• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kennedy guts CDC's vaccine panel of independent experts

Bonnot

Your Politics Are Boring As F**k
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
3,544
Political Leaning
Other

Kennedy guts CDC's vaccine panel of independent experts

The Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices helps the agency make recommendations on who should get certain vaccines.
www.nbcnews.com

More bullshit form the dangerous morons in government.

Another jagoff that should be jailed for the deaths he’s gonna cause with his anti vaxx conspiracy bullshit.
 

Another reminder that RFK, Jr. is a malicious idiot.
 
in addition to what is in the nbc article, as is standard practice in the Trump administration, Kennedy is lying.

From the NYT:

Mr. Kennedy said the panel, called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, “has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest.”

“The public must know that unbiased science guides the recommendations from our health agencies,” he said. “This will ensure the American people receive the safest vaccines possible.”

He has previously claimed that 97 percent of ACIP members had financial conflicts of interest. But the statistic came from a 2009 report, and a review found that 97 percent of the disclosure forms had errors, such as missing dates or information in the wrong section, not significant financial conflicts.

In fact, ACIP members are carefully screened for major conflicts of interest, and they cannot hold stocks or serve on advisory boards or speaker bureaus affiliated with vaccine manufacturers.

On the rare occasion that members have indirect conflicts of interest — for example, if an institution at which they work receives money from a drug manufacturer — they disclose the conflict and recuse themselves from related votes.


Kennedy talks about being unbiased, but he is just a lying scumbag.
 
Excellent news!


“CDC needs to decide whether or not to add that vaccine to the schedule.”

“This committee has the frightening power to create a liability-free captive market of 74 million American children with guaranteed payment to the manufacturers.”

“Almost all the vaccines that are currently on the schedule … were added to that schedule not because of evidence, not because of science, but some other reasons.”

“ACIP recommendations have transformed the vaccine market from a $1 billion industry in 1986 to a $44 billion industry in 2017.”


“It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons.”

“It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women.”

“To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.”
 
Is anyone surprised the NYT is lying about Kennedy supposedly lying? The NYT is in bed with big pharma


“Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial tiesto pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines.”
 

Hardly good news.

Wonder how many articles with fake citations this group will produce.

I do not trust Kennedy. He said it himself that no one should look to him for medical advice.
 

“That panel has been a kangaroo court where they just rubber stamp every single vaccine put in front of them.”

“You look at the minutes of the last couple years, they say we want a simple message for everybody just so they can understand it.”

“It was not a data-based conversation. It was a conversation based on marketing and ease.”
 
mike2810 said:
Hardly good news.

Wonder how many articles with fake citations this group will produce.

I do not trust Kennedy. He said it himself that no one should look to him for medical advice.
Click to expand...
Time for some new talking points. He's right. People should only take medical advice from their doctor and the doctors and scientists at NIH, CDC, FDA, etc.

8 of the last 10 HHS secretary's didn't have a medical degree. Did you listen to them for medical advice or the doctors & scientists under them?

Were you worried about the medical journals that had a higher citation error report than the MAHA report?

 
NOLA Dude said:
Time for some new talking points. He's right. People should only take medical advice from their doctor and the doctors and scientists at NIH, CDC, FDA, etc.
Click to expand...
NOLA Dude said:
8 of the last 10 HHS secretary's didn't have a medical degree. Did you listen to them for medical advice or the doctors & scientists under them?
Click to expand...
the past HHS Secretary at least listen to medical doctors and scientist and not quacks from the far fringes.
The past HHS Sect. did not publish a report with fake citations to defend their positions.
NOLA Dude said:
Were you worried about the medical journals that had a higher citation error report than the MAHA report?
Click to expand...
Which medical journals are you referring to?

"This guide provides information about questionable publishers and journals as well as resources for locating legitimate scholarly journals for research and publication.

Guides: Predatory Publishers: Questionable Journals

This guide provides information about questionable publishers and journals as well as resources for locating legitimate scholarly journals for research and publication.
libraryguides.mayo.edu

I am concerned that some people use medical sources that are questionable and posting them as being creditable.
NOLA Dude said:
Click to expand...
 
Good.

All you have to do is lookup who the people are on that panel to know that they are corporate lackeys with enormous conflicts of interest.

We should not have big pharma or big agro reps in our regulatory bodies. They are supposed to be impartial.
 
Nothing magas like less than being surrounded by competent people who constantly remind them that they themselves are incompetent.
 
If @NOLA Dude says something’s “excellent news” it’s surely terrible news.
 
 
RaleBulgarian said:
If @NOLA Dude says something’s “excellent news” it’s surely terrible news.
Click to expand...
Only rabid vaxers would think this is good:

“Four out of eight ACIP members who voted in 1997 on guidelines for the Rotashield vaccine, subsequently withdrawn because of severe adverse events, had financial tiesto pharmaceutical companies developing other rotavirus vaccines.”
 
NOLA Dude said:
Awe. Big pharma shill who made Kennedy make a bunch of concessions to get confirmed didn't get everything for big pharma that he wanted. Boo hoo
Click to expand...

Not actively facilitating the spread of measles should be a low bar for an HHS Secretary to clear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…