Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:56, 15 July 2023

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. COVID-19 Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alternative medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Skepticism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This Article is Very Skewed Away From the Point of the Book

I read the book. The book does quote people on the crazy anti-vax side, but it does so as quotes of their opinions.

The book represents an excellent journalistic approach to what is going on in the world, with specific attention played to Anthony Fauci (director of the National Institutes of Health) and Bill Gates (co-director of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) and their influence over vaccine research almost the world over.

Some of the facts in the book were so horrifying that I had to take a break from reading it more than once. These are facts backed up by references. The references are easily followed when reading an electronic copy of the book. I was unable to find a single case in the dozens of references I reviewed where Mr. Kennedy changed the facts. There were a couple of cases where he cherry-picked parts of what was said in research papers, but in general these were extracting the damning facts that were being whitewashed by researchers who were paid by pharmaceutical companies.

On my opinion, the article about the book misrepresents the book and should be rewritten to more accurately reflect the actual arguments made in the book.

At least the many people who have read the book know what is going on, although it is hard to follow, even for people with a strong non-professional background in the biological sciences. Todd Bezenek (talk) 01:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

This article represents what reliable reviews say about the book. What those sources say about the book is what is represented here, as Misplaced Pages is not the place for original research on subjects. Silverseren 02:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments @Silver seren.

(Side note: I have read all of the articles concerning the intent of Misplaced Pages and one of my closest friends got his Ph.D. next to me and now is a major person at the Wikimedia Foundation. I am not trying to be a crazy Misplaced Pages zealot, as I have seen many times reading the banning documents.)

That is a good point. Perhaps an excerpt from a news article about one of the horrific things discussed in the book?

The entire intent of this book is to discredit Anthony Fauci. I doubt any of the reviewers--unless they were medical people--would have been able to absorb the book. It took me about 80 hours to read it. How long does a book reviewer spend? Todd Bezenek (talk) 02:10, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

How about one paragraph about researchers testing chemotherapy drugs that burn people form the inside out at clinics in the United States which have been subsequently shut down? Even worse, after they are shut down, the tests are then done on people in Africa who do not have the ability to consent because they do not even understand what is being tested on them. One paragraph with reference from the book, not references to the book? Todd Bezenek (talk) 02:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that we should write this article based on your comprehensive and credible but also not published assessment the topic, instead of what reliable sources said about the topic? CT55555(talk) 04:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Nope. I was only trying to fix something I thought was wrong. No problem. I've got more important things to do. :) Todd Bezenek (talk) 05:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

So you have some RS sayong what you say? Slatersteven (talk) 09:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

If "RS sayong" means "reason for saying", then my reason is the book the article is written about is intended to do one thing, which is evidenced by its title. That is to show what has happened to a pillar of our scientific community (Dr Fauci) over time. 90% of the book is about that subject, which includes Bill Gates, because of the money Mr. Gates is putting into the global pharmaceutical industry using the World Health Organization (and other global health organizations like UNICEF) and Dr Fauci's organization (NIH) as spigots.

This issue is of particular importance to the health of the world's population and the United States indirectly, because of the upcoming presidential election in the US.

Robert Kennedy's respectability as a whistleblower on behalf of the health of the world's population (and not over ivermektin and hydroxychloroquine (I&H)) is going to be a major factor in whether or not he becomes the President of the USA in 2024.

I&H are not the main problem. The main problem is anti-viral medications, including the chemotherapy drugs which have been tested on children in US hospitals in the late 20th century and after that testing was discovered, moved overseas to the African continent. In a significant (5-20%) portion of test subjects, these drugs either burn the subject from the inside or cause renal or hepatic failure. These drugs are being given to the children of parents who are unable to conceive of proper consent because of the lack of knowledge about modern medical procedures in their society. They don't know how dangerous the drugs they are allowing doctors to test on their children are. THIS is the statement the book is making. It is a statement none of the reviewers caught. It also makes up a majority of the book.

The book has thousands of referenced peer-reviewed journal articles and news articles by respected news sources (not CNN/FOX/RT/pick your currently non-respected news outlet) supporting its contention that what I discuss above is happening. During the 60-80 hours I spent reading the book and chasing references online to verify the author was being truthful, I was made sick to my stomach and had to put the book down until at least the next day.

I am in no way associated with any political party nor am I paid by anyone involved in this debate. In fact, I am an unemployed engineer (electrical engineering and software engineering) living in Silicon Valley, USA.

I have to get back to studying for interviews. If you reply to this I will read it.

Cheers!

Todd Todd Bezenek (talk) 10:58, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

RS means WP:RS. Your contribution is based on a wrong assumption. (Several wrong assumptions, of course, for example the ridiculous one that Kennedy is a credible source.)

@Slatersteven: better use the link instead of just the abbreviation in the future. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:49, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Additional wrong assumptions:

• that a lawyer like Kennedy or an engineer like you is qualified to judge the content, result, quality and reliability of medical studies.
• that lawyers (like Kennedy) will impartially use any reliable source, instead of only those sources that sound like supporting their ideas.
• that quackery advocates (like Kennedy) will impartially use any reliable source, instead of only those sources that sound like supporting their ideas. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Hob: You do make a good point. I'm only an engineer.

I spent a long time writing this (over an hour), so please take 3-5 minutes to read it.

We need to find someone who is credible in the area of vaccination research. There is one. I can't remember his name but I can find him. He was a pillar in his area of research in the world and a faculty member at Berkeley. He criticised the idea that vaccines were the best solution for everything and his career was destroyed.

There are people at the top of their game who disagree all the time, but people don't feel the need to destroy their career to shut them up. For this I'll address something for which I am an expert. You can look at the Misplaced Pages article describing the DeWitt Clause. This was caused when David Dewitt (an acquaintance of mine) published a paper showing that Oracle's database was slower than the competition. Larry Ellison (the guy who started Oracle) still hates David DeWitt, but nobody lost their career over anything. Today, David is the head of the Jim Gray Microsoft Research Lab, which does cutting edge database/cloud computing research. Back to the book.

The argument here is not that vaccines have no place. It is that the mechanism for driving medical research has been hijacked by patentable medicines. It works this way: a company takes an old, discarded chemotherapy drug. They repackage it as a different mixture (more saline or whatever stabilizing agent they have to use to preserve it until it burns its way into the patient) which makes it sellable for $10,000 per treatment. Then, in order to get it approved, they test it on children in Africa.

There is nothing written in the above that has to do with vaccines, other than the fact that the money to be made from perfectly good vaccine research led to this terrible use of children to test chemotherapy drugs which are known to be highly dangerous on perfectly healthy children in Africa. And, the papers that were published state the fact--all but how many people died.

So, there is a leap-of-faith that has to be taken here. We have to believe that a chemotherapy drug which was shown to cause renal/hepatic failure in 5-10% of adults when they were given it before it was withdrawn from the market decades ago for safety concerns will actually kill children if it is given to them today. It will. There is no leap-of-faith.

A reasonable person would say, "Isn't it fine to give adults these drugs because they are going to die from cancer?" I'll say, yes! Give the adults the drug because they are going to die and they can make the choice. But, do not give the drug to children in New Jersey--which caused deaths proven by children's bodies piled in a mass grave--or to children in Africa who are being experimented on because of consent given to doctors in exchange for basic medical care by parents who do not understand how dangerous these drugs can be.

If it is not possible to convince a Misplaced Pages editor to do a little reading to save a bunch of children, then there is no point. I did what I could.

Cheers!

Todd

p.s. I would be perfectly happy if you said you see how the premise of the book is believable, but Robert Kennedy's credibility has already been destroyed by his earlier public statements. That is a good reason to not put the information out there. The only thing that has me upset is I saw terrible things in this book and when I say there are terrible things in the book I like to be acknowledged. I studied how to research ideas to get to the bottom of what is true and I did so under the guidance of many of the most recognized researchers on the U. of Wisconsin, one of the most recognized research institutions in the world.

One of the people I studied under won the billion-dollar lawsuit against Intel. I studied and learned for 16 years. Doing good research is the same whether it is in the computer sciences, electrical engineering, artificial intelligence, or in deducing whether or not someone likely experimented on children. One of the keys is recognizing when a person does not understand something. So, a person must read enough to be absolutely certain. In the case of the chemotherapy drugs I am certain. I am in no other case. But, the whole book leads up to that one, sickening case. I'll never forget it. Mengele did worse, but not by much.

The doctors who did the study should be ashamed of themselves. Just like the people who listened to Hitler and killed all those nice people back in the 1930s and 1940s, they followed the money and did what they did. And, I am not Jewish, Romany, homosexual, mentally handicapped, or suffering from any of the other things that caused Hitler to want them killed.

I wish Robert Kennedy had titled the book, "What went wrong with the global health system" and only written about the chemotherapy drug studies. But, he had to tie everything to the stupid anti-vax movement.

Robert Kennedy might be a hard-working lawyer fighting for people who have been damaged by environmental contamination, but he will always be an anti-vaxxer. I'd rather have an anti-vaxxer who has never hurt anyone in his life running things than any alternative.

You are right. I just want to see a decent person running what is still the most powerful country in the world for a while. China has a supercomputer that uses 15,000,000KW!) I was in the audience when the researcher from China presented the "God" processor paper detailing the design. It was designed to be able to be used to build the fastest fixed-point supercomputer in the world--and China did it. This makes me afraid for my descendants. And yours. And everyone's.

Whew! He kicks the soapbox to the side and tries to get a couple of hours sleep before the day starts. :) Thank you for reading. Todd Bezenek (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:SOAPBOX is exactly the right word. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. Misplaced Pages is not a forum. It is not for walls of text: I stopped reading after a few sentences.

If you want to research what is true by diving into sources or to confirm certain beliefs by sniffing out someone with the belief you want to confirm, you are in the totally wrong place. Misplaced Pages is for exactly reproducing what reliable sources say, and nothing else. As far as this page is concerned, we check what experts publish about this book, and that's it. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't want to beat a dead horse, @Hob. You just said two things:

1. reproduce what reliable sources say.

2. e check what experts publish about this book.

So, are book reviewers experts? If so, how do you determine a book reviewer is an expert? Is it if they publish in one of the reliable sources listed on Misplaced Pages's reliable sources list? If I have this correct, then I understand. Please confirm.

Cheers!

Todd Todd Bezenek (talk) 02:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

are book reviewers experts? Not necessarily. how do you determine a book reviewer is an expert? There is no simple recipe anyone can apply; WP:CIR. s it if they publish in one of the reliable sources listed on Misplaced Pages's reliable sources list? Not necessarily. A reliable source is reliable within a certain scope. If the subject is stocks, Wall Street Journal is probably a RS; if the subject is climate change, they are not.

Explaining the basics does not belong on this page; there should be a place where it is appropriate but I cannot think of it at the moment. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Hob Gadling: Thank you for sticking with the discussion. I appreciate it! I don't know Misplaced Pages markdown, so most of the stuff below is raw text.

Below, "FaucI Article" refers to the article this talk is about. Each of my conclusions is in bold. If you don't read anything else, please read the bold parts.

I believe we are getting to the root of the issue! Stick with me please. Here I am addressing each of the issues you mentioned, in order:

o WP:CIR refers to the competence of the person adding to Misplaced Pages. I'm competent, so this is not relevant based on what you said.

o You are saying that even if someone publishes in a "reliable source", they are NOT reliable unless they are an expert. Book reviewers are experts on books. Does this make them an expert on all books? No. So what to do? Find a reviewer who is an expert at medicine? Yes! None of the reviewers mentioned in the Fauci Article fit this case, so most of the stuff in it is non-reliable. This is a fact based on what you said.

o You are an expert on Science and Pseudoscience. I know it because you say this on your Misplaced Pages Talk page.

o I believe we have already covered the basics. That is why you don't know where to look. You are obviously an expert at Misplaced Pages, so if you don't know where to look, it means it is not there.

What to do next? From what I see, we either have to wipe most of the Fauci Article or find someone who is better expert on Science/Pseudo Science. Looking on Misplaced Pages (my root of knowledge), Dehart Hurd, Paul is an expert on Pseudoscience and Science. We need to talk with him to resolve this.

Who are the real experts on Misplaced Pages? We need to find one to help out with this. One way to find experts is to see who is willing to let you know who they are. I need to add contact information to my Talk page. The only reliable contact information today is a person's phone number. I'm putting my phone number on my Misplaced Pages talk page right after I send this.

Any thoughts?

Thank you for sticking with this. That is how progress is made.

Cheers! Todd Bezenek (talk) 17:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I should have said User:User Page, not User:User Talk page. Todd Bezenek (talk) 17:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

In summary, you don't think the people who wrote the sources are qualified. Including author and medical doctor Theodore Dalrymple and science communicator Dan Wilson (biologist). Instead you'd like the invite comment from a specific scientist. That is not how Misplaced Pages works. CT55555(talk) 17:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I read the bolded parts, and they do not make sense. One particularly egregious piece: Misplaced Pages pages are not based on talking with people, it is based on published sources. You keep disregarding the purpose of this page, and you keep spreading fringe nonsense and relying on clearly bad sources. Stop it. The longer you do it, the more likely you are to be banned. Also, do not ping me. I have a watchlist. This pseudo-discussion is over as far as I am concerned. Do your off-topic chatting somewhere else where it is on topic. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Read wp:or. Slatersteven (talk) 14:52, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Is there a tool where I can quickly check my sources against Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Perennial sources list? Or do I have to check them all by hand to find out if they are "green"? Todd Bezenek (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Look here WP:RSPSS CT55555(talk) 18:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry. I see now that you know that exists. I am not aware of any simpler process than looking at the list. CT55555(talk) 18:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Where is the Search Engine I Can Use to Check Sources on the Fauci Book

If I want to check sources on this book about Fauci (and maybe the other book about Fauci), where is the search engine which will search only the Misplaced Pages/Wikimedia Web sites?

If you do not know where this is, where can I go to get permission to build it. I don't mean permission as in anyone can build it, I mean permission as in PERMISSION to build it, i.e., a meeting with someone important enough to discuss building it.

Cheers! Todd Todd Bezenek (talk) 18:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

If you want to make a new search engine that includes only what Misplaced Pages considers to be reliable sources, I don't think you need anyone's permission to do that.

The list of Reliable sources and Perennial sources is here WP:RSPSS CT55555(talk) 18:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

No, you are missing my point. I couldn't do that legally.

I want to make something legal.

I asked my CTO to post to here so we could get through, but I didn't need to. :)

Can you help? Do you want to discuss this over a medium where I can be sure my idea is protected from prying eyes? Doug Burger is the person who told me to bring this up. There is also a place on the Web where he talks about how the NYT is wrong. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/podcast/clouds-catapults-life-end-moores-law-dr-doug-burger/?ocid=msr_podcast_dburger_profile.

This is getting fun. I may blow off looking for work today. :) Todd Bezenek (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

No thanks, I don't want to help you with this project. CT55555(talk) 19:02, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Maybe I didn't make it clear. This project will benefit Misplaced Pages. Well, actually, the Wikimedia Foundation, which will benefit all of the projects under its umbrella, including Misplaced Pages. :)

Is there SSO available for Wikimedia yet? Todd Bezenek (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I wish you the best of luck. CT55555(talk) 19:33, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Taken higher up the food chain. Todd Bezenek (talk) 19:36, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

"Pseudoscientific book"

David Gorski calls it a "conspiracy book" here and here. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

...and? Miner Editor (talk) 11:34, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I am just saying that although we do not seem to have sources for calling it a pseudoscientific book, we do have a source for calling it a conspiracy book. Draw your own conclusions, whatever they may be. --Hob Gadling

(talk) 12:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

We can call it both. Slatersteven (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Not in the first sentence of the lead we can't, and not without a sourceMiner Editor (talk) 12:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Why not, does it no postulate a conspiracy? Slatersteven (talk) 12:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Book articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs of publications
• WikiProject Books articles
• B-Class COVID-19 articles
• Low-importance COVID-19 articles
• WikiProject COVID-19 articles
• B-Class medicine articles
• Low-importance medicine articles
• All WikiProject Medicine pages
• B-Class Alternative medicine articles
• B-Class Skepticism articles
• Low-importance Skepticism articles
• WikiProject Skepticism articles