Videos of Interest 5.12.2023
"Commodification of trauma" for detransitioners, another East Palestine meeting (this time on well water), and slow-to-progress science.
I haven’t done this much, but I may consider saving Fridays for videos that I have found interesting. Let me know if you would like to see this as being an ongoing occurrence, as these videos will hopefully be a mix of different topics. I may mix it up with both articles and videos if people prefer that as well.
“Commodification of Trauma”
This was a video that I initially began writing an article on, but ended up stopping short as I couldn’t flesh out my ideas fully (which happens often if I’m being honest…)
YouTuber Benjamin A. Boyce is an individual who has been involved with a lot of the social rot going on currently, with him having turned more towards interviewing people who have raised criticisms of the trans debate and getting their perspective. For the most part, he has become more involved with interviewing detransitioners and have tried getting their story out into the world.
Recently, Boyce participated in a conference led by Genspect. Boyce notes the following with respect to Genspect in his following video’s description:
@Genspect is a nonprofit resource organization providing evidenced based information and experienced care for all who are impacted by the rise of gender medicine. At the end of April, 2023, they hosted a "Bigger Picture" conference in Killarney, Ireland and invited me as a headliner to host a series of panels with persons who I've interviewed over the years. In this video I speak with Helena, Ritchie, Camille, Laura, Michelle, and Jett about their thoughts on transition, detransition, and how their perception of themselves and the future has evolved.
In the following video Boyce interviews several detransitioners from various sexes and ages, including a few adults in their early to mid-30s.
When this video showed up in my feed I thought it would be a typical discussion regarding detransitioning, possibly detailing the MANY issues associated with the coercion and enforcement of trans ideology among these people.
However, the discussion ends up taking a different turn. Rather, the discussion opened to talk about how some of these detransitioners also felt that they were being used for political reasons by those critical of the trans movement. Several people noted that they felt like they were just being used, with one individual (Camilla, who is in the middle) noting that she wasn’t the first pick by a politician to speak out against a trans-related bill. After she spoke about her experience the person who flew her out apparently made a comment that adults should be able to make stupid decisions (around the 12:30 mark).
Camilla tends to learn older than the other detransitioners in the group as she is in her 30s, but it also really spoke of how many of these detransitioners may just be used as a prop to show the failures of broad-scale, unfettered gender ideology.
She also goes on to use the phrase “commodification of trauma”, in that many people may utilize the trauma and suffering that these detransitioners have gone through only to be abandoned by the same people who are using them as an example of the pitfalls of widespread transitioning.
It’s rather harrowing to consider how people may used as props from all sides. In all honesty, it makes me think of the vaccine injured and how vaccine zealots may completely neglect these individuals while vaccine skeptics may use them only to place them on the wayside when there’s no use for them anymore. I’m curious how many vaccine injured people are actively getting help in the same ways many detransitioners may be left to their own devices.
It’s an important reminder that empathy is needed now more than ever. We should be more understanding and compassionate to one another if we are to see some form of resolution.
Holy Bureaucracy, East Palestine!
Another meeting was released with respect to the East Palestine derailment. In this case, the meeting revolved specifically around well water testing for compounds of interest/concern.
I haven’t watched the previous videos on air monitoring or on soil contaminants yet, but I happened to stay up watching this one to get a glimpse of how these sessions went.
I was actually surprised that some of the well water results were explained, albeit not as deeply as I would have hoped.
The testing of well water is important because it will show the accumulation of toxins over time. Well water may take several months to years before any contaminants from the train derailments become present, if they are present to begin with. Therefore, the initial testing at this point serves more as a way of obtaining baseline measures in case contaminants begin entering into private water.
Here, it does appear that there is an attempt to inform and educate the locals, and yet it’s also interesting to look at the bureaucracy on display. It’s interesting to see some of the speakers for the EPA (both US and Ohio) having to speak within the confines of their power, and it’s apparent that many locals are rather frustrated when this means they can’t get any answers.
It appears that some of the locals were still testing positive for vinyl chloride metabolites, and here a concrete answer isn’t provided. The US EPA representative mentions that other factors could be involved with the presence of this metabolite (which is true, but should be looked into as well), and he appears outside of his wheelhouse.
So for as much work that is ongoing, many locals are still left in a state of purgatory, not knowing exactly what to do given their own personal circumstances and having to maneuver being tossed from one place to another.
What’s groundbreaking becomes…groundbreaking.
Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein had an early (or is it late?) episode of their weekly Darkhorse Podcast series.
In this case, the discussion revolved around a hypothesis that Bret Wenstein proposed nearly 20 years* ago relating to telomeres.1
*Edit: Decades changed to years. Or maybe Wenstein is actually several hundred years old! 🤷♂️
The hypothesis, formed in partnership with fellow graduate student Deborah Ciszek, suggested that telomeres serve a role as double-edged sword when it comes to aging.
In short, telomeres are repeat segments that exist at the end of our chromosomes. During replication, the polymerase needs a segment of uncoded DNA to latch onto in order to replicate the genetic material. However, every cycle of replication leads to a shortening of the telomeres as bits of this repeat sequence do not carry over. This is a consequence of the polymerase needing room to latch onto the DNA, which unfortunately means that some end nucleotides won’t become replicated.
More can be found in the following reviews (note that I haven’t read these reviews):
Aubert, G., & Lansdorp, P. M.2: Telomeres and Aging
Chakravarti, et al.3: Telomeres: history, health, and hallmarks of aging.
Thus, it’s been suggested that the shortening of telomeres may be associated with senescence (cellular aging), and mechanisms that shorten telomeres such as repeat cell division and tissue repair may accelerate senescence.
This has led several researchers to try and either increase telomere length or reduce the process of senescence.
What Weinstein and Ciszek argues is that longer telomeres aren’t always better. Rather, longer telomeres may be contrasted with an increase risk of cancer.
Therefore, both accelerated senescence and telomere elongation may come at a cost.
It’s actually been a few years since I’ve read this hypothesis so I can’t recall the details outside of what Wenstein discusses in the podcast.
However, the concept was brought up as it appears that current research corroborates this hypothesis, with a recent study suggesting that longer telomeres may be associated with increased risk of cancer.
The article in question comes from The New York Times with the following headline:
Which also appears to be based off of this recent work published in The NEJM4:
Now, I won’t argue whether Weinstein can lay claim to being the first to propose this hypothesis. However, it’s rather interesting to see that evidence of this hypothesis has been around for nearly two decades, and it’s only now that researchers are beginning to dive deeper into this topic and rebutting the long-held claims that longer telomers are always better.
I thought this discussion was very interesting and rather insightful. It’s interesting to think about the bureaucracy that goes on in science. Many people are still ignorant to the fact that science falls into the same issues that other fields do, in which arrogance, personalities, and ties to industry may be used promote scientific progress rather than just the science itself. This creates the issue of selectively choosing which science gets funding, and which ones get reported.
I will also add that Heying raises an interesting point of noting that many citations in science may not actually be correct. It’s not uncommon to come across a review article, dive through a few citations until you get to the primary source, and come to find out that the claims made in the literature review actually don’t match what the primary source says, and may be a complete mischaracterization of the work.
Science, unfortunately plays a game of telephone where many researchers may not spend time getting to primary sources, leading falsities to become propagated in science.
So here’s a few videos I came across this week that I found interesting. Again, if you guys like this format please let me know and I’ll consider releasing these more routinely.
Substack is my main source of income and all support helps to support me in my daily life. If you enjoyed this post and other works please consider supporting me through a paid Substack subscription or through my Ko-fi. Any bit helps, and it encourages independent creators and journalists such as myself to provide work outside of the mainstream narrative.
Weinstein, B. S., & Ciszek, D. (2002). The reserve-capacity hypothesis: evolutionary origins and modern implications of the trade-off between tumor-suppression and tissue-repair. Experimental gerontology, 37(5), 615–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0531-5565(02)00012-8
Aubert, G., & Lansdorp, P. M. (2008). Telomeres and aging. Physiological reviews, 88(2), 557–579. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00026.2007
Chakravarti, D., LaBella, K. A., & DePinho, R. A. (2021). Telomeres: history, health, and hallmarks of aging. Cell, 184(2), 306–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.12.028
DeBoy, E. A., Tassia, M. G., Schratz, K. E., Yan, S. M., Cosner, Z. L., McNally, E. J., Gable, D. L., Xiang, Z., Lombard, D. B., Antonarakis, E. S., Gocke, C. D., McCoy, R. C., & Armanios, M. (2023). Familial Clonal Hematopoiesis in a Long Telomere Syndrome. The New England journal of medicine, 10.1056/NEJMoa2300503. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2300503
In a past life I was promoted to plant manager of a medium size manufacturing plant. I had about 10 production and maintenance supervisors reporting to me. I noticed early on that what they’d do is come to my office and unload all their problems on me. Then they’d leave feeling better but not accomplishing a damn thing.
So one day I met with them all and reminded them that if they need backup I’ll be there for them but they are paid to solve problems. If I have to do all the thinking what do I need you for? I told them I’d rather see them try and fail than not try at all. But try you must. I understand being frustrated sometimes and needing to vent but it can’t stop there. At the end of the day the problems you’re facing are your problems not mine but I will offer my assistance if necessary.
💥 Bam the turnaround was remarkable. We were always the #1 plant in the system for output, quality and efficiency.
I see the same things going on in the world today. So many people make comfortable livings beating a dead horse presenting us with problems ad nauseum. But precious few take the next step and do anything about them. They play a game of perpetual concerned detachment.
Consequently I’m not impressed with any of the usual pandemic dissenters because for three years they’ve been dropping the problem into our laps and walking away.
No real skin in the game. No insistence on driving a stake through mRNA. That’s how you can tell they’re useless. No end-game. No solutions. Not even trying. The vast majority are professional complainers. And we’re letting them off the hook nodding to their tunes with no meaningful expectations.
"Bret Wenstein proposed nearly 20 decades ago"
Odd, the guy doesn't strike me as a vampire! ;)