Goldtent TA Paradise

An interesting article on vaccine trials

1. Fullgoldcrown says:

   January 3, 2021 - 8:49 pm at 8:49 pm

   Karl’s Comments

   A side comment:  I also think the short publication history hints at one of my side concerns.  The author is a physicist.  If the author were a vaccine expert, the author would almost have to be retired — or would be about to be retired (we hope not worse), I am afraid.  He might have no more future in his profession after this article.   The author has presumably not been able to send it out to vaccine experts and other authorities for review.  Probably as a results, the version of this piece that was on the wesbsite earlier had a couple of errors that someone more closely connected to medicine might not have made, or, having made, would have had corrected by colleagues before going public.  One, if I recall correctly, was calculation of relative risk.  Pretty early on someone called the author’s attention to the errors in the comments section, the author responded in the comments section asking the editors to correct the article, and after a while the article was corrected.

   Now I can recommend the article.   I want to editorialize (or pontificate) some more now.

   I recommend to you the concept to distrust even what you like. Clearly official pieces have not been criticized enough, but also plenty of extremely questionable material is put forward on alternative sites.  I mean, really questionable.  I do not have the expertise (or attention span) to find all the crap in all the stuff I see, and I suspect most of you do not either.  Beware.  Over the past months I have seen some real garbage on alternative sites questioning the official narrative, and I just don’t have time or energy to point it out, especially when virtually none of it is any field of expertise of mine.

   I also think it is nice to bear in mind the thought that I or you could be wrong about general concepts.  Perhaps we are wrong to question official narratives — maybe we question too much, not enough, from the wrong angles, who knows.  If we do not automatically believe official thought, we should not necessarily believe any criticisms we see of official thought either.  Be careful!

   I do recommend looking at this piece, carefully, as always, and also the comment section.  I know the comment section at off-guardian, which is minimally censored, tends to fill up after a while with comments that seem possibly designed to discredit the site, or just plain cause clutter.  Right now there are not too many bad comments.  I know which names I tend to trust, but I will let you judge for yourselves if you go there.

   Some other time I will perhaps tell you what I think is an error almost everyone there (and here) makes about COVID-19 when criticizing the official narrative, but I have already commented too much.

2. Kewl2 says:

   January 3, 2021 - 10:58 pm at 10:58 pm

   Karl — I look forward to your comments always!!