Thank you for a thoughtful commentary, Ted. Thinking back to the failure of Lysenkoism in the USSR, dogma has no place in the scientific method. The challenge is to identify and root out the dogma.
Trump is hardly in the granola faction, he loves Big Macs and MacDonald's garbage food.
Easy to call various critics of current policy "pseudoscientific", Ad Hominems are always easy, but not so easy to rationally counter their arguments. The very odd few who have actually been willing to debate RFKjr on these medical issues have been beaten up, badly. And there are a lot of very intelligent, highly qualified people advocating for these investigations and potential policy changes.
All these movements have noisy extremes. As to regenerative, more carbon in the soil improves crop nutrition and taste. Large scale conventional farmers are adopting it because it lowers cost and improves crop value. So improves profit. It some times lowers profit as they rebuild soil quality, but pays off in long run.
Nice summary. Crunchy liberal people and republican freedom folks have joined forces in the antivax movement. I just spoke with a vaccine sales rep who said that their new vaccine is on hold because the ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) February 26th meeting was cancelled. In my office we have seen a significant increase in patients who are refusing to vaccinate their children.
Your scientists, in conjuction with big government and big business, have had their chance to improve America's health for, well, 100 years or so. They have, by any reasonable standard, failed miserably. This hatchet job on RFK will be relegated to the ashbin, along with the food pyramid and insane vaccine schedule for children.
Any intelligent person could be forgiven for wondering what exactly your motives are. It certainly isn't health.
"...We have fairly good data that five classes of toxicants increase autism risk:
Mercury from coal fired power plants and diesel trucks;
Plastics;
Pesticides & herbicides;
EMF/RFR; and
Pharmaceuticals (Tylenol, SSRIs, & vaccines). ...
Unfortunately, in the debate over toxicants that increase autism risk, all roads lead back to vaccines. At least 5 studies show a statistically significant association between vaccines & autism (Gallagher & Goodman, 2008 & 2010; Thomas & Margulis, 2016; Mawson et al., 2017a & 2017b).
Dr. Paul Thomas is the most successful doctor in the world at preventing autism. Data from his practice show:
If zero vaccines, autism rate = 1 in 715;
If alternative vaccine schedule, autism rate = 1 in 440;
If CDC vaccine schedule, autism rate = 1 in 36.
That study had large sample size (3,344 children), access to medical files, and good researchers working on it. But look closely. His alternative vaccine schedule reduces autism risk by more than 1200%. However even an alternative vaccine schedule increases autism risk by 160% versus no vaccines at all..."
Are you taking payments from Bayer or some other org? The vaccine question, as autism has exploded since the 1986 act, this needs to be investigated. Also, the vaccine schedule has gone up since 1986 to almost 71 shots, to say their is no problem is wrong.
RFKjr has a mixed history on environmental & medical issues. Like everyone you will always find fault if you dig back in their history. With Fauci/Collins you will find grievous and deadly fault that make RFKjr's look trivial in comparison.
The key point RFKjr is making, is that the science of chronic illness needs a thorough unbiased investigation, using rational scientific methods, and conflicts of interest are to be avoided to the limit. This has not been done adequately. Not even close. With Fauci and Collins flatly refusing to do retrospective studies on vaccine effectiveness vs harm. And epidemiological experts stating outright that it should be no problem designing and ironclad retrospective study to determine if vaccine(s) are causing autism. Why hasn't that been done?
As for your metastudy claiming autism is not caused by vaccines:
"...A “meta-analysis” is intended to be an unbiased and scientific review of the literature — in this case, to investigate the link between vaccines and autism. Unfortunately, this meta-analysis, authored by Luke E. Taylor, Amy L. Swerdfeger and Guy D. Eslick, is propaganda poorly masquerading as science.
Using standard criteria, the authors searched the open scientific literature and found 46 eligible studies for their meta-analysis. However, rather than consider the entirety of the 46 studies, the authors cherry-picked only 10 studies — all of which concluded there was no link between vaccines and autism.
After reviewing the list of eligible studies, the only reason I can find for selecting these 10 studies is that they all have one thing in common: They support the authors’ preferred foregone conclusion, which is that vaccines have nothing to do with the autism epidemic we’re facing.
Even worse, the 10 studies included in the analysis considered only the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and the mercury-containing preservative, thimerosal. Yet the authors claim in their title, “Vaccines are not associated with autism.” This is misleading at best and fraudulent at worst, based on the paper’s contents.
It is unscientific to draw a broad-sweeping conclusion about vaccines and autism based on one vaccine and a single vaccine additive when study authors don’t address any of the 16 other vaccines on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood vaccine schedule, or the myriad other additives (besides thimerosal) in vaccines.
If you were checking 17 plates of food for poison, would you check one plate, determine it poison-free — and then declare all the plates of food safe to eat? Of course not. Neither can the authors of this meta-analysis presume or conclude that no vaccines cause autism by testing only one vaccine, the MMR, and one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal.
Further, the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) in 2012 issued a report “Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality” which concluded that there was insufficient evidence to deny or accept a relationship between the DTaP (diphtheria tetanus acellular pertussis) vaccine and autism."
Great survey and explanation. In the context of the need to reopen bounds of science and increase the rigor of application of scientific method - following the politicization and imposition of 'correct' conclusions prior to research and analysis - is RFK's appointment vs a scenario of continuing the pharma/research system status quo a net benefit, net harm, or little effect? it seems 'shaking things up' might stir more rigor in the practitioners, who may have been straightjacketed in the status quo. regardless the practitioner development of science is needed
I’m not sure. Unfortunately science shredded its credibility in the last 5 years and we desperately need to get it back. RFKj can only further discredit it, but maybe it needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt? Tough call here and I don’t know the answer- I just know I don’t like where we are.
No RFKjr will restore some faith in science after the anti-science Covid Plandemic enforced delusion. Which has shown us that medical & agricultural science has been terribly corrupted by Vested Interests, Big Pharma & Big Agro in particular.
I know RFKjr has done some bad work in the past, in particular in the energy field, but Trump won't let him get anywhere near that dept. He has taken a strong position on reputable, uncorrupted scientific investigation, which isn't rocket science, the fact that it hasn't and isn't being done is testimony to the extreme level of corruption that existed, which hopefully RFKjr will weed out.
Thank you for a thoughtful commentary, Ted. Thinking back to the failure of Lysenkoism in the USSR, dogma has no place in the scientific method. The challenge is to identify and root out the dogma.
Fantastic rundown of pseudoscientific horse shit peddled by the granola factions of both sides. Love to see it.
Trump is hardly in the granola faction, he loves Big Macs and MacDonald's garbage food.
Easy to call various critics of current policy "pseudoscientific", Ad Hominems are always easy, but not so easy to rationally counter their arguments. The very odd few who have actually been willing to debate RFKjr on these medical issues have been beaten up, badly. And there are a lot of very intelligent, highly qualified people advocating for these investigations and potential policy changes.
Criticizing people 'shot through with a kind of privilege that masquerades as virtue' sounds like a good campaign theme for someone.
All these movements have noisy extremes. As to regenerative, more carbon in the soil improves crop nutrition and taste. Large scale conventional farmers are adopting it because it lowers cost and improves crop value. So improves profit. It some times lowers profit as they rebuild soil quality, but pays off in long run.
Nice summary. Crunchy liberal people and republican freedom folks have joined forces in the antivax movement. I just spoke with a vaccine sales rep who said that their new vaccine is on hold because the ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) February 26th meeting was cancelled. In my office we have seen a significant increase in patients who are refusing to vaccinate their children.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/low-concentration-chemicals-spur-toxicological-debate/4020828.article
Your scientists, in conjuction with big government and big business, have had their chance to improve America's health for, well, 100 years or so. They have, by any reasonable standard, failed miserably. This hatchet job on RFK will be relegated to the ashbin, along with the food pyramid and insane vaccine schedule for children.
Any intelligent person could be forgiven for wondering what exactly your motives are. It certainly isn't health.
Excellent read
Steve Kirsch has an excellent article on the subject:
Vaccines cause autism. Nearly all the world's autism experts know it. They just can't talk about it:
https://kirschsubstack.com/p/vaccines-cause-autism
A good article on autism by a fellow who did a deep dive in the actual science of autism for his Phd thesis:
https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/the-political-economy-of-autism
The facts:
"...We have fairly good data that five classes of toxicants increase autism risk:
Mercury from coal fired power plants and diesel trucks;
Plastics;
Pesticides & herbicides;
EMF/RFR; and
Pharmaceuticals (Tylenol, SSRIs, & vaccines). ...
Unfortunately, in the debate over toxicants that increase autism risk, all roads lead back to vaccines. At least 5 studies show a statistically significant association between vaccines & autism (Gallagher & Goodman, 2008 & 2010; Thomas & Margulis, 2016; Mawson et al., 2017a & 2017b).
Dr. Paul Thomas is the most successful doctor in the world at preventing autism. Data from his practice show:
If zero vaccines, autism rate = 1 in 715;
If alternative vaccine schedule, autism rate = 1 in 440;
If CDC vaccine schedule, autism rate = 1 in 36.
That study had large sample size (3,344 children), access to medical files, and good researchers working on it. But look closely. His alternative vaccine schedule reduces autism risk by more than 1200%. However even an alternative vaccine schedule increases autism risk by 160% versus no vaccines at all..."
Are you taking payments from Bayer or some other org? The vaccine question, as autism has exploded since the 1986 act, this needs to be investigated. Also, the vaccine schedule has gone up since 1986 to almost 71 shots, to say their is no problem is wrong.
RFKjr has a mixed history on environmental & medical issues. Like everyone you will always find fault if you dig back in their history. With Fauci/Collins you will find grievous and deadly fault that make RFKjr's look trivial in comparison.
The key point RFKjr is making, is that the science of chronic illness needs a thorough unbiased investigation, using rational scientific methods, and conflicts of interest are to be avoided to the limit. This has not been done adequately. Not even close. With Fauci and Collins flatly refusing to do retrospective studies on vaccine effectiveness vs harm. And epidemiological experts stating outright that it should be no problem designing and ironclad retrospective study to determine if vaccine(s) are causing autism. Why hasn't that been done?
As for your metastudy claiming autism is not caused by vaccines:
https://tdefender.substack.com/p/bill-cassidy-meta-analysis-vaccines-autism-rfk-jr-senate-hearing
"...A “meta-analysis” is intended to be an unbiased and scientific review of the literature — in this case, to investigate the link between vaccines and autism. Unfortunately, this meta-analysis, authored by Luke E. Taylor, Amy L. Swerdfeger and Guy D. Eslick, is propaganda poorly masquerading as science.
Using standard criteria, the authors searched the open scientific literature and found 46 eligible studies for their meta-analysis. However, rather than consider the entirety of the 46 studies, the authors cherry-picked only 10 studies — all of which concluded there was no link between vaccines and autism.
After reviewing the list of eligible studies, the only reason I can find for selecting these 10 studies is that they all have one thing in common: They support the authors’ preferred foregone conclusion, which is that vaccines have nothing to do with the autism epidemic we’re facing.
Even worse, the 10 studies included in the analysis considered only the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and the mercury-containing preservative, thimerosal. Yet the authors claim in their title, “Vaccines are not associated with autism.” This is misleading at best and fraudulent at worst, based on the paper’s contents.
It is unscientific to draw a broad-sweeping conclusion about vaccines and autism based on one vaccine and a single vaccine additive when study authors don’t address any of the 16 other vaccines on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood vaccine schedule, or the myriad other additives (besides thimerosal) in vaccines.
If you were checking 17 plates of food for poison, would you check one plate, determine it poison-free — and then declare all the plates of food safe to eat? Of course not. Neither can the authors of this meta-analysis presume or conclude that no vaccines cause autism by testing only one vaccine, the MMR, and one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal.
Further, the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) in 2012 issued a report “Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality” which concluded that there was insufficient evidence to deny or accept a relationship between the DTaP (diphtheria tetanus acellular pertussis) vaccine and autism."
Great survey and explanation. In the context of the need to reopen bounds of science and increase the rigor of application of scientific method - following the politicization and imposition of 'correct' conclusions prior to research and analysis - is RFK's appointment vs a scenario of continuing the pharma/research system status quo a net benefit, net harm, or little effect? it seems 'shaking things up' might stir more rigor in the practitioners, who may have been straightjacketed in the status quo. regardless the practitioner development of science is needed
I’m not sure. Unfortunately science shredded its credibility in the last 5 years and we desperately need to get it back. RFKj can only further discredit it, but maybe it needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt? Tough call here and I don’t know the answer- I just know I don’t like where we are.
No RFKjr will restore some faith in science after the anti-science Covid Plandemic enforced delusion. Which has shown us that medical & agricultural science has been terribly corrupted by Vested Interests, Big Pharma & Big Agro in particular.
I know RFKjr has done some bad work in the past, in particular in the energy field, but Trump won't let him get anywhere near that dept. He has taken a strong position on reputable, uncorrupted scientific investigation, which isn't rocket science, the fact that it hasn't and isn't being done is testimony to the extreme level of corruption that existed, which hopefully RFKjr will weed out.
We need to stop "drawing the curve and then plotting the points".
Too much "science" is serving a preordained outcome.