27, 2014
Crisis: Financial Crisis, Snowden, Feinstein, Austerity, mB12-protocol
   "They who can give up essential 
   liberty to obtain a little temporary
   safety, deserve neither liberty
   nor safety."
   -- Benjamin Franklin [1]
   "All governments lie and nothing
   they say should be believed.
   -- I.F. Stone.
   "Power tends to corrupt, and   
   absolute power corrupts
   absolutely. Great men are        
   almost always bad men."
   -- Lord Acton

Prev- crisis -Next

1. Another Financial Crisis Is Looming—Here's Why and How
     It Will Play Out

2. Snowden Speaks on Obama Reforms As Supporters Call
     for End of His Persecution

Sen. Feinstein's Pro-NSA Bill Has Hit a Snag: Obama
4. Caring too much. That's the curse of the working classes
5. ME and my mB12 protocol

 About ME/CFS


This is the Nederlog of March 27. It is another crisis issue.

I did not find more than four items, which is good because I need to do some other things than writing this Nederlog. But here they are, with an added last item on my ME and the mB12-protocol.

1. Another Financial Crisis Is Looming—Here's Why and How It Will Play Out

The first article today is by David Dayen on AlterNet:
This starts as follows: 

Bloomberg financial reporter Bob Ivry has written an entertaining new book, “ The Seven Sins of Wall Street,” which, instead of rehashing the various illegal activities that triggered the financial meltdown, focuses on what the banks have been up to since the crisis. Much of it would be familiar to readers of this space: the  Bank of America whistle-blowers who were instructed to lie to homeowners, and received gift card bonuses for pushing them into foreclosure; the  London Whale derivatives trade that lost JPMorgan Chase more than $6 billion; the investment banks who traded commodities while also  operating physical commodity warehouses and facilities; and more. All the while, megabanks continue to  enjoy subsidies on their borrowing costs because of the (accurate) perception that they will get bailed out in the event of any trouble.

There is considerably more there that I leave to you, and it ends like this:
Ultimately, we don’t yet know exactly where the next financial crisis will emerge. But we do know how the conditions for future crises get set. When law enforcement fails to prosecute Wall Street for prior misdeeds, they give no reason for them to curb their behavior. As the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services, Ben Lawsky, said recently, “There are certain bad apples in any large institution who are willing to push the limits. And if they don’t think there are going to be large consequences for them, they’re going to keep doing it.”

Similarly, the size and power of the largest financial institutions, which has only grown since the crisis, virtually guarantees similar outcomes. Congress and the White House have not yet moved to chop these behemoths down to size; as a result, their sprawling corporate structures and inadequate risk controls make them almost unmanageable.

It’s telling and sad that it took until the past couple of weeks for top regulators to publicly consider whether Wall Street exhibits a culture of corruption. Those seven sins Bob Ivry documents in his new book practically comprise a credo in the financial industry, with a desire for making fast profits, ignoring pesky things like rules or ordinary people’s lives, and offloading risk like a hot potato. We saw in 2008 how this puts all of us in peril.

Yes, indeed - and I pointed out a little while ago that the CEOs of the 16 leading banks all are corrupt and indeed all are - by coincidence, surely - mega-rich. Also, much is easily prevented, and was prevented for more than three decades, by better - more honest, fairer - rules, but such rules have been shedded like the plague since Clinton, and have been removed because of propaganda and bullshit: Crisis + DSM-5: It's deregulation, stupid!

2.  Snowden Speaks on Obama Reforms As Supporters Call for End of His Persecution

The next item is an article by Jon Queally on Common Dreams:

This starts as follows:
Edward Snowden, the former NSA employee-turned-whistleblower whose disclosures to journalists about the unknown extent of surveillance on Americans and the world population have now spurred major reform proposal by President Obama, publicly responded to the president's announcement late Tuesday, calling it "a turning point" in the effort to "reclaim rights" and restore the people's voice on issues of privacy and government spying.
As I indicated yesterday, I am a bit more skeptical than Snowden is (or appears to be), but I probably would have done likewise were I in his shoes.

There also now is a panel of Snowden supporters, that includes Ray McGovern, former CIA, Coleen Rowley, former FBI, and Norman Solomon, as Queally explains, who are doing something to help Snowden get his passport back, and guarantee his rights to seek political asylum.

Here is some of Solomon:

The American people, said Solomon, have become familiar in recent years with the phrase, "If you see something, say something."

"Edward Snowden saw something," said Solomon, "And he said something."

He continued: "He saw the undermining of the free press aspects of the First Amendment. He saw the undermining of the Fourth Amendment. He saw the full-scale assault on due process and other key aspects of the Fifth Amendment." And because of his decision to go public, continued Solomon, over the last tens months since the reporting on his disclosures began appearing, "Many millions of Americans have seen what's being done under the cover of the NSA and other intelligence agencies."

Acknowledging the implications of the Obama's announcement about his reform proposals, Solomon argued that such a development makes it more clear than ever that Snowden's actions were justified and cast only further doubts on the many past arguments put forward by the intelligence community and White House as they defended the bulk spying program. “The credibility of the White House has gone through the floor, while the credibility of Snowden continues to ascend,” said Solomon.

The petitions, which will be delivered on Wednesday, make clear the argument that Snowden has done a public service for which he should be rewarded, not punished.

Yes, indeed. There is more under the last dotted link, including a video of the press conference by the panel.

3.  Sen. Feinstein's Pro-NSA Bill Has Hit a Snag: Obama

Next, an article by Dana Liebelson on Mother Jones:

This starts as follows:

Since Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA is scooping up the phone records of law-abiding Americans in bulk, the program has had a stalwart defender in Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). She has supported the program's continuation as recently as last week,
criticized a judge who ruled it may be unconstitutional, and pushed a bill through the Senate Intelligence Committee to codify its existence, with some reforms. But now, her bill may be dead in the water. Late Monday, news broke that President Obama is expected to propose ending the program as it currently exists. In response, Feinstein issued the following statement

"I believe the president’s plan is a worthy effort. I have said before that I am open to reforming the call records program as long as any changes meet our national security needs and address privacy concerns, and that any changes continue to provide the government with the means to protect against future terrorist attack."

The article proceeds to explain that Feinstein's bill "may be dead in the water", and does this well. Incidentally, did Feinstein ever read Franklin's words?

 "They who can give up essential 
   liberty to obtain a little temporary
   safety, deserve neither liberty
   nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin [1]

I have no idea, but she surely was a long time prepared to have ordinary people give up nearly all liberty, by having all their personal data stolen from them by anonymous governmental spies, on the pretext that all ordinary people may be terrrorists (which is a pretext, and indeed one that serves and allows state terrorism against its own population).

4. Caring too much. That's the curse of the working classes 

Next, an article by David Graeber on The Guardian:
This starts as follows:

"What I can't understand is, why aren't people rioting in the streets?" I hear this, now and then, from people of wealthy and powerful backgrounds. There is a kind of incredulity. "After all," the subtext seems to read, "we scream bloody murder when anyone so much as threatens our tax shelters; if someone were to go after my access to food or shelter, I'd sure as hell be burning banks and storming parliament. What's wrong with these people?"

It's a good question. One would think a government that has inflicted such suffering on those with the least resources to resist, without even turning the economy around, would have been at risk of political suicide. Instead, the basic logic of austerity has been accepted by almost everyone. Why? Why do politicians promising continued suffering win any working-class acquiescence, let alone support, at all?

This is a good question, but I am less satisfied with the answer (or "answer"), which is unclear to me, except that it seems to have a lot to do with the writer's working class background.

What he should have written about are propaganda, advertisements, low education, and none too high intelligence (which I do have, which is the reason I was one of the few from a working classs background who finished university):

The working class, if there is such an entity [2], has been given and consumed far more propaganda, advertisements and "public relations" prose than any of its members ever got before, and because they nearly all did not have much of an education, and also are on average not very intelligent, they are easily deceived.

If you want to know more about it, Adam Curtis's four part series "The Century of the Self" is a good entry, and it is well-discussed in this Nederlog:
Crisis: Modern man, Century of Self, Snowden, Greenwald, Rosen  under "Century of Self". (Unfortunately, the link to the video is dead.)

5. ME and my mB12 protocol

I have M.E. for the 36th year, and it is a real disease, not a psychiatric disorder, but it is also true that there is no good medical explanation for it (as was and still is the case with many real diseases, and used to be the case with all [3]).

Also, I should serve as an excellent case: My ex and I fell ill in the first year of our studies, on study loans, and eventually we also both finished our studies, and both with really excellent M.A.s, because we both are highly gifted, but are ill now for 36 years and, while we could have made a lot of money had we been healthy, I never earned more than dole in all of my life in each year, for 45 years, and frequently less.

For more, see below or in the ME-Resources.

Anyway, it has been a month since I last reported, and I've also changed the protocol a little over three weeks ago.

Here is the protocol I have been using for something like almost a month now, each day, and spread over two doses, plus the B12, that I take separately - and the bold underlined items are links to Wikipedia:

metafolin: 2400 mcg:
This is the directly usable form of folate, and part of the protocol. (3 pills.)
vitamin C: 4 grams:
I think - statistics support me - this makes sense for me. (4 pills)
vitamin D: 10 mcg:
This turned out, when tested, to have kept me on the safe side. (2 pills)
kalium: 600 mg:
This is part of the protocol. I do need at least 400 mg, given the rest. (3 pills)
vitamin mB12: 1000 mcg: Note it is methylcobalamin, and I currently use B12 infusion, from Enzymatic Therapy. (1 pill)
vitamin aB12: 3000 mcg: This is adenosylcobalamin. I currently use 1 every other or every third day (roughly).
calcium + vitamin D: 1200 mg + 5 mcg. This is mainly because I do not use milk anymore. (2 pills)
VM-75: A multivitamin + mineral supplement from Solgar, that contains about everything, that I will not list here, also because it seems - experimentally - most is not very relevant for me. (1 pill)

And that is it, and I am doing relatively well on this since a month. Here are the changes with reasons:

metafolin: I had earlier noted more MF is better, but it is difficult to keep balance. I did increase it and so far it works, though I did have to supplement with more K on a few days.

Incidentally, there is some news that the FDA may want to forbid metafolin as a freely available supplement, which would be a huge blast against anyone trying out this protocol. In any case, I hope this will not effect Europe, where they are slightly more sensible. See here in case you're interested:
kalium: Actually, the previous protocol had a calculating mistake: 600 mg is what 3 pills give me, and what I take most days, unless I get more pain, and then I add 2 more, wich equals 400 mg and lands me at 1000 mg. This works so far.

vitamin aB12: I still had aB12 standing around, and it does appear to help some, in combination with the rest.

As to how it works: I am feeling a bit better over all, and I can do more things.

Thus, I bought another bike recently, having bought one in late August last year and having had that one stolen after three months, but then I recently bought another and I do cycle, on average, every other day for about an hour - which I could not do from 2002-2012, indeed not at all. Also, this is quite unproblematic for me.

There are quite a few other similar examples: I am certainly not better, but I can do a bit more, quite consistently also, which is quite important to me, since whatever needs to be done for me must be done by me: I have no wife and no family in Holland (that I know).
[1] Here it is necessary to insist, with Aristotle, that the governors do not rule, or at least, should not rule: The laws rule, and the government, if good, is part of its executive power. Here I quote Aristotle from my More on stupidity, the rule of law, and Glenn Greenwald:
It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws.
(And I note the whole file I quote from is quite pertinent.)

[2] In my university-educated working class mind the answer is: mostly not. That is: there is a working class statistically, by considering incomes and jobs, but apart from that - low incomes and hard jobs - there is not much in common.
(You could similarly argue for "a blue clothes class" or "a blond permanent class" or even "an evangelical class": They all exist statistically, but not much more, except in rare cases.)

[3] Psychiatrists, who these days are the very willing policemen and prosecutors of the state and the rich, are trying to declare all unexplained diseases explained (?!?!), namely by their being psychiatric disorders. This allows them to scold ill people as too lazy to work, and to deny them dole or real help, which seems to enjoy them a lot, and indeed also is cheaper for the state.

This is a foul move, and there would have been no medicine if this had been the attitude of Hippocrates and other doctors: "what we cannot explain now, we do explain nevertheless (?!?!) by calling it mad, except that we do so politely, if possible with latinate terminology: "somatic symptom disorder" is our preferred diagnosis".

My own reaction to this - and I am a psychologist and a philosopher - is to insist that psychiatry is not and never was a real science, and that if it goes as far as this, which it does, it should be removed from science: I live now 36 years without any help, and with great difficulties, because of Simon Wessely and Gijs Blijenberg, both utter frauds, who are unfortunately without M.E., but are very well off after lives full of demeaning people who are ill with M.E.

About ME/CFS (that I prefer to call M.E.: The "/CFS" is added to facilitate search machines) which is a disease I have since 1.1.1979:
1. Anthony Komaroff

Ten discoveries about the biology of CFS(pdf)

3. Hillary Johnson

The Why  (currently not available)

4. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2003)
5. Consensus (many M.D.s) Canadian Consensus Government Report on ME (pdf - version 2011)
6. Eleanor Stein

Clinical Guidelines for Psychiatrists (pdf)

7. William Clifford The Ethics of Belief[2]
8. Malcolm Hooper Magical Medicine (pdf)
Maarten Maartensz
Resources about ME/CFS
(more resources, by many)

       home - index - summaries - mail