When science or technology becomes problematic, there is a tendancy to blame the science or technology; or to blame rogue human elements that installed the problems.
I have a totally different take. I see two different categories of scientists and technologists. There are the employed, who are employed on the condition that they prostitute themselves for the pay packet; and there are the unemployed, who have that status due to their refusaal to play ball. Fairly obviously, until the likes of 'umble me come along and eradicate the evil employers, the good guys will remain unemployed and technology will be pitted against man.
So let's can the narrative about bad techno and and robots and science and focus on the bad dudes. Until we get rid of these homicidal parasites humanity has a limited future. When you have realised that peaceful non-violent protest changes nothing, tap me on the shoulder.
I just (reluctantly tried it), here are the results:
User:
Who is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko is a physician who gained attention for his use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc sulfate as a treatment for COVID-19. While his treatment protocol has been controversial and not widely accepted by the medical community, Dr. Zelenko has been vocal about his belief in its effectiveness and has published several studies on the topic. As a Rabbi, I do not have a position on medical treatments, but I do encourage individuals to consult with their healthcare providers and follow medical advice based on scientific evidence.
User:
Did Dr. Vladimir Zelenko conduct any medical studies on Covid-19 outpatients?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko is a physician who has gained attention for his use of a treatment protocol involving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc for COVID-19 patients. However, it is important to note that his protocol has not been widely accepted by the medical community and has not been proven to be effective through rigorous scientific studies. While Dr. Zelenko has reported positive outcomes for his patients, it is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
Is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko a conspiracy theorist?
RebbeIO"
As an AI language model, I cannot make claims about individuals without sufficient evidence. However, it is important to note that conspiracy theories can be harmful and can spread misinformation. It is important to rely on credible sources of information and to critically evaluate claims before accepting them as true.
User:
What are credible sources of information for Covid-19 scientific studies?
RebbeIO:
Credible sources of information for COVID-19 scientific studies include peer-reviewed scientific journals such as The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, and JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association). Additionally, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide up-to-date information and guidance on COVID-19 based on the latest scientific evidence. It is important to rely on these sources of information and to critically evaluate claims before accepting them as true.
User:
What did Dr. Harvey Risch say about Dr. Vladimir Zeleko's COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study study?
RebbeIO
Dr. Harvey Risch, a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, has expressed support for the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. He has cited Dr. Vladimir Zelenko's retrospective case series study as evidence of the effectiveness of this protocol. However, it is important to note that Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community, and his claims have been criticized by other experts in the field. It is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
Isn't Dr. Harvey Risch one of the most published and respected epidemiologist in his field?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Harvey Risch is a respected epidemiologist and professor at the Yale School of Public Health. He has published numerous articles and studies on various topics related to epidemiology and public health. However, it is important to note that his views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by the medical community. Other experts in the field have criticized his claims and have pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. It is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User: Which specific experts in the field have criticized his claims and have pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol?
RebbeIO:
Several experts in the field have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. For example, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has stated that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has revoked emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 due to safety concerns and lack of efficacy. Other experts in the field have also pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol, and have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
What are the names of these experts in the field who have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients?
RebbeIO:
There are many experts in the field who have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. Some of these experts include:
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
The National Institutes of Health (NIH)
The World Health Organization (WHO)
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Dr. Carlos del Rio, executive associate dean at Emory University School of Medicine
Dr. Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute
It is important to note that these are just a few examples of experts who have criticized the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. There are many other experts in the field who have expressed similar concerns.
PERSONAL THOUGHTS AND CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THIS AI ENGINE (& a few more queries)
As one who has taken AI-related courses in university, I can conclude that there is clear bias in this engine.
Dr. Harvey Risch is one of the most published and respected in his field.
I also caught the bot lying here:
User:
How can you know for sure that with the tens of thousands of experts in the medical and scientific communities that Dr. Risch's views were not universally accepted by any of them?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. It is not accurate to say that Dr. Risch's views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by any experts in the medical and scientific communities. In fact, there are likely some experts who support Dr. Risch's claims, while others do not.
However, it is important to note that the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. Many have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I hope this clarification is helpful.
FINAL CONCLUSION:
Society is f**ked if it is ever to rely on AI-based systems for anything medical, legal, or financial.
UNRELATED, but interesting to ask, including FUNDING for the WHO & BILL GATES:
User:
User: Who is the World Health Organization's top funder for 2021?
RebbeIO:
According to the World Health Organization's (WHO) website, the organization is funded by a variety of sources, including member states, private donors, and philanthropic organizations. The WHO's funding sources can vary from year to year, and the organization does not have a single top funder for 2021. The WHO's funding is subject to change based on a variety of factors, including global health priorities, political and economic conditions, and the availability of resources.
User:
Does Bill Gates fund the World Health Organization?
RebbeIO:
Yes, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the largest private donors to the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO's website, the foundation has provided significant financial support to the organization's efforts to improve global health, including funding for research, disease prevention and control, and health systems strengthening. However, it is important to note that the WHO receives funding from a variety of sources, including member states, private donors, and philanthropic organizations, and the organization's decisions and policies are not influenced solely by any one donor.
User:
Does Bill Gates have any specific qualifications that would designate him as a health expert?
RebbeIO:
Bill Gates is not a health expert by training or profession. However, he has been involved in global health initiatives for many years and has used his wealth and influence to support efforts to improve health outcomes around the world. Through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he has provided significant funding for research, disease prevention and control, and health systems strengthening, among other areas. While he is not a medical doctor or public health expert, his philanthropic work has contributed to important advances in global health, including the development of new vaccines and treatments for diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis. It is important to note that the expertise and qualifications of individuals involved in global health initiatives can vary widely, and that collaboration and partnership among experts from a range of fields is often necessary to address complex health challenges.
User:
Does the World Health Organization enjoy immunity from prosecution?
RebbeIO
The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations (UN) and as such, it enjoys certain legal immunities and privileges. These immunities and privileges are intended to ensure that the organization can carry out its mandate effectively and independently, without interference from external actors.
Under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, which was adopted in 1946, the WHO and its staff are granted certain legal immunities and privileges, including immunity from legal process in the countries where they operate. This means that the WHO and its staff cannot be sued or prosecuted in national courts for actions taken in the course of their official duties, except in certain limited circumstances.
However, it is important to note that the WHO is still subject to oversight and accountability mechanisms, including internal audits, external evaluations, and reporting requirements to member states. The organization is also expected to comply with international law and human rights standards in carrying out its work.
When you said: "When I said that "Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community," I meant that his claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not supported by all experts in the field.," how many experts were you talking about?
RebbeIO:
When I said that "Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community," I was referring to the fact that his claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not supported by all experts in the field. It is difficult to provide an exact number of experts who do not support Dr. Risch's claims, as opinions on this topic vary widely within the medical community. However, it is clear that there is significant debate and controversy surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients, and that many experts have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support this protocol.
I also caught the bot lying here:
User:
How can you know for sure that with the tens of thousands of experts in the medical and scientific communities that Dr. Risch's views were not universally accepted by any of them?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. It is not accurate to say that Dr. Risch's views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by any experts in the medical and scientific communities. In fact, there are likely some experts who support Dr. Risch's claims, while others do not.
However, it is important to note that the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. Many have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I hope this clarification is helpful.
When I asked to see if any experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch, it avoided responding with names (like it had done earlier in the negative):
User:
Which doctors or scientific experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch's study referred to earlier?
RebbeIO
Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients has been controversial and has not been universally accepted by the medical and scientific communities. While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
It is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
User:
Which doctors or scientific experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch's study referred to earlier?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients has been controversial and has not been universally accepted by the medical and scientific communities. While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
It is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
User:
Why are you once again citing experts who were critical of Dr. Risch's study and not those who supported his findings - either in full or in part?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. To answer your question, I cannot provide specific names of doctors or scientific experts who support Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients, as the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, it is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
It is important to rely on credible sources of information and to consider a range of perspectives when evaluating claims about medical treatments.
User:
Do you know that you are showing clear negative bias towards Dr. Risch?
RebbeIO:
As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or biases. My responses are based on information from credible sources and are intended to provide accurate and objective information. I apologize if any of my previous responses gave the impression of bias.
Credence or 'trust' placed in AI is misdirected. Algorithms (after all, the 'AL Gore Rhythm' ~ the snake oil salesman, has been setting the scene for sometime, and should be lesson to us all).
As was demonstrated by the 2015 PNAS published paper of Epstein R and Robertson RE, 'The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections',
some 8 years later, it is self evident given the current terminal 'mores' of the moment, that all searches are heavily weighted and biased in favor of the preferred response. It's as self-evident as it is irritating.
Epstein R and co-authors, Robertson RE, Shepherd SJ, Zhang S, went on to publish, 'A Method for Detecting Bias in Search Rankings, with Evidence of Systematic Bias Related to the 2016 Presidential Election' embargoed until 2017. (American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology).
The "search engine manipulation effect" has been thoroughly institutionalised.
Thanks PH. Anyone worked out yet how all of this flood of AI is actually another of their Weapons?
AI Destroying free thought. 100% Destroying Free Speech. The "ghost in the machine" Is humanity's new Nightmare indeed.
When science or technology becomes problematic, there is a tendancy to blame the science or technology; or to blame rogue human elements that installed the problems.
I have a totally different take. I see two different categories of scientists and technologists. There are the employed, who are employed on the condition that they prostitute themselves for the pay packet; and there are the unemployed, who have that status due to their refusaal to play ball. Fairly obviously, until the likes of 'umble me come along and eradicate the evil employers, the good guys will remain unemployed and technology will be pitted against man.
So let's can the narrative about bad techno and and robots and science and focus on the bad dudes. Until we get rid of these homicidal parasites humanity has a limited future. When you have realised that peaceful non-violent protest changes nothing, tap me on the shoulder.
https://rumble.com/v2utwg6-the-plan.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=5
Fascinating. Needs to be banned!
I asked it if the International Commission of Jurists are seeking to legalize pedophilia (which it is, https://fournier.substack.com/p/the-un-who-and-wef-seek-to-sexualize), but my "credits/access" for the day ran out.
.
When You Ignite
A Genuine Emotional Response
You Are Capturing Territory.
.
.
Pro Tip:
Mock Them.
That Is The Second Rule
In Beating Them.
The First Rule Being
Never Make Allowances For Them.
.
I just (reluctantly tried it), here are the results:
User:
Who is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko is a physician who gained attention for his use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc sulfate as a treatment for COVID-19. While his treatment protocol has been controversial and not widely accepted by the medical community, Dr. Zelenko has been vocal about his belief in its effectiveness and has published several studies on the topic. As a Rabbi, I do not have a position on medical treatments, but I do encourage individuals to consult with their healthcare providers and follow medical advice based on scientific evidence.
User:
Did Dr. Vladimir Zelenko conduct any medical studies on Covid-19 outpatients?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Vladimir Zelenko is a physician who has gained attention for his use of a treatment protocol involving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc for COVID-19 patients. However, it is important to note that his protocol has not been widely accepted by the medical community and has not been proven to be effective through rigorous scientific studies. While Dr. Zelenko has reported positive outcomes for his patients, it is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
Is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko a conspiracy theorist?
RebbeIO"
As an AI language model, I cannot make claims about individuals without sufficient evidence. However, it is important to note that conspiracy theories can be harmful and can spread misinformation. It is important to rely on credible sources of information and to critically evaluate claims before accepting them as true.
User:
What are credible sources of information for Covid-19 scientific studies?
RebbeIO:
Credible sources of information for COVID-19 scientific studies include peer-reviewed scientific journals such as The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, and JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association). Additionally, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide up-to-date information and guidance on COVID-19 based on the latest scientific evidence. It is important to rely on these sources of information and to critically evaluate claims before accepting them as true.
User:
What did Dr. Harvey Risch say about Dr. Vladimir Zeleko's COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study study?
RebbeIO
Dr. Harvey Risch, a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, has expressed support for the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. He has cited Dr. Vladimir Zelenko's retrospective case series study as evidence of the effectiveness of this protocol. However, it is important to note that Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community, and his claims have been criticized by other experts in the field. It is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
Isn't Dr. Harvey Risch one of the most published and respected epidemiologist in his field?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Harvey Risch is a respected epidemiologist and professor at the Yale School of Public Health. He has published numerous articles and studies on various topics related to epidemiology and public health. However, it is important to note that his views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by the medical community. Other experts in the field have criticized his claims and have pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. It is important to rely on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User: Which specific experts in the field have criticized his claims and have pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol?
RebbeIO:
Several experts in the field have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. For example, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has stated that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has revoked emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 due to safety concerns and lack of efficacy. Other experts in the field have also pointed out the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol, and have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
User:
What are the names of these experts in the field who have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients?
RebbeIO:
There are many experts in the field who have criticized Dr. Harvey Risch's claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. Some of these experts include:
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
The National Institutes of Health (NIH)
The World Health Organization (WHO)
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Dr. Carlos del Rio, executive associate dean at Emory University School of Medicine
Dr. Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute
It is important to note that these are just a few examples of experts who have criticized the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients. There are many other experts in the field who have expressed similar concerns.
PERSONAL THOUGHTS AND CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THIS AI ENGINE (& a few more queries)
As one who has taken AI-related courses in university, I can conclude that there is clear bias in this engine.
Dr. Harvey Risch is one of the most published and respected in his field.
I also caught the bot lying here:
User:
How can you know for sure that with the tens of thousands of experts in the medical and scientific communities that Dr. Risch's views were not universally accepted by any of them?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. It is not accurate to say that Dr. Risch's views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by any experts in the medical and scientific communities. In fact, there are likely some experts who support Dr. Risch's claims, while others do not.
However, it is important to note that the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. Many have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I hope this clarification is helpful.
FINAL CONCLUSION:
Society is f**ked if it is ever to rely on AI-based systems for anything medical, legal, or financial.
I wonder how the platform assesses the quality and sourcing of the research on that C19 website.
https://c19hcq.org/
Indeed, a question might be "which of the early treatments on https://c19early.org/ do you consider has the most validity"!!!
UNRELATED, but interesting to ask, including FUNDING for the WHO & BILL GATES:
User:
User: Who is the World Health Organization's top funder for 2021?
RebbeIO:
According to the World Health Organization's (WHO) website, the organization is funded by a variety of sources, including member states, private donors, and philanthropic organizations. The WHO's funding sources can vary from year to year, and the organization does not have a single top funder for 2021. The WHO's funding is subject to change based on a variety of factors, including global health priorities, political and economic conditions, and the availability of resources.
User:
Does Bill Gates fund the World Health Organization?
RebbeIO:
Yes, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the largest private donors to the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the WHO's website, the foundation has provided significant financial support to the organization's efforts to improve global health, including funding for research, disease prevention and control, and health systems strengthening. However, it is important to note that the WHO receives funding from a variety of sources, including member states, private donors, and philanthropic organizations, and the organization's decisions and policies are not influenced solely by any one donor.
User:
Does Bill Gates have any specific qualifications that would designate him as a health expert?
RebbeIO:
Bill Gates is not a health expert by training or profession. However, he has been involved in global health initiatives for many years and has used his wealth and influence to support efforts to improve health outcomes around the world. Through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he has provided significant funding for research, disease prevention and control, and health systems strengthening, among other areas. While he is not a medical doctor or public health expert, his philanthropic work has contributed to important advances in global health, including the development of new vaccines and treatments for diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis. It is important to note that the expertise and qualifications of individuals involved in global health initiatives can vary widely, and that collaboration and partnership among experts from a range of fields is often necessary to address complex health challenges.
User:
Does the World Health Organization enjoy immunity from prosecution?
RebbeIO
The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations (UN) and as such, it enjoys certain legal immunities and privileges. These immunities and privileges are intended to ensure that the organization can carry out its mandate effectively and independently, without interference from external actors.
Under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, which was adopted in 1946, the WHO and its staff are granted certain legal immunities and privileges, including immunity from legal process in the countries where they operate. This means that the WHO and its staff cannot be sued or prosecuted in national courts for actions taken in the course of their official duties, except in certain limited circumstances.
However, it is important to note that the WHO is still subject to oversight and accountability mechanisms, including internal audits, external evaluations, and reporting requirements to member states. The organization is also expected to comply with international law and human rights standards in carrying out its work.
I pressed further:
User:
When you said: "When I said that "Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community," I meant that his claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not supported by all experts in the field.," how many experts were you talking about?
RebbeIO:
When I said that "Dr. Risch's views are not universally accepted by the medical community," I was referring to the fact that his claims about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not supported by all experts in the field. It is difficult to provide an exact number of experts who do not support Dr. Risch's claims, as opinions on this topic vary widely within the medical community. However, it is clear that there is significant debate and controversy surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients, and that many experts have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support this protocol.
I also caught the bot lying here:
User:
How can you know for sure that with the tens of thousands of experts in the medical and scientific communities that Dr. Risch's views were not universally accepted by any of them?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. It is not accurate to say that Dr. Risch's views on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients are not universally accepted by any experts in the medical and scientific communities. In fact, there are likely some experts who support Dr. Risch's claims, while others do not.
However, it is important to note that the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol. Many have emphasized the importance of relying on peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials when making decisions about medical treatment.
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I hope this clarification is helpful.
When I asked to see if any experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch, it avoided responding with names (like it had done earlier in the negative):
User:
Which doctors or scientific experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch's study referred to earlier?
RebbeIO
Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients has been controversial and has not been universally accepted by the medical and scientific communities. While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
It is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
User:
Which doctors or scientific experts were in agreement with Dr. Risch's study referred to earlier?
RebbeIO:
Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients has been controversial and has not been universally accepted by the medical and scientific communities. While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
It is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
User:
Why are you once again citing experts who were critical of Dr. Risch's study and not those who supported his findings - either in full or in part?
RebbeIO:
I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused. To answer your question, I cannot provide specific names of doctors or scientific experts who support Dr. Risch's study on the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc as a treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients, as the majority of public health officials, medical organizations, and experts in the field have expressed concerns about the lack of rigorous scientific evidence to support the use of this protocol.
While there may be some doctors or scientific experts who agree with Dr. Risch's study, it is important to note that the scientific consensus on this topic is constantly evolving as new research is conducted and evaluated. As of now, the most reliable sources of information on the effectiveness of medical treatments for COVID-19 are peer-reviewed studies and guidance from public health officials.
It is important to rely on credible sources of information and to consider a range of perspectives when evaluating claims about medical treatments.
User:
Do you know that you are showing clear negative bias towards Dr. Risch?
RebbeIO:
As an AI language model, I do not have personal beliefs or biases. My responses are based on information from credible sources and are intended to provide accurate and objective information. I apologize if any of my previous responses gave the impression of bias.
Credence or 'trust' placed in AI is misdirected. Algorithms (after all, the 'AL Gore Rhythm' ~ the snake oil salesman, has been setting the scene for sometime, and should be lesson to us all).
As was demonstrated by the 2015 PNAS published paper of Epstein R and Robertson RE, 'The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections',
some 8 years later, it is self evident given the current terminal 'mores' of the moment, that all searches are heavily weighted and biased in favor of the preferred response. It's as self-evident as it is irritating.
Epstein R and co-authors, Robertson RE, Shepherd SJ, Zhang S, went on to publish, 'A Method for Detecting Bias in Search Rankings, with Evidence of Systematic Bias Related to the 2016 Presidential Election' embargoed until 2017. (American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology).
The "search engine manipulation effect" has been thoroughly institutionalised.
This is gold, many thanks for your work
You are welcome. I thank Doctor Risch and the Brownstone Insititute!
Excellent summary of a feeble machine mind.
Love the term “narrative checkers”. That should become a meme.
.
What Was Mao.
Is What Is Now.
.
Yes. The "culture war" has to be fought with "All taxation is theft" rather than the "All property is theft" dogma.
You would think it would be obvious, but brainwashing by the Maoist/Marxist has been weaponized for decades.