Have you heard of the perverted game “Plague Company”?”Plague Company” is a strategy game based on infectious diseases, developed by the independent game studio Ndemic Creations in London, England.It frantically uses the virus to infect all mankind in order to achieve the dark purpose of exterminating all mankind, and the player is acting as the man behind the destruction of the world.
In the final stage of the game, WHO and medical institutions in various countries will directly approve the legality of human trials.Skip the animal experiment and start the human experiment directly. The goal is self-evident——Shorten the test cycle of a new drug or vaccine .Even more frightening is that the British government has planned to move the game to reality and implement this “highest level of humanitarianism.”
This is the limit of medical ethics that Britain is preparing to break through after the herd immunity concept was proposed.Infect healthy people with the new coronavirus and conduct clinical trials.Under the so-called “controllable” situation, the human body is infected with the virus and relevant drug and vaccine trials are carried out.It is reported that this test has been approved by the ethics committee and will be implemented in March.
I have to say that the UK is really too cutting-edge, even challenging the bottom line of “medicine”.It is not an exaggeration to say that history is being rewritten.Treat or cause disease? In the face of the new crown epidemic, the UK-led trial is challenging the definition of doctor status.
How does this experiment work?The British government has pledged to invest 33.6 million pounds in a clinical trial called “human challenge trial”.Ninety healthy people aged 18 to 30 participated in the nasal infection of the new coronavirus produced in the laboratory.By then, 90 adult volunteers between the ages of 18 and 30 will be exposed to the new coronavirus in a safe and controllable environment to help researchers understand the human body’s response to the virus, how the virus spreads, and the minimum number of viruses needed to cause infection .
Endorsing this human trial is the Imperial College London and the British Government Vaccine Task Force.Volunteers need to undergo health risk testing before they can be allowed to participate in the trial, and will be quarantined for 17 days. Experts and medical staff will closely monitor them, and then follow up for more than 12 months.According to the “Guardian” report on the 17th, volunteers participating in the human challenge test of the new crown virus are not paid, but will receive a compensation of about 4,500 pounds .
For this so-called “medical research”, the ethical limit is whether it is voluntary.According to reports, there is also an 18-year-old British youth Alastair Fraser-Ucht who voluntarily “tested the drug”.After the British government announced the approval of the test, he immediately signed up.He said that of course there will be concerns because there are unknown risks, but he can accept these risks and has the support of his family.He hopes that this trial will have a lasting impact, enabling people to develop vaccines earlier in future epidemics.
It has to be said that Britain is always one step ahead of others to abandon “humanitarianism”.If we don’t talk about “humanism”, this experiment has positive meaning.The reason for not discussing it is because it can only be a “higher level of humanitarianism” after talking about this experiment.
To understand the human body’s response to the virus in a controlled environment, the test population is mostly young people, then the problem is coming——What should we do to deal with elderly people with weakened immunity from the virus?How significant is the test data for the elderly?How to ensure the health of young people participating in clinical trials? Is there any real “controllable”?
These questions are avoided. Where can we see the positive significance of this experiment?When the British government wanted to implement “herd immunity”, Sanlian Weekly called it “a higher level of humanitarianism.” This article is still deleted.Now, Britain is about to start the experiment of “healthy people infected with the virus”, and the “highest level of humanitarianism” is nothing more than this.
But this kind of “humanitarianism” began in the United States decades ago.The human test of syphilis using 800 black people did not ultimately bring any medical progress, but rather an ethical regression.You know, smallpox, plague, and syphilis are probably the three diseases that have the greatest impact on humans in history.A chronic infectious disease caused by Treponema pallidum. When Treponema pallidum enters the human body, it quickly spreads to all organs of the body, producing various symptoms and signs, and can also be in a latent state, and can also be passed on to the next generation through the placenta.At present, no one knows where syphilis originated. The earliest record of it was in Naples, Italy, 1494-1495.
At the beginning of the 20th century, because of discrimination against blacks, American society believed that syphilis spread in blacks and whites in different ways.Syphilis invades the “more complex brain” of whites, but only invades the cardiovascular system of blacks, leaving their “underdeveloped brains.”Therefore, syphilis experiments were conducted in the United States at that time, and 399 black men infected with syphilis and 201 black men without syphilis became “experimental products.”This is the infamous “Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment”.
But the black people who conducted the experiment were not innocent from beginning to end, what kind of experiment they were conducting and what was their purpose.Many people still think that this is doctors going to the countryside to help the poor and solve their health problems.In this experiment, 201 black men who were not infected with syphilis were also infected with syphilis.There are even more cruel methods. In order to ensure the so-called medical continuity, these blacks did not receive systemic treatment after suffering from syphilis.Until death.
Even in 1943, when penicillin was found to cure syphilis, these people still did not receive treatment. As the name suggests, the continuity of the test must be ensured.These people became victims of syphilis.In the United States, the “Tasji syphilis test” has become synonymous with racial discrimination.
In fact, this is not the first time that humans have launched a “human challenge.” Except for some unethical human trials, the earliest trials can be traced back to the birth of human vaccines.In 1796, British doctors extracted harmless cowpox from a milkmaid and injected it into an 8-year-old boy.Then, the doctor repeatedly infected the little boy with smallpox virus, and the little boy was always healthy.So the first vaccine for smallpox in medical history appeared.
However, this human test is relatively formal and helpful. Not every human test is profitable but harmless, and more cases are accompanied by great risks.So, what will happen to this “superior humanitarian” experiment conducted by the UK?The answer is that it may not help the science itself.In addition to telling the test subjects the purpose of the experiment, effective treatment for viral infections.According to what is currently known, there is no essential difference between the “Human Challenge Test” in the United Kingdom and the “Tasji Syphilis Test” in the United States.
At present, more than 5% of the infection in the UK has caused more than 100,000 deaths. The vaccine has been vaccinated on a large scale.From a scientific point of view, it is not clear what is the significance of such a human challenge?If this project is implemented, it will inevitably leave a dishonorable in the history of science, and the scientists who put forward the experiment will also be questioned.
Before the lack of effective plans for the new crown treatment, the so-called “human challenge” is very irresponsible.The prerequisite for this test must be-The disease is self-limiting (can heal itself like a cold) or there is a complete treatment plan.Obviously, the new crown does not have it.
Is it wise to take the risk of infecting 90 healthy people for unnecessary data?Moreover, the new crown treatment is immature, and the sequelae are still unclear. Volunteers are noble warriors, but is it the attitude of scientists to conceal these risks?These “scientific significance” are much smaller in the face of human life.In order to have dispensable data, and choose to actively infect healthy people, in the eyes of the British, the new crown is like a cold.
From herd immunity to human challenges, Britain’s for the first time is more than iron.To borrow the words of the previous Sanlian Life Weekly:For such a brand-new live test, perhaps we don’t have to rush to make a conclusion, but should encourage countries to follow the example of the United Kingdom based on the number of deaths.Doing so can at least provide some proof for the intelligent species living on the earth in the future, and proof that human beings have survived here.And this is the highest level of humanitarianism.News | Stories | International StudentsEdit | Captain DragonflyTypography | Captain DragonflyProofreading | JiaruiRecommended reading:Really hammered! Evidence of BBC’s use of despicable means to “filter the underworld” against China
For a long time, many Chinese netizens have suspected that when the BBC reports about our China, in addition to distorting the facts and inverting black and white, it will also give them an extra layer of gray and dark tones in the scenes they photographed in China. Filters to further vilify us in our visual perception.
This is because many Chinese netizens have conducted on-site inspections of the dim street scenes that appeared in BBC programs and found that these street scenes were originally quite bright.
As a result, Chinese netizens ridiculed the BBC routine as a “filter of the underworld.”
Of course, the BBC has always refused to admit that they have used this kind of trick, and has repeatedly emphasized that they are “fair and objective” media.
But recently, some Chinese netizens found real evidence on the BBC’s official website that they did use the “Underworld Filter” when reporting on China!
It turned out that some Chinese netizens recently watched a video report on the BBC’s “How the New Crown Epidemic Changed Wuhan One Year Later” launched on the overseas video site Youtube, and found that even though the British media reported in its English version Both the Chinese version and the Chinese version use the same program content, but the two different language versions show completely different color effects!
From the following sets of comparison pictures from the program, Geng Zhige believes that everyone should be able to clearly see that in this program broadcast on the BBC Chinese version, the colors on the streets of Wuhan are bright colors that are more in line with the actual local colors. But in the English version of the program, the same scene became extremely pale and gray, and it was obvious that it was deliberately put on a “underworld filter”:
In the scenes involving Wuhan night in the program, there is also a clear gap in the color of the BBC Chinese and English version of the program. As shown in the four sets of comparison pictures below, in the English version of the BBC program for Westerners to watch, the streets of Wuhan at night are obviously covered with a layer of gray and a sickly yellow filter.
We have also specially produced a comparison video to let everyone more intuitively feel how the BBC uses this “underworld filter” in its programs for the English-speaking world:
The BBC’s despicable approach to China is a real hammer!(Source: Video Synthesis)
Video production: Global Times “Three Missing Two” Video Team
At present, the BBC has not yet discussed why its same program will show completely different tones in the Chinese version and the English version, and why it uses this extremely dark, pale and pathological “underworld filter” in the English version of the program. Give any explanation.
Several BBC reporters in China still continue to play dumb in their personal accounts on overseas social platforms, claiming that they are fair media, and are “proud” of their reports and reporters.
(The picture shows Kathy Long, a BBC news producer based in Beijing, who declares that the BBC report is not fake news and is “proud” of their reporter)The BBC documentary discredited China: Why is the sky in Wuhan so gray?
A building has at least 22 angles to make a completely different feeling, and there must be one angle to make it look shaky
Recently, the documentary “Return to Hubei” filmed by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has caused great controversy on the Chinese Internet.
Netizens questioned the Wuhan suburbs in the BBC documentary, the sky is always “smoggy”:
And the Wuhan sky shot by Brother Dao is like this:
The BBC used a variety of shooting and editing techniques in the documentary. For example , a scene of “police using nets to arrest people” was actually cut from a high-speed anti-terrorism exercise during the epidemic last year.
Some self-media have summed up the BBC’s method of shooting documentaries, such as “Underworld Filter” , deliberately adjusting the contrast of light and dark to the same as “Underworld”:
Or deliberately use an abnormal shooting angle to cause a “sneak camera” effect:
Or deliberately guide questions and edits. When the interview material is not satisfied, add a voice-over:
Or deliberately select some scenes:
It should be said that these self-media videos are all well shot and have also received a considerable amount of attention.
However, Brother Dao also wanted to “pick a thorn” for them, and they created a “wrong” impression: BBC documentary = “Underworld filter” + “Transfer the flowers”, as long as you can make a good BBC documentary with PS.
Is BBC bad at making documentaries?
By next year, the BBC will celebrate its 100th birthday. As the world’s first nationally established broadcaster, the first television station, it is also the world’s largest news media. In addition to news reports, documentaries are also its trump card. product.
BBC’s documentaries have a wide range of subjects and are well-produced, ranging from the vast universe to the deep sea, and many of the pictures are also very beautiful photography masterpieces. Most of the top 15 documentaries on Douban scores were shot by the BBC, except for concerts.
So, the BBC documentary can only shoot animal planets, and is not good at shooting humanities and social themes?
This answer was first given by our own people. Some “domestic senior documentary practitioners” bluntly said: BBC documentaries describe grand themes through individual destiny. “Domestic documentaries are kindergarten-level”, which is the “central idea” instilled in domestic education for many years. As a result, unlike foreign parents who tell their children stories before going to bed.
What about the actual situation?
The BBC once filmed a classic documentary series “British Railway Journey”, presided over by the former British Secretary of Defense Michael Portillo, and traveled on various trains to tour the British Isles. The English cities and countryside in the film are beautiful and full of life, and they are not “underworld” at all.
Although the weather in Britain is notoriously rainy, but the BBC in Britain is always sunny.
Even in such an obvious cloudy day, the contrast of the picture is very high, and it does not look gray at all.
The capitalist construction sites are beautiful.
Everyone owns the socialist construction site.
Later, the BBC crew also traveled across the oceans and set foot on the land of allies to shoot “American Railroad Journey”, which is also picturesque, and any picture can be taken as a desktop.
Therefore, Brother Dao is here to “refute rumors” and “rectify his name” for the BBC:
The BBC documentary is not only “underworld filter” + “shifting flowers and trees”. The BBC does not always tilt its neck and squint its eyes to carry the camera. It is not that “normal” documentaries cannot be filmed. Don’t “discriminate” it!
Some netizens use a picture to illustrate how the magical BBC “filter” uses one lens to represent five continents and four oceans:
In fact, emotional manipulation and even ideological propaganda through images are nothing new in the history of film and television.
(The same scene, shooting from different angles, can get different results)
The time when a picture is taken will affect its illumination and contrast; the focal length of the lens used will give the audience a psychological hint of different viewing angles; and post-processing can be manipulated with parameters such as color temperature, hue, saturation, and gamma curve. Make the picture show different styles; even through editing, some information that cannot be obtained from the picture alone can be added, namely montage fraud . These are the basic knowledge that students majoring in film and television can access.
For example, by lowering the color saturation of the entire picture, and then adjusting the brightness mapping to the dark part as a whole, and then setting the standard color temperature of the white balance to a lower level, you can make any picture look like Stalinger who was besieged by the Nazis in the cold winter. Le; and lower the saturation of red and blue and increase the brightness of the whole picture a little bit, you can get a post-nuclear war where plants are thriving and animals are lingering.
Moreover, the director can also do the opposite. Like “Return to Wuhan” may be adopted, 8 to 10 am is the best shooting time, and everyone starts work at 5 am; the lens is beautiful on sunny days , The camera crew sat in the hotel waiting for it to rain.
In addition to the state-owned ideological organization such as the BBC, many commercial companies have actually discovered the benefits of this “filter”. In the past ten years, almost all Internet celebrity SNS have incorporated filter trading-let bloggers produce A batch of images with their own style, and then help the blogger to package the later parameters of these images.
Searching on the paid knowledge platform, you can also find a lot of tutorials to let you realize a certain art style through post-production. But the best in this regard is the Hollywood film company or the veteran ideological fighter like the BBC.
(According to the needs of different parts of the same movie, the subtle differences in focal length, art color matching, saturation, etc. can efficiently and accurately instill ideology. This thing is much more efficient than text)
The rich experience accumulated by the BBC during the Cold War allowed its production staff to select shooting equipment and coordinate the production time according to the emotional needs of each part of the material during the planning stage. For the subject that wants to beautify, it is natural to use professional knowledge to adjust-how to take a good-looking picture is the basic skill of the photography department.
(Even if the time is not enough, the material taken in an emergency situation must be added with a ton of special effects in the later stage, even if the overall picture shows a color cast and obvious processing traces)
Correspondingly, there are as many ways to destroy a frame as there are ways to make it look good. When the BBC filmed the world outside of our allies, we can see that the reverse application of this kind of knowledge is fully utilized. Obviously, these elders of the empire who use “Traditional English” still feel that the public should understand the world from their given perspective.
As a public organization, the BBC has a very special presence in the global media industry. It has almost no commercial advertising revenue, and viewing fees are its main source of funding. According to British law, watching a TV program without paying a viewing fee will constitute a criminal offence. Offenders will be prosecuted, have to appear in court and face a fine of up to £1,000. Therefore, viewing fees are also called “BBC tax.”
We can see the legacy of the old British Empire from its special system: the rich read the Times, and the poor read the Daily Mail. The “aristocratic virtue” left over from the Middle Ages determines that some people have “special talents” compared with others and can see the world accurately, while others need to see the world clearly through their eyes.
This kind of elite political thinking, mixed with “Western Centrism” + Liberalism, constitutes the special ideology of some Western media such as the BBC. When they become an independent source of power and seek benefits by manipulating information and seeking privileges with artistic techniques, they are not only the mouthpiece of specific group interests, the mouthpiece of specific ideologies, and the mouthpiece of the Western free world.
After the end of the Cold War, like other well-known Western media, the BBC has a myth . This set of myths is based on the advantages that the Western world once exhibited objectively, and on the communication standards that have been mastered by virtue of the advantages. With the blessing of this advantage, European and American media practices have been justified and become a rule, which no one can challenge for a long time.
However, we found that the BBC, which relied on filters to win the Cold War, became more and more inseparable from filters. The sky in China must be “smoggy and gray”, and the sky in South America must be “desert yellow”. When the real world is beyond the understanding of the BBC, the BBC will use a filter to bring the “world” back and decorate its own psychology. come back.
Therefore, Brother Dao is here to “justify” the BBC:
Sometimes it is a “liar”, but it is more of self-deception . The real world seen through the filter can no longer be accepted by it. It not only stops at slandering other countries, but also numbing its own audience. : “Look, the outside world is still messy.”
Therefore, the BBC filter is a “mental opium.”
What if the world changes faster and faster?
Then adjust the filter to two more levels!