Why would the committee vote in favor of ANY vaccine to be given to newborn babies? The vaccine schedule should be drastically reduced not increased. You should be ashamed of yourself for believing anything the CDC says. The CDC is paid by big pharma.
The logic is clear and unassailable. To KEEP the infant healthy! That is a worthy altruistic goal. Now the tools being used can be brought under close scrutiny, and in fact the laudable primary motive may be corrupted. But that is the work of smart dedicated health professionals who have integrity.
I would advise HHS RFK Jr, Dr. Malone and all of the ACIP committee to take my view: the msm medical community which includes the cdc cannot be trusted. Assume that everything is tainted until you have proven otherwise. Do not trust them.
This is the tragedy! Much of CDC data is likely sound, but clearly not all. And it’s a Herculean task to sort the wheat from the chaff! Thankfully we have dedicated people taking the helm. TRUTH at all costs
I’m always appalled when I hear about clinical trials involving babies. Who the f^*k is willing to hand over their child for this ? Are they still using foster children and orphans? Big pharma is chemical poison .
RFK has a huge problem and I hope he identifies every last psychopath involved with this and shares that information. No one is being held accountable. I still don’t trust the Means.
Those who withheld the data findings must be publicly identified and held accountable while whatever “mainstream media” we have left broadcasts the information
10 years ago, I worked at the WA State Health Care Authority in the Health Technology Assessment Committee. We reviewed 8-10 technologies per year for the 9 years I was on the committee. The HCA recruited bids for each technology assessment so as to select a single medical technology group from multiple national groups with critical analytic skills who expressed interest in the analysis. Each selected analysis included all relevant evidence-based medical literature and data provided by the technology industry. Each technology analysis was provided two to three weeks in advance of the committee meeting, and the provided manuscripts were 100 to 300+ pages in length. In that way, each analysis was complete and up-to-date and was as unbiased as possible. The committee member experts, who were diverse and selected by the HCA with approval of the WA governor, had the ability and time to make a reasoned assessment before the meeting of the committee members.
The ACIP should adopt a similar process to minimize bias and independence of analysis from the manufacturers of the products they are asked to approve. The change could also potentially achieve financial savings for the CDC as internal CDC resources are replaced by independent outsourced analyses.
I am glad Malone is changing his opinion based on new data. It's sad but true reality - ACIP absolutely must not take CDC analysis as "unimpeachable." If they do, it's as if we have learned nothing over the past 5 years. Someone outside of CDC needs to vet that data as it comes to ACIP
The "outside of CDC" reviewers needs to be never-ever-related to Big Pharma and while transparency is great, considerable thought should be given to keep the identities of said panel confidential, and thus, not bribe-able. Likewise, perhaps as a rule of being accepted, successful nominees agree to NOT share their titles on business or social media! The global/social bragging that has occurred during the last 15+ years makes many Gov and advisory positions ripe for corruption.
"How did we get into this mess?" We allowed the pharma paradigm to go too far and become too entrenched and profitable. Why? Because we humans want to be saved by things outside of ourselves? Digging out of this mess will take time and recognition of how we got here. Taking responsibility for our health begins the process, and the GOOD news is that we know how to reverse chronic disease now. But it requires a paradigm shift away from pharma and that is hard. HHS and Sec Kennedy have a monstrous job to do. Bless them.
Yes, pharmaceuticals have been erroneously viewed as real medicine. The liability shield for pharma regarding school shots set a reckless precedent that continued with EUA for experimental mRNA shots. Society allowed the guard rails to be removed, and the devil never sleeps.
That is the problem with the way they approve drugs. They approve them before the trials are posted. There were already deaths in VAERs for Beyfortus.
The other thing they didn't mention in the article was the control drug. Palivizumab was approved in 1998. It caused deaths in the trials along with the other 2. The real question should be what is the problem with these monoclonal antibody biologics presented as vaccines for RSV? Palivizumab has deaths in VAERs as well. We have 3 approvals killing babies. RSV is really easy to treat in the hospital setting.
Another question is why do the two newest recommend using PCR tests along with them? Why did the FDA approve the newest one and ACIP recommend it when the trial results weren't published yet? They gave the company until 2026 to post them. How can families, physicians make informed decisions? They can't access the data. Just trust the FDA/CDC. That isn't patient centered care.
Part 24, Suing CDC over unsafe, untested childhood schedule
Dr. Stoller: "The CDC has never tested the safety of the entire childhood vaccine schedule as a whole"
There is nothing the CDC does that can be trusted. Two doctors are suing the CDC over the fact that there have never been studies on the cumulative effect of the ever-expanding vaccine schedule. Since it seems that the CDC is answerable to no one, the vaccine program is nothing more than a massive medical experiment forced on our children.
I'm wondering why only 2 members of ACIP voted against approval, when one of them spoke out about the trend lines for excess deaths all going in the same direction. Are the other members not really reading the material they are given? The CDC has lied about vaccines since the 1950s. Why does anyone on the new oversight committee think that would have changed?
I have known about the untrustworthy data and conclusions of the CDC for many years. I followed their data and the ‘papers’ they posted the past five years to protect and inform my patients. It was uphill as the public trusted them- I would go over the publications with my patients and show them the flaws.
"But – and this is key – Malone and others on the ACIP were acting on data they assumed was unimpeachable. It wasn’t."
"Unimpeachable data"?! NOTHING that comes from pharma is unimpeachable!!! How stupid do these guys have to be to have watched pharma hide and/or falsify data time and time again, only to just believe them again? And right now, under their very noses, we've got these fools believing Merck's data as Merck has just been exposed by a whistleblower hiding yet more safety problems with Gardasil!
I expect this kind of dumbassery from Malone, given that he CLAIMS to have taken the COVID vaccine while knowing what a health disaster the LNPs were, but what are the excuses of the others?
There should be no such thing as a mandate for a medical product of any kind, given the inescapable incompetence and corruption from health officials.
Why would the committee vote in favor of ANY vaccine to be given to newborn babies? The vaccine schedule should be drastically reduced not increased. You should be ashamed of yourself for believing anything the CDC says. The CDC is paid by big pharma.
That was my reaction. Routinely administering ANYTHING to a healthy newborn? What intellectual universe do these people inhabit?
The logic is clear and unassailable. To KEEP the infant healthy! That is a worthy altruistic goal. Now the tools being used can be brought under close scrutiny, and in fact the laudable primary motive may be corrupted. But that is the work of smart dedicated health professionals who have integrity.
Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
I would advise HHS RFK Jr, Dr. Malone and all of the ACIP committee to take my view: the msm medical community which includes the cdc cannot be trusted. Assume that everything is tainted until you have proven otherwise. Do not trust them.
This is the tragedy! Much of CDC data is likely sound, but clearly not all. And it’s a Herculean task to sort the wheat from the chaff! Thankfully we have dedicated people taking the helm. TRUTH at all costs
I’m always appalled when I hear about clinical trials involving babies. Who the f^*k is willing to hand over their child for this ? Are they still using foster children and orphans? Big pharma is chemical poison .
RFK has a huge problem and I hope he identifies every last psychopath involved with this and shares that information. No one is being held accountable. I still don’t trust the Means.
I often think the same thing, who is handing a healthy newborn over to be tested on these things?
Those who withheld the data findings must be publicly identified and held accountable while whatever “mainstream media” we have left broadcasts the information
Who received royalties in CDC for this drug? Follow the money.
NEVER TRUST THE CDC EVER AGAIN
I haven't trusted them since the 1970s when I discovered them lying about vaccines.
Just stop. "They thought the data from the CdC was unimpeachable"? Where in the hell would they get that thought from?
Listen, Dr. Demasi dug up the dirt and they got caught.
Thats it.
10 years ago, I worked at the WA State Health Care Authority in the Health Technology Assessment Committee. We reviewed 8-10 technologies per year for the 9 years I was on the committee. The HCA recruited bids for each technology assessment so as to select a single medical technology group from multiple national groups with critical analytic skills who expressed interest in the analysis. Each selected analysis included all relevant evidence-based medical literature and data provided by the technology industry. Each technology analysis was provided two to three weeks in advance of the committee meeting, and the provided manuscripts were 100 to 300+ pages in length. In that way, each analysis was complete and up-to-date and was as unbiased as possible. The committee member experts, who were diverse and selected by the HCA with approval of the WA governor, had the ability and time to make a reasoned assessment before the meeting of the committee members.
The ACIP should adopt a similar process to minimize bias and independence of analysis from the manufacturers of the products they are asked to approve. The change could also potentially achieve financial savings for the CDC as internal CDC resources are replaced by independent outsourced analyses.
CDC = Corrupt Disinformation Cabal
Amen!
I am glad Malone is changing his opinion based on new data. It's sad but true reality - ACIP absolutely must not take CDC analysis as "unimpeachable." If they do, it's as if we have learned nothing over the past 5 years. Someone outside of CDC needs to vet that data as it comes to ACIP
I'm glad he's changing his opinion, but how on earth did someone of his caliber ever come to think the CDC was worthy of trust?
I'll only believe he really didnt know IF HE NOW CHANGES IT AND MAKES IT (MONOCLONAL JUNK) ILLEGAL.
CDC should be shut down. Completely.
Besides All vaccines are toxic poison!
The "outside of CDC" reviewers needs to be never-ever-related to Big Pharma and while transparency is great, considerable thought should be given to keep the identities of said panel confidential, and thus, not bribe-able. Likewise, perhaps as a rule of being accepted, successful nominees agree to NOT share their titles on business or social media! The global/social bragging that has occurred during the last 15+ years makes many Gov and advisory positions ripe for corruption.
"How did we get into this mess?" We allowed the pharma paradigm to go too far and become too entrenched and profitable. Why? Because we humans want to be saved by things outside of ourselves? Digging out of this mess will take time and recognition of how we got here. Taking responsibility for our health begins the process, and the GOOD news is that we know how to reverse chronic disease now. But it requires a paradigm shift away from pharma and that is hard. HHS and Sec Kennedy have a monstrous job to do. Bless them.
Yes, pharmaceuticals have been erroneously viewed as real medicine. The liability shield for pharma regarding school shots set a reckless precedent that continued with EUA for experimental mRNA shots. Society allowed the guard rails to be removed, and the devil never sleeps.
That is the problem with the way they approve drugs. They approve them before the trials are posted. There were already deaths in VAERs for Beyfortus.
The other thing they didn't mention in the article was the control drug. Palivizumab was approved in 1998. It caused deaths in the trials along with the other 2. The real question should be what is the problem with these monoclonal antibody biologics presented as vaccines for RSV? Palivizumab has deaths in VAERs as well. We have 3 approvals killing babies. RSV is really easy to treat in the hospital setting.
Another question is why do the two newest recommend using PCR tests along with them? Why did the FDA approve the newest one and ACIP recommend it when the trial results weren't published yet? They gave the company until 2026 to post them. How can families, physicians make informed decisions? They can't access the data. Just trust the FDA/CDC. That isn't patient centered care.
https://adachel.substack.com/p/part-22-suing-the-cdc-over-the-unsafe
Part 24, Suing CDC over unsafe, untested childhood schedule
Dr. Stoller: "The CDC has never tested the safety of the entire childhood vaccine schedule as a whole"
There is nothing the CDC does that can be trusted. Two doctors are suing the CDC over the fact that there have never been studies on the cumulative effect of the ever-expanding vaccine schedule. Since it seems that the CDC is answerable to no one, the vaccine program is nothing more than a massive medical experiment forced on our children.
I'm wondering why only 2 members of ACIP voted against approval, when one of them spoke out about the trend lines for excess deaths all going in the same direction. Are the other members not really reading the material they are given? The CDC has lied about vaccines since the 1950s. Why does anyone on the new oversight committee think that would have changed?
I have known about the untrustworthy data and conclusions of the CDC for many years. I followed their data and the ‘papers’ they posted the past five years to protect and inform my patients. It was uphill as the public trusted them- I would go over the publications with my patients and show them the flaws.
"But – and this is key – Malone and others on the ACIP were acting on data they assumed was unimpeachable. It wasn’t."
"Unimpeachable data"?! NOTHING that comes from pharma is unimpeachable!!! How stupid do these guys have to be to have watched pharma hide and/or falsify data time and time again, only to just believe them again? And right now, under their very noses, we've got these fools believing Merck's data as Merck has just been exposed by a whistleblower hiding yet more safety problems with Gardasil!
I expect this kind of dumbassery from Malone, given that he CLAIMS to have taken the COVID vaccine while knowing what a health disaster the LNPs were, but what are the excuses of the others?
There should be no such thing as a mandate for a medical product of any kind, given the inescapable incompetence and corruption from health officials.
Amen to no mandates for any medical product ever!!!