470 Comments

This is a predictable blowback from 3 years of damaging and ineffective authoritarian covid policy, false claims about the covid vaccines, and the disastrous strategic error of trying to mandate them. With the huge pile-on into the CDC vax schedule since 1980, more parents are questioning the need for all of these shots and wondering which are truly necessary. The lax standards by which covid vaccines were approved for children and CDC's studied avoidance of addressing adverse events has caused many to question what the FDA/CDC standard of "safe and effective" means.

This is a problem that the ID/ public health community has created. We need an outbreak of covid truth and reconciliation. Trying to blame and censor "misinformation" will only make the problem worse.

Expand full comment

I completely agree, well said.

Expand full comment

Sigh.....I have always had a high opinion of the Australian educational system...but here you are agreeing with a big pile of BS that insults the intelligence/math skills of a 10 year old.

Expand full comment

Not sure why you posted that here....anyways.

Just read the words....the covid vaccines fit all the historical CDC definitions of a vaccine. Your link is remarkably dishonest and foolish.

Then there the key point that what is required is that they fit the legal definition of a vaccine.

Expand full comment

Actually they had to change the definition fall 2020 so our bodies could be made to produce the bio weapon. But they did so you don’t have to worry… gene therapy is now called a vaccine.

Expand full comment

Wow!

1. Vaccines are defined by 1988 law--that did not change!

"Vaccine The term “vaccine” means any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of 1 or more diseases."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=26-USC-222761909-1963936815&term_occur=999&term_src=#:~:text=(2)%20Vaccine%20The%20term%20%E2%80%9C,of%201%20or%20more%20diseases.

2. Atkisson provided the historic CDC definitions of vaccines--and the Covid vaccines fit all of them!

3. The covid vaccines are clearly not even close to being gene therapies!

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/what-gene-therapy

Just curious, how many times do the anti-vaccs have to be proven to be lying to you before you become a bit skeptical of them????

Expand full comment

You’re hell bent on a jav that doesn’t work.

Expand full comment

Sigh...

You changed the topic!

Just like all it takes is basic reading skills to see that the covid vaccines are by definition vaccines.

All it takes is 5th grade math to understand they work.

Apparently, you just don't care that you are supporting a fraud that kills people.

Expand full comment

Funny how the purveyors of misinformation are always the first to insist “you can’t blame misinformation” for the spread of antivaccine sentiment.

Expand full comment

Yes, there are a lot of false claims about the vaccines. Please don’t propagate them.

Expand full comment

"This is a predictable blowback from 3 years of damaging and ineffective authoritarian covid policy, false claims about the covid vaccines, and the disastrous strategic error of trying to mandate them."

Those are testable claims and there is lots of data.

Prove you are right and show your work.

Expand full comment

Read the actual Pfizer clinical trial and done of the released documents. Scary as hell and still EUA, so multiple formulas no check on manufacturers and the best…. EUA means the harms of the new formulation do not have to be disclosed. I love EUA that way they cdc don’t have to disclose the harms they shared internally September 2020, PowerPoint, slide 16?

Expand full comment

1. Both mRNA vaccines are fully licensed and the anti-vaccs keep lying about this simple fact:

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/vaccines-licensed-use-united-states

2. I have read the clinical trial documents--bet you haven't--because the anti-vaccs just keep lying about the basic facts.

3. I have read the EUA regulations--bet you haven't--because the assertion that harms do not have to be disclosed is just an anti-vacc lie.

So are you going to read the documents and condemn the anti-vaccs for all these lies?

Expand full comment

You realize the two covid 19 shots listed in your link have had their approvals revoked. Lol. You cannot and never could receive them in the US because then Pfizer and Moderno would be liable for your injuries, and would have to disclose all of the injuries that they know about. Why would they need an EUA after three years?

Expand full comment

"You realize the two covid 19 shots listed in your link have had their approvals revoked"

Huh, I gave you the link to currently approved vaccines. Both covid vaccines are fully approved and no approves have been revoked.

You realize that running the anti-Vacc fraud requires lying to you right?

"You cannot and never could receive them in the US because then Pfizer and Moderno would be liable for your injuries, and would have to disclose all of the injuries that they know about"

Like millions of other American's I have received them...you can easily find them at your local pharmacist.

You realize that running the anti-Vacc fraud requires lying to you right?

Expand full comment

I have also read these documents, both the application for EUA and the clinical trial results... in spring, 2021, when I was trying to figure out what the f... happened to my mom. The current shot-- just approved-- is EUA, I watched the damn vote of the advisory committee. EUA means it is experimental.

It also means ingredients are not disclosed, manufacturing is not regulated, and you take it at your own risk of harm there’s no one to help you if you’re injured. Take as many as you would like.

Expand full comment

I am sorry about your mother and hope for the best.

I am glad you are making an effort, but you need a lot more practice.

The current shot is approved.

Big hint--Pfizer received an "Approval Letter" it is right in the link I posted....

Further, even under EUA all the ingredients are disclosed, the manufacturing is regulated and (while there are legal protections) you can still sue the vaccine makers if you are injured.

Whoever you are listening to is filling you up with lies.

Expand full comment
Aug 28, 2023·edited Aug 28, 2023

We can't have the freedom to drive unless we all agree to obey the traffic laws. We can't have the freedom of financial independence unless we all agree to pay taxes. We can't have the freedom to do whatever we want unless we all agree to the same set of rules.

Whether we want to admit it or not, having our individual freedoms depends upon the collective actions of others. "Personal choice" without personal responsibility is chaos.

Should one's right not to vaccinate infringe on the rights of people not to get sick from easily preventable diseases?

Expand full comment

Forced injections are tyranny. It has become a religion. If safe then everyone will roll up their sleeve. If you are vaccinated, you are protected. Why do you give any time to what others do if you are protected.

Expand full comment

Literally nobody is being "forced" to get vaccinated.

Expand full comment

Literally people were forced to get vaccinated. specifically elderly, children, and disabled were forced. prisoners were forced. i understand these groups don't often have recognized medical agency but they are not nobody. Literally they are people.

Many other non-consenting adults were also coerced into being vaccinated by having their livelihoods threatened. with no other way to feed and house their families, they complied with the jabs. that form of coercion is essentially force.

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023

The use of the word “force” is highly emotive as well as being wrong by definition. Those who have jobs for which one of the requirements is to have received vaccination (be it MMR, Hep B, Covid etc) should get medical exemptions if they are unable to have vaccination for medical reasons. If their objection is ideological, they have a choice; to either get the vaccination (all of which have been determined to reach high safety standards) or seek employment elsewhere where vaccination is not a condition for employment.

If it was a choice of “losing custody of my children” or getting a vaccine for which I have objections to on purely ideological grounds, as a loving and caring parent I would not hesitate to accept vaccination.

Expand full comment

You clearly understand people did not accept the vaccine by choice for medical reasons. They were forced into doing it. That's unethical. I understand you don't care about the hardship mandates created, but instead of playing semantic games you should just admit that you don't care about bodily autonomy when you disagree with the choice being made. In this case, you want the government to force people to comply so you can have an illusion of safety. If they need to be put in a camp, you'd probably support that too.

As for the safety of the "vaccine", it did not complete clinical trials (hence the EUA) so I would skip the argument that it met high safety standards. It really didn't meet any safety standards for testing which is why people were surprised to get strokes and blood clots after their jab. But you probably think that didn't happen either, since stories aren't data and VAERs can't be trusted even though it's the only system we have for tracking adverse events.

Expand full comment

"As for the safety of the "vaccine", it did not complete clinical trials (hence the EUA) so I would skip the argument that it met high safety standards."

Speaking of unethical, the vaccines DID complete phase 3 before the EUA....you didn't get the most basic facts correct.

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-conclude-phase-3-study-covid-19-vaccine

Expand full comment

You still don’t understand the meaning of “forced”.

As for safety, these vaccines are probably the most tested and researched vaccines in history. The “EUA” excuse is s lame one; and the USA is not the entire globe.

VAERS cannot establish causality as it goes to great pains to point out and warns people about on their front page; you are correct in that stories are not data, and VAERS is only one of at least 5 systems for monitoring vaccine safety in the US (I suggest you check the far more reliable Vaccine Safety Datalink publications for starters, and again, VAERS is US based, and not global in its reach.

Expand full comment

Speaking again of unethical.

Seems like you have given up even the pretense of being truthful.

Expand full comment

also people's careers were threatened which, for many people, is their entire identity. other people were threatened with losing custody of their children for not vaccinating. so yes, they can choose to be unemployed and homeless and lose their families. i understand you don't care because you think the unvaccinated are so selfish and stupid, but the whole point of the policy is that people give up their medical autonomy. it is tyranical and it is bad policy.

Expand full comment

The "pro-health/pro-healthcare choice" folks keep arguing for being allowed to make their own choices.

Fact is that when folks make choices they also assume the consequences for their choices.

Wanting to make choices but not to accept the consequences of those choices is morally indefensible.

Expand full comment

The whole point of living in a free country is the ability to make choices. It would appear you’d be more at home elsewhere. I’ve heard that China has a very rigorous mandate policy ... you’d probably like that.

Expand full comment

The whole point is that everyone did have choices to make.

Your "argument" here is not functionally literate and somehow you manage to live without the most trivial understanding of basic ethics.

No surprise, since you are an anti-vacc

Expand full comment

You have to be joking right? People loosing jobs if they don't get vaccinated. People being denied life saving surgeries because they won't get vaccinated? Doctors loosing their jobs because they speak out against this one new type of vaccine (gene manipulating)? The only force not being used is actually tying you down and putting the shot in your arm. Anyone thinking the rest is not a form of force is kidding themseves.

Expand full comment

They put this failed excuse for medication on the child immunization schedule. That should be criminal. Making it mandated to attend school? Holy s***. there is a new phrase going around about all of this. Please, Please, WAKE UP!

Expand full comment

Even if you can't count well enough to understand the vaccines are safe and effective, you could at least listen to life insurance companies and health insurance companies and national healthcare systems......

Expand full comment

I have. Death rates are up 40% in some demographics.

Expand full comment

Not surprising that you don't understand the word forced or the concept that choices come with consequences....

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Thanks for the tip on what to look for. I'm new at this

Expand full comment

Translation: here is an excuse to hide from facts.

Expand full comment

😂😂😂 oh wait, you’re serious? 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

Expand full comment

Wow, you can't count, you can't read, and you won' correct your errors no matter how many times they are explained.

Expand full comment

"Forced injections are tyranny."

The non-existent forced injections????

Expand full comment

No one questions the positive impact of traffic laws.

The problem is there are legitimate questions about the risk/reward of many vaccines of the mandated vaccines, their impact in large cocktails, and whether the testing and approval process has been corrupted by money.

Expand full comment

Hi WC, I find those questions very fair to ask. The pharmaceutical industry is no stranger to controversies (e.g. opioid epidemic, Vioxx), and they no doubt have financial incentives to produce more vaccines. The concern I have is the answers being given to these problems seem to be less about the facts and more about the general distrust and cynicism around them. One reason I follow Paul Offit here on Substack is because he seems more focused on the former, even willing to be contrarian when the consensus said everyone needed a booster.

Expand full comment

Not to mention the mis/disinformation fueling this distrust and cynicism.

Expand full comment

Some folks are making lots of money off of misinformation!

Expand full comment

Yes they are...especially Pfizer.

Expand full comment

If only you could count and read the countless links posted here....

Expand full comment

"The problem is there are legitimate questions about the risk/reward of many vaccines of the mandated vaccines,..."

Ok, folks can have honest questions, but with many decades of data...and countless billions of datapoints....from health insurance companies and from national healthcare systems...no honest argument can be made that the benefits from vaccines don't grossly outweigh the risks!

Expand full comment

You mean the data that Pfizer wanted to block the release of for 75 years? You can’t trust data that you aren’t allowed to look at....🤦🏼‍♂️

Expand full comment

"You mean the data that Pfizer wanted to block the release of for 75 years? "

Aren't we lucky that I have already proved that Pfizer published online their data in Dec2020

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577

Thanks for demonstrating again that all the anti-vaccs have are stupid lies.

Expand full comment

I don't see how the right to refuse vaccination infringes on the right "not to get sick from easily preventable diseases". All they have to do is get vaccinated themselves. While the right to refuse vaccination follows from the right to refuse any medical treatment, which has been recognized for decades, I don't think the right "not to get sick from easily preventable diseases" actually exists.

Expand full comment

Babies cannot be vaccinated until they are 1. Their second dose, which confers a more complete immune response is not until age 4. If we stop vaccinating against measles, babies die. Some toddlers too. And a few old folks with cancer, immune dysfunction, asplenia. Measles encephalitis causes lifelong brain damage in many children. This is why we must vaccinate the entire population.

Expand full comment

You seem to be saying that the fact that not everyone can be vaccinated means that we have to vaccinate the entire population. I think you meant to say that all vaccinations that are not medically unadvisable should be required. If I am interpreting you correctly, why do you think this is relevant to vaccine mandates for schoolchildren?

Expand full comment

Nope. Go back. Re-read it. You seem to be trying to move the goalposts. If we allow many people to refuse MMR vaccines- we will have measles outbreaks where MANY babies and small children will get very sick, and some will die, and some will be damaged for life. Because they cannot be protected. This is what happens in measles outbreaks in the current era. See Paul's article re RFK jr and the Samoan measles outbreak of 2019. Herd immunity is essential for infants and toddlers, who are extremely vulnerable

Expand full comment

I'm not following you. If you aren't saying that all vaccinations that are not medically unadvisable should be required, what were you trying to communicate to me when you said "we must vaccinate the entire population".

BTW, I understand and agree that herd immunity is helpful to prevent measles outbreaks. But we currently allow people to refuse the MMR vaccines. We just don't allow children to attend school without either a vaccine or an exemption of some kind.

Expand full comment

“We currently allow”.... ??? Just who do you think you are to mandate what is injected into someone else? The only option I can foresee at this point is we split the world in half and let everyone scared of the unvaxxed go live there.

Expand full comment

😂😂 you’re funny...you probably aren’t trying to be...but here we are.

Expand full comment

Another fact-free posting from Johnathan....do you have just one fact to contribute?

Expand full comment

"I don't see how the right to refuse vaccination infringes on the right "not to get sick from easily preventable diseases". All they have to do is get vaccinated themselves. "

Please it is just percentages in action!

Here is some real world data that demonstrates how the anti-vaccinated increase risks for everyone:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11135778/

Expand full comment

Your vaccine don’t work unless 100% of the population takes it? It must not be very effective if that’s the case.

Expand full comment

I understand why you are silent on the facts from the link I posted.

The facts prove how stupid the anti-vacc fraud and how they kill children...the fraud you continue to support.

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023

Unfortunately there are many who cannot or are not vaccinated against diseases like measles. These individuals rely on there being sufficient “herd immunity” to render the chances of a measles outbreak being highly improbable. This means there is a collective responsibility for us to maximise measles immunity (through vaccination) in all those who are able to be vaccinated.

Expand full comment

Yes, there are many who cannot or are not vaccinated against diseases like measles and rely on herd immunity to decrease the probability of getting contagious diseases. I can even agree that we have a "collective responsibility for us to maximize measles immunity (through vaccination)" but this is necessarily limited by individual rights to refuse medical treatments. I don't think we should force vaccinations on the unwilling or their children, just make it easy for those who want them to get vaccinated.

We currently have mandates for school children as our approach to achieve herd immunity, which has worked fairly well for measles. I don't object to mandates as long as exemptions are allowed for those who don't wish to vaccinate. Exemptions allow unvaccinated children to attend public schools. Are we in disagreement?

Expand full comment

I agree with you that exemptions for valid medical reasons are a must.

Expand full comment

There are very few medical reasons to receive an exemption. The spread of pseudoscientific anti-vaccine rhetoric has prompted more and more parents to seek out (essentially) fake exemptions for vaccinating their children. Vaccination rates for children are plummeting as this poorly informed belief system grows and spreads. Thus the break-out of epidemics in communities such as Samoa, and recently in central Ohio. Wherever vaccination rates fall, outbreaks will occur, given the contagiousness of meals. We also have polio making a comeback, with significant detection in wastewater in New York, and an actual case of an unvaccinated man with paralytic polio. He didn't travel. He got infected right in his own town. We will see more cases for those who are unvaccinated against polio.

Expand full comment

Many people cannot get vaccinated for medical reasons.

Expand full comment

And also vax in not 100% effective. Therefore, one can’t depend on self vaccing.

Expand full comment

Yes, that's true. What point are you trying to make with that response?

Expand full comment

The point here is that there are four categories of people:

1. People who choose to get vaccinated.

2. People for whom vaccines don't work due to underlying conditions

3. People who legitimately can't get vaccinated.

4. People who choose not to get vaccinated simply because they don't want to.

Now, I can concede that all four of these are legitimate positions, even #4. Bodily autonomy? Sure.

But you also don't have an unfettered right to *enter* a public or private space that isn't yours. If I'm entering someone else's home, or someone else's business, or sending my kids into a public school, or pursuing certain types of employment - well, those things come with strings attached. There's no contradiction there.

Now, that being said, the optics of things like vaccine passports weren't so great in late summer 2021 through the spring of 2022. And indeed, they didn't last long because they were so unpopular. I don't think it was reasonable to expect frontline workers to act as police (often incurring the wrath of pissed off anti-vaxxers). I think Australia has the right idea, by using tax incentives. We have an opportunity to do something similar, by adding back some of the tax breaks that were removed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2018, but making them contingent on vaccination. You know - the KISS principle.

Covid is very much still a risk - but in some sense it's a very *monetizable* risk at this point. To the point that some people have made about traffic laws - many of these are enforced by fines, citations, and insurance underwriting. There's no reason we can't evolve to something like that with vaccines.

Expand full comment

I think your categories are somewhat overlapping, but I think category 4 is the only one we are discussing. I agree that there's no reason we can't evolve to something like that with vaccines. I see mandates for school children as part of that evolution. I just think it's more important for a child to have access to public education than to be vaccinated.

Expand full comment

They have access to education: their parents are free to home school. What they don't have a right to do is send their unvaccinated kids to public schools, unless they can furnish a valid medical excuse from a licensed professional.

Expand full comment

If your vaccine worked (they don;t ) then you shouldn't have to care about others. Inect your body if you want, but don't come close to my house.

Expand full comment

Anyone with 5th grade math skills, can see your lie.

Anyone with integrity will read the words below and see your anti-vacc lie injures and kills children.

Expand full comment

😂

Expand full comment

Yes Jonathan you have been clear that you have neither 5th grade math skills or integrity.

You just don't seem smart enough to see you are making a fool of yourself.....

Expand full comment

You already said I had grade 5 math skills and the other Jonathan had grade 3.... which is it? You’re starting to confuse me.

Expand full comment

"You already said I had grade 5 math skills"

Did I? If so I apologize for making such a silly error.

Clearly you can't do anything near 5th grade math.

Expand full comment

Licenses aren’t “freedom” and those those that do have licenses also have liability insurance. They are liable for their actions.

Expand full comment

Everyone seems to want freedom without consequences, and rights without responsibilities.

Expand full comment

Not only will children die of measles, if vaccination rates drop, children will be paralyzed by tetanus, will develop whooping cough, paralytic polio, german measles which will put unborn babies at risk for deafness ... and the list goes on of completely preventable morbidity and mortality.

Expand full comment
Aug 28, 2023·edited Aug 28, 2023

Then pharma needs to make them safe … but they said in the 80’s vaccines couldn’t be made safe, and the Regan gave them f..ing immunity. I just never knew, no wonder the vaccines are getting more dangerous, the companies are basically unregulated. Start asking your friends about vaccine adverse events, when I started saying my mom and dad had been injured, I found out friends and family had also been injured by mRNA, and a few also were injured by flu shots.

So somehow these two realities have to meet. But if vaccines work… then why does it matter? The vaccinated will be fine! They win! And it would soon be obvious the harms on both sides.

Expand full comment

Here is a crazy idea: you could use your basic reading skills and see that vaccine makers were NOT given immunity--anti-vaccs lied to you.

And you could read the lawsuits against vaccine makers and see that the anti-vaccs are exposed as liars and frauds.

But.....then you would know that the anti-vaccs are "f.....ing" evil....and stupid!

Expand full comment

Not immunity; indemnity.

Expand full comment

Good thing I have already provided you the law.

Not given immunity or indemnity.

If it weren't for stupid lies, the anti-vaccs wouldn't have anything to say!

Expand full comment

😂 wErE aLl GoNnA dIiIieE.

Expand full comment

It would be really nice if you would just make one posting that doesn't fail 5th grade...just one would be nice.

Expand full comment

Very few people are going to argue against a measles or polio vaccination, but it's very reasonable to argue against some other vaccines where the risk reward is less clear and where the total cocktail given now may produce adverse reactions that were never tested for. The tests required to get approval for vaccines look at individual vaccines. They often do comparisons to other vaccines. Only an idiot or corrupt person would test it that way. They never even look at what happens to a person's body from a cocktail of 70 vaccines and whether there is cumulative damage.

At this point everyone knows the profit motive is major part of the decision making process. That became obvious very quickly during Covid when even though the vaccines were failing badly in Israel after just months the authorities in the US were still lying about its effectiveness, when they lied about immunity from prior infection and mandated the vaccines anyway, when they covered up the red flags on safety in several databases on side effects and put the onus on the people suffering to prove it was from the vaccine instead of the other way around. They are STILL lying about side effects now or are so biased they are in denial.

The only ignorant people left are those in the medical community. The public gets it. You'll never be trusted again by anyone with a functioning brain. The only ones left that trust you are the lemmings.

The people know Scott Gottleib is playing musical chairs between the FDA and Pfizer.

The people know Anthony Fauci wanted to test these mRNA vaccines and blocked off possible early treatments. They know he had financial incentives to do so.

The people know that politicians get contributions from drug companies.

The people know that the media is bought and paid for by advertising dollars.

They people know the system is corrupt and will rightfully never trust you again.

Expand full comment

We agree on one thing: there sure is a lot of lying!

"Only an idiot or corrupt person would test it that way. They never even look at what happens to a person's body from a cocktail of 70 vaccines and whether there is cumulative damage"

Yup, anyone that isn't a complete idiot....that is to say anyone that can read at ~3rd grade level and easily see the anti-vacc lie!

Here is a review with 100s of references:

"Each new vaccine considered for inclusion in the immunization schedule is tested within the context of the existing schedule and reviewed by clinical researchers, who analyze the balance of demonstrated benefits and risks. Thus, each new vaccine is approved on the basis of a detailed evaluation of both the vaccine itself and the immunization schedule."

But then the point is that the anti-vaccs really do stupidly lie about ~everything!

Expand full comment

I‘ll argue against polio vaccine and masks...I’ll also argue that Pfizer, who spends 75% of it budget on advertising is a criminal entity. The only reason it still exists is that it owns 90% of the politicians and funds 75% of the big media outlets operating budgets. Health is the last thing they have any concern with.

Expand full comment

Thanks for proving that you are literally incapable of doing 5th grade math.

Please keep up the great public service and post about vaccines as often as possible!

Expand full comment

The reason to have a booster after surviving is the shot is for a new mutated virus.

Expand full comment

Vitamin D3, Ivermectin, and/or HCQ, etc. all work better, cost less, have much better risk to benefit ratio's, don't care which variant is current, and get us away from all of the dictatorial dictats of the current medical mess (leaders) we are in. Hello, anyone home?

Expand full comment

This is wrong. You are reading bad stuff. We have good data on all of these measures, and they have all been shown to be ineffective.

Expand full comment

To add, by the time a new "shot" is developed, the virus has already mutated to a new one. The whole process if fraught with illogical and ineffective nonsense. It is not as bad as a cold unless you have a horrible immune system in which case a strong wind will be disastrous for you. Try improving your immune system with diet, exercise, and vit D3 which Fauci takes but forgot to tell you to take it. I am 76 with asthma & one kidney. I have taken my own advice, am unvaccinated for flue, covid, or anything else and when I got Covid, I did not know I had anything but the vaccinated two people in my family were sick so I thought I would test also. If you want to harm your immune system get as many shots as you can. The CDC just had a convention and if you classify their own supervaccinated crowd as something, it would be a super spreader because so many got sick with it while there. Go Figure. And wake up from your sleep before you can no longer wake up. You are listening to the wrong people. Try Meryl Nass, Sasha Latypova, and hundreds more. If you connect with one and their conventions you can find many, many, people with integrity. Just FYI, anyone with integrity is made out to be horrible misinformation spreaders so you won't listen to them-just ask google for that approach. Duck Duck go for more truth.

Expand full comment

Tom Martin you are an N of one or Personal experiences are just that. So please provide research studies from reliable journals to support your conclusions. For example provide research data to support this statement”

It is not as bad as a cold unless you have a horrible immune system in which case a strong wind will be disastrous for you. ”

Expand full comment

You want to talk it to death but if you check the sources I mentioned & follow the dots, they have hundreds of studies & contracts. American Front Line Doctors can be added, Edward Dowd, Epoch Times, Steve Kirsch, Harvey Reisch, see what other countries are doing, just search on VAERS for yourself. Do anything except trust the joint Pharma/government narrative. It sounds great but you check out what the bad smell is you will find corruption worse than has ever existed on earth until now. Follow the money. How much does Meryl Nash get for her troubles. How much did Faucci & Big Pharma get for theirs. Look at CDC site for 2medication eligible for emergency use authorization (Ivermectin) & it’s side effects the compare Remdesiver which was selected-by Faucci then compare price. I have done a ton of reading & checking. Try it you may wake up. I hope so.

Expand full comment

PS. It would be wise to know exactly what is meant by safe (watch the movie Anacdotals, or The unseen Crises, or the New Zealand version of same.). Did u watch Senator Johnson’s Conference on CoVid “vaccines”? Do u know why the CDC changed the definition of vaccine. Do u know why legally the so called vaccines are referred to as “Countermeasurs”? Clue=they are not true vaccines. They are a gene therapy-not remotely similar to why we the people think of as vaccines. You are being taken for a ride of your life-literally. Sounds crazy but start looking & you will find it is all true. Or u can just do what most sheeple do which is say how horrible I and every one of the people above are for trying to speak truth to power.

Expand full comment

I guess there is no chance you will look at the facts and see that AFL Doctors fabricated data and that their patients had higher risk of dying....

Expand full comment

Quoting and citing quacks and charlatans doesn’t make your argument more credible, but less.

Expand full comment

I guess there is no chance you will listen to actual scientists and learn how you have been lied to about the mutations and vaccine.....

Expand full comment

Guess there is no chance that you will bother to look and see the ivermectin fraud...how they just keep making up data...if anything, there patients die more often....and how the ivermectin sellers used death threats to hide their fraud.....

Expand full comment

😂 now you’re really grasping at straws...

Expand full comment

If you had integrity you would at least look at the facts.....but you don't!

Expand full comment

Vaccinating for Covid during a Covid outbreak is like vaccinating for tetanus after rubbing cow crap in your open wound. 🤦🏼‍♂️ Absolutely pointless...

Expand full comment

I am trying to be fair to you...but I just think almost everyone over the age of ~8 knows that during a covid outbreak most folks don't currently have covid and they can be protected by vaccination.

Then there are folks like you!

Expand full comment

If I understand your point, no tetanus bacilli in faeces. Which according to the European CD you are wrong.

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/tetanus/facts#:~:text=Clostridium%20tetani%20is%20an%20obligate,resistant%20to%20boiling%20and%20freezing.

Clostridium tetani is an obligate anaerobic Gram-positive bacillus. The tetanus bacillus forms spores that can be found in soil and house dust, and in animal and human faeces. The spores remain viable for years in the environment and are resistant to boiling and freezing.

Expand full comment

You misunderstand my point. Tetanus shots take two weeks to create an immune response. However, if you are already injured and infected the day you are vaccinated the vaccine will do nothing to prevent illness from that infection.

Expand full comment

Reference please. I couldn't find one that agrees W/you. All recommended a shot immediately after an injury, especially if not received a booster W/I five years.

Expand full comment

Exactly like Covid....

Expand full comment

Well, if the measles vaccine is safe and effective parents will want it for their kids. Problem solved.

Expand full comment

It is safe and effective, but that doesn’t solve the problem of parents who are irrationally determined to exercise their right to “choose” and who decide to choose no vaccines.

Expand full comment
Aug 28, 2023·edited Aug 28, 2023

Well maybe measles vaccine were safe when given alone. It’s usually given with multiple shots. Maybe we should figure out why kids have so many neurological disorders now… gmo’s? Chem trails? Metal in 9 vaccines given at once? I didn’t know any autistic kids growing up… but I only had 10? Total vaccines?

Now, we have all these damaged kids, many who can never be independent. And doctors in general don’t care because otherwise they would try to solve the problem.

So you think parents should choose autism allergies and adhd over the chance of catching childhood diseases everyone caught just 50 years ago. The grift is known. I have apologized to my adult children for any damage, and I know there was damage because of how one child after a particular vaccine (I don’t know how many vaccines were received, I think seven in three shots) was so afraid of the whole building where her sweet pediatrician worked. Now I know. She suffered but was too young to verbalize what happened. I figure that’s why the schedule targets babies because the older the child is, vaccine damage would be more obvious.

Pre- covid, I assumed safe and effective. But the my mom had a severe reaction to moderna shot two. It was awful, ripped up her blood vessel lining and I thought she would die. Ten months after the shot, her symptoms started to abate. She was 82 and didn’t sleep for ten months. Then my dad took the booster out of fear. He had terribly long heart rhythm episodes and now has congenital heart failure. Safe and effective now just means the government is trying to murder my family or make pharma profits… because my mom went from zero to FOUR prescriptions to deal with her new blood pressure and blood sugar issues her new rheumatoid arthritis and my dad went up in number as well after the crappy booster. A win for pharma! They get more money.

Expand full comment

Sorry, but there is no credible evidence that autistic disorders are caused by vaccination.

Expand full comment

Instead of arguing from your personal ignorance, here is a crazy idea.....

Other than the US, every other developed country has a national healthcare system that tracks the entire population. What does their data show?

In the US, we have for-profit health insurance companies...what does their data show?

We have countless billions of data points over many decades showing that vaccines are safe and effective......

Expand full comment

Irrationally determined? On what basis do you make that claim? Almost every “anti-vaxxer” I know was once a unthinking vaxxer and only reversed their stance when their own children were harmed by the very vaccines that they were told were for their protection. That was me...I didn’t even think about it. If the doc recommended it we did it. Never again. The only thing the medical system is any good for and at is emergency trauma care. They know nothing about anything else.

Expand full comment

Correction: almost every anti-vaxxer is person fooled by stupid anti-vacc lies.

Hard to believe, but some parents so totally fail their own kids that they just won't look at the facts!

Expand full comment

Is that really consistent with your life experience/observations as to how people really act?

Expand full comment

If vaccines work, then vaccinated children are protected. Why does everyone have to vaccinate for my vaccine to work? Shouldn’t my vaccine protect me?

Expand full comment

Not everyone can get vaccinated for medical reasons, including babies because their immune system isn’t developed enough to respond to it.

Expand full comment

Internet search herd immunity.

Expand full comment

"If vaccines work, then vaccinated children are protected."

Our kids understood percentages before 5th grade....strange that you can't.....

Expand full comment

You seem to be au fait with most antivaccine tropes and arguments, so you cannot possibly be unaware of the rational answers to your question. You are just JAQing off, and you know it.

Expand full comment

You are protected by the vaccine. If others are not for whatever reason then they are not protected. If 95% of your compatriots are vaccinated then the other 5% are also protected as the virus cannot spread easily as it cannot get a foothold. Note that vaccination prevents serious illness but not necessarily infection.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry, but your last statement is factually wrong. If vaccination allows for any kind of illness, then you can spread the virus to someone who is at risk as they aren't vaccinated in your world view.

If you are sick, you are shedding viruses at some point. So no this new it prevents serious illness still prevents transmission is not correct.

We even know this from animal vaccines. check out Merck's, and what a terrible situation we've created due to a leaky vaccine.

Take a few minutes and think about how viruses work before posting platitudes that include taking away peoples rights.

Expand full comment

Vaccines stimulate the adaptive immune system to produce antibodies initially and then memory cells, as does the initial infection. It takes up to 14 days for the IgG antibodies to peak, once the antigen has been cleared the number of antibodies decreases, leaving behind memory T and B cells. These can only be retriggered by a further exposure to the relevant antigen, which requires reinfection. Instead of taking 14 days to maximise adaptive immune response it takes approximately 3 days.

If you have an upper respiratory tract infection such as a cold, CoViD19, measles, rubella you will develop a temperature, a cough, sneezing, a sore throat and a runny nose, feel unwell, off your food and swollen glands. This is your innate immune system fighting the virus, the inflammatory response. If this is inadequate then after a while you develop IgA antibodies in the mucosa of the respiratory tract. If this is still not enough and the virus spreads to the lower respiratory tract then you become seriously ill and you start to depend on IgG antibodies. Either the virus is cleared or you die. If you’ve been vaccinated or previously infected then the memory cells will trigger the IgG response much faster and hence you’re less likely to become seriously ill or die.

What kills infected cells is not the virus but the CD8+ T cells of your immune system in response to non self peptides being presented by HLA class I on the cell membrane.

No vaccine ever created has been sterilising, i.e. prevents infection. It is suggested that such a vaccine may actually be dangerous and counterproductive.

Expand full comment

"I'm sorry, but your last statement is factually wrong. If vaccination allows for any kind of illness, then you can spread the virus to someone who is at risk as they aren't vaccinated in your world view."

That is just a complete misunderstanding....

Expand full comment

Yea ok Mr keyboard warrior. Let me do basic 6 th grade health/biology, virus infects cell, virus replicates and kills cell, virus sheds. When cells start dying, you get diseases. Just by experiencing disease , you can spread. Sometimes you don’t even have to show symptoms. If your going to run around Substack and post crazy retorts, atleast pretend to consider what was posted, vs your talking points.

Expand full comment

"Yea ok Mr keyboard warrior. Let me do basic 6 th grade health/biology, virus infects cell, virus replicates and kills cell, virus sheds."

And anyone that has taken virology 101 can list many virus that don't kill the host cells and many infections that cause serious illness.....like death...but are not infectious......

Too bad you didn't bother look for the facts before posting!

Expand full comment

So name them? I started off the thread with a reference to an actual virus that causes massive problems due to a leaky 'vaccine'. you've yet to prove anything... haha sure I can google and find an example for your strawman, and then you'll have another, the logic still stands buddy. Virus infects, reproduces, causes death and destruction of cells, and spreads. so having a vaccine that doesn't prevent the infection, doesn't protect the unvacinatable people. Hence my comment about Mericks. Do you know about that one?

Expand full comment

Asymptomatic COVID’s infected others.

Expand full comment

The worst part of this is that the new jab has been conflated successfully as a vaccine. It is not a vaccine in any objective person's mind except in name only. It is a gene therapy aka called a countermeasure so it can be produced in a rush with no quality standards or even true risk analysis so we are to just be ignorant slaves and do what we are told and roll up our sleeves. Too many don't really understand that "never again" is indeed happening again because of narratives that sound good. Thomas Sowell wrote that the last 2 decades we have traded what worked for what sounded good. He is spot on. It is time we stopped doing things that sound good and look for conflicts of interest, honest trials, honest people with integrity in our medical field and in our elections. We are about to go under if we don't wake up and have integrity.

Expand full comment

Here is an idea: how about you use your God given brain and try reading some words?

Like....vaccine is defined by a 1988 US law, and the Covid vaccines exactly fit the definition"!

"Vaccine The term “vaccine” means any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of 1 or more diseases."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=26-USC-222761909-1963936815&term_occur=999&term_src=#:~:text=(2)%20Vaccine%20The%20term%20%E2%80%9C,of%201%20or%20more%20diseases.

And clearly they are NOT gene therapies:

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/what-gene-therapy

Remember: the anti-vacc fraud really counts on folks to be too clueless to read.....

Expand full comment

Editing a gene to continuously produce a spike protein is not the same as immune system exposure to a weakened virus. There you go gaslighting again...

Expand full comment

There you go again starting with an anti-vacc lie predicated on you being to clueless to count at the first grade level.

Expand full comment

Doctors, including epidemiologists, public health specialists, virologists, infectious disease specialists, immunologists and vaccine locusts call the Covid vaccines “vaccines”.

But no matter what you call them, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

Expand full comment

What I smell is a huge agribusiness like a dairy farm when driving by on the freeway. I hold my breath until it is in the rear view mirror.

Expand full comment

What you should smell is the brimstone that comes with eternal damation from working to kill children!

Expand full comment

As Dr. Offit lays out in this post the history of what happens when a vaccine that has served the public well becomes laxed by those who believe it isn't needed, the outcome is pretty obvious.

Expand full comment

If parents can choose to kill their children inside the womb, then parents should be able to choose whether or not, they vaccinate their children.

Expand full comment

That is just waaaay too logical for the vaccine cultists.

Expand full comment

I guess there zero chance you will bother to learn some basic logic and see the absurdity of David's posting....

Can't be an anti-vacc and think correctly!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Ok, you have made it 100% clear that you have zero ability to find or analyze basic data.

Here is a different approach: why do life insurance companies say?

https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/insurance-death-rates-working-age-people-up-40-percent

Surprise:

1. Covid infections are killing and disabling a lot of people

2. Being unvaccinated massively increases your risks from covid--hey, that means the vaccines are safe and effective!

3. Insurance premiums are being increased based on not using the vaccines.

Wow, that is super clear.

Bonus: anyone with the integrity to look can see how Malone obviously lied about the data, counting on folks to be too clueless to read.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/life-insurance-deaths-up-40---dr-robert-malone-s-chilling-analysis/article_d24bccac-6f38-11ec-912f-1f6d8fc5fac4.html

Expand full comment

I have 25 years of bedside clinical experience; ER, ICU, Cardiac. You? How many 'Covid' Patients have you actually treated? I know my clientele very well. I suggest you broaden your education, and reading, and study some philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Jab all you want. Come near me, you will get a lead injection.

Expand full comment

"I have 25 years of bedside clinical experience; "

That has nothing to do with the fact you are knowingly supporting a fraud that kills people and that your entire claim fails basic counting.

Expand full comment
Sep 8, 2023·edited Sep 8, 2023

All you can do is peacock your (not very impressive) credentials and threaten others with violence.

Why are you here?

Expand full comment

It is still a fact that all you have offered so far are stupid lies that fail 5th grade and kill people.

And you continue to ignore the fact that I have proved your "source" to be a liar.

Shall we start calling you Nurse Letby? She only murdered 7, the anti-vaccs have killed far more!

Expand full comment

They are.

I keep asking folks for data that shows otherwise and other than a bunch of name-calling I have received nothing....not one single piece of data.

Do you have any? Any at all???

And I have posted lots of links that show they are safe and effective, but it seems that not one single anti-vacc has been willing to read the words.....

Expand full comment

What planet are you on?

Expand full comment

On my "planet" everyone notices that you couldn't provide one single piece of data.

Apparently you have nothing at all to support our POV!

Expand full comment

They are allowed to choose whether to vaccinate their children.

They may not like the consequences (eg they may need to seek pvt or home schooling), but they still have the choice.

Expand full comment

The Covid shot isn’t a vaccine. A vaccine doesn’t take 7 shots over 2 1/2 years. Then measles vaccine doesn’t need 7 shots, does it?

Expand full comment

Since the covid shot exactly fits the definition of a vaccine it is a vaccine.

Expand full comment

Only because after the shots came out and didn’t work, they changed the definition of a vaccine. Look it up.

Expand full comment

So no, you really just don't care that the anti-vaccs lied about the definition of being changed.

Expand full comment

Simply look at the 2015 definition from the CDC, and look at it now. It changed. Are you up to date on all your Covid jabs? Should be 7 at this point. What a complete failure, you must be the poster child for Pfizer.

Expand full comment

Sigh....

1. What is important is the legal definition of vaccine, here one more time is the 1988 law:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=26-USC-222761909-1963936815&term_occur=999&term_src=#:~:text=(2)%20Vaccine%20The%20term%20%E2%80%9C,of%201%20or%20more%20diseases.

2. As YOUR miamiherald link points out, the updated definition is a

“slight changes in wording over time … haven’t impacted the overall definition."

The old/new definitions are right in your link.....somehow you missed that covid vaccines exact fit both!

And your link points out how effective the covid vaccines are.

Why can't anti-vaccs ever seem to read correctly?

Expand full comment

You’re so locked up it’s crazy. Take your legal definition and jam it. The goal posts are always moving, and call it what you want, the Covid jabs aren’t doing shit. So have fun jabbing yourself with every single jab out there. Covid variants keep coming, every other month a new jab needs to be developed and by the time you get your jab another variant will need another obsolete shot. Enjoy

Expand full comment

Exactly what part about the definition being defined in law in 1988 are you not understanding?

Expand full comment

It only fits the definition because THE DEFINITION WAS CHANGED to make it fit. 🤦🏼‍♂️ I saw it with my own two eyes. Stop with the gaslighting already.

Expand full comment

I have already posted the definition multiple times, here it is again:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=26-USC-222761909-1963936815&term_occur=999&term_src=#:~:text=(2)%20Vaccine%20The%20term%20%E2%80%9C,of%201%20or%20more%20diseases.

It was defined in law in 1988!

Stop posting anti-vacc lies the insult the intelligence of the average 6 year old.

Expand full comment

Many vaccines need boosters; it's what happens when immunity is not durable (or when the disease mutates to evade previous vaccines).

Polio takes 5 shots for the primary series, and regular boosters thereafter. Are you saying that isn't a vaccine?

Some vaccines don't give immunity at all against infection, but are directed against toxins the infection produces, like tetanus and diphtheria. Are you saying those aren't vaccines?

Influenza strains evolve, meaning that the vaccine has to be reformulated every season to cover the strains, and so it's given every year. Are you saying that isn't a vaccine?

Expand full comment

See George Carlin, and germs

Expand full comment

Thanks, I watched it. He’s very tongue in cheek, and I hope you didn’t take what he said literally. He’s obviously putting on a wildly over exaggerated opinion to get laughs. I did chuckle once or twice, like when he recounted how as a child he swam in raw sewage everyday, and that’s why he never got polio.

I bet his parents vaccinated him.

Expand full comment

You seem to be running cover for big pharma. Why are you set against even listening to some of these men and women. I can tell that you have not even tried. Are you afraid of their message? You can't cherry pick deaths. Either someone dies or they did not die. It is one metric that cannot be cherry picked. The number of jabs given out and to whom does not lend itself to cherry picking either. The only question is: Is their a correlation between the two and if so is it possitive, negative, and how strong is the correlation. That is all Edward Dowd does. If you search for any of these people, I should have mentioned not to use Google. They will put many negative articles ahead of anything you search for because they do not want you to see these messages. If you use Duck Duck Go, you can decide what you want to see by what your search is for. It is impossible to discuss these topics intelligently without spending some time listening to some of these courageous people. Many of them lost their jobs and many friends and spend much of their time reading all they can to get a handle on what seems like the biggest scam of all history. Most people sound like talking heads just repeating what they hear elsewhere. Just because the common narrative is heard 500 times with money backing the message, does not make it true. These people from my prior post do not. I admit I do just repeat what they say so don't listen to me. Listen to them. I am just trying to be a warning voice to all who have been duped by the official false narratives and most people have never heard more than a few lines from these people and need to hear their voices before committing to such a serious thing as taking an experimental injection with no even medium term data and many signs that all is not well with the whole rollout of our response. One glaring red flag it that their are alternatives that are awesome and more effective like I mentioned earlier but the narrative wants you to believe that you must get vaccinated whether you are old, young, healthy, pregnant, fit, unhealthy, etc. How many read flags do you need? I have a hard time not wanting to show how horrible it all seems to me. To use an experimental drug (emergency use) their can't be any alternative therapy thus they demonized any alternative from the get go. That tactic, in my view caused more deaths that the jabs will ever, ever save. Everyone needs money but huge amounts of money flowing to stay in line is worth watching for.

Expand full comment

You continue to be clear: you will post any old BS no matter how stupid it is as long as it criticizes vaccines.

Expand full comment

I've listened to the antivax messages for many years, and I'm not afraid of their message, just scornful of their ignorance and naivety, and cross at the way antivaxers deliberately spread them, increasing avoidable illness and deaths.

Examples with measles:

1. Wakefield. Not only do I refer to his disastrous and deceptive efforts to play himself off as an infection expert, leading to a fraudulent paper that dipped vaccination rates globally and led to thousands of unnecessary deaths, but just look at the example of the American Somali Minnesota outbreak, which followed low vaccination rates after Wakefield's talks to the Somali community on the supposed dangers of MMR. "Nothing to do with me" he claimed.

https://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j2378#:~:text=Contacted%20by%20the%20Washington%20Post,t%20feel%20responsible%20at%20all.%E2%80%9D

2. Kennedy junior. He visited Samoa and gave public meetings about the supposed dangers of MMR. Vax rates fell to 40%, then there was an epidemic, killing 83 kids and causing brain damaging encephalitis in hundreds of others. "Not my fault" he said.

Expand full comment

Disclaimer: I believe, based on available evidence, that MMR and DPT vaccines are safe and effective. Also, based on the available evidence, I believe it is perfectly reasonable for a parent to forego these vaccines. Using Dr. Offit’s own statistics, in 1963 3.5 million people would get the measles and 500 would die. That comes out to .014% infection fatality rate, assuming the 3.5 million didn’t include any additional unreported cases. About 1 in 10,000 people of all ages would die from getting the measles in the pre-vaccine age. Any reasonable parent might ask, “How many of these people were elderly and infirm? Can we assume that comorbidities played a role in a majority of these deaths? Would many or even most of these deaths have been averted with today’s standard of medical care vs. that of 1963?”

Also, any intelligent parent would know that, though risks are low with, for example, the measles vaccine, they are not zero. More questions arise: “How many deaths/serious adverse events occur due to inappropriate handling of vaccines? Contamination? Production error? Staph infections? Live viral infection caused by the vaccine? Anaphylaxis? Or just plain error on the part of the administer of the vaccine?”

Dr. Offit says the case-fatality rate (CFR) for measles is about 1 in 1,000. This says more about Dr. Offit’s integrity than it does about the measles. For those of you who may not remember how we were misled by the media in the early days of Covid, the CFR is the number of fatalities divided by the number of reported cases, as opposed to the infection fatality rate, which is fatalities divided by the ACTUAL number of cases. For example, the CFR of Covid was regularly reported in the media to be between 3% and 6% in 2020. The IFR was actually well below 0.5% and falling. When someone mentions the CFR of a virus, I advise hiding your wallet, locking up your daughters, and not giving them the time of day. You’re not dealing with a safe person.

A 1962 episode of The Rifleman (23:00 mark) adds historical perspective on how worried we should be about the measles: The Rifleman - Season 5, Episode 4 - Quiet Night, Deadly Night - Full Episode - YouTube

Expand full comment

Your posting started out so well....

"Dr. Offit says the case-fatality rate (CFR) for measles is about 1 in 1,000. This says more about Dr. Offit’s integrity than it does about the measles.'

How about you show some integrity and spend a minute or two on Google? It is pretty easy to find the data that shows Dr. Offit is correct and your really obvious errors!

Expand full comment

I didn't say that he was lying about the case fatality rate. Google does say that the CFR for measles is about 1 in 1,000. The CFR has little to do with the actual mortality rate. It can be manipulated depending upon how many cases are reported, vs. how many cases actually exist. Dr. Offit gave us an excellent example of the Infection Mortality Rate at the beginning of his article. Using his own numbers, we see that about 1.4 out of 10,000 measles infections resulted in death before a vaccine was created. if only 1000 of those 10,000 infections are reported, you get a CFR of 1.4 per thousand. So--the CFR is often used as a tool to scare people into thinking a virus is much more dangerous than it is. This is what Dr. Offit does at the end of his article, and it's what the CDC and corporate press did through most of the pandemic.

Expand full comment

Thanks, but.....

I didn't say anything about you calling Dr. Offit a liar. I did show where you attacked his integrity, but it was you who really wasn't being ethical.

And if you do a bit of research, you can easily figure out how very, very wrong the 1.4 out of 10,000 is and how that falsehood has been used to deceive people into thinking measles is less dangerous than it really is.

Bonus: we do have ~recent outbreaks where the data makes it clearly how very wrong the historical reported numbers are.

Expand full comment

Is the CDC good enough for you? https://www.cdc.gov/measles/downloads/measlesdataandstatsslideset.pdf

Scroll down to the fourth slide. It says:

U.S. Measles Burden:

Before 1963 Vaccine Development*

 Each year, measles caused an estimated 3 to 4 million cases

• Close to 500,000 cases were reported annually to CDC, resulting in:

o 48,000 hospitalizations

o 1,000 cases with encephalitis (brain swelling)

o 400 to 500 deaths

If you want the Case Fatality Rate (number of deaths from annual *reported* cases), Divide 450 deaths/year by 500,000 reported cases. That gives you 1 death out of 1,000 reported cases.

If you want the Infection Fatality Rate (an honest number), divide 450 annual deaths by 3.5 million *actual* cases per year, and you get 1 death in 10,000 cases.

Can you see how the first one (CFR) is misleading? Dr. Offit knows this; hence my assertion that he is acting without integrity on this.

Expand full comment

When I last looked at this issue some years ago, there were several papers explaining how the reported fatalities of measles were undercounted by around half. That may affect your calculations.

And as I say, death from the vaccine is less than one in a million, and could be as low as one in ten million.

That is several orders of magnitude lower than the measles IFR.

Expand full comment

Yes the math is easy.

But if the numbers are wrong then your answer will still be wrong.

I think a person with integrity would spend a couple of minutes asking basic questions like....how confident are we in the numbers?

Fact is the numbers are wrong.

Here is a simple explanation from a Hosptial network/health insurance organization....they posted it because so many people like you have been deceived:

https://www.unitypoint.org/news-and-articles/seriously-how-deadly-is-measles

Expand full comment

The article you offered does more to convince me that I am right. It says, "Out of the 3-4 million annual cases of measles, only about 400k to 600k were reported to the CDC. If we go with the 400k for easy math again, that's one reported measles death per one thousand reported measles cases."

It is admitting that measles were vastly--and understandably, because of the lack of severity and the ubiquity of the disease--underreported, resulting in inflated death rates.

Then the author goes on to insinuate that measles deaths were equally vastly underreported, bringing the fatality rate back to 1 in 1000 or so. He offers no reasoning or evidence for this assertion that measles deaths were underreported; just his opinion. Interesting that the CDC accounts for underreported cases but not underreported deaths. Could it be because the concept of underreported measles deaths is so far-fetched?

Bottom line: when I ask myself, "How likely is it that measles cases were underreported?" I can confidently say, "Certainly," given the circumstances and CDC data. When any intelligent person asks themselves, "How likely is it that measles deaths were *equally* underreported?" the only reasonable answer is "don't be ridiculous."

Don't be ridiculous. Nonsense is nonsense, even if it's posted by an insurance company.

Expand full comment

The article you cite is conjecture - on all fronts. We don't have actual IFR numbers for Measles and probably won't ever (given the current vaccine programs). For that matter, we will never have good data on IFR or CFR of any virus, these numbers are always estimations.

It is unfair to compare givens to unknown unknowns. Cases will always be underreported as will death, and nobody can ever draw conclusive numbers given that data.

It is equally invalid to claim that:

1. Data from the 1960's showing a IFR of 12-16/100,000, and a CFR of 1/1000, is inaccurate.

2. Data from 'recent' outbreaks is more accurate (given the unknown statistics of key metrics).

You might have reasons for suggesting why statement 1, is not a valid reference, but I could give you numerous points about statement 2 (e.g overcounted deaths by: not including co-morbidities, investigating more deaths; Undercounting cases: underreporting by parents do to the political nature of the debate and fear, surveys being unrepresentative for the same reasons; it may also be the case that data in the 60's was more accurate since the topic was not politicized).

Moreover, it is not 'naughty' (as noted in your link) to compare reported deaths to estimated cases. It is required to draw IFR results (which would be skewed by underreported deaths) - which are always an estimation. Reported deaths are always the least 'fixable' variable, although its manipulation has great effect on the results.

Unreported deaths are missing, but counted deaths might also be skewed, how many of those who died in the 1990's have had co-morbidities, and hence, measles perhaps did not increase all-cause mortality.

I think some common sense is in order. The IFR of Measles is certainly well above 1/1000, deaths would have to be undercounted ten times less for that to be true in the 1960's, which I think is rather unlikely. Perhaps 1/5000-1/10,000. Of course, the next question is how many died of co-morbidities?

Expand full comment

Nope. Show me your numbers and I'll show you mine.

Expand full comment

What numbers? The entire point is we don't have valid historic numbers on measles deaths.

Why?

1. Diagnosis challenges. There are many deaths from measles where the cause of death can't be determined without modern diagnostic technics. Thus, historically, it was impossible for these deaths to be correctly assigned to measles.

2. Administrative challenges. As you go back in time....like before computers....the medical records get worse. It is just a fact, in earlier years the reported death records are often inaccurate, incomplete and frequently non-existent.

When the reported cause of death is inaccurate or not reported all, doesn't change the fact the child is still dead.

Even when a cause of death was reported, it was often natural causes or infectious disease....no way to know how many of those cases were measles deaths.

Bottom line: epidemiologists have literally spent decades explaining the facts about measles, the anti-vaccs just aren't truthful.

Expand full comment

OK, but do you have numbers for verified deaths from measles vaccine?

Expand full comment

The sounds of silence....

Expand full comment

Whatever the IFR for measles is, it is far less than the VFR (vaccine fatality rate) which is so small as to be deemed incalculable, but often encompassed with the statement that serious reactions are less than one in a million.

Expand full comment

I'd like to see a source for that one in a million statement. Regardless, given the relatively low risk of serious outcomes for children with measles, it's not remotely obvious that vaccines are the only logical choice for parents. We have the data and the statistics. Parents should question and do the research, and be permitted to evaluate the risks without being manipulated by those who stand to profit.

Expand full comment

Putting our health into the hands of those who profit from our being sick doesn’t sound too smart to me.

Expand full comment

I have demonstrated the staggering stupidity of your argument...but you clearly just can't do better.

Expand full comment

20% of parents thinking vaccines are dangerous is a huge achievement for Mercola, RFK and the other anti public health ninnies who are loving the freedom from responsibility the internet brings. If, as the Greeks knew, Democracy cannot work without an educated electorate, then what future are we facing. I pity this generation of kids!

Expand full comment

Though focusing on mortality, let's not forget the numbers of children with post acute sequelae. I, myself, have a lifelong hearing disability from measles. The vaccines came a decade too late. We shouldn't discount the healthcare burden either. Look what happened during the RSV season last year. Luckily we now have means to help newborns.

Expand full comment

Thank you for the excellent point that all the anti-vaccs ignore.

Expand full comment

Also forgetting/ignoring at the beginning of 1800, 463 out of 100000 children did not make it to age 5. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1041693/united-states-all-time-child-mortality-rate/

Not easier later than 5. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data-visualization/mortality-trends/index.htm

Of course, improvement in the mortality rate is due other factors besides vaccine such as improved hygiene, better prenatal care, and medical treatment. The first smallpox vaccine in the US was administered in 1800 by Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse to his family including his son. It was slow going because, even back then, there were anti-vaxx groups. Massachusetts was the first state to mandate children smallpox vaccination in 1855. Save for outbreaks/pandemics of cholera ,smallpox, yellow fever, and the 1918 Influenza. You can see the decline in mortality rate really declined during the 1940 to 1950, thanks to his work on modern vaccines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Hilleman

PS Note this is about mortality but look at Post Acute Sequelae stats as well A well known infectious disease PAS? Polio!

Expand full comment

My 2 cents: it is mostly just psychology.

There have always been grifters and the internet makes it easier for them to find marks. To me this is a given.

As you have clearly demonstrated, it is just not that hard to see that there must be problems with the anti-vacc "arguments".

What I struggle with is are deceived parents that double down on stupidity rather than be willing to look at the fact...

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023

Thanks. It seems prior to introduction of measles vaccines, deaths were running at 100-150 per year. After MMR was successfully introduced in the late 80s, deaths dropped further and now run at between 0 and 1 or two deaths per year, many of those a legacy of infection 30 or more years ago (deaths from SSPE).

Thank goodness for measles vaccines!

Expand full comment

Thank you for bringing actual data into the conversation.

Now could you please explain your interpretation?

Thanks!

Expand full comment

In 1963, three to four million children got measles. 450 died. As you observed here. That’s 1.125 deaths out of 10,000 cases of measles. I had it at six, as everyone I ever knew my age or older had had. Measles is not dangerous to healthy, well-nourished children who are not given fever reducers. Giving them vitamin A prevents eye damage and other complications. It would be better to let natural measles come back. Dr. Peter Aaby found that in Senegal, children who got and recovered from natural measles had only one-fifth the all-cause mortality in the subsequent four years as those who for whatever reason did not get natural measles. About half the measles deaths in the US in 1963 were in malnourished children in the Deep South. Most of the others were in immunocompromised children. It would be better to let healthy children just go through the natural disease and receive the benefits of its training the immune system.

Expand full comment