People need to be selective about who they believe. It's wise to doubt contrarians, outliers, eccentrics, conspiracists, unqualified, arrogant & hostile persons when their claims contradict the best qualified experts & institutions of good people. #Liars
Letโs Talk About Why RFK, Jr Thinks Vaccines Caused an Allergy Epidemic in Kids: Because he does not understand what aluminum adjuvants do, and gets a lot of other facts wrong, explains @AboutPediatrics https://t.co/ANBxdJQexM
@shallit43@NightShiftMD@PeterHotez The medical community aren't the ones being dishonest or getting it wrong.
Placing greater trust in a tiny group of a few dozen medical contrarians & conspiracy theorists over millions of scientifically qualified professionals & ๐ leading experts is fundamentally illogical.
@TMZ Nefariously wealthy people may think they're above the law... may even be able to buy their way out of accountability some of the time... but it's extreme arrogance to presume they can declare a court's decision 'unjust' simply because they dislike the accusations or the outcome.
"This is the secret they didn't want you to find out.โ (Pun intended.)
They've uncovered evidence of #MAHA grifter #RFKJr & his pals' hypocrisy:
Financial conflicts โ๏ธ
Big Pharma collaborations โ๏ธ
Profiteering over best evidence โ๏ธ
@thereal_truther
Thx for this share!
Itโs 2026.
And weโre still arguing about whether glyphosate causes cancer.
Whether vaccines cause autism.
Whether mRNA vaccines are dangerous.
Meanwhile, scientists are developing new cancer treatments, preventing diseases, improving agriculture and finding ways to feed billions of people.
Imagine what we could achieve if we spent less time recycling old fears and more time understanding new discoveries.
Science is moving forward. Our public conversations need to catch up.
WHEN THE INSIDER GETS THE SCIENCE WRONG
Calley Means has made serious allegations about corporate influence inside the Trump administration.
Some deserve investigation. Others are disputed.
But in the same Joe Rogan interview, Means makes questionable scientific claims about vaccines, pesticides, and cancer.
What happens when someone may be a credible witness to political misconduct but an unreliable interpreter of scientific evidence?
And how do we distinguish the two without allowing our political sympathies to influence our judgment?
A thread about evidence, credibility, and the difference between healthy skepticism and unwarranted certainty. ๐งต
@HeyNurseKat The hypocrisy among #Antivaxers is over-the-top.
They demand the freedom to pick & choose medical treatments for themselves, yet think nothing of trampling on the medical decisions and autonomy of others.
Freedom and bodily autonomy aren't exclusive to those who agree with you.
@DrNeilStone โ ๏ธ
Check the credentials and evidence behind accounts casting doubt on medical science.
A confident online presence doesn't make someone a medical expert. Makis's cancer claims & remedies aren't supported by scientific evidence. They offer false hope.
https://t.co/pe7PcdLMtb
https://t.co/jEpn4tJjTI
"No person shall use the title โdoctorโ, โsurgeonโ, โpathologistโ or โoncologistโ or โDr.โ ... in connection with providing a health service unless the person is authorized to use the title"...
#Makis misrepresents himself. He's a cancer scam #grifter.
I don't here any debate or proposals being made here, just an attack.
Does she have a bill?
Democracy will work better if more time is spent discussing issues, not wasting time on accusations.
It's still democracy if the majority disagree with her!
@MarkJCarney@liberal_party
This politician's doublespeak, hypocrisy, & disingenuousnous is over-the-top.
Her criticisms are #MAGA style red herrings that fuel anger & distrust in Liberals.
Has she made any real improvements, or just makes good talking points?
#Dissembler?