The Ethical Skeptic

Challenging Agency of Pseudo-Skepticism & Cultivated Ignorance

Eternal are the Embers which Conflagrate the Library of History

There are two forms of destruction, simple obliteration, or the more tantalizing prospect of surreptitiously capturing into one’s collection, an asset which is thereafter regarded by history as having been obliterated. Especially if that asset is Nelsonian knowledge pertaining to mankind’s history. For of what value is knowledge, if every man possesses it? Such knowledge is more precious, powerful, and perishable than mere gold.

The great Library of Alexandria was part of a larger research institute called the Mouseion at Alexandria. It was established upon the Ptolemaic Royal Palace grounds in the Egyptian capitol city of Alexandria in 283 bce during the time of Ptolemy Soter I. The Library itself was purported to house anywhere from 40,000 to 400,000 books, codices, and scrolls – most derived from the documentary antiquity of Greece, the Levant, Egypt, Persia, and India. Given that these regions comprise the birthplace of modern humanity, it can be speculated therefore that this trove of documents included significant works outlining the emergence and ascendancy of modern civilization, and possibly much of its prehistory as well.

Throughout various touchpoints in history the Library underwent a steady process of decline and destruction; its curators even being forced into exile by various fanatic influences over the centuries. The Library was of course eventually destroyed, with its works either having been burned or disseminated into other hands over time. 1

There exist four primary notions as to how the destruction/demise of the Library of Alexandria came about.2 3 4

  1. Accidental burning, 48 bce – from soldiers setting fire to Egyptian ships in Alexandria’s harbor during Caesar’s Civil War.
  2. Military conquest and razing, 260 – 275 ad – by Palmyrene invasion and/or subsequent recapture of Alexandria by Roman Emperor Aurelian.
  3. Christian razing, 391 and/or 415 ad – in retaliation against both Jews and Pagans, one of which was Library Member Hypatia.
  4. Islamic retaking and burning of Alexandria, 646 ad – as Amr ibn al-As’ revenge against the capture of Alexandria by Byzantine Emperor Constans II.

While it is easy narrative to solely blame various religions for the obliteration of mankind’s history, it is very likely that all four of the influences above played some part in the Library’s full demise. However, given that the Library was located on the Ptolemaic Royal Palace grounds, and contained such a vast trove of leather-bound scrolls, metal codices, and books (as a Top Secret materials custodian who has burned documents regularly as part of his duties, this would have taken an army months to actually destroy by burning. Burning is not such an easy solution as it might appear), one could imagine that significant impacts to the Library would necessarily have involved military conquest, control of the area for months or even years, along with confiscation of many documents into competing royal libraries and private collections. If indeed the documents were stolen, of course the simpler explanation of ‘they all got burned up’ would be preferable and simpleton history.

The most clever of deception is that which exploits the luxurious wisdom of the simplest explanation.

Even the most cynical of fundamentalist emperor or general would succumb to the heady nature of holding lock-and-key knowledge which no other king or civilization possessed – especially if such knowledge pertained to the cryptic emergence of mankind (see The Dual-Burden Model of Inferential Ethics – “An Example Inside Evolutionary Genetics”). Moreover, no mere riot nor civil disturbance could accomplish this level of destruction, as there simply would not have been sufficient time to destroy nor sort through most documents. No, these documents were not burned subject to the mythical sentiment of Muslim Caliph Omar, who was purported to have uttered, “They [Library documents] will either contradict the Quran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, so they are superfluous. Destroy them all.”5 I don’t buy this as history for one minute.

Exploit stakes seldom go uncaptured.

These documents were too valuable as knowledge. Knowledge is indeed power, and as such many of these documents were more precious and perishable than mere gold. In the context of a military conquest, it is more likely that an exiled curator was taken into confidence, and the Library subsequently became target of well-orchestrated pilfering – as opposed to destruction at the hand of foaming-at-the-mouth Neanderthals or hood-clad book burners. Such fairy tale imagery may serve to satisfy the shallow cravings of budding academics and atheists, but not the curious wisdom of an ethical skeptic. Isn’t it funny how simple explanatory tales always conveniently identify enemies of the Cabal as the perpetrator?

Nonetheless the real story, as is almost always the case, is not nearly as simple as we desire it to be. Many of these former Library of Alexandria documents, I conjecture, still exist in private collections and in powerful hands. The purging from history of collections such as

  • The Dead Sea Scrolls (408 – 318 bce, buried in clay jars, Qumran West Bank, disc. 1946),6
  • The Nag Hammadi Library (300 bce – 370 ad, buried in clay jars, central Egypt, disc. 1945),7 and
  • Sumerian historical and religious cylinder seals (4500 – 2100 bce, buried by conquest ???, disc. 1950’s-)8

stand as exemplary testament to the age-old handiwork of this Cabal, and their active extinguishing of anything which might broach their coveted Nelsonian knowledge. However, these collections appear to be derived from an extensive documentation of human history which has now become extinct. This absence of the library of man’s ascendancy is purposeful, not accidental.

The agencies (not simply our religious institutions) which obfuscate and control our access to information today, work analogously to the conquering armies of the past. They are meticulous in their theft and burial of that which is the property of all of mankind. They are ruthless in their obliteration of institutions and individuals which might seek or develop such knowledge outside their approval.9 They are insistent that you venerate only that which they consider to be authoritative Canon and truth. They might even hire the dilettante to abuse skepticism inside this malicious errand.10 You dear reader, as their subject, were never intended to have access to this knowledge to begin with. For of what interest is suffering unless it be made savory from the pleasant broth of ignorance? The despair of innocently not even knowing why. Who is drunk on such libation, is indeed our Enemy from the beginning.

When human intervention is the critical feature of a hypothesis, human intervention to a priori obfuscate that hypothesis, forces it into becoming the null.

An idea cannot be a conspiracy theory, if it is also the null hypothesis.

The squelching of mankind’s critical path knowledge is never benevolent. This form of pathology is not mere bias, but rather agency. Agency and influence which has persisted much longer than the vagaries of mere nation and empire.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Eternal are the Embers which Conflagrate the Library of History”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 16 Oct 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=53225

October 16, 2021 Posted by | Agenda Propaganda, Ethical Skepticism | , | Leave a comment

Oh the Quackery!

Fake medical skeptics must realize that instructing someone from a position of scientific authority, claim to facts or likelihood, to not undertake a treatment or protocol, constitutes quackery as well.
Americans are successfully employing supplements to improve their well being, and as well are increasingly sharing this success with others. As this industry inflection point unfolds, it is such a joy to witness the trolls of pretend science scoffing angrily from their parents’ basements. A wage well earned.

In a November 2017 Business Insider article journalist Erin Brodwin tendered copious amounts of medical advice concerning the supplement industry, and in particular which supplements one should and should not be taking. For example, I should be taking zinc and magnesium she instructs, but not vitamins C, cobalamine (B12), NADH (B3) nor l-methylfolate (B9). She expertly opines that most all this constitutes “pills and powders which are ineffective and sometimes dangerous”, and follows this modus absens scientific claim with an even more amazing claim, that “[All/unnamed] Public health experts recommend that people stay away from supplements altogether.” Let’s be clear – this constitutes a medical treatment advisement to me based upon a psychic diagnosis on the part of a pretend medical professional appealing to unnamed scientific authority. No more, no less. I lost count of how many times Erin cited the size of the supplement industry ($37 billion) in the article – as if this revenue turnover, which would simply inflate four-fold in price if the pharmaceutical-regulatory industry gained control of it, immediately in and of itself served to condemn such well-being management activity. As it turned out, Erin Brodwin was not simply wrong – but the medical advice she offered up to me in this article, is the same as that which has served to impart significant harm to my life for decades. In this article she was acting in the role of a quack, plain and simple.

I contend that the majority of suffering experienced by especially our US population, stems from a lack of available health knowledge on the part of its average citizen. Shill agency or no, knowledge which is squelched in the media by such fake medical skeptics as Erin Brodwin. Millions suffer, she gets a pharma-guaranteed celebrity boost to her career. Fake medical skeptics must realize, that instructing someone from a self-claimed position of scientific authority, set of ‘facts’ or even probability, that a treatment is ineffective/harmful/quackery – constitutes the making of a medical recommendation as to diagnoses, cures and appropriate treatments. Instructing someone that, not administering a treatment or arguably beneficial approach, constitutes the right medical treatment for them – is pretending to be a medical professional and offering unskilled medical advice – even if offered to a group of individuals. One cannot simultaneously make an accusation of ‘ineffective and/or dangerous’ and then qualify the accusation with the de rigueur ‘there are only anecdotes of its effectiveness’ permissive apologetic. This is dishonesty in inference, and in itself constitutes the most harm-imparting form of quackery.

Information that constitutes medical advice [is] the provision of a professional’s [or poseur’s thereof] opinion about what action an individual should or should not take with regard to their health…

Dana C. McWay, Legal and Ethical Aspects of Health Information Management1

If I could sue the skeptic-quacks who instructed me through highly publicized media releases, purported to be ‘communicating the science’ of medicine, that the following list (see ‘The Quackery’ below) was quackery – I would sue them for millions for the harm they created in my life over decades of suffering – through wrong diagnosis and erroneous treatment. An example of just such a quack-study can be found in this May 2019 ‘publication’, in the Annals of Internal Medicine no less (was simply a press release in reality): Chen F, Du M, Blumberg JB, et al. Association Among Dietary Supplement Use, Nutrient Intake, and Mortality Among U.S. Adults: A Cohort Study. A study wherein a student at Tufts University advises an entire national population as to a medical/health protocol they should not undertake (modus absens). The study was based upon death statistics among large cohorts who recalled ever taking a vitamin pill in their life, and what food they ate over 6, two year intervals. Not to mention recalling how much copper and 30 other nutrients that food had in it. Of course those who are still living are going to recall that this longevity is because they ‘ate healthy’ – this is how self-deception works in humans, and this study sought to exploit that foible. In other words, its analysis bore the agency and student conflict-of-interest (seeking to impress potential future employers) which sought to exploit noise-infused cohort stat-hacking bullshit. No wonder the study and its data are all hidden behind a paywall. An extraordinary claim to an absence (a monumental task of inference), affecting hundreds of millions of people through a medical diagnosis and treatment recommendation – and they don’t want to show the data or study. Right. A notorious trick of those seeking legislative rule (and extractive earnings) over American lives and rights.

Those seeking to keep Americans chronically sick – knowing that nutrient is being diluted from our food more and more each decade,2 they insist that all nutrient must come from our food alone, and then are mystified as to why Americans compulsively consume more calories each decade as well.

The incumbent weight battle and health harm were all imparted to me through instruction as purported medical and science aficionados, that the below approaches were quackery. When indeed all the below protocols turned out to be highly beneficial; critical in the recovery and maintenance of my well being. Such pseudoscience gets very personal and as a result, I am not afraid to call people like Brodwin and Chen, Blumberg, et al. incompetent and malicious fakers.

It is one thing to cite that the claimed benefits of a treatment have not been study-confirmed by the FDA. It is another level of harm-imparting potential to then call that same thing ‘ineffective or dangerous’.

Never trust a person who does not understand the ethical difference – and certainly never get your science nor medical advice from them, no matter what letters they may flaunt after their name.

“Supplements are an ineffective and sometimes dangerous waste of money.”

The Most Injurious Statement a Quack Can Make

Such fakers should be held legally accountable for the medical misinformation they spread. Be careful medical skeptics – the world does not suffer a lack of your cudgeling voice as to what constitutes the entire set of falsehood. Claims to absence and falsity require a much higher rigor in inference than do claims to presence,3 yet ironically such claims are doled out like candy by celebrity-seeking medical skeptics and journalists. Those foisting final claims to conclusive confidence, regarding topics about which they in reality know very little. That emotionally impaired propensity, the ‘Bunk! – I am the smartest person in the room and cannot be fooled’4 bravado, adds no value whatsoever to society. Such emotional frailty inevitably serves to impart harm, an affliction upon us all derived from one’s lack of critical knowledge and circumspection. If that is what you are here to add into the fray, then your life is of a net negative value to mankind. Celebrity or no – Doctor or no. You might help one person, and then definitely harm 10,000 in the next breath. Such sad circumstance mandates a long look in the mirror on your part.

You harm people like me – persons who no longer accept your claim to personal representation of medicine, science, science communication nor skepticism. Americans are successfully employing supplements to improve their well being, and as well are increasingly sharing this success with their friends and families. As this industry inflection point unfolds, it is such a joy to witness the trolls of pretend science scoffing angrily from their parents’ basements. A wage well earned.

The Quackery

Now first please note, that I am not a medical professional. The protocols I undertook below, while beneficial for me, do not constitute recommendations nor non-recommendations by me as to diagnoses, cures, treatments or protocols for adoption on the part of any individual. It should also be noted that each of these successes were accompanied by many more protocols I personally tested, which either failed or did nothing for me.

That being said, the following protocol introductions changed my life substantially, in order of critical benefit – each of these were pooh-pooed by skeptic-quacks over the decades (and in particular the article and study cited above), those who caused me much injury by recommending specific not-protocols, which turned out to bear harm:

    l-Methylfolate (L-5-methyltetrahydrofolate)

Transitioning from the feeling like I was dying, weakness, sweating, light-headedness and anxiety – to feeling like it was a warm spring summer day and I was well again. I could run 3 miles on an 8 minute pace in my daily workouts, but could not even walk through the grocery store nor sit through an hour and a half professional conference lecture – without wondering whether I should have them call an ambulance. It ceased within 10 minutes of taking my first l-methylfolate and has never come back. My daily folic acid vitamin I took over the decades was completely useless this entire time.

    Methylcobalamine/Adenosylcobalamine

All the same maladies as cited under l-methylfolate above, as I take this in combination with that supplement. These and more ceased within 10 minutes of taking my first methylcobalamine and have never come back. Doctor confirmed that my red blood cell count, months after starting this, had risen barely back above the anemic level. I was in the bottom 3% of the range – but to me it felt invigorating and wonderful just getting to that point.

    EDTA and Doxycycline (Both are required)

As verified by catheterization by a top cardiologist (“Well TES, I have good news and I have bad news. The bad news is, you are going to die of cancer in your mid to late 90’s most likely…”). Two years of daily therapeutic dose in the morning completely eliminated arterial plaque from both my heart (cardiologist confirmed) and (I conjecture) my brain fine capillaries and other plaque-vulnerable organs. Significant cardiovascular boost and significant boost in cognitive skills. Significant change in endurance and required breathing for heavy activity. I lost my feet callouses and my veins became supple like cooked spaghetti (according to my regular phlebotomist). The cardiologist suggested I stop, since the job was done. I did – but the benefits have sustained without diminishing, for well over 15 years now. In my 50’s, with training, I am able to beat one third of my high school 5K cross country times.

    Digestive Enzyme Pancreatin/Ox Bile/Betaine HCL

Daily left lower quadrant pain (after all other possibilities were eliminated by doctor first) was eliminated via taking this with each meal and at bedtime. Helped clear up skin.

    Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide (NADH/NAD+)

Significant boost in daily energy, mental clarity and feeling of well being. If one gets dizzy, then back off on the supplementation amount.

    Negative Ionic Fulvic Acid Suspension

Energy all day long, reduction in anxiety, reduction in autoimmune measures (thyroid peroxidase antibodies and thyroid supplement required). If I go without this for more than 48 hours, I can tell physically. The first ingestion of this afterwards is akin to drinking water after being very thirsty. Very refreshing and reinvigorating. Hair thickness boost.

    Quercetin and Bromelain

Significant reduction in face sores and rosacea. Reduction in the sick-bloated feeling after evening meal.

    Vitamin C in Larger Dose (Not ‘Mega-Dose’)

Significant reduction in time to get up off the floor. Significant improvement in flexibility. Significant reduction in joint pain. Lower rate of flu and cold styled illnesses per year. Dropped from sick once per year – to once every other or three years.

    Vitamin D3

Nominal boost in overall well being, skin and hair tone. Lower rate of depressive winter funk.

    Amla (Indian Gooseberry) Powder

Significant reduction in illness, sick feeling, brain fog and rosacea – along with an increase in well being, energy and fresher morning feeling (no bad taste in mouth). Much less joint pain in knees and ankles, and more flexible workouts.

    Eliminating Toxic Agriculture from My Diet

Significant quality of life improvements were achieved by my whole family, through the elimination of the following toxic foods from our diet:

     Soy (All types and forms)
     Soy-fed animal proteins

     GMO Corn

     Wheat/Barley/Rye/Oats/Bran

     Non-Grassfed Butter

     Dairy (All types and forms)

     Peanuts/Legumes/Peas/Lentils

     GMO Oils (Soybean, Canola, Cottonseed)

Night and day difference in overall well-being, lessened anxiety, irritable bowel syndrome, thick and slow sick/toxic feeling, autoimmune reactions – along with a significant reduction in facial redness/rosacea and increase in metal acuity/attention/alertness.

My doctor of course has helped me through one surgery and a broken ankle. I celebrate those successes. However, the endless profit-minded monitoring of my blood pressure, A1C and cholesterol – has served to dissuade the doctor’s work from my real medical needs. Decades of undiagnosed pernicious anemia. Decades of autoimmune maladies and years of painful IBS. These were the important things (which probably eventually cause out-of-range blood pressure, A1C and cholesterol in the first place).

The money-making measures were never out of line – and my doctor falsely regarded that because of this, I was therefore fine. This, to my harm and suffering. I no longer want my blood pressure, A1C and cholesterol checked by my doctor. Neither do I bathe myself in ice-water when I get a nominal 101 degree fever. Instead I look for the cause. Otherwise, to focus on only the symptom …is well, quackery.

An ethical skeptic eschews such fake knowledge which stands in substitution of the critical knowledge, path or need.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Oh the Quackery!”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 25 Jan 2020; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=44156

January 25, 2020 Posted by | Agenda Propaganda, Institutional Mandates | , | 7 Comments

Unethical Employment of Intellectual Property

Should intellectual property holders be allowed to name their patented product, the same exact name as its natural variant? Can one ethically patent a portion of a public domain item, then force the rest of that public domain item out of business – defacto patenting a formerly natural public domain resource?
Moreover, what if that ‘product’ was a pathogen? If I deploy a novel product in such a fashion, which solely as a result of my deployment of that product, threatens the prospective user with harm if they do not thereafter acquire and further propagate that new product – this is called ‘Racketeering’ under 18 U.S.C. § 1961.

In the mid 20th Century, organized crime shifted from its traditional business bases of gambling, prostitution, booze running, drug smuggling, human and weapons trafficking, to more legitimate and prima facia ethical business avenues. As a result, in 1978, Congress enacted the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO Act as it is called, in order to provide prosecutors with new sets of laws effective at combating these newer forms of quasi-legitimate criminal enterprises.1

In one of my past projects, the company I led had developed a new way to fabricate a medical treatment intervention. This new method of fabrication neutralized several defects incumbent with the old version of the treatment, and made it both a much healthier and now permanent and life-long solution to the entailed human malady, alleviating much suffering for the patients who needed this new medical technology. This intellectual property bore patentability, given that it was novel, useful, non-obvious to a practitioner in the art, had not been fairly addressed before, and was teachable and sustainable as a technology.2 As a result, we issued a barrage of intellectual property protections (both internal and external) per the chart on the right.

Subsequently, we approached several business partners to help us deploy this medical technology for benefit inside medical praxis. What I have outlined here of course is an example of an ethical employment of intellectual property. A condition wherein the technology in question is but one small specialized segment of its market vertical, and as well was actually serving to create a completely new market niche out of non-existence (ex nihilo) – and not necessarily displacing naturally occurring versions of itself into oblivion. In addition, our target user was highly interested in our product because of the novel advantage it afforded them; an advantage which they could not obtain through natural means.

But let us consider for a moment, the hypothetical circumstance wherein our technology provided more than simply those two advantages. What if our technology became so ‘beneficial’, dominant-in-practice, ‘virtuous’ or critically valuable (think ‘selling plywood before a hurricane landfall’), that it served to accomplish several of the perhaps more negative potential ramifications of intellectual property? Let’s outline two hypothetical examples of this species of negative IP condition below – in the forms of racketeering, through predation and extortion. We present the predation form of racketeering first, because it helps shed light into the critical issues involved inside how a market metastasizes under an artificial pathogen threat.

 Racketeering Predation

Intellectual Property Metastasizes Market thru Economy of Scale Exploitation

The intellectual property (IP) technology deployed either enables a better cost-inputs efficiency or enables cartel-enforced economies of scale such that it becomes predatory upon heirloom and naturally occurring species, which are healthier but now cost more to produce. When the market metastasizes, this displacement harms genetic stocks through depletion, human health through lack of nutrition and farming economies through loss of ability to affect margin.

In the example below, the FructatoTM displaces all 5 varietals of naturally occurring sweet potato from bearing market viability. Yes, these varietals can be grown, however they are not supported as a technology by the metastasized market, and now must be grown at a much greater cost, because of the economies of scale now incumbent in FructatoTM production and supply. Few real advantages were realized with the FructatoTM; rather its perception was spun by market entities who were able to propel it into a sufficient critical mass of employment, such that it appeared advantageous versus traditional options. Once all heirloom species are too expensive for farmer to grow, then the cartel using the new tech, starts calling the FructatoTM the ‘sweet potato’. Thereafter the cartel slowly raises prices and squeezes farmers into foreclosure and forfeiture to underwritten industrial farms – as is happening now in America.

This is predatory market activity – much like a mega Pet-Mart putting an entire nation of mom and pop pet stores out of business through predatory dog food pricing – employing smart Wall Street money backing to bolster the company during the predatory-loss phase, and then raising prices once all the competition has been eliminated – this is illegal trust activity.

 Racketeering Extortion

Artificial Pathogen Metastasizes Market thru Ironically Its Own Artificial Threat

A treatment (VapoxTM) for the naturally occurring illness Poxolitis, once installed in the human body, causes others around that person being treated, to reside under a threat of developing a similar but artificial/acceleration-mutated version of the pathogen (Poxolitis B) the treatment was designed to counter in the first place. Thereby mandating that family members, classmates and office workers exposed to the person receiving the intellectual property treatment, now are compelled/coerced into having to obtain that same IP from its supplier – because they have inherited an artificial/mutated disease exposure risk because of the mutations induced by the VapoxTM treatment for that paqthogen in the first place.

These stakeholders are denied their human right to their own pedigree natural immunity asset which results from Poxolits, and must purchase the intellectual property (IP) version of immunity (a predatory product called VapoxTM) in its place because of the artificial acceleration of Poxolitis mutations. A subscription must now be purchased for immunity to un-natural pathogens Poxolitis B, C, D, etc. However, this is all enacted under an implicit threat created by the profit-making IP holder, solely because of the artificial variant of the pathogen they have broadcast into the market in the first place. The pathogen can be natural or man-made, it really does not matter – as long as it has the ability to mutate in sufficient turnover.

The key unethical practice here, involves conflating in the industry praxis, both the natural immunity and artificial product symptomatology as constituting the same illness (regardless of how mild) – diagnosed by means of the same medical identifier. Once this has been done, racketeering fraud comes into play.

Do such conditions exist today? In the case of predation, absolutely this exists. In the case of extortion, we actually do not possess enough information to know whether or not that racketeering condition exists. However, one must be reminded that wilful ignorance or Nelsonian obfuscation of information surrounding 18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code Racketeering, also constitutes racketeering in itself (Section 35). It is our duty as a society and a medical industry, to find out. The way we find out, is to name and track such natural and artificial maladies by means of separate and non-ambiguous identifiers – mandatory in each instance of outbreak/use. Labs must be held accountable for the genetic signatures of the viruses they breed and submit to gain of function study. Such litmus conditions serve to place an ethical cap on the ceiling, limiting the rights and conditions claimable by an intellectual property holder. To broach either of the litmus conditions, serves to constitute a legal threshold under the 1978 RICO Act.

The critical essence of this set of ethics involves the naming and market identity conventions employed regarding novel intellectual property.

To mix the identity of naturally occurring and artificial IP variants, constitutes unethical activity.
If the measles vaccine itself can cause measles, then this derivative intellectual property disease must bear a different name entirely and cannot be registered as a ‘measles outbreak’.

Pathoteering – Racketeering by Means of Artificial Pathogen Threat

What these two hypothetical cases of racketeering serve to elucidate is the principle of racketeering by threat of artificial pathogen. My obfuscation of identity between my novel intellectual property pathogen and the naturally occurring variant may constitute Racketeering on my part, if my novel technology, of its own accord, serves to threaten its prospective users or coerce them into compliance under duress of its deployment. The issue therefore hinges on whether or not the threat which makes the purchase or acquisition of product or illegitimate establishment of market power, involves

      An intellectual property device or element of market power which

           1.  has established user or at-risk stakeholder compulsion into its market prevalence or use,

           2.  is not naturally occurring or is a derivative of a naturally occurring element,

           3.  has displaced a plurality or more of the naturally occurring market, through

                a.  illegal forms market predation,
                b.  a threat or implicit threat of harm to candidate adopters, and/or
                c.  requiring its efficacy, safety or confirmation of safety, be confirmed through its adoption by that using community, and

           4.  is ambiguously referred to by the same name as the naturally occurring variant. 

If all four exist, then this establishes the basis for 18 U.S.C. Racketeering.

Durable Franchise

A business product or service which bears a feature in that, as it grows in consumption or employment, it also serves to create a condition by which its criticality grows inside its target specific market or channel – artificially promoting it to the status of category killer or monopoly. An application, refreshment, drug, vaccine, practice or technology standard, which displaces all competing entities or alternatives, or serves to habituate the user into increasing dependency or demand for the product or service over its lifespan.

What we have served to broach here is the critical role of product identity, in the conflation of ethical burdens on the part of companies inside the separate contexts of naturally occurring and synthesized threats. The ethical standards under each circumstance are different. The exercise of enforced medicinals under threat of a naturally occurring pathogen can be ethical. However, once the threat is principally created by a modified/artificial/fabricated agent, then enforcement of that synthesized/derived agent itself, as the solution to a problem which it created in the first place, especially under the auspices of monopoly profit, constitutes 18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code Racketeering. Related excerpts from that United States Code follow.

18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code – Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 19613

Section 1951 (Extortion): Interference with commerce by threats or violence

Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires so to do, or commits or threatens physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose…

The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.

Sections 175 – 178 (Biological Harm) : biological weapons

175 (b) Additional Offense.—Whoever knowingly possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system of a type or in a quantity that, under the circumstances, is not reasonably justified by a prophylactic, protective, bona fide research, or other peaceful purpose… In this subsection, the terms “biological agent” and “toxin” do not encompass any biological agent or toxin that is in its naturally occurring environment, if the biological agent or toxin has not been cultivated, collected, or otherwise extracted from its natural source.

(1) – (4) any “biological agent”, “toxin”, “delivery system”, or “vector” which causes “death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;”

A legislative reality exists in which I am prohibited from litigating the IP-racketeering entity and seeking award damages as a result of their causing my child’s encephalitis or death. I was unable to pursue any recourse on behalf of my child, because the permanent disability encephalitic injury for my son was not able to be confirmed as a diagnosis until he was old enough to be tested for such damage – well past the 3 years of age limitation specified in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The irony is that he cannot get disability either. He is destined to live a life of poverty, working menials jobs – solely because of the malice, oppression and criminal racketeering activity of the part of the pharmaceutical industry. I will work hard to help alleviate inevitable poverty which my child will have to undergo at the hands of these incompetent elites. But I will be damned if I will be silent about it.

But at-risk families like mine can use racketeering and anti-trust laws to protect their loved ones from harm/coercion into being forced to ingest a possibly harm-potent intellectual property product – even if the entailed racketeering is enacted by society at large – and more importantly, even if we are unsure as to the existence of the four conditions above.

In other words, once a vaccine is no longer reasonably justified as a ‘prophylactic or protective’ agent against a naturally occurring microbe – and is now only protecting its coerced/threatened victims against harm imparted by its intellectual-property-derived imitation/variant – and this is clouded by the coercing entities’ or market’s or society’s conflation of the same name in common between the naturally occurring and genetic/modified/derived variant – then compulsory vaccination under this condition has become an act of Racketeering, under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code.

I cannot seek damages for my child’s injury or death, nor for pharmaceutical company Racketeering under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code, precisely because of the NCVIA of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) legislation, however

I can seek a protective injunction against Racketeering which employs coercion to enforce use of a product under a threat of implicit harm which meets the above four criteria.

The basic premise resides in this, if the disease against which I am now being vaccinated is, even in a remote possibility and even if we do not know, principally a disease which was invented by the actions of any coercing entity to begin with, and I am not aware of this because the same name is used for both the natural and artificial variants of the pathogen – I do not have to comply to such legal action, by law. I also may seek an injunction of such coercive activity under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 – U.S. Code.

I am testing this as my legal delineation between justified vaccination, and unethical vaccination which induces more harm than good. The ‘risk/benefit’ analysis which everyone keeps talking about, yet nobody actually does. I am pro-vaccine, but there is a viable limitation to such virtue, just as there is a context limit to all virtues. We as a society need to face and fathom these ethical boundaries.

Such is also the duty of an ethical skeptic.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Unethical Employment of Intellectual Property”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 27 Dec 2019; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=42337

December 27, 2019 Posted by | Agenda Propaganda, Institutional Mandates | , | 3 Comments

Chinese (Simplified)EnglishFrenchGermanHindiPortugueseRussianSpanish
%d bloggers like this: