tyb
>>15988838 PB
>>15989213 PB
>>15989342 PB
How long will the articles get and how many times will they say its fake and dangerous?
If I keep saying it's been debooonked and dangerous it will actually be debooonked and dangerous and they will stop getting stronger. - Jason Silverstein
Like it or not, there are signs the group's influence is growing.
-a false and dangerous conspiracy theory
-While completely untrue
-a dangerous conspiracy theory was being spread
-conspiracy theory is still the center of a lot of curiosity. And it's still false.
-Adrenochrome, according to this misinformation
-While that may sound patently ridiculous
-you don’t need to kidnap children and drain their blood
-The source of the myth that you need to steal adrenochrome from a corpse
-Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is not a documentary
-A central conspiracy theory circulating within the QAnon
-A more fringe aspect of that theory
-the conspiracy theorist Liz Crokin
-Other QAnon conspiracy theorists,
-Why does it matter that anyone believes this conspiracy is real?
-malice that which can be explained by stupidity, but in the case of QAnon, their conspiracy theories are a generous -helping of both.
-the conspiracy theory is targeting the party that is not in power
-may seem outrageous
-“Conspiracy theories can be like drugs,
-So the conspiracy theories just get crazier and crazier.”
-who studies misinformation, we're in a "golden age" of the stuff right now
-inaccurate information being spewed
-the middle of an "infodemic."
-laced with sensationalism, misinformation like the adrenochrome conspiracy theory
-The extremism of QAnon
-referencing a man shooting, and thank God not killing anyone, inside a Washington, D.C., it's as miracle!
-in conspiracy theories like adrenochrome harvesting
-working themselves into a kind of self-radicalizing frenzy
They also claim that Hillary Clinton and former aide Huma Abedin were caught on tape ripping off a child’s face, wearing it as a mask, and drinking the child’s blood to obtain adrenochrome. (Yes, really.)
Jason Silverstein
Jason Silverstein is a Lecturer and the Writer-in-Residence at Harvard Medical School in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine. He is also an Instructor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who writes about health, politics, and justice.
>Jason Silverstein
When your Harvard education and curriculum vitae doesn't mean what you think it means
I am a Lecturer and the Writer-in-Residence at Harvard Medical School in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine and the co-director of the Media, Medicine, and Health program. I write about health, politics, and justice.
I am a regular contributor to Men's Health, writing lately about conspiracy theories and all things coronavirus. I have written for VICE, The Atlantic, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Guardian, Slate, Playboy, and The Nation, and my work has been featured by MSNBC, NPR, HuffPost Live, BET, and Big Think. I hold a Ph.D. and master's in Anthropology from Harvard, a master's in Religion, Ethics, and Politics from Harvard Divinity School, and a B.A. in Philosophy from Pennsylvania State University.
You can contact me at Jason_Silverstein [at] hms.harvard.edu.
First Opinion
Eliminating the FDA’s blood donation ban on men who have sex with men would help ease the U.S. shortage
By Jason SilversteinJan. 14, 2022
For the first time ever, the American Red Cross this week declared a national blood shortage crisis and hospitals are putting out calls for donors — yet the Food and Drug Administration continues to ban men who have sex with men from donating blood.
It is long past time for the FDA to eliminate this ban. No other group is similarly banned from donating blood. Prohibiting only men who have sex with men from donating blood is the definition of homophobic, because it presumes that this sexual orientation is unsafe. That is provably false: Studies report no risk to the blood supply in other countries that do not ban donations from this group of men.
The assumption that blood from sexually active gay and bisexual men is deadly is deadly. UCLA researchers say lifting the ban would mean as many as 350,000 new donors and could treat more than a million people.
The FDA’s current policy is this: A man who has had sex with another man in the last three months may not donate blood. It is an outdated artifact of the early years of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
In March 1983, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a report that HIV can be transmitted by blood. Shortly after, gay and bisexual men began to be turned away from donating blood at Irwin Memorial Blood Bank in San Francisco if they had been sexually active in the last five years. This unofficial policy became official in September 1985, when the FDA banned gay and bisexual men for life from donating blood.
That policy was partially lifted 30 years later when the FDA swapped the lifetime ban for a year of abstinence. That policy was shortened to the current three-month ban in April 2020, when the coronavirus pandemic forced the cancellation of blood drives across the country, causing blood supply shortages in New York and Seattle and the loss of enough blood to treat 3,000 people in Southern California.
The argument for a three-month ban is to account for early infection that an individual may not be aware of. In the summer of 2021, the United Kingdom revised its 12-month abstinence requirement to allow blood donations by men who have sex with men as long as they have been monogamous for three months. Yet even a three-month ban is scientifically unwarranted.
The FDA acknowledges that current blood-screening methods can detect infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C within this three-month window. That the U.S. has sophisticated screening methods in place is why no one was surprised when researchers found found no difference in HIV infection when the lifetime ban was shortened to one year in 2015. This is good news: With more than 17 million blood transfusions every year in the U.S., the country does not rely on the honor system. The bad news is that people are punished for telling the truth about who they are and blood donors are turned away even though their blood is needed and would be carefully screened.
Yet here we are today. To turn away blood donors because of their sexual orientation while there is a critical blood shortage during the worst pandemic in a century is medically baseless and morally reprehensible.
A more sensible approach would be to assess potential blood donors’ risk for infectious disease on a case-by-case basis, regardless of sexual orientation. Other countries are doing just that. Three weeks ago, the Canadian Blood Services announced it would entirely lift its ban on men who have sex with men donating blood. Israel did the same thing back in August. Both are shifting toward a practice similar to Italy’s, which eliminated its ban in 2001. That country went straight from an outright ban to an individual risk assessment, a practice that does not consider sexual orientation but at-risk behavior. A study led by Italy’s National Institute of Health compared HIV infection among blood donors before and after the ban was lifted. There was no difference in the rate between men who have sex with men and heterosexuals.
The ban on blood donations by men who have sex with men should have been ended in the wake of the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando in 2016, when men who tried to give their blood to save their friends’ lives could not do so. Now, as countries around the world report dangerously low numbers of blood donors and the American Red Cross says hospitals in the U.S. have “less than a day’s supply of certain blood types,” the FDA ought to do what is medically and morally right and end the ban on blood donation by sexually active men who have sex with men.
>By Jason SilversteinJan. 14, 2022
Harvard. pfffft
You know what Q said about those who are the loudest
Teaching on Global Health and Coronavirus Interventions
In this faculty insight, Jason Silverstein, a lecturer at Harvard Medical School, discusses teaching and working with students on research
Blog
Dec 09, 2021
Jason Silverstein, a lecturer and writer-in-residence in the Global Health and Social Medicine department at Harvard Medical School, has been bringing his expertise to Harvard Extension School students for five years. He’s taught courses on the AIDS epidemic, the opioid crisis, and the coronavirus pandemic.
In this faculty insight (adapted from a Career & Academic Resource Center podcast episode), Silverstein discusses his courses and his experience working with Harvard Extension students in the Faculty Aide Program.
Silverstein is the co-director of the Master of Science in Media, Medicine, and Health Program at Harvard Medical School. He is also the associate director of the Media and Medicine Certificate Program at Harvard Medical School.
In addition to teaching, Silverstein is a regular contributor to Men’s Health, writing about health and all things coronavirus. He has also written for VICE, GQ, The Atlantic, The New Republic, The New York Times, The Guardian, Slate, Playboy, and The Nation.
Harvard Extension: Jason, can you share a bit about yourself and the courses you’ve taught at Harvard Extension School?
Silverstein: Absolutely. I’ve had a chance to offer classes through the Extension School and Harvard Summer School since the spring of 2017. I’ve been able to teach classes on everything from AIDS, to earthquakes, to the opioid epidemic.
I’ve also taught a class on death and dying, called Dying Well, which has meant so much to me and came out of my dissertation research on pediatric palliative care at Boston__ Children’s __Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
Recently, we’ve been offering a pretty innovative course on the coronavirus pandemic, which has been an incubator for students’ own interventions.
Harvard Extension: Can you tell us about your course the Coronavirus Pandemic: the Fight to Save the World? Why did you decide to offer it, and what do you hope students get out of it?
Silverstein: Everyone, no matter who we are or where we work … all of our lives have been upended by COVID. It certainly has transformed all of our work in the Global Health and Social Medicine department at Harvard Medical School.
For several years I had been teaching a class on the opioid epidemic, and it’s a course that is no less relevant today. In 2020, there were more opioid overdose deaths than in any other year. So this is not an epidemic that’s going away just because we are now experiencing one of the worst pandemics in 100 years. But the pandemic definitely did change what we should be teaching.
But then, how do you design a class on an ongoing pandemic? The knowledge is always changing, right? That happens. That’s how science progresses. When people are serious about protecting people and saving lives, they follow the evidence where it goes.
We had to design a different type of course—a course that would allow students not just to read a lot of articles and books, but also to develop an intervention for some aspect of the pandemic. At Harvard College, a professor named Allan Brandt had taught these incubator courses, especially around stigma, that involved students actually coming up with a solution that would work in the real world.
That’s what we’ve done here with this class. It’s an incubator course for interventions. The class focuses on three steps that help students design an intervention that could actually work in the world.
First, we guide students through identifying a problem—trying to really understand a problem of COVID in a particular setting. The next step involves tracing the social factors. And then the final step is creating an intervention that will include an executive summary.
We also bring in guest speakers from the front lines. We’ve hosted the director of operations for Doctors Without Borders and someone who’s working in an ICU.
And throughout the course, the students are getting feedback from the teaching staff. We give instruction on various factors important to the intervention’s success. What does it cost? Why should someone want to do it? How is it sustainable? Then, one of the big questions is, can the intervention affect more than one thing? In a global health and public health context, the most successful interventions are what we call vertical to horizontal interventions.
Take the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. You might have a vertical, or disease-specific, intervention. There are no labs to do testing for the disease in the area, so you build a lab. That’s a horizontal approach too—an entire system strengthened because now you have that lab that’s available not just for Ebola but for any number of other things.
And of course, you have to be able to argue for the intervention. During the Ebola outbreak, people were dying at far greater rates for other reasons, including malnutrition and the inability to perform C-sections. We take students through how to build an argument for the intervention.
It’s all about being specific, specific, specific. It’s not about whether you, in your home, can come up with a better vaccine than Pfizer did. Or something. Which if you can, good for you. You should do that and not do this class.
Assuming that you can’t do that, that you’re a mere mortal like the rest of us, you explore how you can actually make a really big impact with a small intervention. We’ve had wonderful projects coming out of the class. As the pandemic changes, it’ll be interesting to see what students come up with and what they take out into the world with them.
Harvard Extension: The Faculty Aide Program offers a unique opportunity for high-performing Harvard Extension degree candidates to do research outside of the classroom with instructors. Over the years, a few students have worked with you on projects. What has this experience been like for you?
Silverstein: I always have projects that I’m looking to get help with. But the exciting thing about the Faculty Aide Program is getting the opportunity to work with students. These students want to get real experience in the type of work that I’m doing to improve their own work, to learn from it, and to use it for their own aspirations.
Everything that I do in my own career, as far as writing goes, I learned from research assistant positions. That’s how I learned to write a conference abstract. That’s how I learned to write an actual academic paper. That’s how I learned to work with editors. It was all from these types of positions.
Most recently, my work has been focused on COVID reporting. I had been doing a column for Men’s Health and some additional reporting for other places like GQ. I needed someone who was excellent at research but also very good at helping me bulletproof these articles. Being able to ask the types of tough questions that I might miss. Being able to add that extra set of eyes.
I hope that they were able to get some insight too. Here’s how you pitch an editor at GQ. Here’s what that process looks like of sending out an idea, of getting it accepted, of working through the piece, then seeing it go out into the world.
I also give them a sense of how often I get rejected as well. I think that’s a really good lesson, something that I definitely learned from working closely with professors when I was a student. Too often, students can get the impression that once you hit a certain level, the rejections stop. That certainly is not the case. If you’re working on anything that’s even remotely creative you’re going to hear “no way” more than you hear “yes.”
I don’t think we as faculty always do the best job of modeling to students: Here’s how you deal with failure. When the piece you work really hard on doesn’t get accepted. Or it gets accepted and it’s like another wave on the beach; no one really pays attention. That’s another type of feeling.
I’ve certainly gotten so much help from the faculty aides. And I hope that they’ve come away with some types of skills that you can’t really take a class to get. You really have to have someone show you: “OK, I’m going to pull back the curtain, and here’s what magazine publishing is. Here’s what op-ed writing is. Here’s what book writing is.”
That’s been so rewarding and exciting for me. And I hope that it’s also been rewarding for the students as well.
>nd the co-director of the Media, Medicine, and Health program.
Jason Silverstein's Co-director at the Harvard School of Medical Propaganda
Neal Baer, MD
Co-Director, Master of Science in Media, Medicine, and Health
Co-Director, Media and Medicine Certificate of Completion Program
Lecturer on Global Health and Social Medicine
Executive Producer and Showrunner,Designated Survivor, NetflixMedia Program Co-Director
Neal Baer, M.D. is an award-winning showrunner, television writer/producer, physician, author and a public health advocate and expert.
Dr. Baer currently serves as Executive Producer and Showrunner of the third season of Designated Survivor, starring Kiefer Sutherland and coming back to audiences globally onNetflix in the summer 2019. He was most recently an Executive Producer and Showrunner for the hit CBS television series Under The Dome. Previously, he was Executive Producer of the CBS medical drama A Gifted Man, as well as the Executive Producer of the hit NBC television seriesLaw & Order: Special Victims Unit from 2000-2011, where he oversaw all aspects of producing and writing the show, with a budget of $100 million. During his tenure, among the awards the series won include the Shine Award, People’s Choice Award, the Prism Award, Edgar Award, Sentinel for Health Award and the Media Access Award. Actors on the show have won six Emmys and the Golden Globe. The series regularly appeared among the top ten television dramas in national ratings.
Prior to his work on SVU, Dr. Baer wasExecutive Producer of the NBC series ER.A member of the show’s original staff and a writer and producer on the series for seven seasons, he was nominated for five Emmys as a producer. He also received Emmy nominations for Outstanding Writing in A Drama Series for the episodes “Hell and High Water” and “Whose Appy Now?” For the latter, he also received a Writers' Guild of America nomination.
Dr. Baer’s other work includes "Warriors," an episode of China Beach, nominated for a Writers' Guild Award for best episodic drama, and the ABC Afterschool Special “Private Affairs,” which he directed and wrote. The Association of Women in Film and Television selected the program, dealing with sexually transmitted diseases, as the Best Children’s Drama of the Year. He wrote “The Doctor Corps,” a feature film for Twentieth Century Fox; “Outreach,” a pilot for the WB Network, which he also produced; “The Edge,” a pilot for CBS; and “The Beast,” a pilot for NBC, which was redeveloped in 2017 by Twentieth Century Fox Television. Dr. Baer’s first novel, Kill Switch, co-written with Jonathan Greene, was published in January 2012, and his second novel, Kill Again, also with Jonathan Greene, was published in 2015.
Dr. Baer graduated from Harvard Medical School andcompleted his internship in Pediatrics at Children’s Hospital, Los Angeles. He received the Jerry L. Pettis Memorial Scholarship from the American Medical Association as the most outstanding medical student who has contributed to promoting a better understanding of medicine in the media. The American Association for the Advancement of Science selected him as a Mass Media Fellow.
Dr. Baer's primary medical interests are inadolescent and global health.
>a summary would be nice.
>if dis notable, collect the relevant links and gimmie a tagline.
>>15989428 Jason Silverstein Despearate to Debooonk muh qanon kids adrenochrome theory. Hopes saying 'dangerous conspiracy theory' 100 times in one article will stop growth of the movement
>>15989448 Silverstein Hahvahd bio.
>>15989479 Wants to inject AIDS blood into the donor pool to cover for Fauci VAIDS
>>15989519, >>15989545, >>15989547 Interview with Some Harvard Rag. Mentions his Dissertaion on Pediatrics and the Children's Hospital
>>15989905 Jason Silverstein's Co-director at the Harvard School of Medical Propaganda Neal Baer, MD. Netflix NBC Law and Order Special Victims Unit, blah blah