What will it take to change people's minds? I'm thinking that it might take a massive pandemic, but this time with no vaccines and no public health mandates, producing a far higher body count than COVID-19. Perhaps, after decimating half our population, the survivors might be willing to reconsider their beliefs.
I think it will take these people seeing their children or other family members die of diseases that could have easily been prevented. I know of a number of covid deniers who have died of covid at great expense to taxpayers. Sad to say but let them die if that’s what they want but quit wasting my tax dollars in the process.
Ancient Greek proverb: “The gods help those who help themselves.”
During the height of our current pandemic, some doctors suggested not giving scarce hospital and ICU beds to people with covid who had not made use of their opportunity to get vaccinated. That would have allowed natural selection to take its course.
Natural selection before vaccines has ensured that we have evolved an immune system capable of handling ANY pandemic. Modern pandemics are iatrogenic. If you stopped damaging our immune system using dirty vaccines and stopped GOF research spewing new viruses, there will be no pandemic.
You explain that injecting a viral protein trains the immune system to attack the virus. You inject egg protein (flu shots) and train the immune system to attack egg -> egg allergy. You are taught in med school that injecting egg proteins causes the development of deadly allergy to egg and fatal asthma to egg aerosol. Want to explain why all of you doctors should not be charged with assault?
An opposing perspective to consider on the HPV vaccine saga:
•A “groundbreaking” vaccine was rushed to market by our regulators because it addressed a critical unmet need.
•To make the vaccine work, a new reckless technology had to be used that exposed recipients to significant risk and inevitably produced contaminated vaccine lots.
•The vaccine’s benefit was largely theoretical and not supported by the clinical trials. Because of that, they had to be doctored to heavily exaggerate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy.
•Once the HPV vaccine hit the market, as predicted due to its known and theoretical risks, a tsunami of injuries happened.
•Instead of listening to the countless red flags and public protest, the regulators instead did everything they could to cover them up, began instituting vaccine mandates, and pushed the vaccine on more and more people to increase sales (e.g., boys at no risk of cervical cancer) while simultaneously ensuring the vaccine manufacturers had complete legal immunity for injuries from their product.
•All of the promised benefits of the vaccine have still failed to materialize, and if anything the vaccine actually made things worse (e.g., by changing the circulating strains or provoking severe HPV).
•None of the groups you would have expected to help end this violation of bodily autonomy or help the victims did; instead grass roots ones stepped up to help them.
•There has still been no accountability for what happened, nothing has been done to help the unimaginable number of people who were permanently disabled by the vaccines and the HPV vaccines are now one of the most lucrative pharmaceutical products on the market.
•All of that happened 17 years later with the COVID-19 vaccines.
No vaccine can protect us from willful arrogance. And so I've come to the sad, infuriating, and terrifying conclusion that it will require a return to the days of American children dropping like flies from measles, whooping cough, tetanus, you name it. When my mother died, I was deeply touched to discover that she'd held on to my sister's and my childhood vaccination booklets for over five decades. Thumbing through them, I compared our fate with four of my grandparents' siblings who were dead by age 6 of diseases we can now prevent. Estelle, Charles, Catherine, Babs. Children's lives are so cheap now.
No one dies of infectious disease except the old. If children die it is due malnutrition or iatrogenic causes. We depend on these diseases for good health. Measles/chicken pox infections protect against cancer, shingles, dementia, etc.. Mothers who had natural infections, passively protect babies through breast milk. Babies infected when being breastfed, develop strong natural immunity, with disease so mild they cannot be diagnosed. They pass the protection to the next generation. "Public health" fools destroyed all that.
And the Earth is FLAT. I responded to this same nonsense about how mothers who survived having the disease breastfeeding their kids was the preventative cure for measles. When I responded that I was one of those kids and got a severe case of the measles at 6 years old you went mute. Same thing happened to all my friends. So you have zero interest in evidence based science. What you’re trying to do is spread disinformation that will cause great suffering amongst people. That’s called Sadism.
If your Mom had measles and you were exposed to measles when being breastfed, there's no way you developed severe measles at 6. Stop inventing new immunology.
"Infants who have low levels of passively acquired maternal antibody and persons who receive blood products that contain antibody often have subclinical infections or minimal symptoms that may not be diagnosed as measles [24–26]."
"Infants who have low levels of passively acquired maternal antibody and persons who receive blood products that contain antibody often have subclinical infections or minimal symptoms that may not be diagnosed as measles [24–26]."
This comment is a trainwreck of anti-science nonsense. Infectious diseases don’t “protect” us—they kill and disable. Before vaccines, measles alone caused mass deaths and lifelong complications. The idea that we need these diseases for health is as absurd as it is dangerous.
Also, this has a certain… algorithmic staleness to it. A clunky, regurgitative quality, like something spat out by a bargain-bin AI trained on bad Facebook posts. If that’s the case: tell your creators they did a sloppy job. If not—well, that’s somehow worse.
So you’re advocating periodic mass die offs of the human population as occurred during the plague in Europe as a better outcome than vaccination? 50 Million estimated to have died. We could have another virus / bacterium come along with similar potential. As I said quite the sadistic view.
What does a link to a letter from a Uganda University about Measles and Burkitt’s lymphoma behind a paywall have to do with anything? Wasting our time with nonsense.
I’m done as well.
Wake up to real, valid scientific analysis of the pathogens that affect human health. Broaden your field of information out of the echo chamber of pseudo science with convoluted false logic that is about disinformation spreading.
We evolved being nomads. Not living in filthy cities. With sanitation, that is fixed. No pandemics unless you create GOF viruses.
If it is behind a paywall, it becomes invalid? It is your peer-reviewed, published article in a "major medical journal", The Lancet. Suddenly you don't like your med journal articles any more because they challenge your dogma?
IDSA are Pharma corrupted barbarians who make/market disease for their corruptors. You swallow it.
Why do you insert links behind a paywall? You’re citing random things to look like there is substance there when there isn’t. You don’t have any understanding of the studies that you cite. They don’t back up your pseudo science
Wrong. Only if they suffer malnutrition. Otherwise, you are denying evolution. How did this child's ancestors survive the disease? Why did they not go extinct before this child could be born?
Some ancestors survive not because of nutrition , but rather they have an immune system that does not over-react to the germ. /and every year new humans are born with differing varieties of immune systems - not exactly what their parents were . Infectious disease is a much more complex process - it is not nutritional status alone that determines how virulent any specific microbe is . Of course nutritional status is important , but it just does not determine all the ways your immune system functions. Many many well known epidemics have devastated very healthy peoples . The genes involved in infection response do not “ carry through” directly - in other words even if your mother AND father both survived smallpox , it does NOT ensure that your immune system genes will do that ( even though you got them from your parents ) . These immune system genes are sometimes called HLA genes and are about 16% of the genes you inherit. This is not the right place to go into HLA genetics , believe me I am a practicing primary doc and I find learning about them challenging. But , I can cite 2 brief illustrations . One , even identical twins do not have the same infectious disease responses . Similar ? Sure , but not the same. Second , in kidney transplants , sometimes the BEST match is NOT your closest relatives . Transplant medicine involves very careful manipulation of the immune system and this is related to infection response. Yet , in receiving a kidney from another individual , for the receivers immune system to tolerate it , a close relatives immune system may not be the best match . Strange , right ? But wonderful as well. That’s evolution for you - it does lots of things you just do not expect.
"even identical twins do not have the same infectious disease responses"
Once vaccinated, they are no longer identical. Vaccine contaminants vary 100-fold across doses. Russian roulette. Then you need to control viral load exposure before you can draw any useful conclusion.
There were no organ transplants during evolution. Why did we evolve to reject transplanted organs at all? Answer: Transplanted organs are indistinguishable from cancer. We evolved an immune system to attack cancer. So predictably it rejects transplants.
Most organ damage is vaccine-induced. First do no harm. mRNA vaccines are ideal for organ damage.
You and I share something - we both want very precise engineering for vaccines . But there are other things we share - What of infections that last for the remainder of one’s life ? There are many of these . Too many to count but you know some of them well. Several of them , I guarantee , you carry yourself as do I . I do not know your age but if you are born prior to about 1990 you carry Chicken Pox virus , EB virus ( mono ) , CMV ( another type of Mono) . Something like 1 of 4 or 1 of 3 of your friends and family and acquaintances carry HSV , either 1 or 2 . This is just a beginning . Evolution did not get rid of these infections , they last a lifetime , even in you Vinu. And me . All of these were well documented prior to any vaccine era. Most of them we have no vaccine for . Most of these have lasted for millennia among humans and will continue to do so ( unless we were able to engineer vaccines to eliminate them , but most vaccines do not eliminate infections , nor were they designed to ) . Many , not all , of these lifelong infections have consequences that lead to mildly annoying ( think HSV 1 ) to devastating diseases ( think Multiple Sclerosis ) or highly lethal conditions ( think lymphomas or liver cancers) . Now if evolution or proper nutrition fixed all these problems , or at least the worst ones , why were these diseases well known very long before vaccines and yet continue ? Why didn’t evolution get rid of you or me , or our parents , as both of us could suffer the downstream effects of these infections.
Sorry doc, if inheritance of disease protection does not work, humans would have gone extinct long ago. Inheritance is not 100% guaranteed as evolution fine-tunes the immune system. That's what science must understand. Who are the tiny percentage who are susceptible and need help? Instead you insanely jab everyone in sight and cause the $4.3T/yr chronic disease epidemic.
It’s difficult to read comments like that. The “ excitement “ about the nomination of an unqualified, that’s generous, person like RFK is terrifying. It’s not an opportunity to root out corruption, it enables it.
The mandate to suspend research in infectious diseases to redirect funds to research in alternative “medicine “ is straight out of an insane asylum. If corruption is the main argument then focus on the alternative scams.
Life expectancy increases since the early 1900s are a direct result of real advances with real medical treatments; vaccines and antibiotics maybe the largest contributors to these increases.
Bad actors exist in every field. Where do you think they will aggregate? Where regulations exist or where there are no regulations?
Full disclosure: I worked in big pharma, I am proud of the lives saved. I am proud the industry supported research and the scientists involved in that research. And no, there is no legal ways for a pharmaceutical company to influence the results of trials. Can’t speak for other countries, in mine, 85% or more funding for medical research comes from private sources with some of the toughest regulations in the world. I trust the approval process, I trust the approved medicines to do what they’re supposed to do over any unproven alternative scams that prey on desperate people.
We are still dealing with the mess of the opioid crisis. The problem is when a few bad actors high enough in the chain slip up, it is catastrophic to the average American. People are not able to conceptualize the efficiency of an agency when it's running as it's intended to.
Not only would redoing clinical trials on approved vaccines be wasteful, they also would not provide evidence of safety in large populations. No clinical trial can be large enough to identify rare adverse reactions. Those can only be found in post approval phase 4 or real world evidence studies. So this is a complete farce.
Exactly. That's why products must be DESIGNED FOR SAFETY. Vaccines are NEVER EVER designed. It is all trial and error. They are unsafe by definition. We will eliminate the vaccine industry. We have known for 100+ years that it is impossible to make safe injected vaccines. Vaccines are the worst scam in medicine.
Can you tell me which medications have been designed for safety in all patients? And if you don't have an example do you think the entire pharmaceutical compendium should be trashed and we should start over with drugs that are designed for safety? If so, how do you go about designing those drugs that will be safe in every human being on the planet? Is there any human activity that doesn't involve risk?
Perhaps you are unaware of the basics of biology but every person is different. We all have polymorphisms in genes that will affect how we react to and metabolize various molecules. So there is no such thing as a drug that is safe for everyone. For that reason all chemical drugs are tested against panels of metabolic enzymes with the known human polymorphisms to determine which ones are safer for which patients. For biologic drugs and vaccines this is not possible because these molecules are broken down in every cell and tissue in your body. So there is no information on the effect of polymorphisms because, presumably, if your body is unable to breakdown protein or nucleic acids you would not live very long.
So science and medicine looks at the risk to benefit ratio of each medication. If the risk is greater than the benefit then the drugs will not be approved. Even if the benefit is positive but and the medication is unsafe for a significant number of people it will not be approved.
Vaccines have an excellent risk to benefit ratio which we know from decades of use. They are protective against viral diseases and are safe in the vast majority of patients. They are in general far safer than any other medications because they are natural products that you are exposed to only a few times.
As an example of safety, the most common serious side effect from the mRNA vaccines is myocarditis. Myocarditis affects about 18 people per 100,000 vaccinated individuals. That is a rate of 0.018%. In almost all cases the myocarditis is mild and resolves without medical intervention.
Do you think that is unsafe as compared to the Covid virus which has killed millions, has resulted in hospitalization of millions more and further has permanently damaged the cardiovascular systems of even more people and resulted in long covid in unknown numbers of people. The vaccine protects against all of those events.
"Myocarditis affects about 18 people per 100,000 vaccinated individuals."
Lies. Everyone who ever receives that sewage jab has multiple organ damage including heart damage. For the vaccine to "work" it must cause organ damage.
mRNA/LNP transfect into multiple organs. Cells in those organs make spike and display spike epitopes on their surface. CD8+ Tcells that recognize those epitopes will KILL ALL THOSE CELLS.
Also, it seems there is a pattern in your answers: You don't answer the questions asked (i.e. how do you design a drug for safety?), you pivot to something else, you post a reference to a publication you clearly don't understand, and then claim you are more intelligent than all the scientists and medical professionals posting here.
So show the data that everyone has multiple organ damage from the mRNA vaccines. Still waiting for that one.
And this 'letter to the editor' is discussing the theoretical possibility based on PKPV studies in rats injected with large quantities of tritium labelled lipid components of the mRNA vaccine. There is no way to know whether the distribution of tritium label is due to intact nanoparticles, the lipid on its own or the tritium bound to another molecule (you really don't know much biology do you?). So the study is useless as it tells you nothing about nanoparticle distribution and this is why it is not required by more enlightened regulatory agencies. Also most of the links or papers referenced in the letter no longer exist.
By the way, that Japanese study also shows that the protein encoded by the mRNA encapsulated by those lipids is only found at the site of injection and the liver. Explain the discrepancy. Bet you can't. But answer the first question first if you can.
I'm a little sad because you literally do not know what you do not know. No amount of evidence in the world will allow you to accept truth because your fundamental understanding is not based in reality. If you do not know how to conduct/dissect scientific studies/research, there will be no evidence in the world that will allow you to accept the truth because you are so unwilling to question yourself or put it through the test of reality. Which, in and of itself is a profound limitation in your logic.
Keep posting articles you either haven’t read or don’t understand… 🤣🤣
Tell me, does it hurt to be this stupid or does it just hurt those around you? Also, thank you for proving my point that you understand nothing about PK/PV experiments by posting that time course of radioactivity from the tritium labelled lipid experiment. I really do hope for you that you get an education one day because whatever you’ve had so far clearly didn’t work.
And COVID severity itself is iatrogenic, caused by allergic sensitization to tetanus antigens in the tetanus shot, which cross reacts with SARS-COV-2 antigens.
"Public health" killed 32 million. 15 million killed by severe COVID caused by the tetanus shot. 17 million killed by the COVID shot. #Nuremberg2 coming up.
Look at you go! An “open-label drug use, without a placebo control or randomization.” On 110 patients no less. Which you think is definitive proof of efficacy. Please learn how clinical trials should be designed. Then maybe you won’t make a fool of yourself cherry picking biased open label non-randomized studies that are all but meaningless…
Oh ant the tetanus study doesn’t show anything like what you think it does…
The same questions keeps me up at night! How do we bridge the gap? What can we do to get our message out in ways that resonate with the people who have been taken in by pseudoscience? I think it's going to take a unified sci comm village and innovative approaches to reach audiences who don't live where we display our evidence-based info.
Cow's milk is a harmless, healthy food. You inject cow's milk proteins into people (DTap vaccine) and train their immune systems to violently attack milk as if it were a dangerous pathogen. Then you are baffled by the explosion of milk allergies. You say the immune system is "overreacting" and producing an "inappropriate" response. But YOU trained it to do exactly that. Then you are baffled that people don't trust you? Hello?
Do you know the pathophysiology of allergies, asthma, autism, autoimmune diseases? No, you don't. We do. If you were a real scientist, you would want to learn from us.
Because we studied the problem and solved it. I provided a link with evidence. May be you should read it. What's the point of asking questions if you refuse to read the answers?
I've read the article. It does not say what you are saying. The children affected had existing severe allergies to cows milk prior to being vaccinated.
There's nothing safe about injecting 6000 yeast proteins adsorbed on AAHS (HPV vaccines), no matter how many corrupted, "independent researchers" you buy to lie.
"What will it take to bridge this gap? To help people understand that the scientific community isn't their enemy, that we're all searching for truth together?"
Sadly, there is no bridge. "Science" is the new kid on the evolutionary block. Most people do not think in terms of data and science and truth. They believe what they believe because it "works" for them. When they or someone they love is dying, they beg for good treatments, but they never appreciate or "believe" in the science/scientists that created them. It's just how most brains work. Scientists just need to keep on with their work undeterred as long as they are allowed to so the benefits keep on flowing.
So true. Evolutionary psychology would point out that science is usually on the cusp of progress, and our brains aren't programmed to like the cusp. We have a habitual, protective tendency to fear what is new. We don't know yet it can't harm us, so we default to "scary" and "dangerous." Our brains don't recognize the work of others showing it's safe, we just acknowledge what we have experienced as safe ourselves and eschew the unknown. It's easier and safer to be anti than pro in our mamalian minds. It's an act of bravery and trust outside of instinct to trust science, arguably even evolved. And many humans are fighting that, and their brains tell them they're literally fighting for their lives. Only time will tell if we can evolve out of that. Some people have...
Perfectly said Sheri! I like what you say about the courage it takes to suspend our evolved belief systems (mostly designed to reduce the risk of the 'false negative' that could get us killed) in favor of the results of scientific inquiry. Most find that too big a risk/leap.
False equivelance fallacy . "Most people" is straw man argument . The entire comment is hyperbole based in psychology as a diversion. Plenty of examples of bad medicine & lazy science producing them for profit rather than ethics or public health . This is why there is scepticism or outright refusal. Fix the drugs that cause these possibly unintended bad outcomes, and maybe the bridge will be restored.
It starts with relationships. That needs to happen first. People like us, I’m a science educator, are viewed with skepticism by those who believe people like RFK Jr.
It will take more measles outbreaks like what's happening in one Texas county. I'm old I lived before the Polio Vaccine ( took the sugar cube and then got the shot to stay safe) and had friends who caught Polio and suffered. I'm as confused as you and probably more disappointed. But I'll continue to read the truth, very my vaccines (if they're available) and they to stay safe and sane... it isn't easy. Sigh.
Thank you for doing this work and responding to people's skepticism so earnestly and thoughtfully.
I found Jessica Grose's recent OpEd helpful in understanding the emotional factor in all of this—and how America experienced a similar pattern after the 1918 flu pandemic.
As she writes, "Make America Healthy Again is an emotional, not an intellectual, movement. It is based on a fear of cultural and technological change, and it yields to charisma instead of bureaucracy."
And I think that gets at your point in this newsletter—the data, the studies, the facts don't matter when someone is deeply emotionally invested in a narrative that makes them feel safe and in control when the world feels scary and out of control. So while high quality research is still important (maybe more so than ever—though harder to do than ever?), changing hearts and minds will require emotionally-charged stories of why we need the tried-and-true public health measures we took for granted for so long.
What's so scary and what keeps me up at night is knowing that a lot of the powerful storytellers of the future are going to be parents who will come to this work because of a child's suffering and death that could have been prevented. I hope I'm wrong.
This should be a gift link for anyone who is curious to read the article:
This reminds me of the last question of the Bill Nye vs Ken Ham debate, when someone in the audience asked each one “what would it take to change your mind (about evolution)
Nye said: New and contradictory data - and listed about a dozen things that could change his mind.
Ken Ham said: Nothing will change my mind. The Bible is my source.
I think this illustrates the asynchronous nature of these anti-science debates, and also how Mr. Nye brilliantly reframes the question.
So maybe people need to understand what it would take to change medical consensus. What exactly is the threshold? What sort of studies of what quality? Can we have some study quality metric? It would be great to ask: “Is that study XYZ validated? How was it rated?”
So that the answer could be: “there is a process for changing the consensus, you need at least X studies of ABC validation or better. You need at least Y studies of CDE validation to merit public spending.”
My point is that we’re answering yes or no questions with squishy answers. We need to find (or invent) the processes by which we can answer yes or no questions with yes or no answers.
For the most part, what we take ourselves to know is due almost entirely to who we decide to believe. Scientists should have a Hippocratic Oath that is identical to the MDs: First Do No Harm. Too many scientists pass off in their writing and research statements that are not keeping in mind the incredibly tentative nature of the research project they just completed. Scientists of all flavors should carefully and assiduously eliminate political proclivities and biases from their work.
I have personal experience consulting with CDC, FDA, and USDA. Sadly enough, political leanings are NOT eliminated from the work these bureaucracies do. Sadly enough, something like 90 percent of published research in the social sciences cannot be reproduced. Sadly enough, 100 percent of what we read in legacy media about some "scientific" result is overstated and misstated.
Yes, of course. But politicians are not in the same league as professional scientists. Scientists have a greater burdon to be humble, truthful, and honorable in their work, just like medical doctors; at least that's my opinion.
Sad, but true. They should be held to the same high standards, given the human lives that depend on them. Sadly, they seem to be playing statistics and popularity contests and not recognizing they're supposed to be supporting actual people.
Scientific conclusions are always provisionally expressed in terms of probabilities, and are always subject to revisions in the face of contradictory evidence. That suggests presenting those conclusions with a degree of humility and an honest admission of their shortcomings.
In my opinion, we are no longer able to take pronouncements about science at face value. The problem is not only in the social sciences. It is in also in physical sciences. In my opinion, too may scientists have sold themselves to the federal grant process.
Looking at food additives and pesticide effects is a good thing if he does it but implementing it, Big Food won’t allow it. His vaccine stance is criminal so surprised that people affected by his anti-measles campaign and lost their children didn’t sue him.
this article has zero unbiased science, its wholly an emo response to a comment and dripping ‘we’ and ‘us’ as if a massive group actually reads and critiques studies, or any books on disease and vax histories. This is hollow, when its all parroted repetition and no actual unbiased, not pharma bought, ‘science’
Wow. Yes this divide is getting wider. Personally, I will continue to choose spirit over technology. Human hubris has not done the earth, or human health well ... I see most of the illnesses we are 'battling' are created by technology ... Sedentary lifestyle, synthetic fertilizer, pesticide etc ... Then we 'mitigate' with technological intervention... A slow downward spiral, always with a very profitable spin for the technologists. Illness is profitable. Speaking of evidence, in over 100 years of scientific experiments, contagion has yet to be proved ... Remember, the sun animates everything on earth - through sympathetic resonance.
Not only does the P/Harma industry control allopathic medicine it controls the training of medical students so we churn out experts in vaccine schedules and medication prescriptions, well, pseudo-experts, who have little knowledge of anatomy, physiology and are incapable of diagnosis without a myriad of tests, and even then.
What will it take to change people's minds? I'm thinking that it might take a massive pandemic, but this time with no vaccines and no public health mandates, producing a far higher body count than COVID-19. Perhaps, after decimating half our population, the survivors might be willing to reconsider their beliefs.
I think it will take these people seeing their children or other family members die of diseases that could have easily been prevented. I know of a number of covid deniers who have died of covid at great expense to taxpayers. Sad to say but let them die if that’s what they want but quit wasting my tax dollars in the process.
Ancient Greek proverb: “The gods help those who help themselves.”
During the height of our current pandemic, some doctors suggested not giving scarce hospital and ICU beds to people with covid who had not made use of their opportunity to get vaccinated. That would have allowed natural selection to take its course.
Natural selection before vaccines has ensured that we have evolved an immune system capable of handling ANY pandemic. Modern pandemics are iatrogenic. If you stopped damaging our immune system using dirty vaccines and stopped GOF research spewing new viruses, there will be no pandemic.
Ignorance is curable; stupidity is not.
Your ignorance is astounding.
Education is the cure.
Get some!
You explain that injecting a viral protein trains the immune system to attack the virus. You inject egg protein (flu shots) and train the immune system to attack egg -> egg allergy. You are taught in med school that injecting egg proteins causes the development of deadly allergy to egg and fatal asthma to egg aerosol. Want to explain why all of you doctors should not be charged with assault?
UC Irvine, School of Medicine,Immunology notes:
https://pdfcoffee.com/notes-of-immunology-pdf-free.html pg.157.
Who needs the education here, doc?
MAHA will educate all doctors and biomed researchers on how to do science.
You’re an anti-vax troll. FOAD.
Notice how they cant interact with your responses other than by hurling invectives? Telling, huh?
Keep up the good fight, bro!
Do you know the pathophysiology of autism, asthma, allergies or autoimmunity? You KNOW NOTHING. Are you not ashamed of your incompetence/ignorance?
We have all those answers. Want to get educated? Here:
https://zenodo.org/records/3647593
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Trujf2s-WkriH1hZ6epxjGG2ow_2A53qPaz2QAkUbSY/edit#slide=id.p
https://zenodo.org/records/14873242
Get a life, troll.
An opposing perspective to consider on the HPV vaccine saga:
•A “groundbreaking” vaccine was rushed to market by our regulators because it addressed a critical unmet need.
•To make the vaccine work, a new reckless technology had to be used that exposed recipients to significant risk and inevitably produced contaminated vaccine lots.
•The vaccine’s benefit was largely theoretical and not supported by the clinical trials. Because of that, they had to be doctored to heavily exaggerate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy.
•Once the HPV vaccine hit the market, as predicted due to its known and theoretical risks, a tsunami of injuries happened.
•Instead of listening to the countless red flags and public protest, the regulators instead did everything they could to cover them up, began instituting vaccine mandates, and pushed the vaccine on more and more people to increase sales (e.g., boys at no risk of cervical cancer) while simultaneously ensuring the vaccine manufacturers had complete legal immunity for injuries from their product.
•All of the promised benefits of the vaccine have still failed to materialize, and if anything the vaccine actually made things worse (e.g., by changing the circulating strains or provoking severe HPV).
•None of the groups you would have expected to help end this violation of bodily autonomy or help the victims did; instead grass roots ones stepped up to help them.
•There has still been no accountability for what happened, nothing has been done to help the unimaginable number of people who were permanently disabled by the vaccines and the HPV vaccines are now one of the most lucrative pharmaceutical products on the market.
•All of that happened 17 years later with the COVID-19 vaccines.
The typical anti-vaccine activist talking points. Boring!
Hippocratic oath be damned he says . Victor Goebbels and Megele were doctors too.
I think the same thing, sadly. That's what has brought progress historically. 😭😳
No vaccine can protect us from willful arrogance. And so I've come to the sad, infuriating, and terrifying conclusion that it will require a return to the days of American children dropping like flies from measles, whooping cough, tetanus, you name it. When my mother died, I was deeply touched to discover that she'd held on to my sister's and my childhood vaccination booklets for over five decades. Thumbing through them, I compared our fate with four of my grandparents' siblings who were dead by age 6 of diseases we can now prevent. Estelle, Charles, Catherine, Babs. Children's lives are so cheap now.
No one dies of infectious disease except the old. If children die it is due malnutrition or iatrogenic causes. We depend on these diseases for good health. Measles/chicken pox infections protect against cancer, shingles, dementia, etc.. Mothers who had natural infections, passively protect babies through breast milk. Babies infected when being breastfed, develop strong natural immunity, with disease so mild they cannot be diagnosed. They pass the protection to the next generation. "Public health" fools destroyed all that.
And the Earth is FLAT. I responded to this same nonsense about how mothers who survived having the disease breastfeeding their kids was the preventative cure for measles. When I responded that I was one of those kids and got a severe case of the measles at 6 years old you went mute. Same thing happened to all my friends. So you have zero interest in evidence based science. What you’re trying to do is spread disinformation that will cause great suffering amongst people. That’s called Sadism.
If your Mom had measles and you were exposed to measles when being breastfed, there's no way you developed severe measles at 6. Stop inventing new immunology.
Seems that factual evidence is anathema to your gig here. Maybe find a new one that you can make money from that helps people.
"Infants who have low levels of passively acquired maternal antibody and persons who receive blood products that contain antibody often have subclinical infections or minimal symptoms that may not be diagnosed as measles [24–26]."
https://sci-hub.se/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15106083/
Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the word "often" and how it differs from the word "always"...
Behind a paywall as best I can see. The abstract at least does not support your viewpoint.
We are done.
Vinu, you are mistaken.
"Infants who have low levels of passively acquired maternal antibody and persons who receive blood products that contain antibody often have subclinical infections or minimal symptoms that may not be diagnosed as measles [24–26]."
https://sci-hub.se/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15106083/
You are scientifically illiterate and your opinion is invalid. Shut the fuck up.
Learn the difference between fact and opinion first.
Every accusation is a confession with you asinine losers.
You only show ignorance with this type of comments.
This comment is a trainwreck of anti-science nonsense. Infectious diseases don’t “protect” us—they kill and disable. Before vaccines, measles alone caused mass deaths and lifelong complications. The idea that we need these diseases for health is as absurd as it is dangerous.
Also, this has a certain… algorithmic staleness to it. A clunky, regurgitative quality, like something spat out by a bargain-bin AI trained on bad Facebook posts. If that’s the case: tell your creators they did a sloppy job. If not—well, that’s somehow worse.
Why did you not go extinct before your quackccines?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26972449/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4103972/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03201-5
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(71)91186-X/fulltext
So you’re advocating periodic mass die offs of the human population as occurred during the plague in Europe as a better outcome than vaccination? 50 Million estimated to have died. We could have another virus / bacterium come along with similar potential. As I said quite the sadistic view.
What does a link to a letter from a Uganda University about Measles and Burkitt’s lymphoma behind a paywall have to do with anything? Wasting our time with nonsense.
I’m done as well.
Wake up to real, valid scientific analysis of the pathogens that affect human health. Broaden your field of information out of the echo chamber of pseudo science with convoluted false logic that is about disinformation spreading.
We evolved being nomads. Not living in filthy cities. With sanitation, that is fixed. No pandemics unless you create GOF viruses.
If it is behind a paywall, it becomes invalid? It is your peer-reviewed, published article in a "major medical journal", The Lancet. Suddenly you don't like your med journal articles any more because they challenge your dogma?
IDSA are Pharma corrupted barbarians who make/market disease for their corruptors. You swallow it.
https://idsafoundation.org/giving/industry-partners/
Why do you insert links behind a paywall? You’re citing random things to look like there is substance there when there isn’t. You don’t have any understanding of the studies that you cite. They don’t back up your pseudo science
Ad hominem fallacy
Not true - children can die of disease. You are completely mistaken.
Wrong. Only if they suffer malnutrition. Otherwise, you are denying evolution. How did this child's ancestors survive the disease? Why did they not go extinct before this child could be born?
Some ancestors survive not because of nutrition , but rather they have an immune system that does not over-react to the germ. /and every year new humans are born with differing varieties of immune systems - not exactly what their parents were . Infectious disease is a much more complex process - it is not nutritional status alone that determines how virulent any specific microbe is . Of course nutritional status is important , but it just does not determine all the ways your immune system functions. Many many well known epidemics have devastated very healthy peoples . The genes involved in infection response do not “ carry through” directly - in other words even if your mother AND father both survived smallpox , it does NOT ensure that your immune system genes will do that ( even though you got them from your parents ) . These immune system genes are sometimes called HLA genes and are about 16% of the genes you inherit. This is not the right place to go into HLA genetics , believe me I am a practicing primary doc and I find learning about them challenging. But , I can cite 2 brief illustrations . One , even identical twins do not have the same infectious disease responses . Similar ? Sure , but not the same. Second , in kidney transplants , sometimes the BEST match is NOT your closest relatives . Transplant medicine involves very careful manipulation of the immune system and this is related to infection response. Yet , in receiving a kidney from another individual , for the receivers immune system to tolerate it , a close relatives immune system may not be the best match . Strange , right ? But wonderful as well. That’s evolution for you - it does lots of things you just do not expect.
"even identical twins do not have the same infectious disease responses"
Once vaccinated, they are no longer identical. Vaccine contaminants vary 100-fold across doses. Russian roulette. Then you need to control viral load exposure before you can draw any useful conclusion.
There were no organ transplants during evolution. Why did we evolve to reject transplanted organs at all? Answer: Transplanted organs are indistinguishable from cancer. We evolved an immune system to attack cancer. So predictably it rejects transplants.
Most organ damage is vaccine-induced. First do no harm. mRNA vaccines are ideal for organ damage.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35298029/
You and I share something - we both want very precise engineering for vaccines . But there are other things we share - What of infections that last for the remainder of one’s life ? There are many of these . Too many to count but you know some of them well. Several of them , I guarantee , you carry yourself as do I . I do not know your age but if you are born prior to about 1990 you carry Chicken Pox virus , EB virus ( mono ) , CMV ( another type of Mono) . Something like 1 of 4 or 1 of 3 of your friends and family and acquaintances carry HSV , either 1 or 2 . This is just a beginning . Evolution did not get rid of these infections , they last a lifetime , even in you Vinu. And me . All of these were well documented prior to any vaccine era. Most of them we have no vaccine for . Most of these have lasted for millennia among humans and will continue to do so ( unless we were able to engineer vaccines to eliminate them , but most vaccines do not eliminate infections , nor were they designed to ) . Many , not all , of these lifelong infections have consequences that lead to mildly annoying ( think HSV 1 ) to devastating diseases ( think Multiple Sclerosis ) or highly lethal conditions ( think lymphomas or liver cancers) . Now if evolution or proper nutrition fixed all these problems , or at least the worst ones , why were these diseases well known very long before vaccines and yet continue ? Why didn’t evolution get rid of you or me , or our parents , as both of us could suffer the downstream effects of these infections.
Here is organ damage that is caused by the disease Covid. But you’re not really interested in understanding damage from infectious disease are you?
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11048001/
Sorry doc, if inheritance of disease protection does not work, humans would have gone extinct long ago. Inheritance is not 100% guaranteed as evolution fine-tunes the immune system. That's what science must understand. Who are the tiny percentage who are susceptible and need help? Instead you insanely jab everyone in sight and cause the $4.3T/yr chronic disease epidemic.
https://open.substack.com/pub/theunbiasedscipod/p/the-evidence-gap-when-knowledge-isnt?r=wwdfq&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=93978054
The article is a non sequitur unrelated to my post. I think it’s now widely known that antibiotic overuse is to be avoided.
O
M
G
Shame on you.
MPH= Masters Public Hysteria
It’s difficult to read comments like that. The “ excitement “ about the nomination of an unqualified, that’s generous, person like RFK is terrifying. It’s not an opportunity to root out corruption, it enables it.
The mandate to suspend research in infectious diseases to redirect funds to research in alternative “medicine “ is straight out of an insane asylum. If corruption is the main argument then focus on the alternative scams.
Life expectancy increases since the early 1900s are a direct result of real advances with real medical treatments; vaccines and antibiotics maybe the largest contributors to these increases.
Bad actors exist in every field. Where do you think they will aggregate? Where regulations exist or where there are no regulations?
Full disclosure: I worked in big pharma, I am proud of the lives saved. I am proud the industry supported research and the scientists involved in that research. And no, there is no legal ways for a pharmaceutical company to influence the results of trials. Can’t speak for other countries, in mine, 85% or more funding for medical research comes from private sources with some of the toughest regulations in the world. I trust the approval process, I trust the approved medicines to do what they’re supposed to do over any unproven alternative scams that prey on desperate people.
We are still dealing with the mess of the opioid crisis. The problem is when a few bad actors high enough in the chain slip up, it is catastrophic to the average American. People are not able to conceptualize the efficiency of an agency when it's running as it's intended to.
Not only would redoing clinical trials on approved vaccines be wasteful, they also would not provide evidence of safety in large populations. No clinical trial can be large enough to identify rare adverse reactions. Those can only be found in post approval phase 4 or real world evidence studies. So this is a complete farce.
"No clinical trial can be large enough"
Exactly. That's why products must be DESIGNED FOR SAFETY. Vaccines are NEVER EVER designed. It is all trial and error. They are unsafe by definition. We will eliminate the vaccine industry. We have known for 100+ years that it is impossible to make safe injected vaccines. Vaccines are the worst scam in medicine.
Can you tell me which medications have been designed for safety in all patients? And if you don't have an example do you think the entire pharmaceutical compendium should be trashed and we should start over with drugs that are designed for safety? If so, how do you go about designing those drugs that will be safe in every human being on the planet? Is there any human activity that doesn't involve risk?
Perhaps you are unaware of the basics of biology but every person is different. We all have polymorphisms in genes that will affect how we react to and metabolize various molecules. So there is no such thing as a drug that is safe for everyone. For that reason all chemical drugs are tested against panels of metabolic enzymes with the known human polymorphisms to determine which ones are safer for which patients. For biologic drugs and vaccines this is not possible because these molecules are broken down in every cell and tissue in your body. So there is no information on the effect of polymorphisms because, presumably, if your body is unable to breakdown protein or nucleic acids you would not live very long.
So science and medicine looks at the risk to benefit ratio of each medication. If the risk is greater than the benefit then the drugs will not be approved. Even if the benefit is positive but and the medication is unsafe for a significant number of people it will not be approved.
Vaccines have an excellent risk to benefit ratio which we know from decades of use. They are protective against viral diseases and are safe in the vast majority of patients. They are in general far safer than any other medications because they are natural products that you are exposed to only a few times.
As an example of safety, the most common serious side effect from the mRNA vaccines is myocarditis. Myocarditis affects about 18 people per 100,000 vaccinated individuals. That is a rate of 0.018%. In almost all cases the myocarditis is mild and resolves without medical intervention.
Do you think that is unsafe as compared to the Covid virus which has killed millions, has resulted in hospitalization of millions more and further has permanently damaged the cardiovascular systems of even more people and resulted in long covid in unknown numbers of people. The vaccine protects against all of those events.
So what is an acceptable level of risk?
"Vaccines have an excellent risk to benefit ratio"
Biggest lie ever told. Atherosclerosis is due to vaccine-induced autoimmunity. So vaccines are the #1 killer.
"which we know from decades of use."
Thanks for confessing you illegally experimented on the general population for decades. Same as Mengele.
"which medications have been designed for safety in all patients"
Thanks for confessing that none are. But you criminals lie "safe and effective" and mandate it to babies. Barbarians. Prosecution coming.
Hilarious. 😂 You should be a comedian.
"Myocarditis affects about 18 people per 100,000 vaccinated individuals."
Lies. Everyone who ever receives that sewage jab has multiple organ damage including heart damage. For the vaccine to "work" it must cause organ damage.
mRNA/LNP transfect into multiple organs. Cells in those organs make spike and display spike epitopes on their surface. CD8+ Tcells that recognize those epitopes will KILL ALL THOSE CELLS.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35298029/
Also, it seems there is a pattern in your answers: You don't answer the questions asked (i.e. how do you design a drug for safety?), you pivot to something else, you post a reference to a publication you clearly don't understand, and then claim you are more intelligent than all the scientists and medical professionals posting here.
So show the data that everyone has multiple organ damage from the mRNA vaccines. Still waiting for that one.
And this 'letter to the editor' is discussing the theoretical possibility based on PKPV studies in rats injected with large quantities of tritium labelled lipid components of the mRNA vaccine. There is no way to know whether the distribution of tritium label is due to intact nanoparticles, the lipid on its own or the tritium bound to another molecule (you really don't know much biology do you?). So the study is useless as it tells you nothing about nanoparticle distribution and this is why it is not required by more enlightened regulatory agencies. Also most of the links or papers referenced in the letter no longer exist.
By the way, that Japanese study also shows that the protein encoded by the mRNA encapsulated by those lipids is only found at the site of injection and the liver. Explain the discrepancy. Bet you can't. But answer the first question first if you can.
Keep lying.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(23)00366-3/fulltext
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Biodistribution-of-lipid-nanoparticle-in-rat-Pfizer-study-November-2020-From-TGA-FOI_fig5_373210100
I'm a little sad because you literally do not know what you do not know. No amount of evidence in the world will allow you to accept truth because your fundamental understanding is not based in reality. If you do not know how to conduct/dissect scientific studies/research, there will be no evidence in the world that will allow you to accept the truth because you are so unwilling to question yourself or put it through the test of reality. Which, in and of itself is a profound limitation in your logic.
Seek professional help. You are clearly insane.
Says the clown who cannot understand basic cellular immunology, even when it is spoon-fed.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27101/#:~:text=These%20cytotoxic%20T%20cells%20can,the%20eradication%20of%20infected%20cells.&text=Summary-,By%20agreement%20with%20the%20publisher%2C%20this%20book%20is%20accessible%20by,feature%2C%20but%20cannot%20be%20browsed.
Keep posting articles you either haven’t read or don’t understand… 🤣🤣
Tell me, does it hurt to be this stupid or does it just hurt those around you? Also, thank you for proving my point that you understand nothing about PK/PV experiments by posting that time course of radioactivity from the tritium labelled lipid experiment. I really do hope for you that you get an education one day because whatever you’ve had so far clearly didn’t work.
"Covid virus which has killed millions"
COVID kills no one with early cetirizine/famotidine/ivermectin. They were murdered by incompetent doctors or for profit.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7455799/
And COVID severity itself is iatrogenic, caused by allergic sensitization to tetanus antigens in the tetanus shot, which cross reacts with SARS-COV-2 antigens.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1425374/full
"Public health" killed 32 million. 15 million killed by severe COVID caused by the tetanus shot. 17 million killed by the COVID shot. #Nuremberg2 coming up.
Look at you go! An “open-label drug use, without a placebo control or randomization.” On 110 patients no less. Which you think is definitive proof of efficacy. Please learn how clinical trials should be designed. Then maybe you won’t make a fool of yourself cherry picking biased open label non-randomized studies that are all but meaningless…
Oh ant the tetanus study doesn’t show anything like what you think it does…
Keep going! You are the entertainment. 🤣🤣🤣
OMG
The same questions keeps me up at night! How do we bridge the gap? What can we do to get our message out in ways that resonate with the people who have been taken in by pseudoscience? I think it's going to take a unified sci comm village and innovative approaches to reach audiences who don't live where we display our evidence-based info.
Cow's milk is a harmless, healthy food. You inject cow's milk proteins into people (DTap vaccine) and train their immune systems to violently attack milk as if it were a dangerous pathogen. Then you are baffled by the explosion of milk allergies. You say the immune system is "overreacting" and producing an "inappropriate" response. But YOU trained it to do exactly that. Then you are baffled that people don't trust you? Hello?
https://www.bmj.com/content/361/bmj.k2396/rr
Do you know the pathophysiology of allergies, asthma, autism, autoimmune diseases? No, you don't. We do. If you were a real scientist, you would want to learn from us.
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/the-pharma-corrupted-american-association-e1a
“Learn from us,” okay cult member. Now drink your unpasteurized cows milk and enjoy your bacterial infections.
Pasteurization killed 400 million. Unpasteurized milk protected people from smallpox/HIV by causing cowpox infections which provided cross-protection.
Do you pasteurize human breast milk before a baby consumes it? Why not?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100517204405.htm
Because breast milk comes from a human, not a cow...go choke on some milk curds.
So no bacteria in human milk but only in cow's milk? Keep inventing new biology.
Do you wear your aluminum hat out in public, or only inside your residence?
Seriously? You know it? How?
Because we studied the problem and solved it. I provided a link with evidence. May be you should read it. What's the point of asking questions if you refuse to read the answers?
https://zenodo.org/records/14873242
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/i-predicted-and-warned-the-fda-before
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/the-pharma-corrupted-american-association?triedRedirect=true
So you are an electrical engineer, right?
Yes.
Not a biologist right? Any courses ever in biology?
I've read the article. It does not say what you are saying. The children affected had existing severe allergies to cows milk prior to being vaccinated.
Be specific. Which article? I provided numerous pieces of evidence.
A study in JAMA found 60% trust us. 40% trust you and we are just getting started. Want to know the secret to our success in "sci comm"?
It's simple. We provide the truth. It may come as a surprise to you BUT THE TRUTH IS WILDLY POPULAR. You should try it some time.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2821693
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Trujf2s-WkriH1hZ6epxjGG2ow_2A53qPaz2QAkUbSY/edit#slide=id.p
"independent researchers"
Who are these independent researchers?
There's nothing safe about injecting 6000 yeast proteins adsorbed on AAHS (HPV vaccines), no matter how many corrupted, "independent researchers" you buy to lie.
https://zenodo.org/records/1435404
"What will it take to bridge this gap? To help people understand that the scientific community isn't their enemy, that we're all searching for truth together?"
Sadly, there is no bridge. "Science" is the new kid on the evolutionary block. Most people do not think in terms of data and science and truth. They believe what they believe because it "works" for them. When they or someone they love is dying, they beg for good treatments, but they never appreciate or "believe" in the science/scientists that created them. It's just how most brains work. Scientists just need to keep on with their work undeterred as long as they are allowed to so the benefits keep on flowing.
So true. Evolutionary psychology would point out that science is usually on the cusp of progress, and our brains aren't programmed to like the cusp. We have a habitual, protective tendency to fear what is new. We don't know yet it can't harm us, so we default to "scary" and "dangerous." Our brains don't recognize the work of others showing it's safe, we just acknowledge what we have experienced as safe ourselves and eschew the unknown. It's easier and safer to be anti than pro in our mamalian minds. It's an act of bravery and trust outside of instinct to trust science, arguably even evolved. And many humans are fighting that, and their brains tell them they're literally fighting for their lives. Only time will tell if we can evolve out of that. Some people have...
Perfectly said Sheri! I like what you say about the courage it takes to suspend our evolved belief systems (mostly designed to reduce the risk of the 'false negative' that could get us killed) in favor of the results of scientific inquiry. Most find that too big a risk/leap.
False equivelance fallacy . "Most people" is straw man argument . The entire comment is hyperbole based in psychology as a diversion. Plenty of examples of bad medicine & lazy science producing them for profit rather than ethics or public health . This is why there is scepticism or outright refusal. Fix the drugs that cause these possibly unintended bad outcomes, and maybe the bridge will be restored.
It starts with relationships. That needs to happen first. People like us, I’m a science educator, are viewed with skepticism by those who believe people like RFK Jr.
It will take more measles outbreaks like what's happening in one Texas county. I'm old I lived before the Polio Vaccine ( took the sugar cube and then got the shot to stay safe) and had friends who caught Polio and suffered. I'm as confused as you and probably more disappointed. But I'll continue to read the truth, very my vaccines (if they're available) and they to stay safe and sane... it isn't easy. Sigh.
Thank you for doing this work and responding to people's skepticism so earnestly and thoughtfully.
I found Jessica Grose's recent OpEd helpful in understanding the emotional factor in all of this—and how America experienced a similar pattern after the 1918 flu pandemic.
As she writes, "Make America Healthy Again is an emotional, not an intellectual, movement. It is based on a fear of cultural and technological change, and it yields to charisma instead of bureaucracy."
And I think that gets at your point in this newsletter—the data, the studies, the facts don't matter when someone is deeply emotionally invested in a narrative that makes them feel safe and in control when the world feels scary and out of control. So while high quality research is still important (maybe more so than ever—though harder to do than ever?), changing hearts and minds will require emotionally-charged stories of why we need the tried-and-true public health measures we took for granted for so long.
What's so scary and what keeps me up at night is knowing that a lot of the powerful storytellers of the future are going to be parents who will come to this work because of a child's suffering and death that could have been prevented. I hope I'm wrong.
This should be a gift link for anyone who is curious to read the article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/15/opinion/rfk-maha-history-america-healthy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.xE4.DtTO.4tnbp4NHmIiP&smid=url-share
This reminds me of the last question of the Bill Nye vs Ken Ham debate, when someone in the audience asked each one “what would it take to change your mind (about evolution)
Nye said: New and contradictory data - and listed about a dozen things that could change his mind.
Ken Ham said: Nothing will change my mind. The Bible is my source.
I think this illustrates the asynchronous nature of these anti-science debates, and also how Mr. Nye brilliantly reframes the question.
So maybe people need to understand what it would take to change medical consensus. What exactly is the threshold? What sort of studies of what quality? Can we have some study quality metric? It would be great to ask: “Is that study XYZ validated? How was it rated?”
So that the answer could be: “there is a process for changing the consensus, you need at least X studies of ABC validation or better. You need at least Y studies of CDE validation to merit public spending.”
My point is that we’re answering yes or no questions with squishy answers. We need to find (or invent) the processes by which we can answer yes or no questions with yes or no answers.
For the most part, what we take ourselves to know is due almost entirely to who we decide to believe. Scientists should have a Hippocratic Oath that is identical to the MDs: First Do No Harm. Too many scientists pass off in their writing and research statements that are not keeping in mind the incredibly tentative nature of the research project they just completed. Scientists of all flavors should carefully and assiduously eliminate political proclivities and biases from their work.
I have personal experience consulting with CDC, FDA, and USDA. Sadly enough, political leanings are NOT eliminated from the work these bureaucracies do. Sadly enough, something like 90 percent of published research in the social sciences cannot be reproduced. Sadly enough, 100 percent of what we read in legacy media about some "scientific" result is overstated and misstated.
First Do No Harm.
Politician should be held to that ethic too.
Yes, of course. But politicians are not in the same league as professional scientists. Scientists have a greater burdon to be humble, truthful, and honorable in their work, just like medical doctors; at least that's my opinion.
Sad, but true. They should be held to the same high standards, given the human lives that depend on them. Sadly, they seem to be playing statistics and popularity contests and not recognizing they're supposed to be supporting actual people.
Scientific conclusions are always provisionally expressed in terms of probabilities, and are always subject to revisions in the face of contradictory evidence. That suggests presenting those conclusions with a degree of humility and an honest admission of their shortcomings.
In my opinion, we are no longer able to take pronouncements about science at face value. The problem is not only in the social sciences. It is in also in physical sciences. In my opinion, too may scientists have sold themselves to the federal grant process.
It's.
Propaganda plain and simple after, so many times have been drilled into your head.That's all you know
Here is a YouTube video from the 1940s about propaganda and how to avoid it
https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?si=ItE4N6wB87qAQs-x
Looking at food additives and pesticide effects is a good thing if he does it but implementing it, Big Food won’t allow it. His vaccine stance is criminal so surprised that people affected by his anti-measles campaign and lost their children didn’t sue him.
this article has zero unbiased science, its wholly an emo response to a comment and dripping ‘we’ and ‘us’ as if a massive group actually reads and critiques studies, or any books on disease and vax histories. This is hollow, when its all parroted repetition and no actual unbiased, not pharma bought, ‘science’
Wow. Yes this divide is getting wider. Personally, I will continue to choose spirit over technology. Human hubris has not done the earth, or human health well ... I see most of the illnesses we are 'battling' are created by technology ... Sedentary lifestyle, synthetic fertilizer, pesticide etc ... Then we 'mitigate' with technological intervention... A slow downward spiral, always with a very profitable spin for the technologists. Illness is profitable. Speaking of evidence, in over 100 years of scientific experiments, contagion has yet to be proved ... Remember, the sun animates everything on earth - through sympathetic resonance.
Not only does the P/Harma industry control allopathic medicine it controls the training of medical students so we churn out experts in vaccine schedules and medication prescriptions, well, pseudo-experts, who have little knowledge of anatomy, physiology and are incapable of diagnosis without a myriad of tests, and even then.