I'm afraid this is all part of their anti-science agenda - a hallmark of cultism. The first step is always to dissuade followers from listening to experts, because once trust in evidence collapses, anything can be sold as truth.
He's doing this for a base that already doesn't trust the experts, right?
Either he's right and we get a medical breakthrough ('breakthrough' may be too zealous a word) , or he proves the experts right. Seems okay to me...
MAGA (MAHA? The 'cult' RFK has procured...) has been screaming "Don't trust the experts" for years. At some point, someone needs to validate the credibility of the experts for this subset of people. Otherwise, we'll get more cases of diseases we have already found vaccines for.
Trust needs to be re-established in these systems. I haven't looked at the data he's claiming is fraudulent, and I probably wouldn't understand it even if I did. I'm fine going with "People who know more than me in this area determined x,y, and z". However, I'm not naive enough to see a profit motive, and know the awful things some of these same companies have done in the name of profit.
I don't see the downside to "reviewing vaccines" but maybe I'm missing context. The article doesn't seem to provide the exact comments he made, just that he is questioning aluminum in vaccines.
I'm afraid this is all part of their anti-science agenda - a hallmark of cultism. The first step is always to dissuade followers from listening to experts, because once trust in evidence collapses, anything can be sold as truth.
He's doing this for a base that already doesn't trust the experts, right? Either he's right and we get a medical breakthrough ('breakthrough' may be too zealous a word) , or he proves the experts right. Seems okay to me...
MAGA (MAHA? The 'cult' RFK has procured...) has been screaming "Don't trust the experts" for years. At some point, someone needs to validate the credibility of the experts for this subset of people. Otherwise, we'll get more cases of diseases we have already found vaccines for.
Trust needs to be re-established in these systems. I haven't looked at the data he's claiming is fraudulent, and I probably wouldn't understand it even if I did. I'm fine going with "People who know more than me in this area determined x,y, and z". However, I'm not naive enough to see a profit motive, and know the awful things some of these same companies have done in the name of profit.
I don't see the downside to "reviewing vaccines" but maybe I'm missing context. The article doesn't seem to provide the exact comments he made, just that he is questioning aluminum in vaccines.