For insurance, I suggest people start writing to their *state* legislators to ensure continued coverage of covid (and other) vaccines. The states have primary jurisdiction over insurance in the US, because of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945.
Adding - the ACA sets a floor, not a ceiling, for preventive care (including vaccines). Those minimum standards do not preempt a state from requiring insurance from covering more.
Unfortunately, those of us who live in states with Republican legislatures are not likely to be successful with that approach. Our current Republican Assembly Chair here in Wisconsin is a Trump wannabe.
Vaccines have been one of the greatest medical advances of all times. Jefferson wrote Jenner a congratulatory letter predicting his vaccination would eliminate smallpox. It was a long time coming, but on that point Jefferson was right. Anti vaccination thinking has been present throughout the history of vaccination. Yet vaccines continue to prevent disease and save lives. The development and testing of vaccines has improved, and the Covid-19 vaccines have been more intensely studied than older vaccines and found to be safe and effective. Now we are dealing with a regime that questions vaccines, but has not the training or perspective to understand the issues. Bias and misinformation at least are guiding their decisions. Pathways to recommendations, such as the FDA bypassing advisory boards and the CDC, are revised to eliminate expertise and transparency. There are clearly those in the FDA who are still there who could point out to the public the danger to public health, which is shared by all, and it’s implications to health and demonstrate the autocratic take over of all levels government. Government is for public good as is public health, this administration is an opponent of each.
Some vaccines have been hugely benefical, others have questionable reward given the risk (especially at the individal level) but are pushed for monetary and career reasons by corrupt metaphysically evil people unto a naive public.
It's about time we are going to start at least trying to figure out which is which.
The FDA and the CDC make careful evaluations of risk benefit analysis for vaccines. The data are available publicly and the deliberations include open meetings of respected experts. The FDA has a VRBPAC committee and the CDC has the ACIP committee that meets and discusses their deliberations before recommendations are made. These experts are truly experts and the public good is their desired outcome. The issue of public benefit is primary. The evil people are those who either choose not to understand the process or are fooled by people who do not understand the process and do not have the humility to know what they do not know. RFK jr has said people should not take medical advice from him. After 50 years of medicine and science, including working in vaccine development, I would suggest that he was correct on that point. The public may be naive, but they manifest their naivety by listening to the biased and poorly informed. Vaccines and pure drinking water are great public health successes that have elevated more suffering and saved more lives than can be measured. You are correct, careful evaluation is necessary, but that is what is done.
>Give us the percentage, son, and then explain how this is relevant
If you can't understand CONFLICTS OF INTEREST then there is no point
>Yes, because that would…
Don't preach to me about ethics when the FDA and CDC are revolving doors into positions at pharmaceutical giants.
Don't mouth off about ethics when these drug companies have settled multi billion FRAUD cases
This isn't rocket science. I can do an epidemiological study in my own neighborhood. There are about 12 kids in my children's school who aren't vaccinated. Grab a sampling of 12 vaccinated kids of the same socio economic background (whose parents followed the CDC vaccine schedule)
Compare doctors visits
Compare overall health
Compare chronic illnesses and allergies
Compare school performance mental development
Btw I have done that study (snecdotal.it maybe) which is why I swore off continuing the CDC vaccination schedule
Oh, you mean RFK junior being HHS secretary while earning millions advising on anti-vaccine litigation?
All you other claims are rubber ducks rising back up to the surface in your bathtub after you mommy ducked them under. But she needs to wrap her fingers firmly around a wooden spoon and apply it repeatedly and forcefully to the bare buttocks of her little boy.
A study with only 12 + 12 would still be "anecdotal", not valuable data.
"In cahoots with pharmaceutical giants" would be a valid bias to mitigate, but the politically motivated incompetent step of taking real scientific research out of the equation is still a horrible step backwards that ignores (or even promotes?) its harm to public health.
Fortunate for us that they dont. Otherwise we wouldnt know that 95% of mortality rates to childhood illnesses had decreased before vaccines for them appeared on the market
How will Prasad and Macary answer Dr Offit’s questions on transparency and process? These guys were so happy to be the Monday morning quarterbacks of the public health officials they’ve replaced, chatting for hours on Zubin Damania’s ZDogg MD show.
I would have assumed they’d be comfortable explaining themselves as they do seem thoughtful and capable of constructive dialogue. Are they concerned that in the free for all of a Q&A they’ll be cornered into offending Kennedy and, more importantly, his base?
Also, I’m curious if Damania will take up Offit’s points. He seems to have moved away from public health questions since the election. Kudos to Dr Offit for being such a valuable resource throughout.
Ad hominems aren't persuasive, especially when you call a demonstrably intelligent person "dumb." ZDogg has given far more of a platform to Vinay Prasad than to Offit. (They co-host a separate podcast). I don't know if you think Prasad is also "dumb," or if he's smart because he wants to repeat studies that have already been done but will find a different result. In any case, Prasad seemed to think highly of Offit in the past (link below). Offit is not an extremist when it comes to vaccines (because he knows the evidence pro and con), and his main beef is revealed in this quote: "If they voted in June to narrow it to just those at highest [risk] — everybody over 65, and those less than 65 who have a medical risk factor — then that would be one thing. The difference here is that the FDA has made it part of their licensure." (link #2). That affects insurance coverage, which makes it unaffordable for some people who want to get the vaccine. That REMOVES freedom of choice, and that is something that they supposedly want, but apparently only when it applies to them, not to others. Given that a large percentage of people get their boosters at the pharmacy, Offit asks an extremely important question when he asks if it's up to the pharmacist to determine who is at greater risk. Makary and Prasad are NOT dumb, but neither of them have training and experience in infectious diseases and/or vaccines. They found it extremely easy to criticize when they were not in charge. (And they were not always right, as Makary's infamous Wall Street 2021 OpEd proved). Now that they are in charge, it is time for them to face the critiques. If they have evidence-based/rational responses, great. Let's hear them. Their NEJM article did not address many of Offit's and others' critical questions, and despite promising transparency, they refused to take questions. Hmmmm.....if I were a conspiracy theorist, I might ask what they're hiding.
Offit himself relies on combination of ad hominen attacks ("antivaxers" "AIDS Denialist" blah blah), a boatload of logical fallacies and bogus studies. Not to mention massive financial conflicts of interest. Offit, like is buddy Ferret Fauci. believes his "science" is the "Science." And whoever questions it, is an Antivaxer. grandma killer. But let's just start with the notion of "contagion.' Please cite the study that provides "measles' or "COVID" or pick your purported "virus' is "contagious." Go ahead, I'll wait.
So you think viruses aren't contagious. Then I imagine you're very disappointed that neither Prasad nor Makary agree with you, and that Trump is a germaphobe. Silly fools!
I agree, I’d like to see what Demania thinks. I wonder if they have thought through the insurance coverage angle. Concerning policy for sure. Am in Canada, hope we don’t follow suit.🤞🏻
Agreed about insurance. They want us to be like European countries when it suits them, but not when it doesn't; i.e., universal health insurance coverage. They are comparing apples to oranges and I hope their peers call them on it because I do think that still matters to them (at least I hope). With Trump in office, hopefully Canada will always want to do the opposite of what he does! O Canada and Go Canada! :)
What do every single one of the covid "contrarians" have in common?
Prasad - Heme/Onc
Makary - Surg Onc
Bhattacharya - none (???)
Atlas - Radiology
McCullough - Cardiology
Ladapo - Cardiology
Cole - Dermatopath
Dr Oz - CT Surg
Dr Drew - Addiction Medicine
Bret Weinstein - not even a damned doctor!
Alex Berenson - spy novelist
I can keep going...
Not one even practices in a specialty related to treating sick covid patients, much less has actual experience in the area. None had any clue what we were seeing on the front lines of the first wave. ALL became famous because they spoke out, though, and gave the Fox News crowd what they wanted to hear. And since Trump's understanding of all issues is just what he gets through either twitter posts or Fox headlines in between rounds of golf, these are his "experts".
Bhattacharya is an economist with a medical degree (and zero clinical training or experience), turned health economist, turned contrarian magaland darling, after shitting out a deeply flawed economic agenda masquerading as public health policy.
Prasad is a dismissive narcissistic sh-t-flinger. He's a condescending social media bully that cherry-picks data to support his "establishment bad" public health and clinical trial narratives, oversimplifying nuanced subjects, and applying broadly generalized critiques to complex systems and issues.
Grievance politics and antiestablishmentarianism, via self-promotion and audience cultivation, are their areas of expertise. Likewise, Makary, who made his (new) name bashing the "medical establishment." COVID was the best thing that ever happened to these elite establishment stalwarts - now leveled up, playing leading characters in magaword.
Makary regurgitated misleading claims for his 'public health policy by edict' NEJM opinion piece with Poo-Smearing Prasad:
I don't know if they are "grifters" though. Just nuts, and ignorant. There are hundreds of thousands of medical doctors in the US, probably close to a million. Tens of thousands of those who have specific expertise related to covid (ID, pulm, critical care, ER, immunology, etc). And at least hundreds of us who both have that expertise and who had direct experience at the front lines during the first wave. But Fox/Twitter/Rogan/etc instead elevated those like the "contrarians" listed above to celebrity status because they say what people want to hear.
We are now full blown idiocracy territory. Not an exaggeration.
McCullough, Oz, Bobby, Cole, Berenson, Weinstein have big-time monetary grifts going on. Bhatty, Prasad, Makary, and Oz$$$ are far from ignorant, though they foster and stoke ignorance (or something) in others. They grift for power and adulation.
The term "idiocracy" doesn't adequately convey the malign motivations behind all of this. It seemed weird to me that some of these appointments took so long to announce. We knew early on that Batty, Prasad, Makary and Grifty Means were going to be cast in big roles. What took so long?
I got a reply from from someone on McCullough's site when I asked when I asked when he treated hospitalized Covid patients and why he didn't mention the fact that you were more likely to contract myocarditis from Covid disease that the vaccine:
"Dr Peter McCullough has been treating covid patients right from the start. Did you not hear his early senate hearing where he described that, which started his "cancellation" process?"
I have no clue what his "cancellation process" refers to, but it couldn't have possibly have gone far enough!
Why would he, as a cardiologist, been treating sick covid patients “from the start”? Ask them very specifically which hospital and when. Would be easy to fact check. I know people at most NYC hospitals. Could just check the schedule those dates.
Returning to the thread, my new friends had already made the claim that I had “made up” my name in order to slander the good doctor - pauvre petite - and I told them that if they were willing to assume my home mortgage, I would gladly assume a pseudonym. It remains to be seen if I get a response as to his hospital privileges.
"Policy-making for health" and "data sharing" by this administration are deeply flawed -- we will need the experts outside of government to provide the guidance needed and maintain reliable data through this period of alt-facts and misinformation
Vinay will respond to this with a bunch of childish insults. Nothing more. Because in addition to not having any expertise on the subject and absolutely NO clinical experience related to treating sick covid patients on the front lines during the first wave, he is honestly just a jerk with obvious insecurity issues. I used to like ZDogg and his videos. But his elevating Vinay Prasad to the spotlight is absolutely disgusting.
Notice the childless lengths YOUR side go to deceive the public. One of you m0rons took my online id here - "Aldous Blackwolf" cloned it by changing the last l for an i and imported my avatar - the PHOENIX GATE - then proceeds to comment here as if they were me.
Thats fraud and deception. But then again you are provaxxer pharma-shills - I EXPECTED NO LESS
What I havent figured out is what the m0ron hoped to accomplish impersonating me. Did he or she think that I couldnt just change my nickname and import a new avatar? Or where they hoping to discourage me from posting?
Idiots. I havent only just started with you buffoons
am suprised - deception didnt annoy you? but again you are a pharma-shill supporting companies that pay out billions for fraud
go ahead and clone this account name and avatar. Ill just rename it and select a new avatar
You dont get what motivates me. its the sheer anger at having allowed myself to be duped by the public health agencies and pharmaceutical giants.
I wont give up this fight. if offit cancels me like Rombios - ill create another account. if he switches the comment section to subscriber only ILL BECOME a PAID subscriber so i can comment
You fools got away for years using “anti-vaxxer” as a curse word to keep information seekers quiet.
Think about the people who work in occupations that have face to face interactions with the public, such as grocery stores or healthcare. They should be considered to be high risk, and that situation was not addressed in the guidelines.
Very happy with the vaccine recommend recommendations. Allows a lot of wiggle room for maximizers who wish to get the vaccine despite the fact that there is no data showing that this vaccine in current Covid strain is providing any efficacy against hospitalization or death from upper respiratory infection.
Wrong answer. Booster approval issues aside, that "wiggle room" ensures that many US insurance companies WILL NOT PAY for these vaccinations for those outside the maga-spoiled guidelines (and revised product labels). Inclusion as recommended seasonal booster for adults on CDC schedule necessitated a minimum level of reimbursement - but didn't actually mean much beyond that - as with yearly influenza vaccine. Population-wide adult "mandates" are long gone.
No biggie for those with $250 to spend once or twice yearly - Or for Julia and her fellow gloating "skeptical" contrarian Prasadists.
that of course depends on how you define "unvaccinated". in the case of Covid - you remain "unvaccinated" up to two weeks (within the range you would experience visible adverse reactions) after vaccination. And in many cases the hospitals classified people as UNvaccinated after they died in order to reap insurance
Official mortality data for England suggest systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status and uncertain effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination
If healthy lives were a priority, we wouldn't see cuts in medical research and access to health care. But this administration only cares about life before birth, not after. We also wouldn't have a rogues' gallery of what many consider quacks, basing decisions on ideology rather than on the consensus of years of published research. Hearing Kennedy brag that he "couldn't be more pleased to announce" removing the Covid vaccine recommendation during pregnancy is as bizarre as having a Flat Earther head of NASA cancelling orbital missions. Because, hey, you can't orbit a flat earth, right? I'll close with a quote from Zels et al. in the journal, Placenta, dated 25 March 2024. "The risk of fetal demise was more than 5 times higher for non-vaccinated mothers, and their placentas showed significantly more syncytiotrophoblast necrosis and chronic histiocytic intervillositis compared to vaccinated mothers (both p < 0,001)." Yes, five times more dead fetuses. Did you hear that, supposed pro-lifers?
I am afraid there is no hope in looking for logical consistency in anything this administration does.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has come out and criticised these guidelines, and it still recommends Covid vacccination for pregnant women.
It might help you understand the evidence based rationale for the updated guidelines if you read the NEJM article from last week authored by Prasad and Makary discussing this very topic:
Your post above is concerning. You seem to be suggesting that people literally do their own research instead of simply relying on the government experts.
I am concerned by the following facts about the mRNA shots:
VAERS data showing huge spike in deaths after vaccination corelated to covid shots;
studies showing spike in IG4 immune antibodies after repeated doses of covid mRNA shots;
studies showing greater likelihood of contracting covid based on number of covid shots received;
data showing Pfizer mRNA shot recipients 36% more likely to die of any cause compared to Moderna mRNA shot recipients one year out;
initial trial data on mRNA shots showing equal numbers of infections in control compared to vaccine arms;
initial trail data on mRNA shots showing rate of SAE at 1/800;
data form V-SAFE showing 7.7% of mRNA shot recipients sought medical care for side effects from shot;
continued elevated excess mortality trends in heavily mRNA shot exposed populations, compared to non- exposed populations;
lack of "pull forward" decline in all cause mortality in mRNA shot exposed populations compared to non-exposed populations;
revelations that Pfizer deliberately delayed releasing mRNA trial data until after November 2020 election;
Until these matters are addressed- public confidence in all vaccines, not just mRNA shots- will continue to crater.
Josh, you stated "instead of simply relying on the government experts." I generally agree that we *should* be able to trust experts in government with such health policy and recommendations. The problem has become: this administration has fired the real experts and replaced them with shills and non-qualified alternatives.
The Secretary of HHS is a litigation attorney who has made his millions attempting to destroy evidence-based science and medical practice with sham medicine and pseudoscience.
Dr. Makary, while an expert in abdominal surgery and health policy, is not an expert in vaccines. He's not a vaccinologist, immunologist, or expert in infectious disease.
Dr. Prasad, while an expert in cancer and health statistics, is not an expert in vaccines. He's not a vaccinologist, immunologist, or expert in infectious disease.
I previously respected a lot of the views and work of Drs. Makary and Prasad. However, over the past few years, they have gone off the rails, gotten into bed with Trump, Kennedy, Jr., and the ilk of junk science. Their words have become so incredibly untrustworthy that I simply have to ignore them now and look to real scientists and experts in these fields, like Dr. Offitt.
So, while I again generally agree that we *SHOULD* be able to trust our government experts, this is a case of the exact opposite being true.
The prior administration forced out Gruber and Krause over politics. They would not sign off on covid boosters based on the evidence available, so politics, not science, was the agenda:
Paul Offit, a well known and highly respected vaccine scientist, published in NEJM his reservations about covid policies affecting low risk populations (Offit is certainly entitled to "do his own research"- and I believe we should consider his views to inform medical decisions). Of course, one would have to "do one's own research" to find his views-
"I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later."
Josh, The politicization of science and medicine need to end...on both sides of the aisle. You'll get no argument from me on that. Allow science to be free from politics, agendas, and BS. Let scientists do what they're trained to do...seek truth.
And Dr. Offitt has stated those things based on his expertise, yes.
Can you provide citations for the claims which you utilized in your original post? I'd like to follow the trail of evidence myself that you're laying. Some of them seem to be hasty conclusions, lacking robust evidence and investigation, and may show all sorts of bias, subjective conclusions, false assumptions, and overstated correlations.
Also, quick note, using VAERS data is not the best way to make an argument based on science. VAERS isn't a scientific system and anyone can have access to it. It's a reporting system, not a research system. The very best it could do, if used properly, is possibly find correlations. However, VAERS does not establish causal factors. We also saw a spike in false reports from anti-vaccine activists to VAERS making claims which are not substantiated anywhere. However, on the good side, VAERS reporting did lead to further investigation which did clearly show a causal link to myocarditis and COVID-19 vaccinations. Using VAERS information as your source of proof is sort of like saying that a police tip line proves who committed a crime.
I also generally agree that "we *SHOULD* be able to trust our government experts", but I stopped trusting in government experts on vaccination decades ago. This had to do with the many documented conflicts of interest tolerated by those who were appointed to the advisory committees.
While I am disappointed in the lack of transparency shown by this administration so far, I don't find it to be any worse than previous administrations. I am happy by this administrations move towards decision makers without financial interests aligned with the for-profit vaccine producers.
Another "own researcher" parroting her substack-acquired talking points. Gobble up turds, so that you can puke them proudly - Malone, Bobby, Singal, Arora and the Second Most Transparently Fraudulent Grifter. See ya, Ci(y)a.
Beth, Those conflicts of interest are incredibly well known. They're disclosed by all members of ACIP and VRBAC. Since the field of vaccine research/development is awfully small, there's always going to be crossover. But the conflicts are acknowledged and members often abstain from voting if their interest if too close.
Further, I wouldn't really call vaccine makers "for profit." Yes, they're part of for-profit corporations but vaccines hardly make a profit. And that's why so many manufacturers have dropped out. At latest count from WHO, there are about 10 major producers and this number is dropping year after year. There's simply no money in it, especially when they do all the development work and assume all the risk. And because of RFK, Jr. and his ilk they're constantly being litigated against for asinine reasons that are not based in science. Thus, many leave the field which puts the entire world's population at risk. You also have to consider that almost every vaccine is a once in a lifetime intervention. No really profit there. Thus, those former manufacturers are switching to chronic disease drugs because those are taken for the long term/forever.
While "conflict of interest" and "for-profit" are great buzzwords for trying to sound like there's a sinister case here with vaccines. However, any slight or cursory look into these words and the real story behind lets them allows the thin fabric they're built upon fall apart into the dust they came from.
"vaccines hardly make a profit" might be true in general, I don't know, but I do know that the mRNA COVID vaccine produced at least 3 new billionaires.
I'd be more likely to listen to conflict of interest arguments if the people advancing them weren't anti-vax nuts in general. In fact, I have been very sympathetic to past exposes about the terrible revolving door incentives at FDA. It's a shame that the current crowd think we can't address this problem without burning it all down.
Dennis, I won't say that the government's total policy around funding vaccines always made sense. However, giving a large pool of money took the usual red tape away to ensure that a viable vaccine would not take decades (as many do) to come to market.
There is a balancing act that needs to be achieved in a program like that. Sadly, yes, Pfizer and Moderna CEOs got uber rich on our dime.
A conflict of interest being well known does not erase the conflict. Our current president exemplifies this with a foreign government offering him a fancy new plane fit for a king that he will be keeping for his personal use after he leaves office and oligarchs, both foreign and domestic, pouring money into his crypto coin.
The point of having documentation for the conflict of interests of committee members is to allow members of the public like myself, who are not part of the medical community, to assess how much bias that creates and make our own decisions regarding their recommendations. When most or all of the members of the advisory committee have such waivers on file, as was the case back in the 90's, it impacts our willingness to simply accept their recommendations as having the best interests of the public their number one concern.
It's certainly clear that the committee has had a bias towards recommending more and more vaccines over the past three decades. IMO, they have done insufficient research on finding an optimum schedule and checking for interactions when multiple vaccines are given on the same visit.
Vaccines are a major source of income for their producers. How much of that income is profit is harder to discern, but when the U.S. government funds the development, as with COVID vaccines, there isn't as much risk involved for companies producing them. Given their profits, I conclude the profit motive is alive and well in the pharmaceutical industry, including vaccine producers.
Beth, I agree that the current President has emoluments problems up the wazoo and these can easily be avoided.
When it comes to finding the expertise needed to evaluate the mountainous level of information and data that come with vaccines, you're going to find an incredibly shallow pool. You nor I are qualified to make those decisions. And thus, yes, we're going to end up with people who work for vaccine manufacturers, or who have developed vaccines in the past. Yes, there can be conflicts but many of them can be managed. We rely on the ethical work and practice of these experts. Dr. Offitt, for example, did not vote on the vaccine that he created. Nor should he have. This is what has been happening for generations and we're glad for their level of transparency.
I don't disagree that the public should be involved. But if we all started raising a fuss over the level of conflicts of interest in an expertise pool that is more like a puddle, I fear that we lose out on their amazing brilliance.
The committees make these recommendations based not on bias for profits but out of bias for outcomes. They know what they're talking about and recommend that which is best in their judgment.
The vaccine schedule is based, again, on expert work. What the optimum schedule is? Our schedule is pretty darn optimal. I would love to see any data to the contrary (and by data, I mean peer-reviewed, ethically obtained investigations). There are many who claim that the vaccine schedules "overwhelm the immune system" of newborns. This is simply not the case. Newborns systems are bombarded from the moment of birth. The vaccines pale in comparison to what they are given from just coming out of the womb. There is no overload of of anything that has ever been shown and that research was not completed by the vaccine creators or manufacturers but by independent universities and research groups. They have shown there are no harms from the current vaccine schedules used in the US.
>When it comes to finding the expertise needed to evaluate the mountainous level of information and data that come with vaccines, you're going to find an incredibly shallow pool. You nor I are qualified to make those decisions. And thus, yes, we're going to end up with people who work for vaccine
That's pure poppycock. It doesn't take rocket science to evaluate this data
Yes, conflicts of interest can be "managed" to some extent. That does not eliminate the effect of unconscious bias. Whether or not you consider this a concern, I do.
I would agree that the bias is for outcomes rather than profits. But the outcomes of interest can easily be influenced by financial considerations. That's the whole point of requiring the waivers. My perception is that they want to maximize the number of people getting vaccinated for as many diseases as possible. This is not the same bias as wanting outcomes to maximize health for individuals.
The fact that you think they should do a Vac vs unVax study and that this could be ethical in any way tells me all I need to know about your state of idiocy.
The fact that you think they could do a simple epidemiological study free of confounders and that you think this could possibly be necessary given what we already know tells me all I need to know about your state of idiocy.
But then you belong to a Killer Kult where idiocy rules.
All the clinical trials are transparent available to the public, lying antivax arsehole.
"Discussion of ethics"
Get a grip, son, it is UNETHICAL to conduct a clinical trial in which you do not offer best available treatment to date to the control group. Got it? It is called "clinical equipoise". Your clinical trial will NOT be approved if this condition is not satisfied. Got it?
"when you support pharmaceutical giants"
That is a blatant LIE. You know what my position is but you LIE about it anyway.
I support:
1) Maximum government regulation of the pharmaceutical industry.
2) Maximum fines for not abiding by those regulations.
But you have no argument, so you lie like all science illiterate antivax arseholes.
"that have settled multi billion dollar FRAUD cases"
No problem from where I stand.
What about you, son, regarding full government regulation of the pharmaceutical company. Let's see if we can agree on at least one thing!
BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF VACCINES!
Neither Prasad or Makary are by ANY means "experts". Prasad is a hematologist and Makary is a cancer surgeon. They have no specific expertise related to infectious disease, to vaccines, to immunology, to pulmonology, to public health, and sure as hell have no first-hand understanding whatsoever of we faced on the front lines during the first wave. They became famous because Fox and right-wing Twitter gravitated to them immediately because they told them what they wanted to hear. No other reason.
Josh, you've been a public health antagonist since well before COVID, with your ugly attorneys. Are you on better terms with your daughter at this point? After using her for your crusade?
Every other claim you make here is easily debunked. And you would realize this if you got your information from ACTUAL experts, not what you seem to get from social media and/or Fox.
Cite peer reviewed sources. I assure you & others, Covid killed many. Every pandemic does. Lack of clarity online caused more death & disease. As for vaccine, the "one & done" may be all anyone needs. Kids with cystic fibrosis are high risk. Insurance agencies are not the enemy. Eva DB Fain, BSN, MPH, retired public health nurse.
Just because scientific peer review has some flaws, that doesn’t mean you can accept advice on how to do brain surgery from a road sweeper, or be told how to fly a plane by a plumber.
There are no commenters on lewrockwell.com. Lewrockwell.com is just a website that gathers news and current events for their audience. That could be anything related to liberty and freedom (medical and otherwise).
Youll see a vast range of discussions for LIBERTARIAN minded people covering politics, international events, banking, local events, etc
My opinion on this subject (as I pointed out before) is informed by the BOOKS written by board certified medical doctors and research scientists in public and private practice
All I suggest is that people wishing to get valid evidence and information should avoid the crank antivaccine web sites and stick to verified, credible and evidence based information.
Post Covid lies ? - thats not going to work. Most people who were ignorant before have since woken up
Science ESPECIALLY medical science is completely corrupted. It needs to be burned to the ground. Until then - its safe to do the opposite of what ever the majority of "medical scientists" suggest.
I approach it by saying to myself
first - CUI BONO? who benefits
second - i look for medical doctors and research scientists who are being criticized, attacked, deplatformed - they are the Galileos of our time and the only ones I will bother listening to
third - I look for books on this subject. social media accounts can be pulled and deleted, interviews can be rescheduled and cancelled. research articles on various research websites can be removed and pulled.
You write gushing, flowery commentaries extolling Brainworm's "faith, integrity and morality" to the Baltimore Sun, Josh Bygosh. AND James Lyons-Weiler wrote an ode to you - pre-COVID! That is some next-level lunacy, Dr. Science. I can't be bothered to include those links.
IgG4 is still neutralising like IgG1, without being inflammatory. Bee keepers have IgG4 against bee venom having been stung multiple times, and this has no detrimental effects on them.
The SAE of 1 in 800 was based on poor statistical analysis, combining the sae of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines although no one would have both vaccines at the same time, and subsequent doses were separate time independent events, i.e. the probability of an SAE in a second dose is the same as the probability of an SAE following the first dose or subsequent doses were.
Excess deaths were not due to vaccination but the fallout from the pandemic (excess deaths following the 1918 influenza pandemic didn’t stabilise for over a decade), delayed diagnoses and treatments etc.
You do realise that no vaccine prevents infection?
>You do realise that no vaccine prevents infection?
That's not the lie we were told. We were told vaccines prevent infections and transmission
In truth those of us who did our research realized quickly that the ONLY path to lifelong immunity is natural infection. This applies to every illness for which a vaccine exists for
This child killer is linking to confabulated quotes. The numbskull cannot, or will not, link to the original quotes and definitely will not provide you with the context of those quotes.
Stop moving the goalpost fcktard. You said ANY scientist. Theres more than 1 there you imbecile
Science education? Lol.
Dont me laugh.
Last year Rombios challenged you to produce a SINGLE book (in your vast library of popup books and crayon doodles) that inform your opinion on.this subject. You couldnt manage 1; just 1.
You spent the time deflecting, character assinating and false narratives.
What a joke you are. Overpaid pharma shill. But thats not going to last very long. Soon you might actually have to get a real job
The immune system cannot distinguish between vaccine induced pathogens or infection induced pathogens. The problem with the latter is that you cannot know how seriously ill you may become following infection.
>The immune system cannot distinguish between vaccine induced pathogens or infection induced pathogens.
That's a lie. The fact that you need boosters puts that lie to rest.
There's a massive difference between natural infection through the bodies GASTRO INTESTINAL FILTER and direct injection into the blood stream
Stop trying to fool people.
>The problem with the latter is that you cannot know how seriously ill you may become following infection.
Doesn't matter. That's a personal decision and the reward is lifetime immunity without the dangers of a vaccine (chronic illnesses and death and disability)
Infact before vaccine manufacturers hijacked the definition: HERD IMMUNITY was tied to NATURAL INFECTION
American parents mid last century routinely took their kids to measles mumps and chickenpox parties to be infected and suffer to lifelong immunity
They wouldn't have taken these risks if death were part of the equation
During CONvid my wife and her friends routinely organized playdates for the kids of the neighborhood SANS MASKS, for much the same reason
All this fvkwits links are to news media - not a single scientific paper is linked here - and all the opinions of lawyers and politicians. What a clueless nong. He also got his mechanic to put in his artificial hip and his carpenter to make his set of dentures.
2. IgG4 shifts have no adverse clinical consequences in the context of Covid.
3. The studies apparently showing more Covid after getting the shots are outnumbered 50 to one by studies showing the opposite, and they are invalidated by serious confounding and selection bias.
4. Pfizer recipients had a 36% higher mortality than Moderna recipients, but you could equally present that data as showing Moderna recipients having a 26% LOWER mortality than Pfizer, and you fail to mention that mortality following either vaccine is still far lower than the mortality in the unvaccinated.
5. You misrepresent the Pfizer trial data.
6. You misrepresent the VSD data; you fail to say that the background rate of contact with s health provider is around 15% per year, so Covid vaccine recipients actually had lower levels of contact than expected.
7. You lie… overall all cause mortality (excess mortality) is lower in vaccinated than unvaccinated populations.
8. The reason public confidence in vaccines has dropped is mainly because of the spread of lies and disinformation about them by antivaxers like you.
For insurance, I suggest people start writing to their *state* legislators to ensure continued coverage of covid (and other) vaccines. The states have primary jurisdiction over insurance in the US, because of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945.
Adding - the ACA sets a floor, not a ceiling, for preventive care (including vaccines). Those minimum standards do not preempt a state from requiring insurance from covering more.
Unfortunately, those of us who live in states with Republican legislatures are not likely to be successful with that approach. Our current Republican Assembly Chair here in Wisconsin is a Trump wannabe.
I will DO THE OPPOSITE
Anubis <-- I will DO THE OPPOSITE to this antivax lunatic.
Vaccines have been one of the greatest medical advances of all times. Jefferson wrote Jenner a congratulatory letter predicting his vaccination would eliminate smallpox. It was a long time coming, but on that point Jefferson was right. Anti vaccination thinking has been present throughout the history of vaccination. Yet vaccines continue to prevent disease and save lives. The development and testing of vaccines has improved, and the Covid-19 vaccines have been more intensely studied than older vaccines and found to be safe and effective. Now we are dealing with a regime that questions vaccines, but has not the training or perspective to understand the issues. Bias and misinformation at least are guiding their decisions. Pathways to recommendations, such as the FDA bypassing advisory boards and the CDC, are revised to eliminate expertise and transparency. There are clearly those in the FDA who are still there who could point out to the public the danger to public health, which is shared by all, and it’s implications to health and demonstrate the autocratic take over of all levels government. Government is for public good as is public health, this administration is an opponent of each.
IT'S a shame that FDA hasn't kept to ITS lane.
Some vaccines have been hugely benefical, others have questionable reward given the risk (especially at the individal level) but are pushed for monetary and career reasons by corrupt metaphysically evil people unto a naive public.
It's about time we are going to start at least trying to figure out which is which.
Hooey. Just a load of hooey.
The FDA and the CDC make careful evaluations of risk benefit analysis for vaccines. The data are available publicly and the deliberations include open meetings of respected experts. The FDA has a VRBPAC committee and the CDC has the ACIP committee that meets and discusses their deliberations before recommendations are made. These experts are truly experts and the public good is their desired outcome. The issue of public benefit is primary. The evil people are those who either choose not to understand the process or are fooled by people who do not understand the process and do not have the humility to know what they do not know. RFK jr has said people should not take medical advice from him. After 50 years of medicine and science, including working in vaccine development, I would suggest that he was correct on that point. The public may be naive, but they manifest their naivety by listening to the biased and poorly informed. Vaccines and pure drinking water are great public health successes that have elevated more suffering and saved more lives than can be measured. You are correct, careful evaluation is necessary, but that is what is done.
The Center for Data Concucsion and the FDA are revolving doors for corrupted doctors into and out of pharmaceutical giant positions.
Witness how many have left to join various pharma companies.
For 40 years both agencies have refused calls for a Vax vs UnVax study to conclusively settle the issue of vaccine safety and efficacy
"The Center for Data Concucsion"
The antivax loon still hasn't learned how to spell "Concoction"
"Witness how many have left to join various pharma companies."
Give us the percentage, son, and then explain how this is relevant.
"For 40 years both agencies have refused calls for a Vax vs UnVax study"
Yes, because that would be an unethical study that would not pass the Ethics Committee.
Your statement also reveals you to be a science illiterate nong.
>Give us the percentage, son, and then explain how this is relevant
If you can't understand CONFLICTS OF INTEREST then there is no point
>Yes, because that would…
Don't preach to me about ethics when the FDA and CDC are revolving doors into positions at pharmaceutical giants.
Don't mouth off about ethics when these drug companies have settled multi billion FRAUD cases
This isn't rocket science. I can do an epidemiological study in my own neighborhood. There are about 12 kids in my children's school who aren't vaccinated. Grab a sampling of 12 vaccinated kids of the same socio economic background (whose parents followed the CDC vaccine schedule)
Compare doctors visits
Compare overall health
Compare chronic illnesses and allergies
Compare school performance mental development
Btw I have done that study (snecdotal.it maybe) which is why I swore off continuing the CDC vaccination schedule
" CONFLICTS OF INTEREST "
Oh, you mean RFK junior being HHS secretary while earning millions advising on anti-vaccine litigation?
All you other claims are rubber ducks rising back up to the surface in your bathtub after you mommy ducked them under. But she needs to wrap her fingers firmly around a wooden spoon and apply it repeatedly and forcefully to the bare buttocks of her little boy.
A study with only 12 + 12 would still be "anecdotal", not valuable data.
"In cahoots with pharmaceutical giants" would be a valid bias to mitigate, but the politically motivated incompetent step of taking real scientific research out of the equation is still a horrible step backwards that ignores (or even promotes?) its harm to public health.
BS WC!
(We call WCs toilets)
Concern trolling I see.
Vaccines are useless in the best case deadly in the worst
http://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
There are those deceitful graphs again.
I'm not playing "rubber duck" with this child.
Looks like someone hijacked antivaxxer MAC's account. :)
Pharma Lies. Vaccines are the most dangerous drugs on earth. That's why they are liability shielded when no other drugs are
Pharma can't and doesn't control hospital or morbidity statistics.
http://globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/chronic-illness-chart.png
dissolvingillusions.com/graphs-images/
Fortunate for us that they dont. Otherwise we wouldnt know that 95% of mortality rates to childhood illnesses had decreased before vaccines for them appeared on the market
Anubis <-- "the most dangerous drug on earth"
NOTE: They are not liability shielded. That is now a BLATANT LIE.
How will Prasad and Macary answer Dr Offit’s questions on transparency and process? These guys were so happy to be the Monday morning quarterbacks of the public health officials they’ve replaced, chatting for hours on Zubin Damania’s ZDogg MD show.
I would have assumed they’d be comfortable explaining themselves as they do seem thoughtful and capable of constructive dialogue. Are they concerned that in the free for all of a Q&A they’ll be cornered into offending Kennedy and, more importantly, his base?
Also, I’m curious if Damania will take up Offit’s points. He seems to have moved away from public health questions since the election. Kudos to Dr Offit for being such a valuable resource throughout.
ZDogg is all about awakening now. But these guys need an awakening!
Z-Idiot! He’s Offit’s biggest and dumbest cheerleader
Ad hominems aren't persuasive, especially when you call a demonstrably intelligent person "dumb." ZDogg has given far more of a platform to Vinay Prasad than to Offit. (They co-host a separate podcast). I don't know if you think Prasad is also "dumb," or if he's smart because he wants to repeat studies that have already been done but will find a different result. In any case, Prasad seemed to think highly of Offit in the past (link below). Offit is not an extremist when it comes to vaccines (because he knows the evidence pro and con), and his main beef is revealed in this quote: "If they voted in June to narrow it to just those at highest [risk] — everybody over 65, and those less than 65 who have a medical risk factor — then that would be one thing. The difference here is that the FDA has made it part of their licensure." (link #2). That affects insurance coverage, which makes it unaffordable for some people who want to get the vaccine. That REMOVES freedom of choice, and that is something that they supposedly want, but apparently only when it applies to them, not to others. Given that a large percentage of people get their boosters at the pharmacy, Offit asks an extremely important question when he asks if it's up to the pharmacist to determine who is at greater risk. Makary and Prasad are NOT dumb, but neither of them have training and experience in infectious diseases and/or vaccines. They found it extremely easy to criticize when they were not in charge. (And they were not always right, as Makary's infamous Wall Street 2021 OpEd proved). Now that they are in charge, it is time for them to face the critiques. If they have evidence-based/rational responses, great. Let's hear them. Their NEJM article did not address many of Offit's and others' critical questions, and despite promising transparency, they refused to take questions. Hmmmm.....if I were a conspiracy theorist, I might ask what they're hiding.
https://x.com/vprasadmdmph/status/1565892889841790976
https://www.wintergardenvox.com/articles/dr-paul-offit-talks-about-the-fda-policy-shift-on-covid-vaccines#body
Offit himself relies on combination of ad hominen attacks ("antivaxers" "AIDS Denialist" blah blah), a boatload of logical fallacies and bogus studies. Not to mention massive financial conflicts of interest. Offit, like is buddy Ferret Fauci. believes his "science" is the "Science." And whoever questions it, is an Antivaxer. grandma killer. But let's just start with the notion of "contagion.' Please cite the study that provides "measles' or "COVID" or pick your purported "virus' is "contagious." Go ahead, I'll wait.
So you think viruses aren't contagious. Then I imagine you're very disappointed that neither Prasad nor Makary agree with you, and that Trump is a germaphobe. Silly fools!
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/07/donald-trump-germaphobe-1399258
Look up "John Snow" "clusters of cholera" for a mid-1850s, basic science lesson. Discover our elimination of small pox.
(Name-calling says a lot about one's emotions usurping objectivity and effective discussion.)
I agree, I’d like to see what Demania thinks. I wonder if they have thought through the insurance coverage angle. Concerning policy for sure. Am in Canada, hope we don’t follow suit.🤞🏻
Agreed about insurance. They want us to be like European countries when it suits them, but not when it doesn't; i.e., universal health insurance coverage. They are comparing apples to oranges and I hope their peers call them on it because I do think that still matters to them (at least I hope). With Trump in office, hopefully Canada will always want to do the opposite of what he does! O Canada and Go Canada! :)
Who the hell is Offit that he deserves an answer from them for ANY question?
Don't make me laugh
Anubis <--- "Who the hell is this $h!thead"
What do every single one of the covid "contrarians" have in common?
Prasad - Heme/Onc
Makary - Surg Onc
Bhattacharya - none (???)
Atlas - Radiology
McCullough - Cardiology
Ladapo - Cardiology
Cole - Dermatopath
Dr Oz - CT Surg
Dr Drew - Addiction Medicine
Bret Weinstein - not even a damned doctor!
Alex Berenson - spy novelist
I can keep going...
Not one even practices in a specialty related to treating sick covid patients, much less has actual experience in the area. None had any clue what we were seeing on the front lines of the first wave. ALL became famous because they spoke out, though, and gave the Fox News crowd what they wanted to hear. And since Trump's understanding of all issues is just what he gets through either twitter posts or Fox headlines in between rounds of golf, these are his "experts".
Bhattacharya is an economist with a medical degree (and zero clinical training or experience), turned health economist, turned contrarian magaland darling, after shitting out a deeply flawed economic agenda masquerading as public health policy.
Prasad is a dismissive narcissistic sh-t-flinger. He's a condescending social media bully that cherry-picks data to support his "establishment bad" public health and clinical trial narratives, oversimplifying nuanced subjects, and applying broadly generalized critiques to complex systems and issues.
Grievance politics and antiestablishmentarianism, via self-promotion and audience cultivation, are their areas of expertise. Likewise, Makary, who made his (new) name bashing the "medical establishment." COVID was the best thing that ever happened to these elite establishment stalwarts - now leveled up, playing leading characters in magaword.
Makary regurgitated misleading claims for his 'public health policy by edict' NEJM opinion piece with Poo-Smearing Prasad:
https://science.feedback.org/review/marty-makary-misleading-unsubstantiated-claims-accuse-us-government-spreading-misinformation/
McCullough, Oz and Ladapo are full-on grifters, as are the others.
Agree completely.
I don't know if they are "grifters" though. Just nuts, and ignorant. There are hundreds of thousands of medical doctors in the US, probably close to a million. Tens of thousands of those who have specific expertise related to covid (ID, pulm, critical care, ER, immunology, etc). And at least hundreds of us who both have that expertise and who had direct experience at the front lines during the first wave. But Fox/Twitter/Rogan/etc instead elevated those like the "contrarians" listed above to celebrity status because they say what people want to hear.
We are now full blown idiocracy territory. Not an exaggeration.
McCullough, Oz, Bobby, Cole, Berenson, Weinstein have big-time monetary grifts going on. Bhatty, Prasad, Makary, and Oz$$$ are far from ignorant, though they foster and stoke ignorance (or something) in others. They grift for power and adulation.
The term "idiocracy" doesn't adequately convey the malign motivations behind all of this. It seemed weird to me that some of these appointments took so long to announce. We knew early on that Batty, Prasad, Makary and Grifty Means were going to be cast in big roles. What took so long?
Remember Steven Hatfield? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill
This motherf-cker is now a "senior advisor" at HHS. He's allowed to WORK FROM HOME, like many of those cast in the leading roles.
I got a reply from from someone on McCullough's site when I asked when I asked when he treated hospitalized Covid patients and why he didn't mention the fact that you were more likely to contract myocarditis from Covid disease that the vaccine:
"Dr Peter McCullough has been treating covid patients right from the start. Did you not hear his early senate hearing where he described that, which started his "cancellation" process?"
I have no clue what his "cancellation process" refers to, but it couldn't have possibly have gone far enough!
Why would he, as a cardiologist, been treating sick covid patients “from the start”? Ask them very specifically which hospital and when. Would be easy to fact check. I know people at most NYC hospitals. Could just check the schedule those dates.
Returning to the thread, my new friends had already made the claim that I had “made up” my name in order to slander the good doctor - pauvre petite - and I told them that if they were willing to assume my home mortgage, I would gladly assume a pseudonym. It remains to be seen if I get a response as to his hospital privileges.
"Policy-making for health" and "data sharing" by this administration are deeply flawed -- we will need the experts outside of government to provide the guidance needed and maintain reliable data through this period of alt-facts and misinformation
Experts outside of government are currently on the scene ...
They took no questions because they have no answers. And the nejm article doesn’t provide complete answers.
Vinay will respond to this with a bunch of childish insults. Nothing more. Because in addition to not having any expertise on the subject and absolutely NO clinical experience related to treating sick covid patients on the front lines during the first wave, he is honestly just a jerk with obvious insecurity issues. I used to like ZDogg and his videos. But his elevating Vinay Prasad to the spotlight is absolutely disgusting.
Vinay was bright and accomplished, but now he's mostly just a c-nt.
Interesting what you did there "cloning" my profile.
Once I discover who you are in previous Offit posts I'll be sure to return the favor
So you admit you are just another sock puppet of Aldous Blackwolf?
I thought the comment style and ignorant content were familiar.
Notice the childless lengths YOUR side go to deceive the public. One of you m0rons took my online id here - "Aldous Blackwolf" cloned it by changing the last l for an i and imported my avatar - the PHOENIX GATE - then proceeds to comment here as if they were me.
Thats fraud and deception. But then again you are provaxxer pharma-shills - I EXPECTED NO LESS
What I havent figured out is what the m0ron hoped to accomplish impersonating me. Did he or she think that I couldnt just change my nickname and import a new avatar? Or where they hoping to discourage me from posting?
Idiots. I havent only just started with you buffoons
Well it obviously annoyed you, which seems to be one satisfying accomplishment of theirs at least.
Let’s hope they do the same with your new sock puppet account.
am suprised - deception didnt annoy you? but again you are a pharma-shill supporting companies that pay out billions for fraud
go ahead and clone this account name and avatar. Ill just rename it and select a new avatar
You dont get what motivates me. its the sheer anger at having allowed myself to be duped by the public health agencies and pharmaceutical giants.
I wont give up this fight. if offit cancels me like Rombios - ill create another account. if he switches the comment section to subscriber only ILL BECOME a PAID subscriber so i can comment
You fools got away for years using “anti-vaxxer” as a curse word to keep information seekers quiet.
NEVER AGAIN!!!
Clue 1: UK resident
Your consistent wrongness is impressive, at least.
As is the narratives and fairytales you craft to let you sleep at night
Think about the people who work in occupations that have face to face interactions with the public, such as grocery stores or healthcare. They should be considered to be high risk, and that situation was not addressed in the guidelines.
Because CONvid was a lie.
Anubis <-- "a lie"
Killer Kult Kid.
Do viruses exist, Anubis?
All I can say is...thank the gods I live in Canada.
in Canada it's also only recommended in high risk groups. Only addition is pregnancy.
Thanks for speaking out. As a retired physician, people like you and TWIV are lifelines to science and my ability to help others.
I am hugely disappointed that Vinay Prasad did not make some more detailed nuance(s) public regarding COVID vax policy matters. This situation stinks.
Not surprised, though, this antivax-adjacent pr!ck has been heading there all through the pandemic.
Very happy with the vaccine recommend recommendations. Allows a lot of wiggle room for maximizers who wish to get the vaccine despite the fact that there is no data showing that this vaccine in current Covid strain is providing any efficacy against hospitalization or death from upper respiratory infection.
Wrong answer. Booster approval issues aside, that "wiggle room" ensures that many US insurance companies WILL NOT PAY for these vaccinations for those outside the maga-spoiled guidelines (and revised product labels). Inclusion as recommended seasonal booster for adults on CDC schedule necessitated a minimum level of reimbursement - but didn't actually mean much beyond that - as with yearly influenza vaccine. Population-wide adult "mandates" are long gone.
No biggie for those with $250 to spend once or twice yearly - Or for Julia and her fellow gloating "skeptical" contrarian Prasadists.
Remove the mandates so Darwin Award Winners can inoculate themselves to death if they so wish
That's the only concern of most antivaxxers. Informed consent.
Considering the Covid death rate is 10 times higher in the unvaccinated, it looks like the Darwin Awards are dominant in that population.
LOL
that of course depends on how you define "unvaccinated". in the case of Covid - you remain "unvaccinated" up to two weeks (within the range you would experience visible adverse reactions) after vaccination. And in many cases the hospitals classified people as UNvaccinated after they died in order to reap insurance
Official mortality data for England suggest systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status and uncertain effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357778435_Official_mortality_data_for_England_suggest_systematic_miscategorisation_of_vaccine_status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination
CDC allows hospitals to classify dead vaxxed people as “unvaccinated”
https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-10-01-cdc-allows-hospitals-classify-dead-vaxxed-unvaccinated.html
Covid vaccines need to be covered by insurance, period.
If healthy lives were a priority, we wouldn't see cuts in medical research and access to health care. But this administration only cares about life before birth, not after. We also wouldn't have a rogues' gallery of what many consider quacks, basing decisions on ideology rather than on the consensus of years of published research. Hearing Kennedy brag that he "couldn't be more pleased to announce" removing the Covid vaccine recommendation during pregnancy is as bizarre as having a Flat Earther head of NASA cancelling orbital missions. Because, hey, you can't orbit a flat earth, right? I'll close with a quote from Zels et al. in the journal, Placenta, dated 25 March 2024. "The risk of fetal demise was more than 5 times higher for non-vaccinated mothers, and their placentas showed significantly more syncytiotrophoblast necrosis and chronic histiocytic intervillositis compared to vaccinated mothers (both p < 0,001)." Yes, five times more dead fetuses. Did you hear that, supposed pro-lifers?
Well said, Ralph.
I am afraid there is no hope in looking for logical consistency in anything this administration does.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has come out and criticised these guidelines, and it still recommends Covid vacccination for pregnant women.
It might help you understand the evidence based rationale for the updated guidelines if you read the NEJM article from last week authored by Prasad and Makary discussing this very topic:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb2506929
Your post above is concerning. You seem to be suggesting that people literally do their own research instead of simply relying on the government experts.
I am concerned by the following facts about the mRNA shots:
VAERS data showing huge spike in deaths after vaccination corelated to covid shots;
studies showing spike in IG4 immune antibodies after repeated doses of covid mRNA shots;
studies showing greater likelihood of contracting covid based on number of covid shots received;
data showing Pfizer mRNA shot recipients 36% more likely to die of any cause compared to Moderna mRNA shot recipients one year out;
initial trial data on mRNA shots showing equal numbers of infections in control compared to vaccine arms;
initial trail data on mRNA shots showing rate of SAE at 1/800;
data form V-SAFE showing 7.7% of mRNA shot recipients sought medical care for side effects from shot;
continued elevated excess mortality trends in heavily mRNA shot exposed populations, compared to non- exposed populations;
lack of "pull forward" decline in all cause mortality in mRNA shot exposed populations compared to non-exposed populations;
revelations that Pfizer deliberately delayed releasing mRNA trial data until after November 2020 election;
Until these matters are addressed- public confidence in all vaccines, not just mRNA shots- will continue to crater.
Josh, you stated "instead of simply relying on the government experts." I generally agree that we *should* be able to trust experts in government with such health policy and recommendations. The problem has become: this administration has fired the real experts and replaced them with shills and non-qualified alternatives.
The Secretary of HHS is a litigation attorney who has made his millions attempting to destroy evidence-based science and medical practice with sham medicine and pseudoscience.
Dr. Makary, while an expert in abdominal surgery and health policy, is not an expert in vaccines. He's not a vaccinologist, immunologist, or expert in infectious disease.
Dr. Prasad, while an expert in cancer and health statistics, is not an expert in vaccines. He's not a vaccinologist, immunologist, or expert in infectious disease.
I previously respected a lot of the views and work of Drs. Makary and Prasad. However, over the past few years, they have gone off the rails, gotten into bed with Trump, Kennedy, Jr., and the ilk of junk science. Their words have become so incredibly untrustworthy that I simply have to ignore them now and look to real scientists and experts in these fields, like Dr. Offitt.
So, while I again generally agree that we *SHOULD* be able to trust our government experts, this is a case of the exact opposite being true.
The prior administration forced out Gruber and Krause over politics. They would not sign off on covid boosters based on the evidence available, so politics, not science, was the agenda:
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/why-these-covid-vaccine-scientist-resigned-fda-n1278207
Paul Offit, a well known and highly respected vaccine scientist, published in NEJM his reservations about covid policies affecting low risk populations (Offit is certainly entitled to "do his own research"- and I believe we should consider his views to inform medical decisions). Of course, one would have to "do one's own research" to find his views-
"I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2215780
Josh, The politicization of science and medicine need to end...on both sides of the aisle. You'll get no argument from me on that. Allow science to be free from politics, agendas, and BS. Let scientists do what they're trained to do...seek truth.
And Dr. Offitt has stated those things based on his expertise, yes.
Can you provide citations for the claims which you utilized in your original post? I'd like to follow the trail of evidence myself that you're laying. Some of them seem to be hasty conclusions, lacking robust evidence and investigation, and may show all sorts of bias, subjective conclusions, false assumptions, and overstated correlations.
Also, quick note, using VAERS data is not the best way to make an argument based on science. VAERS isn't a scientific system and anyone can have access to it. It's a reporting system, not a research system. The very best it could do, if used properly, is possibly find correlations. However, VAERS does not establish causal factors. We also saw a spike in false reports from anti-vaccine activists to VAERS making claims which are not substantiated anywhere. However, on the good side, VAERS reporting did lead to further investigation which did clearly show a causal link to myocarditis and COVID-19 vaccinations. Using VAERS information as your source of proof is sort of like saying that a police tip line proves who committed a crime.
Paul Offit's opinion was a minority one that lost out to the majority.
Be sure to support everything else he has said on vaccinations, son.
>Paul Offit, a well known and highly respected vaccine scientist,
Is this comedy hour at the Apollo?
Offit is a vaccine inventor who sits on a MERCK appointed chair at CHOP.
If not for the damages vaccines like his rotavirus do to American children daily, he would fade into irrelevance
Anubis <-- "comedy hour at the Apollo"
The vile creature is as irrelevant as always.
I also generally agree that "we *SHOULD* be able to trust our government experts", but I stopped trusting in government experts on vaccination decades ago. This had to do with the many documented conflicts of interest tolerated by those who were appointed to the advisory committees.
While I am disappointed in the lack of transparency shown by this administration so far, I don't find it to be any worse than previous administrations. I am happy by this administrations move towards decision makers without financial interests aligned with the for-profit vaccine producers.
Another "own researcher" parroting her substack-acquired talking points. Gobble up turds, so that you can puke them proudly - Malone, Bobby, Singal, Arora and the Second Most Transparently Fraudulent Grifter. See ya, Ci(y)a.
Beth, Those conflicts of interest are incredibly well known. They're disclosed by all members of ACIP and VRBAC. Since the field of vaccine research/development is awfully small, there's always going to be crossover. But the conflicts are acknowledged and members often abstain from voting if their interest if too close.
Further, I wouldn't really call vaccine makers "for profit." Yes, they're part of for-profit corporations but vaccines hardly make a profit. And that's why so many manufacturers have dropped out. At latest count from WHO, there are about 10 major producers and this number is dropping year after year. There's simply no money in it, especially when they do all the development work and assume all the risk. And because of RFK, Jr. and his ilk they're constantly being litigated against for asinine reasons that are not based in science. Thus, many leave the field which puts the entire world's population at risk. You also have to consider that almost every vaccine is a once in a lifetime intervention. No really profit there. Thus, those former manufacturers are switching to chronic disease drugs because those are taken for the long term/forever.
While "conflict of interest" and "for-profit" are great buzzwords for trying to sound like there's a sinister case here with vaccines. However, any slight or cursory look into these words and the real story behind lets them allows the thin fabric they're built upon fall apart into the dust they came from.
"vaccines hardly make a profit" might be true in general, I don't know, but I do know that the mRNA COVID vaccine produced at least 3 new billionaires.
I'd be more likely to listen to conflict of interest arguments if the people advancing them weren't anti-vax nuts in general. In fact, I have been very sympathetic to past exposes about the terrible revolving door incentives at FDA. It's a shame that the current crowd think we can't address this problem without burning it all down.
Dennis, I won't say that the government's total policy around funding vaccines always made sense. However, giving a large pool of money took the usual red tape away to ensure that a viable vaccine would not take decades (as many do) to come to market.
There is a balancing act that needs to be achieved in a program like that. Sadly, yes, Pfizer and Moderna CEOs got uber rich on our dime.
>Further, I wouldn't really call vaccine makers "for profit." Yes, they're part of for-profit corporations but vaccines hardly make a profit.
Vaccines are a liability shielded multi billion dollar industry
What do you mean they are not for profit. Go look at Pfizer's records pre 2020, 2021-2024 when mandates were in place, vs now
A conflict of interest being well known does not erase the conflict. Our current president exemplifies this with a foreign government offering him a fancy new plane fit for a king that he will be keeping for his personal use after he leaves office and oligarchs, both foreign and domestic, pouring money into his crypto coin.
The point of having documentation for the conflict of interests of committee members is to allow members of the public like myself, who are not part of the medical community, to assess how much bias that creates and make our own decisions regarding their recommendations. When most or all of the members of the advisory committee have such waivers on file, as was the case back in the 90's, it impacts our willingness to simply accept their recommendations as having the best interests of the public their number one concern.
It's certainly clear that the committee has had a bias towards recommending more and more vaccines over the past three decades. IMO, they have done insufficient research on finding an optimum schedule and checking for interactions when multiple vaccines are given on the same visit.
Vaccines are a major source of income for their producers. How much of that income is profit is harder to discern, but when the U.S. government funds the development, as with COVID vaccines, there isn't as much risk involved for companies producing them. Given their profits, I conclude the profit motive is alive and well in the pharmaceutical industry, including vaccine producers.
Beth, I agree that the current President has emoluments problems up the wazoo and these can easily be avoided.
When it comes to finding the expertise needed to evaluate the mountainous level of information and data that come with vaccines, you're going to find an incredibly shallow pool. You nor I are qualified to make those decisions. And thus, yes, we're going to end up with people who work for vaccine manufacturers, or who have developed vaccines in the past. Yes, there can be conflicts but many of them can be managed. We rely on the ethical work and practice of these experts. Dr. Offitt, for example, did not vote on the vaccine that he created. Nor should he have. This is what has been happening for generations and we're glad for their level of transparency.
I don't disagree that the public should be involved. But if we all started raising a fuss over the level of conflicts of interest in an expertise pool that is more like a puddle, I fear that we lose out on their amazing brilliance.
The committees make these recommendations based not on bias for profits but out of bias for outcomes. They know what they're talking about and recommend that which is best in their judgment.
The vaccine schedule is based, again, on expert work. What the optimum schedule is? Our schedule is pretty darn optimal. I would love to see any data to the contrary (and by data, I mean peer-reviewed, ethically obtained investigations). There are many who claim that the vaccine schedules "overwhelm the immune system" of newborns. This is simply not the case. Newborns systems are bombarded from the moment of birth. The vaccines pale in comparison to what they are given from just coming out of the womb. There is no overload of of anything that has ever been shown and that research was not completed by the vaccine creators or manufacturers but by independent universities and research groups. They have shown there are no harms from the current vaccine schedules used in the US.
>When it comes to finding the expertise needed to evaluate the mountainous level of information and data that come with vaccines, you're going to find an incredibly shallow pool. You nor I are qualified to make those decisions. And thus, yes, we're going to end up with people who work for vaccine
That's pure poppycock. It doesn't take rocket science to evaluate this data
http://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
The only purpose your shallow pool of "experts" serve is to hide the truth from the public
Yes, conflicts of interest can be "managed" to some extent. That does not eliminate the effect of unconscious bias. Whether or not you consider this a concern, I do.
I would agree that the bias is for outcomes rather than profits. But the outcomes of interest can easily be influenced by financial considerations. That's the whole point of requiring the waivers. My perception is that they want to maximize the number of people getting vaccinated for as many diseases as possible. This is not the same bias as wanting outcomes to maximize health for individuals.
The plane was offered during the Biden administration you nitwit
A claim for which there is no evidence.
Lying hound.
"many documented conflicts of interest tolerated by those who were appointed to the advisory committees."
LYING HOUND.
"I don't find it to be any worse than previous administrations. "
NAIVE NEOPHYTE.
"I am happy by this administrations move towards decision makers without financial interests"
BETTY BONKERS.
The fact that they have refused to do a Vac vs unVax study for 40 years tells me all I need to know
A simple epidemiological study pitting vaccinated children on the CDC schedule against unvaccinated populations in the U.S
Report on
1) Overall health
2) Chronic diseases
3) Mental development
But they won't because they can't. It would blow this whole cult like worship of indemnified drugs out of the water
The fact that you think they should do a Vac vs unVax study and that this could be ethical in any way tells me all I need to know about your state of idiocy.
The fact that you think they could do a simple epidemiological study free of confounders and that you think this could possibly be necessary given what we already know tells me all I need to know about your state of idiocy.
But then you belong to a Killer Kult where idiocy rules.
The studies have already been conducted and buried; you mindless simpleton.
We are simply asking that the results be made public
Discussion of ethics when you support pharmaceutical giants that have settled multi billion dollar FRAUD cases is laughable.
But go on
All the clinical trials are transparent available to the public, lying antivax arsehole.
"Discussion of ethics"
Get a grip, son, it is UNETHICAL to conduct a clinical trial in which you do not offer best available treatment to date to the control group. Got it? It is called "clinical equipoise". Your clinical trial will NOT be approved if this condition is not satisfied. Got it?
"when you support pharmaceutical giants"
That is a blatant LIE. You know what my position is but you LIE about it anyway.
I support:
1) Maximum government regulation of the pharmaceutical industry.
2) Maximum fines for not abiding by those regulations.
But you have no argument, so you lie like all science illiterate antivax arseholes.
"that have settled multi billion dollar FRAUD cases"
No problem from where I stand.
What about you, son, regarding full government regulation of the pharmaceutical company. Let's see if we can agree on at least one thing!
BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF VACCINES!
IDIOT.
Neither Prasad or Makary are by ANY means "experts". Prasad is a hematologist and Makary is a cancer surgeon. They have no specific expertise related to infectious disease, to vaccines, to immunology, to pulmonology, to public health, and sure as hell have no first-hand understanding whatsoever of we faced on the front lines during the first wave. They became famous because Fox and right-wing Twitter gravitated to them immediately because they told them what they wanted to hear. No other reason.
Josh, you've been a public health antagonist since well before COVID, with your ugly attorneys. Are you on better terms with your daughter at this point? After using her for your crusade?
Interesting what you did there "cloning" my profile.
Once I discover who you are in previous Offit posts I'll be sure to return the favor
That NEJM opinion piece relies on flawed and unfounded assumptions Spare us your pathetic JoshSplaining.
Every other claim you make here is easily debunked. And you would realize this if you got your information from ACTUAL experts, not what you seem to get from social media and/or Fox.
Cite peer reviewed sources. I assure you & others, Covid killed many. Every pandemic does. Lack of clarity online caused more death & disease. As for vaccine, the "one & done" may be all anyone needs. Kids with cystic fibrosis are high risk. Insurance agencies are not the enemy. Eva DB Fain, BSN, MPH, retired public health nurse.
>Cite peer reviewed sources.
PEER REVIEW IS A LIE
1) https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/online/11674/Wall-Street-Journal-op-ed-Corruption-of-peer
2) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/
3) https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/new-peer-review-why-unbiased-science-now-often-misleading
4) https://www.pacificresearch.org/the-corruption-of-peer-review-is-harming-scientific-credibility/
5) https://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/sep/05/publish-perish-peer-review-science
Anubis is a lie lying in wait to lie.
Flawed logic.
Just because scientific peer review has some flaws, that doesn’t mean you can accept advice on how to do brain surgery from a road sweeper, or be told how to fly a plane by a plumber.
Of course not.
the individuals who inform my opinion on this subject are ALL board certified medical doctors in private and public practice
The commenters on Lewrockwell are Board certified medical practitioners?
Pull the other one.
There are no commenters on lewrockwell.com. Lewrockwell.com is just a website that gathers news and current events for their audience. That could be anything related to liberty and freedom (medical and otherwise).
Youll see a vast range of discussions for LIBERTARIAN minded people covering politics, international events, banking, local events, etc
My opinion on this subject (as I pointed out before) is informed by the BOOKS written by board certified medical doctors and research scientists in public and private practice
COVID was a flu derivative with a 99.9% recovery rate
What we suffered through 2020 to 2014 was a psych-op of death relabeling and fear mongering
# Nolte: NY Times Reports Coronavirus Deaths Overcounted by 30% … on Paragraph 17
www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/nolte-ny-times-reports-coronavirus-deaths-overcounted-by-30-on-paragraph-17/
# Johns Hopkins Study Explodes COVID Death Hoax; It’s Re-Labeling on a Grand Scale
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/jon-rappoport/johns-hopkins-study-explodes-covid-death-hoax-its-re-labeling-on-a-grand-scale/
# In Colorado, They're Counting Gun Shot Fatalities as COVID Deaths
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/12/17/in-colorado-theyre-counting-gun-shot-fatalities-as-covid-deaths-n2581730
# Ontario (Canada) Admits Labelling Deaths As COVID When They’re Not A Result of COVID
www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/no_author/ontario-canada-admits-labelling-deaths-as-covid-when-theyre-not-a-result-of-covid/
# In March, US Deaths from COVID-19 Totaled Less Than 2 Percent of All Deaths
www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/ryan-mcmaken/in-march-us-deaths-from-covid-19-totaled-less-than-2-percent-of-all-deaths/
# Minnesota lawmakers say coronavirus deaths could be inflated by 40% after reviewing death certificates
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/coronavirus-death-certificates-minnesota-inflated
# Grand County Coroner Raises Concern On Deaths Among COVID Cases
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/12/15/grand-county-covid-deaths/
# 'The numbers are skewed': Colorado officials warn of inflated COVID death statistics
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/numbers-are-skewed-colorado-officials-warn-inflated-covid-deaths
# Massive Pandemic Data Fraud Exposed: 40% of ‘Covid Deaths’ Were Fabricated
https://slaynews.com/news/global-pandemic-data-fraud-exposed-covid-deaths-fabricated/
# There Is No Pandemic
www.lewrockwell.com/2021/02/no_author/there-is-no-pandemic
Thanks, Anubis, for coming out of the closet as an insane conspiracy theorist.
All you have is antivax propaganda from crank websites.
Not valid.
You are NOT the authority on whats valid and acceptable data on here. And you never will be
All I suggest is that people wishing to get valid evidence and information should avoid the crank antivaccine web sites and stick to verified, credible and evidence based information.
Post Covid lies ? - thats not going to work. Most people who were ignorant before have since woken up
Science ESPECIALLY medical science is completely corrupted. It needs to be burned to the ground. Until then - its safe to do the opposite of what ever the majority of "medical scientists" suggest.
I approach it by saying to myself
first - CUI BONO? who benefits
second - i look for medical doctors and research scientists who are being criticized, attacked, deplatformed - they are the Galileos of our time and the only ones I will bother listening to
third - I look for books on this subject. social media accounts can be pulled and deleted, interviews can be rescheduled and cancelled. research articles on various research websites can be removed and pulled.
But books - books remain!!!
Think you got “ suggesting that people literally do their own research” 180 degrees incorrect. Not sure the rest of data is supported either.
You write gushing, flowery commentaries extolling Brainworm's "faith, integrity and morality" to the Baltimore Sun, Josh Bygosh. AND James Lyons-Weiler wrote an ode to you - pre-COVID! That is some next-level lunacy, Dr. Science. I can't be bothered to include those links.
IgG4 is still neutralising like IgG1, without being inflammatory. Bee keepers have IgG4 against bee venom having been stung multiple times, and this has no detrimental effects on them.
The SAE of 1 in 800 was based on poor statistical analysis, combining the sae of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines although no one would have both vaccines at the same time, and subsequent doses were separate time independent events, i.e. the probability of an SAE in a second dose is the same as the probability of an SAE following the first dose or subsequent doses were.
Excess deaths were not due to vaccination but the fallout from the pandemic (excess deaths following the 1918 influenza pandemic didn’t stabilise for over a decade), delayed diagnoses and treatments etc.
You do realise that no vaccine prevents infection?
>You do realise that no vaccine prevents infection?
That's not the lie we were told. We were told vaccines prevent infections and transmission
In truth those of us who did our research realized quickly that the ONLY path to lifelong immunity is natural infection. This applies to every illness for which a vaccine exists for
https://dissolvingillusions.com/graphs-images/
Correction of more cluelessness for this clueless death cult member:
Vaccinations do NOT prevent infection and no scientists has ever said otherwise.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of symptomatic infection.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of severely symptomatic infection.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of hospitalisation.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of ICU admission.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of artificial ventilation.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of DEATH.
Vaccinations DO reduce the risk of transmission.
The death cult does not like any of this.
They want you to get infected.
They want you to die.
>Vaccinations do NOT prevent infection and no scientists has ever said otherwise.
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F99b63013-8b6f-457e-aa9f-9ee72f134c88_1230x1216.jpeg
I won't bother with the rest of your drivel. You are literally too stupid to waste time on.
Rombios proved you are an inept uneducated idiot who hasn't read a single book on a topic he mouths off on daily
No surprise.
This child killer is linking to confabulated quotes. The numbskull cannot, or will not, link to the original quotes and definitely will not provide you with the context of those quotes.
And only 2 of the 6 are scientists!
But what would this Killer Kult Kid know.
GET A SCIENCE EDUCATION. IDIOT.
Stop moving the goalpost fcktard. You said ANY scientist. Theres more than 1 there you imbecile
Science education? Lol.
Dont me laugh.
Last year Rombios challenged you to produce a SINGLE book (in your vast library of popup books and crayon doodles) that inform your opinion on.this subject. You couldnt manage 1; just 1.
You spent the time deflecting, character assinating and false narratives.
What a joke you are. Overpaid pharma shill. But thats not going to last very long. Soon you might actually have to get a real job
The immune system cannot distinguish between vaccine induced pathogens or infection induced pathogens. The problem with the latter is that you cannot know how seriously ill you may become following infection.
>The immune system cannot distinguish between vaccine induced pathogens or infection induced pathogens.
That's a lie. The fact that you need boosters puts that lie to rest.
There's a massive difference between natural infection through the bodies GASTRO INTESTINAL FILTER and direct injection into the blood stream
Stop trying to fool people.
>The problem with the latter is that you cannot know how seriously ill you may become following infection.
Doesn't matter. That's a personal decision and the reward is lifetime immunity without the dangers of a vaccine (chronic illnesses and death and disability)
Infact before vaccine manufacturers hijacked the definition: HERD IMMUNITY was tied to NATURAL INFECTION
American parents mid last century routinely took their kids to measles mumps and chickenpox parties to be infected and suffer to lifelong immunity
They wouldn't have taken these risks if death were part of the equation
During CONvid my wife and her friends routinely organized playdates for the kids of the neighborhood SANS MASKS, for much the same reason
>Excess deaths were not due to vaccination but the fallout from the pandemic (excess deaths following
# Minnesota lawmakers say coronavirus deaths could be inflated by 40% after reviewing death certificates
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/coronavirus-death-certificates-minnesota-inflated
# Grand County Coroner Raises Concern On Deaths Among COVID Cases
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/12/15/grand-county-covid-deaths/
# 'The numbers are skewed': Colorado officials warn of inflated COVID death statistics
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/numbers-are-skewed-colorado-officials-warn-inflated-covid-deaths
# Massive Pandemic Data Fraud Exposed: 40% of ‘Covid Deaths’ Were Fabricated
https://slaynews.com/news/global-pandemic-data-fraud-exposed-covid-deaths-fabricated/
# There Is No Pandemic
www.lewrockwell.com/2021/02/no_author/there-is-no-pandemic
All this fvkwits links are to news media - not a single scientific paper is linked here - and all the opinions of lawyers and politicians. What a clueless nong. He also got his mechanic to put in his artificial hip and his carpenter to make his set of dentures.
But large epidemiological studies show Covid deaths were 30-40% UNDERreported.
And those look at populations and not small, biased individual sampling and anecdotes.
Thats incorrect. They were OVER counted by 30%.
# Nolte: NY Times Reports Coronavirus Deaths Overcounted by 30% … on Paragraph 17
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/07/18/nolte-ny-times-reports-covid-deaths-overcounted-30-paragraph-17/
Nope, population based analysis shows covid deaths were undercounted.
https://www.bu.edu/sph/news/articles/2024/new-analysis-reveals-many-excess-deaths-attributed-to-natural-causes-are-actually-uncounted-covid-19-deaths/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
And so what if you were correct (though you aren’t).
Does reducing the number of deaths from covid in the US from 1.2 million to 900,000 suddenly turn it into some benign disease?
You claim covid/viruses don’t exist, so show me the studies proving that.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/12/paul-craig-roberts/rising-death-rates-and-health-injuries-from-covid-vax-can-no-longer-be-covered-up/
nope
Your “concerns” are totally specious.
1. You have no idea what VAERS is or does.
2. IgG4 shifts have no adverse clinical consequences in the context of Covid.
3. The studies apparently showing more Covid after getting the shots are outnumbered 50 to one by studies showing the opposite, and they are invalidated by serious confounding and selection bias.
4. Pfizer recipients had a 36% higher mortality than Moderna recipients, but you could equally present that data as showing Moderna recipients having a 26% LOWER mortality than Pfizer, and you fail to mention that mortality following either vaccine is still far lower than the mortality in the unvaccinated.
5. You misrepresent the Pfizer trial data.
6. You misrepresent the VSD data; you fail to say that the background rate of contact with s health provider is around 15% per year, so Covid vaccine recipients actually had lower levels of contact than expected.
7. You lie… overall all cause mortality (excess mortality) is lower in vaccinated than unvaccinated populations.
8. The reason public confidence in vaccines has dropped is mainly because of the spread of lies and disinformation about them by antivaxers like you.
Dr Offit do you recommend getting last year's booster *now* in case we are not covered this Fall for the new one?
https://covidreason.substack.com/p/paul-offit-im-not-getting-this-years
He got off that band wagon years ago. Try and keep up
You didn't answer the question, son, try to keep up.