principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--ER Doctor: Abortion Not an ‘Essential Health Service’ in a Pandemic

ER Doctor : Abortion Not an ‘ Essential Health Service ’ in a Pandemic Although we appear to be “ flattening the curve ” of the COVID-19 pandemic , with governors slowly lifting stay-at-home orders and hospitals beginning to schedule surgeries again , infection spikes in certain regions remain a possibility .
Throughout the coming months , we need to focus as a society on medical care that will not only help us survive but thrive .
Working in emergency rooms as an emergency medicine physician of more than 20 years , I ’ m particularly concerned that abortion activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an “ essential health service.
” An essential health service is a health care action or medical procedure that is essential to protecting the life of a human .
But the truth is that rather than helping women through this pandemic , abortion is more likely to worsen the toll of illness .
Any decision about a medical procedure as serious as terminating a pregnancy must be made with facts and an assessment of risks .
When medical equipment is scarce and many resources must be directed toward treating victims of COVID-19 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here are three key facts : 1 .
The stress of COVID-19 adds to abortion ’ s emotional toll .
Abortion is known to result in mental health issues , and COVID-19 is likely to exacerbate those negative effects .
Anxiety and fear have exploded during this time as many Americans suffer from prolonged isolation and economic challenges .
Calls to the federal mental health crisis hotline are nearly 900 % greater than this time last year .
According to Kaiser Family Foundation , nearly half ( 45 % ) of adults @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mental health has been affected negatively due to worry and stress over the coronavirus .
Combined with the emotional toll of abortion , the impact of this stress is amplified .
Abortion long has been associated with serious , adverse mental health outcomes such as depression , grief , persistent sadness , and elevated stress—many of the same mental health challenges we are seeing from COVID-19 .
> > > Brian Fisher , president of Human Coalition , is among guests set to participate in “ Preserving Life in a Global Pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 11 a.m. May 13 .
Losing a baby , whether from abortion or a spontaneous miscarriage , causes emotional pain .
Women who have abortions face higher rates of depression .
Data shows an increase in the number of suicide attempts by women who previously had an abortion .
In fact , women who get abortions are at a 154 % increased risk of suicide , according to the Southern Medical Journal .
What ’ s more , we know that women sometimes are coerced into abortion as a result of domestic abuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ essential health service ” only will minimize the emotional risks , fueling this cycle of violence and pressure .
At a time when domestic abuse afflicts more women than ever before , we need to respect and support women , not encourage them to get abortions .
2 .
Complications from abortion are more dangerous during a pandemic .
Complications from an abortion are a significant risk—even more so during a pandemic with an over-stressed health care system .
I ’ ve seen firsthand the life-threatening medical complications that stem from an abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often the result of abortion clinics not being equipped to provide the necessary emergency care .
Instead , they send women to the ER .
Abortion itself carries risks of infection and increases the likelihood of women needing additional medical supervision and treatment .
Also , blood loss , inflammatory stress , and other adverse outcomes from abortion can compromise a woman ’ s health and immune system , which makes her more susceptible to contracting a virus .
Chemical abortions , such as by the brand-name drug Mifeprex , are no safer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of women who undergo a chemical abortion require surgical follow-up procedures .
Experimenting with an abortion at home—especially right now—is very dangerous .
I have heard from pregnant women who are worried that continuing a pregnancy during COVID-19 could be harmful .
I understand their concerns , but the available data suggests that pregnant women do not suffer from coronavirus infections .
And as yet there is no evidence of vertical transmission of the coronavirus from mother to baby ; the virus hasn ’ t been found in breast milk or amniotic fluid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research shows that women infected with the coronavirus during pregnancy don ’ t have a higher incidence of compromised health or unhealthy babies .
Some women may be considering abortion because they fear that increased doctor visits and a hospital birth might expose them and their family at home to COVID-19 .
In actuality , abortion puts women at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 than their pregnancy does .
Abortion has long-term detrimental effects on a woman , the data shows .
Our nation desperately needs more love and hope , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that if women who face unplanned pregnancies view abortion as the “ healthy ” option , we know that it is in fact a fatal deception .
As a physician who deals with death daily in the ER , I can say that death of any kind is horrific .
I believe we can and must protect the lives of both the young and the old , and this includes protecting preborn human life .
About the author : Dr. Scott French .
Dr. French oversees clinical operations for Human Coalition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a practicing board-certified emergency physician in Indiana and teaches emergency medicine .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

ER Doctor: Abortion Not an ‘Essential Health Service’ in a Pandemic
Written by Dr. Scott French
Although we appear to be “flattening the curve” of the COVID-19 pandemic, with governors slowly lifting stay-at-home orders and hospitals beginning to schedule surgeries again, infection spikes in certain regions remain a possibility.
Throughout the coming months, we need to focus as a society on medical care that will not only help us survive but thrive.
Working in emergency rooms as an emergency medicine physician of more than 20 years, I’m particularly concerned that abortion activists have been promoting and advocating abortion as an “essential health service.”
An essential health service is a health care action or medical procedure that is essential to protecting the life of a human. But the truth is that rather than helping women through this pandemic, abortion is more likely to worsen the toll of illness.
Any decision about a medical procedure as serious as terminating a pregnancy must be made with facts and an assessment of risks. When medical equipment is scarce and many resources must be directed toward treating victims of COVID-19, continuing to perform abortions is medically irresponsible.
Here are three key facts:
1. The stress of COVID-19 adds to abortion’s emotional toll.
Abortion is known to result in mental health issues, and COVID-19 is likely to exacerbate those negative effects. Anxiety and fear have exploded during this time as many Americans suffer from prolonged isolation and economic challenges.
Calls to the federal mental health crisis hotline are nearly 900{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} greater than this time last year. According to Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly half (45{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}) of adults in the United States reported that their mental health has been affected negatively due to worry and stress over the coronavirus.
Combined with the emotional toll of abortion, the impact of this stress is amplified. Abortion long has been associated with serious, adverse mental health outcomes such as depression, grief, persistent sadness, and elevated stress—many of the same mental health challenges we are seeing from COVID-19.
>>> Brian Fisher, president of Human Coalition, is among guests set to participate in “Preserving Life in a Global Pandemic,” a Heritage Foundation webinar, at 11 a.m. May 13.
Losing a baby, whether from abortion or a spontaneous miscarriage, causes emotional pain. Women who have abortions face higher rates of depression.
Data shows an increase in the number of suicide attempts by women who previously had an abortion. In fact, women who get abortions are at a 154{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} increased risk of suicide, according to the Southern Medical Journal.
What’s more, we know that women sometimes are coerced into abortion as a result of domestic abuse. Claiming that abortion is an “essential health service” only will minimize the emotional risks, fueling this cycle of violence and pressure.
At a time when domestic abuse afflicts more women than ever before, we need to respect and support women, not encourage them to get abortions.
2. Complications from abortion are more dangerous during a pandemic.
Complications from an abortion are a significant risk—even more so during a pandemic with an over-stressed health care system. I’ve seen firsthand the life-threatening medical complications that stem from an abortion procedure.
This type of crisis is often the result of abortion clinics not being equipped to provide the necessary emergency care. Instead, they send women to the ER.
Abortion itself carries risks of infection and increases the likelihood of women needing additional medical supervision and treatment. Also, blood loss, inflammatory stress, and other adverse outcomes from abortion can compromise a woman’s health and immune system, which makes her more susceptible to contracting a virus.
Chemical abortions, such as by the brand-name drug Mifeprex, are no safer. Typically 5{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} to 7{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of women who undergo a chemical abortion require surgical follow-up procedures. Experimenting with an abortion at home—especially right now—is very dangerous.
3. COVID-19 doesn’t affect pregnancies.
I have heard from pregnant women who are worried that continuing a pregnancy during COVID-19 could be harmful. I understand their concerns, but the available data suggests that pregnant women do not suffer from coronavirus infections.
And as yet there is no evidence of vertical transmission of the coronavirus from mother to baby; the virus hasn’t been found in breast milk or amniotic fluid after birth. To date, the research shows that women infected with the coronavirus during pregnancy don’t have a higher incidence of compromised health or unhealthy babies.
Some women may be considering abortion because they fear that increased doctor visits and a hospital birth might expose them and their family at home to COVID-19. In actuality, abortion puts women at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 than their pregnancy does.
Abortion has long-term detrimental effects on a woman, the data shows. Our nation desperately needs more love and hope, and less death and despair.
The reality is that if women who face unplanned pregnancies view abortion as the “healthy” option, we know that it is in fact a fatal deception.
As a physician who deals with death daily in the ER, I can say that death of any kind is horrific. I believe we can and must protect the lives of both the young and the old, and this includes protecting preborn human life.
About the author: Dr. Scott French. Dr. French oversees clinical operations for Human Coalition, a pro-life health care organization. He is a practicing board-certified emergency physician in Indiana and teaches emergency medicine.
Read more at www.dailysignal.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--Suspicious: CV-19 Drug Metrics Switch for Remdesivir in Clinical Trial

Death and other negative outcomes were moved to secondary measure status : They would still be tracked , but they would no longer be the key measure of remdesivir ’ s performance .
The switch — which specialists said is unusual in major clinical trials but not unheard of — was publicly disclosed on the government ’ s clinicaltrials.gov website on April 16 but did not receive much attention at the time .
The change reflects evolving scientific understanding of the fast-moving nature of the virus and uncertainties around how the lethal effects reveal themselves in patients , said NIAID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the change also adds weight to the assessment of government and medical researchers that remdesivir is not a knockout drug that will change the trajectory of the coronavirus pandemic .
The difference in death rate , one of the original primary measures , was not statistically significant , Fauci said , showing only a marginal reduction from 11 percent in patients given a placebo to 8 percent in patients given remdesivir .
Full release of the trial results would be made soon , Fauci said .
But Fauci said Wednesday that ethical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a clear evidence of shorter hospitalizations was available , trial investigators owed it to patients on placebo to stop that phase of the trial so they could access the drug .
When the trial began on Feb. 21 , it was designed to focus on collecting eight patient outcomes , to be measured on the 15th day after treatment .
The list of outcomes was similar to guidance the World Health Organization issued in February for coronavirus clinical trials .
The original NIAID trial list started with death , followed by five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or ECMO machine ( which oxygenates blood outside the body ) ; on high-flow oxygen therapy ; on basic supplemental oxygen ; not requiring oxygen but requiring ongoing care ; not requiring care .
The final two categories covered patients released from the hospital .
NIAID said in response to questions Thursday that it made the switch eight weeks later to the more limited measure of “ time to recovery ” based on modeling that took into account new information about the course of the disease .
The initial measurement period of two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be too short as scientists learned more about the lengthy time patients could be seriously ill with covid-19 , NIAID said .
“ Little was known regarding the natural course of covid-19 when the trial was initially designed , and the initial endpoint chosen specified a single timepoint for evaluation , namely day 14 , ” the institute said .
“ However , with the growing knowledge during the epidemic , we learned that covid-19 had a more protracted course than previously known .
“ NIAID statisticians performed modeling of what happens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for assessment , which revealed that meaningful treatment effects could be missed with that primary endpoint , ” NIAID said .
“ Time to recovery avoids this issue , and the change in primary endpoint seemed appropriate given the evolving clinical data.
” “ NIAID changed the primary endpoint while the study was blinded , ” Gilead spokesman Ryan McKeel said in an email , a decision he said was “ based on continuing discussions and evolving understanding of the disease.
” He added that it is important to note that death , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the list of the trial ’ s secondary outcome measures “ and will be reported when the data are published.
” An exact timetable for publication of the results has not been disclosed .
In the absence of any other treatment for coronavirus , Fauci declared that remdesivir would become the standard of care for certain hospitalized patients .
Clinicians are eagerly awaiting more data from the trial so they will know which patients stand to benefit the most .
Fauci ’ s announcement coincided with more negative results for remdesivir published in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial , a Chinese study that was stopped early because it did not recruit enough patients , showed no benefit of remdesivir over placebo , and also no benefit in survival .
“ It raises a lot of flags , and it requires a lot of answers , ” Walid F. Gellad , a professor of health policy and management at the University of Pittsburgh ’ s Department of Medicine , said in an interview , “ especially when people start saying it ’ s become the standard of care , and all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a trial with an outcome that was changed two weeks ago .
It really is striking.
” An expert in transparency in clinical trials at the University of Oxford , Henry Drysdale , said the Oval Office setting of Fauci ’ s announcement , combined with the limited data disclosed , raised important questions about the outcomes change that will need to be answered when the full results are published in a peer-reviewed journal .
Drysdale is part of a team of researchers who , in a landmark study published last year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outcomes in major academic journals .
“ If you knew that the number of observations was inadequate to answer the question , and you did not know the breakdown , then shifting the endpoint is not a problem , ” Packer said .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Death and other negative outcomes were moved to secondary measure status: They would still be tracked, but they would no longer be the key measure of remdesivir’s performance. The switch — which specialists said is unusual in major clinical trials but not unheard of — was publicly disclosed on the government’s clinicaltrials.gov website on April 16 but did not receive much attention at the time.
The change reflects evolving scientific understanding of the fast-moving nature of the virus and uncertainties around how the lethal effects reveal themselves in patients, said NIAID, Gilead, and outside specialists. But the change also adds weight to the assessment of government and medical researchers that remdesivir is not a knockout drug that will change the trajectory of the coronavirus pandemic.
On Friday, as expected, the Food and Drug Administration approved an emergency use authorization for the drug that will allow it to be prescribed for hospitalized patients infected with the coronavirus.
The newly adopted criteria were a central feature of this week’s declaration by Fauci, NIAID’s director, that remdesivir reduced the time to recovery for surviving patients from 15 days to 11 days, a 31 percent improvement.
“The data shows that remdesivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said as he sat in an Oval Office meeting with President Trump and other members of the president’s coronavirus task force. “It’s highly significant.”
The difference in death rate, one of the original primary measures, was not statistically significant, Fauci said, showing only a marginal reduction from 11 percent in patients given a placebo to 8 percent in patients given remdesivir. Full release of the trial results would be made soon, Fauci said.
Some medical research specialists questioned the change in the primary outcome measure of the trial, which had 1,063 patients.
“I think that they thought they weren’t going to win, and they wanted to change it to something they could win on,” said Steven Nissen, a Cleveland Clinic cardiologist and expert clinical investigator who has led numerous drug trials. “I prefer the original outcome. It’s harder. It’s a more meaningful endpoint.
“Getting out of the hospital early is useful,” he said, “but it’s not a game-changer.”
Nissen expressed dismay that the placebo phase of the trial was declared over so quickly, when a few more weeks might have provided a pool of patients large enough to show a statistically beneficial difference in death.
But Fauci said Wednesday that ethical considerations drove the announcement: As soon as a clear evidence of shorter hospitalizations was available, trial investigators owed it to patients on placebo to stop that phase of the trial so they could access the drug.
When the trial began on Feb. 21, it was designed to focus on collecting eight patient outcomes, to be measured on the 15th day after treatment. The list of outcomes was similar to guidance the World Health Organization issued in February for coronavirus clinical trials.
The original NIAID trial list started with death, followed by five categories of hospitalized patients: on ventilator or ECMO machine (which oxygenates blood outside the body); on high-flow oxygen therapy; on basic supplemental oxygen; not requiring oxygen but requiring ongoing care; not requiring care. The final two categories covered patients released from the hospital.
NIAID said in response to questions Thursday that it made the switch eight weeks later to the more limited measure of “time to recovery” based on modeling that took into account new information about the course of the disease. The initial measurement period of two weeks, it said, was deemed to be too short as scientists learned more about the lengthy time patients could be seriously ill with covid-19, NIAID said.
“Little was known regarding the natural course of covid-19 when the trial was initially designed, and the initial endpoint chosen specified a single timepoint for evaluation, namely day 14,” the institute said. “However, with the growing knowledge during the epidemic, we learned that covid-19 had a more protracted course than previously known.
“NIAID statisticians performed modeling of what happens if the right day is not picked for assessment, which revealed that meaningful treatment effects could be missed with that primary endpoint,” NIAID said. “Time to recovery avoids this issue, and the change in primary endpoint seemed appropriate given the evolving clinical data.”
Government researchers who decided to make the switch in outcome measure did not have access to clinical data, NIAID added.
Gilead did not respond to a question about whether it had input on the decision to change the endpoint.
“NIAID changed the primary endpoint while the study was blinded,” Gilead spokesman Ryan McKeel said in an email, a decision he said was “based on continuing discussions and evolving understanding of the disease.” He added that it is important to note that death, ventilation and other measures are included in the list of the trial’s secondary outcome measures “and will be reported when the data are published.”
An exact timetable for publication of the results has not been disclosed. In the absence of any other treatment for coronavirus, Fauci declared that remdesivir would become the standard of care for certain hospitalized patients. Clinicians are eagerly awaiting more data from the trial so they will know which patients stand to benefit the most.
Fauci’s announcement coincided with more negative results for remdesivir published in the medical journal The Lancet; that trial, a Chinese study that was stopped early because it did not recruit enough patients, showed no benefit of remdesivir over placebo, and also no benefit in survival.
Some experts in clinical trials raised questions about the change in outcome measures.
“It raises a lot of flags, and it requires a lot of answers,” Walid F. Gellad, a professor of health policy and management at the University of Pittsburgh’s Department of Medicine, said in an interview, “especially when people start saying it’s become the standard of care, and all we saw was a news release in a trial with an outcome that was changed two weeks ago. It really is striking.”
An expert in transparency in clinical trials at the University of Oxford, Henry Drysdale, said the Oval Office setting of Fauci’s announcement, combined with the limited data disclosed, raised important questions about the outcomes change that will need to be answered when the full results are published in a peer-reviewed journal. Drysdale is part of a team of researchers who, in a landmark study published last year, found discrepancies in trial designs and reported outcomes in major academic journals.
“It’s extremely worrying that those very important outcomes were dropped from the primary outcome,’‘ Drysdale said in an interview. Asked to assess NIAID’s statement issued to reporters on Thursday, Drysdale said, “Whenever I see an explanation like this, when an outcome-switching has happened, that’s fine, but you were not open about this when you reported your quote-unquote exciting results.”
But a strong degree of transparency about the change, combined with NIAID’s assurances that trial leaders did not know trial results when they switched the outcome, should settle any lingering questions, experts agreed.
Milton Packer, a cardiologist and clinical trial investigator at Baylor University Medical Center, said that, based on Fauci’s disclosures, roughly 95 people died in both arms of the trial. That combined number may have led investigators to believe they would not have a large enough sample of deaths to be statistically significant, he said.


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--The World’s Fastest Camera Is Frankly Mind-Boggling

Scientists developed a new camera that can take a whopping 70 trillion frames per second .
One of the inventors calls the new process compressed ultrafast spectral photography , or CUSP .
For as much as cameras allow us to experience phenomena that would otherwise go unnoticed , their imaging speeds still fundamentally limit our capability to see , well , everything .
Now , scientists at the California Institute of Technology hope to change that .
The study appears in the April 29 edition of Nature Communications .
In a new paper published in the journal Nature Communications , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that can capture a mind-boggling 70 trillion frames per second .
Prior imaging developments based on silicon sensors have ushered in speeds up to millions of frames per second , Lihong Wang , a medical engineering and electrical engineering professor at Caltech , tells Popular Mechanics .
But that still isn ’ t nearly fast enough to observe and document some of the most fleeting curiosities in our physical world , from nuclear fusion , to ultrashort pulses of light on the order of picoseconds ( 10−12 second ) , to the fluorescent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study these ultra-fast occurrences by triggering the desired event multiple times and repeatedly observing it through a different window of time .
This nonlinear approach , often used to study chemical reactions , is called the pump-probe method .
While clever , it ’ s still impossible to render images of the ultrafast events in real time , which means only repeatable tasks may benefit from it .
Wang ’ s technique , which he calls compressed ultrafast spectral photography ( CUSP ) , uses short pulses of laser light that each last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quadrillionth of a second .
It ’ s easiest to think of the advanced process in two steps : imaging and illumination .
First , in the imaging phase , an interchangeable lens system captures the scene at hand , splitting the light pathway into two separate streams .
In one of those paths , an external camera captures the undispersed image .
In the other , a digital micromirror device encodes the image into a pseudorandom binary pattern and relays it to the entry port of a streak camera , which measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s intensity .
Streak cameras are mostly notably used in lidar systems , which self-driving cars use to “ see ” the world around them .
This isn ’ t Wang ’ s first foray into lightning-fast imaging .
The CUSP endeavor actually builds on his earlier work on phase-sensitive compressed ultrafast photography ( pCUP ) .
That method could snap images of light traveling in slow motion at 10 trillion frames per second .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

The World’s Fastest Camera Is Frankly Mind-Boggling
Written by Courtney Linder
Scientists developed a new camera that can take a whopping 70 trillion frames per second. One of the inventors calls the new process compressed ultrafast spectral photography, or CUSP.
For as much as cameras allow us to experience phenomena that would otherwise go unnoticed, their imaging speeds still fundamentally limit our capability to see, well, everything.
Now, scientists at the California Institute of Technology hope to change that. The study appears in the April 29 edition of Nature Communications.
In a new paper published in the journal Nature Communications, the scientists outline a new imaging technique that can capture a mind-boggling 70 trillion frames per second.
Prior imaging developments based on silicon sensors have ushered in speeds up to millions of frames per second, Lihong Wang, a medical engineering and electrical engineering professor at Caltech, tells Popular Mechanics.
But that still isn’t nearly fast enough to observe and document some of the most fleeting curiosities in our physical world, from nuclear fusion, to ultrashort pulses of light on the order of picoseconds (10−12 second), to the fluorescent radioactive decay of molecules.
Scientists usually study these ultra-fast occurrences by triggering the desired event multiple times and repeatedly observing it through a different window of time. This nonlinear approach, often used to study chemical reactions, is called the pump-probe method. While clever, it’s still impossible to render images of the ultrafast events in real time, which means only repeatable tasks may benefit from it.
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Wang’s technique, which he calls compressed ultrafast spectral photography (CUSP), uses short pulses of laser light that each last for just one femtosecond, or one quadrillionth of a second. It’s easiest to think of the advanced process in two steps: imaging and illumination.
First, in the imaging phase, an interchangeable lens system captures the scene at hand, splitting the light pathway into two separate streams. In one of those paths, an external camera captures the undispersed image. In the other, a digital micromirror device encodes the image into a pseudorandom binary pattern and relays it to the entry port of a streak camera, which measures variation in a pulse of light’s intensity.
Streak cameras are mostly notably used in lidar systems, which self-driving cars use to “see” the world around them.
“Think of it as a movie: The frequency of the movie is not that long, so the total number of frames is not that long,” Wang says. “It’s like an atomic bomb, nuclear fusion. Total energy is always conserved, so it’ll end fast.”
This isn’t Wang’s first foray into lightning-fast imaging. The CUSP endeavor actually builds on his earlier work on phase-sensitive compressed ultrafast photography (pCUP). That method could snap images of light traveling in slow motion at 10 trillion frames per second.
Read more at www.popularmechanics.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--U.S. Hearing: CV19 Deaths Up to 40x LOWER than pre-Lockdown Estimates

U.S .
Hearing : CV19 Deaths Up to 40x LOWER than pre-Lockdown Estimates The coronavirus infection fatality rate is lower @ @ @ @ @ similar or even lower than the seasonal flu ’ s 0.1 percent for some segments @ @ @ @ @ couple of doctors confirmed in testimony before a Senate panel on Thursday .
Breitbart News @ @ @ @ @ took into account mild or asymptomatic infections and found that the ongoing pandemic is more @ @ @ @ @ early estimates .
One of those studies placed the coronavirus illness ’ s ( COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ low as 0.1 percent , similar to that of the flu .
A death rate @ @ @ @ @ estimated number of mild or asymptomatic infections is known as the infection fatality rate .
@ @ @ @ @ testified about the coronavirus infection mortality rate during a hearing held Thursday by the Republican-led @ @ @ @ @ and Governmental Affairs on Thursday In written testimony , Dr. Scott Atlas , a senior @ @ @ @ @ s Hoover Institution , said , seemingly referring to the infection death rate :

U.S. Hearing: CV19 Deaths Up to 40x LOWER than pre-Lockdown Estimates
Written by truepundit.com
The coronavirus infection fatality rate is lower than initially predicted, perhaps similar or even lower than the seasonal flu’s 0.1 percent for some segments of the population, a couple of doctors confirmed in testimony before a Senate panel on Thursday.
Breitbart News has highlighted some studies that took into account mild or asymptomatic infections and found that the ongoing pandemic is more widespread but less deadly than early estimates.
One of those studies placed the coronavirus illness’s (COVID-19) infection mortality rate as low as 0.1 percent, similar to that of the flu.
A death rate that takes into account the estimated number of mild or asymptomatic infections is known as the infection fatality rate.
At least two medical experts testified about the coronavirus infection mortality rate during a hearing held Thursday by the Republican-led Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Thursday
In written testimony, Dr. Scott Atlas, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, said, seemingly referring to the infection death rate:
By now, multiple studies from Europe, Japan, and the US all suggest that the overall fatality rate is far lower than early estimates, perhaps below 0.1 to 0.4{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117}, i.e., ten to forty times lower than estimates that motivated extreme isolation. – READ MORE Listen to the insightful Thomas Paine Podcast Below —
Read more at truepundit.com **** PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--Rockefeller, Big Pharma & the War Against Cheap, Natural Cures

It has been said that the Rockefeller family has affected modern society to a degree but what most do not realize is just how much they have made an impact .
The family name has now been linked to the suppression of natural medicine to found big pharmaceutical companies and make big money .
The West Has the Best and Most Profitable Healthcare in the World The west is home to some of the best healthcare in the world .
Anyone in an emergency which needs prompt medical treatment is better off than those living elsewhere .
In the west @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better than what is offered in an establishing nation .
However , it is often overlooked that healthcare is now a multi-trillion dollar industry in the west .
The mainstream medicine of today is based on treating people who are ill with drugs , radiation , and operations that are very pricey .
What many people do not realize is that the Rockefeller family was the first to recognize the opportunity to take full advantage of what has become an ecosystem with huge profits .
Anyone Questioning Big Pharma Is Branded a Quack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a world of social media censorship , and anyone who even dares to question the intentions of any of the big pharmaceutical companies is branded insane and given the label of a crazed conspiracy theorist .
Any information brought forward about recovery residential or commercial properties of holistic practices and plants that can not be patented are branded phony news as they are considered to threats to the drugs of the big pharmaceutical companies .
John D. Rockefeller realized the opportunity first .
He was an oil mogul who was the first person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
By the start of the 20th century , he had 90 % control over oil refineries in the US with his company Standard Oil .
In 1900 , researchers came across petrochemicals , and they found out that it was possible to make many chemicals out of oil .
The first plastic , which was Bakelite , was made in 1907 from oil .
Turning Point Came On Realization Pharmaceutical Drugs Could Come From Oil The turning point came when researchers found out that vitamins could be produced from oil and presumed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rewarding opportunity for Rockefeller as he concluded that he could monopolize not only the oil business but also chemical and medical industries .
Petrochemicals were a new discovery that could be patented and which would bring about maximum revenues .
The only thing stopping Rockefeller was the fact that herbal and natural remedies were popular in the USA at that time .
About half of the medical professionals in the US were practicing holistic medicine , based on understandings from Europeans and Native Americans .
This meant that Rockefeller had to get rid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made use of a strategy that was time-proven , problem-reaction-solution .
The concept works when developing an issue that would bring terror to people and then offer them a solution that was pre-planned .
He got the help of Andrew Carnegie ; he had made lots of money monopolizing the steel industry .
The Carnegie Foundation sent Abraham Flexner on a trip around the nation , and he was given the task of reporting the status of medical facilities along with the medical colleges in the United States .
This led to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to modern medication of today .
The report stated that a revamp was needed along with the centralization of medical institutions .
Following the report , half of the medical colleges were closed down .
Natural medications and homeopathy were rubbished , and some of the medical professionals who practiced holistic medicine were sent to prison .
Rockefeller gave over $ 100 million to medical facilities and colleges to help with the transition and to try to change the minds of doctors and researchers .
The General Education Board was also founded .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and structured and students realized that medicine utilized drugs that were patented .
Scientists were also given huge grants to study recovery residential or commercial properties of different plants , and how they were able to cure diseases .
What they were really doing was finding the chemicals in the plants and then recreating the compound so that it could be patented .
Cures for Illnesses Such As Cancer Would Be Bad For Business 100 years later and medical colleges produce doctors who do not know anything about holistic practices or the many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The government in the United States invests 15 % of the Gross domestic item in mainstream health care .
This is a system focusing on symptoms , and it produces a flurry of repeat paying clients that is never-ending .
Despite much advancement in medicine , there is still no cure for cancer , diabetes , autism , asthma or even the common cold .
Cures for any of these illnesses would only be bad for business .
John D. Rockefeller was even behind the establishment of the American Cancer Society in 1913 @

Rockefeller, Big Pharma & the War Against Cheap, Natural Cures
Written by www.disclose.tv
It has been said that the Rockefeller family has affected modern society to a degree but what most do not realize is just how much they have made an impact. The family name has now been linked to the suppression of natural medicine to found big pharmaceutical companies and make big money.
The West Has the Best and Most Profitable Healthcare in the World
The west is home to some of the best healthcare in the world. Anyone in an emergency which needs prompt medical treatment is better off than those living elsewhere. In the west, people receive healthcare that is much better than what is offered in an establishing nation. However, it is often overlooked that healthcare is now a multi-trillion dollar industry in the west.
The mainstream medicine of today is based on treating people who are ill with drugs, radiation, and operations that are very pricey. What many people do not realize is that the Rockefeller family was the first to recognize the opportunity to take full advantage of what has become an ecosystem with huge profits.
Anyone Questioning Big Pharma Is Branded a Quack and Conspiracy Theorist
Today we live in a world of social media censorship, and anyone who even dares to question the intentions of any of the big pharmaceutical companies is branded insane and given the label of a crazed conspiracy theorist. Any information brought forward about recovery residential or commercial properties of holistic practices and plants that cannot be patented are branded phony news as they are considered to threats to the drugs of the big pharmaceutical companies.
John D. Rockefeller realized the opportunity first. He was an oil mogul who was the first person in the USA to become a billionaire. By the start of the 20th century, he had 90 percent control over oil refineries in the US with his company Standard Oil. In 1900, researchers came across petrochemicals, and they found out that it was possible to make many chemicals out of oil. The first plastic, which was Bakelite, was made in 1907 from oil.
Turning Point Came On Realization Pharmaceutical Drugs Could Come From Oil
The turning point came when researchers found out that vitamins could be produced from oil and presumed pharmaceutical drugs. This was a financially rewarding opportunity for Rockefeller as he concluded that he could monopolize not only the oil business but also chemical and medical industries. Petrochemicals were a new discovery that could be patented and which would bring about maximum revenues. The only thing stopping Rockefeller was the fact that herbal and natural remedies were popular in the USA at that time. About half of the medical professionals in the US were practicing holistic medicine, based on understandings from Europeans and Native Americans.
This meant that Rockefeller had to get rid of what was significant competition. He made use of a strategy that was time-proven, problem-reaction-solution. The concept works when developing an issue that would bring terror to people and then offer them a solution that was pre-planned. He got the help of Andrew Carnegie; he had made lots of money monopolizing the steel industry. The Carnegie Foundation sent Abraham Flexner on a trip around the nation, and he was given the task of reporting the status of medical facilities along with the medical colleges in the United States. This led to the Flexner Report, and this eventually led to modern medication of today.
Flexner Report Led To Practitioners of Holistic Medicine Jailed
The report stated that a revamp was needed along with the centralization of medical institutions. Following the report, half of the medical colleges were closed down. Natural medications and homeopathy were rubbished, and some of the medical professionals who practiced holistic medicine were sent to prison. Rockefeller gave over $100 million to medical facilities and colleges to help with the transition and to try to change the minds of doctors and researchers. The General Education Board was also founded.
Not long after medical colleges became homogenized and structured and students realized that medicine utilized drugs that were patented. Scientists were also given huge grants to study recovery residential or commercial properties of different plants, and how they were able to cure diseases. What they were really doing was finding the chemicals in the plants and then recreating the compound so that it could be patented.
Cures for Illnesses Such As Cancer Would Be Bad For Business
100 years later and medical colleges produce doctors who do not know anything about holistic practices or the many benefits that herbs have to offer. The government in the United States invests 15 percent of the Gross domestic budget in mainstream health care. This is a system focusing on symptoms, and it produces a flurry of repeat paying clients that is never-ending.
Despite much advancement in medicine, there is still no cure for cancer, diabetes, autism, asthma or even the common cold. Cures for any of these illnesses would only be bad for business. John D. Rockefeller was even behind the establishment of the American Cancer Society in 1913.
Read more at www.disclose.tv
****
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-13--Beware the CDC Playbook: Learning From Lyme Disease

While most of the world is staggering under imposed social distancing measures , worrying about viruses and how to bolster the immune system , chronic Lyme patients simply carry on doing these things daily .
They ’ ve been isolated for some time – either to avoid illness due to being immunocompromised or because they were forced into exile by authorities who tell them the illness they are struggling with simply doesn ’ t exist .
In time , family and friends become more and more distant because they tend to believe the authorities .
Authorities , after all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health – aren ’ t they ?
They say history repeats itself , which appears to be the case regarding COVID-19 when you study the sordid history of how Lyme disease has been and continues to be handled .
Due to decisions made at a conference in Michigan , serology testing criteria for Lyme Disease were purposely manipulated for vaccine development .
To this day the CDC insists upon its own two-tiered Research has proven the testing is abysmal and misses a vast majority of cases .
It has now been removed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specialized labs testing for tick-borne illness , “ home-brewed.
” I personally heard a pediatrician use those exact words at the Wisconsin State Capital in his effort of delegitimatizing patients who are forced to go to special doctors using these labs to get proper treatment .
This history is disturbing in and of itself but should particularly concern us in light of current events .
It has been discovered that CDC COVID-19 tests are in fact contaminated with COVID-19 – making ALL numbers based upon those tests absolutely worthless .
COVID-19 laced tests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Due to contamination , which they state on their website is a “ problem with a reagent , ” the entire United States is in lockdown .
Had accurate testing been accepted by the CDC from the WHO from the start , authorities would have had accurate data to base decisions upon .
This article states there are only 12 labs outside the CDC with the capability to test for the virus ; however , as of the beginning of March , they hadn ’ t received FDA authorization to do their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following : Compare that statement with the following : If you are thinking that FDA cleared tests are effective , think again .
This article states that only two government agencies are required by law to be “ patient-centered , ” the FDA and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute ( PCORI ) , yet Lyme patients continue to experience false negative results on CDC 2-tiered testing .
Negative results means no diagnosis and no treatment .
They ’ ve complained profusely with no change in testing .
The CDC ’ s insistence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refrain .
The reasons are clear when you go down rabbit-holes to discover they own patents on nearly everything surrounding the diseases they have tests for .
Please also see ConflictReport .
Dr. Fauci , director of NIAID , and leader in the corona task force has numerous patents .
• James Lyons Weiler , Phd also reveals the CDC ’ s testing fiasco .
He knows that of which he speaks as he attempted to have the CDC test his own test for Ebola .
Let ’ s just say he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pathologist is suing the CDC for their willful suppression of direct detecting methods .
• Professor Lane hit the same brick wall regarding testing .
The CDC wants their own tests & patents so they can create their own vaccines and drugs they will profit from .
A vaccine called Lymerix caused Lyme-like symptoms in many .
In fact , it can be directly linked to 222 deaths and hundreds of adverse reactions , and these are only the ones that were recorded .
COVID-19 vaccines have been fast-tracked thereby bypassing important safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ researcher , is on record stating previous respiratory vaccines caused “ paradoxical immune enhancement “ : James Lyons Weiler , PhD also gives the following chilling prediction : Even the FDA is worried about potential risks of the PER C6 Ad5 technology ( aborted fetal cells ) within many COVID-19 vaccines , which not only has moral implications but oncogenicity and infectivity concerns .
The vaccine also uses electricity to drive DNA into your cells .
Faulty testing issues and the subsequent push for vaccines are uncannily similar between Lyme and COVID-19 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a vaccine manufacturing company first and foremost – to the detriment of severely ill and desperate patients .
The CDC to-date hasn ’ t even attempted to address the immune issues caused by Lymerix .
They just deny it ever happened .
In fact , another Lyme vaccine is in the works which still uses the same OspA component which is attributed with problems in the first human vaccine .
FOOL ME ONCE , SHAME ON YOU – FOOL ME TWICE , SHAME ON ME .
The question begging to be asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Their track record speaks for itself ( and this is far from a complete list ) .
Recently , microbiologist Judy Mikovitz spoke out on the unethical behavior of Dr. Fauci ( Director of the NIAID since 1984 and one of the lead members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force ) .
Excerpt : For those of you who are unaware , Mikovits discovered that a mouse virus ( XMRV ) has contaminated vaccines all the way back to the 30 ’ s .
She believes the virus can be linked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , autism , Alzheimer ’ s , cancer , autoimmune , neuroimmune , central nervous system diseases , and even chronic Lyme disease .
While retroviruses do not directly cause diseases by themselves they help to create acquired immune system deficiency ( non-HIV AIDS ) which in turn causes unrelenting inflammatory processes .
Call it a trigger , in a perfect storm of events within the body allowing disease to occur .
YOU MAY ASK WHY YOU ’ VE NEVER HEARD OF XMRV BEFORE .
THAT ’ S BECAUSE THE CDC , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AGENCIES COVERED IT UP .
THEY DIDN ’ T WANT TO WORRY YOU , AND THEY CERTAINLY DON ’ T WANT YOU TO QUESTION VACCINES .
Ian Lipkin , aka The Virus Hunter , has been involved with both issues due to the urging of Dr. Fauci .
He denies XMRV involvement in human disease , despite Mikovitz ’ s group being able to transmit it from patients ’ T-cells to uninfected T-cells in the laboratory .
He also denies COVID-19 is a lab-made , manipulated virus .
Despite his denial , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the globe , has returned to show strong evidence that it is most likely a manipulated virus for biowarfare purposes after all .
But we were warned about this months ago , and then again recently with even more damning details .
Lyme patients are also familiar with bioweaponization .
Recently , Congressman Smith announced a DOD investigation on the bioweaponization of ticks .
Tick researchers have gone on record admitting to experimenting on ticks and dropping them out of airplanes .
Dr. William Burgdorfer , the discoverer of the causative agent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the US military and worked in programs tasked with breeding ticks and infecting them with pathogens that cause human diseases .
Besides shoddy testing , a thrust to create a vaccine at all costs , a tightly controlled narrative , and bioweaponization , there is also a similar smear campaign on successful clinical treatments in both Lyme disease and COVID-19 .
Authorities have purposely thwarted IV therapy for Lyme patients in a recent MMWR paper .
The short recap is that the CDC cherry-picked 5 cases that had poor outcomes using IV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bejesus out of doctors .
What ’ s interesting about the MMWR paper is that one of the authors , a CDC epidemiologist , allegedly solicited IDSA doctors for evidence of harm from IV antibiotic treatments , offering co-authorship of the report if anecdotes were used .
No such solicitation was made for IV treatment success stories .
There has been hot debate on Lyme treatments for decades .
THE MMWR PAPER IS ONLY ONE EXAMPLE OF BIAS WHICH IS EMBEDDED WITHIN THE CDC .
I just happen to have success stories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was a Wisconsin doctor who disagreed with his colleagues on how to treat Lyme disease .
Meanwhile , doctors are reporting in on the success of treatments for COVID-19 , but the CDC , true to form , bad-mouths any treatment other than ones they orchestrate .
Based upon the CDC ’ s casting a dark shadow upon treatments that even patients attribute to saving their lives , numerous states ( MI , NV , NY ) as well as France have banned their usage for COVID-19 .
This tactic of politicizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within the CDC/IDSA/NIH .
This article clearly shows the bantering common in mainstream media regarding COVID-19 treatment .
The bi-partisan squabbling is tangible , and similar hit-pieces have been written about Lyme treatment for years .
I was told by a front-line European doctor treating severely ill COVID-19 patients that hydroxychloroquine , commonly known as plaquenil , was used for over 70 years over the counter and was frequently given to travelers .
Then , all of a sudden it became a prescription drug overnight , and now it ’ s being banned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no question that IV therapies as well as extended antibiotics for Lyme and hydroxychlorquine for COVID-19 have side effects .
No one is denying this .
What ’ s unconscionable is that authorities zoom in on particular treatments and microscopically nit-pick due to ulterior motives .
It becomes crystal clear that the motivation is to control the narrative , not to safe-guard patients .
Everyone wants double blind , placebo controlled studies ; however , in the case of Lyme disease , those studies are controlled by a cabal who continue to study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with faulty parameters for entrance into their studies .
In the case of COVID-19 , severe patients can quickly die , making those studies of little use in the present .
Treatments are needed now , not in six months .
Doctors and pharmacists go to school to learn about drugs and their interactions .
How about authorities just let doctors do their jobs ?
I don ’ t see these authorities condemning cancer treatments which kill as many good cells as bad cells .
Why the focus on HCQ ?
This recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CDC is in bed with Gilead Science as nine of the experts on the NIH COVID-19 Panel recommending treatment options have disclosed financial support from Gilead .
Gilead Science created the anti-viral remdesivir which was unsuccessful for Ebola .
They are now digging it out of the drug graveyard and pushing it for COVID-19 to make up for lost profits .
HCQ , even though it ’ s clinically showing great success , stands in the way of their chosen profitable treatment .
Remdesivir is not without side-effects and only showed modest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC ’ s “ golden ” treatment , therefore , everything said about it is positive while they bad-mouth HCQ .
Where the handling of the two diseases drastically departs ; however , is in how seriously the CDC is handling COVID-19 by enacting what some declare to be draconian measures , while continuing to downplay Lyme disease .
The learning curve for COVID-19 has been lightening fast in comparison to Lyme disease in that the conflicts of interest , the reliance upon faulty testing , and the polarization in the medical community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease hasn ’ t budged in over 40 years .
What ’ s happening in the world today regarding COVID-19 is probably easier for Lyme patients to understand than the average person , but that doesn ’ t give them solace for the future .
They will continue to wash their hands , do an entire laundry list of things to strengthen their immune systems , and will continue to be isolated .
While the rest of the world returns to “ normal ” at some point , Lyme patients will continue living @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctors don ’ t even believe , test , or treat them , because the CDC has filled their heads with 40 year old dogma .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Beware the CDC Playbook: Learning From Lyme Disease
Written by Alicia Cashman MS, Lyme patient and advocate
While most of the world is staggering under imposed social distancing measures, worrying about viruses and how to bolster the immune system, chronic Lyme patients simply carry on doing these things daily.
They’ve been isolated for some time – either to avoid illness due to being immunocompromised or because they were forced into exile by authorities who tell them the illness they are struggling with simply doesn’t exist. In time, family and friends become more and more distant because they tend to believe the authorities. Authorities, after all, are honest and are looking after public health – aren’t they?
They say history repeats itself, which appears to be the case regarding COVID-19 when you study the sordid history of how Lyme disease has been and continues to be handled.
Due to decisions made at a conference in Michigan, serology testing criteria for Lyme Disease were purposely manipulated for vaccine development. To this day the CDC insists upon its own two-tiered testing. Research has proven the testing is abysmal and misses a vast majority of cases. It has now been removed, but the CDC website used to call specialized labs testing for tick-borne illness, “home-brewed.” I personally heard a pediatrician use those exact words at the Wisconsin State Capital in his effort of delegitimatizing patients who are forced to go to special doctors using these labs to get proper treatment. This history is disturbing in and of itself but should particularly concern us in light of current events.
It has been discovered that CDC COVID-19 tests are in fact contaminated with COVID-19 – making ALL numbers based upon those tests absolutely worthless. COVID-19 laced tests were also found in the UK. Due to contamination, which they state on their website is a “problem with a reagent,” the entire United States is in lockdown.
Had accurate testing been accepted by the CDC from the WHO from the start, authorities would have had accurate data to base decisions upon. This article states there are only 12 labs outside the CDC with the capability to test for the virus; however, as of the beginning of March, they hadn’t received FDA authorization to do their own testing. The CDC website states the following:
“This message is to remind clinical laboratories that this is currently the only EUA assay for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19. Any laboratory that is not designated by CDC as a qualified laboratory and is implementing a COVID-19 diagnostic test other than the CDC EUA assay must contact the FDA to obtain an EUA before any COVID-19 diagnostic testing may be performed in their facilities.”
Compare that statement with the following:
“The conference proceedings recommended a two-test methodology using a sensitive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or immunofluorescence assay as a first test, followed by a western immunoblot assay for specimens yielding positive or equivocal results (1,2). On July 29, 2019, FDA cleared several Lyme disease serologic assays with new indications for use based on a modified two-test methodology (4). The modified methodology uses a second EIA in place of a western immunoblot assay. Clearance by FDA of the new Lyme disease assays indicates that test performance has been evaluated and is ‘substantially equivalent to or better than’ a legally marketed predicate test.“
If you are thinking that FDA cleared tests are effective, think again. This article states that only two government agencies are required by law to be “patient-centered,” the FDA and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), yet Lyme patients continue to experience false negative results on CDC 2-tiered testing. Negative results means no diagnosis and no treatment. They’ve complained profusely with no change in testing.
The CDC’s insistence upon its own tests is a common refrain.
The reasons are clear when you go down rabbit-holes to discover they own patents on nearly everything surrounding the diseases they have tests for. Please also see ConflictReport. Dr. Fauci, director of NIAID, and leader in the corona task force has numerous patents.
Journalist Mary Beth Pfeiffer summarizes CDC testing incompetence.
incompetence. James Lyons Weiler, Phd also reveals the CDC’s testing fiasco. He knows that of which he speaks as he attempted to have the CDC test his own test for Ebola. Let’s just say he was promptly rebuffed.
fiasco. He knows that of which he speaks as he attempted to have the CDC test his own test for Ebola. Let’s just say he was promptly rebuffed. Currently, a pathologist is suing the CDC for their willful suppression of direct detecting methods.
suppression Professor Lane hit the same brick wall regarding testing.
The CDC wants their own tests & patents so they can create their own vaccines and drugs they will profit from.
A vaccine called Lymerix caused Lyme-like symptoms in many. In fact, it can be directly linked to 222 deaths and hundreds of adverse reactions, and these are only the ones that were recorded.
COVID-19 vaccines have been fast-tracked thereby bypassing important safety studies. Dr. Hotez, a vaccine researcher, is on record stating previous respiratory vaccines caused “paradoxical immune enhancement“:
James Lyons Weiler, PhD also gives the following chilling prediction:
When Phase I trials become Phase II trials people will start getting infected w/SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination and start dying at even higher rates due to disease enhancement caused by Pathogenic Priming from SARS-CoV-2 vaccination – something the vaccine developers SHOULD have tested for in animal studies, but skipped.
Even the FDA is worried about potential risks of the PER C6 Ad5 technology (aborted fetal cells) within many COVID-19 vaccines, which not only has moral implications but oncogenicity and infectivity concerns. The vaccine also uses electricity to drive DNA into your cells.
Faulty testing issues and the subsequent push for vaccines are uncannily similar between Lyme and COVID-19 and should strongly remind us that the CDC is a vaccine manufacturing company first and foremost – to the detriment of severely ill and desperate patients.
The CDC to-date hasn’t even attempted to address the immune issues caused by Lymerix. They just deny it ever happened. In fact, another Lyme vaccine is in the works which still uses the same OspA component which is attributed with problems in the first human vaccine.
FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU – FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.
The question begging to be asked is why should anyone trust the CDC? Their track record speaks for itself (and this is far from a complete list).
Recently, microbiologist Judy Mikovitz spoke out on the unethical behavior of Dr. Fauci (Director of the NIAID since 1984 and one of the lead members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force). Excerpt:
Dr Fauci ordered Mikovits to keep her mouth shut. When she refused, he illegally confiscated her work books and hard drives, drove her from government work + blackballed her from receiving NIH grants ending her science career.
For those of you who are unaware, Mikovits discovered that a mouse virus (XMRV) has contaminated vaccines all the way back to the 30’s. She believes the virus can be linked to diseases like chronic fatigue (CFS/ME), autism, Alzheimer’s, cancer, autoimmune, neuroimmune, central nervous system diseases, and even chronic Lyme disease. While retroviruses do not directly cause diseases by themselves they help to create acquired immune system deficiency (non-HIV AIDS) which in turn causes unrelenting inflammatory processes. Call it a trigger, in a perfect storm of events within the body allowing disease to occur.
YOU MAY ASK WHY YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF XMRV BEFORE. THAT’S BECAUSE THE CDC, NIH, FDA, AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES COVERED IT UP. THEY DIDN’T WANT TO WORRY YOU, AND THEY CERTAINLY DON’T WANT YOU TO QUESTION VACCINES.
XMRV remains in American vaccines.
Ian Lipkin, aka The Virus Hunter, has been involved with both issues due to the urging of Dr. Fauci. He denies XMRV involvement in human disease, despite Mikovitz’s group being able to transmit it from patients’ T-cells to uninfected T-cells in the laboratory. He also denies COVID-19 is a lab-made, manipulated virus.
Despite his denial, the origin of COVID-19, after boomeranging around the globe, has returned to show strong evidence that it is most likely a manipulated virus for biowarfare purposes after all.
Excerpt:
After creating the synthetic virus, which they call SHC014, Zhengli and her coauthors write that they “next synthesized a full-length SHC014-CoV infectious clone based on the approach used for SARS-CoV.”24 Other papers Zhengli co-wrote focus on the transmission of coronaviruses from one species to another, according to the documentary. Zhengli and her fellow researchers admit they used a “reverse genetics system” to generate “a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus,” raising legitimate fears that COVID-19 is also reverse-engineered, according to “Tracking Down the Origin of the Wuhan Virus.”
And the real clincher:
According to Mikovits, the S proteins seen on COVID-19 that make it so transmittable to humans come from “cutting and pasting of two different viruses” and the apparent insertion of four new genes could not have been generated from a natural “zoonotic transmission.” They had to come from a medical, bioweapons or lab setting, says Mikovits. Other scientists in the film agree that COVID-19 is a re-engineered, laboratory-driven virus.
But we were warned about this months ago, and then again recently with even more damning details.
Lyme patients are also familiar with bioweaponization. Recently, Congressman Smith announced a DOD investigation on the bioweaponization of ticks. Tick researchers have gone on record admitting to experimenting on ticks and dropping them out of airplanes. Dr. William Burgdorfer, the discoverer of the causative agent of Lyme disease worked as a bioweapons researcher for the US military and worked in programs tasked with breeding ticks and infecting them with pathogens that cause human diseases.
Besides shoddy testing, a thrust to create a vaccine at all costs, a tightly controlled narrative, and bioweaponization, there is also a similar smear campaign on successful clinical treatments in both Lyme disease and COVID-19.
Authorities have purposely thwarted IV therapy for Lyme patients in a recent MMWR paper. The short recap is that the CDC cherry-picked 5 cases that had poor outcomes using IV therapy and then wrote a paper scaring the bejesus out of doctors.
What’s interesting about the MMWR paper is that one of the authors, a CDC epidemiologist, allegedly solicited IDSA doctors for evidence of harm from IV antibiotic treatments, offering co-authorship of the report if anecdotes were used. No such solicitation was made for IV treatment success stories. There has been hot debate on Lyme treatments for decades.
THE MMWR PAPER IS ONLY ONE EXAMPLE OF BIAS WHICH IS EMBEDDED WITHIN THE CDC.
I just happen to have success stories on IV therapy from an IDSA founder who was a Wisconsin doctor who disagreed with his colleagues on how to treat Lyme disease.
Meanwhile, doctors are reporting in on the success of treatments for COVID-19, but the CDC, true to form, bad-mouths any treatment other than ones they orchestrate. Based upon the CDC’s casting a dark shadow upon treatments that even patients attribute to saving their lives, numerous states (MI, NV, NY) as well as France have banned their usage for COVID-19.
This tactic of politicizing clinically successful treatments is also very common within the CDC/IDSA/NIH. This article clearly shows the bantering common in mainstream media regarding COVID-19 treatment. The bi-partisan squabbling is tangible, and similar hit-pieces have been written about Lyme treatment for years.
I was told by a front-line European doctor treating severely ill COVID-19 patients that hydroxychloroquine, commonly known as plaquenil, was used for over 70 years over the counter and was frequently given to travelers. Then, all of a sudden it became a prescription drug overnight, and now it’s being banned for use for COVID-19.
There is no question that IV therapies as well as extended antibiotics for Lyme and hydroxychlorquine for COVID-19 have side effects. No one is denying this. What’s unconscionable is that authorities zoom in on particular treatments and microscopically nit-pick due to ulterior motives. It becomes crystal clear that the motivation is to control the narrative, not to safe-guard patients. Everyone wants double blind, placebo controlled studies; however, in the case of Lyme disease, those studies are controlled by a cabal who continue to study only the acute phase of the disease with faulty parameters for entrance into their studies.
In the case of COVID-19, severe patients can quickly die, making those studies of little use in the present. Treatments are needed now, not in six months. Doctors and pharmacists go to school to learn about drugs and their interactions. How about authorities just let doctors do their jobs? I don’t see these authorities condemning cancer treatments which kill as many good cells as bad cells. Why the focus on HCQ? This recent article explains why. In essence, the CDC is in bed with Gilead Science as nine of the experts on the NIH COVID-19 Panel recommending treatment options have disclosed financial support from Gilead.
Gilead Science created the anti-viral remdesivir which was unsuccessful for Ebola. They are now digging it out of the drug graveyard and pushing it for COVID-19 to make up for lost profits. HCQ, even though it’s clinically showing great success, stands in the way of their chosen profitable treatment. Remdesivir is not without side-effects and only showed modest benefits against COVID-19 but this is the CDC’s “golden” treatment, therefore, everything said about it is positive while they bad-mouth HCQ.
Where the handling of the two diseases drastically departs; however, is in how seriously the CDC is handling COVID-19 by enacting what some declare to be draconian measures, while continuing to downplay Lyme disease. The learning curve for COVID-19 has been lightening fast in comparison to Lyme disease in that the conflicts of interest, the reliance upon faulty testing, and the polarization in the medical community on pretty much every aspect of the disease hasn’t budged in over 40 years.
What’s happening in the world today regarding COVID-19 is probably easier for Lyme patients to understand than the average person, but that doesn’t give them solace for the future. They will continue to wash their hands, do an entire laundry list of things to strengthen their immune systems, and will continue to be isolated. While the rest of the world returns to “normal” at some point, Lyme patients will continue living in a paradigm where the majority of doctors don’t even believe, test, or treat them, because the CDC has filled their heads with 40 year old dogma.
Read more at madisonarealymesupportgroup.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-14--Bill Gates: Yes, Untested Genetically Modified Organisms Are in Vaccines

Bill Gates : Yes , Untested Genetically Modified Organisms Are in Vaccines Bill Gates told an audience in Brussels , Belgium that he is taking “ genetically modified organisms ” and “ injecting them right into little kid ’ s arms “ , in a recently surfaced shock video .
“ We are taking things that are , uh , you know , genetically modified organisms and injecting them into little kid ’ s arms , ” said Gates in January 2015 , before adding , “ we just shoot ’ em right into the vein.
“ “ So yeah @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety system where we do trials and test things out , ” continued Gates .
According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. , who shared a version of the video on Instagram last week , Gates is unqualified to “ dictate vaccine policy to 7 billion humans.
” Bill Gates “ landed the job of dictating world health policy with no election , no appointment , no oversight and no accountability ” says Robert F. Kennedy Jr. , who is demanding to know how and why this happened , adding “ Does anybody else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Kennedy Jr. , Bill Gates has a “ messianic conviction that he is ordained to save the world with technology.
” “ Vaccines , for Bill Gates , are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses ( including Microsoft ’ s ambition to control a global vac ID enterprise ) and give him dictatorial control over global health policy—the spear tip of corporate neo-imperialism , ” Kennedy Jr. wrote .
“ Gates ’ obsession with vaccines seems fueled by a messianic conviction that he is ordained to save the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experiment with the lives of lesser humans.
” PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Bill Gates: Yes, Untested Genetically Modified Organisms Are in Vaccines
Written by Baxter Dmitry
Bill Gates told an audience in Brussels, Belgium that he is taking “genetically modified organisms” and “injecting them right into little kid’s arms“, in a recently surfaced shock video.
“We are taking things that are, uh, you know, genetically modified organisms and injecting them into little kid’s arms,” said Gates in January 2015, before adding, “we just shoot ’em right into the vein.“ “So yeah I think maybe we should have a safety system where we do trials and test things out,” continued Gates.
According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who shared a version of the video on Instagram last week, Gates is unqualified to “dictate vaccine policy to 7 billion humans.”
“Punchline: He considers himself competent to dictate vaccine policy to 7 billion humans, AND he believes vaccines are inter-venous medications. Finally, he admits he’s injecting us with GMOS. Number of studies indicating that is safe? ZERO!“
Bill Gates “landed the job of dictating world health policy with no election, no appointment, no oversight and no accountability” says Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is demanding to know how and why this happened, adding “Does anybody else think this is creepy?“
According to Kennedy Jr., Bill Gates has a “messianic conviction that he is ordained to save the world with technology.”
“Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft’s ambition to control a global vac ID enterprise) and give him dictatorial control over global health policy—the spear tip of corporate neo-imperialism,” Kennedy Jr. wrote. “Gates’ obsession with vaccines seems fueled by a messianic conviction that he is ordained to save the world with technology and a god-like willingness to experiment with the lives of lesser humans.”
Read more at newspunch.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-14--FDA Suspends Bill Gates Coronavirus Testing Program

The organizers of a virus-tracking project funded by Bill Gates , say their efforts are being paused while they deal with concerns raised by the Food and Drug Administration .
The FDA has ordered SCAN , the Seattle Coronavirus Assessment Network , to stop screening for the virus , putting the program , that has been providing hundreds of home testing kits each day , on pause .
The SCAN suspension comes just a day after Bill Gates praised the effort in his personal blog .
He wrote “ It has the potential to become an important tool for health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behavior of the virus ” RT reports : As of Wednesday , however , all links to the project ’ s website redirect to a notice stating its operations are “ currently paused ” due to a conflict with the FDA .
“ SCAN has been operating under an emergency use authorization ( EUA ) from the Washington State Department of Health , ” the notice says , adding that while the FDA has allowed states to approve new Covid-19 tests , “ we have been notified that under revised guidance issued on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now required ” to continue testing .
The FDA has requested additional information about SCAN ’ s at-home nasal swabs , and seeks clarification on the project ’ s testing of “ people who have not reported Covid-like illness.
” While the notice offered no timetable for when testing might go back online , it noted that SCAN is “ actively working ” to address the FDA ’ s concerns and has been in contact with the agency since March .
Spearheaded by five Seattle-area healthcare organizations , the program , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a coronavirus surveillance system by testing “ a sample of people in the Seattle region ” – both sick and healthy – in hopes of gaining insight into how the illness is “ moving through the community , who is at greatest risk , and whether physical distancing measures are working.
” Though the FDA has given no indication that the SCAN project is linked to fraud , the agency has gone on high alert after a rush of fly-by-night coronavirus testing services emerged across the US , many offering faulty or outright @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becoming more prevalent , the FDA , FBI , CDC and a number of other federal agencies have issued public warnings to consumers .
Despite ramped up testing around the country – over 9.6 million have been carried out in the US , according to Johns Hopkins University – public health officials continue to sound alarms about inadequate supplies , arguing states should not consider reopening without widespread screenings in place .
With SCAN out of commission , at least temporarily , that goal has only been pushed further out of reach .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

FDA Suspends Bill Gates Coronavirus Testing Program
Written by Niamh Harris
The organizers of a virus-tracking project funded by Bill Gates, say their efforts are being paused while they deal with concerns raised by the Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA has ordered SCAN, the Seattle Coronavirus Assessment Network, to stop screening for the virus, putting the program, that has been providing hundreds of home testing kits each day, on pause.
The SCAN suspension comes just a day after Bill Gates praised the effort in his personal blog. He wrote “It has the potential to become an important tool for health officials seeking insights about the spread and behavior of the virus”
RT reports: As of Wednesday, however, all links to the project’s website redirect to a notice stating its operations are “currently paused” due to a conflict with the FDA.
“SCAN has been operating under an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Washington State Department of Health,” the notice says, adding that while the FDA has allowed states to approve new Covid-19 tests, “we have been notified that under revised guidance issued on May 8th, a separate federal EUA is now required” to continue testing.
The FDA has requested additional information about SCAN’s at-home nasal swabs, and seeks clarification on the project’s testing of “people who have not reported Covid-like illness.” While the notice offered no timetable for when testing might go back online, it noted that SCAN is “actively working” to address the FDA’s concerns and has been in contact with the agency since March.
Spearheaded by five Seattle-area healthcare organizations, the program, according to Gates, was meant to create a coronavirus surveillance system by testing “a sample of people in the Seattle region” – both sick and healthy – in hopes of gaining insight into how the illness is “moving through the community, who is at greatest risk, and whether physical distancing measures are working.”
The key advantage of this at-home testing approach is that people don’t need to go to a clinic, where they risk exposing themselves or others to infection.
Bill Gates ✔@BillGates I’m hopeful that this program will improve our understanding of the coronavirus outbreak in Seattle and provide valuable information about the virus for other communities around the world. https://gatesnot.es/2AfADpF 7,022 Twitter Ads info and privacy 3,026 people are talking about this
Though the FDA has given no indication that the SCAN project is linked to fraud, the agency has gone on high alert after a rush of fly-by-night coronavirus testing services emerged across the US, many offering faulty or outright fake test kits. With such schemes becoming more prevalent, the FDA, FBI, CDC and a number of other federal agencies have issued public warnings to consumers.
Despite ramped up testing around the country – over 9.6 million have been carried out in the US, according to Johns Hopkins University – public health officials continue to sound alarms about inadequate supplies, arguing states should not consider reopening without widespread screenings in place. With SCAN out of commission, at least temporarily, that goal has only been pushed further out of reach.
Read more at newspunch.com *****
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-14--Unexplained Event Captured Close to International Space Station

On a NASA ’ s live broadcast from the ISS on March 13 , an eyewitness discovered a round unidentified object that glowed and moved .
Several bright flashes of the subject were seen in the video .
In this case , the object moved from side to side , and judging by the votes on the record , it was a planned and controlled event or experiment .
At the moment , no official statements from NASA or other space organizations have followed up on this subject .
Moreover , an eyewitness claims that NASA ignores his questions about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was probably some kind of “ an event or test related to project Solar Warden ( The Secret Space Program ) ” .
We don ’ t know exactly what it was , but the Pentagon recently posted videos on its website that capture “ unidentified phenomena ” .
The footage was shot by crews of combat aircraft in November 2004 and January 2015 .
The Department of Defense has confirmed that these flying objects are unknown .
Therefore , this event raises questions and does not seem random .
PRINCIPIA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Unexplained Event Captured Close to International Space Station
Written by John Kessler
On a NASA’s live broadcast from the ISS on March 13, an eyewitness discovered a round unidentified object that glowed and moved. Several bright flashes of the subject were seen in the video.
In this case, the object moved from side to side, and judging by the votes on the record, it was a planned and controlled event or experiment. At the moment, no official statements from NASA or other space organizations have followed up on this subject.
Moreover, an eyewitness claims that NASA ignores his questions about what happened. Also in his opinion, it was probably some kind of “an event or test related to project Solar Warden (The Secret Space Program)”.
We don’t know exactly what it was, but the Pentagon recently posted videos on its website that capture “unidentified phenomena”.
The footage was shot by crews of combat aircraft in November 2004 and January 2015. The Department of Defense has confirmed that these flying objects are unknown. Therefore, this event raises questions and does not seem random.
Read more at freenews.live
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-05-14--COVID Crisis: Why Science Must Now Adopt A ‘Red Team’ Approach

COVID Crisis : Why Science Must Now Adopt A ‘ Red Team ’ Approach While tens of thousands are dying from the Covid-19 virus and hundreds of millions of people around the world are facing the loss of their jobs and livelihoods , the scientific community is deeply divided over the nature , spread , and health risks of this new coronavirus .
The evident divisions and contradictory results published in thousands of new studies in recent weeks ( and the conflicting scientific advice provided to governments ) are causing growing confusion , anger , and disarray both within the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientific models and predictions based on widely differing assumptions are exposed as fatally flawed as never before .
As a result , institutional science is hemorrhaging trust around the world while the way research is conducted and published is facing an existential crisis .
In many ways , the coronavirus crisis has triggered the biggest crisis of science in modern history .
In light of this evident disarray , calls for a radical reform of quality control of scientific methods and claims and the introduction of institutional Red Teaming are gaining ground .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nature , Professor Daniël Lakens sets out the arguments for a radically new way to conduct quality-control of scientific research and its methods ( see below ) .
The introduction of institutional red teams into the way science is organized and funded in open societies should be the top priority of a scientific reformation after the end of the Covid-19 crisis ( see e.g .
Red Teams Can Save Climate Science From Itself ) .
This kind of scientific paradigm shift will be absolutely essential if we want to learn the biggest lesson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also help to ensure that free nations can avoid repeating similar catastrophic mistakes and disastrous policy decisions based on fallacious modeling and flawed predictions .
To guard against rushed and sloppy science , build pressure testing into your research .
As researchers rush to find the best ways to quell the COVID-19 crisis , they want to get results out ultra-fast .
Preprints — public but unvetted studies — are getting lots of attention .
But even their advocates are seeing a problem .
To keep up the speed of research and reduce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ build criticism into the process .
Finding ways to prove ourselves wrong is a scientific ideal , but it is rarely scientific practice .
Openness to critiques is nowhere near as widespread as researchers like to think .
Scientists rarely implement procedures to receive and incorporate pushback .
Most formal mechanisms are tied to the peer-review and publishing system .
With preprints , the boldest peers will still criticize the work , but only after mistakes are made and , often , widely disseminated .
[ … ] It is time to adopt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science that integrates criticism into each step of the research process .
A red team is a designated ‘ devil ’ s advocate ’ charged to find holes and errors in ongoing work and to challenge dominant assumptions , with the goal of improving project quality .
The team has a role similar to that of ‘ white-hat hackers ’ hired in the software industry to identify security flaws before they can be discovered and exploited by malefactors .
Similarly , teams of scientists should engage with red teams at each phase of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The logic is similar to the Registered Report publication system — in which protocols are reviewed before the results are known — except that criticism is not organized by journals .
Ideally , there is a larger amount of speedier communication between researchers and their red team than peer review allows , resulting in higher-quality preprints and submissions for publication .
Even scientists who invite criticism from a red team acknowledge that it is difficult not to become defensive .
The best time for scrutiny is before you have fallen in love @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important the claims , the more scrutiny they deserve .
The scientific process needs to incorporate methods to include ‘ severe ’ tests that will prove us wrong when we really are wrong .
[ … ] This shows that assembling a red team isn ’ t enough : research teams need to commit to addressing criticism from the outset .
Sometimes , this is straightforward — items on checklists are absent from a proposal , or an independent statistical analysis yields different results , for example .
Usually , it will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protocol or including a caveat .
The key is that , when results are presented , the team transparently communicates the criticism that the red team raised .
( Perhaps incorporated criticism could be listed in the methods section of a paper , and unincorporated criticism in the limitations . )
This will show how severely a claim has been tested .
[ … ] With research moving faster than ever , scientists should invest in reducing their own bias and allowing others to transparently evaluate how much pushback their ideas have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as reliable as only the most severe criticism it has been able to withstand .
Read more at The GWPF PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

COVID Crisis: Why Science Must Now Adopt A ‘Red Team’ Approach
Written by Dr Benny Peiser
While tens of thousands are dying from the Covid-19 virus and hundreds of millions of people around the world are facing the loss of their jobs and livelihoods, the scientific community is deeply divided over the nature, spread, and health risks of this new coronavirus.
The evident divisions and contradictory results published in thousands of new studies in recent weeks (and the conflicting scientific advice provided to governments) are causing growing confusion, anger, and disarray both within the scientific community and the general public.
Scientific models and predictions based on widely differing assumptions are exposed as fatally flawed as never before.
As a result, institutional science is hemorrhaging trust around the world while the way research is conducted and published is facing an existential crisis.
In many ways, the coronavirus crisis has triggered the biggest crisis of science in modern history.
In light of this evident disarray, calls for a radical reform of quality control of scientific methods and claims and the introduction of institutional Red Teaming are gaining ground.
In a compelling article in the journal Nature, Professor Daniël Lakens sets out the arguments for a radically new way to conduct quality-control of scientific research and its methods (see below).
The introduction of institutional red teams into the way science is organized and funded in open societies should be the top priority of a scientific reformation after the end of the Covid-19 crisis (see e.g. Red Teams Can Save Climate Science From Itself).
This kind of scientific paradigm shift will be absolutely essential if we want to learn the biggest lesson of the coronavirus disaster.
It would also help to ensure that free nations can avoid repeating similar catastrophic mistakes and disastrous policy decisions based on fallacious modeling and flawed predictions.
To guard against rushed and sloppy science, build pressure testing into your research. Daniël Lakens As researchers rush to find the best ways to quell the COVID-19 crisis, they want to get results out ultra-fast. Preprints — public but unvetted studies — are getting lots of attention. But even their advocates are seeing a problem. To keep up the speed of research and reduce sloppiness, scientists must find ways to build criticism into the process. Finding ways to prove ourselves wrong is a scientific ideal, but it is rarely scientific practice. Openness to critiques is nowhere near as widespread as researchers like to think. Scientists rarely implement procedures to receive and incorporate pushback. Most formal mechanisms are tied to the peer-review and publishing system. With preprints, the boldest peers will still criticize the work, but only after mistakes are made and, often, widely disseminated. […] It is time to adopt a ‘red team’ approach in science that integrates criticism into each step of the research process. A red team is a designated ‘devil’s advocate’ charged to find holes and errors in ongoing work and to challenge dominant assumptions, with the goal of improving project quality. The team has a role similar to that of ‘white-hat hackers’ hired in the software industry to identify security flaws before they can be discovered and exploited by malefactors. Similarly, teams of scientists should engage with red teams at each phase of a research project and incorporate their criticism. The logic is similar to the Registered Report publication system — in which protocols are reviewed before the results are known — except that criticism is not organized by journals. Ideally, there is a larger amount of speedier communication between researchers and their red team than peer review allows, resulting in higher-quality preprints and submissions for publication. Even scientists who invite criticism from a red team acknowledge that it is difficult not to become defensive. The best time for scrutiny is before you have fallen in love with your results. And the more important the claims, the more scrutiny they deserve. The scientific process needs to incorporate methods to include ‘severe’ tests that will prove us wrong when we really are wrong. […] This shows that assembling a red team isn’t enough: research teams need to commit to addressing criticism from the outset. Sometimes, this is straightforward — items on checklists are absent from a proposal, or an independent statistical analysis yields different results, for example. Usually, it will be less clear whether criticism merits changing a protocol or including a caveat. The key is that, when results are presented, the team transparently communicates the criticism that the red team raised. (Perhaps incorporated criticism could be listed in the methods section of a paper, and unincorporated criticism in the limitations.) This will show how severely a claim has been tested. […] With research moving faster than ever, scientists should invest in reducing their own bias and allowing others to transparently evaluate how much pushback their ideas have been subjected to. A scientific claim is as reliable as only the most severe criticism it has been able to withstand.
Read more at The GWPF
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related