@o2b Well lol, whilst a bit of a dump of information, I'll try my best to get through it throughout the day.
Firstly, I'll reply to the point on 'Robert Kennedy Jr' and his 'activities in India'.
To begin with, Robert Kennedy is a nobody. I don't think the political dynasty of the Kennedy's is very influential within today's age, as their power has been dwindling ever since John's assassination. I don't give much credence to a man who uses the surname of a past, influential relative of his to build a platform for himself. Do I seriously think that he is given extraordinary insight into a secret world we civilians don't have access to? I don't think so. Unless he attends some political dinners he might be invited to.
A lengthy exposition? Where? All I can find when googling it as that he shared some captioned image on Instagram, and as a result
got his account blocked for spreading misinformation for an already debunked theory. Surprisingly, it seems that to hear his important information one has to buy his book. If it is such an issue, why is this man charging for the pleasure of the information?
Neither is he a doctor. A man who is intent on spreading information such as he does either should have a medical background, or have a team of medical experts under their employment (such as Bill Gates). He has a degree in American history and literature and a masters in Law. So in what capacity is he speaking on vaccines? He is no more than a layman, such as you or I.
Where are the citations? Superscripts?
Hundreds of thousands of infected children, there must be data for it.
Where have they came from? It appears as though they have come out of thin air.
I can't find it. Can you? The study they mention says they '
may have been paralysed' - a claim by one 'leading paediatrician'. Who?
Also, why is Bill Gates on the article if it's about the 1970s and 1980s? The foundation was formed in 2000. Gates didn't even step down as Microsoft CEO until that same year, so I don't think he was involved in vaccines in the decades before as he was busy with Microsoft. What does this have to do with him?
All I can find is this fact-check article where the earliest record they could find about this was from none other than Robert Kennedy himself in a
lengthy Instagram (of all things) post. As for the cases of the vaccine which mutated, and possibly/did cause paralysis?
17. In twenty one years. The last two being in 2010.
Similar was the case in Africa. A week after World Health Organisation (WHO) declared that its decade-long vaccination campaign in Africa was successful, its own
oral vaccine itself has sparked a new Polio outbreak in the continent. The outbreak was caused by mutation of strain in vaccine.
A new outbreak? An outbreak? The same article later says it was two children. Vaccines aren't perfect. They aren't meant to be. There will always be mutations, such as with the Indian polio vaccine.
Similar was the case in Africa. A week after World Health Organisation (WHO) declared that its decade-long vaccination campaign in Africa was successful, its own
oral vaccine itself has sparked a new Polio outbreak in the continent. The outbreak was caused by mutation of strain in vaccine.
According to another peer reviewed study published in a respected journal by the world’s most authoritative vaccine scientists,
Bill Gates DTP vaccine killed 10 times more African girls than the disease itself.
The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems. Although, such study was never performed before 2017, Bill Gates and the Vaccine Alliance GAVI and WHO pushed the vaccines on unsuspecting African babies.
This is grossly misleading. The fact this site even felt comfortable making such a claim which so contradicts
the study it is basing such a statement on, seriously affects any credence it may have. This is disgusting 'journalism', if you can even call it that.
The study which they are even basing this on says themselves that the 'vaccine
may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis'. Yes, I also cede that the study says those vaccinated with DTP have a '5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated', but this is a separate debate and issue on the ethics of such vaccinations. Is the risk of such worth it, to prevent the death of children? This comes down to a matter of subjective ethics more-so than anything.
I couldn't find anything about the DPT vaccine being 'pushed on unsuspecting African babies'. It seems that this 'journal' has conflated one vaccine for another, as I found claims for a meningitis vaccine apparently being 'pushed'. Again, another example of the negligence apparent within this journal.
This was debunked. The article finds the sources of the claims made.
Moreover, in unauthorised clinical trials
Bill Gates funded NGO PATH killed tribal girls in India and got away with it.
[end of excerpt]
These aren't findings. This 'raft of evidence' literally has 'alleged' in the title - there's nothing definite. If there is so much evidence, of which is so strong, it would be a lot more than alleged.
Additionally, if he had been doing so badly, I don't think the Indian Prime Minister would have told Gates in a call how he
appreciated the work the foundation was doing, in 2020.
Again, they've misled the source of their article. The
paper of which they have linked in their mention of 'clinical trials' speaks not of the deaths sustained, but that the NGO didn't file the proper documentation necessary under Indian law. The paper states that much of the issues of documentation stems from the Government itself, and that its legislation needs to be strengthened - as the paper's primary focus is about NGO's being involved with healthcare within developing countries. The main point of the article is not that there
were human rights abuses, but that owing to the weak governmental regimes, there is the
potential.
"While claims of human rights abuses resulting from these trials across Africa may be unsupported, the trials had the same potential for abuse as in India because of the weak legal regime governing trials in these countries. In fact, an analysis of national laws across relevant African countries shows that they have a generally less developed legal system governing clinical trials than in India, so the potential for abuse is even greater. Thus, an analysis of the national laws across these African countries hosting the Gates Foundation funded trials is still necessary to illustrate the very weak laws and the ease through which potential abuse can happen,"
I don't think either of us will find an apology. He doesn't owe one.
The horse dewormer is ivermectin
Thank you for that. As I said, I couldn't remember the name and all I could recall on the medicine was that it was referred to as a parasitic for horses.
Perhaps it does work.
As for the article, it's a little bit misleading. He wasn't dying, he was on a respirator with '
more than 50% chance'. A rather vague estimate, all in all. So perhaps the ivermectin did save him - or perhaps it was the respirator, which he was never taken off of. You cannot definitively conclude his recovery was solely down to ivermectin - if you gave him calpol before, only for him to recover, I don't think people would go saying that calpol is a miracle covid drug.
Perhaps it does work, but there's no studies. I found this one from July, which concluded that "current very low- to low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID-19. The completed studies are small and few are considered high quality". Until there's substantive evidence, I will remain sceptical, and it's clear why hospitals will refuse to use it.
If it has worked for people, that's great. But one also has to consider that it could also be down to a variety of factors, unless there's a case of someone using only ivermectin whilst having a low survivability rate (particularly if they're amongst the older generations).
Out of curiosity, do you read and find the sources of what you read? These articles are rife with misleading statements which the sources contradict in some form or another. Not a single one holds any credibility.
