The Ongoing Debate on Vaccines

Baiting The Left Wuhan Flu 97 Comments

This morning I’m listening to this recent discussion between Viva Frei and Robert Barnes. About 2/3 of the way through, they’re discussing the recent Twitter spat between Dr. Peter Hotez, Joe Rogan, and RFK Jr. According to Barnes:

  • Some time in the 1980’s, vaccine manufacturers were given blanket immunity from lawsuits, which lead to a skyrocketing of damages to children from vaccines.
  • Hotez insists that his daughter, Rachel, did not get autism from being vaccinated.

It’s somewhat of a mystery why Hotez, who has appeared on Rogan’s podcast before, is refusing to debate RFK Jr. on the show now.

97 Replies to “The Ongoing Debate on Vaccines”

  1. It’s not a mystery, Hotez represents SCIENCE!, and SCIENCE! shall not be questioned, ever.

    1. He’s never wrong, even when he is.
      Statists don’t just want to play God, they want to replace Him, to determine our climate, gender and thoughts.
      Which vaccine number are we on, or is it now the bye bye variant?
      Hotez pushed multiple vaccines on kids, failing basic virology; and we’re now supposed to just take his word for it?
      Here are his legion misrepresentations and copious errors about vaccines, nice organized and presented with humour.
      https://twitter.com/i/status/1670795349097586689

  2. It’s extraordinary that anyone still believes that vaccines can cause autism. The only scientific evidence is a single paper in 1998, which was subsequently retracted as fraudulent. There have been at least ten studies since then involving over 1.25 million children in total that could find no correlation.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24814559/

    1. The evidence of the protecting effect of vaccines is overwhelming. I grew up during an age when the last of the polio cases were going through the school system. Where it was applied, polio was eliminated.

      Who now experiences smallpox? No one. But two hundred years ago, its incidence was near unitary. Smallpox was much of the reason why childhood life expectancy was so low. Everyone got it. Vaccination has eliminated a host of formerly lethal diseases such as tetanus and diphtheria.

      And you are entirely right about Andrew Wakefield. His was a case of criminal fraud, and he has resulted and will result in the death or illness of millions. Scaring parents away from the MMR vaccine produced a large, noticeable increase in measles post-2000. That swine should have been hanged.

      1. Well your blanket statement about the “protecting effect of vaccines” being overwhelming is simply incorrect. First of all, vaccines work for some diseases but certainly not all. Polio and smallpox (and the others you mention) are quite different from COVID, etc. There is a BIG difference between sterilizing vaccines and imperfect vaccines….in fact, imperfect vaccines can be downright dangerous.

        As for the polio vaccine, there is something you probably are not aware of….and that is, that polio was on a massive DOWNward trend before the vaccines were introduced. The peak of polio in North America was in 1952 and it was falling as fast as it went up (following Farr’s Law). The vaccines did not come on the scene until 1955 by which time, the infection rate was 1/2 that of 1952 and the death rate was about 1/3.

        There was also a polio epidemic in 1916 that rose and fell in a similar fashion.

        1. I asked my mother (now deceased) how people coped when polio cases occurred in her childhood community.

          Her response? “There was abject terror.”

        2. Like polio, C-19 was also on a massive downward trend before the injections. Everything we did made the situation worse, the early interventions – intubation, the refusal of antibiotics or other over the counter medicines, discounting healthy diet and exercise and vitamin D, forced masks, lockdowns and injections. I’m tired of the ‘sky is green’ pinheads. Thankfully, the internet is less censored by the government today and it is easy to spot pinheads like Hotez.

        3. The problem, Art, is ignoramuses running around saying that all vaccines have no effect except destructive ones. There were all too many prepared to believe the tripe put out by Andrew Wakefield.

          Joe’s comment about ‘abject terror’ is entirely correct. Polio was one, scarlet fever was another. Red measles was a third. Tuberculosis was a fourth. Antivaxxers are a broad sweep of ignorance that kills and has killed many and benefits none.

          2. cgh
            Is that yer “EDUKATION” missfiring again. Yes vaccines do some good, but if pharmaceutical companies are forced to improve, were’s the negative to that. They use “metals” like aluminum, and that is thought to cause problems, and possibly autism. Jamaican immigrants to great brittan tend to have a greater number of kids who suffer with autism, and that COULD be because of the requirement to get vaxxed.
            As usual, you fail at basic analysis and research.

          3. I’m sure I’m much younger than VOWG, but my vax record is minimal. I’ve been forever immunized against measles, mumps, chicken pox and rubeola by contracting them all. The only vaxxes I ever got were either mandated (no. not c-19), like oral polio, variola (have a faint scar to prove it), or either “epidemic”, like a meningitis scare in the 70s (the army was involved in delivering it…) or travel and lifestyle related (Hep A and Yellow Fever for a trip and tetanus due to gardening and home maintenance.).

            “The ‘pandemic’ was created so that the mRNA technology could be unleashed”

          4. Just like legal immunity for murder. If they’re so effective and as flawless as you claim, why such a complete state of unaccountability and legal immunity?

            You are a complete airhead, cgh.

      2. Too bad about the children paralyzed by the vaccine that is supposed to prevent paralysis. Oh,well. A little oncogenic SV40 with that vacccine. Oh well. (Which to Canada’s credit did eliminate the contaminated vaccines years ahead of the US)
        I used to think like you that vaccines are some super class of medical intervention that has no downside.Rather immature thinking really. Then I started reading and reading and reading some more.
        Why are newborns with immature immune systems given a vaccine (hep B) shortly after birth for a sexually transmitted disease that all mothers are tested for before birth?
        Of course I don’t really expect you to answer because you are clearly a pharma shill.

        1. Yeah, that’s right. Pharmaceutical companies pay people to go on SDA and shill for them. I’m posting all this from my yacht, by the way, over a glass of prestige cuvée.

          If you have any credible evidence that vaccines cause autism, present it now. And if you don’t, you should consider changing your mind.

          2. Stay tuned? Why? The controversy began 25 years, and nothing’s likely to change in the next few months.

      3. Both Smallpox and Polio were on their way down when vaccines appeared. It is not clear that the vacvibes were responsible. Also, Wakefield is not the only person questioning the effectiveness of vaccines these days. Vaccine damage continues to be covered up.

      4. While there’s plenty of evidence that smallpox, measles, and polio vaccines are effective, the Covid debacle proves that not all vaccines are created equal. And whatever the Covid-19 MRNA shot is, it’s NOT a vaccine. It does NOT do what vaccines do, and that’s why Fauci literally had to have the definition of ‘vaccine’ changed. That’s right, in case you didn’t know it, the CDC had to change the definition of ‘vaccine’ during the pandemic because of the Covid-19 vaccine failed so miserably to prevent people from either catching or spreading Covid. And because of that, I no longer “Trust the Science”, and anyone who “Trusts the Science” and says they “know” vaccines don’t cause autism is simply full of crap. I’m not saying they do or they don’t, because I truly don’t know, but it’s blatantly obvious that no one else does either. Just ‘Google’ “Causes of Autism” and see for yourself.

        The jury is still out on this issue.
        The fat lady hasn’t even begun to warm up.

    2. I presume this a reference to the paper by Wakefield et al, which is a tell. Someone interested in the facts based on evidence under oath ought to read the lenghty and thorough Walker-Smith decision of the English High Court that exonerated the authors of the study and their work and was harshly critical of the witch hunt against them. The pretext for retracting the study was failure to get consent for research on children, but the court (after hearing numerous experts under cross-examination) concluded there was no unauthorized research. Of course pharma-feuled media characterizations aren’t evidence given under oath and cross-examined in front of a court.

      That’s the problem Hotez would face:–solid evidence and not pharma hype.

      Hotez is fearful of a debate with a science informed attorney who has made a career of cross-examining scientific witnesses with good reason. RFK Jr. would shred him to pieces and sweep him into the dustbin of history. $2.5 million would be peanuts compared to his cultivated “Bill Nye the Science Guy” media brand.

      The debate comes down to a choice between the best interests of children and the best interests of pharma profits.

      Meanwhile, where are the randomized, all-cause mortality, double-blind studies using genuine placebos? There are none–and that’s a HUGE tell.

      1. That ruling concerned John Walker-Smith, who was the last of thirteen authors in the now-infamous and retracted paper. It is not about the lead author Andrew Wakefield, who to this day can not practice medicine.

        1. Read the decision. All the authors were exonerated. Wakefield couldn’t afford the litigation which took many years and had already left to practise in the US, so the reinstatement order in the UK didn’t include him.

      2. “Meanwhile, where are the randomized, all-cause mortality, double-blind studies using genuine placebos? There are none–and that’s a HUGE tell.”

        You’re big on “tells”, aren’t you? My question is this: Where is a single credible study showing that vaccines cause autism?

          1. cgh
            ” Lots of idiots on SDA caught up in the narrative.”
            and you and killer unDORK are two of those IDIOTS

        3. Back at you; show me evidence where the MMR vaccine was even necessary in the first place. When I was a kid in the ’60s, everyone got the diseases and there was no spike in deaths that I’ve ever heard of. Unlike polio and smallpox. I also remember first hearing about autism in the late ’60s. They didn’t know what it was at the time. Not causation in and of itself, but certainly curious timing.

          1. “show me evidence where the MMR vaccine was even necessary in the first place.”

            Holy crap, that’s misinformed. Measles is a deadly disease that killed over 4 million people in 1980. It is now less than 10% of that, almost all deaths occurring where measles vaccination coverage is still poor. It’s a modern miracle, and anyone who isn’t deeply grateful is a bloody fool.

          2. Reply to Killer Marmot
            From the CDC website;
            “In the decade before 1963 when a vaccine became available, nearly all children got measles by the time they were 15 years of age. It is estimated 3 to 4 million people in the United States were infected each year. Also each year, among reported cases, an estimated 400 to 500 people died (0.0001285%), 48,000 were hospitalized (0.0137%), and 1000 suffered encephalitis (swelling of the brain) (0.0002857%) from measles.”
            Almost Covid-like in it’s survivability! Furthermore, in 1989, an outbreak of measles among vaccinated children prompted recommendations for a second dose of the vaccine. Sound familiar?

        4. Pharma got legal immunity in exchange for VAERS and the government (HHS?) being required by law to do independent studies to establish safety. Got that? The null hypothesis puts the burden on proving safety. Basic science. Basic legal theory. The independent studies were never done, contrary to law. RFK Jr. discovered this after suing the agency under FOIA to produce the studies. The studies were never done. The law was broken. Hotez knows this. He knows RFK well understands how regulatory capture works and the system is gamed. He knows he’d get creamed in a debate without pharma-bought media protecting him. Pharma knows that too and would never allow Hotez into the arena, despite the adverse, damning publicity of denying now $2.6 million to charities.

          Meanwhile studies are showing the highest levels of neuro-toxic aluminum are in the brains of autistics, much higher than elderly Alzheimers subjects. Steve Kirsch is showing, for example, MMR has some 37 times higher VAERS reports of subsequent autism than hepatitis B vaccines, for example.

          So yes, the absence of the most basic and simplest of studies to establish non-causation is a HUGE tell, one a responsible parent ought not to ignore when wagering their child’s life on vaccines without adequate safety testing.

    3. Actually, it is extraodinary that so many fail to see the connection. Many of the
      “studies” are designed to obscure any connection. Parents are the best source of evidence regarding children who were fine one day, and seriously damaged after a vaccine.

      1. There’s a reason why medicine has advanced so far in the last few centuries, resulting in soaring life expectancies and quality of life.

        Namely this — that anecdotal evidence is only good for suggesting where proper scientific research is warranted. It should never be used to draw definitive conclusions from.

        1. Soaring life expectancies are mostly the result of clean, reliable sources of water, food, and shelter. When I went to school, these factors were referred to as “primary health care.” The resulting crash in infant mortality drove the demographic transition and population growth whenever it has occurred.

  3. Now if that Dr. Peter Hotez were to marry Paris Hilton, she would be Mrs. Hilton-Hotez.

  4. Re this topic, here’s a brief on Cutter incident, 1955:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/

    Towards the end: “Offit proposes that the option of suing vaccine manufacturers should be stopped”. And this is from 2006.

    I’m pretty sure that ALL contracts involving vaccines have lots of lawyerese protecting all parts against any claims. But in the case of Covid ‘vaccines’, the crap that we were all forced to take cannot be named vaccines: 1) didn’t cure 2) didn’t prevent spreading.

    1. You’re redefining what a vaccine is.

      1. Traditional vaccines have never cured diseases. That’s not how they work. There is a new class called “therapeutetic vaccines” that help to cure illnesses, but I think they’re still in the testing phase.

      2. The COVID vaccines demonstrably slowed the transmission of the disease. They did so imperfectly, and became less effective with time as the COVID strains mutated, but that is the case with many vaccines.

      1. Not ‘cure’, sorry (I’m not in this business). I meant prevent from having the disease. Like polio or measles or rabies vaccines which btw are true vaccines not BS.
        But re your #2: sorry, I disagree. COVID ‘vaccines’ didn’t slow the transmission. And certainly not ‘demonstrably’.

          2. It means “reduces the chances of being infected over a given time period.”

          3. They were guaranteed by Pfauci and Biden among others to STOP spread and PREVENT infection. BIOYA Howard.

          4. Thomas:

            Take it up with Fauci and Biden. It has nothing to do with the issue at question here.

          5. And yet a recent paper from the Cleveland Clinic just shows that the vaccinated have a 33% greater chance of getting Covid than the unvaccinated. And vaccinated women have a 24% greater chance of getting Covid than vaccinated men.

            So much for reducing the future incidence of contracting the disease.

          6. ruralcounsel:

            The McGill University Office for Science and Society says the paper is being misinterpreted…

            https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-medical/vaccine-study-has-people-worried-being-misinterpreted

            And the entire final paragraph of the preprint is this:

            In conclusion, this study found an overall modest protective effect of the bivalent vaccine booster against COVID-19, among working-aged adults. The effect of multiple COVID-19 vaccine doses on future risk of COVID-19 needs further study

          7. @Killer:

            Thx for the links provided but I have friends and relatives who vaccinated & boosted and they STILL got COVID. Of course, Pfizer/Moderna etc will say they prepared their stuff for different strain, not for the one that got them infected etc. Bottom line, I’m still firmly convinced that what we were all forced to take something that was not ‘vaccine’. Actually even Pfizer/Moderna sensed that the word was not the best since they came with the term ‘booster’ 🙂

          8. Correct DC. They are not vaccines. They are genetic therapies, worlds apart from the true vaccines of our youth, which used dead virus as the basic ingredient.

            Excess Death Mortality rates are telling a real story, but, the usual suspects don’t talk about them, for the same reasons they avoid any debate or criticism.

          9. “It means “reduces the chances of being infected over a given time period.”
            Problem is, they totally ignore the significant increase in cases within two weeks of people getting the Covid vax. Effectively, they have cooked the books to make the vaccines look effective when they are not.
            Suggest you read Turtles All the Way Down, which nicely explains the problems with how vaccine effectiveness is determined (claimed).

          10. DanC: Yes, that’s what I said. The vaccines did not give perfect protection against infection, and became less so as the strains evolved.

      2. The COVID vaccines absolutely did NOT slow the transmission of the disease. That is absolute rubbish.

        New Zealand had 80% of their entire population vaccinated by December 31, 2021. According to Worldometer data this was the situation as it existed as of April 12, 2023.

        New Zealand
        Total of all COVID cases from the pandemic start up to January 1, 2022 – 14,118 or 19 cases per day
        Total of all COVID cases from January 1, 2022 to April 12, 2023 – 2,286,481 or 4,866 cases per day

        Which represents an increase in new cases per day of over 250 times

        Total of all COVID deaths from the pandemic start up to January 1, 2022 – 59 or .081 per day
        Total of all COVID deaths from January 1, 2022 to April 12, 2023 – 4,045 or 8.54 per day

        Which represents an increase in deaths per day of of over 100 times

        And that is with the milder Omicron variant…..yeah those “vaccines” sure are “safe and effective”.

        1. So what are you going to believe? Numerous scientific studies involving millions of people in total, or opinion pieces in Panda Uncut?

          1. The Panda group is very rigorous on interpreting stats. I thought the linked piece was very balanced. I think I will believe them.

          3. “The Panda group is very rigorous on interpreting stats.”

            I read the article, and I’m a statistician. There was nothing rigorous about it. Many of the arguments they put forward had more holes in them swiss cheese, and they abused more than analyzed the statistics.

      4. “You’re redefining what a vaccine is.”

        You mean, like Meriam-Webster did circa 2021?

      5. You people redefined what a vaccine is two years ago.

        How can you live with yourself?

          1. “You people redefined what a vaccine is two years ago.

            Who is “you people”? Do you think I publish dictionaries?”

            No, but I for one find it a bit suspicious that you almost always show up here only for vaccine threads. Others wait for climate change, election fraud or Ukraine discussions before being compelled to enter the discussion…for you, it’s ‘vaccines’.
            Why is that?

        3. “You people redefined what a vaccine is two years ago.”

          I remember that well. It was appalling.

          I got a vaccination just this morning, in fact…of a *real* vaccine (for tetanus). It is effective, it is safe and it has no unknown side-effects because the methods used to create it are decades old and well proven. The COVID-19 ‘vaccination’ was none of those things.

      6. The CDC redefined what a vaccine was on Sept. 1, 2022:

        Before:
        ‘Vaccine’: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
        ‘Vaccination’: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

        After:
        ‘Vaccine’: A product that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
        ‘Vaccination’: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection (however mild and short lasting) to a specific disease.

  5. Todays Thomas Paine podcast has RFK on as a guest. The jibby-jabby industry is far worse and incestual than could be imagined, I don’t know what normie would make of it.
    ( I always start with part 2)

    1. That’s because he’s in environmental law, not environmental science. My experience is that people who get into the legal side of environmental issues are generally so scientifically and technologically ignorant that they just assume what they are told is true. Unfortunately, they tend to listen to radical voices that really just want to stir up trouble. Because that gives them a “cause” to push. Almost a form of ambulance-chasing, in most cases.

    2. Yes, that’s why any support for RFKJ needs to be context driven.

      He is definitely a climate change nutter, as we see lately, he has squelched his public comments on that topic.

      But, so far as his POTUS run, I applaud him. It’s splitting the DeMarxist party, as they get exposed to uncomfortable truths about the Quackzines, and the totalitarian, anti-Liberal measures and actions of the Demarxists, the so-called “Liberal” party.

      Talk of a Trump/Kennedy ticket is just internet nonsense. They have little in common, other than being wealthy and from NY.

  7. What is playing out between Rogan, RFK jr. and Hotez is an extension of what Thomas Sowell wrote about in his 1995 book The Vision of the Anointed. From a book synopsis:

    “Paramount for the anointed is their sheltering of themselves from scrutiny about facts and policy with the veil of “moral certitude,” which likewise makes them heavily resistant to evidence…Indeed, the anointed go to great lengths to silence or otherwise ignore reason and evidence, instead focusing on accusations of sinister intentions on behalf of their opponents. “What is remarkable is how few arguments are really engaged in, and how many substitutes for arguments there are,” Sowell observed.”

    The un-annointed class aren’t worthy enough to debate the annointed class. All knowledge comes from the annointed class and must not be defied, challenged or debated.

  8. I suspect Hotez is avoiding public debates because there is a YouTube video out there showing his continuously “evolving” opinion about the Covid “vaccine” in which he never admits he was wrong, and yet is contradicting his previous statements (all delivered with great certainty and authority) time after time after time. His credibility is in tatters.

    It’s one thing to say our understanding was evolving. It’s quite another to deliver sermons with certitude that within a few months turn out to have been utter crap. There was far too much pontification by people who should have known better that turned out to be wrong. If the science is uncertain, say so. Don’t say something that isn’t known, isn’t proven, and we don’t yet have data about. And yet that is what all those idiots at the CDC, NIH, WHO did throughout the entire ‘pandemic.’ That is not the time for aspirational bullschitt, it’s the time for honesty.

    But they turned their certain ignorance into boldface lies in service of the big PR campaign to get people to take the jabs (which is still ongoing, I might add). Some of them, I suspect, knew they were lying. Maybe they thought it was in service of a greater good. Maybe not. The result is that their organizations are no longer trusted. Probably never will be again by a lot of people. They fed wishful thinking as if it were proven science to our politicians (who of course are blithering idiots in their own right) who took it hook line and sinker and spouted out the lies and misinformation as if it were gospel. Again, sometimes just because they were idiots and thought it was true, but in far greater proportion because they were evil narcissistic sociopaths who wanted to take advantage of tightening the harness on their proles.

  9. Too bad about the destroyed research.
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/simpsonwood-meeting-corruption-vaccine-autism/
    Please, you are welcome to take all the vaccines you want but people are entitled to the truth about all the risks and benefits of each and every substance injected into their bodies and the actual lack of research on the long term outcomes of for example, administering 11 antigens in 1 Dr. visit.
    There are lots of substances in vaccines-they are not just saline and some killed virus.What do you know about the other ingredients?
    The government/pharma symbiosis is just incredibly deep. What did you think would happen when all liability for products which can be mandated by government(and with people who will financially benefit by their mandated use being in positions to vote for their inclusion)was removed?

  10. t’s somewhat of a mystery why Hotez, who has appeared on Rogan’s podcast before, is refusing to debate RFK Jr. on the show now.

    For some.

  13. Pah….I smelled a NAZI rat at the onset of masking and lockdowns.

    Refused the face diaper and the sewer syringe. Went out and lived my life.
    Not been sick since 2003.

    That there are COVIDIITS still pushing this filth just blows me away….but if they’re true believers, I surmise they won’t be with us long.

    The folks I fear for the most, those who were forced between saying up yours or retaining their employment. They ALL DESERVE Restitution… BIG TIME.

    Those that pushed the Lie, starting with Teflon Tony, should ALL have a date with NUREMBERG

  14. Blanket immunity you say?.. Why would they not jump in bed with politicians?.. Its win win.. They both get to run the grand experiment of their dreams.. The mRNA roll out and a little something to put Trumpy in the ditch..

    None of it had to happen.. No healthy person under 70 was under any threat.. It was the biggest power grab scam in the history of democracy / world.. They wanted everything on their shopping list and they took it from right under your nose.. Just look around and tell me that our political and business interests have not been compromised, bribed..

    I hope your little win and phony victory lap was worth it?..

    1. Yes. When I hear the selected class whining about the ‘threats’ and ‘harassment’ of their town criers on the internet, they need to understand that I view all of them as the monsters that forced me to watch them rape my wife. Figuratively folks, but you get the picture.

  15. I’d never heard of this Hotez poofter until today but look at him! Why would anyone take health advice from a fat pedo face?

  16. It’s hilarious when the Pfizer and Moderna employees show up to convince us otherwise from the facts. Who you gonna believe, them or your own lying eyes?

  17. “The Panda group is very rigorous on interpreting stats.”

    I read the article, and I’m a statistician. There was nothing rigorous about it. Many of the arguments they put forward had more holes than swiss cheese, and they abused more than analyzed the statistics.

    1. What did they get wrong? I believe their statistics are in line with other things I have read.

  18. Years ago, this site would have scoffed at Robert Kennedy Jr. and Jenny McCarthy and their anti-vaxx nonsense. Now SDA seems to be morphing into an anti-science site, dismissing any research — no matter how thorough and competent — that supports the case for vaccination. Instead any layman’s opinion is take as God’s truth if it’s anti-vaccine.

    Kate, this is nothing to be proud of.

    1. I’ve notified the manufacturers that you can have all my boosters.

    2. KM,

      With every passing year, I think I understand just a little better why the Khmer Rouge acted as they did. Not just science, not just statistics, not just law, all our educated elites have a greater likelihood of being scoundrels than the population at large.

      1. You understand Mao’s cultural revolution that purged the country of “stinking intellectuals” unleashed untold misery and death on his people that took decades for China to recover from.

        1. Every jab for Justin. Once the government weaponized science against humanity it became none of the above. Boomers don’t get it but Justin was promised covid would kill them all. What a disappointment the corona must be.

    4. @Killer –I believe that a lot of the current anti- vax sentiment stems from the mRNA vaccine policies. These particular vaccines were not adequately tested before rolling them out to massive numbers of people, including those who were not particularly at risk. Putting mandates in place to coerce some people into getting vaxed when they did not want to was further violation of people’s rights, so not surprising that the situation caused more general skepticism about vaccines, warranted or not.
      Do not, however assume that people are not researching this, just because their sources may differ from your own. Alternative views on vaccines are derived from credible sources and qualified researchers — just not necessarily main stream academia which is frequently focussed on preserving the status quo. Academia is often hostile to new ideas and works hard to protect their turf. On this issue, those with alternative views are blackballed. That does not make them wrong.

      1. Every time I comment on vaccines, I provide links to scientific papers to back up my position. Often these papers are meta studies that assess the results of dozen of other papers. I don’t ask anyone to take my personal word for something.

        And I keep asking the same question to those who disagree with me, again and again — why do you believe what you do? Usually there is no coherent answer. When there is, the evidence is either patently weak or doesn’t say what they think it says. Occasionally it’s some guy with a blog abusing statistics beyond all recognition, but in a way that’s perhaps convincing to those who don’t deal with statistics regularly.

        A good example is the “Cleveland” paper cited above, which says the opposite of what the anti-vaxxers claim it says. All they had to do was read it, or at least read the conclusions.

        In short, where is this credible evidence that you speak of? I have searched for it and it’s scarce on the ground. The vast preponderance of credible evidence supported use of the vaccines.

        1. I don’t keep a database of sources, but I read a lot and form my opinions over time. Some sources I have valued and been influenced by are Robert Malone (his book), Jessica Rose, Edward Dowd, Norman Fenton, and reports on the Pfizer data releases from Naomi Wolfe. Many important reports coming out if the NCI. Dennis Raincourt is excellent. Many, many others, actually. The Canadian Covid Care Alliance is well researched and informative. There is no single source that is likely to satisfy you, but here iscdome good food for thought: https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/all/real-time-ethics-about-misinformation-disinformation-and-scientific-discourse/

    5. You are correct. Years ago I did scoff at Robert Kennedy Jr. and Jenny McCarthy and their anti-vaxx nonsense. But since then I discovered that academia, the government, and the media lie. They all lie. They lie and lie, and lie, and lie, and then lie some more. And then they lie to cover their lies. I’ve seen it and so have you. Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that at least 50% of what we read or hear are lies. But the liars are so very good at what they do, it’s difficult to tell lies from the truth.

      I’m not saying you’re wrong. You’re a smart guy. I’m saying that it’s time to open your eyes. If you don’t realize, or can’t admit that you’ve been lied to by almost everyone in authority for a very long time, you’re a fool.

      2. “But since then I discovered that academia, the government, and the media lie. They all lie. They lie and lie, and lie, and lie, and then lie some more. And then they lie to cover their lies. ”

        Couldn’t have said it any better. They also make *huge* money from those lies, and they rely on the Useful Idiots among us to defend them by citing “science” and “peer review”, and calling anyone who questions The Narrative ™ “deniers” or “anti-vaxxers” (yeah, as if we avoid *all* vaccinations, right?) or “anti-science” or whatever else they can think of to try to intimidate or shame us into silence.

  21. Sure was a lot of words about shots that have been proven to be poison.
    The shots are non sterilizing and as such cannot confer immunity. . A vax that cannot confer immunity is not a vax that is why the the definition was changed.
    The shots could not prevent infection, transmission, mitigate illness or prevent death, those are facts.
    Those here who believe otherwise are blind.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation