idsrdum

On a related note, check out the Anti-Semitism Act of 2025.

quote:

---

This bill provides statutory authority for the requirement that the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights take into consideration the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA's) working definition of antisemitism when reviewing or investigating complaints of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. According to the IHRA's working definition, antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. 

---

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/558

It is very problematic that a law could be passed that uses a "working definition" from a third party.

Hate is an emotion that should be avoided, but do we want our government making laws against it? What a ridiculously slippery slope.

As for Ted Cruz, it was informative to hear him in the Tucker Carlson interview state: “I came into the Congress 13 years ago with the stated intention of being the leading defender of Israel in the United States Senate, and I’ve worked every day to do that.”

Any St. Tammany people remember this one? It was the case where the guy that got pulled over had a friend who recorded the whole interaction. That recording demonstrated the arresting officer had completely fabricated the details of the field sobriety test. Yet, initially, no criminal investigation took place...

"I didn't see it as a criminal act. I'm the hiring and firing authority as the sheriff. I make those decisions to whether we open up an internal investigation"

LINK

If you want to dig deeper, this is an informative paper on the many potential risks of acetaminophen, not just neurodevelopmental, but reproductive and urogenital disorders as well.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34556849/

I have wondered why the recent FDA new conference focused only on the Autism angle since there seems to be a lot of red flags with this drug. Some of the references in the above paper go back to the 1990's - so it not new information.

quote:

---

They destroy language and definitions to bend society

---

Did you see how Obama used the word violence the other day?

quote:

---

Barack Obama has accused President Donald Trump of “violence against the truth” for linking autism to the use of Tylenol by pregnant women.

---

LINK

Anyone else notice that one of the links on the Whitehouse.gov page was to a 2021 Consensus Statement which included safety concerns beyond Autism? Why did the FDA ignore these other concerns in their letter to physicians? Note that APAP and Paracetamol = acetaminophen.

Paracetamol use during pregnancy - a call for precautionary action

quote:

---

The experimental evidence of urogenital and reproductive effects
Consistent with evidence from epidemiological studies, exposure to APAP has been linked to abnormalities in testicular function, sperm abnormalities and the development of male reproductive disorders [across a range of studies involving in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo models (Supplementary Table 2). These data suggest that several mechanisms of action result in decreases in hormones critical for normal reproductive development and inhibition of germ cell proliferation and differentiation. For example, experimental studies have suggested that APAP can reduce testosterone production in the human fetal testis. Treatment of pregnant mice and rats with APAP has been found to cause urogenital abnormalities, such as reduced AGD in male offspring that is coupled to decreased hormonal levels during the masculinization programming window. Differences and inconsistencies remain between studies that might be related to several factors, including species, strain, age, developmental stage, dose, duration, and route and schedule of administration, among others. However, strong evidence from rodent studies and experiments with human cells and tissue performed in several independent laboratories shows that both acute (for example, 24 h) and long-term (for example, 1 week) exposure to APAP results in a reduction in fetal androgens

Four independent research teams have found consistently that prenatal APAP exposure can reduce female reproductive health and fertility. These teams utilized different models in both rats and mice with APAP exposure at doses equivalent or close to the maximal human recommended dose from 7 days post coitum to birth or from 13.5 days post coitum to birth. The combined data show that APAP exposure results in the reduction of primordial germ cells and delayed meiotic entry, which leads to a decreased number of follicles in adult ovaries and subsequent infertility through early-onset ovarian insufficiency. Importantly, the effects of APAP on female development have not yet been properly investigated in human observational studies.

---

Apparently preclinical data as detailed above is extensive, some of which goes back decades.

While I wasn't a fan of Trump's delivery on this topic, perhaps he has caused appropriate attention to be given to the probability that acetaminophen is not the benign drug many believe it to be.

Here is an interesting conversation on the topic. Well worth a listen.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

The presentation to the innate immune system is not different

---

The route of delivery with Covid is injection. The route of delivery with natural infection is mucosal. This can effect immune response.

quote:

---

The presentation to the innate immune system is not different. I have no idea what 'the antigen is different with non-live vaccines' means, as that sentence borders on nonsense.

---

Is immune imprinting with a single antigen is different than imprinting from the whole virus?

quote:

---

It's something the human body can do extremely well. This sounds like something you read somewhere and thought profound

---

Repeatedly activating the adaptive arm doesn't have the potential to cause immune dysregulation?

quote:

---

They probably don't, or at least, we don't have significant evidence of this, but again, this is the question one might pose if they believed the vaccines were worse that the diseases which they protect against.

---

Where is the desire and funding to study potential issues here? Is absence of evidence is evidence of of absence?

quote:

---

Maybe you should try that again. It has been a while since you mentioned antibody-dependent enhancement. Did that every play out? You certainly warned about it enough.

---

I'm not sure how many times I warned about it but it did alarm me to read in the EUA that it was an 'Unknown Risk' of Covid vaccination. I felt people should be aware of it. Didn't a Cleveland Clinic study show the more vaccines the more susceptible to Covid in healthcare workers? Might that be antibody-dependent enhancement of infection?

quote:

---

If you go to page 1184 of Cellular Immunology, it says this explicitly.

---

I have Janeway's ninth edition. Obviously, it is beyond complex for a layperson but it definitely seems to over-focus on adaptive immunity and under-focus on innate immunity. I was disappointed it doesn't even mention 'trained innate immunity'. Does your Cellular Immunology textbook? It is said to be a paradigm shift in immunology.

quote:

---

Interacting with you is a good argument for gatekeeping knowledge.

---

Sorry you feel that way.

quote:

---

How have you gotten this much stupider? I guess you are on the side of Polio. Sad!

---

Lol. I am not 'on the side of polio' whatever that may mean, I was just pointing out the parallels of Polio and Covid.

Look I know you believe that vaccines are just "mimicking a natural process". But is that is not quite accurate. The route of delivery is different, the antigen is different with non-live vaccines, and most importantly the presentation to the innate immune system is different. What effect does this have on innate/adaptive homeostasis? And how might this factor in other diseases? Do we know, or do we just measure pathogen specific antibodies and call the vaccine a success?

According to ChatGPT:

quote:

---

How Non-Live Vaccines Differ from Natural Infection and Possible Health Effects

Innate Immune Activation:

Natural infection exposes the immune system to a broad range of natural PAMPs continuously, leading to strong, diverse PRR activation and robust innate immune training.

Non-live vaccines usually lack these natural PAMPs and rely on adjuvants to stimulate PRRs, resulting in narrower, often less sustained innate activation.

T Helper (Th) Response Profile:

Natural infection tends to induce a balanced Th1/Th2/Th17 response, appropriate for clearing the pathogen and training immune regulation.

Non-live vaccines often skew towards a Th2-biased response (antibody-heavy), which may not fully protect against certain infections needing strong Th1 cellular immunity.

Potential Impact on Overall Health

Reduced innate training and skewed Th responses can lead to weaker or less durable immunity, affecting protection against both target and unrelated pathogens.

It might influence susceptibility to allergies, autoimmune conditions, or other immune-related diseases due to altered immune regulation.

Overall, vaccines that don’t fully mimic natural infection may miss opportunities to promote broad, balanced, and long-lasting immune health.

---

If ChatGPT is wrong here (it happens) let me know.

ChatGPT helped refine my take:

The widespread promotion of mRNA vaccination—a novel platform using a novel antigen—for low-risk populations, including babies, children, and healthy young adults, was a deeply flawed public health strategy. This approach failed to account for critical immunological realities such as immune imprinting and the potential for detrimental non-specific effects, especially in developing immune systems. These are well-known concepts within vaccinology and immunology, yet were rarely, if ever, communicated to the public.

For those at genuinely high risk of severe COVID-19, the calculated risk of a novel intervention may have been justified. But extending this intervention to entire populations—without transparent risk stratification—was scientifically and ethically indefensible.

The individuals and institutions responsible for shaping and promoting these blanket policies should be held accountable for disregarding known immunological principles and for undermining public trust. This was not sound science; it was a failure of scientific integrity and responsible policy-making.

quote:

---

But the comparison here is between the same set of immunogenic material

---

It is NOT the same. The vaccine includes lipid nanoparticles and the spike mRNA is modified with substitutions. Wasn't there a Nobel prize for this? Also the delivery is IM rather than mucosal - how does that affect responses?

Given that antibody titers were much greater in the multiple mRNA vaccinated than with natural infection, might we assume that vaccine may indeed be more immunogenic?

quote:

---

Your body is making those antibodies anyway. Because you are always dealing with antigenic material. Much of it won't result in anything, this line of resource trade-off is nonsensical.

---

Well doesn't the immune system have finite resources? And new specific antibodies have to go through clonal expansion, right? Which may not even be necessary in a natural infection as evidenced during Covid with the lack of seroconversion in some people who were exposed or infected.

Also, with mRNA vaccines the antibody titers generated were 10-20 times greater than with a natural infection. This seems like a big deal, no? It also appears it was unexpected as LabCorp had to raise the upper limit on their spike antibody test from 2,500 to 25,000 units in 2022.

According to ChatGPT -

quote:

---

Producing and maintaining very high levels of antibodies requires substantial metabolic resources. When the adaptive immune system is highly activated—such as during repeated or strong antigen exposure—it can affect other areas of the immune system.

This includes:

Suppression of innate immune responses, especially through regulatory cytokines that prevent overactivation but may also dampen early defense against unrelated pathogens.

Immune cell exhaustion, where chronically stimulated B and T cells become less responsive or dysfunctional.

Skewing of immune response types, potentially reducing effectiveness against intracellular infections or impairing immune surveillance of cancer cells.

Increased risk of autoimmune mechanisms in genetically predisposed individuals due to heightened immune activity.

Competition for biological resources, which can impact overall immune system balance and function.

These effects are not guaranteed in every individual but are biologically plausible and supported by immunological mechanisms and evidence from vaccine and infection studies. They highlight the need to consider immune system balance, not just stimulation.

---

Is this bad AI info?