By Andy May
Greg Weiner has written a great essay in Law & Liberty, entitled: “Why We cannot Just ‘Follow the Science.‘” His point is that scientists and science are important, but relying only on “The Science” for decision making is both dangerous and foolish. Science is a methodology for proposing well-developed answers to questions about natural events, it is a tool for proposing answers, not the answer. Skeptical scientists will try and disprove any proposed answer or theory, it is their duty. Only the very best theories survive this process and gain universal acceptance, like Einstein’s theory of relativity. For further discussion of this idea, see my discussion of facts and theories here. Most proposed answers, like man-made climate change, are furiously debated. So, it is fair to ask, as Weiner does, “Which [scientific] experts should we listen to …?”
The phrase “follow the science,” is a way to duck responsibility. In Weiner’s word’s: “The slogan ‘follow the science’ is meant to exempt politicians from the duty of judgment.” Moral and political judgement must superintend science. It seems likely that the virus that causes COVID-19 was engineered in the Wuhan Virology lab. The U.S. NIAID, led by Dr. Fauci, supported this research. Was that money, distributed by a government scientist, wise or moral? Would the public or politicians have approved of sending money to a Chinese laboratory, connected to the Chinese military, to conduct research on a deadly virus? Was “following the science” wise in that case? I think not.
Scientists should not be making critical decisions; they should be in advisory roles and carefully supervised by elected political leaders, not unelected bureaucrats. Recently, Nature revealed that critical early SARS-CoV-2 (the COVID-19 virus) gene sequences were removed from a U.S. government database, at the request of Wuhan University scientific researchers. The gene sequences contained valuable information that shows the early viral sequences from the Wuhan seafood market are more distantly related to SARS-CoV-2’s closest relatives in bats than later sequences found in humans from China and the U.S. This makes it less likely the market is the source of the first human infection.
Dr. Jesse Bloom discovered that the sequences had been deleted and managed to recover them from archives. He says there is no plausible reason for the deletions and suspects they were to obscure their existence. Bloom also believes we should be skeptical that all early Wuhan sequences have been shared.
The amino acid arginine is typically used in laboratories to “supercharge” a virus and make it more communicable and deadly. Arginine can be built with 36 different gene sequences in DNA. SARS-CoV-2 contains the sequence CGG-CGG, or “double CGG.” The same lethality is achieved with any of the 36 sequences (or codons) in the same site, but the double CGG sequence is the least likely to occur in nature. In fact, the double CGG sequence has never been found in naturally occurring coronaviruses. A virus naturally obtaining a new skill, will pick it up from similar viruses, yet no similar viruses have this combination, it was almost certainly the result of engineering.
While it is clear that politics has corrupted climate science, it appears the reverse is also true. Science has corrupted politics, in the words of Jon Stewart on Stephen Colbert’s show recently:
“Here’s how the world ends, the last words man utters are somewhere in a lab. A guy goes, ‘Huhuh, it worked.'”
Some pundits have tried to defend scientists and experts, but most of us should remember what Richard Feynman once said,
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”
Science is scientific debate, with rules. Science is not wise words spoken from on high. Science, properly done, is so professionally researched and explained as to be self-evident. Once the paper is read, the data obtained and checked, anyone with the necessary skills can reproduce the author’s result and convince themselves that what the author said was true. “The Science” is not truth, it is a process that results in truth, if done properly. If no one can reproduce the result, if the underlying data aren’t available to the public, if the methodology is not clear, it is not a proper scientific theory, it is not “science.” Don’t follow it.
COPD, Emphysema, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), showed unusually high rates of survival from Covid-19, particularly surprising in the case of the lung patients.
What did these patients take that the other elderly victims of the disease did not?
HCQ or Inhaled Steroids.
“They” claim HCQ is so dangerous but the US Military administers 40 to 50 thousand doses per day.
Most members of the military don’t have COPD, Emphysema, Rheumatoid Arthritis or SLE.
But they can get malaria.
Do you have reading comprehension issues?
Following the science requires repeating all the work.
For practical reasons, we mostly have faith that the experts have been thorough – and board the 737 Max.
Smugness makes some believe that the latter is following the science.
The fact is that HCQ, if administered properly along with Zinc and vitamin C (what else, I don’t recall), but with the correct protocol and as early as possible, could possibly have saved thousands of lives. We’ll never know for sure, but those who cannonballed HCQ as a treatment likely have blood on their hands.
The antibiotic — avermectin?
And yes, the course of action was — “go and stay home, take an aspirin, and when you can no longer breathe, come into the hospital.”
Thanks, Fraudci.
Ivermectin?
Yes, invermectin. Thought of it afterwards.
Duh, not my strong suit — I meant azithromycin, but conflated the name with Ivermectin.
You were on the right track. The treatment for Wuhan virus using HCQ, included using Zinc and Azithromycin (not sure that’s spelled properly) in combination. Another common antibiotic whose name escapes me now, could be substituted for the azithromycin. Both worked equally well.
I personally doubt that arginine gives viruses superpowers. More than likely it destabilizes the lysine/arginine ratio, which has a negative impact on human biological function. High-dose lysine is claimed to significantly help ameliorate shingles symptoms, and apparently the lysine/arginine ratio is what’s important (i.e., greater than 1).
Great post, Andy!
It is especially timely as the VAERs data comes out and shows that for many demographics the “vaccines” are more deadly than the ChiCom virus! This is a sad time in history, when many in our government and health care industry show themselves to be partisan activists who would rather kill people to achieve their agenda than to heal the sick!
There NEVER was any scientific basis for lockdowns, only the recommendations of the CCP! And you have to ask yourself why studies of HCQ are 3 1/2 times more likely to find negative results if they take place in the US as opposed to the rest of the world! The meta-analysis shows that HCQ, taken early and properly, yields a 66% reduction in fatalities. This is nothing compared to the results from ivermectin, but one has to wonder why ALL the therapeutics were summarily suppressed! The ONLY logical explanation has to be drug company profits! There is no other answer that fits all the data!
From the article: “Skeptical scientists will try and disprove any proposed answer or theory, it is their duty.”
I don’t know how one can be a scientist and not have a skeptical attitude. Everything has to be challenged, even one’s own thought processes.
From the article: “The phrase “follow the science,” is a way to duck responsibility. In Weiner’s word’s: “The slogan ‘follow the science’ is meant to exempt politicians from the duty of judgment.”
I couldn’t have said it better. It not only exempts politicians from actually knowing the science, it exempts all the alarmist followers from doing their own thinking. It’s a dodge.
I know that people who use the phrase are doing so because they don’t know the science themselves and are appealing to a higher authority. Unfortunately, as is the case with Climate Science, the “Higher Authorities” are wrong about the climate science.
“Everything has to be challenged, even one’s own thought processes.”
Except the Great and Powerful Mosher. His though processes are as enigmatic as his misuse of capital letters.
According to mosher, his thoughts are so far above those of mere mortals, even trying to explain them is a waste of time.
There was a story yesterday that one of the companies that Hunter BIden was associated with in China also was sending funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for coronavirus research.
The coronavirus research certainly seems to have had many supporters in many countries.
Link?
https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/hunter-biden-invested-in-ecohealth-wuhan-partner/
What if that had been Donald Trump Jr. investing in Ecohealth?
We know what would happen: The Leftwing Media would go into a frenzy of criticism.
But when Hunter Biden does something like that, it’s crickets from the Leftwing Media.
Can you say: Dangerous Double Standard?
Maybe he was selling them his paintings?
“Follow the science” is simply the propaganda device known as “transference” or the special “appeal to authority.”
ex cathedra science
Dr Fauci’s Guru style of advice does not seem to be based in science as he has changed his advice more than once. If he is connected to the development of a more lethal virus he would know how it travels and how to protect from it.
Fraudci talks out of three sides of his sometimes-masked mouth.
Four sides! Right and left, front and back!
Up and down?
Before and after?
MarkW,
I was thinking that a lot of his talking seems to come out of his backside, but this guy definitely needs a weatherman, as he is always changing his story with every veer of the wind!
This is perhaps the most important point of the OP’s argument.
Prof Didier Raoult, despite his reputation and good work on Hydroxychloroquine has been harassed (and slandered) on the Pubpeer website. His hospital had a presentation “Hydroxychloroquine and its friends” Jun 25, 2021 by Dr Harvey Risch.
This is well worth listening to and exposes the extent of corruption in the medical/pharmaceutical world where making money and pushing certain politics is more important than patient care. Please listen and save before it is taken down.
Just checked Pubpeer (June 29th) as suggested – search result for the above title = “No publication found”. Do you have a copy you can share, Michael?
According to the chemistry HCQ should work. HCQ allows zinc to enter cells and act as an anti-viral. It is not expected to be useful for everyone. Reports — clinical reports, not trials — show a low fatality rate when used early. The problem is when 95% survive anyway the report could arise by chance very easily.
Nevertheless as risk-management why not? It is not dangerous and need not replace other protocols.
OMG 😱 How very well presented. This is an issue very important to the philosophy of science. It is very hard to see, and many of those aware of it are only highly-educated people holding graduate and doctoral degrees who can quite expand on the issue. I’ve been sharing in my blog site Defacto Chem that science is only a tool to understand nature in a very approximately manner, nothing is exact. Math is rules that only apply inside the set ups of our universe. Our math, formulas, and statistics are only models for us to represent the manifestation of nature, in the sense that they are NOT telling us what is exactly nature. They rather tell us about systems that can work in this nature. Take the case of waveparticles, wavelengths, frequencies, mass, and momentum: one of the fundaments of all. Science is NOT saying that the universe is made of this entities; it says that the system of those entities is a good model to explain most of what happens around us, and is excellent as a base to build industries like electronics and drugs (medicines). This is so, because if nature changes the initial set ups that gave rise to its existence, all will change to a new balance and it is most likely that our science cannot explain the new order. So, no one knows what the universe really is, nor reality or existence because our science cannot quite see outside of the universe, and so, science is incomplete, has uncertainties and impossibilities, very well represented by the presence in the most prevalent theories of quantum mechanics and relativity of imaginary numbers (square root of negative), infinities, divisions by zero, discontinuities, divergences. There’s no absolute scientific knowledge of the universe, the elusive identity of time is a good example, and any science that refuses to independently and objectively revise/corroborate/double-check any claim is automatically pseudoscience.The true place of science in society is as a tool for us to take decisions on how to proceed to solve problem “X” or to make product ”Y”, is not to dictate at the societal arena what to implement as a dictator, because although it does represent the best understanding that humans can produce, it is unfortunately also subjected to 1) be very good in theory but bad in practice, 2) deliberate manipulations of data, 3) errors from instruments of measurements/calculations, 4) bad experimental method/design, 5) biased conclusions, … It is us the ones in charge to test/interrogate/question whoever proclaims the “big chairs of great scientists” and it is a scientific responsibility to test their scientific claims too.
JBVigo, PhD
Doc , there’s lots of highly educated people sitting on their bum because their not SMART enough to use the tools their been trained in, they will sellout to the highest bidder and become part of the propaganda machine by lying to the sheeple. I believe Fauci is one of those people. How many people come out of university and cant find a job in their discipline. There are still scientist promoting the electron Bohr model of individual electrons moving around the nucleus when in fact the nucleus is held in place by a sea of electrons aka the cloud model. In my mind dark energy is the electron acting as a wave and dark matter is electrons acting as a particle. Science is held back by laws written centuries ago when they had no real tools to test their theories. Question Doc, how many electrons hold the nucleus we call Earth together.?
Blasted climate change. I was at the dentist and he was running an Attenborough documentary whilst doing my fillings. Some scientist dude exclaimed that twenty years before, he could swim in a Brazilian river and not be bothered by piranhas. This gave me the giggles to such an extent the dentist had to stop for a while.
“Blasted climate change. I was at the dentist and he was running an Attenborough documentary whilst doing my fillings.”
Lol ! 🙂