patrick.net

They don't use a control because it is assumed that control groups would get infected massively and the goal of a vaccine is to prevent infection, so if there are already approved vaccines on the market, they take those for comparison studies. This looks mostly ok to me unless you have strong evidence that an unvaccinated group would do better. Covid agent may be the first agent where this is likely true, perhaps the flu vaccine could also be a toss up for certain people depending on the seasonal effectiveness, as well as viruses that are hard to transmit such as hep b. Most traditional vaccines however are so effective that the prevention of close to 100% of cases is deemed to be sufficient to not have a control group, esp. if the illness is severe.

check out Suzanne Humphries, MD she also wrote a book my husband read. I've read her vitamin c protocol for whooping cough fascinating!

mell says

They don't use a control because it is assumed that control groups would get infected massively and the goal of a vaccine is to prevent infection, so if there are already approved vaccines on the market

At the time of release there was no vaccine for chickenpox, still no control was used. There are always unvaccinated groups, pharma has refused to use them, CDC and HHS have refused to require they do. If trial vaccine "A" causes 50% increase in likelihood of stroke, and control vaccine "B" causes 50% increase, vaccine "A" is approved, because the increase against control is 0%. Now if the disease vaccines "A" and "B" is supposed to protect against only carries a 5% chance of death, the vaccine would get rejected if it was used with a real control. In the current system it's always approved.

The FDA doesn't approve a single prescription medication without a control in the study. No science worth it's salt is ever conducted without a control. But when it comes to vaccines, we should reject everything we know because..?

When the polio vaccine came out, polio was already on the decline. Vaccines that follow diseases on the way out cannot be pointed at as the root cause of eradication. There was not DTAP when my Mom was growing up, she got mumps, whooping cough, all of it. None of it was even close to life threatening.

In the 80's the chances of developing autism where 1 out of 15,000, today their less than 1/20. At the current trajectory half of all children will have autism by 2030.

Do you know of any other industry that requires such extensive legal protection from liability in order to survive?

Have you looked at Bechamp's research at all? Contemporary of Pasteur, totally different take on what makes people sick. A follower on Bechamp's work drank a pitcher of cholera in the early 20th century to prove his theory. Not even a sniffle...

I don't think kids need to to take all these vaccines, but if they don't get the childhood diseases during childhood then they may want to take the vaccine as adults. Polio has been eradicated because of the vaccine, I consider both Tetanus and polio useful vaccines. You can argue the cost/benefit of most modern vaccines for sure, but I wouldn't drink a pitcher of cholera. If a vaccine is the first of its kind, then there should be a control group though you cannot purposely expose them to the pathogen, so the results may be skewed based on environmental factors and natural distribution of the pathogen.

NuttBoxer says

At the current trajectory half of all children will have autism by 2030.

Holy cow. I feel extremely lucky, I think. I have a 3 year old granddaughter and a 20 month old grandson. At what age would it be considered a safe bet that they will not develop autism?

A follower on Bechamp's work drank a pitcher of cholera in the early 20th century to prove his theory. Not even a sniffle...

Cholera doesn't cause sniffles - it causes massive vomiting and diarrhea. Won't take a pitcher either, just a little water contaminated by an infected person's poop.

WineHorror1 says

NuttBoxer says

At the current trajectory half of all children will have autism by 2030.

Holy cow. I feel extremely lucky, I think. I have a 3 year old granddaughter and a 20 month old grandson. At what age would it be considered a safe bet that they will not develop autism?

A lot of autism is bs, severe cases may be real autism, but mild or moderate on the spectrum has always been around. They say Linus Torvalds is on the spectrum just because he is direct like many great programmers, but in today's snowflake world being direct means you're autistic. Don't fall for the leftoid hype. I'm pretty sure if Patrick weren't a grown and accomplished retired man by now, but a boy in today's world, then he would be considered autistic, or myself for that matter, for speaking directly about issues others find hurtful. What, lack of empathy (obviously not true)?! You must be on the spectrum! Don't wanna talk to everybody?! You must be on the spectrum!

HeadSet says

A follower on Bechamp's work drank a pitcher of cholera in the early 20th century to prove his theory. Not even a sniffle...

Cholera doesn't cause sniffles - it causes massive vomiting and diarrhea. Won't take a pitcher either, just a little water contaminated by an infected person's poop.

It's possible to develop immunity of you grow up in an environment that exposes you to it regularly so you may not get much sick or sick at all, whereas a 1st world cracker may get violently ill. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea to harden yourself with exposure to cholera as it can leave lasting damage/symptoms for some.

mell says

They don't use a control because it is assumed

And assumptions make an ass out of you and me.

mell says

This looks mostly ok to me unless you have strong evidence that an unvaccinated group would do better.

Would a person who is disabled or killed by a vaccine have faired better to risk natural infection and rather to have focused on healthy living to promote proper immune function? It matters not what the odds are if you are the guy who takes the Russian roulette challenge and ends up with a .357 size entry wound, for him the outcome was avoidable, by refusing to pull the trigger, just like it is for a person who chooses not to get the jab.

mell says

A lot of autism is bs,

Autistic symptoms are on the rise. Vaccines are probably not a major contributor to the rise in prevalence but scientists are looking into possible causation. Here is one of the latest lines of inquiry. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32398374/

I’ve read that Roundup is so prevalent in our environment as a pollutant that if we stopped using it today it would take 50 years for it to be fully removed from the ecosystem by the microbes that are capable of metabolizing it. Thanks Monsanto.

PeopleUnited says

Would a person who is disabled or killed by a vaccine have faired better to risk natural infection and rather to have focused on healthy living to promote proper immune function? It matters not what the odds are if you are the guy who takes the Russian roulette challenge and ends up with a .357 size entry wound, for him the outcome was avoidable, by refusing to pull the trigger, just like it is for a person who chooses not to get the jab.

I totally agree with this, but for most people the risk/reward for taking the tetanus shot is favorable, it's uncommon in the US because most are vaccinated. Polio you may say is almost eradicated and could be worth a gamble, but would you really want to take the risk? Now when it comes to the flu, covid, hep b or childhood diseases the risk/reward is not clear and may be not favorable esp. with taking too many vaccinations in a short period. Vaccines are a good invention that has increased longevity no doubt but every good technology can be abused for greed and power. See the covid agents.

PeopleUnited says

Autistic symptoms are on the rise.

Maybe but so are most "diseases" due to better, earlier and sometimes too sensitive diagnostics. What's also on the rise are lazy ass teachers and parents and greedy MDs who tranquilize/energize kids with uppers and downers as they see fit whenever they don't exactly "conform to specification". That's a real crime imo.

PeopleUnited says

I’ve read that Roundup is so prevalent in our environment as a pollutant that if we stopped using it today it would take 50 years for it to be fully removed from the ecosystem by the microbes that are capable of metabolizing it. Thanks Monsanto.

Roundup is evil, so are most herbicides and pesticides, but again there are exceptions where the risk/reward is favorable in certain conditions, such as ddt (deet). I would never use roundup to kill weeds or for anything else.

WineHorror1 says

Holy cow. I feel extremely lucky, I think. I have a 3 year old granddaughter and a 20 month old grandson. At what age would it be considered a safe bet that they will not develop autism?

Both of our older daughters got all their shots, fortunately both are in great health. The youngest hasn't received any and is by far our healthiest, and most advanced child. Sadly, a friend's two kids both have autism. It's not genetics, he and his wife have no family history, and it's not our genetics either, my wife and myself both had a litany of weaknesses as children. And from my interactions with his oldest, I don't believe he was born autistic.

mell says

If a vaccine is the first of its kind, then there should be a control group though you cannot purposely expose them to the pathogen, so the results may be skewed based on environmental factors and natural distribution of the pathogen.

For chickenpox, seriously? Because getting itchy is so deadly? If vaccines would get the same scrutiny and criticism without people rushing to defend them, and so virulently attacking anyone who questions them, I would be a lot less skeptical. If something is really good for you, it should stand up to scrutiny better, and definitely not require so many excuses for why it's treated differently.

HeadSet says

Cholera doesn't cause sniffles - it causes massive vomiting and diarrhea. Won't take a pitcher either, just a little water contaminated by an infected person's poop.

When I say "not even a sniffle", that means he suffered zero side affects. Doesn't seem like something that needs explanation, but if you really didn't get that, you should definitely look into Bechamp's work.

mell says

A lot of autism is bs, severe cases may be real autism, but mild or moderate on the spectrum has always been around. They say Linus Torvalds is on the spectrum just because he is direct like many great programmers, but in today's snowflake world being direct means you're autistic.

It's a popular 4chan saying, we're all autistic(programmers, people in SW). But what's happening to these kids isn't funny, and it's not mild.

PeopleUnited says

Autistic symptoms are on the rise. Vaccines are probably not a major contributor to the rise in prevalence but scientists are looking into possible causation. Here is one of the latest lines of inquiry. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32398374/

Look into the MMR study the CDC did in early 2000. Specifically why it took so long to release the findings, and the leaked documents by the CDC employee who headed up the study showing how they manipulated the data.

mell says

Vaccines are a good invention that has increased longevity no doubt

But recent number have shown we're actually not living longer than previous generations. Look around a graveyard sometime. Also, fuck age if you spend the last 10 years hooked up to tubes, or on so many medications all you do is go to the doctors and the hospital. People have become so obsessed with quantity, it seems they'll trade almost anything for an extra day.

mell says

Maybe but so are most "diseases" due to better, earlier and sometimes too sensitive diagnostics.

So you fully buy into asymptomatic disease? Thousands of people were walking around with severe autism, and we just didn't notice? Cancer, diabetes, obesity, we just didn't recognize any of those? If I die a vibrant healthy man at 110, and the post-mortum says I had every disease on the planet, who gives a fuck. I'm just glad I never went to the doctor for treatments I didn't need.

NuttBoxer says

But recent number have shown we're actually not living longer than previous generations. Look around a graveyard sometime. Also, fuck age if you spend the last 10 years hooked up to tubes, or on so many medications all you do is go to the doctors and the hospital. People have become so obsessed with quantity, it seems they'll trade almost anything for an extra day.

The age thing is a biggie for me. I frankly don't want to live to 90. So I enjoy life (within reason) now instead of waiting for my body to be a shell of its former self. Still have to provide and raise 3 kids, but the wife and I like to have a lot of fun and travel. And I still take care of myself relatively well.

Lifetimes dropping isn't a big secret. Drugs (big Pharma & illicit like fentanyl/meth/heroin) and suicide. Think I just heard suicide rates are up 60% either in IL or national. Sorry, wife needs the tv noise and light to sleep, pisses me off, so I am laying down and just taking in the sound most mornings and am not always accurate with what I hear.

I know too many people that have died from both causes way too young. Also, we're kind of capped out as the lifespan of someone relies on data that includes infants that die, which drags the number down. Basically most increases in lifespans were because of babies/children not dying. Not necessarily people living longer. If a bunch of 20-40 year olds start OD'ing and offing themselves, that will drag the number down as well. Which I think is what is happening.

And then as you get older, you get into the poison club of big Pharma. Where they make you feel good but ultimately those meds are probably damaging major organs instead of just dealing with the ailment or trying an alternative route. There are some specialties that are okay to great. Cardiologist come to mind. They somehow keep land whales alive till 80, so they're doing work. lol.

Being healthy without even supplements and getting outside is the best remedy for a long life. Can't stop cancer is the only thing, but otherwise you can prevent most everything from being fit and healthy.

NuttBoxer says

mell says

Maybe but so are most "diseases" due to better, earlier and sometimes too sensitive diagnostics.

So you fully buy into asymptomatic disease? Thousands of people were walking around with severe autism, and we just didn't notice? Cancer, diabetes, obesity, we just didn't recognize any of those? If I die a vibrant healthy man at 110, and the post-mortum says I had every disease on the planet, who gives a fuck. I'm just glad I never went to the doctor for treatments I didn't need.

No, that's what I meant by too sensitive diagnostics - many people get "treated" needlessly as disease states get revised over the years or their bodies would have taken care of it, and some treatment may make things worse. But again it depends on the diagnosis, treating the body functionally early when certain hormones or vitamins are off may often not be a bad thing. Wrt autism - mild autism and aspergers doesn't need to be treated, those people have been around forever. Same for ADD/ADHD.

mell says

mild autism and aspergers doesn't need to be treated, those people have been around forever

I think it's actually adaptive to have some people in society like that. They make very good engineers even if they are less adept socially.

Patrick says

They make very good engineers even if they are less adept socially.

I'd venture to guess that most people come to a site like this are on some spectrum. As toxic as facebook is, it's still a great communication tool for people. This is a place where generally we like to bitch about things or each other. I live with the other side, an extreme extrovert... the wife. I was a total introvert. I now have probably close to 200 people I could call and ask for anything on a friendship level, a ride, help with something, hang out, etc.

I have a 41 year friend that still plays video games all the time with 2 kids and a wife. Successful. To me that makes zero sense. I'd rather shoot the shit through writing like this. He's actually mentioned I write too much in texts. I'm like okay, my mind races and I want to get thoughts out and make sure all the bases are covered. Funny part is he's an automotive engineer. Degree, not mechanic. Only been friends with him 4 years or so. Still trying to figure him out. He is weird.

https://usmortality.substack.com/p/eight-major-issues-with-the-covid

The COVID-19 vaccine's Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) had several issues. In combination, this is evidence that they are very likely a complete fabrication.

Here's a list of the eight major issues:

1) Didn't have a representative study population (younger/healthier than the general population), and "excluded participants at high risk of SARS-

CoV-2 infection".

—> https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download, p. 12

2) Investigators were discouraged to test for COVID-19 up to seven days after each dose.

—> https://twitter.com/USMortality/status/1521914430791077888

3) Didn't report & record relevant clinical endpoints such as (CLI, ARI, SARI, or ILI) (besides all-cause death)

—> https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download

4) Unblinded very early after only an average of three months. (Instead of three years).

The BNT162b2 trial began on July 27, 2020, and the FDA granted Emergency Use Authorization on December 10, 2020. Therefore, the average blinded length of the trial was approximately 4.5 months.

Most study participants would have been blinded for at least 2 months, and potentially up to 4.5 months.

—> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8702495/

5) Had a large enough drop out rates to possibly skew the results the other way.

—> https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download, p. 18

6) Actually mRNA vaccinated can be detected via PCR "tag", thus potentially offering a mechanism of unblinding by authors.

—> https://twitter.com/Jikkyleaks/status/1613114836086591489

7) Pfizer does not know how their vaccine actually provides immunity: "The exact immunologic mechanism that confers protection against SARS-CoV-2 is unknown."

—> https://x.com/USMortality/status/1598355240767848449?s=20

8) Pfizer claims that antibodies are "neutralizing", however the claimed 95% efficacy already started way before sign. amounts of antibodies were detectable.

—> https://x.com/Jikkyleaks/status/1536295541638066176?s=20

—> https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-publish-data-two-laboratory-studies

The above is especially problematic when you consider there is no test, or sequenced strain that is different from what has always existed.

I told my Mom every time someone asks about taking a covid test, Mullis is rolling over in his grave. Let the man rest already!