As someone not directly affected by his appointment, part of me wants him to be confirmed if only to see how people respond to having their faces eaten.
Cassidy is doing the Senator Collins patented routine, showing "concerns" before falling into line. He'll have a perfect phone call with Jnr over the weekend, guaranteed.Yeah, could there be hope after all?
RFK Jr. on defensive over his vaccine views as a key confirmation vote hangs in the balance
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s bid to be the nation’s top health official is uncertain after a key Republican joined Democrats to raise persistent concerns over the nominee’s deep skepticism of routine childhood vaccinations that prevent deadly diseases.apnews.com
He made a typo, what he meant to sat "and then everybody caught the clap!"
I'd say its more telling that Republican Senators have made no issue of it because they are cowards afraid of offending Trump.
She thinks he killed it today, just wait and see how much killing he achieves in four years.
Senators hostile to RFK Jr. received thousands of dollars from pharma, health PACs
(The Center Square) – Three senators who displayed some of the most hostility towards Health and Human Services secretary nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at his confirmation hearing Wednesday allwww.thecentersquare.com
And, you know, you'd think the Democrats would be happy to have an HHS Secretary who is much closer to their view on abortion than to the Republican view. RFK Jr. supports allowing abortion until week 28, i.e., up to 7 months into the pregnancy.
I can't get that link to work.Also, it's worth noting that the Democrat senators who are grilling RFK Jr. with the most hostility have taken huge donations from Big Pharma.
Senators hostile to RFK Jr. received thousands of dollars from pharma, health PACs
(The Center Square) – Three senators who displayed some of the most hostility towards Health and Human Services secretary nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at his confirmation hearing Wednesday all
mediabiasfactcheck.com
I started laughing about here, and haven't stopped giggling yet.
The bizarre thing is to imagine that 'Big Pharma' is somehow pro-vaccination.The drug companies get their profits from selling drugs to (amongst other things) treat infections. Anti-viral and anti-bacterial drugs. Which option is more profitable do people think? A world where a one off shot (Ok sometimes a series of three), provides life long protection against infections, producing a healthy population in which serious infections are relatively low, or a scenario in which those infections aren't prevented there are frequent out breaks when transiently acting drugs need to be given to treat or prevent infections on repeated occasions. drugs which people will buy at great expense when their life or health is threatened.
I don't doubt it.
Read: Don't bother you with any facts that don't support what you want to believe. I'm guessing you couldn't bring yourself to read the link or watch the video, right? Right?
I love how she (I don't whether Megyn or Charlie is the one that identifies as female) complained about the chloride in the water, appropriately she complained about a sea of toxins a bit earlier. A fact free rant by people who are concerned about chloride being in water, I'm sure she'd be horrified by the levels of dihydrogen oxide in common foodstuffs. The opinions of people who are clearly scientifically illiterate aren't going to influence me.
It's hardly a "fact-free rant." Many of the things they discuss are now virtually universally acknowledged. You say they're "scientifically illiterate" because you've only read one side of the story.
www.nature.com
Yes, I do know about vaccines pulled from the market. As a UK physician I am very familiar with AZ covid vaccines adverse effects, we had detailed guidance on what to look for. The J&J vaccine was not used much so I am less familiar with the details. I explained above why immunity to liability was given to the AZ vaccine in particular and vaccines in general, because profits are so low and the AZ vaccine in particular was sold at cost which would not have been possible if an unknown liability had to be costed in.It's hardly a "fact-free rant." Many of the things they discuss are now virtually universally acknowledged. You say they're "scientifically illiterate" because you've only read one side of the story.
Do you have any idea how many vaccines have been pulled off the market because they proved to be unsafe? Have your left-wing sources told you anything about the problems that were discovered with the J&J and AstraZeneca COVID vaccines? Why do you suppose the COVID vaccines were given immunity from liability?
As of 9/24/21, over three quarters of a million (752,803) adverse events following COVID vaccines had been reported to the national Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), including 15,937 deaths. According to a government-funded study at Harvard, less than 1% of all vaccine adverse reactions are actually submitted to VAERS.
In case you dare yourself to read scientific information that does not support Big Pharma propaganda, here are some articles for you:
NOTE: This comes straight from released VAERS data as of late 2024.
I trust you've heard of the science journal Nature. This article documents, among other things, that in one study, vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) naturally, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization. Two died. In subsequent studies, vaccinated animals became very sick when they later became infected with the actual virus. Many died. This phenomenon is called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE).Learning from the past: development of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines - Nature Reviews Microbiology
In this Perspective, Su, Du and Jiang discuss lessons from previous vaccine development efforts for other viruses and how the mechanisms of vaccine-associated disease enhancement seen in some viral infections can inform the development of a safe and efficacious COVID-19 vaccine.
NOTE: This 2011 report is also based on VAERS data.
www.nature.com
Not to stray too far from the thread, but the GB declaration was based on the now proven false idea that herd immunity would occur, that once people had been infected by SARS-CoV-2 then lasting immunity would occur. We now know the assumptions these people made are wrong. They were well meaning, if their assumption about herd immunity occurring had been correct then they would have been correct. Their starting assumption was wrong, so their recommendations were wrong. Also many advocated hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as preventative and curative treatment, treatments we now know are ineffective.
