This is basically the other side of what I was saying about censorship: surveillance. Big tech is becoming an arm of the state and the “antagonism” is an illusion. The government “going after” big tech just subjugates them further.
This is absolutely relevant to health, because health is their first and foremost target of both censorship and surveillance right now.
If you don’t think this will be applied to food, please read David Gumpert’s book Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Food Rights about the all-out assault on small farms and raw food coops that the Feds began in 2008:

amzn.to/34QGxcT
That quieted down, but don’t take that for granted. When they’re done with COVID they will come for your food. They aren’t even pretending otherwise. (Bill Gates buying all the farmland, WEF, etc).

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Chris Masterjohn

Chris Masterjohn Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ChrisMasterjohn

8 Jun
Some back-of-the-envelope math meant only as a thought experiment.

Deaths in 2020 were up 17.6% in 2020, and 68.5% of this was attributed to COVID.

If 25% of COVID deaths are falsely attributed, as in Alameda County, the COVID share drops to 51.4%.
51.4% obviously would have sufficient margin of error to say that half of the excess deaths were COVID, and half were non-COVID.
The non-COVID deaths are at least potentially attributable to lockdown. Supply chains cut off, lack of normal doctor's visits, and things like this compromised medical care.
Read 13 tweets
7 Jun
@coldxman and @wil_da_beast630 I'm listening to your excellent interview and wanted to add something about the call-back studies.
The first thing is that the Bertrand and Mullainathan paper revealed some remarkable "name privilege" within each race. For example, "Brad" got 2.4x as many callbacks as "Neil" and "Kristen" got 64% more than "Emily."

nber.org/papers/w9873 Image
"Latonya" got 4.1x more than "Aisha," and "Jermaine" got 3.8x as many as "Rasheed."
Read 13 tweets
7 Jun
They need faculty who aren’t totally ignorant of genetics to correct these students. “Race” might be a social construct, but “genetics” are not socially constructed, and this statement just highlights that Yale nursing students apparently are never taught a class on genetics. Image
Here’s an example of genetics underlying this association:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
The major variant in this study is only found in people of African descent: Image
Read 6 tweets
25 May
@krosenque @ZKForTre @Jbpoiuytrewq A quick search turns up this Finnish study saying that 1.95 children under 15 get myocarditis every 100,000 person-years. That suggests that ~900,000 children under 15 have been vaccinated in Connecticut. Let me check.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
@krosenque @ZKForTre @Jbpoiuytrewq Holy shit! Connecticut only started vaccinated children under 15 2 weeks ago.

google.com/amp/s/www.nbcc…
@krosenque @ZKForTre @Jbpoiuytrewq I can’t find the number vaccinated in the 12-15 year old range. For example this page breaks it down by age but only goes down to 16 years old.

usafacts.org/visualizations…
Read 6 tweets
25 May
The reason the phase III trial placebo groups were all given the vaccine after three months without any blinding was that maintaining blinding while also giving the placebo group the chance to get vaccinated was considered “onerous” by the companies.
98% of the placebo group has been vaccinated.

bmj.com/content/373/bm…
J&J had a median of TWO MONTHS follow up when it amended its protocol to implement unblinding of the two phase III trials.
Read 8 tweets
14 May
Vioxx gained full FDA approval in 1999.

After 80 million people took it, in September 2004, five years later, it became clear it was causing heart attacks and strokes.
In 2009, ten years after FDA approval, Scott Reuben admitted that data from 21 efficacy studies was fabricated.

Between 2006 and 2011, hundreds of millions of dollars were paid out in civil suits, including wrongful death suits.
In 2015, the FDA reiterated its own conclusion that there is no specific risk of Vioxx but rather all NSAIDs have the same increased risk of heart attacks and stroke with high doses and long duration, and it should come back to market.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(