[FRIAM] FW: Covid-Lancet-PART-2 (002).doc

Thu May 6 16:33:51 EDT 2021

Thanks, Peiter, 

At 83, we are fully vaccinated, and although we have changed our behavior very little, we breath easier.  You have that to look forward to. 

Nic

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Pieter Steenekamp
Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 2:24 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Covid-Lancet-PART-2 (002).doc

 is it true that the matter simply stands with the Hah-vud studies retracted, and nothing more said?  That doesn’t seem right.

I just don't know.

I speculated that the topic was just way too politicized to get to the bottom of it without spending serious time and effort on it and I chose not to do that. 

On a personal note, we don't yet have vaccinations in South Africa, my wife and I are each having daily doses of Quercetin, a natural over-the-counter version of  Hydroxychloroquine, and vitamin D and Zinc and a couple of other immune boosters too.   

On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 21:46, <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> > wrote:

Thanks, Pieter, 

Interesting.  As somebody who has followed the research, is it true that the matter simply stands with the Hah-vud studies retracted, and nothing more said?  That doesn’t seem right. 

Nick 

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com> > On Behalf Of Pieter Steenekamp
Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 1:12 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Covid-Lancet-PART-2 (002).doc

I'm not particularly fond of Donald Trump, but the elephant in the room is that  Hydroxychloroquine became well-known after Trump advocated it. At the time I followed and researched it a bit and I came to the conclusion that both the mainstream media and the medical industry were against  Hydroxychloroquine mainly because Trump actively advocated it. The Lancet saga certainly did not influence me to change that conclusion.

On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 19:52, Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com <mailto:wimberly3 at gmail.com> > wrote:

This does not seem interesting to me.  The vaccines have been demonstrated to be effective and safe to very large degrees based on many millions of inoculations.  Why should I care about some suspect studies with small n.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Thu, May 6, 2021, 11:33 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> > wrote:

Dear Phellow Phriammers, 

I have noted that most of what I have written here of late has been ignored, and that’s ok, actually.  Usually, it is the possibility that you MIGHT read what I write that keeps me writing and, behaviorist to the last, writing is what I need to do in order to think.  

But this situation is different.  I really don’t know what to think about Pavlovic’s <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dragan-Pavlovic-4>  paper.  There may have been some trouble with the cloud version, so I have attached it to this message. 

So, this is a case where I really need some help.  I realize that you are all engaged in this excellent correspondence about UBI, which has revealed all sorts of “-ists” that I never thought were alive and well in the world, let alone in this group.  I would not interfere with that for a second.  But, could a few of you take a look at his paper <https://1drv.ms/w/s!AptIKbsAd7gjllccpq9yXXQ4hb2N?e=HCzjaV>   (very short, a commentary, actually).  I think he is actually a candidate for this group.  He is an MD, Phd, anaesthesiologist, retired in Paris, who has participated in hundreds of scientific papers,  who is passionate ( I worry, perhaps sometimes a bit too passionate) about dozens of different things and suspicious of everything. He wants, for instance, to dig a gigantic tunnel to bring large ships directly from the danube to the Mediterranean.   

I, of course, live in a bubble, but I don’t like to have that fact thrust in my face as powerfully as when he reveals to me that the two HAAA=VUD papers denouncing Chloquoroquine were retracted a year ago, and I never found out.  I can’t get any sense of whether there has been any attempt to revive them or to redo the original clinical study that suggested HCQ’s efficacy against CoVid.   

Any little bit of help you could give me would be great. 

Nick 

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>  <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> > 
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2021 9:48 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com> >
Cc: 'Prof David West' <profwest at fastmail.fm <mailto:profwest at fastmail.fm> >
Subject: Covid-Lancet-PART-2 (002).doc

Dear Colleagues, 

I attach a paper <https://1drv.ms/w/s!AptIKbsAd7gjllccpq9yXXQ4hb2N?e=HCzjaV>  written by an internet acquaintance I made some years back, Dragan Pavlovic.  I am sending it along for two reasons.  First, it reveals (to me, at least) that the two negative studies on Hydroxychloroquine use in SARS-CoVid-19 treatment were based on unverified data and were withdrawn by their authors almost immediately.  (Have the rest of you known this for the last year and not told me?  I cannot believe, after we pilloried poor Dave for advocating for it, that he has not gloated about it. ) Second, Pavlovic raises the intension/extension distinction in the context of the interpretation of scientific results and also questions Randomized Control Trials as the "Gold Standard" for discovery. Thus, I think he is a kindred spirit, being a bit of a grumpy contrarian like many of us here.  I have promised to forward any comments you make to him, so be polite but speak truth.   

Thanks, 

Nick Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> 

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210506/e1d21085/attachment.html>