Will there ever be a safe vaccine?

[hotsun]

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

Well there is some small highlights once and awhile, and I have a family I care for, both In Norway and Thailand, so it is still giving some meaning in the darkness of repetitious happenings. 

 

If there is no meaning, then create some meaning. You are the master of your own illusions, where you need to convince yourself life is good to keep your chemical brain stimulated.

 

Negativity do not stimulate in a good way

Yup and the vaccine stuff on a thailand forum is silly. I just got back from a trip on the highways here. Definitely not thinking about vaccines

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, hotsun said:

Yup and the vaccine stuff on a thailand forum is silly. I just got back from a trip on the highways here. Definitely not thinking about vaccines

True, yesterday riding around the hills, I didnt think about world problems or vaccines for one sec during 2 1/2 hours.

 

Full focus

 

I do not think so much about anything when Im working around the farm 15 - 20min intervals. Thats the maximum before I need to sit and cool down. 

[johng]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

Australian researchers are using the mRNA "tool" in order to rid the body of HIV, so this will be a major step for the sufferers, and could lead to more research and cures utilising the mRNA "tool".

[Red Phoenix]

5 minutes ago, johng said:

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

Australian researchers are using the mRNA "tool" in order to rid the body of HIV, so this will be a major step for the sufferers, and could lead to more research and cures utilising the mRNA "tool".

 

Yes. the plot from 'I Am Legend' is not far around the corner...

[xylophone]

18 hours ago, DezLez said:

No point in explaining anything to you as your single track mind responses reject all other posters responses or explanations.

Agree with your post and it applies to others on AN, so I have found the perfect T-Shirt for them......

 

[Red Phoenix]

4 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Agree with your post and it applies to others on AN, so I have found the perfect T-Shirt for them......

 

 

Agree with the T-shirt message, but you seem to think that science is only to be found in peer-reviewed articles in 'prestigious' scientific journals like the Lancet or NEJM (heavily sponsored by Big Pharma).  

But do consider what the former editors of both publications have to say on that issue:

Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), wrote in 2009:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

And here also Dr. Richard Horton, the long-time Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet.

In 2015, he made a striking statement during a symposium on research integrity:

“Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

 

And here is what Allan Savory has to say on 'peer reviewed science'  in this 1.5 minute clip. 

 

 

 

[kwilco]

5 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Absolutely!  

It took them less than a month to approve the data, and it would take 70 years to 'redact' what they approved?  

Obviously the judge didn't buy that BS and ordered the FDA to release all the data over a more reasonable period.  

...and what conclusion do you get from this ?

[kwilco]

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

It wasn't when I needed it, not that I could have afforded it.

probably more a reflection of the Thai healthcare industry - which is a totally different tangent. Too many people have blind faith in healthcare in Thailand and often don't realise when they get bad advice.

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, hotsun said:

Yup and the vaccine stuff on a thailand forum is silly. I just got back from a trip on the highways here. Definitely not thinking about vaccines

Read my stuff on road safety in Thailand - same as the anti-vaxxers full of wooly thinking and anecdotal evidence by those who don't understand. 

[kwilco]

for those who don't understand critical thinking, here is an introduction...

 

[KhaoHom]

On 6/15/2025 at 11:20 AM, Mark Nothing said:

No.  The entire field of virology is false.  It should be disbanded and completely shut down.  And the dictionary should use it as a perfect example for the definition of quackery.

 

Interestingly if the objective is good health and being disease free, then the Holy Bible is where the answers are located.  The creator of human beings has a definite blueprint on achieving health.  Most probably couldn't explain it.  Fewer still have fully implemented it.  But for those who desire health this is where to look.

 

 

 

The CDC definition of vaccine was changed because the covid vaccine did such a poor job of mitigating the illness. $$$$$$

[kwilco]

58 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Agree with the T-shirt message, but you seem to think that science is only to be found in peer-reviewed articles in 'prestigious' scientific journals like the Lancet or NEJM (heavily sponsored by Big Pharma).  

But do consider what the former editors of both publications have to say on that issue:

Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), wrote in 2009:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

And here also Dr. Richard Horton, the long-time Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet.

In 2015, he made a striking statement during a symposium on research integrity:

“Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

 

And here is what Allan Savory has to say on 'peer reviewed science'  in this 1.5 minute clip. 

 

 

 

 

In the clip above , Allan Savory launches into a tired attack on peer-reviewed science — claiming it “prevents” new ideas and that only outsiders can see the truth. This is the classic Galileo fallacy: “they laughed at Galileo, so I must be right too!” No — lots of people get laughed at because they’re just wrong and in this instance Savory is one of them.
Peer review isn’t perfect, but it’s there to test ideas with evidence. If your theories collapse under scrutiny, that’s not a sign of a broken system — it’s a sign that your work doesn't hold up.
Savory’s ideas on grazing have been heavily criticised because they lack solid data. Not because he’s too visionary, but because he waves off actual science and replaces it with grand claims and anecdotes. That’s not science — it’s self-promotion.
He wants scientific respect without doing the hard work. Rejecting peer review isn’t bold — it’s an excuse.
 

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Agree with the T-shirt message, but you seem to think that science is only to be found in peer-reviewed articles in 'prestigious' scientific journals like the Lancet or NEJM (heavily sponsored by Big Pharma).  

But do consider what the former editors of both publications have to say on that issue:

Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), wrote in 2009:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

And here also Dr. Richard Horton, the long-time Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet.

In 2015, he made a striking statement during a symposium on research integrity:

“Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

 

And here is what Allan Savory has to say on 'peer reviewed science'  in this 1.5 minute clip. 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, the T-shirt is right: “Science doesn’t care what you believe.” And no — science isn’t only what appears in The Lancet or NEJM. But let’s stop pretending that quoting disgruntled former editors somehow proves mainstream science is broken or that vaccines are deadly. That’s a leap so big it should have a parachute.

 

Take the often-misused quotes from Marcia Angell and Richard Horton. They’re expressing frustration with corporate influence and the publication of low-quality or biased studies — a valid concern shared by many in the scientific community. But here’s the trick: anti-vaxxers rip these quotes out of context and spin them into a false syllogism:

“Some science is flawed → All science is fake → Therefore my wild theory must be true.”

 

It doesn’t follow. If half the literature is “untrue” — you still don’t get to assume your blog post, YouTube video, or Telegram meme is in the other half.

And those wild claims like “All vaccines will kill you” or “mRNA shots are proven deadly”? 

That’s not evidence. That’s propaganda. Repeating it louder or wrapping it in stolen credibility doesn’t make it true. The actual data — from countries all over the world, across millions of doses — shows the opposite: COVID vaccines have saved lives, massively.

 

So no, these editor quotes are not proof of anything except that science needs to be rigorous and constantly self-correcting — which is exactly what peer review, replication, and critical analysis are for. The real danger isn’t scientific debate — it’s the distortion of it by people who want to replace evidence with ideolog
 

[hotsun]

41 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Read my stuff on road safety in Thailand - same as the anti-vaxxers full of wooly thinking and anecdotal evidence by those who don't understand. 

Ive read some of your stuff and i dont agree. They are bad drivers and the infrastructure isnt safe for driving, its a double whammy. 

[kwilco]

54 minutes ago, hotsun said:

Ive read some of your stuff and i dont agree. They are bad drivers and the infrastructure isnt safe for driving, its a double whammy. 

exactly the same type of thinking you get from anti-vaxxers. Drawing conclusions from cherry-picked ideas - and a deliberate misinterpretation of my posts coupled with a naive use of evidence.

"not thinking about vaccines"? - what is that supposed to mean a general slur on Thai people and false observations all round.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

for those who don't understand critical thinking, here is an introduction...

 

One of my favorite books is "Straight and Crooked Thinking" by R H Thouless. It explores common fallacies and dishonest means of argument, seen daily on ASEAN.