• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Opinion RFK calls for retraction of Danish vaccine study

Pretty much anything that comes out of RFK’s mouth is “a deceitful propaganda stunt.”
The guy is an absolute bottom-of-the barrel scumbag of a person.
Im going to go out on a limb here and risk embarrassing myself

I get the impression the guy actually means well, hes just dumb as f*ck and unqualified which makes him supremely dangerous
 
Im going to go out on a limb here and risk embarrassing myself

I get the impression the guy actually means well, hes just dumb as f*ck and unqualified which makes him supremely dangerous

I don’t think he means well. If he meant well he would listen to people that actually know what they are doing. I genuinely believe he is doing all of this intentionally.
 
Lmao. Tell this squawk box to shut his mercury-filled pie hole and stop worrying about my metals.

7hwni8fcdeb91.gif
 
The US is free of polio because of the vaccine!
You're better off banging your head against a brick wall lmao
It's not even really about vaccines, or health; the anti vaccine chud legions are propped up mostly on just a few things, the biggest being vaccines as a representation of "big liberalism". They refuse to accept Big Liberalism telling them what to do, period. And if other people die (it's always other people) for the cause of destroying vaccine science, well, that's a sacrifice they are willing to make.
 
I don’t think he means well. If he meant well he would listen to people that actually know what they are doing. I genuinely believe he is doing all of this intentionally.
Ive learned; particularly with our recent political shift, that stupid people dont value intelligence or expertise.

However you may be right and Im naive.
 
I still think the study is valid, the findings are encouraging. Maybe not perfect but it's good evidence.

Have you known anyone who had polio? The people that I know who had it are all big vaccine supporters.
Polio vaccine is the leading cause of polio bud.
 
Aluminum can only be put in vaccines for nefarious reasons.
That is how Big Salt gets you. Salt has chlorine in it. If you drink chlorine you die. The science tells you not to use salt because nobody drinks bottle of Chloride.
If you want to be healthy act more like RFK Jr., swim in fecal filled creeks, get a brain worm and use massive amounts of steroids.
 
How can you have a study without a control group?

With so many variables to account for like healthcare access, socioeconomic status etc. getting a consistent vaccinated vs unvaccinated group can be extremely difficult. Instead they compared children with different levels of aluminum exposure due to their vaccine schedule, this controls lifestyle factors more effectively. There's also an ethical dilemma of intentionally withholding proven protection from an infectious disease to children for a study. The natural variation method that the Danish study used avoided that.
 
Last edited:
There is a clear methodology issue with this study.

This study does not include a truly unvaccinated control group, which limits its ability to completely rule out possible harms from aluminum additives. There is evidence to suggest aluminum builds up in the body and cross into the brain, creating big concerns about repeated exposure during early childhood. We need to be skeptical here.

RFK bless
Its funny not one post objects to this critique because no honest person can. Just a thread full of insults. The reality is most studies have flaws but people make the epistemic leap of having unwarranted confidence in them, beyond even what the scientists conducting them would conclude. This has become a religion for many, relying on a "priest" class for their "truth", abdicating their own capacity for critical thinking.
 
Its funny not one post objects to this critique because no honest person can. Just a thread full of insults. The reality is most studies have flaws but people make the epistemic leap of having unwarranted confidence in them, beyond even what the scientists conducting them would conclude. This has become a religion for many, relying on a "priest" class for their "truth", abdicating their own capacity for critical thinking.
If only he had the power to also do a large scale study that addresses the issues he has with this.

Oh wait he does, he can have this disputed with actual science rather than just complain about it. The better the study the better the data, while it doesn't have a control group I think the size and length still has validity. Calling foul just because he thinks it had an outcome in mind at the start means he should have a counter unbiased study done.
 
If only he had the power to also do a large scale study that addresses the issues he has with this.

Oh wait he does, he can have this disputed with actual science rather than just complain about it. The better the study the better the data, while it doesn't have a control group I think the size and length still has validity. Calling foul just because he thinks it had an outcome in mind at the start means he should have a counter unbiased study done.
None of what you said addresses the flaw, and there are multiple with this study not just that one. Are you just being reactionary? This study has validity towards what end?
 
None of what you said addresses the flaw, and there are multiple with this study not just that one. Are you just being reactionary? This study has validity towards what end?

Yes, there are always some flaws in every study, as the real world has variables that can't be accounted for. I'm game though, which one(s) would you like to discuss?
 
Yes, there are always some flaws in every study, as the real world has variables that can't be accounted for. I'm game though, which one(s) would you like to discuss?
Lets start with a few simple questions Who has the burden of proof when a vaccine is introduced? Why do we feel justified in our knowledge of vaccines, to the point of speaking of them as matter of fact healthy, the same way we speak about physics or technlogies like computers? We know biology is a different science with more variables and isnt a closed system. Why do we pretend that the risk analysis is suffiecient when it isnt?
 
Back
Top