RFKjr Tapped to Head HHS

[Anonymous]

If Trump thinks all the issues RFK raises are so pressing, why didn't he tackle them during his first term? Why the urgency now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Trump thinks all the issues RFK raises are so pressing, why didn't he tackle them during his first term? Why the urgency now?

The first term was tax cuts for the rich and the fake wall. The second term is tax cuts for the rich and fake vaccine science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a long time healthy volunteer at NIH and the VRC, vaccines only started full double blinded placedo testing in 2018 after RFK sued. Fun fact, the Covid phase 1 testing cut corners.

You have a link that shows this?

Does a researcher and nurse at the vrc who verbally told me they sped up the study count?

No

Ok Karen. Keep believing that the same media who lied about a pee pee tape and "believe the science" wont question the side effects of vaccines. Fun fact, between 1971 and 2020, 1,312 athletes suffered a cardiac arrest and died in the US. Between 2021 and 2022 that number was 1,398.

LIE

This is the problem - 1/2 the country believes in LIES. Just gross falsehoods.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-covid-vaccines-athlete-deaths-1500-989195878254

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RFK is for vaccines if properly tested... silence

Big pharma has control over the Democrats... silence

RFK will Make America Healthy Again.... UGGHHH!

Vaccines are properly tested. That's what anti vax nitwits don't understand. Or they do understand it and refuse to believe it because the data show vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and effective. Vaccine are tested in clinical trials. They even publish the results publicly in peer reviewed journals.

So many idiots on the Internet can't understand it and will just say 'corruption!!!' when the trial data don't go their way.

DP. What is considered "proper" is widely debated. Many of us skeptics would like vaccines to be tested against inert placebos, instead of using other vaccines as a "control." We also are inherently suspicious of the "vaccine court" and its impartiality.

Personally, I won't trust vaccines until we get a longitudinal study with the current vax schedule, an older vax schedule and an unvaccinated control group. I suspect vaccine utility peaked decades ago, but no one will touch this with a 10-foot pole.

Please describe a clinical trial testing a vaccine against a placebo. Do you give 500 children the vaccine, 500 get the placebo, and expose them all to the disease and see which ones survive? I’m genuinely interested in your description of this trial.

lol. Clearly the PP is a clinician and understands the ethics…..


What a nutcase.

These circular "ethics" are what ultimately the vaccinators have to hid behind. It would be unethical to not give kids them, because we know they work so well even though we've never proven them to be a net positive. Please ignore the visible decline in children's health over the years.

Someday, somewhere someone is going to put vaccines to a real test. It's only a matter of time.

So again, can you describe the clinical trial you envision to support what you believe?

Start with stating your null hypothesis. Then describe the comparison groups, the intervention, and the length of follow-up needed. If you can do that I’ll even do your power and sample size calculations.

[Anonymous]

Don’t blame me. I voted for Harris.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RFK is for vaccines if properly tested... silence

Big pharma has control over the Democrats... silence

RFK will Make America Healthy Again.... UGGHHH!

Vaccines are properly tested. That's what anti vax nitwits don't understand. Or they do understand it and refuse to believe it because the data show vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and effective. Vaccine are tested in clinical trials. They even publish the results publicly in peer reviewed journals.

So many idiots on the Internet can't understand it and will just say 'corruption!!!' when the trial data don't go their way.

DP. What is considered "proper" is widely debated. Many of us skeptics would like vaccines to be tested against inert placebos, instead of using other vaccines as a "control." We also are inherently suspicious of the "vaccine court" and its impartiality.

Personally, I won't trust vaccines until we get a longitudinal study with the current vax schedule, an older vax schedule and an unvaccinated control group. I suspect vaccine utility peaked decades ago, but no one will touch this with a 10-foot pole.

Please describe a clinical trial testing a vaccine against a placebo. Do you give 500 children the vaccine, 500 get the placebo, and expose them all to the disease and see which ones survive? I’m genuinely interested in your description of this trial.

lol. Clearly the PP is a clinician and understands the ethics…..


What a nutcase.

These circular "ethics" are what ultimately the vaccinators have to hid behind. It would be unethical to not give kids them, because we know they work so well even though we've never proven them to be a net positive. Please ignore the visible decline in children's health over the years.

Someday, somewhere someone is going to put vaccines to a real test. It's only a matter of time.

So again, can you describe the clinical trial you envision to support what you believe?

Start with stating your null hypothesis. Then describe the comparison groups, the intervention, and the length of follow-up needed. If you can do that I’ll even do your power and sample size calculations.

Believe me I know this thing would be massive. You want at least three groups, unvaccinated, current vax schedule, and some intermediate schedule. Track for life, each group representative of child population. Measure hospitalization, deaths, disability. Probably could bring on sponsors to measure related outcomes, and defray some cost. Think Anne E Casey Foundation and the like.

But it would put all the vaccination nonsense to bed one way or another, which makes it worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OOF!

Assuming he gets cofirmed (a BIG if IMHO), he will be bad for the healthcare institutions of this country.

I don't think he's getting confirmed and think Trump thinks this too. He's just going through the motions to satisfy the deal for his dropping out of the race and get rid of his crazy ass.

[Anonymous]

National Review: pro-abortion RFK Jr. is a disastrous pick

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pro-abortion-rfk-jr-is-a-disastrous-hhs-pick/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RFK is for vaccines if properly tested... silence

Big pharma has control over the Democrats... silence

RFK will Make America Healthy Again.... UGGHHH!

Vaccines are properly tested. That's what anti vax nitwits don't understand. Or they do understand it and refuse to believe it because the data show vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and effective. Vaccine are tested in clinical trials. They even publish the results publicly in peer reviewed journals.

So many idiots on the Internet can't understand it and will just say 'corruption!!!' when the trial data don't go their way.

DP. What is considered "proper" is widely debated. Many of us skeptics would like vaccines to be tested against inert placebos, instead of using other vaccines as a "control." We also are inherently suspicious of the "vaccine court" and its impartiality.

Personally, I won't trust vaccines until we get a longitudinal study with the current vax schedule, an older vax schedule and an unvaccinated control group. I suspect vaccine utility peaked decades ago, but no one will touch this with a 10-foot pole.

Please describe a clinical trial testing a vaccine against a placebo. Do you give 500 children the vaccine, 500 get the placebo, and expose them all to the disease and see which ones survive? I’m genuinely interested in your description of this trial.

lol. Clearly the PP is a clinician and understands the ethics…..


What a nutcase.

These circular "ethics" are what ultimately the vaccinators have to hid behind. It would be unethical to not give kids them, because we know they work so well even though we've never proven them to be a net positive. Please ignore the visible decline in children's health over the years.

Someday, somewhere someone is going to put vaccines to a real test. It's only a matter of time.

So again, can you describe the clinical trial you envision to support what you believe?

Start with stating your null hypothesis. Then describe the comparison groups, the intervention, and the length of follow-up needed. If you can do that I’ll even do your power and sample size calculations.

Believe me I know this thing would be massive. You want at least three groups, unvaccinated, current vax schedule, and some intermediate schedule. Track for life, each group representative of child population. Measure hospitalization, deaths, disability. Probably could bring on sponsors to measure related outcomes, and defray some cost. Think Anne E Casey Foundation and the like.

But it would put all the vaccination nonsense to bed one way or another, which makes it worth it.

For this to work as a clinical trial, you would have to randomize each individual to one of the 3 groups. Do you believe that is feasible? Otherwise it is an observational study that would introduce too much bias to prove anything.

Also, still need the null hypothesis. That is the first step in any study design.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:National Review: pro-abortion RFK Jr. is a disastrous pick

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pro-abortion-rfk-jr-is-a-disastrous-hhs-pick/

Also NY Post editorial board:

https://nypost.com/2024/11/14/opinion/putting-rfk-jr-in-charge-of-health-breaks-the-first-rule-of-medicine/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OOF!

Assuming he gets cofirmed (a BIG if IMHO), he will be bad for the healthcare institutions of this country.

I don't think he's getting confirmed and think Trump thinks this too. He's just going through the motions to satisfy the deal for his dropping out of the race and get rid of his crazy ass.

Why won’t he get confirmed? GOP comfortably has the senate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OOF!

Assuming he gets cofirmed (a BIG if IMHO), he will be bad for the healthcare institutions of this country.

I don't think he's getting confirmed and think Trump thinks this too. He's just going through the motions to satisfy the deal for his dropping out of the race and get rid of his crazy ass.

Why won’t he get confirmed? GOP comfortably has the senate.

You just need 4 moderate to defect.

Even McConnell is very pro vaccine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RFK is for vaccines if properly tested... silence

Big pharma has control over the Democrats... silence

RFK will Make America Healthy Again.... UGGHHH!

Vaccines are properly tested. That's what anti vax nitwits don't understand. Or they do understand it and refuse to believe it because the data show vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and effective. Vaccine are tested in clinical trials. They even publish the results publicly in peer reviewed journals.

So many idiots on the Internet can't understand it and will just say 'corruption!!!' when the trial data don't go their way.

DP. What is considered "proper" is widely debated. Many of us skeptics would like vaccines to be tested against inert placebos, instead of using other vaccines as a "control." We also are inherently suspicious of the "vaccine court" and its impartiality.

Personally, I won't trust vaccines until we get a longitudinal study with the current vax schedule, an older vax schedule and an unvaccinated control group. I suspect vaccine utility peaked decades ago, but no one will touch this with a 10-foot pole.

Please describe a clinical trial testing a vaccine against a placebo. Do you give 500 children the vaccine, 500 get the placebo, and expose them all to the disease and see which ones survive? I’m genuinely interested in your description of this trial.

lol. Clearly the PP is a clinician and understands the ethics…..


What a nutcase.

These circular "ethics" are what ultimately the vaccinators have to hid behind. It would be unethical to not give kids them, because we know they work so well even though we've never proven them to be a net positive. Please ignore the visible decline in children's health over the years.

Someday, somewhere someone is going to put vaccines to a real test. It's only a matter of time.

So again, can you describe the clinical trial you envision to support what you believe?

Start with stating your null hypothesis. Then describe the comparison groups, the intervention, and the length of follow-up needed. If you can do that I’ll even do your power and sample size calculations.

Believe me I know this thing would be massive. You want at least three groups, unvaccinated, current vax schedule, and some intermediate schedule. Track for life, each group representative of child population. Measure hospitalization, deaths, disability. Probably could bring on sponsors to measure related outcomes, and defray some cost. Think Anne E Casey Foundation and the like.

But it would put all the vaccination nonsense to bed one way or another, which makes it worth it.

For this to work as a clinical trial, you would have to randomize each individual to one of the 3 groups. Do you believe that is feasible? Otherwise it is an observational study that would introduce too much bias to prove anything.

Also, still need the null hypothesis. That is the first step in any study design.

I would love to see PP, along with others who feel this way, sign their kids (or grandkids) up for a randomized, double-blind, longitudinal clinical trial since they are such a big proponent of this idea. Expose the kids to the various diseases and see what happens. They are their families can play a fun guessing game over the next 20 years wondering if they are in the vaccine group or the placebo group. Sounds fun!

[Anonymous]

Lol. The right-leaning British tabloid, the Daily Mail, seems to be trying to stir sh**t up between Trump and RFK by reporting negative things RFK Jr has said about Trump's diet. We also get some fun insights on what is serve on the Trump campaign airplane. This will irritate Trump.

During an interview with podcaster Joe Polish RFK Jr said: 'The stuff that he (Trump) eats is really, like, bad. 'Campaign food is always bad, but the food that goes onto that airplane is like just poison. You have a choice between—you don’t have the choice, you’re either given KFC or Big Macs. 'That’s when you’re lucky and then the rest of the stuff I consider kind of inedible.'

The Daily Beast reported that the former Democrat also revealed that a close friend of Trump's claimed to have never seen the billionaire drink water. It has been widely reported that Trump lives off of Diet Coke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National Review: pro-abortion RFK Jr. is a disastrous pick

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pro-abortion-rfk-jr-is-a-disastrous-hhs-pick/

Also NY Post editorial board:

https://nypost.com/2024/11/14/opinion/putting-rfk-jr-in-charge-of-health-breaks-the-first-rule-of-medicine/

JFC when I'm nodding along to agree with the NY Post