convos on the surface can seem to be about facts but they are really about moral issues rooted in the ideologues sense of identity and their self perception as a moral person. All you can do at that point is realize what and who you’re dealing with and introduce doubt into their moral epistemology and try to reframe.

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  smokie
September 13, 2021 8:36 pm

Catapulting a steaming pile of flaming manure into the Admin office while playing Flight of the Valkyries would have been a more effective resignation.

Mandrake
Mandrake
September 10, 2021 10:53 pm

Off topic…but I wonder what happened to ole Dan the Miami Beach Grim Reaper? I enjoyed following his antics. Last I heard he got accused by the law of “violating rules of professional conduct” which in Florida I guess rises to the standard of lurking around in a black robe and blocking the sacred tanning rays of Spring Breakers. The scythe might have been a tad intimidating, especially to the safe space crowd. No doubt walking around in the equivalent of a burka and getting sand flies up his skirts slowed him down some – and calling out “I am death” probably got a bit old too. If I’d run into him I’d definitely have invited him out for a beer, some salmon pate and possibly a game of chess.

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 11, 2021 7:33 am

That get-up had to be mucho uncomfortable. Cue pic of derrière of gal playing beach volleyball – If you’re going to get sand up your bum this is how you do it.

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  Mandrake
September 11, 2021 7:50 am

Sorry Rob, I guess it’s not that kind of website. Back to Ivermectin and pass the pate.

jim
jim
September 10, 2021 6:09 am

The basic problem with these vaccines is that during the product development stage they used Reduction in the severity of Symptoms as the metric of success. They did not use prevention of infection as the measure of success. So that is what they developed a “vaccine” that reduces the severity of symptoms of covid but does not prevent people from getting and transmitting the virus. In the short run that probably has some benefit but in the long run you can make the virus worse. But hey that is a win- win for the pharmaceutical companies.

AJ
AJ
Reply to  jim
September 10, 2021 12:19 pm

I wonder if it was ever possible to have a non-sterilizing vaccine that would, if given to enough people, conferred immunity? Or, do non-sterilizing vaccines always push for the evolution of variants that escape the vaccine no matter how many people are vaccinated?
AJ

Adam
Adam
Reply to  AJ
September 10, 2021 4:26 pm

I have read that the type of virus matters, due to the mechanism by which they attack the cell. Since this is a coronavirus it is able to mutate quickly and evade the vaccines protections. Also the antibodies created when vaccinated are not long lived in the body, so in a few months any protection has waned. Just a laymen tho!!

madbobul
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 10, 2021 2:55 am

I am affraid that “democratically supported rapid population reduction policies” are inherently self-contradictory.
It looks that only policies that would work are non-democratically implemented…

Generally – majority will never support something that is against our wired nature…

theblondbeast
theblondbeast
September 8, 2021 7:04 am

Of all the things that may be true about Covid-19, there is one I know for sure: Our global response to the issue has comprehensively destroyed any hope I had left that society may respond effectively to energy, environment and overshoot issues. There is nothing for it now but to enjoy the fireworks.

AJ
AJ
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 8, 2021 12:28 pm

Rob,
I would agree with you that if someone isn’t focused on overshoot, overpopulation, and denial or at least mentions them they would be suspect.
I read Fuller’s long piece and he seems to make many good points that one should be suspicious of all of the players. But he seems to not even be aware of the possibility (or discounts it?) that the medical establishment, big pharma and the “science” connected to them could have an incentive to suppress something cheap like Ivermectin/hydroxy chloroquine in favor of making a lot of money, or that keeping or gaining prestige/retaining jobs & status could could play a factor in their pushing vaccines. He doesn’t appear to look at incentives or conflicts of interest very closely, except when it suits him.
AJ

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  theblondbeast
September 11, 2021 9:05 am

That kind of talk will get you banned on Twitter by Michael E. Mann – he considers hard-eyed realists as more objectionable than deniers. I’m somewhat sympathetic to his negative view on passivity, but also believe if we’d been ‘realistic’ about the human predicament, especially decades ago when J. Hanson warned us about the dangers of GW we might have gone down a different path. But probably not given MPP, easy access to FF and the seeming inevitability of overshoot.

The concept of the “global response” is interesting. Take a film like “Home Alone” in which the McCallister family forgets about little Kevin and fly off to Paris without him. Sure it’s just a movie, but it captures the quintessence of how humans F-up at the family level, let alone the band or civilizational level. Frankly I’m thankful things are holding together as well as they are.

Mandrake
Mandrake
Reply to  Mandrake
September 11, 2021 10:26 am

Then again we were capable of putting Man on the moon. Go figure.

Perran Leitch
Perran Leitch
September 8, 2021 5:15 am

I’m not sure if you no longer want any links or comments about the Rona. Let me know and I won’t post anymore if that is the case. I read this article today and found it insightful. I really felt it seemed like an honest critique.
View at Medium.com

Perran
Perran
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 8, 2021 6:06 pm

No I haven’t followed fuller at all and I rather like your litmus test. I only posted it because it came across as an honest attempt at disputing some of the claims around ivermectin etc. There was no labelling of people as right wingers, anti-vaxers or conspiracy theorist. He wasn’t belligerent towards Brett or Heather or anybody else.
I’m reading and listening to the public debate over vaccination in my country at the moment and I’m beginning to feel rather terrified. It is so polarising. I can honestly say that vaccine passports was not my list of things that I’d see on the road to olduvai.

madbobul
September 8, 2021 1:24 am

Just off-topic, I saw Apneaman’s comment on megacancer which I still look at from time to time (to see how strangely thoughts of brilliant people may roam). I hope he is going to come back here as well after long break. I really like his sanity and great comments…

madbobul
September 7, 2021 12:11 am

“I’m going to try to follow Kendrick’s lead and return my focus to the many much more important overshoot issues that are grounded in reliable science that we collectively deny.”

Amen to that. In the beginning of COVID I spent plenty of time and was vividly involved in discussions and any new foundings. But many months ago I just understood that there is no way for layman to learn all the facts and correctly decide what is the real picture. It was just lost of time, energy and other personal resources.
It is definitelly better to focus on the overshoot and related areas – COVID is just small bump on the road (anyway predicted many years ago – doesn’t matter if it is 100% natural, or got some “help” from smart apes).

monkmil
Reply to  madbobul
September 7, 2021 2:58 pm

I agree with you! I just want to be able to remain agnostic about COVID-19 etc. to keep an open mind

smokie
smokie
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 6, 2021 4:49 pm

It’s the Make America Great strategy.

Diogenes' Donkey
Diogenes' Donkey
September 5, 2021 2:22 pm

The banality of evil: NHS document shows GP’s to be paid an additional £10 for every child they inject with a Covid-19 Vaccine on top of the £12.58 already received – & Google are trying to hide it.

https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/09/04/gps-to-be-paid-22-pound-for-every-child-they-inject-with-a-covid-19-vaccine/

Click to access C1384-Vaccinating-children-and-young-people-frequently-asked-questions.pdf

nikoB
nikoB
Reply to  Diogenes' Donkey
September 6, 2021 9:58 pm

If I were to pay the DR £20 do you think I could just get them to just say they injected my kid.

Bev Courtney
Bev Courtney
September 4, 2021 7:45 pm

I’ve been following Dr K. for many years now and was pleasantly surprised to see your comments yesterday at his latest blog. The comments are worth reading too except that they usually number into the hundreds! His books are excellent, especially Doctoring Data. I have some of his videos bookmarked….if they’re still up on YouTube I’ll send you links.

Bev Courtney
Bev Courtney
Reply to  Bev Courtney
September 4, 2021 8:28 pm

Rob, I’ve Googled “Malcolm Kendrick YouTube” and there are many links still working; too many to bother about sending you the links, so have a go yourself.

Bev Courtney
Bev Courtney
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 4, 2021 11:34 pm

I don’t think there ever was much Covid stuff. He’s mainly into heart disease. That video with Ivor Cummins js the only one I remember. He’s written more Covid stuff on the blog and has had warnings from the UK medical establishment about that and his stance on statins.

monkmil
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 5, 2021 1:41 pm

Whoopsie doopsie

theblondbeast
theblondbeast
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 8, 2021 7:09 am

There is a great documentary on our sordid history with water. Cadilac Desert.

It inspired an excellent fiction novel called “The Water Knife” about the governments of near future SW united states fighting over water rights. I highly recommend both as entertaining and informative to those who are collapse informed.

AJ
AJ
Reply to  Rob Mielcarski
September 4, 2021 4:00 pm

Sorry Rob,
I disregarded our previous discussion and watched the power point presentation that the authors’ have on their web site (for the book). I ordered the book. These two scientists seem to get it. The problem is too many people (throw in denial) with too much stuff causes problems that will destroy us. Seems like a potential good read. I’ll let you know in a few weeks (if we are all still around!!).
AJ

Ken Barrows
Ken Barrows
September 4, 2021 7:40 am

The 13th anniversary of the death of capitalism is in a couple of weeks.

AJ
AJ
September 4, 2021 2:14 am

That was the scariest analysis of finance I have read in a long time. If his analysis is correct Xi (Chinese leadership) is seeing a collapse of the worldwide economic system coming soon, and they are attempting to assert a more “communistic” control on the country. The absolutely scariest line of his analysis was that Xi would probably attack Taiwan to divert internal criticism away from the party. Would an attack on Taiwan precipitate nuclear war? It would be the end of the economy as we know it. Collapse is so unruly!
AJ