Expert comparative evaluation (ECE) tool

Calibrate : to standardize (something, such as a measuring instrument) by determining the deviation from a standard so as to ascertain the proper correction factors

Merriam Webster

How can someone recognize which expert to trust with answers to important questions such as: are the Cov-vaxx injections safe and effective? Should I enlist for the injection? Should I do the same for my child? Should these injections be mandated? The ECE tool was created to equip the public, enabling each person to navigate the many experts encountered in this process. To avoid sad incident such as the infamous episode involving children in a French-Canadian talk show. We must develop a keener sense of which expert to rely on; certainly not young children irresponsibly thrown in the debate.

Unfortunately, mass media is following a tendency of being stubbornly bias instead of the being the impartial sources of information they are supposedly meant to be. With all the conflicting views, contradictory information and opposing expert opinion circulating, one lay person can simply decide to blindly trust and follow the herd. Others will remain quite lost, perplexed, or feeling manipulated.  

The average citizen is left wondering who to believe, to listen and to rely on.  Feeling confused on where the Truth lies and how it can be found.

Calibrate your experts; validate their expertise

In all spheres of our life, we are surrounded by measuring tools that can provide data about common parameters within our daily activities (time, distance, temperature, to name a few) and can support the monitoring of our health (glucose level, hemoglobin, blood pressure, etc.). They can also be paramount in assuring the safety of our surroundings (engineering tools). The many houses, bridges and buildings came to be thanks to the numerous tools and measuring instruments.  As they play a key role in important decisions we continuously make, the tools providing valuable data must be precise, accurate and reliable. Therefore, essential instruments are regularly calibrated to ensure trustworthy readings. Without calibration, their reading loses all value, and the instrument is useless.

Different experts are called to the many public platforms to share their views, recommendations, or conclusions in the matter of safety, efficacy, and necessity of the Cov-vaxxines, their rollout and related mandates or passport. These public experts whom we are meant to rely on, generally hold ranks to support the government-media-big pharma discourse.  Many are instrumental in the implementation of sanitary measures, public safety directives and health policies. On the other hand, several dissident expert voices are being heard in the background but are being silence. It is thus paramount to ascertain the credibility, accuracy, and competence of the opposing groups to know the validity of the stances.

This can be done by verifying their affirmations and statements. The verification of even one topic through scientific articles can be quite time consuming and requires a good understanding of the vocabulary and key concepts, specific of the field. Unfortunately, the layman does not have the minimal knowledge and understanding to do a proper verification. Therefore, the regular individual will mainly rely on different fact-checkers trusting them with the task. Another way to validate an expert’s opinion would be to evaluate the expert himself. This option is under-utilized if even pursued. It involves the verification of the professional background by looking at the relevance of his education and main field of work. All this is to ensure that the baggage of knowledge is pertinent and strong enough.

The Expert Comparative Evaluation Tool we created is meant to do just that; it is an interactive spreadsheet meant to be used as calibration device for those experts. This analysis tool is a semi-quantitative guideline to be used to compare protagonists or to ascertain the caliber of anyone’s competency regarding the SARS-CoV2 crisis.

The evaluation grid can be utilized to be critical of everyone displayed in the media as reference. Do they have the minimal required for competency to be called subject matter expert? Are they fit to give their expert opinion on the matter? If they don’t have the required minimal competency, they are not credible, and their views hold no value.  Or worse, are we ignoring the voice of many dissidents who may well be subject matter authorities? Subject matter experts must be highly competent individuals with verifiable credentials.  They cannot be self-proclaimed experts relying second-hand back-alley information. Those are simple parrots, allowing their professional title to be used as promotional tools for deficient (and dangerous) rules and policies.

Making an informed choice

Primarily, one mustn’t limit their information source to mass media, government, or Big-pharma rhetoric. In a better world, when someone lacks understanding and knowledge regarding certain important facets of the issue at hand, he first acknowledges his shortcomings then seeks to educate himself. This education can be done by different means: reading peer reviewed articles, seeking opposite perspectives, listening to broad range of different sources of information. The best way to get to the proper information is to keep an open mind by letting go of fear while exercising critical thinking, respecting logic, and using basic common sense. The goal is to become a minimally knowledgeable individual when voicing an opinion or deciding between two critical options.

Being able to answer the five important questions below is indicative of a person’s cov-injection decision readiness.

Who should be evaluated?

Whether from one’s entourage, the media, or personal quest, information, opinions, advices are coming from every side, by professionals as well as from people of all walks of life.  Who should be evaluated?

The answer is simple: everyone. Everyone who have a say in the issue should be evaluated. Although realistically this cannot be done systematically, there are some groups for which it should be required. Thus, some people really need to be processed through the ECET. These are the most influential voices in the mass media outlet, the experts, the dissident voices, the influencers, the doctors providing advice, and most certainly the decisions makers and their advisors. Do not assume that they know what they are doing. It is important to verify the competency of policy makers and advisory board members. You can also use the tool on yourself as an introspection exercise; am I fit to give advice, to influence, to coerce on the matter? Am I being a danger to myself or others by pretending that I know it all? It is also more then appropriate to verify the value of the many facts-checkers who are putting their say in the matter.

According to the world in data (January 2022 data), Germany, China, Canada, France, and Australia are amongst the countries with the most stringent measures in the Covid-19 crisis so far.

It would be interesting to obtain their government’s adviser’s final score on the ECE. Are those countries being led by real competent, independent expert in the field? Are the decisions measures, policies, based on tainted biased beliefs of a group, rather than on solid expert knowledge and analysis? It is now time to find out.

Seek advice from a minimally competent biotechnology and life science individual

Only competent individuals should be allowed to opine scientifically, or medically on the Covid-19 complex issues. One must only seek advise from the most competent or expert individuals in their life while respecting their specific scope and limits of expertise is most important. With the ECE, an Evaluated Level of Expertise (ELE) of 60 is minimal for one to be deemed competent. Therefore, individual endowed with multidisciplinary knowledge of at least three different fields relevant to the SARS -CoV0-2 crisis is most adequate and hold a valuable oversight. The more diverse the field of competence, the more valuable is the expert’s perspective.

Bear in mind that during a professional life, many go through career reorientation to accommodate changes in their personal life, in their perspectives or in their conscience. Even when several years have past since the career change, one can remain competent as they retained a lot of the vast specific original knowledge. Like riding a bicycle. In this person’s toolbox, the knowledge is still accessible and valuable and will enable such individual to have enough pertinent oversight over subjects pertaining to their previous field of expertise.

If you are left feeling doubtful of your leaders’ expertise by the end of such an exercise, allow yourself to challenge the promoted narrative, policies, and rules.  Finally, it is not only a right, but also a duty to demand unbiased expert opinions and open dialogue on all crucial issues brought down by the Covid-19 crisis.

One advice: know your expert! But how can one navigate the many experts?

The different field of expertise can be consulted below to get a better understanding of their professional frontier.