Moving Day

It's been a good run here at Blogger, but I feel like it's time to update to a more modern platform for those times I feel inspired to write, so from here on out I'll be posting on Substack. 

Yeah, yeah, I'm one of those people now. 

I've duplicated the archives and this blog will remain, but all future posts will be made at -

https://sickofitall.substack.com/

As a segue, check out my guest post where I wrote a piece outlining my Twitter troubles with a disgruntled Skeptic named Mary who loves Monsanto over at the DisInformation Chronicle. Occasionally Skeptics, and as you might have guessed, industry disinformation is a frequent topic over there. 

Enjoy, and I'll see you on Substack!

Pandemic Play Along - Covid19 Minimizer BINGO Cards

It's fall 2022. The Winter of our Dystopian Plague is upon us. We have a sustained SARS-CoV-2 surge, hundreds of deaths per day, abandonment of all mitigation strategies save the pharmaceutical ones, immune-evasive variants that render some of those pharmaceutical interventions useless, multiple circulating variants (variant soup), pediatric wards full of sick kids, and minimizers as far as the eye can see. Oh the minimizers. They infest every level of government and the media.

Might as well hunker down as much as we are able, fire up the Corsi-Rosenthal box, and play some games until spring - because this winter is comin' in like Hannah Montana. 

Covid19 Minimizer BINGO Cards may be saved and disseminated by clean air lovers everywhere. 

U.S. Versions 1 & 2

O Canada Edition

U.K. Edition

Enjoy, mask up, and stay safe out there!

R-E-S-P-E-C-T My Unbiased Science Authority!

As written about here before, there are certain contentious issues that Skeptics like to zero in on and the controversy over Lyme disease is no exception.

For those who may not be aware, there is ongoing debate as to the cause of post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome, or PTLDS which is also referred to as chronic Lyme. Some deny that a persistent infection is at play, even while much research exists that supports this. From the Columbia University website:

When patients are treated shortly after infection, most patients recover fully and do well. For patients whose symptoms return or for those whose initial infection wasn't caught early, the course of illness may be more prolonged and the treatment uncertain. Because we do not yet have a diagnostic test that is a sensitive marker of active infection, patients and doctors are left with tremendous uncertainty regarding whether or not to treat with additional antibiotics. This uncertainty can lead to conflict — with some doctors advocating treatment and others stating further treatment is not indicated. Such conflict can create anxiety in patients as they become uncertain whom to trust — and it can even cause conflict between doctors who hold different perspectives on this illness.

As you can see, this conflict plays out even among physicians. Sadly, it's the patients who end up caught in the middle of this messy business. 

In today's example we find a doctor of philosophy who has decided that she is the defacto expert when it comes to Lyme disease, PTLDS and chronic Lyme, and you must never question her authority! 

Comments on this echo chamber have been limited to Substack subscribers only.
(Side note - pictured is the bound dissertation by Dr. Love, not a book.)

Andrea C. Love, PhD of the Unbiased Science podcast (USP) cohosted with Jessica Steier, DrPH, PMP, shared links to the USP episodes on Lyme disease last weekend and were met with much criticism from Lyme patients. I watched from the sidelines as comments disappeared and people were banned. Links to legitimate research on chronic Lyme were deleted. 

Dr. Love is firmly in the camp that denies chronic infection is at play. She is of course entitled to her own opinion on the matter and to express that opinion through social media and through the podcast and website that she contributes to in her personal time, just like I'm doing here.

There are however, a number of issues that are problematic with the USP Facebook/Instagram posts. (Full disclosure: I have not listened to the podcast episodes, and do not address them in this blog.)

First is a specific and unusual assertion made by Dr. Love that is contradictory to the CDC and IDSA guidance on treating Lyme disease.

“As such, there is no thing as a chronic Lyme infection. Even without antibiotics, most infections would self-resolve.”

In the restricted comment section (followers only!) on Instagram Dr. Love also advises a follower that “infection would be cleared by the immune system even without abx treatment."

As I stated earlier, there is quite a bit of controversy over the cause of PTLDS or what it should be called, but one area where everyone agrees is that infections need to be treated with antibiotics! This is not at all in question. It is a universally well-accepted fact that an untreated infection can lead to serious illness and even death. Not treating a patient with such an infection would be considered malpractice.

It is very concerning that Dr. Love, who is not a medical doctor, through her credentials and podcast, is influencing people to not take tick bites seriously or to delay or forgo necessary and lifesaving treatment.

***THIS IS A VERY BAD PLAN***

Of course in addition to this, Dr. Love is refusing to allow discussion by banning people and restricting comments on the social media pages for the USP - which means this dangerous advice has gone uncorrected. 

Communication goes both ways. If you want to be a science communicator, you best get that right. As a scientist who has elected to use her advanced degree to communicate science to the public, she is responsible to disseminate accurate information and to allow a fair exchange with stakeholders. She's also responsible to check her ego at the door in favor of the health and well being of the public and USP's followers. 

"Our content educates the general public about scientific matters that have direct relevance to their lives and health-related decisions...We know that now, more than ever, the world needs accurate information. We know misinformation is a threat to people’s lives and the stability of our societies. At Unbiased Science, we fight for truth, health, and the evidence-based way." - Unbiased Science Institute

The fucking irony in calling your organization "Unbiased" and then engaging in this juvenile, arrogant behavior is enough to make Alanis Morissette roll over in her metaphorical grave!

When she's not podcasting, merching or Substacking (only $55 per month!), Dr. Love portrays Lyme patients (sick people) as deluded zealots who doctor shop, drink urine, have "implausible coinfections," are hostile toward evidence-based medicine,  have Munchausen's, Munchausen's by Proxy, and are medical child abusers.

A degree is not a free pass to demean and gaslight patients. There is no excuse for this shit.

The USP also claims that biofilms and cyst forms of Borellia are "not real problems with Lyme disease"...except again, there is actual research on this and it even has pictures!

Imaginary Lyme biofilms

The USP echo chamber is not much better. Mz./Mr./Mrs./Ms./Mx. Tooth over here has decided that you and your health are a worthless anecdote and only "fully fleshed" (ew, wtf) research studies matter, but not the ones you post, those get deleted! Fuck off you lousy cripples with your pseudoscience! 

It should come as no surprise then, that the USP engage in typical Skeptic behavior when it comes to other areas of science and ethics, not just Lyme. Did you know, everything is a chemical?

A popular myth about dose response straight from the chemical industry.

Also, it's totally normal for your nonprofit to have paid ad partnerships with 3M right? Right?? 

(Full disclosure: 3M has ravaged my community and poisoned the bodies of my friends. I'm not unbiased towards them.)

You MUST hate on organic food (and straight up lie about it) if you want to be a Skeptic.

Here are a couple more graphics that have not aged well...

Breakthrough infections: SO RARE!

Spoiler: KEEP YOUR MASK ON YOU FUCKING DOPE

I guess the question we need to ask is how much are we willing to tolerate from these twatwaffles in the name of "science"?

Why is it that David Avocado Wolfe, Dr. Joe Mercola and Gwyneth Paltrow are held to a standard that doesn't apply if you and your bestie have degrees and call yourselves Unbiased Science? Well, probably because these people are filthy fucking hypocrites, that's why.

Would you like to see a new day where we hold sci-commers accountable for their actions instead of them getting to hide behind science as a virtuous shield while they shoot missiles at sick and suffering people, and suckle off the teat of toxic industries?

Ah well, we can dream.

A Brief History of Pandemic Front Groups

The Covid-19 pandemic has enriched some of the elite, but it has also gotten in the way of powerful corporate profits. Let’s look at a brief chronological history of pandemic inspired front groups seeking to promote the financial interests of a certain few. 

Do you remember when America’s Frontline Doctors suddenly burst onto the scene in crisply pressed matching embroidered lab coats for a well publicized press conference?

According to a report by NBC News, “The event was hosted and funded by the Tea Party Patriots, a right-wing political nonprofit group led by Jenny Beth Martin, the group's co-founder, who spoke at the news conference...Tea Party Patriots have been critical of measures enacted to slow the spread of the coronavirus. Before America's Frontline Doctors, the group launched the Second Opinion Project, a website that hosted videos of doctors attacking state and local coronavirus efforts.”

This circus featured Dr. Stella Immanuel, who brought the side show with her claims that endometriosis is caused by demon sperm. No really.

She’s continuing the world class level of entertainment by now claiming that the messenger RNA vaccines will turn you into nephilim and you won’t be allowed into the kingdom of God. She provides scriptural citations, oh ye of little faith.

Unfortunately for the public under viral assault, this dark money fueled stunt failed to elevate the conversation about HCQ beyond Orange Man Bad! territory so who the fuck knows if it’s any good or not? Their goal was really to oppose any restrictions or mitigation anyway…

After America's Frontline Docs faded off into semi obscurity, a new cowboy rode into town! A town called Great Barrington, Massachusetts. Of course this just so happens to be the home to the decades old front group, the American Institute for Economic Research.

In her book Why Trust Science? Naomi Oreskes, the co-author of Merchants of Doubt states that AIER “promotes anti-scientific discussion of climate change, much of which promotes the familiar canard that climate change will be minor and manageable.”

The main authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Martin Kulldorf, Jay Bhattacharya and Sunetra Gupta seen posing in front of the AIER Cotswold Cottage mansion below, advocated for a somewhat vague “focused protection” strategy after Jeffrey Tucker, former Editorial Director for AIER slid into Kulldorf's DMs on Twitter to invite him to the mansion for some R&R. ‘We’ve got a nice place here, why don’t you come and visit us - two hours away?  We’ll feed you well and relax a bit.’ And he wrote me back and said ‘Okay.’

A principle intention of the declaration was to allow the virus to spread through the population to create “herd immunity.”

Click for animation

Says Gupta, “…not only is it a good thing for young people to go out there and become immune, but that it is almost their duty." 

It's your DUTY to get infected with an organ and immune system damaging virus for the economy, kids! 

Gupta even claimed that we had maybe already reached herd immunity back in 2020.

Ooops!

But not only are the GBD authors terribly, horribly, stupidly wrong, they are also the public face of a network of moneyed interests that want to make sure the economy continues to grind on regardless of the high risk of death or disability for those caught in the wheels.

It should therefore come as no surprise that the Tea Party, who were intimately involved with America’s Frontline Doctors, makes another appearance behind the GBD, along with the orchestration and support from AIER mentioned previously.

This brings us up to the present time, where during the most massive surge yet in the pandemic another group of “experts” are calling for lifting the already weak and inconsistent patchwork of pandemic mitigation strategies being utilized in public schools.

#UrgencyOfNormal launched a webinar which was open to the public, well, unless you have ever tweeted about #UrgencyOfEquity or #COVIDisAirborne, then you were digitally escorted out.
Monica Gandhi rounded this out by blocking people who have never engaged her...

…and deleting her tweet about the toolkit, that despite being described as “evidence based”…

…reads like some Dead Alive baby birthed from the Independent Women's Forum after the GBD impregnated it in the dining room of a house full of zombies. 

The citations and cherry picked, misrepresented stats in the toolkit are easily dismantled, and have already been multiple times just on Twitter. 

But less clear is the funding, support, and/or political motivation behind this well-coordinated effort that appears more legitimate on the surface than America's Frontline Doctors and the GBD. It is somewhat differentiated by its focus on children, who are clearly suffering due to the shit response to the pandemic by the adults around them.

Despite the framing of this being "for the children" the timing and message don’t pass the sniff test. The agenda is not even remotely in the best interest of children. 

Keep both eyes on #UrgencyOfNormal in the coming weeks to see if we can catch a glimpse of the man behind the curtain.

Is that a voting machine? I'm keeping my gaze turned to the LEFT this time ahem ahem

Monday January 31 - And already we have an update. Joe Friday reports a game of musical chairs, where five of the original Urgency of Normal authors (see screen shots above) have disappeared and been replaced. Monica Gandhi, Jeff Vergales, Amy Beck, Tara Henderson and Aparna Bole have been replaced by Vinay Prasad, Jennifer Grant, Martha Fulford, Ram Duriseti and Todd Porter. 

What does this all mean? It's anyone's guess but there are some clues.

Prasad is listed as an Author and Contributor at the Brownstone Institute, along with the GBD Authors Kulldorf, Bhattacharya, and Gupta. Brownstone describes itself as the "spiritual child" of the GBD, naturally. And wouldn't you know, the Founder and President of Brownstone is Jeffrey Tucker. That guy sure gets around!

Wednesday, March 1 - Oh, hey, looks like this memo might explain in part the political motivation behind some of this new "Urgency."

Giving the World a #ScienceHug

If there is one thing that fake skeptics are known for, it's not their warm and fuzzy demeanor. 

Don't Be A Dick Guys, Says Phil Plait 

This makes the new hashtag that our old friend Kevin Folta is trying trying to popularize, that much more ironic.

"In this week of technical failures and personal challenges, this week’s podcast investigates the merits of civil conversation. In an angry online environment, can we use the tools of trust building, listening, and empathy to build trust and have greater influence? I discuss my current circumstances and the status of the social media discussion of vaccine hesitancy and genetic engineering. Can we influence the acceptance of good technology with a soft touch? Can we win more hearts and minds with kindness than with data? This is a very important episode I hope you’ll find illuminating."

Clearly the need for this type of outreach speaks to the deficit in basic civility from a lot of self-described science communicators. It has been touched on here before how important science communication is, which is why this blog exists in large part. The warped form of "SciComm" displayed by fake skeptics harms the efforts of legitimate scientists, journalists, activists, and educators to improve public knowledge and inspire action on a manner of important topics that affect every living being on earth. Quite literally the future of our species and planet are on the line here, and we can't afford to fuck this up.

So while we can definitely see examples out there of science communication being done right by both professionals and laypersons alike, have things improved with the behavior of those who identify as Skeptics since Phil Plait's blunt admonishment? This blog alone is a testament to the fact that things seem to only be worsening. The continued popularity of social media accounts and celebrity Skeptics with surly attitudes who endlessly debunk the same tired shit and throw around insults is evident to those who pay even a minimum amount of attention. 

Is the #ScienceHug a real good faith effort, or is it just a ploy? Does Professor Folta really practice what he preaches? Will he help Skeptics turn a new leaf?

Well, in this first example, he's using the hashtag to call someone a liar...not off to great start. Wonder how they took it?

Mmmm, not so good. How about Folta's followers? Are they giving Twitter a big, warm #ScienceHug? Let's find out!

So, not really off to a great start.

If Kevin's past track record is any indication, we can expect that #ScienceHug isn't going to bring about any lasting change to the attitudes of a particular faction of SciComm.

See Science Bullies, Censorship or Consequences, and Empathy Deficiency Syndrome for a slice of the recent history of SciComm by fake skeptics. 

Two Sides of the Same Coin

I'm a rather busy person, but sometimes I have deep thoughts when showering or brushing my teeth. This latest installment of Sick Of It All (the blog, not the band) comes to you from the nether regions of my brain and my impeccable hygiene.

It's been well established here before that many Skeptics are not in the habit of peering through the lens of self-reflection, perhaps because their enormous egos cast a shadow that obscures the view. Whatever the case may be, it seems to go unnoticed by them how their club has become one of the extreme ends of a varied spectrum.

A Crude Spectrum of Scientific Thought & Opinion 

Skeptics have essentially cast themselves in the role of hero and savior to the Regular People who they seem to believe, at any moment, could be sucked into the vortex of Fringey Cringey. The dimension where chemtrails criss cross the skyline of a flat earth populated by deep state illuminati lizard people that you access just by say, visiting a chiropractor or using some essential oils.

Steven Novella has described Skeptics as the "last line standing" to protect the rest of the world who are at risk of "being completely overwhelmed by quackery and nonsense."

And yet, more and more we see that they have become a caricature that is simply a mirror image of the quackery and nonsense they claim to be protecting us from. 

The Skeptics are the Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy Theorists. Take this example from prominent Skeptic voice, David Gorski.

You may recall back in 2016 when Zika virus was all over the headlines because of its link to microcephaly. Brazil had such a large increase in cases compared to elsewhere, that it seemed that there was another factor at play. Some public health professionals brought up the idea that the larvicide pyriproxifen may have had a role in increasing cases of microcephaly. 

Rather than concede that this should at least be properly investigated, which is what the scientific method calls for, Gorski, in his role as Orac wrote at Respectful Insolence of this hypothesis as a baseless conspiracy theory that was something to be mocked.

"Monsanto. It just had to be Monsanto. I will give these cranks props for figuring out a way to blame Monsanto for the microcephaly suspected to be caused by Zika virus without mentioning GMOs. Well played, Second Nexus, well-played. Not so well-played, Mr. Takei. Not so well-played in falling for this."

What did Mr. Takei share that was so horrible? An article based on a report from Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages. Despite Gorski's lame attempt at science cockblocking, the scientific community heard the recommendation by doctors from the Brazilian Association forCollective Health (ABRASCO) who demanded that urgent epidemiological studies be carried out to look for a causal link.

Flash forward to today, when these studies have now been conducted. One such study found a potential mechanism that could explain the increase in microcephaly case in areas where pyriproxifen was used.

A report in The Conversation by the study authors says, "...we have shown that pyriproxyfen could indeed exacerbate the already severe effects the Zika virus has on foetal brain development." And describe the possible mechanism that they show in their study, "...pyriproxyfen impairs thyroid hormone signalling in the brain, modifying crucial processes for its proper development."

Does this sound like a conspiracy theory to you?

If Gorski and friends had their way, and sometimes they do succeed in this, their debunking would be taken as the authoritative source on topics they don't wish to see researched. For the people exposed to this larvacide, we are lucky they did not succeed here. But it's doubtful they will ever admit or correct these types of blunders, they would rather just ignore the new science, and move on to another subject.

This isn't much different from how cults like QAnon operate on the other extreme end of the spectrum. "Trust the science" may as well be, "Trust the plan." I'm not suggesting that Skeptics are cult members, but they do exhibit some cult-like behavior at times. When the predictions (or debunking) doesn't bear out, they just move to a new target. 

Skeptics use a flawed version of the scientific method, as the above example illustrates. This is not any different than the pseudoscientific methodology used by flat earth proponents and others on the Fringey Cringey end of the spectrum. It doesn't matter if your conclusions end up being correct, and we have just seen that they don't always land on the right side in many cases. It is the method you use that matters. 

One might cloak themselves in talk of science, evidence and reason, but if they don't follow the scientific method, they may find themselves on the extreme end of the spectrum of scientific thought and opinion.

The Bromance Continues: Kevin Folta Hearts Patrick Moore

The most recent episode of Talking Biotech podcast is yet another chapter in one of the love stories for the ages, that between Kevin Folta and Patrick Moore. We've seen their affection on display before in Turning a Blind Ideology.

Despite the title, the topic of climate change comes up for a large portion of this interview. Folta's description at the end also understated Moore's stance just a little bit. 

The dude is a full on denier.

In order to save you the pain of listening, I have summarized their discussion as follows

In addition to spouting utter BS about climate, Moore says to Folta “People have been indoctrinated to believe plastic is destroying the oceans.” Regarding the great pacific garbage patch, “It’s a fake, it doesn’t exist. It’s is not there. There is no pacific garbage patch.”

 

He continues, “It is a photo shop on the internet.”

Source

After you read his book, unless you are “completely indoctrinated into the cult of climate catastrophe,” you will believe what he’s saying. Also, polar bear counters are lying.

 
Kevin now chimes in to say he’s not a climate skeptic, he’s a skeptic of the catastrophic interpretations....then a half ass push back on one of Moore’s claims, who talks over him a bunch to declare, “we are actually in a 6,000 year cooling period now.”

 
“Read my book Kevin.”

 
“I’m a member of the CO2 Coalition. (A front group) Our conclusion is clear, increased CO2 is 100% beneficial for the environment.” 

Kevin then says he relies on the info from the National Academy of Sciences re climate, then asks Moore “who am I supposed to trust?” Moore bashes the NAS, and spews more propaganda. “We (humans) have restored a balance to the global carbon cycle.”

 
Folta reiterates his question about who can people trust, Moore says read my book.

Folta continues glossing over Moore’s ridiculous claims and kisses his ass.

Moore unsurprisingly says, “The solution is nuclear energy.”
He then sings the praises of fossil fuels, and goes on a tangent about nuclear again.

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear.

 
Kevin loves it.

Kevin loves Patrick.

Fin.

In all seriousness, this is bad. Kevin has given this guy a platform to sell his book and promote his brand of ideological pseudoscience. Folta once again demonstrates how he gives Moore a pass on  climate science (and basic fucking ecology and logic). He weakly challenged Moore's assertions which just adds to the evidence that any credibility afforded to Folta by virtue of his teaching position at the University of Florida is undeserved. This whole podcast was an embarrassing farce. 

Several on Twitter also noticed this and voiced their criticism.

Sadly though, many who should definitely know better, including one of the organizers for the March for Science liked Kevin's shares of the podcast with Moore. Facepalm.

If you want to learn about climate science, here's a list compiled by MPH@GW, the George Washington University online Master of Public Health program. They don't list Moore, his book, The CO2 Coalition, or Kevin Folta, so you should probably be okay.