Here's your "experts":

 

And I'd say just about comparable understanding of foreign to them concepts like "science" and "public health".

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

But no experiments. No trials. Regurgitated nonsense.

 

I [refer the US Navy experiments thanks Fred Sir.

All studies by leading scientists. All factual, and they all say the same things, so that leave bias out for the most part. I know you'll never agree but it's the truth.

33 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Unsourced non-credible rubbish:

 

"1 in 5 children globally do not have access to lifesaving vaccines. About 4 million deaths worldwide are prevented by childhood vaccination every year. Each dollar spent on immunization saves $52 in low- and middle-income countries. That’s only $18 per child to fully immunize children in low-income countries. CDC works with U.S. and global partners to find and vaccinate children and others missed by vaccination programs.

...

More than 50 million deaths can be prevented through immunization between 2021 and 2030.

• By 2030, it is estimated that:
  • Measles vaccination can save nearly 19 million lives.
  • Hepatitis B vaccination can save 14 million lives."

https://www.cdc.gov/global-immunization/fast-facts/index.html

 

According to big pharma lol

10 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

All studies by leading scientists. All factual, and they all say the same things, so that leave bias out for the most part. I know you'll never agree but it's the truth.

Funded by big pharma.

2 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

According to big pharma lol

 

According to the U.S. CDC, an agency currently headed by your favorite anti-vaxer, RFK Jr.

5 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

That’s only $18 per child to fully immunize children in low-income countries.

3rd world

No clean water lol

 

Maybe fix that first.

Maybe not ignore the underlying main cause and best method to prevent:

 

--AI assisted

 

AND

What is the best way to prevent measles?

Getting the measles vaccine is the best way to prevent measles.

You are considered vaccinated against measles if you have written proof of 2 valid doses of MMR vaccine, or other live, measles-containing vaccine.

 

https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/communicable/measles/

 

31 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

You seem to be interested in scientifically studying how vaccination vs non-vaccination affects people's health outcomes.

 

To be useful, studies must be well designed to eliminate or at least reduce as far as practical all selection factors that will bias any result.  The data point you presented is not useful because of severe selection bias. 

 

Please show us how well you understand scientific studies by identifying the selection factors that introduce bias in your data point.

 

I'll tell you what the number one criterion should be for studies: not being paid for by those who have a financial interest in reaching a specific outcome.

 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2018/06/28/the-biopharmaceutical-industry-provides-75-of-the-fdas-drug-review-budget-is-this-a-problem/?sh=687d6a9e49ec

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Funded by big pharma.

Some allow ads on their websites The Mayo Clinic , WHO or NFID doesn't. 

The change from government funded to significant pharma industry funding for FDA drug reviews was enacted under a Republican administration, because in the wake of the AIDS epidemic, the traditional public funded system was failing to process drug reviews in a timely manner:

 

"In 1992, in response to intense pressure, Congress passed the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. It was signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.

With the act, the FDA moved from a fully taxpayer-funded entity to one funded through tax dollars and new prescription drug user fees. Manufacturers pay these fees when submitting applications to the FDA for drug review and annual user fees based on the number of approved drugs they have on the market. However, it is a complex formula with waivers, refunds and exemptions based on the category of drugs being approved and the total number of drugs in the manufacturers portfolio."

 

https://today.uconn.edu/2021/05/why-is-the-fda-funded-in-part-by-the-companies-it-regulates-2/

 

But now that Trump is president, and RFK Jr. is HHS secretary, they're proceeding to gut government funding for both the CDC and the FDA.... So guess where the funding for drug reviews is going to come from instead?  Courtesy of your favorite anti-vaxer politicians.

 

4 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

In 2019, our last bad measles year, 77%* of index cases (i.e., patient zero for an outbreak) were U.S. residents who had recently traveled and returned home infected. The top source countries were the Philippines, Ukraine, Israel, Thailand, and Vietnam. [emphasis added]

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20250405074154/https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/

 

Hasn't there been a huge influx of illegal immigrants since 2019?

 

Data from 2019 is no longer valid.

 

You guys keep posting pablum that dances all around my question, but doesn't answer it.  And I think I know why... 

 

What was the immigration status of the 3 fatal measles victims?

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

You seem to be interested in scientifically studying how vaccination vs non-vaccination affects people's health outcomes.

To be useful, studies must be well designed to eliminate or at least reduce as far as practical all selection factors that will bias any result.  

...

Exactly, and this is addressed in full detail in this link to the testimony by Toby Rogers during the recent 9 September Senate hearing on the subject. 

> https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/clip-3-from-the-sept-9-senate-hearing

I opened  a thread addressing his testimony, and if you have any genuine interest in the subject the short article is more than worth the read.  

https://aseannow.com/topic/1375245-the-newspeak-in-vaccine-trials-is-meant-to-gaslight-you

 

52 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

All studies by leading scientists. All factual, and they all say the same things, so that leave bias out for the most part. I know you'll never agree but it's the truth.

Thalidomide victimes might not agree with you Fred buddy.

Re Toby Rogers: Rubbish nonsense from a non-credible anti-vaxer source. But it's a nice attempt to cross promote your rubbish thread on the subject:

 

Toby Rogers -- predictably, not a medical doctor of any kind, but instead, a run-of-the-mill anti-vaxer affiliated with anti-vax misinformation peddling groups like RFK Jr.'s Children's Health Defense organization and the right-wing Brownstone Institute:

 

From this guy's written testimony:

" I was in a Ph.D. program in Political Economy at the University of Sydney...

Since then I’ve continued my research with Children’s Health Defense, as an independent journalist, and as a Fellow at Brownstone Institute."

 

-----------------

 

Overall, we rate the Children’s Health Defense a strong conspiracy and quackery level advocacy group that frequently promotes unsupported claims. We also rate them low for factual reporting due to the promotion of propaganda and several failed fact checks.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/childrens-health-defense/

 

AND

 

Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownstone-institute-bias

 

17 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Thalidomide victimes might not agree with you Fred buddy.

Every medicine and vaccine has side effects. Some die, but millions have been saved, so they're a positive thing we've had all along. If you've had vaccinations, there's a chance you are here because of them. Who are you going to believe. studies done by non profits and organizations that are privately funded and by donations or a few who have their opinions? I believe studies done by those organizations who have proven to help millions. Of course some are funded by pharma, but much of that goes towards helping areas without money, like 3rd world countries. This is from WHO's guidelines., which are much the same as NFID and Healthline, among others..............

The WHO's Stance

• The WHO's guidelines are intended to avoid indirect collaboration with commercial enterprises, including those with a direct commercial interest in the outcome of a project. ...When the WHO does receive funds or donations, these are subject to transparent reporting and accounting..Collaborations with pharmaceutical companies, when they occur, are often related to specific programs like vaccine access or the development of treatments for neglected tropical diseases. 

 

Study conducted on Hill Tribes in northern Thailand.

 

Spiritual beliefs + fear of govt exists .... 

 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353339/#s0005

 

Apparently, my parents believe my child is being watched over by an ancestor spirit. Introducing something foreign into their bodies could violate this protection, so it’s important to respect parents’ wishes. (Mother, P5.7)

 

Certain hill tribe groups may also refuse a vaccine due to the beliefs that it contains a toxin intended to function as a chemical weapon by the Thai government to eliminate the hill tribe people. 

 

17 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Re Toby Rogers: Rubbish nonsense from a non-credible anti-vaxer source. But it's a nice attempt to cross promote your rubbish thread on the subject:

 

Toby Rogers -- predictably, not a medical doctor of any kind, but instead, a run-of-the-mill anti-vaxer affiliated with anti-vax misinformation peddling groups like RFK Jr.'s Children's Health Defense organization and the right-wing Brownstone Institute:

 

From this guy's written testimony:

" I was in a Ph.D. program in Political Economy at the University of Sydney...

Since then I’ve continued my research with Children’s Health Defense, as an independent journalist, and as a Fellow at Brownstone Institute."

 

-----------------

 

Overall, we rate the Children’s Health Defense a strong conspiracy and quackery level advocacy group that frequently promotes unsupported claims. We also rate them low for factual reporting due to the promotion of propaganda and several failed fact checks.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/childrens-health-defense/

 

AND

 

Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.Overall, we rate the Brownstone Institute Right Biased based on editorial positions that favor a conservative-libertarian perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to a failed fact check and the promotion of misinformation regarding Covid-19.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/brownstone-institute-bias

 

 

Always the messenger or the medium on which he makes his claims...   Never the CONTENT. 

Note that in this case, his testimony is also accessible on the official US Senate site 

> https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/how-the-corruption-of-science-has-impacted-public-perception-and-policies-regarding-vaccines/

10 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Every medicine and vaccine has side effects. Some die, but millions have been saved, so they're a positive thing we've had all along. If you've had vaccinations, there's a chance you are here because of them. Who are you going to believe. studies done by non profits and organizations that are privately funded and by donations or a few who have their opinions? I believe studies done by those organizations who have proven to help millions. Of course some are funded by pharma, but much of that goes towards helping areas without money, like 3rd world countries. This is from WHO's guidelines., which are much the same as NFID and Healthline, among others..............

The WHO's Stance

• The WHO's guidelines are intended to avoid indirect collaboration with commercial enterprises, including those with a direct commercial interest in the outcome of a project. ...When the WHO does receive funds or donations, these are subject to transparent reporting and accounting..Collaborations with pharmaceutical companies, when they occur, are often related to specific programs like vaccine access or the development of treatments for neglected tropical diseases. 

How to put this in a nice way; you don't know what you are talking about.

 

As for the WHO. A strain on world health IMO. Why do you think Dr Chan left the organisation. I'll tell you why Fred Sir; she was too honest for her own good.

 

Trust WHO?

 

https://odysee.com/@LongXXvids:c/(2018-02-25)-Trust-WHO:0

 

5 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

How to put this in a nice way; you don't know what you are talking about.

 

As for the WHO. A strain on world health IMO. Why do you think Dr Chan left the organisation. I'll tell you why Fred Sir; she was too honest for her own good.

 

Trust WHO?

 

https://odysee.com/@LongXXvids:c/(2018-02-25)-Trust-WHO:0

 

You really are brainwashed. What makes you think the people you listen to are right and organizations that have been proven entities for decades are liars? You'd be surprised how much some here know, that aren't fooled although you might think they are, as that's your own naivete talking. Every organization on earth has it's share of liars and those that leave because they did something wrong or didn't fit into the agenda. Money talks. That you believe the body can heal everything is foolish. That you believe vaccines don't work is ludicrous, as they've saved millions, and likely you if you've had any. There are certain people on earth that live longer than others on average, the Blue Zoners, and they've been taking vaccines and some medicines all along, which is proof enough. What has people living longer on average is evidence enough for a blind man.

9 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Always the messenger or the medium on which he makes his claims...   Never the CONTENT. 

Note that in this case, his testimony is also accessible on the official US Senate site 

> https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/how-the-corruption-of-science-has-impacted-public-perception-and-policies-regarding-vaccines/

I've no real idea why some of these posters continually want to discredit the messenger. Perhaps it's because debating on content they would fall flat.

7 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

You really are brainwashed. What makes you think the people you listen to are right and organizations that have been proven entities for decades are liars? You'd be surprised how much some here know, that aren't fooled although you might think they are, as that's your own naivete talking. Every organization on earth has it's share of liars and those that leave because they did something wrong or didn't fit into the agenda. Money talks. That you believe the body can heal everything is foolish. That you believe vaccines don't work is ludicrous, as they've saved millions, and likely you if you've had any. There are certain people on earth that live longer than others on average, the Blue Zoners, and they've been taking vaccines and some medicines all along, which is proof enough. What has people living longer on average is evidence enough for a blind man.

What about the CDC Fred? Ever heard of the revolving door? Why, and how, did Vioxx get past the FDA? What about the Big Pharma fines. Truthful eh Fred Sir.

 

Yes Fred. Only the body can heal itself. I do not believe that any vaccine has ever saved one life at any time. Why am I so sure? Because the virus that the vaccine goes hand in hand with, is not a danger to anyone.

 

As for those on here that might know much; bring them forward and let's debate. They had better know their stuff though.

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Have to say firstly that measles is not so easy to detect

 

It's detected - diagnosed, quite easily.

 

It has definite symptoms.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

What about the CDC Fred? Ever heard of the revolving door? Why did Vioxx get past the FDA. What about the Big Pharma fines. Truthful eh Fred Sir.

 

As for those on here that might know; bring them forward and let's debate. They had better know their stuff though.

I've seen many here provide evidence, along with myself, and many links to studies. That you believe all of them are fake and that vaccines don't save lives is enough proof of someone who's easily fooled by opinions rather than studies. I haven't seen any reputable studies done by anyone proving otherwise about vaccines. We are all going by studies done by reputable organizations that have been around for a very long time. The other side is opinions.

3 minutes ago, Bacon1 said:

 

It's detected - diagnosed, quite easily.

 

It has definite symptoms.

 

Not according to the CDC Sir.

 

As much as I don't believe a lot they say; I do on this.

7 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

18 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Always the messenger or the medium on which he makes his claims...   Never the CONTENT. 

Note that in this case, his testimony is also accessible on the official US Senate site 

> https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/how-the-corruption-of-science-has-impacted-public-perception-and-policies-regarding-vaccines/

I've no real idea why some of these posters continually want to discredit the messenger. Perhaps it's because debating on content they would fall flat.

 

That's not "perhaps", it's an absolute certainty he would fall flat during any debate on content. 

Continually flooding the threads here with negative 'fact check' posts, simply shows that that poster outsources any personal critical thinking to the 'experts and authorities'.  It's pathetic.

11 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Not according to the CDC Sir.

 

 

Please provide evidence that the CDC  states:

 

"measles is hard to detect"

5 minutes ago, Bacon1 said:

 

 

Please provide evidence that the CDC  states:

 

"measles is hard to detect"

 

The blind leading the blind, obviously!

 

 

https://www.healthpartners.com/blog/what-you-need-to-know-about-measles/

 

 

 

https://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/โรคหัด

 

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

'll tell you what the number one criterion should be for studies: not being paid for by those who have a financial interest in reaching a specific outcome.

So, other than funding you don't have any idea what makes one study better than another?

12 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

So, other than funding you don't have any idea what makes one study better than another?

 

The papers referred to in the context of this discussion are not studies, they are basic marketing assets used under the age-old principle of creating demand to generate product sales.

 

An industry financially dependent on me being sick is not going to give me relevant or helpful information regarding my health.

 

 

https://archive.ph/EM5wh