Jesus
-
His opening comment shows just how stupid he is.
"When RFK was born, there were 3 vaccines..........."
Okay. When Abraham Lincoln was born, there were zero vaccines and zero kids diagnosed with autism.
Obviously people were more healthy back then. I bet the lifespan was 150 years +
-
He says there were 3 vaccines for kids and now there are 76. There are 15.
He says this is because of what happened in 1986. Back then, the under-5 mortality rate was 14 in 1,000. It has since been cut in half (7 in 1,000). I wonder why.
For autism, I have no idea but I bet the rates are increasing because of increased awareness and finer-tuned diagnosis requirements.
-
I personally have no problem with vaccines. At the same time, I don’t believe the pharmaceutical companies should have such a wide ranging protection.
-
-
-
@taiwan_girl said in Jesus:
For autism, I have no idea but I bet the rates are increasing because of increased awareness and finer-tuned diagnosis requirements.
I agree.
150 years ago, how many people were diagnosed and died from (for example) Parkinsons? MS? ALS?
When I was a kid the kids who today would be given ADHD diagnoses were labeled ‘hyperactive’ if not just ‘troublemaker’.
-
I know several people, including some family, who labeled their kids as having Aspergers to explain why they weren't succeeding at whatever. It was a HUGE mistake. Stick that label on a kid and he will underperform forever.
I think labels and diagnoses are not bad in themselves, but too many parents and children can't differentiate between "category" and "excuse."
-
Solution: Don't lie to people.
Completely agree - you shouldn't lie to people. But the solution is a couple of decades in vaccine science purgatory to atone for the CDC's politics in 2020? (under Trump's nose, no less).
Be more explicit - the CDC lied about masks therefore we’re going to put a generation of children at risk, many of whom will die.
Can someone - anyone - walk me through the logic here? Jolly?
-
What’s really sad is Trump’s people pandering to a whack job like RFK over this issue in order to gain the crunchy nut flake vote.
-
I think you’ll probably see them remove the protections for the vaccine manufacturers. Depending on the limits, I don’t find that unreasonable. There will also likely be some new studies. Not sure that I like that very much. I think we all can agree that we’ve seen how bias can affect studies…
-
Yeah, sort of hoping the blanket anti-vax stuff doesn't actually make it into any meaningful policy decisions.
tbh, I'd even been wondering if the RFK/Trump alliance could make it all the way through to the election...Kennedy has a real 'big business=bad' kind of way about him. How long into an administration could it be before heads but, and Trumps latest best bud, becomes another 'lame brain' that had to get fired?
-
I think it’s highly possible he’ll dump RFK once he becomes inconvenient. Let’s hope so, at least.
“RFK, go away, what more do I have to say?”
-
Education is extremely important.
-
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Jesus:
I think you’ll probably see them remove the protections for the vaccine manufacturers. Depending on the limits, I don’t find that unreasonable.
That’s legislation, not executive action. I don’t know enough about it but let’s do gun manufacturers too.
There will also likely be some new studies. Not sure that I like that very much.
As long as it’s P4 (post-marketing, IOW they don’t pause immunizing babies in the mean time).
I think we all can agree that we’ve seen how bias can affect studies…
Far less common in interventional drug studies because the entire statistical analysis has to be pre-registered with and approved by the FDA. In the few instances where we’ve seen pharma cheat it’s full on felonious shit like hiding data, not putting the thumb on the scale with a little p-fishing.
-
Solution: Don't lie to people.
Completely agree - you shouldn't lie to people. But the solution is a couple of decades in vaccine science purgatory to atone for the CDC's politics in 2020? (under Trump's nose, no less).
Be more explicit - the CDC lied about masks therefore we’re going to put a generation of children at risk, many of whom will die.
Can someone - anyone - walk me through the logic here? Jolly?
Again? Okay…
-
“Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data,” Walensky - March 30, 2021
-
Masking kids is effective… Throughout the last 4 years. There are still people trying it.
-
Myocarditis? Of course not! AND COVID poses a serious risk to younger children.
-
Lab leak? Of course not! It was bats… Or possibly Pangolins. From the market in Wuhan. Just go past the institute studying Coronaviruses and make a left.
-
It is dangerous to take ivermectin! Which is a horse dewormer!
-
Don’t mask! Okay, we take that back, mask if you feel comfortable. Wait… Dear God! Wrap your face in plastic wrap if you have to!
-
Herd immunity can be achieved at 70%… No, wait, 80%… All while having evidence they needed 60%.
-
The rate of hospitalizations in children is rising! Referring to a small statistical blip weeks before that had already settled and gone to prior levels and even lower.
-
6 feet! The science tells us 6 feet! There was no fucking science showing that..
Shall I go on?
-
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Jesus:
Shall I go on?
Yes. I get that some health professionals said or did things people don’t like. But I can’t complete the logical leap from ‘I don’t like what some health professionals said or did’ to ‘therefore let’s stop immunizing kids and let some die from preventable disease’
Is that some kind of revenge? ‘Hey, Mr Redfield, screw your masking lies, here’s some dead kids so fuck you’.
-
