Why was Dr Ericson's video targeted on YouTube for a takedown?

Is YouTube Censoring Dissent on Covid-19?

Did you see this video? If so, good. Because if you didn't, due to YouTube censorship, you'll never get a chance to see it again.

The Coronavirus statistics are pointing to a significantly different picture than first thought.

Why was Dr Erickson's video banned from YouTube?

YouTube says they pulled this video because it "violates their standards."

It's hard to know why the people who sit in big, rich corporations decide to do what they do. And as is the case with FaceBook, Google and YouTube, they seem to sit in great towers glowing with unapproachable light. Is this "YouTube censorship" over content related to Covid-19 and alternative approaches to Coronavirus?

Maybe. They definitely have a slant (like everyone else). And they come out of California, where things seem to lean left.

It's a private corporation and it seems they probably should be able to do what they want, right? 

YouTube says they will censor "bad" information that goes against the W.H.O.

Apparently, they said this video goes against the recommendations of the the World Health Organization. And they don't want to spread dangerous and harmful misinformation.

As reported on Fox News, that is where YouTube sets its sites for calibrating and containing what is allowable to pass for truth. You can see an editorial by Tucker Carlson here, where they come right out and say so. And where Tucker doesn't think that's too cool.

I'm not sure I can crucify them for intent.

In fact, I suppose that's commendable (if they're right).

Even in the age of free speech, in a country that advocates for free speech, you still can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre. Not that you can find one these days with mandated social distancing. But we can dream, can't we?

But if it is a private corporation, in the end, it's a free country. If I should be free to not bake a cake for a wedding when it means endorsing a lifestyle that troubles me, they should be able to put the brakes on message they feel could ultimately kill people. Right?

But, maybe (maybe) it's not just about censorship. Because if it's about them getting rid of inaccurate information, 

YouTube still has lots of flat-earth videos, too. Even though they said they're messed up.

YouTube said it was going to crack down on "flat earth" videos. According to an article on "Mashable," they were going to change their algorithm.

Even without Alex Jones, harmful conspiracy theory videos were running rampant on YouTube. Now, the company says it’s going to take action.
In a blog post published on Friday, YouTube said it would be making changes to its recommendations algorithm to explicitly deal with conspiracy theory videos. The company says the update will reduce the suggestion of “borderline content and content that could misinform users in harmful ways.”
YouTube clarified what kind of videos fit that description by providing three examples: “videos promoting a phony miracle cure for a serious illness, claiming the earth is flat, or making blatantly false claims about historic events like 9/11.”

But they're still out there. Many of them.

And as I've said before, if the people making the videos were half as good as understanding science as they were at creating the videos to spread their pseudo-science, we wouldn't have the videos.

But the videos persist. And YouTube lets them exist on their platform, even though they KNOW those videos are full of bad information.

Similarly, there are a LOT of videos still on YouTube that buck the convention that seems to be promoted by the CDC and the WHO regarding the amount of caution needed, and what the proper course of treatment for this virus should be.

So, why this video?

I don't know if this is exactly the reason the video was pulled. But as with most things Clinton, 9/11 and Trump hating, there is the evidence, there is the direction the evidence takes you, and then there is the room from pushback that comes from "plausible denial."

I don't know what the thinking is behind it, but Fox News did an interview with Dr. Erickson (you can watch the video HERE) and they touched on the fact that the American Medical Association released a statement that seems to indicate the AMA thought there could be something fishy here.

So if YouTube thinks the doctors were deliberately spreading misinformation with the intent of trying to sway public opinion, ultimately with the goal of lining his own pockets with influencing back to work (not sure how, but) I can see that maybe - maybe  - they were trying to right a wrong or something.

But I wonder if YouTube folk even ask this question:

Could there be self-serving motives at the W.H.O.?

One of the assumptions on the left is that the government is above self-serving interests (unless you're a republican, in which case it is assumed).

But whenever I bring up the nefarious things happening at the World Health Organization, and I bring up the possibility that there is corruption at the top, many people - especially on the left - ask, "what possible reason should we see that proves there are motives and bias in a place as supposedly politically neutral as the CDC and the WHO?

Well, what if the W.H.O. is skewed on what is "accurate" on Coronavirus because they are headed by a China-sympathizer?

If you're not familiar with the whole fiasco of how this could have happened (or if it even actually did) I would suggest that you look at another article I wrote recently about this very issue.

I believe the guy at the head of the WHO is in bed with Communist China and that he has a vested interest in skewing the data, covering for the Chinese, and (possibly) doing whatever he can, whether with scare tactics or skewing the data, to keep the US economy depressed for as long as possible.

Don't believe me? Please check out the article I wrote where​ I analyzed what Glenn Beck said about this and carefully documented virtually every point he strung together to prove the case that this guy can't be trusted.​​​

So what about free speech?

Free speech is a value we hold as a sacred right in America. Inalienable rights granted by a creator.

Canada has a charter of rights and freedoms. And even though Trudeau seems to be trying to dismantle fairness and equality in Canada like the Democrats are in the US, it's still official there, too.

The problem is this: 

Your God-given right to be able to speak freely doesn't translate to a God-given obligation for everyone to listen to you.

So the question becomes one of who gets to decide when your speech rights are violated and when YouTube's obligation to let people speak and lack of obligation to repeat everything everyone has to say (no matter what) collide.

Does YouTube have a legal obligation to "fairness?" Who decides what is fair? Can they censor anything? Do they have a right to police their own platform to try to reasonably control what they might legitimately feel is "harmful disinformation?"

Remember: there is always a lawsuit pending out there.

Is there a left-leaning bias in this move from YouTube?

Maybe. It's possible. There seems to be no question about the fact that Google (who owns YouTube) leans left. Just go to Google and search for something like "Hillary Clinton email server" and compare your result to what happens when you do the same search on DuckDuckGo and see for yourself.

But it is a big leap from taking down this video to conspiracy.

Honestly, my money is on the fact that they simply wouldn't buy into the idea that there is any bias at the WHO. In the left's world, that is a simple "right-wing conspiracy."

But even if it is deliberate, in some sinister plot to let Fauci and Gates hold the world at bay until they develop some vaccine with a chip in it, you'll NEVER be able to prove it.

Remember: there is always the factor of plausible denial. There is enough honest wiggle-room here to say that they really only honestly have a motive of protecting people from those who are dangerous. And remember. Even the AMA says Dr. Erickson is dangerous.

And so we don't always get all the points of view delivered to us on Google's platform (FREE, I might add) as we might like.

So what do you do, if you think videos like Dr. Erickson's should be in the realm of free speech? What if you think the left owns the big tech world and they're out to silence the opposition?

If YouTube, FaceBook and Google are stacked against the right, what can you do?

That is the million dollar question. 

But I have some ideas. First of all, momentum is a thing. Many of us (especially in the boomer and millennial generation) have gotten so used to Facebook that we haven't done much else except whine to each other when they censor us.

But we need to look at the alternatives. And we need to pioneer a movement to other platforms that are more accomodating to the point of view from the right.

Suggestions: there are:

  • MeWeTheir slogan is "Your private life is #Not4Sale. No Ads. No Spyware. No BS. Get Started - Free Forever. They are very "right friendly."
  • Gab, also very "right-friendly." Their page says, "A social network that champions free speech, individual liberty and the free flow of information online. All are welcome."
  • TrumpbookUSA"A place for free speech."  

So GO THERE. You don't have to dump Facebook. But use it as a recruiting field, so to speak, to invite folks who are tired of the left's tyranny on the big 3 (Facebook, Google, Youtube). Go there. Don't abandon it, necessarily.

And if you're tired of the search engines tracking you, try DuckDuckGo. They don't track. They're not quite as sharp as Google for honing in on all the data (yet). But they're getting there and they never track you.

But branch out.

If enough people abandon Google and FaceBook in favour of free speech oriented sites, those others will lose their grip on the monopoly of "what can be considered as true."

Read More
Nurse Practitioner speaks out about why the death rate is so high in New York City Hospitals

Are Coronavirus Patients Being Murdered in New York City?

Are Covid-19 patients being "murdered" in NYC hospitals during this crisis?

If you run a blog long enough, or even if you're just someone who digs long and hard about certain things, you become a lightning rod for getting stuff sent to you from your "fans." And I got one of those "things" sent to me last night. It is a video about that asks "Are Covid-19 patients being murdered in New York City?"

Yup. The headline says "murdered."

Ok. As it turns out, not "murdered," exactly. You see, the woman doing this video on youtube is speaking for someone else; and second-hand information always needs to be filtered and questioned.

And we all see "clickbait" headlines in a lot of blogging these days.

But here is why I give her a pass on the word "murdered."

Pretty quickly she tells you that she is a) speaking out for someone working in the hospitals in NYC, and b) that the person she is speaking out for specifically said, "murdered."

Still, maybe "murder" is not a fair word to use. But what about "dying of negligent homicide?"

I'm not arguing about the semantics here. But I'm sure the people being accused of murder in this video would.

Murder is a pretty strong accusation. It seems to be cause for libel. In fact, I think even negligent homicide is pretty harsh.

I will get to that later. But first, you need to watch the video. 

I did. And having actually watched the video and heard what her testimony is, it opened my eyes to a possible understanding about why...

the death rates from Covid-19 are SKYROCKETING in New York City as compared to most other places in the country.

My assessment of this testimony leads me to believe it is an actual nurse conveying a message from another actual nurse.

I'm NOT speaking specifically about the medical science discussed in the video. I'm not a "doktorb" so I can't say for sure.

What I mean by "legitimate" is that this young lady is very credible and articulate. I don't think testimony like this could be given by someone unless they are rather well educated in the use and functions of lungs and ventilators. Just sayin'.

So I'm thinking what we have here is a real nurse or nurse-practitioner conveying a message from another nurse friend who really is seeing some disturbing things going on in the hospital(s) in New York City.

And she is  crying out for help in spreading a message out of a total lack of any understanding about anything else she can do except "get the word out."

But please. Give a listen to this yourself.

Now, I'm posting the link to this video on YouTube here. But due to things I've noticed happening before, I'm not sure how long the video will stay there. The woman talks about a video that was published to youtube by Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell and has since been remove. 

That video, I saw. And THAT video, I can no longer find on YouTube. So why it disappeared, I don't know.  (I've written elsewhere about another video that disappeared and why - Dr. Erickson in California and why his video was banned from YouTube.)

But for now, you can watch this one on YouTube if you wish. It's the same one I loaded up above. 

So let's clear some things up here, shall we?

Point number one:

I don't know who this lady is in the video. I wish I did, but I have no idea.

She sounds entirely credible. What I mean is, she's either an incredibly good actor and able to memorize medical jargon and spew it double-time in a totally natural fashion, or, more likely, she really is what she says she is.

Point number two:

The lady in this video is NOT "Karlee Sunshine."

It's an important point to make. You see, "Karlee Sunshine" is a flat-earther with about 3,300 followers on YouTube. And if you don't know, I'm not exactly a fan of the "flat earth theory." I've written about it elsewhere on the blog, if you're curious. 

Point number 3:

I don't want to get too carried away on the fact that the woman who posted the video is a "flat-earther."

I know some of my readers lean that way and I don't want them to miss the fact that on the topic in this post, we're probably much on the same page, whether planted on pillars or floating on a ball in space.

Anyway.... As I often say, even a broken clock is right twice a day. And just because I think the person who posted this video is waaaaay off on the configuration of the earth, it doesn't mean I can dismiss what this other lady says about Covid-19.

And I have no reason to expect that the lady in the video is a flat-earther. But it's irrelevant to the point. So please set that aside, no matter your beliefs on Karlee Sunshine, ok?

So, is this woman credible? Is her story plausible?

Let me take some time here to give you "The Cognitive Man" take on this. Because there are a few things to consider here.

I can imagine that some of this craziness could actually be going on. I'm probably about mid-range on the conspiracy index. I've written about other things (and more to come) but I have to think what she says in the video is entirely possible.

Could someone really be scared about losing their job coming out about this kind of thing?

Uhhhh, well..... what do YOU think?

Even in normal circumstances, when a nurse challenges a doctor, it is a high stakes game, I would think.

There are reputations at stake. And lawsuits if they're wrong. And even if it's not an issue of reputation, there are still some doctors have HUUUUUUGE egos. And that along with the power and authority structures in hospitals makes for a powder keg if you're the nurse "blowing the whistle."

So I get the reason for the anonymity.

Think "Juanita Broadderick and Bill Clinton," and ask yourself if it's credible she fears for her job? I think so.

But is it fair to call this "murder?" Is it even fair to call it "negligent homicide?"

Well, let's explore that a bit, shall we?

Because the problem is that even though the numbers seem to be coming out in some places indicating that the original models about the mortality and hospitalization rates on this thing were likely highly flawed, it's still NEW GROUND.

This is, after all, called a "novel virus" for a very good reason.

There is a very thoughtful post on "MedScape" about this whole issue and how doctors are discovering that the treatment protocol for Covid-19 is turning out to be a much different animal than they thought at first.

You can click on this screenshot below to watch the video and read the transcript.

Link to MedScape interview with Cameron Kyle-Sidell, MD

MedScape interview with Cameron Kyle-Sidell, MD

So what is the takeaway from this?

I guess the first thing I would say is that it is often said in military circles, “No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.”

Listen to this video collective and analysis from the New York Times. Very informative about what is going on in treatment and the concerns from all sides of the "medical fences."

So, when all is said and done, is it fair to label this as "murder?" Or even "negligent homicide?"

Well, as far as the murder accusation goes, let's just say, "no."

It's an unfortunate thing she said that. You see, the biggest problem is that 

murder implies intent. And that is a pretty heavy accusation, now, isn't it?

So, what about negligent homicide?

Well, maybe. But who are you gonna charge?

Who is in charge? How much pressure are they under? If you were fearful for your own life in a situation with a pandemic like this, do you think you would always get everything right? Woud you never get scared? Would YOU never make a bad decision while running on a chronic lack of sleep and constant adrenaline and caffiene for weeks on end?

This is a war. And every battle plan works like magic until the first shot is fired.

It's maybe not a cops and robbers movie. The action isn't always split-second like in a good made-for-Netflix drama series.

But the medical professionals are overworked and under-slept. They have to answer for every intubation and every death. And often, the people on the floor maybe DON'T care.

Maybe some of the medical professionals are not really all that professional.

I don't know. I have to say what this lady says in this video is plausible; I have to allow for a reality that says some of them don't care.

But, as is usually the case, those front-line workers are not the ones who make the executive decisions. Often, they're following orders. Sometimes, there aren't enough of the right people around to make the decisions.

And sometimes, decisions are driven by fear, by ego and by protocols that don't fit a novel virus.

And sometimes, years of neglect in a system set it up for a fall.

Maybe the Bronx situation with Covid-19 is a result of poverty and neglect.

There is an article at ABC News entitled, "Poverty, pollution and neglect: How the Bronx became a coronavirus 'formula for disaster.'"

The Bronx has the highest fatality rate per capita in New York City. It's just a fact. And the Bronx is very poor. (And it's highly populated by minorities. So there are going to be some people who go there, too, which is too bad. Because this isn't about race. But it is about poverty and years of bad management, maybe?)

From the article....

The first thing Dr. Ernest Patti noticed when he stepped into the emergency department at St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx for his weekend shift was the sound. An unusually loud cacophony of beepers, alarms and the mechanical gasps of ventilators filled the air.
The morning before one shift, he recorded a video on his phone where he appears shaken and can be heard saying, "We're gonna have to decide who gets one and who doesn't." The hospital managed to make it through the weekend with enough ventilators and has since been sent more, Patti said. But the ordeal left an indelible mark on him.

That's some pretty heavy stuff. There ARE some places where they are overwhelmed and under-equipped.

More from the article.

"Are we shocked that the rates are higher in the African American [and] Latino community? We know that there's inequality in the health care system. We know that the poorer communities often pay the highest price for these types of emergency situations because they're really just bringing to light that systemic racism and discrimination in the system."

So, let me give you the "Cogny Mann" take on the "murder" charge.

This isn't a time to get angry at anyone. It's time to get angry with the situation, and to be as supportive as we can.

You might be a little "uncaring" or neglectful, too, if you were in their shoes.

Be thankful for good healthcare if you have it. Learn to be less judgemental about those who might not always get it right.

What this lady is talking about in this video seems to be real problem. But God help us all if we don't see a time when we need to BE THE CHURCH.

If you read my blog, you'll know that I always want to make room for God to show Himself strong. I'm a firm believer that prayer changes things.

No. It's NOT murder. But it IS killing people. 

But this isn't a time to judge. You don't stand in their shoes. But you can get on YOUR knees. And pray.

Read More
Taiwan didn't do a Covid-19 lockdown and they are doing just fine.

Taking The Coronavirus “Seriously”

Some thoughts for my critics who don't think I'm taking the Coronavirus crisis seriously.

I got a chuckle this morning. My wife had posted something online about the Coronavirus and apparently, someone thought she wasn't taking the Coronavirus seriously.

And it got me to thinking, "what does taking it seriously really mean?"

Taking it seriously and taking it at face value are two different things.

I wish some people could take a step back and learn to look at things objectively for a bit instead of just gaging my seriousness about it by the amount of fear and caution I have over this virus.

I take the issue of the Coronavirus quite seriously. People die from it. Mostly older people or people with pre-existing conditions. But yeah. People die.

Worldwide, there are tens of thousands of deaths resulting from this virus. We all know that.

You want to see serious? Take a look at this video of what this horrible disease can do to someone's lungs.

For the people who get the virus and manifest the horrible symptoms from it, it's no joke. Let me get this out of the way first, in case you don't think I get it or that I don't think it's a big deal. It's a big deal. It kills people.

If you don't take this virus as a serious threat, look at what it can do to your lungs.

See what Coronavirus does to the lungs

Ok. Does everybody get the point? Good.

Because I don't want anyone to miss the fact that I know this is a terrible disease if you're one of the people to be affected by it.

But here is the part that - excuse me - pisses me off.

People seem to equate the idea of "taking Coronavirus seriously" with taking every possible precaution and doing everything possible to not let ANYONE get this disease, no matter what.

FEAR is not always the appropriate response to a crisis. EVERY POSSIBLE precaution is not always an appropriate response to serious situations.

Without being irreverent or disrespectful to the people who attack me or look at me with disdain when I wander out in public (whatever remnants of "public" I can find these days at the drug store and the grocery isle) let me say that I don't want to make anyone feel like I'm not taking THEM seriously.

I understand people are scared and cautious. I understand that and I don't want to belittle anyone's feelings.

But there was a guy at the drug store line yesterday who ripped the face off the lady behind him for not keeping six feet away from him. She was about four feet. But for him, it wasn't good enough.

The point for him was that this lady behind him wasn't paying attention to the rules; she wasn't taking it "seriously." He said to her, "there's an old expression that says better to be 6 feet apart than 6 feet under."

Now honestly, I'd not heard that ancient expression before. It sounds like an expression that hadn't yet reached its first birthday.

But anyway, what I said to the the guy in response was,

If you're going to yell at her for not keeping six feet away from you, at least have the decency to yell at her through a mask. 

... that you don't seem to be wearing right now.

It seems he maybe didn't think masks were necessary. I guess.

I don't know how seriously this guy was taking the Coronavirus scare. But concerned enough to bark at the lady behind him because he thought she wasn't taking it seriously.

But the incongruity of a guy who is bothered enough by a lack of social distancing to yell at someone about it but not bothered enough to wear a mask recommended by the same people who insisted on all those "six-foot-apart" stickers on the floors maybe isn't so concerned as he is annoyed that OTHER people aren't obeying the same rules he has to obey.

Some people are like that.

But the fact of the matter is the spacing and the masks aren't the only things to consider here.

The effects of the disease aren't the only considerations here if you want to take the Coronavirus issue "seriously."

If you want to take this (or ANY) issue "seriously," you need to evaluate all the evidence that is being presented. 

Again, I don't want to be irreverent. If there is a real terrorist threat, we need to send in the military.

But if Godzilla is on the roof of your local city hall, you need to do a SERIOUS evaluation of the facts to see if, in fact, Godzilla is real, after all.

And if he is, you need to call in the military for that, too.

Seriously. If Godzilla is real, then he poses a real threat. But if you're going to call in the military because he MIGHT be real, you sure better do your homework (ESPECIALLY if you're the guy in charge) BEFORE you send cannons blazing.

I think you get the point.

Ya see, those real canons do a lot of collateral damage, whether Godzilla is real or imagined.

The problem is there is mounting data to prove that the original models were way overblown.

We had some pretty serious and highly credentialed people seeing this current round of "Covid Godzilla" as a clear and present danger.

This isn't a game of poker. People's lives are at stake. And the original models predicted a threat potential of MILLIONS of lives being lost to this horrible disease.

But the problem with that scenario is that there is ever-mounting evidence that the original models were seriously flawed. There have been numerous studies by some very "serious" organizations like the USC Berkley that have determined that potentially as much as 20% of the country's population has been infected by this virus already.

By the way: Taiwan didn't play the "lockdown game." And they're not any further in the hole than us.

Take a look at this article, below. Click on the picture to link to the article.

Taiwan didn't do a Covid-19 lockdown and they are doing just fine.

If you understand math, you realize that if you want to find the odds on something, you need the top AND the bottom numbers of the fraction to figure out the ratios - the odds - of anything happening - like the odds of having a serious illness from this virus.

The original models didn't have that "bottom number" because mass testing hadn't been done yet.

But they're doing mass testing now. And the models were wrong - by MAGNITUDES of error.

Taking any issue seriously - including the issue of Covid-19 and what the odds are of getting it means looking at the real data and taking the train where it takes you.

THIS GUY below is a doctor who runs a clinic that now has compiled fairly extensive amounts of data from his own labs and from data he has collected from other ER doctors nationwide.

This is a long video; but if you want to get a good feel for the REAL math, please watch this.

Dr Erickson out of California explaining why the Coronavirus numbers are way off the mark

Dr. Erickson From Urgent Care in California

I know emotions run high. We tend to think with our emotions sometimes. And some of my critics think they have an "inside scoop" on the data. They work in the hospital in some city somewhere and it's tough. I get that.

And If your wife or mother or daughter-in-law has been up all night taking care of dying patients in the ICU, you maybe have more of a pulse on what is happening in your city.


YOUR EMOTIONAL attachment to any part of this picture doesn't qualify you to be the decider of what the STATISTICS ultimately mean.

No one can compete with YOUR personal experience. But YOUR PERSONAL experience does not get to dictate what the overall statistical picture looks like. It doesn't.

Sorry. But with all due respect, it just doesn't. I don't care about emotion here, compared to the hard realities that result on either side - whether the statistics dictate that we all need to be in lockdown FOREVER, or if they show an entirely different picture.

If you want to take this "seriously," you also need to be willing to take serious steps in the direction that the data points. And the data is ever-increasingly pointing to the reality that it is no longer prudent to keep people locked up and paralyze the economy forever based on data that was projected from models that are more and more being shown to be SERIOUSLY FLAWED.

If you want to take this seriously, you ALSO need to take the context and the overall picture seriously.

Context and statistics are "all that" in this discussion.

If some bizarre disease occurred because of some chemical spill in some chemical factory in the middle of the fields in Idaho and three people died from it, that would be tragic. But it would never result in a shutdown to the economy.

If a disease breaks out in the middle of the fields of Idaho (or Wuhan, or wherever) that looks like it killed three people, that's an entirely different deal. And if it looks like, a few days later, there are 20 people who died from it, then hell's bells, lets lock down EVERYTHING until this thing doesn't move anymore.

Shutting down the world to save the millions of lives that were projected to be lost due to preliminary models appeared wise and necessary.

But if - IF - the disease spreads like wildfire but it looks like 99.9 percent of the population turn out to have had it and didn't even know they did, and it went away? Was it worth the lockdown? 

For a day? Maybe? For three months? The point is you have to look at the whole picture, the whole fraction, the WHOLE package and weigh it in the balance.

It's time to take the REST of the situation "seriously."

If you bothered to watch the video that I linked to above from the doctor who talked about the statistics, you'll already be aware of some of the real collateral damage that is occurring due to this extended lockdown of people in their homes, apartments, care facilities and the like - without normal human interaction and the ability to get out and blow off steam.

The number of suicides is up; the number of spousal abuse and child abuse cases is up. These effects have lasting repercussions. 

That doesn't even START to deal with the real and lasting economic impact that this worldwide lockdown is having on the economy. Those shutdowns are affecting jobs and people's abilities to buy groceries and pay their heating and electric bills.

People are losing their homes and savings. Major industries are bleeding money onto the ground and it seems some of the people out there who listen to nothing but the WHO and CNN don't really believe there even is another side to this. They just don't seem to even consider the possibility that the models might have been proven wrong.

And if the models have been overblown, and people are affected by this disease in magnitudes of numbers LESS than originally thought, then taking it seriously also means seriously course-correcting when we've missed it and admitting it's time to take another approach - that getting the world back to normal  is now the MORE serious issue here.

It's also time to drop the hubris that leads you to assume if I don't see it like you do, I'm not taking the Coronavirus seriously.

I get SO TIRED of people who have such an arrogance as to think that anyone who does not agree with where THEY are at on this issue has simply not looked into it.

I find that many people who attack my take on this thing as being overblown are not even aware that there are studies out there that increasingly show it IS overblown and it's time to change direction here.

I take this issue of Coronavirus very seriously. I always did. But I'm also open to the idea that serious consideration of the FACTS is pointing to a change in direction here. We need to START GETTING PEOPLE BACK TO WORK, because the BIGGEST issue from before has become the SECONDARY issue. The economy must now become the PRIMARY issue.

That is, if you want to take this thing "seriously."

Read More

The Questions About Covid-19 No One Is Asking

There are a number of questions no on seems to be asking about Covid-19.

Our news stations and websites are bombarded for weeks now about the coronavirus - the number of confirmed cases; the number who have died.

We hear reports of people on ventilators and see recycled pictures in the news about ICUs overflowing with patients on equipment, supposedly clinging to life, supposedly at death's door from the effects of a new virus that seemed to show up pretty quickly and bring the entire world economy to its knees.

But there are certain things I rarely, if ever, hear discussed. We don't hear about how many have survived, how long it took to recover, and what the expected quality of life is for those who have recovered.

You can use a good search engine to get information overload on the basic questions.

You've probably gotten more different answers than you can imagine about "how long does Coronavirus last on surfaces," and "what is the Coronavirus incubation period?"

I don't hear so many about "what happens when you get the Covid-19 virus?" What I do hear is that "it's terrible." But what does that mean? What is the average length of hospitalization? What proportion of the population that are hospitalized for this thing are high-risk patients?

But this morning, I started to consider all kinds of other questions, both disease and non-disease related. You see,

I got a random phone call this morning that got me thinking.

My dentist called me this morning. He just called to say hello. I've not known him long. But he's a great young guy with a real desire to make a difference for his patients. But he was just calling to check in and say hello.

We have the most interesting conversations sometimes. And he is one of the more thoughtful guys I've met. He doesn't quickly jump to conclusions; he sees the value of saying, "maybe. I don't know. Let's investigate things before we decide."

I had been working on the site this morning, writing about Covid-19 and the political aspects of what looks to me like the left milking this thing for political control.

Everyone as a bias - a "flavour," if you will. Mine leans right.

But I was curious what his thoughts were from a biological standpoint on this thing. I was curious what his take was on it from a health-practitioner standpoint.

We bounced a lot back and forth and mused about what we know and don't know. And what came out of that conversation was a list of questions I've not even seen asked, let alone answered.

Here goes.

We've seen the curve over time. What about a severity curve?

Everyone has seen curves like this one.

The curve that everyone is talking about

The thing that every man and his corona-avoiding dog knows by now is that if we delay the onset of this thing and let it hit gradually rather than all at once, then the expectation is that the hospital systems will not be overwhelmed when this thing hits the peak number of cases requiring hospitalization.

We are also pretty much familiar with the problems that this is posing for the economy.

We never hear discussion about what I call a "triage curve" for treatment of Covid-19.

I never hear discussion about what I call a "triage curve" - a curve for what coronavirus severity across the spectrum of total cases looks like compared to a similar curve for a typical flu cycle.

Consider this, for example. My sketch.

Proportions of population being treated for flu and chances of survival

What I'm trying to show in this sketch is what I picture to be a typical flu season in relative numbers. Group 1 is the large majority of the population that survives a flu bug - perhaps with little to no symptoms; perhaps with a week off work, but resting at home. Group 3 is the bunch that, either due to age, complications (like pneumonia) or pre-existing conditions, will not survive the bug.

Group 2, for me, is the "x" factor I'm looking for and it represents the proportion of the population who get the flu and will recover with treatment but would otherwise die without the treatment.

This, for me, is a huge factor and one I don't see discussed with curves to show  part of the story about how dangerous Covid-19 really is. What are we looking at with this virus? 

If the curve looks the same, then I honestly don't see why we collapsed a world economy over what turns out to be a nothing-burger.

But what if it looks like this?

What if Covid-19 caused a triage bubble in the middle?

The great unknown here is whether the level 1 - 2- 3 curve for Covid-19 looks like the normal flu bug or if it balloons in the middle?

In other words, if this thing affects the population with something that really requires medical intervention to save lives for a greater proportion of the people that get it, then isn't this something that should be in the discussions?

The government response seems to be that this thing is being treated as if it looks like the second graph rather than the first; and it looks like they insist on going after it in spite of the fact that numerous studies are indicating that it is more likely like the first picture. Consider, for instance, the latest studies on this, including this one out of the University of Southern California that shows the infection rates are much higher and therefore the "triage curve" concept I referred to above looks much more like a normal flu bug than they first thought.

USC and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health on Monday released preliminary results from a collaborative scientific study that suggests infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread — and the fatality rate much lower — in L.A. County than previously thought.

But again, that is only part of it. What about the part that I'm not hearing discussed? How long does it take to recover? And what does recovery LOOK LIKE? 

Are the long-term effects different than from the flu?

We hear all the time the number of diagnosed cases, and the number of people who have died from Covid-19. But we don't hear much discussion about the ones who have survived.

What does "being healed" look like? Is there a reduced quality of life after Covid-19 as compared to the flu, which, under normal circumstances, doesn't result in any reduced quality of life at all (unless complicated with pneumonia, for instance)? If that is the case, then the lungs can be scarred from pneumonia; patients are more susceptible to further pneumonia attacks in the future. Breathing capacity can be affected after recovery.

What about Covid-19? Is there scarring? Is the scarring caused by improper treatment, such as putting patients on ventilators when they should just be put on oxygen?

How long does the recovery take and what is the quality of life afterwards? What, if any, is the reduced life expectancy?

I know they're all questions no one knows answers for yet; but perhaps the quarantining and the closing down of the economy deserves some good detailed responses to these types of questions.

What these answers look like will determine how well an informed public is willing to go along with the distancing rules and the like and for how long before they go crazy and revolt.

And then there is all the other stuff...

Are we done with the impeachment?

Not to get too political... at least, not in this post. But is the Trump-Russia collusion "problem" still a thing? Did Joe Biden get a total pass on accusations that he fondled one of his office aides years ago? Does the media still care? Can we ever get past the endless Trump-bashing that goes on in the mainstream media these days and get unified around supporting each other and getting the economy going again?

Are children still starving in Africa and Central America?

What is happening in Venezuala these days? Is socialism still a failed experiment? Has it failed as badly yet as the price of oil? And do they have Covid-19 down there too? How well are they doing? 

And 3rd world countries? If you've sponsored a child with Compassion or World Vision, are you sacrificing a little these days to keep those donations going? If it's rough on you, imagine how rough this shutdown is on those who are the least among us?

Can you make a sacrifice right now to help those in need by donation to Compassion or some other organization in these challenging times?

As the economy struggles with Covid-19, we need to remember the least among us

Is zika still a thing?

Are we so paralyzed with fear for our safety that we forget how fortunate we are that THIS is not our normal, day-to-day world we have to deal with?

Have you taken time in this era of getting all worked up about the stupidity of the politicians on the other side of the isle from where your rep sits that you forget to be thankful for how relatively normal your life still is, and that your normal seems so much better than so many millions in this world?

As Covid-19 causes a surge in the media, zika still carries on

Are there still rockets being fired into Israel? 

Or did that stop? Are there still radical Muslims burning Christian churches in Africa with all the worshippers still inside? Are there no more machete attacks?

Is the Chinese government still persecuting Christians and Uyghur Muslims in China? And if you're a Christian, do you get as bothered by Muslims being persecuted as you do about Christians being persecuted? 

Do you pray for the persecuted? And just as important, do you pray for the persecutors? 

Do you remember that before Paul was Paul, he was Saul?

Does anybody care?

Enter your text here...

Read More

How Communist China Has Infiltrated The World Health Organization

If you've been a fan of the site for any length of time, you're probably up on a lot of the stuff going on these days with the whole Covid-19 mess. But the reasons why the world has gotten into this whole global financial meltdown over something that really shouldn't have gone this way are hard to see when the #MSM refuses to talk about it.

One alarming issue is how Communist China has infiltrated the World Health Organization.

I've been aware of this for a while now. I originally smelled a rat when I was made aware of it by way of an article by John Leonard of Southern Prose. He's a pretty sharp guy and he does some writing for some pretty prominent sites like American Thinker. His (very well written) article is here, if you want some good opinion on the whole situation.

Glenn Beck has a monologue that will show you how the World Health Organization has a communist problem and why they need to clean house.

The only problem is that I can't show it to you directly. You see, it keeps getting pulled from YouTube and stuff. Funny how that happens, huh?

Anyway, if you're logged into the big blue Comrade Zuckerberg FaceThing, then if you click on this link below, you probably should be able to watch it. Try this link or click on the image to watch.

Glenn Beck on the ties between WHO and communist China

I know, I know. Glenn Beck is a conspiracy nut, right?

First of all, there are conspiracies out there. All the time. Second, even a broken clock is right twice a day, right? Third, this guy does his homework. And if you don't like what he says, it doesn't give you license to ignore it simply because it pisses you off.

He tells you in the video it's all documented. But you might not be able to get to HIS documentation. Let's see if I can supply some here for you.

Let's look at some links here that support EXACTLY what he is saying.

After Trump cut funding of the WHO, the WHO accused Trump of politicizing the Corona virus. Yup, yup and yup. Check those links if you wish.

Tedros is the head of WHO but doesn't have a medical degree. True dat. Check it out. He's a politician. He was Ethiopia's minister of foreign affairs - the "Mike Pompeo" of Ethiopia.

"He was chairman of the African Union. " I don't know. But they sure love the guy.....

"The African Union has ties to communist China." True dat, too. China even seems to brag about it.

"Ethiopia sponsored the 'belt and road' summit. The "belt and road" summit is China's effort to dominate world trade. Yup. True dat, too. Is that problematic for these poor countries that get all this help from China and have no money to pay it back? You betcha.

"The Chinese presence in Ethiopia is staggering."  Yup. That too. Not only is their presence staggering, China is REALLY PROUD OF IT. They even say so themselves.

China is pouring billions into Ethiopian railroads, and Ethiopia is over it's head in debt to the chinese.

Like Glenn said, it's all documented. You can find all this stuff even on the left-leaning and selectively screened Google search engine.

Glenn says...

 ...their goal is to "Reshape the international system to accommodate its political and economic interests. In service of this strategy, China has consistently sought to trade financial incentives for votes, offering bribes and cancelling debts for countries that support them."

Is that true? Really? REALLY!?!?? Well, yes. Washington post reports that China wrote off Cameroon's debt just before they withdrew their candidate to head the UN's "food and agriculture" organization. Vote buying? Influence peddling? Say it ain't so!!!

Do you smell dead rats yet?

China has threatened other countries too. And who sits at the head of the food and agriculture organization at the UN? QU Dongyu from China, of course.

So let's sum this up. A communist from a country beholding to China is heading up the WHO and saying the Covid-19 problem isn't such a bad thing, really. Where's the problem with that?

Seeing all of this, and knowing that China has an interest in world domination, is it so far fetched to think China might try to buy into a depressed market to gain control and power?

Well, CNN even thinks so.

Communists lie like cheap chinese rugs. They've done it before. Melamine in baby food, but of course they denied it. Prosecuting, torturing Christians and Uighur Muslims by the BOATLOAD and always denying it.

The pieces all fit together. Everything supports the theory that the leader of the WHO is beholden to China.

It's in the playbook, over and over. So why should we believe the stats from WHO about why we should continue to isolate for another few months when it seems obvious it will destroy our economy but it seems ever more doubtful that we should believe Fauci or the WHO about how dangerous this thing really is?

Write to your senators, your congressmen, your MPs and MPPs and tell them this is long overdue to stop.

They will not be able to push this forever in free societies unless the population lets them by simply doing nothing but waiting for "somebody" to do something.

Be the somebody. Do something. And not just by passing clips around Facebot. Start writing letters and raising your voice. Please. There are LIVES at stake.

Read More

Are The Coronavirus Fears Justified By The Numbers?

Is the Coronavirus the apocalypse or a big nothing burger?

 Are the Coronavirus fears that are being propagated in the mainstream media justified by the numbers coming back from the test results? Depending on how you read the results, (or, more likely, depending on who you listen that is interpreting them, since most people never really look at the actual data) the world has either entered into the twilight zone or... the twilight zone.

It's just two different kinds of twilight zone, driven by two different agendas.

What do the test numbers really tell us?

Well, for one thing, depending on how you read the numbers, you may well have already had the virus. There was a recent study done in Santa Clara County, California, where they did testing of a portion of the population - 3000 people - a small portion, but on people other than just those presenting with symptoms and they found that

... the results suggested that between 2.5% and 4.2% of people in the county have contracted COVID-19, which is 50 to 85 times greater than the number of cases being reported at the time.

That is a stunning discrepancy between anticipated and actual cases. Now, keep in mind that the left-side-twilight zone people will find all kinds of problems with jumping to any conclusion that this ripples through to be a valid statistic of the population at large. They are quick to say the test that the researchers used was not reliable and that the sample size is so small as to be meaningless.

Or else, alternatively, by God, those numbers must mean this thing is a LOT more to be feared than we thought!!!!!!

But whose agendas are driving this thing, anyway?

The panic or the negative reaction to it as overblown tripe seems to run through the minds of the masses pretty much in lockstep to their political predispositions. At least, that seems to be the way it is running in North America.

It seems those on the political left see the Covid-19 pandemic as having brought us into a twilight zone of a super-bug that is capable of wiping out our entire generation if we don't hose down everything (and everyone around us) with hand sanitizer and sleep in isolation rooms with N95 masks.

Those on the political right see something equally worthy of the twilight zone label; but it is something more sinister than a virus. What the right sees is a good crisis being milked by power-hungry politicians hell-bent on maintaining power and removing Trump from office.

Does the truth of where this thing washes out lie somewhere in the middle? Or is it being measured on a somewhat more simple line of left vs right than it deserves? Are we being nearly nuanced enough in how we look at this?

The numbers tell us that you can't look at ANY ONE particular city or state and try to anticipate what it means for the country.

New York City is a highly mobile, international city with lots of traffic and a varied population that comes and goes to and fro for every kind of reason. Right now (as of 2020-04-19) the official numbers of cases run around 10,000. For a city of 8.8 million people, the rough math says about 1 in every 880 people in NYC has or did have the virus.

Washington, D.C. has a similar type of population: an international city with lots of traffic and a varied population that comes and goes to and fro for every kind of reason. According to the Washington Post, there are currently 3100 cases  (as of 2020-04-21). The population of DC is about 702,000. That makes a rough calculation of about 1 in every 225 people in DC has or did have the virus.

Unfortunately, I can't trust that the numbers aren't jacked up anyway.

Again, looking at the data from the study done in Santa Clara County, California, we see some real discrepancy between what they expected and what the testing results show for the number of cases.

A total of 50 tests came back positive. After adjusting for differences in zip code, race and sex between the sample population and Santa Clara as a whole, the researchers estimated that between 48,000 and 81,000 people in the 2-million-strong county had contracted coronavirus at some point. At the time, the health department was reporting about 1,000 positive cases.

They were estimating Santa Clara county to have had about 1,000 positive cases, with a population of 2,000,000 giving the expected rate of 1 out of every 2000 people for Santa Clara County. But based on the actual results from the test, it looks like an actual rate of 1 in every 25 to 40 people.

So, until they have test results based on testing more than the people who are already symptomatic, we have no idea what we're really up against.

And you see this idea being talked about by both sides for different purposes.

People on the right, such as Rush Limbaugh, seem to believe that this thing blows through the population for the most part without even being an issue for any concern. On his radio show, he said,

The common cold is normally a mild illness that resolves without treatment in a few days. And because of its mild nature, most cases are self-diagnosed. However, infection with rhinovirus or one of the other viruses responsible for common cold symptoms can be serious in some people. Complications from a cold can cause serious illnesses and, yes, even death – particularly in people who have a weak immune system.

He then went on to say that statistically - statistically - this coronavirus is potentially even less dangerous than a common flu bug for the number of deaths and hospitalizations compared to the normal flu bug every year.

Although Rush is excoriated and lambasted relentlessly by his critics, his thought is, basically, this thing is overblown; not enough to bring the economy to a screeching halt.

And people on the left? Well, they're people on the left. For them, it all depends who is saying it.

And they think Rush is an idiot. So if Rush says it, it's asinine.

But if other people say it - especially someone from the democratic side of the isle - then it's "thoughtful" and "weighed carefully against the science."

Check out this little speech by Dr. Birx on the idea of opening the beaches in Florida and why it's maybe not a reason for global panic:

See? Thoughtful. Nuanced.

And yet, when Limbaugh makes statements like it's not the end of the world if states make determinations to open their economies, he's stupid.

And if the president does it? Well, he's just an idiot, apparently.

Apparently, if the president says it, it must be stupid just because HE is saying it.

You want to hear stupid? I was listening to a conservative talk show last weekend (don't remember which) but a caller basically said as much. He asked why hydroxichloriquine was even on the table for discussion for a possible treatment for Covid-19. The host asked if patients want to try it and their doctors think it's a good idea, then why should they not be allowed to try it? Why can't we trust the medical professionals to make medical decisions?

The response from this guy? Well, he said there was no way in hell he was going to try hydroxicholoriquine if he got sick because it has to be stupid because Trump is recommending it and Trump is an idiot.

It's what he honestly said. I lie not.

There IS an increasing number of reports that seem to recognize this thing may be less deadly than the first numbers suggested.

A Los Angeles news station reports it may be more widespread than first thought.

An estimated 320,000 adults in Los Angeles County may have been infected with coronavirus, according to preliminary results of a study that suggests the illness is far more widespread than current testing shows and the death rate is much lower.

But depending on who is reporting, it is either seen as a cause not to see this thing as a deadly sweep, or a cause for fear that the sky is falling. It always amazes me how different people can even look at the same numbers and come to such drastically different conclusions.

But are some manipulating the figures for nefarious gain?

The short answer that I hold to is that I was suspending judgement at first on this thing as to how cautious we needed to be with it and how dangerous it was. But however it might have needed to be given benefit of the doubt in the beginning, it is becoming clear that the powers that be have been trying to co-opt this thing as a tool to take out Trump.

Nancy Pelosi makes Trump out to be a racist for blocking flights in January from China and then, in March, says he's not done enough to help the country but seems to block pretty much every move he tries to make to keep the country going as a political stunt to make him look bad.

But it gets worse.

What is troubling is the number of reports that medical officials are told to report deaths unrelated to te virus as caused by the virus anyway. Consider this report from NPR radio:

But new guidelines from the National Center for Health Statistics, which Minnesota follows, will err on the side of pinning more deaths on COVID-19, at least provisionally.
An alert issued Thursday instructs those who fill out death certificates to categorize pneumonia deaths that can’t be traced to another underlying condition as presumptively COVID-19.

What could POSSIBLY be the reason for that? Yeah. I don't know, either. But think of how much fuel that adds to the fires of conspiracy. It sure feels like an inappropriate use of the numbers.

One analyst looked at some of the stuff in this CDC guideline given to doctors and medical staff on how and when to report as a Covid-19 death vs a non-Covid-19 death. According to the CDC guideline, the result is....

“The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID- 19 being the underlying cause more often than not,” the guidelines read.
“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death,” CDC guidelines issued March 24 read. “Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc.,” the guidance continued.
“If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II.”

I don't know about you. But I find that troubling. They are coming right out and saying that they are expecting the coding to show the cause of death as coronavirus more often than not. Also, it says they SHOULD report it as Covid-19 where the disease "caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death." But if they had underlying conditions, they CAN BE reported in part 2."

So..... how often does the "can be" part get done as compared to the "should be" done part? And how does this shake out in real life?

Remember the telephone game you played in kindergarten?

The reality is that it seems this "over-attributing to Covid-19" happening in ridiculous situations.

There are numerous reports of false attributions to Covid-19 when it seems pretty obvious that it is overreach. In fact, many in the medical community say the same thing. Fox News interviewed Dr. Scott Jensen from Minnesota who feels the reporting is ridiculous and could be very misleading.

Why Coronavirus death reports are inflated

The problem for many is that Dr Jensen is a Republican State Senator. So for the left, he is part of the "Fox News Conspiracy."

But you have to think about what his complaint is. He says that in his 35 years of medicine, it's hard to imagine that for the amount of money a hospital admission gets for a patient ($13,000) and the amount of money they get for putting a patient on a ventilator ($39,000) it's not affecting the healthcare decisions that are being made.

And when you hear a number of doctors saying these patients sometimes shouldn't be put on ventilators but should just be put on oxygen, that is a concern. According to some doctors, some of these patients might well get lung damage from the respirator.

Now, maybe this is where some of the "nuance" maybe needs doing. In a March 25th article in Buzzfeed, there was a report of patients being underreported as having Covid-19 due to lack of testingPerhaps - perhaps - this is why the CDC changed their guidelines. 

It is wise to give benefit of the doubt. I try. I really do. I'm just trying to be a cognitive man. And I don't always have enough hours in a day to compare timelines of stories to see what might have let to what.

But by any measure, by the time the kindergarteners in the media finish the game, it's usually a chicken little disaster.

The CLASSIC case of "reporting" frenzy is a story that came out of a Louisiana newspaper where there was "a one-day old baby who died of Covid-19."

Now, we all (should) know that a one-day old baby can't contract a disease that takes two weeks to manifest after exposure. And the reality of the story was that the pregnant mother went into premature labour (at about 20 weeks or so?) and the baby died a day after it's premature death. Apparently,

The coroner said the child has not tested positive for Covid-19 but doctors and the state's epidemiologist agreed that the death can be ruled a coronavirus-related death.

How does that help anything but the hysteria and the conspiracy theories?

And just because you have a conspiracy theory, it doesn't mean it's not true. Sometimes, they're harder than hell to prove to people who choose not to see it - you know - "court of law" level proof. But there are a lot of people who get away with murder.

Part of what goads these people on the left is the popularity of a President that has them in his crosshairs.

He is stopping them from simply doing what they want, which is to play class warfare to maintain their seats of power by sowing hatred and discontent.

And right now, quite frankly, it feels like they're trying to milk this one for all it's worth to try to maintain power and control.

While congress should have been dealing with funding for medical preparation measures back in February, they were too busy impeaching the president. And now, they oppose him at every turn, all the while saying he isn't doing enough.

They are mad with rage. Back in January, Nancy Pelosi was criticizing Trump for shutting down the flights from China. It was racist, she said. Then, in March, she criticized him for not doing enough.

For the left, consistency seems to be the hobgoblin of small minds unless the consistency is a hatred for Trump.

The fear on the right seems to be that the democratic side is holding on to keeping things locked down until there is a vaccine.

And now, even now, there is already a hysteria being ginned up about a possible second coronavirus wave next winter even worse than the first. THAT seems to be good justification for keeping the alarm bells ringing until there is a vaccine.

Never waste a good crisis.

This seems unnecessary.

The numbers seem to be going down. There are numerous treatments being done by many doctors using existing medications and with stellar results. The economy is reeling from the unwillingness to acknowledge that countries that are simply refusing to go overboard with these draconian measures of quarantining are seeing virus infection numbers no worse or maybe even better than all these countries sheltering in place.

So what do you do?

You can pray. Real prayer changes things. I truly believe these people are evil and with nefarious intent. This has to be treated as spiritual warfare.

And you can write. Write to your congressmen, your senators. Write letters to the editors of your papers. Call your local talk shows. And be prepared for pushback. The left can be a very, very disingenuous bunch. They are some of the most intolerant and hateful people who spew all they spew in the name of tolerance and love. 

The left seems to be the epitome of what Paul was talking about when he spoke about the reprobate sinners in Romans, chapter 1.

The worst part is they truly think they are the tolerant ones and you are the hateful bigots. But unfortunately, If there is any hope, it is that iron still sharpens iron. But don't expect any sharpening happens without some sparks flying.

And in all your doing, if you see from your position on the right that those on the left look like the reprobate in Romans, chapter 1, be careful not to see yourself as righteous simply because you believe the correct things.

In all your being right, you must always strive to act loving and to be gracious. You aren't dealing just with the people. You're dealing with collective mindsets (and, if you can hear it, with principalities and powers in heavenly places). You need to be better in your hearts and attitudes as you become the iron that sharpens other iron.

You need to be the better person because you don't want to be the person that Paul talks about in Romans, chapter 2.

Enter your text here...

Read More

Check Your Mental Health – An Open Letter To Jeffrey Guterman

Jeffrey, Jeffrey. It is pretty stupid for you to tell people not to follow you. It's stupid, in fact, on so many levels.

You know, Jeffrey, I get it. I get that you hate Trump. And I get why. At least, I get it enough to understand that, depending on your predisposition and your world view, you may see president Trump as a very dangerous man for the country.

A lot of people think Trump is a narcissistic wing-nut. I get that.

Does the president brag a lot? Of course. He's probably in a class of his own in this regard - most everyone sees the reality that a guy in a role as a world leader should act far more "presidential" than he does. He is magnitudes removed from proper decorum and tone of speech from what a world leader is assumed to be.

I don't understand you, though. Why on earth would you hold yourself out to be any better than him? Your latest Twitter post proves the opposite.

You're a mental health coach. You should know better. In a response to @realDonaldTrump and his tweet to "LIBERATE MICHIGAN," you out-stupided yourself where you said, 

"I welcome follows unless you support Trump. If you support him, please block me. Thank you."

The edited screen shot of that post sort of  looks like this:

You know, it's too bad I can't just post a link here to the actual Twitter post. I would, except your mental health seemed to be compromised when the picture you posted with your little pissy-fit of apparent portions of some male genitalia made it unfit to print here.

I'm not exactly sure the reason for the visual vulgarity. It seems to be beneath any decent human being, let alone someone with a doctorate in telling people how to have good mental health.

This, actually, is one of the reasons many people seem to think a Ph. D. doesn't always mean much.

Your ranty little post seems designed to tweak your fans (who probably also hate Trump).

It's ironic how you probably don't see how ironic your quite "Trump-like" post, designed to be provocative, shows you're just like what it is you think you hate about him.

You despise him for how he attacks his enemies and seems to embrace controversy and attempts to go after his critics.

But your rant betrays a lack of integrity.

Isn't mental health about not carrying grudges, about learning to hear the other side of an argument so that the best idea can win? Is your idea of mental health despising people you disagree with?

I'm not sure I would trust anyone as a mental health coach if they spew hatred for anyone. I understand the despising of ideas; for instance, I despise the concepts in modern left-wing liberalism. But I would never tell anyone who holds to those ideas that I don't want them to listen to me.

If you truly cared for people who think differently than you, why not welcome them to follow you, so you have a better chance to influence their thinking for the better.

Your post also seems to be counter-productive, if your goal truly is peoples' mental health.

It seems if you're truly interested in engaging people with the idea of helping them to think better, clearer and more consistently and logically, then you should want people who disagree with you to follow you, reading your posts, visiting your site, in hopes that something you say will actually get through to them.

How else do you actually get through to someone who, apparently (in your mind) is thinking wrongly enough to actually like Trump? Don't you do it by presenting them with ideas they've maybe not chewed on before?

Think, Jeffrey, think. You've got a doctorate, for crying out loud. You should be able to sift through ideas and separate the wheat from the chaff, no?

You don't seem to be much about mental health. But you do seem to spew the same attitude on the left: silence the opposition.

There is such a contrast in approach to differences between the left and the right.

People on the right feel that everyone should be free to say what they want; but that, in the end, the best ideas will survive and thrive simply by intellectual competition in the marketplace.

People on the left feel the only way to win is to effectively remove the right's right to have a voice. For instance, Red State writes of the attack on Rush Limbaugh:

Last week, Rush Limbaugh suggested Sandra Fluke was a slut. The left immediately began calling for boycotts of his advertisers. He apologized on Saturday. Fluke refused to accept his apology claiming he did it under duress and the pressure has kept up.It is organized and it has nothing to do with Limbaugh referring to Sandra Fluke as the same thing Ed Schultz referred to Laura Ingraham as. It has to do with a well executed PR strategy to frame a debate on mandating [that] Americans subsidize the sexual habits of women as a war on women by the GOP. The media, which leans left already on social issues, would much rather focus on Rush Limbaugh than on the left’s PR strategy and Sandra Fluke’s own testimony. What is happening here is an organized campaign by the left to shut down opposing views from the right. Many on the left and right, myself included, have said things we should not have said. The difference is that the left seizes on the statements made by the right as excuses to demand they never be heard from again and are unqualified to speak on any topic.

It's obvious you don't really care at all for the people who disagree with you; otherwise, you'd welcome them to follow you in case they might actually learn something from your perspective.

You just want to spew hate toward your dissenters in the name of intellectual superiority.

But don't worry. I followed you on twitter. I thought it's what you really wanted anyway. I'm just waiting to see how long it will be until you block me.

Read More

Sweden And The Corona Crisis

Has Sweden Lost It's Collective Mind?

Or has Sweden maybe just never developed an unrealistic, collective fear about this virus and how to handle it?

John Fund and ​Joel Hay at National Review wrote an interesting article about Sweden's approach to how to handle this virus.

Essentially, they've decided not to go crazy with the quarantines. Check out the article above to see. But they've not closed the bars and restaurants; they're only halting events with over 50 people. 

"Lots of people are rushing to discredit Sweden’s approach, which relies more on calibrated precautions and isolating only the most vulnerable than on imposing a full lockdown. While gatherings of more than 50 people are prohibited and high schools and colleges are closed, Sweden has kept its borders open as well as its preschools, grade schools, bars, restaurants, parks, and shops."

These guys ask a bunch of fair questions:

"In the rush to lock down nations and, as a result, crater their economies, no one has addressed this simple yet critical question: How do we know social-isolation controls actually work? And even if they do work for some infectious epidemics, do they work for COVID-19? And even if they work for this novel coronavirus, do they have to be implemented by a certain point in the epidemic? Or are they locking down the barn door after the horses are long gone?"

Give the article a serious look.

Read More

Dr. Shiva, MIT Biologist, On Covid-19

Dr. Shiva is a scientist in the field of biological sciences at MIT and is also a hopeful for a seat in the 2020 Massachusetts senate race on the republican side.

Give a listen to what this guy has to say about the Corona virus and about the “powers that be,” how they’re handling this, and what things look like when you follow the power and the money.

He gives an excellent rundown on the closest thing to a good “conspiracy theory” without theorizing. He just gives the facts. Plain and simple facts.

Read More