Mark seems to be working on some:
http://peakchoice.org/moron-a-virus-45.html
He also recommends:
https://respectfulinsolence.com/
NIH debunking article:
SARS?CoV?2, Covid?19, and the debunking of conspiracy theories
TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum
COVID Conspiracy Debunking Sites (6 posts)
-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Mark, you didn't mention that Respectful Insolence is run by Dr. David Gorski, also an editor at the site Science Based Medicine. He is a highly partisan source, to say the least. Just look at all the controversy they have to put on his bio page below.
Can't you come up with a better source? This guy is like another James Randi, in fact they are friends.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/editorial-staff/d...
A note for potential patients Googling for information about Dr. Gorski
Because of his criticism of pseudoscience and quackery on Usenet, online discussion forums, and blogs over the last 18 years, Dr. Gorski has angered some supporters of dubious health practices and pseudoscience. As a result, there are a number of articles and posts online that repeat misinformation and outright lies about him. (A list of examples can be found here.)
Examples of the campaign of vilification over the last 21 years clearly designed to try to silence Dr. Gorski include an accusation of pedophilia by neo-Nazis for his work debunking Holocaust denial, a reference to him as being a “nipple ripper” by a man named Patrick “Tim” Bolen, and a false accusation in 2010 of a nonexistent conflict of interest by an antivaccine website that led to a campaign on the part of antivaccinationists to try to get him fired from his job, as documented here. False claims that he is secretly a shill for the pharmaceutical industry (known as the “pharma shill gambit”) are frequently used to try to discredit him.
Two photos of Dr. David Gorski, one in London, another presenting at NECSS in 2015.
Last year, in response to Dr. Gorski’s criticism of an antivaccine movie directed by Andrew Wakefield and supported by Robert De Niro, Mike Adams, founder of the NaturalNews.com “alternative health” online empire, resurrected the false 2010 charge of an undisclosed financial COI and written a series of screeds (included in the list) making false accusations against him, claiming, for instance, that he sabotaged the entry for the movie on Wikipedia (he does not edit Wikipedia) and being in cahoots with a corrupt oncologist (Dr. Farid Fata) who bilked Medicare out of millions and gave chemotherapy to people who didn’t have cancer. Adams has posted fake patient reviews and even claims to have reported Dr. Gorski to the FBI, Michigan Attorney General, and his state medical board. Worse, in doing so, he has made similar allegations against his cancer center in an effort to pollute its Google reputation along with Dr. Gorski’s. These allegations were answered here and discussed here.
Dr. Gorski is dedicated to the best science- and evidence-based treatment of breast cancer that is currently available. If you want evidence of his commitment to providing patients with the best science-based care, look no further than his career, his position in a statewide quality consortium, and his standing up to the bullies on the Internet who want him silenced. Dr. Gorski’s financial and conflict of interest disclosures
Dr. Gorski has been funded over the last decade by institutional funds, the Department of Defense, the National Cancer Institute, the Conquer Cancer Foundation of ASCO, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. He has recently held a small grant (€30,000) from Bayer HealthCare through its Grants4Targets program, a fact that will no doubt bring forth more criticism. Never mind that the grant expired in 2012. Before that small seed grant, so bereft of pharmaceutical funding was Dr. Gorski that before his talks, as part of his disclosures, he often joked that no pharmaceutical company was interested enough in his research to want to give him any money. For everything else, however, like most biomedical scientists in academia, Dr. Gorski must beg the NIH and other granting agencies for the money to keep his lab going. Currently, Dr. Gorski’s research is funded by the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program with two-year Breakthrough Award expiring in 2017.
Dr. Gorski’s opinions are his alone (and other disclaimers)
Because he is still a working academic surgeon and researcher (and hopes to remain so until he retires, which means—hopefully—for another 15 years or possibly even more), Dr. Gorski must emphasize that the opinions expressed in his posts on SBM are his and his alone and that all blog posts for SBM and elsewhere are written during his own time during evenings and weekends. Also note that e-mail relating to SBM sent to either of his work addresses will most likely be ignored. David Gorski discussing CAM.
Dr. Gorski’s opinions on ScienceBasedMedicine.org are most definitely not intended to represent the opinions or positions of Wayne State University School of Medicine, his department, or the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute and should never, ever be construed as such. He doesn’t know how he can make this statement any stronger. Finally, his writings are for the purposes of commentary and general education only and are therefore not meant to be used as specific health care recommendations for individuals. Readers should consult their own personal physicians for advice regarding specific health problems or issues that they might have.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Business Insider:
Amazon just took down a controversial documentary that links vaccines to autism. Doctors have known for years that it relies on sham science.
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-removes-vax...
Pharmaceutical companies make very little money off of vaccines, which cost an average of $12 a dose and typically protect people for a lifetime.
Wow, that's a relief. I thought they had some sort of financial incentive to keep giving us more and more vaccines and even make us dependent on them. It's good to know that those pharmaceutical companies "make very little money off of vaccines" and that they are really just doing all that R&D and manufacturing and taking out patents for the public good.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The NYT's Partisan Tale about COVID and the Unvaccinated is Rife with Sloppy Data Analysis (On Glenn Greenwald's Substack)
https://outsidevoices.substack.com/p/the-nyts-part...NOTE FROM GLENN GREENWALD: The corporate media has worked very hard to propagate the liberal-pleasing narrative that COVID has become a partisan disease due to vaccine hesitancy on the right, often ignoring the inconvenient truth that large percentages of politically diverse groups, principally African-Americans and Latinos, remain resistant to vaccination. Recent reporting from The New York Times serves to further this distorted narrative, dubbing the positive correlation between support for Donald Trump and COVID death rates “Red COVID," and brandishing it as evidence of a partisan pandemic. But the Times’ report misleads readers through statistical manipulation and data games, as illustrated by this meticulous analysis, presented in an Outside Voices contribution by Jeremy Beckham:
Debunking of the above. Still trying to find a "debunking of the debunking." Who is right here?
Jeremy Beckham's understanding of COVID demographics is lacking Jeremy Beckham accuses the New York Times of a lack of rigor with regard to COVID data analysis. His critique is even worse in that regard
https://gregoryt.substack.com/p/jeremy-beckhams-un...Rumors of age being a major "confounding factor" in county-level death rates have been greatly exaggerated.
https://acasignups.net/21/10/06/rumors-age-being-m...A couple of weeks ago, one of my COVID "partisan lean" graphs was cited by David Leonhardt of the New York Times. This paragraph in question gained plenty of attention, and ended up being referenced by Nicole Wallace on Deadline: White House; Morning Joe; Raw Story and Paul Waldman of the Washington Post:
Since Delta began circulating widely in the U.S., Covid has exacted a horrific death toll on red America: In counties where Donald Trump received at least 70 percent of the vote, the virus has killed about 47 out of every 100,000 people since the end of June, according to Charles Gaba, a health care analyst. In counties where Trump won less than 32 percent of the vote, the number is about 10 out of 100,000.
I even got a nice shout-out from Paul Krugman.
Well, this didn't go over too well with a couple of people...specifically, Glenn Greenwald and some guy named Jeremy Beckham.
Posted 3 years ago # -
COVID: Top 10 current conspiracy theories Cornell's Alliance for Science
https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2020/0...Posted 3 years ago # -
Note about the "Vaxxed" hoax film. It praises a defrocked doctor who was PAID by a lawyer to make up the claim that vaccines supposedly cause autism. None of Mr. Wakefield's claims have been replicated by others and it is good he is no longer allowed to practice medicine.
I would not trust Dr. Gorski to understand the extrajudicial removal of John Kennedy from the Presidency nor the suppressed warnings and overlapping war-games of 9/11, but on medicine and public health I am very impressed by his knowledge and humor.
Unfortunately, differentiating real claims for conspiracies from ludicrous nonsense is more difficult than ever due to the intense flood of hoaxes alienating most people. It's like serving fine food with a dog turd on top, most people will not eat. This tactic immunizes conspirators from accountability. No planes on 9/11 was a successful example. Covid denial / downplaying helps protect Trump from accountability. Have a nice day.
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.