Just read 'The Real Anthony Fauci' to find out how safe and effective FDA aoproved vaccines and treatments are. Why isnt he in prison or dangling from a rope?
If you want to test the idea that clinicians are well-informed, ask one to explain the difference between RRR and ARR. He probably can't even tell you what those letters stand for.
With the possible exceptions of the FBI and CIA, whose employees enjoy a revolving door between DC and Silicon Valley, the FDA is the most captured regulatory agency in world history. I'll tell you what made me, an enthusiastic vaccine proponent in December, 2019, take a second look at vaccine effectiveness and then do a 180 on the whole idea: the FDA. The non-stop lying from the FDA.
Besides the importance of knowing both ARR and RRR when evaluating a vaccine's effectiveness, here's what the FDA will tell no one: The injections, as products that exist under EUA rules, are exempt from "safety regulations governing [their] manufacture, shipment, holding, dispensing, administration, and labeling." "No federal or state agency assures that the contents of the batch of Pfizer-BioNTech covid-19 vaccine...has similar contents to any other batch...making any practical determination of the safety" of a given dose "impossible," according to Katherine Watt. How many people would have rolled up their sleeves if the FDA had been honest about that? How many FDA employees would still get cushy gigs at a pharma giant if they'd been honest about that? How many people would have taken the injections if they'd known that in 2019 HHS "suspended all previously enforceable rules pertaining to independent testing, site inspections, and regulatory compliance" for anything granted EUA status?
The FDA is run and staffed by liars, and that includes the two tools who produced the propaganda that JAMA ran. They have no one but themselves to blame for destroying trust in the agency and in vaccines.
I tormented drug reps for some years about their details: "RRR is Spam."
Some of my former colleagues eventually began to ask "What is the NNT?" Few progressed to the second step, "What is the NNH?"
The Therapeutics Initiative at UBC has been assessing drugs by NNT for about three decades, and finding some which actually worked.
I had understood that while Comirnaty was "approved" it was not actually available in the US. Without looking in detail, I assume that "Comirnaty" was the original PCR-produced substance, not the E coli derived shots.
The Comirnaty injections have been available in the US throughout and as far as I know they still are. There was a compound they "trialled" and a compound they subsequently sold, and those weren't the same thing. Since the FDA wasn't responsible for overseeing it, the bait and switch was made without any fuss and they slapped the same Comirnaty brand name on the labels. Getting away with wild variations between subsequent batches was a snap.
I've taken prescription drugs that worked and some of my animals are on prescription drugs that work. But I'll be asking a lot more questions about any that I or they take in the future. As for vaccines: The burden of proof is on the proven liars to show me why I should ever trust them again.
That link is nothing more than a hit piece by a someone that is clearly suffering for TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). I suspect you have the same condition
Behind it was Fauci. The face was Dr. Birx. Yes, because he made a statement on the issue This had been planned long before Trump was elected. Why do you not realise it? think fella think. "Fauci: ‘No doubt’ Trump will face surprise infectious disease outbreak. Really how would he know unless he has intel or was involved.
Trump can’t be even credited with the “warp speed” name - that verbiage was invented under Obama administration in conjunction with the zika vaccine scam. He is responsible, in the best case, for being duped and not having enough leadership in him to admit he was duped. We won’t know the truth until a full honest investigation is conducted on this matter. - Sasha Latypova.
You have made a withering assumption that I have Trump Derangement Syndrome and you made an ASS out of U and ME, on the strength of me sharing an article. You know nothing about me or what I know. I don't need your education thank you. Trump Duped Syndrome is plausible as he is facile and vain. However, this Kabuki Theatre is so obvious with our favourite WWE Wrestling Characters rolled out before us. We all have our confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance to varying degrees. Trump is one of them.
You have confirmed what I eluded to by your ad hom calling me out as being "self-righteous condescending"
What you don't get is that I have no dog in the fight, and you too have no clue as to who I am and also know nothing about me. So you also make unfounded "withering" assumptions.
I am not an American and my response was based on an observation of what you posted.
I simply corrected you with substantiation. If you don't like it well that's just tough. Take it or leave it.
I'll leave it Thanks. The fact you just admitted to an allusion (yes the word is allude not elude) says it all about your original reply. Pompous Prick.
You are a pompous prick. For a start your TDS hit piece slur was nonsense. The article was not accusing Trump of being behind anything so am questioning if you even read it. You started the ad hominem with "That link is nothing more than a hit piece by a someone that is clearly suffering for TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). I suspect you have the same condition". So fuck off yourself you moron.
Excellent article! Thank you again for your great work! I would suggest you are being optimistic about regaining public trust. It is one of those necessary fragile social contracts that are hard to build and easy to break. The public that realizes the FDA lied about Covid vaccines will not immediately trust them upon a single truthful statement because trust is not about 80% or 90% coverage. Similarly, a public that realizes that the FDA has lied repeatedly over time about many vaccines will not regain trust this generation. Count me in the latter.
Thanks for the solid takedown of this farcical report. I will never get another injection of any kind, ever, and will spend the rest of my life discouraging folks from getting them as well.
Many thanks for this masterpiece rebuttal. It's indeed possible that the authors are plegged by conflicts of interest. On top of that, their biggest issue is to admit to themselves and to others how wrong they were and still are. That's an EGO killer that they would not survive in their position.
Some omissions. DoD Military Industrial Complex run the democide show and the legislation has been sneakily changed over decades to allow these "countermeasures" to be foisted on the world using Other Transactional Authority (OTA) without ANY quality control as per Katherine Watt and Sasha Latypova work. CDC and FDA, corrupt as they are, are glove puppets. The Financial incentives for Russian Roulette murdering are the spoonful of sugar that makes the medicine go down. Our legislators are complicit. Even Rand Paul's wife bought Gilead shares early in this shitshow.
Thanks for this line up. So much damage was done to people's lives. And 90% does not even know what caused their misery. Can only hope that more people wake to to reality by reading articles like these.
Never took a single Covid shot, and no flu shot either.
Circumventing adequate research on efficacy and safety studies in the name of fast track development and obtaining emergency use authorization has been one of the hall mark of the covid vaccine development. Especially when the therapeutic intervention is intended for such a larger scale administration. To add to the misery, simply repurposing a previously failed method of therapeutic intervention like the mRNA lipid nano particle and hacking the cellular homeostasis of the host body to produce indiscriminate amount of single antigen called the spike protein. All of this to simply scale up the production of the so called vaccine/antigen with a known pathological potential but an unknown immune response. Overall a flawed method of vaccination under the pretext of an overestimated and falsely projected health risk and fatality rate, has been endorsed by the highly corrupt global institutions of health regulations in collusion with the industry. With a single most objective of monetising and creating a pathway for such false health emergencies in future.
While I applaud this effort, it is vital to point out here that so-called ‘hesitancy’ with regard to childhood vaccination goes far beyond Covid. All of the issues called out in the response are good points, but the response plays into the framing preferred by Marks and Califf. The elephant in the room is ignored. The CDC pediatric schedule is nothing less than egregious and outrageous. The problems go *well* beyond just the Covid shots. This isn’t lost on innumerable parents, many of whom have gone down the rabbit hole and found the CDC’s evidence for safety and efficacy to be sorely wanting. The basis for the *entire* schedule is in question.
I didn’t disagree in principle; however, I feel like this was a response to a specific position statement and therefore limited by the claims of the authors to which it is responding.
That is surely one way to approach the issue. That said, what is being argued by Marks and Califf is much broader, even if some of it is only implied. The crux of the issue lies in the deeper roots of the so-called ‘hesitancy’. The problems with the schedule are deep and profound, and the Covid debacle only made it more obvious for those that cared to look. The position taken by Marks and Califf implies that the entire practice of ‘vaccination’ is unassailable and unquestionable. They are only using Covid as the vehicle for their argument. If one is going to critique this effectively, in my opinion, you go for the throat, not the kneecaps.
"Hesitancy" is less of the crux than a perceived "side effect" of the crux, which is efficacy claims, existence of requirements (irrespective of efficacy), & longstanding coercion/pressure within the doctors' office setting.
We agree as to Marks and Calif's implied position.
Well, you’re restating (somewhat) what I’ve pointed to. But it’s much more than just efficacy claims, ‘requirements’ and coercion in doctor’s offices. It’s blatant lies, deception, goosed studies, and agency capture and corruption, and more. It’s an entire edifice built on what amounts to an elaborate mythology.
And let’s not forget the enormity of the (ongoing) fraud and misrepresentation embedded deeply in the entire vaccine edifice. The Covid debacle is built on that foundation of misrepresentation and deceit.
The entire thing needs the deepest and most serious scrutiny.
That was a part of it, certainly. I don’t know if that’s taking it further, however. It was perhaps more pointedly an abuse of an already mythological belief system. The vaccine racket already enjoyed significant liability protection. They wanted the jabs called a ‘vaccine’ for far more than just cover from the CDC schedule and 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. It’s a potent, deep-rooted, and very significant part of the Op.
Absolutely intuitively I felt something was wrong about this vaccine and I consider myself so lucky to have had an NHS Doctor who spoke to me about the genuine risks of covid and the Vaccine which made me decide to not take the vaccine. Since then I have seen so many people become ill some getting covid heart irregularities and even Cancer I definitely dodged a bullet and I have since researched big pharmas corruption of health care and how prescription drugs are now the third biggest killer in western countries.
"Despite... [vaccines] clear and compelling benefit of saving individual lives and improving population health outcomes"
I'm frustrated with these broad statements of "known fact" - has population health really improved?
Thank you for your article...but I feel you missed this point...though that is a book on its own.
The alleged "vaccine hesitancy" is leading to people question the entire medical system is not new thing. I'm currently reading 1908 article, 100 years (or so) ago, where there was the same widespread mis-trust in the medical profession by laity as well as their own orthodox practitioners ....history is repeating itself. I hope to stack on this soon.
Curiously 1908 was the same time that the Carnegie Foundation funded Abraham Flexner took over the AMA's medical education reform project. This was after publication of Flexners 1907 "little book" where he noted a “splendid opportunity thus awaits a school outside the present system”. An "opportunity" for a great reset.
They knowingly lied and in my humble opinion there is a whole bunch around the world who need to be charged with crimes against humanity...mass and deliberate murder, something that is still ongoing on with these maggots in their pursuit of the depopulation agenda! I have no pity for them none!
Claim number 3 is largely correct, concerning the lack of vaccinations in under developed countries. Professor Benn from Denmark has spent decades studying the non-specific effects of vaccines (these are the effects of vaccinations other than the target disease). The evidence is considerable and consistent; live attenuated vaccines, eg measles, save childrens' lives over and above the benefit from the protection against the target disease. This has been shown in both developed and underdeveloped countries. The reverse is true for killed vaccines. There is a discussion of these concepts in relation to Covid vaccines in the Lancet (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00498-4/fulltext#%20)
Malnutrition, dirty water and bad sanitation are the main reasons for mortality, just same as in west before things improved and deaths reduced to almost zero BEFORE vaccinations for the illnesses, including Scarlet Fever, which there is no vaccine. Maybe read Disolving Illusiions?
Whether some vaccines save some children was not the point being addressed. The authors used basic childhood mortality as some kind of catch all proof vaccines work. That is bad science whether or not one vaccine is effective.
Every vaccine has to be examined for its own efficacy and adverse event profile. It's not possible nor scientific to lump them all together as good because of child mortality, which the authors clearly intended to do.
As for the Lancet article you link to, I am inclined to think that if a study finds that a vaccine has benefits other than against its intended disease it means that study failed to track the numbers of vaxxed and unvaxxed correctly. If vaccines enhance immune response to other diseases, how much better will we all be to just get a minor cold from time to time: something the FDA seems to seek to eliminate.
I have read some of Benn's articles and listened to talks, but obviously not all, given she has been studying this for over 30 years as I understand it. She says there is a clear consistent signal of the benefit of live attenuated vaccines independent of background mortality, ie both in low childhood and high childhood mortality countries. Not all science that supports vaccination is wrong. "I am inclined to think...." means that you wish to disbelieve this result as a prior belief. Not scientific or evidence based.
Ian, I have finally finished reading Benn's article in the Lancet that you linked to. I see now I had missed the nuance of your original post. Thanks for the link. In reading the article, Benn made it clear that:
1. The immune system is incredibly complex,
2. We are only just beginning to piece together how it works.
3. We do not know how different vaccines interact with each other, and we certainly don't understand whatever interactions there might be.
4. Vaccines based on different platforms or technology may interact with each other negatively.
5. There is room for a great deal of research in this field.
6. She recommends focusing research, not on vaccines that focus on one specific pathogen, but on strengthening the immune system.
I concur with all 6 points. I did think that her theory that live attenuating vaccines cause incidental benefits has potential, albeit it is possible that all she is documenting is that eating dirt and getting sick from time to time is in general beneficial to the long term health of children.
I did find it noteworthy that although she praised the OPV for reducing childhood mortality, she never mentioned that this vaccine is now linked to a vaccine induced polio that is causing more grief than the wild strain of polio. See:
Thanks Ian. My statement "I am inclined to think" is the functional equivalent of the first step in the scientific method: postulate an intelligent and plausible hypothesis. The next step is to research the hypothesis to see if it can be falsified, or if it is or might be true. Thus, I had previously put it on my agenda to study the paper you link in more detail to see how my hypothesis stands up. All that said, in the past 3 years I've dug into multiple papers/studies claiming unintended benefits from vaccines, one going so far as to say vaccine uptake correlated with less car accidents. For a look at how it is possible to conclude that going to a movie is associated with higher mortality rates, see this interesting discussion: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtmHS0QQws
You are most correct that "not all science that supports vaccination is wrong.," and this concurs with my point above that every vaccine needs to be examined for its own merits.
Just read 'The Real Anthony Fauci' to find out how safe and effective FDA aoproved vaccines and treatments are. Why isnt he in prison or dangling from a rope?
If you want to test the idea that clinicians are well-informed, ask one to explain the difference between RRR and ARR. He probably can't even tell you what those letters stand for.
With the possible exceptions of the FBI and CIA, whose employees enjoy a revolving door between DC and Silicon Valley, the FDA is the most captured regulatory agency in world history. I'll tell you what made me, an enthusiastic vaccine proponent in December, 2019, take a second look at vaccine effectiveness and then do a 180 on the whole idea: the FDA. The non-stop lying from the FDA.
Besides the importance of knowing both ARR and RRR when evaluating a vaccine's effectiveness, here's what the FDA will tell no one: The injections, as products that exist under EUA rules, are exempt from "safety regulations governing [their] manufacture, shipment, holding, dispensing, administration, and labeling." "No federal or state agency assures that the contents of the batch of Pfizer-BioNTech covid-19 vaccine...has similar contents to any other batch...making any practical determination of the safety" of a given dose "impossible," according to Katherine Watt. How many people would have rolled up their sleeves if the FDA had been honest about that? How many FDA employees would still get cushy gigs at a pharma giant if they'd been honest about that? How many people would have taken the injections if they'd known that in 2019 HHS "suspended all previously enforceable rules pertaining to independent testing, site inspections, and regulatory compliance" for anything granted EUA status?
The FDA is run and staffed by liars, and that includes the two tools who produced the propaganda that JAMA ran. They have no one but themselves to blame for destroying trust in the agency and in vaccines.
I tormented drug reps for some years about their details: "RRR is Spam."
Some of my former colleagues eventually began to ask "What is the NNT?" Few progressed to the second step, "What is the NNH?"
The Therapeutics Initiative at UBC has been assessing drugs by NNT for about three decades, and finding some which actually worked.
I had understood that while Comirnaty was "approved" it was not actually available in the US. Without looking in detail, I assume that "Comirnaty" was the original PCR-produced substance, not the E coli derived shots.
The Comirnaty injections have been available in the US throughout and as far as I know they still are. There was a compound they "trialled" and a compound they subsequently sold, and those weren't the same thing. Since the FDA wasn't responsible for overseeing it, the bait and switch was made without any fuss and they slapped the same Comirnaty brand name on the labels. Getting away with wild variations between subsequent batches was a snap.
I've taken prescription drugs that worked and some of my animals are on prescription drugs that work. But I'll be asking a lot more questions about any that I or they take in the future. As for vaccines: The burden of proof is on the proven liars to show me why I should ever trust them again.
https://open.substack.com/pub/democracymanifest/p/the-countermeasures-coup?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=b7m4j further to my earlier comment, this is illuminating
That link is nothing more than a hit piece by a someone that is clearly suffering for TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). I suspect you have the same condition
Behind it was Fauci. The face was Dr. Birx. Yes, because he made a statement on the issue This had been planned long before Trump was elected. Why do you not realise it? think fella think. "Fauci: ‘No doubt’ Trump will face surprise infectious disease outbreak. Really how would he know unless he has intel or was involved.
Moncef Slaoui was the head of Warp Speed prior to Trump becoming President. https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/24/moncef-slaoui-former-head-of-operation-warp-speed-fired-from-company-board-over-sexual-harassment-allegations/
Trump can’t be even credited with the “warp speed” name - that verbiage was invented under Obama administration in conjunction with the zika vaccine scam. He is responsible, in the best case, for being duped and not having enough leadership in him to admit he was duped. We won’t know the truth until a full honest investigation is conducted on this matter. - Sasha Latypova.
Norm Eisen was the architect of the plan to oust Trump. Here for your ongoing education. https://revolver.news/2020/09/meet-norm-eisen-color-revolution/
P.S. we have many subs in common. Will check out some of yours I do not know.
You have made a withering assumption that I have Trump Derangement Syndrome and you made an ASS out of U and ME, on the strength of me sharing an article. You know nothing about me or what I know. I don't need your education thank you. Trump Duped Syndrome is plausible as he is facile and vain. However, this Kabuki Theatre is so obvious with our favourite WWE Wrestling Characters rolled out before us. We all have our confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance to varying degrees. Trump is one of them.
https://watchmanscry.com/?p=6550
The 5 part series is revealing.
Interesting links in your comment. Thank you. Try to avoid the self-righteous condescending snark next time please. Was really unnecessary.
You have confirmed what I eluded to by your ad hom calling me out as being "self-righteous condescending"
What you don't get is that I have no dog in the fight, and you too have no clue as to who I am and also know nothing about me. So you also make unfounded "withering" assumptions.
I am not an American and my response was based on an observation of what you posted.
I simply corrected you with substantiation. If you don't like it well that's just tough. Take it or leave it.
I'll leave it Thanks. The fact you just admitted to an allusion (yes the word is allude not elude) says it all about your original reply. Pompous Prick.
What a nit picker you are. Grow up and play somewhere else and note I don't say please.
You are a complete idiot by having to continue to insult by calling me a "Pompous Prick." Your response is infantile.
You are a pompous prick. For a start your TDS hit piece slur was nonsense. The article was not accusing Trump of being behind anything so am questioning if you even read it. You started the ad hominem with "That link is nothing more than a hit piece by a someone that is clearly suffering for TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). I suspect you have the same condition". So fuck off yourself you moron.
Excellent article! Thank you again for your great work! I would suggest you are being optimistic about regaining public trust. It is one of those necessary fragile social contracts that are hard to build and easy to break. The public that realizes the FDA lied about Covid vaccines will not immediately trust them upon a single truthful statement because trust is not about 80% or 90% coverage. Similarly, a public that realizes that the FDA has lied repeatedly over time about many vaccines will not regain trust this generation. Count me in the latter.
Thanks for the solid takedown of this farcical report. I will never get another injection of any kind, ever, and will spend the rest of my life discouraging folks from getting them as well.
Many thanks for this masterpiece rebuttal. It's indeed possible that the authors are plegged by conflicts of interest. On top of that, their biggest issue is to admit to themselves and to others how wrong they were and still are. That's an EGO killer that they would not survive in their position.
Some omissions. DoD Military Industrial Complex run the democide show and the legislation has been sneakily changed over decades to allow these "countermeasures" to be foisted on the world using Other Transactional Authority (OTA) without ANY quality control as per Katherine Watt and Sasha Latypova work. CDC and FDA, corrupt as they are, are glove puppets. The Financial incentives for Russian Roulette murdering are the spoonful of sugar that makes the medicine go down. Our legislators are complicit. Even Rand Paul's wife bought Gilead shares early in this shitshow.
DOD can’t run anything independent of being ordered.
Thanks for this line up. So much damage was done to people's lives. And 90% does not even know what caused their misery. Can only hope that more people wake to to reality by reading articles like these.
Never took a single Covid shot, and no flu shot either.
Circumventing adequate research on efficacy and safety studies in the name of fast track development and obtaining emergency use authorization has been one of the hall mark of the covid vaccine development. Especially when the therapeutic intervention is intended for such a larger scale administration. To add to the misery, simply repurposing a previously failed method of therapeutic intervention like the mRNA lipid nano particle and hacking the cellular homeostasis of the host body to produce indiscriminate amount of single antigen called the spike protein. All of this to simply scale up the production of the so called vaccine/antigen with a known pathological potential but an unknown immune response. Overall a flawed method of vaccination under the pretext of an overestimated and falsely projected health risk and fatality rate, has been endorsed by the highly corrupt global institutions of health regulations in collusion with the industry. With a single most objective of monetising and creating a pathway for such false health emergencies in future.
While I applaud this effort, it is vital to point out here that so-called ‘hesitancy’ with regard to childhood vaccination goes far beyond Covid. All of the issues called out in the response are good points, but the response plays into the framing preferred by Marks and Califf. The elephant in the room is ignored. The CDC pediatric schedule is nothing less than egregious and outrageous. The problems go *well* beyond just the Covid shots. This isn’t lost on innumerable parents, many of whom have gone down the rabbit hole and found the CDC’s evidence for safety and efficacy to be sorely wanting. The basis for the *entire* schedule is in question.
I didn’t disagree in principle; however, I feel like this was a response to a specific position statement and therefore limited by the claims of the authors to which it is responding.
That is surely one way to approach the issue. That said, what is being argued by Marks and Califf is much broader, even if some of it is only implied. The crux of the issue lies in the deeper roots of the so-called ‘hesitancy’. The problems with the schedule are deep and profound, and the Covid debacle only made it more obvious for those that cared to look. The position taken by Marks and Califf implies that the entire practice of ‘vaccination’ is unassailable and unquestionable. They are only using Covid as the vehicle for their argument. If one is going to critique this effectively, in my opinion, you go for the throat, not the kneecaps.
"Hesitancy" is less of the crux than a perceived "side effect" of the crux, which is efficacy claims, existence of requirements (irrespective of efficacy), & longstanding coercion/pressure within the doctors' office setting.
We agree as to Marks and Calif's implied position.
Well, you’re restating (somewhat) what I’ve pointed to. But it’s much more than just efficacy claims, ‘requirements’ and coercion in doctor’s offices. It’s blatant lies, deception, goosed studies, and agency capture and corruption, and more. It’s an entire edifice built on what amounts to an elaborate mythology.
Can agree with that. Approaching the broader narrative that vaccination replace naturally-derived immunity should be addressed.
And let’s not forget the enormity of the (ongoing) fraud and misrepresentation embedded deeply in the entire vaccine edifice. The Covid debacle is built on that foundation of misrepresentation and deceit.
The entire thing needs the deepest and most serious scrutiny.
I'd take it further.
An impetus of Operation COVID was the protection of the vaccination racket.
That was a part of it, certainly. I don’t know if that’s taking it further, however. It was perhaps more pointedly an abuse of an already mythological belief system. The vaccine racket already enjoyed significant liability protection. They wanted the jabs called a ‘vaccine’ for far more than just cover from the CDC schedule and 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. It’s a potent, deep-rooted, and very significant part of the Op.
Absolutely intuitively I felt something was wrong about this vaccine and I consider myself so lucky to have had an NHS Doctor who spoke to me about the genuine risks of covid and the Vaccine which made me decide to not take the vaccine. Since then I have seen so many people become ill some getting covid heart irregularities and even Cancer I definitely dodged a bullet and I have since researched big pharmas corruption of health care and how prescription drugs are now the third biggest killer in western countries.
I can't get past this first part of claim 1:
"Despite... [vaccines] clear and compelling benefit of saving individual lives and improving population health outcomes"
I'm frustrated with these broad statements of "known fact" - has population health really improved?
Thank you for your article...but I feel you missed this point...though that is a book on its own.
The alleged "vaccine hesitancy" is leading to people question the entire medical system is not new thing. I'm currently reading 1908 article, 100 years (or so) ago, where there was the same widespread mis-trust in the medical profession by laity as well as their own orthodox practitioners ....history is repeating itself. I hope to stack on this soon.
Curiously 1908 was the same time that the Carnegie Foundation funded Abraham Flexner took over the AMA's medical education reform project. This was after publication of Flexners 1907 "little book" where he noted a “splendid opportunity thus awaits a school outside the present system”. An "opportunity" for a great reset.
https://totalityofevidence.com/timeline/the-flexner-report/
Would love to read your vaccine hesitancy article. Let us know at panda@pandata.org when you've released it.
Viruses Don’t Exist and Why It Matters - (Dr. Sam Bailey) http://tinyurl.com/3abdtfzj
They knowingly lied and in my humble opinion there is a whole bunch around the world who need to be charged with crimes against humanity...mass and deliberate murder, something that is still ongoing on with these maggots in their pursuit of the depopulation agenda! I have no pity for them none!
You could use also the strange meanders of the Flumist as a proof that vaccines are marketed despite being ineffective for all age groups.
Please compare this news by NPR (sic!) https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/06/27/483706023/how-flumist-slipped-from-preferred-to-passe
with this Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_attenuated_influenza_vaccine
Another interesting story can be found here
https://wa.kaiserpermanente.org/static/healthAndWellness/flu/flu-mist.pdf
Claim number 3 is largely correct, concerning the lack of vaccinations in under developed countries. Professor Benn from Denmark has spent decades studying the non-specific effects of vaccines (these are the effects of vaccinations other than the target disease). The evidence is considerable and consistent; live attenuated vaccines, eg measles, save childrens' lives over and above the benefit from the protection against the target disease. This has been shown in both developed and underdeveloped countries. The reverse is true for killed vaccines. There is a discussion of these concepts in relation to Covid vaccines in the Lancet (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00498-4/fulltext#%20)
Malnutrition, dirty water and bad sanitation are the main reasons for mortality, just same as in west before things improved and deaths reduced to almost zero BEFORE vaccinations for the illnesses, including Scarlet Fever, which there is no vaccine. Maybe read Disolving Illusiions?
Whether some vaccines save some children was not the point being addressed. The authors used basic childhood mortality as some kind of catch all proof vaccines work. That is bad science whether or not one vaccine is effective.
Every vaccine has to be examined for its own efficacy and adverse event profile. It's not possible nor scientific to lump them all together as good because of child mortality, which the authors clearly intended to do.
As for the Lancet article you link to, I am inclined to think that if a study finds that a vaccine has benefits other than against its intended disease it means that study failed to track the numbers of vaxxed and unvaxxed correctly. If vaccines enhance immune response to other diseases, how much better will we all be to just get a minor cold from time to time: something the FDA seems to seek to eliminate.
I have read some of Benn's articles and listened to talks, but obviously not all, given she has been studying this for over 30 years as I understand it. She says there is a clear consistent signal of the benefit of live attenuated vaccines independent of background mortality, ie both in low childhood and high childhood mortality countries. Not all science that supports vaccination is wrong. "I am inclined to think...." means that you wish to disbelieve this result as a prior belief. Not scientific or evidence based.
Ian, I have finally finished reading Benn's article in the Lancet that you linked to. I see now I had missed the nuance of your original post. Thanks for the link. In reading the article, Benn made it clear that:
1. The immune system is incredibly complex,
2. We are only just beginning to piece together how it works.
3. We do not know how different vaccines interact with each other, and we certainly don't understand whatever interactions there might be.
4. Vaccines based on different platforms or technology may interact with each other negatively.
5. There is room for a great deal of research in this field.
6. She recommends focusing research, not on vaccines that focus on one specific pathogen, but on strengthening the immune system.
I concur with all 6 points. I did think that her theory that live attenuating vaccines cause incidental benefits has potential, albeit it is possible that all she is documenting is that eating dirt and getting sick from time to time is in general beneficial to the long term health of children.
I did find it noteworthy that although she praised the OPV for reducing childhood mortality, she never mentioned that this vaccine is now linked to a vaccine induced polio that is causing more grief than the wild strain of polio. See:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(23)00680-1/fulltext
Thanks again for the interesting link.
Thanks, I have learnt a lot from links and posts in these discussions, as well as having some good laughs at some of the complete dingbat ideas
Thanks Ian. My statement "I am inclined to think" is the functional equivalent of the first step in the scientific method: postulate an intelligent and plausible hypothesis. The next step is to research the hypothesis to see if it can be falsified, or if it is or might be true. Thus, I had previously put it on my agenda to study the paper you link in more detail to see how my hypothesis stands up. All that said, in the past 3 years I've dug into multiple papers/studies claiming unintended benefits from vaccines, one going so far as to say vaccine uptake correlated with less car accidents. For a look at how it is possible to conclude that going to a movie is associated with higher mortality rates, see this interesting discussion: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtmHS0QQws
You are most correct that "not all science that supports vaccination is wrong.," and this concurs with my point above that every vaccine needs to be examined for its own merits.