re: U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations - Vaccines

I didn’t provide anything.

This was a congressional hearing on a study done by doctors and you are acting like it was a couple of assholes in their garage.

Publish it or not. I’m not a doctor. But I was under impression the process of research involves small studies that have to be then replicated on a larger scale and then analyzed . And that during that process prior studies may be validated or invalidated. But to to that the original study would need to be published no?


I didn’t realize y’all in the med field just killed the studies you don’t like.

I’m not trying to demonize. But this reeks of gate keeping. And the response has been…. well more gate keeping

quote:

---

Being named Tiffany causes air pollution

---

That’s pretty cool.

But it’s amazing what a difference it makes when action is taken to head off a serious problem.

So a vaccine can’t do what it was intended to do AND also have side affects? Those are mutually exclusive?

Good logic there bud

If you’ll notice I haven’t made any comments about not using vaccines. I asked if shelving data from studies is common.
Which was the real purpose of the hearing.

quote:

---

Also, the vaccinated cohort had far less neurological issues and less cancer. So vaccines are good for the brain and prevent cancer?

---

Ok what are those numbers?

quote:

---

The study itself was blocked from being published - it may become published now


So then you don't have the actual data from the study. Well, that's convenient.

---

If you went and looked at the links before you reacted, you would see they have some of the data, and that the doctors at the Ford Institute set out to prove vaccinations were safe and their own study proved the opposite, so they shelved the study for fear of losing their jobs (their words).

I don't have any of the information in my possession, I just watched the hearing and listened to both sides. Read the data provided, read the links provided, wondered why they did not publish this and posted it here, and went looking for the study. The information is what exists.

I am no sure how that is convenient or inconvenient, it was never offered for peer review if duplication out of fear (again their words)