CDN/US Covid-related political discussion

[Remius]

Right. But what we have here is what we've had throughout COVID. Attempts to discredit what that person is saying with underhanded smears. Here is a lifelong expert in the medical field with long time association to top institutions in their arena (NEJM, Harvard), but if they propose uncomfortable (and qualified) views on contentious subjects the tendency is to discredit; interim... alternative medicine.. etc. This is a passive aggressive way to shut down discussion on serious issues not yet resolved. This practice was prolific throughout the pandemic and continues.

Why would the word interim be used to discredit someone?

Also she is not a fan of alternative medicine and in fact would prefer that the term not be used at all. My quick read of her background saw her state « it’s time to stop giving Alternative Médecine a free ride. »

She has been critical of the industry well before COVID and she has been rebutted by others well before as well. Not sure why COVID is a factor in any of this.

But I don’t know much about her until now I doubt you did either. How is she being discredited exactly?

 

[Blackadder1916]

Journals have been captured by industry.

Ex-editor of NEJM tells how Big Pharma has corrupted academic institutions - MinnPost

In the May/June issue of the Boston Review, Dr.

www.minnpost.com

The only specific reference to "journals" in the article, is to identify the publication of which the writer was formerly the editor. As to "industry" capturing academia, researchers and the general direction and publicity of research, the flippant response would be "duh". While "Big Pharma" may be the current flavour of the Big Bad Wolf, they are no different than any other industrial sector. The number one goal is to maximize profit and value. Yes, they made out like bandits due to vaccines, but that is just one episode. Not that long ago, the moneymaker was giving men erections and helping them regrow hair so they could increase opportunities to put the erections to use. Recently it seems that one of the next waves will be rapid weight loss.

I am not saying there are no altruists in the pharmaceuticals industry, there probably are (or were when they started out). But like the "no bucks, no Buck Rogers" scene from The Right Stuff, all that scientific stuff is dependent on funding. But unlike the space race which was entirely publicly funded, publicly funded pharmaceutical research has largely ceased and decisions as to which lines to pursue or champion devolve mostly to which ones have the greatest chance of turning a profit. The pandemic provided great opportunities for quick profit, the next brass ring might likely be in the defense industry. International chaos and tragedy have always been moneymakers.

As for "journals" . . . an ever expanding industry in itself. Just as one can scan the net in search of their favourite political, social, cultural, racial, whatever opinion and then use that as evidence of the rightness of their point of view, the internet have also brought a growth of "peer reviewed" publications. I use "peer reviewed" with some cynicism; there are many that have very loose standards (if any at all) as to what they consider review. Along with the mantra of "publish or perish" comes the requirement to find somewhere to publish, creating business opportunities for those publishers (or wannabe publishers) to turn a profit. Thankfully there are still many legitimate and well respected publications that maintain high standards of review and editing. But even in them, while papers may have passed the scrutiny of their reviewers and editors, that doesn't make the conclusions (or the methods used to reach those conclusions) beyond question.

 

[PMedMoe]

I think it still is ok to still refer to her as an ex editor in chief even if interim for that period.

So , when a news report says "former military member robs bank" and they served less than a year, 20+ yrs ago, that's okay too?

Yes, you're including info, but it's misleading.

 

[Remius]

So , when a news report says "former military member robs bank" and they served less than a year, 20+ yrs ago, that's okay too?

Yes, you're including info, but it's misleading.

No. It’s context. And it’s relevant to the subject being spoken of. If a an ex CDS speaks up about NATO it adds credibility to the subject at hand. In this case someone who was an ex editor and has written extensively on the subject.

Your example is not comparable as it isn’t adding or seeking any credibility to the subject.

I fail to see why identifying her as an ex editor of that particular journal as an issue And it seems that that was the launching point for her post career writing about various related things in the last 2 decades.

Also note, the headline says ex editor. She was an editor there for twenty years and interim editor in chief for her last year or so.

How is that misleading?

 

[Blackadder1916]

Journals have been captured by industry.

Ex-editor of NEJM tells how Big Pharma has corrupted academic institutions - MinnPost

In the May/June issue of the Boston Review, Dr.

www.minnpost.com

I just noticed, so I may not be the only one, that the linked article is from 2010. While it may have been a somewhat original point of view back then, it's been much discussed in the intervening 13 years. Unfortunately, not much has changed, nor do I expect it to.

 

[PMedMoe]

Thanks for pointing out the age of the article.

I was wrong to say the headline was misleading, but I will still say it's exaggerated so that people will think she was the actual editor of the NEJM when she never was.

As far as her views, she's probably not wrong on most of them. She's quite critical of several areas of healthcare:

conflicts of interest and biases in the medical establishment;

the Food and Drug Administration;

the U.S. healthcare system; and

the pharmaceutical industry.

Regarding the pharmaceutical industry:

Richard Friedman, director of the psychopharmacology clinic at Weill Cornell Medical College, and a regular contributor to the New York Times science pages, criticized Angell's views as unbalanced. "Dr. Angell is now doing pretty much the same thing the industry she assails has done, just the converse. Pharma withheld the bad news about its drugs and touted the positive results; Dr. Angell ignores positive data that conflicts with her cherished theory and reports the negative results."

Here's another article (dated 2012) that provides some other insights.

Marcia Angell's Attacks on Pharma Have Lost all Credibility

 

[Kirkhill]

Trudeau's half-brother is an anti-vaxxer AND and RFK jr supporter?

Who knew?

Justin Trudeau's Brother Is Driving a RFK Jr. Campaign Bus

The antivax bus is coming. Everybody's jumping.

www.bugeyedandshameless.com

 

[Brad Sallows]

Heck, Billy Carter was Jimmy Carter's full brother. Hard to top that.

 

[QV]

Thanks for pointing out the age of the article.

I was wrong to say the headline was misleading, but I will still say it's exaggerated so that people will think she was the actual editor of the NEJM when she never was.

As far as her views, she's probably not wrong on most of them. She's quite critical of several areas of healthcare:

conflicts of interest and biases in the medical establishment;

the Food and Drug Administration;

the U.S. healthcare system; and

the pharmaceutical industry.

Regarding the pharmaceutical industry:

Richard Friedman, director of the psychopharmacology clinic at Weill Cornell Medical College, and a regular contributor to the New York Times science pages, criticized Angell's views as unbalanced. "Dr. Angell is now doing pretty much the same thing the industry she assails has done, just the converse. Pharma withheld the bad news about its drugs and touted the positive results; Dr. Angell ignores positive data that conflicts with her cherished theory and reports the negative results."

Here's another article (dated 2012) that provides some other insights.

Marcia Angell's Attacks on Pharma Have Lost all Credibility

The author of the article you cite was the president of Pfizer Global R&D. But even this article recognizes she is the former editor of NEJM.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Heck, Billy Carter was Jimmy Carter's full brother. Hard to top that.

Famous for something

 

[daftandbarmy]

Not surprising, but depressing nonetheless...

Ottawa and Washington wasted many billions during COVID​

In both Canada and the United States, the federal government spent a massive amount of money during COVID. A significant portion of this money was mismanaged, poorly targeted, wasteful or simply excessive. And taxpayers in both countries will bear the cost of this fiscal waste for years to come.

In Canada, the largest federal government pro¬grams were the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS), which cost $100.7 billion, and the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and its successor the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB), which totalled $100.4 billion.

There were several problems with the design of these programs. For instance, money was provided to individuals and businesses that were not in genuine need, and excessive amounts of support went above what was required to stabilize income for Canadians affected by COVID restrictions.

For instance, according to a report by the auditor general (AG), the government paid $4.6 billion in CERB and other benefits to ineligible Canadians. The AG also recommended that the government investigate the nature of another $27.4 billion in COVID spending. Overpayment recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 dead people and 434 children too young to be eligible. Finally, the AG found that 51,049 employ¬ers, who received $9.9 billion in CEWS payments, did not demonstrate a sufficient revenue drop to be eligible for the subsidy.

A similar story emerged with our southern neighbours. For instance, during the pandemic, the U.S. federal government enacted the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which provided an estimated $800 billion in payroll funds for small businesses, and Economic Impact Payments (i.e. stimulus payments) estimated at $814 billion.

According to independent analyses, these programs were also poorly designed, excessive and largely ineffective. The Office of Inspector General (OIG) estimated that at least 21.5 per cent of unemployment payments—one in five—were “improper” and cost at least $191 billion.

Another study found that between $335 billion and $395 billion of the $510 billion distributed over the first two phases of the PPP in 2020—equivalent to 66 to 77 per cent of the money—didn’t go towards paycheques but rather to businessowners, shareholders, creditors and others. And that about three-quarters (72 per cent) of PPP benefits went to Americans in the top 20 per cent of household income.

Now, according to a new analysis on COVID spending published by the Fraser Institute, Canada’s federal government spent $359.7 billion while the U.S. federal government spent $5.1 trillion. In both cases, each country financed this spending entirely through borrowing.

Ottawa and Washington wasted many billions during COVID: op-ed

Overpayment recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 dead people and 434 children too young to be eligible.

www.fraserinstitute.org

 

[Good2Golf]

Fortunately we’re getting thousands and thousands more taxation public servants to….ummm…not recover billions of those ineligible funds…

 

[OldSolduer]

Fortunately we’re getting thousands and thousands more taxation public servants to….ummm…not recover billions of those ineligible funds…
View attachment 79715

The head of CRA should have had his ass fired out the door - recovering $15 billion dollars wasn't worth the effort. A$$hole

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Fortunately we’re getting thousands and thousands more taxation public servants to….ummm…not recover billions of those ineligible funds…
View attachment 79715

At least they aren't getting guns.

Another parallel of the biden/ trudeau policies.

 

[mariomike]

The municipal union arbitrations continue.

Sudbury had the right to fire workers who refused COVID-19 vaccine, arbitrator rules

The union representing inside, outside and housing staff at Greater Sudbury has lost a grievance opposing the dismissal of staff who didn’t follow the city’s vaccination policy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

northernontario.ctvnews.ca

Sudbury had the right to fire workers who refused COVID-19 vaccine, arbitrator rules

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Not surprising, but depressing nonetheless...

Ottawa and Washington wasted many billions during COVID​

In both Canada and the United States, the federal government spent a massive amount of money during COVID. A significant portion of this money was mismanaged, poorly targeted, wasteful or simply excessive. And taxpayers in both countries will bear the cost of this fiscal waste for years to come.

In Canada, the largest federal government pro¬grams were the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS), which cost $100.7 billion, and the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and its successor the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB), which totalled $100.4 billion.

There were several problems with the design of these programs. For instance, money was provided to individuals and businesses that were not in genuine need, and excessive amounts of support went above what was required to stabilize income for Canadians affected by COVID restrictions.

For instance, according to a report by the auditor general (AG), the government paid $4.6 billion in CERB and other benefits to ineligible Canadians. The AG also recommended that the government investigate the nature of another $27.4 billion in COVID spending. Overpayment recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 dead people and 434 children too young to be eligible. Finally, the AG found that 51,049 employ¬ers, who received $9.9 billion in CEWS payments, did not demonstrate a sufficient revenue drop to be eligible for the subsidy.

A similar story emerged with our southern neighbours. For instance, during the pandemic, the U.S. federal government enacted the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which provided an estimated $800 billion in payroll funds for small businesses, and Economic Impact Payments (i.e. stimulus payments) estimated at $814 billion.

According to independent analyses, these programs were also poorly designed, excessive and largely ineffective. The Office of Inspector General (OIG) estimated that at least 21.5 per cent of unemployment payments—one in five—were “improper” and cost at least $191 billion.

Another study found that between $335 billion and $395 billion of the $510 billion distributed over the first two phases of the PPP in 2020—equivalent to 66 to 77 per cent of the money—didn’t go towards paycheques but rather to businessowners, shareholders, creditors and others. And that about three-quarters (72 per cent) of PPP benefits went to Americans in the top 20 per cent of household income.

Now, according to a new analysis on COVID spending published by the Fraser Institute, Canada’s federal government spent $359.7 billion while the U.S. federal government spent $5.1 trillion. In both cases, each country financed this spending entirely through borrowing.

Ottawa and Washington wasted many billions during COVID: op-ed

Overpayment recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 dead people and 434 children too young to be eligible.

www.fraserinstitute.org

It's just what liberals do.

 

[Jarnhamar]

.... yet ...

Looks like the CAF decided against court martialing the major. I wonder what the deciding factor between not court martialing Major Chledowski and court martialing Warrant Topp was.

 

[brihard]

Looks like the CAF decided against court martialing the major. I wonder what the deciding factor between not court martialing Major Chledowski and court martialing Warrant Topp was.

That’s absurd. What a brutal double standard.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yesterday we had an appointment with our "Case manager" for my daughters diabetes. He is actually a spinal surgeon from India and has been looking after my daughter for 2 and half years. He is fantastic and super smart. Sadly yesterday was his last day as he is going home to look after his parents. His parents left Toronto to go home to get better healthcare. He is utterly critical of Canada's way of conducting healthcare and I can't blame him a bit.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

That’s absurd. What a brutal double standard.

As you are frequently pointing out in other cases- are you familiar with the facts in each case here and therefore why a (independent) prosecutor would or would not proceed?

In other words- how can you be certain of a double exists here?