Read your URL, the date's in it.
I'm suggesting AI hallucinated the existence of the study. We keep seeing examples of this happening--when you ask an AI to prove something that's false it's very prone to outright fabrication. And we see this administration routinely falling for AI hallucinations.
1) I don't care what they say about conflict of interest as the problem is apparent. They are looking at small unit data. Did they somehow only look at those places (which aren't realistically related to each other) where more vaccinated babies died?? Or did they look at the whole sample and select those cases where more vaccinated babies died. Since the chance of a baby dying of a vaccine-preventable cause in that sample window is quite low the expected null case is vaccinated deaths = unvaccinated deaths. And, statistically, half of the time when they aren't equal you would expect vaccinated to exceed unvaccinated. To take an obviously expected result and pretend it's something important is enough to damn them.
Not at all. Failure to take due care in a situation you had a part in creating will cause you legal trouble. It doesn't matter if you don't believe your child needs to eat, you'll still be in jail if they starve.
No, they aren't looking to reduce harm--no evidence is being presented that their approach will reduce harm. It's pure faith.
Look upthread, I did some numbers.
Part of what you say may be true, but that doesn't mean that everyone who has an issue with vaccines is necessarily wrong. I am surprised that these strange beliefs are clumped together with vaccines. It really puts a bad spin on anyone who questions the safety and efficacy of vaccines at all because you're given loony status. Unfortunately, many sites that focus on vaccines specifically have been scrubbed off the internet. You can find nothing on any search engine other than the benefits, and very little about the drawbacks, so you're stuck with the few sites that offer a different side to this issue, where everyone gets a say.She sounds very delusional. Sad.
These exercises should tell you something about the website. Her deal is that she's raking in cash money from vulnerable people. The links to her info and videos are provided from childrenshealthdefense.org. The "scientific" (crazy) content is being approved by the site and the science officer has a hand in much of that. That's Brian Hopper, one of the studies' authors you had posted where the study got retracted. It's all very untrustworthy from a combination of delusional people and people trying to make a buck and their poor, vulnerable followers.
The Tylenol bit is almost certainly AI slop. They did find a link between Tylenol and autism--but when they looked more carefully it disappeared when looking at siblings. This is a Chinese flag saying there's a confounder. Something both makes autism more likely and makes Tylenol use more likely. The AI found the original and has no ability to understand that it was found to be a red herring.
Duh! A million is bigger than a thousand.
Once again you're trying to play gotcha without thinking about it.So you think the government willingly let people die because it was better financially? Where were they cost-cutting? I think they were doing their best. It's easy to place blame after the fact because hindsight is always 20/20.Of course, but people are concerned about long-term effects that may not have been picked up by the studies. Usually, they don't follow children's long-term health consequences and would never make the connection anyway. Some feel that it's unnatural for children to be injected with so many vaccines. I'm sure vaccines have saved people, but does that mean we can't reevaluate the need for a vaccine for every illness that comes down the pike? Look, I'm being the devil's advocate, so please don't pounce on me. In Florida, they are lightening up on some vaccines to enter school, but not all. This is a first, so we will have to wait and see if certain diseases make a comeback.
Florida's plan to drop school vaccine rule won't start for 90 days, won't cover all diseases
It would include only chickenpox and a few others unless lawmakers decide to extend it to other diseases.www.wusf.org
Peacegirl, do you not recognise the above as a cost cutting measure by a gov't which demonstrably does not give a shit about the populace? And a stupid, short sighted measure, even if only from a financial POV if you factor in the larger drain on already stretched medical facilities and the loss of potential to the nation. Never mind the human costs (which your gov't seems increasingly willing to do.)
The problem is the vast, vast majority of those "hurt by the vaccine" were not. That's why the lawyers hate the VCIP--they have to prove the problem before experts rather than a jury that's easy to manipulate.
Except there's no evidence of causation.
You are equating "learn something" with agreeing with your position.
I didn't say that. I said that scientific theory is called this for a reason. It doesn't mean that all science is wrong, but it leaves the door open, which is honorable.
That is true if one's belief is so strong that nothing will sway them, even if it's based on faith. This doesn't mean that anytime someone stands their ground, even though others disagree, is a fundamentalist.
It seems to me that it would be whether something works in practice. The falsification, I presume, would be to show under which conditions this application would be false. This makes sense because it can further prove a thing's falseness or truth scientifically.
Everybody has denied that seeing in real time (my other thread) cannot be true because Einstein's relativity and special relativity ARE true, which would cancel out the possibility of seeing in real time, but in actuality, these two disparate observations are not in competition with each other.
You have already seen my post explaining why that's a crock of shit. If that were credible science it would be in a journal, not "published in the federal register".
No, you cannot use the fact that a parent saw a child change dramatically right before their eyes after a vaccine was given, and immediately call it woo because they show a pattern that is believed to be woo. It's unconscionable for a parent's cries to fall on deaf ears, no matter what the science says. Maybe it is just an association, but maybe it's not. I disagree vehemently with how parents are treated when they share their stories. It is a callousness and disregard for their eye-witness accounts that I just don't understand. Science and one's humanity are not mutually exclusive.I agree with you that some of this stuff sounds nutty.
I posted it but it comes from that childhealthdefense website, the one RFK Jr was heading. These "experts" they are quoting are lunatics. This is like pizzagate level conspiracy stuff.
This one:
Starring Dr Carrie Madej:
The Battle for Humanity - Children's Health Defense Hawai`i Chapter
Video featuring Dr. Carrie Madej discussing COVID-19 Vaccine safety and efficacy, mandates, DNA, mRNA, control of humanity via technology by technocracyhi.childrenshealthdefense.org
The vials look demonic.
Refers to here:
Vaccines insert nanobots in our bodies, turning us into HUMAN 2.0, says Dr. Madej
Big Tech collaborates with Big Pharma to create vaccines that inject nanotechnology into humans, starting the process of transhumanism, says Dr. Madejstopworldcontrol.com
mRNA Vaccines alter human DNA and start transhumanism
World renowned medical expert Dr Carrie Madej reveals how Big Tech collaborates with Big Pharma to introduce technologies in new vaccines that alter our DNA and turn us into hybrids. The goal is to end humanity as we know it, and start the process of transhumanism: HUMAN 2.0
WATCH NOW!
These people are fucking lunatics.
Video makes it look like a forearm barcode...the doctor is talking about luciferase which is a thing in biotech...but making it sounds like Lucifer-ase. The video makes it look like you get a barcode on your forearm, but really neither of these were a thing.
View attachment 53981
Nanobots:
View attachment 53982
The site also mentions chemtrails.
Speaking of which, I posted a couple of wackadoo posts from the mother of the child who died and claims it was caused by a vaccine. These were from her facebook page. One of them was about chemtrails. Clearly, the poor mother is completely brainwashed by these charlatans.
Sounds?
Just because someone is nuts doesn't mean they are wrong. HOWEVER, you earlier used an emotional appeal regarding the parents of the children calling people who said they were lying despicable. If we observe a number of delusions and wu, then it looks like a broader pattern, doesn't it?
That's what a scientific paper should look like. Note how different it is from the stuff you usually post. No use of fonts to point things out, no use of stupid graphics, just information. It's also written assuming a much higher competence on the part of the reader--terms are used without explanation as the reader is expected to already be familiar with the jargon.
paper said:
It's more beneficial to someone with diabetes, but that doesn't mean it's not beneficial for all except those allergic to it.It popped up in my feed. This is the kind of thing where vaccines can be individualized based on someone’s health status. It makes sense. I don’t know if it makes sense to get the flu shot every year if you don’t have diabetes or a poor immune system, especially when it’s a different strain every year which may not even help. My friend got so sick from the shot, he said he will never get another one. That was a few years ago and so far he hasn’t gotten the flu.
Yes, it means all are unfounded.
No, you cannot use the fact that a parent saw a child change dramatically right before their eyesI agree with you that some of this stuff sounds nutty.
I posted it but it comes from that childhealthdefense website, the one RFK Jr was heading. These "experts" they are quoting are lunatics. This is like pizzagate level conspiracy stuff.
This one:
Starring Dr Carrie Madej:
The Battle for Humanity - Children's Health Defense Hawai`i Chapter
Video featuring Dr. Carrie Madej discussing COVID-19 Vaccine safety and efficacy, mandates, DNA, mRNA, control of humanity via technology by technocracy
The vials look demonic.
Refers to here:
Vaccines insert nanobots in our bodies, turning us into HUMAN 2.0, says Dr. Madej
Big Tech collaborates with Big Pharma to create vaccines that inject nanotechnology into humans, starting the process of transhumanism, says Dr. Madej
mRNA Vaccines alter human DNA and start transhumanism
World renowned medical expert Dr Carrie Madej reveals how Big Tech collaborates with Big Pharma to introduce technologies in new vaccines that alter our DNA and turn us into hybrids. The goal is to end humanity as we know it, and start the process of transhumanism: HUMAN 2.0
WATCH NOW!
These people are fucking lunatics.
Video makes it look like a forearm barcode...the doctor is talking about luciferase which is a thing in biotech...but making it sounds like Lucifer-ase. The video makes it look like you get a barcode on your forearm, but really neither of these were a thing.
View attachment 53981
Nanobots:
View attachment 53982
The site also mentions chemtrails.
Speaking of which, I posted a couple of wackadoo posts from the mother of the child who died and claims it was caused by a vaccine. These were from her facebook page. One of them was about chemtrails. Clearly, the poor mother is completely brainwashed by these charlatans.
Sounds?
Just because someone is nuts doesn't mean they are wrong. HOWEVER, you earlier used an emotional appeal regarding the parents of the children calling people who said they were lying despicable. If we observe a number of delusions and wu, then it looks like a broader pattern, doesn't it?
You recognize the problem with these claims, why don't you recognize that the rest of her claims are equally trustworthy?
The problem is the vast majority of "vaccine reactions" are either normal, routine things (look at the reports of "major" reactions to the Covid vaccine--the only way you get numbers like that is if you count the flu-like symptoms as a "major" reaction) or have nothing to do with the vaccine.
I'm laughing because a disclaimer sounds so funny, as if I really need one when there are biologists, immunologists, and toxicologists who have an issue with certain vaccines. I'm sure there are well-meaning doctors and researchers, but there are a lot of bad apples when money is involved. We already went over this. Conflict of interest is a very bad thing. Once a person has a bad reaction to a vaccine, they're basically on their own. Half the time they aren't believed because their complaints are anecdotal and therefore ignored. There is very little recourse. The vaccine makers go scot-free, and it takes forever to get any kind of compensation, even when the proof of damage is in their favor. Doesn't that bother you?
