• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Truth about RFK Jr

Planigale said:
Yet the smallpox vaccine (smallpox being a virus) was introduced over a hundred years earlier. So this argument is false.
Click to expand...
But there weren't smallpox "lab viruses". The scenario described seems to invoke the prospect of a lab playing around with isolated viruses, and I suspect that that is intentional.
 
Planigale said:
Yet the smallpox vaccine (smallpox being a virus) was introduced over a hundred years earlier. So this argument is false.
Click to expand...
I think they were referring to a vaccine for influenza specifically, not vaccines per se. The smallpox vaccine was known and proven to work, long before viruses were discovered (late 1800's, from my immediate recall).
 
TheHill reported on Dr. Oz's comments concerning influenza to Newsmax. They wrote "“Flu is always a problem. Every year there’s a flu vaccine. It doesn’t always work very well. That’s why it’s been controversial of late,” Oz said. “But like many illnesses, the best news out there is if you can take care of yourself, so that when you do end up running into the flu, you can overwhelm it...Things like getting sunlight, and you can’t do that in northern parts of the country, which is tough this time of year, take some vitamin D. Zinc seems to be effective as a basic supplement,” he added. “But fundamentally, the MAHA initiatives: Eat the right food, food that came out of the ground looking the way it looks when you eat it and consume it, and getting physical activity actually makes sense. But the most important tool of all is sleep.""
 
Last edited:
Reformed Offlian said:
But there weren't smallpox "lab viruses". The scenario described seems to invoke the prospect of a lab playing around with isolated viruses, and I suspect that that is intentional.
Click to expand...
Actually there were, retrospectively quite a lot of research has happened in trying to find out what people were vaccinated with. serial passage resulted in shifts in the features of the vaccination virus. People may not have known what viruses were, but they had factories to manufacture the vaccine (vaccine farms where animals were infected and could produce large amounts of infected material which could be used to vaccinate many people). Research was done on preserving vaccine so it could be transported, prior to glycerol preservation the vaccine had to be transported using orphans*, a group of orphans would be taken on a ship and the virus passed from one to another during the voyage so that there was viable virus to inoculate at the destination.

The exact origin of the vaccination virus remains uncertain, it may be a now extinct natural virus or a cross over of cowpox and horse pox. That it is a 'laboratory' product and not a natural virus seems most likely.

*I should have put this in the thread on scientific trivia!
 
Last edited:
Planigale said:
Actually there were, retrospectively quite a lot of research has happened in trying to find out what people were vaccinated with. serial passage resulted in shifts in the features of the vaccination virus. People may not have known what viruses were, but they had factories to manufacture the vaccine (vaccine farms where animals were infected and could produce large amounts of infected material which could be used to vaccinate many people). Research was done on preserving vaccine so it could be transported, prior to glycerol preservation the vaccine had to be transported using orphans*, a group of orphans would be taken on a ship and the virus passed from one to another during the voyage so that there was viable virus to inoculate at the destination.

The exact origin of the vaccination virus remains uncertain, it may be a now extinct natural virus or a cross over of cowpox and horse pox. That it is a 'laboratory' product and not a natural virus seems most likely.

*I should have put this in the thread on scientific trivia!
Click to expand...
Vaccine farms is not the image RFK is trying to invoke here. This is feeding into his "mRNA vaccines are potentially dangerous, we need more research, except said research is also dangerous, so better not do it" narrative. Labs working with antigens (ETA: viral antigens) capable of causing a disease outbreak if someone broke a vial were only just starting to exist in 1918, and they weren't working on influenza antigens until after the flu outbreak itself.

I appreciate the history lesson, but stand by my statement that, in the relevant sense, no, there weren't.
 
Last edited:
Paul Offit (Beyond the Noise), discussed the similarities between Denmark and the United States. Dr. Offit wrote, "Although Denmark’s healthcare system far exceeds that in the United States, RFK Jr. and Donald Trump have ignored one important fact. Independent of the level of hygiene in the home, sanitation in the country, general health of the population, or access to a healthcare, certain diseases, for instance rotavirus, RSV, influenza, and Covid-19, will infect virtually all children by 10 years of age. Every year, about 1,200 children in Denmark are hospitalized with severe dehydration caused by rotavirus infection. And every year, more than 2,800 children in Denmark, mostly less than 6 months of age, are hospitalized with pneumonia caused by RSV. Accounting for differences in size of the countries, these figures are virtually identical to those found in the U.S. before vaccination. In the United States, a routine rotavirus vaccine recommendation in 2006 has virtually eliminated the 70,000 hospitalizations caused by rotavirus every year. During the past year, routine recommendations for a maternal RSV vaccine and an RSV-specific monoclonal antibody has reduced the 60,000 to 80,000 RSV-associated hospitalizations in infants less than 7 months of age by about 50 percent."
 
The Guardian wrote an editorial about the 2025 change in mRNA policy brought about by HHS. They wrote, "Until very recently, the US, which put more than $10bn into mRNA development, appeared primed to reap the scientific and commercial rewards. Despite the deregulatory zeal that birthed mRNA, the second Trump administration has rejected it...These cuts will be devastating. Developing safe novel therapies depends on long timelines, steady funding and – despite Braben’s thesis – predictable regulation. The abrupt US reversals signal that Washington is now an unreliable partner, willing to walk away after others have invested heavily...So far, mRNA’s biggest impact has been on diseases that we already vaccinate against, but not very effectively. For example, flu shots are slow to develop and cumbersome to produce, a terrible match for a virus that mutates every year...It will take more than a mercurial Donald Trump to destroy the US’s advantage in mRNA research and production. The technology emerged from an American university, most industry jobs are there, and nearly 75% of all manufacturing comes out of the US (the remainder is almost entirely in the EU). However, both public and industry researchers are alarmed by the government’s actions, and both say that they will take their work elsewhere if it continues. It’s quite a leap from threatening to move to actually doing it. Given the circumstances, the UK and the EU should help them along."
 
Here's a lot of information about deaths and illness caused by the COVID-19 vaccines. It includes studies written by medical experts and published in peer-reviewed medical/scientific journals (starting at 5:04 in video, and starting at 9:15 in video).

 
mikegriffith1 said:
Here's a lot of information about deaths and illness caused by the COVID-19 vaccines. It includes studies written by medical experts and published in peer-reviewed medical/scientific journals (starting at 5:04 in video, and starting at 9:15 in video).

Click to expand...
Empirically false. He mostly references anecdotal evidence and cellular studies. It is hard to avoid the fact that multiple very large studies of many different groups from many different countries do NOT show excess mortality in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. If there was excess mortality on the scale he claims it would have been easily detected. Also it is not seen when comparing mRNA vaccines vs non mRNA vaccines.
 
mikegriffith1 said:
Here's a lot of information about deaths and illness caused by the COVID-19 vaccines. It includes studies written by medical experts and published in peer-reviewed medical/scientific journals (starting at 5:04 in video, and starting at 9:15 in video).

Click to expand...
He says what my tribe gives as excuses for their deadly obsession. Therefore it is true.

Correct?
 
NBC News reported that the CDC has changed the childhood vaccine schedule. They said, "Under the change — effective immediately — the vaccine schedule will more closely resemble Denmark’s, recommending all children get vaccines for 11 diseases, compared with the 18 previously on the schedule." NBC quoted an unnamed official, "“The loss of trust during the pandemic not only affected the COVID-19 vaccine uptake. It also contributed to less adherence to the full CDC childhood immunization schedule, with lower rates of consensus vaccines such as measles, rubella, pertussis, and polio,” reads the scientific assessment the agency based its decision on. The assessment said “there is a need for more and better science” on vaccines — though the new schedule does not say there are specific vaccines children should not get."

The New York Times reported, "The new schedule circumvents the detailed and methodical evidence-based process that has underpinned vaccine recommendations in the nation for decades. Until now, a federal panel of independent advisers typically reviewed scientific data for each new vaccine, and when and how it should be administered to children. Public health experts expressed outrage at the sweeping revisions, saying federal officials did not present evidence to support the changes or incorporate input from vaccine experts."

This sounds similar to the rationale for ending research into mRNA vaccines.
 
Last edited:
As part of a retrospective, medicinal chemist Derek Lowe wrote, "There’s plenty of blood to go around, though. I have often stated my belief that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has it on his hands after his actions during a measles epidemic in Samoa, and now he will get a chance to replicate that disaster on a grander scale, as befits his self-image. Kennedy, our HHS secretary, believes that the 1918 flu pandemic and the 1980s rise of HIB somehow happened because of vaccine research. Marty Makary, our head of the FDA, believes that Lyme disease is an escape biowarfare agent. Jay Bhattacharya, among other things, believes that he is fit to lead the NIH. We are being governed by grinning idiots and sociopaths, and any assessment of our situation in 2026 has to take that as a precondition."
 
Reuters reported, "Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy [CIDRAP], said there should have been public discussion on the risks and benefits of the potential impact of dropping the recommendations. Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said other developed countries face different disease risks and have different healthcare systems than the United States. Unlike the U.S., which depends on private healthcare, most countries provide basic universal healthcare that is paid for by the government...Each of the four vaccines prevents diseases that once caused unnecessary hospitalizations and death in children, said Dr. Jesse Goodman, a Georgetown University professor and former FDA chief scientist."
 
Last edited:
Chris_Halkides said:
Reuters reported, "Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy [CIDRAP], said there should have been public discussion on the risks and benefits of the potential impact of dropping the recommendations. Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said other developed countries face different disease risks and have different healthcare systems than the United States. Unlike the U.S., which depends on private healthcare, most countries provide basic universal healthcare that is paid for by the government...Each of the four vaccines prevents diseases that once caused unnecessary hospitalizations and death in children, said Dr. Jesse Goodman, a Georgetown University professor and former FDA chief scientist."
Click to expand...
Quit bringing up facts!
 
From HHS: "The assessment also documents a significant decline in public trust in health care institutions between 2020 and 2024, alongside falling childhood vaccination rates and increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases.

“Public health works only when people trust it,” Dr. Makary said. “That trust depends on transparency, rigorous science, and respect for families. This decision recommits HHS to all three.”

The accepted recommendations recognize there is a need for more and better gold standard science, including placebo-controlled randomized trials and long-term observational studies to better characterize vaccine benefits, risks, and outcomes. HHS agencies are called on to fund this gold standard science for all vaccines on the schedule.

“Science demands continuous evaluation,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said. “This decision commits NIH, CDC, and FDA to gold standard science, greater transparency, and ongoing reassessment as new data emerge.”"
 
Chris_Halkides said:
“Science demands continuous evaluation,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said. “This decision commits NIH, CDC, and FDA to gold standard science, greater transparency, and ongoing reassessment as new data emerge.”"
Click to expand...
"Gold standard science" is code. What they mean is double blind peer reviewed studies. And the reason they focus on this is that they know that it is unethical to do double blinded studies on vaccines.

Therefore vaccines are not "gold standard" and we do not endorse them any more.
 
At his Substack Beyond the Noise Paul Offit wrote, "Kennedy recently funded a $1.6 million, 14,000-person study in Guinea-Bissau set to begin in early 2026. Investigators will divide 14,000 newborns into two groups. One group will receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth, as recommended by the WHO. The other group won’t receive the vaccine until 6 weeks of age, a continuation of the woefully substandard care that has put so many children in Guinea-Bissau at risk. Because it is unethical and cruel, this study could never be performed in the United States."

He continued, "The study will be conducted over 5 years. Children who are infected with hepatitis B virus at birth don’t develop chronic liver disease for decades. Therefore, RFK Jr. is unlikely to know about how much harm his “study” has done during the 5-year period. The study is single-blinded. This means that investigators will know whether children received a birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine, but the parents won’t know. This allows for investigator bias, where the investigator might find vague neurodevelopmental problems in the birth-dose group but not the 6-week group."
 
On social media Dr. Alex Sundermann wrote, "There were major policy changes from HHS yesterday that are misguided and will have serious consequences for public health. Let’s walk through the stated “rationale” for influenza specifically and why it doesn’t hold up
In summary:
1. Wrong study design for rare outcomes
2. Real-world data shows vaccines reduce hospitalizations
3. Cochrane flagged trial limits - not vaccine failure
4.Not measuring transmission ≠ no benefit
5. Vaccine risks are rare - infection risks are higher
So if this is the justification for influenza, do you think the reasoning is stronger for the other diseases?
 
On X Jake Scott MD wrote, "And yes, American children have been at risk. Before the hepatitis B birth dose, 18,000 children a year were infected. Before rotavirus vaccination, 55,000 to 70,000 children were hospitalized annually. Before Hib vaccination, it was the leading cause of bacterial meningitis in American children. These diseases didn't disappear on their own. Vaccination made them rare. The question isn't whether American children have been at risk. The question is why we're abandoning the protections that reduced that risk."
 
Jess Steier and colleagues (Unbiased Science) discussed the recent change in the childhood recommended vaccine schedule:

2. Even those of us “in the know” are genuinely confused.

And I think that might be the point.

We’ve been told that vaccines will still be covered by insurance. Okay, great. But what about families who want the second HPV dose? What about parents who want to vaccinate their child before age 11? What about the pediatrician who now has to figure out which vaccines to stock, which to order on request, and how to document “shared clinical decision-making” for every single shot that used to be routine?

Nobody has clear answers. And when nobody has clear answers, people default to doing nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom