This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands says [quote] The words misinformation and disinformation tend to be improperly used. He has questioned the safety of vaccines, which he is entitled to do. [/quote]
RFK Jr is not "questioning" vaccines. He's spreading LIES about vaccines. And then denying he did so. Surely you can discern the difference. Spreading lies is a synonym for disinformation.
@LeopoldBloom @windinhishair
[quote] [i]Fridman, July 6:[/i] You’ve talked about that the media slanders you by calling you an anti-vaxxer, and you’ve said that you’re not anti-vaccine, you’re pro-safe vaccine. Difficult question: Can you name any vaccines that you think are good?
[i]Kennedy:[/i] I think some of the live virus vaccines are probably averting more problems than they’re causing. There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective. [/quote]
[b]https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/scicheck-rfk-jr-incorrectly-denies-past-remarks-on-vaccine-safety-and-effectiveness/[/b]
Kennedy also lies when he says that vaccines are the “only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests.” [center][/center]
I'm happy to link you, @badlands, to the double blind placebo controlled trials of the two mRNA vaccines that were authorized for use in the US. One had 30,000 test subjects, the other 45,000.
RFK Jr is not "questioning" vaccines. He's spreading LIES about vaccines. And then denying he did so. Surely you can discern the difference. Spreading lies is a synonym for disinformation.
@LeopoldBloom @windinhishair
[quote] [i]Fridman, July 6:[/i] You’ve talked about that the media slanders you by calling you an anti-vaxxer, and you’ve said that you’re not anti-vaccine, you’re pro-safe vaccine. Difficult question: Can you name any vaccines that you think are good?
[i]Kennedy:[/i] I think some of the live virus vaccines are probably averting more problems than they’re causing. There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective. [/quote]
[b]https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/scicheck-rfk-jr-incorrectly-denies-past-remarks-on-vaccine-safety-and-effectiveness/[/b]
Kennedy also lies when he says that vaccines are the “only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests.” [center][/center]
I'm happy to link you, @badlands, to the double blind placebo controlled trials of the two mRNA vaccines that were authorized for use in the US. One had 30,000 test subjects, the other 45,000.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues Why would I need to be linked this information? I have not shared a view. I have only correctly interpreted what RFK Jr. is saying. You have ignored my comment where I say: "He (RFK Jr.) said the polio vaccine is effective, but not necessarily safe or worth it." He was trying to say that there is no vaccine that is safe [i]and[/i] effective.
"Kennedy also lies when he says that vaccines are the “only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests."
Where did he say this?
"Kennedy also lies when he says that vaccines are the “only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests."
Where did he say this?
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands asks [quote]Why would I need to be linked this information?[/quote] Because it proves RFK Jr's claim is false.
@badlands asks [quote]Where did he say this?[/quote] Try following the link😂🤣😂🤣
Hint: In a “PBS NewsHour” interview, early Nov, 2023
BTW, The phrase "safe and effective" has appeared in US laws and regulations at least since thalidomide, and the FDA has a working definition for testing purposes. It's a large topic with a lot of public health history, similar to 'case law' for legal issues. The FDA has extensive literature on how they test and evaluate drugs, vaccines, etc.
@badlands asks [quote]Where did he say this?[/quote] Try following the link😂🤣😂🤣
Hint: In a “PBS NewsHour” interview, early Nov, 2023
BTW, The phrase "safe and effective" has appeared in US laws and regulations at least since thalidomide, and the FDA has a working definition for testing purposes. It's a large topic with a lot of public health history, similar to 'case law' for legal issues. The FDA has extensive literature on how they test and evaluate drugs, vaccines, etc.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues He is talking about placebos used in the trial process. They are sometimes not used. With regard to ones that are used, how do you know what he considers an acceptable placebo?
"Safe" may have a different meaning to RFK Jr. He believes that there may be an association between certain vaccines and cancer. You would have to take that up with him. Being the strange person you are, I know you are going to be arguing with like I am RFK Jr. Can we be less biased here? Or do you just want to be a Democrat shill?
"Safe" may have a different meaning to RFK Jr. He believes that there may be an association between certain vaccines and cancer. You would have to take that up with him. Being the strange person you are, I know you are going to be arguing with like I am RFK Jr. Can we be less biased here? Or do you just want to be a Democrat shill?
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands says [quote]He is talking about placebos used in the trial process.[/quote] Where did he say this? Link please.
[quote]"Safe" may have a different meaning to RFK Jr.[/quote]
Where does he define "safe"? Link please.
[quote]Can we be less biased here? [/quote] My bias is towards scientific testing of hypotheses and evidence based conclusions. I'm sorry if that troubles you, but I'm still going to keep that bias.
[quote]Or do you just want to be a Democrat shill?[/quote] I like your implication here that the Democrats are the party of science, whereas republicans are the party of superstition and hearsay conspiracy theories, but it's not 100% accurate.
[quote]"Safe" may have a different meaning to RFK Jr.[/quote]
Where does he define "safe"? Link please.
[quote]Can we be less biased here? [/quote] My bias is towards scientific testing of hypotheses and evidence based conclusions. I'm sorry if that troubles you, but I'm still going to keep that bias.
[quote]Or do you just want to be a Democrat shill?[/quote] I like your implication here that the Democrats are the party of science, whereas republicans are the party of superstition and hearsay conspiracy theories, but it's not 100% accurate.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues He says it in the PBS NewsHour interview found in the article you linked. RFK Jr. has not defined "safe", but one would assume that a link between certain vaccines and cancer would render them not safe. This is what he thinks. What is your definition of safe?
Your comments display the words of an ideologue. Nonetheless, it appears you have recognized your bias.
Your comments display the words of an ideologue. Nonetheless, it appears you have recognized your bias.
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands You said [quote]He is talking about placebos used in the trial process.[/quote] Actually, he never said the placebos caused cancer.
[quote] but one would assume that a link between certain vaccines and cancer would render them not safe. [/quote] He identified a [i]possible[/i] link between a [i]single[/i] tainted vaccine and cancer. One large batch of polio vaccine got tainted. That doesn't render all vaccines unsafe. That doesn't render DTaP or MMR unsafe. Smallpox vaccine eradicated the disease, sounds pretty safe to me. Surely you can see this, right??
Yep, science is my bias, and I won't apologize for it. Now, can you identify your bias??
[quote] but one would assume that a link between certain vaccines and cancer would render them not safe. [/quote] He identified a [i]possible[/i] link between a [i]single[/i] tainted vaccine and cancer. One large batch of polio vaccine got tainted. That doesn't render all vaccines unsafe. That doesn't render DTaP or MMR unsafe. Smallpox vaccine eradicated the disease, sounds pretty safe to me. Surely you can see this, right??
Yep, science is my bias, and I won't apologize for it. Now, can you identify your bias??
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues "THEY BOTH USE Placebos."
And? I never commented on the mRNA vaccines. There are many vaccines in the US. Vaccines for Covid-19 are only one type. There is one that I know of that was not part of placebo-controlled trials.
How many parents vaccinating their children do you think question what their children are receiving, and why?
Your definition of "safe and effective" doesn't matter; it is irrelevant. RFK Jr. has a view and he has explained it. He gave the polio vaccine as an example in the material we have discussed. A fair statement could be: "vaccines [i]can[/i] be safe and effective." It still depends on your perception and your experiences with vaccines. There are people who do experience ill effects, and their world is what matters to them. You have ignored most of what I have said in relation to the polio vaccine. Some scientists thought this was worthy of further investigation.
You say: "Your reference on SV40 includes many patients who WEREN'T EVEN BORN when the tainted polio vaccines were administered😂🤣 There are many possible sources of SV40 on this Earth."
The research says: "Using data from SEER, we analyzed the incidence of brain tumors, bone tumors, and mesotheliomas from 1973-1993 and the possible relationship of these tumors with the administration of the SV40 contaminated vaccine."
Where else is SV40 found? You claim there are "many possible sources" of it.
[quote]Simian virus 40 (SV40) was discovered in 1960 as a contaminant of poliovaccines. Hundreds of millions of people worldwide were inadvertently exposed to infectious SV40 in the late 1950s and early 1960s when they were administered contaminated virus vaccines prepared in rhesus macaque kidney cells. SV40 had unknowingly contaminated batches of both the inactivated and live attenuated forms of the poliovaccine and preparations of some other viral vaccines. Although primary cultures of monkey cells were known to be commonly contaminated with indigenous viruses and safety testing was carried out, SV40 had escaped detection in part because it failed to induce cytopathic effects in rhesus cells. However, when it was inoculated into African green monkey kidney cells, a prominent cytoplasmic vacuolization developed. Originally christened as ‘vacuolating virus’, the name was later changed to SV40 to conform to a numerical system of designating simian virus isolates. [/quote]
[quote]Concern about the vaccine contaminations heightened considerably when it was found in 1962 that SV40 was tumorigenic in newborn hamsters and could transform many types of cells in culture. Subsequently, manufacturers treated poliovirus vaccine seed stocks to remove infectious SV40, and screening methods were implemented to increase detection of infectious SV40 in vaccine lots.[/quote]
[quote]Because of the potential risk to public health posed by the previous distribution of contaminated poliovaccines, SV40 became the focus of intensive investigation. For scientists, SV40 has turned out to be an invaluable tool for dissecting molecular details of eukaryotic cell processes. Numerous techniques now commonly used in molecular biology were pioneered in the SV40 system. It continues to serve as a model for basic studies of viral carcinogenesis.[/quote]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/sv40
And? I never commented on the mRNA vaccines. There are many vaccines in the US. Vaccines for Covid-19 are only one type. There is one that I know of that was not part of placebo-controlled trials.
How many parents vaccinating their children do you think question what their children are receiving, and why?
Your definition of "safe and effective" doesn't matter; it is irrelevant. RFK Jr. has a view and he has explained it. He gave the polio vaccine as an example in the material we have discussed. A fair statement could be: "vaccines [i]can[/i] be safe and effective." It still depends on your perception and your experiences with vaccines. There are people who do experience ill effects, and their world is what matters to them. You have ignored most of what I have said in relation to the polio vaccine. Some scientists thought this was worthy of further investigation.
You say: "Your reference on SV40 includes many patients who WEREN'T EVEN BORN when the tainted polio vaccines were administered😂🤣 There are many possible sources of SV40 on this Earth."
The research says: "Using data from SEER, we analyzed the incidence of brain tumors, bone tumors, and mesotheliomas from 1973-1993 and the possible relationship of these tumors with the administration of the SV40 contaminated vaccine."
Where else is SV40 found? You claim there are "many possible sources" of it.
[quote]Simian virus 40 (SV40) was discovered in 1960 as a contaminant of poliovaccines. Hundreds of millions of people worldwide were inadvertently exposed to infectious SV40 in the late 1950s and early 1960s when they were administered contaminated virus vaccines prepared in rhesus macaque kidney cells. SV40 had unknowingly contaminated batches of both the inactivated and live attenuated forms of the poliovaccine and preparations of some other viral vaccines. Although primary cultures of monkey cells were known to be commonly contaminated with indigenous viruses and safety testing was carried out, SV40 had escaped detection in part because it failed to induce cytopathic effects in rhesus cells. However, when it was inoculated into African green monkey kidney cells, a prominent cytoplasmic vacuolization developed. Originally christened as ‘vacuolating virus’, the name was later changed to SV40 to conform to a numerical system of designating simian virus isolates. [/quote]
[quote]Concern about the vaccine contaminations heightened considerably when it was found in 1962 that SV40 was tumorigenic in newborn hamsters and could transform many types of cells in culture. Subsequently, manufacturers treated poliovirus vaccine seed stocks to remove infectious SV40, and screening methods were implemented to increase detection of infectious SV40 in vaccine lots.[/quote]
[quote]Because of the potential risk to public health posed by the previous distribution of contaminated poliovaccines, SV40 became the focus of intensive investigation. For scientists, SV40 has turned out to be an invaluable tool for dissecting molecular details of eukaryotic cell processes. Numerous techniques now commonly used in molecular biology were pioneered in the SV40 system. It continues to serve as a model for basic studies of viral carcinogenesis.[/quote]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/sv40
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands RFKJr says: [quote]There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective. [/quote] That's a very broad statement with zero wiggle room. That's what I'm calling a lie; that's what you are attempting to defend. RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective."
"Safe and effective" is a medical and legal phrase with a clear working definition. If someone wants to redefine such a phrase without alerting that they're doing so, that's misinformation and/or disinformation. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, you don't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
You say [quote] His claim is that the testing process for vaccines is insufficient, and the lack of placebos used is a reason for this in his eyes.[/quote] Which Covid vaccines don't use placebos? Links and references please.
I have demonstrated that the two mRNA vaccines used placebos and had full phase 3 human trials (phase 3 is safety and efficacy). Thus they don't fall under this RFK Jr lie:
[quote]only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests.[/quote]
Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false. Both mRNA vaccines render that statement false.
And they're not the only ones! DTaP is a combo of 3 vaccines; required for all kids entering public elementary school. All three were tested for safety and efficacy. MMR is another combo of 3 vaccines; required for all kids entering public elementary school. All three were tested for safety and efficacy.
Smallpox vaccine is not only safe and effective, it ERADICATED the disease! Can't get much more safe and effective than that!
Those six vaccines have been in use for decades and have proven safety and efficacy. Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false, and now I've cited [b][i]NINE!!![/i][/b]
"Safe and effective" is a medical and legal phrase with a clear working definition. If someone wants to redefine such a phrase without alerting that they're doing so, that's misinformation and/or disinformation. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, you don't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
You say [quote] His claim is that the testing process for vaccines is insufficient, and the lack of placebos used is a reason for this in his eyes.[/quote] Which Covid vaccines don't use placebos? Links and references please.
I have demonstrated that the two mRNA vaccines used placebos and had full phase 3 human trials (phase 3 is safety and efficacy). Thus they don't fall under this RFK Jr lie:
[quote]only medical product … that is allowed to get a license without engaging in safety tests.[/quote]
Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false. Both mRNA vaccines render that statement false.
And they're not the only ones! DTaP is a combo of 3 vaccines; required for all kids entering public elementary school. All three were tested for safety and efficacy. MMR is another combo of 3 vaccines; required for all kids entering public elementary school. All three were tested for safety and efficacy.
Smallpox vaccine is not only safe and effective, it ERADICATED the disease! Can't get much more safe and effective than that!
Those six vaccines have been in use for decades and have proven safety and efficacy. Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false, and now I've cited [b][i]NINE!!![/i][/b]
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues He said they are not safe [i]and[/i] effective. My understanding is that he acknowledges that vaccines are mostly effective, but not always safe. You have a paranoia, and you are an ideologue, so you have taken this to mean that I am defending his comments. I think we should all seek to know what another person means when they are using words, instead of jumping to wild conclusions that are used to suppress and propagandize.
"Which Covid vaccines don't use placebos? Links and references please."
Where did I mention Covid-19 vaccines? Where did he mention Covid-19 vaccines in these remarks? The only person talking about the mRNA vaccine is you. RFK Jr. meant vaccines generally. I understand they were used in these vaccines. All I said was that they are sometimes not used. This is rare, but not unknown. What is unknown is why you have decided to obsess over Covid-19 vaccines and post it for all to see. Can you take this fetish elsewhere?
"Smallpox vaccine is not only safe and effective, it ERADICATED the disease! Can't get much more safe and effective than that!"
Oh, I see. You think safety is only determined by the removal of the disease. That is the problem. There is more than one single disease in the world. Didn't you know that?
"Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false, and now I've cited NINE!!!"
What is the point? You don't understand what he means. RFK Jr. knows what he's talking about, but you don't. You think safe and effective are the same thing. You are judging this issue using one criterion. Are you autistic or what?
"Which Covid vaccines don't use placebos? Links and references please."
Where did I mention Covid-19 vaccines? Where did he mention Covid-19 vaccines in these remarks? The only person talking about the mRNA vaccine is you. RFK Jr. meant vaccines generally. I understand they were used in these vaccines. All I said was that they are sometimes not used. This is rare, but not unknown. What is unknown is why you have decided to obsess over Covid-19 vaccines and post it for all to see. Can you take this fetish elsewhere?
"Smallpox vaccine is not only safe and effective, it ERADICATED the disease! Can't get much more safe and effective than that!"
Oh, I see. You think safety is only determined by the removal of the disease. That is the problem. There is more than one single disease in the world. Didn't you know that?
"Again, RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE to render that broad statement false, and now I've cited NINE!!!"
What is the point? You don't understand what he means. RFK Jr. knows what he's talking about, but you don't. You think safe and effective are the same thing. You are judging this issue using one criterion. Are you autistic or what?
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands RFKJr says: [quote]There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective. [/quote] That's a very broad statement with zero wiggle room. That's what I'm calling a lie; that's what you are attempting to defend. RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective."
"Safe and effective" is a medical and legal phrase with a clear working definition. If someone wants to redefine such a phrase without alerting that they're doing so, that's misinformation and/or disinformation. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, you don't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning.
It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE safe and effective vaccine to render that broad statement false, and I've cited NINE.
"Safe and effective" is a medical and legal phrase with a clear working definition. If someone wants to redefine such a phrase without alerting that they're doing so, that's misinformation and/or disinformation. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, you don't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning.
It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE safe and effective vaccine to render that broad statement false, and I've cited NINE.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues He meant safe AND effective. When asked, he has said that he believes vaccines are mostly effective. Are they also safe? That is the question in his mind.
What is safe? People have different bodies and different experiences. Vaccines are administered by trained nurses and physicians. We all need to question whether it is worth it to us. I haven't been vaccinated for anything since I was six. I am a healthy young woman. There are some who say they have been harmed by vaccines, and I choose to believe them when they tell their story. Others can go ahead and get vaccinated. We can all do what we want. If people question their safety or talk about bad experiences after being vaccinated or having their children vaccinated, they are entitled to.
What is safe? People have different bodies and different experiences. Vaccines are administered by trained nurses and physicians. We all need to question whether it is worth it to us. I haven't been vaccinated for anything since I was six. I am a healthy young woman. There are some who say they have been harmed by vaccines, and I choose to believe them when they tell their story. Others can go ahead and get vaccinated. We can all do what we want. If people question their safety or talk about bad experiences after being vaccinated or having their children vaccinated, they are entitled to.
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands As I've already said repeatedly, "Safe and effective" is a medical and legal phrase with a clear working definition. If someone wants to redefine such a phrase without alerting that they're doing so, that's misinformation and/or disinformation.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning.
It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a way of misleading or misinforming.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning.
It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a way of misleading or misinforming.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues I am suggesting no definition. This is about people and their diverse experiences in life. Vaccines have the potential to be dangerous, and in some instances have been. I am saying that what you claim is the "medical and legal phrase" is irrelevant. The words of RFK Jr. and their misrepresentation is what is relevant. Safe means different things to different people. Open your mind.
badlands · 22-25, F
@windinhishair Indeed they can. RFK Jr. knows all about contaminated water through his work as an environmental lawyer. Food itself is not dangerous, but types of food can be dangerous. Like vaccines, one person may be fine with a food and another person not. If it is very processed and unhealthy, or unclean, it can be dangerous. I used to be a medical student so I know about these things.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@badlands I was a close friend of someone who died of anaphylaxis from eating food, so yes, food itself can be dangerous. But I would call food and water safe and effective. Wouldn't you?
By the way, I know all about contaminated water through my 45 years of work on the subject, and have presented international seminars on advanced wastewater treatment in several European countries. I have also worked on sediment contamination in the Hudson River which RFK Jr. is very familiar with through his work with Riverkeeper. He has no technical training on the subject (his BA in American History and Literature didn't cover these issues), but has experience in litigation on the subject following his JD. I have been a strong supporter of his work as an environmental lawyer, but question his anti-vaxxing stance and tendency to believe in conspiracy theories. I believe he should continue to work on the environmental issues he is passionate about, and where he can be effective. He has no business being president.
By the way, I know all about contaminated water through my 45 years of work on the subject, and have presented international seminars on advanced wastewater treatment in several European countries. I have also worked on sediment contamination in the Hudson River which RFK Jr. is very familiar with through his work with Riverkeeper. He has no technical training on the subject (his BA in American History and Literature didn't cover these issues), but has experience in litigation on the subject following his JD. I have been a strong supporter of his work as an environmental lawyer, but question his anti-vaxxing stance and tendency to believe in conspiracy theories. I believe he should continue to work on the environmental issues he is passionate about, and where he can be effective. He has no business being president.
badlands · 22-25, F
@windinhishair Effective at what? It is effective at preventing starvation and malnutrition, and this helps to keep people alive. Food can also make you fat. We would die if we stopped eating, but we don't know that we would die if we choose not to be vaccinated.
RFK Jr. graduated from law school and is now an environmental lawyer. His BA in American history and literature does not prevent him from knowing about the environment. He has to know; this is his job.
RFK Jr. graduated from law school and is now an environmental lawyer. His BA in American history and literature does not prevent him from knowing about the environment. He has to know; this is his job.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@badlands RFK Jr. knows the law enough to litigate environmental issues. He is not an engineer or scientist and does not know the subject matter well enough to be a subject matter expert. He has to use people who have similar training and experience to my own as subject matter experts. He would get laughed out of court if he presented himself as a subject matter expert. The same issue pertains to his knowledge of vaccines. He is not a subject matter expert. I will rely on the people who understand the subject best to inform my actions. You obviously can rely on whoever you wish.
ElwoodBlues · M
@badlands says [quote]I am suggesting no definition. [/quote] Actually, that's EXACTLY what you're doing.
Suggesting that RFK Jr's re-definition has legitimacy IS suggesting a definition.
[quote]Vaccines have the potential to be dangerous, and in some instances have been.[/quote] That in no way negates the legal and working definitions of "safe and effective" that have been part of law since thalidomide.
[quote] I am saying that what you claim is the "medical and legal phrase" is irrelevant. [/quote]
The words of RFK Jr. and what they misrepresent is what is relevant. As an environmental lawyer, he knows he can't redefine "pollution." His attempts to redefine "safe and effective" are just as misleading as attempting to re-define pollution.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE safe and effective vaccine to render that broad statement false, and I've cited NINE.
Suggesting that RFK Jr's re-definition has legitimacy IS suggesting a definition.
[quote]Vaccines have the potential to be dangerous, and in some instances have been.[/quote] That in no way negates the legal and working definitions of "safe and effective" that have been part of law since thalidomide.
[quote] I am saying that what you claim is the "medical and legal phrase" is irrelevant. [/quote]
The words of RFK Jr. and what they misrepresent is what is relevant. As an environmental lawyer, he knows he can't redefine "pollution." His attempts to redefine "safe and effective" are just as misleading as attempting to re-define pollution.
No matter how hard you try to re-define the phrase "safe and effective," it still has its legal and medical meaning. It's like if I were to call someone a liar and, when challenged, say I have my own personal definition of liar. Sorry, one doesn't get to redefine legal or ethical terms of art. Doing so "in secret" is just a form of disinformation.
RFK Jr can be summarized as "No vaccine is safe and effective." It only takes ONE safe and effective vaccine to render that broad statement false, and I've cited NINE.
badlands · 22-25, F
@ElwoodBlues That doesn't matter. RFK Jr. understands that there is always going to be one person a vaccine isn't safe and effective for. When talking about the polio vaccine, he was alluding to the cancers associated with it. Vaccines are mostly effective as they mostly prevent the diseases they are meant to, and they can be safe for most of the people who receive them. This is the correct way to say it. Other people will disagree and say they are not safe, especially if they have children who developed autism after receiving vaccines. I would not question their experiences or their decision to avoid further vaccinations.