Why are you simping for Moderna? It never successfully brought a product to market until the COVID EUA, which skipped important safeguards. The "secret" to Moderna and Pfizer's record profits is an unprecedented business model where they lobby governments to mandate subscription to their products, but they can't be sued for adverse effects. European countries whose regulatory bodies are not as captured as the US FDA/CDC have banned COVID jabs for healthy young people. Here's a solid subscription business to look at: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-build-a-killer-business-and
yup. every single low hanging fruit disease/treatment using mRNA tech failed miserably due to toxicity, yet when they get to skip extensive testing with the help of mass fear/panic, suddenly mRNA tech magically works (and not only does mRNA tech suddenly work, it suddenly works on not a low hanging fruit disease, but a disease that has also never had a treatment developed that passed safety trials).
"yet when they get to skip extensive testing with the help of mass fear/panic"
They did extensive testing. You all keep ignoring that testing and don't actually read the underlying trial data and keep spreading nonsense about how they didn't. I mean, the phase III results are public!
And this talk of mass panic is so ... just immoral. I mean I am trying to assume good faith because I do think we overreacted (we should have approved the vaccine sooner and not locked down!) But the excess death data shows over 10 million people dead. We should have done nothing?
"suddenly mRNA tech magically works"
If you actually want to know what happened such that the technology was a failure for a long time, but now it worked, read into books like "The Messenger" and the many journalists who have documented precisely this process. First of all, toxicity was not the issue, immune response was. The innovation they made was a form of encapsulation and modification to the mRNA strand itself to limit that response. Its not magic. Again, this process has been documented and is public, if you are not going to actually look into it, then at the very least stop spreading dishonest crap.
"but a disease that has also never had a treatment developed that passed safety trials"
You mean the flu? What? Coronaviruses are extremely common. SARS was 20 years ago! Covid-19 is much more deadly but it has a similar biology, so we know how this works. And we did phase I and phase II trials, which explicitly cover safety.
Look, no one said you had to be an expert in any of this. And while some people did write criticisms of "doing your own research", I think that sentiment is just as stupid and dangerous. But refusing to listen to the actual science on this and then continuing to cite the same debunked nonsense over and over isn't doing your own research, its adopting a religion, a particularly stupid one, that is getting people killed.
What do you work for the FDA or something? This laughable in the light of all the new information out there. These companies lied, withheld information, and the agencies that are supposed to protect us helped cover it up. Just like any corrupt agency would.
I have been extremely critical of the FDA for years. However, my criticisms happen to be based in actual science and economics and not conspiracy theories.
Tell me, exactly, what did they lie about? You do realize that in the United States, the FDA ignores the analysis done by the pharma company right? It doesn't factor in. The data is collected by a third party, usually a CRO, who is audited directly by the FDA. The CEO of the pharma company is usually learns about the data in the same livestream the general public does.
No, not like from the CDC. Only an idiot trusts the CDC. But you are even more of an idiot to trust Rep. Massie and the endless parade of right wing charlatans who don't have your best interest in mind and pretend as if they are approaching their views on this from a place of good faith when they are not. Its pure mindless contrarianism and a cynical ploy to stir up political controversy where there shouldn't have been any. The vaccine drive came from the Trump admin. The skeptics were democrats ... now its flipped. Its a stupid game everyone is playing that is killing people. I don't say that lightly, but even to this day hospitalization rates for unvaccinated people is far higher than vaccinated, doubly so for boosted.
Its doesn't even make logical sense! In what universe does "freedom" entail banning people from taking a drug? If people actually believed in freedom regarding this they would have supported allowing people to take this before approval, but they did not.
People have a right to be skeptical. The lockdowns were foolish. Masking policy was stupidly done. The notion that everyone should trust some central authority is dumb and I fundamentally am opposed to that. You are making a strawman.
But that entails that the people who do challenge the central authority be responsible. Spreading anti-vaccine stuff, then mindlessly repeating the same thing over and over again despite what the data actually says, then baselessly claiming that anyone who has actually studied how drug interactions work is a member of a massive conspiracy, then outright play into peoples conspiratorial confirmation biased view on things as a cynical hit against "the man", being the FDA or CDC or whatever, that is irresponsible.
I am not opposed to criticism. I am opposed to lying. Much of the anti-vaccine stuff, the election rigging stuff, anti-Ukraine, all of this ... are lies. The media writ large has shown itself to engage in bad faith and spread propaganda and be biased, and people are dissatisfied. But the opposition takes those people and instead of growing a pair and telling the truth, play into cynical nonsense to make a political point that the spreaders don't actually believe themselves.
This I don't like the CDC, therefore I will take the opposite view on everything, is just beyond stupid. Many times the experts are wrong, but sometimes they are right. A responsible opposition would take them to task and sort out the good from the bad, and not play into their audiences worst instincts at every point.
And its just sad because so many times I hear that doctors are all part of this left wing conspiracy when ... most doctors were Republicans! Not too long ago! And everyone I used to work with at the pharma companies was an extreme conservative who hated the FDA and CDC. Even today my primary case physician went into a large rant to me about woke volunteers he works with. They only turned because a bunch of cynical assholes decided to sike large swaths of the population against people, who, while not immune to mistakes and legitimate things that should be criticized, are actually working extremely hard to save lives.
> You all keep ignoring that testing and don't actually read the underlying trial data and keep spreading nonsense about how they didn't. I mean, the phase III results are public!
i have read the published phase III clinical trials. vaccine group showed zero reduction in mortality, but a very significant increase in adverse events.
in pfizer's trial in children, they labeled a child that became a paraplegic due to an adverse reaction to the vaccine as having a "stomach ache" (name is maddie de garay).
> But the excess death data shows over 10 million people dead. We should have done nothing?
you're right, excess deaths are quite large. interesting they didn't decrease post-vaccine. also interesting that these same excess deaths are highly correlated with poverty. almost as if not allowing the poor to go to their jobs (unlike the elite laptop-class that can continue their job sitting in bed typing emails) results in downstream effects causing death
> You mean the flu? What? Coronaviruses are extremely common.
the flu is influenza, not coronavirus, and as a matter of fact, independent clinical trials of flu vaccines have shown them to be anywhere from 0-10% effective. also, since the mass rollout of flu vaccines, flu cases have absolutely exploded. curious. if you're wondering why independent clinical trials are important, ~94% of phase III clinical trials by drug companies typically show effectiveness, yet when those same drugs undergo clinical trials, only ~50% show effectiveness (the real number is likely even lower given that academia still have incentives to fudge numbers towards effectiveness). a very good example of this is amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) drugs, as while many have been approved, later independent clinical trials have gradually found not a single one to show any efficacy
> Coronaviruses are extremely common. SARS was 20 years ago!
i know they're common. hence why researchers have tried to make vaccines for them. they has thus far failed
> listen to the actual science
that quote pretty much sums up your entire argument. "listen". "listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say". science isn't about listening, it's primarily about reading scientific papers, and then questioning, and even doing experiments of your own if you have the means. i would know, i'm a literal medical scientist.
Your citing an article from 4/30? Are you for real? What an idiot. Yeah, no shit, we didn't have results a month into the pandemic. The deadline was pushed forward due to manufacturing constraints eased by Operation Warp Speed (which Trump deserves credit for) not by reducing testing.
"i have read the published phase III clinical trials. vaccine group showed zero reduction in mortality, but a very significant increase in adverse events."
They showed a 95% reduction, which has reduced recently due to mutations and waning effectiveness but this is just a fucking lie. That approaches the realm of maliciousness. And they are still 60% effective against death, with a much higher percentage
"the flu is influenza, not coronavirus, and as a matter of fact, independent clinical trials of flu vaccines have shown them to be anywhere from 0-10% effective"
They are around 50% effective. Not 0-10%. Again, your view of the data is wrong and you are making shit up. Also, yes, vaccinated people have lower death rates generally, so saying they don't is either mistaken or a lie. Here you go: https://pandem-ic.com/excess-mortality-and-vaccination/
"almost as if not allowing the poor to go to their jobs (unlike the elite laptop-class that can continue their job sitting in bed typing emails) results in downstream effects causing death"
They have controlled for that and still found extremely large excess deaths. Arguing that most of the deaths come from lockdowns is just laughably stupid. I am not defending the lockdowns! They were bad! But they arguably reduced excess deaths, not increased them, and we see in countries with significant lockdowns and little initial viral spread reduced deaths (for example: excess deaths in the first 6 months in Israel was negative, due to reduced traffic collisions.)
"i'm a literal medical scientist."
Well you misread the initial phase III clinical trial trial reports and outright lied about the results so maybe you need to study harder? Or be a little bit more intellectually honest? Like so what? Dr. Christopher Duntsch a medical student at one time too! Your doing an appeal to authority now?
""listen". "listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say". science isn't about listening, it's primarily about reading scientific papers, and then questioning, and even doing experiments of your own if you have the means."
That is what you are doing. Like this is so stupid. You aren't approaching this from an honest perspective, you have a built in allergy to "experts", so you just took the contrarian view regardless of whether or not those experts are wrong or not. Like here is some data: https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf
That makes it fairly clear doesn't it? What else do you want man?
"listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say"
Oh shut up man. Pretending as if everyone who happens to have looked up and confirmed the sky is in fact blue is sheep and your this great independent thinker ,while turning on the Daily Wire or Tucker Carlson or some random podcast, who isn't doing the exact thing you criticize others of, for thinking its in fact bright green.
Yeah, I listen to people who have studied this shit for decades. What, I'm supposed to be ashamed of that? I'm plenty skeptical. My personal views are extremely anti-FDA and CDC. Independent thinking is not about automatically taking the automatic opposite position of everyone then bragging about how much questioning you do. That is just being stupid. Its about knowing what you know and don't know, asking fair questions, and yes, deferring to experts when necessary. Like if you actually had fair questions to ask of the medical community I don't know a single doctor who wouldn't answer them.
This is 2022 data! Showing death rates far higher in unvaccinated people! With pronounced effects for older people! You can find similar data everywhere making it super fucking obvious. You lecture as to what science is but you don't actually have an interest in the truth!
they showed a 95% reduction in positive PCR tests in individuals with covid symptoms. yet curiously, this has not proven to be true with real world testing. then they started saying, "oh but it reduces symptoms", yet as i previously stated, symptoms/adverse-events were far higher in the vaccinated group: https://rumble.com/vrlftb-the-pfizer-inoculations-for-covid-19-more-harm-than-good.html
in addition, there is a very plausible theory that vaccination can reduce positive nasal swabs via IgG leaking out of the blood into the mucosa in the nose shortly after infection, which while its not fast enough to completely stop the virus, it is fast enough to eliminate the virus from the nose by the time you get symptoms and then go get tested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-vxhfwfvBs
> they are still 60% effective against death
again, the pfizer clinical trials showed no reduction in mortality. observation data post-vaccine has too many confounding variables in both data collection and vaccine vs control selection
> They are around 50% effective. Not 0-10%.
the 50% number is based on data that has not taken into account the wealth/health effect
too much disinfo, i don't have the time to correct
> Well you misread the initial phase III clinical trial trial reports and outright lied about the results so maybe you need to study harder?
lied about what?? you keep saying that but never mention the exact lie, nor offer a citation to correct it
> Your doing an appeal to authority now?
only in response to this quote from you: " But refusing to listen to the actual science on this and then continuing to cite the same debunked nonsense "
i personally don't care too much about credentials. only arguments. it's quite easy to spot a moron when you're an expert in the subject matter, as they slip-up frequently, saying things that arent true, or have arguments that don't make any sense. though there is certainly a correlation between credentials and expert status / having ideas worth listening to
> while turning on the Daily Wire or Tucker Carlson
lol. i don't watch either of them. stop pretending i'm some uninformed ideologue. i am an intellectual gift from god
Your evidence is that before the pandemic people took longer to develop vaccines. That's true. Its also completely irrelevant. That does not mean safety standards were relaxed.
You keep saying this without actually reading the underlying thing. Drug discovery was already finished by the time the pandemic happened, its a continual process. The only reason clinical trials take a long time is because of recruitment, which is obviously much easier in the middle of a pandemic ...
You don't need to keep citing cockamane theories about how the 95% reduction was received. You could look at the linked pdf and see very clearly the vaccine save lives well into 2022. Like the biological mechanism is that it only affects the nose. Your serious right?
"again, the pfizer clinical trials showed no reduction in mortality. observation data post-vaccine has too many confounding variables in both data collection and vaccine vs control selection"
Yes they did and this is quite a stupid objection. Its all just a weird coincidence! Confounding variables! Do you actually know how to control for confounding variables? Its not automatically dismissing stuff you don't like via magic words!
The chart in the data I provided makes it clear. Unless you have specific objections, you are just lying to yourself.
This is why we need to decentralize medicine - have a decentralized portal for doctors and patients to share notes - free from the centralized control of these corrupt organizations.
Like Ivermectin and Covid, the same thing is happening with autoimmune diseases and diet. Thousands of people right now are beating auto immune diseases with carnivore diet and strict elimination diets. Everything from Multiple Sclerosis to Psoriasis to Ulcerative Colitis to Chron's Disease to Rheumatoid Arthritis. They are also able to beat mental disorders such as clinical anxiety and depression with elimination diets. I know, because I am one of them (carnivore diet now for almost 2 years).
We need a decentralized platform where we can share experiences that the corrupted centralized monolithic entities don't have control of where both doctors and patients can share information.
Sigh. So now anti-vaccine nonsense has spread to this blog too? Really?
"which skipped important safeguards."
No it didn't. Its just not true. There is are so many books and articles with detail exactly what the process was. It did not skip any safeguards whatsoever.
"mandate subscription to their products, but they can't be sued for adverse effects"
Such a stupid framing man. You can't sue because allowing lawsuits here would be stupid, for the same reason that the tort system does not work in general ... it only focuses on harm, which cannot be offset by citing benefits because the legal system has stupid incentives. Side effects are common with every drug, which is why we have the approval process to begin with! Once approved, liability is limited because that is what approval means!
I don't know why this keeps getting repeated. It is flat out misleading and wrong.
"European countries whose regulatory bodies are not as captured as the US FDA/CDC have banned COVID jabs for healthy young people."
The FDA has a strong reputation in the pharmaceutical community of being STRICTER than the EU. Much much stricter. And framing lack of approval as a ban is blatantly dishonest. Europe has approved a much wider range of vaccines, including novavax and some vaccines that were less effective, than we have! The AstraZeneca vaccine probably isn't the best to apply to young people, but it isn't an mRNA vaccine!
Do you live under a rock? These vaccines are garbage. Read the released data on them (they they tried to keep hidden for 50+ years). They lied about nearly all of the data.
As Yuri says, you can't reason with a demoralized person. You could tell Akash that the former FDA head is now on Pfizer's board, or that Pfizer paid the largest fine in corporate history in 2009 ($2.3 billion) for misleading marketing, and he'd still line up for more shots saying they're safe and effective!
Do you understand basic corruption and incentives? Moderna, Pfizer, and Gottlieb are all incentivized to make more money, not to care about your health or adverse effects. When a private company hires former regulators, they are buying favoritism not any "expert" insight. Happens in every industry. Your naivete is stunning.
"Do you understand basic corruption and incentives?"
You haven't cited any specific example of corruption! The initial post was about Moderna's vaccine, I mean, come on.
"Moderna, Pfizer, and Gottlieb are all incentivized to make more money, not to care about your health or adverse effects."
They make money by creating drugs that work, which they do. Otherwise they don't get approved. Companies lose billions every year over lack of FDA approval and insurance companies looking at the data themselves and deciding they will not insure it because it does not work.
"When a private company hires former regulators, they are buying favoritism not any "expert" insight"
Yes I am sure hiring a Trump regulator is going to get soo much favoritism amongst the Biden FDA ...
"Your naivete is stunning."
Oh this is typical. Some random commentator who knows absolutely nothing and has zero desire to actually learn in good faith accuses the guy who have actually studied this shit of "naivete".
You have said nothing concrete. No specific criticism, expert evidence, just general vague accusations. Its just the same flurry of nonsense over and over and over again with no good faith effort to actually understand this stuff. I have had conversations with skeptics who actually present arguments, and I don't mind that. But this is ridiculous.
Why are you simping for Moderna? It never successfully brought a product to market until the COVID EUA, which skipped important safeguards. The "secret" to Moderna and Pfizer's record profits is an unprecedented business model where they lobby governments to mandate subscription to their products, but they can't be sued for adverse effects. European countries whose regulatory bodies are not as captured as the US FDA/CDC have banned COVID jabs for healthy young people. Here's a solid subscription business to look at: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-build-a-killer-business-and
yup. every single low hanging fruit disease/treatment using mRNA tech failed miserably due to toxicity, yet when they get to skip extensive testing with the help of mass fear/panic, suddenly mRNA tech magically works (and not only does mRNA tech suddenly work, it suddenly works on not a low hanging fruit disease, but a disease that has also never had a treatment developed that passed safety trials).
https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/10/investigative-reports/moderna-a-company-in-need-of-a-hail-mary
"yet when they get to skip extensive testing with the help of mass fear/panic"
They did extensive testing. You all keep ignoring that testing and don't actually read the underlying trial data and keep spreading nonsense about how they didn't. I mean, the phase III results are public!
And this talk of mass panic is so ... just immoral. I mean I am trying to assume good faith because I do think we overreacted (we should have approved the vaccine sooner and not locked down!) But the excess death data shows over 10 million people dead. We should have done nothing?
"suddenly mRNA tech magically works"
If you actually want to know what happened such that the technology was a failure for a long time, but now it worked, read into books like "The Messenger" and the many journalists who have documented precisely this process. First of all, toxicity was not the issue, immune response was. The innovation they made was a form of encapsulation and modification to the mRNA strand itself to limit that response. Its not magic. Again, this process has been documented and is public, if you are not going to actually look into it, then at the very least stop spreading dishonest crap.
"but a disease that has also never had a treatment developed that passed safety trials"
You mean the flu? What? Coronaviruses are extremely common. SARS was 20 years ago! Covid-19 is much more deadly but it has a similar biology, so we know how this works. And we did phase I and phase II trials, which explicitly cover safety.
Look, no one said you had to be an expert in any of this. And while some people did write criticisms of "doing your own research", I think that sentiment is just as stupid and dangerous. But refusing to listen to the actual science on this and then continuing to cite the same debunked nonsense over and over isn't doing your own research, its adopting a religion, a particularly stupid one, that is getting people killed.
What do you work for the FDA or something? This laughable in the light of all the new information out there. These companies lied, withheld information, and the agencies that are supposed to protect us helped cover it up. Just like any corrupt agency would.
"What do you work for the FDA or something?"
I have been extremely critical of the FDA for years. However, my criticisms happen to be based in actual science and economics and not conspiracy theories.
Tell me, exactly, what did they lie about? You do realize that in the United States, the FDA ignores the analysis done by the pharma company right? It doesn't factor in. The data is collected by a third party, usually a CRO, who is audited directly by the FDA. The CEO of the pharma company is usually learns about the data in the same livestream the general public does.
Like from the CDC? Like this?
https://twitter.com/repthomasmassie/status/1558299020828753922?s=21&t=OdVxD1uIuze9oaIu-x--pQ
No, not like from the CDC. Only an idiot trusts the CDC. But you are even more of an idiot to trust Rep. Massie and the endless parade of right wing charlatans who don't have your best interest in mind and pretend as if they are approaching their views on this from a place of good faith when they are not. Its pure mindless contrarianism and a cynical ploy to stir up political controversy where there shouldn't have been any. The vaccine drive came from the Trump admin. The skeptics were democrats ... now its flipped. Its a stupid game everyone is playing that is killing people. I don't say that lightly, but even to this day hospitalization rates for unvaccinated people is far higher than vaccinated, doubly so for boosted.
Its doesn't even make logical sense! In what universe does "freedom" entail banning people from taking a drug? If people actually believed in freedom regarding this they would have supported allowing people to take this before approval, but they did not.
People have a right to be skeptical. The lockdowns were foolish. Masking policy was stupidly done. The notion that everyone should trust some central authority is dumb and I fundamentally am opposed to that. You are making a strawman.
But that entails that the people who do challenge the central authority be responsible. Spreading anti-vaccine stuff, then mindlessly repeating the same thing over and over again despite what the data actually says, then baselessly claiming that anyone who has actually studied how drug interactions work is a member of a massive conspiracy, then outright play into peoples conspiratorial confirmation biased view on things as a cynical hit against "the man", being the FDA or CDC or whatever, that is irresponsible.
I am not opposed to criticism. I am opposed to lying. Much of the anti-vaccine stuff, the election rigging stuff, anti-Ukraine, all of this ... are lies. The media writ large has shown itself to engage in bad faith and spread propaganda and be biased, and people are dissatisfied. But the opposition takes those people and instead of growing a pair and telling the truth, play into cynical nonsense to make a political point that the spreaders don't actually believe themselves.
This I don't like the CDC, therefore I will take the opposite view on everything, is just beyond stupid. Many times the experts are wrong, but sometimes they are right. A responsible opposition would take them to task and sort out the good from the bad, and not play into their audiences worst instincts at every point.
And its just sad because so many times I hear that doctors are all part of this left wing conspiracy when ... most doctors were Republicans! Not too long ago! And everyone I used to work with at the pharma companies was an extreme conservative who hated the FDA and CDC. Even today my primary case physician went into a large rant to me about woke volunteers he works with. They only turned because a bunch of cynical assholes decided to sike large swaths of the population against people, who, while not immune to mistakes and legitimate things that should be criticized, are actually working extremely hard to save lives.
> They did extensive testing.
wrong. debunked.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html
> You all keep ignoring that testing and don't actually read the underlying trial data and keep spreading nonsense about how they didn't. I mean, the phase III results are public!
i have read the published phase III clinical trials. vaccine group showed zero reduction in mortality, but a very significant increase in adverse events.
in pfizer's trial in children, they labeled a child that became a paraplegic due to an adverse reaction to the vaccine as having a "stomach ache" (name is maddie de garay).
most important though is the methodology. here is a good writeup: https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/hiding-the-truth-by-hiding-the-data
> But the excess death data shows over 10 million people dead. We should have done nothing?
you're right, excess deaths are quite large. interesting they didn't decrease post-vaccine. also interesting that these same excess deaths are highly correlated with poverty. almost as if not allowing the poor to go to their jobs (unlike the elite laptop-class that can continue their job sitting in bed typing emails) results in downstream effects causing death
> You mean the flu? What? Coronaviruses are extremely common.
the flu is influenza, not coronavirus, and as a matter of fact, independent clinical trials of flu vaccines have shown them to be anywhere from 0-10% effective. also, since the mass rollout of flu vaccines, flu cases have absolutely exploded. curious. if you're wondering why independent clinical trials are important, ~94% of phase III clinical trials by drug companies typically show effectiveness, yet when those same drugs undergo clinical trials, only ~50% show effectiveness (the real number is likely even lower given that academia still have incentives to fudge numbers towards effectiveness). a very good example of this is amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) drugs, as while many have been approved, later independent clinical trials have gradually found not a single one to show any efficacy
> Coronaviruses are extremely common. SARS was 20 years ago!
i know they're common. hence why researchers have tried to make vaccines for them. they has thus far failed
> listen to the actual science
that quote pretty much sums up your entire argument. "listen". "listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say". science isn't about listening, it's primarily about reading scientific papers, and then questioning, and even doing experiments of your own if you have the means. i would know, i'm a literal medical scientist.
"https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html"
Your citing an article from 4/30? Are you for real? What an idiot. Yeah, no shit, we didn't have results a month into the pandemic. The deadline was pushed forward due to manufacturing constraints eased by Operation Warp Speed (which Trump deserves credit for) not by reducing testing.
"i have read the published phase III clinical trials. vaccine group showed zero reduction in mortality, but a very significant increase in adverse events."
They showed a 95% reduction, which has reduced recently due to mutations and waning effectiveness but this is just a fucking lie. That approaches the realm of maliciousness. And they are still 60% effective against death, with a much higher percentage
"the flu is influenza, not coronavirus, and as a matter of fact, independent clinical trials of flu vaccines have shown them to be anywhere from 0-10% effective"
They are around 50% effective. Not 0-10%. Again, your view of the data is wrong and you are making shit up. Also, yes, vaccinated people have lower death rates generally, so saying they don't is either mistaken or a lie. Here you go: https://pandem-ic.com/excess-mortality-and-vaccination/
"almost as if not allowing the poor to go to their jobs (unlike the elite laptop-class that can continue their job sitting in bed typing emails) results in downstream effects causing death"
They have controlled for that and still found extremely large excess deaths. Arguing that most of the deaths come from lockdowns is just laughably stupid. I am not defending the lockdowns! They were bad! But they arguably reduced excess deaths, not increased them, and we see in countries with significant lockdowns and little initial viral spread reduced deaths (for example: excess deaths in the first 6 months in Israel was negative, due to reduced traffic collisions.)
"i'm a literal medical scientist."
Well you misread the initial phase III clinical trial trial reports and outright lied about the results so maybe you need to study harder? Or be a little bit more intellectually honest? Like so what? Dr. Christopher Duntsch a medical student at one time too! Your doing an appeal to authority now?
""listen". "listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say". science isn't about listening, it's primarily about reading scientific papers, and then questioning, and even doing experiments of your own if you have the means."
That is what you are doing. Like this is so stupid. You aren't approaching this from an honest perspective, you have a built in allergy to "experts", so you just took the contrarian view regardless of whether or not those experts are wrong or not. Like here is some data: https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf
That makes it fairly clear doesn't it? What else do you want man?
"listen to the unelected man on tv that tells me what to think and what to say"
Oh shut up man. Pretending as if everyone who happens to have looked up and confirmed the sky is in fact blue is sheep and your this great independent thinker ,while turning on the Daily Wire or Tucker Carlson or some random podcast, who isn't doing the exact thing you criticize others of, for thinking its in fact bright green.
Yeah, I listen to people who have studied this shit for decades. What, I'm supposed to be ashamed of that? I'm plenty skeptical. My personal views are extremely anti-FDA and CDC. Independent thinking is not about automatically taking the automatic opposite position of everyone then bragging about how much questioning you do. That is just being stupid. Its about knowing what you know and don't know, asking fair questions, and yes, deferring to experts when necessary. Like if you actually had fair questions to ask of the medical community I don't know a single doctor who wouldn't answer them.
This is 2022 data! Showing death rates far higher in unvaccinated people! With pronounced effects for older people! You can find similar data everywhere making it super fucking obvious. You lecture as to what science is but you don't actually have an interest in the truth!
> Your citing an article from 4/30
correct, i am citing an article from a leftist pre pharma industrial complex vaccine propaganda. here is another one: https://www.ifpma.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/IFPMA-ComplexJourney-2019_FINAL.pdf
- drug discovery: 2-5 years
- pre-clinical: 2 years
- clinical phase I, II, and III: 9-15 years
- approval: 2 years
> They showed a 95% reduction
they showed a 95% reduction in positive PCR tests in individuals with covid symptoms. yet curiously, this has not proven to be true with real world testing. then they started saying, "oh but it reduces symptoms", yet as i previously stated, symptoms/adverse-events were far higher in the vaccinated group: https://rumble.com/vrlftb-the-pfizer-inoculations-for-covid-19-more-harm-than-good.html
in addition, there is a very plausible theory that vaccination can reduce positive nasal swabs via IgG leaking out of the blood into the mucosa in the nose shortly after infection, which while its not fast enough to completely stop the virus, it is fast enough to eliminate the virus from the nose by the time you get symptoms and then go get tested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-vxhfwfvBs
> they are still 60% effective against death
again, the pfizer clinical trials showed no reduction in mortality. observation data post-vaccine has too many confounding variables in both data collection and vaccine vs control selection
> They are around 50% effective. Not 0-10%.
the 50% number is based on data that has not taken into account the wealth/health effect
too much disinfo, i don't have the time to correct
> Well you misread the initial phase III clinical trial trial reports and outright lied about the results so maybe you need to study harder?
lied about what?? you keep saying that but never mention the exact lie, nor offer a citation to correct it
> Your doing an appeal to authority now?
only in response to this quote from you: " But refusing to listen to the actual science on this and then continuing to cite the same debunked nonsense "
i personally don't care too much about credentials. only arguments. it's quite easy to spot a moron when you're an expert in the subject matter, as they slip-up frequently, saying things that arent true, or have arguments that don't make any sense. though there is certainly a correlation between credentials and expert status / having ideas worth listening to
> while turning on the Daily Wire or Tucker Carlson
lol. i don't watch either of them. stop pretending i'm some uninformed ideologue. i am an intellectual gift from god
Your evidence is that before the pandemic people took longer to develop vaccines. That's true. Its also completely irrelevant. That does not mean safety standards were relaxed.
You keep saying this without actually reading the underlying thing. Drug discovery was already finished by the time the pandemic happened, its a continual process. The only reason clinical trials take a long time is because of recruitment, which is obviously much easier in the middle of a pandemic ...
You don't need to keep citing cockamane theories about how the 95% reduction was received. You could look at the linked pdf and see very clearly the vaccine save lives well into 2022. Like the biological mechanism is that it only affects the nose. Your serious right?
"again, the pfizer clinical trials showed no reduction in mortality. observation data post-vaccine has too many confounding variables in both data collection and vaccine vs control selection"
Yes they did and this is quite a stupid objection. Its all just a weird coincidence! Confounding variables! Do you actually know how to control for confounding variables? Its not automatically dismissing stuff you don't like via magic words!
The chart in the data I provided makes it clear. Unless you have specific objections, you are just lying to yourself.
This is why we need to decentralize medicine - have a decentralized portal for doctors and patients to share notes - free from the centralized control of these corrupt organizations.
Like Ivermectin and Covid, the same thing is happening with autoimmune diseases and diet. Thousands of people right now are beating auto immune diseases with carnivore diet and strict elimination diets. Everything from Multiple Sclerosis to Psoriasis to Ulcerative Colitis to Chron's Disease to Rheumatoid Arthritis. They are also able to beat mental disorders such as clinical anxiety and depression with elimination diets. I know, because I am one of them (carnivore diet now for almost 2 years).
We need a decentralized platform where we can share experiences that the corrupted centralized monolithic entities don't have control of where both doctors and patients can share information.
Here is more on my experience with carnivore diet: https://joshketry.substack.com/p/does-carnivore-diet-really-work-for
Here is more on decentralization: https://joshketry.substack.com/p/decentralize-everything
Sigh. So now anti-vaccine nonsense has spread to this blog too? Really?
"which skipped important safeguards."
No it didn't. Its just not true. There is are so many books and articles with detail exactly what the process was. It did not skip any safeguards whatsoever.
"mandate subscription to their products, but they can't be sued for adverse effects"
Such a stupid framing man. You can't sue because allowing lawsuits here would be stupid, for the same reason that the tort system does not work in general ... it only focuses on harm, which cannot be offset by citing benefits because the legal system has stupid incentives. Side effects are common with every drug, which is why we have the approval process to begin with! Once approved, liability is limited because that is what approval means!
I don't know why this keeps getting repeated. It is flat out misleading and wrong.
"European countries whose regulatory bodies are not as captured as the US FDA/CDC have banned COVID jabs for healthy young people."
The FDA has a strong reputation in the pharmaceutical community of being STRICTER than the EU. Much much stricter. And framing lack of approval as a ban is blatantly dishonest. Europe has approved a much wider range of vaccines, including novavax and some vaccines that were less effective, than we have! The AstraZeneca vaccine probably isn't the best to apply to young people, but it isn't an mRNA vaccine!
Do you live under a rock? These vaccines are garbage. Read the released data on them (they they tried to keep hidden for 50+ years). They lied about nearly all of the data.
As Yuri says, you can't reason with a demoralized person. You could tell Akash that the former FDA head is now on Pfizer's board, or that Pfizer paid the largest fine in corporate history in 2009 ($2.3 billion) for misleading marketing, and he'd still line up for more shots saying they're safe and effective!
"You could tell Akash that the former FDA head is now on Pfizer's board"
Why don't you actually give a legitimate criticism of Mr. Gottlieb then? Do you have any? Your issue with his analysis is what?
Do you understand basic corruption and incentives? Moderna, Pfizer, and Gottlieb are all incentivized to make more money, not to care about your health or adverse effects. When a private company hires former regulators, they are buying favoritism not any "expert" insight. Happens in every industry. Your naivete is stunning.
"Do you understand basic corruption and incentives?"
You haven't cited any specific example of corruption! The initial post was about Moderna's vaccine, I mean, come on.
"Moderna, Pfizer, and Gottlieb are all incentivized to make more money, not to care about your health or adverse effects."
They make money by creating drugs that work, which they do. Otherwise they don't get approved. Companies lose billions every year over lack of FDA approval and insurance companies looking at the data themselves and deciding they will not insure it because it does not work.
"When a private company hires former regulators, they are buying favoritism not any "expert" insight"
Yes I am sure hiring a Trump regulator is going to get soo much favoritism amongst the Biden FDA ...
"Your naivete is stunning."
Oh this is typical. Some random commentator who knows absolutely nothing and has zero desire to actually learn in good faith accuses the guy who have actually studied this shit of "naivete".
You have said nothing concrete. No specific criticism, expert evidence, just general vague accusations. Its just the same flurry of nonsense over and over and over again with no good faith effort to actually understand this stuff. I have had conversations with skeptics who actually present arguments, and I don't mind that. But this is ridiculous.
"Do you live under a rock?"
No, I just happen to get my information from actual experts and books, many of whom are actually extraordinarily critical of the FDA (as am I!).
"They lied about nearly all of the data."
This isn't true. Stop saying things that aren't true. It weakens your case.
Thoroughly enjoyed!.
I also wrote an eclectic piece (US 5Y5Y real-rates, the labour market, Louboutin heels) in my latest monthly editorial:
https://hxllywxxdvices.substack.com/p/hxllywxxdvices?utm_campaign=post&utm_source=direct