"Science" was dangerous long before Covid lockdowns, masks, distancing, jabs, etc." Lethal scientific/medical fraud did not commence in March 2020. Do not forget "the Tuskegee Study, mercury fillings,

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), veal crates, electroshock therapy, gender mutilations, napalm, mustard gas, automatic weapons, sonic weaponry, directed energy weapons, weapons in general (by MICKEY Z).

…and surgical experiments (without anesthesia) on slaves, deforestation, Vioxx, DDT, eugenics, GMOs, fossil fuels, the Milgram experiments, factory farming, the medicalization of the birthing process, vivisection, mountaintop mining, MK ULTRA, forced sterilizations, pre-frontal lobotomies, waterboarding, deep-sea bottom trawling, Accutane, land mines, and the electric chair — to name but a few.”

 

"Science" was dangerous long before Covid lockdowns, masks, distancing, jabs, etc.

Excellent cogent substack by Mickey Z:

‘Lethal scientific/medical fraud did not commence in March 2020. A detailed list of specious scientific achievements [sic] would be long enough to warrant a ten-part Netflix series. For now, here’s a sampling:

The ongoing sins of science include, for example, the Tuskegee Study, mercury fillings, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), veal crates, electroshock therapy, gender mutilations, napalm, mustard gas, automatic weapons, sonic weaponry, directed energy weapons, weapons in general, surgical experiments (without anesthesia) on slaves, deforestation, Vioxx, DDT, eugenics, GMOs, fossil fuels, the Milgram experiments, factory farming, the medicalization of the birthing process, vivisection, mountaintop mining, MK ULTRA, forced sterilizations, pre-frontal lobotomies, waterboarding, deep-sea bottom trawling, Accutane, land mines, and the electric chair — to name but a few. 

And I haven’t yet mentioned television, cellphones, automobiles (and automobile culture), the Internet, social media, and artificial intelligence!

Please allow me to introduce a few more feathers in science’s ever-expanding cap:

Since so many have fallen in love with scientists over the past four years, by all means, please allow me to introduce you to Chester M. Southam.

In 1952, he injected unknowing inmates at the Ohio State Prison with live cancer cells. Eleven years later, he did the same to 22 elderly patients at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn. Why would a man of science do such a thing? Simple, he wanted to “discover the secret of how healthy bodies fight the invasion of malignant cells.” Despite a cover-up, Southam’s atrocities were exposed and he was given the harsh punishment of (wait for it) one-year probation.

By the late 1960s, the American Cancer Society elected him vice president.

The because-science hive mind should also be enamored with the University of Iowa researchers Wendell Johnson and Mary Tudor — creators of what is now known as the “Monster Study.” In 1939, Johnson and Tudor conducted an experiment on 22 orphan children. One group was given positive speech therapy. The others got negative speech therapy. Using science as their guide, the researchers left the negative group with speech problems they retained for the rest of their lives. 

Who doesn’t appreciate the doubly dubious intersection of science and the military? A fine example occurred in 1956 and 1957 when the U.S. Army released millions of infected mosquitos into Savannah, Georgia, and Avon Park, Florida. Their “scientific” goal was to see if the insects would spread dengue fever and yellow fever — and what a success! Hundreds of unknowing civilians presented with symptoms like respiratory problems, stillbirths, fevers, encephalitis, typhoid, and death. 

And, if science is your fetish, you’ll certainly love what researchers at Harvard University did in the late 1940s. They tested diethylstilbestrol, a synthetic estrogen, on pregnant women — without their knowledge — at the Lying-In Hospital of the University of Chicago. This scientific wizardry resulted in an abnormally high number of miscarriages and babies with low birth weights.

But, hey, to question the white lab coats responsible would be tantamount to ignorance, right?

Trust me, I’ve heard all the knee-jerk complaints about how I’m conveniently ignoring the various benefits of science.

Let’s be clear: You don’t need me or anyone else to laud scientific accomplishments. That already happens 24/7 — across all forms of media, in textbooks, and in everyday conversation.

Here’s what we do need: Context, balance, and humility — on all “sides.”’

Shared here as written.