Take a look at mindspace.pdf - https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/MINDSPACE.pdf
blueprint for the Behavioural Insights Team.
They have been using it for 10 years already.
2 Likes
What a disturbingly hilarious read.
I love how they frame what they achieve on page 3:
âSafer communities!
The good society!
Healthy and prosperous lives!â
Simply Orwellian!
2 Likes
Iâve seen that document somewhere before. As FairComment said, itâs real-world Orwellian stuff. The problem is that these manipulation techniques are in the public domain. Anyone with a psychology degree knows how they work. Itâs not deep-magic, top-secret stuff that only the CIA know about. So, undoubtedly, governments are going to make even greater use of these techniques in future.
The most disturbing aspect of mind-control techniques is that the subject is almost always unaware that heâs being manipulated. The only time some awareness surfaces is when he experiences cognitive dissonance caused by reality contradicting the things heâs been told to believe.
Are you a CIA plant, by any chance? 
If we are to have any kind of freedom loving peaceful future, the education systems have to step up. If we dont teach kids critical thinking and strong work ethics, its all for nothing. Regardless of the topic.
Your exact words were
Now you say the criteria for such a category of diet to exist are
- measurability
- quantifiability (not sure what distinction youâre making there)
- linkability to specific health outcomes
If I follow your logic (something thatâs usually dangerous to attempt, but here I go), the third criterion can only exist if the first two exist.
The first two obviously do exist to exactly the same extent for a high carbohydrate diet as for a low carbohydrate diet â itâs in the names after all.
If the third criterion exists for one, and the two categories of diet are opposites as far as carbohydrate quantity is concerned (which they obviously are â see the names again), then the lack of those outcomes should exist insofar as the lack of the purported cause of those outcomes (i.e. consumption of carbohydrates) exists. Yet you insist this couldnât possibly be so.
In other words, you are applying a double standard in your definitions for no ostensible reason: heads I win, tails it doesnât count because tails donât exist (not even as âlack of headsâ).
In all your years of reading these studies, how often did the nuance of not-all-carbohydrates-are-the-same come up as an issue?
Your conception of absolutism is a bit silly, but whatever. You know that I know that not all vegan food is the same, not all vegetarian food is the same, not all meat is the same⌠and yet, you do not know that not all carbohydrates are the same? Thereâs some kind of short circuit there.
Bla bla bla⌠weâve been through that one. Iâm willing to repeat that I donât see vegan conspiracies where you insist without evidence that they are, but if you donât need evidence, itâs all pointless anyway, because youâll be right no matter what. 
Iâm willing to agree that the study could have and should have been better designed. But words have meanings to most people, and odds are Average Joe Keto, Average Jane Paleo, or even Average Bob Plant-Based knows enough about his/her own diet and the meanings of words c. 2021 to select the most accurate (or least inaccurate) category from the list.
Oh good grief. I knew we end up arguing over the meaning of âisâ. I explained what I meant when I said âthereâs no such thing as a low-carb high-protein dietâ. I used the same words but the intent was slightly different. In this context it means something like âthereâs no such thing as a chocolate fireguardâ. No doubt you could technically build a chocolate fireguard; it exists in potentia. Why anybody would actually do so is another question.
There are three major macronutrients, only two of which can be used (efficiently) for energy. If you donât consume carbohydrates and you donât consume fat, then you die (if you take it to extremes - google ârabbit starvationâ).
The point here is that lumping âlow carbâ together with a different (much narrower) category âlow-carb high-protein low-fatâ is invalid. Apart from the obvious logical flaw, âlow-carbâ is usually shorthand for âlow-carb moderate-protein high-fatâ.
Nutritionists like to say this on the assumption that, if you repeat it often enough, it becomes true. Physiologically, and in terms of medical outcomes, itâs a fairly minor consideration. A diet based mainly on potatoes, rice, pasta and bread is not as bad for you as a diet based on pop-tarts, Cheez-its, Pepsi, and instant noodles, but the difference lies in how long it takes you to develop metabolic disease, and how serious it gets. Thus you end up with the deliciously stupid scenario of the NHS telling people that fruit cake is a healthy snack as long as itâs home-made and you donât put butter in it.
Where we can agree, I think, is that it all gets a bit silly when you start boiling everything down to micronutrients. A potato is not just a vial of starch. A steak is not protein. What I described as âlow-carb, moderate-protein, high-fatâ is more accurately described as âlots of vegetables with some minimally-processed meat/eggs/dairy, according to preferenceâ.
Bringing this back to the research paper, we might ask ourselves: given their result, what then should we eat? And the answer is âwe donât knowâ, because their result isnât associated with any easily-identifiable pattern of eating. Itâs completely obvious (to me if to no-one else) that theyâre not advocating veganism based on prepackaged junk and cake, which is the preferred diet of an elderly (and incredibly fat and unhealthy) person of my acquaintance. Nor, I suspect, are they suggesting that my diet of fresh produce is more unhealthy than that. So what was the point of it all, apart from the fact that they entertained themselves for a few months and drew a comfortable salary?
Thereâs no âvegan conspiracyâ. The vegans are just useful idiots, like Greta Thunberg. Food processors - and therefore agibusiness-at-large - can make the most impressive profits from the cheapest ingredients, ie., corn, soy, and sugar (from various sources). Those commodities are most profitably grown by burning through natural capital, and you can find disposable natural capital in the Third World.
It just so happens that corn, soy, and sugar are vegan-compliant, so they can hop on another do-gooder bandwagon and continue buggering up the planet.
Since this is the COVID conspiracy thread, Iâll suggest there are strong tie-ins here with the Great Reset, which includes a whole raft of eco-bollocks.
Looks like the 77th Brigade or the 13th signals are at work. For those that do not know who they are, they are tied in with the behavioural insights team. They are members of the UK armed forces acting like bots trying to influence those on social media into accepting the corporatist system we need to adhere to for our own good.
3 Likes
Thatâs a rather hamfisted attempt, innit.
Perhaps some have-a-go amateurs rather than the professionals? Unless the professionals just arenât very professional, I guess.
It works, however.
Itâs truly amazing how easy it is to manipulate the opinions using a fears and modern technologies.
Just compare this with the ideas from another thread:
âRamm denounced any form of health care for âhereditarily inferiorâ people and asserted that every person in Nazi Germany had a moral duty to stay healthyâ
âThese creatures merely vegetate and constitute a serious burden on the national community. They not only reduce the standard of living of the rest of their family members because of the expenses for their care but also need a healthy person to take care of them throughout their lives.â
It will be interesting when the mocking from the entertainment/celebrity prostitutes turns nasty. It already has on the ground looking above.
People saying others need to be exterminated for not doing as they are told.
Like I said this is how Nazis got into power with little pushback.
The video will not make many who havenât already (unless easily influenced by these goons) want to take the jab. It has been done to influence the division they want in society. Those championing it, cannot see that.
1 Like
Now youâve got me scurrying off down a whole different rabbithole.
What if the vaccines were just a red herring, a means to an end? What if the actual goal of putting the vaccines out there was to cause a massive schism in society - to split up families and friendships? To tear big holes in the very fabric of the systems that keep modern capitalist/democratic societies cohesive, trustful, and functional?
They couldnât keep the lockdowns going forever: people were starting to get fractious. There had to be another means to keep people isolated, alienated, suspicious of everybody, and willing to report their neighbours to the Authorities. Vaccines are doing the job nicely.
Yep, a lot of brainwashed peeps. So many people on this forum are happy to say in one sentence how heartless people are for not getting vaccinated and in the next how they hope all unvaccinated people get covid and die without any medical help. And they think they are virtuous while saying that. Cuckoo cuckoo
AlsoâŚJust read a news article online saying that the unvaccinated are a problem because they allow new variants to develop. The point of the article was to tell people how unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, but to everyone. So that messaging will be seen all over twitter soon I guess.
4 Likes
I was just watching a TV show that was filmed in Australia some time back when it was allegedly at âzero COVID.â The English presenter was saying things like, âItâs amazing here, that Australia has eliminated COVID completely!â as he wandered around the country chatting with people.
Fast forward to today and the country is in utter disarray, locked down all over and COVID aplenty.
This obsession with âzero COVID,â low numbers,âherd immunityâ and 'eliminationâ is precisely what is stopping countries recovering from this situation entirely. In Australian terms these ideas are considered furphies.
âA furphy is Australian slang for an erroneous or improbable story that is claimed to be factual. Furphies are supposedly âheardâ from reputable sources, sometimes secondhand or thirdhand, and widely believed until discounted.â
2 Likes
Let it be said clear.
Iam not getting vaccinated.
I am pro vaccinations.
I am simply waiting for the fuckery to fuck off. Eg. Chinas vaccine diplomacy and the whole paranoia of both virus deniers and vaccine end of days nut jobs.
With all this going on and waiting for people to come back to a pretend rationality again, i am relying on me staying healthy, excercising, eating quality nutrition (@finley ), not licking my fingers, not putting my shit paper in open waste baskets, washing my hands, wearing a mask when out and about and basically being a non retarded adult. Focus on the retarded part and see where that gets us each time. be it pandemic, war, food, water, economy and etc.
3 Likes
Ah, like drop bears 
But yeah. Isnât it funny how people can go from being completely smug to cowering in the corner in a heartbeat? I was absolutely blown away by how fast it happened in Taiwan.
1 Like
But its common here, in most cases. im curious which situation has not gone from polar opposite A to polar opposite B. Be it hormones in pork, pesnions, china good, china bad, its always polarized.
Ah, i got one! Pedophilia. seems to never move much in any direction. Never seems to cause an issue here despite being fairly common. Seems consistent elsewhere as well. I digress, retarded statement above 
I am still curious how people denying nutrition justify it. Eating quality (not sprayed/injected) foods of good variability and not known to obviously kill us seems like a fantastic idea when unsure about the virus/bacteria/fungus/parasite/other pathogens trajectory.
Some common sense from Taiwan University Childrenâs Hospital Director Huang Limin and observation by professor Chen Xiuxi,
Limin claims that how the CECC is using âcluster infectionsâ to determine Levels is wrong/ bad science.
He states that âclustersâ are badly defined and used to keep us all locked up (Stay at Home! Keep Safe!) is actually âmeaningless.â
And Chen Xiuxi, a professor at the Taiwan University School of Public Health also says the CECC is using the wrong metrics completely!
However, the masses are so bought into the âLook! Low numbers! We have this beat!â propaganda, that no one cares.
The obsession with current metrics is anti-science.
We really are far, far from each other in terms of our points of reference and so on. I donât think thereâs much point in continuing down this line in your lovely little humbug thread, but for the record I still disagree with your way of framing the diet issue (shocking, I know).
Ah, well, itâs English cuisine after all. 
I want my money back, dammit! I bought shares in Vegan Conspiracy PLC based on your shoddy prophecy! 