Revisiting Jarry

Just a couple more thoughts popped into my head about Jarry's piece.

It's worse than I thought upon light reflection.

For starters, Jarry uses the same techniques as much of modern epidemiology which really is just the art of not looking for what you don't want to find. Hence, they ignore causal links. This is best revealed in the 'Doctors baffled by rise in heart attacks and 'Are perplexed by rises in excess mortality'. Rather than consider the vaccines as a culprit, they move forward and attempt to normalize these sudden medical problems. What you get is 'it's normal for kids to have strokes'.

Epidemiology in this state should not be influencing public health policy and is just about on par with astrology at this point. It uses statistics to find correlations and increasingly unreliable 'garbage in, garbage our' models as we saw with David Firman's last 'study'. Epidemiologists use computers and rarely see patients. 

Like, well, Fisman, Furness, Jarry and others we often see on TV.

In the previous post, I mentioned one of Jarry's favourite logical fallacy is ad hominem. I neglected to add the appeal to authority. He's credentialed. A credentialed glorified blogger with a McGill bumper sticker.

The other part we need to take seriously is the problem of conflict of interest that is wreaking havoc on the sciences including the cottage industry that has become a monstrosity clime change.

McGill is well-funded by the BMFG. It recently partnered with Moderna which the Canadian and Quebec governments permitted to build a facility in Laval. Moderna is tied to NIH which itself is tied to the Department of Defense. Over 70% of the media's budget comes from Big Pharma.

Are you connecting the damn dots? 

Pfizer and its lobby - which is vastly larger and more powerful than the gun lobby liberals like Jarry keep harping about -  has its tentacles in all schools.

Where do you think Jarry is going to sway in this pond?

Cui bono?

It's not that difficult to see nor is it unreasonable to assert.

McGill is a captured entity of pharma. They all but solidified this with their antics and opinions during Covid-19.

In his latest instalment of misinformation, he gave the impression to his readers 'a Substack journalist' is a euphemism for 'blogger'. This makes no sense because journalists - good investigative ones - use such platforms to get information out. By this infantile quip, does he think excellent journalists like Taibbi, Greenwald, Matter etc. are 'bloggers'?

His fact-checking skills also leave much to be desired. Recall that Fact-checkers are just arms of the state and corporate media funded by the same groups that fund Covid propaganda. They all swim in the same pool. France Soir did an in-depth report on this fact many of us deduced on our own by merely understanding the tricks, twists and ploys of how they construct their 'fact checks'.

One thing that popped in my head was, why didn't he reach out to Dr. Cole?

I mean he's all over the place explaining his findings. Cole is an experienced and respect pathologist and a doctor. He actually sees patients unlike Jarry - who remember, is a 'science communicator. To borrow from him, basically a 'blogger'.

Here's but one tiny example of what's out there:

The other thing the hit piece did was bring me back to when Michael Moore was all the rage when he was churning out those films. I bet Jarry was a huge fan despite the gaps of misinformation and sly editing. When people would point them out, the response was, 'it's art and to look at the big picture of the point he's making'. It's the same thing, it can be argued, here with 'Died Suddenly'.

To say the shine off McGill's sterling reputation has come off is an under statement. 

At least institutions like Stanford, Harvard, and Johns Hopkins, despite their 'official' stances on Covid, produced several dissenters like Ioannidis, Bhattachayra, Atlas, Makary, Kulldorf, Risch etc. That tells me the institutions aren't fully captured and maintain world-class independent science thinkers. Would love to see Jarrry disparage these scientists/doctors. Ga'head Jonathan. Make our day. 

McGill on the other hand, I've yet to see one offer a critical assessment of anything. It's "Damn the Torpedoes yo!" with this school. Constantly circulating the same, stale message that has been proven wrong. They just haven't gotten the memo. Which begs the question: Why? Is it the Gates money? Did they just lose their senses? 

Why is that, McGill?

Forgive if this was a little too free-form but I have things to get to and just blasted this off in one take.

Here's another interview with prominent cardiologist Dr. Malhotra.

Again. People aren't 'anti-vcxx' as Jarry insufferably keeps misleading. They're questioning these mRNA shots.

A huge distinction needs to be made but experts conveniently refuse to do so.

Did Jarry and his pals ever educate people of the difference between relative and absolute risk? Of course not. That's because the absolute risk would demolish their claims. What? You expect journalists from The Gazette to ask or even demand an explanation? Bif. Get real.

Not a very good communicator this Jonathan, eh?

Just like good comrade 'communicators' like Jarry doesn't tell you they changed the definition of a vaccine in late 2020 because they knew then it wasn't going to stop transmission or prevent infection. It went from the traditional 'produce immunity' to 'stimulate immune response'.

See the dirty trick they did there?

Again. WHY?

In fact, I'd guess that the 'anti-mandate, question mRNA' movement is probably dominated by vaccinated people. It's a lot more complex than the simplistic narrative people like Jarry peddle. 

If McGill keeps denying the reality that chasing a highly mutating virus with endless treatments with what is basically a failed drug pimped by Big Pharma and their junk trials, their reputation will not only suffer but may even collapse.

Jarry keeps denying the undeniable.

This is one of the all time, I stand by, great travesty of medical malpractice in human history. If they don't course correct soon, Western medicine may never recover. 

End the mRNA program.

It's doing more harm than good. 

*************

Watch those videos. Where do you hear this kind of honest discussion anywhere in Canada? I see it in Europe and the USA but not in Canada.

Why?