The health of the people in our country

[Glass1/2fullguy]

I challenge everyone to put their political views aside and listen to Robert Kennedy Jr’s interview on Fox News Sunday from this morning. What he had to say about health care and our country’s food supply is an issue by itself that would have me voting for him. It echos what I was saying all through the pandemic. Why would our government push for everyone to get a vaccine when really what we need is to get healthy? It’s a legitimate question everyone should ask ourselves.

 

[CP87]

I challenge everyone to put their political views aside and listen to Robert Kennedy Jr’s interview on Fox News Sunday from this morning. What he had to say about health care and our country’s food supply is an issue by itself that would have me voting for him. It echos what I was saying all through the pandemic. Why would our government push for everyone to get a vaccine when really what we need is to get healthy? It’s a legitimate question everyone should ask ourselves.

Agree this is a critical area, and agree that anyone bringing it to the forefront is a step in the right direction.

But, I don't think RFK Jr. is the right messenger. He is so deep into the anti-vax and conspiracy stuff, hard to imagine him guiding thoughtful policy in this direction. He has also aligned himself with the right, and that end of the spectrum is generally against any potential regulation of the food industry, public health departments, environmental regulation to improve air and water quality, universally available preventative care, etc. If you are committed to an anti-regulation stance and our food- and healthcare-systems being driven by a profit-motive, I am just not sure what you are going to do to effectively tackle the chronic health epidemic.

There is only so much that can be accomplished by a millionaire socialite publicly exercising in jeans and no shirt and telling people not to vaccinate their children.

 

[PCHawk]

Agree this is a critical area, and agree that anyone bringing it to the forefront is a step in the right direction.

But, I don't think RFK Jr. is the right messenger. He is so deep into the anti-vax and conspiracy stuff, hard to imagine him guiding thoughtful policy in this direction. He has also aligned himself with the right, and that end of the spectrum is generally against any potential regulation of the food industry, public health departments, environmental regulation to improve air and water quality, universally available preventative care, etc. If you are committed to an anti-regulation stance and our food- and healthcare-systems being driven by a profit-motive, I am just not sure what you are going to do to effectively tackle the chronic health epidemic.

There is only so much that can be accomplished by a millionaire socialite publicly exercising in jeans and no shirt and telling people not to vaccinate their children.

If that's your opinion on Kennedy (which is fair because that's what the media wants you to think) you should really listen to him on the Rogan podcast. Even if you walk away still thinking all vaccines are completely fine, you will at least understand why and how he thinks what he does.

Just a quick spoiler alert, he doesn't say vaccines cause autism. He says it's possible they do and it's really shady that everyone refuses to even look into it.

 

[PCHawk]

Also don't be fooled. Kennedy is a Democrat. He's just a Democrat from 10 years ago, which is more like a Republican today. He just couldn't run as a Democrat because Democrats did everything they could to eliminate their competition, like force people out of their primary and arrest the other party's primary leader.

 

[PCHawk]

I challenge everyone to put their political views aside and listen to Robert Kennedy Jr’s interview on Fox News Sunday from this morning. What he had to say about health care and our country’s food supply is an issue by itself that would have me voting for him. It echos what I was saying all through the pandemic. Why would our government push for everyone to get a vaccine when really what we need is to get healthy? It’s a legitimate question everyone should ask ourselves.

Not preaching health is bad enough. But now they praise obesity.

 

[CP87]

If that's your opinion on Kennedy (which is fair because that's what the media wants you to think) you should really listen to him on the Rogan podcast. Even if you walk away still thinking all vaccines are completely fine, you will at least understand why and how he thinks what he does.

Just a quick spoiler alert, he doesn't say vaccines cause autism. He says it's possible they do and it's really shady that everyone refuses to even look into it.

It has been looked into extensively and there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism (aside from a single case series that was incredibly flawed and the scientific community considers fraudulent), and much evidence has piled up indicating that a link is incredibly unlikely. If one has an understanding of evidence quality and the importance of weight of evidence, it is immediately obvious that most of what RFK, Jr. says is bunk.

Unfortunately, most do not have a strong understanding of how to interpret scientific evidence, and hence the online "wellness" space is a cesspool of people trying to make a buck and gain influence by preying on this naivete and people's desire to be well. I have a loved one who has fallen deep down this hole, and who subsequently got cancer. Their desire to listen to online wellness gurus instead of their oncologist is going to cost them years that could have been enjoyed with their loved ones.

 

[PCHawk]

It has been looked into extensively and there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism (aside from a single case series that was incredibly flawed and the scientific community considers fraudulent), and much evidence has piled up indicating that a link is incredibly unlikely. If one has an understanding of evidence quality and the importance of weight of evidence, it is immediately obvious that most of what RFK, Jr. says is bunk.

Unfortunately, most do not have a strong understanding of how to interpret scientific evidence, and hence the online "wellness" space is a cesspool of people trying to make a buck and gain influence by preying on this naivete and people's desire to be well. I have a loved one who has fallen deep down this hole, and who subsequently got cancer. Their desire to listen to online wellness gurus instead of their oncologist is going to cost them years that could have been enjoyed with their loved ones.

I'm pretty sure his point is the people that do the studies set them up to pass because they are the ones making money when they do pass the studies. Have you listened to the Rogan podcast? I know everyone's brain works different but pretty much everyone who sides with him now says they used to think he was a nut before they listened to him. If you've listened to long interviews with him and still have that opinion, it's completely understandable. But if you've only heard clips of him talking and read articles about things he's said, I'm betting you have a completely different opinion of him than you would if you heard him explain his point in Ling interview form.

I'm not a huge believer in medicine. I think a lot of them are designee to keep you taking them. That said, if I end up with cancer, a doctor is the first place I'll go. I'll also do a bunch of other shit too tho. I think it's a mistake to rely 100% on one thing.

 

[CP87]

I'm pretty sure his point is the people that do the studies set them up to pass because they are the ones making money when they do pass the studies. Have you listened to the Rogan podcast? I know everyone's brain works different but pretty much everyone who sides with him now says they used to think he was a nut before they listened to him. If you've listened to long interviews with him and still have that opinion, it's completely understandable. But if you've only heard clips of him talking and read articles about things he's said, I'm betting you have a completely different opinion of him than you would if you heard him explain his point in Ling interview form.

I'm not a huge believer in medicine. I think a lot of them are designee to keep you taking them. That said, if I end up with cancer, a doctor is the first place I'll go. I'll also do a bunch of other shit too tho. I think it's a mistake to rely 100% on one thing.

Science is not run in a centralized, top-down manner. The people doing research on efficacy of vaccines, or a purported link between vaccines and autism, have no pony in the show...they just want to help the scientific community get closer to the truth. Outside of a belief in a global cabal that controls all aspects of our lives, there would be no way to orchestrate a world-wide decentralized research community into producing a desired outcome.

I have no need to give up 3 hours of my life to listen to RFK, Jr. blather on to Joe Rogan because none of that will change what the weight of evidence says on the matter. I do know how to find and interpret evidence, and the body of evidence lends absolutely no support to the notion that vaccines cause autism or that our scheduled vaccines for deadly diseases have been anything but a massive success story.

There are many areas of science that are unsettled. To take a recent example, it still is not entirely clear if COVID vaccinations are worth it for kids (the medical community feels the benefits very likely outweigh any potential risks, and I tend to agree). Or, we have little direct evidence that masks are effective in preventing spread of COVID, although we have reasons to believe they could be. But vaccines and autism is not one of those unsettled areas, nor is the overwhelming efficacy of our scheduled childhood vaccines in preventing death and disability in our children*.

* acknowledging, of course, that nothing is ever proven conclusively in science...conclusions are drawn based upon the body of evidence available at the time, and new discoveries and technology always has the chance of dramatically changing the evidence

 

[CP87]

I know everyone's brain works different but pretty much everyone who sides with him now says they used to think he was a nut before they listened to him.

Yes, bullshit artists are convincing, and they prey on individuals' fears and insecurities, for example the fear of some harm coming to their children. They also know how to peddle pseudoscientific bullshit to seem like their ideas are backed by evidence to those unfamiliar with how science and evidence-based reasoning works.

 

[PCHawk]

Yes, bullshit artists are convincing, and they prey on individuals' fears and insecurities, for example the fear of some harm coming to their children. They also know how to peddle pseudoscientific bullshit to seem like their ideas are backed by evidence to those unfamiliar with how science and evidence-based reasoning works.

I thought exactly like you before covid. The way they were so positive the vaccine worked great with no serious side affects, the way they discredited every scientist that said anything bad about the vaccine, and the amount of money they made was so obvious it made me question past vaccines too. You say it takes a global cabal, but really all it takes it a handful of people in very powerful jobs to make sure anyone who says anything negative is called an anti vaxer and shunned.

 

[PCHawk]

To be clear I had never had even I tiny fear of getting a vaccine before covid and I made fun of people who did. (Behind their backs of course because I'm not an asshole)

 

[Glass1/2fullguy]

Science is not run in a centralized, top-down manner. The people doing research on efficacy of vaccines, or a purported link between vaccines and autism, have no pony in the show...they just want to help the scientific community get closer to the truth. Outside of a belief in a global cabal that controls all aspects of our lives, there would be no way to orchestrate a world-wide decentralized research community into producing a desired outcome.

I have no need to give up 3 hours of my life to listen to RFK, Jr. blather on to Joe Rogan because none of that will change what the weight of evidence says on the matter. I do know how to find and interpret evidence, and the body of evidence lends absolutely no support to the notion that vaccines cause autism or that our scheduled vaccines for deadly diseases have been anything but a massive success story.

There are many areas of science that are unsettled. To take a recent example, it still is not entirely clear if COVID vaccinations are worth it for kids (the medical community feels the benefits very likely outweigh any potential risks, and I tend to agree). Or, we have little direct evidence that masks are effective in preventing spread of COVID, although we have reasons to believe they could be. But vaccines and autism is not one of those unsettled areas, nor is the overwhelming efficacy of our scheduled childhood vaccines in preventing death and disability in our children*.

* acknowledging, of course, that nothing is ever proven conclusively in science...conclusions are drawn based upon the body of evidence available at the time, and new discoveries and technology always has the chance of dramatically changing the evidence

And why exactly do you “tend to agree”? What statistics can you provide that would bring you to such conclusion? Children's risk for serious disease for those who have no underlining health issues was and is practically non-existent. So what benefit does the vaccine provide to a healthy child? The ultimate factual benefit from not giving the covid vaccine to a healthy child is such child would have zero chance of having an adverse reaction from the vaccine. And I’m not “anti vax” per say. I suggested to my unhealthy father when he asked for my opinion on whether or not he should get it I told him if I was in his position I’d probably get it. I have zero problems w/ those who want it to get it. Zero. I do have a problem w/ government and the medical community pushing drugs on people who don’t need it and/or to simply treat/alleviate symptoms. Processed food, people not exercising/taking care of their bodies, and having a drug to relieve any & every symptom known to man is the main reasons our country is so sick. It’s time we have people in place who are willing to fight the worst epidemic glaring us right in our face.

 

[CP87]

And why exactly do you “tend to agree”? What statistics can you provide that would bring you to such conclusion? Children's risk for serious disease for those who have no underlining health issues was and is practically non-existent. So what benefit does the vaccine provide to a healthy child? The ultimate factual benefit from not giving the covid vaccine to a healthy child is such child would have zero chance of having an adverse reaction from the vaccine. And I’m not “anti vax” per say. I suggested to my unhealthy father when he asked for my opinion on whether or not he should get it I told him if I was in his position I’d probably get it. I have zero problems w/ those who want it to get it. Zero. I do have a problem w/ government and the medical community pushing drugs on people who don’t need it and/or to simply treat/alleviate symptoms. Processed food, people not exercising/taking care of their bodies, and having a drug to relieve any & every symptom known to man is the main reasons our country is so sick. It’s time we have people in place who are willing to fight the worst epidemic glaring us right in our face.

Because the risk of adverse events (e.g. myocarditis, pericarditis, anaphylaxis) is extremely low (1 in a million range), and all of these events typically resolve with no long term effects. While children have very low risk of serious outcome with COVID, the risk is not zero, and there is still much we do not know about long-term impact of COVID.

I also understand (generally speaking) how the immune system and vaccines work, as well as the VAERS system, so I am not easily taken in by fear-mongering.

 

[PCHawk]

Because the risk of adverse events (e.g. myocarditis, pericarditis, anaphylaxis) is extremely low (1 in a million range), and all of these events typically resolve with no long term effects. While children have very low risk of serious outcome with COVID, the risk is not zero, and there is still much we do not know about long-term impact of COVID.

I also understand (generally speaking) how the immune system and vaccines work, as well as the VAERS system, so I am not easily taken in by fear-mongering.

You can argue that it's falling for fear mongering that convinces people they need the vaccine. I didn't not take the covid vaccine because I was scared of it. I didn't take it because by the time it came out I had zero fear of the disease it was supposed to protect you from. So while some people say "I took the vaccine because I didn't fall for the fear mongering", other people say " I didn't take the vaccine because I didn't fall for the fear mongering". I supposed both are probably fine to say and both can be accurate at times and wrong at times.

 

[Westernhawk]

Interesting topic. I have a couple of thoughts:

1. Vaccines (in general) and healthy life choices, like a good diet and exercise, are not opposite issues. You can do both, as they are both preventive measures.
2. Our life expectancy (particularly white males) is decreasing due to diet, stress, alcohol, drugs, depression, and a lack of decent preventive health care.
3. I'm concerned that the conspiracy theorists have deemed "vaccines" as one broad category. You may feel that Covid boosters are unnecessary, and that's just fine. However, to lump them in with Measles and Mumps vaccines is dangerous, and very poorly informed. Vaccines are generally incredibly safe and life saving over the generations. Millions of lives have been saved by vaccines over the years.

I'm sure you guys have noticed this, but everything has become "all one way or another way" in our country. You either have to be "pro or anti" on any given issue. We've somehow lost the ability to see any shades of gray or see context. Aren't you all getting tired of this as well?

 

[Westernhawk]

Science is not run in a centralized, top-down manner. The people doing research on efficacy of vaccines, or a purported link between vaccines and autism, have no pony in the show...they just want to help the scientific community get closer to the truth. Outside of a belief in a global cabal that controls all aspects of our lives, there would be no way to orchestrate a world-wide decentralized research community into producing a desired outcome.

I have no need to give up 3 hours of my life to listen to RFK, Jr. blather on to Joe Rogan because none of that will change what the weight of evidence says on the matter. I do know how to find and interpret evidence, and the body of evidence lends absolutely no support to the notion that vaccines cause autism or that our scheduled vaccines for deadly diseases have been anything but a massive success story.

There are many areas of science that are unsettled. To take a recent example, it still is not entirely clear if COVID vaccinations are worth it for kids (the medical community feels the benefits very likely outweigh any potential risks, and I tend to agree). Or, we have little direct evidence that masks are effective in preventing spread of COVID, although we have reasons to believe they could be. But vaccines and autism is not one of those unsettled areas, nor is the overwhelming efficacy of our scheduled childhood vaccines in preventing death and disability in our children*.

* acknowledging, of course, that nothing is ever proven conclusively in science...conclusions are drawn based upon the body of evidence available at the time, and new discoveries and technology always has the chance of dramatically changing the evidence

Fantastic post, sir.

 

[PCHawk]

Interesting topic. I have a couple of thoughts:

1. Vaccines (in general) and healthy life choices, like a good diet and exercise, are not opposite issues. You can do both, as they are both preventive measures.
2. Our life expectancy (particularly white males) is decreasing due to diet, stress, alcohol, drugs, depression, and a lack of decent preventive health care.
3. I'm concerned that the conspiracy theorists have deemed "vaccines" as one broad category. You may feel that Covid boosters are unnecessary, and that's just fine. However, to lump them in with Measles and Mumps vaccines is dangerous, and very poorly informed. Vaccines are generally incredibly safe and life saving over the generations. Millions of lives have been saved by vaccines over the years.

I'm sure you guys have noticed this, but everything has become "all one way or another way" in our country. You either have to be "pro or anti" on any given issue. We've somehow lost the ability to see any shades of gray or see context. Aren't you all getting tired of this as well?

Completely agree with this but it's not just the conspiracy theorists who do that. The other side say "vaccines are safe and effective" without even questioning the obvious reality that some are safer or more effective than others.

If someone has gotten every vaccine possible and given their kids every vaccine possible, they're suddenly labeled an anti vaxer or conspiracy theorist if they say they don't trust a brand new technology with very little testing for a virus that is almost completely harmless to healthy people. Or the mere mention that it's possible that vaccines night be causing autism or allergies (even if you give the caviot that they're still overall worth the risk of playing Russian roulette with them because statistics are in your favor) instantly makes you a nut job. "Don't ask questions, just take our shot so we can improve our profits" isn't something you should be skeptical of at all.

 

[PCHawk]

Fantastic post, sir.

It is a fantastic post. Most of his are, on all subjects. But it does leave out the part where everyone who does question things gets shunned from the medical community. That part is fact. The only question is, are they getting shunned because they're wrong and everyone knows it? Or are they getting shunned because they're right (or possibly right) and they want to make sure no one believes them or follows their path of asking questions? I'm not sure how the general public could ever confidently answer that question. That's why I don't say I know for sure what's going on (just like Kennedy doesn't say he knows what's going on). I'll never touch the covid vax until I'm old because covid is almost 100% no risk to me. But I'll take a polio shot without even asking because that's scary as F (from the fear mongering) maybe?) and the vax has been around forever so probably won't kill me in a week.

 

[CP87]

It is a fantastic post. Most of his are, on all subjects. But it does leave out the part where everyone who does question things gets shunned from the medical community. That part is fact. The only question is, are they getting shunned because they're wrong and everyone knows it? Or are they getting shunned because they're right (or possibly right) and they want to make sure no one believes them or follows their path of asking questions? I'm not sure how the general public could ever confidently answer that question. That's why I don't say I know for sure what's going on (just like Kennedy doesn't say he knows what's going on). I'll never touch the covid vax until I'm old because covid is almost 100% no risk to me. But I'll take a polio shot without even asking because that's scary as F (from the fear mongering) maybe?) and the vax has been around forever so probably won't kill me in a week.

What this comes down to is epistemology, or how we think we know things.

I am of the view that we know things through accumulation and interpretation of evidence, and lacking evidence on a given topic, or if I lack the expertise and time to find and evaluate evidence on a certain topic, I will trust experts in that area.

You seem to be of the opinion that nothing can be known and everything is corrupt. In areas where the evidence is as unequivocal as it could be (e.g. vaccines and autism), you claim that the evidence cannot be trusted because of corrupt actors. That is an unfalsifiable position that is not really worth debating. You trust your intuition and internet "research" over the advice of experts and professionals because you believe everyone is out to make a buck off you. Your combination of cynicism, nihilism, and hubris leads you to believe that your opinion on these matters is as valid as that of anyone else, no matter their level of expertise.

Probably not much point in continuing this conversation. We can keep it to sports over on the other boards.

 

[HuckFinn]

What this comes down to is epistemology, or how we think we know things.

I am of the view that we know things through accumulation and interpretation of evidence, and lacking evidence on a given topic, or if I lack the expertise and time to find and evaluate evidence on a certain topic, I will trust experts in that area.

You seem to be of the opinion that nothing can be known and everything is corrupt. In areas where the evidence is as unequivocal as it could be (e.g. vaccines and autism), you claim that the evidence cannot be trusted because of corrupt actors. That is an unfalsifiable position that is not really worth debating. You trust your intuition and internet "research" over the advice of experts and professionals because you believe everyone is out to make a buck off you. Your combination of cynicism, nihilism, and hubris leads you to believe that your opinion on these matters is as valid as that of anyone else, no matter their level of expertise.

Probably not much point in continuing this conversation. We can keep it to sports over on the other boards.

OK. But I am grateful for the well thought out posts you delivered.