Oxford University Press will censor genetic studies from China because some of the samples come from Uyghurs, who are allegedly persecuted.
First: Most of the good research is in China now. Rejecting Chinese studies is deliberately blinding ourselves to most science.
Second: I can understand rejecting a study because the subjects were unnecessarily harmed. But DNA for research comes from saliva, not blood or skin. Taking some spit can’t possibly be interpreted as harm.
Third: We don’t know what’s really happening to the Uyghurs. We know what our media tell us, and we know for certain that nearly everything the media says about our Official Enemies is pure bullshit.
Fourth and most important: Every important advance in medicine and behavior involved some harm, deliberate or incidental, and most studies are done on people who might be seen as “persecuted” by our insane Deepstate. If we applied this bizarre fussiness about informed consent** to all science we’d have NO SCIENCE AT ALL. If we applied the “persecuted” standard we’d only do research on white males. I seem to recall that we formerly DID use only white males, and eventually decided to include more “persecuted” people.
We already blinded ourselves to a large part of genetics. We rejected the whole concept of epigenes because Lysenko discovered it. We are MANDATED TO DO THE OPPOSITE of everything Russia does, because Russia is the country we hate. Russia is the country we hate because we hate Russia. All logical and scientific.
= = = = =
** Informed consent was always silly. One of our research proposals was rejected because we were going to use taped samples of speech already recorded in therapy sessions, but the therapists hadn’t asked the people to fill out informed consent before LISTENING to their speech. Since 2020 the whole concept is grotesque. Bush and Trump and all the other leaders in the world subjected 8 billion people to the cruelest experiment in history with no consent at all.
Polistra's Mill 