Current Affairs

"The fiasco of the 1976 ‘swine flu affair’"

What may be coming--the past doesn't repeat but it rhymes--real soon.

I remember waiting in a huge line at my college for the shot when they handed out a paper listing possible side effects. There were many horrible effects listed. (With no probabilities attached, of course.) As this was my first time seeing such a warning, I got out of line and didn't get the shot.

I'm much older now and I've been given a number of such warnings. Heck, listen to ads for drugs on network TV in which they about half the ad listing all the terrible things that may happen if you take the drug. Again, with no probabilities of any kind given. Excuse me, but I think such "information" is worthless. Maybe worse than worthless.


"Growth and regulation"

A piece by noted economist John Cochrane that will ruin your week: maybe the slower growth of the last few decades is due to regulation. Even worse the market doesn't seem to be correcting it.

If all this adds up, though, it asks the question just why "policy-making" technocratic elite, who have been so wrong about so much for so long remain able to impose such things on the rest of us. Why are they so immune from competition? 


"COVID – why terminology really, really matters"

By Malcolm Kendrick, Scottish doctor. Argues that a part of the imperfect COVID response is simply terminological confusion.

Why are these figures so all over the place? It is because we are using horribly inaccurate terminology. We are comparing apples with pomegranates to tell us how many bananas we have. Our experts are, essentially, talking gibberish, and the mainstream media is lapping it up. They are defining asymptomatic swabs as cases, and no-one is calling them out on it. Why?

See also this summary of an discussion with one Harvard and two Stanford professors.