In a small New England village, on a beautiful September morning, the town folk were gathering in front of the church before Sunday Mass. Men were discussing the upcoming harvest. Women were discussing everything else. And the children were playing “tag.”
Mrs. Allen asked Mrs. Robbins, “Martha, where’s Tommy? Won’t he be attending Mass? It’s the last Mass before school begins.”
Mrs. Robbins, Tommy’s mother, replied, “Oh, hello Ethel. Thomas will be here. He went to visit my brother and sister-in-law and his cousins for the weekend over in Jonestown. He promised to be back in time for Mass.”
Mrs. Allen, a bit concerned, stated, “Martha, he’s only ten years old. Are you not afraid for his safety traveling such a long way alone on foot?”
Mrs. Robbins replied, “Not at all. Jonestown is only seven miles away. He’s been walking that road alone since he was five years old. What could possibly happen to him since the farmers rid us of the wolves in these parts?”
The women returned to the usual banter until the church bell rang indicating that Mass would soon begin. As they all queued up to enter the church, Mr. Kuhleid looked down the street from the top step before entering the church. He stopped and exclaimed, “Hey everyone. Look! There’s a boy lying at the edge of the road at the entrance to the village.
People turned, looked, and then everyone started walking down to see who it was. Martha Robbins, sensing that it might be Tommy, ran down the street. She immediately knelt down and tried to shake the boy. She screamed and held him tightly. By her reaction, everyone knew it was Tommy.
The crowd gathered ‘round. Women were crying. Children were scared. There, at the edge of the road, lay Tommy held by his mother under a bush. Tommy had berries in his hands and berry juice running from his mouth, down his cheeks, and onto his shirt. White foam filled his open mouth.
Martha screamed, “What happened?”
The townspeople lamented.
The reverend was last to arrive at the scene and offered prayer for Tommy and the townspeople. He directed everyone to an immediate special meeting at the church to discuss the death of Tommy. After several minutes, Tommy’s father hugged his wife, picked up Tommy and carried him to the town’s funeral home.
Before leaving for the the special meeting, Ethel said to the woman next to her, “Harriet, people will be too distraught to plan the luncheon to be held after the funeral. Let’s get to work preparing food for our neighbors and friends.”
Harriet looked at the bush and said, “I’ve never noticed berries on this bush before. Perhaps it finally matured enough to bear fruit this year. Ethel, that’s a prudent idea to prepare food for tomorrow’s luncheon. Let’s pick all these berries to make pies for everyone to eat after the funeral.”
In the church, the town physician stood in the pulpit and took questions. Many expressed sympathy for the Robbins family. Others were more concerned with what could possibly have caused Tommy’s death. They all knew by then that Tommy had come from Jonestown. Mr. Kuhleid asked, “Dr. Ough, what if Tommy brought a disease back from Jonestown? When will you be able to tell us what killed him?”
Dr. Ough then explained to the townspeople that the science™is slow and that it would take him about four years to determine the cause of Tommy’s death. The townspeople grumbled in response and Dr. Ough then said, “Four years is not that long. Before the Jonestown Method of obvious based medicine, what we call ‘OBM,’ it took decades to study causes of death.” He then explained triple deaf serialized chaotic trials (SCT).
No one had noticed that little Billy Ough had snuck into this adults-only meeting in the church. When there was a moment of silence after his father, Dr. Ough, finished explaining the timeline of investigation, Billy shouted, “Father! It’s the berries! Tell them all it’s the berries!”
Dr. Ough immediately shouted, “Billy! You go home right now. This is not a conversation for children. We don’t have time to talk about anecdotal evidence from the machinations of a child. Be gone, Billy!”
Mr. Robbins, Tommy’s father, had joined the group after delivering Tommy’s body to the funeral director’s office. Mr. Robbins asked Dr. Ough, “What about the berries, Dr. Ough? What if Billy is right?”
Dr. Ough responded, “I understand the desire to jump at the first possible cause you hear. But what if it is not the berries? What if it is a disease from Jonestown that will kill us all? Surely you want this studied for the next four (4) years to ensure our safety. We will pray for the Robbins family and for our town’s safety. I move to adjourn.” The motion was seconded. The meeting ended. And everyone went home.
Author’s Commentary
No. This is not what would have happened in any other time in human history. No one would have baked pies from the berries. They would have immediately burned that berry bush to the roots. However, in the current covid era of human history, people now abdicate their discernment to medical “authorities” and blindly follow government sponsored propaganda meant to control them.
Propaganda
Until the covid era, I’d never heard the definite article “the” used in front of the word, “science.” Yet “the science™” is now a common term where adjoined to the imperative, “follow.”
The word “anecdotal” has been used too often by both sides of the vaccine debate because it was programmed (propagated) into society by powers masterful in planting words like “conspiracy theorist” in order to discredit and derogate the enemy. And the current enemy of the regime is antivaxers. “Antivaxer” is another word programmed into the people — an actual defined word, and another word that was formally changed in definition in 2020 along with “vaccine,” which was changed to include the new gene altering drug mRNA injections. The new definition of “antivaxer” still includes people who oppose the use of all vaccines as from the prior definition, and now also includes those who oppose the use of any vaccine or who oppose any government mandate or rule regarding anything called a vaccine. The societal programming of the new definition of “antivaxer” was fast and grand. Imagine labeling someone an “antivaxer” if he merely questions whether the government considered pre-existing autoimmune or clotting conditions in a vaccine recipient. That is now what they are doing. How many people died from the Covid vaccine because they were not asked a simple screening question, “Have you ever been diagnosed with blood clots?” I read several death records and VAERS reports in which pre-existing clotting conditions were documented in the vaccine recipient.
Returning to the word “anecdote” or “anecdotal,” doctors and scientists now use the word to describe a case, including cases for which we have a 12,000 page medical files. This is not “anecdotal.” This is evidence. An anecdote is one in which Billy told Bobby about his Aunt Florence having died wearing a green dress and that green dresses are deadly. Anecdotes are stories, usually via word of mouth, and now often via e-mail, text, or social media post. A patient’s case history is not an anecdote, though doctors and scientists have been recently programmed to refer to them by that word. Case records are a higher form of evidence than a double blind randomized control trial evidence-based medicine research paper that relies upon hyperbolic inferential statistical methods.
EBM vs 10,000 Years of Wisdom and the Scientific Method
For 10,000 years of human history, man adapted to his environment and advanced to where we are today (or where we were thirty years ago at our peak). We learned what we can safely eat and drink based on the collective experience and knowledge of our forbears. Wisdom was handed down from generation to generation. Science grew into the scientific method that sufficed for centuries. Then, evidence based medicine happened (“EBM”).
Since 1992, EBM put a box around methodology. Doctors are taught that they are somehow scientists instead of treating physicians, whereas the truth is that physicians are more like field techs or failure analysis engineers of the human body. Physicians need to react, adapt, and improvise in treating real patients. EBM boxes in scientists and physicians to rely upon upon inherently flawed models derived from inferential statistical methods. The probability distribution function of any medical or health situation is unknown at the beginning of a study. To use a normal distribution, or bell curve, at the onset may be a necessary starting point. However, to continue using only a normal distribution within a research paper is folly as a consequence of the highest hubris. We are humans. We discern. EBM replaces creativity, discernment, and “thinking outside the box” with a cookie cutter methodology that has corrupted research and science for more than thirty years.
If you ask any physician under fifty years old what they rely upon for evidence in treating patients, they will tell you, “the literature.” And “the literature” is nothing more than EBM, double blind RCT, normal distribution, peer-reviewed, journal-published papers aggregated under the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) and PubMed.
My readers understand that I deliver conclusive evidence outside the paradigms of EBM, RCT, NIH, and other TLAs (“three-letter acronyms”). I reject these methods for a few reasons. 1) Most people do not understand the methods and the journal publications’ authors who employ them. This makes the information esoteric, thus inaccessible to the average person. 2) It is my strong belief that inferential statistical methods should not be relied upon by disciplines that have inherently uncontrollable multi-variate environments. That is, there are often too many confounding variables and an unknown probability distribution function in a study involving the social sciences, where epidemiology resides. Epidemiology is not a biological science.
If you can control all or most of the input variables, then inferential statistical methods can be effectively relied upon. For example, the study of defect density distribution of die from silicon wafers in semiconductor manufacturing requires important statistical analyses. Profits are affected by the percentage yield of working chips. Failing chips are scrap and cost the company money. In order to increase profits, statistical methods are used to tweak the pressure, temperature, and time of exposure of the wafers in plasma chambers, etch systems, and other unit process machines.
Understanding and controlling these variables in the context of statistical methods is powerful in yield optimization for profit. However, epidemiology is far from a controlled environment. When governments instituted mandates and laws that changed the behavior of all society, the baseline prior years became less useful in the context of normal distributions. If there comes an excess of deaths, it would not be known whether the disease or the mandates are the cause of illness or death. Methods other than inferential statistics may lend more insight into causality.
Descriptive statistics are certainly worth pursuing and the data is available on every government server. The governments are simply not studying it and they are preventing us from studying it.
Complaint
The individual case histories and descriptive statistical evidence delivered in my analyses are so abundant and conclusive that no judge, jury, or reasonable man can refute the findings. Yet, very few doctors or scientists have referred to my official government case evidence and data visualizations. From my individual case forensic investigations corroborated by graphical visualizations of aggregated raw data over time, the average person can understand and conclude that the covid vaccines are very deadly and that covid disease is not nearly as deadly as purported.
The blackout of my work by doctors and scientists in the TRUTH movement is not likely purposeful. I really don’t think they can escape the confines of their career boxes into which they were indoctrinated. I do not blame them for being blind to the most conclusive and abundant evidence in the world. They are caught in the hubris-laden matrix of EBM and peer review. One question I would like to ask them is, “If you are not corrupt, and you know the journals to be corrupt, and you know the peer reviewers to be corrupt, then why would you submit to this paradigm and sully yourself in corruption? If you call a corrupt person a ‘peer,’ then are you not also corrupt?”
Paper Hawkers & Mongers
There are some who seek to have their name on as many papers as possible. It’s a career objective for some. If someone seeks to have their name on research papers, or if they are sought to have their name on research papers, while not having contributed anything significant to the research, then it is an act of fraudulent misrepresentation. The intent from the other authors is to have you believe that the big name author contributed significantly, which is usually not true. The intent from the big name author is to get his or her name on as many papers as possible, which results in a knowing misrepresentation. The public is being sold a paper branded with a name whose person made no significant contribution to the research. That is a fraud and is, unfortunately, all too common as the ethical slide downward continues across the research paper industry.
A thought for The People — if you follow false leaders who repeat the same failing procedure for four years while expecting a different result, then where do you think your destination will be? Please consider how much good it has done to read and repost research papers filled with p-values and confidence intervals, while officials from your town, shire, village, or city falsify death records, hide Covid vaccine deaths, count accidental deaths as Covid deaths, and lie to you on television and in print media. There is conclusive evidence of people sick and dying all around you, while you have been programmed to follow false leaders and repost research papers on social media. Maybe I need a catch phrase to make my point. I do not want to be political, but this should make some chuckle and infuriate others. MAKE AMERICA DISCERN AGAIN.
Frustration Arrives Like a Thunderclap
Humility has its limits where it becomes a liability or weakness. The offeror of information mistakes his own weakness for the virtue of humility, while the readers are left without the author’s innate vigor.
There is no better evidence than what is provided in The Real CdC, THE CDC MEMORANDUM, THE VERMONT MEMORANDUM, THE MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM, THE CONNECTICUT MEMORANDA SERIES Vol. I & Vol. II, and EXHIBIT F from Beaudoin v Baker et al (2022).
I have been two years ahead of doctors and scientists in providing the TRUTH to The People.
My forensic analysis system ALPHA is better than anything created by 250,000 state and federal public health employees.
My solutions are the most economical and robust for public health.
My models and methods are better than anything the field of epidemiology currently has.
My two bills that I wrote for New Hampshire HB 1661 and Minnesota HF 5131 are the best public health bills I’ve ever seen.
There is no epidemiologist in the world who can explain the interrelated systems of the Covid era as I have on many podcasts and X spaces and in my substack articles. Epidemiologists are myopic and cannot see outside their narrow lane of expertise.
I’m no genius. I simply know a moderate bit about many things and I have a knack for finding issues and proposing solutions because my default mindset is to distrust the current paradigm, whether it is EBM or “the science™.” It cost me tens of millions of dollars to have this awkward personality that pissed off many vice presidents in my career. But that’s what delivered billions of dollars in revenue that no one else in the companies for which I worked would have garnered. I do not always do what I’m told. I nearly always do what is right.
Now I turn over a new leaf and maybe sound a little boastful. People otherwise just don’t get it. They will continue to chase Pfizer data or research paper statistics for another four years as hundreds of thousands per year are murdered in the United States via “vaccines” and “treatment” protocols. How do I wake up those who are now entertained by podcast interviews of celebrity doctors who only talk about research papers and reject the trove of official records evincing vaccine-caused deaths?
God Bless you all.
John 14:6
I miss my son.
The Real CdC’s Newsletter is free today. But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell The Real CdC’s Newsletter that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription. You won't be charged unless they enable payments.
| ||||||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment