I loved The Seneca Effect! I've been a fan of your old blog for quite a while. Most people have yet to learn how science works and mistake science PR and reporting for the processes and work organizations engage in while doing the slogging, iterative work practicing science requires. Will JFK Jr. help? Don't get your hopes up. People must educate themselves about science and what's needed to do good science and stop listening to media personalities with an axe to grind. Science is a big basket with lots of people working in it across the world; if it crashed, no one would benefit—it would be a disaster. It's hard to reboot complex institutions and domains from scratch. It takes generations. Do we want to throw out the baby, the water, and the bath because science journalism is full of it and "science" isn't perfect? Most scientists will continue doing their work without recognition until we are extinct. Nothing will put that genie back in the bottle except the total collapse of civilization. I hope we are confronting the usual foibles of science for generations to come. Sometimes, I engage in optimistic thoughts just to be cheeky.
Well, the pandemic was not the first and will not be the last. The multiresistant germs generated by our most rational agriculture and animal husbandry are already in the starting holes.
And still, if the medicines they get don't do them any good, what does that make of whoever keep prescribing them ? No wonder they want to try something else.
This is not like American people had the choice between an honest physician and a charlatan. Far from it...
Rebuilding trust, once lost, is far more difficult than earning it the first time around. It will be a very steep uphill climb for the institutions in our society that we once relied on to get that back.
Also, it would be nice to think that the reason for fading trust in media is due to the public's increasing ability to see the lies they are exposed to. But I think it might be closer to the truth to ascribe that loss of trust to a simple failure of media to reflect the worldview of its consumers. That is why we see the trust figure significantly higher among Democrats than among Republicans--the media leans heavily toward the former.
The difference is Trump offers the potential for widespread reform whereas Harris was offering business as usual meaning continued spending on forever wars and censorship of wrong think by fact checkers. America has certainly gone for the interesting option.
How does RFK Jr manage to get even the slight credibility you afford him? Dive deeper a bit, my friend. You will find no pearls, only bottom muck and a hungry mud shark.
The site is kept by Charles Henegan and Tom Jefferson. They are top level epidemiologists whom I knew and respected even before the Covid story. You see that they have an open attitude to Kennedy's views -- for me, although I am not an epidemiologist, I can recognize a smear campaign when I see it.
https://apple.news/A73T-oua4Sg2X7GPpETBdmQ Here is a quote from The Atlantic article, written by a physician specializing in pathology and laboratory medicine: "The sanewashers seem to understand that, if medical experts want any say in public health over the next few years, they will have to engage with the incoming Trump administration’s many eccentrics. But RFK Jr. is indeed a grade-A crank. Why should he have input on anything? This nation has no shortage of public-health and medical experts with thoughts on raw milk or fluoridated water. Some experts will surely agree with aspects of Kennedy’s platform, but they will also bring the credibility, experience, rigor, and honesty he lacks. Let’s not pretend that Kennedy’s views have any value whatsoever."
Did you take the latest booster you twat? If you follow cdc advice you should be on your 15th or so by now. Good riddance! No one that played Russian roulette for a long time ever won.
As Jefferson pointed out a couple of hundred years ago, democracy is built on lies (but it's still preferable to dictatorship). I'd say "trust in the media" is inversely proportional to how much attention people are paying. While everybody was busy enjoying the post-war economic boom, nobody much cared that they were being fed industrial quantities of BS. Now that boom has levelled off, they do care.
That is about the size of it! Its big though, about the same size as America. America not the whole world or anything like it, but the issues will travel, one way or another.
Loved this post. I agree the task of reforming sprawling, self serving institutions is difficult and hazardous. The only fruitful path I can see is to split the organisations into two or three pieces, then have them compete against each other for a fixed period of time to be the surviving half. This strategy isn't that different to how Bilbo Baggins tricked the giants trolls to turn on each other.
How is possible to make a competition between police? How is possible to make competition between schools? In the USA healthcare is competitive but is so better than EU state one?
Competition sound good if you can have metrics that are quantifiable and that can't be "faked", after that you need to know the balance you are looking to: in healthcare how much is "too much", justice system prefer to accept some guilty free or some innocents in and so on.
Today we know that "fair" competition is a utopian dream, we have power players that bend the rules and that is unavoidable, players tend to become fewer and bigger in any field using economy of scale then become a cartel (usually loosely associated and informal).
I feel that there are no simple "magical" solutions to problems that derive from complexity of systems, usually are wishful thinking if are good, total scam and snake oil if bad....
All fair points. Predefining metrics for performance opens the door to Goodhart's law- bureaucracies are already skilled at playing that game. The main advantage of this approach is that the energy of the bureaucracy is redirected toward saving their own skin rather than attacking/undermining their new unfriendly department head. Bureaucracies are also highly skilled at that game.
I loved The Seneca Effect! I've been a fan of your old blog for quite a while. Most people have yet to learn how science works and mistake science PR and reporting for the processes and work organizations engage in while doing the slogging, iterative work practicing science requires. Will JFK Jr. help? Don't get your hopes up. People must educate themselves about science and what's needed to do good science and stop listening to media personalities with an axe to grind. Science is a big basket with lots of people working in it across the world; if it crashed, no one would benefit—it would be a disaster. It's hard to reboot complex institutions and domains from scratch. It takes generations. Do we want to throw out the baby, the water, and the bath because science journalism is full of it and "science" isn't perfect? Most scientists will continue doing their work without recognition until we are extinct. Nothing will put that genie back in the bottle except the total collapse of civilization. I hope we are confronting the usual foibles of science for generations to come. Sometimes, I engage in optimistic thoughts just to be cheeky.
As a physician I learned that dying patients as a rule turn to charlatans. Probably the inhabitants of a dying empire and a dying world do the same. More here: https://lukasfierz.blogspot.com/2024/11/denial-anger-and-trump.html
Interesting take. Was it a typo, or did you really mean to call her Great Thunberg? Seems apropos, actually. 🙂
Typo, thanks.
As a physician you are a higher charlatan than all the so called charlatans. For promoting the fake plandemic and injections.
Well, the pandemic was not the first and will not be the last. The multiresistant germs generated by our most rational agriculture and animal husbandry are already in the starting holes.
I deleted Joe Doe's comments and banned him. Sorry about that, but there are limits.
Go fuck yourself and all the future plan-demics. Once you are done, go fuck yourself even harder. Now, fuck off.
And still, if the medicines they get don't do them any good, what does that make of whoever keep prescribing them ? No wonder they want to try something else.
This is not like American people had the choice between an honest physician and a charlatan. Far from it...
Rebuilding trust, once lost, is far more difficult than earning it the first time around. It will be a very steep uphill climb for the institutions in our society that we once relied on to get that back.
Also, it would be nice to think that the reason for fading trust in media is due to the public's increasing ability to see the lies they are exposed to. But I think it might be closer to the truth to ascribe that loss of trust to a simple failure of media to reflect the worldview of its consumers. That is why we see the trust figure significantly higher among Democrats than among Republicans--the media leans heavily toward the former.
The difference is Trump offers the potential for widespread reform whereas Harris was offering business as usual meaning continued spending on forever wars and censorship of wrong think by fact checkers. America has certainly gone for the interesting option.
Yes. People are fed up. They definitely choose to kick the (ant)hill. For better or worse.
How does RFK Jr manage to get even the slight credibility you afford him? Dive deeper a bit, my friend. You will find no pearls, only bottom muck and a hungry mud shark.
Albert, hello! I practice a rule that I call LETN (listen to everyone, trust no one). About RFK, I have some sources that I mistrust less than others. You may take a look at https://trusttheevidence.substack.com/p/the-bbc-and-rfk-jr and https://trusttheevidence.substack.com/p/flouride-in-the-water
The site is kept by Charles Henegan and Tom Jefferson. They are top level epidemiologists whom I knew and respected even before the Covid story. You see that they have an open attitude to Kennedy's views -- for me, although I am not an epidemiologist, I can recognize a smear campaign when I see it.
https://apple.news/A73T-oua4Sg2X7GPpETBdmQ Here is a quote from The Atlantic article, written by a physician specializing in pathology and laboratory medicine: "The sanewashers seem to understand that, if medical experts want any say in public health over the next few years, they will have to engage with the incoming Trump administration’s many eccentrics. But RFK Jr. is indeed a grade-A crank. Why should he have input on anything? This nation has no shortage of public-health and medical experts with thoughts on raw milk or fluoridated water. Some experts will surely agree with aspects of Kennedy’s platform, but they will also bring the credibility, experience, rigor, and honesty he lacks. Let’s not pretend that Kennedy’s views have any value whatsoever."
I don't think that insulting RFK jr. is a good way to carry on this debate.
Did you take the latest booster you twat? If you follow cdc advice you should be on your 15th or so by now. Good riddance! No one that played Russian roulette for a long time ever won.
As Jefferson pointed out a couple of hundred years ago, democracy is built on lies (but it's still preferable to dictatorship). I'd say "trust in the media" is inversely proportional to how much attention people are paying. While everybody was busy enjoying the post-war economic boom, nobody much cared that they were being fed industrial quantities of BS. Now that boom has levelled off, they do care.
Weird update:
Kremlin Says Reports That Trump Spoke To Putin Are 'Pure Fiction', Didn't Happen
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/kremlin-says-reports-trump-spoke-putin-are-pure-fiction-didnt-happen
Why Is WaPo Reporting A Trump-Putin Call That Did Not Take Place?
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/11/why-is-wapo-reporting-a-trump-putin-call-that-did-not-take-place.html#more
Interesting to see how it changed so much in 2016, the very year Trump was elected for the first time but without winning the popular vote.
Then how Biden won when trust stayed hight among Democrats.
Then, how in 2020, as it went back to its pre-2016 level, Trump won the election and the popular vote.
That is about the size of it! Its big though, about the same size as America. America not the whole world or anything like it, but the issues will travel, one way or another.
FWIW:
A Post Mortem Autopsy: From A Diddy Party to a Pity Party https://shorturl.at/eIVYI
Introducing The Paycheck to Paycheck Voter https://shorturl.at/6AIkb
Remember Remember the 5th of November https://shorturl.at/PFtAJ
The Red Badge of Courage Being Called Uncle Tom https://shorturl.at/onCf7
Black Women Blaming Black Men For Harris Loss https://shorturl.at/mq0kH
Loved this post. I agree the task of reforming sprawling, self serving institutions is difficult and hazardous. The only fruitful path I can see is to split the organisations into two or three pieces, then have them compete against each other for a fixed period of time to be the surviving half. This strategy isn't that different to how Bilbo Baggins tricked the giants trolls to turn on each other.
Smart idea!!!
Ideally good, on what they will compete?
How is possible to make a competition between police? How is possible to make competition between schools? In the USA healthcare is competitive but is so better than EU state one?
Competition sound good if you can have metrics that are quantifiable and that can't be "faked", after that you need to know the balance you are looking to: in healthcare how much is "too much", justice system prefer to accept some guilty free or some innocents in and so on.
Today we know that "fair" competition is a utopian dream, we have power players that bend the rules and that is unavoidable, players tend to become fewer and bigger in any field using economy of scale then become a cartel (usually loosely associated and informal).
I feel that there are no simple "magical" solutions to problems that derive from complexity of systems, usually are wishful thinking if are good, total scam and snake oil if bad....
All fair points. Predefining metrics for performance opens the door to Goodhart's law- bureaucracies are already skilled at playing that game. The main advantage of this approach is that the energy of the bureaucracy is redirected toward saving their own skin rather than attacking/undermining their new unfriendly department head. Bureaucracies are also highly skilled at that game.