humansarefree--2020-03-24--Debt Forgiveness and Nationalization Are the Answers to the Economic Crisis

The US airline companies have bankrupted themselves by buying back their stock in an enrichment scheme for CEOs and board members .
With the impact of the virus on their revenues , Congress is handing them a $ 50 billion bailout .
Instead of being bailed out they should be nationalized .
In the health and economic crisis in which we find ourselves , the government is going to need all the public trust it can get .
Bailouts of those who caused their problems and ours won ’ t meet the fairness test .
As I previously wrote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but it actually offers a chance to correct for the decades of deregulation and concentration and thereby restore competition to the economy .
Nationalized banks too-big-to-fail , for example , can later be broken up and the pieces sold back into private hands .
Commercial banks can again be separated from investment banks , and concentrated financial power can be broken .
Now that we know that markets are not self-regulating , we can restore sensible financial regulation and require banks to lend for productive purposes , not for financializing and leveraging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has not served the productive side of the US economy for a long time .
While ordinary heavily indebted Americans are losing their jobs right and left as businesses close , shopping center lobbyists are asking for a $ 1 trillion guarantee .
The hotel industry wants $ 150 billion .
The restaurant industry wants $ 145 billion .
The National Association of Manufacturers wants $ 1.4 trillion .
Food service distributors are in trouble .
Boeing wants $ 60 billion funded in part by loan guarantees .
Local and state governments need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wants $ 250 billion .
The list is endless .
And what is to be done for the 40 % of Americans who , according to a Federal Reserve study , can not raise $ 400 in cash without selling personal property ?
How are the large number of uninsured going to be cared for during this health crisis ?
Where will hospitals and medical practices get the money ?
The only solution is to nationalize health care so that the bills can be paid .
We can not survive large numbers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raiding for food and whatever they can take .
The only solution for the economy is debt forgiveness for the ordinary people and nationalization for the companies .
Trump indicated that aid might be given in the form of an equity stake , and later sell the government ’ s stake for a profit in a privatization when things return to normal .
This would be a partial nationalization .
Much better to go whole hog as it allows a cure for concentration and deregulation .
The pandemic has made it clear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a society .
A society is a social system .
A successful social system is one that can support its members .
Once a self-sustaining social system exists , then there is a basis for people to branch out on their own .
But without a sustainable social system , there can be nothing .
To create a sustainable society in the United States requires the abandonment of dogmatic ways of thinking .
Old ideologies are in the way .
We and our leaders must think creatively if we are to successfully deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The US airline companies have bankrupted themselves by buying back their stock in an enrichment scheme for CEOs and board members.
With the impact of the virus on their revenues, Congress is handing them a $50 billion bailout. Instead of being bailed out they should be nationalized.
In the health and economic crisis in which we find ourselves, the government is going to need all the public trust it can get. Bailouts of those who caused their problems and ours won’t meet the fairness test.
As I previously wrote, nationalization is a four-letter word for many, but it actually offers a chance to correct for the decades of deregulation and concentration and thereby restore competition to the economy.
Nationalized banks too-big-to-fail, for example, can later be broken up and the pieces sold back into private hands. Commercial banks can again be separated from investment banks, and concentrated financial power can be broken.
Now that we know that markets are not self-regulating, we can restore sensible financial regulation and require banks to lend for productive purposes, not for financializing and leveraging existing assets. The US financial system has not served the productive side of the US economy for a long time.
While ordinary heavily indebted Americans are losing their jobs right and left as businesses close, shopping center lobbyists are asking for a $1 trillion guarantee. The hotel industry wants $150 billion. The restaurant industry wants $145 billion. The National Association of Manufacturers wants $1.4 trillion.
Food service distributors are in trouble. Boeing wants $60 billion funded in part by loan guarantees. Local and state governments need support. The US conference of mayors wants $250 billion. The list is endless.
And what is to be done for the 40% of Americans who, according to a Federal Reserve study, cannot raise $400 in cash without selling personal property? How are the large number of uninsured going to be cared for during this health crisis? Where will hospitals and medical practices get the money?
The only solution is to nationalize health care so that the bills can be paid. We cannot survive large numbers of infected and jobless people roaming the streets raiding for food and whatever they can take.
The only solution for the economy is debt forgiveness for the ordinary people and nationalization for the companies. Trump indicated that aid might be given in the form of an equity stake, and later sell the government’s stake for a profit in a privatization when things return to normal. This would be a partial nationalization. Much better to go whole hog as it allows a cure for concentration and deregulation.
The pandemic has made it clear that a society of self-seeking individuals is not a society. A society is a social system. A successful social system is one that can support its members. Once a self-sustaining social system exists, then there is a basis for people to branch out on their own. But without a sustainable social system, there can be nothing.
To create a sustainable society in the United States requires the abandonment of dogmatic ways of thinking. Old ideologies are in the way. We and our leaders must think creatively if we are to successfully deal with the health and economic crisis.
By Paul Craig Roberts, Guest writer


humansarefree--2020-03-25--PG&E Pleads Guilty to Involuntary Manslaughter for Sparking California’s Deadliest Fire

California utility Pacific Gas & Electric ( PG & E ) will plead guilty to involuntary manslaughter for sparking the state ’ s deadliest wildfire , the company announced Monday .
The announcement comes a little less than a year after an investigation confirmed that power lines owned by the utility sparked the Camp Fire , which burned 153,336 acres , killed 85 people and scorched the town of Paradise .
“ We can not replace all that the fire destroyed , but our hope is that this plea agreement , along with our rebuilding efforts , will help the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” PG & E Chief Executive Bill Johnson said in a statement reported by Reuters .
The plea is part of a March 17 agreement with the Butte County District Attorney ’ s office .
According to the agreement , the county would drop all criminal proceedings against the utility and , in exchange , it would plead guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of accidentally starting a fire .
It would also pay a fine of $ 3.5 million maximum and $ 500,000 in legal costs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ towards water for residents who relied on the Miocene Canal destroyed in the fire .
The announcement also comes three days after California Gov .
Gavin Newsom said he was willing to approve PG & E ’ s plan to emerge from bankruptcy , which it entered in early 2019 as it faced billions in liabilities from the fires .
As part of that agreement , it would pay $ 13.5 billion to fire victims , The New York Times reported… The fire was sparked when a tower more than 100 years old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspect it for nearly 20 years…

California utility Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) will plead guilty to involuntary manslaughter for sparking the state’s deadliest wildfire, the company announced Monday.
The announcement comes a little less than a year after an investigation confirmed that power lines owned by the utility sparked the Camp Fire, which burned 153,336 acres, killed 85 people and scorched the town of Paradise.
“We cannot replace all that the fire destroyed, but our hope is that this plea agreement, along with our rebuilding efforts, will help the community move forward from this tragic incident,” PG&E Chief Executive Bill Johnson said in a statement reported by Reuters.
The plea is part of a March 17 agreement with the Butte County District Attorney’s office.
According to the agreement, the county would drop all criminal proceedings against the utility and, in exchange, it would plead guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of accidentally starting a fire.
It would also pay a fine of $3.5 million maximum and $500,000 in legal costs, as well as put $15 million towards water for residents who relied on the Miocene Canal destroyed in the fire.
The announcement also comes three days after California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he was willing to approve PG&E’s plan to emerge from bankruptcy, which it entered in early 2019 as it faced billions in liabilities from the fires.
As part of that agreement, it would pay $13.5 billion to fire victims, The New York Times reported…
The fire was sparked when a tower more than 100 years old malfunctioned. The utility had failed to inspect it for nearly 20 years…
Source: EcoWatch.com (excerpt)


humansarefree--2020-03-25--Jeremy Corbyn’s Brother Claims Bill Gates and George Soros Are Behind Coronavirus

Jeremy Corbyn ’ s brother Piers has claimed that Bill Gates and George Soros are behind the coronavirus .
The @ @ @ @ @ that the illness is an attempt to cull the world ’ s population with a @ @ @ @ @ CV PANDEMIC WAS SIMULATED OCT 2019 BY MEGA-RICH CONTROL FREAKS BILL GATES , GEORGE SOROS @ @ @ @ @ S FOR REAL .
‘ THE AIM IS A WORLD POPULATION CULL ( “ PEOPLE @ @ @ @ @ ) by THEIR mass VACCINATION PLAN CONTAINING POISON .

Jeremy Corbyn’s brother Piers has claimed that Billy Boy and George Soros are behind the coronavirus.
The 72-year-old told followers on Twitter that the illness is an attempt to cull the world’s population with a poisoned antidote.
He wrote:
‘THE CV PANDEMIC WAS SIMULATED OCT 2019 BY MEGA-RICH CONTROL FREAKS BILL GATES, GEORGE SOROS +CRONIES. NOW IT’S FOR REAL.
‘THE AIM IS A WORLD POPULATION CULL (“PEOPLE cause #CO2 problem”) by THEIR mass VACCINATION PLAN CONTAINING POISON.
*REFUSE*CV*VACCINE*.’
THE CV PANDEMIC WAS SIMULATED OCT 2019 BY MEGA-RICH CONTROL FREAKS BILL GATES, GEORGE SOROS +CRONIES.
NOW IT'S FOR REAL.
THE AIM IS A WORLD POPULATION CULL ("PEOPLE cause #CO2 problem") by THEIR mass VACCINATION PLAN CONTAINING POISON. *REFUSE*CV*VACCINE*https://t.co/uv0A4B5rNP — Piers Corbyn (@Piers_Corbyn) March 16, 2020
Source: DailyMail.co.uk


humansarefree--2020-03-25--Florida’s Top Child Abuse Doctor Exposed – Second Opinions by Other Doctors Not Allowed When Examini

Florida’s Top Child Abuse Doctor Exposed – Second Opinions by Other Doctors Not Allowed When Examining Child Injuries

With the recent , negative media attention focusing on the sub-specialty Child Abuse Pediatrics , Dr. Bruce McIntosh , the statewide medical director of nearly two dozen child protection teams in Florida , has broken his silence to speak out in defense of these Child Abuse Pediatricians ( CAP ’ s ) .
According to a story by Katie LaGrone with WPTV in West Palm Beach , Dr. McIntosh is quoted as saying : “ We do not set out to diagnose abuse ; we set out to find out what happened.
” “ This is the first time Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , after their investigation found several families were wrongly accused of child abuse by child abuse pediatricians who work for the state as experts on abuse.
” The response was the result of questions posed by WPTV regarding a 2017 training video they found on the state child welfare website .
( Full video below . )
The video includes 62 minutes of Dr. McIntosh and state legal experts presenting common defenses in child abuse cases and why those defenses are false .
Dr. McIntosh claims these false defenses are often made by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the child ’ s injuries .
What McIntosh and others fail to mention is the fact that child abuse pediatricians are paid by the prosecution to testify in these cases as well .
They are paid because most of them are “ hired ” or contracted with the state to consult on suspected abuse cases and testify for the prosecution .
Often times , the Child Abuse Pediatrician is the primary and/or only expert witness for the prosecution .
This is never told to families when they are being questioned by the Child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ L. Bomar , Jr. , author of The Compensation of Expert Witnesses , points out how and why experts are paid by the prosecution , which includes medical doctors .
Bomar also brings up the fact that expert witnesses who are contracted with the state , as most ( if not all ) CAP ’ s are , are paid the amount listed in the contract to testify against the defense .
He writes : “ The constitutional argument more frequently used is that an expert ’ s opinion is his property , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a deprivation of property without due process forbidden by both federal and state constitutions.
” So despite what McIntosh and prosecutors say in regards to the hiring of expert witnesses by the defense , it is the constitutional right of any expert witness to ask for and be compensated for his work and testimony , whether they are testifying for the defense or the prosecution .
The real issue isn ’ t about defense witnesses being paid for their time and testimony , but the fact that families and individuals are put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out , hire and pay an expert to review medical records , provide these “ alternative explanations for a child ’ s injuries ” other than abuse , and testify at trial .
Child abuse pediatrics seems to be the only specialty where individuals are not allowed to seek a second opinion .
According to WebMD.com , second opinions are encouraged and even covered by most health insurance plans .
An article by Jay MacDonald , “ The 6 questions every patient want to ask about getting a 2nd opinion , ” Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johns Hopkins Medicine , answers the question “ why get a 2nd opinion ?
” by saying : “ Easy : 20 % to 30 % of second opinions differ from the first opinion ” , says Makary .
“ When you ’ re dealing with something serious , what ’ s the downside of getting one ?
” MacDonald ’ s article also brings up another option which is to talk with your Primary Care Physician .
Niran Al-Agba , MD , a pediatrician in Silverdale , Washington , and a regular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an article published November , 2019 , on Kitsapsun.com , describing exactly how her opinion as a primary care physician , and the opinion of a seasoned law officer , were disregarded by CPS .
“ The CPS caseworker ultimately disregarded the opinions of a veteran police detective and the child ’ s pediatrician , resting a determination on the outside doctor ’ s observation .
On the basis of a single piece of evidence , CPS decided the allegations of abuse were “ founded ” — meaning the state believed it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or mother had intentionally inflicted harm on their 2-year-old.
” According to Dr. Al-Agba , these allegations were deemed “ founded ” when an outside child abuse pediatrician reviewed only photos provided by CPS .
These photos were the only thing used by the child abuse pediatrician to make her determination that the child was abused .
Two cases were mentioned in this article , “ both involved overzealous child abuse pediatricians who made mistakes , ” wrote Dr. Al-Agba .
“ Washington state lawmakers should implement stronger safeguards to protect families when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ child abuse experts ’ whose opinions may at times be at odds with those of primary care physicians .
Keeping families intact should always be a top priority.
” These contracted physicians are paid by the state to testify against families , something Dr. McIntosh fails to make the audience aware of in his 2017 training video .
WPTV reports Dr. McIntosh and other legal experts describe , “ some witnesses hired by the defense attorneys as carnival people who travel around the country making six-figure incomes offering explanations not backed up by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is attacking the character , agenda and knowledge of physicians who testify for the defense , this time going so far as to call them “ carnival people ” and again , failing to mention child abuse pediatricians , who are contracted with the State , as mentioned by Dr. Niran Al-Agba , are also paid by the state to testify against the families .
Dr. McIntosh also claims the explanations used by these physicians are not backed up science or medicine .
This too is false .
There have been countless studies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ published , meaning they have been objectively verified and accepted by peers of the author in the medical community .
There is a multitude of peer-reviewed articles and studies that have found alternative explanations for the common “ injuries ” and findings , used by CAP ’ s to diagnose abuse .
Not to mention the slew of rare and sometimes common diseases known to mimic abuse .
The studies show concrete medical and scientific evidence that support the fact that many injuries deemed abuse by child abuse pediatricians do in fact have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theories .
The only “ explanations NOT backed up by science and medicine ” are the theories used by child abuse pediatricians to claim abuse ; theories that , till this day , remain just that , theories .
Some of which continue to be theories for almost 50 years , as is the case with Shaken Baby Syndrome ( SBS ) /Abusive Head Trauma ( AHT ) .
Shaken Baby Syndrome , now known as Abusive Head Trauma and other names that are constantly changing , was popularized in the 1970 ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this theory is still unproven .
In fact , there is more evidence disproving the theory , yet it is still being taught in the medical literature , is still used by child abuse pediatricians to diagnose abuse , is used by prosecutors to charge individuals with felony child abuse , and is still convicting people of child abuse and sometimes murder .
Family ( civil ) courts have the lowest burden of proof which is “ preponderance of the evidence , ” but in criminal court , the burden of proof @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable doubt ” which , according to Investopedia.com , means the evidence presented by the prosecution establishes the defendant ’ s guilt so clearly that it must be accepted as fact by any rational person .
A theory is just that , a theory , and has yet to be proven and supported as fact .
The “ triad ” or “ constellation of findings ” is what is used to make the diagnosis of SBS/AHT .
Sometimes it only takes just one or two of the findings for a CAP to claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independent study conducted by the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services ( SBU ) , concluded : “ There is limited scientific evidence that the triad1 and therefore its components can be associated with traumatic shaking ( low quality evidence ) .
There is insufficient scientific evidence on which to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the triad in identifying traumatic shaking ( very low quality evidence ) .
” Even with the overwhelming evidence discrediting the theory of the SBS/AHT and other common theories used by CAP ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainty , it is still being defended by its supporters and taught as fact in the medical literature .
In a paper by Jay Simmons , “ Ironic Simplicity : Why Shaken Baby Syndrome Misdiagnoses Should Result in Automatic Reimbursement for the Wrongly Accused , ” Simmons points out several times the prominent supporters of the theory acknowledge it is a theory , one even claiming “ the triad ” is a myth .
WPTV asked Linda Shiflet , a former State Prosecutor in Hillsborough County , Florida , to watch the training @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shiflet ’ s opinion on the training session is : “ In my opinion it ’ s a training session on how to be a good prosecutor.
” Shiflet goes on to explain : “ They weren ’ t saying that all defenses are false , they were specifying certain defenses and how the medical science doesn ’ t support them as , in fact , true defenses.
” While McIntosh makes claims that families and individuals are using “ false defenses ” conjured up by these alleged “ carnival people , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families use a “ false defense ” if the child abuse pediatrician tested for these underlying conditions and ruled them out ?
McIntosh and other child abuse pediatricians are attacking families , many later deemed by the courts to be innocent of their charges , who have fought to find out the truth about their child and attacking the physicians who are more qualified to diagnose these types of conditions .
If it wasn ’ t for the negligence of these child abuse pediatricians ’ biased opinions and being under-qualified in genetics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other specialties , families and individuals wouldn ’ t have a defense because anything and everything that could cause or mimic the findings to diagnose abuse have been tested for and ruled out .
It is clear this is not being done .
Child abuse pediatricians continue to rely on the circular reasoning surrounding the many theories regarding common factors that are indicative of abuse ; they fail to consider , which means they don ’ t test for , other conditions and diseases .
Once “ Abuse ” is Diagnosed Families Left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This leaves the burden of finding the true cause of a child ’ s “ injuries ” to the family and/or caretaker .
A burden that is financially and emotionally devastating .
This doesn ’ t include the burden placed on CPS agencies to investigate cases that should have never been referred to CPS , taking up their time and resources that need to be used for true cases of abuse and neglect .
The courts and taxpayers then have to waste time , money and resources on lengthy and expensive trials , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one physician who failed to perform their due diligence and has also failed to uphold the ethical oath they took when they became a doctor .
The modern version of the Hippocratic Oath , according to MedicineNet.com , translates “ Do no harm ” as : “ I will not be ashamed to say ‘ I know not ’ , nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient ’ s recovery ” .
“ …this awesome responsibility must be faced with great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Above all , I must not play God.
” Child abuse pediatricians continue to defy the very oath they took when they became physicians by continuously jumping to a conclusion supported only by theories and never testing for , or even considering , other possible causes .
CAP ’ s also fail to involve other medical specialists with more knowledge and experience in rare diseases and neurology before rendering their conclusions .
In a recent story by Mike Hixenbaugh with NBC News , Hixenbaugh reports how several emergency room doctors at a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ describe an : “ ’ Out of control ’ child abuse team that is too quick to report minor injuries to authorities and that is too closely aligned with state child welfare investigators.
” “ Three of the doctors recalled being pressured by child abuse pediatricians to alter medical records , removing passages where they had initially reported having little or no concerns about abuse.
” It seems to be common in cases involving a child abuse pediatrician where they fail to consult with other specialists .
Now with the investigation conducted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going so far as bully other physicians .
According to The Becker Law Firm , “ medical records are legal documents that may not be falsified or altered in any way .
Knowingly falsifying medical records is a felony crime with a potential fine of $ 250,000 or five years in prison.
” In a medical malpractice case , “ falsification of a medical record with any kind of alteration or destruction is considered as tampering with evidence , ” also a felony .
In an episode of “ Diagnosis Murder ” – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2012 , Dr. Patrick Barnes was interviewed .
Dr. Barnes is a Pediatric Radiologist and Pediatric Neuroradiologist who has been practicing for over 41 years .
His experience also includes being a past Chair of the Child Abuse Task Force of the Society for Pediatric Radiology .
In the past Dr. Barnes was an expert witness for prosecution and would testify against individuals accused of shaken baby syndrome .
After seeing the credentials of the physicians who were expert witnesses for the defense and speaking out against the theory , he decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and studies used to back up the theory that continues to be taught to medical students .
He learned through his research and explains in the interview it was found out from other experts you can ’ t diagnose shaking based on the “ triad.
” There are lots of other causes .
They also found the whole theory about the amount of force being equivalent to throwing a child out of a third story window “ has no basis in science whatsoever and in fact the prosecution witnesses admitted it was somewhat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sustain the same findings by falling off small pieces of furniture or playground equipment.
” In regards to “ the triad ” he says , “ This was a theory .
A theory that made sense with no other theory to replace it which means it was taught and accepted dogma .
You can ’ t shake children to test the theory , which makes it hard to prove or disprove making it accepted.
” Dr. Barnes made it clear the theory is , “ being questioned now quite widely .
Science is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The point is , if the prosecutions witness is saying short falls can ’ t kill , and you have evidence a short fall did kill , you have disproven that theory .
It only takes one , ” he says .
In regards to his opinion on the science used to back the shaken baby theory is : “ Very skeptical about the science of shaken baby theory .
You can ’ t identify shaken baby syndrome as the cause of most , if any of these injuries based on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just not there.
” “ The medical and scientific community can ’ t agree that the theory is the cause for a child ’ s death.How can we expect a jury to decide beyond a reasonable doubt ?
” Which Doctors Are Using False Theories and Hiding Behind HIPAA Laws ?
So again this begs the question : Who is using false theories ?
The prosecution who brings in paid experts to testify about a theory as if it is fact when modern science has disproved it , or the defense who brings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other causes of a child ’ s injuries , causes that were never considered or tested for by the child abuse pediatrician prior to concluding abuse ?
WPTV reported McIntosh as saying he would not discuss any single case due to HIPAA laws , but was quoted as saying : “ Families who have abused their children are free to go to the media and proclaim their innocence .
The Child Protection Team , however , is constrained by Florida statutes and Federal HIPAA regulations .
Therefore , it is easy for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the accuracy and value of CPT medical provider ’ s work.
” This is a common excuse used by hospitals defending their child protection teams .
It ’ s not clear if this statement is true under HIPAA regulations , but it seems if the family has made the records public , there would be nothing obstructing them from commenting on the case or at least making the public aware of the testing used to prove a child was in fact abused .
Yet , this never seems to be the case .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ an umbrella to hide under when the conduct and medical practices of a CAP are called into question , and more importantly proven to be wrong in the courts .
According to WPTV , the Florida ’ s Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics , sent a letter to at least two lawmakers .
The letter was defending the work of the state ’ s child abuse pediatricians .
Dr. Paul Robinson , Chapter President responded to the WPTV investigation and other media outlets who have been reporting on this topic stating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inaccurate and misleading information about child abuse pediatricians.
” Dr. Robinson and Dr. McIntosh make this claim , but continue to hide behind privacy laws , avoiding a true response and failing to provide any sort of evidence to back up these claims .
It seems the only inaccurate and misleading information in these cases are the reports and opinions given by child abuse pediatricians .
Judges and juries are hearing all of the evidence from both sides .
They are hearing the claims of abuse based on theories and opinions not supported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with other “ true ” causes that can and do result in the same injuries .
Are Dr. Robinson and Dr. McIntosh now claiming all of these judges and juries are getting it wrong ?
Are they willing to publicly say this while attacking the families that have been proven innocent , therefore proving the child abuse pediatrician was wrong ?
Furthermore , if these child abuse pediatricians are so firm in the science used to make their diagnoses with such certainty that it can ’ t possibly be anything else , why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a second opinion from an independent physician or specialist ?
With the recent push for legislators to make changes to the law to provide families the right to a second opinion before CPS steps in and removes their children , Dr. Robinson also mentions in his letter , “ Some cases already can [ get a second opinion ] by seeking the opinion of the state ’ s medical director Dr. Bruce McIntosh.
” How can a family get an unbiased opinion with this type of proposition that uses the same doctors who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on circular reasoning ?
Last year the Florida Department of Children and Families reported nearly 37,000 cases of child abuse and neglect , among the top five reporting states , according to WPTV .
More than 15,000 cases were reviewed by child abuse pediatricians during fiscal year 2018/2019 .
The finding of abuse was confirmed in “ roughly ” half of cases .
It needs to be pointed out there is no mention as to how the cases were confirmed as abuse , but even “ roughly ” half is not a good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If the “ training , ” studies , and scientific and medical evidence is sound and accurate , shouldn ’ t these physicians should be getting it right a lot more than just “ roughly ” half the time ?
Child Abuse Pediatricians Held to the Lowest Standards of Accuracy ?
No other specialty in medicine is held to such a low standard .
No other medical specialty is immune from liability if they get it wrong even one time .
Why are child abuse pediatricians put on a pedestal with no oversight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ training seminar by warning the audience of experts to be more thorough when evaluating a child for abuse .
“ It ’ s not really sufficient anymore to look at a child .
Look at x-rays and say this is abuse , ” he said .
Is this the type of negligence that has been used in the past , and most likely currently used to diagnose child abuse ?
Simply look at an x-ray and say “ this is abuse ?
” And how is a child abuse pediatrician able to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and who does not consult with other physicians in that specialty ?
How many families have been falsely accused by this type of negligence ?
Oversight and accountability is long overdue for this growing sub-specialty .
Law makers must step in and govern how these “ doctors ” are practicing medicine and the methods being used to “ diagnose ” crimes .
Families and children deserve to remain together and not be torn apart based on flawed medical science and studies , the true “ false theories , ” and biased opinions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Family Advocate and mother .
She is a surviving victim of a false Child Abuse Pediatrician ’ s accusation .
Read her story here .

With the recent, negative media attention focusing on the sub-specialty Child Abuse Pediatrics, Dr. Bruce McIntosh, the statewide medical director of nearly two dozen child protection teams in Florida, has broken his silence to speak out in defense of these Child Abuse Pediatricians (CAP’s).
According to a story by Katie LaGrone with WPTV in West Palm Beach, Dr. McIntosh is quoted as saying:
“We do not set out to diagnose abuse; we set out to find out what happened.”
Katie LaGrone reports,
“This is the first time Dr. McIntosh has responded, on the record, after their investigation found several families were wrongly accused of child abuse by child abuse pediatricians who work for the state as experts on abuse.”
The response was the result of questions posed by WPTV regarding a 2017 training video they found on the state child welfare website. (Full video below.)
The video includes 62 minutes of Dr. McIntosh and state legal experts presenting common defenses in child abuse cases and why those defenses are false.
Dr. McIntosh claims these false defenses are often made by hired witnesses to offer alternative explanations for the child’s injuries.
What McIntosh and others fail to mention is the fact that child abuse pediatricians are paid by the prosecution to testify in these cases as well. They are paid because most of them are “hired” or contracted with the state to consult on suspected abuse cases and testify for the prosecution.
Often times, the Child Abuse Pediatrician is the primary and/or only expert witness for the prosecution. This is never told to families when they are being questioned by the Child Abuse Pediatrician in the hospital.
Horace L. Bomar, Jr., author of The Compensation of Expert Witnesses, points out how and why experts are paid by the prosecution, which includes medical doctors.
Bomar also brings up the fact that expert witnesses who are contracted with the state, as most (if not all) CAP’s are, are paid the amount listed in the contract to testify against the defense. He writes:
“The constitutional argument more frequently used is that an expert’s opinion is his property, the taking of which without adequate compensation is a deprivation of property without due process forbidden by both federal and state constitutions.”
So despite what McIntosh and prosecutors say in regards to the hiring of expert witnesses by the defense, it is the constitutional right of any expert witness to ask for and be compensated for his work and testimony, whether they are testifying for the defense or the prosecution.
The real issue isn’t about defense witnesses being paid for their time and testimony, but the fact that families and individuals are put in the position to have to seek out, hire and pay an expert to review medical records, provide these “alternative explanations for a child’s injuries” other than abuse, and testify at trial.
Child Abuse “Medical” Diagnosis: Second Medical Opinions Not Allowed
Child abuse pediatrics seems to be the only specialty where individuals are not allowed to seek a second opinion.
According to WebMD.com, second opinions are encouraged and even covered by most health insurance plans.
An article by Jay MacDonald, “The 6 questions every patient want to ask about getting a 2nd opinion,” Dr. Martin Makary, Professor of Surgery at Johns Hopkins Medicine, answers the question “why get a 2nd opinion?” by saying:
“Easy: 20% to 30% of second opinions differ from the first opinion”, says Makary.
“When you’re dealing with something serious, what’s the downside of getting one?”
MacDonald’s article also brings up another option which is to talk with your Primary Care Physician.
Niran Al-Agba, MD, a pediatrician in Silverdale, Washington, and a regular columnist for the Kitsnap Sun, wrote an article published November, 2019, on Kitsapsun.com, describing exactly how her opinion as a primary care physician, and the opinion of a seasoned law officer, were disregarded by CPS.
In one case, Dr. Al-Agba describes:
“The CPS caseworker ultimately disregarded the opinions of a veteran police detective and the child’s pediatrician, resting a determination on the outside doctor’s observation. On the basis of a single piece of evidence, CPS decided the allegations of abuse were “founded” — meaning the state believed it was more likely than not that a father or mother had intentionally inflicted harm on their 2-year-old.”
According to Dr. Al-Agba, these allegations were deemed “founded” when an outside child abuse pediatrician reviewed only photos provided by CPS. These photos were the only thing used by the child abuse pediatrician to make her determination that the child was abused.
Two cases were mentioned in this article, “both involved overzealous child abuse pediatricians who made mistakes,” wrote Dr. Al-Agba.
Dr. Niran Al-Agba suggests:
“Washington state lawmakers should implement stronger safeguards to protect families when Child Protective Services defer to contracted ‘child abuse experts’ whose opinions may at times be at odds with those of primary care physicians. Keeping families intact should always be a top priority.”
These contracted physicians are paid by the state to testify against families, something Dr. McIntosh fails to make the audience aware of in his 2017 training video. WPTV reports Dr. McIntosh and other legal experts describe,
“some witnesses hired by the defense attorneys as carnival people who travel around the country making six-figure incomes offering explanations not backed up by science or medicine.”
Again Dr. McIntosh is attacking the character, agenda and knowledge of physicians who testify for the defense, this time going so far as to call them “carnival people” and again, failing to mention child abuse pediatricians, who are contracted with the State, as mentioned by Dr. Niran Al-Agba, are also paid by the state to testify against the families.
Dr. McIntosh also claims the explanations used by these physicians are not backed up science or medicine.
This too is false. There have been countless studies done by physicians that are peer-reviewed and published, meaning they have been objectively verified and accepted by peers of the author in the medical community.
There is a multitude of peer-reviewed articles and studies that have found alternative explanations for the common “injuries” and findings, used by CAP’s to diagnose abuse. Not to mention the slew of rare and sometimes common diseases known to mimic abuse.
The studies show concrete medical and scientific evidence that support the fact that many injuries deemed abuse by child abuse pediatricians do in fact have other causes. They are not just theories.
Shaken Baby Syndrome Theory Lacks Scientific Consent
The only “explanations NOT backed up by science and medicine” are the theories used by child abuse pediatricians to claim abuse; theories that, till this day, remain just that, theories. Some of which continue to be theories for almost 50 years, as is the case with Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS)/Abusive Head Trauma (AHT).
Shaken Baby Syndrome, now known as Abusive Head Trauma and other names that are constantly changing, was popularized in the 1970’s. So for almost 50 years, this theory is still unproven.
In fact, there is more evidence disproving the theory, yet it is still being taught in the medical literature, is still used by child abuse pediatricians to diagnose abuse, is used by prosecutors to charge individuals with felony child abuse, and is still convicting people of child abuse and sometimes murder.
Family (civil) courts have the lowest burden of proof which is “preponderance of the evidence,” but in criminal court, the burden of proof is the highest at “without a reasonable doubt” which, according to Investopedia.com, means the evidence presented by the prosecution establishes the defendant’s guilt so clearly that it must be accepted as fact by any rational person. A theory is just that, a theory, and has yet to be proven and supported as fact.
The “triad” or “constellation of findings” is what is used to make the diagnosis of SBS/AHT. Sometimes it only takes just one or two of the findings for a CAP to claim a child has been shaken. An independent study conducted by the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU), concluded:
“There is limited scientific evidence that the triad1 and therefore its components can be associated with traumatic shaking (low quality evidence).
There is insufficient scientific evidence on which to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the triad in identifying traumatic shaking (very low quality evidence).”
Even with the overwhelming evidence discrediting the theory of the SBS/AHT and other common theories used by CAP’s to claim child abuse with such certainty, it is still being defended by its supporters and taught as fact in the medical literature.
In a paper by Jay Simmons, “Ironic Simplicity: Why Shaken Baby Syndrome Misdiagnoses Should Result in Automatic Reimbursement for the Wrongly Accused,” Simmons points out several times the prominent supporters of the theory acknowledge it is a theory, one even claiming “the triad” is a myth.
WPTV asked Linda Shiflet, a former State Prosecutor in Hillsborough County, Florida, to watch the training seminar and interpret it for them.
Shiflet’s opinion on the training session is:
“In my opinion it’s a training session on how to be a good prosecutor.”
Shiflet goes on to explain:
“They weren’t saying that all defenses are false, they were specifying certain defenses and how the medical science doesn’t support them as, in fact, true defenses.”
While McIntosh makes claims that families and individuals are using “false defenses” conjured up by these alleged “carnival people,” the real question remains: How can families use a “false defense” if the child abuse pediatrician tested for these underlying conditions and ruled them out?
McIntosh and other child abuse pediatricians are attacking families, many later deemed by the courts to be innocent of their charges, who have fought to find out the truth about their child and attacking the physicians who are more qualified to diagnose these types of conditions.
If it wasn’t for the negligence of these child abuse pediatricians’ biased opinions and being under-qualified in genetics, radiology, neurology, orthopedics, and other specialties, families and individuals wouldn’t have a defense because anything and everything that could cause or mimic the findings to diagnose abuse have been tested for and ruled out.
It is clear this is not being done. Child abuse pediatricians continue to rely on the circular reasoning surrounding the many theories regarding common factors that are indicative of abuse; they fail to consider, which means they don’t test for, other conditions and diseases.
Once “Abuse” is Diagnosed Families Left to Themselves to Find True Medical Causes
This leaves the burden of finding the true cause of a child’s “injuries” to the family and/or caretaker. A burden that is financially and emotionally devastating.
This doesn’t include the burden placed on CPS agencies to investigate cases that should have never been referred to CPS, taking up their time and resources that need to be used for true cases of abuse and neglect.
The courts and taxpayers then have to waste time, money and resources on lengthy and expensive trials, all due to the medical negligence of one physician who failed to perform their due diligence and has also failed to uphold the ethical oath they took when they became a doctor.
Child Abuse Pediatricians Violate the Hippocratic Oath
The modern version of the Hippocratic Oath, according to MedicineNet.com, translates “Do no harm” as:
“I will not be ashamed to say ‘I know not’, nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient’s recovery”.
“…this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play God.”
Child abuse pediatricians continue to defy the very oath they took when they became physicians by continuously jumping to a conclusion supported only by theories and never testing for, or even considering, other possible causes.
CAP’s also fail to involve other medical specialists with more knowledge and experience in rare diseases and neurology before rendering their conclusions.
In a recent story by Mike Hixenbaugh with NBC News, Hixenbaugh reports how several emergency room doctors at a prominent children’s hospital in Wisconsin describe an:
“’Out of control’ child abuse team that is too quick to report minor injuries to authorities and that is too closely aligned with state child welfare investigators.”
Hixenbaugh also reported:
“Three of the doctors recalled being pressured by child abuse pediatricians to alter medical records, removing passages where they had initially reported having little or no concerns about abuse.”
It seems to be common in cases involving a child abuse pediatrician where they fail to consult with other specialists.
Medical Doctors Speak Out Against Child Abuse Pediatricians
Now with the investigation conducted by Mike Hixenbaugh, CAP’s are going so far as bully other physicians.
According to The Becker Law Firm,
“medical records are legal documents that may not be falsified or altered in any way. Knowingly falsifying medical records is a felony crime with a potential fine of $250,000 or five years in prison.”
In a medical malpractice case, “falsification of a medical record with any kind of alteration or destruction is considered as tampering with evidence,” also a felony.
In an episode of “Diagnosis Murder” – Broadcast date, Friday, January 13, 2012, Dr. Patrick Barnes was interviewed.
Dr. Barnes is a Pediatric Radiologist and Pediatric Neuroradiologist who has been practicing for over 41 years. His experience also includes being a past Chair of the Child Abuse Task Force of the Society for Pediatric Radiology.
In the past Dr. Barnes was an expert witness for prosecution and would testify against individuals accused of shaken baby syndrome. After seeing the credentials of the physicians who were expert witnesses for the defense and speaking out against the theory, he decided to go back and research the science and studies used to back up the theory that continues to be taught to medical students.
He learned through his research and explains in the interview it was found out from other experts you can’t diagnose shaking based on the “triad.” There are lots of other causes. They also found the whole theory about the amount of force being equivalent to throwing a child out of a third story window
“has no basis in science whatsoever and in fact the prosecution witnesses admitted it was somewhat anecdotal and it was concluded children can sustain the same findings by falling off small pieces of furniture or playground equipment.”
In regards to “the triad” he says,
“This was a theory. A theory that made sense with no other theory to replace it which means it was taught and accepted dogma. You can’t shake children to test the theory, which makes it hard to prove or disprove making it accepted.”
Dr. Barnes made it clear the theory is,
“being questioned now quite widely. Science is always contingent and changing and developing.”
“The point is, if the prosecutions witness is saying short falls can’t kill, and you have evidence a short fall did kill, you have disproven that theory. It only takes one,” he says.
In regards to his opinion on the science used to back the shaken baby theory is:
“Very skeptical about the science of shaken baby theory. You can’t identify shaken baby syndrome as the cause of most, if any of these injuries based on the medical science today. It’s just not there.”
Finally he states:
“The medical and scientific community can’t agree that the theory is the cause for a child’s death.How can we expect a jury to decide beyond a reasonable doubt?”
Which Doctors Are Using False Theories and Hiding Behind HIPAA Laws?
So again this begs the question: Who is using false theories? The prosecution who brings in paid experts to testify about a theory as if it is fact when modern science has disproved it, or the defense who brings in experts to testify to the various other causes of a child’s injuries, causes that were never considered or tested for by the child abuse pediatrician prior to concluding abuse?
WPTV reported McIntosh as saying he would not discuss any single case due to HIPAA laws, but was quoted as saying:
“Families who have abused their children are free to go to the media and proclaim their innocence. The Child Protection Team, however, is constrained by Florida statutes and Federal HIPAA regulations. Therefore, it is easy for the public be provided a slanted impression of the accuracy and value of CPT medical provider’s work.”
This is a common excuse used by hospitals defending their child protection teams.
It’s not clear if this statement is true under HIPAA regulations, but it seems if the family has made the records public, there would be nothing obstructing them from commenting on the case or at least making the public aware of the testing used to prove a child was in fact abused.
Yet, this never seems to be the case. Instead HIPAA privacy laws are used as an umbrella to hide under when the conduct and medical practices of a CAP are called into question, and more importantly proven to be wrong in the courts.
According to WPTV, the Florida’s Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, sent a letter to at least two lawmakers. The letter was defending the work of the state’s child abuse pediatricians.
Dr. Paul Robinson, Chapter President responded to the WPTV investigation and other media outlets who have been reporting on this topic stating:
“Recent news reports have contained inaccurate and misleading information about child abuse pediatricians.”
Dr. Robinson and Dr. McIntosh make this claim, but continue to hide behind privacy laws, avoiding a true response and failing to provide any sort of evidence to back up these claims.
It seems the only inaccurate and misleading information in these cases are the reports and opinions given by child abuse pediatricians.
Judges and juries are hearing all of the evidence from both sides. They are hearing the claims of abuse based on theories and opinions not supported by medical and scientific evidence, along with other “true” causes that can and do result in the same injuries.
Are Dr. Robinson and Dr. McIntosh now claiming all of these judges and juries are getting it wrong? Are they willing to publicly say this while attacking the families that have been proven innocent, therefore proving the child abuse pediatrician was wrong?
Furthermore, if these child abuse pediatricians are so firm in the science used to make their diagnoses with such certainty that it can’t possibly be anything else, why are they so opposed to families seeking a second opinion from an independent physician or specialist?
With the recent push for legislators to make changes to the law to provide families the right to a second opinion before CPS steps in and removes their children, Dr. Robinson also mentions in his letter,
“Some cases already can [get a second opinion] by seeking the opinion of the state’s medical director Dr. Bruce McIntosh.”
How can a family get an unbiased opinion with this type of proposition that uses the same doctors who believe the same child abuse dogma based on circular reasoning?
Last year the Florida Department of Children and Families reported nearly 37,000 cases of child abuse and neglect, among the top five reporting states, according to WPTV. More than 15,000 cases were reviewed by child abuse pediatricians during fiscal year 2018/2019. The finding of abuse was confirmed in “roughly” half of cases.
It needs to be pointed out there is no mention as to how the cases were confirmed as abuse, but even “roughly” half is not a good statistic when it comes to medicine. If the “training,” studies, and scientific and medical evidence is sound and accurate, shouldn’t these physicians should be getting it right a lot more than just “roughly” half the time?
Child Abuse Pediatricians Held to the Lowest Standards of Accuracy?
No other specialty in medicine is held to such a low standard. No other medical specialty is immune from liability if they get it wrong even one time.
Why are child abuse pediatricians put on a pedestal with no oversight and accountability?
McIntosh ends his 2017 training seminar by warning the audience of experts to be more thorough when evaluating a child for abuse.
“It’s not really sufficient anymore to look at a child. Look at x-rays and say this is abuse,” he said.
Is this the type of negligence that has been used in the past, and most likely currently used to diagnose child abuse? Simply look at an x-ray and say “this is abuse?”
And how is a child abuse pediatrician able to make such conclusions without having specialized radiological training and who does not consult with other physicians in that specialty?
How many families have been falsely accused by this type of negligence?
Conclusion: Oversight and Accountability Needed for Child Abuse Pediatricians
Oversight and accountability is long overdue for this growing sub-specialty. Law makers must step in and govern how these “doctors” are practicing medicine and the methods being used to “diagnose” crimes.
Families and children deserve to remain together and not be torn apart based on flawed medical science and studies, the true “false theories,” and biased opinions of child abuse pediatricians.
By Allie Parker
Allie Parker is a Family Advocate and mother. She is a surviving victim of a false Child Abuse Pediatrician’s accusation. Read her story here.


humansarefree--2020-03-25--Commissioner Calls Out Mayor for Cutting Off People’s Power During COVID-19 Outbreak

Lake Worth Beach , FL — Over the last 10 days , across the country , millions of Americans have watched as their careers in restaurants , bars , barber shops , spas , and many other businesses came crashing down .
Many of these folks live paycheck to paycheck and have just received their last one .
Of these folks , many of them have children .
Imagine for an instant that you have just received your last paycheck , your rent is due and you don ’ t have enough to cover your utility bill for your family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep your roof over your head and the government responsible for your unemployment then cuts off your power .
A Lake Worth Beach , Florida city commissioner attempted to stop such a scenario from unfolding earlier this month by holding an emergency meeting to discontinue shutoffs of water and electric to city residents with derelict accounts during the crisis .
However , that emergency meeting was denied and as a result , dozens of residents had their utilities shut off .
That commissioner was Omari Hardy who is now going viral in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayor during a later meeting — after residents had their power cut off .
During the meeting , Hardy slammed Lake Worth Beach city manager Michael Bornstein who admitted to turning off electricity for 50 customers on Tuesday .
He also accused the mayor , Pam Triolo of holding a “ banana republic.
” “ Lake Worth is 10 minutes from Mar-a-Lago , but we ’ re the second-poorest city in Palm Beach County , ” Hardy said , referring to President Trump ’ s resort .
“ Our working-class families may have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future .
It doesn ’ t seem right to turn off their electricity in the middle of a pandemic.
” Hardy went on to note that the city slow played their reaction in spite mass unemployment amid the crisis .
“ We could have banned large public gatherings , we could have closed the beach , we could have put a moratorium on utility cutoffs , ” Hardy said .
“ We should have been talking about this last week .
We cut off people ’ s utilities this week and made them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paycheck to us to turn their lights on .
But you don ’ t care about that !
You didn ’ t want to meet.
” Not wanting to hear anymore of Hardy ’ s words , the mayor called the meeting to a recess .
“ Also not within your power , ” Hardy retorted .
“ You came up with new rules at the beginning of the meeting and then you didn ’ t even want to follow the rules you came up with .
This is a banana republic is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into with your so-called leadership.
” While being scolded by the commissioner , the mayor got up and walked away .
“ You call me disrespectful because I ’ ve interrupted people , ” Hardy said to Triolo while gesturing toward Bornstein .
“ But this gentleman has turned off people ’ s lights in the middle of a global health pandemic .
That ’ s what that gentleman did .
And you think I ’ m disrespectful.
” Video of the incident subsequently went viral with Hardy becoming a hero to many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but make him president , ” one person wrote on Twitter .
“ Omari Hardy For President , ” another said .
“ That lady couldn ’ t handle all that truth in her face.
” In an interview with the Washington Post , Hardy said he doesn ’ t regret what he said , only noting that he wished he would not have yelled .
“ I didn ’ t know how to feel about it , ” Hardy said .
“ I felt I said what needed to be said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have to yell it .
I don ’ t regret the words , but I regret the circumstances that led to what was a very disagreeable situation.
” Luckily , for those affected by the crisis , Lake Worth Beach has since enacted a moratorium on utility shut offs and residents who had their electricity shut off have since had it turned back on .

Lake Worth Beach, FL — Over the last 10 days, across the country, millions of Americans have watched as their careers in restaurants, bars, barber shops, spas, and many other businesses came crashing down. Many of these folks live paycheck to paycheck and have just received their last one. Of these folks, many of them have children.
Imagine for an instant that you have just received your last paycheck, your rent is due and you don’t have enough to cover your utility bill for your family.
You pay only your rent to keep your roof over your head and the government responsible for your unemployment then cuts off your power.
A Lake Worth Beach, Florida city commissioner attempted to stop such a scenario from unfolding earlier this month by holding an emergency meeting to discontinue shutoffs of water and electric to city residents with derelict accounts during the crisis.
However, that emergency meeting was denied and as a result, dozens of residents had their utilities shut off.
That commissioner was Omari Hardy who is now going viral in a video in which he calls out the mayor during a later meeting — after residents had their power cut off.
During the meeting, Hardy slammed Lake Worth Beach city manager Michael Bornstein who admitted to turning off electricity for 50 customers on Tuesday. He also accused the mayor, Pam Triolo of holding a “banana republic.”
“Lake Worth is 10 minutes from Mar-a-Lago, but we’re the second-poorest city in Palm Beach County,” Hardy said, referring to President Trump’s resort.
“Our working-class families may have seen their last paycheck for the foreseeable future. It doesn’t seem right to turn off their electricity in the middle of a pandemic.”
Hardy went on to note that the city slow played their reaction in spite mass unemployment amid the crisis.
“We could have banned large public gatherings, we could have closed the beach, we could have put a moratorium on utility cutoffs,” Hardy said.
“We should have been talking about this last week. We cut off people’s utilities this week and made them pay what could have been their last paycheck to us to turn their lights on. But you don’t care about that! You didn’t want to meet.”
Not wanting to hear anymore of Hardy’s words, the mayor called the meeting to a recess.
“Also not within your power,” Hardy retorted.
“You came up with new rules at the beginning of the meeting and then you didn’t even want to follow the rules you came up with. This is a banana republic is what you’re turning this place into with your so-called leadership.”
While being scolded by the commissioner, the mayor got up and walked away.
“You’re done. You’re done,” Triolo said. “Disrespectful.”
“You call me disrespectful because I’ve interrupted people,” Hardy said to Triolo while gesturing toward Bornstein. “But this gentleman has turned off people’s lights in the middle of a global health pandemic. That’s what that gentleman did. And you think I’m disrespectful.”
Video of the incident subsequently went viral with Hardy becoming a hero to many.
“Idk who Omari Hardy is, but make him president,” one person wrote on Twitter.
“Omari Hardy For President,” another said. “That lady couldn’t handle all that truth in her face.”
In an interview with the Washington Post, Hardy said he doesn’t regret what he said, only noting that he wished he would not have yelled.
“I didn’t know how to feel about it,” Hardy said.
“I felt I said what needed to be said, but I wish I didn’t have to yell it. I don’t regret the words, but I regret the circumstances that led to what was a very disagreeable situation.”
Luckily, for those affected by the crisis, Lake Worth Beach has since enacted a moratorium on utility shut offs and residents who had their electricity shut off have since had it turned back on.
Source: TheFreeThoughtProject.com


humansarefree--2020-03-26--Environmentalist Group: “Corona is the Cure – Humans are the Disease”

A climate change group that aligns itself with Extinction Rebellion posted stickers claiming that coronavirus is a “ cure ” for the “ disease ” that is humanity .
“ Earth is healing .
The air and water is clearing , ” tweeted Extinction Rebellion East Midlands .
“ Corona is the cure .
Humans are the disease !
” The post shows stickers with the same message and the Extinction Rebellion logo plastered on lamp posts .
When another branch of Extinction Rebellion challenged that this “ does not follows XR ’ s principles , ” the East Midlands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointing out that from the perspective of the Earth , humans behave like a disease .
The idea is not to be , ” they responded .
While Extinction Rebellion East Midlands may represent little more than the ravings of one idiot , the notion that humanity somehow deserved coronavirus and that it ’ s good for the planet has been widely shared by environmentalists and celebrities .
After actor Idris Elba tested positive for coronavirus , he claimed that COVID-19 was the planet “ reacting to the human race ” as revenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that nature is ‘ flourishing ’ and animals are thriving thanks to coronavirus , it turns out that most of those stories are fake news .

A climate change group that aligns itself with Extinction Rebellion posted stickers claiming that coronavirus is a “cure” for the “disease” that is humanity.
“Earth is healing. The air and water is clearing,” tweeted Extinction Rebellion East Midlands. “Corona is the cure. Humans are the disease!”
The post shows stickers with the same message and the Extinction Rebellion logo plastered on lamp posts.
When another branch of Extinction Rebellion challenged that this “does not follows XR’s principles,” the East Midlands chapter doubled down.
“We are pointing out that from the perspective of the Earth, humans behave like a disease. The idea is not to be,” they responded.
While Extinction Rebellion East Midlands may represent little more than the ravings of one idiot, the notion that humanity somehow deserved coronavirus and that it’s good for the planet has been widely shared by environmentalists and celebrities.
After actor Idris Elba tested positive for coronavirus, he claimed that COVID-19 was the planet “reacting to the human race” as revenge for climate change.
Despite numerous claims that nature is ‘flourishing’ and animals are thriving thanks to coronavirus, it turns out that most of those stories are fake news.
Source: Summit.news


humansarefree--2020-03-26--No Meaningful Consensus Among Climate Scientists

The meme of “ an overwhelming consensus ” of scientists favoring one particular view on climate change is very popular , despite its implausibility .
In fact , the claim of 97 % agreement throughout the literature that mankind is responsible for warming in the past century readily falls apart upon inspection .
Here ’ s why .
First , polls that ostensibly support the 97 % consensus idea either ask the wrong people or ask the wrong question ( or both – see here ) .
Regardless , every reader should recognize that there are essentially no groups who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level .
And , of course , even if they did , it would prove nothing about nature .
The validity of scientific hypotheses are not decided by a show of hands .
When Albert Einstein developed his Theory of Relativity , German scientists compiled a book titled Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein ( A Hundred Authors Against Einstein ) , published in 1931 .
“ Why 100 ?
” Einstein asked .
“ If I were wrong , one would have been enough.
” That climate change is real and happening is clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To say it is due to human activities begs the questions , “ how much ?
” and “ how do we know ?
” Nearly all scientists understand that some of the past century ’ s warming trend is due to natural causes .
The issue is how much is natural variability and how much is due to man-caused greenhouse gases and land uses such as agriculture and forestry ?
Some scientists believe it is difficult or meaningless to ascribe a single temperature to the globe and then to attribute changes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And whether climate change is dangerous or not is a subjective and political decision , not a scientific concept .
Who is at risk ?
When ?
And how do the risks created by climate change compare to other risks we face every day ?
At times , consensus may have a place in science , but only in contexts different than what occurs in climate science .
It is typically achieved over an extended period of time by independent scientists following the conventions of the Scientific Method , in particular not neglecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Consensus emerges from open debate and tolerance of new theories and discoveries ; it is not handed down by an authoritative international organization tasked with defending a single paradigm .
Yet , this is exactly what the United Nation ’ s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) has been charged to do ; find man ’ s role in climate change rather than find all the factors that control climate .
In following this path , the IPCC has chosen to vilify scientists who disagree with the UN body ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ framed around providing support for the hypothesis of human-caused climate change .
As a result , variables that logically would be expected to impact climate change have been neglected in these assessments .
The list below includes a dozen such variables about which little is understood .
2- energy flows between the ocean and atmosphere 3- energy flows between the air and land 4- the balance between the Earth ’ s water , water vapor , and ice 8- the ability to factor in hurricanes and tornadoes 9- the impact of vegetation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earth ’ s surface and the planet ’ s core Instead of experimentation and open debate , today ’ s science maintains that consensus brought about by deliberation among experts determines what is true enough to direct trillion-dollar public policy decisions .
This is purely politics and not real science at all .
But it tempts scientists to simply sign on to the IPCC ’ s latest reports and pursue the research topics and methodologies approved for funding by the controlling agencies .
The result in climate science is too little hypothesis testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be dredged from mathematical simulations and cherry-picked observations to support the ruling world-view .
US President Dwight Eisenhower famously warned of such an outcome of government funding of scientific research in his 1961 farewell address .
“ The free university , historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery , has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research .
“ Partly because of the huge costs involved , a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity… The prospect of domination of the nation ’ s scholars by Federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of money is ever present-and is gravely to be regarded.
” The discipline of climate science is still immature , leaving many basic questions yet unanswered .
Instead of conforming to a bogus consensus , climate science which is outside the IPCC ’ s mandate to find mankind guilty , is full of new discoveries , new theories and lively debate .
For example , Geophysical Research Letters published a paper in 2018 by Hyinskata reporting that carbon dioxide emissions from a subglacial volcanic caldera in Iceland is ten times greater than previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Icelandic sources .
Further measurements of subglacial volcanoes worldwide would seem to be in order to determine if Iceland is unique or if estimates of the emissions from volcanic eruptions around the world have long been underestimated .
Also in 2018 , John McLean published An Audit of the Creation and Content of the HadCRUT4 Temperature Dataset .
HadCRUT4 is from Hadley Centre and the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia , United Kingdom .
It is the most widely used temperature data set in the world .
McLean found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as sparse data heavily relied upon and adjusted to exaggerate warming .
Simply cleaning up this database , which is relied upon by the IPCC , should be a high priority .
The idea that ‘ the science is settled ’ is an absurdity contrary to the very spirit of scientific inquiry .
This is especially the case in a field that is evolving as quickly as climate science .
Disagreements among scientists about methodology and the validity of claims in field make it difficult for fair-minded laypeople to judge where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when politicians and too many scientists embrace claims of a scientific consensus so as to free them of the obligation to look at the science and reach an informed decision .
We must call them on it every time the argument is presented .

The meme of “an overwhelming consensus” of scientists favoring one particular view on climate change is very popular, despite its implausibility.
In fact, the claim of 97% agreement throughout the literature that mankind is responsible for warming in the past century readily falls apart upon inspection. Here’s why.
First, polls that ostensibly support the 97% consensus idea either ask the wrong people or ask the wrong question (or both – see here).
Regardless, every reader should recognize that there are essentially no groups who agree on anything at such a high level.
And, of course, even if they did, it would prove nothing about nature. The validity of scientific hypotheses are not decided by a show of hands.
When Albert Einstein developed his Theory of Relativity, German scientists compiled a book titled Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931. “Why 100?” Einstein asked. “If I were wrong, one would have been enough.”
That climate change is real and happening is clearly true; Climate is always changing. To say it is due to human activities begs the questions, “how much?” and “how do we know?”
Nearly all scientists understand that some of the past century’s warming trend is due to natural causes. The issue is how much is natural variability and how much is due to man-caused greenhouse gases and land uses such as agriculture and forestry?
Some scientists believe it is difficult or meaningless to ascribe a single temperature to the globe and then to attribute changes to that statistical abstraction to human causes.
And whether climate change is dangerous or not is a subjective and political decision, not a scientific concept. Who is at risk? When? And how do the risks created by climate change compare to other risks we face every day?
At times, consensus may have a place in science, but only in contexts different than what occurs in climate science.
It is typically achieved over an extended period of time by independent scientists following the conventions of the Scientific Method, in particular not neglecting the need to entertain competing hypothesis.
Consensus emerges from open debate and tolerance of new theories and discoveries; it is not handed down by an authoritative international organization tasked with defending a single paradigm.
Yet, this is exactly what the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been charged to do; find man’s role in climate change rather than find all the factors that control climate.
In following this path, the IPCC has chosen to vilify scientists who disagree with the UN body’s effort. All of their reports are framed around providing support for the hypothesis of human-caused climate change.
As a result, variables that logically would be expected to impact climate change have been neglected in these assessments. The list below includes a dozen such variables about which little is understood.
1- changes in seasonal solar irradiation
2- energy flows between the ocean and atmosphere
3- energy flows between the air and land
4- the balance between the Earth’s water, water vapor, and ice
5- the impact of clouds
6- understanding the planet’s ice
7- mass change among ice sheets, sea level, and glaciers
8- the ability to factor in hurricanes and tornadoes
9- the impact of vegetation on temperature
10- tectonic movement on the ocean floor
11- the differential rotation between the earth’s surface and the planet’s core
12- the solar system’s magnetic field and gravitational interaction
Instead of experimentation and open debate, today’s science maintains that consensus brought about by deliberation among experts determines what is true enough to direct trillion-dollar public policy decisions.
This is purely politics and not real science at all. But it tempts scientists to simply sign on to the IPCC’s latest reports and pursue the research topics and methodologies approved for funding by the controlling agencies.
The result in climate science is too little hypothesis testing and too much amassing of data that can be dredged from mathematical simulations and cherry-picked observations to support the ruling world-view.
US President Dwight Eisenhower famously warned of such an outcome of government funding of scientific research in his 1961 farewell address.
“The free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research.
“Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity… The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations and the power of money is ever present-and is gravely to be regarded.”
The discipline of climate science is still immature, leaving many basic questions yet unanswered. Instead of conforming to a bogus consensus, climate science which is outside the IPCC’s mandate to find mankind guilty, is full of new discoveries, new theories and lively debate.
For example, Geophysical Research Letters published a paper in 2018 by Hyinskata reporting that carbon dioxide emissions from a subglacial volcanic caldera in Iceland is ten times greater than previous estimates of the total emissions from all Icelandic sources.
Further measurements of subglacial volcanoes worldwide would seem to be in order to determine if Iceland is unique or if estimates of the emissions from volcanic eruptions around the world have long been underestimated.
Also in 2018, John McLean published An Audit of the Creation and Content of the HadCRUT4 Temperature Dataset. HadCRUT4 is from Hadley Centre and the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, United Kingdom. It is the most widely used temperature data set in the world.
McLean found a great deal of erroneous data as well as sparse data heavily relied upon and adjusted to exaggerate warming. Simply cleaning up this database, which is relied upon by the IPCC, should be a high priority.
The idea that ‘the science is settled’ is an absurdity contrary to the very spirit of scientific inquiry. This is especially the case in a field that is evolving as quickly as climate science.
Disagreements among scientists about methodology and the validity of claims in field make it difficult for fair-minded laypeople to judge where the truth lies.
This problem is magnified when politicians and too many scientists embrace claims of a scientific consensus so as to free them of the obligation to look at the science and reach an informed decision. We must call them on it every time the argument is presented.
By Dr. Jay Lehr & Tom Harris


humansarefree--2020-03-26--New York Hospitals Are Treating Coronavirus Patients with High Dosages of VITAMIN C After Promising

New York Hospitals Are Treating Coronavirus Patients with High Dosages of VITAMIN C After Promising Results from China

Doctors throughout New York state are giving their critically ill coronavirus patients massive doses of vitamin C , a tactic said to have helped those hit the hardest in China .
Dr Andrew Weber , a Long Island based pulmonologist and critical-care specialist with Northwell Health , shared that he has been immediately giving his intensive-care patients 1,500 milligrams of intravenous vitamin C [ that ’ s very little compared to China ] .
Those patients are then re-administered the doses of the powerful antioxidant three or four times a day , the doctor explained to the New York Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on experimental treatments administered to coronavirus patients in Shanghai , China .
‘ The patients who received vitamin C did significantly better than those who did not get vitamin C , ’ he said .
‘ It helps a tremendous amount , but it is not highlighted because it ’ s not a sexy drug.
’ Jason Molinet , a spokesman for Northwell , said that Vitamin C is being ‘ widely used ’ as a coronavirus treatment throughout the health system .
He noted , however , that the amount given to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cheng , Dr. Mao stated that his group treated about 50 cases of moderate to severe cases of Covid-19 infection with high dose IVC .
Dosing of IVC ranged from 10,000 mg – 20,000 mg a day for 7-10 days , with 10,000 mg for moderate cases and 20,000 for more severe cases .

Doctors throughout New York state are giving their critically ill coronavirus patients massive doses of vitamin C, a tactic said to have helped those hit the hardest in China.
Dr Andrew Weber, a Long Island based pulmonologist and critical-care specialist with Northwell Health, shared that he has been immediately giving his intensive-care patients 1,500 milligrams of intravenous vitamin C [that’s very little compared to China].
Those patients are then re-administered the doses of the powerful antioxidant three or four times a day, the doctor explained to the New York Post.
Weber said the regimen is based on experimental treatments administered to coronavirus patients in Shanghai, China.
‘The patients who received vitamin C did significantly better than those who did not get vitamin C,’ he said. ‘It helps a tremendous amount, but it is not highlighted because it’s not a sexy drug.’
Jason Molinet, a spokesman for Northwell, said that Vitamin C is being ‘widely used’ as a coronavirus treatment throughout the health system. He noted, however, that the amount given to patients varies.
According to Dr. Richard Cheng, Dr. Mao stated that his group treated about 50 cases of moderate to severe cases of Covid-19 infection with high dose IVC. Dosing of IVC ranged from 10,000 mg – 20,000 mg a day for 7-10 days, with 10,000 mg for moderate cases and 20,000 for more severe cases.
Source: Dailymail.co.uk (excerpt)