We were talking about off-label use by physicians and you said “Name one.”
Then you provided a study showing it was used off-label 29,000 times.
RFK Jr reports 20% of Moderna Vaccine recipents suffer "grave injuries"
- Thread starter royhobbs2
- Start date
Then you provided a study showing it was used off-label 29,000 times.
No. The problem is that nobody is able to adequately fill in the costs side of the cost/benefit equation.
While also destroying perfectly healthy lives. Try being the parent who one day has to answer his child, eye to eye, why mom and dad had their healthy child jabbed when nothing was wrong...as the child sits in his/her wheelchair or suffers from an immune disorder for the duration of their life.
If damages were awarded to every damaged child instead of the current 1%, NVICP would have shelled out over $400 Billion.
Here in this video was the CDC Dir. during the '76 swine flu fraud. That vaccine was switched onto the public and NOT field tested.
Also telling, is the end of the video showing the same propaganda as today to condition the sheep.
Again, you people were trying to make the claim that vaccines aren't used off label which is clearly wrong.
Sanofi Pasteur Full Prescribing Information306 –Adacel®Page 15 of 298 USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS Pregnancy Pregnancy Category C Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Adacel vaccine. It is also not known whether Adacel vaccine can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Adacel vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.
Yep, that sure seems like it should be the number one recommended vaccine for pregnant women.
From the JAMA article on the 29,000 test subjects:
Dr Sukumaran reports receiving research support from the National Institutes of Health. Dr Naleway reports receiving research support from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer. Dr Klein reports receiving research support from GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur, Merck, Pfizer, Nuron Biotech, MedImmune, Novartis, and Protein Science. The Vaccine Safety Datalink Project is funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Saves far more perfectly healthy lives.
If those folks react to a vaccine, they almost certainly would die if infected with the actual virus, and absent the vaccines, the likelihood of contracting most of those illnesses becomes a near certainty.
Your 'safety' study would not have been possible without 29,000 women being injected with vaccinations for which no safety studies were done on the effects of the vaccine on pregnant women. It's generally indicated for young children. Off-label usage, which you said never happens. Go look at some charts and graphs.
---INDICATIONS AND USAGE------------------------------DAPTACEL is a vaccine indicated for active immunization against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis as a five dose series in infants and children 6 weeks through 6 years of age (prior to 7th birthday)
No - you said there were no studies on the safety of the vaccine with pregnant women. You were wrong. Accept it and move on. It happens.We were talking about off-label use by physicians and you said “Name one.”
Then you provided a study showing it was used off-label 29,000 times.
Who said anything about me taking it personally? Does it look like I care what people think of me here? Actually what I said was there were personal attacks, which is a big difference. The point is if you can't bring anything more to the table than personal attacks, the problem will remain. This is what people fail to see.
To simplify this for you:
1) Problem mentioned
2) Personal attack. Person that did so falsely feels they said something useful that addresses the problem.
3) Problem remains....untouched.
Until the problems surrounding vaccines are addressed properly, they will remain....until they are addressed properly.
That's a nice pile of unsubstantiated BS you just vomited.
Lol - you did.
"Someone raises concerns about some new negative information surrounding vaccines. Instead of the clearly reasonable response "yes, that is concerning", or reasonable counterpoints against the information presented, the OP (and others) get personally attacked."
Yes. Most definitely.
Go pull up the full data, spud. The vaccines were tested.
The IFUs are based upon the test data AND any follow-on studies.
Uh yeah, the point I was trying to convey is that's all you can do with the information, not that people are butthurt over the exchange.
If it makes you feel better to put your supposed intent into my text then so be it. But, let's just for $#i+$ and giggles switch it to "that's all you can do with the information" and see if you or anyone else can counter the point.
This makes no sense. Another swing and miss. You're flailing and it's funny.
RFKjr is not a reputable source in this subject area.
Decent on the environment, though.
You are not credible on any subject
RFK Jr is extremely knowledgeable about vaccines and a very good man.
As in the OP posted negative information about the vaccine and mostly what I see done with that information is personally attack. Ad hominem. It's a logical fallacy. It's very commonly used by the hardcore vaccine defenders to make themselves feel like they're doing a good job defending their vaccine religion. All the while, the problems remain.
I can't tell if you are supporting RFKjr because you share his idiocy about vaccines, or because you just want to embarrass liberals by pointing to a legacy who's embarrassing himself.
Maybe both, although that's probably giving you too much credit.
As if it's just RFK alone dissecting it before releasing this information.
And, he knows what he's talking about. If he didn't, the so called "EXPERTS" wouldn't be such pussies and would actually show up to debate him. He was chomping at the bit and FLEW IN to debate 6 "experts". Yes 6 to 1 and guess who pussied out? All f'n 6 of them, and RFK was the only one left to mingle with what press was left at the form venue.
Yeah. Let's give the man some credit.
You say that because you are a proponent of stabbing defenseless children. RFK, as an atty., has been involved in over 500 cases, many relating to science. He has read fat stacks of documents for over 15 years on this topic. Gates never finished 1 year of college and yet, he is treated with reverence. But, that's what happens when you throw major bucks at networks.
Not only that, they would sue him for libel or slander. He wishes they would.
2:20 long, but informative. Just not to the Mengele types who refuse to open their minds.
Yes, I absolutely approve of stabbing defenseless children. That's my entire reason for thinking RFK jr is a flake on this topic.
How perceptive of you.
Not easy for most to admit they are closed-minded and biased. However, you pulled it off with aplomb.
Exactly, because if they did they'd uncover a LOT more hidden $#!+ through the discovery process.
Nuremberg Code
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
https://www.ushmm.org/information/e...ns/special-focus/doctors-trial/nuremberg-code
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
https://www.ushmm.org/information/e...ns/special-focus/doctors-trial/nuremberg-code
Yes, I know. You're going around in circles now.
And I said - "it's your problem if you take personally the proof showing the anti-vaxxing stance to be nonsense. Vaccines save lives and Bill Gates is putting a significant amount of his fortune behind them to better the world for all. Those are good things."
To which you responded by asking - "Who said anything about me taking it personally? Does it look like I care what people think of me here?"
I said - "Lol - you did." And then you spouted some other nonsense. It's been funny to watch but I'm bored with you now.
WWJD if he was such a flake, why do you suppose the "experts" backed out of the debate?
If your assertion had any sort of grounding, they'd show up with all their facts and science and steam roll this mofo out of town and slam dunk this debate into oblivion. They would have had the cameras rolling for proof for every human being with a set of eyes and ears. Only they needed six white flags instead of one. Now why is that? It's because RFK has balls bigger than your house, and has the science and facts to back it up. THATS why.
Your experts are pussies without the science to back up their claims. That's the only conclusion I can come to after this complete fiasco.
Last edited:
Get a clue! We are the sickest nation in the developed world because of these drug pushers.
If you have 6 kids get the measles at Disney, the CDC will send people in moon suits to trace this. Prior to '89, autism was 1 in 10,000. Today it is 1 in 34. Peanut allergies were 1 in 1200, today 1 in 12. Ask the CDC why and they can't/won't tell you. Nor, do they care.
You are a typical "pro" vaccine debater, smoke screening the fact that you've got nothing to bring to the table to handle the huge mound of dirty laundry that is the current state of vaccine safety.
The vaccine inserts(labels) all say the same thing: no studies were done on pregnant women with their vaccines.
It's been apparent for years that the vaccine industry has no problem doing 'studies' - paid for with pharmaceutical money - showing how safe their products are.
Two different things entirely. You are wrong.
Then why do all the inserts say that no studies were done on pregnant women?
Why don't you pull up and post the full data, and highlight the parts that prove you're right.
Can you address any of these?
1) Adequately fill in the costs side of the cost / benefit equation of the current vaccine schedule in the US. By costs, I'm referring to adequately accounting for all types and estimated numbers of negative health outcomes incurred as a result of the vaccine schedule.
2) Explain why regulatory agencies should be justified to cite only oral dosing studies to determine safe pediatric dosing for IM injected aluminum.
3) Justify the continued use of the DTP vaccine in Africa.
Sorry. Again, you said there were no studies and I've documented one. My guess is there are others.
Try again.
1) Just look at Measles.
Nearly every American child contracted measles at some point before they turned 15 before a measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About half a million new cases were reported to the CDC every year between 1942, the first year it was tracked, and 1962.
Most cases went unreported, and the CDC estimates up to 4 million people actually caught the measles every year. About 400 to 500 people died, 48,000 were hospitalized and 1,000 suffered encephalitis, or brain swelling.
This went to 0 in 2000 due to the vaccine. Other vaccines have similar results.
2) I have no idea if this is true or if it matters. I'll leave it to the experts.
3) If it continues to show higher mortality it should and will be stopped. However they are modifying it to include live vaccine which, counter-intuitively, has been shown to be safer. Still, looking at the broad spectrum of vaccines they have been wildly successful in developing countries. Unfortunately they are not perfect, but on the whole they save millions of lives each year.
Similar threads
