Should anti-vaxx parents be charged with child neglect? (Personal story)

[Joes Place]

Without getting into the specific discussion you have going, I'd like to make 3 points.

1) Why does there need to be a journal article

Because journal articles are documented science, not memes, and are reviewed by actual researchers in the area. And if they are determined to be inaccurate/wrong, they get retracted.

Do you not understand this aspect of the scientific process? You sure as shit don't seem to understand much "finance", either....

 

[Joes Place]

Without getting into the specific discussion you have going, I'd like to make 3 points.


2) Who funds most research that get's published

Independent foundations and government grants. Which put zero stipulations on what the results come out as.

The people who do that research are paid by universities and/or government entities. They have no conflicts of interest, UNLIKE most of the idiots out posting memes and Youtubes, which you have no clue who is paying them.

 

[Joes Place]

3) Even if there was a published article, if the article doesn't support your view you will ignore it

There are varying levels of quality in published works. I rely on experts who review them.
You and your buddies don't know the difference (and routinely post out-of-context snippets that are inconsistent with the actual work that was done).

 

[abby97]

My anti-vaxx cousin and family (2 kids under age 8) are sick as dogs with the flu.

All are un-vaxxed and didn't get the flu shot. I tried to encourage them to get vaxxed to the max but they didn't want to.

I get the flu shot every October. I had 6 covid vaccines. No side effects. I think they all got 1 or 2 covid vaccines years ago because they were forced to.

I feel like anti-vaxx parents should get fined or deported if/when their un-vaxxed kids get sick.

What do you think?

I'll give that some serious thought as soon as our president stops unvaxxed illegals from pouring into our country. Get back to me what that happens.

 

[Joes Place]

You just brought up the cost benefit analysis of a completly unrelated topic

The topic is "vaccination", Cletus. Specifically "anti-vax" parents.

Try to keep up.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Independent foundations and government grants. Which put zero stipulations on what the results come out as.

The people who do that research are paid by universities and/or government entities. They have no conflicts of interest, UNLIKE most of the idiots out posting memes and Youtubes, which you have no clue who is paying them.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Quite possibly the most hilarious thing Joe ‘I am the science guy’ has ever posted.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

The topic is "vaccination", Cletus. Specifically "anti-vax" parents.

Try to keep up.

So when you brought up measels, and then said we were not discussing measels, you were just flailing like a bitch?

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

Independent foundations and government grants. Which put zero stipulations on what the results come out as.

The people who do that research are paid by universities and/or government entities. They have no conflicts of interest, UNLIKE most of the idiots out posting memes and Youtubes, which you have no clue who is paying them.

You are an absolute idiot. Sci3nce is not able to be conducted without money, science that shows what the money does not want to be found gets buried. This isn't new.

 

[Finance85]

Because journal articles are documented science, not memes, and are reviewed by actual researchers in the area. And if they are determined to be inaccurate/wrong, they get retracted.

Do you not understand this aspect of the scientific process? You sure as shit don't seem to understand much "finance", either....

Thanks for proving my point.

If the US Government is hiding something, why would any researcher getting grants from the US Government do the research on their own dime, and publish that research, thus jeopardizing future grants? Do you really think science matters more than streams of money?

We're over 3 years into the mRNA vaccines. Take away the liability for vaccine injuries from the manufacturers and see how long they keep producing the vaccines. They have the data on efficacy and safety, and the FDA has the data. They have stonewalled releasing the data because they know what the reaction from the public will be. You are ignoring the science, because you are worried about the reality of it.

If you want to truly support 'science', then support the immediate release of the trial data. I note that you favor statistical data over clinical data. Statistics are only as good as the assumptions, number of variables, biases, and method.

 

[Joes Place]

Quite possibly the most hilarious thing Joe

You can review EVERY published article and EVERY researcher who authors them.
Email them, their institutions, yourself and ask about "conflicts of interest". See what their Department Chairs say to you in response.

You're too much of a beta-pussy to actually do this.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

You can review EVERY published article and EVERY researcher who authors them.
Email them, their institutions, yourself and ask about "conflicts of interest". See what their Department Chairs say to you in response.

You're too much of a beta-pussy to actually do this.

You can't seem to grasp that the legs get cut out for unintended findings long before publishing.

 

[Joes Place]

Thanks for proving my point.

If the US Government is hiding something, why would any researcher getting grants from the US Government do the research on their own dime

It's not "proving your point".

Independent foundations fund much of this research. Some institutions do it, themselves.
Some is funded by government grants; those grants have no stipulations on the research details.

How can the government "hide" all of this, with many thousands of independent researchers at hundreds of independent research institutions?

Are the departments at the U of Iowa "compromised"?
UCLA?
Stanford?
Duke?

You truly do not understand any of this, yet just want to bandwagon on with the uneducated idiots here.

 

[Joes Place]

You can't seem to grasp that the legs get cut out for unintended findings long before publishing.

No; they do not. They get published like everything else.
It's simply not feasible that EVERY doctor and researcher in the world is somehow muzzled or outmaneuvered by a couple "governments" on this.

 

[Joes Place]

So when you brought up measels

I did not bring up "measels".

You did.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

No; they do not. They get published like everything else.
It's simply not feasible that EVERY doctor and researcher in the world is somehow muzzled or outmaneuvered by a couple "governments" on this.

No... they do not.... I had several studies, paid for by the university I attended, never make publishing because we hit the null.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

I did not bring up "measels".

You did.

We are all familiar with small dick Joes Place tactics but you not even remembering what you posted 2 hours ago is a bit much.


"LOLWUT?

I post science, not propaganda vids, Cletus. Go look up the cost-benefit analysis for measles vaccines; there are several publications on it out there easy to find."

 

[Joes Place]

Sci3nce is not able to be conducted without money

Where have I stated, otherwise?

Independent foundations fund a lot of it.
So do governments.

If the researchers doing the research understood that they had to come up with pre-determined outcomes based on that funding, they wouldn't bother with doing the research work.

Go dig up some of the publications I cite for you, and email the actual researchers, yourself. They have their institutions and contact information included with their papers. You too big of a pussy to actually send a real inquiry to any of them? Why is that? Concerned you'll be embarrassed by their response?

They put their own names and reputations out there, yet here you are as an anti-vax keyboard jockey, trying to anonymously discredit all of them. Very very Beta...

 

[Joes Place]

No... they do not.... I had several studies, paid for by the university I attended, never make publishing because we hit the null.

That was the decision of the RESEARCHERS.
NOT the "university". Not the funder. Not the government.

Are you too stupid to understand here that you've erased your own argument?

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

Where have I stated, otherwise?

Independent foundations fund a lot of it.
So do governments.

If the researchers doing the research understood that they had to come up with pre-determined outcomes based on that funding, they wouldn't bother with doing the research work.

Go dig up some of the publications I cite for you, and email the actual researchers, yourself. They have their institutions and contact information included with their papers. You too big of a pussy to actually send a real inquiry to any of them? Why is that? Concerned you'll be embarrassed by their response?

They put their own names and reputations out there, yet here you are as an anti-vax keyboard jockey, trying to anonymously discredit all of them. Very very Beta...

I see the issue, you think it is us who is finding thr flaws in the vaccine.

No sir, we are simply reposting what scientist have found.


Which brings us back to how the Japenese are fist ****ing the covid narrative right now.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

That was the decision of the RESEARCHERS.
NOT the "university". Not the funder. Not the government.

Are you too stupid to understand here that you've erased your own argument?

I was part of the research group numbnuts, we were told it wouldn't globe going any further because we were not beating the null.


The study, fwiw, was "lights effect on athletic performance" as measured over a 40 yard dash using 3 test groups conducted 2008.

 

[Joes Place]

No sir, we are simply reposting what scientist have found.

"scientist"?

You're posting memes and Youtube videos, Cletus.
Some of them so stupid, they're referring to "Turbo-Cancer", which is not a thing.

 

[Joes Place]

I was part of the research group numbnuts, we were told it wouldn't globe going any further because we were not beating the null.

Yes; that was the decision of your RESEARCH GROUP.

Nothing precluded them from publishing "the null". NOTHING.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

"scientist"?

You're posting memes and Youtube videos, Cletus.
Some of them so stupid, they're referring to "Turbo-Cancer", which is not a thing.

First one is free, next one will cost you:

"a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences."



No dipshit, there have been actual research articles presented you choose to ignore them.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

Yes; that was the decision of your RESEARCH GROUP.

Nothing precluded them from publishing "the null". NOTHING.

The institution told us our research was concluded.

I was there.

 

[Finance85]

You can review EVERY published article and EVERY researcher who authors them.
Email them, their institutions, yourself and ask about "conflicts of interest". See what their Department Chairs say to you in response.

You're too much of a beta-pussy to actually do this.

There's really no need to do all that. Most reputable studies have a disclaimer clause about funding. You apparently ignore that most of the time.

 

[Joes Place]

First one is free

Not interested in free "memes" and Youtube videos misrepresenting vaccine science

 

[Joes Place]

There's really no need to do all that.

Why not? You're on here disparaging their reputations w/o any evidence to back up your bullshit.

 

[Joes Place]

The institution told us our research was concluded.

And your researchers CHOSE not to publish your negative results.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

"scientist"?

You're posting memes and Youtube videos, Cletus.
Some of them so stupid, they're referring to "Turbo-Cancer", which is not a thing.

Long covid is not a ‘thing’.

There Is No Such Thing As Long Covid, Australian Study Finds

The leading health official in Queensland urges the public to refrain from using the term 'long Covid' in light of recent research findings.

www.ndtv.com

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

And your researchers CHOSE not to publish your negative results.

Again Joe, WE were the researchers, you are talking out of your ass.


You fell for the narrative.


Hey Joe, how many flu hospitalizations were there in say 2018? And say 2021? And say 2022?

 

[Joes Place]

There's really no need to do all that. Most reputable studies have a disclaimer clause about funding.

They do not have a "disclaimer clause".
They list any and all possible conflicts. Each author lists any financial affiliations.

 

[Joes Place]

Long covid is not a ‘thing’.

There Is No Such Thing As Long Covid, Australian Study Finds

The leading health official in Queensland urges the public to refrain from using the term 'long Covid' in light of recent research findings.

www.ndtv.com

LMAO!!! Another propaganda video!!!

 

[naturalbornhawk]

I think it's pretty simple to say that anyone has a right to get jabbed or not get jabbed with whatever the hell it is. Really who the f**k cares. I didn't get one Covid vaxx but I really don't care if someone I know or work with got 0 shots or 100. Again who the f*** cares.

This. With true informed consent.

 

[Finance85]

It's not "proving your point".

Independent foundations fund much of this research. Some institutions do it, themselves.
Some is funded by government grants; those grants have no stipulations on the research details.

How can the government "hide" all of this, with many thousands of independent researchers at hundreds of independent research institutions?

Are the departments at the U of Iowa "compromised"?
UCLA?
Stanford?
Duke?

You truly do not understand any of this, yet just want to bandwagon on with the uneducated idiots here.

They are hiding it. It took a lawsuit in federal court (AZ) to force the FDA to release clinical trial data. The FDA had previously said they would do so over 75 years. That's a fact.

When they actually do release the data, it's redacted when there's no apparent reason.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

They do not have a "disclaimer clause".
They list any and all possible conflicts. Each author lists any financial affiliations.

Bull crap.

Few universities make required reports to the government about the financial conflicts of their researchers, and even when such conflicts are reported, university administrators rarely require those researchers to eliminate or reduce these conflicts, government investigators found.

In a report expected to be made public on Thursday, Daniel R. Levinson, the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, said 90 percent of universities relied solely on the researchers themselves to decide whether the money they made in consulting and other relationships with drug and device makers was relevant to their government-financed research.

And half of universities do not ask their faculty members to disclose the amount of money or stock they make from drug and device makers, so the potential for extensive conflicts with their government-financed research is often known only to the researchers themselves, the report concluded.

Science for sale. 🤑

Drug companies have long been castigated by lawmakers and advocacy groups for a lack of openness on research, and the investigation shows just how far individual firms have gone to skirt the disclosure law. But while the industry generally performed poorly, major medical schools, teaching hospitals, and nonprofit groups did worse overall — many of them far worse.

Memorial Sloan Kettering failed to report data for two trials of the experimental anticancer drug ganetespib, made by Synta Pharmaceuticals. The results of tests involving breast and colorectal cancer patients showed serious adverse effects in 13 of 37 volunteers. They included heart, liver, and blood disorders, bowel and colon obstructions, and one death.

The FDA, which regulates prescription drugs, is empowered to levy fines of up to $10,000 a day per trial for late reporting to ClinicalTrials.gov. In theory, it could have collected $25 billion from drug companies since 2008 — enough to underwrite the agency’s annual budget five times over. But neither FDA nor NIH, the biggest single source of medical research funds in the United States, has ever penalized an institution or researcher for failing to post data.

Even the agency’s own staff scientists have violated the reporting law three-quarters of the time.

Patients endangered as law is ignored

A STAT analysis has found that some of the top research institutions are not reporting clinical trial results as required by law.

www.statnews.com

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Why don't they publish their "data" in an actual journal?

You continually ignore the expertise of actual doctors and scientists who DO publish their data and work, and rely on unverified nonsense on Youtube.

Many of them have, but it doesn't surprise me that you haven't paid attention. There are a few big names that have talked shit about vaccines, some published it, some not. You remember William Thompson, right? He's the CDC Scientist whose conscience got the best of him and told the world he regretted not publishing his data. I think you might need to look at that cost side of the C/B equation a little closer. That clearly doesn't get the attention it deserves. Also, I think we can add some names to that list as well if you'd like. Time to quit pretending like there's nothing to see here.

 

[Joes Place]

Bull crap.

Few universities make required reports to the government about the financial conflicts of their researchers

Stay on the bus here: We are referring to PUBLICATIONS where they must disclose any conflicts of interest.

 

[Joes Place]

Many of them have

No. They haven't. And you have posted nothing here but propaganda videos.

 

[Joes Place]

They are hiding it.

They freaking published it.

You don't get to see the raw data and patient records, Cletus.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Stay on the bus here: We are referring to PUBLICATIONS where they must disclose any conflicts of interest.

No matter how many times you attempt to move the goalposts you’re always wrong. ‘Science’ is nothing more than a rubber stamp agency for Big Pharma.

And you’ll always be a 🤡

Roughly 70–75% of the industry’s expenditures on clinical trials go to contract research organizations (CRO’s) rather than to independent researchers in the form of grants (Mirowski and Van Horn 2005; Fisher 2008; Westrock 2016). CROs together have revenue estimated to be approximately US$50 billion in 2020, most of it coming from pharmaceutical industry clinical trials (Fortune Business Insights, 2019). As a result, in the comparison of “industry-sponsored” and independent research, in most cases the “sponsorship” involves direct control over the research.

Even when it appears that industry-sponsored trials are led by academic or other actors, and that their subjects are recruited via independent clinics, hospitals and academic medical centers, it is most likely that at a higher level they are run by CROs working for pharmaceutical companies, and analyzed by company statisticians and others. Manuscripts are most likely drafted by ghostwriters on structures created by publication planners, and then shepherded through to publication by those planners, with limited opportunities for their academic and other independent authors to contribute (Fugh-Berman and Dodgson, 2008; Sismondo 2009; Matheson 2016). The published articles, then, are largely creations of the (pharmaceutical) companies, even if the nominal authors include independent researchers. All of this constitutes the “ghost-management” of medical research (Sismondo 2018).