Twenty years ago, I had a one-hour conversation with RFK Jr. In his current campaign for president, he has referred to that conversation during public appearances. It’s time to set the record straight
Paul Offit has NEVER called for data transparency of the public health record level data so we all can see what is going on. He is not a friend of truth and transparency.
Scientists should be afraid to be challenged.
I believe Paul Offit will never debate RFK Jr., e.g., on Rogan so we can hear both sides of the story real-time.
If the Real Anthony Fauci was in fact outright lies...It seems Fauci would have a very strong defamation case....don't you think? Funny he hasn't sued.
Why don't you let people read them and utilize their intellect to deduce what from the book is closer to the truth than not.
Should we all just assume a book is either a LIE or the TRUTH?
....thus there is no need to waste our time reading them, just go with the prevailing narrative that XXX books are lies and have no facts, information, documents...etc...etc.... or book XXX is the absolute truth, so there is no need to read anything else including the book itself because all the experts, pundits, doctors, politicans agree and have TOLD you what to do....which is get jabbed with chemicals and toxins.....which you did.....correct?!?!?
I care not about those books, however there are bits and pieces of information in all of them that to some degree ring true, otherwise they would be universally opposed and they are not....
If I can find one truth in the books you call lies is the book nothing but lies?
All the pro vaxxer books have lies too, it is easy to expose them as well.
This is why I am in neither of these camps....I stay outside of the Rockefeller Allopathic Capitalistic System of Medicine......never been healthier!
You are grossly misrepresenting my postings....I have already posted that I have read many of them.
I am fully in favor of folks reading them and in fact I have assigned some/some similar books to students.
What I do want is for everyone that has finished middle school to have the basic math/reading/thinking skills to be able to look up "big" words like toxin and to be able to the math that show that vaccines are safe and effective.
I mean if you have concluded or deduced somethintg correctly you too can call yourself a scientist....right???
But seriously this is the lie!
That I need to be an Expert, Doctor, Scientist, multiple degrees, credentials....blah blah blah.
One only needs to know how to READ.
I do not need to be a scientist and you are a fool for believeing such nonsense as if being a 'scientist' is the only way towards knowledge.
The entire system of capitalistic allopathy was set up in the manner that makes you believe it is ALL legit. A bit of simple research will allow one to intelligently conclude this is most likely true and that Gilded Age Robber Barons set up what is essentially a 'medical business venture' and a good one at that!
Rockefeller Medicine Men corrupted every aspect from college/universities, accreditation, medical journals...etc...etc.... there is no facet of medicine/science that has not been tainted by these robber barons,
I mean why should I trust science or studies when prestigious research universities like Duke is fined 112 million for falsify studies.......and only a fool thinks Duke is the ONLY university/college that conducts themselves in this manner ....right???
Lying to get grants, using falsified data...etc...etc.... but believe the experts, the scientist, the peeps with all the letters after the name signafying what? That they are good little programmed Rockefeller Medicine Men? because that is EXACTLY what they are! John D would not have it any other way.
The proof is in the unHEALthy world we live in.... People have never been more unhealthy, sick, unwell....I have lived long enough to have witnessed this.
Talk about not being able to figure out basic things......
You are talking garbage and i know this is true because you have comfortably settle into Rockefeller Medicine Men system of Capitlaistic Allopathy........
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.” ― Marcia Angell
Congrats future winner of the Darwin award... Put the joint down and stop watching propaganda on tv. Thanks for playing Sparky... Oh yeah, Siri is a lawyer, not a scientist, so your point is? What?
250k+ 250k +100k = not 2.7 mil. Besides debating is pointless. There is nothing to debate! In a debate both people need to be knowledgeable on the subject matter. I would never debate a lawyer on the law, I would debate about my expertise of Hazmat Disposal. Rogan should get an infectious disease anti vaxxer to debate. He has enough pull for that. Wait...maybe he can't? Why can that be? If I seem rude its because the guy called me stupid, assume you called him rude too?
Stay away from internet sites like highwire they have no legal responsibility to report truth. Only sites that still have a broadcast over airwaves are Slightly regulated against just spewing complete BS. Highwire
edits videos, goto arizona site and get the complete video with context thats edited out. Warning the actual video is longer than a short spoon fed one.
No one reports the truth period, not the left media, not the right media, not the government, not the NGO's....not even the so called alternate media.
I do not trust Highwire only an idiot would.
All Del and the rest do is propagate the "vaccine divide" when vaccine have NEVER WORKED!
You said it yourself the "airwaves" are REGULATED....so why would i listen to something that is not pure, unadultrated in its organic form?
There is zero reason to ever regulate information. If information is being regulated it is because someone, some group or some interest does not want the majority to know certain information.
So we agree on Highwire but you took a jab and i did not.....hmmm!
It is a good idea to get vaccinated. The science is pretty clear on that. But you choose to be anti-science. Do you also eschew other scientific achievements like computers, refrigerators? If you break your leg, do you heal it with homeopathy?
You also have not brought any evidence that RFK Jr. is not enriching himself from his anti-vax shtick. Because he is.
I don't trust RFK Jr and "science is not pretty clear"
“Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty — some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.”- Richard Feynman
Putting toxins, chemicals amongst other things in your body is never a good idea.
Listen I read the EUA and there was a sentence in the EUA at the end of the 4th or 5th paragraph in which the following sentence appeared though it had nothing to do with the information in the paragraph. It was bizarre...like the sentence was just placed there...it read.....
"It Is An Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed For Any Indication"
Now I read the EUA and when I read the sentence in quotation marks I said to myself, It is not a good Idea to get vaccinated.
Please search that sentence, do some research before you tell me and others it is a good idea to get an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication........
RFK makes a lot of money pushing the Anti Vax agenda, a lot from writing books which are full of B.S. and have been debunked 100s of times. This offitt article tells you exa tly who RFK is a professional liar whose profession is about sowing doubt thats his training. Lawyers do not care about TRUTH. ANYONE with experience dealing with lawyers knows This.
To not debate is akin to censorship and censorship is always about hiding the Truth. It certainly is not about hiding the lie, because the thought would be to expose the lie to the light of day and let everyone see it....and this is why Hotez would never debate while hiding behind reasons why you should not debate.
I simply cannot believe there are people stupid enough to believe that to NOT debate you somehow get closer to the TRUTH than not.
If the so called anti- vaxxers are soooooooooo wroooooooong then Hotez, Offut and the rest should easily kick ass and settle the debate once for all wrapping it up with a nice neat little bow.
James why don't you tell me what part of the article backs up your argument as opposed to just posting a link and some how thinkng that link wins you the debate/argument.
OK the supposed attack was not cool, but it must be noted you would seem inclined to get more boosters so is it really an attack?
I think it is insane to have chemicals, toxins injected into your body to prevent something that is not going to happen if you just live a healthy clean active life.
I know this is true because I live in an amish community, work on an amish organic farm and know for an absolute fact that the covid narrative is FAKE. I spend 98% of my time with amish.
They did not mask, did not test, did not vax, did not get covid and did not die from covid, nor did I take any of the so called covid percautions around them.
Everybody got their usual sniffles, dry cough, runny nose, no one was ever sick for a whole week or more and i know this because i pick up all the amish workers and take them to the farm for work so I know, unlike many of my non amish freinds who got jabbed and keep contracting covid....worse part is these people think they would have died or been in the hospital for weeks if it was not for the covid jab............Do you have this belief James?
Come to amish country, ask any amish person who do they know that contracted/died of covid. .....also the amish are not cloisterd, they get out and about, shopping, vacation, restaurants, plus non amish shop at ALL amish businesses.....if covid was deadly, it would have ravaged the amish and it did not whatsoever...zilch...notta....zero....
My personal expieriences is enough to determine what is most likely true!!
I like all flesh and blood men and women are the truth, but if you allow compulsory government schooling to sculpt and mold the mind of the young while Strangers that TELL A VISION blind and dumb down the adults with visions the people cannot see beyond or outside of then of course you are going to go with the Visions told by Strangers on their TV PROGRAMS that PROGRAM you to inject a chemical or toxin into your body.
I mean it IS what you did....no?
I like to think i cannot be fooled or decieved and with covid i was not.
My own assertions were closer to correct than the crowd that believes in injecting chemicals into their body in what was literally a marketing ploy to get a segment of the population to do something detrimental to their own life.
Truth be told these parasites are really good at what they do getting people to do things that are detrimental to their life....Boggles my mind that people cannot see the deception but then deception is the realm of th satan so I am not entirley shocked. Satan has been making people do shit for centuries and the people doing evil have no idea they satan made them do it.
This was very entertaining Maybe it’s not any of the mercury forms that are causing the autism The better question may be ---- WHAT INGREDIENT OR WHAT INGREDIENT COMBINATION COCKTAIL IS CAUSING THE GROWING NUMBERS OF AUTISM? we have to shift to the BIG PICTURE - the whole paperclip operation - not win or lose this debate on a few details... truth will prevail We all stand to learn something. R f Kennedy jr has put himself at risk to challenge vaccine safety Not an easy road Smearing and threatening spot for him to put himself in Id call him brave
Autism is more common now than it was prior to the expansion of the vaccine schedule in the late 1980s. One in 34 children, up from one in 10,000 in years prior. I don’t know what causes autism, especially at these levels, but don’t you think it deserves investigation?
It has been investigated countless times and we do know that vaccination does not cause autism. Autism starts before a child is born and has genetic factors.
Dont get near my body SD! I have a right not to have you infect my body so I can keep it clean. I have that RIGHT, pee your argument so please quarantine in a closet
Seriously, spending your time on a newsletter countering the good that vaccines have done is a waste of your one precious life. If there was a vaccine during the flu epidemic of 1918, I doubt many would turn away from it and many would be alive to tell their truth stories.
Janet, and everyone, I recommend reading Turtles All The Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth. If you don't want to purchase it, you can ask your library to do so.
Or you can read this long and thorough (10 part, i believe) review of it for free. Spares you time and money. (And the library, often having hard times already, maybe too..)
With all the corrections, additions, explanations and quite a lot of questions just answered (where possible) you will be better informed than without..
Their bias is mainly towards plausability, i think..
Plausability may not be the be all and end all in life, but it does have some advantages. (Definitely helped e.g. making this smartphone work, even exist. Whatever the disadvantages of smartphones, they're still quite something, wouldn't you agree..?)
RB I would have more respect for you if you had taken a tidbit from the book 'turtles all the way down" and shown, discussed, debated any part of where it is wrong, misleading, incorrect....etc...etc...
...but you did not do this, instead you just offered up a link as if it just settles the question no and ifs or butts as if everything is wrapped up all with a nice neat bow, but this is not to be.
I don't know about you but i do not read a book based on the notion that the prevailing narrative in the book is true or not. I read the book because it has information, facts, opinions, conclusions, deductions...etc....etc.... all that along with what I already know helps me deduce and conclude what is closer to the truth than not.
Don't know about you but i do not rely on strangers for truth, never have and never will and I certainly will not refused to read a book because some clown world deciple told me it is all lies. See even a book of lies is helpful because when you deduce what is in the book against what you already know you are able to concluder what is true and not.....this is how you spot a lie. Now if you only read the books you are told that are true you will NEVER spot the lie, the deception, the misinformation.....this is where you are at!
If i think the "prevailing narrative" or the information in a book is untrustworthy , i would not read a book without having sources of information at hand i do deem more trustworthy, to check it's content.
I admit i haven't read the book, and probably won't, even if it's just because there is too much to read.
(And originally i don't give much about all the pandemic and vaccine and disease-stuff and so. I'm more interested in all the things that people believe.)
But also because doing my own research led me to distrusting its source. Call it informed prejudice.
I just recently heard about the title, because i did read the review i link to. (Although i cannot follow everything, because i don't have the book at hand and didn't read it. So reading both would indeed be best, if one's interested! Makes one also learn some other things, maybe..)
In the articles behind the link, what you challenge me to do is done better than i could ever do (i probably couldn't at all, without studying the subject more), so why don't you follow the link?
(One will be even more informed, i think, when one also reads the comments overthere. Because some commenters go deeper into some stuff that according to them is not adressed in fully the right way by the reviewer.
(It all also has to do with the way science is done, i understand. What you can ask it, and what not. Not certainty, for instance..Well, better read it yourselve..))
If that settles the question for you or anyone else i don't know. Make it up for yourselve..i myselve are quite fine with it..
I do regret if i was rude or mean or wisenosy in my reaction. Certainly also should have left out the last part.
But because i was confronted with the title recently, i thought it was importish to make the comment, and i dó believe people will be better informed when they also read this review, and also the comments to it. Next to the book itselve.
Do you have information that shows that Reuters is ALWAYS correct and has never been proven wrong?
Also Facts do not have to be true, a lie can be a fact as well, so 'fact checking' is evidence and proof of nothing but the construction or mainting a narrative.
Now what I said was: " it was due to innoculations that the 1918 epidemic happened in the first place"
What you posted was: "False claim: the 1918 influenza pandemic was caused by vaccines"
The two are not one in the same. I said nothing about Influenza now did I?!
Are you making an ASSumption?
As a veteran I know absolutely and with zero doubt that the MOST tested on demographic in the history of mankind is 'Military Personel" specifically USA Military Personel. The things done to these men without their knowledge and with their knowledge but not full understanding or disclosure is just horrible especially with respect to vaccines.
I am the father of a 100% disabled veteran who is vaccine damaged (Anthrax)
Lets note the anthrax from the anthrax attacks one week after 9/11 did not come from Islamic Terroist, it came from Fort Deitrick Maryland....for this my child was vaccinated and now disabled 100%
Vaccines have NEVER worked and it is clear that much evidence, information, documents, books, interviews, court cases, studies...etc...etc... exist to support such a notion.
There is also mass amounts of information that shows a small group of powerful people have literally built the "Allopathic Capitalistic System of Medicine" that the whole world is immersed in.
In parting there is no such thing as a reputable source....
You must put information from ALL sources, good, bad, pro, con, neutral, indifferent and conclude what is most likely true using your BRAIN and not from viewing a Stranger that TELL A VISION of reputability.
Here you need some help...Start Here:
Rockefeller Medicine Men: Medicine and Capitalism in America By e. Richard Brown
Reuters is so reputable they worked closely with the British Foreign Office to overthrow the first democratically elected leader in the history of Egypt.
"The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection." Perhaps if there was a vaccine back then, many would have not died once the virus entered their lungs. And yes, antibiotics would have perhaps helped too if available.
How about you break the information down and explain it with your scientific technical knowledge as oppose to posting a link and then have the smug false air of superiority to think you proved a point when you did squat.
If I search pubmed for Paul Offit I get 71 publications. Maybe you should first read them all before you make misleading statements?
If I search for Steve Kirsch in pubmed I get "No results were found.". Because Pubmed tries to exclude predatory journals like "the Gazette of Medical Sciences".
It is impossible to do complicated stories justice in real time. Real discussions in science take their time and all a public discussion is empty theater. Check whether science or creationism profited more from having a public debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham.
A real discussion which would advance matters would also necessity that both parties agree to be constrained by facts so there is a level playing field and are not allowed to make claims which cannot be independently verified. That is a independent committee of fact checkers with demonstrated knowledge in the field under discussion (which disqualifies Rogan) will be allowed to interrupt when one of the debaters commits an obvious lie and correct the claim. RFK Jr will never submit to that. But why don't you work this into your debate proposal? It would be in service of truth and transparency.
Funny thing is Dr & Scientist have went back (post covid scam) and have been reading studies and exposing flaws........
I guess many did not think people would go back and read studies and journal articles.
Look at Duke Univ....what 112 Million fine for scientific misconduct, false claims...etc...etc.....but trust the experts, don't do your own research.......
Seriously.........
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
“Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big Pharma uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers and the medical profession itself.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
“In 2003, the profits of the top 10 big Pharma exceeded that of the cumulative profits of the other 490 Fortune 500 Companies.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
More recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness”
The role of Steve Kirsch in exposing flaws in the medical and pharmacological system is exactly what? Where are the studies he has published in peer reviewed non-predatory journals which would show up in pubmed? Nothing you copy and paste about has anything to do with Steve Kirsch or how to best have a discussion about scientific matters. What about efforts to provide a level playing field? How to ensure actual falsehoods are exposed? You are commenting on an article where one person documents lies said about him by a different person. Do you endorse lies? Steve seems to do so. He is not about creating a level playing field in a debate, he is all about creating a spectacle, preferable in a way which gives his side a huge advantage. That is not servicing truth and transparency. That is demagoguery. Endorsing this style of debate is endorsing demagoguery.
What you quote about profits in the pharma industry comes from a study published in a scientific journal like this:
Which is a published study. According to your copypasta we can't trust studies any more. So why can we trust this one? Studies are good if they tell me what I want to hear? Or what is it? Should we dispense with science because some of it is bad? If you are looking for perfection, you are not going to find it. That is just a fact.
Producing copypasta instead of a cogent argument also means your cherrypicking will produce inaccuracies: Dr. Marcia Angell did not resign from her post, she voluntarily withdrew from it, and she was not 20 years editor-in-Chief, though she was one of the editors during that time, but she was editor-in-Chief only for a brief time. Taking quotes out of their context can change them.
While nobody denies that excessive profit is a problem in the pharma industry, but do you really want to abolish it and deprive people of their often life-saving medications? What is your alternative? Do you have a plan? Or do you just want to tear down, to hell with consequences? Have you ever thought a problem through yourself, or do you always rely on others to do your thinking by picking quotes you like?
Do you really want to go back to times before smallpox was eradicated? Smallpox would still be around but for vaccines. Have you read up on smallpox? Would you have wanted to catch it?
"Do you really want to go back to times before smallpox was eradicated? Smallpox would still be around but for vaccines. Have you read up on smallpox? Would you have wanted to catch it"
Isn't to "catch" something i would do willingly?
I mean who would "catch" something they do not want?
Anyways I had someone say the exact same thing only they used "Polio" as opposed to smallpox.
I promptly told that person both the Salk and Sabin vaccines were tainted with an animal carcinogen. and that 98 Million doses were given.
Tigris what do "carcinogens" cause?
The polio vaccine was given in the 50's and the 60's and then it is these groups of people that have cancer left and right just like it is the common friggin cold...so much that there are hospitals just for cancer now....who would have thought???
My Mother had five differnt kinds of cancer or so they say, gave her CHEM_o_icals that HEALed her? No it killed her......I watched it happen as the brainless Dr just follow their teachings and practices.
You can inject chemicals to keep from dying, I will eat organic foods and live in the amish community that does not allow Strangers to TELL A VISION of virus, vaccines, death, fear..........
I am not about defending Steve Kirch and never will.
and the quotes are not taken out of context.
She was Chief Editor YES or NO? "Yes" thank you for agreeing with me!
Why even mention that she was CHIEF EDITOR....was that to verify what I posted.....Lol!
and that quote I actually transcribed from a book, so politely f off on the copy paste comment.
What is my alternative?
Glad you asked.
I live amongst the amish working on an amish organic farm.
My alternative is to eat healthy, no chemicals, additives, food coloring, toxins, preservatives, vaccines, medicines, GMO's, processed foods...etc....etc........
I never get sick....I might have a 12 or 24 hour bug once or twice a year which i fast through drinking a lot of water, but i never get sick to where I am down and out for a week or more or that I would be desperate enough to go to a capitalistic allopath for some "medicine by deception" (Pharmakeia/Pharmacy)
Also the amish did not test, did not mask, did not vaccinate, did not contract covid or die from covid. The amish are not cloistered, they get out and about, they eat in restaurants, shop in stores, go on vacation, non amish shop in amish shops/stores/businesses so the prevailing narrative AS YOU BELIEVE it should have covid slaying the amish because they did none of the reccomendations and yet they are one of the healthiest communities in america if not the world and you have zero to refute any of what I just said. In fact you can pound sand because the amish prove the covid narrative is 100% bullshit and they will tell you that and none of them have a college degree, are a scientist, experts, doctor...blah...blah...blah.
...and this leads to the fact the vaccinations are bullshit....I mean why do you need them?
Just ask the amish what they did to not need a jab with respect to covid.....right?!?!
BTW I cannot wait to hear the tripe you are going to post about the amish.
One last thing
There are two things that determine how long and how well you will live.
1) What you consume and or put in or on your body.
2) How clean is the Air, Land and Water you live around.
These two things have more to do with how long and how well you live than anything eles in this world and nothing else comes close least it fall under one of the two categories.
Knowing this I act accordingly, this is why i would never take a vax.
The Rogan Show is like a carnival freak show. Nothing of any importance can be decided in that atmosphere. There is an ongoing debate about all aspects of vaccines in the scientific literature. It is a free market of ideas. Join the debate if you dare.
Hes constantly calling for data transparency. He literally spend a lot of time going through data on vaccine advisory panel! I bet he spends 10 times the amount you do on data. But im sure your a data expert right? Try and be honest fir once
The studies he's referring to are publicly available. You've simply ignored them. If you have a criticism of them, you need to find a problem with them on the merits.
Thank you for writing this. My father, Samuel L Katz, MD had many of the very same lies written about him in that salon/Rolling Stone article as well. Truth matters. He, you, and the many other people who have dedicated their lives to eradicating diseases that kill children do wonderful work and I thank you for it.
A debate between a lawyer and infectious disease specialist on infectious disease is pointless, the infectious disease specialist knows a lot more about infectious disease than a lawyer! Lawyering is not about Truth, its about raising doubt. Which is why RFK is so good at spreading misinformation and sowing doubt. He is a really solid lawyer. Check out Ari Melber explanation on why debate is pointless. By the way, Ari loves debate, even has a book about it.
I prefer reading books, with books you learn as you go, with videos I have to then go back, check, research, investigate excogitate about what strangers say when i can form my own opinions while i read.
Watching the video the host correctly points out that environmental issues could be the cause of autism.....see same page, don't be so quick to judge.
In the environmental insurance industry there are but two things that determine how long and how well one will live.
1) How clean is the air, land and water you live upon.
2) What you consume and or put in or on your body.
Nothing else comes close and if it does it falls under one of the two aforementioned.
Vaccines fall under #2
For the host to then turn around and say we simply don't know precisely the cause of Autism is just a bunch of wishy washy speak. I am suppose to trust the capitalistic allopathic medical scientific experts that cannot figure out the cause of autism but don't worry injecting these foreign substances in you definitely will not be the cause of autism.....right?
in fact the shots are HEALthy aren't they james.......right?!
After the admission that the host has no idea what cause autism he continues to speak about it by telling that people they have a cognitive bias and skews how we interpret new information...Blah...blah....blah.... I am an adult flesh and blood male. I do not need some nerd dressed to tell me how to excogitate. This guy could not be more wrong. he is full of sh_t
Moving along the video there is a lot of B/S speak. The examples, allegories the host comes up with are pathetic and kiddie like....I mean cars? puddles?
Then he speaks of over a dozen peer reviewed papers that say there is no correlation.
Correlations is Statistical between random variables....
So it is number crunchers that tell me a vaccine is safe.....eh?
Bill Gates already made it clear "How to Lie with Statistics" by Darrell Huff....Right?!?!
Also lets not speak of the 98 million doses of polio vaccine given that was tainted with an animal carcinogen when speaking abut the safety of vaccines ....Ok?
I mean anyone can post a link, so i will return the favor. Here is one: 226 papers demonstrating the multiple associations between vaccines and autism.
The host admits that people (which I will change to MOTHERS) Draw a conclusion between vaccines and autism. ....and why would that be?????????
Mothers are special.... for without "Mother" there is nothing. I trust the instinct of "Mothers" if they Draw a conclusion with concern to their offspring it is legit.
Now here is a whopper:
The host says: "(Parents) MOTHERS who Think about Vaccines before their child is born is 8 times less likely to vaccinate their children" Conclusion? TRUST MOTHER!
and then goes on to say that when Mothers do their own research Mothers get confused and default to doing nothing (no vax).
Quite frankly doing nothing in many instances is better than doing something just for the sake of especially when you do not fully understand it as the host is seemingly making clear.
Seriously this video was a joke.
It had nothing, just a bunch or mumbo jumbo speak.
You must have been joking that it was good, even if it backed up your point of view it was a ridiculously horrible video. Suffice to say there will be no need to link a video to me in the future...... you better come with something much better than that.
There was zilch in this video...notta, zero hard evidence!
Not a strange question at all - if you have children you should reallt read «The Real Anthony Fauci» by Robert Kennedy. Or even better and a shorter read is «A Letter To Liberals» - the facts are there and references to studies, etc. It’s very odd to me that no one in public health wants to step up and debate him. That is strange.
Not sure if you are a bot or if you can’t read or comprehend well, but in case you wish to understand, I’m not speaking about anything in that article you referenced. I’m speaking about that RFK jr stated that my father had a patent on the measles vaccine (which he did not) and made millions from pharma (which he did not.). How would my father have a patent and make millions without knowing that he did? You make no sense.
I am not sure about de safety of vaccines after having read the Simpsonwood Conference transcription. What they said there is really clear and shows that they had lied to citizens.
Hi Dr Offit, As have many others, I have relied on you and Dr Monica Gandhi for evidence based updates and recommendations during the pandemic. As a critical care RN it scares me how trust on our public health leaders has eroded, and when well known individuals such as RFK Jr use their platform to stoke these same fires it only adds to the problem and as you rightly said, potentially with devastating consequences. Thank you for all you do, and know you are deeply appreciated!
How do you know that RFK is not telling the truth? Im just curious? You should read his book «The Real Anthony Fauci» - at least the first 120 pages- has over 2000 references. The facts are all there
BTW it matters not what government you live under, they all perform the same functions.
They collectivize ALL the people whether the people want to be collectivized or not, and if not ALL Governments will utilize enFORCEment.
It does not matter if they are communist, democracy, monarchy, dictator, national socialist, fascist, republicanism, oligarchy, socilaist...they ALL do the same things, the only difference will be the degrees of brutality.
There is no such thing as 99% freedom. You are either 100% free or you are 1% to 99% a slave.... thus everyone is in a dictatorship.
also you know what they say about enFORCE_ment?
"Bad Ideas Require enFORCEment Good Ideas do not for mankind will naturally gravitate towards good Ideas which is why Bad Ideas MUST be enFORCEd"
Who enFORCEs Bad Ideas?
Do you support people who seek to enFORCE Bad Ideas?
Do you think it is OK to force people into the Bad Ideas they do not want to be in?
You have some explaining to do least I conclude you are a violent deciple of the governing body.
Are you violent? Do you like utilizing enFORCEment against those that do not think like you?
Disinformation may not be false. It's just to un(der)proven or un(der)evidenced, at least at that moment, and in comparison to other information available, to be considered legitimate (or the best) information.
('Legitimate', not in a law sense, but in a logical (or so) sense.
At least within a working democracy. Then spreading of disinformation is to a large extent allowed, like spreading of information to a large extent is.
Not so much in e. g. dictatorships, or "theocracies". Then much information is not allowed, and much disinformation is even mandated.
Then information becomes il/legitimate in a law sense firstly, and very often not so much in a logical sense. (at least for the content of the information. It's function can be very logical.)
Given that much of the information/data/evidence that proves you wronger than what you oppose (at least on the facts/data/plausible assessment of it) is out there, accesible and uncensored (allthough maybe hard to find, because of the overwhelming amounts of "other" (i.c. un(der)evidenced) information, the impression (of the presency of BOTH almost free information and almost free disinformation!) is that your country is to a large extent still kind of a working democracy.
That doesn't mean that everything is perfect, or that there are no downsides to certain policies, or products, or to the way things are organized.
That should be critisized and adressed. This would also be possible, as long as it's a working democracy.
(It certainly doesn't mean that 'big things' like 'capitalism' are only good..)
Information in a country governed by a government that is not outright brutal has other ways to limit the information.......
In the USA there is all kinds of information that is not known to the people that the people should know and do not!
As I said in my original comment nothing lies like the USA Government and I asked where do you want to start?
But you did not take me up on the challenge, instead you start blathering on about political ideologies when in fact all political ideologies simply fall under the heading of collectivism.
I would never trust the USA Government.
There is no entity in the history of mankind that has lied, more, killed more, committed war on more nations and people than the USA.
Your defense of it and thier disinformation list is sickening.
I hate to think if this were colonial times you would support the Crown and the Redcoats disninformation list against your fellow colonist......
Who would promote that political ideology with its history?
"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide" ----Letter from John Adams to John Taylor, 17 December 1814
"A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief’s of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." -----James Madison
So you are part of the US government? Since you just documented that you are incapable of even identifying truth. Disinformation is the definition of false. Your attempt to redefine language reveals your love of dishonesty.
I did not defined the language the US Government did.
How can the USA say what is Disinformation when nothing in the history of mankind has come anywhere close to the number of lies produced by the USA............
Did i ever say i was part of the US Government....no I never did, I am not into violence so I definitely would not be with the government.
Misinformation, disinformation is still information or are you saying it is not?
when any government uses these terms it becomes apparent that it is done so to censure and ensure the Government narrative is maintained....a narrative that is a lie and yet it is the same government that throws the word disinformation around as if EVERYTHING the US Government says is the truth and anything else it is not thus it is deemed disinformation, misinformation...
lets be honest nothing lies more than the USA Government but you did not want to go down that road did you.... and yet you want to base disinformation as something that is false based on the US Government supposedly telling the truth and that is a laugher....again nothing has lied more than the the US Government in the history of mankind.
Why anyone would trust the misinformation and disinformation of the US Government says a lot about ones intelligence or lack thereof.
How much do you get paid? Anybody who is automatically pulling out the corporate interest card is suspect of getting paid for sowing discord. And not getting paid enough to do it well. Do you get paid in roubles?
I am going to assume that Kindered and Albus have already read the references so give me a quick run down guy's since the two of you are quite knowledgable after reading the references.....
He obviously and grossly misrepresented the basic facts.
If you are interested, feel free to go through all of them.
I will note, that RFK jr continues to make money with wild claims.....often fraud...but he still isn't willing to make them in court....where perjury applies.
Good you keep noting that, I have already realized as well that i would never cast my lot with RFK jr....so what is your point of bringing it up with me?
Go find someone who adores, loves and will vote for RFK jr and have this debate/argument with you. I agree he is a skunk!
First aid and emergency medical is legit and has been so for a long time.
No one has a problem with being sewn up or bone set......pretty simple and has been done for a long time.
What the phrase "An Apple a Day Keeps the Doctor away" is due to the probiotic nature of the apple that keeps you healthy, regular so you do not need the allopath who is going to give you toxins or butcher you.........for better HEALth....right?!
I do not take anti biotics (bio= life) i am going to consume something that says anti-life in its name.
and yes water has a chemical formula and water is used to wash cuts, so you got me there.
But seriously I have no medicine cabinet.
I consume none of mainstream pharma's bs prescriptions, I buy none of the over the counter medicines.
I do not have 'a doctor' that i run to for a script everytime my body does not feel well because i am not feeding that body well.....
I have had two broken bones in six decades so I can tolerate two shots of lidacaine.
Been sewed up three times, have not had a vaccine in 40 years, did not take a tetnus shot even though i was told I could get lockjaw from being cut by a piece of old rusty metal....never happened, stay far and away from the dentist as well.
I have been alive long enough to sniff the bullshit out and phrama, allopathy are exactly that....bullshit.
You can say whatever but i am in great shape and me and me alone got my self there, no Doctor or Big Pharma was a part of it at all. You do not need either to live a healthy life.
Really unfair comment. Offit has been at odds many times with Fauchi et al during the pandemic. All it takes is a simple google search or you can see the number of podcasts he has done on the topic.
from his writing linked above: Siri writes that many 'journalists' are rebutting RFK Jr's argument that: most vaccines never went through placebo controlled safety studies. Notably, Siri takes aim at an article published by STAT claiming RotaTeq did undergo a placebo control study. Siri says they are wrong and provides evidence.
"RotaTeq is administered via oral drops. A “placebo” would have been water drops in the mouth. The control used in the trial, however, included bioactive ingredients including almost all the ingredients in the RotaTeq vaccine itself.
How do I know this? Because in 2018, on behalf of ICAN, we were investigating the control used in each clinical trial relied upon by the FDA to license each childhood vaccine.
In that review, we found that while the package insert for the RotaTeq vaccine says the control in its clinical trial was a “placebo,” when we read the FDA’s clinical trial review for RotaTeq, the ingredients of this so-called “placebo” were redacted:
So, on behalf of ICAN we submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request to the FDA for “Documents sufficient to identify the ingredients of the ‘placebo’ in the prelicensure clinical trials identified in Section 6.1 of the package insert for RotaTeq.”
In a response dated June 14, 2018, the FDA provided the requested documents which clearly show that the control was not a placebo. Rather, it included polysorbate-80, sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, and sucrose.
These same four ingredients are also contained in RotaTeq. The only difference between the vaccine and the control is that RotaTeq also included tissue culture medium and rotavirus reassortments. So, bottom line: the control used in the RotaTeq clinical trial was not a placebo since it included bioactive ingredients."
perhaps Dr Offit is willing to do President Joe Biden a favor and engage RFK Jr in a recorded exchange of ideas to dismantle his arguments & set the record straight?
or perhaps it is more comfortable & convenient to take the peter hoetez way out and only preach to your own echo chamber?
It is total nonsense that a placebo for any vaccine can only be water. It is the correct way to formulate a placebo to use everything but the eventual antigen against which the body will make antibodies. Only a science illiterate person would claim otherwise.
Also our human bodies do not make antibodies against substances which are too small, so addition against sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, and sucrose cannot be an issue.
It is understandable that a lawyer has no real knowledge in biology, but that is zero excuse to write pseudoscientific babble in public and personal ignorance in biology is also no excuse to spread such babble.
What the heck is bioactive supposed to mean in this context? That a human body can metabolize some substances is totally irrelevant whether it produces antibodies against it. Even if the body would produce antibodies against those substances, the point of antibodies is that they are highly specific and they would not bind to rotavirus and therefore not protect from disease. It is therefore total nonsense to find presence of additional substances in a placebo objectionable.
Does either of you even have a remote clue why flu shots are given yearly? Obviously not.
I think you have swallowed way too many blue pills. Go and learn some basic facts about the human immune system before you think ignorant nonsense is worth writing about.
I think what the vaccine skeptical are referring to is that it depends on the study question: if we're talking about how effective the treatment is at stimulating an immune response, then yes, substances that are immunologically inert could reasonably be considered as being a placebo. But if safety is the question, then the placebo for something given parenterally should be saline, and nothing more.
If you don't like anti-vacc, then there are many courts that have characterized such folks as liars for money.
My 2 cents. Most folks aren't scientists and it is easy to see why they are fooled by anti-vaccs lying about what a placebo is. Then you are just a victim of fraud.
But if one then refuses to use their basic reading skills to learn what placebos are and how to use them.....then one is an anti-vacc.
Safety is studied in the phase 1 of a clinical trial. Effectiveness is studied in phase 2 of a clinical trial when it is already known whether the treatment is safe. So what is your point?
No one gets these colds that last a week or more. Most have a sniffle, cough, runny nose for a day or two and sometime just a few hour bug.
Healthy GMO free, chemical free vegtables, fruits, baked good and meats is the way to go.
Hell that nut job Kirsch offered a large sum of money if anyone could just find five amish people who died of covid...I mean all you had to do is scan the amish obit's in the amish papers....I read them all the time.
I mean Tigris why did you not take up Kirsch on his bet?
Surely you must believe the deadly covid killed the anti-vaxxer amish right??!?!??!!?!
At least Five of them.....right?!?!?!?!?!
If you cannot explain away why the amish did not die of from covid you should run along and stfu.
Every post I am going to ask you why the amish are not contracting covid, why they are not taking the jab and yet they flourish despite your fear mongering.
Paul Offut has zero to say about the amish.
The amish impugn the whole covid narrative.
and i can tell you the amish politely laugh at the notion that they are fine but they see all these crazy people wearing mask, lining up outside testing tents, getting jabbed down at the fire station and then the amish see these same type of people coming out of the store with cartons of cigarettes, bottles of coke and pepsi, bags of chips...fat and unhealthy with the wal-mart bodies.
Again tell me why the amish are immune to covid maybe i will take you seriously.
I have asked you why the amish that i live with are immune to covid?
Sadly you cannot answer.........and you will NEVER be able to answer.
You run off parroting the same old line about placebo's
Blah Blah Blah.
There is no covid and there is no need to be jab and if you believe so explain away the amish and their ability to magically sidestep covid.
and BTW this is not to say the amish are immune from sickness because there are amish farmers who do not know any better and they use Roundup and other chemicals and they get cancer. The amish community i am in are organic regenititive farmers, they do not have these problems.
What information would you need from me then to prove to you what I say, because i can offer it up to a legitimate source....
I have my bills to the farm that itemize every farm worker i bring to the farm, creamery worker (Milk maids) deliveries, pick ups, auctions...etc...etc.....that i do for the amish.
I have documented proof for over two and a half years of that pandemic B/S that shows I continued to bring the same workers in day after day after day and like i said i never missed a day of work and i never got sick....why is that?....you said yourself the amish had covid, then i should have contracted....right?!
How come no one showed Steve Kirsch the obit of five amish that died of covid so they could collect a big payday?
because no amish died of covid.
Well Albus I take that back. I know one Amish who died of covid.
He had a Congenital heart condition and went to a hospital where you know they are going to diagnose $$$$ covid.
The family was raising the money to have a new autopsy done. The community knows why this man died and they know it is not covid.
are you okay? do you need someone to talk to besides typing comments here? there are solutions out there for you.
i have seen a lot of advertisements for a new company called "better help". i believe it is a counseling & therapy business you can use conveniently from the privacy of your home. maybe it is something you should look into.
the reason I did not respond to your argument is: you did not respond to mine.
you seem to think you did, but adding conjecture does nothing to advance the conversation nor bring clarity to the core issue.
Paul Offit already got caught editing his recent post "should scientists debate the undebatable" by Aaron Siri walking back his claim that 'of course all vaccines are tested against placebos': being you are unlikely to - you know, read - the punch line is Offit changed his words from "all" to "most"
again the punchline being: RFK wont take away any vaccines, but he will push the CDC to live up to its mission & conduct placebo controlled studies for the cdc recommended vaccine schedule.
You claimed a lawyer dude (you seem to think that being a lawyer makes somebody omniscient in other matters) says a placebo only can contain water.
I explained to you that this is wrong and why.
You have not been able to defend your position.
And of course vaccines are not always tested against placebos. There is a progression in clinical studies. It depends on the phase of the clinical study what a vaccine is tested against.
But you don't know what clinical studies are, you have no clue that sucrose is table sugar. Yes, if you eat too much sugar it is bad for you. You have no clue that that in an oral vaccine the absence of sugar only in the placebo could really clue somebody in whether their child is getting a placebo or not.
If RFK is so concerned about vaccine safety, why does he say all his kids are fully vaccinated? He won't put his kids at risk of infectious diseases, but for other kids, that it totally fine?
you explained why a randomized double blind placebo controlled trial for a vaccine using a saline solution is wrong? where?
you claim "It is the correct way to formulate a placebo to use everything but the eventual antigen against which the body will make antibodies," but provide no rationale other than, "Only a science illiterate person would claim otherwise."
this is your unsubstantiated claim. many disagree with you and think that giving mercury or aluminum (which will be in the final formulation of the drug being tested) to the control group in a vaccine trial may mask safety signals.
you say 'of course vaccines are not tested against placebos"
paul offit just got caught revising himself initially claiming "all" vaccines do placebo trials to "most":
you make a lot of claims and use an appeal to authority as your only justification.
"you don't know what clinical studies are, you have no clue that sucrose is table sugar."
Tigris, it seems like you are very stressed and are lashing out. talking with someone about what is stressing you may be a good idea. perhaps you should take some time away from the internet and reflect on what is causing your stress.
offit agrees that too much of anything can cause adverse events including water & salt.
you then create this weak argument about risk to the clinical trial if the blinding is broken - yet again it's a claim without data.
here is something you might find interesting - its one of the most widely cited papers by one of the world's most cited researchers (phD in epidemiology): Why most published research findings are false - lead author John Ioannidis
Albus is dense...he does not see that both sides are working towards the same goal.
It is the same playbook in every other country.
RFK loves vaccines.........
To say otherwise is just flat out wrong!
He has said it many many many times he is for vaccines just not the untested covid vaccine...and it is untested.
In the EUA was one sentence that said: "It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for Any Indication"
Albus took an 'It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for any Indication'
and you really have to be amazed at people who allowed this crap to be injected into their body when that sentence is in every Emergency Use Authorization letter......
That EUA was a warning not to take the jab.
What did you think when you read that sentence in the EUA Albus?
Apparently you must have thought it ok....you took the jab....right?
Talk about foolish!
Again the covid vaccinations is: 'It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for any Indication'
These are all inert ingredients and would work just fine as placebo. Given that rotavirus vaccine is in a medium that is somewhat sweet, it makes sense to deliver it in trials using completely inert compounds that are used to help storage. None of those would be active ingredients for the immune response. Sucrose? Come on.
not sure I am following. did you read the post from Aaron Siri above? 2/3rds of the way down is a chart detailing HHS's childhood vaccine schedule showing vaccine type / description of what the test group received in the clinical trial / description of what the control group received in the clinical trial / was there a placebo control group.
in many instances, the new vaccine was tested against an old vaccine. in other instances, thimerosal or other compounds aside from an innocuous saline or sucrose solution were used for the control groups.
attenuated virus based vaccines are often given with other compounds, some of which are knowingly toxic. the argument is the weakened virus does not create a strong enough immune system response to create future protection/immunity. therefore, introducing a toxic agent with the weakened virus creates a more robust immune system response providing for the desired clinical outcome: immunity/protection to future infectious disease.
some argue this creates a false control group.
it is my understanding of RFK Jr's position that all vaccines should be tested against totally inert compound to provide a valid phase 1 / safety check during early in human testing of new products.
I take issue with “toxic substance.” I read Siri’s argument and he says that the safety of the vaccines can’t be proven (rotateq) because there was no true placebo. He lists evidence of sodium phosphate being a known nephrotoxin and giving it to babies as one of the issues. Lists the NIH’s own page.
Sodium phosphate is a salt. Taken orally, it’s in all sorts of things (tums for example). Polysorbate is in simethicone drops, if you want something that is typically given to babies. Biologically inert materials, though if given IV AND in high amounts AND to people with health problems (kidney problems especially) these compounds could pose a problem. In 2mL of an oral vaccine, no.
the only time I have seen phase 1 clinical trials for new chemical or biological injectable drugs/therapeutics not be tested against an innocuous (saline) placebo - is in some cancer drug trials. the rationale being: we know we are giving the body something toxic designed to kill human cells (hopefully just the cancer cells) so why test for just safety?
for these cancer drugs the clinical protocol calls to basically merge phase 1 & 2 (phase 1 traditionally being a safety check & phase 2 traditionally being the small patient group efficacy check).
you can go to the recently revamped clinicaltrials.gov website and see for yourself - first in human cancer drug trials tend to be phase 1/2 studies.
Unfortunately, you’re right but that doesn’t make it harmless. Recent research has demonstrated that polysorbate 20 and 80 have detrimental effects on the gut’s epithelial lining.
With all due respect, it is difficult to believe anything Dr. Offit writes or says given how he has pushed for the ineffective and dangerous Covid vaccines. He even recommended that healthy children take these ineffective and dangerous shots even though healthy young people were at virtually zero risk from Covid. It was also known that the Covid shots do not stop their recipients from getting ill with Covid or transmitting the virus to those around them. How can a rational man of science support such a thing? Neither has Dr. Offit apologised for or retracted his erroneous and misleading statements regarding Covid injections. This is what an honest scientist would do.
"With all due respect, it is difficult to believe anything Dr. Offit writes or says given how he has pushed for the ineffective and dangerous Covid vaccines. "
Ok, this is ~5th grade math/science. How do you know that they are ineffective and dangerous. Show your work.
lol thats not how this works - how do you know hopping on one leg is ineffective for cancer? the people pushing jabs have to show they are safe and effective, not the other way round.
and if you think they have done that in anything like good faith I invite you to google the stories of maddie de garay, brianne dressen and augusto roux - all of whom were trial participants with very severe AEs that pharma / FDA simply dismissed.
maddie de garay, a 12 year old kid, was put in a wheelchair for life by a condition that came on out of nowhere immediately after her jab - but the people running the trial simply asserted it wasn't related to the jab, so there's no problem. remember this is the trial to determine the effects of the jab. it's that easy for them.
Did anyone else notice the disappearance from this comments section of two excellent, but critical responses to this article? One was by the husband of a surgeon, describing the progress of his own skepticism around the COVID vaccines specifically. It was long, well written, and fully referenced. The other was by a female paediatrician, and challenged several of the points made in the article regarding the threat posed to children, and was also well supported. I may have mixed these up a little, but they were definitely there as of a few hours ago. It seems implausible that both these commenters would delete their well formulated responses. So where did they go?
If RFK JR were deleted and censored, you certainly would not be able to find much current information about him, yes? And he would be sitting in a jail somewhere without good communication to the outside....
Poor RFK, he is wasting away in jail after having survived poisoning like Alexei Navalny ...
It is just the vile mainstream media telling you to believe your lying eyes that RFK is very publicly running for the presidency...
correct, instagram deleted him in 2019 & youtube shortly thereafter. Same with twitter. Just last month youtube deleted mike tyson’s episode that had RFK jr. on. No one will debate him. When in history were the ones who block information & censor ever the good guys? Corporations control & good people cheer on the fascism not realizing the detriment to themselves.
LOL. It is clearly life threatening to not being able to post on instagram and youtube. Poor dude. Now he can't make millions off these forums. Maybe he needs to go to get food from a food pantry next? And of course he is on twitter. You are behind the times.
RFK consistently refuses to debate scientists on a fair forum, which is he does not do any research and publish it in reputable peer reviewed journals. What is he afraid of? That somebody disproves him?
Rockefeller Medicine Men took care of that a looooong time ago.
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.”
“Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big Pharma uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers and the medical profession itself.” -- Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
The writer of the substack has the ability to delete comments and block posters. Based on your words, this is apparently what Dr. Offit has been doing. You can see he is reading and interacting with the comments because he gives likes to those he likes.
The article you are commenting on is about thimerosal and communications about this between Dr. Offit and RFK Jr 20 years ago.
I have no idea whether anything has been deleted, but any discussion about COVID vaccines would be rather off topic. Or are you trying to claim those contain thimerosal? Because they most definitely don't.
""He {Offit} claimed that thimerosal in vaccines had caused autism, when several studies had shown that it hadn’t.
I {Krisch} checked the page. There are no studies on that page showing thimerosal doesn’t cause autism."
Yes there are studies listed that tested thimerosal and studies listed that tested mercury....you can find the references in the section marked "references".
Fact is that no matter how many times people prove to Kirsch that he is not just wrong but routinely not even functionally literate, he just keeps asserting the BS over and over...
Did you read the studies referenced? The first two are highly contested and issues with the methods and dosages measured. The third study concludes that it "the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between exposure to Thimerosal from vaccines and....autism". Plus the third study is more of a case study, which is scientifically week. I don't have access to the fourth, but there was a correction made 2mths later regarding the ratio on page 1039, but I couldn't read the study, plus notes the author now works for Glaxo-Smith Kline. I could keep going, but I'll stop. Why would Offit offer up such weak, if not erroneous support? The Wakefield studies is typically referenced by Offit and others, but they ignore the many qualified studies that point to a causal relationship. Ultimately, the CDC and NHI really haven't conducted and never will conduct the studies necessary. I think you are missing the bigger issue, which is the lack of proper safety studies on most, if not all vaccines. I saw how you eluded to the definition of "placebo". I think the concern regarding a "placebo" is how it is currently defined by the Vaccine Corporate and Scientific Support community. Maybe you should debate Kirsch, you seem very confident. Go for it. I'd like to hear it. It would be interesting. You might want to read this before reading studies, just say'n. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020124
What Kirsch said is not true and fails ~3rd grade reading skills.
Fact is that many people have pointed out his scientific errors--he is amazingly scientifically illiterate--but also there is a long list of examples he has been given where he is functionally illiterate.
He just refuses to correct his errors, but instead keeps on making money saying things that he knows are not true.
Did you read the Burbacher study? Sounds like very good indication that ethyl mercury is possibly worse as the concentrations accumulate and last much longer in the brain and other tissues even though clear from the blood.
There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal monkeys than in the brains of MeHg monkeys (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed monkeys were approximately twice that of the MeHg monkeys. Interestingly, the inorganic fraction in the kidneys of the same cohort of monkeys was also significantly higher after im thimerosal than after oral MeHg exposure (0.71 ± 0.04 vs. 0.40 ± 0.03). This suggests that the dealkylation of ethylmercury is much more extensive than that of MeHg.”
This seems to support RFK. I would like to see a debate and let the true facts prevail. We all know many scientific studies are done to reach a specific conclusion.
Because it contains these sentences already in the abstract:
"The initial and terminal half-life of Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. "
It does say that the percentage of inorganic Hg in the brain was higher when exposed to thiomersal, but the numbers are 34% vs. 7%. BUT: Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys. Which means the total amounts are actually rather comparable.
It's sad to me that both you and Dr. Hotez have to spend your valuable time clearing up all the lies spewing out of RFK Jr. and Joe Rogan's mouth. Thank you for clearing up those lies.
The Kennedy name has carried lots of weight for years in our country, almost to the point of being treated as royalty. Many Kenedys have and are doing good work in our country, but as in all families, there are those that choose a different path. I live in a town with one of his cousins, (also a lawyer who cares about the environment), served as my State Senator, lost one of his legs from cancer and lives a quiet life continuing to do good work.
RFK was a hero of mine growing up. I was in 7th grade when he was murdered. I still remember getting off my school bus and being told to go straight to our 1st period class (my history class), walking into the room darkened with the TV on and told by my teacher to sit down and mentioned how we are living in history. No discussion, just a sense of importance watching the TV. It's sad that RFK Jr. has chosen a different path.
Blocked. Unfortunately, there are trolls on Substack too who present themselves behind a closed curtain, mentioning they write a newsletter. Upon checking, there is nothing except a comment from Dec. 2021 stating a newsletter is forthcoming.
Nobody wants to debate RFK Jr because it is like playing chess with a pigeon. Too much crap. And the bullshit asymmetry principle means that it takes a lot more effort to debunk crap than it is to create it, putting anybody who is concerned with actual facts at a major disadvantage.
Notice that RFK does not want to debate like scientists debate? Publishing research in peer reviewed and reputable non-predatory journals. RFK Jr is never going to go on a forum where he won't get away with lies.
If the experts are so sure, then it really should take little to no time to mop the floor up with RFK jr............and I am not an RFK jr fan at all.
See I do not trust either side, I have concluded that both sides are doing a little of the same. I mean here the people are debating over a debate that is never going to take place further creating a divide that benefits who?!
certainly none of us in this substack....well except for Doc O.
I do not need to be a scientist, doctor, expert to understand....You only have to know how to read that is all. If it is that complex that one cannot understand then it is that which is so complex that is suspect and should be scrutinized.
Fact is the usury nature of the currency makes everyone in the Industrial Complexes (Medical, Media, Military...etc..) defend it even when it is violent, immoral, dangerous, wrong........it says a lot about those people..........
he debates in court. He uses his opponents own research against them. And even though the system & bias is stacked against him he still wins because his evidence is so overwhelming. Hence, Bayer, Merck, Glaxo, Pfizer (all the ex nazi pharma giants btw) put a gag order on all their owned doctors & scientist not to engage with RFk jf cause it exposes them & people would see the truth.
And since when are courts science arbiters? They are clearly not. Courts have insufficient scientific expertise and have often made decisions which contradict science. And that is why RFK does not debate scientists on the terms of science. Because he can't.
But I am not aware that RFK Jr ever won a lawsuit against vaccines? Please link, I would like to know more.
You know that even his own family says he is wrong?
You’re a fraud dude and I’m one of your victims. Why on earth do you think adverse events to pharmaceutical products runs in families. I’ve had many adverse events over 36 years to vaccines, 2 titanium alloy spinal implants both of which had to be removed, composite dental fillings and Cortoss bone cement
I’m allergic to titanium aluminium(and alumina) and mercury. I had the sensory symptoms of autism from the Cortoss bone cement in 2020 including adhd symptoms.
There are many drs who get adhd symptoms from the metals in vaccines. I’ve spoken to many of them. I’ve also asked lots of drs if they know colleagues who have neurotoxic reactions to vaccines and all have said yes so far. I’ve been secretly recording them
The only reason you won’t do a live debate with Kennedy is because you don’t believe what you say you believe and know that Kennedy will show you up as the fraud that you are
I have relied on you for good information during the recent pandemic. I still do. I have been grateful for shows like TWIV and interviews between doctors and scientists that can be easily found on You Tube. Please don’t let this RFK Jr episode deter you from your science communication efforts.
Nice to meet you, too! I worked in the vaccine business for 10 years and have experience with (among other vaccines) the rotavirus vaccine that Dr. Offit helped develop. So I didn't just " meet him". Now, don't YOU feel ignorant?
SO WHY IS IT YOU ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT OF THE FACTS ON VACCINE INJURIES!! YOU HAVE BLINDERS ON, I SEE THAT A LOT WITH ACADEMICS!!! WHY DON'T "YOU" DEBATE RFK LOLOLOL!!!! NOW DON'T YOU FEEL IGNORANT.
I'm not an "academic", lol. I've forgotten more about vaccines than you'll ever know. Pro tip: turn off the caps lock. It makes you look like an idiot.
YOU ARE THE PRODUCT OF ACADEMIA, AND ITS A GOOD THING YOU'VE FORGOTTEN ALL THAT GARBAGE, NOW GO EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THE REAL SCIENCE OF THE DANGERS AND INEFFECTNESS OF THOSE VACCINES. HERE'S A GOOD PLACE TO START;
Louisiana U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty blocked a federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers on Tuesday.
The ruling by Judge Doughty follows Missouri US District Judge Matthew Schelp’s ruling on Monday that blocked mandates in 10 states.
Judge Doughty pointed out all of the illogical and irrational contradictions in the mandate. “If boosters are needed six months after being “fully vaccinated,” then how good are the COVID-19 vaccines, and why is it necessary to mandate them?” says Judge Doughty in his ruling.
Maybe you can help me with this then - while he's very upset at RFK Jr for suggesting he has a conflict of interest because of that vaccine, the article is a little mysterious on how much he has actually made from it.
Internet seems to suggest 10 figure sums. Do you have any ideas? Would it change your view of him as an impartial expert if he was making this kind of money?
SEE! THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT- NOTHING BUT AD HOMINEMS AND SLANDER- NOTHING "INTELIGENT" TO ADD TO THE TOPIC AT HAND!!! P.S. I PURPOSELY MISSPELL THINGS IN ORDER TO INVOKE SUCH A STU*** RESPONCE FROM STU*** PEOPLE! YOU JUST FELL FOR IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING! Ad hominem
An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their argument or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.
I wish the last jab wasn’t in this piece. You know that RFK has in fact accomplished a lot for the environment so to take a jab like that, for me, unnecessarily weakens this piece.
Because of his last paragraph, it suddenly calls all the facts he just listed into question? How would you feel if someone continually misrepresented the things you said to a global audience as big as Joe Rogan's (10+ million), smeared your name, and influenced lunatics to threaten you and your family through no fault of your own?
Prior to reading this article were you pro RFK and his views? Rather than read and understand what Dr.Offit is saying were you looking for that one phrase that you could call out? Please reread this article with an open mind and empathy for all Dr. Offit has been through for the past twenty years. In regards to vaccines, RFK is wrong and as a result of his public statements, unvaccinated children have died or been left with long term effects of the diseases they have contracted. Dr. Offit, a paediatrician, is very much aware of these cases. Perhaps the sentence should have read: What has RFK accomplished to prevent disease in children brought on by viral
Infections? Seems like RFKs statements for the past 20 years have only served to cause an increase in these diseases.
WHAT? NO EMPATHY FOR RFK??? RFK HAS A SHITLOAD OF FACTS AND OTHER TOP MINDS IN THE SCIENCE AND MEDICAL FIELDS BEHIND HIM. OFFIT HAS BEEN DISMANTLED MANY TIMES. WTFU!
Proof that unvaccinated children have died? Where'd ya get that one?
Parent of two vaccine injured children here, one I recovered from non verbal autism. So I know he is full of bs and he profits off sacrificing children like my sons. The fact that we are denied by western medicine in unconscionable.
FYI, fun fact, Pfizer, Merck, and other vax mfg have paid BILLIONS to the fed government for fraud charges for their vaccines. Pertusis vaccine didn't work and cause silent carriers. Outbreaks in measles due to the virus continuing to mutate, currently over 10 strains of measles, same with mumps, outbreaks in fully vaccinated populations of people. There is zero increase in ANY of those diseases despite your lie otherwise. Do better research.
I do not have a problem with the sentence in the last paragraph in context with the article and that paragraph per se. That sentence did not strike me in the same manner it did you. But readers can differ.
Actually, if you read carefully you will see that RFK Jr said that the NIH and/or National Academy of Sciences told him to ask Paul Offit and that Paul Offit made $186 million in his deal with Merck.
Offit from that decided to say that RKF Jr's statement was a lie, but he didn't address that RFK Jr might have been told that lie by someone at NIH or the American Academy of Sciences and repeated it in good faith. I didn't note any opprobrium towards NIH or AAS, but just RFK Jr., which I find puzzling. It sounds like RFK Jr didn't pass the information he learned off as his own thinking, but stated where he was given this information.
So based on what Offit wrote, that people were threatening his children due to things the NIH and AAS said about him, but instead he seems to blame RFK Jr. I wonder why he didn't try to get to the bottom of who at the NIH or AAS was saying such things, if they were lies.
"Actually, if you read carefully you will see that RFK Jr said that the NIH and/or National Academy of Sciences told him to ask Paul Offit and that Paul Offit made $186 million in his deal with Merck."
So RFK jr lied about the money and then lied about where he got his "information".
This is a good comment - the last paragraph hadn't flagged when I read it. I agree for maximum impact, personal jabs should be removed as they might undermine the very sensible rebuttal that preceded them. Really this is just the 'what has he accomplished?' sentence.
Though for context, I think this is another example of how asymetrical our expectations are of each party in debates / contentions like this. One party can casually say pretty much whatever they like in a calm manner, with implicit accusations baked right in - true or not. Thats RFK Jr in this case. Paul Offit has to set all that aside: the slander to his reputation that no doubt followed their original disussion, the threats etc, and maintain the steely calmness of a scientist: basically put his humanity aside and take the higher road, when there's every reason for him to be furious with the guy.
This isn't an excuse, as I do believe it's absolutely necassary to do this, so if we're talking impact, that sentence shouldn't be there. But, it's a sobering thought nonetheless, and really encapsultates the challenge that faces reasonable people when unpicking bad arguements or defending themselves.
I agree in part, but I don't think it's really the case (respectfully) that Offit, Hotez and others are all valiant and courageous takers-of-the-high-road, up against an onslaught of viscous slander and lies from people like RFK.
What I mean by that is: Offit, Hotez and others made themselves into 'political' and 'cultural' figures during the pandemic. They chose to step away from the role of 'just science' and get right down into the mud pit that is the media. In fact, a lot of the pronouncements of the state during Covid turned out to be nonsensical or just wrong, so now these figures are associated with that, and people want answers (albeit they often ask for them in wholly unhelpful ways).
So with respect to RFK actually making specific misrepresentations about Offit, and thimerosal, then that is absolutely wrong. So is any abusive behaviour toward Offit and his loved ones, that may have arisen from these public statements by RFK.
Offit certainly has right of reply, and calmly gives it here. But to frame it as him having to take the high road alone (a kind of innocent lamb, being attacked by wolves for no reason), I would just add that when anyone [in any career] decides to step out and make themselves a public figure, and to make specific statements that affect the lives of literally millions of people (some of which later seem to be specious or wrong), then is it not fair to expect that this is part of the cut & thrust of being a public figure in a divided age? — it's not exclusive to scientists, and I'm not sure that scientists should be exempted from it actually, in so far as they have become political figures of a kind ...and that is never a smooth ride!
I agree, I think you put it well. Putting yourself out there is a package deal, and one has to expect the bad with the good. I also agree that it’s unhelpful to lump one group as courageous truth purveyors and the other as fringe crackpots (or whatever) as the reality is always more nuanced than that.
My comment was mostly acknowledging that Offit is a human being, beyond ‘Scientist’ which is a hat he dons - and some leeway is in order when considering the comment he made: at least so it doesn’t undermine the first 90% of the article.
I do feel there’s an asymmetry though, in this case and more generally when we consider the debate of consensus vs fringe positions - which can be described without judging the truthfulness of any position. I think it has three parts:
1) Rules of Engagement
I feel those who become spokespeople for fringe positions generally have more implicit licence to be combative and hyperbolic vs their strait-laced counterparts. I think this tone is often likened to cutting through the noise, that it’s somehow more honest, so supports their position. I think this is far less the case for those defending a consensus position, where the expectation is to be completely exacting and by the book, the scientist persona - and deviation from this is more likely to weaken their position. I’m mindful that RFK Jr. wasn’t exactly hyperbolic; he was just emphatic / definitive about some tenuous stuff.
You could argue that this is the ideal stage to dismantle claims like this, so the ‘scientist persona’ should rejoice. I’m less sure of the net effect here, because at this point it becomes more about the debater than the point being made.
2) Type of Person
This relates more to the Hotez vs RFK debate non-starter, and people’s expectations of different personality types.
Generally, those who adopt fringe positions and rise to the surface as public speakers are going to be excellent communicators, charismatic, and totally confident in their own beliefs and ability in a debating arena. RFK Jr embodies this well: he’s a debater by profession and a career public speaker.
I think this is less true of those expected to defend these positions; where being an expert in a given field doesn’t always neatly overlap with those attributes.
E.g the Hotez example - whilst yes, he has put himself out there by broadcasting an opinion about this stuff, I can see why he might be confident enough to write a book / give an interview, and not square up to RFK Jr and an incensed Joe Rogan in a no-holds-barred podcast debate. To Rogan, Musk etc. not doing the debate is unthinkable and must be reflection on Hotez’s sincerity, when the truth is a bit simpler than that.
3) Bullshit Asymmetry
This part is a well-known phenomenon but a substantial part of the problem: that bullshit is far easier to deploy than refute. I tend to believe this is true for a variety of reasons, I think this will always tip the scales before the debate begins.
Thanks for your comment, very well articulated, and I mostly agree.
My (very minor) quibbles...
On point 2, Hotez: Unlike Offit, it's my impression that Hotez is a person who *loves* the public eye [on his terms; from the platform of power]; he is really quite an obsequious and duplicitous personality in many respects (I say that even despite having great respect for his work on an attempt at a patent-free Covid vaccine). Offit and RFK, I actually class both as rational actors, trying to do good, based on their own understanding of what 'good' means in that moment... and disagreeing, but not not being motivated by bad intent, fame, or profit.
I do not put Hotez in that same category; his ability to lie shamelessly, and pivot between lies, is truly something to behold. Perhaps in these conversations we need a parlance for 'likely speaking from an honest position' (whether right or wrong) vs 'likely to say whatever gets them on TV / 'wins' an argument', etc (which is many media 'pundits'). Offit , I personally feel has opened himself up to a new level of public critique by stepping out and making pronouncements that affected millions. But I don't honestly think he's in the same class as Hotez, who (even when right) comes across as a kind of scientific prostitute, who will happily go on TV and state the opposite of what he said 5 minutes ago, if that is marketable.
On point 3, yes I certainly agree. It's rather challenging to combat a gushing firehose of b*llsh*t.
Having said that, I would make the following caveats...
Prior generations of scientists (like Feynman) never considered themselves to be above talking to the public, even to explain the simplest concepts. I do think a strain of academic thought has taken root that is quite repellent to 'normal folks', and high handed in declaring itself 'above debate' ...and highlighting issues that are "settled" [the argument being: "because: consensus" ...insert: Einstein and others rolling in their graves at the idea that consensus is acceptable scientific argument lending any weight to the validity of your hypothesis...]
There is a current circling trope — "LOL, why should *real scientists* [meaning: consensus / establishment scientists] debate "anti vaxxers"?? ...I mean, what next? - should they debate flat earthers??" ...
My answer to this is: YES. They SHOULD debate flat-earthers.
We should revert to the time (which is not that long ago) where such debates might even be held before a large public audience, and broadcast to the whole country. And the scientists could show us how we form a hypothesis, and what experiments we could use to test this hypothesis, to find the true answer. I think there is a real fear that we shouldn't allow these things to be debated (again, because: consensus), but I deeply believe that fear to be unfounded. Science is magical, entertaining, changeable and challenging. It is certainly robust enough to withstand long form debates. In fact, I would posit that *had science communication been less paternalistic* and more *informative and honest* during Covid, I actually think we'd be in a far better place right now, with respect to public trust.
I would note that eminent scientists such as Richard Dawkins or Lawrence Krauss, they happily went out and debated in public (and won debates), on questions like: "Does science refute God?" — a question both men might view as absurd on it's face. Yet, on the contrary, they relished the chance to lay out their evidence, and argue their case. I think this is the model we need to return to. The current (elitist) attitude of "trust me bro, because: credentials ...or, because: consensus" — I think that's dead in the water in an age when so many of our institutions have fallen into disrepute, and where the divide between 'normal people' and the new 'elite class' seems to widen, and be enforced by an ever more repressive regime of censorship, sneering and gatekeeping.
I could be wrong about this, but I don't think you can deal with the claims of people like RFK effectively unless 'The Science' [and it's representatives] are willing to be more honest, and engage in these debates about what they can prove, and what was actually just supposition (and wrong). I think perhaps we'd agree on that?
You are blatantly misrepresenting the Burbacher study.
Burbacher et al very clearly conclude that Thimerasol has a *higher* inorganic mercury content in monkey's brains compared to methyl mercury and, thus, only looking at the half life in blood is not a fair risk assessment since there are some other studies hinting that inorganic Hg accumulation in brain may be harmful and more risk assessment is needed. Later, this even led to Thimerasol being removed from children's vaccines.
Seriously, if you honestly want to be a free thinker so see things more clearly....why don't you read the sites YOU listed and see that thimerosal was never used in MMR.
Big hint: it is a disinfectant...it kills pathogens and MMR is a live virus vaccine.....
You are right, B et al came after and Thimerasol was removed before probably based on some other criteria.
You are right that B et al is not a safety study in clinical trial sense. It provides important info regarding the mechanisms with which mercury can accumulate within different parts of the body.
The criticism offered above still stands though that Paul is misrepresenting the Burbacher study. The study doesn't clear thimerasol as safe, but rather, points out why a straightforward comparison with methyl mercury may not be accurate for safety.
1. It is a matter of public record, thimerosal was removed from vaccines as part of the precautionary principle.
2. The Burbacher study is in no way a safety study. The point is that there was a lot of data on Me-Hg and thus Me-Hg standards were being used to access the safety of Et-Hg--the exact point I think you are making is that this is incorrect.
3. It does show that trace levels of Et-Hg in the brain. Of course, being alive....eating, breathing, drinking causes trace levels of mercury in the brain. There is no biological effect from these trace levels.
4. Remember that RFK jr misrepresented two papers. Here is the second one:
No, the inorganic content of mercury was higher in the brains of monkeys in the thimerasol group. Please check burbacher et al. RFK's interpretation of the paper is more "right" than Offit's.
"The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg."
"Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed monkeys were approximately twice that of the MeHg monkeys."
"Results from these studies indicated higher inorganic Hg concentrations in the brain 6 months after MeHg exposure had ended, whereas organic Hg had cleared from the brain. The estimated half-life of organic Hg in the brain of these adult monkeys was consistent across various brain regions at approximately 37 days (similar to the brain half-life in the present infant monkeys). The estimated half-life of inorganic Hg in the brain in the same adult cohort varied greatly across some regions of the brain, from 227 days to 540 days."
"Stereologic and autometallographic studies on the brains of these adult monkeys indicated that the persistence of inorganic Hg in the brain was associated with a significant increase in the number of microglia in the brain, whereas the number of astrocytes declined."
"The longer-term effects (> 6 months) of inorganic Hg in the brain have not been examined. In addition, whether similar effects are observed at lower levels in the developing brain is not known."
"The key findings of the present study are the differences in the disposition kinetics and demethylation rates of thimerosal and MeHg. Consequently, MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg."
Paul Offit has NEVER called for data transparency of the public health record level data so we all can see what is going on. He is not a friend of truth and transparency.
Scientists should be afraid to be challenged.
I believe Paul Offit will never debate RFK Jr., e.g., on Rogan so we can hear both sides of the story real-time.
How about it Paul?
My guess is that Paul is in it for the money. Rather hideous to get rich off innocent children IMHO.
Your thinking is severely impaired. Seek professional help
IS THAT ALL YOU'VE GOT???? SLANDER AN AD HOMINEMS!
That's not an argument; it was an ad hominem logical fallacy.
Okay sweetie, I'll bite, which book on this list is "impaired" - https://philberg.substack.com/p/covid-19-and-virus-books-review or which book here would you like to support - https://philberg.substack.com/p/covid-19-books-review-final Are you up to date on all your booster shots? if so, good for you.
OK,
Books I have read/read most of:
*The Real Anthony Fauci
*Ending Plague
*Cause Unknown
*Turtles All the Way Down
*Dissolving Illusions
*Callous Disregard
*The Vaccine Guide
At best crap and frequently outright lies.....but they don't really stand up to any good faith effort and veriying.
If the Real Anthony Fauci was in fact outright lies...It seems Fauci would have a very strong defamation case....don't you think? Funny he hasn't sued.
It is pointless to speculate about the motives for Dr. Fauci's actions or inactions.
What we know is that anyone that has the integrity to read the references can't help but see how it is full of lies.
The book doesn't even make a childish effort at hiding its dishonest.
Bet you think they should burn these books....Huh?
Nope I do not.
I do want you to act with integrity and condemn them for what they are ...a bunch of lies.
This albus dude is entertaining isnt he?
OK, you don't care that your books stupidly lie.
Why don't you let people read them and utilize their intellect to deduce what from the book is closer to the truth than not.
Should we all just assume a book is either a LIE or the TRUTH?
....thus there is no need to waste our time reading them, just go with the prevailing narrative that XXX books are lies and have no facts, information, documents...etc...etc.... or book XXX is the absolute truth, so there is no need to read anything else including the book itself because all the experts, pundits, doctors, politicans agree and have TOLD you what to do....which is get jabbed with chemicals and toxins.....which you did.....correct?!?!?
I care not about those books, however there are bits and pieces of information in all of them that to some degree ring true, otherwise they would be universally opposed and they are not....
If I can find one truth in the books you call lies is the book nothing but lies?
All the pro vaxxer books have lies too, it is easy to expose them as well.
This is why I am in neither of these camps....I stay outside of the Rockefeller Allopathic Capitalistic System of Medicine......never been healthier!
You are grossly misrepresenting my postings....I have already posted that I have read many of them.
I am fully in favor of folks reading them and in fact I have assigned some/some similar books to students.
What I do want is for everyone that has finished middle school to have the basic math/reading/thinking skills to be able to look up "big" words like toxin and to be able to the math that show that vaccines are safe and effective.
Which one of the 50 in the list? Never mind - F Offit
I gave you a list below.
As usual, what anti-vacc lack in literacy they make up for with name-calling.
Yeah vaccines are so safe that they don’t need liability……
Wow someone is into something for money! Thats all the proof i needed that its a lie. So anyone doing stuff for money is a liar? Wow, good to know!
Don't be stupid... https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/aaron-siri-gives-testimony-on-the-floor-of-arizona-state-senate/
See how it works?
Siri is not a scientist and can't figure out basic things like what is a placebo.
The world rejects his nonsense because it is just garbage.
😂
What exactly is funny about Siri and his followers making life and death decisions when they can't even get the meaning of placebo correct?
😆😆😆the world rejects… what world are u living un?
That would be the world where ~everyone that has finished 5th grade can see the facts.
Apparently you can't!
Fact is everyone is a scientist to some degree.
I mean if you have concluded or deduced somethintg correctly you too can call yourself a scientist....right???
But seriously this is the lie!
That I need to be an Expert, Doctor, Scientist, multiple degrees, credentials....blah blah blah.
One only needs to know how to READ.
I do not need to be a scientist and you are a fool for believeing such nonsense as if being a 'scientist' is the only way towards knowledge.
The entire system of capitalistic allopathy was set up in the manner that makes you believe it is ALL legit. A bit of simple research will allow one to intelligently conclude this is most likely true and that Gilded Age Robber Barons set up what is essentially a 'medical business venture' and a good one at that!
Rockefeller Medicine Men corrupted every aspect from college/universities, accreditation, medical journals...etc...etc.... there is no facet of medicine/science that has not been tainted by these robber barons,
I mean why should I trust science or studies when prestigious research universities like Duke is fined 112 million for falsify studies.......and only a fool thinks Duke is the ONLY university/college that conducts themselves in this manner ....right???
Lying to get grants, using falsified data...etc...etc.... but believe the experts, the scientist, the peeps with all the letters after the name signafying what? That they are good little programmed Rockefeller Medicine Men? because that is EXACTLY what they are! John D would not have it any other way.
The proof is in the unHEALthy world we live in.... People have never been more unhealthy, sick, unwell....I have lived long enough to have witnessed this.
Talk about not being able to figure out basic things......
You are talking garbage and i know this is true because you have comfortably settle into Rockefeller Medicine Men system of Capitlaistic Allopathy........
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.” ― Marcia Angell
Scientist....Lol!!!!!
Once again, I note that you offer is argument by assertion, but your posting is riddled with obvious logical and conceptual errors.
It is exactly like you just don't like the facts provided by actual scientists....
Congrats future winner of the Darwin award... Put the joint down and stop watching propaganda on tv. Thanks for playing Sparky... Oh yeah, Siri is a lawyer, not a scientist, so your point is? What?
The point is that making life and death science-based decisions based on the opinions of a non-scientists is silly.
Especially someone like Siri that keeps making mistakes that fail middle-school science.
Joe Rogan offered 100k to peter hotez to debate , its on his twitter, but your crappy source of info thehighwire.com says 2.7 mil offered. Stop with your crappy information sources and maybe you could be a little less of an idiot! https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2023/06/26/why-peter-hotez-should-not-debate-rfk-jr-on-the-joe-rogan-experience/
Elon Musk and William Ackman both added $250k each, many others also put money in. 2.7 mill is offered. You seem rude and wrong.
250k+ 250k +100k = not 2.7 mil. Besides debating is pointless. There is nothing to debate! In a debate both people need to be knowledgeable on the subject matter. I would never debate a lawyer on the law, I would debate about my expertise of Hazmat Disposal. Rogan should get an infectious disease anti vaxxer to debate. He has enough pull for that. Wait...maybe he can't? Why can that be? If I seem rude its because the guy called me stupid, assume you called him rude too?
Wake up chump
The irony is beyond infinite!
Stay away from internet sites like highwire they have no legal responsibility to report truth. Only sites that still have a broadcast over airwaves are Slightly regulated against just spewing complete BS. Highwire
edits videos, goto arizona site and get the complete video with context thats edited out. Warning the actual video is longer than a short spoon fed one.
I do believe in Darwin, I do I do I do believe in Darwin, I do I do I do... You hang in there Sparky...
Keep in your bubble thats all your brain has enough bandwith for!
No one reports the truth period, not the left media, not the right media, not the government, not the NGO's....not even the so called alternate media.
I do not trust Highwire only an idiot would.
All Del and the rest do is propagate the "vaccine divide" when vaccine have NEVER WORKED!
You said it yourself the "airwaves" are REGULATED....so why would i listen to something that is not pure, unadultrated in its organic form?
There is zero reason to ever regulate information. If information is being regulated it is because someone, some group or some interest does not want the majority to know certain information.
So we agree on Highwire but you took a jab and i did not.....hmmm!
Can you please provide evidence for this claim?
Keep in mind that RFK Jr. makes a lot of money from being anti-vaccine:
https://nypost.com/2022/02/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-anti-vax-crusade-is-making-him-millions/
It really pays a lot pandering to the anti-vaccine people.
So they all make a lot of money?
and do you side with any one of them?
If so it says more about you than anything else.
Fuku so hotez and offeit and killing folks so politely stfu
If you don't like the term anti-vaccs, there are a number of courts that have described the anti-vaccs as for profit liars (in nicer words).
Of course RFK jr keeps lying and claiming one can't sue vaccine makers.....
Vaccine makers were indemnified in 1986 (or thereabouts). It’s a law. Reagan signed it. RFK, Jr. said even his uncle Teddy Kennedy voted for it.
It is a good idea to get vaccinated. The science is pretty clear on that. But you choose to be anti-science. Do you also eschew other scientific achievements like computers, refrigerators? If you break your leg, do you heal it with homeopathy?
You also have not brought any evidence that RFK Jr. is not enriching himself from his anti-vax shtick. Because he is.
I am calling you out Tigris!
Did you read the EUA?
Did you catch this sentence?
"It Is An Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed For Any Indication"
You know so much I have to be certain you read the EUA so you must have a word or two to say about the above quoted sentence.......Right?!?!?
Seriously why is it 'a good idea to get vaccinated' with an Investigational Vaccine?
Or why is it 'a good idea to get a vaccinated' with a vaccine that is not Licensed for any Indication?
I would like to hear you respond to the two questions.
I don't trust RFK Jr and "science is not pretty clear"
“Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty — some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.”- Richard Feynman
Putting toxins, chemicals amongst other things in your body is never a good idea.
Listen I read the EUA and there was a sentence in the EUA at the end of the 4th or 5th paragraph in which the following sentence appeared though it had nothing to do with the information in the paragraph. It was bizarre...like the sentence was just placed there...it read.....
"It Is An Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed For Any Indication"
Now I read the EUA and when I read the sentence in quotation marks I said to myself, It is not a good Idea to get vaccinated.
Please search that sentence, do some research before you tell me and others it is a good idea to get an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication........
Now run along.....
RFK makes a lot of money pushing the Anti Vax agenda, a lot from writing books which are full of B.S. and have been debunked 100s of times. This offitt article tells you exa tly who RFK is a professional liar whose profession is about sowing doubt thats his training. Lawyers do not care about TRUTH. ANYONE with experience dealing with lawyers knows This.
They haven been debunked sorry brainwashed shill
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2023/06/26/why-peter-hotez-should-not-debate-rfk-jr-on-the-joe-rogan-experience/
Good Right wing source of info for you. Thanks for the personal attack it proves your arguments SUCK!
No one is right wing yer just malignancy personified
To not debate is akin to censorship and censorship is always about hiding the Truth. It certainly is not about hiding the lie, because the thought would be to expose the lie to the light of day and let everyone see it....and this is why Hotez would never debate while hiding behind reasons why you should not debate.
I simply cannot believe there are people stupid enough to believe that to NOT debate you somehow get closer to the TRUTH than not.
If the so called anti- vaxxers are soooooooooo wroooooooong then Hotez, Offut and the rest should easily kick ass and settle the debate once for all wrapping it up with a nice neat little bow.
Forbes?
Good gosh when will people think for themselves?
James why don't you tell me what part of the article backs up your argument as opposed to just posting a link and some how thinkng that link wins you the debate/argument.
OK the supposed attack was not cool, but it must be noted you would seem inclined to get more boosters so is it really an attack?
I think it is insane to have chemicals, toxins injected into your body to prevent something that is not going to happen if you just live a healthy clean active life.
I know this is true because I live in an amish community, work on an amish organic farm and know for an absolute fact that the covid narrative is FAKE. I spend 98% of my time with amish.
They did not mask, did not test, did not vax, did not get covid and did not die from covid, nor did I take any of the so called covid percautions around them.
Everybody got their usual sniffles, dry cough, runny nose, no one was ever sick for a whole week or more and i know this because i pick up all the amish workers and take them to the farm for work so I know, unlike many of my non amish freinds who got jabbed and keep contracting covid....worse part is these people think they would have died or been in the hospital for weeks if it was not for the covid jab............Do you have this belief James?
Come to amish country, ask any amish person who do they know that contracted/died of covid. .....also the amish are not cloisterd, they get out and about, shopping, vacation, restaurants, plus non amish shop at ALL amish businesses.....if covid was deadly, it would have ravaged the amish and it did not whatsoever...zilch...notta....zero....
My personal expieriences is enough to determine what is most likely true!!
I like all flesh and blood men and women are the truth, but if you allow compulsory government schooling to sculpt and mold the mind of the young while Strangers that TELL A VISION blind and dumb down the adults with visions the people cannot see beyond or outside of then of course you are going to go with the Visions told by Strangers on their TV PROGRAMS that PROGRAM you to inject a chemical or toxin into your body.
I mean it IS what you did....no?
I like to think i cannot be fooled or decieved and with covid i was not.
My own assertions were closer to correct than the crowd that believes in injecting chemicals into their body in what was literally a marketing ploy to get a segment of the population to do something detrimental to their own life.
Truth be told these parasites are really good at what they do getting people to do things that are detrimental to their life....Boggles my mind that people cannot see the deception but then deception is the realm of th satan so I am not entirley shocked. Satan has been making people do shit for centuries and the people doing evil have no idea they satan made them do it.
This was very entertaining Maybe it’s not any of the mercury forms that are causing the autism The better question may be ---- WHAT INGREDIENT OR WHAT INGREDIENT COMBINATION COCKTAIL IS CAUSING THE GROWING NUMBERS OF AUTISM? we have to shift to the BIG PICTURE - the whole paperclip operation - not win or lose this debate on a few details... truth will prevail We all stand to learn something. R f Kennedy jr has put himself at risk to challenge vaccine safety Not an easy road Smearing and threatening spot for him to put himself in Id call him brave
Ps
When someone calls another one “a liar”
Or says “he’s lying”
I become a bit suspicious
Is a smear campaign happening here ?
1. here is a crazy idea: why not ask epidemiologists about the actual numbers of autism cases?
2. How many examples of RFK jr obviously lying do you want?
Autism is more common now than it was prior to the expansion of the vaccine schedule in the late 1980s. One in 34 children, up from one in 10,000 in years prior. I don’t know what causes autism, especially at these levels, but don’t you think it deserves investigation?
It has been investigated countless times and we do know that vaccination does not cause autism. Autism starts before a child is born and has genetic factors.
Of course there is a massive amount of research into autism.
You can find lots of studies if you search using Pubmed.
You sick embarrassment
It would be nice if could make a posting with 3rd grade literacy skills.
Do you think could do that please?
Simple, there is no correlation between vaccination and autism.
Liar stop being a Pharmaceuticalcartelism shill no soul nad keep murdering folks
I suppose if you had a single rational thought in your brain to support your POV....you would have posted it by now!
Yeah! Or maybe even more better/broader: what is causing the growing numbers of autism?
How is it brave to grift clueless people out of money?
Agreed 100% He is beyond brave !! 💪💪💪🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💪
Dont get near my body SD! I have a right not to have you infect my body so I can keep it clean. I have that RIGHT, pee your argument so please quarantine in a closet
Evidence please.
This you Steve KIrsch? https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/10/05/1036408/silicon-valley-millionaire-steve-kirsch-covid-vaccine-misinformation/
I think it is also this one:
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/anti-maskers-bizarre-airplane-story-000326609.html
I think it is also the one who didn't pay up after scientist Dan Wilson debated him:
https://twitter.com/crackedscience/status/1600588917165768705?lang=en
Around the 19 minute mark in the youtube video.
Seriously, spending your time on a newsletter countering the good that vaccines have done is a waste of your one precious life. If there was a vaccine during the flu epidemic of 1918, I doubt many would turn away from it and many would be alive to tell their truth stories.
Janet, and everyone, I recommend reading Turtles All The Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth. If you don't want to purchase it, you can ask your library to do so.
Or you can read this long and thorough (10 part, i believe) review of it for free. Spares you time and money. (And the library, often having hard times already, maybe too..)
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/part-1-10-the-grand-debunk-of-the-antivaxxer-book-turtles-all-the-way-down/
This review is biased, just like SBM itself. I think people would be better served by actually reading the book.
Then at least read both.
With all the corrections, additions, explanations and quite a lot of questions just answered (where possible) you will be better informed than without..
Their bias is mainly towards plausability, i think..
Plausability may not be the be all and end all in life, but it does have some advantages. (Definitely helped e.g. making this smartphone work, even exist. Whatever the disadvantages of smartphones, they're still quite something, wouldn't you agree..?)
RB I would have more respect for you if you had taken a tidbit from the book 'turtles all the way down" and shown, discussed, debated any part of where it is wrong, misleading, incorrect....etc...etc...
...but you did not do this, instead you just offered up a link as if it just settles the question no and ifs or butts as if everything is wrapped up all with a nice neat bow, but this is not to be.
I don't know about you but i do not read a book based on the notion that the prevailing narrative in the book is true or not. I read the book because it has information, facts, opinions, conclusions, deductions...etc....etc.... all that along with what I already know helps me deduce and conclude what is closer to the truth than not.
Don't know about you but i do not rely on strangers for truth, never have and never will and I certainly will not refused to read a book because some clown world deciple told me it is all lies. See even a book of lies is helpful because when you deduce what is in the book against what you already know you are able to concluder what is true and not.....this is how you spot a lie. Now if you only read the books you are told that are true you will NEVER spot the lie, the deception, the misinformation.....this is where you are at!
If i think the "prevailing narrative" or the information in a book is untrustworthy , i would not read a book without having sources of information at hand i do deem more trustworthy, to check it's content.
I admit i haven't read the book, and probably won't, even if it's just because there is too much to read.
(And originally i don't give much about all the pandemic and vaccine and disease-stuff and so. I'm more interested in all the things that people believe.)
But also because doing my own research led me to distrusting its source. Call it informed prejudice.
I just recently heard about the title, because i did read the review i link to. (Although i cannot follow everything, because i don't have the book at hand and didn't read it. So reading both would indeed be best, if one's interested! Makes one also learn some other things, maybe..)
In the articles behind the link, what you challenge me to do is done better than i could ever do (i probably couldn't at all, without studying the subject more), so why don't you follow the link?
(One will be even more informed, i think, when one also reads the comments overthere. Because some commenters go deeper into some stuff that according to them is not adressed in fully the right way by the reviewer.
(It all also has to do with the way science is done, i understand. What you can ask it, and what not. Not certainty, for instance..Well, better read it yourselve..))
If that settles the question for you or anyone else i don't know. Make it up for yourselve..i myselve are quite fine with it..
I do regret if i was rude or mean or wisenosy in my reaction. Certainly also should have left out the last part.
But because i was confronted with the title recently, i thought it was importish to make the comment, and i dó believe people will be better informed when they also read this review, and also the comments to it. Next to the book itselve.
and what good would that be?
Also it was due to innoculations that the 1918 epidemic happened in the first place!
This claim fails a fact check:
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccines-caused-1918-influe/false-claim-the-1918-influenza-pandemic-was-caused-by-vaccines-idUSKBN21J6X2
Do you have any evidence that there even was a flu vaccine in existence? Please provide it from a reputable source.
Reuters is not reputable.
Do you have information that shows that Reuters is ALWAYS correct and has never been proven wrong?
Also Facts do not have to be true, a lie can be a fact as well, so 'fact checking' is evidence and proof of nothing but the construction or mainting a narrative.
Now what I said was: " it was due to innoculations that the 1918 epidemic happened in the first place"
What you posted was: "False claim: the 1918 influenza pandemic was caused by vaccines"
The two are not one in the same. I said nothing about Influenza now did I?!
Are you making an ASSumption?
As a veteran I know absolutely and with zero doubt that the MOST tested on demographic in the history of mankind is 'Military Personel" specifically USA Military Personel. The things done to these men without their knowledge and with their knowledge but not full understanding or disclosure is just horrible especially with respect to vaccines.
I am the father of a 100% disabled veteran who is vaccine damaged (Anthrax)
Lets note the anthrax from the anthrax attacks one week after 9/11 did not come from Islamic Terroist, it came from Fort Deitrick Maryland....for this my child was vaccinated and now disabled 100%
Vaccines have NEVER worked and it is clear that much evidence, information, documents, books, interviews, court cases, studies...etc...etc... exist to support such a notion.
There is also mass amounts of information that shows a small group of powerful people have literally built the "Allopathic Capitalistic System of Medicine" that the whole world is immersed in.
In parting there is no such thing as a reputable source....
You must put information from ALL sources, good, bad, pro, con, neutral, indifferent and conclude what is most likely true using your BRAIN and not from viewing a Stranger that TELL A VISION of reputability.
Here you need some help...Start Here:
Rockefeller Medicine Men: Medicine and Capitalism in America By e. Richard Brown
https://ia800902.us.archive.org/10/items/rockefellermedic00browrich/rockefellermedic00browrich.pdf
Reuters is very reputable:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/reuters/
Children's health defense is not:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-defender-childrens-health-defense-credibility/
The 1918 epidemic was an influenza epidemic. Google 1918 epidemic and see what result you get.
I notice you don't even try to come up with evidence, the best you can do is make assumptions.
Fact Checking has nothing to do with truth.
I clearly exposed you.
You used a fact check on me that did not apply and now you double down.
Legacy media are lies wake the fuk up
Reuters is so reputable they worked closely with the British Foreign Office to overthrow the first democratically elected leader in the history of Egypt.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/07/05/reuters-overthrow-egyptian-democracy/
I said nothing about CHD....I am not trusting of them either........
This is interesting. NYT wrote about it in 2009 as well.
https://open.substack.com/pub/boriquagato/p/the-greatest-lie-told-during-covid?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Tell them about the transmission experiments preformed on soldiers during the "Spanish flu" epidemic, not a single person got sick.
I wonder why?
Because it never happened.
Well you were not there so how do you know?
The 1918 epidemic deaths were bacterial not viral. People died of bacterial pneumonia. They did not have antibiotics.
"The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection." Perhaps if there was a vaccine back then, many would have not died once the virus entered their lungs. And yes, antibiotics would have perhaps helped too if available.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/bacterial-pneumonia-caused-most-deaths-1918-influenza-pandemic
They didn't know what a virus was in 1918.
Contact transmission was the transmission vector thought plausible as "scientist unanimously agree airborne transmission doesn't exist" in late 1800s.
The people rebelled against militarized govt mandates which ended the scamdemic.
It is comical that the sheep think repeating 1918 methods in the 2020 situation was anything but a scam using our ignorance of science of history.
Do me a favor read Gina Kolata's book Flu then go a university and take a course in virology and basic immunology. It will help you.
I GUESS YOUR BRAIN IS COMPLETELY VOID OF ANY ACTUAL SCIENCE THAT PROVES THE DANGERS OF VACCINES.
Thanks for offering every rational thought you have to offer in one response.
Thanks for proving David wrong with information, facts, documents, interviews, studies....that is really rational behavior.
How many more facts, documents, studies should I post before you decide that David just doesn't care what the truth is?
How about you break the information down and explain it with your scientific technical knowledge as oppose to posting a link and then have the smug false air of superiority to think you proved a point when you did squat.
Wake up foool yer embarrassing yerself
I agree that someone here should be embarrassed...but that takes integrity!
If I search pubmed for Paul Offit I get 71 publications. Maybe you should first read them all before you make misleading statements?
If I search for Steve Kirsch in pubmed I get "No results were found.". Because Pubmed tries to exclude predatory journals like "the Gazette of Medical Sciences".
It is impossible to do complicated stories justice in real time. Real discussions in science take their time and all a public discussion is empty theater. Check whether science or creationism profited more from having a public debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham.
A real discussion which would advance matters would also necessity that both parties agree to be constrained by facts so there is a level playing field and are not allowed to make claims which cannot be independently verified. That is a independent committee of fact checkers with demonstrated knowledge in the field under discussion (which disqualifies Rogan) will be allowed to interrupt when one of the debaters commits an obvious lie and correct the claim. RFK Jr will never submit to that. But why don't you work this into your debate proposal? It would be in service of truth and transparency.
Funny thing is Dr & Scientist have went back (post covid scam) and have been reading studies and exposing flaws........
I guess many did not think people would go back and read studies and journal articles.
Look at Duke Univ....what 112 Million fine for scientific misconduct, false claims...etc...etc.....but trust the experts, don't do your own research.......
Seriously.........
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
“Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big Pharma uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers and the medical profession itself.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
“In 2003, the profits of the top 10 big Pharma exceeded that of the cumulative profits of the other 490 Fortune 500 Companies.” ----Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
More recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness”
The role of Steve Kirsch in exposing flaws in the medical and pharmacological system is exactly what? Where are the studies he has published in peer reviewed non-predatory journals which would show up in pubmed? Nothing you copy and paste about has anything to do with Steve Kirsch or how to best have a discussion about scientific matters. What about efforts to provide a level playing field? How to ensure actual falsehoods are exposed? You are commenting on an article where one person documents lies said about him by a different person. Do you endorse lies? Steve seems to do so. He is not about creating a level playing field in a debate, he is all about creating a spectacle, preferable in a way which gives his side a huge advantage. That is not servicing truth and transparency. That is demagoguery. Endorsing this style of debate is endorsing demagoguery.
What you quote about profits in the pharma industry comes from a study published in a scientific journal like this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054843/
Which is a published study. According to your copypasta we can't trust studies any more. So why can we trust this one? Studies are good if they tell me what I want to hear? Or what is it? Should we dispense with science because some of it is bad? If you are looking for perfection, you are not going to find it. That is just a fact.
Producing copypasta instead of a cogent argument also means your cherrypicking will produce inaccuracies: Dr. Marcia Angell did not resign from her post, she voluntarily withdrew from it, and she was not 20 years editor-in-Chief, though she was one of the editors during that time, but she was editor-in-Chief only for a brief time. Taking quotes out of their context can change them.
While nobody denies that excessive profit is a problem in the pharma industry, but do you really want to abolish it and deprive people of their often life-saving medications? What is your alternative? Do you have a plan? Or do you just want to tear down, to hell with consequences? Have you ever thought a problem through yourself, or do you always rely on others to do your thinking by picking quotes you like?
Do you really want to go back to times before smallpox was eradicated? Smallpox would still be around but for vaccines. Have you read up on smallpox? Would you have wanted to catch it?
Tigris posted,
What you quote about profits in the pharma industry comes from a study published in a scientific journal like this:....
No it comes from the mouth of Marcia Angell or do you have another flesh and blood man or women to attribute it to?
I mean she told you where the information came from.
Who is responsible for the Fortune 500?
JAMA?
NIH?
Of course not and then you actually say: "comes from a study published in a scientific journal like this:...."
Not that it was published in an EXACT specific scientific journal ....just one like this........
Seriously?!?! one just like this?
Why don't you give me the actual scientific journal's name where it is published? and not one just like this...........
Tigris posted,
"Do you really want to go back to times before smallpox was eradicated? Smallpox would still be around but for vaccines. Have you read up on smallpox? Would you have wanted to catch it"
Isn't to "catch" something i would do willingly?
I mean who would "catch" something they do not want?
Anyways I had someone say the exact same thing only they used "Polio" as opposed to smallpox.
I promptly told that person both the Salk and Sabin vaccines were tainted with an animal carcinogen. and that 98 Million doses were given.
Tigris what do "carcinogens" cause?
The polio vaccine was given in the 50's and the 60's and then it is these groups of people that have cancer left and right just like it is the common friggin cold...so much that there are hospitals just for cancer now....who would have thought???
My Mother had five differnt kinds of cancer or so they say, gave her CHEM_o_icals that HEALed her? No it killed her......I watched it happen as the brainless Dr just follow their teachings and practices.
You can inject chemicals to keep from dying, I will eat organic foods and live in the amish community that does not allow Strangers to TELL A VISION of virus, vaccines, death, fear..........
I am not about defending Steve Kirch and never will.
and the quotes are not taken out of context.
She was Chief Editor YES or NO? "Yes" thank you for agreeing with me!
Why even mention that she was CHIEF EDITOR....was that to verify what I posted.....Lol!
and that quote I actually transcribed from a book, so politely f off on the copy paste comment.
What is my alternative?
Glad you asked.
I live amongst the amish working on an amish organic farm.
My alternative is to eat healthy, no chemicals, additives, food coloring, toxins, preservatives, vaccines, medicines, GMO's, processed foods...etc....etc........
I never get sick....I might have a 12 or 24 hour bug once or twice a year which i fast through drinking a lot of water, but i never get sick to where I am down and out for a week or more or that I would be desperate enough to go to a capitalistic allopath for some "medicine by deception" (Pharmakeia/Pharmacy)
Also the amish did not test, did not mask, did not vaccinate, did not contract covid or die from covid. The amish are not cloistered, they get out and about, they eat in restaurants, shop in stores, go on vacation, non amish shop in amish shops/stores/businesses so the prevailing narrative AS YOU BELIEVE it should have covid slaying the amish because they did none of the reccomendations and yet they are one of the healthiest communities in america if not the world and you have zero to refute any of what I just said. In fact you can pound sand because the amish prove the covid narrative is 100% bullshit and they will tell you that and none of them have a college degree, are a scientist, experts, doctor...blah...blah...blah.
...and this leads to the fact the vaccinations are bullshit....I mean why do you need them?
Just ask the amish what they did to not need a jab with respect to covid.....right?!?!
BTW I cannot wait to hear the tripe you are going to post about the amish.
One last thing
There are two things that determine how long and how well you will live.
1) What you consume and or put in or on your body.
2) How clean is the Air, Land and Water you live around.
These two things have more to do with how long and how well you live than anything eles in this world and nothing else comes close least it fall under one of the two categories.
Knowing this I act accordingly, this is why i would never take a vax.
The Rogan Show is like a carnival freak show. Nothing of any importance can be decided in that atmosphere. There is an ongoing debate about all aspects of vaccines in the scientific literature. It is a free market of ideas. Join the debate if you dare.
Hes constantly calling for data transparency. He literally spend a lot of time going through data on vaccine advisory panel! I bet he spends 10 times the amount you do on data. But im sure your a data expert right? Try and be honest fir once
BOOOOOOOOOOMMM!!!!!!
I'm with Mr. Kirsch
Paul Offit does not know the meaning of the words, truth or transparency.
oh look, a fact-free personal attack!
If you had a fact, then I suppose you would have posted it!
"Scientists should be afraid to be challenged."
...should not be afraid?
Kirsch, the pandering, transparent, Dunning-Kruger effect personified. You have ZERO substance, just low-IQ game playing. You are such a waste
The studies he's referring to are publicly available. You've simply ignored them. If you have a criticism of them, you need to find a problem with them on the merits.
Steve is neither a hcw or scientist. His opinion and that's all it is, is not worth the time reading it.
Thank you for writing this. My father, Samuel L Katz, MD had many of the very same lies written about him in that salon/Rolling Stone article as well. Truth matters. He, you, and the many other people who have dedicated their lives to eradicating diseases that kill children do wonderful work and I thank you for it.
I believe you are getting the wrong information
The wrong information about what? About what I read in that article with my own eyes, or about what I know to be true about my own father?
A debate between a lawyer and infectious disease specialist on infectious disease is pointless, the infectious disease specialist knows a lot more about infectious disease than a lawyer! Lawyering is not about Truth, its about raising doubt. Which is why RFK is so good at spreading misinformation and sowing doubt. He is a really solid lawyer. Check out Ari Melber explanation on why debate is pointless. By the way, Ari loves debate, even has a book about it.
That is a lie.
A debate is never pointless.
https://youtu.be/Rzxr9FeZf1g. Good video for you to watch! If you can, which I doubt
I prefer reading books, with books you learn as you go, with videos I have to then go back, check, research, investigate excogitate about what strangers say when i can form my own opinions while i read.
Watching the video the host correctly points out that environmental issues could be the cause of autism.....see same page, don't be so quick to judge.
In the environmental insurance industry there are but two things that determine how long and how well one will live.
1) How clean is the air, land and water you live upon.
2) What you consume and or put in or on your body.
Nothing else comes close and if it does it falls under one of the two aforementioned.
Vaccines fall under #2
For the host to then turn around and say we simply don't know precisely the cause of Autism is just a bunch of wishy washy speak. I am suppose to trust the capitalistic allopathic medical scientific experts that cannot figure out the cause of autism but don't worry injecting these foreign substances in you definitely will not be the cause of autism.....right?
in fact the shots are HEALthy aren't they james.......right?!
After the admission that the host has no idea what cause autism he continues to speak about it by telling that people they have a cognitive bias and skews how we interpret new information...Blah...blah....blah.... I am an adult flesh and blood male. I do not need some nerd dressed to tell me how to excogitate. This guy could not be more wrong. he is full of sh_t
Moving along the video there is a lot of B/S speak. The examples, allegories the host comes up with are pathetic and kiddie like....I mean cars? puddles?
Then he speaks of over a dozen peer reviewed papers that say there is no correlation.
Correlations is Statistical between random variables....
So it is number crunchers that tell me a vaccine is safe.....eh?
Bill Gates already made it clear "How to Lie with Statistics" by Darrell Huff....Right?!?!
Also lets not speak of the 98 million doses of polio vaccine given that was tainted with an animal carcinogen when speaking abut the safety of vaccines ....Ok?
I mean anyone can post a link, so i will return the favor. Here is one: 226 papers demonstrating the multiple associations between vaccines and autism.
https://howdovaccinescauseautism.org/
I Digress...
The host admits that people (which I will change to MOTHERS) Draw a conclusion between vaccines and autism. ....and why would that be?????????
Mothers are special.... for without "Mother" there is nothing. I trust the instinct of "Mothers" if they Draw a conclusion with concern to their offspring it is legit.
Now here is a whopper:
The host says: "(Parents) MOTHERS who Think about Vaccines before their child is born is 8 times less likely to vaccinate their children" Conclusion? TRUST MOTHER!
and then goes on to say that when Mothers do their own research Mothers get confused and default to doing nothing (no vax).
Quite frankly doing nothing in many instances is better than doing something just for the sake of especially when you do not fully understand it as the host is seemingly making clear.
Seriously this video was a joke.
It had nothing, just a bunch or mumbo jumbo speak.
You must have been joking that it was good, even if it backed up your point of view it was a ridiculously horrible video. Suffice to say there will be no need to link a video to me in the future...... you better come with something much better than that.
There was zilch in this video...notta, zero hard evidence!
How do you know your father knows what is true? That is what I meant
How does he know what is true about himself? About whether or not he accepted bribes from drug companies? What a strange question.
Not a strange question at all - if you have children you should reallt read «The Real Anthony Fauci» by Robert Kennedy. Or even better and a shorter read is «A Letter To Liberals» - the facts are there and references to studies, etc. It’s very odd to me that no one in public health wants to step up and debate him. That is strange.
Not sure if you are a bot or if you can’t read or comprehend well, but in case you wish to understand, I’m not speaking about anything in that article you referenced. I’m speaking about that RFK jr stated that my father had a patent on the measles vaccine (which he did not) and made millions from pharma (which he did not.). How would my father have a patent and make millions without knowing that he did? You make no sense.
People set aside the truth and their own integrity, in exchange for money, every day. Some people do not.
I am not sure about de safety of vaccines after having read the Simpsonwood Conference transcription. What they said there is really clear and shows that they had lied to citizens.
Hi Dr Offit, As have many others, I have relied on you and Dr Monica Gandhi for evidence based updates and recommendations during the pandemic. As a critical care RN it scares me how trust on our public health leaders has eroded, and when well known individuals such as RFK Jr use their platform to stoke these same fires it only adds to the problem and as you rightly said, potentially with devastating consequences. Thank you for all you do, and know you are deeply appreciated!
How do you know that RFK is not telling the truth? Im just curious? You should read his book «The Real Anthony Fauci» - at least the first 120 pages- has over 2000 references. The facts are all there
If you had actually read the article you are commenting on you could find out that no, RFK is not especially truthful.
He also made it on the list of the disinformation dozen. Disinformation =/= truth.
That list is nothing more than an attempt to censor which is only done when authorities have something to hide. What are those list-makers afraid of?
Did you know that RFK jr's site uses censors to stop actual scientists from posting facts?
Why would they want to post on RFK Jr's site when they do not even want to debate?
I thought the thing was not to give RFK jr any creedence.
Moral people want to provide facts with the hope that his readers will read the words and not needlessly die.
Strange that you didn't immediately see that....
From whose a** did you pull that factoid? Your credibility weakens with every post.
Personal experience...and that of other scientists that I know.
Are you familiar with disqus?
Of becoming a society being totally led by this sort of information..
(One is even a presidential candidate by now..)
The list may be necessary, because they hardly are and can't be censored. Just critisized. Because you don't live in a dictatorship (yet).
It's to inform you..
Censorship always censors the truth never a lie.
BTW it matters not what government you live under, they all perform the same functions.
They collectivize ALL the people whether the people want to be collectivized or not, and if not ALL Governments will utilize enFORCEment.
It does not matter if they are communist, democracy, monarchy, dictator, national socialist, fascist, republicanism, oligarchy, socilaist...they ALL do the same things, the only difference will be the degrees of brutality.
There is no such thing as 99% freedom. You are either 100% free or you are 1% to 99% a slave.... thus everyone is in a dictatorship.
also you know what they say about enFORCE_ment?
"Bad Ideas Require enFORCEment Good Ideas do not for mankind will naturally gravitate towards good Ideas which is why Bad Ideas MUST be enFORCEd"
Who enFORCEs Bad Ideas?
Do you support people who seek to enFORCE Bad Ideas?
Do you think it is OK to force people into the Bad Ideas they do not want to be in?
You have some explaining to do least I conclude you are a violent deciple of the governing body.
Are you violent? Do you like utilizing enFORCEment against those that do not think like you?
I despise violent people!
Disinformation is not false, it is just not the approved government information....that is all....same with misinformation.
Lets be honest nothing tells more lies than the USA Government.....where do you want to start?
Oh and i do agree with you about RFK jr
Disinformation may not be false. It's just to un(der)proven or un(der)evidenced, at least at that moment, and in comparison to other information available, to be considered legitimate (or the best) information.
('Legitimate', not in a law sense, but in a logical (or so) sense.
At least within a working democracy. Then spreading of disinformation is to a large extent allowed, like spreading of information to a large extent is.
Not so much in e. g. dictatorships, or "theocracies". Then much information is not allowed, and much disinformation is even mandated.
Then information becomes il/legitimate in a law sense firstly, and very often not so much in a logical sense. (at least for the content of the information. It's function can be very logical.)
Given that much of the information/data/evidence that proves you wronger than what you oppose (at least on the facts/data/plausible assessment of it) is out there, accesible and uncensored (allthough maybe hard to find, because of the overwhelming amounts of "other" (i.c. un(der)evidenced) information, the impression (of the presency of BOTH almost free information and almost free disinformation!) is that your country is to a large extent still kind of a working democracy.
That doesn't mean that everything is perfect, or that there are no downsides to certain policies, or products, or to the way things are organized.
That should be critisized and adressed. This would also be possible, as long as it's a working democracy.
(It certainly doesn't mean that 'big things' like 'capitalism' are only good..)
You just have to "do your own research" a bit better..
Wow and so to do you.........
than "they" hope you do..
("They" is the disinformation-spreaders)
Information in a country governed by a government that is not outright brutal has other ways to limit the information.......
In the USA there is all kinds of information that is not known to the people that the people should know and do not!
As I said in my original comment nothing lies like the USA Government and I asked where do you want to start?
But you did not take me up on the challenge, instead you start blathering on about political ideologies when in fact all political ideologies simply fall under the heading of collectivism.
I would never trust the USA Government.
There is no entity in the history of mankind that has lied, more, killed more, committed war on more nations and people than the USA.
Your defense of it and thier disinformation list is sickening.
I hate to think if this were colonial times you would support the Crown and the Redcoats disninformation list against your fellow colonist......
Disinformation means many different things, it depends on who is speaking the disinformation.
Working democracy?
Well they do work and then they crash ALWAYS.
Who would promote that political ideology with its history?
"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide" ----Letter from John Adams to John Taylor, 17 December 1814
"A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief’s of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." -----James Madison
So you are part of the US government? Since you just documented that you are incapable of even identifying truth. Disinformation is the definition of false. Your attempt to redefine language reveals your love of dishonesty.
I did not defined the language the US Government did.
How can the USA say what is Disinformation when nothing in the history of mankind has come anywhere close to the number of lies produced by the USA............
Do you support Governments that lie?
Did i ever say i was part of the US Government....no I never did, I am not into violence so I definitely would not be with the government.
Misinformation, disinformation is still information or are you saying it is not?
when any government uses these terms it becomes apparent that it is done so to censure and ensure the Government narrative is maintained....a narrative that is a lie and yet it is the same government that throws the word disinformation around as if EVERYTHING the US Government says is the truth and anything else it is not thus it is deemed disinformation, misinformation...
lets be honest nothing lies more than the USA Government but you did not want to go down that road did you.... and yet you want to base disinformation as something that is false based on the US Government supposedly telling the truth and that is a laugher....again nothing has lied more than the the US Government in the history of mankind.
Why anyone would trust the misinformation and disinformation of the US Government says a lot about ones intelligence or lack thereof.
How much do you get paid? Anybody who is automatically pulling out the corporate interest card is suspect of getting paid for sowing discord. And not getting paid enough to do it well. Do you get paid in roubles?
Is this your comeback..."How much do you get paid"
That comment by Kindered was the defnition of vacuous.
Oh my now you are gonna call Plague Trooper a russian asset?
Sowing discord?
If Plague was going to sow discord he would tell everyone to get the jab pronto......not run from it!
How much is RFK Jr paying you to promote his book?
Have you read any of the references?
Since you have not read the article you are co.menting on my money is on "no".
I agree and you should pull the references and see what they actually say.
I am going to assume that Kindered and Albus have already read the references so give me a quick run down guy's since the two of you are quite knowledgable after reading the references.....
I picked a chapter and pulled ~20-30 references.
He obviously and grossly misrepresented the basic facts.
If you are interested, feel free to go through all of them.
I will note, that RFK jr continues to make money with wild claims.....often fraud...but he still isn't willing to make them in court....where perjury applies.
Good you keep noting that, I have already realized as well that i would never cast my lot with RFK jr....so what is your point of bringing it up with me?
Go find someone who adores, loves and will vote for RFK jr and have this debate/argument with you. I agree he is a skunk!
On 06Aug YOU asked for a run down.....
An Apple a day keeps the dr away was not said for no reason at all.
The object is to NEVER go to the Dr!
My cousin fell out of an apple tree trying to pick some apples as a kid and broke her arm. Don't give apples too much credit.
First aid and emergency medical is legit and has been so for a long time.
No one has a problem with being sewn up or bone set......pretty simple and has been done for a long time.
What the phrase "An Apple a Day Keeps the Doctor away" is due to the probiotic nature of the apple that keeps you healthy, regular so you do not need the allopath who is going to give you toxins or butcher you.........for better HEALth....right?!
Appeal to nature fallacy.
First aid is never free of chemicals. Or do you get your bones set without any anesthetic or get sewn up without antibiotics?
I do not take anti biotics (bio= life) i am going to consume something that says anti-life in its name.
and yes water has a chemical formula and water is used to wash cuts, so you got me there.
But seriously I have no medicine cabinet.
I consume none of mainstream pharma's bs prescriptions, I buy none of the over the counter medicines.
I do not have 'a doctor' that i run to for a script everytime my body does not feel well because i am not feeding that body well.....
I have had two broken bones in six decades so I can tolerate two shots of lidacaine.
Been sewed up three times, have not had a vaccine in 40 years, did not take a tetnus shot even though i was told I could get lockjaw from being cut by a piece of old rusty metal....never happened, stay far and away from the dentist as well.
I have been alive long enough to sniff the bullshit out and phrama, allopathy are exactly that....bullshit.
You can say whatever but i am in great shape and me and me alone got my self there, no Doctor or Big Pharma was a part of it at all. You do not need either to live a healthy life.
BTW I pick apples....I use a ladder.
Really unfair comment. Offit has been at odds many times with Fauchi et al during the pandemic. All it takes is a simple google search or you can see the number of podcasts he has done on the topic.
A really good way to get someone to engage in honest dialogue is to be condescending and call them names. Be better.
Are you really gonna play "sweetheart" is calling someone names?
and look you replied but not to engage, instead blaming Plague Trooper for you not engaging.....
Am I missing something here?
You engage just to say you are not going to engage.
Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you consider random folks in the comment section your sworn enemies, I suggest you get off the Internet and get outside my friend.
Lol, RFK Jr is one of the disinformation dozen. Dr. Offit isn't.
https://counterhate.com/research/the-disinformation-dozen/
That list was made by people who should be on it.
Correct...Offut should be on that list.
The corporation of sane people.
Who is paying you to post this type of comment?
It appears attorney Aaron Siri would be open to a conversation with you:
https://aaronsiri.substack.com/p/clinical-trial-to-license-rotateq?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=516360&post_id=131000216&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
from his writing linked above: Siri writes that many 'journalists' are rebutting RFK Jr's argument that: most vaccines never went through placebo controlled safety studies. Notably, Siri takes aim at an article published by STAT claiming RotaTeq did undergo a placebo control study. Siri says they are wrong and provides evidence.
"RotaTeq is administered via oral drops. A “placebo” would have been water drops in the mouth. The control used in the trial, however, included bioactive ingredients including almost all the ingredients in the RotaTeq vaccine itself.
How do I know this? Because in 2018, on behalf of ICAN, we were investigating the control used in each clinical trial relied upon by the FDA to license each childhood vaccine.
In that review, we found that while the package insert for the RotaTeq vaccine says the control in its clinical trial was a “placebo,” when we read the FDA’s clinical trial review for RotaTeq, the ingredients of this so-called “placebo” were redacted:
So, on behalf of ICAN we submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request to the FDA for “Documents sufficient to identify the ingredients of the ‘placebo’ in the prelicensure clinical trials identified in Section 6.1 of the package insert for RotaTeq.”
In a response dated June 14, 2018, the FDA provided the requested documents which clearly show that the control was not a placebo. Rather, it included polysorbate-80, sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, and sucrose.
These same four ingredients are also contained in RotaTeq. The only difference between the vaccine and the control is that RotaTeq also included tissue culture medium and rotavirus reassortments. So, bottom line: the control used in the RotaTeq clinical trial was not a placebo since it included bioactive ingredients."
perhaps Dr Offit is willing to do President Joe Biden a favor and engage RFK Jr in a recorded exchange of ideas to dismantle his arguments & set the record straight?
or perhaps it is more comfortable & convenient to take the peter hoetez way out and only preach to your own echo chamber?
It is total nonsense that a placebo for any vaccine can only be water. It is the correct way to formulate a placebo to use everything but the eventual antigen against which the body will make antibodies. Only a science illiterate person would claim otherwise.
Also our human bodies do not make antibodies against substances which are too small, so addition against sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, and sucrose cannot be an issue.
It is understandable that a lawyer has no real knowledge in biology, but that is zero excuse to write pseudoscientific babble in public and personal ignorance in biology is also no excuse to spread such babble.
What the heck is bioactive supposed to mean in this context? That a human body can metabolize some substances is totally irrelevant whether it produces antibodies against it. Even if the body would produce antibodies against those substances, the point of antibodies is that they are highly specific and they would not bind to rotavirus and therefore not protect from disease. It is therefore total nonsense to find presence of additional substances in a placebo objectionable.
Does either of you even have a remote clue why flu shots are given yearly? Obviously not.
I think you have swallowed way too many blue pills. Go and learn some basic facts about the human immune system before you think ignorant nonsense is worth writing about.
I think what the vaccine skeptical are referring to is that it depends on the study question: if we're talking about how effective the treatment is at stimulating an immune response, then yes, substances that are immunologically inert could reasonably be considered as being a placebo. But if safety is the question, then the placebo for something given parenterally should be saline, and nothing more.
Let’s imagine the call to poison control.
Hello poison control? My infant accidentally swallowed 2mL of polysorbate 80, sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, and sucrose.
….. your baby is fine.
First thing to do is to look up what the actual function of a placebo is....not what the anti-vaccs keep claiming.
anti vaxx is a term of marginlization.
Why don't you be stand up and just say people are skeptical about Big Pharmas claims of safety because that is what it really comes down to.
You have made this comment several times.......
So why don't you just tell people what a placebo is Smarty Pants instead of just being a jerk off.
If you don't like anti-vacc, then there are many courts that have characterized such folks as liars for money.
My 2 cents. Most folks aren't scientists and it is easy to see why they are fooled by anti-vaccs lying about what a placebo is. Then you are just a victim of fraud.
But if one then refuses to use their basic reading skills to learn what placebos are and how to use them.....then one is an anti-vacc.
Knock it off with scientist B/S!
You do not have to be a scientist to understand and comprehend these allopathic Rockefeller Medicine Men Operations.
Seriously....scientist?
How about the scientist at Duke? A world renown research university.
https://businessnc.com/deceit-at-duke-how-fraud-at-a-university-research-lab-prompted-a-112m-fine/
Let me geuss that Duke is the ONLY research university that would LIE and FALSIFY Data to get grants...right?!?
you are so naive that is why you injected a substance you have no idea what is in it unless you would like to give me the ingredient list....
Safety is studied in the phase 1 of a clinical trial. Effectiveness is studied in phase 2 of a clinical trial when it is already known whether the treatment is safe. So what is your point?
https://www.mdanderson.org/patients-family/diagnosis-treatment/clinical-trials/phases-of-clinical-trials.html
No I do not have a clue why there are flu shots.
I live amongst the amish.
No one gets these colds that last a week or more. Most have a sniffle, cough, runny nose for a day or two and sometime just a few hour bug.
Healthy GMO free, chemical free vegtables, fruits, baked good and meats is the way to go.
Hell that nut job Kirsch offered a large sum of money if anyone could just find five amish people who died of covid...I mean all you had to do is scan the amish obit's in the amish papers....I read them all the time.
I mean Tigris why did you not take up Kirsch on his bet?
Surely you must believe the deadly covid killed the anti-vaxxer amish right??!?!??!!?!
At least Five of them.....right?!?!?!?!?!
If you cannot explain away why the amish did not die of from covid you should run along and stfu.
Every post I am going to ask you why the amish are not contracting covid, why they are not taking the jab and yet they flourish despite your fear mongering.
Paul Offut has zero to say about the amish.
The amish impugn the whole covid narrative.
and i can tell you the amish politely laugh at the notion that they are fine but they see all these crazy people wearing mask, lining up outside testing tents, getting jabbed down at the fire station and then the amish see these same type of people coming out of the store with cartons of cigarettes, bottles of coke and pepsi, bags of chips...fat and unhealthy with the wal-mart bodies.
Again tell me why the amish are immune to covid maybe i will take you seriously.
Here we go again!
The fraud narrative that only certain people can understand or have the knowledge.
You are a Fraud Tigris. You are basically calling everyone stupid....
Vaccines have never worked. There is a centuries worth of vaccine injuries and deaths.
Are you "Signature Reduction"
lol, good luck to you.
are you up to date on all of your covid shots?
You are obviously unable to cogently defend the position you have been presenting. Have you been overdosing on your blue pills yet again?
I have defended my positions.
I have asked you why the amish that i live with are immune to covid?
Sadly you cannot answer.........and you will NEVER be able to answer.
You run off parroting the same old line about placebo's
Blah Blah Blah.
There is no covid and there is no need to be jab and if you believe so explain away the amish and their ability to magically sidestep covid.
and BTW this is not to say the amish are immune from sickness because there are amish farmers who do not know any better and they use Roundup and other chemicals and they get cancer. The amish community i am in are organic regenititive farmers, they do not have these problems.
"I have asked you why the amish that i live with are immune to covid"
Flat out making things up is not defending your position....it is demonstrating how wrong you are.
What information would you need from me then to prove to you what I say, because i can offer it up to a legitimate source....
I have my bills to the farm that itemize every farm worker i bring to the farm, creamery worker (Milk maids) deliveries, pick ups, auctions...etc...etc.....that i do for the amish.
I have documented proof for over two and a half years of that pandemic B/S that shows I continued to bring the same workers in day after day after day and like i said i never missed a day of work and i never got sick....why is that?....you said yourself the amish had covid, then i should have contracted....right?!
How come no one showed Steve Kirsch the obit of five amish that died of covid so they could collect a big payday?
because no amish died of covid.
Well Albus I take that back. I know one Amish who died of covid.
He had a Congenital heart condition and went to a hospital where you know they are going to diagnose $$$$ covid.
The family was raising the money to have a new autopsy done. The community knows why this man died and they know it is not covid.
are you okay? do you need someone to talk to besides typing comments here? there are solutions out there for you.
i have seen a lot of advertisements for a new company called "better help". i believe it is a counseling & therapy business you can use conveniently from the privacy of your home. maybe it is something you should look into.
the reason I did not respond to your argument is: you did not respond to mine.
you seem to think you did, but adding conjecture does nothing to advance the conversation nor bring clarity to the core issue.
Paul Offit already got caught editing his recent post "should scientists debate the undebatable" by Aaron Siri walking back his claim that 'of course all vaccines are tested against placebos': being you are unlikely to - you know, read - the punch line is Offit changed his words from "all" to "most"
https://twitter.com/AaronSiriSG/status/1673808897692557312
here is the best example of RFK's opinion on vaccines, its a long form discussion in which both a MD & the news host push back.
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1674266437890744323
again the punchline being: RFK wont take away any vaccines, but he will push the CDC to live up to its mission & conduct placebo controlled studies for the cdc recommended vaccine schedule.
Here let me fix that for you:
RFK jr will continue grifting million$ from the clueless.
Agreed, but why would you think a Kennedy is not in it for money....so....can you tell me why the amish are immune to covid?
While following absolutely none of the covid protocols?
You claimed a lawyer dude (you seem to think that being a lawyer makes somebody omniscient in other matters) says a placebo only can contain water.
I explained to you that this is wrong and why.
You have not been able to defend your position.
And of course vaccines are not always tested against placebos. There is a progression in clinical studies. It depends on the phase of the clinical study what a vaccine is tested against.
But you don't know what clinical studies are, you have no clue that sucrose is table sugar. Yes, if you eat too much sugar it is bad for you. You have no clue that that in an oral vaccine the absence of sugar only in the placebo could really clue somebody in whether their child is getting a placebo or not.
If RFK is so concerned about vaccine safety, why does he say all his kids are fully vaccinated? He won't put his kids at risk of infectious diseases, but for other kids, that it totally fine?
you explained why a randomized double blind placebo controlled trial for a vaccine using a saline solution is wrong? where?
you claim "It is the correct way to formulate a placebo to use everything but the eventual antigen against which the body will make antibodies," but provide no rationale other than, "Only a science illiterate person would claim otherwise."
this is your unsubstantiated claim. many disagree with you and think that giving mercury or aluminum (which will be in the final formulation of the drug being tested) to the control group in a vaccine trial may mask safety signals.
you say 'of course vaccines are not tested against placebos"
paul offit just got caught revising himself initially claiming "all" vaccines do placebo trials to "most":
https://twitter.com/AaronSiriSG/status/1673808897692557312
you make a lot of claims and use an appeal to authority as your only justification.
"you don't know what clinical studies are, you have no clue that sucrose is table sugar."
Tigris, it seems like you are very stressed and are lashing out. talking with someone about what is stressing you may be a good idea. perhaps you should take some time away from the internet and reflect on what is causing your stress.
offit agrees that too much of anything can cause adverse events including water & salt.
https://twitter.com/DrPaulOffit/status/1673327740227919872
you then create this weak argument about risk to the clinical trial if the blinding is broken - yet again it's a claim without data.
here is something you might find interesting - its one of the most widely cited papers by one of the world's most cited researchers (phD in epidemiology): Why most published research findings are false - lead author John Ioannidis
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16060722/
when did pfizer & moderna break their blinding on their clinical trial programs? did it compromise the study?
are you up to date on your covid shots?
have you received your updated pfizer or moderna shot?
CDC says you should go get your updated shot:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/stay-up-to-date.html
best not to question authority.
Albus is dense...he does not see that both sides are working towards the same goal.
It is the same playbook in every other country.
RFK loves vaccines.........
To say otherwise is just flat out wrong!
He has said it many many many times he is for vaccines just not the untested covid vaccine...and it is untested.
In the EUA was one sentence that said: "It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for Any Indication"
Albus took an 'It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for any Indication'
and you really have to be amazed at people who allowed this crap to be injected into their body when that sentence is in every Emergency Use Authorization letter......
That EUA was a warning not to take the jab.
What did you think when you read that sentence in the EUA Albus?
Apparently you must have thought it ok....you took the jab....right?
Talk about foolish!
Again the covid vaccinations is: 'It is an Investigational Vaccine Not Licensed for any Indication'
"He has said it many many many times he is for vaccines just not the untested covid vaccine...and it is untested."
Of course it was tested before the EUA.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-key-action-fight-against-covid-19-issuing-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19
And lots and lots more testing since then.
Amazingly some folks just can't find these basic facts....anti-vaccs like RFK jr prey upon such folks.
These are all inert ingredients and would work just fine as placebo. Given that rotavirus vaccine is in a medium that is somewhat sweet, it makes sense to deliver it in trials using completely inert compounds that are used to help storage. None of those would be active ingredients for the immune response. Sucrose? Come on.
not sure I am following. did you read the post from Aaron Siri above? 2/3rds of the way down is a chart detailing HHS's childhood vaccine schedule showing vaccine type / description of what the test group received in the clinical trial / description of what the control group received in the clinical trial / was there a placebo control group.
in many instances, the new vaccine was tested against an old vaccine. in other instances, thimerosal or other compounds aside from an innocuous saline or sucrose solution were used for the control groups.
attenuated virus based vaccines are often given with other compounds, some of which are knowingly toxic. the argument is the weakened virus does not create a strong enough immune system response to create future protection/immunity. therefore, introducing a toxic agent with the weakened virus creates a more robust immune system response providing for the desired clinical outcome: immunity/protection to future infectious disease.
some argue this creates a false control group.
it is my understanding of RFK Jr's position that all vaccines should be tested against totally inert compound to provide a valid phase 1 / safety check during early in human testing of new products.
So Siri has zero understanding of clinical trials and claims lots of nonsense.
It is for good reason that the world rejects his arguments.
Except that he’s won some important cases for medical freedom.
So...are you still looking for any relevant examples?
If you say so, but where are any cases about the safety or efficacy of vaccines?
I take issue with “toxic substance.” I read Siri’s argument and he says that the safety of the vaccines can’t be proven (rotateq) because there was no true placebo. He lists evidence of sodium phosphate being a known nephrotoxin and giving it to babies as one of the issues. Lists the NIH’s own page.
Sodium phosphate is a salt. Taken orally, it’s in all sorts of things (tums for example). Polysorbate is in simethicone drops, if you want something that is typically given to babies. Biologically inert materials, though if given IV AND in high amounts AND to people with health problems (kidney problems especially) these compounds could pose a problem. In 2mL of an oral vaccine, no.
Pharmaceutical drugs are tested against a saline placebo.
the only time I have seen phase 1 clinical trials for new chemical or biological injectable drugs/therapeutics not be tested against an innocuous (saline) placebo - is in some cancer drug trials. the rationale being: we know we are giving the body something toxic designed to kill human cells (hopefully just the cancer cells) so why test for just safety?
for these cancer drugs the clinical protocol calls to basically merge phase 1 & 2 (phase 1 traditionally being a safety check & phase 2 traditionally being the small patient group efficacy check).
you can go to the recently revamped clinicaltrials.gov website and see for yourself - first in human cancer drug trials tend to be phase 1/2 studies.
Not willing or unable to Google "vaccine saline placebo"????
Google "vaccine saline placebo" and read a few hundred of the studies.
Google is a vaccine manufacturer. Why not ask Ronald Mcdonald if eating daily big macs is good for your health.
Polysorbate 80 is not inert or benign.
It sure is used in a whole bunch of foods that no one gets up in arms about. Gelatin desserts, canned foods, whipped cream etc etc etc
Unfortunately, you’re right but that doesn’t make it harmless. Recent research has demonstrated that polysorbate 20 and 80 have detrimental effects on the gut’s epithelial lining.
Well most people can easily see that Siri doesn't even know what the word placebo means.
It is bizarre that some folks want to get their science from non-scientists that can't even use a dictionary.
Sill working on the what the word Placebo means???
Wow. Where in any description of anything does it say a placebo is water? That’s definitely science that a scientist scienced up!!
The “smoking gun” you found is that the placebo was sugar. What?! Congratulations! 🤦🏻♀️
With all due respect, it is difficult to believe anything Dr. Offit writes or says given how he has pushed for the ineffective and dangerous Covid vaccines. He even recommended that healthy children take these ineffective and dangerous shots even though healthy young people were at virtually zero risk from Covid. It was also known that the Covid shots do not stop their recipients from getting ill with Covid or transmitting the virus to those around them. How can a rational man of science support such a thing? Neither has Dr. Offit apologised for or retracted his erroneous and misleading statements regarding Covid injections. This is what an honest scientist would do.
He recommended that his son, who was in college, NOT get the booster, yet he appears to be recommending it for children.
"With all due respect, it is difficult to believe anything Dr. Offit writes or says given how he has pushed for the ineffective and dangerous Covid vaccines. "
Ok, this is ~5th grade math/science. How do you know that they are ineffective and dangerous. Show your work.
Thanks.
lol thats not how this works - how do you know hopping on one leg is ineffective for cancer? the people pushing jabs have to show they are safe and effective, not the other way round.
and if you think they have done that in anything like good faith I invite you to google the stories of maddie de garay, brianne dressen and augusto roux - all of whom were trial participants with very severe AEs that pharma / FDA simply dismissed.
maddie de garay, a 12 year old kid, was put in a wheelchair for life by a condition that came on out of nowhere immediately after her jab - but the people running the trial simply asserted it wasn't related to the jab, so there's no problem. remember this is the trial to determine the effects of the jab. it's that easy for them.
https://www.trialsitenews.com/a/mother-of-maddie-de-garay-speaks-out-about-her-13-year-old-daughters-life-altering-injuries-from-pfizers-covid-vaccine
So that would be a big old "no" you can't do the 5th grade math to understand the effectiveness and safety of vaccines.
Did anyone else notice the disappearance from this comments section of two excellent, but critical responses to this article? One was by the husband of a surgeon, describing the progress of his own skepticism around the COVID vaccines specifically. It was long, well written, and fully referenced. The other was by a female paediatrician, and challenged several of the points made in the article regarding the threat posed to children, and was also well supported. I may have mixed these up a little, but they were definitely there as of a few hours ago. It seems implausible that both these commenters would delete their well formulated responses. So where did they go?
deleted, censored & ignored. Just like they are doing to RFK jr. btw,
the only one who would debate RFK jr in last 3 yrs was Dershowitz (Mr. i went to epstein island “but i kept my underwear on”)
but i’ll give Dirty Dershowitz credit for at least being the only one man enough to accept the debate.
If RFK JR were deleted and censored, you certainly would not be able to find much current information about him, yes? And he would be sitting in a jail somewhere without good communication to the outside....
Poor RFK, he is wasting away in jail after having survived poisoning like Alexei Navalny ...
It is just the vile mainstream media telling you to believe your lying eyes that RFK is very publicly running for the presidency...
correct, instagram deleted him in 2019 & youtube shortly thereafter. Same with twitter. Just last month youtube deleted mike tyson’s episode that had RFK jr. on. No one will debate him. When in history were the ones who block information & censor ever the good guys? Corporations control & good people cheer on the fascism not realizing the detriment to themselves.
LOL. It is clearly life threatening to not being able to post on instagram and youtube. Poor dude. Now he can't make millions off these forums. Maybe he needs to go to get food from a food pantry next? And of course he is on twitter. You are behind the times.
RFK consistently refuses to debate scientists on a fair forum, which is he does not do any research and publish it in reputable peer reviewed journals. What is he afraid of? That somebody disproves him?
It is never a good idea to get in a verbal argument with either a total deluded person. Brandolini's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
There are no reputable peer reviewed journals.
Rockefeller Medicine Men took care of that a looooong time ago.
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.”
“Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big Pharma uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers and the medical profession itself.” -- Dr. Marcia Angell, a former long-time editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) resigned in June of 2000 after twenty years in the post
The writer of the substack has the ability to delete comments and block posters. Based on your words, this is apparently what Dr. Offit has been doing. You can see he is reading and interacting with the comments because he gives likes to those he likes.
I was also looking for those. Where are they?
Exactly. Did you see them there before too? I came back to read them again they were so good, but they had disappeared.
After searching, I discovered they were on his substack on why children should get Covid vaccines.
The article you are commenting on is about thimerosal and communications about this between Dr. Offit and RFK Jr 20 years ago.
I have no idea whether anything has been deleted, but any discussion about COVID vaccines would be rather off topic. Or are you trying to claim those contain thimerosal? Because they most definitely don't.
Thank you, facts matter!
I suggest you dig a little deeper. This is will provide you with a start.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/paul-offit-is-trying-to-gaslight?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=548354&post_id=131313735&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
And that fact is that anyone with basic reading skills can see that Kirsch was not truthful in his posting.
I pretty sure they call that gaslighting. What specifically are you referencing in Kirsch's response?
One example from the comments at his site....
""He {Offit} claimed that thimerosal in vaccines had caused autism, when several studies had shown that it hadn’t.
I {Krisch} checked the page. There are no studies on that page showing thimerosal doesn’t cause autism."
Yes there are studies listed that tested thimerosal and studies listed that tested mercury....you can find the references in the section marked "references".
Fact is that no matter how many times people prove to Kirsch that he is not just wrong but routinely not even functionally literate, he just keeps asserting the BS over and over...
Did you read the studies referenced? The first two are highly contested and issues with the methods and dosages measured. The third study concludes that it "the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between exposure to Thimerosal from vaccines and....autism". Plus the third study is more of a case study, which is scientifically week. I don't have access to the fourth, but there was a correction made 2mths later regarding the ratio on page 1039, but I couldn't read the study, plus notes the author now works for Glaxo-Smith Kline. I could keep going, but I'll stop. Why would Offit offer up such weak, if not erroneous support? The Wakefield studies is typically referenced by Offit and others, but they ignore the many qualified studies that point to a causal relationship. Ultimately, the CDC and NHI really haven't conducted and never will conduct the studies necessary. I think you are missing the bigger issue, which is the lack of proper safety studies on most, if not all vaccines. I saw how you eluded to the definition of "placebo". I think the concern regarding a "placebo" is how it is currently defined by the Vaccine Corporate and Scientific Support community. Maybe you should debate Kirsch, you seem very confident. Go for it. I'd like to hear it. It would be interesting. You might want to read this before reading studies, just say'n. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020124
You changed the subject.
What Kirsch said is not true and fails ~3rd grade reading skills.
Fact is that many people have pointed out his scientific errors--he is amazingly scientifically illiterate--but also there is a long list of examples he has been given where he is functionally illiterate.
He just refuses to correct his errors, but instead keeps on making money saying things that he knows are not true.
Facts can be lies, the truth is always the truth.
Did you read the Burbacher study? Sounds like very good indication that ethyl mercury is possibly worse as the concentrations accumulate and last much longer in the brain and other tissues even though clear from the blood.
There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal monkeys than in the brains of MeHg monkeys (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed monkeys were approximately twice that of the MeHg monkeys. Interestingly, the inorganic fraction in the kidneys of the same cohort of monkeys was also significantly higher after im thimerosal than after oral MeHg exposure (0.71 ± 0.04 vs. 0.40 ± 0.03). This suggests that the dealkylation of ethylmercury is much more extensive than that of MeHg.”
This seems to support RFK. I would like to see a debate and let the true facts prevail. We all know many scientific studies are done to reach a specific conclusion.
What an excellent suggestion. Why have the pro vax experts avoided debates with the pro safe experts?
Why don't you try reading the explanations that pro vax give?
Better question: why aren't the "pro safe experts" willing to make their claims in Court under oath?
No it does not support RFK jr.
RFK jr just doesn't seem to care what the facts are.
Did you read the Burbacher study?
Because it contains these sentences already in the abstract:
"The initial and terminal half-life of Hg in blood after thimerosal exposure was 2.1 and 8.6 days, respectively, which are significantly shorter than the elimination half-life of Hg after MeHg exposure at 21.5 days. "
It does say that the percentage of inorganic Hg in the brain was higher when exposed to thiomersal, but the numbers are 34% vs. 7%. BUT: Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys. Which means the total amounts are actually rather comparable.
It's sad to me that both you and Dr. Hotez have to spend your valuable time clearing up all the lies spewing out of RFK Jr. and Joe Rogan's mouth. Thank you for clearing up those lies.
The Kennedy name has carried lots of weight for years in our country, almost to the point of being treated as royalty. Many Kenedys have and are doing good work in our country, but as in all families, there are those that choose a different path. I live in a town with one of his cousins, (also a lawyer who cares about the environment), served as my State Senator, lost one of his legs from cancer and lives a quiet life continuing to do good work.
RFK was a hero of mine growing up. I was in 7th grade when he was murdered. I still remember getting off my school bus and being told to go straight to our 1st period class (my history class), walking into the room darkened with the TV on and told by my teacher to sit down and mentioned how we are living in history. No discussion, just a sense of importance watching the TV. It's sad that RFK Jr. has chosen a different path.
lies? he’s got the evidence from their own research which he obtains via discovery’s That’s why RFK jr beats them in court & no one will debate him.
Blocked. Unfortunately, there are trolls on Substack too who present themselves behind a closed curtain, mentioning they write a newsletter. Upon checking, there is nothing except a comment from Dec. 2021 stating a newsletter is forthcoming.
Blocked
Nobody wants to debate RFK Jr because it is like playing chess with a pigeon. Too much crap. And the bullshit asymmetry principle means that it takes a lot more effort to debunk crap than it is to create it, putting anybody who is concerned with actual facts at a major disadvantage.
Notice that RFK does not want to debate like scientists debate? Publishing research in peer reviewed and reputable non-predatory journals. RFK Jr is never going to go on a forum where he won't get away with lies.
That is an excuse and a poor one at that.
If the experts are so sure, then it really should take little to no time to mop the floor up with RFK jr............and I am not an RFK jr fan at all.
See I do not trust either side, I have concluded that both sides are doing a little of the same. I mean here the people are debating over a debate that is never going to take place further creating a divide that benefits who?!
certainly none of us in this substack....well except for Doc O.
I do not need to be a scientist, doctor, expert to understand....You only have to know how to read that is all. If it is that complex that one cannot understand then it is that which is so complex that is suspect and should be scrutinized.
Fact is the usury nature of the currency makes everyone in the Industrial Complexes (Medical, Media, Military...etc..) defend it even when it is violent, immoral, dangerous, wrong........it says a lot about those people..........
he debates in court. He uses his opponents own research against them. And even though the system & bias is stacked against him he still wins because his evidence is so overwhelming. Hence, Bayer, Merck, Glaxo, Pfizer (all the ex nazi pharma giants btw) put a gag order on all their owned doctors & scientist not to engage with RFk jf cause it exposes them & people would see the truth.
I note the large number of folks that have made the ~same claim as you...but so far no one has provided one single example.....
"he debates in court. "
Still looking for an example of that.
And since when are courts science arbiters? They are clearly not. Courts have insufficient scientific expertise and have often made decisions which contradict science. And that is why RFK does not debate scientists on the terms of science. Because he can't.
But I am not aware that RFK Jr ever won a lawsuit against vaccines? Please link, I would like to know more.
You know that even his own family says he is wrong?
Why can't you give any vaccine examples of RFK jr "beating" them in Court?
you have internet easy to find. What’s not easy to find is Pfizer’s covid vax trial data that they locked up for 75yrs.
So no, you couldn't provide any examples.
And the Pfizer covid vax trial data is published on line.....
forced by a judge not voluntarily i wonder why. you too lazy to look up RFK jr’s trial history? go eat your gmo’s & get your boosters.
Sigh...so no you don't have any examples of the Court cases you claim he has won.
And the covid data was published on-line before the lawsuit was filed....the anti-vacc lied to you.
YOU---ARE A MORON!
Blocked
Very soon vaccines will fade out of existence very soon thanks to quacks like you, Offit.
You’re a fraud dude and I’m one of your victims. Why on earth do you think adverse events to pharmaceutical products runs in families. I’ve had many adverse events over 36 years to vaccines, 2 titanium alloy spinal implants both of which had to be removed, composite dental fillings and Cortoss bone cement
I’m allergic to titanium aluminium(and alumina) and mercury. I had the sensory symptoms of autism from the Cortoss bone cement in 2020 including adhd symptoms.
There are many drs who get adhd symptoms from the metals in vaccines. I’ve spoken to many of them. I’ve also asked lots of drs if they know colleagues who have neurotoxic reactions to vaccines and all have said yes so far. I’ve been secretly recording them
The only reason you won’t do a live debate with Kennedy is because you don’t believe what you say you believe and know that Kennedy will show you up as the fraud that you are
I wish the media was as concerned with the way this administration has lied and continues to about public health as they are about RFK Jr’s lies.
I have relied on you for good information during the recent pandemic. I still do. I have been grateful for shows like TWIV and interviews between doctors and scientists that can be easily found on You Tube. Please don’t let this RFK Jr episode deter you from your science communication efforts.
YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO AND GASLIGHTED. WTFU!
I've met Dr. Offit several times at medical meetings, and he's certainly far more trustworthy and believable than RFK Jr.
MEETING SOMEONE DOESN'T PROVE CREDIBILITY! HAVE YOU EVER MET RFK????? GOD PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE IGNORANT!
Nice to meet you, too! I worked in the vaccine business for 10 years and have experience with (among other vaccines) the rotavirus vaccine that Dr. Offit helped develop. So I didn't just " meet him". Now, don't YOU feel ignorant?
SO WHY IS IT YOU ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT OF THE FACTS ON VACCINE INJURIES!! YOU HAVE BLINDERS ON, I SEE THAT A LOT WITH ACADEMICS!!! WHY DON'T "YOU" DEBATE RFK LOLOLOL!!!! NOW DON'T YOU FEEL IGNORANT.
I'm not an "academic", lol. I've forgotten more about vaccines than you'll ever know. Pro tip: turn off the caps lock. It makes you look like an idiot.
YOU ARE THE PRODUCT OF ACADEMIA, AND ITS A GOOD THING YOU'VE FORGOTTEN ALL THAT GARBAGE, NOW GO EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THE REAL SCIENCE OF THE DANGERS AND INEFFECTNESS OF THOSE VACCINES. HERE'S A GOOD PLACE TO START;
“The COVID-19 Vaccines DO NOT Prevent Transmission of the Disease” – Judge Doughty’s Ruling Destroys Biden’s Vax Mandates https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/covid-19-vaccines-not-prevent-transmission-disease-judge-doughtys-ruling-destroys-bidens-vax-mandates/
Louisiana U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty blocked a federal COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers on Tuesday.
The ruling by Judge Doughty follows Missouri US District Judge Matthew Schelp’s ruling on Monday that blocked mandates in 10 states.
Judge Doughty pointed out all of the illogical and irrational contradictions in the mandate. “If boosters are needed six months after being “fully vaccinated,” then how good are the COVID-19 vaccines, and why is it necessary to mandate them?” says Judge Doughty in his ruling.
I never supported (and don't support) vaccine mandates for adults, chief. Yet another mistake from the ALL CAPS dude...
Saying, " I've forgotten more about vaccines than you'll ever know"
while saying nothing else makes you look like an idiot.
Thanks for the tip, chief.
Maybe you can help me with this then - while he's very upset at RFK Jr for suggesting he has a conflict of interest because of that vaccine, the article is a little mysterious on how much he has actually made from it.
Internet seems to suggest 10 figure sums. Do you have any ideas? Would it change your view of him as an impartial expert if he was making this kind of money?
No because that means nothing unless you are well versed in the origins of the "Allopathic Capitalistic System of Medicine" in america.
It is simply another business venture for the wealthy.
The Rockefellers certainly have benfitted.....eh?
What's with the all caps?
A troll deserving of being blocked.
THEY ARE FOR TRIGGERING STU*** PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOTHING """INTELIGENT""" TO ADD
Did you purposely misspell intelligent? You do you man.
SEE! THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT- NOTHING BUT AD HOMINEMS AND SLANDER- NOTHING "INTELIGENT" TO ADD TO THE TOPIC AT HAND!!! P.S. I PURPOSELY MISSPELL THINGS IN ORDER TO INVOKE SUCH A STU*** RESPONCE FROM STU*** PEOPLE! YOU JUST FELL FOR IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING! Ad hominem
An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their argument or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.
Oh, "THEY ARE FOR TRIGGERING STU*** PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOTHING """INTELIGENT""" TO ADD" is not an ad hominem?
How amazing!
and blocked.
I wish the last jab wasn’t in this piece. You know that RFK has in fact accomplished a lot for the environment so to take a jab like that, for me, unnecessarily weakens this piece.
Because of his last paragraph, it suddenly calls all the facts he just listed into question? How would you feel if someone continually misrepresented the things you said to a global audience as big as Joe Rogan's (10+ million), smeared your name, and influenced lunatics to threaten you and your family through no fault of your own?
So it’s ok for him to smear RFK and misrepresent facts? It’s not ok on either side.
Prior to reading this article were you pro RFK and his views? Rather than read and understand what Dr.Offit is saying were you looking for that one phrase that you could call out? Please reread this article with an open mind and empathy for all Dr. Offit has been through for the past twenty years. In regards to vaccines, RFK is wrong and as a result of his public statements, unvaccinated children have died or been left with long term effects of the diseases they have contracted. Dr. Offit, a paediatrician, is very much aware of these cases. Perhaps the sentence should have read: What has RFK accomplished to prevent disease in children brought on by viral
Infections? Seems like RFKs statements for the past 20 years have only served to cause an increase in these diseases.
WHAT? NO EMPATHY FOR RFK??? RFK HAS A SHITLOAD OF FACTS AND OTHER TOP MINDS IN THE SCIENCE AND MEDICAL FIELDS BEHIND HIM. OFFIT HAS BEEN DISMANTLED MANY TIMES. WTFU!
Thanks for the irony!
You mean like where RFK jr said the mercury went straight to the brain, but the actual data he referenced showed it was quickly excreted in the stool.
That is his business model: preying upon folks that can't tell the difference between brains and shit.
HEY STU***!!! THE MERCURY THAT GOES TO THE BRAIN IS NOT THE MERCURY THAT GETS EXCRETED IN THE STOOL!!! ARE YOU COMPLETED ILITERATE!!!???
Proof that unvaccinated children have died? Where'd ya get that one?
Parent of two vaccine injured children here, one I recovered from non verbal autism. So I know he is full of bs and he profits off sacrificing children like my sons. The fact that we are denied by western medicine in unconscionable.
FYI, fun fact, Pfizer, Merck, and other vax mfg have paid BILLIONS to the fed government for fraud charges for their vaccines. Pertusis vaccine didn't work and cause silent carriers. Outbreaks in measles due to the virus continuing to mutate, currently over 10 strains of measles, same with mumps, outbreaks in fully vaccinated populations of people. There is zero increase in ANY of those diseases despite your lie otherwise. Do better research.
I am their voice.
Why couldn't you give any examples of Dr. Offit misrepresenting facts?
I do not have a problem with the sentence in the last paragraph in context with the article and that paragraph per se. That sentence did not strike me in the same manner it did you. But readers can differ.
HEY STU***!!! HE WOULDN'T BE ON ROGAN AND HAVING 10 MILLION VIEWS IF HE WAS SPEWING JIBBERISH!
Thank you for sharing your perspective David!
Perhaps. But people threatened his children due to RFK’s lies. RFK is a dishonorable man. I’ll give Dr. Offit a pass here.
Actually, if you read carefully you will see that RFK Jr said that the NIH and/or National Academy of Sciences told him to ask Paul Offit and that Paul Offit made $186 million in his deal with Merck.
Offit from that decided to say that RKF Jr's statement was a lie, but he didn't address that RFK Jr might have been told that lie by someone at NIH or the American Academy of Sciences and repeated it in good faith. I didn't note any opprobrium towards NIH or AAS, but just RFK Jr., which I find puzzling. It sounds like RFK Jr didn't pass the information he learned off as his own thinking, but stated where he was given this information.
So based on what Offit wrote, that people were threatening his children due to things the NIH and AAS said about him, but instead he seems to blame RFK Jr. I wonder why he didn't try to get to the bottom of who at the NIH or AAS was saying such things, if they were lies.
"Actually, if you read carefully you will see that RFK Jr said that the NIH and/or National Academy of Sciences told him to ask Paul Offit and that Paul Offit made $186 million in his deal with Merck."
So RFK jr lied about the money and then lied about where he got his "information".
And you are OK with that?
what lies? show one. It’s just pfizer sponsored tv news that tells you how to feel. Try to find one of his lies. post it here
Assumption: RFK jr can read at the 5th grade level.
Given that assumption, you couldn't see any of his lies?
This is a good comment - the last paragraph hadn't flagged when I read it. I agree for maximum impact, personal jabs should be removed as they might undermine the very sensible rebuttal that preceded them. Really this is just the 'what has he accomplished?' sentence.
Though for context, I think this is another example of how asymetrical our expectations are of each party in debates / contentions like this. One party can casually say pretty much whatever they like in a calm manner, with implicit accusations baked right in - true or not. Thats RFK Jr in this case. Paul Offit has to set all that aside: the slander to his reputation that no doubt followed their original disussion, the threats etc, and maintain the steely calmness of a scientist: basically put his humanity aside and take the higher road, when there's every reason for him to be furious with the guy.
This isn't an excuse, as I do believe it's absolutely necassary to do this, so if we're talking impact, that sentence shouldn't be there. But, it's a sobering thought nonetheless, and really encapsultates the challenge that faces reasonable people when unpicking bad arguements or defending themselves.
I agree in part, but I don't think it's really the case (respectfully) that Offit, Hotez and others are all valiant and courageous takers-of-the-high-road, up against an onslaught of viscous slander and lies from people like RFK.
What I mean by that is: Offit, Hotez and others made themselves into 'political' and 'cultural' figures during the pandemic. They chose to step away from the role of 'just science' and get right down into the mud pit that is the media. In fact, a lot of the pronouncements of the state during Covid turned out to be nonsensical or just wrong, so now these figures are associated with that, and people want answers (albeit they often ask for them in wholly unhelpful ways).
So with respect to RFK actually making specific misrepresentations about Offit, and thimerosal, then that is absolutely wrong. So is any abusive behaviour toward Offit and his loved ones, that may have arisen from these public statements by RFK.
Offit certainly has right of reply, and calmly gives it here. But to frame it as him having to take the high road alone (a kind of innocent lamb, being attacked by wolves for no reason), I would just add that when anyone [in any career] decides to step out and make themselves a public figure, and to make specific statements that affect the lives of literally millions of people (some of which later seem to be specious or wrong), then is it not fair to expect that this is part of the cut & thrust of being a public figure in a divided age? — it's not exclusive to scientists, and I'm not sure that scientists should be exempted from it actually, in so far as they have become political figures of a kind ...and that is never a smooth ride!
What do you think?
I agree, I think you put it well. Putting yourself out there is a package deal, and one has to expect the bad with the good. I also agree that it’s unhelpful to lump one group as courageous truth purveyors and the other as fringe crackpots (or whatever) as the reality is always more nuanced than that.
My comment was mostly acknowledging that Offit is a human being, beyond ‘Scientist’ which is a hat he dons - and some leeway is in order when considering the comment he made: at least so it doesn’t undermine the first 90% of the article.
I do feel there’s an asymmetry though, in this case and more generally when we consider the debate of consensus vs fringe positions - which can be described without judging the truthfulness of any position. I think it has three parts:
1) Rules of Engagement
I feel those who become spokespeople for fringe positions generally have more implicit licence to be combative and hyperbolic vs their strait-laced counterparts. I think this tone is often likened to cutting through the noise, that it’s somehow more honest, so supports their position. I think this is far less the case for those defending a consensus position, where the expectation is to be completely exacting and by the book, the scientist persona - and deviation from this is more likely to weaken their position. I’m mindful that RFK Jr. wasn’t exactly hyperbolic; he was just emphatic / definitive about some tenuous stuff.
You could argue that this is the ideal stage to dismantle claims like this, so the ‘scientist persona’ should rejoice. I’m less sure of the net effect here, because at this point it becomes more about the debater than the point being made.
2) Type of Person
This relates more to the Hotez vs RFK debate non-starter, and people’s expectations of different personality types.
Generally, those who adopt fringe positions and rise to the surface as public speakers are going to be excellent communicators, charismatic, and totally confident in their own beliefs and ability in a debating arena. RFK Jr embodies this well: he’s a debater by profession and a career public speaker.
I think this is less true of those expected to defend these positions; where being an expert in a given field doesn’t always neatly overlap with those attributes.
E.g the Hotez example - whilst yes, he has put himself out there by broadcasting an opinion about this stuff, I can see why he might be confident enough to write a book / give an interview, and not square up to RFK Jr and an incensed Joe Rogan in a no-holds-barred podcast debate. To Rogan, Musk etc. not doing the debate is unthinkable and must be reflection on Hotez’s sincerity, when the truth is a bit simpler than that.
3) Bullshit Asymmetry
This part is a well-known phenomenon but a substantial part of the problem: that bullshit is far easier to deploy than refute. I tend to believe this is true for a variety of reasons, I think this will always tip the scales before the debate begins.
Thanks for your comment, very well articulated, and I mostly agree.
My (very minor) quibbles...
On point 2, Hotez: Unlike Offit, it's my impression that Hotez is a person who *loves* the public eye [on his terms; from the platform of power]; he is really quite an obsequious and duplicitous personality in many respects (I say that even despite having great respect for his work on an attempt at a patent-free Covid vaccine). Offit and RFK, I actually class both as rational actors, trying to do good, based on their own understanding of what 'good' means in that moment... and disagreeing, but not not being motivated by bad intent, fame, or profit.
I do not put Hotez in that same category; his ability to lie shamelessly, and pivot between lies, is truly something to behold. Perhaps in these conversations we need a parlance for 'likely speaking from an honest position' (whether right or wrong) vs 'likely to say whatever gets them on TV / 'wins' an argument', etc (which is many media 'pundits'). Offit , I personally feel has opened himself up to a new level of public critique by stepping out and making pronouncements that affected millions. But I don't honestly think he's in the same class as Hotez, who (even when right) comes across as a kind of scientific prostitute, who will happily go on TV and state the opposite of what he said 5 minutes ago, if that is marketable.
On point 3, yes I certainly agree. It's rather challenging to combat a gushing firehose of b*llsh*t.
Having said that, I would make the following caveats...
Prior generations of scientists (like Feynman) never considered themselves to be above talking to the public, even to explain the simplest concepts. I do think a strain of academic thought has taken root that is quite repellent to 'normal folks', and high handed in declaring itself 'above debate' ...and highlighting issues that are "settled" [the argument being: "because: consensus" ...insert: Einstein and others rolling in their graves at the idea that consensus is acceptable scientific argument lending any weight to the validity of your hypothesis...]
There is a current circling trope — "LOL, why should *real scientists* [meaning: consensus / establishment scientists] debate "anti vaxxers"?? ...I mean, what next? - should they debate flat earthers??" ...
My answer to this is: YES. They SHOULD debate flat-earthers.
We should revert to the time (which is not that long ago) where such debates might even be held before a large public audience, and broadcast to the whole country. And the scientists could show us how we form a hypothesis, and what experiments we could use to test this hypothesis, to find the true answer. I think there is a real fear that we shouldn't allow these things to be debated (again, because: consensus), but I deeply believe that fear to be unfounded. Science is magical, entertaining, changeable and challenging. It is certainly robust enough to withstand long form debates. In fact, I would posit that *had science communication been less paternalistic* and more *informative and honest* during Covid, I actually think we'd be in a far better place right now, with respect to public trust.
I would note that eminent scientists such as Richard Dawkins or Lawrence Krauss, they happily went out and debated in public (and won debates), on questions like: "Does science refute God?" — a question both men might view as absurd on it's face. Yet, on the contrary, they relished the chance to lay out their evidence, and argue their case. I think this is the model we need to return to. The current (elitist) attitude of "trust me bro, because: credentials ...or, because: consensus" — I think that's dead in the water in an age when so many of our institutions have fallen into disrepute, and where the divide between 'normal people' and the new 'elite class' seems to widen, and be enforced by an ever more repressive regime of censorship, sneering and gatekeeping.
I could be wrong about this, but I don't think you can deal with the claims of people like RFK effectively unless 'The Science' [and it's representatives] are willing to be more honest, and engage in these debates about what they can prove, and what was actually just supposition (and wrong). I think perhaps we'd agree on that?
You are blatantly misrepresenting the Burbacher study.
Burbacher et al very clearly conclude that Thimerasol has a *higher* inorganic mercury content in monkey's brains compared to methyl mercury and, thus, only looking at the half life in blood is not a fair risk assessment since there are some other studies hinting that inorganic Hg accumulation in brain may be harmful and more risk assessment is needed. Later, this even led to Thimerasol being removed from children's vaccines.
Source: Burbacher's own study https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.113-a543
Last I read they are still using it in the MMR shot
Never used in MMR.
Can't be used with any live virus vaccine because it would inactivate the virus.
That is totally not true! Its listed as part of the MMR vaccine in the CDC website and Maybe WHO
It has been a month.
Seriously, if you honestly want to be a free thinker so see things more clearly....why don't you read the sites YOU listed and see that thimerosal was never used in MMR.
Big hint: it is a disinfectant...it kills pathogens and MMR is a live virus vaccine.....
So why didn't you post the nonexistent page from the CDC site?
Still working on how 1999 came before 2005?
Sigh....
"Later, this even led to Thimerasol being removed from children's vaccines"
The Burbacher study is from 2005.
Thimerosal was removed starting in 1999.
Whoops!
BTW it is not even a safety study.
You are right, B et al came after and Thimerasol was removed before probably based on some other criteria.
You are right that B et al is not a safety study in clinical trial sense. It provides important info regarding the mechanisms with which mercury can accumulate within different parts of the body.
The criticism offered above still stands though that Paul is misrepresenting the Burbacher study. The study doesn't clear thimerasol as safe, but rather, points out why a straightforward comparison with methyl mercury may not be accurate for safety.
Thank you for the follow-up.
1. It is a matter of public record, thimerosal was removed from vaccines as part of the precautionary principle.
2. The Burbacher study is in no way a safety study. The point is that there was a lot of data on Me-Hg and thus Me-Hg standards were being used to access the safety of Et-Hg--the exact point I think you are making is that this is incorrect.
3. It does show that trace levels of Et-Hg in the brain. Of course, being alive....eating, breathing, drinking causes trace levels of mercury in the brain. There is no biological effect from these trace levels.
4. Remember that RFK jr misrepresented two papers. Here is the second one:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18245396/
When RFK jr asserted the mercury went straight to the brain, he really meant it was rapidly excreted in the stool.
No, the inorganic content of mercury was higher in the brains of monkeys in the thimerasol group. Please check burbacher et al. RFK's interpretation of the paper is more "right" than Offit's.
Sorry....here is the link:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280342/
Instead of listening to not a scientist RFK jr....why don't you read the words and see for yourself?
Here again is a free version of the paper.
"The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg."
"Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed monkeys were approximately twice that of the MeHg monkeys."
"Results from these studies indicated higher inorganic Hg concentrations in the brain 6 months after MeHg exposure had ended, whereas organic Hg had cleared from the brain. The estimated half-life of organic Hg in the brain of these adult monkeys was consistent across various brain regions at approximately 37 days (similar to the brain half-life in the present infant monkeys). The estimated half-life of inorganic Hg in the brain in the same adult cohort varied greatly across some regions of the brain, from 227 days to 540 days."
"Stereologic and autometallographic studies on the brains of these adult monkeys indicated that the persistence of inorganic Hg in the brain was associated with a significant increase in the number of microglia in the brain, whereas the number of astrocytes declined."
"The longer-term effects (> 6 months) of inorganic Hg in the brain have not been examined. In addition, whether similar effects are observed at lower levels in the developing brain is not known."
"The key findings of the present study are the differences in the disposition kinetics and demethylation rates of thimerosal and MeHg. Consequently, MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg."