Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) have come to serve many purposes in the COVID era, different purposes for different people, but do they actually serve the purpose people believe they do, and do they live up to being the supposed “gold standard” of scientific research or evidence-based medicine?Let’s take some of the assumptions people make about RCTs and see if they tally with reality.A RCT comprehensively reviews the drug in question, testing it on its target population.RCTs are conducted by pharma companies who are free to cherry-pick trial participants. For instance, mRNA vaccines for COVID were tested exclusively on younger, basically healthy volunteers, even though COVID only poses a significant danger to the elderly and/or infirm. The FDA then approved mRNA vaccines based on these trials, for everyone over the age of 18, including pregnant women, even though the drugs were never tested on any high-risk groups.The results of a RCT are scientifically conclusive regarding the drug concerned; that is to say, the results can be expected to be replicated on a future occasion, with no surprises in store.A pharma company can run as many RCTs as it likes. Suppose it ran 100, and the results of 98 showed that the drug either didn’t work or was dangerous (or both), but 2 RCTs showed that the drug has some benefit and the side-effects are moderate to low. The pharma company can take these 2 RCTs to the FDA and get the drug approved, and the FDA doesn’t need to, and in fact won’t, ask if those 2 trials were the only ones conducted. The results of 98 failed RCTs simply disappear. The public has no way of accessing that data; in fact, even the FDA has no way of accessing it, and no one other than the pharma officials knows that it even exists.If a drug is approved based on a “successful” RCT, the public can trust that it has been shown to be safe.Following on from the previous point, there could be any number of failed RCTs for a specific drug before the company seized on one successful trial. However, even the success of that one RCT doesn’t necessarily tell you anything about safety. Unless the trial was specifically examining the safety profile of a drug, there is no guarantee that safety issues were adequately addressed or even examined. Furthermore, it is all too easy for pharma companies to delete, relabel, or dismiss adverse effects of the drug under trial. The FDA has no way of verifying the details without a comprehensive investigation, as it is not given the raw data from the trials including the names of participants.&nbsp;A RCT focuses on the primary effect of the drug in question. All other effects can be assumed to be secondary and of minor importance.A RCT can focus on whatever the trial managers want to focus. To use just one example of many possibilities, the anti-depressant Paxil. The FDA approved it on the basis of an RCT that showed a marginal benefit over placebo in improving mood which translates to a mood benefit for around 1 person in 10 who takes the drug. However, Paxil’s effect on sexual dysfunction has been estimated as anywhere between 1.5 and 9 people in 10 who take Paxil. Yet dysfunction is considered a side-effect, and Paxil is considered a mood enhancer.Doctors can derive best clinical practices from RCTs that show that some drugs help and others are either useless or harmful.Here we provide the testimony of Dr. Paul Marek on the often devastating effects of treating patients based on trials rather than on practical clinical experience. Dr. Marek was addressing a panel convened by Senator Ron Johnson.<div class="raw-html-embed"><iframe width="100" height="500" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9jMONZMuS2U?start=1668" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div>Remdesivir, the only drug approved for COVID patients, passed its RCT with vaguely flying colors, despite the fact that even the WHO concluded, based on trial data, that it had no significant effect on mortality rates. That didn’t matter, though, because the RCT didn’t examine mortality rates, but only reduction of time to recovery. Patients who died were thus by definition excluded from the primary endpoint of the study, and deaths from or with remdesivir were merely an unfortunate side-effect.So why are RCTs sought, esteemed, and relied upon? For doctors, they provide a safety net, absolving them of real accountability to their patients. For the FDA, they promote the appearance of genuine consideration of the risk-benefit analysis for the drugs they approve. For the patient, they provide (false) reassurance that their drug has passed rigorous scientific testing. For thinking people, their only benefit is that the limited information released to the public can be pored over with a microscope and discrepancies and warning signs sought out.For example, a trial study that notes that “the majority of adverse events were mild or moderate” begs the question: what about the minority of adverse effects? (This, from Pfizer’s trials testing mRNA shots for young children.)In the words of Dr. David Healy:<blockquote>... we license statins on the basis of lowered cholesterol levels rather than any benefit on mortality. We license hypoglycemic agents on the basis of an ability to lower glucose, even though this commonly leads to more hospitalizations than diabetes. The drugs for osteoporosis are licensed on the basis of an ability to thicken bones rather than reduce fractures with the result that there are now more serious fractures of abnormally thickened bones in the elderly after falls than there ever were before these drugs were introduced. We have the same situation with the mRNA trials ... reducing apparent infection rates may even be a bad thing. Abolishing symptoms like cough may make infected younger people more likely to kill their elderly relatives…</blockquote>

iStock-1314329972.jpg

Remdesivir

RCTs

When a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing

Are randomized-controlled trials really the 'gold standard'?

A British vigilante group known as the “Blade Runners” is receiving widespread support from British taxpayers as it continues to destroy climate surveillance cameras across London.<h2>The ULEZ mandate</h2>By order of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the city is peppered with ultra-low emission zones (ULEZs), areas accessible only to low-emission vehicles. Cars that do not meet the city’s environmental standards are charged £12.50 ($16) for entering the ULEZ. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras positioned around the zones read license plates and check them against the vehicles’ make and model in real time. If a vehicle does not meet the environmental threshold, a fine is levied against the car owner.&nbsp;The ULEZ climate mandate has drawn heavy&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-hundreds-protest-against-climate-mandates">protests</a> from residents, including&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/british-veteran-launches-hunger-strike-as-unrest-grows-over-climate-mandates">hunger strikes</a> and refusals to pay fines. Taxpayers have also taken to disabling the ANPR surveillance cameras which Transport for London (TfL), the city’s transportation department, said will be used both for climate and law enforcement.<h2>Taxpayers cheer the ‘Blade Runners’</h2>Since the climate restrictions were expanded last year, the Blade Runners have taken to disabling and destroying hundreds of cameras. Between April and September 2023, Metropolitan Police recorded 200 reports of cameras being stolen and 595 reports of cameras being vandalized.TfL began placing black boxes around ULEZ camera wirings to protect them from being cut, but taxpayers found other ways to disable the cameras — like removing them completely.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"> MUST SEE: Blade Runners topple THREE ULEZ cameras in a coordinated strike… The people are fighting back! <a href="https://t.co/Yvr2Xr7Lun">pic.twitter.com/Yvr2Xr7Lun</a>— David Morgan #StayFree (@david_r_morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/david_r_morgan/status/1802726912050995623?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>In response, the city&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-taxpayers-attack-surveillance-vans-in-continued-revolt">deployed</a> mobile surveillance vans mounted with ANPR cameras across London in the hopes of evading attacks, but Blade Runners soon began targeting those as well. Some surveillance vans have been spotted covered in graffiti with their tires slashed, while others have been completely covered in tarp.Last month, 21 cameras were destroyed in the hours after Sadiq Khan was re-elected mayor of London, the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13538797/Moment-Blade-Runner-uses-power-tool-cut-ULEZ-camera-traffic-light-latest-attack-Sadiq-Khans-hated-scheme.html">reported</a>. Last weekend, Blade Runners used power tools to topple a ULEZ camera and traffic lights to the delight of some fellow taxpayers. In a video that was posted to social media, passing cars can be heard honking in support.The video received over 37,000 likes. Comments on the post were largely supportive, with users writing that, “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty,” and “Fair play to them, it's a complete scam that does nothing.”Blade Runner Matt Hardy told the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;that the Blade Runners are “people pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us and getting out and doing things about it – real votes, real boys here.”<h2>‘These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control’</h2>British actor and influencer Laurence Fox said this week he was just given back his electronic devices by police after being arrested earlier this year for cheering on the Blade Runners:<blockquote>These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control. They are the primary infrastructure for all sorts of things that ideologues like the midget dictator [Sadiq Khan] would like to impose upon us.I can now finally say the word ‘Bladerunners’ again. One of the ridiculous restrictions on free speech imposed by the police.It’s a dreadful shame to see so many of these cameras dying suddenly. I’m not at all thrilled about it. Just because I am smiling like a Cheshire Cat, it doesn’t mean that I am over the moon that these scameras continue to topple in high winds.&nbsp;Vive la résistance!</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">POLICE UPDATE Following 6 coppers bursting into my house earlier this year to arrest me for saying how pleased I was that the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ULEZ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ULEZ</a> scam was meeting such robust resistance, this morning the <a href="https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@metpoliceuk</a> were ordered by the magistrate to hand back all my devices, including my…— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) <a href="https://twitter.com/LozzaFox/status/1803030521095622912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 18, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div> &nbsp;

ulez sign camera.jpg

Pushback_Resistance

Climate Change

‘Pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us’

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Fisker is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the electric vehicle (EV) company announced Tuesday.<h2>‘Like other companies in the electric vehicle industry’</h2>“Fisker has made incredible progress since our founding, bringing the Ocean SUV to market twice as fast as expected in the auto industry and making good on our promises to deliver the most sustainable vehicle in the world,” a spokesperson <a href="https://assets.ctfassets.net/cghen8gr8e1n/6W19OiEBJDVIFVEmo4feHA/df902c5cb2b067251a300efb0b35f611/Fisker-Filing-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>.The California-based company added it is not the only EV maker that has been struggling to stay in business.“We are proud of our achievements, and we have put thousands of Fisker Ocean SUVs in customers’ hands in both North American [sic] and Europe. But like other companies in the electric vehicle industry, we have faced various market and macroeconomic headwinds that have impacted our ability to operate efficiently. After evaluating all options for our business, we determined that proceeding with a sale of our assets under Chapter 11 is the most viable path forward for the company.”Fisker’s collapse is the latest indication that the EV industry is folding due to sinking demand. Other EV industry players are also cutting their losses as they jump ship.<h2>Hertz</h2>In March, Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motorfinanceonline.com/news/hertz-ceo-resigns-amid-ev-investment-setback/#:~:text=Scherr's%20departure%20coincides%20with%20Hertz's,electric%20vehicle%20(EV)%20rentals">resigned</a> after his bet on EVs cost the car rental giant its biggest quarterly loss since 2020. Hertz had been praised by the Biden administration for its ambition to convert 25% of its fleet to EVs by the end of this year. In January, however, the company announced it would instead be selling its 20,000 EVs — including Teslas — at heavily discounted prices and replacing them with gas-powered cars.<h2>Mercedes-Benz</h2>Mercedes-Benz also recently had to give up its ambition to only sell electric cars by 2030. Instead, EVs are expected to make up only 50% of the German carmaker’s sales over the next decade.<h2>Apple</h2>In February, Apple abandoned its multi-billion dollar effort to create an electric car. Despite being a decade in the works and employing 2,000 people, Project Titan was axed due to falling consumer demand.<h2>Aston Martin</h2>A lack of consumer demand is also partly to blame for Aston Martin&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13138123/Aston-Martin-puts-brakes-new-electric-supercar-2026-bosses-say-drivers-want-engines-throaty-roar.html">placing</a> its battery-operated “supercar” on hold until 2026.“Demand, certainly at an Aston Martin price point, is not what we thought it was going to be two years ago,” said Aston Martin Executive Chairman Lawrence Stroll.&nbsp;<h2>Ford</h2>In December, Ford slashed production of its flagship EV at its assembly plant in Dearborn, Michigan by half. The automaker cut the monthly production quote for the all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck from 3,200 units to 1,600 units per month.<h2>Biden administration continues to force EV production</h2>Nevertheless, the Biden administration in March issued new climate mandates aimed at forcing more EV production. The new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contain tight emissions standards that will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/epa-electric-vehicles-emissions-limits-climate-biden-e6d581324af51294048df24269b5d20a">require</a> 56% of new vehicle sales to be fully electric by 2032, with an additional 13% required to be hybrids.

car market decline.jpg

US News

Biden administration continues to force EV production

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

For the last two years, British authorities have been testing AI-powered emotion recognition cameras on travelers in train stations, according to recently disclosed documents.<h2>What can the cameras see?</h2>In each of eight train stations around the UK, five to seven cameras or sensors scan the passing crowds. Using AI software from Amazon, the cameras use object recognition algorithms to spot criminal activity, trespassing, weapons, wet floors, overcrowding, and overstuffed trash cans.&nbsp;They can also alert authorities when passengers engage in “unusual behavior,” such as shouting, running, smoking, or skateboarding.&nbsp;A combination of existing cameras and newly installed smart cameras are being used for the surveillance project. All are equipped with Amazon’s Rekognition surveillance system.<h2>Emotional recognition</h2>Through a combination of facial and behavioral analyses, the Rekognition software allows officials to also <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">analyze visitors’ emotions</a>. Internal documents note that the cameras can detect whether a passenger is “happy, sad [or] angry.” They can also recognize passenger satisfaction, which “could be utilized to maximum advertising and retail revenue.”<h2>Anti-social behavior</h2>Authorities can also detect passengers who exhibit “anti-social behaviour,” which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/asb/asb/antisocial-behaviour/what-is-antisocial-behaviour/">according</a> to London’s Metropolitan Police Service means “behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person.”<h2>Social distancing, face masks, and demographics</h2>Other&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24757655-usecases_dpas_review_managed_stations?responsive=1&amp;title=1">use cases</a> for the surveillance cameras include detecting whether passengers are keeping to social distancing rules and wearing face masks. The cameras can also scan for demographics by identifying people’s age profiles and “socio-economic classification,” which the documents note can create “revenue opportunities for better targeted advertising and product placement.”<h2>‘Quite a concerning step’</h2>The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch, a civil rights and government watchdog group, in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. Network Rail, a body within the Department of Transportation which manages most of the country’s train network, has been overseeing the surveillance project.&nbsp;“The rollout and normalization of AI surveillance in these public spaces, without much consultation and conversation, is quite a concerning step,” Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/">told</a> Wired.As of now, the surveillance systems do not use facial recognition technology, which analyzes faces and matches them against facial images stored in certain databases.

crowd surveillance.jpg

surveillance

World News

Cameras can also detect 'anti-social behavior,' social distancing

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations

The European Union (EU) is considering subjecting foreign travelers to lie detector tests administered by AI technology.&nbsp;<h2>How would it work?</h2>Authorities at airports and ferry ports would use cameras equipped with machine-learning software to detect whether a person is being untruthful. As travelers fill out their entry applications, their eye, facial, and behavioral movements would be analyzed. If the camera indicates the traveler is lying, the software will send an alert to an immigration officer who will investigate.The technology has already been successfully tested in trials conducted by EU countries in the last few years. iBorderCtrl and TRESPASS, two such trials, explored how to create an automated border control system. Several features were tested, including the lie detector tests described above. They also piloted a feature in which AI software scans the social media accounts of travelers before granting them entry.Critics of the lie-detection scheme include Patrick Breyer, a German MEP. Breyer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13534215/Outrage-British-tourists-going-away-EU-countries-face-lie-detector-test-carried-artificial-intelligence-granted-entry.html">told</a> The Mail on Sunday that the technology is “pseudoscience” that threatens to profile the wrong people.&nbsp;“It will discriminate against anyone who is disabled or who has an anxious personality. It will not work,” said Breyer.<h2>Part of the Entry-Exit System</h2>If the EU decides to implement AI-powered lie detection, it will likely be introduced as part of the new Entry-Exit System (EES) due to take effect on October 6th. EES will replace the passport-stamping process by having foreign travelers apply for entry through self-service kiosks. These kiosks will collect the travelers’ biometric data, including their fingerprints and facial images.These data will eventually be stored in the Common Identity Repository (CIR), a massive database being built by the EU. The CIR will be capable of storing biometric files on 300 million individuals.&nbsp;<h2>EES for outsiders, digital ID for insiders</h2>While the EU prepares to roll out the EES for foreigners, including British citizens, it is also rolling out a digital ID program for EU citizens .Regulations that took effect last month&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/europe-launches-digital-id-scheme/">require</a> EU&nbsp;Member States in the European Union to provide a digital ID wallet to their citizens by 2026 which must conform to the European Union Digital Identity (EUDI) wallet specifications. These specifications include the ability to store a taxpayer’s identity papers, such as driver’s licenses, health insurance cards, diplomas and other official documents.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h2>How will the wallet be used?</h2>The digital wallet will allow access to both public and private services. Uses include making payments, opening a bank account, getting prescriptions, signing contracts, traveling, accessing government services, receiving social security benefits, logging into social media accounts, and more.&nbsp;“It can also be used to facilitate the freedom of movement by storing documents such as the European Health Insurance Card,” explains the European Commission (EC) on its&nbsp;<a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eudi-wallet-implementation">website</a>.Under the current rules, the EUDI wallet will be optional for taxpayers.&nbsp;<h2>Critics raise concerns about the wallet</h2>The EUDI wallet’s main selling point is that users will be able to share only the details necessary to authenticate themselves for a given service. All other personal information will remain hidden. The EC expects this feature to satisfy widespread privacy concerns.But concerns about the wallet remain. The main worry is that while users only share those details that are necessary, the government can decide at any point which information is “necessary” to share. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, the European Commission made proof of vaccination necessary to access services and establishments. Prior to that, each taxpayer’s health information was considered confidential.

face scanning.jpg

Technology could be introduced with new biometric entry system

Europe may subject travelers to lie detector tests

Are randomized-controlled trials really the 'gold standard'?

When a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing

Related Articles

FBI intimidated nurse who exposed hospital’s child mutilation practices, report reveals

Just 2 in 10 Biden supporters think marriage and kids are important for society. Why?

Couples sue Vermont for requiring gender ideology in foster care

Supreme Court deals blow to government censorship

Latest Articles

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations

Europe may subject travelers to lie detector tests