Kamala Harris Leads the 2026 Race

Kamala Harris . leads in all the polls for 2028 nomination. The betting market has her tied with AOC, behind Newson. In the betting market, Newsom, Harris, AOC lead.

Here is her 26-year-old step daughter Ella Emhoff:

...I'm just sitting here crocheting, waiting for a friend, and I was just listening to this podcast that The Wall Street Journal put out about SSRIs and anti-anxiety meds and kind of the over-prescription of them in America.

And it was making me think a lot because I've been on SSRIs for over a decade, almost fifteen years probably, and they were calling out the lack of research on long-term use of these things. ...

But I've noticed that every time I've gone off of it for a week or missed it or for whatever reason, like, it has been really hard for me, and I've had a really hard time.

The video shows her with several visible ugly tattoos.

So she has been on those drugs continually since age 11? Without considering the consequences?

I do not want to pick on this girl, as she is a product of the culture. And I do not know whether Harris personally approved the drugs and tattoos.

Update: Matt Walsh broadcast The Dark Side Of Mental Health | Ep. 1776. In short, no one knows how SSRIs work, and they probably do more harm than good. In particular, they do not correct a chemical imbalance in the brain.

Marijuana Legalization was Oversold

Politico reports:

The New York Times editorial board walked back its yearslong support for marijuana legalization in a Monday editorial, writing that the U.S. “has recently gone too far in accepting and even promoting its use.”

In the piece, the editorial board conceded that some of its past positions on legalization no longer hold up, including its initial assessment that marijuana addiction and dependence are “relatively minor problems, especially compared with alcohol and tobacco.”

The surprising thing is that the NY Times admits that it duped us.

The past decade has seen huge increases in marijuana and gambling use. The effects have been overwhelmingly negative.

What next? An admission that transgenderism was oversold? There was just another transgender mass shooting in Canada.

The police superintendent later described the shooter as a “gunperson” in a press briefing.

How Drug Companies Manipulate Research

Dr. Josef explains Study 329: Why I Stopped Trusting Medical Research.

Briefly, a drug company manipulated a study to claim that the anti-depressant Paxil was good for children, and then made $11 billion in sales. It later paid $3B to settle govt claims about fraudulent research.

A p-value of 0.11 was moved to less than the required 0.05 by restructuring the data.

He ends by saying that the journal should retract the publication. There must be a better solution. The study data were not faked. They were just artfully presented, with some relevant data omitted. This was considered acceptable at the time. Possibly someone could figure that out by reading the study.

We need higher standards for medical study publications.

In the meantime, you should know that the research behind psychiatric drugs is questionable.

The Fall of Minneapolis

This site has the truth about George Floyd:

Award-winning investigative journalist Liz Collin sets the record straight. She uncovers what really happened on Chicago Avenue and exposes the truth of the 2020 riots.

Based on conversations with those who were there—including Derek Chauvin, Thomas Lane, and other Minneapolis police officers who’ve never spoken out before — Liz exposes how the facts were manipulated to dupe and divide America.

The book has 735 ratings, overwhelmingly positive. You can watch the 1.6 hour video documentary online for free.

I did not see anything surprising. The essential facts have been available from day one.

I watched the trial on tv. I was puzzled by a few things, such as why the jury was not shown the actual police training materials. I thought that maybe I missed that testimony, or that it had to be excluded for some reason.

Based on the documentary, it was excluded because it would have exonerated the police. The police were reasonably following reasonable procedures, in a difficult situation.

Update: See here for reasonable liberals being convinced by this film that Chauvin did not murder Floyd. One of them is a Black professor who had written about the murder of Floyd, and now admits that he was wrong. It is always nice to see people revise their opinions in the face of hard evidence.

Old Evidence that Floyd was not Murdered

Newsweek reports:

Fact Check: Tucker Carlson Says New Evidence Clears Derek Chauvin of Murder

Conservative pundit Tucker Carlson has claimed this week that new court papers show George Floyd was not murdered in May 2020 by then police officer Derek Chauvin.

Former Minneapolis police officer Chauvin, who is white, was found guilty in April 2021 of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in the death of George Floyd, who was Black. ...

In a video clip posted on X, formerly Twitter, by Tucker Carlson's account on October 20, 2023, and since viewed more than 21 million times, Carlson said that Floyd was not murdered by Chauvin.

Carlson said during the clip "...did he [Chauvin] actually murder George Floyd? And the answer is, well, no he didn't murder George Floyd.

"We're not guessing about that. We know it conclusively thanks to a new court case now underway in Hennepin County, Minnesota."

Case files include a deposition from Sweasy in which she mentioned a conversation with the county's medical examiner, Dr. Andrew Baker, after he performed Floyd's autopsy.

In the Carlson clip, text attributed to Sweasy read: "I called Dr. Baker early that morning to tell him about the case and to ask him if he would perform the autopsy on Mr Floyd.

"He called me later in the day on that Tuesday and he told me that there were no medical findings that showed any injury to the vital structures of Mr. Floyd's neck.

"There were no medical indications of asphyxia or strangulation." ...

Sweasy added that Baker said "'This is the kind of case that ends careers.'"

Newsweek does not dispute any of this, but rates the Carlson claim false because the evidence is not new.

As the article explains, it was known at the time of Chauvin's trial that Floyd had a lethal dose of illegal drugs in his body, and that the autopsy showed no injury to the neck or nearby areas.

During Chauvin's trial, Baker told Chauvin's attorney that if Floyd had been found at home in his locked residence with no evidence of trauma, and the only autopsy finding was his fentanyl level "then yes I would certify his death is due to fentanyl toxicity," adding, "the interpretation of drug concentrations is very context-dependent."

And the context of this case was that it was of the kind and ends careers.

I watched the trial. Floyd was already dying of an overdose before the cops arrived. They were trying to save his life. Chauvin's actions could not have killed anyone. It was all political.

Blacks activists had been claiming for years that Blacks were mistreated, but no one could find an example. Floyd was supposedly the example that they were looking for. Most people went along with it, to argue for systemic racism. Saying otherwise would end careers.

The new House Speaker is supposed to be a right-winger, but he recites leftist racial nonsense:

I was outraged. I don’t think anyone can view the video and objectively come to any other conclusion but that it was an act of murder. And I felt that initially, as everyone did and it’s so disturbing. And, you know, the underlying issues beneath that are something that the country is now struggling with. And I think it’s something we have to look at very soberly and with a lot of empathy. And I’m glad to see that’s happening around the country.

... the difference in the experiences between my two 14-year-old sons, Michael being a black American and Jack being white Caucasian. They have different challenges. ... But the reality is and no one can tell me otherwise, my son Michael had a harder time than my son Jack is going to have simply because of the color of his skin. And that’s a reality. It’s an uncomfortable, painful one to acknowledge, but people have to recognize that’s a fact.

No, he is wrong. Either lying or deranged.

I watched the video. It is the video of a man dying of a fentanyl overdose. It is not the video of a murder. If Chauvin wanted to murder Floyd, he would have moved to avoid the video cameras. Floyd was being restrained, but no one has ever died from being restrained in that way. It does not happen to a healthy man.

He says "no one can tell me otherwise" because he is not discussing facts. He cannot give any example of the Black boy being treated worse than the White boy. There is no substance to these comments. He is just saying BLM talking points.

Low Serotonin does not Cause Depression

Psychology Today reports:

For the last half-century, the dominant explanation for depression has centered on serotonin. The basic idea: low levels of brain serotonin or serotonin activity leads to symptoms of depression. This theory, which is known as the “serotonin hypothesis,” is based on several data points, including animal research and the effects of antidepressants that are supposed to work by increasing brain serotonin levels. But, in the last several decades, a number of researchers have challenged the idea that serotonin plays a principal or even major role in depression.

In recent days, the serotonin hypothesis of depression has been explicitly challenged by a number of scientific publications. Most notable (at the time of this writing), a paper published in Nature Molecular Psychiatry reviewed several lines of evidence on the subject of the serotonin-depression connection and concluded that “the main areas of serotonin research provide no consistent evidence of there being an association between serotonin and depression, and no support for the hypothesis that depression is caused by lowered serotonin activity or concentrations.”

Millions of people are taking drugs because they have been told that the drugs are correcting a chemical imbalance in the brain. That has never been proved.

Depp Case up to the Jury

CNN reports:

The jury in the defamation trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard has begun deliberations. ...

At issue is a 2018 op-ed Heard penned in the Washington Post where she identified herself as "a public figure representing domestic abuse," which Depp said falsely painted him as an abuser and cost him work in Hollywood. Heard countersued Depp, claiming his attorney's statements that her abuse allegations were a "hoax" defamed her and her once blossoming career to suffer.

Shortly before beginning deliberations, jurors heard closing arguments from both Heard and Depp's attorneys.

Heard's attorney, Ben Rottenborn, told jurors that if Depp failed to prove he never abused Heard, she wins the case.

"Mr. Depp simply cannot prove to you that he never once abused Amber," Rottenborn said. "A ruling against Amber here sends the message that no matter what you do as an abuse victim, you always have to do more. No matter what you document, you always have to document more. No matter who you tell, you always have to tell more people. No matter how honest you are about your own imperfections and your own shortcomings in a relationship, you need to be perfect in order for people to believe you. Don't send that message."

Earlier on Friday, Depp's attorneys argued that Heard was the abuser, not Depp.

The consensus seems to be that Depp is losing the legal case, but winning in public opinion.

Heard is right, that Depp cannot prove that he never abused her. Abuse has become a meaningless and broad term.

Heard obviously got legal advice that she can make whatever abuse allegations she want, and they will be to her advantage in divorce court. It is a common story that gets played every day in divorce courts around the country. If the husband fights it, he ends up worse off.

Depp decided to fight it, even though the fight would expose his addictions and other faults.

Nearly everyone says Heard is an opportunistic liar.

Heard hired the ACLU to write that op-ed, and lied about having paid them. I would think that she could refuse to pay the ACLU, on the grounds that their lawyers should have some responsibility for the op-ed getting her into so much legal trouble. But no, sabotaging Depp's career seems to be her intention.

Depp should have sued the Wash. Post and the ACLU also, as they are also culpable. So is everyone else who says to believe all women, and who perpetuate myths about supposedly abused women.

I am guessing that the jury will return a small verdict in favor of Depp. Heard will say she won, because Depp did not get the $50M he was requesting. But Depp's real goal appears to be to restore his reputation.

City Helps Drug Dealers Compete

News:

San Francisco supervisors on Tuesday unanimously approved an ordinance to suspend the city’s Cannabis Business Tax through the end of next year, in an attempt to curb illegal marijuana sales.

This is one indication that the city's priorities are disordered. For more, see the book San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities.

How Medical Lobbyists Manipulated the Election

There are still some people who doubt that the Nov. 2021 election was stolen.

There were millions of people wo voted against Pres. Trump because the news media kept saying that thousands of Americans were dying from him not doing anything about the coronavirus. He said that a vaccine was in the works, but the press said that he was lying.

Soon there will be more covid deaths under the Biden administration than there were under Trump.

It turns out that there was a Trump-hater conspiracy to suppress what was supposed to be public info about the vaccine.

MIT Technology Review reports:

After being released from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on October 5, US President Donald Trump praised the doctors who treated him for covid-19 and promised that the public would soon have a vaccine against the deadly coronavirus. “We have the best medicines in the world, and very shortly they are all getting approved, and the vaccines are coming momentarily,” he said in a video statement shared with millions of Twitter followers.

Across the country, in California, a doctor named Eric Topol was responding in real time on social media. He questioned the president’s health, his doctors’ actions, and even his mental status.

By that point Topol, a heart expert and researcher with a huge Twitter following of his own, was already weeks into a personal campaign to make sure the administration could not rush a covid-19 vaccine through regulatory authorization before Election Day on November 3.

The article goes on to say that the drug companies were scheduled to release favorable news about vaccine trials, but Democrats in the govt and industry conspired to suppress the data in order to try to make Trump look bad for the election.

This article shows Topol and others bragging about something that should be criminal. The public had a right to know the status of govt agencies considering covid health measures. If the news had been bad, then maybe Republicans would have wanted to suppress the news, but that would have been wrong. That would be like NY Gov. Cuomo covering up nursing home deaths. As it turned out, the news was good, and Democrats successfully suppressed the news.

Another plot to manipulate the election was the 4-year push to impeach Trump. The effort was almost entirely led by Jews, with one notable exception: Robert Mueller.

Now Congressman Adam Schiff has a new book out, and he reveals that Mueller was just a puppet of the Jewish Trump-haters, and they kept him out of the public eye because he was a senile fool. In an NPR Radio interview:

(On regretting that he asked special prosecutor Robert Mueller to testify about the investigation into interference in the 2016 election)

I did understand immediately why his staff had been so protective and why they were so reluctant to have him testify. And I immediately told our members, "We need to cut down our questions. We can't ask for narrative answers. We need to be very precise in what we ask. We need to have the page references of the report ready." And it was painful, honestly, it was painful. And if I had known, I would not have pushed for his testimony.

So why was Mueller leading an investigation of the President, if all the insiders knew that he was incompetent?

The obvious answer is that Schiff and the others were carrying a coup. Their gripes against Trump were dishonest and meritless, so they needed a front man with sterling non-Jewish credentials and with no ability to resist orders.

They have the same thing in Joe Biden. Long record of public service. Not Jewish. Too senile to give a coherent narrative answer to a question. All of his important advisers and officers are Jewish. They control him much better than they would control some actual Jew, like Bernie Sanders.

Life of a Caffeine Addict

From an NPR interview:

"I think the word 'addiction' has a lot of moral baggage attached to it," he says. "As [Johns Hopkins researcher] Roland Griffiths told me, if you have a steady supply of something, you can afford it and it's not interfering with your life, there's nothing wrong with being addicted."

Actually he goes on to explain that there is something wrong with it.

It's a problem in ways we don't perceive, because caffeine undermines the quality — not necessarily the quantituay, but the quality — of our sleep. And specifically, one very particular kind of sleep, which I'd never heard of before, called "slow wave" or deep sleep.

And what is the benefit to caffeine? The main effect is merely to control the withdrawal symptoms and maintain the addiction!

they're beginning to go through that withdrawal. They're starting to feel a little off — that muzziness is coming in. Maybe they have a headache. Maybe they're a little irritable. And then they have that cup of coffee, and the pleasure they're getting from it, I learned, is not simply the lift, the euphoric lift of the drug. It's the suppression of the symptoms of withdrawal. We go through that cycle. ...

Those people [who are addicted] are getting a little bit of lift, but mostly what they're getting is the relief from these symptoms that are about to come down on them. And that feels pretty good. You're back to baseline.

(I heard this broadcast on NPR a couple of days ago, but I see from the web site that it was a rerun from last year.)

This guy explains that slavery made tobacco and caffeine production feasible, and then these drugs were used to keep factory workers going for long hours. They enslave the users, as they cannot go a single day without their drug fix. Most modern office supply free caffeine machine to keep the employees working.

And yet he willing submits to a drug-addicted life!

If he wants to live that way, that is his business, but he is wrong to say "there's nothing wrong with being addicted." The addict is not fully human. He becomes what Aristotle would call a natural slave.

How our health experts failed us

I sometimes see people thanking Anthony Fauci, or the CDC or FDA or WHO, for work on COVID. Or schoolteachers for heroicly leading zoom classes.

I wonder why. Fauci is our highest paid federal govt employee, so he is already being compensated. Throughout 2020, he lied to us about masks, lockdowns, and herd immunity. When confronted, he would rationalize it by saying that he was moving the goalposts for the public good. The WHO is still lying to us about herd immunity.

It now appears that the school shutdowns were entirely unnecessary, and did no good in preventing disease.

And of course there were many other absurdities, such as encouraging BLM riots while shutting down all other gatherings.

I wonder what would have happened if we had no FDA, CDC, WHO, or Fauci.

The CDC blocked all COVID-19 testing because it said that it was developing its own test. Then it scrapped its test because it was contaminated. Without the CDC, we would have had private companies distributing tests in early 2020.

The FDA was sitting on large stockpiles of drugs that safely treat COVID-19, but blocked anyone from using them. Those drugs might have saved thousands of lives. The FDA even has rules that caused the trials to be delayed, in order to recruit more Hispanic Americans. Which is more important, approving a drug to save lives, or satisfying some stupid bureaucratic diversity quota?

The COVID-19 vaccines were developed in Jan. 2020. If there were no regulatory or legal impediments, they could have been marketed to the public in early 2020. Supplies would have been limited, and most people would probably not want an experimental vaccine. But many would, and if people saw that it was working, then the company would make a lot more and a lot more people would voluntarily get them.

Before you say that this would be unethically using the general public as guinea pigs, you should realize that these vaccines, and every other drug, gets tested on human subjects before approval. The FDA insists on supervising the process, and delaying everything for what is usually years. Under Operation Warp Speed, Pres. Trump reduced the process to about 11 months.

But even with the approvals, we are still stuck with sub-optimal procedures. For example, maybe we could save more people faster by giving single doses to everyone. We are only giving double doses because that was done during the FDA-testing phase. No one is allowed to revisit that thinking, even tho the testing showed that most of the benefit came from the first dose.

Letting the CDC prioritize vaccine distribution has resulted in policies that kill old folks because they are mostly White.

In short, we may have 200k more dead than what we would have had if the FDA and CDC did not exist.

Meanwhile, NY Times columnist David Brooks complains that Jewish brainwashing does not work:

This is the year that broke the truth. This is the year when millions of Americans — and not just your political opponents — seemed impervious to evidence, ...

So many of our hopes are based on the idea that the key to change is education. ...

It turns out that if you tell someone their facts are wrong, you don’t usually win them over; you just entrench false belief.

One of the most studied examples of this flawed model is racial diversity training.

He goes on to explain that if you force White Christians to sit in a class and be lectured that they are evil racists who owe something to Blacks, Moslems, and other groups, then they are unpersuaded.

Finally, our training model of “teaching people to be good” is based on the illusion that you can change people’s minds and behaviors by presenting them with new information and new thoughts. If this were generally so, moral philosophers would behave better than the rest of us. They don’t.

Brooks started the column talking about "truth". These classes do not teach truths. They try to manipulate with "new information and new thoughts". The new info is that Whites should accept Jews telling them that they are inferior to Blacks.

If you actually tell people the truth about Whites and Blacks, they accept it.

Drug companies manipulated the election

Before the election, Pres. Trump told us that COVID-19 vaccines were coming this year. The press said that he was lying. We now know that he was telling the truth. We would have known before the election, but Pfizer and Moderna delayed the news. The NY Times reports:

Mr. Trump’s anger about the timing has not abated. In a news conference on Friday, he suggested Pfizer and other drugmakers had taken revenge on him for pushing drug price controls.

“They were going to come out in October, but they decided to delay it because of what I’m doing,” he grumbled. “They waited and waited and waited.”

As the article details, Trump was completely correct. The drug companies were on an approved timetable for releasing the info, but they asked for, and obtained, permission to delay the announcement until after the election. Stock market analysts deduced that the companies were hiding poor results. We now know that the results were better than expected. When Pfizer was ready to announce the good results, it secretly tipped off the Biden campaign, and Trump had to read about it in the newspapers.

This election manipulation was vastly more damaging than anything the Russians did in 2016.

And of course Google, Facebook, newspapers, TV, etc were all heavily biased against Trump. I don't know how anyone could think this was a fair election.

You could say that the FDA is managed by Trump appointees, and that he could have had his appointees force the drug companies to honestly follow the protocol before the election. Yes, that is true. Unfortunately, 4 years was not enough time to drain the swamp, and the federal govt is filled with employees who actively undermine the administration.

If Trump were really the authoritarian that his enemies say, then he would have forced the drug companies to behave.

The major news media continue to describe the election contest inaccurately. They always say that Joe Biden is the President-elect, that he won the election, and that there is no evidence of anything wrong with the election. In fact the electoral votes have not been decided yet, and there are hundreds of examples of election irregularities. While it is true that the courts have not been persuaded to reverse the certifications, there is certainly evidence.

The courts are not really the ones to decide on the evidence anyway. As I pointed out, federal law requires electors to be appointed on election day. That did not happen in the swing states.

Federal law then requires:

Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law [Nov. 3, this year], the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day [such as now!] in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct. [3 US Code 2]

The legislatures are probably not going to act, but they can and should, and Biden is not the President-elect until the electors meet and vote.

Trend to ban change in skin tone

The NY Times reports:

As major consumer products companies have rushed to declare their opposition to racism in response to the national outrage over the killing of George Floyd, many of them have been accused of openly promoting a beauty standard rooted in racism and discrimination.

Unilever, Procter & Gamble, L’Oreal and Johnson & Johnson — some of the world’s biggest advertisers — sell beauty products that advocate lighter, whiter skin in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

So I guess we need to ban dark-skinning people passing themselves off as light-skinned. Also, the campaign against entertainers using cosmetics to darken their skin is greater than ever, as two late-night talk-show hosts have gotten into trouble for skits they did long ago.

This development should please race segregationists. They want everybody's race to be readily identifiable. As it is, we have BLM leaders like Shaun King who pretends to be Black, but appears to be mostly or entirely White.

It is funny how changing one sex is now considered a sacred right, but changing race is forbidden.

Unilever is also boycotting Facebook, because Facebook refuses to ban pro-Trump messages! It is amazing how evil these big companies can be.

Melinda Gates wants to make sure White Americans are last in line to get any Wuhan virus vaccine:

"One of the reasons we are so involved in this is that you don't want the first vaccines to go to the highest-bidding countries," Melinda Gates said. "There are 60 million healthcare workers [around the world]. They deserve to get the vaccine first, they're the ones dealing with this on the front lines, trying to keep us all safe."

"Then you have to start to tier from there, based on the countries and the populations," Melinda Gates continued. "Here in the United States, it's going to be black people who really should get it first and many indigenous people, as well as people with underlying symptoms, and then elderly people."

I have heard people say we ought to make Bill Gates a benevolent dictator. Nope. He and Melinda are anti-American.

This NY Times article brags about how a Chinese software company successfully conspired to sabotage a Trump campaign event. This is the same newspaper that has published a thousand stories alleging crazy Russian conspiracy theories about election influence, as if Russians helping Trump is the worst thing in the world. But China working against Trump is just fine, apparently.

Another crazy NY Times rant says:

I have rape-colored skin. ...

I am a black, Southern woman, and of my immediate white male ancestors, all of them were rapists. My very existence is a relic of slavery and Jim Crow.

No, her skin color is much more likely to be the result of Black men raping White women.

FBI rape data show that Black men rape White women about 10,000 times more often than White men rape Black women. If anything, her skin color is a relic of Black crime. If she is really against race-mixing, then she should be all in favor of Jim Crow.

The trope of the drug-crazed Negro

I posted evidence that George Floyd died of a combination of heart disease, Covid-19, and a fentanyl overdose, and that Minneapolis police followed recommended procedures for saving his life.

Not everyone agrees. So I am posting a NY Times op-ed denying the overdose:

My heart sank when I read the prosecutors’ criminal complaint against Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer who is charged with killing George Floyd. It suggests that drugs were one factor contributing to his death.

Not again, I thought. I have seen the “drug-crazed Negro” script trotted out too many times when a police officer kills a black person.

And it could happen again in the Floyd case. ...

The trope of the drug-crazed Negro is old and durable. A hundred years ago, people believed that cocaine made black men homicidal, exceptional marksmen, and impervious to some bullets. ...

He also had 11 nanograms of fentanyl in his blood. ...

What’s more, the same amount of fentanyl that produces euphoria in a tolerant user can result in an overdose in a newer user. ...

There was a time when we had virtually no scientific data on drugs. This allowed racists and others to exaggerate drug effects in the name of subjugating black people. Now, we do have data — and yet, the scarecrow of the drug-crazed Negro persists.

Okay, maybe Floyd had developed a tolerance, but the fentanyl in his blood was triple the lethal dose for a new user.

The article says "11 nanograms", but it is really 11 ng per mL. If the author doesn't know the difference, then he is no expert on the subject.

The autopsy also confirms that Floyd had severe heart disease, and Covid-19.

I don't like to jump to a conclusion until I see both sides of the issue, but this article just convinces me more that fentanyl was the main cause of death. It doesn't give any reason to believe that the police contributed to Floyd's death. It does say that the medical examiner called it a "homicide", but he specifically denied that use of that term had any legal significance. In particular, he found no neck injuries.

The main argument is just that the drug-crazed Negro is a trope.

This is crazy. Opioids are killing 47,000 people a year, and 35,000 of them are White. 6,000 are Black. Floyd was one of them. Anyone who does not recognize this as a possible outcome of the court process is just lying to you.

The news in 2020 has degenerated to ignoring the facts, and just calling people racists instead.

Cat parasites make people crazy

Science news:

Scientists claim they have found new evidence of a link between infection with the protozoan parasite, Toxoplasma gondii, and schizophrenia, in what is described as the largest study of its kind. From a report:

T. gondii, a brain-dwelling parasite estimated to be hosted by at least 2 billion people around the world, doesn't create symptoms in most people who become infected -- but acute cases of toxoplasmosis can be dangerous. Healthy adults are generally thought to not be at risk from T. gondii infections, but children or people with suppressed immune systems can develop severe flu-like symptoms, in addition to blurred vision and brain inflammation.

The alarming thing is that this parasite has been proven to affect rat behavior, and probably affects human behavior also, without the infected person realizing it.

In short, it allows cats to enslave humans to support their needs.

There is no cure, or practical solution except to eradicate all the house cats. If you have a pet cat, you may already be a zombie.

Scared of medical diagnostic tests

From the Slate.com medical examiner column:

We Don’t Want to Know What Will Kill Us
Years of data on genetic testing reveal that when given the option, most people want less information, not more. ...

When, in 1996, French nun Mariannick Caniou found out she didn’t have Huntington’s disease, the lethal, degenerative genetic disorder, she fell into a depression. Throughout her life, she had been convinced that she would develop the illness that had killed her mother and grandmother. So convinced, in fact, that all her most important decisions had been based on that conviction: her decision not to marry, for example, or not to have children. ...

In those preparatory surveys, roughly 70 percent of those at risk of Huntington’s said they would take a test if it existed. In fact, only around 15 percent do — a proportion that has proved stable across countries and decades. A similar pattern emerged when tests became available for other incurable brain diseases, including rare familial forms of Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia: The vast majority of people prefer not to know.

There is a certain logic to this. Why know if there’s nothing you can do about it?

I think that she is misreading these studies. Huntington's is incurable, but obviously Caniou's (faulty) knowledge did influence her decisions. There were things that she could do about the Huntington's info.

I have posted examples of genetics experts who refuse to get their genes sequenced. Sometimes they complain that the tests are too unreliable, and sometimes that they are too reliable.

A lot of ppl are also afraid to take an IQ test. Some sort of phobia is at work here.

While some ppl have these problems, I refuse to believe that it is a majority. Most ppl have no problem with other diagnostics, like cholesterol, blood pressure, and diabetes tests. These are pushed by physicians who want to prescribe drugs for treatment, but the drugs don't really cure the problems.

Chemicals Turn Xenophobes Into Migrant-Lovers

Here is something I learned from a Google-censored site:

Jews Planning to Put Chemicals in the Water Which Turn Xenophobes Into Migrant-Lovers

This time they’re not planning to turn the frogs gay.

In the paper that is being referenced here they claim that in addition to being accepting of their own ethnic displacement people doped with oxytocin increased donations to migrants by 74%.

This sounds like hate-inspired fake news, but it cites its source, and the paper was indeed published in PNAS, one of the top scientific journals in the USA. The published paper says:

Significance
In the midst of rapid globalization, the peaceful coexistence of cultures requires a deeper understanding of the forces that compel prosocial behavior and thwart xenophobia. Yet, the conditions promoting such outgroup-directed altruism have not been determined. Here we report the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment showing that enhanced activity of the oxytocin system paired with charitable social cues can help counter the effects of xenophobia by fostering altruism toward refugees. These findings suggest that the combination of oxytocin and peer-derived altruistic norms reduces outgroup rejection even in the most selfish and xenophobic individuals, and thereby would be expected to increase the ease by which people adapt to rapidly changing social ecosystems.

The paper actually cites the Bible for justification!

The biblical parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–16:17) describes an ethical maxim of helping strangers who have fallen in need. As such, it not only captures the essence of altruistic behavior by emphasizing the personal costs of selflessness toward others but also represents a formidable example that norm-enforced altruistic cooperation is by no means limited to the ingroup, but can even extend to outgroup members in ways neither precisely understood nor systematically researched. Here, we hypothesize that normative incentives co-occurring with enhanced activity of the OXT system exert a motivational force for inducing altruism toward strangers even in the most selfish and xenophobic individuals.

I wonder if the authors even read the Bible passasge, as the description and citation are inaccurate. After saying "Love your neighbor as yourself", the parable seeks to answer "And who is my neighbor?". Jesus says that the non-Jew who helps the traveler is more of a neighbor than the Jews who refused to help.

The paper is all about drugging ppl to help non-neighbors, and the Bible parable does not support that at all.

Google is censoring Daily Stormer criticism of this research. If you are willing to let Google censor ideas from what you read, then maybe you would be willing to let the authorities drug you to change your beliefs towards alien invaders, and also to make you donate towards leftist goals.

Testing for marijuana psychosis

NPR radio reports:

The American Psychological Association emailed us to say that the correction they issued on Thursday was incorrect. The email says in part:

I am afraid that the correction we put out regarding the teen marijuana study was not accurate. We are in the process of placing this more accurate editor's note on the release on our website. ...

Although these supplemental analyses indicated that teens who engaged in frequent marijuana use had a higher probability of meeting criteria for a psychotic disorder than infrequent/nonusers by their 30s, this difference did not reach statistical significance using a two-tailed test (p=.09). ...

The group difference on psychotic disorder approached statistical significance and would have been significant if a more liberal test (i.e., one-tailed) was utilized.

It is unusual to make such a big deal out of an obscure statistical test, and to have to correct a correction.

Women celebrate getting drugged again

SciAm reports:

Addyi, the first prescription medication approved to boost female libido, hits the market today. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved marketing the drug to premenopausal women whose low libido doesn’t stem from a medical or psychiatric condition, medication or other substances, but from a lack of desire characterized as hypoactive sexual desire disorder, or HSDD.

The so-called “female Viagra” — something of a misnomer because Addyi does not affect arousal as Viagra does but rather increases libido — was mired in controversy prior to its approval, in large part because clinical studies did not show dramatic improvements in sexual desire and used measures that many experts criticized as inadequate. Despite such concerns, Addyi’s drugmaker, Sprout Pharmaceuticals, was purchased by Valeant Pharmaceuticals International for $1 billion once the drug received approval.

With about 10 percent of women suffering from HSDD, Valeant projects a healthy market for this once-a-day pill, and that does not include a large group of women who are likely to be prescribed the drug for another kind of desire problem: the low libido that is a common side effect of antidepressants.

Although Addyi has not been approved by the FDA for antidepressant-induced libido problems, once a drug hits the market, doctors can prescribe it off-label for other uses other than its approved indication. Nearly one in five women in the U.S. takes an antidepressant, and as many as 70 percent report dampened sexual desire as a result.

A study shows that Viagra increases female arousal and satisfaction, but apparently that is not what women want.

20% of US women are hooked on antidepressant pills?! I had heard that before, but did not believe it. That is huge. Presumably millions of other women are just as crazy but refuse to take pills.

I have noticed that ads directed at women often tell them to take whatever pills their doctor recommends. In private conversation also, women commonly say that they take whatever drugs their doctor says to take, as if they were not even allowed to have an opinion on the matter. So I guess they take antidepressants just because they are told, and soon they may be taking libido boosters also, even with all the side effects. Strange.

Here is an example of an NPR news story assuming that women like to do what they are told:

But what was surprising, she says, was that, after discussing family history and personal health, her doctor determined that because Nichols was not at high risk for getting breast cancer, it was probably too soon to get that first scan. ...

Nichols says she felt comfortable with that decision, "knowing that my risk for breast cancer was low compared to the risk of having to have more invasive procedures such as biopsies or lumpectomies."

She's right about the statistics. Researchers say that, across a 10-year period of getting annual mammograms, women overall have a 50-50 chance of being called back at least once for further testing that turns up nothing cancerous.

She has the choice of whether to do that scan, and then whether to have that more invasive procedure. Her physician is probably just following standard guidelines that anyone can read on the web. If not, his advice is probably worse. Apparently women want to do what they are told.

Killer used name Mohammed Salem

Buried in the reporting on the Washington Navy Yard shooting is this story:

Friends and relatives have also said he had a preoccupation with the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, felt slighted as a veteran, had money problems and was so unhappy with his life that he considered leaving the U.S.

Law enforcement officials told NBC News that Alexis created a webpage with the name "Mohammed Salem," but they said he never did anything with it. They said they had found nothing else that might indicate any interest in violent jihad or even in Islam.

So he was just a black Buddhist who heard voices in his head? Are these the same officials who denied that the Fort Hood shooting was Islamic terrorism?

Alexis did prove that so-called assault weapons are not need for this sort of mass killing. He had a plain old low-tech pump-action shotgun and 24 shells. It was just the gun that VP Joe Biden encourages everyone to buy and use for warning shots. And he did it in the area with the tightest gun control laws in the USA.

Update: Alexis was also on the antidepressant trazodone, which is associated with violence in some patients.