Robert Kennedy, Jr. Is Wrong About Vaccine Testing

RFK Jr. is claiming that scientists do not test vaccines with placebo-controlled trials, specifically against a saline placebo, and that all he’s asking for is that they are tested this way, as all other medicines are.
On its face alone, that probably sounds like a reasonable argument. I, too, would like vaccines to be tested in randomized controlled trials - and thankfully, THEY ARE.
Related HCT episodes:
Vaccines History and Science: • Vaccines: History, Pre...
Be sure to check out our podcast!
• Podcast
Other Healthcare Triage Links:
1. Support the channel on Patreon: vid.io/xqXr
2. Check out our Facebook page: goo.gl/LnOq5z
3. We still have merchandise available at www.hctmerch.com
4. Aaron's book "The Bad Food Bible: How and Why to Eat Sinfully" is available wherever books are sold, such as Amazon: amzn.to/2hGvhKw
Credits:
Aaron Carroll -- Writer
Tiffany Doherty -- Writer and Script Editor
John Green -- Executive Producer
Stan Muller -- Director, Producer
Mark Olsen - Art Director, Producer

[@tomwilson4778]

Seeing this thumbnail and then reading the comments is like therapy for me.

[@Matsyendranath792]

lol

[@user-hn7df2hr9n]

Debunks with zero sources

[@sherkr]

Any chance you could provide the links for the placebo controlled studies you refer to in this video? It would really support your argument.

[@sneakerbabeful]

The polio studies he talked about happened back in the 1950s. Use Google and look them up yourself.

[@pro-gamer7391]

He won’t, cause they don’t exist.

[@isaiahayers1550]

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114166/

[@isaiahayers1550]

www.stat.cmu.edu/~rnugent/PUBLIC/teaching/UWstat220/ExpDesign-3-27.pdf

[@OutloudfortheClass]

Perhaps you could help explain why in 1986 the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed which eliminated any and all liability to vaccine manufacturers and their products?

[@Dteshome85]

This

[@kathycook7311]

Yes, and the rate of childhood neurological disease has skyrocketed since then.

[@SarahShante]

​@@kathycook7311 Vaccines are FAR from the biggest culprit in these supposed skyrocketing numbers 1. Increasing maternal age- it's a fact (no matter how hurtful it may be to some) that having your first child after age 35 increases your child's risk of having chromosomal abnormalities like Down Syndrome or of having autism and learning disabilities. Starting too young increases the risks for those conditions too. 2. Child abuse in all forms are increasing (either that or people are more willing to talk about it). Abuse has been proven to increase the likelihood of developing learning disabilities and mental health issues. Anecdotal evidence points to this too ("urban" schoolkids having more exposure to neighborhood violence than suburban kids thus leading to lower literacy rates and test scores among "urban" populations) 3. The stigma against these conditions is decreasing so parents are more likely to comply with diagnostic testing and screening. Those screenings and tests are also increasing in accuracy which would lead to increased numbers as well.

[@AceofDlamonds]

That is pure correlation and is meaningless data. Show the causal relationship otherwise this is why vaccine scaremongerers aree not taken seriously.@@kathycook7311

[@harpran346]

They are not tested properky. It should be saline.

[@CobraChannel01]

Pre-license is the focal point of Kennedy’s claim. You didn’t mention that here. You also didn’t cite any actual studies. I’ve fact checked his claims and he’s not lying. HHS couldn’t provide any studies when pressed by court order.

[@223Drone]

You didn't fact check anything. RFK Jr is a proven liar and his claims have no evidence to support them.

[@spamman9456]

RFK lies constantly, for example he lied about an article he wrote with Paul Offit that allegedly got axed last minute bc it was anti vaccine. But Paul offit claimed the opposite, and gave evidence for it? Why lie about that

[@kickinsnarehat]

So this is the guy that has the safety testing results and review papers the Government agencies didn’t have when Kennedy sued the them to produce or discontinue saying that Kennedy was lying to people. Please do share, lots of people would like to see those.

[@shan6736]

Lol

[@OnevoiceOneview]

The CDC/FDA have redefined placebo to mean whatever they choose it to mean for any particular study, while RFK means the long-held definition, as being a relatively inactive substance like saline. So, they can SAY that they used a “placebo”. But they can't use a true placebo because it would allow vaccine side effects to show! So they test a new vaccine against an earlier version of itself & then explain that the earlier version WAS actually tested against saline. Well, if it was, then they cooked the books in some other way because older vaccines caused trouble too - like the old pertussis vaccine that was replaced with the acellular version..

[@rosec8101]

Just because something was safe in the 60s doesn't mean it would be now. Also doesn't mean kids didn't have reactions that were hidden like we have had with covid.

[@zakglove6536]

Has he ever been proven wrong about any of his so called conspiracy theorist. He has been proven right over and over and over again.

[@daveeyboy123]

Here’s a thought-if Rfk is wrong then why won’t anybody debate him on the point

[@adamhodgson4185]

Because THEY are wrong

[@llPHAzERll1]

Because his proposal is idiotic and the answer is simple. There’s no “debate” to be had. Did you not watch the video?

[@nickcugini3842]

@@llPHAzERll1listen to joe Rogan interview RFK and you’ll see how incorrect your comment is.

[@brianmurphy5313]

@@llPHAzERll1 duped.

[@arthurofcharn]

Because RFKjr is an exceptionally skilled orator. He is likely to win any debate. But debates are not how we learn the truth. Debates are how skilled orators battle each other. Debates are entertaining, but are not a path to knowledge. I wish that we lived in a world in which debates were a path to wisdom.

[@kayg5903]

His claims are that they do not do PRE-LICENSING long term trials against a saline substance placebo. RFK Jr is right, I haven't seen any that were done prior to distribution.

[@JayaLove]

Yep

[@JayaLove]

See my comment also for more added nuance.

[@ha-kh7ef]

“his claims” then says “he’s right” lmao

[@thehomeschoolinglibrarian]

Why would they put lives at risk using saline when they are testing an updated version of an existing vaccine? The point is to test if the updated version works better then the existing one or if combo vaccine works better then existing non combo vaccines. I don't expect them to test the MMRV against a saline solution I expect them to test it against the MMR and V given as two separate shots. The same goes for DtaP and Polio combo vaccine that my daughter got recently. They know the vaccine is safe they just need to know if it works better then what is currently on the market.

[@PhysicsPolice]

Why should they use saline as a placebo control when studying vaccines that produce an immune response that's already known to be safe? What does it matter if safety testing happens pre-licensing or post-licensing?

[@Andrea-np3dh]

@healthcare triage: serious question: are you saying that the population of children is at the same risk of polio TODAY as it was when it first introduced the polio vaccine? And the same for all the other vaccines in question that are subjected to this critic? Which studies/data are you basing this claim on?

[@aprilmaemae2]

Yeah he's talking complete nonsense and sponsored by big Pharma

[@philippemaltais731]

I wonder why no one will debate RFK directly. Joe Rogan offert 100 000$ to debate Peter Hotez (or anyone he chooses) than people add over 4 millions to see the debate happening. No one agreed. People keep making these short clips letting no counterarguments possible

[@jackjohnson4386]

I wonder why you think scientific fact is contingent on people agreeing to debate a guy who isn't even a scientist

[@JulieHerrick]

I was in the Novavax Covid vaccine trial. It was randomized and placebo controlled. But it started later than the Pfizer and Moderna trials, so partway through our trial, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines became broadly availble to the public, and some Novavax participants considered dropping out of our trial to get them. So Novavax implemented a crossover at that time. After that, we could all be reassured that we were vaccinated but we just disnt know if it was in the initial round or in the crossover.

[@philpphilp2731]

Are you still being monitored? Say this as 5 years is the trial period for long term effects. COVID vaccines are still completing trials. That is science. Over confidence is not

[@thatguy1729]

Once you vaccinate the placebo group, the data is not useful. You're comparing vaccinated against those vaccinated at a later date.

[@tylerdavis4947]

If we had less guinea pigs like you America would be more free Robert F Kennedy he's telling the truth so this guy is obviously a government troll and

[@JulieHerrick]

@@tylerdavis4947 Nobody is forced to be a guinea pig. I volunteered, and I had to go through a detailed informed consent process. I had the opportunity to ask any questions I wanted to ask before I signed up. And then I signed up enthusiastically, because I wanted to be part of the solution, and because I wanted to learn firsthand about the vaccine testing process. I have no regrets.

[@JulieHerrick]

​@@thatguy1729 There are a number of data collection goals in a clinical trial, but broadly they fall into two categories: efficacy and safety. To study efficacy, they had to wait until X number of trial participants got infected with COVID out in the wild while living their everyday lives. Then they could look at those participants: How many were from the vaccine group vs the control group. If most, or all, of them were from the control group, this demonstrates efficacy. The time it takes to reach this milestone can vary wildly between clinical trials, and largely depends on how much that disease is currently spreading in the community at the time. Unfortunately for the community, and fortunately for the trial, COVID was spreading A LOT during those first few months of the trial, so they reached the milestone number of COVID cases fairly quickly. It might have taken much longer if conditions were different, but in this case, because we were in the peak of a global pandemic, and because they had a very large trial population, the efficacy piece of the data collection happened pretty fast, so it was already complete before the crossover. That doesn’t mean the trial was over, just one of the data collection goals, specifically the one that required a placebo group. The safety data collection continued on for the full two-year duration of the trial. They also continued to take periodic blood draws on all of us to watch how our antibody levels might change over time.

[@GrueTurtle]

Testing against the standard of care and not against nothing seems like common sense. It did not occur to me to leave the control group untreated when we have a control that is known to be safe and effective because I'm neither stupid nor a monster.

[@heatherjohnson9167]

Then you obviously are not a big shot for a pharmaceutical company either! 😂

[@llPHAzERll1]

Common sense isn’t common, just look at these comments. They seriously want people to be given saline, it’s insane.

[@badhare663]

Except no vaccine was properly tested. Standard of care means nothing when the population of the US is one of the sickest on earth.

[@OnevoiceOneview]

@@user-pq3vd6oc1c Naturally, they claim so. But the older vaccines were causing plenty of problems too. That, for example, is why parents struggled for years to at least get Thimerosal removed from most of them.

[@davidrizzardi975]

RFK Jr deserves a medal for calling out big pharma phallacies

[@CaptainHavfun-lp4ok]

When my doctor heard the news, he said "GOOD FOR HIM" excitedly. Biden has refused secret service protection for RFK... His father was murdered, and Sirhan Sirhan was just the killer. RFK thinks he could be assassinated, like his father and uncle.

[@jsnip6720]

So RFK Jr is absolutely right that they do not do pre-licensing saline placebos tests? I’m so sick of these “trust the experts” idiots trying to pretend RFK doesn’t have valid points.

[@BrotherAlpha]

No, RFK, Jr. is not right. The used a placebo when testing the first batch of covid-19 vaccines.

[@llPHAzERll1]

Let me get this straight. You want people to be infected with Varicella and instead of giving them a vaccine you want half of them to get Saline and half to get a vaccine? I just want to be sure you know what you’re asking for.

[@aolson1111]

He doesn't.

[@JessJoanne]

@@aolson1111 Yes he does. You have had your thinking done for you. The damage has been done. The proof of that damage is still being shown and will probably continue.

[@gingerbread3972]

Terrible comment, "So RFK Jr is absolutely right that they do not do pre-licensing saline placebos tests?" Did you not watch litterally any of the video? The entire point is that you test against standard of care not just PLACEBO because you've already done that for previous iterations so you now need to know not if it wil be effective at all, but if it will be more effective than what is currently being used for the application. RFK's point here is entirely mitigated and shows that he simply lacks understanding of the topic and material. Not to mention the idea that "We don't know how effective the vaccines are" is an increadibly funny point, would you like to be the placebo control for measals? How about the plague? You could not pay me enough to be the placebo for some of the diesieses we have vaccines against because they have such a high mortality rate. Looks like this expert is called that for a reason.

[@jonj8379]

Not all lot numbers are equal

[@dizzyboy92]

I love your content, but I think there are 2 important points you are missing. 1) Other medicines are not tested against placebo either, unless they are novel. They are also tested against standard of care. For example (for reader's benefit, not HCT): if you develop a new NSAID, you'd test against ibuprofen, not against sugar pills. 2) The safety of medicine is not (mainly) tested against placebo. Huge side effects are measured with a tiny population receiving increasing doses (phase I), (mostly) short timeframe effects are seen a bit on phase III (which is the one that uses standard of care as comparator, which, if there is no previous treatment would be placebo) but are mainly seen in phase 4 or aftermarket studies. We use placebo (or standard of care more properly) to test effectiveness, not safety.

[@1travisvideo]

Zero sources, all opinion. This is why Kennedy would steamroll anyone in a debate as he brings facts.

[@arronsmith4958]

Can we start demanding better from our leaders now?

[@gyozakeynsianism]

We should never have stopped.

[@ThreeRunHomer]

RFK Jr isn’t anyone’s leader. Thank goodness.

[@arronsmith4958]

@@ThreeRunHomer yet he still has a national megaphone, echos talking points from other elected officials, and is working on steering the national momentum towards ignorance and authoritarian agendas... He may not have official power, but he isn't without influence and that is directly attached to the leaders who amplify his message.

[@shakeyj4523]

Yes, you can. You just have to VOTE FOR BETTER LEADERS. SMH

[@MikeAnn193]

All good points. I've been wanting more from our leaders and influencers for at least four decades -- specifically _respect for science._ It's why, for example, I strongly advocate the teaching of critical thinking in schools at age-appropriate levels from kindergarten through high school. It's almost incalculably important to have a citizenry in which people use their _minds,_ apply healthy skepticism to random social media claims, distinguish good information sources from bad ones, question authority figures, follow evidence and reason, and understand the differences between fact and opinion, reason and propaganda. I was an early supporter of Science Debate 2008, which is now just Science Debate. (I'd include a link but that sometimes gets comments blocked.) It's a non-profit that aims to get political candidates' views about current issues which _involve science_ -- of which there are many, including COVID-19 and the next pandemic, vaccine denial, human-caused global warming, nuclear power and weapons, genetically modified organisms, and so much more.

[@PaulLobosco]

Why has the NIH not produced any pre-licensure safety studies? Why have we gone from 3 vaccines to 17 vaccines in one generation? Could it be because vaccine companies are exempt from all liability? Now we have a 'new' vaccine to treat a variant with little impact, xbb.1.5. They just keep coming. $Cha-Ching for big pharma!

[@horsepoorwilson]

so true

[@kathycook7311]

Our children are supposed to get 72 vaccines, most of them when they are small and vulnerable. Profits over people.

[@zachjohnson6191]

I would love to hear you address one point that struck me as reasonable from RFK: Is there a difference between an efficacy trial like you mentioned (does the vaccine prevent against the intended disease) and a safety trial which you didn't mention (does the vaccine have unintended consequences not directly related to the target disease). In a recent town hall, he gave specific examples where a vaccine performed well against the target illness and was approved, but serious negative side effects were discovered years later after a 'safety trial' was conducted. (I think he mentioned the DTP & Chickenpox vaccines) Thanks for helping sift through facts/rhetoric/etc.!

[@MrJacobegg]

Both efficacy and safety are evaluated against "standard of care" - meaning against a current, established treatment for whatever condition you're proposing a new treatment for. In the case of vaccines, adverse effects are often so rare you might not expect to reliably detect them until literally millions of people have gotten the vaccine. For the chickenpox vaccine, I can only assume that he's referring to the study published in 2019, which included data for over 200M vaccine doses given over 20 years. However, that study found less than 1 in 1 million reported a serious adverse event. And the frequency and types of adverse events were consistent with previous studies. So I really don't know what point RFK could be trying to make. LPT: Don't listen to politicians spouting FUD about topics they're not experts in - it's a waste of your time. RFK isn't a doctor or a scientist, doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, and mindlessly spreads mountains of misinformation without even the most basic vetting first.

[@zachjohnson6191]

@@MrJacobegg thanks! Yes, that was one of my concerns, how long do you go on testing before deeming a vaccine 'safe'?... while people keep getting sick. I did go back and watch that town hall clip. He mentioned that the NHS (UK's version of the NIH) doesn't recommend the chickenpox in their vaccine schedule, and he was correct about that. I looked it up and the NHS does not recommend it and lays out risks (shingles, etc.) on their site. Your warnings are well taken. Thanks again!

[@MrJacobegg]

@@zachjohnson6191 Thanks for pointing that out. The NHS position on the chickenpox vaccine is an interesting and nuanced one. Their reasons for not recommending it universally don't have anything to do with the safety or risks of the vaccine itself. Instead, they're worried about what might happen when chickenpox becomes so rare that people aren't exposed to it on a regular basis, and then they get exposed to it later in life - either causing shingles, if they've had chickenpox or the vaccine, or a severe chickenpox infection, if they haven't had either. It's quite an interesting argument, and chickenpox is kind of a unique case in this regard. I'm not sure I agree with their conclusion, but I don't disagree with it either.

[@MrJacobegg]

Oops... hit reply rather than enter. I meant to add a note that the shingles vaccine is available, which specifically addresses the concern about increased susceptibility to shingles in populations where chickenpox doesn't circulate regularly. I found it interesting that the NHS didn't address this in their FAQ on why the chickenpox vaccine isn't part of their childhood schedule. That seems like a pretty important counterpoint to me.

[@wtice4632]

​@@MrJacobeggplease get your 7th booster

[@chrisruef3201]

Thank you for confirming my choice for President. The Covid 19 - was not a vax, but Gene therapy ( New England journal of Medicine 1970's)

[@PrettyGoodLookin]

RFK Jr is on point.

[@jeffteza8644]

What about vaccines that are a new mechanism of action such as mRNA? Should they be tested against previous (additional 5 listed on hhs.gov website) mechanisms or start over since adverse reactions are not captured in the other vaccines?

[@Emilio1985]

More people need to learn about "active control" conditions. Placebo is nice, but it is not the only way to have a control condition.

[@Ketoswammy]

Don’t pretend. Double blind placebo has been the gold standard forever. That’s what Reagan’s CDC removed in 1989z. RFK is 100% correct on all of this, and documents his work throughly. In many cases, certain industry insiders would rather you not know, but it’s (kind of) still a free country, even if there is a great deal of censorship, and misinformation on the internet, such as this video. The government just invented a new term, malinformation, which is information that is true, but which is being censored. They did this to censor RFK.

[@badhare663]

It is ridiculous not to use a saline placebo, unless you want to hide something. No valid excuse.

[@CarlSciuk]

Placebo is the only way to have a control condition. The only way come close to a placebo is by going to vaccination records in Africa and following outcomes of vaccinated vs unvaccinated. Extremely interesting results which are termed "Non specific efffects". Check out Dr. Christine Benn of Denmark

[@uddek]

I don't know who you are, but you sound educated enough. I also agree, that all the points you're making sound logical. If these Gen 1 vaccines went through the same testing JFK Jr is expecting later generations of the same vaccines to go through, couldn't you have shared an example of one of those studies? You obviously feel this topic is important enough to make a video about, and I agree with you there, but I no longer take random KZbinrs' words at face value when all you're saying is "I'm right, he's wrong, just trust me."

[@kathleenmalone4567]

True placebo controlled trials prior to licensure are not unethical. It just makes sense. Think about it. Not a hard conclusion to come to.

[@rednarok]

so RFKis right we didnt test it properly

[@forthreeeee]

Look I'm just interested in what the truth is. The reasoning for RFKs argument for why he believes that placebo safety trials arent undertaken for vaccines (though he admits on the Lex Friedman podcast that there may be one for polio), is because relevant authorities can't provide him with any evidence/trial studies that would support that claim. The easiest way to debunk him, and to show in betweeners on the subject that he is incorrect, is to just supply the studies. If I understood correctly, your argument is that there are no saline studies for Vaccine X version 3, because version 3 was only tested with version 2, and so on. So youd have to go back to version 1 to find the saline study. But your argument is completely baseless to RFKs argument unless you then say "See, here is study of Version 1 vs Saline. Here is is V1 vs V2, etc.." So can you provide links to these studies for the vaccines that are "mandated" by the government? Thanks

[@BrotherAlpha]

"So can you provide links to these studies for the vaccines that are "mandated" by the government?" ... It took me about a minute to find these placebo trials online. They are publicly available.

[@forthreeeee]

@@BrotherAlpha and yet you still couldn't link them

[@BrotherAlpha]

@@forthreeeee "and yet you still couldn't link them" Fuck no. Linking them would be more work than you are worth. You need to understand that. You are not worth the effort to post a link I have already found. The only reason I'm responding to you is because I'm procrastinating from doing work. I'm so far ahead at work that I basically don't have to do anything for the rest of the month.

[@inforuimteschip5970]

The problem with the argument in this video is: it fails to mention the introduction of adjuvants into the vaccine. At some point they switched from alive virus to dead virus in most vaccines for safety reasons. But for the body to make an immune response to the dead virus they had to put in an adjuvant. They chose Mercury because it is very toxic. Then when they did the trails for this vaccine they gave the placebo group al the same adjuvants just without the dead virus. So #1 it seems like they designed the trail to not show harmfull effects from the mercury, and #2 the whole argument of it not being ethical to not give the placebo group immunity falls flat, because they didn't in this trail, they just gave them the toxins. A good thing to listen to on this is Paul Offit in beyond the noise #8, in this he is debunking RFK by admitting he is right. its a curious thing.

[@jeffhaddix9508]

Actually in The Lex fridman podcast when Lex brought up the pre-licensing saline solution placebo controlled trial for polio RFK Jr said that test was only for efficacy not safety.

[@FlexxibleFree]

Huh, classic situation - ridiculous claims without basic understanding of the matter

[@drumrollwithjoel]

As many others have suggested in the comments, this debunk just doesn't hold water. And, in regards to the Polio vaccine, what about The Cutter Incident? Care to explain that?

[@AnthonyPasos]

How about a vaccinated Vs unvaccinated study? Everything could be put to rest if they did that.

[@jackjohnson4386]

Did you even watch the video?

[@AnthonyPasos]

Yes, why do you ask?@@jackjohnson4386

[@nochepatada]

How did the tests for the covid vaccine turn out? 🤔

[@SinHurr]

Pretty well, all things considered.

[@changingworld7467]

@@SinHurr The US had the worst outcome of any country in the world, and that is 'pretty well'?? OK, now let's look at 'the conspiracy theories' that the media gave us over the last three years from 'the science' of Dr Fauci et al (thousands of people besides RFK jr, including large numbers of prominent doctors were banned from social media because of these 'conspiracy theories'). The doctors, like Fauci, the CDC, FDA, and all of the TV doctors we watched on MSM for three years told us that: 'the Wuhan lab leak is misinformation'; 'the vaccine is 95% effective'; 'if you are vaccinated you will not get or spread Covid'; 'there is no such thing as early treatment for Covid'; 'there is no such thing as natural immunity after getting Covid...you still need to get vaccinated'; 'when 60% are vaccinated (and then 70%, 80%, etc) we will have herd immunity'; 'the vaccines are completely safe and effective'; 'pregnant women can get vaccinated safely'...etc. etc. ALL of these statements of 'the science' have now been shown to be either 100% wrong -- or in some cases -- extremely unlikely to be true. And these are the people you trust? And make arrogant assumptions about people who are actually looking at the current science? BTW, RFK jr was right about every one of these false claims. That matters. Science is not the private domain of people funded by Big Pharma, and entrenched in a system that has failed the public. The US has 4% of the world's population, and after following the 'science' of these fellows, had 16% of the world's Covid deaths...the worst outcome of any country in the world. As RFK jr says, show me where I am wrong, and I will change my mind...you cannot rewrite the Covid history.

[@jeffhaddix9508]

@@SinHurr Yeah the clinical trials went so well that the FDA wanted the court to give them the leeway to slow walk the full release of the Pfizer clinical trial data for 75 years.

[@keenanmclaughlin2611]

more bullshit myths. the data was released long ago. antivaxxers never learned how to read it for themselves cause they're all armchair "doctors"@@jeffhaddix9508

[@magicM526]

​@@jeffhaddix9508they're not going to respond they're complete bots

[@ericmohan93]

why don't you then have RFK on and debate him!

[@user-wu1dv6jk5s]

you have blood on your hands

[@CreativeIsolation]

All fine and good except, extrapolate over decades…. You don’t think change upon change upon change could lead to deleterious side effects? How would you know in this case? Especially in cases where the disease isn’t lethal or paralyzing, for example chicken pox, wouldn’t it be worth doing a trial?

[@e7eezzz]

Healthcare yeah

[@pottedplant4393]

Can you do a video on the mercury he claims isn't exiting the body, but instead going to the brain?

[@lukerichardson2404]

Oh, we don't want to touch that subject now, do we?

[@Ketoswammy]

This guy will NEVER admit the effects of mercury or aluminum. Nothing to see here. If you want the answers, get a copy of RFKs book. Not hard to find.

[@robotron17]

Dr. Palevsky does an awesome job on this subject in this testimony: "Dr Larry Palevsky, MD . Testimony Connecticut 2/19/2020"

[@Snoops510]

Read my post...it explains it.

[@DrSpooglemon]

The mercury in tuna fish?

[@buckrogers7115]

As of May 2024, this hasn’t aged well lol

[@zachbohemian]

these bozos have no clue. try debating RFK

[@jodhweijoundica3453]

the problem is the medical community has been getting its ethical calculations wrong for as long as vaccinations have been around. It's not actually equivalent when someone who gets a placebo as part of a trial they consented to be a part of dies of something they might have otherwise been protected against compared to someone who dies as a direct result of an adverse reaction to a pharmaceutical. The latter has far reaching consequences on the entire medical community for decades to come and that just isn't being acknowledged by the simplistic utilitarian calculations being done to determine what is and isn't ethical.

[@oakworm5526]

When KZbin puts a community note that is positive on your channel, we know whose side you're on.

[@SinHurr]

The side of correcting lies and misunderstandings.

[@scott16151]

This is the most accurate comment here.

[@gingerbread3972]

Wow what a two sided issue, he totally didn't completly anihalate RFK Jr.'s point at all!

[@jeffhaddix9508]

We live in a completely F'd up country where the doctors that tell the truth lose their licenses and turds like this doctor rise up in the ranks of the corrupt medical system.

[@lukerichardson2404]

@@gingerbread3972 He didn't though. RFK's arguments are 10 steps ahead

[@kickinsnarehat]

Lol… did anyone catch the end of this video when the guy says this video and series is sponsored by the NIH? 😂😂😂 No conflict of interest here people.

[@tokk3n-hj4xg]

Whats NIH?

[@CaptainHavfun-lp4ok]

National Institute of Health, where Fuci worked. @@tokk3n-hj4xg

[@healthcaretriage]

I think you misunderstood. Aaron refers to NIHCM (National Institute for Healthcare Management) in the credits because that's who sponsored the series he recommends to watch next (so not this video). The NIHCM is a nonprofit organization that isn't related to the NIH. -Tiffany

[@CaptainHavfun-lp4ok]

Yes, he is not going to speak out against his sponsor. Do you not know that? That's the first rule. Don't insult the money. If your show is sponsored by a drug company, you can't say you don't like them. Sponsors have a lot of say. Like on The Twilight Zone. Folgers sponsored it. A line had to be changed from "who you like some tea" to "would you like some coffee". The guy says yes. Says that it would help him relax..... IDK about you, but coffee is not what I drink, when I need to relax. It was basically an ad in the middle of the episode. Rod Serling spoke about it. He hated sponsors. @@healthcaretriage

[@kathycook7311]

National Institute of Health. @@tokk3n-hj4xg

[@mikevanaerle9779]

ok give me te test and reports. because there are non 🤣

[@PaulLobosco]

NO NO NO! Wathc Kim Iverosn's discussion with Brian Hooker. You are not only wrong, you are dangerous.

[@Nitrotix1]

Supporting medical choice and consent is not an "anti-vaxx" stance.

[@SigmaShorts911]

Source - Trust me bro.

[@anaharriscolonna]

they died because they weren’t washing their hands or practicing decent hygiene

[@tomwilson4778]

Yeah so the tag from KZbin is a blatant example of dystopian, technocratic, authoritarianism.

[@christineyoung5270]

WELL..after hearing the facts about this recent pandemic helps me with your facts about previous pandemics! 4 boosters a year anyone 😂 He also sait doctors get huge incentives for every single vaccine they give.

[@rebekahgrant1551]

I was in the medical field and it’s true. Also when new medicine comes out these pharmaceutical companies send representatives to drs offices and when the dr prescribes the new meds to their patients they collect money from the pharmaceutical company. Big Pharma is awful!

[@horsepoorwilson]

that's the real reason, just like hospitals got paid more money if patient listed with covid instead of, say, the flu. No money in the flu folks! By the way, whatever happened to the monkeypox pandemic?

[@MichaelHplus]

Would love if you could do much longer form discussion on vaccines. I appreciate that you don’t turn off comments like so many other videos. Parents and others just want to understand more about the topic. 🙏

[@healthcaretriage]

Hi! I'm not sure of the exact vaccine content you're looking for, but we do have a vaccine series under our playlists if you're interested! :) -Tiffany

[@lovemore4229]

Yawn!

[@07deus]

What are your kickbacks from NIH?

[@healthcaretriage]

I think you misunderstood. Aaron refers to NIHCM (National Institute for Healthcare Management) in the credits because that's who sponsored the series he recommends to watch next (so not this video). The NIHCM is a nonprofit organization that isn't related to the NIH. -Tiffany

[@petercarey4655]

Where does the funding for nihcm come from? Blue Cross Blue Shield?

[@askingwhy123]

Please make a playlist with his misinformation as you refute it.

[@angel.apollo]

Thank God for REASON

[@Doviruses.existbaileyonodysee]

Science . . .

[@BAUSSCO]

Interesting🤔, so by taking the established vaccine as the new control, safe & effective outcomes can shift over time depending on how quickly you roll out updates.

[@kaiezesi6630]

Rfk talked about how this too. This video was a huge strawman argument in hopes to further censorship

[@keenanmclaughlin2611]

If it's censorship then why are you hearing about RFK's bullshit? @@kaiezesi6630

[@speerunscompared]

RFK is talking about how (and he says this almost every time he makes this point) the safety studies are not done PRE-licensure, which is an important distinction. Using a placebo that isn't a saline solution just because it is not a first-generation medicine is a slippery slope. This allows medicines to slip through the more rigorous and difficult first-generation safety testing protocols/regulations, and enjoy benefits such as not requiring saline placebo, or pre-licensure safety trials period. If a medicine is unsafe, for example the MRNA COVID injections, yet manages to be approved (EUA in this case), in the future it can be safety tested in a placebo controlled trial where the placebo is the vaccine itself minus the mRNA payload (or modified mRNA that doesn't produce the spike protein), which would essentially mask any damage caused by the other ingredients in the vaccine, when the outcomes of the cohorts are compared.

[@ssdd28561]

Ok, serious question. X vs placebo is used to prove effectiveness. We test safety with the real X (after animals, ofc) on healthy humans first. So let's take "old drugs" vs X, and replace old drugs with a saline. What has changed? Why should it suddenly be better? Using old drugs in these studies is even better (if we forget about ethics) imo. Imagine a new drug is working, but giving you diarrhea, while old is working slightly worse but is giving you headache. You'll see how part of your volunteers drop off the study like crazy. Using saline in this example would show you nothing (because strictly basic safety was checked before with the real drug). You'll see that drug is working, but the drop out rate is high. When the other part of the study receives older drugs, you can actually see the "yeah, it works, and maybe even better, but ppl don't think it's worth it". (E.g. ssri - every single one is working exactly with the same objective effect, but the adherence is crazy different, when studies compare those) Any bad surprising side effects you're worried about will appear in part of the study who received the real X, if that side effect was missed before. Was it saline or "old drug" in other humans doesn't change anything for that. So why would you use saline there?

[@speerunscompared]

@@ssdd28561 I explained this in my comment. You are making the assumption that the previous generation of the drug did undergo strict safety testing and was approved, which isn't always the case. You're only testing the relative safety of the drug compared with another version.

[@mihai6400]

Bruh, nobody that watches this to feel smart will (be able to) read such a long logic paragraph

[@petetheneighbor8132]

This is not convincing its simply eye rolling. Kennedy is talking about pre licensing. This video actually made me trust him more congratulations.

[@liamsingsmusic]

Read Turtles All the Way Down

[@jakecorban582]

Love the video, just wish you weren't as focused on phrasing your facts as attacks towards the person youre speaking about, whether either side is right or wrong it makes your overall video seem malicious

[@EasilyInfluenced44]

I love when people argue RFK Jr… one of the only people on the planet who has actively been suing big pharma and our government on behalf of our environment and the injured. The guy who has had more access to and seen the documents and studies that most of us would never get access to or even understand. He’s done this over and over and over, countless discovery… does it ever occur to people why he gets more passionate with every case? With the more that he learns?

[@TerryOldfieldYoutube]

Sponsored by NIH ... 🧐

[@healthcaretriage]

I think you misunderstood. Aaron refers to NIHCM (National Institute for Healthcare Management) in the credits because that's who sponsored the series he recommends to watch next (so not this video). The NIHCM is a nonprofit organization that isn't related to the NIH. -Tiffany

[@stevemelton3619]

Nonsense

[@Mollygaga42]

This guy is completely wrong to the point of psy

[@pixie0714]

Thanks for the video. Don't think I would have connected the problem with his argument/request on my own.

[@timscanlon6323]

And i pose this question to you Americas Working Class ,? Are the same companies who test these vaccines connected financially in any way to the companies who sell them ?

[@changingworld7467]

They are ONLY tested by the companies that are selling them. There is no independent testing of vaccines in America.

[@adrianpietryga949]

Best ignore this fool

[@sunriot7112]

Sadly this is another video with a strong arrogant vibe missing a large part of the question and/or concerns with vaccines for us less educated folks not in the healthcare industry. Several of us want details into the "improvements" to the vaccines that are NOT being thoroughly tested for some of the ethical reasons highlighted in this video. If you are adding things like mercury or other foreign substances to the human body, which are known to be quite dangerous at low almost non-existent amounts, then how do you test the impacts of these improvements thoroughly? Are they more effective? Possibly? But at what cost?

[@kyletrusler4565]

The ethylmercury used in vaccines is slightly different than the methylmercury typically found in our environment, which is the more toxic version. That being said, its used in such small quantities for both mercury and aluminum, eating fish/seafood or using antipersperant should be more of a concern at that rate than a vaccine. With that being said, there are studies being conducted on ethylmercury on the blood brain barrier, amongst many of these other components, but so far it hasnt shown anything of concern from what Ive been able to find.

[@sokolov22]

He explained how it is tested yet people keep insisting they aren't tested??? The ethical reasons don't prevent testing. They just suggest you test against what is known to be safe and effective. If the original version was already tested against saline, it is fine to test against it as you get the same relative information. The point of a control is to get a baseline to compare against. Sadly most of the criticism comes from people who still don't understand what's going on.

[@London2035]

It’s a sad day when doctors no less about medicine then politicians

[@garagavia]

Some of them are payd to be ignorant

[@llPHAzERll1]

Yea they “no” less. Hahaha you joke.

[@horsepoorwilson]

@@garagavia understatement!

[@KLewis5499]

Dude, I am an objective observer. Everyone in this comment thread seems to disagree with you

[@peterpeters7534]

So? If I was to go into a theology video as an atheist do you think most people would disagree with me?

[@RioRioRio1234567890]

Take all the meds you want…don’t force them on me

[@BrotherAlpha]

If you don't take vaccines, don't complain when others don't want you in their business.

[@robotron17]

@@BrotherAlpha "Durr... it stops transmission ... durr ... durr ... protect the community." - Every Leftist. LOL.

[@BrotherAlpha]

@@robotron17 No it goes... "Here's the studies that show how effective the vaccine is against infection and transmission. Here are some follow-up studies. And even more studies. ... " Virus: "I don't like studies, because I can't read. They hurt my head." I want you to understand something. There's another wave coming and more people are going to die. Someone's going to snap and kill one of you anti-vaccine viruses and they won't go to jail. And then it will be open season on you guys. Do you understand?

[@robotron17]

@@BrotherAlpha UK data tracked everyone during 2021 and their data ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS showed the opposite. I feel sorry for you. The initial EUA studies admit they didn't study transmission, but Fauci promoted them as stopping transmission before one dose was given to the public. I truly feel sorry for you. But hey, you never looked and now it's time to reap.

[@RioRioRio1234567890]

@@BrotherAlpha I respect and understand that as a private business owner but do you agree it’s a problem if the government starts mandating vaccines and vaccine passports

[@DonaldAMisc]

Thank you for continuing to be a science channel that educates (rather than patronizes) people. I've seen one too many scientists drive people into RFK's hands because they won't address his claims civilly (as frustrating as they are). 🙌

[@PhysicsPolice]

@@norandon You don't read too good, do you?

[@dave9547]

Hope you're up to date with your boosters, don? They're really safe and really effective.

[@SinHurr]

@@dave9547 That's correct. They are! Thank goodness for them.

[@JenniferLarson-zu4yc]

Thank you. I'm excited to watch.

[@cbpd89]

I'm glad to have this piece of information! Now I know how to answer that question if it ever comes up in a discussion! I think once it's been explained this way, most people would agree that it's totally reasonable.

[@Ketoswammy]

This video is misinformation. Public Relations. Damage control. Propaganda.

[@GreenWitch1]

This is the information 😂 it’s propaganda

[@mariannasmith249]

Do I understand right that you are satisfied with an explanation as soon as they say; Its unethical? What a cop-out. Did you know they could do a comparison study on all they data they are sitting on since the 1960's, scrub it from personal data and compare with the thousands, if not millions of kids that have not been vaccinated over the years? They could, no-one would miss out on any vaccines and we would get some insights. But they won't. Why NOT???

[@cornbread4everyone555]

don't forget to take your booster!

[@SinHurr]

I have an appointment Monday, but thank you for the reminder. Squeeming filthy little childrens with all their germs.

[@Nitrotix1]

Booster #7954 coming right up 💉

[@tylerspiegel3294]

Dude, if you're going to say that these placebo controlled studies have been done then link them! Is this not public information? It seems like you are not supporting people being informed but supporting people that listen to what you have to say.

[@linanicolia1363]

He has been listening to his actress wife. She should shut up. She is not helping him.

[@georgewidger2306]

Polio was caused by poisoning such as DDT, not by an imaginary lierus. How many people were killed or injured by the polio quackzines?

[@bls5160]

Exactly! I have tried to educate people and they refuse to believe the truth.

[@colbertcapps9880]

interesting sponsor im sure they have no skin in the game 🤔

[@healthcaretriage]

If you're referring to the NIH as others have, I think you misunderstood. Aaron refers to NIHCM (National Institute for Healthcare Management) in the credits because that's who sponsored the series he recommends to watch next (so not this video). The NIHCM is a nonprofit organization that isn't related to the NIH. -Tiffany

[@dylanspitz827]

😂😂😂

[@kathycook7311]

And who funds them?@@healthcaretriage

[@walimane2348]

Then why did they win a court case in the Supreme Court

[@Ma1q444]

No sources in the description or video hmmmm😂 yet you claim RFK is a conspiracy theorist

[@riktol63]

IIRC the first Covid vaccines were done in a randomised controlled trial. But the placebo wasn't saline, it was a dose of a different vaccine (a non Covid vaccine but I don't remember which). The reason for this was that both vaccines cause some side effects, whereas saline does not. This stops people from immediately realising which group they are in, and inadvertently affecting the outcome, e.g. by being more cautious if they are in the placebo group.

[@extern83]

Why aren’t you providing links to these tests you claim exist?

[@JessJoanne]

Great question. Another one is, why do we keep focusing on this when we have a wonderful candidate who could be our next leader who's platform is not vaccinations? I guess because he was censored for so long, this just has to run its course.

[@Bruno-tz5xk]

❤

[@paineoftheworld]

I love the arguments here asking to debate this particular leopard. Because this particular leopard won't eat your face and just have a civilized debate.

[@kevinsheldrick917]

Is everyone ready for a new booster? Can go down to the clinic with a face mask, a bottle of hand sanitiser and a PCR test and camp out overnight outside the doctor's office and be the first to get it the next morning! Who's getting number 6?

[@Ketoswammy]

LOL, daily vaccinations can’t be far off.

[@BrotherAlpha]

You do know there are yearly flu vaccines, right? I mean, you aren't completely stupid, right?

[@LeviFiction]

I had not heard this argument before, so nice to hearing both it and the answer all in one go.

[@kaiezesi6630]

Yah this youtubers' video was the biggest gotcha strawman argument.

[@GreenWitch1]

Well, it’s all bullshit

[@aolson1111]

You can't dispute a single thing he said.

[@GreenWitch1]

@@aolson1111 He who?

[@mariannasmith249]

you had never heard this argument before? It's the only argument they have ever had; It is unethical! period, end of discussion. nothing else matters. And they don't think that injecting unproven medicines is unethical but testing them thoroughly BEFORE injecting them is unethical. Nope there is no logic in that whatsoever, no matter how many letters a person has behind his or her name.

[@robertcoelho4322]

Eh😂

[@rcdune7132]

Haha yeah he's sooo wrong but yet absolutely NOBODY can prove him wrong 🤔

[@HotelRioLindo]

Trust us bc we say so… this was a big nothing burger

[@nicnicol694]

I am going to address your points by numbering them below. Though I can tell you passionately believe there are parts i disagree with and for important reasons. Since most of what is done in medicine is opinion based as it is practicing medicine. Science in general is based on our current understanding of things. Things that we call facts and are proven can be overturned at a later date when our understanding changes because of some new information that was not considered when testing the first time occurred that being said I'm going to address the points you're making. 1) randomized controlled trials and vaccines. First to your point on secondary variations of the vaccines not having trials because it would be unethical. That's nonsense if they are putting new and different things into the vaccine it Hass to be tested again. It's not an ethical to do a trial when people are aware and that they are part of it. I'm tired of hearing doctors say that's an ethical no it's not it's an ethical to change things around and think you're getting the same thing you were before that's an ethical. I also want to point out that the system of trials is done by the manufacture of the drugs which I think is unethical especially when Pfizer has been criminally charged and convicted for fraud and bribery. So I did not realize that this was just a short video I thought you were going to tackle several topics that I'm sure he's disgusting you're probably opposing. As I have not heard you speak on the rest of this I really don't know for sure so I'm not claiming any of what I'm about to say as you have an opposing view on. More to the point I'm stating my view on things and you're welcome to oppose it or not. 2) vaccines link to autism and other diseases. This is something that is vehemently denied within the medical community. The only studies done that saying there's no connection have been done by the drug companies themselves. The very few doctors that have done any real testing outside of it and have stated that their findings showed these issues were instantly treated as quacks stripped of their licenses and ridiculed. That is a clear sign that they're most probably right. Because the truth fears no scrutiny it stands firm in the face of the lies. The lies they very much fear the truth and so they shut it and hide it away cut out its tongue and make sure everyone thinks it's not real Because again the truth stands above the lies always. Now if you don't know this bit about life and history and the world. I don't know what else to tell you but you should start paying attention. 3) vaccines for viruses. This is a topic of heavy debate so I'm going to start with the bigger part of the conversation instead of focusing on our vaccines even good for viruses. From the standpoint of science as far as proven fact, viruses are not contagious. No you heard me right, it is a scientific proven fact that viruses are not contagious. Calm down, take a deep breath. It is a scientifically proven fact the viruses are not contagious. I understand that that must seem ludicrous to you. But it doesn't matter if it seems ludicrous to you or me or anyone else because it is a scientifically proven fact that viruses are not contagious. So what am I talking about How how could this insane idea be true. We have a whole field of study dedicated to viruses and their contagiousness. Well unfortunately that was based on the premise that viruses are contagious but it's a scientifically proven fact that they're not. As I spoke about earlier in science we sometimes find that our understanding of things changes When it comes to a certain scientific fact. So we have the process that you must go through to change that fact. This has never been done. The original study that was done was incorrectly labeled inconclusive and nobody paid attention. In fact there were two studies done proved the viruses are not contagious. We've been operating under the wrong premise. No nee science been done to change what was proved. If you don't know already I'm talking about the Rosenau experiments. First one in 1918 and the second one in 1919 during the Spanish flu. In both tests he took 100 volunteer Navy men with 25 of them having contracted the virus but surviving as a control it and the other 75 never showing symptoms to be used as the test group. This is just a brief description of what they did read the study for the full details. They utilized three different methods to try and infect the volunteers. a)They took fluid from the lungs and nasal passages of sick patients refined it and sprayed it into the eyes nose and throat's of volunteers. b) volunteers had to spend an hour each with 10 different sick patients where they were to remain face to face lips almost touching. The volunteers were instructed to breathe in the air from the sick patience exhale the sick patient was instructed to cough and sneeze directly in the faces of the volunteers. To be clear that the total of 10 hours one hour with 10 different sick patients each c) they took the same isolated fluid from the first experiment and injected it subcutaneously into the arms of the volunteers. Now the first time around the study was done in one of the islands near Boston that they had a hospital on for those stricken with the virus. At the end of the study he had not met his hypothesis of proof of contagion so he labeled the study inconclusive. I'm sure you know that for a scientific method study to be done that's proof of fact one of the requirements is that with the test you would get the same results every single time it's repeatable will always give you those results so obviously with any within any one of those three groupings of testing if he does gotten everyone sick it would've been proof as fact. He was not able to do that. Like I said he labeled it inconclusive. But to be inconclusive would've meant that he got some of them sick and others he didn't. But that's not what happened either. He was unable to get a single person sick. Even though it was not his hypothesis it met the burden of proof that viruses are not contagious. Since he was convinced he messed up something someway somehow he did the experiment again the following year same type of set up the time in San Francisco Bay on Angel Island and again he got the same results he labeled it inconclusive and they shuffled it away into the halls of forgot forgotten medicine as everyone believed viruses were contagious. But that is twice proof that viruses are not contagious. And until something is done to change that science it stands as fact. You can say whatever your opinion is but it doesn't change the science. So unfortunately for the whole of the medical community that is involved in this they are operating against science. This isn't my opinion this is the fact. When I have argued this against other doctors they all pull out the unethical nonsense as the reason it hasn't been re-tested. Again you are claiming a whole industry of medicine is contagious and dangerous but the science says it's not so who is being unethical. I rest my case.

[@wynbrown5985]

So therefore, vaccines do not protect against viruses.

[@Jetsboy69]

Can I see the Pfizer ingredient list? Is HT on BP funding list? Probs.

[@robotron17]

*European Medicines Agency, June 22, 2023:* "The long-term safety of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is unknown at present"

[@peterpeters7534]

We don't know the long term safety of blue tooth headphone either or composite wings on aircraft. You do realise that is the same argument that has been used by antivaxxers for almost 150 years?

[@jackjohnson4386]

Me 10/7/2023: "The future is unknown at the present" People who complain about "long-term" safety not being known are idiots

[@robotron17]

@@jackjohnson4386 Ooof. But that's not what they told you, is it? Stockholm Syndrome is the leading cause of death.

[@jackjohnson4386]

@@robotron17 What doctors have told us is simply what studies to date have shown. No one can tell you the future. However, the fact remains that no "long-term" complications of vaccines has ever been documented. So, drumming up fear about some nonspecific, theoretical "long-term" effects, without any definition of what that even means, is not helping anyone.

[@robotron17]

@@jackjohnson4386 There's no documented issues because there is no country/state in the world tracking all-cause "events" by "substance"-status, even though that's the only data that would give us a remotely accurate picture. And that's why everybody has to guess as to whether it's causing this or that bad thing to happen. There's only one reason they wouldn't do this... and it's not good (sorry have to be vague due to not-suspicious censorship).

[@tonymartin4259]

Just another hit job. Invite him on your show and interview him. You need an education. But you won't do that because he would clean your clock.

[@ha-kh7ef]

tel me what peered reviewed papers and research RFK uses ? You can’t because he hasn’t provide a single source of evidence

[@d_dave7200]

The idea that RFK Jr. would clean Dr. Carroll's clock on the evidence re: vaccines is laughable. At the same time though, people who are sharing inaccurate ideas that are harmful to children should NEVER be platformed. I would be angry/disappointed if he did.

[@changingworld7467]

@@d_dave7200 OK, let's look at the claims of the doctors for Big Pharma, compared to RFK jr 'the conspiracy theorist'. MSM News and the doctors and scientists like Fauci, the CDC, FDA, and all of the TV doctors we watched on MSM for three years told us that: 'the Wuhan lab leak is misinformation'; 'the vaccine is 95% effective'; 'if you are vaccinated you will not get or spread Covid'; 'there is no such thing as early treatment for Covid'; 'there is no such thing as natural immunity after getting Covid...you still need to get vaccinated'; 'when 60% are vaccinated (and then 70%, 80%, etc) we will have herd immunity'; 'the vaccines are completely safe and effective'; 'pregnant women can get vaccinated safely'...etc. etc. ALL of these statements of 'the science' have now been shown to be 100% wrong -- or in some cases -- extremely unlikely to be true. And these are the people we are supposed to trust? And believe them when they claim the people who got everything right were 'conspiracy theorists'? BTW, RFK jr was right about every one of these false claims. That matters. Science is not the private domain of people funded by Big Pharma, and entrenched in a system that has failed the public. The US has 4% of the world's population, and after following the 'science' of these fellows, had 16% of the world's Covid deaths...the worst outcome of any country in the world. As RFK jr says, show me where I am wrong, and I will change my mind...you cannot rewrite the Covid history..

[@PhysicsPolice]

It's not a hit job. That implies it's biased and/or inaccurate. It's a full-throated takedown of the misinformation being spread to millions of people. RFK Jr. is the aggressor. Not the victim. He's made a career as an ambulance chaser winning lawsuits for anti-vaccine and anti-GMO clients by misrepresenting medical science. You're the one who needs an education so you can better identify truth from lies. The reason people like Dr. Carroll don't interview RFK Jr. is that he is not in the least qualified to have the discussion.

[@SinHurr]

My man here is literally a doctor.

[@factualfeith]

Who afe tou?

[@dmitryk2040]

Appreciate the concise video but would appreciate more a long-form conversation with RFK Jr. himself and/or a debate. Without that, this information alone is insufficient.

[@xmz70]

RFK is smart and courageous.

[@Hudute]

Holy shit, I didn't watch this channel for a couple months, the host got YOKED

[@kathycook7311]

All you have to do is find children whose parents do not vaccinate and use them as the placebo group. Ethical problem avoided.