I find it interesting that even the author of the article states,” This “placebo (DT)-controlled” label is not just misleading; it’s a semantic trick.”. A semantic trick? It is a LIE. The lie is right in the title of the study. There is NO PLACEBO! We live in a world where people in charge of regulating safety regarding our health lie to us about what they say is good to put in our bodies. Deplorable. Let’s call a LIE a LIE.
"Dissolving Illusions" is also a great book on the subject. Very thoroughly researched. A bit of a tome but worth the time. Always a good idea to buy the hard copy as 'they' haven't figured out a way to alter the physically printed word, at least to my knowledge.
I'm not seeing anything in that example that addresses safety. The word used is efficacy. Efficacy is about it working against the foreign protein. Is it effective in the job it's supposed to do which is immunize. Safety is more of a total characterization of ALL responses to the vax including those that are adverse. Think VAERS database. The covid vax had efficacy for a few months but it caused many adverse co-reactions like myocarditis. Most vaxes are looked at for 5 days post injection, if no issues it's good. Ironically covid vax did have a longer post vax review period but they ignored all the signals anyway. Aaron Siri cross examined Plotkin and made him admit there were no safety studies out there. Plotkin is supposedly the godfather of vaccine technology.
We agree mostly here. I think the tension that needs addressing is the difference between what the public think is happening, and what is *actually* happening....
And it seems the science/medical journals are not always "neutral" and withhold publication of trials Pharma don't want anyone to see. In another word, corruption, and very bad because it can result in serious harm for patients. In Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma (written before C-19) he - a GP - says he prescribed an anti-depressant because according to the directory of medicines doctors usually refer to it seemed to be safe; however his patient suffered severe adverse effects. This was because the information in the directory (which I assume is drawn from the journals) was incomplete; if it were complete it would have included the adverse effects and would not earned Pharma (presumably) billions. Needless to say, Goldacre was riddled with guilt, though it wasn't actually his fault.
Withholding a product that has not been properly tested is not nuanced. That is just hoping for the best, a hail Mary, but it is not science and based on my observations not a wise decision. I hesitate to say that this decion should be left to the individual because the individual does not have the facts and context to make this decision but it is better than forcing a potentially toxic substance on everyone.
Being "properly tested" is an arbitrary non-standard since safety from "rare" events (1/8000) can only be detected in very large groups and typically only in Phase 4/post-marketing surveillance programs.
“Now, some people argue that it’s unethical to use true placebos in vaccine trials because it would mean withholding a potentially life-saving intervention from the control group.”
That’s assuming there is an actual pathogen to protect people from. They never proved that there was one, so where’s the ethics in injecting infants with toxins?
Quote: If people believe that vaccines have been tested against true placebos and then discover that they haven’t, trust in public health will be severely damaged, hence the effort to fudge it by using weasel words like “placebo (DT)-controlled”.
This is a great example of why we need AI to tease out what studies are really saying. I had no idea they did tricks like this. Thank you.
Yes, placebos used in studies of childhood vaccines, are no longer normal saline. They are often another vaccine. This is a known fact to many accept the parents, whose small children are injected with dangerous god knows what poisons. Turtles All the Way Down, explains the way “studies” on childhood vaccines are “performed”. God bless President Donald Trump and Bobby Kennedy Jr for getting these serious concerns about the safety of childhood and adult vaccines to the attention of the American public.
Using an active placebo, the efficacy signal is smaller: A biologically active placebo decreases the disease incidence in the placebo group, leading to a smaller effect size for efficacy.
The active placebo will introduce side effects, causing the background rate of adverse events to increase, necessitating a larger sample to distinguish specific vaccine-related effects.
ICAN - via years of FOIA requests and legal actions - exposed the hidden truth about the cult of vaccines, “all vaccines on HHS’s pediatric schedule were licensed based on a clinical trial with no control whatsoever, or another vaccine/substance used as a control which itself was never licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial.” https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ICAN-Reply-1.pdf
Fraudulent methodology, data manipulation and trickery to make vaccines appear safe & effective have been systemic and entrenched for decades (see link).
I find it interesting that even the author of the article states,” This “placebo (DT)-controlled” label is not just misleading; it’s a semantic trick.”. A semantic trick? It is a LIE. The lie is right in the title of the study. There is NO PLACEBO! We live in a world where people in charge of regulating safety regarding our health lie to us about what they say is good to put in our bodies. Deplorable. Let’s call a LIE a LIE.
You're right, it's a lie, but it's generally harder to write it as one when they kind of give their lie away in the phrase.
Turtles all the way down 😢
Yup, reading that book is what changed my mind. No more shots for my kids
"Dissolving Illusions" is also a great book on the subject. Very thoroughly researched. A bit of a tome but worth the time. Always a good idea to buy the hard copy as 'they' haven't figured out a way to alter the physically printed word, at least to my knowledge.
I'm not seeing anything in that example that addresses safety. The word used is efficacy. Efficacy is about it working against the foreign protein. Is it effective in the job it's supposed to do which is immunize. Safety is more of a total characterization of ALL responses to the vax including those that are adverse. Think VAERS database. The covid vax had efficacy for a few months but it caused many adverse co-reactions like myocarditis. Most vaxes are looked at for 5 days post injection, if no issues it's good. Ironically covid vax did have a longer post vax review period but they ignored all the signals anyway. Aaron Siri cross examined Plotkin and made him admit there were no safety studies out there. Plotkin is supposedly the godfather of vaccine technology.
We agree mostly here. I think the tension that needs addressing is the difference between what the public think is happening, and what is *actually* happening....
And it seems the science/medical journals are not always "neutral" and withhold publication of trials Pharma don't want anyone to see. In another word, corruption, and very bad because it can result in serious harm for patients. In Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma (written before C-19) he - a GP - says he prescribed an anti-depressant because according to the directory of medicines doctors usually refer to it seemed to be safe; however his patient suffered severe adverse effects. This was because the information in the directory (which I assume is drawn from the journals) was incomplete; if it were complete it would have included the adverse effects and would not earned Pharma (presumably) billions. Needless to say, Goldacre was riddled with guilt, though it wasn't actually his fault.
.
This Has Been A 100 Year War
On Natural Immunity.
It Is High Time Someone Declare Victory
For Natural Immunity
And End This War.
.
Recommend reading Turtles All The Way Down for a more in depth explanation of how these tricks are done
https://www.amazon.com/Turtles-All-Way-Down-Vaccine/dp/9655981045
Withholding a product that has not been properly tested is not nuanced. That is just hoping for the best, a hail Mary, but it is not science and based on my observations not a wise decision. I hesitate to say that this decion should be left to the individual because the individual does not have the facts and context to make this decision but it is better than forcing a potentially toxic substance on everyone.
Being "properly tested" is an arbitrary non-standard since safety from "rare" events (1/8000) can only be detected in very large groups and typically only in Phase 4/post-marketing surveillance programs.
Exactly
“Now, some people argue that it’s unethical to use true placebos in vaccine trials because it would mean withholding a potentially life-saving intervention from the control group.”
That’s assuming there is an actual pathogen to protect people from. They never proved that there was one, so where’s the ethics in injecting infants with toxins?
Quote: If people believe that vaccines have been tested against true placebos and then discover that they haven’t, trust in public health will be severely damaged, hence the effort to fudge it by using weasel words like “placebo (DT)-controlled”.
This is a great example of why we need AI to tease out what studies are really saying. I had no idea they did tricks like this. Thank you.
Recommended reading Turtles All The Way Down https://www.amazon.com/Turtles-All-Way-Down-Vaccine/dp/9655981045
Thanks. Looks like something I can give my daughters in deciding what to do with my grandchildren's vaccines.
" I think that’s a debate worth having, and it’s more nuanced than either side might admit'
Any leads to a good debate on this point?I think it is the crux of the matter.
in other cases , a vaccine was not used as the placebo but a possibly noxious substance was
Yes, placebos used in studies of childhood vaccines, are no longer normal saline. They are often another vaccine. This is a known fact to many accept the parents, whose small children are injected with dangerous god knows what poisons. Turtles All the Way Down, explains the way “studies” on childhood vaccines are “performed”. God bless President Donald Trump and Bobby Kennedy Jr for getting these serious concerns about the safety of childhood and adult vaccines to the attention of the American public.
Using an active placebo, the efficacy signal is smaller: A biologically active placebo decreases the disease incidence in the placebo group, leading to a smaller effect size for efficacy.
The active placebo will introduce side effects, causing the background rate of adverse events to increase, necessitating a larger sample to distinguish specific vaccine-related effects.
ICAN - via years of FOIA requests and legal actions - exposed the hidden truth about the cult of vaccines, “all vaccines on HHS’s pediatric schedule were licensed based on a clinical trial with no control whatsoever, or another vaccine/substance used as a control which itself was never licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial.” https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ICAN-Reply-1.pdf
Fraudulent methodology, data manipulation and trickery to make vaccines appear safe & effective have been systemic and entrenched for decades (see link).
This is standard practice for corrupt industry & co-opted regulators to maintain the edifice of fraud; https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ICAN-Reply-1.pdf
I don’t think most people think drugs and
Vaccines are tested against placebos.
The drug company didn’t hide anything , they clearly showed how they tested their vaccine.
The challenge of placebo testing is people don’t want the placebo, they want the vaccine to be protected.
Terrific analogy! Saving this for my constantly updated thing-to-send-new-moms-if-they-seem-open-to-hearing.
Thank you for this article.