@Stache2020@dckls@bennyjohnson What?? Where did you read that? This vaccine does not reduce the chance of transmission at all. This has been known for nearly a year
@han_francis@tedcruz On the contrary. What you have shared here is a sophomoric response to the questions posed. Total CV deaths in Texas? Really? What's the rate? Or don't denominators mean anything? I don't think anyone can take vaxopedia seriously
@han_francis@tedcruz So...you want to use VAERS as a reporting system w/regard to myo/pericarditis? Those reports are worthy of investigation? Why are all the thousands of Vax Induced deaths from VAERS in the adult population not worthy of the same level of scrutiny?
@han_francis@tedcruz Let's be serious. the 300k pages of info are not chock full of trade secrets. It's the raw data. Sure we can be patient, but why are we vaxxing in the meantime? We are just supposed to trust that there's nothing concerning while we inoculate infants and kids?
@han_francis@tedcruz Immunobridging is NOT a "well accepted technique" to evaluating effectiveness. This is directly out of the mouths of VRBPAC members in their 4/5/22 meeting. Show us where in the original stipulations around EUA immunobridging was a surrogate for VEffectiveness
@han_francis@tedcruz Who cares who wrote the questions? What are the answers? The VE in 5-11 yo kids w/r to hospitalization has conf intervals in the negative range. So statistical significance doesn't matter anymore?
@joshg99 Thanks for pulling this out of the monthly dump. And the CDC says these things have been rigorously tested for safety. There is no regulation happening. None.
@DrPaulOffit Authorizing this formulation for any child right now has no scientific justification. You and the VRBPAC agreed that boosting was merely a "stopgap" measure.A nod of approval will destroy any credibility in the regulation process. Consider carefully how you vote on this one.
@AaronSiriSG Marks and the entire VRBPAC aren't hiding their cards anymore. They aren't interested in helping people. They're interested in vaxxing them. Period.
@ENirenberg This trial did no more than prove that the vaccine reduced the risk of common cold symptoms by 2%. There were no serious cases or deaths in either arm of the study.
@glenpyle@Voices4Vaccines It seems like you haven't read the article at all. No clinician would overturn the results from a medical coroners report. I would not let him tell you how to "actually think about" a pathologic study.
@marcelsecours @RobertKennedyJr Two autopsies were done. That's what the whole article is about. The medical examiners' offices concluded they were vaccine-induced deaths. Have you actually read the article or are you just repeating what someone else had to say about it?
@SusanPedler @RobertKennedyJr Not sure how you can conclude that. The original medical examiners' reports are linked in the article. Quotes are taken verbatim. Names are given. Every piece of info is cited, including statements from the CDC.
@ninja_sidekick @RobertKennedyJr This is an analysis of medical coroners' reports. That is the gold-standard when the cause of death is being investigated. Isn't it more irresponsible to continue vaccinating without investigating these med examiners findings more closely?
@han_francis I am the author of the analysis. I am also a physician. So happy you are willing to "fight" to right the record. Please offer your opinions in the discussion on The Defender so that we can bring more people to clarity.
@han_francis First, you are wrong about what RFK believes. Second, the article you are attacking wasn't written by him. I wrote it. Join the discussion at The Defender and we can openly clarify where we disagree.