We do not use "active comparators" instead of true placebos for other drugs. Why are the standards lower for vaccines? Yet despite an FDA promise of new rules last year, nothing has changed.
Turtles is great - but problematic due to its (lack of) authorship.
"Dissolving Illusions" is also very good - and does not suffer from that same easy critique.
Alex, reading either, you would find that your statement about "testing new vaccines for diseases like measles, where older jabs for the same disease already exist" might be a bit more ... nuanced.
In my opinion, losing Dr. Vinay Prasad is a big problem regardless of his personal politics; he is a great man and cares about everyone and his country. Someone should do everything they can to get him back, regardless of what Trump loyalists want.
yes, a great loss. i wouldn't expect him to come back, however. i think those government positions kill the soul. you start out optimistic about the changes you will make, the glaring errors you will correct and you soon learn that change is almost impossible. no one is more aware of the dangers in the childhood vaccine schedule than RFKjr who promised to end the liability shield on day one and still has the covid vaccine recommended for children.
This sounds conspiratorial to say, but until people realize that vaccines are one of the biggest pseudosciences out there, they will continue to ask “but why do or don’t we do this?”
I’m sure some older than me will remember the flu vaccine fiasco of the 70s that 60 mins covered and some also may remember the Cutter incident of polio in the 50s. Any other drug would’ve been halted, but for vaccines, we still push on? Why
There is so much political and pseudoscience behind this product and until readers ultimately see that, they will continue to ask, “but why do?”
I fear the answer is much darker than that, but that’s what I’ve seen.
And PS, there’s a reason there’s no controlled for vaccine trials, because if they ever thought about comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated they’d show that unvaccinated are entirely more healthy than those vaccinated: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/vaccinated-children-are-sicker-than
That would destroy the industry, hence the BS excuse, “it would be inhumane not to give everyone a vaccine.”
Excited for part 2 as I’ve covered this topic EXTENSIVELY and have a plethora of sources to share.
I recall you writing a while ago about your decision to vaccinate your daughter against HPV. Was this info about trial tomfoolery known to you at the time? And if not, would that change your decision making process on that issue now?
but they are all based on faulty trials. doctors have said that the most dangerous vaccines on the market- until the covid shots- were the HPV vaccines
Vaccines are all the same.... none have demonstrated efficacy and safety in a double blinded RCT using a proper placebo.
You have literally just written an article exposing fraudulent safety trials by the pharmaceutical industry, yet still support HPV vaccines created by the same pharmaceutical industry - make that make sense.
Alex I love your work, but for the love of God wake up!
I wish your daughter the best with the vaccine. I’m sure there are those who take it without issue, although most parents I have talked to who are in tune with their children note some oddity months after the vaccine - eczema, change in menstrual cycle, unexplained nausea, or something as simple as increased acne they can’t get a hold of for months. One of my daughters developed PCOS as a Junior in HS. After a few years, if your daughter has any complication you feel could be related to the vaccine doses, please report back. It could save someone else from dealing with the inconvenience and expense of trying to solve a new problem brought on by the vaccine.
i think a lawsuit against the HPV vaccine was just settled for $50 million, sadly with no admission of guilt and probably a gag order. still you can't blame the family of the damaged child for taking the money, which is chump change for the drug company, which should have been sued out of business in my humble opinion.
the Nurses Out Loud podcast just did an episode on it.
None of the childhood vaccines would survive a true placebo-controlled study. That is why Pharma does not conduct them. Retrospective studies show that unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated. Pharma has always refused to do a prospective vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study (surprise!).
Let's assume that there is one vaccine that is both safe and effective. Further assume that another is safe but not effective and a third is effective but not safe. Which vaccine is which?
The government-industrial-professional-journal complex would have us believe that every single vaccine is both safe and effective. Is this plausible?
We know that the COVID vaccines were not particularly effective. If they had been effective, we wouldn't need 3 or 4 boosters each year. We know that children rarely, if ever, suffered from severe COVID infections. So, were they effective for children? And, we know that young males had heart complications. Were they safe for young males? If the COVID vaccines are cause to doubt the claim that all vaccines are both safe and effective then which other vaccines should we doubt?
We know that FDA can't tolerate the thought of applying the Gold Standard of science (i.e., a placebo-controlled trial) to vaccines. This alone should be sufficient to raise alarms.
Finally, when the Henry Ford Health system did a study of their patients who were vaccinated vs. those who were not vaccinated, the former were discovered to have a multiple of chronic health conditions compared to the unvaccinated. So HFH refused to publish the results. They were leaked and can be found on the internet.
The one thing we should be most skeptical about is the combination of some three dozen vaccines administered in multiple doses. Is it plausible that the combination of all these vaccines, the cumulative side-effects of all these doses, is safe?
Glad you're starting to see how vaccine trials are actually conducted. Now go read the clinical trial protocols and data for the vaccines on the market with the same level of scrutiny. Look at the study design, comparator, follow-up period, endpoints, exclusion criteria, and how safety and adverse events were evaluated and reported. Don't just accept anyone else's characterization of the evidence - including mine. Read the underlying data and trial structures yourself and decide whether the evidence meets the standard you believe is appropriate for giving an otherwise healthy child a medical intervention.
Kennedy is nothing more than a figurehead now. The number 2 guy is running the show.
You write “nobody is forced into a trial” which is the same to me as I’m not forced to take it either. Every time any doctor asks me about any vaccine my answer is always “would you give this to your parents or children?” Many times their answer is absolutely. Then I say you can poison your own family I’ll decline.
sadly I'm afraid that you are right. I'm also afraid that he's damaging his reputation by remaining in the administration. listen to him on Rogan, tying himself in knots while trying to justify Trump's EO on glyphosate. he's destroying his own credibility. I wish he had quit like Joe Kent.
Question: do foreign FDA-equivalent agencies (eg in Europe or UK) require pharmaceutical companies to run better vaccine trials for approval or do most countries in the world just accept the vaccine trial results from the USA?
If you haven’t followed Del Bigtree, Aaron Siri, and Informed Consent Action Network’s work in this subject area, you have missed comprehensive discoveries and contributions. If you have followed and have made no mention of them, you are unethical.
Alex, you missed 2 other features of vaccine trials that renders them useless- the short duration of the trials and that they are usually underpowered. in those Hep B trials, the subjects (all 140 of them) were followed for 4 days in one study and 5 days in another. if the vaccine manufacturers were subject to litigation, they would have an interest in discovering the possible long term effects of their products and the trials might have lasted a few years. since they have no worries about liability, they want to race through the study in the shortest amount of time possible so they DON'T discover any problems with it.
i had friends in the Moderna trials- the husband was in the treatment arm and the wife was in the control group. after two months, the study was unblinded and the wife took the shot- end of control group! how could anyone make any claims about "long term" safety when the "term" was only 2 months?
to make matters worse, the participants weren't followed at all after that. the husband was so freaked out about getting covid that he got himself 2 Pfizer shots and was itching for a booster!! the wife came down with the Delta variant and called me for help! then on New Years, they all came to stay here- my friend, her husband, her son, his girlfriend- all covid vaccinated to the max- and her unvaccinated mother. after they left, they ALL, except for the mother came down with Omicron.
and those studies were brilliant compared to the way childhood vaccine studies are done! there were lots of people in the studies and there was an actual placebo. you can't make that claim about a single vaccine on the childhood schedule!
Question: while I sort of understand giving vaccine test subjects a different vaccine/drug, why is the comparison of side effects between the two vaccines and not between the side effects suffered by those getting the tested vaccine and a baseline of NO side effects (as would be the case for someone not getting the tested vaccine)?
Because Pharma is responsible for reporting all side effects as determined by the pt. You get a vaccine trial drug on Monday. Tuesday you get a headache (report). You take Motrin. On Wed your stomach is upset (report--even if its Motrin's fault), Thursday you're fine but Fri you go out and have chili nachos and lo and behold on Sat you have bad GERD and feel queasy (that's a report as well). So NO side effects is not actually how people live. Look at it from the other perspective---in many, many trials 30% of people get better with the PLACEBO. I mean like even their BP goes down! That's why a good drug better help way more than 50% of the time.
What if this is all for naught?(or far worse, darker as Franklin implied)
If viruses don’t exist (no scientific evidence that they do), contagion is a myth(multiple contagion studies failed miserably to prove contagion), and bacteria don’t cause disease(germ theory disproven by multiple studies), then truly it is for naught!
What if this country’s poor health is because we’re basing our healthcare on false principles?
Welcome to the LIGHT ALEX.
you must be reading "Turtles All The Way Down" book.
Its shocking to learn, NO childhood vax has been tested against a pure saline placebo.
TOTAL SCAM!!!
I am not. I discovered this myself in researching another piece.
It's far better for everyone if I reach conclusions on my own instead of feeling spoon-fed or pushed.
Thank GOD you discovered the truth!!!
@Alex- which is why I subscribe to your Substack. I trust you.
but still, you should read Turtles
Turtles is great - but problematic due to its (lack of) authorship.
"Dissolving Illusions" is also very good - and does not suffer from that same easy critique.
Alex, reading either, you would find that your statement about "testing new vaccines for diseases like measles, where older jabs for the same disease already exist" might be a bit more ... nuanced.
In my opinion, losing Dr. Vinay Prasad is a big problem regardless of his personal politics; he is a great man and cares about everyone and his country. Someone should do everything they can to get him back, regardless of what Trump loyalists want.
yes, a great loss. i wouldn't expect him to come back, however. i think those government positions kill the soul. you start out optimistic about the changes you will make, the glaring errors you will correct and you soon learn that change is almost impossible. no one is more aware of the dangers in the childhood vaccine schedule than RFKjr who promised to end the liability shield on day one and still has the covid vaccine recommended for children.
This sounds conspiratorial to say, but until people realize that vaccines are one of the biggest pseudosciences out there, they will continue to ask “but why do or don’t we do this?”
Vaccines have been protected since the 80s by the government. Think about this: no other drug class gets this much protection, but vaccines do? Why: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/do-you-know-what-the-vaccine-information
I’m sure some older than me will remember the flu vaccine fiasco of the 70s that 60 mins covered and some also may remember the Cutter incident of polio in the 50s. Any other drug would’ve been halted, but for vaccines, we still push on? Why
There is so much political and pseudoscience behind this product and until readers ultimately see that, they will continue to ask, “but why do?”
I fear the answer is much darker than that, but that’s what I’ve seen.
And PS, there’s a reason there’s no controlled for vaccine trials, because if they ever thought about comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated they’d show that unvaccinated are entirely more healthy than those vaccinated: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/vaccinated-children-are-sicker-than
That would destroy the industry, hence the BS excuse, “it would be inhumane not to give everyone a vaccine.”
Excited for part 2 as I’ve covered this topic EXTENSIVELY and have a plethora of sources to share.
i'm 73. my cousin's wife took that swine flu vaccine and spent the following year in a wheelchair. that pretty much did it for me
I recall you writing a while ago about your decision to vaccinate your daughter against HPV. Was this info about trial tomfoolery known to you at the time? And if not, would that change your decision making process on that issue now?
It would not. Not all vaccines are the same.
but they are all based on faulty trials. doctors have said that the most dangerous vaccines on the market- until the covid shots- were the HPV vaccines
Vaccines are all the same.... none have demonstrated efficacy and safety in a double blinded RCT using a proper placebo.
You have literally just written an article exposing fraudulent safety trials by the pharmaceutical industry, yet still support HPV vaccines created by the same pharmaceutical industry - make that make sense.
Alex I love your work, but for the love of God wake up!
I wish your daughter the best with the vaccine. I’m sure there are those who take it without issue, although most parents I have talked to who are in tune with their children note some oddity months after the vaccine - eczema, change in menstrual cycle, unexplained nausea, or something as simple as increased acne they can’t get a hold of for months. One of my daughters developed PCOS as a Junior in HS. After a few years, if your daughter has any complication you feel could be related to the vaccine doses, please report back. It could save someone else from dealing with the inconvenience and expense of trying to solve a new problem brought on by the vaccine.
How are they not though?!?!?
i think a lawsuit against the HPV vaccine was just settled for $50 million, sadly with no admission of guilt and probably a gag order. still you can't blame the family of the damaged child for taking the money, which is chump change for the drug company, which should have been sued out of business in my humble opinion.
the Nurses Out Loud podcast just did an episode on it.
I wondered the same thing. Thanks for asking him that.
None of the childhood vaccines would survive a true placebo-controlled study. That is why Pharma does not conduct them. Retrospective studies show that unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated. Pharma has always refused to do a prospective vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study (surprise!).
And Alex, what was the “placebo” given in the HPV trials?
Indeed. Alex should read this analysis from Slate (hardly an “anti-vax” platform): https://slate.com/health-and-science/2017/12/flaws-in-the-clinical-trials-for-gardasil-made-it-harder-to-properly-assess-safety.html
Exactly!!!
That's a great question. When Alex finds out he's going to be pissed!
Let's assume that there is one vaccine that is both safe and effective. Further assume that another is safe but not effective and a third is effective but not safe. Which vaccine is which?
The government-industrial-professional-journal complex would have us believe that every single vaccine is both safe and effective. Is this plausible?
We know that the COVID vaccines were not particularly effective. If they had been effective, we wouldn't need 3 or 4 boosters each year. We know that children rarely, if ever, suffered from severe COVID infections. So, were they effective for children? And, we know that young males had heart complications. Were they safe for young males? If the COVID vaccines are cause to doubt the claim that all vaccines are both safe and effective then which other vaccines should we doubt?
We know that FDA can't tolerate the thought of applying the Gold Standard of science (i.e., a placebo-controlled trial) to vaccines. This alone should be sufficient to raise alarms.
Finally, when the Henry Ford Health system did a study of their patients who were vaccinated vs. those who were not vaccinated, the former were discovered to have a multiple of chronic health conditions compared to the unvaccinated. So HFH refused to publish the results. They were leaked and can be found on the internet.
The one thing we should be most skeptical about is the combination of some three dozen vaccines administered in multiple doses. Is it plausible that the combination of all these vaccines, the cumulative side-effects of all these doses, is safe?
Why Alex, don’t you know vaccines are sacrosanct? Don’t touch that third rail.
(The very reason we can’t have legitimate science anymore- vaccines are just one medical establishment “god”)
It is! Literally a cult. It’s like the rules of science fail when it comes to their established “gods” — the gods must be right so we won’t test it
Glad you're starting to see how vaccine trials are actually conducted. Now go read the clinical trial protocols and data for the vaccines on the market with the same level of scrutiny. Look at the study design, comparator, follow-up period, endpoints, exclusion criteria, and how safety and adverse events were evaluated and reported. Don't just accept anyone else's characterization of the evidence - including mine. Read the underlying data and trial structures yourself and decide whether the evidence meets the standard you believe is appropriate for giving an otherwise healthy child a medical intervention.
Kennedy is nothing more than a figurehead now. The number 2 guy is running the show.
You write “nobody is forced into a trial” which is the same to me as I’m not forced to take it either. Every time any doctor asks me about any vaccine my answer is always “would you give this to your parents or children?” Many times their answer is absolutely. Then I say you can poison your own family I’ll decline.
sadly I'm afraid that you are right. I'm also afraid that he's damaging his reputation by remaining in the administration. listen to him on Rogan, tying himself in knots while trying to justify Trump's EO on glyphosate. he's destroying his own credibility. I wish he had quit like Joe Kent.
Question: do foreign FDA-equivalent agencies (eg in Europe or UK) require pharmaceutical companies to run better vaccine trials for approval or do most countries in the world just accept the vaccine trial results from the USA?
If you haven’t followed Del Bigtree, Aaron Siri, and Informed Consent Action Network’s work in this subject area, you have missed comprehensive discoveries and contributions. If you have followed and have made no mention of them, you are unethical.
Alex, you missed 2 other features of vaccine trials that renders them useless- the short duration of the trials and that they are usually underpowered. in those Hep B trials, the subjects (all 140 of them) were followed for 4 days in one study and 5 days in another. if the vaccine manufacturers were subject to litigation, they would have an interest in discovering the possible long term effects of their products and the trials might have lasted a few years. since they have no worries about liability, they want to race through the study in the shortest amount of time possible so they DON'T discover any problems with it.
i had friends in the Moderna trials- the husband was in the treatment arm and the wife was in the control group. after two months, the study was unblinded and the wife took the shot- end of control group! how could anyone make any claims about "long term" safety when the "term" was only 2 months?
to make matters worse, the participants weren't followed at all after that. the husband was so freaked out about getting covid that he got himself 2 Pfizer shots and was itching for a booster!! the wife came down with the Delta variant and called me for help! then on New Years, they all came to stay here- my friend, her husband, her son, his girlfriend- all covid vaccinated to the max- and her unvaccinated mother. after they left, they ALL, except for the mother came down with Omicron.
and those studies were brilliant compared to the way childhood vaccine studies are done! there were lots of people in the studies and there was an actual placebo. you can't make that claim about a single vaccine on the childhood schedule!
100%
Question: while I sort of understand giving vaccine test subjects a different vaccine/drug, why is the comparison of side effects between the two vaccines and not between the side effects suffered by those getting the tested vaccine and a baseline of NO side effects (as would be the case for someone not getting the tested vaccine)?
Because Pharma is responsible for reporting all side effects as determined by the pt. You get a vaccine trial drug on Monday. Tuesday you get a headache (report). You take Motrin. On Wed your stomach is upset (report--even if its Motrin's fault), Thursday you're fine but Fri you go out and have chili nachos and lo and behold on Sat you have bad GERD and feel queasy (that's a report as well). So NO side effects is not actually how people live. Look at it from the other perspective---in many, many trials 30% of people get better with the PLACEBO. I mean like even their BP goes down! That's why a good drug better help way more than 50% of the time.
Well, this is very disappointing to read. We have pretenders atop "the science".
What if this is all for naught?(or far worse, darker as Franklin implied)
If viruses don’t exist (no scientific evidence that they do), contagion is a myth(multiple contagion studies failed miserably to prove contagion), and bacteria don’t cause disease(germ theory disproven by multiple studies), then truly it is for naught!
What if this country’s poor health is because we’re basing our healthcare on false principles?