Oh the Quackery!

Posted on January 25, 2020 by The Ethical Skeptic

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 (head cardiologist of a major cardiac center 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 and finger callouses, while 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 beat one third of my high school 5K cross country times. Cardiologist cited that I was a “1 in 10,000 exception in terms of plaque-clear cardiovascular system – and the reason I cite 10,000 is because that is the number of heart-caths I have conducted.”

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

The Distinction Between Bias and Agency

Posted on January 4, 2020 by The Ethical Skeptic

Bias comes from the inside and only becomes bias when we ignore it or are compelled to act upon it. Agency comes from the outside and seeks to leverage ignorance. Bias is the prejudice of the individual. Agency is the awesome insistence of the club. Agency is that intent which seeks virtuous godship over a lesser person or at-risk stakeholder.

What is Agency?

As part of my studies of mythology and in particular Gnostic Christianity, I made an effort to transliterate my way through some of the Nag Hammadi codex material and in particular The Hypostasis of the Archons. These Second Century early-sect Christian texts were not discovered until recently, inside buried and sealed clay jars, in upper Egypt in 1945.¹ ² In this version of early Christian mythology the ‘God’ which created the original failed prototype of mankind on Earth was named Samael. Pistis Sophia, the celestial and true God, took pity upon the suffering creature and made him into a fully sentient being – much to the indignation of Samael. As a result, Samael enslaved the new creature back into servitude under the Archons, or Rulers.

Samael, also called the ‘demiurge’, was a heavenly being, subordinate to the Supreme Being (Pistis Sophia), that was considered to be the absolute Ruler (Archon or Archangel) of the Earth – antagonistic to all that is celestial, enlightened and/or spiritual. Samael eventually came to be known as Ha-Satan,³ the one who in Levant mythology tempted Christ, the Son of Man, by offering him rule over all the kingdoms of Earth if he would only subjugate himself (and the coming Mankind) unto the authority of the Archons.

This Gnostic version of ancient writ was regarded as holy well before that Canonical consensus which was assembled three centuries later and eventually came to be called the Bible.⁴ It is no mystery why those in charge of developing that World power which would become the Christian Church would have sought to exterminate this version of scripture – causing it to flee into Egypt – because in its texts as compared to the Bible, the roles of God (Pistis Sophia, Eternal Wisdom and Faith) and Satan (Samael, Ruler of Earth) are reversed in many regards:

Of primary importance to know, is the core principal that the Chief Authority of the Rulers, Samael is spiritually blind. Because his spiritual vision was very limited in this regard, because there was apparently no one to challenge him from what he could see, and finally because he was also arrogant, he concluded that quod erat demonstrandum, he must be the most powerful entity which exists. He therefore declared himself manifestly, to be God. But as a good man knows, it is the gravest of sins to adorn one’s self in the costume of God over a fellow or lesser being.
Thereafter, the Rulers took the man Pistis Sophia had rescued from their inept hands and mercifully transmutated as well into a fully sentient being, Adam, and placed him into a great garden situated adjacent to their abode in the Levant. They tasked him to maintain and cultivate the garden. But in this garden, they had hatched another plan as well – that of a trap. The Rulers had decided to plant a Tree in the center of the garden, and to subsequently instruct their ‘Man of the Clay’, “From every tree in the garden shall you eat; yet from the tree of understanding what is not-evil and what is evil, do not eat. For in the day you eat from that tree, you will again fall under our dominion and may no longer claim this Earth which has been so unworthily bequeathed to you. You will again die like the service animal you are.” Of course the Rulers knew, that once man was told to not do something, that is the exact thing which he would elect to then do.
Nag Hammadi – The Hypostasis of the Archons (Consolidation and Transliteration)

Now of course, this cache of ancient mythological writing bears no more credibility nor lack thereof than does any other (also known as ‘noise’, see below). However such mythology can stand as a form of analogue or parable relating key messages. What interests me in these passages of the The Hypostasis of the Archons, are three key inferences:

Adam bore an exploitable bias, however Samael bore its exploiting agency. Each bears a different ontological consequence.
Relative to the array of misdeeds which can be undertaken there exists no morality, there is no virtue – as every and any intent is actually good, when compared to that intent which seeks to enact godship over a fellow or ‘lesser’ being. It is not the costume one wears, nor how one appears to regard self, but rather what one does to others – which betrays the narcissist.
In this mythology, the urge to godship on the part of the Archons was what actually constituted the original sin.

As the reader may observe, one cannot enslave mankind under a burden of racial guilt, if this last element of inference sustained as a part of holy writ. Thus, such a parable had to be exterminated – or the house would be divided against itself.

Moreover, implicit in the Nag Hammadi mythos is the understanding that, avoiding regarding one’s self under the agency of god, and treating others accordingly is actually rather straightforward in its application:

First, there is a higher wisdom, knowledge, and faithfulness (Pistis Sophia) to cherish and hold dear above all else.
Second, hold those within your reach just as worthy of this as you do yourself.

That is pretty much it. One does not have to save the world. One does not need to put on a fake humility. One does not need to extract money from hard-working people in the name of helping the oppressed refugees championed in some virtuous narcissistic fantasy. These are merely forms of godship over those ‘lesser’ than us. We are deceived often in this – that between the at-risk laborer who is harmed, and the lowly victim who is blessed, there exists an enacting, ‘humble’ and ‘virtuous’ third party who has made an implicit claim to godship inside this entire sordid play. Part of treating others as you would want to be treated, also involves holding all accountable to do their share and not simply sexually reproduce beyond sustainability and confiscate the workfruit of their fellow beings (through that third party). This does not serve to invalidate acts of taxation nor mercy of course; however, there is no mercy in this particular social play act – rather only opportunities to claim godship over one’s fellow man.

Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell.
Karl Popper

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.
Lord Acton

One does not conduct deception for the sake of deception itself. It is always conducted as part of a conflict or in a competitive context, intended to support some overarching plan or objectives of a participant.
Robert Mitchell and William Mitchell, Intelligence Specialists⁵

Therefore the mere biases of suspicion, skepticism, sponsorship, hunch, predilection or conspiracy theory are one thing – but evil is known by one signature and one signature alone – and that is agency – the intent which seeks a position of godship over a lesser being or at-risk stakeholder. To costume this intent in virtue, goodness, morality, justice, science, religious or academic robes or any other urge of the poseur, stands only to compound such evil.

Evil is known by one signature alone – agency –
that intent which seeks godship over a lesser being or at-risk stakeholder.

To costume this intent in virtue, goodness, morality, justice, science,
religious or academic robes serves only to compound its evil.

Yes, an ethical skeptic recognizes the risk inherit in bias – but also understands as well that bias, is not really our preeminent problem. Agency possesses a raison d’être or telos which does not inhabit bias. This is why the First Duty of Ethical Skepticism is to oppose agency. But first, a few definitions.

Tradecraft – refers to the techniques, methods, habits, concealment, and touch-points employed in modern espionage.
Agency – refers to an individual or entity’s consistent application of tradecraft, as opposed to mere bias.
Predator – a person or entity whose tradecraft is social virtue or conformance, and whose agency is selfishness, harm, and cleverly concealed self-aggrandizement.

Bias

Any form of development in epistemology which is conducted under a lack of epoché or skeptical neutrality. Bias is not something that one holds – as everyone possesses this form of ‘bias’. Rather bias is an action which has succumbed to such inclination, whether conscious or unconscious. It is a set of actions, postulates, questions, observations, analyses, portrayals, manipulations, methods, omissions or conclusions which are influenced in any way by a premise of non-neutrality concerning a question of inquiry or science. It can be considered an inherent variance in accuracy.

Noise

The range of variance or inconsistency in a set of measures or systemic outcomes which result from error, lack of precision, misperception, low clarity, or other deleterious contributors to the involved process. Noise presents a difficulty in that it can conceal signal, bias, and agency from being detectable. The employment of noise so as to obscure a result or bias, is a method of agency.

Agency

The manipulation of persons, institutions, procedures, risks, ignorance, biases or social message such that they bring to effect a particular surreptitious or manifest outcome. The seeking of godship over lesser, disdained or at-risk stakeholders in the form of power, virtue, moral authority, conflict, positional authority, defamation, control, retribution, sequestration, harm, death, justice, extermination, extraction of wealth, oppression or enslavement.

Bias versus Agency

Bias introduces error. Agency enforces it.

Bias is Tau. Agency is Indigo. (*see here)

Bias does not seek to govern. Agency does.

Bias does not seek to exploit other bias. Agency does.

Bias can be mitigated and worked around. Agency can not.

Bias will be acknowledged and surrendered by an honest researcher. Agency will not.

Bias can be discerned from noise. Agency uses it as camouflage.

Bias does not form a syndicate (cartel, mafia, cathedral, cabal, party). Agency does.

Bias counters its potential error by means of skepticism. Agency entrenches its correctness by joining a skeptic club.

Bias can be countered by in-context methodology and researcher discipline. Agency can not.

Bias does not celebrate, exploit, nor seek to wallow in ignorance. Agency’s argument grows stronger as ignorance increases.

Bias is identified through knowledge. Agency is identified through intelligence.

Bias will seek to protect its own. Agency will seek to harm those different.

Bias might involve standing up to a bully. Agency is the bully.

Bias does not see the full set of ramifications. Agency sets those as its goal.

Bias does not seek to bolster an institution. Agency is the institution.

Bias comes from inside. Agency comes from the outside.

Bias appeals to a higher authority aside from itself. Agency implies that it is the higher authority.

Bias can detect and deliberate an impact upon stakeholders. Agency does not care – or is even worse when it does.

Thus I have outlined as faithfully as I can muster, the threshing tool of the ethical skeptic allowing a distinction between bias and agency. Wise is he or she who understands and can master the difference.

The Ethical Skeptic, “The Distinction Between Bias and Agency”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 4 Jan 2020; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=42966

Unethical Employment of Intellectual Property

Posted on December 27, 2019 by The Ethical Skeptic

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 Fructato^TM 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 Fructato^TM production and supply. Few real advantages were realized with the Fructato^TM; 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 Fructato^TM 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 (Vapox^TM) 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 Vapox^TM 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 Vapox^TM) 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? Yes, in the case of chickens we have placed our entire chicken population at risk of extinction by means of attempting to protect them with a vaccine against Marek disease.³ Chickens are not substantially far enough removed from humans, in order for us to pretend that such a mistake could never befall our vaccination practices. Vaccines present risks on a very large scale, and one day in the casino of vaccines, in our panic over a novel disease we will make a mistake that impacts mankind in ways and to degrees never thought of before.

So in the case of predation, this market metastasization absolutely exists. In the case of extortion, we actually do not possess enough information to know whether or not racketeering conditions exist. 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, 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 § 1961⁴

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

The Ethical Skeptic

Challenging Pseudo-Skepticism, its Agency and Cultivated Ignorance

Category Archives: Institutional Mandates