Hand run government or democracy: the Guardian

[myata]

The Guardian today on the New Brunswick brain disorder:

Top Canadian scientist alleges in leaked emails he was barred from studying mystery brain illness

Why is the country so prone to botching these cases like every single one or them, or very close? Could there be a simple, logical cause?

So which one would it be? It can't be both, together and in the same place, obviously.

Edited June 3, 2024 by myata

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, myata said:

The Guardian today on the New Brunswick brain disorder:

Top Canadian scientist alleges in leaked emails he was barred from studying mystery brain illness

Why is the country so prone to botching these cases like every single one or them, or very close? Could there be a simple, logical cause?

So which one would it be? It can't be both, together and in the same place, obviously.

Well, seems like both Federal and Provincial were involved in this and an independent committee disagrees with the scientist too.  They should have at least kept the investigation open, though, from the sounds of it.

[myata]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

They should have at least kept the investigation open, though, from the sounds of it.

That's it. Keep it open until the truth is established. Like with Covid, any matter important for the society. What could be the problem? Why do we have to blow every single one, and then come back with apologies? Sure the bureaucrats get paid twice for their f@ckups with bonuses too. But what good does it do to the society?

“All I will say is that my scientific opinion is that there is something real going on in [New Brunswick] that absolutely cannot be explained by the bias or personal agenda of an individual neurologist,” wrote Michael Coulthart, a prominent microbiologist. “A few cases might be best explained by the latter, but there are just too many (now over 200).”

"In an October 2023 email exchange with another PHAC member, Coulthart, who served as the federal lead in the 2021 investigation into the New Brunswick illness, said he had been “essentially cut off” from any involvement in the issue, adding he believed the reason was political."

Another bureaucrat who just couldn't help but to know better? Will we ever get enough of this?

Edited June 3, 2024 by myata

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, myata said:

That's it. Keep it open until the truth is established. Like with Covid, any matter important for the society. What could be the problem? Why do we have to blow every single one, and then come back with apologies? Sure the bureaucrats get paid twice for their f@ckups with bonuses too. But what good does it do to the society?

“All I will say is that my scientific opinion is that there is something real going on in [New Brunswick] that absolutely cannot be explained by the bias or personal agenda of an individual neurologist,” wrote Michael Coulthart, a prominent microbiologist. “A few cases might be best explained by the latter, but there are just too many (now over 200).”

"In an October 2023 email exchange with another PHAC member, Coulthart, who served as the federal lead in the 2021 investigation into the New Brunswick illness, said he had been “essentially cut off” from any involvement in the issue, adding he believed the reason was political."

Another bureaucrat who just couldn't help but to know better? Will we ever get enough of this?

Holy shit....I read the entire article and it looks to me like one doctor being pissed off. He was cut off a paycheck and is bitter. Glysophates had been used in weed killers for decades and it's hazards are well known.

2 levels of government scientists quashed the program. They have not ruled out inbreeding.

Holy crap myata, you can find conspiracy everywhere. You waiting to debunk the Santa Clause or the easter bunny legend"? LOL

Edited June 3, 2024 by ExFlyer

[myata]

42 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

one doctor being pissed off.

You were reading something else. Just not the same story.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, myata said:

You were reading something else. Just not the same story.

From your link

"The committee and the New Brunswick government also cast doubt on the work of neurologist Alier Marrero, who was initially referred dozens of cases by baffled doctors in the region, and subsequently identified more cases. The doctor has since become a fierce advocate for patients he feels have been neglected by the province. A final report from the committee, which concluded there was no “cluster” of people suffering from an unknown brain syndrome, signalled the end of the province’s investigation."

"

“Although Dr Alier Marrero has made statements regarding findings and observations with regards to a large number of patients, since May 2023, Public Health New Brunswick has received a total of only 29 complete notifications from Dr Marrero,” a spokesperson for the province’s health department told the Guardian in an email.

“These are being reviewed … to date, Public Health New Brunswick has not received any similar notifications from other physicians.”

[myata]

How could you have missed this?

3 hours ago, myata said:

"In an October 2023 email exchange with another PHAC member, Coulthart, who served as the federal lead in the 2021 investigation into the New Brunswick illness, said he had been “essentially cut off” from any involvement in the issue, adding he believed the reason was political."

 

17 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

“These are being reviewed … to date, Public Health New Brunswick has not received any similar notifications from other physicians.”

And that has to be the matter of a grave concern for the society. It needs to find out what has actually happened, not happy government reports. Remember what happened during Covid? Did you hear anyone with a different point of view? Do you think there wasn't anyone, just like in China or Russia?

The citizens must know or the government knows best. Pick one, no they just cannot work together.

[ExFlyer]

4 minutes ago, myata said:

How could you have missed this?

 

And that has to be the matter of a grave concern for the society. It needs to find out what has actually happened, not happy government reports. Remember what happened during Covid? Did you hear anyone with a different point of view? Do you think there wasn't anyone, just like in China or Russia?

The citizens must know or the government knows best. Pick one, no they just cannot work together.

Hey... a pissed off guy does not make for "a grave concern for the society".

Lots of "pissed off guys"  out there, you are one LOL, and society is not of grave concern.

You pick one, a pissed off neurologist that lost his research grant LOL

[myata]

Government knows best, of course. You spent two years in the basement afraid to go to the park next door in a level 3 respirator. While somewhere restaurants and clubs stayed open, no quarantines, no curfews, no mandatory Orwell-style "vaccinations". Same result, pretty much. So pick one: no can't be both, the common sense and government always knows best. Obviously.

[ExFlyer]

17 hours ago, myata said:

Government knows best, of course. You spent two years in the basement afraid to go to the park next door in a level 3 respirator. While somewhere restaurants and clubs stayed open, no quarantines, no curfews, no mandatory Orwell-style "vaccinations". Same result, pretty much. So pick one: no can't be both, the common sense and government always knows best. Obviously.

Huh??

Is that the pissed off neurologist take on inbreds??

[myata]

9 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Is that the pissed off neurologist take on inbreds??

No: only the general pattern of things. When the government know best, always and everything. F@ckups and apologies follow on the clock but nothing to worry, only the normal business. It's exactly this attitude that causes citizens distrust to anything. Just cannot take anyone or anything on their word. Wear mask at home at all times no look it's gone did you see it? And no trusted, independent voices anywhere around. That is a troubling situation - no? I would be concerned.

Yes, there's a way to handle these matter: gather a panel of independent experts. Open direct communications with the public, full 100% transparency. Hold open public information sessions. Then narrow down on the conclusion, and publish everything, all and open. Sounds impossible, in the little bureaucratic zoo?

[ExFlyer]

24 minutes ago, myata said:

No: only the general pattern of things. When the government know best, always and everything. F@ckups and apologies follow on the clock but nothing to worry, only the normal business. It's exactly this attitude that causes citizens distrust to anything. Just cannot take anyone or anything on their word. Wear mask at home at all times no look it's gone did you see it? And no trusted, independent voices anywhere around. That is a troubling situation - no? I would be concerned.

Yes, there's a way to handle these matter: gather a panel of independent experts. Open direct communications with the public, full 100% transparency. Hold open public information sessions. Then narrow down on the conclusion, and publish everything, all and open. Sounds impossible, in the little bureaucratic zoo?

Sometimes, using staff for 2 or 3 or 4 years and no new information or data comes out and the government closes the files. Then one neurologist that had only one paycheck from the government on that one file is pissed and makes a lot about nothing.

The government cuts its losses and one guy is pissed.

They did have a panel (they called it a committee) and the committee concluded there was nothing more to investigate.

As for "public information sessions", really? What good would public information sessions be with such a specialized issue that government scientists worked on for up to 4 years without conclusions?? That would be a waste of money LOL

[myata]

20 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Sometimes, using staff for 2 or 3 or 4 years and no new information or data comes out and the government closes the files. Then one neurologist that had only one paycheck from the government on that one file is pissed and makes a lot about nothing.

Yes: and the independent expert and citizen panel could have looked into it and resolved. In Covid and measures, which are right and where's too much, too.

But no: the government just has to know better. And everything. You know the cause too, right? Because it can. What's there to stop it, or even show look right here is the line?

Edited June 4, 2024 by myata

[ExFlyer]

18 minutes ago, myata said:

Yes: and the independent expert and citizen panel could have looked into it and resolved. In Covid and measures, which are right and where's too much, too.

But no: the government just has to know better. And everything. You know the cause too, right? Because it can. What's there to stop it, or even show look right here is the line?

WTF does a "citizen panel" know about medical and scientific things?? Give your head a shake.

Stop with the covid shit already, get over it.

The government and a scientific "committee" had decided there was no merit after 4 years of investigation so, it did know better.

You want them to re-open the case, spend more money to come up with the same conclusion because one pissed off guy wrote and email?? Shake your head real good LOL

[Michael Hardner]

23 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. WTF does a "citizen panel" know about medical and scientific things?? Give your head a shake.

2. The government and a scientific "committee" had decided there was no merit after 4 years of investigation so, it did know better.

3. You want them to re-open the case, spend more money to come up with the same conclusion because one pissed off guy wrote and email?? Shake your head real good LOL

1. Nothing.  But they have questions and they constitute a 'public'.  I think panels, especially online ones, would do a lot to respond to disinformation and questions.

2. What the government decides is usually in the interest of smoothing things over for better or worse.  We need to re-arm our public institutions for more contention and also leave things unresolved sometimes.

3. The newspaper that looked into this is legitimate so it's worth asking, at least.

 

[ExFlyer]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. Nothing.  But they have questions and they constitute a 'public'.  I think panels, especially online ones, would do a lot to respond to disinformation and questions.

2. What the government decides is usually in the interest of smoothing things over for better or worse.  We need to re-arm our public institutions for more contention and also leave things unresolved sometimes.

3. The newspaper that looked into this is legitimate so it's worth asking, at least.

 

My point was and is, there was a panel/committee/group of scientists and medical experts that have already determined there was no merit in continuing. Are you some way saying they were  "smoothing things over"? The article never even came close to insinuating that. Those are the kinds of insinuations that conspiracys come from LOL

To ask for a citizens panel makes no sense. Why? To explain to laymen why professionals made a decision? Seems like in a time when we are whining about wasting money, having a public hearing to explain scientific and medical resolutions would be a waste of money and expert time and expense.

The newspaper is for sure legitimate but the story is about one disgruntled neurologist and not the findings or research or outcome of the investigation..

 

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. Are you some way saying they were  "smoothing things over"?

2. The article never even came close to insinuating that. Those are the kinds of insinuations that conspiracys come from LOL

3. To ask for a citizens panel makes no sense. Why? To explain to laymen why professionals made a decision?

4. Seems like in a time when we are whining about wasting money, having a public hearing to explain scientific and medical resolutions would be a waste of money and expert time and expense.

5. The newspaper is for sure legitimate but the story is about one disgruntled neurologist and not the findings or research or outcome of the investigation..

 

1.  Yes but not in a nefarious or sneaky way.  We can see with the public health challenges of the past five years, and science challenges of the past thirty that "the" public is getting more engaged and isn't satisfied with pat answers. 

2.  No but you can anticipate what we're talking about here yes ?

3.  Exactly yes.  

4.  Money is not in question, but value is.  The mistake people make is to confuse the two.

5. I would expect them to filter the story if there wasn't anything more behind it.

[ExFlyer]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  Yes but not in a nefarious or sneaky way.  We can see with the public health challenges of the past five years, and science challenges of the past thirty that "the" public is getting more engaged and isn't satisfied with pat answers. 

2.  No but you can anticipate what we're talking about here yes ?

3.  Exactly yes.  

4.  Money is not in question, but value is.  The mistake people make is to confuse the two.

5. I would expect them to filter the story if there wasn't anything more behind it.

1. I am sure there was a valid reason for halting a study after 4 year. Nothing nefarious, just no further progress was seen or noted.

2 Well, no. Like I said, conspiracies come from suppositions and insinuations. I mean, look at what is happening in the Trudeau Rumour thread... LOL 

3. OK

4. Money and cost and expenses is always a factor. Costs a lot of money to bring a panel of medical, scientific and other experts to a place ot answer questions for =m laymen.

5. I think the story said all it had to say. Still boils down to one person being upset and going to the press. That is what we do nowadays can't get my way so go on social media or the press or TV or any media

Edited June 4, 2024 by ExFlyer

[Michael Hardner]

8 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I am sure there was a valid reason for halting a study after 4 year. Nothing nefarious, just no further progress was seen or noted.

2 Well, no. Like I said, conspiracies come from suppositions and insinuations. I mean, look at what is happening in the Trudeau Rumour thread... LOL 

3. Money and cost and expenses is always a factor. Costs a lot of money to bring a panel of medical, scientific and other experts to a place ot answer questions for =m laymen.

 

1. Ok but the learnings of the past few years should tell us that the bar has elevated and we now have to work harder to get as much of the public to agree, and agree to disagree.

2. The threshold has moved but we don't have to investigate troll bait or the system doesn't work.

3. But you get value from it, is the point.

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok but the learnings of the past few years should tell us that the bar has elevated and we now have to work harder to get as much of the public to agree, and agree to disagree.

2. The threshold has moved but we don't have to investigate troll bait or the system doesn't work.

3. But you get value from it, is the point.

1. Like I said, one disgruntled person does not warrant a public inquiry. When a panel/board of professionals has determined to end a study kowtowing to the disgruntled is a waste.

2. Not sure what that means but, if I interpret your comment, the article seems to be troll bait then

3. Value if is attains a significant cost is not value.

[myata]

42 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

My point was and is, there was a panel/committee/group of scientists and medical experts that have already determined there was no merit in continuing. Are you some way saying they were  "smoothing things over"? The article never even came close to insinuating that. Those are the kinds of insinuations that conspiracys come from LOL

How could you miss reading it? At least one recognized expert felt that he was silenced.. that doesn't include the doctor who initially made these observations. You're obviously no more interested in establishing the facts of the matter than buzz crowd.

[myata]

34 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

4. Money and cost and expenses is always a factor. Costs a lot of money to bring a panel of medical, scientific and other experts to a place ot answer questions for =m laymen.

Now, how does it compare with the total cost of bonuses; inquiries, commissions, compensations etc. and yada?

[Michael Hardner]

23 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. Like I said, one disgruntled person does not warrant a public inquiry. When a panel/board of professionals has determined to end a study kowtowing to the disgruntled is a waste.

2. Not sure what that means but, if I interpret your comment, the article seems to be troll bait then

3. Value if is attains a significant cost is not value.

1. When it gets out into the public then it needs some threshold of acceptance of the conclusions.  And that's new.

2. We don't have to investigate whether Justin Trudeau worked with Robert Pickton to murder people, for example.

3. Value means result for $.  So there is necessarily a trade off.

[Michael Hardner]

@ExFlyer something like this sheds light on situations if framed right.

Questions asked - questions answered.  It's on the record.  All you need to do is package this so that people understand that the questions have been responded to.  If people aren't satisfied with an open process (of some kind) then they will never been satisfied.
 

 

[ExFlyer]

39 minutes ago, myata said:

How could you miss reading it? At least one recognized expert felt that he was silenced.. that doesn't include the doctor who initially made these observations. You're obviously no more interested in establishing the facts of the matter than buzz crowd.

So, one "expert" and one doctor felt dissed by "an independent oversight committee created by the province" and "A final report from the committee, which concluded there was no “cluster” of people suffering from an unknown brain syndrome, signalled the end of the province’s investigation."

What did I miss?

One doctor vs "an independent oversight committee "

 

31 minutes ago, myata said:

Now, how does it compare with the total cost of bonuses; inquiries, commissions, compensations etc. and yada?

My point exactly....you are OK with paying "total cost of bonuses; inquiries, commissions, compensations etc. " for yada which will not change anything?? LOL