RFK - Make America Healthy? again?
I believe this guy is going to need his own thread.
no
i was saying at least there's a silver lining to have that nutbag in that role
but keep on projecting nonsense on fairly mainstream centrist positions and view everyone you slightly disagree with as hitler - i can see that's working quite well for everyone
I just don’t get how anyone can acknowledge that RFK is in fact a nutbag and be “somewhat happy” about him being in such an influential and important role - especially when the highest profile and most vocal positions he took were on vaccines.
And I also don’t get how anyone can be shocked or even disappointed that his actions so far have aligned with this.
I didn’t say anything about Hitler. The criticism of RFK in particular isn’t that he’s a “facist” at all. It’s that he is pushing a fringe agenda with no scientific backing that is most likely to harm and kill babies and children for a generation. That is not a slight disagreement and no amount of red dye removal or restrictions on vaguely defined “ultra processing” is worth even a fraction of the harm and cost he is causing.
Here you go guys. Processed food isn't the problem.
Well not the major problem.
BREAKING: Peer-Reviewed Reanalysis of the Henry Ford Birth Cohort Study Finds Vaccinated Children Sicker Across All 22 Chronic Disease Categories
Ahh yes, a paper published in an explicitly anti-vac journal that has previously published "peer-reviewed" papers with claims such as there being nanobots in COVID-19 vaccines and whose editor-in-chief is a linguist (i.e. not even a scientist, let alone a medical one) with a book pushing the debunked claims of vaccines causing autism. Definitely a very reliable source that.
you can indeed buy caviar and any number of high priced luxury food items with foodstamps
I just don’t get how anyone can acknowledge that RFK is in fact a nutbag and be “somewhat happy” about him being in such an influential and important role - especially when the highest profile and most vocal positions he took were on vaccines. And I also don’t get how anyone can be shocked or even disappointed that his actions so far have aligned with this. I didn’t say anythin
there's nothing good about having him in that role - it was "well at least out of this disaster we'll remove unnecessary food coloring and other additives from our shelves"
Here you go guys. Processed food isn't the problem.
Well not the major problem.
there's nothing good about having him in that role - it was "well at least out of this disaster we'll remove unnecessary food coloring and other additives from our shelves"
You're grabbing food off the wrong shelves.
Ah, Trump lovers, seeing a silver lining in the drug addicted trainwreck that is RFK.....are you also an addict, dear Richard? Would explain a lot...
Here you go guys. Processed food isn't the problem.
Well not the major problem.
The Henry Ford study was never published because the people who did the study knew there were major flaws in the study.
'Dr. Adnan Munkarah, Henry Ford’s chief of clinical enterprise, wasn’t involved in the vaccine study; in fact, he said he’d never heard about it until it emerged at the Senate hearing. But after reviewing it, Munkarah said the reason it was never published is simple: It just wasn’t a very well-designed or executed piece of research.
“The data that has been used is not complete data,” Munkarah said. “There is a significant discrepancy between the groups in that study. The analysis that was done was not the correct analysis. And accordingly, the conclusions that were made out of the study are flawed conclusions, because the data and the method of the study all do not support those conclusions.” '
What are the study’s alleged flaws?
By now, Henry Ford researchers aren’t the only ones who have reviewed the vaccine study and found fault with its methodology and conclusions. One critic is Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious diseases physician at Stanford University who also testified at the Senate hearing, which he called a platform for “some really extreme, really fringe views on vaccines and Covid.”
Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious diseases physician at Stanford University, calls the unpublished Henry Ford study was "fraught with major issues."
Scott said there were a number of flaws with how the study was conducted, including:
The two cohorts the researchers compared – the vaccinated and unvaccinated children – were vastly different “from the start,” Scott said. Not only was the vaccinated group much larger, but the children in that group were a much more diverse group racially and in other ways than the unvaccinated group. And it contained many more children who were born pre-term or suffered respiratory distress at birth, making them more vulnerable to developing certain chronic conditions later on.
The study followed the vaccinated children much longer than the unvaccinated – about twice as long on average. Scott said that’s a critical flaw, particularly when it comes to certain diagnoses. “Most of these conditions, including ADHD and learning disabilities, are diagnosed after age four,” he said. “So you can't find what you're not looking for yet.”
The vaccinated children saw a doctor much more often than the unvaccinated children, even before the onset of any chronic conditions. “When you combine these problems, you're not measuring vaccine effects,” Scott said. “You're measuring who had more opportunity to be diagnosed.”
Scott isn’t the only scientist unaffiliated with Henry Ford who found the study faulty. Dr. Jeffrey Morris, a professor of public health and biostatistician at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in a piece for The Conversation that “The Henry Ford data could be helpful if the study followed both groups of kids to the same ages and took into account differences in health care use and background risks.”
“But as written,” Morris continued, “the study’s main comparisons are tilted. The follow-up time was short and uneven, kids had unequal chances for diagnosis, and the two groups were very different in ways that matter. The methods used did not adequately fix these problems. Because of this, the differences reported in the study do not show that vaccines cause chronic disease.”
Scott said he was “flabbergasted” that the study was presented as evidence at the hearing because it was so fraught with issues. “It’s pretty obvious to me that it wasn't suppressed truth, it was just rejected science,” he said.
Here you go guys. Processed food isn't the problem.
Well not the major problem.
Thanks for posting this link to a peer-reviewed study. Our 2+2 panel reviewed its data and found it full of horse*****.
From the small print:
Posting bad faith info on vaccines can cause harm and may not be tolerated in the near future.
I guess BJ career posting about vaccine bs is over .
Well at least he got processing Food left .
Thanks for posting this link to a peer-reviewed study. Our 2+2 panel reviewed its data and found it full of horse*****.
From the small print:
Posting bad faith info on vaccines can cause harm and may not be tolerated in the near future.
FYI
That peer reviewed study was recently discussed at a US senate hearing. So it is of topical interest.
It wasn't posted in bad faith.
And just saying something is full of horse **** doesn't qualify as a valid counter argument I'm afraid.
The Henry Ford study was never published because the people who did the study knew there were major flaws in the study.
'Dr. Adnan Munkarah, Henry Ford’s chief of clinical enterprise, wasn’t involved in the vaccine study; in fact, he said he’d never heard abAnd here's an article that counters your article.
"According to their dismissal, the core argument is that unvaccinated children do not interact with the healthcare system as frequently, creating a “surveillance bias.” The claim is that vaccinated children simply get diagnosed more because they’re seen more often, not because they’re actually sicker.
This is valid reasoning on the surface. If you’ve read my article on logic, you’ll realize there’s a difference between valid and sound rationale. A valid reason like this one is intellectually sophisticated enough to pass muster with people who don’t examine it closely. But it’s a major assumption—and it’s fundamentally flawed.
Here’s why their explanation doesn’t work: Yes, going to the doctor more can lead to more diagnoses, but it cannot explain why vaccinated kids have 4-5 times the rates of so many different health problems.
When you see the doctor more often, mild things that might get missed otherwise can get noticed and written down. For example, a slight skin rash or a small speech delay might get diagnosed in a child who visits 15 times, but missed in a child who only visits 5 times.
In those cases, the “more visits” factor could make it look like one child has about double the health issues—even though both children actually have similar problems.
But that’s about the maximum effect that “more doctor visits” can produce. To claim it explains vaccinated kids having 4-5 times more diagnoses across totally different diseases—asthma, autoimmune problems, autism, ADHD—you’d have to believe unvaccinated children almost never see doctors at all.
To claim it explains vaccinated kids having 4-5 times more diagnoses across totally different diseases—asthma, autoimmune problems, autism, ADHD—you’d have to believe unvaccinated children almost never see doctors at all.
If that were true, we’d see unvaccinated kids having fewer diagnoses of everything—including obvious stuff like ear infections, broken bones, and injuries that you can’t miss.
But the study didn’t show that. Unvaccinated children didn’t mysteriously have lower rates of everything across the board. The only areas where they had huge differences were specifically in chronic conditions that develop during early childhood, asthma, autoimmune problems, autism, ADHD, etc.,—exactly when the vaccine schedule is most intense.
Here’s where the sleight of hand occurs: they claim vaccinated kids are more “engaged” with the healthcare system—but what they actually mean is vaccinated kids show up for vaccine appointments.
They define “engagement” as doctor visits, but they never acknowledge that most of those visits ARE vaccine visits. This is the intellectual deception: conflate all medical visits as equal—then claim the difference in vists explains the difference in outcomes.
That’s not a “doctor visit” problem. That’s a real health pattern."
And on a fun note here's a short movie that I'm sure the regulars itt will enjoy (not).
I'll dedicate it especially to Gorgo.
The Covidiot: Animated Movie
OK, we're done then. Your anti-science spiel has run its course. Readers here (vast majority) don't need your type of peer-reviewed science. BJ posts Troll science over the past several years blah blah blah.
Final straw for me : It's not as though SOME of your science is correct; none is correct.
OK, we're done then. Your anti-science spiel has run its course. Readers here (vast majority) don't need your type of peer-reviewed science. BJ posts Troll science over the past several years blah blah blah.
Final straw for me : It's not as though SOME of your science is correct; none is correct.
A glorious day, indeed.
And, BJ, nobody cares about your stupid video.
OK, we're done then. Your anti-science spiel has run its course. Readers here (vast majority) don't need your type of peer-reviewed science. BJ posts Troll science over the past several years blah blah blah.
Final straw for me : It's not as though SOME of your science is correct; none is correct.
Another win for the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex, courtesy of KS.
I think he meant "nobody with a working brain cares about his stupid video". People like Chuck, who regularly defend child rapists, Nazis, anti-vaxers and other scum don't count, of course
I meant smart people. Sure there are a few dfs that might be interested in that video.
Just a tip, rushing in to white knight Brian James of all people isn't the best move. You can do whatever you'd like, but this is an exceptionally stupid choice to make. The disinformation he spreads literally kills people.
must love how much free time you'll have now with half your accounts now gone
