Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
1/15/2022 11:07 AM
. . . What's also an issue is that only about 17% of young kids are getting vaccinated, even if their parents are.
Edit: Robert Malone, M.D., the man who developed and still holds patents on the mRNA technology used to manufacture the Pfizer and Moderna Covid19 vaccines, has done his own analysis and concluded that the risk/benefit cutoff is not age 18 but 30. He may or may not be correct in this assertion, but his voice needs to be heard by the general public, who can make up their own minds.
I don't understand what this means. "His voice needs to be heard" -- why? And through what mediums? Clearly his voice is being heard, as you're telling us about it. He's also appeared on tons of podcasts; the problem is that in the process he keeps saying demonstrably false things.
Some examples:
-- He tweeted an article claiming the vaccine causes 2 deaths for every 3 it saves. That study has been debunked and ultimately retracted due to flawed methodology.
-- He claimed spike proteins generated by the vaccine are "toxic to cells"
-- He claimed those spike proteins cause irreparable harm to vital organs in children
-- He's repeated an easily debunked conspiracy theory that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines have not been approved in the US
-- He claimed in July that the vaccine causes the virus to become more transmissible and vaccinated people create a risk to the unvaccinated.
-- He repeatedly mentions a misinterpretation of data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System cited by Tucker Carlson indicating "an explosion of deaths from the vaccine" that there's no evidence of.
-- He claimed a state in India "crushed Covid" using ivermectin, and then reached an agreement with the United States not to share that information.
-- He claimed vaccinated people are 4.5x more likely to catch Omicron. Here's he's just failing basic math and looking at cases, without comparing the size of the unvaccinated population to the size of the vaccinated population.
It's very unclear to me what you mean when you say that he "needs to be heard by the general public" when he's a dissenting voice, in a context where there's much greater medical consensus supporting a different viewpoint, and he has such a long history of dubious claims. How does one decide what it means to be heard by the general public, how the message is disseminated, and which dissenting opinions get that treatment?
I also noticed that your edited out the only specific example (myocarditis) from your post. I assume that's because you realized that mRNA vaccines increase the risk by 4x, where as Covid infections increase the risk by 40x.
So very specifically, are the risks Malone cites and what data supports them? I get you're much more interested in your meta critique of the media, but it's not clear to me that media outlets largely ignoring him at this point isn't the right choice. What's the case they shouldn't? I think he's just out there saying what a whole bunch of people want to hear, and so people like Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, et al who immediately benefit from telling their audience what they want to hear amplify a credentialed Doctor who is willing to say those things. Even if he's wrong.
Last Edited: 1/15/2022 12:04:07 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame