virusrex comments

The WHO has ignored its duties especially in Africa, where it has performed miserably with its malaria vaccine programs.

That would be the opposite, since the vast majority of the programs work precisely with the support and guidance of WHO, no success have happened in spite of their actions as you misrepresent, but because of their support.

Obviously the old regulations were failures.

The moment you are unable to produce any reference for this claim you are accepting this is just a personal opinion not shared by the actual experts working in regulations for global public health.

A figure well below what was recorded 20 years ago.

But what can you say about the Mother Nature?

That is very easy, you can say it is not the cause of the increase in the frequency and potency of the disasters, that has been proved to be an effect of human activity derived climate change.

This agency should have listened to global health authorities years ago.

The WHO is the global health authority, and it listen to the data, which is still inconclusive because of the already well known effect of asbestos. Pretending clear data was already available is not the same as that data being actually available. As the article clearly describes there is no clear unequivocal data that points to a specific danger, just a possibility, which is what the current determination describes.

An increase in cardiovascular disease in young men the past few years is troubling

Especially when it happens because of refusal to safe and effective medical interventions like vaccines.

Not being political, but hot weather around this level occurs in Japan every summer. Why do people pretend that it doesn’t?

Temperatures at record high last year (and projected to be even higher at an earlier date this year) mean that this is not something that happens as every summer.

Climate change!

No.

The experts of the world say this is the case, they have arguments and data to prove it.

https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/climate-migration/

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/climate-migration-101-explainer

You on the other hand say the opposite but fail to provide any argument or data to support that claim.

This makes it clear who is actually correct here.

The WHO agency has failed miserably over the past few decades.

Yet when asked for any communication where a respected institution on public health supports this personal claim you make, you end up accepting nobody says so, only you.

This would mean there is no such failure, the WHO is still the world public health authority and its work respected and considered important by the institutions related to human health.

As you have implicitly accepted before, nobody has made as much for the global health as the WHO.

Yeah, last year officials were saying that the vast majority of fires were in Canada were started by people. Now why would people want to do this....?

For a variety of reasons, the article even describe this problem. Which of course is not the cause of the increase to record levels, people have initiated fires since prehistoric times, but the reason why these (and other) fires are now out of control is the effect of human activity derived climate change.

With this in mind the people that insist on misrepresenting climate change as false, unimportant or inevitable (depending on which part of the antiscientific propaganda they want to align with) can also be considered as responsible for the huge increase of the damage of the fires, they are also contributing to the worsening of the situation.

Unfortunately these kind of tragedies are only going to become more frequent thanks to the changing situation on the developing countries, climate change is projected to cause huge economic losses so attempts to emigrate to other countries are going to increase. Further complicated with the deterioration of conditions at the sea as well.

Yes, especially since many of the approved and mandated products are increasingly been proven to have serious adverse effects and low or no effectiveness.

Making this claim and not being able to actually provide evidence of those adverse effects and lack of effectiveness is not "proving" anything, it would be the opposite instead.

The medical and scientific consensus have clearly and unequivocally proved that the interventions it recommends are effective and safe, claiming every single respected institution of the planet is wrong (or even more incredibly in a global conspiracy to damage the world population) is not an argument that proves so, is an excuse being used instead of an argument.

Yes, I also think much of the cardiovascular care over the next decade or two will be focused on treating the harm caused by those choices.

Then again, having a higher cardiac risk because of rejection of safe and effective vaccines is a personal consequence, so the person making that irrational choice would be the one suffering as well the consequences. The problem is that this also increase the risk for other people which means the harm of a wrong choice is also spread to other people.

This would be a different scenario if people didn't start fires.

But much more if people acted responsibly in every other way so climate change would not be happening. This would of course have much more important and beneficial consequences at a global scale as well.

Bodily autonomy and the right to refuse people who want to insert things into your body against your will is paramount and inviolable.

As long as the people are willing to assume the logical consequences of that choice when it increases the risk for everybody else. That is the whole point of public health, to make people assume the consequences of their own choices instead of forcing others to assume a higher risk just because someone else have irrational beliefs.

Sounds like there’s a cunning plan afoot.

Plenty more gain of function being done worldwide.

Imagine that, those evil scientists that develop safe and effective health measures thanks to responsible research being done in infectious diseases that do what they have done since before humans appeared on the planet, adapt to new hosts.

I predict a huge wave of heart trouble because of the unnatural health choices many people have made from 2021 onwards.

The actual cause that began recently comes from 2019 not 2021, covid has been correlated with a much higher cardiac risk (as well as many other complications), the "unnatural" health choice people may take that increase their risk would be then to avoid vaccination, which has been proved to reduce that cardiac risk.

LOL again. You can ignore facts, but that doesn't mean they're going away.

This is the point, people making false claims in youtube are not evidence, that is a fact that is not going away.

The experts on the other hand reference primary sources as evidence, studies with objective data, standardized methods and discussed conclusions that are peer reviewed before and after publication.

It was a perfectly accurate and concise summary. No more to say.

No more to say because you could not formulate any actual argument against it, that is understandable since the article makes a very strong point and just not being able to accept it is not something that can be used to refute it.

Only for those wilfully blind or deliberately obfuscating what was really going on with respect to these jabs' safety and effectiveness.

When "those" include the whole medical and scientific communities of the world, and you bring exactly zero evidence or arguments to demonstrate they are wrong, then they are not the ones blind or obfuscating anything, that would apply to people that baselessly claim the contrary and are unable to support that claim, just making personal attacks when this is made clear.

As millions more are figuring out that we were lied to about this sordid affair

By the antivaxxer and other antiscientific propaganda groups, the evidence is objective and clear and prove beyond any reasonable doubt the interventions are justified, beneficial, safe and effective. Even if nameless people on the internet try to convince those millions that the experts must be wrong, source: "trust me, bro"

For example you have been completely unable to disprove the conclusions of the report this article is talking about, yet insist it must be false and people have to believe you when you claim they are false without offering any kind of evidence, any kind of scientific argument against the conclusions, that is more than enough to make it clear your only argument was "LOL"

I know you won't be moved by evidence that contradicts your position because you're not open to changing your mind.

What evidence? people talking in a youtube video without offering any kind of reference are not evidence, they are at much an excuse when there is no evidence to support the point. Primary sources are the minimum level of evidence that have any kind of weight, going below that means you have no evidence and clearly understand this so use youtube videos to pretend this is not the case.

LOL

So no comment at all about the article or the quoted text, but you still thought this was somehow relevant?

Oh, so this is why many people distrust healthcare professionals, not because the latter did anything wrong.

When the people distrust the professionals without anything wrong being the cause that is exactly what the research would be showing, what part of the report can you disprove if you think is wrong? if you can't that would mean the only rational option is to accept they are correct even if you personally have a systematic distrust to healthcare professionals in general.

Yup. Absolutely nothing to do with certain professionals lying through their teeth or plenty of others keeping their mouths shut of fear of retribution

Nothing to do, specially when you could not prove anybody was lying nor keeping quiet about something you would like to imagine is happening.

Again, do you have any evidence the relationship found is spurious? no? that is because the professionals follow a method to validate their conclusions beyond any reasonable doubt.

True, and this can be accomplished without weight loss drugs, with their extremely risky and dangerous side effects.

Pharmacological help is precisely what resources and support may mean for some patients. Some people do not need any support, but for others not having it means failure in changing their lifestyle, which is what is actually risky and dangerous, not the drugs that prevent this failure.

You have previously claimed the FDA failed when it approved the drugs for their use on weight loss, but you have never been able to argue about this supposed failure, that would mean the FDA was correct in doing it and your claim proved incorrect. Wegovy is also covered by insurance in Japan, which means that the Japanese authorities recognize its value as a safe and effective way to fight obesity.

Absolutely consequences of Mother Nature, from my clear reading of the article.

Yet you could not even make a single argument about the quoted text that clearly contradicts your claim, that would mean the experts are correct and you mistaken.

Is the new movie any good? Who cares?

The article does not make me want to see the movie, even on Netflix. It reads as if someone was given the task of writing something positive about a terrible movie without any possible good point to focus on.

Mother Nature doing what she does

As the article clearly explains for anybody that reads it, this is not a consequence of natural processes but human activity.

Experts say that the blazes result from harsh drought linked to climate change and deliberate fires set to expand agricultural land into the forest burning out of control.

A very informative article that help explaining why some people fall so easily into impossible conspiracy beliefs instead of accepting the scientific and medical consensus, it also helps contextualizing other related findings, like the correlation between believing covid conspiracies and psychosis.

The worst part is that by rejecting opportune medical help the patients end up with higher risk of further negative experiences that might solidify their mistrust by blaming the medical professionals, a patient not trusting vaccines ends up with a complicated infection that causes permanent damage which he will blame on inadequate attention when he sees how other (vaccinated) people don't have such problems.

What are the alarmists going to do about the melting caused by the volcanic activity below the ice? Because that's the main cause of melting.

A reference for this is needed, because there is nothing that indicates that volcanic activity is specially important in the last few years to explain a phenomenon that did not happened before, climate change on the other way is a perfectly well supported explanation.

Also, the article makes it perfectly clear the predictions have systematically underestimated the importance of this phenomenon, which is the opposite of what could be called "alarmist". The scientists have been if anything too moderated in their predictions and warnings.

Please don't bring up inconvenient facts

Specially when they are not facts but instead just wishful thinking and invalid excuses.

Because the so-called "experts," whether it's regarding the environment or so many other issues, have been colossally wrong way too often to even keep count anymore.

If you are unable to demonstrate that accusation then it is not an argument. Pretending baseless conclusions that are easy to debunk are more likely to be right just because you want to believe them is what is irrational and unjustifiable.

You want to say the experts are wrong about something? then present your curated, validated data, your methods and the conclusions that contradict what the experts say. If you can't that mean they are simply much more likely to be correct because they sure can and do that professionally for a living.

And most of all, by government funding they hoped to secure.

That make no sense and its a transparent lie, anybody that could present data that refutes climate change could get more funding on several orders of magnitude than whatever government could give, just because it would support the hugely profitable fossil fuel industry, people don't do that only because it is easy to disprove invalid reports when the evidence so clearly points to the opposite direction, even if completely unprofitable in comparison.

any thoughts? global warming at its best?

Climate change comes with dysregulation of local weather patterns, this was predicted from decades ago, there is no contradiction. This is part of the reason why climate change was taken as a much more precise term than global warming, ignorant people were too quick to mistakenly believe the changes produced meant uniform gradual increase of temperature in every part of the globe.

"Objective"? What the heck is this supposed to mean.

Things that do not depend on subjective opinion, something that can be confirmed or disproved independently of what either side says, depending on what is different it may have or not importance but for the police the presence of these differences is what justifies referring the women to the prosecution as well.

It sounds like the Japanese prosecutors are believing the French charges against him, but not the women making the accusations and charges.

As mentioned the charges have nothing to do with France and there is no real contradiction, the police found enough arguments to consider the accusations of both sides believable, so they leave to prosecutors the job of investigating more in detail and decide if charges are to be presented and arrest made, without more detailed information this is not something unreasonable to do.

In a logic world this would be a warning for companies that choose to do business in countries with this kind of governments, but probably profit is too much of a temptation so this will keep happening.

 the sci-fi feedback loop explores how science fiction and technological innovation feed off each other. This dynamic is bidirectional and can sometimes play out over many decades, resulting in an ongoing loop.

Said clearly by Alex Blechman, this is not something that will always be positive:

Sci-Fi Author: In my book I invented the Torment Nexus as a cautionary tale

Tech Company: At long last, we have created the Torment Nexus from classic sci-fi novel Don't Create The Torment Nexus

But the politicians and bureaucrats are beholden to Agenda 2030 and the SDGs at any cost, so they ignore commonsense.

There is exactly zero requirement to ignore commonsense and the advice of experts in order to reach sustainability. Of course restricting fires during high risk periods (so people need permits) is a completely different thing from banning measures that do prevent fires. Misrepresenting what is happening is a very poor argument to criticize it.

The non whites are getting an affordable deal according to you.

Nothing in the comment allows for this conclusion to be made, if anything it would be the opposite, which is in concordance with the contents of the article and the inequalities present.

Another MSM post about a useless study for the average American. Meanwhile big pharma and big med are eating steak and lobster laughing all the way to the bank.

You contradict yourself, a big part of the problem is that the US system allows for overcharging in general, and that is supported by inequalities that make the average American just one or two medical emergencies away from ruin. Eliminating the racial inequalities as the article describes would deeply hurt the pockets of the pharmaceutical industry. Simply said, your criticism does more to support undue profits by pretending inequalities do not affect the public and companies should be allowed to as they like as right now.

maybe we are lucky because where we live have 23c now and light rain,very refreshing air...

Unfortunately this situation is not frequent nor it is going to continue, the changes are so pervasive and inevitable by now that people are going to consider lucky being only on terrible situations instead of deadly ones.

Heat Islands are a thing.

The article is talking about a global scale, not about something that only happens in cities. This is of course a reason to be specially careful in cities, but the changes are happening everywhere.

Combine that with the massive influx of people to major cities, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the underlying cause.

The planet is not a city, and it is heating up the same, the explanation do not hold water when places different from cities are also being affected.

Fact is, anyone who claims the climate has never changed and should never change is off the rocker.

Fallacy, that is not the argument, climate change (as in the current crisis) do not refer to changes in general but those that are being observed thanks to human activity.

What people are doubting is that all these government programs in the West like promoting EVs, windmills, and solar panels have any impact on any climate change.

Yet, when confronted with the lack of evidence to prove that claim nothing is being offered, in that situation the experts of the world (that have at least evidence to support their recommendations) are simply a much more sure source of information.

Quite cool the past few days.

In general? no it is still record high in every region, obviously pretending weather is climate makes no sense.

Not where I am.

But yes in general which is the reason for its importance. The article is talking about a predictable (and deadly) consequence of human activity effects on the climate. Does it make it less important for you that the people are dying where you can't see them? that would betray a terrible lack of empathy.

Diversity vs Actual quality of service, today most of workplace will choose diversity.

There is zero need to choose, the idea that quality can only drop if diversity increases is based on racial stereotypes. As the article clearly explains the opposite is what is true.

Stop banging Ona bout race and dividing people, it’s immature and regressive.

People are divided, there is nothing negative about recognizing reality, if you read the article you would clearly understand how this can be made evident and how diversifying health care helps correcting the situation. Pretending things are equal is just a way people that benefit try to use to perpetuate obvious inequalities.