RFKjr Tapped to Head HHS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We would meltdown because this is insane. You are ok with kids dying from drinking raw milk?

Good God you people are hopelessly brainwashed. Humans have consumed "raw milk" for...hundreds of thousands of years.

Humans have also died from preventable, curable diseases for hundreds of thousands of years. Luckily now we have the technology to prevent this from happening. Have you ever taken antibiotics in your life?

RFK is anti-antibiotic now? Look, we had very different hygiene and sanitation standards and technology before. When you remove feces and other pollutants from water and food supply and introduce antibiotics most things that used to kill people in early age are rather manageable. But lets not forget that people are still dying TODAY at a young age and certainly in middle age from things like cancer, heart disease, genetic conditions, diabetes, etc. Cancer is on the rise, I actually don't know if our life expectancy will be any better than our ancestors in the dark ages pretty soon if we don't do something about it.

He is on the right track, everything is fair game to investigate why our chronic illness is on the rise as well as poorly managed and often incurable terminal illnesses. I mean everything: Food, water, air quality, hormonal birth control and common medical treatments, and yes, vaccines too. Nothing is a "sacred cow" when people are dying increasingly earlier and earlier. It's too late when life expectancy drops to mid 50s while our kids are dying from OD (with increased drug use and mental health issues) with healthy ones foregoing having kids or having fertility issues.

We were talking about raw milk. You are changing the subject to distract. If you are concerned about mortality rates, why put an unsafe product on shelves?

RFK doesn’t care about health. He cares about discrediting legitimate medicine so that he and his backers can sell useless supplements to idiots.

I am asking you again, is raw milk doing to be mandatory? How does it concern you that people will be able to buy it legally any more than it concerns you that people can buy alcohol, tobacco, and even garbage high TCH content cannabis products?

The point is that if you are concerned about increasing mortality as RFK claims to be, how can you also support legalizing the sale of raw milk, which increases mortality? It’s inconsistent. How do you justify that inconsistency?

Still waiting for someone to explain this…

Do you have any credible info about how the legalization of raw milk is going to be implemented that you are asking this question and especially freaking out how it's somehow going to be the only available option for school lunches ? You are some sort of an "insider" now? Raw milk in an of itself is not a poison, it can be contaminated but doesn't have to be. The way it's collected, transported and sold will determine its safety and this what our agencies are for to regulate.

Raw milk is legal for sale in 30 states. STATES MAKE THE DECISION. You want raw milk, go buy some.

[Anonymous]

When you’ve lost the ed board of the New York Post

[Anonymous]

I'm not phased by this idiot pick. Nomination of a raging pedophile to head DOJ is more problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If people want to drink unpasteurized milk, that's their business. I just want it to be labeled as such when sold in grocery stores so I can make an informed decision.

Except it isn’t when we will all get saddled with the huge hospital bills for their dumb choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is what I read: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-robert-f-kennedy-make-america-healthy-again/

Thank you! I think if you decoupled this from Trump, many would agree with these positions.

If a doctor's patient has diabetes or obesity, the doctor ought to be able to say, I'm going to recommend gym membership, and I'm going to recommend, good food and Medicaid ought to be able to finance those things the same as they would Ozempic," Kennedy said on Sept. 30.

Back to diet and exercise instead of Ozempic. Sorry for all the people who said diet and exercise didn't work for them.

[Anonymous]

If you need a laugh and haven't seen it yet, watch this video of RFK Jr. explaining to Roseanne Barr the story of the bear he dumped in Central Park. Her expressions are priceless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not phased by this idiot pick. Nomination of a raging pedophile to head DOJ is more problematic.

It's all a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever Trumpers applaud these ludicrous picks it makes it blatantly obvious they have no concern for the country.

All the MAGA people say "liberals' heads are exploding!" and laugh or revel over the hysteria. They never commend the pick for their credentials. They are completely blind to the fact that these people are dangerous and will endanger our lives and those of our children.

Not my kids. If we need to go to Canada and pay out of pocket to vaccinate, that’s what we do. Because we can afford to. Can’t do anyth8ng about dead MAGA kids.

You realize vaccines will still be available here for anyone who wants them, right? But do continue making up dystopian scenarios to feed your delusions.
DP

PP is having a hysterical moment. Nothing said here about mass deaths and vaccines is remotely realistic. People are mentioning diseases like Typhus and Ebola which aren't a part of the standard vaccination schedule anyway. It's a freak out. Just like the stupid "winter of death" threats from Biden when uptake of Covid vaccines had declined and it became obvious that Covid unvaxxed are not going to take the shot even despite all the mandates and vaxxports and horrible denigrating propaganda from mainstream media and celebrities. While it's entirely possible that childhood vaccination schedule will be revised and it would be very easy to opt out of any vaccinations, it doesn't mean that they won't be available to those who want them or not covered by insurance.

Vaccination programs become fairly ineffective when too many people don’t take them. You know this.

If they prevent infection how are they ineffective? Your vaccine should protect you if it works.. Plus there are treatments too. Are these diseases we are over-vaccinating our kids for (no other country has so many shots) a major concern or do we have other major health concerns now?

No vaccine prevents infection 100% of the time across the entire population. But if fewer people are vaccinated, more people become sick and in turn have an opportunity to spread the sickness to others, including the people unfortunate enough to not gain sufficient immunity despite being vaccinated. More spread also means the pathogen has more opportunity to evolve and circumvent an existing vaccine.

Also, the diseases “aren’t a major” concern because we’re vaccinating. If we stop, they’ll become a major concern again.

Do you believe vaccinated can transmit asymptomatically? Because this is what we were conditioned to accept during Covid times. If you are doubting effectiveness of any vaccine to stop infection then you admit that vaccinated can also transmit and infect others, and this means that they only provide personal protection at most. So, again, if you have a choice to take your vaccine isn't it all you need?

It’s not either or. Vaccines reduce transmission even when they don’t prevent it entirely. I think you know that.

Are you trying to bully me into "knowing that" (e.g. agreeing with you)? No, I don't know that. There is enough room for reasonable doubt especially after the Covid "asymptomatic" spread lockdowns.

NP here. Clearly, you don't know much. Please pick up a science textbook.

"Science textbook". If your understanding of this subject matter comes from the "science textbook", I am done wasting my time Or maybe you can tell us since you are so "educated" what techniques are used to identify and sequence viruses, and how fragile RNA is produced in quantities for the vaccines or even how our regular vaccines are produced and what's in them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you need a laugh and haven't seen it yet, watch this video of RFK Jr. explaining to Roseanne Barr the story of the bear he dumped in Central Park. Her expressions are priceless.

This isn’t funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people want to drink unpasteurized milk, that's their business. I just want it to be labeled as such when sold in grocery stores so I can make an informed decision.

Except it isn’t when we will all get saddled with the huge hospital bills for their dumb choice.

Critical thinking skills galore here

I take it you don't have any problem being saddled with the huge hospital bills of people who make poor lifestyle choices and end up obese or develop eating disorders, drive recklessly and end up in bad accidents, get into a brawl, or OD on drugs. Or simply get older and don't manage to hold on to a job to get health insurance and fail to save. You are only angry at people who make lifestyle choices that do not agree with your political views, right? Every other broke degenerate who does stupid sh** and ends up in a hospital is heads and shoulders above someone wanting to buy raw milk legally (which also would better regulated)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you need a laugh and haven't seen it yet, watch this video of RFK Jr. explaining to Roseanne Barr the story of the bear he dumped in Central Park. Her expressions are priceless.

This isn’t funny.

Can you imagine having to sit in meetings with this man?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The long term devastation of HHS, CDC and FDA will be the culmination of 30+ years of Republican disparagement and dismissal of expertise. It won't recover. Many here will say that's the point. I disagree because I happen to like public health measures like available vaccines, antibiotics, clean water, food that doesn't give me listeria.
I personally have had a lot of shots and most childhood diseases because I was born before vaccines were developed. I am going to load up on more top ups ust in case.Tetanus sounds like it would really suck.
It's kids and the poor and the kids of the poorly educated (Trump's best supporters as he proudly said in 2016) who will suffer more. Elections have consequences.

omg. Nobody is taking away your public health measures. You are also free to take whatever vaccines you want or food you want And there is no guarantee today of food free of listeria and e-coli unless you had been living under a rock and never heard of constant outbreaks and recalls of contaminated food products. Water can also be contaminated and has nothing to do with who is in power. In fact, DC residents were issued boil water directives fairly recently this year. Go get your tetanus shot, it's not even a communicable disease, so you should have zero concern here whether others take it or not. If people suffer because of their choices it's happening under any administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are facts, real unadulterated numbers that basically go against everything the nonvaxers, antipharma, no-fluoride raw milk drinking posters seem to be overlooking, the average life expectancy in the United States per decade from 1820

• 1820s-1830s: ~35-40 years
• 1840s-1850s: ~40 years (increased due to public health measures)
• 1860s-1880s: ~45 years
• 1900s: ~47-50 years
• 1920s: ~55-60 years
• 1940s: ~65 years
• 1960s: ~70 years (medical advancements)
• 1980s: ~74 years
• 2000s: ~77 years
• 2020s: ~79 years

How do you explain these number? Why are we living longer?

Perhaps the “increases” in cancer and other illnesses/diseases is just a signal of advancement in the medical field, identification/diagnosis and detection. Why turn to some sinister conspiracy. I’m not saying that there isn’t serious room for improvement but thinking that the big bad government is poisoning you on purpose and that some anti science conspiracy theorist is some how going to save you is not rational.

Fluoride? How is this affecting longevity exactly? You can topically apply fluoride via toothpaste or mouthwash or get a dental treatment. There is no benefit in drinking it and putting this through your digestive system.

Also think about these numbers and how they are produced. You never know mortality rate of the younger generation because they haven't lived to the old age yet.. Statistical distribution of different age groups also has to be considered. We have more older people now than before and our ability to keep them alive skews statistics. This doesn't mean we got better being healthier when it comes to all age groups, it simply means we have a lot of older people and made advances to keep them alive despite age related illness. This doesn't mean they are alive now because of the advances that happened when they were young.

Many decades ago or centuries ago if you are frail and old you died, you were not cared for if you family didn't have the means to provide nursing services not to mention unlimited access to any type of medical treatment for the diseases of old age. It's still true in poor countries despite modern advances of the world at large.

Bottom line is: old people are sicker overall, if you focus on taking care of them you can prevent them from dying which will make society believe that we are living longer now. If you ignore older people and focus on younger generation then you might see decline in life expectancy because older people will not live this long but you won't know yet if the measures you took to help younger gen to get healthier make any diff.

MAHA tends to focus on the health of younger generations, obesity rates, mental health issues, prevalence of chronic conditions, hormonal issues and fertility, and mortality in younger cohorts from diseases of older age like cardiovascular and cancer. If young today are in worse shape health wise than the young many decades ago then we are having a problem. Even if we make advances to keep people living longer if this generation starts dying younger eventually your life expectancy stats will go down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are facts, real unadulterated numbers that basically go against everything the nonvaxers, antipharma, no-fluoride raw milk drinking posters seem to be overlooking, the average life expectancy in the United States per decade from 1820

• 1820s-1830s: ~35-40 years
• 1840s-1850s: ~40 years (increased due to public health measures)
• 1860s-1880s: ~45 years
• 1900s: ~47-50 years
• 1920s: ~55-60 years
• 1940s: ~65 years
• 1960s: ~70 years (medical advancements)
• 1980s: ~74 years
• 2000s: ~77 years
• 2020s: ~79 years

How do you explain these number? Why are we living longer?

Perhaps the “increases” in cancer and other illnesses/diseases is just a signal of advancement in the medical field, identification/diagnosis and detection. Why turn to some sinister conspiracy. I’m not saying that there isn’t serious room for improvement but thinking that the big bad government is poisoning you on purpose and that some anti science conspiracy theorist is some how going to save you is not rational.

Fluoride? How is this affecting longevity exactly? You can topically apply fluoride via toothpaste or mouthwash or get a dental treatment. There is no benefit in drinking it and putting this through your digestive system.

Also think about these numbers and how they are produced. You never know mortality rate of the younger generation because they haven't lived to the old age yet.. Statistical distribution of different age groups also has to be considered. We have more older people now than before and our ability to keep them alive skews statistics. This doesn't mean we got better being healthier when it comes to all age groups, it simply means we have a lot of older people and made advances to keep them alive despite age related illness. This doesn't mean they are alive now because of the advances that happened when they were young.

Many decades ago or centuries ago if you are frail and old you died, you were not cared for if you family didn't have the means to provide nursing services not to mention unlimited access to any type of medical treatment for the diseases of old age. It's still true in poor countries despite modern advances of the world at large.

Bottom line is: old people are sicker overall, if you focus on taking care of them you can prevent them from dying which will make society believe that we are living longer now. If you ignore older people and focus on younger generation then you might see decline in life expectancy because older people will not live this long but you won't know yet if the measures you took to help younger gen to get healthier make any diff.

MAHA tends to focus on the health of younger generations, obesity rates, mental health issues, prevalence of chronic conditions, hormonal issues and fertility, and mortality in younger cohorts from diseases of older age like cardiovascular and cancer. If young today are in worse shape health wise than the young many decades ago then we are having a problem. Even if we make advances to keep people living longer if this generation starts dying younger eventually your life expectancy stats will go down.

I would question how exactly statistics from a century or more ago were collected in the first place. This is all bunk since data is likely garbage until we developed any form of reliable record keeping. Plus causes of death aren't playing a role. Turbulent times decrease life expectancy, wars, famines and migrations are detrimental to longevity too, and are all additive factors to things like sanitation and medical care. USA was not very peaceful until well after the civil war. Young men used to die violent deaths and women died in childbirth at much higher rates. You can definitely argue that sanitation and advances in gynecological care have saved many lives and increased longevity but you also cannot discount other factors. It would be interesting to look at Europe and compare 1st half of the 20s century to the one in the US.

[Anonymous]

I'm hearing rumors that RFK Jr. has plans for people who take Adderall. Can anyone confirm this?

I'm intentionally being vague, since what I heard was pretty scary and I don't want to spread misinformation.