As Britain’s politicians and bureaucrats (don’t kid yourself bureaucrats are a big part of the problem) push for more stringent lockdowns in that country during the second COVID wave, people are pushing back.
After a nurse, Louise Hampton, 37, received an award from the National Health Services (NHS) for her hard work during the initial COVID-1984 lockdown, she took to Facebook colourfully stating that the award was a complete joke because she and her fellow nurses basically did nothing during the first lockdown. The video had over one million views before Facebook censored it and pulled it down.
Of course, when her NHS bosses found out about the video, they began to move in on Louse, but she quit before they could fire her. She has since posted a second Facebook video showing how empty two hospitals actually are during the second wave. It had over 30,000 views before Facebook…
View original post 293 more words
As you tell more lies to cover up previous lies, each new lie is that much more implausible and easy to see through. From Robert Wright at aier.org:
Many times throughout history, policymakers have doubled down on their own mistakes, refusing to believe that they were wrong or hoping that somehow doing the wrong thing twice or thrice would somehow make things right. Then it all came crashing down at once and the rulers lost their minds, and sometimes their necks or heads.
Economic, governance, and social systems often rely on each other in ways not readily discerned by narrow technocrats. When one crumbles, the others fall in rapid succession while all the putative experts express surprise. Look at the way that the U.S.S.R, one of the world’s two “super” powers, fell apart in the late 1980s when it lost enough feathers from its peacock tail in Afghanistan that…
View original post 74 more words
- There’s an entire school of research within public health on how to frighten people, known as “fear appeal”
- Fear appeal is based on the premise that to successfully implement a public health measure, you must first highlight a threat. And, to work, the threat must be made personal, so that people fear for their personal safety
- Next, you give people something immediate to do that will set them on the path of cooperating with the plan in its entirety. Examples during the COVID-19 pandemic include not leaving your house, wearing a mask, staying 6 feet apart, closing certain businesses and keeping children home from school. In the future, we can expect to be told we must get vaccinated and digitally tracked before we can resume life as normal
- By adding confusion to the mix, you can bring an individual from fear to anxiety — a state of confusion…
View original post 2,895 more words
A couple weeks ago I published a guide to cognitive biases for journalists. I saved perhaps the biggest one of all — confirmation bias — for a post all of its own. It might be one of the best-known biases, but for that very reason it can be easy to underestimate. Here, then, is what you need to know — and what to do to reduce it.
What is confirmation bias — and how does it affect journalism?
Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out — or more easily believe or recall — information that confirms our existing beliefs.
It leads us to make judgements that are not based on an equal assessment of all the evidence, but only that evidence we have cherry picked, remembered or attributed more credibility to.
Confirmation bias affects journalists in at least three ways:
View original post 957 more words
” The sunk cost fallacy is most dangerous when we have invested a lot of time, money, energy or love in something. This investment becomes a reason to carry on, even if we are dealing with a lost cause.
The more we invest, the greater the sunk costs are, and the greater the urge to continue becomes.
If we decide to cancel a project halfway, we create a contradiction: We admit that we once thought differently. Carrying on with a meaningless project delays the painful realisation and keeps up appearances.
No matter how much you have already invested, only your assessment of the future costs and benefits counts. “
Something you learn when you study infectious disease epidemiology is the potential problems with all screening tests. Every test comes with some risk of false negative and false positive results. It is quite complicated and I only understand it in quite a simplistic way, but I do understand it. More so since following the information being shared by Dr Clare Craig recently.
I get a lot of my information now from Twitter, where I can read scientists and researchers sharing useful information and debating details without the hysteria that every mainstream channel seems engaged in. In the main this has been a very positive and educational experience which I’ve tried to share here as my way of speaking out in favour of critical thought over headline grabbing inaccuracies.
Recently I have observed that there are a few scientists who appear to have odd or incongruent ideas. One immunologist with an…
View original post 390 more words