Open mike 28/03/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 28th, 2025 - 78 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

78 comments on “Open mike 28/03/2025 ”

  1. gsays 1
    28 March 2025 at 6:40 am

    This is an interesting and informative look at vaccines from a conventionally educated medical doctor who was a participant in conventional hospital systems from 1989 until 2011 as an internist and nephrologist.

    Dr Suzanne Humphries is author of "Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History."

    A warning, this contains a challenge to accepted orthodoxy.

    The conversation starts with a korero about polio, the different types, how many diseases that were called polio that still exist, the link between tonsillectomies and bulbar polio and how polio is a naturally occurring bug in and on our bodies.

    The indemnity given to pharmaceutical companies in 1976 with swine flu vaccines and the harm they caused, followed by 1986 and the pertussis, dyptheria tetanus vaccine.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=207W1A_bJqI&pp=ygUVSlJFIFN1emFubmUgaHVtcGhyaWVz0gcJCWIABgo59PVc

    Reply
    • weka 1.1
      28 March 2025 at 10:39 am

      that's a long video, perhaps you could summarise her position?

      Reply
      • Incognito 1.1.1
        28 March 2025 at 10:48 am

        No, don’t just summarise it but critically examine it. A bold challenge requires bold evidence and simply posting it here on TS without critical commentary is undesirable, especially when concerning a controversial hot-topic that could endanger people’s lives. I take a dim & grim view of such behaviour – commenting here comes with responsibility.

        Reply
        • weka 1.1.1.1
          28 March 2025 at 11:00 am

          I was thinking other people would critique it, but first we have to know what it is.

          Reply
          • weka 1.1.1.1.1
            28 March 2025 at 11:02 am

            case in point, Ad has now superficially sound bite critiqued it but there's no way to know if he's guessing or he actually looked at her work 🤷‍♀️

            I agree about the need to critique, and in order to do that, we first need to have information in the thread so that people that want to comment know what is being discussed.

            Reply
          • Incognito 1.1.1.1.2
            28 March 2025 at 11:11 am

            Yes, that’s quite common here, submit a comment (i.e., a copy-pasta + link, often to YT) without taking responsibility for it and sharing & explaining one’s thinking/reasoning about the topic/content and then let others do the work (and waste their time). Is that what we want TS to be and for, a public-facing notice board for grievances, mis- and dis-information, fake news and trolling and a sandpit where some folks can play their little mind-games that have no bearing on reality?

            Reply
            • weka 1.1.1.1.2.1
              28 March 2025 at 11:17 am

              Tbf, gsays did introduce the video in their own words. I have more of a problem with people treating TS like FB and just dropping links and one liners.

              politically, I have less of a problem with gsays posting a JR vid about challenging vaccine orthodoxy (I still don't know what she actually says), than I do with the left's insistence on ostracising everyone perceived as wrong.

              Maybe the woman has something useful to say. Maybe she's wrong, in which case it's an opportunity for TS to explain how she is wrong, because there are still lots of people out there who don't understand the problems with the anti-vax narratives. There are also criticisms to be made of the vaccination orthodoxy.

              The problem here is that we will most likely have a poor debate, because no-one is going to watch a 2 hour vid to see what she is on about.

              Reply
              • Incognito …
                28 March 2025 at 11:51 am

                Tbf, gsays did introduce the video in their own words.

                […]

                Maybe she's wrong, in which case it's an opportunity for TS to explain how she is wrong […]

                […]

                The problem here is that we will most likely have a poor debate, because no-one is going to watch a 2 hour vid to see what she is on about.

                It doesn’t really matter whether the video is 2 hours or 5 mins long. A commenter submits a comment with content + reasoning that the commentariat can reason with, i.e., we can have a debate from which we can learn something and not just state opinions & entrenched views to confirm our own cognitive biases to reaffirm our self-identities.

                A mere descriptive intro is no substitute for a reasoned comment – the commenter merely acts as a messenger. If the commenter acts in good faith they will share & explain their reasoning and even state an opinion if/when prompted by the commentariat (or Mods) – it’s exceedingly rare for the original author/creator/producer of the content to show up here and engage in the debate.

                Simply put, say what you mean and mean what you say – this is the commitment and (social) responsibility of every commenter here on TS, in my opinion.

                PS, I rarely contribute to some ‘debates’ as such here other than to challenge poor commenting habits that result in poor debate to improve the debating culture here on TS.

                Reply
      • gsays 1.1.2
        28 March 2025 at 11:16 am

        Sure. Twas early and had just started work for the day but I take the point yourself and Incognito are making.

        A lot of what we have been told about vaccines is untrue and they are linked to lots of the poor health we see in the world.

        How simply a good diet, exercise and plenty of vitamin C can keep us healthy.

        The pro vaccine holy cow polio is largely pulled apart as well as smallpox.

        Because it is such a vast subject supported by propaganda from science and pharmaceutical companies for 200 years,that might explain Ad's views of a sprawling presentation.

        I also didn't go over the top with a description because a lot of people won't be interested because Joe Rogan.

        Reply
        • tWig 1.1.2.1
          28 March 2025 at 11:29 am

          Why not visit here, gsays. Debunk the Funk with Dr Wilson provides plenty of information to debunk disinformation and outright lies spread by anti-vaxxers.

          Reply
          • tWig 1.1.2.1.1
            28 March 2025 at 11:35 am

            Here, for example, in 10 mins, Wilson gives us the background to the US 1986 vaccine injury compensation legislation, debunking Rogan’s concept of 'legal immunity' granted by Big Pharma to general vaccine harm.

            Reply
            • weka 1.1.2.1.1.1
              28 March 2025 at 11:38 am

              why don't you just explain/summarise it? Because lots of people aren't going to bother watching.

              Otherwise it's duelling by youtube.

              Reply
              • tWig …
                28 March 2025 at 12:25 pm

                Well, the explanation is multi-step, and will take me about 20 mins to write.

                A 1980s US documentary claimed a US childhood vaccine caused brain inflammation, so lots of parents started suing pharma companies. The pharma cos said, well, there's very little profit margin in vaccines, so we'll just stop making them, problem solved for us. Not a good idea if you want to keep the incidence of infectious diseases that are readily contained by vaccination low. Additionally, several studies were set up to test the documentary's claims, which turned out to be pure bullshit scientifically.

                As an outcome , the 1986 legislation, applicable to US only, and not international legislation, allows individuals to place claims for personal vaccine injury to an organisation independent of pharma, funded by industry levies, in order to cut out big court battles. Which is a plus for both those who do have valid cases, and for pharma. The fund is for individual cases only. Wilson says most of the claims and payments are for shoulder injuries from the physical process of being vaccinated.

                The legislation and the fund do not mean that pharma is immune, so to speak, if they sell a vaccine that causes general harm beyond the low-level of stated and known side-effects. All the power of government and of class-action law remains to prosecute dangerous medicines.

                As for Dr Wilson's site, I have found his videos informative, scientific and understandable, and they cover a range of anti-vax topics. As you can see, just debunking a small part of Rogan's antivax messaging takes a large part of written comment. Ergo, my recommendation of him to gsays, as Wilson covers many topics.

                Remember, Rogan makes millions by peddling lies. Dr Wilson, with his 20K views or so per video, is not in it for the money, for sure.

                Reply
            • gsays 1.1.2.1.1.2
              28 March 2025 at 3:42 pm

              I've not got time ATM to look at yr linky but I will.

              Just landed in Aucks for Synthany…

              Reply
            • gsays 1.1.2.1.1.3
              29 March 2025 at 8:36 am

              Morena tWig.

              I realize there is a lot of potential for talking past each other on these sorts of things.

              I learnt a couple of things from watching the interview. The US government giving indemnity to Pharmaceutical Companies as a condition of continuing the roll out of a mass flu/H1N1 vaccination programme in 1976.

              "Soon, however, NIIP received the first of 2 crippling blows to hopes to immunize "every man, woman, and child." The first was later in 1976, when instead of boxes of bottled vaccine, the vaccine manufacturers delivered an ultimatum—that the federal government indemnify them against claims of adverse reactions as a requirement for release of the vaccines. The government quickly capitulated to industry's demand for indemnification. "

              https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3291400/

              The language I see being used in this thread is the typical binary reaction- debunked, dangerous liar, disinformation etc tell me there is something to what has been said.

              Anyhoo, off to have brekky in the big smoke and get ready for a lovely weekend.

              Reply
              • Incognito …
                29 March 2025 at 9:39 am

                The language I see being used in this thread is the typical binary reaction- debunked, dangerous liar, disinformation etc tell me there is something to what has been said. [my italics]

                In your opinion, what is that “something”?

                Reply
                • weka …
                  29 March 2025 at 9:47 am

                  that there are problems with the mainstream narrative and position on vaccination programmes and talking about that is difficult because of ideology (is how I would put it).

                  Reply
                • gsays …
                  31 March 2025 at 12:32 pm

                  Good question.

                  The something is that which contributes to a bigger picture or a greater understanding of what is amiss but clashes with an orthodoxy or narrative.

                  Eg the contrast between malnutrition and dysnutrition. Having a population running round with critically low levels of Vit C makes the body less able to heal or medicines to do their job.

                  More controversially, during Covid in an area of India (Utter Pradesh?), part of Ivermectin's efficacy was to dramatically lower the worms and parasite load in the locals guts before taking any other medications. Making those medications far more effective.

                  Reply
                  • Incognito …
                    31 March 2025 at 2:30 pm

                    Yes, that makes sense, thank you.

                    I don’t think it necessarily clashes with “an orthodoxy or narrative” to assert that low levels of Vit C or killing gut parasites with ivermectin don’t have effects on overall health and Covid-related interventions. Similarly, Vit D [supplementation] appeared to have beneficial effects in people with sub-optimal levels. The more controversial claims related to other ‘treatments’ that were more speculative (i.e., they lacked a firm scientific and/or reasoned basis at the time and many still do] and claims of direct effects on the virus. I don’t wish to re-hash those.

                    Reply
                    • gsays …
                      31 March 2025 at 3:32 pm

                      The problem still remains though. Not about health but how we all discuss issues.

                      The reaction and the language used is endemic on the left. Attack the messenger, take part of a bigger lesson out of context, then use that to dismiss and discredit.

                      It's not attractive and it ain't working.

                    • Incognito []
                      31 March 2025 at 4:11 pm

                      You’re speaking to a converted!

                      I think that there’s too much of confirmation bias and emotive reaction and not enough logical reasoning. IMO, this has nothing to do with one’s IQ or level of education but with one’s attitudes & intentions and habits & social skills. That said, no one size fits all.

            • gsays 1.1.2.1.1.4
              31 March 2025 at 9:47 am

              I had a look at this link.

              I can't really comment as it is quoting from a different clip to the one I watched.

              A wider point I am trying to make is the reaction to the likes of Rogan.

              You have a position on him, fair enough. That doesn't mean that there is nothing to be gained from him.

              I didn't know about the indemnity given to Big Pharma in the '70's by the government because of the concern around vaccine harm.

              I see from Dr Wilson's channel the first words in his description are an invitation to his Patreon. The criticisms about money are not limited to Rogan et al. In fact commerce usually doesn't underpins so much that is wrong in our world .

              Reply
        • weka 1.1.2.2
          28 March 2025 at 11:36 am

          ok, so let's tease this out (and sorry, because I know sometimes you are working and can't respond or even keep up with the conversation).

          A lot of what we have been told about vaccines is untrue and they are linked to lots of the poor health we see in the world.

          A lot? Really? Such as? I mean, I can critique aspects of mainstream vax programmes (eg the covid vaccines weren't afaik tested on people with chronic illnesses, which means people with chronic illnesses had to experiment on themselves, by vaxxing or not vaxxing). But the critique is specific.

          How simply a good diet, exercise and plenty of vitamin C can keep us healthy.

          I have a long background in alternative health (not professionally), and I completely agree that those things give people an advantage. But the reality is that many people don't have those things already integrated into their lives when they are exposed to a virus, and many of those people don't have much choice. Poverty is a major factor. From a left wing pov (and a green one), I would challenge that statement as being classist.

          Further, people with excellent healthy lifestyles still get sick. So the idea that healthy lifestyle prevents disease is both true, and not absolute. Which then leaves us with the question of what healthy lifestyles for part of the population would do if people weren't also getting vaccinated.

          My own position is to worry less about the vaccine programmes (in NZ, apart from covid19, the MoH was largely not concerned about people making a conscious choice to not vaccinate, and were rightly focused on making access to vaccination easier for those that would vax but were slipping through the cracks), and to instead focus on how we can make access to healthy lifestyles available to more people.

          There are also ethnicity class issues here. Samoan babies died because mothers got scared from a vaccine mistake death. I think there probably is a way to allow for people to not vaccinate their kids MMR, but it involved them keeping their kids out of society when that threatens other children. eg not flying to Samoa, and staying home from school and away from other children when sick. Are non-vax families willing to do that? I doubt it. Which means that Samoan babies are collateral damage.

          I also see poor science literacy and a lot of frankly bullshit in the hard core anti-vax movement, so they are much responsible for the stalemate and polarisation as the hard core pro-vaxxers.

          Reply
          • Drowsy M. Kram 1.1.2.2.1
            28 March 2025 at 2:07 pm

            yes Even "hard core pro-vaxxers" recognise that understanding the immune system and its interactions with pathogens/vaccines is a work in progress.

            Imho, vaccines are a net benefit to global health – one expert reckons vaccines are "the largest untapped resource for improving health globally."

            How vaccines train the immune system in ways no one expected [TEDxAarhus talk, Oct 2018]

            And this makes vaccines the largest untapped resource for improving health globally.

            Now there is a "but" coming, you can feel it coming up, yeah? If only it were that easy. Because we are having a really hard time getting the world to listen.

            Nobody ever proved that vaccines only have protective effects.

            And we've been accumulating data for 25 years now showing that vaccines have important non-specific effects.

            There's currently renewed interest in how vaccines might help limit antimicrobial resistance and so prolong the efficacy of 'golden age' antibiotics.

            Microbes Saving Lives and Reducing Suffering [22 Jan 2025]
            It is important to note that vaccines also play a crucial role in combating antimicrobial‐resistant (AMR) pathogens by preventing infections, reducing the reliance on antibiotics and lowering the selection pressure for resistance. New vaccines targeting AMR pathogens will be able to directly reduce the proliferation and spread of resistant strains.

            Reply
            • weka 1.1.2.2.1.1
              28 March 2025 at 3:28 pm

              my position is I want to get both sides and bang their heads together.

              Imagine what we could so with the combined powers of vaccine programmes, holistic approaches, and removing barriers to health like poverty.

              Vaccinating against our own stupidity (re AMRs), lol. It's exactly this thinking that lead to the polycrisis, and it's now functionally insane. I'm sorry, but they're fucking idiots if they are saying let's keep overusing antibiotics because we might invent some other drugs that might then make humans resist the super bugs. Capitalism is driving the antibiotic resistance crisis, but let's hold on to that for dear life and ooops, sorry nature and future generations, you're on your own.

              Meanwhile, garlic is a potent agent against bacterial infection, along with many other plants. We don't use those because we can't make money out of them, and because pig headed medical science is god people in positions of power can't see out of their silo.

              /rant 😉

              Reply
              • weka …
                28 March 2025 at 3:30 pm

                and to point out the bleeding, coughing and spluttering obvious, if we don't avert the polycrisis mainstream medicine won't survive climate collapse. That's what we should be focusing on. Oh, look, the same technology will save us attitude is stalling climate action as well.

                Reply
                • weka …
                  28 March 2025 at 3:32 pm

                  if that all sounds doom and gloom, it's not. The alternatives already exist, we just lack the political will, and our leaders apparently also lack the imagination to see what we could be doing differently.

                  Reply
              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                28 March 2025 at 5:26 pm

                I'm sorry, but they're fucking idiots if they are saying let's keep overusing antibiotics because we might invent some other drugs that might then make humans resist the super bugs.

                I didn't think they were saying that, but may have misunderstood.

                yes Re "bang their heads together", Stabell-Bemm put it well in 2018:

                Our research results are not quite yet accepted. And I've spent literally years, I think, pulling out my hair and speculating why it's so difficult to get these promising results acknowledged.

                And I think the main reason is the polarised vaccine debate.

                I can feel her frustration.

                We don’t use those [garlic and other plants] because we can’t make money out of them, and because pig headed medical science is god people in positions of power can’t see out of their silo.

                But there’s nothing to stop science-isn’t-god people using alternative/natural remedies – is there? And a variety of directions for use can be found easily enough via a Google search.

                For serious and/or advanced infections, however, antibiotics might be worth a try too.

                Reply
                • weka …
                  28 March 2025 at 8:35 pm

                  I didn't think they were saying that, but may have misunderstood.

                  I'm saying it's what they're doing. Reductionist science brings us amazing, important things, and it's also entrenched a massive blindspot. If you don't develop a response to antibiotic resistance in the context of the world where antibiotic resistance causes so many problems, how will you not repeat the problem? This is an issue of world view, not technology.

                  But there’s nothing to stop science-isn’t-god people using alternative/natural remedies – is there? And a variety of directions for use can be found easily enough via a Google search.

                  sure, but most people don't have the skills or confidence. There are a lot of people that are still irrationally against such things as well. Imagine taking your child to a doctor and saying I don't want antibiotics and the doctor teaches you how to use garlic (or other plant) instead. Why don't we do this?

                  For serious and/or advanced infections, however, antibiotics might be worth a try too.

                  Unless the bacteria causing the infection are resistant to antibiotics. See the problem?

                  Reply
                  • francesca …
                    29 March 2025 at 8:58 am

                    Phage therapy has been around for a long time , shelved in the west during the heyday of antibiotics, but continued and developed in Eastern Europe, Georgia, Russia and Poland in particular.With anti biotic resistance, western medicine has revived its interest.

                    Many westerners travel to the Tbilisi clinic in Georgia to have persistent infections treated

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy

                    Reply
                    • francesca …
                      29 March 2025 at 1:12 pm

                      I should clarify that phage therapy is the use of naturally ocurring viruses that feed off particular bacteria , like those causing dysentery, cholera, the staphylococci to name a few.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    29 March 2025 at 11:22 am

                    I'm saying it's what they're doing.

                    'They' being the authors? Here are the two sentences you seemed to be critiquing.

                    It is important to note that vaccines also play a crucial role in combating antimicrobial‐resistant (AMR) pathogens by preventing infections, reducing the reliance on antibiotics and lowering the selection pressure for resistance. New vaccines targeting AMR pathogens will be able to directly reduce the proliferation and spread of resistant strains.

                    And the critique @1.1.2.2.1.1:

                    ... they're fucking idiots if they [the authors?] are saying let's keep overusing antibiotics because we might invent some other drugs that might then make humans resist the super bugs.

                    "If they are saying" is fine, but imho the rest misrepresents what the authors are saying. They are not saying "let's keep overusing antibiotics" – in the first sentence they are saying that vaccines reduce [the need for] antibiotic use (that's good), which in turn decreases the selection pressure that facilitates (antibiotic) resistance (also good), i.e. vaccine use can decrease the incidence of antibiotic resistance.

                    Their second sentence is saying that [new] vaccines will be effective against AMR pathogens. Not sure about 'new', but the rest kinda makes sense to me, because vaccines and antibiotics act against infectious pathogens in different ways. Vaccines 'train' your immune system so that it can mount a more effective killing response to real infections, whereas antibiotics inhibit essential cellular processes in microbes – both ideally without side effects. An AMR pathogen is resistant to an antibiotic because (for example) the particular essential process targetted by the antibiotic has changed in such a way that it's no longer susceptible to (inhibited by) that antibiotic, or the pathogen has acquired the 'ability' to inactivate the antibiotic, or to pump it out of the cell, etc. etc. Apologies if some/all of the attendent info is old hat to you, and we can agree to disagree about what they are saying.

                    Amazingly, only one of the 27 authors declared a conflict of interest.

                    Imagine taking your child to a doctor and saying I don't want antibiotics and the doctor teaches you how to use garlic (or other plant) instead. Why don't we do this?

                    If that GP is trained in antimicrobial stewardship, then they should prescribe antibiotics only if they believe they are needed and will be effective. As an aside, most clinical antibiotics/antimicrobials are derived from / inspired by chemicals isolated from natural sources.

                    https://bpac.org.nz/antibiotics/guide.aspx

                    I'm guessing that some GPs might not feel confident about teaching patients to use garlic (or other plants) to treat illness and injury – it could be a gap in their training, and/or they might not believe that garlic is the most effective treatment option and so be concerned about how such advice might play out, for the patient and for them. I can suck a Comvita lemon honey lozenge with the best of them, but if my GP suggested garlic for anything other than minor (skin) infections then I’d definitely seek a second opinion from Dr Google – and I like garlic!

                    Unless the bacteria causing the infection are resistant to antibiotics. See the problem?

                    I'm aware of health problem(s) posed by AMR bacteria, particularly the big six (ESKAPE). If an infection is serious and/or advanced enough to require hospitalisation (assuming one can gain admission), then antibiotics are your friend. Efforts will likely be made to determine the antibiotic susceptibility profile of the offending pathogen(s), possibly by Medlab Central in the case of PN Hospital.

                    Antibiotics with coverage against gram-positive and gram-negative organisms, including Pseudomonas, should be empirically started and then tailored according to susceptibility pattern of isolated organisms. – Medscape

                    Here's a promising prototype for antibiotic susceptibility testing – the three-hour turnaround time is impressive, and time is of the essence!

                    Reply
                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 2:08 pm

                      did they say "we need to reduce antibiotic use as soon as possible and as fast as possible, both in human medicine and animal rearing?" Because if they didn't, they're the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

                      It’s the same dynamic as people saying we can solve climate change with carbon credits and carbon capture and storage. It’s not that those things are wrong/bad, it’s that the situation is so dire we have to drop GHGs immediately (and antibiotics).

                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 2:17 pm

                      If that GP is trained in antimicrobial stewardship, then they should prescribe antibiotics only if they believe they are needed and will be effective. As an aside, most clinical antibiotics/antimicrobials are derived from / inspired by chemicals isolated from natural sources.

                      Yes, that's nice. Meanwhile, humans are still massively overusing antibiotics and much of that is driven by GPs and other doctors. I don't think it's as bad as it used to be, but it's still rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

                      I'm guessing that some GPs might not feel confident about teaching patients to use garlic (or other plants) to treat illness and injury – it could be a gap in their training, and/or they might not believe that garlic is the most effective treatment option and so be concerned about how such advice might play out, for the patient and for them. I can suck a Comvita lemon honey lozenge with the best of them, but if my GP suggested garlic for anything other than minor (skin) infections then I’d definitely seek a second opinion from Dr Google – and I likegarlic!

                      Right. GPs aren't trained to help people recover from bacterial illnesses without antibiotics. Why not? Using plants instead is not an unskilled task, nor is caring for wounds or other problems caused by bacteria. Dr Google is helpful for some people, not many people don't have the time or skills to make use of that, they need assistance which is why they end up at the GP or A&E.

                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 2:24 pm

                      If an infection is serious and/or advanced enough to require hospitalisation (assuming one can gain admission), then antibiotics are your friend.

                      I think you might be missing my point, so let me try and explain it better.

                      Superbugs are a consequence of overuse of antibiotic prescribing. Sometimes people didn't actually need them, sometimes they did. Of those that did, there have been other options eg from plants. A very large number of antibiotic prescriptions in the past 50 years were unnecessary and have caused a crisis.

                      The reason we haven't been using plants is because mainstream society and mainstream medicine are in an ideological cul de sac. Even today you have people arguing that plant medicine doesn't work despite there being sufficient medical research to prove that it does (assuming one doesn't want to trust empirical and traditional evidence).

                      We've known about the superbug for many decades, so why are we not using the alternatives?

                      People end up with intractable bacterial infections sometimes because of the superbugs. Antibiotics are not their friend. There is no doubt that antibiotics are a huge boon for humans, and we've squandered their gift, stupidly.

                      Plant medicine can be used in serious situations too. I'm not saying never use antibiotics, plant medicines and other modalities can be used alongside antibiotics and vice versa. I'm arguing that mainstream medicine needs to get over itself and set up systems that allow practitioners to step out of the reductionist mindset. There are plenty who can do that, and the new generations of doctors keep getting better, but they are hampered by the medical culture that is entrenched in a world view that is harmful.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    29 March 2025 at 2:52 pm

                    did they say "we need to reduce antibiotic use as soon as possible and as fast as possible, both in human medicine and animal rearing?" Because if they didn't…

                    It's a comprehensive and lengthy paper (27 contributing experts, 61 pages) – I was giving my take on what the authors did say/write.

                    If you would now prefer to 'focus' on what the authors didn't say, that's fine. I searched the PDF for your quote and didn't find it, but I did find this, on pages 8-9, which perhaps addresses 'animal rearing'.

                    3.13 | Challenge 2: Antimicrobial Resistance
                    In addition to the development and deployment of new technologies, there must also be accompanying measures which ensure the reduction in non-clinical use of antimicrobial agents to lower environmental selection pressures for evolution and transmission of AMR, and provide the education which will be required to achieve this.

                    I remain unconvinced that the authors are advocating for "overusing antibiotics" – on the contrary, they appear to appreciate the benefits of "reducing the reliance on antibiotics and lowering the selection pressure for resistance", and I'm at a loss as to why that received such a hostile reception. I thought the paper was informative and well written.

                    Perhaps this mini-review will be more to your liking.

                    Mini Review: Antimicrobial Agents Based on Natural Compounds: The Key to Solving the Current Crisis
                    [15 Sept 2024]

                    https://brieflands.com/articles/apid-146195

                    Reply
                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 6:10 pm

                      if someone writes a paper on this amazing technology we're going to invent and build to solve the climate crisis, called carbon capture and storage, and they don't also talk about reducing GHGs fast, it's not unreasonable to assume they don't understand the problem or the solution (and in the case of CCS advocates, they often want us not to drop GHGs because of the impact on civilisation).

                      Likewise, if someone is writing about this brave new tech that will help solve the superbug problem, but aren't also advocating for the lessening of use of antibiotics in medicine, then I have to wonder what their understanding of the problem and solutions is.

                      We don't need to develop more vaccines to combat superbugs if we stop producing pathogenic strains of bacteria in the first place, and use the tools we already have that don’t create more superbugs.

                      Or, there was an old lady who swallowed a fly…

                      Anyhoo, you seem to be ignoring my central point, which is that the kind of thinking that bought us superbugs can't be used to find the solution to that. Likewise climate.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    29 March 2025 at 8:11 pm

                    if someone writes a paper on this amazing technology we're going to invent and build to solve the climate crisis…

                    Microbes Saving Lives and Reducing Suffering [22 Jan 2025]
                    1 Introduction
                    Given the overexploitation of the resources of planet Earth, due in large part to the ever-increasing human population, which has already compromised vital planetary processes, the limitations of which are encapsulated in planetary boundaries and climate tipping points, it would not be unexpected that a visitor from Mars might well be confused, or at least bemused, by our efforts to save lives and reduce morbidity.

                    Likewise, if someone is writing about this brave new tech that will help solve the superbug problem, but aren't also advocating for the lessening of use of antibiotics in medicine, then I have to wonder what their understanding of the problem and solutions is.

                    If you believe the authors are advocating for "overusing antibiotics", then let’s agree to disagree. I believe the authors have a good an grasp of "the superbug problem", including the role of antibiotic (mis)use.

                    As for solutions, each to their own. My (much loved and admirable) maternal grandmother was a strict follower of Dr Ulric Williams, which was problematic for my mother. Fortunately, Grandma had mellowed by the time her grandchildren were born, and lived into her mid-90s – because of, or in spite of her faith in Williams, no-one living knows.

                    Anyhoo, I think it's great that people are pursuing new and/or alternative solutions for the superbug problem. If push comes to shove again, however, then I'm going to be guided by "mainstream medicine" advice. I won't follow that advice blindly, of course, but it has saved my life more than once, hence my faith.

                    Reply
                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 9:31 pm

                      "As for solutions, each to their own"

                      Do you think that about the climate crisis as well?

                    • weka …
                      29 March 2025 at 9:33 pm

                      Anyhoo, I think it's great that people are pursuing new and/or alternative solutions for the superbug problem. If push comes to shove again, however, then I'm going to be guided by "mainstream medicine" advice. I won't follow that advice blindly, of course, but it has saved my life more than once, hence my faith.

                      Of course. I'm not talking about people's personal choices about their healthcare. I'm talking about the politics of medical science and where we are getting it wrong.

                      If medical science refuses to work with plant medicine so as to not over-using antibiotics, that's just daft.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    30 March 2025 at 10:01 am

                    Do you think that about the climate crisis as well?

                    Yes, people and/or groups concerned about anthropogenic global warming can decide how to decrease (their) carbon footprints. Imho, a universal solution is unrealistic – people can do a variety of (evidence-based) things (plant trees, buy less stuff, eat less meat/dairy, switch to electric transport/heating, recycle, etc.). Some can do more than others.

                    If medical science refuses to work with plant medicine so as to not over-using antibiotics, that's just daft.

                    ?? Possibly too many ideas for my reductionist brain to handle – the link between "medical science refuses to work with plant medicine" and "so as not over-using antibiotics" is unclear to me.

                    Agree with "If" – not sure 'medical science' refuses to work with 'plant medicine', but if it does, it won't be a blanket ‘politcal’ refusal. The anticancer drug taxol springs to mind, and cucumber slices to improve undereye skin, plus many traditional Chinese medicines contain plant materials. Refusing to use 'plant medicine', or indeed any medicine that works for you, when you need it would be daft. You might be interested in this brief editorial.

                    Amid Growing Evidence of Conflicts of Interest and Obdurate Groupthink in Medical Journals, Researchers Must Entertain Contrarian Ideas [23 Jan 2025]

                    A Google search indicates there is scope to expand the links between traditional plant-based healers/treatments and medical researchers.

                    Fields of Plenty [Sept-Oct 2011]
                    Look closer. The straggling plants on the riverbank, the so-called weeds in the garden, the insect-eaten leaves on the forest’s edge—often ploughed, sprayed or simply ignored—are finding their way back into the medicine chest. And Māori herbal remedies, once derided and outlawed by an act of Parliament, are revealing their curative power.
                    …
                    Concerns over the sustainability of medicinal plants are not confined to New Zealand. As the New Scientist reported in 2009, globally between 15,000 and 50,000 medicinal plants are under threat of extinction. The ramifications of such loss are huge, says Burgess, who is part of the International Research Group for the Conservation of Medicinal Plants.

                    “More than 400,000 tonnes of medicinal and aromatic plants are traded in the world each year. The great majority of these are harvested from the wild so they each have an impact on their local ecosystem and the people that depend on it.”

                    https://teara.govt.nz/en/rongoa-medicinal-use-of-plants

                    The rise of phytopharmaceuticals in India [Sept-Dec 2024]
                    Over time, the traditional knowledge of herbal medicines has evolved into modern phytopharmaceuticals, where scientific validation, standardization, and regulatory oversight have become integral parts of drug development.

                    Ethnobotanical knowledge and its role in the development of Indian phytopharmaceuticals [Sept-Dec 2024]
                    Ethnobotany is definitely set for an upward trend and expansion in the near future, driven as it will be by continual advances in biotechnology, scope for joint collaboration between traditional healers and modern science, and supportive policies and institutional frameworks.

                    Reply
                    • weka …
                      30 March 2025 at 10:36 am

                      Yes, people and/or groups concerned about anthropogenic global warming can decide how to decrease (their) carbon footprints. Imho, a universal solution is unrealistic – people can do a variety of (evidence-based) things (plant trees, buy less stuff, eat less meat/dairy, switch to electric transport/heating, recycle, etc.). Some can do more than others.

                      we're really talking past each other. I said I'm not talking about individual health choices, or climate action choices. I'm talking about what professionals, organisations, researchers do.

                      If we are all free to do what we want, then people will go with CCS and the world will burn. That is in fact what is happening, which renders the rest of our conversation moot because modern medical systems won't survive climate collapse.

                      My argument is that what we need instead is to change how we think about the problems, because the reductionist thinking that gave use CC won't solve CC, it will make it worse.

                      Reductionist thinking is a fantastic tool, we need it for hard science research and applications (eg how to measure carbon in the atmosphere). But it really sucks as a way of understanding complex systems (the intersection of GHG emissions, capitalism, human nature, politics).

                      Systems thinking is not something we get taught, at least not in Western societies. We have to learn it. I can systems think and also use reductionist thinking, but because I wasn't formally educated I struggle to explain what systems thinking is and how to get there (and why it matters so much).

                      The good news is that some medical science people are system thinkers and that appears to be increasing, but it's glacially slow, far to slow to solve the superbug crisis.

                    • weka …
                      30 March 2025 at 10:42 am

                      Agree with "If" – not sure 'medical science' refuses to work with 'plant medicine', but if it does, it won't be a blanket ‘politcal’ refusal. The anticancer drug taxol springs to mind, and cucumber slices to improve undereye skin, plus many traditional Chinese medicinescontain plant materials. Refusing to use 'plant medicine', or indeed any medicine that works for you, when you need it would be daft. You might be interested in this brief editorial.

                      If medical science had integrated plant medicine, anyone could do to their GP and be taught how to use garlic or whatever to heal their bacterial infection.

                      Taxol isn't a plant medicine, it's a drug. Having derived it from a plant doesn't make it a plant medicine.

                      TCM herbal medicine doesn't contain plant medicines, it IS plant medicine.

                      Medical science does research on plant medicines. What it doesn't do is integrate other systems (like TCM or western herbal medicine) in our current health care. When I say it refuses to, I mean that literally. The opportunity exists and the people in all those systems don't take that opportunity (yes, yes #notalldoctors).

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    30 March 2025 at 11:19 am

                    Taxol isn't a plant medicine, it's a drug. Having derived it from a plant doesn't make it a plant medicine.

                    Taxol is a naturally occurring chemical, originally purified from plants, that is used as an anticancer drug – I think of it as both 'a plant medicine' and 'a drug', and we can agree to disagree.

                    The first 3500 years of aspirin history from its roots – A concise summary [2 Nov 2018]
                    Aspirin is currently the most widely used drug worldwide, and has been clearly one of the most important pharmacological achievements of the twentieth century. Historians of medicine have traced its birth in 1897, but the fascinating history of aspirin actually dates back >3500 years, when willow bark was used as a painkiller and antipyretic by Sumerians and Egyptians, and then by great physicians from ancient Greece and Rome.

                    Any mobile resident of Palmerston North can freely access willow bark (plant medicine) for pain relief – otherwise they have to pay $8 for a packet of 16 tablets at Woolworths.

                    Reply
                    • weka …
                      30 March 2025 at 12:00 pm

                      when you take a single constituent from a plant it's no longer a plant medicine, it's a drug.

                      For instance, willow is a plant with many constituents (chemical compounds) and a variety of herbal medicine uses. Aspirin is a drug, comprised of a single medicinal constituent (acetylsalicylic acid) and some other ingredients to form it into a tablet. They are not even close to being the same despite both having ASA.

                      This isn't an issue of semantics, although I'm going to use the term herbal medicine instead of plant medicine, for extra clarity.

                      willow as a herbal medicine and aspirin have distinctly different effects on the body, both medicinal and side effects. That's because one is a single constituent and the other is multiple compounds. The amount of ASA in aspirin is huge compared to the amount in a cup of willow bark tea.

                      Saying that willow bark and aspirin are interchangeable (the Palmie example), is inaccurate and dangerous on the dose issue alone. You need two different knowledge bases to use each. The difference in dose also accounts for the difference in side effects and the potential for overdose.

                      In herbal medicines (whole plants prepared in various ways), the multiple ingredients matter alongside the perceived active ingredients. Sometimes they buffer side effects, sometimes they have medicinal action in their own right, sometimes it's a matter of the synergy of all the compounds in that plant.

                      As far as I know the ASA in aspirin is now synthesised, they're not harvesting willow bark to make it. Which is fine if you want a drug, but it's not a herbal medicine.

                      Medical science is good at single constituents, it's not very good (yet) and understanding the interplay of compounds in whole plants. There are also differences in how herbal medicine is used compared to drugs, at the practitioner level. There are very real differences in how drugs work in the body compared to herbal medicines, and those difference matter.

                      To go back to the garlic example, it looks like garlic use doesn't promote bacteria to develop resistance to garlic because of the complexity of garlic constituent compounds. But if you took one of the compounds out of garlic, and use that instead, I expect the bacteria would figure it out.

                      Garlic in addition to killing bacteria when it comes in contact with them, also changes the immune system in humans.

                      The key concept here is understanding the difference between reductionist (single constituent) and whole system, more than the sum of the parts (a plant with many constituents interacting together). That's what I meant about reductionist and systems thinking.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    30 March 2025 at 11:47 am

                    we're really talking past each other. I said I'm not talking about individual health choices, or climate action choices. I'm talking about what professionals, organisations, researchers do.

                    When you wrote (@9:31 pm):

                    "As for solutions, each to their own"

                    Do you think that about the climate crisis as well?

                    I thought you were asking about individual choices (each to their own) – my bad. Still, professionals and researchers are individuals too.

                    Off to the Hands Around Palmerston North Hospital event now – it’s a nice day for a walk.

                    FINAL POST ON HANDS AROUND PALMERSTON NORTH HOSPITAL FOR TOMORROW [SUNDAY] INCLUDING PARKING OPTIONS

                    https://www.facebook.com/groups/712464137379398/posts/1066234645335677/

                    Reply
                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    30 March 2025 at 5:24 pm

                    That’s what I meant about reductionist and systems thinking.

                    I like systems thinking, including its explanatory power re therapeutic differences between purified biomolecules and crude extracts.

                    Aspirin has (potential) side effects, which vary from person to person – this is true of the aspirin in willow bark. I might be able to figure out how to obtain effective, reproducible and safe pain relief from willow bark, but time grows short, and Hands Around Palmerston North (organised by Patient Voice Aotearoa), showing community support for hospital workers, seemed like a better use of time – each to their own.

                    Nurses, doctors, the Greens, TPM and the PSA were well represented, and local Labour MP Tangi Utikere attended. Our deputy mayor spoke of her reasons for supporting the gathering, and the president of ASMS gave her views on the current public health crisis – despite the seriousness of the problem, the event had a feel-good vibe.

                    Re garlic, if everyone started using it to treat infections, I wonder if bacteria would figure it out, sooner or later. This is worth another look.

                    Evaluation of Garlic-Resistance in E. coli (strain K12)

                    I'm sensing antibiotic resistance. Nevertheless, herbal products used in combination with antibiotics might do the trick for a bit – time will tell.

                    Antibacterial properties of Allium sativum L. against the most emerging multidrug-resistant bacteria and its synergy with antibiotics [2021]

                    Herbal Products and Their Active Constituents Used Alone and in Combination with Antibiotics against Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria [2023]

                    Reply
          • gsays 1.1.2.2.2
            31 March 2025 at 1:36 pm

            Hi weka, firstly cheers for yr even handedness in this unintentional grenade I dropped a few days ago.

            Context is important and my world view includes acres of cynicism and skepticism when dealing with authorities and corporations. A brief example being, during covid, my wife, a senior ED nurse, having to fight tooth and nail to get access for scrubs as a uniform in the emergency department.

            Management repeatedly sent out emails and reminders for this not to happen as it hadn't been funded.

            She was expected to clean her own uniform at home.

            At the heart of many conversations that have sprung out since I posted the video EG your korero with drowsy -plant medicine versus conventional medicine. Commerce is at the foundation of it.

            It will impact big Pharma profits if people are able to treat common ailments themselves or prevent getting them, herbally.

            The same commerce is what funds science so sometimes it can be hard for scientists and doctors to remain neutral or dispassionate when their livelihood depends on a commerce. Doctors and the tobacco industry.

            In a related aside I've just about finished Careless People by Sarah Williams. High up in Facebook, that is riddled with examples of how corporations say one thing and mean another.

            Reply
            • weka 1.1.2.2.2.1
              31 March 2025 at 1:52 pm

              it amazes me how much of the left see big pharma as benign or even Good. I think partly because so many people are dependent on medicines, or have loved ones who are. Easier for those of us who are comfortable with the alternatives. Not that I think medicines aren't useful, just I don't have the same degree of dependency.

              I see in the gender/sex wars too, the shock at the idea that there are doctors and drug companies making money and power from transition medicine, or in some way driving it. Feminism has long critiqued the over-medicalisation of vulnerable humans and groups of humans, and this didn't used to be controversial on the left, but I guess this isn't the only thing the left has forgotten about feminism, quelle suprise.

              I also see it in the number of liberals who cannot tolerate the idea of alternative medicine and see it all as a sham. Particularly women I see saying they tried this remedy and it didn't work and they are completely oblivious to how many people manage their health and illness in this way successfully. It's an intriguing but sad blindspot.

              Big pharma are like all the other global mega industries, utterly captured by capitalism despite the good things they do. Also drivers of the polycrisis, I cringe every time I engage with the health system and see the amount of 'disposables' used, it's easy to see this multipled globally. I'm old enough to remember when that wasn't so.

              I'm tempted to say there are better people to follow than Rogan, but I will see if I can think of them first (I'm sure there are, but it's not something I follow a lot atm).

              Reply
              • gsays …
                31 March 2025 at 2:32 pm

                Cheers.

                If it helps, I don't follow Rogan or anyone.

                My 23yr old son sent me the link. Incidentally he is atypical of the males that the 'Left' need to reconnect with. Shared and cares about folk but voted ACT! For one issue, opposing the online gun register. (More than likely a distrust of authority he may have picked up from someone 😉).

                I also had a look at JR when he had the Canadian Professor of Psychology that dare not speak his name and again to watch part of Trumps interview.

                You are so right about not making folk a pariah. I listened to The Leftist Collective video while doing leaves this morning. I was hoping they would have dwelled on how to unify the Left a little longer.

                Reply
                • weka …
                  31 March 2025 at 2:40 pm

                  I hope they dwell on it some more going forward!

                  Not sure if you saw my comments on that post, but I was impressed by how well they all spoke with each other despite differences. Respect. That gave me hope I hadn't felt in a while. Would love to know where the outer boundary on that is 😉

                  Reply
                  • gsays …
                    31 March 2025 at 3:42 pm

                    Yes I had a read through that thread.

                    In the video, Samah Huriwai-Seger was spot on. She skewered Labour/Hipkins and their prevarication over the Palestinian Genocide and his 'appeal to the Green bashers/Centrists' comment on Tamantha Paul.

                    Reply
    • Ad 1.2
      28 March 2025 at 10:47 am

      So it's a really cumbersome analogy from one entirely different disease and vaccine to another totally unrelated one 6 decades later.

      Yeah great.

      Reply
    • tWig 1.3
      28 March 2025 at 11:22 am

      Really gsays? Jo Rogan? One of the ways that polio was contained before vaccination was by shutting down schools for months at a time, which decreased transmission rates. Anti-shutdown protesters of Covid would throw conniptions: what about social isolation at critical periods of child development, etc?

      Plus polio is the gift that keeps on giving. A friend who contracted polio as a child in NZ is facing this: Post-polio syndrome, which can debilitate people in later life. And polio is not a disease that differentiates between rich and poor, between those low in essential vitamins.

      Almost no medical intervention is safe. All have risks, and medicine and technology have done the world a disservice by papering over them. Because of patient-advocacy, at least these days doctors are required to point them out to us when choosing treatment. But nuance cannot be delivered without background, and prerequires an understanding of medical ethics and risk assessment.

      Rogan is pushing Humphries, not because he chose her, but I bet because someone is paying him money to push an anti-immunisation message, possibly even the US government. Humphries herself believes that multiple Vitamin C injections (used before antibiotics) are better than effective antibiotic treatment against Bordetella pertussis, the organism that causes potentially fatal whooping cough in infants.

      The US CDC, what remains still in control of public health, is worried about a measles epidemic that is starting across the US, due to a drop in immunisation in the last decade below 95%. According to the article, on exposure nine in 10 unvaccinated people will contract measles, which is highly contagious. One in five children with measles will need hospitalisation. One in five.

      Rogan is doing damage control for the anti-vaxx lobby, to counter the completely valid alarm over the US measles outbreak. Those who refused vaccination for their children are now reassessing their ideas, and Humphries is out there spreading misinformation to keep people in the anti-vaxx fold.

      Reply
    • Kokako 1.4
      28 March 2025 at 6:00 pm

      This is incredibly irresponsible disinformation. This doctor claims in the book you reference that polio is not caused by a virus. She is a complete quack, making money off fabricating science to cater to a paying audience. You should be ashamed.

      [please correct your e-mail address next time, thanks – Incognito]

      Reply
    • joe90 1.5
      28 March 2025 at 7:48 pm

      Dr Suzanne Humphries is author of "Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History."

      A detailed debunking of the dangerous crank's claims about polio..

      This is a longer version of my post on Friday, November 9th, 2018. It is a lengthy discussion of why Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk’s book Dissolving Illusions misrepresents the dangers of polio, one in a series of posts that should comprehensively show the problems with their claims. It covers far more than just polio, but is worthwhile for those interested in the details.

      https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/wrong-about-polio-a-review-of-suzanne-humphries-md-and-roman-bystrianyks-dissolving-illusions-part-1-the-long-version/

      Reply
  2. Ad 2
    28 March 2025 at 11:10 am

    So now we have the stage set for a referendum on Trumpism.

    We've just had the German one, and the result of that was the small-c conservatives won and within it a most stupendous increase in federal spending in all sorts of areas right across the board.

    In the UK the result is pretty much the same as the German one. Socially small c conservative but a whopping re-arm and re-build in infrastructure.

    We've just had the Greenland one and the answer is a resolute No Thanks to Trump. Can't wait to see the reception to the visit by the US D-level team coming up.

    Next week the big US car tariffs hit the world. Which feeds to…

    … On Monday 28 April we have the Canadian Federal election. A pretty good chance that the centre-left that has dominated Canada for decades will continue. And a fully united front behind both Federal and State governments that we haven't seen in decades there.

    Now we have Australia on 3 May. Dutton would be scary and no friend of ours, so there's a lot riding on it regionally. But Albanese has a good shot if the vote share in Western Australia, Queensland, Victorian Melbourne area and South Australia hold up.

    Canada, Australia and New Zealand so far have only see negligible support for populist politicians.

    Mexico is the big leftie standout with President Claudia Sheinbaum governing with her Morena populist left party in coalition with the Greens and the Labour Party, and she takes any opportunity to stick it to Trump.

    In India, Narendra Modi remained in power after the 2024 elections but only in coalition with other right-wing parties after losing 60 seats. He's fully fading now.

    In Türkiye’s 2023 elections, Recep Erdoğan’s ruling party lost 27 seats but remained in power in coalition with other far-right and conservative parties.

    In Brazil’s 2022 Presidential elections, the left-wing Lula da Siva beat the incumbent populist right-wing leader, Jair Bolsonaro. And Bolsonaro is going to jail. Lula is a true independent and leftie champ.

    In Poland, Donald Tusk’s centre-right Civic Platform Party has advanced liberal/internationalist/progressive policies in coalition with other centrist parties, having defeated the incumbent right-wing populist Law and Justice Party in the 2023 legislative elections. Not easy to have simple labels anymore.

    So take a breath from the melancholy people.

    We should take heart that the big hard right populist swing behind Trump across the world is simply not happening.

    It ain't hope, sure, but it ain't disaster either.

    Reply
  3. tWig 3
    28 March 2025 at 11:56 am

    Paul Barlow unpacks the media framing of Tamitha Paul's comments on police last week.

    "How three little words showed us media agenda setting in action".

    Paul also provides context: the balance of government investment in social programmes for crime prevention, rather than 'tough on crime' ambulance-at-the-bottom-of-the-cliff pressure.

    Paul also shows how negative media messages against Māori, particularly wāhine Māori, increases audience numbers for the right-wing media, by fomenting outrage and failing to provide context.

    Reply
    • Anne 3.1
      28 March 2025 at 12:33 pm

      Tamatha Paul was absolutely right but maybe she could have framed it a little better.

      A significant portion of the population do not trust the police. Some of it is generational and had its genesis back in the days when Maori had their land stolen from them. In other cases it has been personal experience.

      I watched a TV1 news clip last night and all the respondents bar one were Pakeha. Of they "trusted the police." The non-whiter didn't seem to know.

      Institutional racism is still a thing in the NZ Police. I well recall Tariana Turia describing an incident where she and her husband were stopped in their car by police. The reason why? They were brown and were subjected to a round of insulting questions before being allowed to continue. I bet if we law-abiding Pakeha were treated like that we wouldn't trust them either.

      Reply
    • weka 3.2
      28 March 2025 at 1:33 pm

      yes.

      and,

      The Greens know that, and need to change how they do their comms.

      Reply
  4. Incognito 4
    28 March 2025 at 12:14 pm

    I still haven’t seen a video or transcript of Tamatha Paul’s original comments that caused so much outrage in certain quarters (i.e., in NZ Trump Land).

    In subsequent interviews she was calm, reasoned, and robust, so I’m guessing that the outrage was manufactured.

    This [Tamatha Paul’s original comments] prompted outrage from the government as well as the Labour Party, with various politicians claiming she was “ill-informed” and in “la la land”. The only problem with all of this is that, from a criminological perspective, Tamatha Paul is completely correct.

    […]

    That Paul’s remarks, as well-evidenced and reasonable as they are, were met with such fervent opposition from four party leaders [+ some other shills] is deeply concerning, and reflects a broader shift towards rightwing populism.

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/28-03-2025/is-tamatha-paul-in-la-la-land-heres-what-the-evidence-says

    I most disappointed but not altogether surprised about Chris Hipkins joining the fray of outraged RW males – Labour would do well to replace him before GE-2026.

    Reply
    • weka 4.1
      28 March 2025 at 1:34 pm

      I don't think her original comments are in the public domain.

      Reply
      • Incognito 4.1.1
        28 March 2025 at 1:53 pm

        So, only the (manufactured) outrage, which is disappointing but not surprising – what’s even more disappointing is how many people are all too willing to jump on the RW bandwagon on this. I’m guided & informed by her subsequent interviews that are available and accessible in the public domain to form my opinion.

        Reply
        • weka 4.1.1.1
          28 March 2025 at 3:22 pm

          she spoke at a student panel. My guess is that there were RW people there to report and shit stir.

          I haven't kept up but I hope the subsequent interviews are getting reach. I want the Greens to have more MPs after the next election.

          Reply
      • ianmac 4.1.2
        28 March 2025 at 2:18 pm

        I think the Hipkins quote was to a reporters question but not referring directly to the Paul situation. Tricky reporting if so?

        Reply
        • Anne 4.1.2.1
          28 March 2025 at 4:48 pm

          And the chances are he hadn't seen or heard about what she actually said, and was reliant upon a reporter's interpretation. It stacks up because he was ahead of all the other pollies to react.

          Btw, note to moderators:

          I can't speak for others but I have difficulty reading the very small edit box. Poor eyesight and arthritic fingers mean my contributions require editing and correction. Today at 3.1, I ended up leaving out half a sentence. blush

          Any chance of a better editing panel?

          Reply
  5. Barfly 5
    28 March 2025 at 5:54 pm

    Where's the protests over the minimum wage and MW adjacent workers getting stuffed over by the government?

    Where's the protests over the 10 -15% of Pensioners getting done over with the CPI increases lowering their Accommodation Supplement ?

    Where's the protests over the poorest Pensioners getting done over with the tax cut/ CPI bullshit? – I think I'll be about $20 a week worse off by April 2

    Why the hell is it always the poorest that get hurt the most? I predict the higher salaries commission will be pushing fat increases for MPs

    But hey at least the "landlordas have their dignity"

    May Luxon and his pseudo christian sociopaths burn in hell.

    Reply
    • SPC 5.1
      28 March 2025 at 6:56 pm

      The MW workers will get a 1.5% wage increase that will be less than the rent increase and their higher food and power cost. That is what National led governments have always done.

      Where's the protests over the 10 -15% of Pensioners getting done over with the CPI increases lowering their Accommodation Supplement

      Not just those over 65, the income increase and AS reduction impacts on under 65's to (whether wage or benefit income).

      Reply

Leave a Comment