Great. Then lets have a truly scientific discussion about the merits and side effects of vaccines and leave the common BS behind. Where would you luke to start?
-
-
Replying to @mmelgar09 @2ndfor1st and
It is Holiday, but will address as I can. Both of us agree that the randomized controlled clinical trial or RCT is the “gold standard” research method, correct?
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @DrMichaelMaster @2ndfor1st and
When it’s ethical to do so, yes. We wouldn’t do a randomized trial to see whether antibiotics are effective for bacterial sepsis for example.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mmelgar09 @2ndfor1st and
Agreed. Ethics extremely important to me, Dr Melgar. On that note, do you believe the “trivial” amount of aluminum adjuvant, utilized in many vaccines & given via IM injection, is safe bc the “dose makes the poison,” despite Aluminum classification as a neurotoxin?
3 replies 6 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @DrMichaelMaster @2ndfor1st and
By definition the dose always makes the poison. Are you aware of any evidence that there is any substance that is poisonous regardless of concentration and dose?
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mmelgar09 @2ndfor1st and
So, by definition, aluminum adjuvant which is in many vaccines, is considered “safe?” Yes or no, please.
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @DrMichaelMaster @2ndfor1st and
Yes. The current dose of aluminum found in vaccines makes up only a portion of the total aluminum dose a child recorded from it environment and is considered safe.
4 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @mmelgar09 @DrMichaelMaster and
That should have said "received from its environment"
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mmelgar09 @DrMichaelMaster and
As a close relative of several highly educated docs whom I respect very much, I'd like to also point out that our best-educated medical professionals/govt. have frequently proven incorrect in their assessments of safety, etc. These matters, in my view, are evolving "science."
5 replies 17 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson @DrMichaelMaster and
And who’s “highly respected” advice would you prefer to take. The expert who has spent their life studying an issue or the person armed with a google search?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Sometimes; neither. For example the Viagra-blindness link was overlooked by FDA, manufacturer and all the experts who prescribe it but found by a practicing eye doctor who noticed a trend that the others said was impossible (at first).
-
-
Replying to @SharylAttkisson @DrMichaelMaster and
Im not sure this proves a point in any way. There were a handful of cases of the millions of users and no clear link. At any rate a suspicion is where research begins not where conclusions are made. Suspicions are always met with some skepticism as they should be until proven.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.