As you I thought I had been bit by a spider to find out it was shingles after going to the Doctor a couple years ago. The Dr. gave me a prescription which I decided not to take. I decided to try what I had accidentally found that cured my planters warts a years back. My thinking was warts are supposedly viral and so is Shingles/Chickenpox. What I took that cured both my plantar warts and Shingles was higher than recommended dose of B supplement for the warts and B pollen for the Shingles. Worked amazingly for both. Lots of money had been spent over the years having the wart to burnt off and such for them to only come back. Once they went away after taking B supplements they have never returned. The Bee pollen cleared up the shingles pretty fast. I shared with my Doctor as to what worked great for me.
I have shared with several individuals what I have tried and worked for me. Those that have tried it B supplement/Bee pollen have gave great reports back to me. I am not a Dr. but definitely has helped others and I more than once.
Interesting. I've been taking bee pollen since 2020 (guess why) and have been thinking about stopping it. Definitely not going to now. Thanks for the info!
Your "moral compass" favors the truly bad guys; those who are members of the established in-group, who take money from foreign governments, who have sexual relationships with Chinese spies, who work for the ordnance companies and have conflicts of interest when it comes to matters of national defense and war - and who's comparable sexual infidelities are suppressed by the powerful lobbies and conspiracies with whom they are aligned.
An allegation or judgment leveled against one vulnerable man is an easy, cheap, highly focused situation. An investigation into nominees' dirty backroom dealings with cartels, foreign governments, ideological movements and conspiracies is expensive, time consuming, complicated, difficult for the general public to understand, easy to obfuscate and involves, potentially, a lot of damage to many powerful, well entrenched people - all of whom will use their influence to squash the investigation and any findings in the first place.
So your thinking is, sorry to say, that of the bully; beat up on the easy target and toss him to the curb, while allowing the far more compromised gangs to have their way.
Hegseth having affairs is less relevant to job performance as Sec Def than, say, Rumsfeld being in bed with Cheney, Wolfowitz and the whole neocon crowd.
As for Gaetz, I don't see how any decision can be made based on allegations of events that are said to have taken place years ago. It's he said/she said. I know I'm not the same person I was when I was in my 20s. Is such past behavior, if true, even relevant?
You tossed out some statistics concerning the percent of allegations that turn out to be false. I question the methodology behind that study. It would be complicated "science" and there would be much wiggle room to allow confirmation of what is a politically/ideologically charged mantra - the woman is always right. You, of all people, should understand that science is often corrupted by politics.
An objective way of achieving effective cabinet appointments would be to assume that all nominees are sinners. Then work from the question of whether or not the sin that is allowed to come to light negates the positive attributes. If the positive attributes are sufficient, then ignore the sin and appoint.
The problem with your outlook is that allegations of sexual impropriety are cheap, easy and - most importantly - do not involve collateral damage. The target of the allegations is isolated; and that is very important in a political environment.
Allegations of more relevant impropriety - say, being deeply involved with the military industrial complex, taking money from foreign governments, holding ideologies that are contrary to the principles of the USA - are much more challenging to bring to light in a way that is easily digested in a two minute news segment. Moreover, such allegations do create collateral damage. Therefore, the challenge is even greater because those who could become collateral damage are highly motivated to pull the necessary strings to keep their activities covert.
One simply cannot be an absolutist when making these decisions. All men (and women) sin. So we must make decisions based on relativism and context (or the position would remain open indefinitely pending the Second Coming - and I'm not sure Jesus even wants the job). We have to compare sins of one to the sins of the others and judge which are more disqualifying given what we are asking of the nominee. You are comparing nominees with sexual improprieties - real or merely alleged - to some potential nominees who's greater and more relevant sins are unknown to you.
I was wondering if you were ok because I didn’t see as many posts from you as you’d typically do. I didn’t have any “visit dreams” -- I got the one where I’d look out a house window and see water like a stream flowing uncharacteristically close to the house (wherever it was).
THis is part of why I posted today. My shingles-afflicted arm is very sensitive, and my opposite shoulder is in pain from overcompensation, so I've tried to avoid doing anything I don't have to do. The CA report is what I have to do right now. After that, I hope to be back on the graphic novel I started.
I believe that shingles are viral. During Covid, also a virus, my doctor prescribed zinc and D3, about 600 I. U.'s per day or more depending on size and weight of one's body. They worked wonderfully. Viruses do not like D3 and Zinc in combination. Anecdotal for sure, but effective in this writer's DNA.
And 'thank you' earlier writer for the "B" Complex experience. I have now added that to my viral protection package.
Where to start???Where to start??? First, how can someone who discovers one of many algorithms in NY's voter rolls, naming one of them "Shingle", get shingles?!?!when still with pain from the jillion of hours spent "mousing" through a gigantic, polluted database. This is terrible!
What is also terrible and unfair is the fact that many of the "sexual impropriety" cases seem to be sprung or brought up way after the "event". These cases should be required to be sealed and never allowed to be exploited (under the possible charge of defamation) by any party or witness until tried by courts. I am looking at those "Hard -no-" Senators regarding Matt Gaetz's nomination as being guilty of defamation. The President won the election and selected Matt Gaetz, these Senators have been acknowledging Matt Gaetz in his role as a U.S. Representative. How is that suppose to look rational to us sitting out here watching?
And, please, whatever you see in those Los Angeles rolls don't go naming it Malaria!
When my mom was 65, she told me that every member of a then popular rock band had drugged her drink at a Vegas hotel, assaulted her, and then left her naked on the highway in the middle of the night. I was instantly outraged, but then started asking details to go to the police, and her story fell apart. she finally admitted it wasn't true. This is just one example why immediate acceptance of this type of accusation is not a good idea.
My mom was willing to go to trial against the band, and probably would have gotten a serious settlement offer to go away (the band is very wealthy). Why she thought up this particular fantasy and how she convinced herself it was worth telling others I don't know, but the bottom line is that it was false.
The Kavanaugh accuser and Trump's E. Jean Carroll fall into this category. Actually, Carroll reminds me a bit of my mom (in all the worst ways).
Because the reputational damage from accusations like this can be so serious, they should not be accepted lightly.
When I was working, a project manager was successfully kicked off a project by our company because a female project manager made accusations about him. The lead on the project was furious because the male, kicked off the project, manager was more qualified and therefore contributed more to move the project forward. Later on when "the more qualified" manager was helping close a different project he had to attend an out of town meeting with a female Operations Officer that had been brought on. She had been involved in the decision process to have him removed from his other project. I pulled him aside and directed him to drive his company truck and take another employee with him and meet her at the meeting. I will never forget, his eyes opened wide and he said, "You are right! Thanks."
I know all men are not saints but I have seen enough coquettes that cause their own "trouble" and "accusations" seem to be spiteful or a way to defend "their honor" (???). I can only imagine the high heeled girls chasing around these men in suits like the Matt Gaetz-es. There are some very careless and evil people in this (internet + money) age. Aren't we getting an eyeful?
Happy Thanksgiving. I hope you are feeling better. I appreciate you very much.
A friend of mine recently published this "accusations of sexual impropriety should not even be considered harmful to one’s career or reputation. The reason is that so many have been made and proven false that none can be considered credible." I think the logic of this is completely backwards. In order to be informed voters we should care about the values and morals of our leaders as more then we care about their PAC contributions. And of course it's completely illogical suggest that false positives should guide us towards completely abandoning the vetting process. Imagine if we applied that same logic to our legal system with regard to murder. Can you please help straighten Andrew out about this?
Answer
Your friend's statement about accusations of sexual impropriety is problematic for several reasons, both logically and ethically. Here are some points to consider when discussing this with Andrew:
Importance of Moral and Ethical Standards
Moral Character of Leaders: The moral and ethical standards of leaders are crucial in assessing their suitability for public office. Voters need to be informed about the values and integrity of candidates, as these qualities can significantly impact their decision-making and leadership style6.
Impact on Public Trust: Allegations of sexual misconduct can erode public trust in leaders and institutions. Ignoring such allegations could lead to a culture where unethical behavior is tolerated, ultimately damaging the credibility and effectiveness of governance9.
Logical Fallacies in the Argument
False Equivalence: The argument that false accusations are so prevalent that all should be disregarded is a logical fallacy. Research indicates that false allegations are relatively rare, estimated between 2% and 10% of all claims7. Disregarding all allegations due to a minority being false is akin to abandoning the legal system because some cases result in wrongful convictions.
Importance of Due Process: Just as the legal system requires due process to determine guilt or innocence, allegations of misconduct should be thoroughly investigated to ensure justice for both the accuser and the accused. Abandoning this process undermines accountability and can allow genuine misconduct to go unpunished48.
Consequences of Dismissing Allegations
Potential Harm to Victims: Dismissing allegations without investigation can discourage victims from coming forward, perpetuating a cycle of abuse and silence5. It is essential to create an environment where victims feel safe and supported in reporting misconduct.
Career Implications: While false allegations can harm reputations, many politicians accused of misconduct have continued successful careers, suggesting that allegations do not automatically destroy careers unless substantiated6. This highlights the need for careful consideration rather than blanket dismissal.
By addressing these points, you can help Andrew understand the importance of considering allegations seriously while maintaining a fair and balanced approach to evaluating their validity.
The problem is that a false accusation says nothing about the person it is directed at. As of right now, I wouldn't be surprised if accusations of sexual improprieties have been levelled at every politician in office right now, good and bad. At that point, the accusation cannot be used to differentiate one candidate from another, without going the extra step of determining whether the accusation is true.
My own mother did this, and very convincingly, for decades. Finally, she admitted to my older half-sister it wasn't true. She had gotten pregnant at 19 and didn't want to admit her fault to my grandfather, so she made up a story. That story got a man arrested and put on trial. He was exonerated, but it couldn't have been fun.
One problem with false accusations is they make it difficult to find the true accusations. In politics, I'm inclined to believe most (more than 50.0%) are false, so my default position is that they are all false absent significant persuasive evidence. Meaning, an accusation alone isn't enough.
come on... Pete is not claiming that he didn't cheat on his wife while she was home nursing their one-month-old baby. He's just claiming that the person he was cheating with wasn't raped. Also, he's not denying that he cheated on his other two wives.
So, it's legitimate to ask whether this should disqualify him from office. I'm not sure it should. But I think it does speak to his moral character. He wouldn't be my first pick 🤠
And I really don't care. Same for Dems btw, so this isn't a partisan issue for me. My opinion is that too many haul out this specific allegation too often for it to be true or meaningful. The media have done everything they can to normalize behavior that we think of as repugnant, but having done that, the value of the charge is limited. It's like a mobster threatening another mobster with a knife. It isn't what I consider polite, but that is what they do. Same thing for lions and other carnivorous predators. I don't begrudge them their kills because it is their nature.
Accusations of sexual impropriety are to a politician what a cannon is to a soldier, the weapon of choice. The problem is that it is only useful as a weapon if the enemies take it seriously. That might have been true 50 years ago, but not today, in the era of Sex and the City, Seinfeld, The b* in apartment 23, etc. Now, they're shooting blanks. What should worry the people who use ths type of ammo is that it is the people who are most concerned with sexual impropriety that don't believe them on this subject.
Yeah, I'm not buying it. If I found out you were doing this kind of stuff I would think differently about you... and it would affect how I judge your work.
There is a difference between an accusation and "finding out". What we're looking at are accusations. Even the ones that get as far as court are usually unconvincing. This doesn't mean I never believe this stuff, Bill Cosby being one such example, but that after so many clearly phony allegations, I am no longer willing to assume true until proven wrong. I presume they are false until proven true. There is another factor as well, because I assume they are false, there is less urgency and interest in studying whether they are true. This obviously makes it harder to be convinced, which is exactly my point: strategically, this particular attack vector has lost much of its force because it has been overused and on dubious occasions.
In California’s 13th Congressional District, Democrat Gray, who trailed on election night, has finally overtaken Republican Duarte after counting votes for three weeks—the typical time it takes for the body to rid itself of the Shingles.
Hopefully, good news for you Dr Andrew….Not so good for California or the USA.
Too much stress Andrew. I hope the shingles complete.y resolves quickly 💕
Thanks. I think it is getting better. The nigh-excruciating pain has subsided and either the swelling is down or I'm more muscular than I remember.
As you I thought I had been bit by a spider to find out it was shingles after going to the Doctor a couple years ago. The Dr. gave me a prescription which I decided not to take. I decided to try what I had accidentally found that cured my planters warts a years back. My thinking was warts are supposedly viral and so is Shingles/Chickenpox. What I took that cured both my plantar warts and Shingles was higher than recommended dose of B supplement for the warts and B pollen for the Shingles. Worked amazingly for both. Lots of money had been spent over the years having the wart to burnt off and such for them to only come back. Once they went away after taking B supplements they have never returned. The Bee pollen cleared up the shingles pretty fast. I shared with my Doctor as to what worked great for me.
I have shared with several individuals what I have tried and worked for me. Those that have tried it B supplement/Bee pollen have gave great reports back to me. I am not a Dr. but definitely has helped others and I more than once.
Interesting. I've been taking bee pollen since 2020 (guess why) and have been thinking about stopping it. Definitely not going to now. Thanks for the info!
Looking forward to the California file(s)! Hopefully more than just the adjacent area to LA.
Thank you! And I hope you get past your shingles soon!
Alex,
Your "moral compass" favors the truly bad guys; those who are members of the established in-group, who take money from foreign governments, who have sexual relationships with Chinese spies, who work for the ordnance companies and have conflicts of interest when it comes to matters of national defense and war - and who's comparable sexual infidelities are suppressed by the powerful lobbies and conspiracies with whom they are aligned.
An allegation or judgment leveled against one vulnerable man is an easy, cheap, highly focused situation. An investigation into nominees' dirty backroom dealings with cartels, foreign governments, ideological movements and conspiracies is expensive, time consuming, complicated, difficult for the general public to understand, easy to obfuscate and involves, potentially, a lot of damage to many powerful, well entrenched people - all of whom will use their influence to squash the investigation and any findings in the first place.
So your thinking is, sorry to say, that of the bully; beat up on the easy target and toss him to the curb, while allowing the far more compromised gangs to have their way.
Hegseth having affairs is less relevant to job performance as Sec Def than, say, Rumsfeld being in bed with Cheney, Wolfowitz and the whole neocon crowd.
As for Gaetz, I don't see how any decision can be made based on allegations of events that are said to have taken place years ago. It's he said/she said. I know I'm not the same person I was when I was in my 20s. Is such past behavior, if true, even relevant?
You tossed out some statistics concerning the percent of allegations that turn out to be false. I question the methodology behind that study. It would be complicated "science" and there would be much wiggle room to allow confirmation of what is a politically/ideologically charged mantra - the woman is always right. You, of all people, should understand that science is often corrupted by politics.
An objective way of achieving effective cabinet appointments would be to assume that all nominees are sinners. Then work from the question of whether or not the sin that is allowed to come to light negates the positive attributes. If the positive attributes are sufficient, then ignore the sin and appoint.
Alex Tsakiris,
The problem with your outlook is that allegations of sexual impropriety are cheap, easy and - most importantly - do not involve collateral damage. The target of the allegations is isolated; and that is very important in a political environment.
Allegations of more relevant impropriety - say, being deeply involved with the military industrial complex, taking money from foreign governments, holding ideologies that are contrary to the principles of the USA - are much more challenging to bring to light in a way that is easily digested in a two minute news segment. Moreover, such allegations do create collateral damage. Therefore, the challenge is even greater because those who could become collateral damage are highly motivated to pull the necessary strings to keep their activities covert.
One simply cannot be an absolutist when making these decisions. All men (and women) sin. So we must make decisions based on relativism and context (or the position would remain open indefinitely pending the Second Coming - and I'm not sure Jesus even wants the job). We have to compare sins of one to the sins of the others and judge which are more disqualifying given what we are asking of the nominee. You are comparing nominees with sexual improprieties - real or merely alleged - to some potential nominees who's greater and more relevant sins are unknown to you.
Hang in there...
I was wondering if you were ok because I didn’t see as many posts from you as you’d typically do. I didn’t have any “visit dreams” -- I got the one where I’d look out a house window and see water like a stream flowing uncharacteristically close to the house (wherever it was).
THis is part of why I posted today. My shingles-afflicted arm is very sensitive, and my opposite shoulder is in pain from overcompensation, so I've tried to avoid doing anything I don't have to do. The CA report is what I have to do right now. After that, I hope to be back on the graphic novel I started.
So when did you have chicken pox, and what was it like? (Did you scratch off any “pox” and get a round scar from it?)
(The chickenpox virus stays in the body and can cause shingles later in life under stress, etc. if I’m understanding it correctly.)
I think I was about 10 when I had chickenpox. I still have a couple of the cards that people sent me then.
A long time ago, at summer camp. I might have been 8.
I believe that shingles are viral. During Covid, also a virus, my doctor prescribed zinc and D3, about 600 I. U.'s per day or more depending on size and weight of one's body. They worked wonderfully. Viruses do not like D3 and Zinc in combination. Anecdotal for sure, but effective in this writer's DNA.
And 'thank you' earlier writer for the "B" Complex experience. I have now added that to my viral protection package.
So sorry you're dealing with shingles! Hope you feel better soon!
Where to start???Where to start??? First, how can someone who discovers one of many algorithms in NY's voter rolls, naming one of them "Shingle", get shingles?!?!when still with pain from the jillion of hours spent "mousing" through a gigantic, polluted database. This is terrible!
What is also terrible and unfair is the fact that many of the "sexual impropriety" cases seem to be sprung or brought up way after the "event". These cases should be required to be sealed and never allowed to be exploited (under the possible charge of defamation) by any party or witness until tried by courts. I am looking at those "Hard -no-" Senators regarding Matt Gaetz's nomination as being guilty of defamation. The President won the election and selected Matt Gaetz, these Senators have been acknowledging Matt Gaetz in his role as a U.S. Representative. How is that suppose to look rational to us sitting out here watching?
And, please, whatever you see in those Los Angeles rolls don't go naming it Malaria!
When my mom was 65, she told me that every member of a then popular rock band had drugged her drink at a Vegas hotel, assaulted her, and then left her naked on the highway in the middle of the night. I was instantly outraged, but then started asking details to go to the police, and her story fell apart. she finally admitted it wasn't true. This is just one example why immediate acceptance of this type of accusation is not a good idea.
My mom was willing to go to trial against the band, and probably would have gotten a serious settlement offer to go away (the band is very wealthy). Why she thought up this particular fantasy and how she convinced herself it was worth telling others I don't know, but the bottom line is that it was false.
The Kavanaugh accuser and Trump's E. Jean Carroll fall into this category. Actually, Carroll reminds me a bit of my mom (in all the worst ways).
Because the reputational damage from accusations like this can be so serious, they should not be accepted lightly.
When I was working, a project manager was successfully kicked off a project by our company because a female project manager made accusations about him. The lead on the project was furious because the male, kicked off the project, manager was more qualified and therefore contributed more to move the project forward. Later on when "the more qualified" manager was helping close a different project he had to attend an out of town meeting with a female Operations Officer that had been brought on. She had been involved in the decision process to have him removed from his other project. I pulled him aside and directed him to drive his company truck and take another employee with him and meet her at the meeting. I will never forget, his eyes opened wide and he said, "You are right! Thanks."
I know all men are not saints but I have seen enough coquettes that cause their own "trouble" and "accusations" seem to be spiteful or a way to defend "their honor" (???). I can only imagine the high heeled girls chasing around these men in suits like the Matt Gaetz-es. There are some very careless and evil people in this (internet + money) age. Aren't we getting an eyeful?
Happy Thanksgiving. I hope you are feeling better. I appreciate you very much.
A friend of mine recently published this "accusations of sexual impropriety should not even be considered harmful to one’s career or reputation. The reason is that so many have been made and proven false that none can be considered credible." I think the logic of this is completely backwards. In order to be informed voters we should care about the values and morals of our leaders as more then we care about their PAC contributions. And of course it's completely illogical suggest that false positives should guide us towards completely abandoning the vetting process. Imagine if we applied that same logic to our legal system with regard to murder. Can you please help straighten Andrew out about this?
Answer
Your friend's statement about accusations of sexual impropriety is problematic for several reasons, both logically and ethically. Here are some points to consider when discussing this with Andrew:
Importance of Moral and Ethical Standards
Moral Character of Leaders: The moral and ethical standards of leaders are crucial in assessing their suitability for public office. Voters need to be informed about the values and integrity of candidates, as these qualities can significantly impact their decision-making and leadership style6.
Impact on Public Trust: Allegations of sexual misconduct can erode public trust in leaders and institutions. Ignoring such allegations could lead to a culture where unethical behavior is tolerated, ultimately damaging the credibility and effectiveness of governance9.
Logical Fallacies in the Argument
False Equivalence: The argument that false accusations are so prevalent that all should be disregarded is a logical fallacy. Research indicates that false allegations are relatively rare, estimated between 2% and 10% of all claims7. Disregarding all allegations due to a minority being false is akin to abandoning the legal system because some cases result in wrongful convictions.
Importance of Due Process: Just as the legal system requires due process to determine guilt or innocence, allegations of misconduct should be thoroughly investigated to ensure justice for both the accuser and the accused. Abandoning this process undermines accountability and can allow genuine misconduct to go unpunished48.
Consequences of Dismissing Allegations
Potential Harm to Victims: Dismissing allegations without investigation can discourage victims from coming forward, perpetuating a cycle of abuse and silence5. It is essential to create an environment where victims feel safe and supported in reporting misconduct.
Career Implications: While false allegations can harm reputations, many politicians accused of misconduct have continued successful careers, suggesting that allegations do not automatically destroy careers unless substantiated6. This highlights the need for careful consideration rather than blanket dismissal.
By addressing these points, you can help Andrew understand the importance of considering allegations seriously while maintaining a fair and balanced approach to evaluating their validity.
The problem is that a false accusation says nothing about the person it is directed at. As of right now, I wouldn't be surprised if accusations of sexual improprieties have been levelled at every politician in office right now, good and bad. At that point, the accusation cannot be used to differentiate one candidate from another, without going the extra step of determining whether the accusation is true.
My own mother did this, and very convincingly, for decades. Finally, she admitted to my older half-sister it wasn't true. She had gotten pregnant at 19 and didn't want to admit her fault to my grandfather, so she made up a story. That story got a man arrested and put on trial. He was exonerated, but it couldn't have been fun.
One problem with false accusations is they make it difficult to find the true accusations. In politics, I'm inclined to believe most (more than 50.0%) are false, so my default position is that they are all false absent significant persuasive evidence. Meaning, an accusation alone isn't enough.
come on... Pete is not claiming that he didn't cheat on his wife while she was home nursing their one-month-old baby. He's just claiming that the person he was cheating with wasn't raped. Also, he's not denying that he cheated on his other two wives.
Megan nailed it:
https://youtu.be/w9uCJdV2qsI?si=Mb596xc_90YkDrA9
So, it's legitimate to ask whether this should disqualify him from office. I'm not sure it should. But I think it does speak to his moral character. He wouldn't be my first pick 🤠
And I really don't care. Same for Dems btw, so this isn't a partisan issue for me. My opinion is that too many haul out this specific allegation too often for it to be true or meaningful. The media have done everything they can to normalize behavior that we think of as repugnant, but having done that, the value of the charge is limited. It's like a mobster threatening another mobster with a knife. It isn't what I consider polite, but that is what they do. Same thing for lions and other carnivorous predators. I don't begrudge them their kills because it is their nature.
Accusations of sexual impropriety are to a politician what a cannon is to a soldier, the weapon of choice. The problem is that it is only useful as a weapon if the enemies take it seriously. That might have been true 50 years ago, but not today, in the era of Sex and the City, Seinfeld, The b* in apartment 23, etc. Now, they're shooting blanks. What should worry the people who use ths type of ammo is that it is the people who are most concerned with sexual impropriety that don't believe them on this subject.
Yeah, I'm not buying it. If I found out you were doing this kind of stuff I would think differently about you... and it would affect how I judge your work.
There is a difference between an accusation and "finding out". What we're looking at are accusations. Even the ones that get as far as court are usually unconvincing. This doesn't mean I never believe this stuff, Bill Cosby being one such example, but that after so many clearly phony allegations, I am no longer willing to assume true until proven wrong. I presume they are false until proven true. There is another factor as well, because I assume they are false, there is less urgency and interest in studying whether they are true. This obviously makes it harder to be convinced, which is exactly my point: strategically, this particular attack vector has lost much of its force because it has been overused and on dubious occasions.
False accusers should be jailed.
In California’s 13th Congressional District, Democrat Gray, who trailed on election night, has finally overtaken Republican Duarte after counting votes for three weeks—the typical time it takes for the body to rid itself of the Shingles.
Hopefully, good news for you Dr Andrew….Not so good for California or the USA.