Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the HHS Secretary of the US, despite a long history of the contrary, now often pretends to be not against vaccinations. Yet, his recent actions depict an entirely different picture (if you read German, I have just summarised his vaccine-related deeds in an article for THE SPIEGEL). His latest in a long list of insanities is his decision to cut $500 million in funding for mRNA vaccine research.
To be precise, he tweeted this: “We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted. BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu. We’re shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.” As mRNA have saved millions of lives during the COVID pandemic and as research in this area is hugely promising, there is an expert consensus that Kennedy’s decision will cost lives and hinder progress.
Experts were quick and unanimous in emphasizing that there are virtually tons of data to show that mRNA vaccines are safe and effective. They warn that cutting funding for mRNA vaccine research will inevitably impact on our ability to improve this technology for existing and emerging diseases including cancer and HIV. The effects will affect public health in the US and globally.
“This isn’t prudent oversight, it’s self‑inflicted vulnerability. We’re weakening critical countermeasures at the very moment that global health risks are intensifying,” said Rick Bright, a former director of BARDA who was forced out of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) during the first Trump administration. “This decision will have severe consequences, measured in lost lives, when a rapid vaccine response is needed.”
Kennedy insists that he has consulted widely and that his decision is evidence-based: mRNA vaccinations do more harm than good, he decided, stating that there is no evidence that mRNA vaccines protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID. Yet, these vaccines were vital during the COVID pandemic, leading to dramatic declines in mortality. The technology has significant advantages, not least the speed of designing and producing vaccines against new infectious agents.
The scientific community has called on Kennedy to publish his evidence. Yet, he has not provided specific evidence backing his weird decision. It is not hard to guess why: his pseudo-evidence cannot possibly stand up because the evidence on mRNA is out there, everyone who is interested can read it, and it does not support what Kennedy claims.
In the absence of compelling evidence, his decision seems not just insane but, in my view, also criminal. We will all pay dearly for it. And that is why, in my view, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might belong into a straitjacket or a prison cell, but certainly not in the post of HHS Secretary of the US.
53 Responses to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the HHS Secretary of the US: does he belong into a straight jacket?
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
RFK Jr. recently pointed out the error in the excuse that the increase in autism is due to better diagnosis: If this were true then it would apply to all generations including ours > 70 year olds, but we are autism free, I never saw a case in my generation either. It only starts to increase after 1986:
https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/rfk-jr-delivers-the-perfect-response
thanks for the distraction but it’s BS, as you probably know.
@Lying Bob
Once again, you are pulling “vigilantfox” out of the conspiracy swamp. It seems that your brain has been eaten by the same worm that feasted on Kennedy’s.
You need to take your argument up with Dr Steven Hatfill, HHS adviser:
Dr. Hatfill said, “It was more dangerous to take a vaccine than it was to contract COVID-19 and be hospitalized with it.”:
https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/senior-hhs-adviser-confirms-covid
A MAJOR peer-reviewed study identified FIVE irrefutable grounds for the immediate market withdrawal of COVID-19 “vaccines”:
📢Widespread & Unified Calls for Market Withdrawal – More than 81,000 physicians, scientists, and concerned citizens, 240 elected officials, 17 public health & physician organizations, 2 State Republican Parties, 17 GOP County Committees, and 6 global studies demand immediate removal.
⚰️ Excess Mortality – More than 12 studies and VAERS confirm mass COVID-19 ‘vaccination’ led to a catastrophic number deaths — up to 17 million.
⚠️ FDA Class I Recall Indicated – 37,544 VAERS-reported deaths exceed past vaccine recall limits by up to 375,340%.
📉 Negative Efficacy – 7 studies have demonstrated that COVID-19 ‘vaccination’ increases your risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
🧬 DNA Contamination – 11 reports have found DNA contamination in COVID-19 vaccines, documented across multiple manufacturers, vaccine platforms, and geographic regions, with levels exceeding regulatory thresholds by up to 65,500%.
sorry to see that you have understood nothing about science!!!
Bullshit squared. You and your “hero” Vigilant Fox are and will remain a dump conspiracy theorist without a shred of knowledge about science, medicine, or pharmaceuticals.
By the way, Hatfill should rot in prison becasue he promoted hydroxychloroquine to treat the COVID-19 virus and supported Trumps insurrection in 2020.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill
(Wikipedia was captured long ago.)
“Zev” Zelenko treated over 5,000 covid patients from 2020 without losing any of them with the following protocols that included HCQ:
https://vladimirzelenkomd.com/treatment-protocol/
OH, DEAR!
You confirm my worst fears anout your stae of delusion.
If Dr. Zelenko recommended that you combat Covid-19 by taking strychnine or arsenic trioxide, you would do it. Wouldn’t you, @DeliriousBob?
https://forward.com/fast-forward/461865/zelenko-spouts-conspiracy-theories-anti-vaxx-sentiment-in-viral-video/
OK, so explain how Kanner and Asperger did their work on autism in the 1930s and ’40s? Who were all those folk in LD hospitals and special schools? Not to mention the ones mis-diagnosed as being psychotic?
Just because you did not see (or didn’t know that you saw) anyone autistic does not mean it didn’t exist, just that you are unobservant.
I’ve never seen anyone with malaria: does that mean I can claim it doesn’t exist?
‘OldBob’: “… > 70 year olds, but we are autism free”
Self-analysis isn’t your forte, obviously.😂
Being anonymous, your personal statements have zero trustworthiness therefore the following is a rhetorical question…
By “we are autism free” you are claiming that either
1. “we” have been medically tested for being on the autistic spectrum and our diagnoses were all negative;
OR
2. “we” have not been medically tested therefore, relying on only the absence of positive diagnoses (relying on only the absence of evidence), ‘OldBob’ can pretend that “we are autism free” whenever he wishes to troll Edzard’s blog.
TROLL [verb]
2a: to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content.
— Merriam-Webster
Feres M, Feres MFN.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2023 Mar 27;31:ed001.
PMCID: PMC10065758.
Are you 75? If so, how many folks have you met during your life so far who were autistic?
Our classes had >40 children in them for the first 5 years, then >30 teenagers for the next 7 years. No one dropped dead, fainted, had allergies or anything else apart from a broken collarbone (me) and a few with appendicitis – none had autism, we had everything else, all snotty nosed kids, we all caught measles, mumps etc, drank our milk at break times, ate our cooked school meals of pilchards and massed potatoes and cabbage at lunchtime (no processed food), got beat up with permanently scabbed knees as recreation break-times and all wore shirt and ties during the very occasional party when everyone was allowed to drink coca cola and eat hot dogs (a luxury) maybe twice a year only but no one had autism.
Then for the next >50 years of mainly contract work for >30 different companies likewise – where are all those one-in-36 with ASD?
I knew a work colleague who died of lung cancer, a man who died of throat cancer, a woman of 30 who died of cancer, a family member who died of colorectal cancer and myself with advanced prostate cancer, my grandfather who died of a stroke at 70, but no one with autism, or knew anyone who knew someone with autism from thousands of people who were of my generation. No one dropped dead playing football. That was unheard of.
That was an absurdly long-winded way of stating that your answer to my rhetorical question is 2.
“That was unheard of.”
Psst….Internet didn’t exist when you were young.
Exactly! And few people in the UK had a television receiver.
That’s true, and we made our own x-tal sets with an OA91, a ferrite rod, a condenser, and plenty of wire instead of being fed brain-mush from thousands of channels where grown adults play childish games.
Maybe you all are right and I am the most stupid here? One of the undiagnosed autistic, similar to covid’s; a-symptom-of-covid-disease-is-having-no-symptoms?
Ummm, it isn’t 1:36; 1:100 is a more commonly accepted figure these days.
IIRC, a list of crucial dates in the study of autism, publication of vital papers, development of asseszment tools and much more was given in a recent discussion here.
No doubt you’ll be wanting to go and have some words with Kanner, Asperger, Lorna Wing, Michael Rutter, Uta Frith and a whole host of others about how they got it all wrong. Not to mention a whole heap of us who worked in CAMHS and did the grunt work of assessments – yeah, you can tell me how I got it wrong…
@Old Bob
I recall research where modern psychology and psychiatry experts collected and re-evaluated patient data from old psychiatric institutions, as well as patient records from family doctors, mostly from the early 1930’s until the 1970’s.
A large number of cases that were originally diagnosed as ‘antisocial’ and ‘withdrawn’ and ‘extremely introverted’ right down to ‘imbecile’ and other descriptions that are now considered quite offensive were relabeled as falling under ASD as defined in more modern diagnostic handbooks. Maybe someone can provide a link to this research, as I can’t seem to find it right now.
And yes, around the 1970’s there were absolutely autistic kids around – I myself being one of them. And I knew of several other kids with similar ‘antisocial’ traits. But neither I or any one of those kids were ever diagnosed as such. Until decades later, that is. But I am very, very certain that in the 1970’s there were just as many ASD people around as today. Most of them simply weren’t recognized as such, and the autism definition of those days only covered the most extreme cases. Which is in fact the gist of many other comments here.
All of which will of course not stop you from brainlessly parroting the lies and nonsense about vaccines from a few self-declared ‘experts’ dwelling in the sewers of the Internet.
It’s pretty ironic: I found that most autistic people learn how to connect with the more neurotypical part of society by training themselves to e.g. recognize social signals, and mimicking social behaviour from others, even if that doesn’t come naturally at all – but there seems to be no analogous way for people like you to deal with your gullibility and stupidity in a more sensible way.
You just keep repeating the same nonsense and lies from the same people, without ever learning anything from the inevitable rebuttals and fact-checks. Which is probably why you are often categorized as a (rather dim) troll.
That ties with an informal review 3 of us once did.
We all trained at different hospitals in the mid-80s-early 90s, 2 in the north east and one in London, and we went through a load of patients we’d known on old style long-stay wards in light of what we later learned about autism and could identify significant numbers who would have been more correctly diagnosed as autistic.
Even in the late ’90s, when I was ward manager on a CAMHS in-patient unit, we had a teenage lad referred to us by a community psychiatrist as probably psychotic; we looked at him for about 5 minutes and saw right off that it was classic Kanner type autism. On taking a developmental history that became even more obvious…
The worst bit was that he’d been involved with his local educational psychologist for ever, but said bod didn’t “believe” in autism, so the bleedin’ obvious was ignored for years.
To be blunt: YES! for both. Kennedy belongs either in the prison or the asylum.
From here:
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-century-of-evidence-vaccines
This:
Story at a Glance:
•Since at least 1933, the medical community has known that vaccines cause infant deaths. To conceal this, those deaths were renamed “crib death” and then “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome” (SIDS), eventually being attributed to infants not sleeping on their backs.
•This revisionism is not supported by the existing evidence nor the historical changes in the frequency of SIDS. Most recently, SIDS rates have had an unprecedented decrease in tandem with the COVID-19 lockdowns reducing vaccination rates.
•The vaccine most strongly associated with SIDS, DPT, was protected for decades by the government despite knowing a large body of evidence around the world showed it killed infants—particularly when an inevitable hot lot was released. Eventually, so many injury lawsuits were filed that in 1986, the government had to give blanket immunity to the vaccine manufacturers.
•This article will concisely review the vast body of evidence showing vaccines cause SIDS and reveal the mechanism modern research has now repeatedly proven causes vaccines to trigger infant death.
this is pure BS!
AND YOU PROBABLY KNOW IT – or else you are far more stupid than I ever imagined.
Galloping madness everywhere: It was then-President Trump who pumped billions of dollars into Operation Warp Speed to develop an mRNA vaccine as quickly as possible, after previously downplaying the coronavirus pandemic.
Trump later also recommended vaccination or boosters with mRNA vaccines (probably also under the impression of his own severe coronavirus illness), which caused his MAGA followers to become very upset.
We are facing a pandemic of mind damaging information with Old Bob a prime example of how people can be harmed by convincing looking websites, particularly anonymous ones.
This played out in the shooting at the CDC, with the mind damaged youth hating public health workers so much he saw fit to try to kill them.
Please try to think more carefully Old Bob, you are contributing to this insanity.
I don’t believe that anyone can change anyone else’s mind e.g. how many minds on this website have decided, “Wow Old Bob is right!” – none, I’ll wager.
“…Convincing looking websites…” – don’t you think that something “convincing” is an interesting challenge, to refute? Whereas blanket censorship is dull? Thinking is fun, following blindly is a sort of enslavement, a waiting-for-orders… from whom?
Anonymity is the best defence against ad-homs. In my case it would make no difference because I am just as much a nobody as any other common-man. Swapping “Old Bob” for [real-name] would only be interesting to Stasi-like law-enforcement and maybe jail for non-crime-thought-crime (or whatever the latest craze is) – Anonymity forces any opposition to call out the false-information (the name “misinformation” no longer has any meaning from misuse) rather than the easy route of ad-hom: “This advocate is a nobody hence everything he says is nothing!” – that was the excuse for crucifying Jesus: for “misinformation”. (not that I am religious or non-religious, just pointing out the danger of “only following orders” except for Pilot who side-stepped the issue).
If you met me face-to-face, I would agree with you, being a total coward and following the narrative is real easy – e.g. while I am writing this, two Jehova Witnesses just knocked on the door and I agreed with both of them – so they went away happy and so did I because being nice to people is good for the soul, even if I don’t believe in the resurrection, but I do believe in being as pleasant as poss, and who could argue against the Passion? You would have to be a real pharisee to go there!
Being Anon allows folks to avoid polite-conventions and say what they really mean, without physical harm, so it is a truth-mechanism. The big names that stand-to-be-counted are generally just that: Big names such as Kevin McKernan or Didie Raoult or Kary Mullis etc i.e. independents or retired that don’t need government support or are just bloody-minded in the best Aussie tradition such as Barry Marshall.
Q: “So why bother posting here Old Bob?”
For several reasons:
It is fun (even being proved wrong is helpful for self-improvement).
There is no point posting somewhere where everyone agrees with you.
There is always something to learn and know-your-enemy is especially so.
“how many minds on this website have decided, “Wow Old Bob is right!” – none, I’ll wage”
THIS COULD BE BACAUSE YOU ARE NEVER RIGHT, OF COURSE.
Didier Raoult?
You mean the “big name” who had numerous papers retracted because of fraudulent use of falsified images and even more subject to concerns over ethical issues?
That Didier Raoult?
Didier Raoult is an unethical charlatan.
“As of 2025, 46 of Raoult’s research publications have been retracted, and at least another 218 of his publications have received an expression of concern from their publishers, due to questions related to ethics approval for his studies.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didier_Raoult
Kary Mullis suffered from the Noble disease.
“Mullis downplayed humans’ role in climate change, expressed doubt that HIV is the cause of AIDS,[4][5][6] and professed a belief in astrology and the paranormal.[7][8] He also practiced clandestine chemistry by producing LSD.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis
Kevin’s McKernan’s alleged evidence of “DNA contamination” in mRNA vaccines against Covid-19 is scientifically untenable.
I consider it an insult to Barry Marshall that you put him on the same level as cranks like Mullis, Raoult or McKernan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Marshall
see, for instance, also here:
https://edzardernst.com/2020/04/didier-raoult-and-the-hydroxychloroquine-controversy-part-1/
and
https://edzardernst.com/2020/04/a-census-of-untruths-about-chloroquine-part-2/
“Swapping “Old Bob” for [real-name] would only be interesting to Stasi-like law-enforcement…”
Oh dear! You really are deluded; furthermore, you need to learn basic English, including the meaning and usage of pronouns, handles and pseudonyms.
You have chosen to be an anonymous Internet troll; for which you have chosen the pseudonym “Old Bob”.
Each and every time that YOU write “Old Bob” or the pronoun “𝙸”:
● from your perspective you are referring to yourself;
● to the readers of your comments, these terms cannot possibly be referring to yourself (you personally); they are referring to nothing more than yet another anonymous Internet troll.
It never ceases to amaze me the frequency with which anonymous Internet trolls use the pronoun “𝙸” to broadcast the intensely boring minutiae of their lives [aka pathetic existences].
As I stated above:
Self-analysis isn’t your forte, obviously.😂
What do you think of this text: ““Swapping “Old Bob” for [real-name] would only be interesting to Stasi-like law-enforcement…”
Oh dear! You really are deluded; furthermore, you need to learn basic English, including the meaning and usage of pronouns, handles and pseudonyms.”?
You have chosen to be an anonymous Internet troll; for which you have chosen the pseudonym “Old Bob”.
Each and every time that YOU write “Old Bob” or the pronoun “𝙸”:
● from your perspective you are referring to yourself;
● to the readers of your comments, these terms cannot possibly be referring to yourself (you personally); they are referring to nothing more than yet another anonymous Internet troll.
It never ceases to amaze me the frequency with which anonymous Internet trolls use the pronoun “𝙸” to broadcast the intensely boring minutiae of their lives [aka pathetic existences].
ChatGPT said:
It reads as quite hostile, sarcastic, and confrontational, with a tone that feels more like a personal attack than a reasoned response.
Here’s what stands out:
Tone & Style – The language (“deluded,” “pathetic existences,” “you really are…”) is loaded with insult, which gives the impression of venting rather than persuading. This will likely alienate most readers, even if they agree with the underlying point.
Structure – The text moves between quoting the original remark, addressing the pseudonym choice, explaining pronoun usage, and making value judgments. The shifts feel abrupt, and the core argument (about anonymity and self-reference) risks being overshadowed by the personal jabs.
Clarity – The point about “I” vs. pseudonym perspective is interesting, but it’s buried in aggressive phrasing. A calmer, more precise explanation could make it stronger.
Impact – As it stands, it’s more likely to escalate an online argument than resolve or clarify anything. It reads as an ad hominem takedown rather than a substantive rebuttal.
If the goal is to genuinely convey the logic about pronouns and pseudonyms, the same argument could be rephrased in a more concise, non-insulting way—keeping the rhetorical sting but removing the direct personal abuse. That would make it much more effective and credible.
If you’d like, I can rewrite it so it keeps the sharp wit but loses the hostility, so it lands as clever rather than caustic.
Not content with being just an anonymous Internet troll, it has now assigned itself the role of tone policeman.🤣
QUOTE
First ‘Old Bob’, then ‘JK’, now ‘Krishna’ epitomize:
A fool who’s managed to gain access to AI, remains a fool.
— Pete Attkins on 01 June 2025 at 19:48
I tried the same thing on my own post above. Here is what
ChatGPT said:
It’s an interesting piece because it mixes philosophy, personal anecdote, and polemic, but as written it’s quite rambling and unfiltered—which makes it engaging in a conversational way, but also undermines its clarity and persuasiveness.
Here’s my breakdown:
Strengths
Genuine voice – It reads like someone speaking candidly rather than posturing. That makes parts of it relatable and human.
Core point – The argument that anonymity protects against ad hominem attacks and forces focus on ideas rather than the person is strong and worth exploring.
Personal touches – The Jehovah’s Witness anecdote and mention of real-world figures make it feel lived-in rather than purely abstract.
Self-awareness – Admitting cowardice or fallibility gives it a touch of humility, which is rare in online debates.
Weaknesses
Length & structure – It meanders between different themes (anonymity, free speech, historical/religious parallels, politeness norms, notable scientists) without a clear roadmap.
Overloaded references – Stasi, Jesus, Pilate, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Australian tradition, etc.—there’s so much packed in that the main point risks getting lost.
Tone inconsistency – Sometimes it’s thoughtful, sometimes snarky, sometimes self-deprecating; the shifts can be jarring.
Potential misinterpretation – Comparing one’s own anonymity issues to the crucifixion of Jesus, even as an illustrative point, could distract or trigger pushback instead of advancing the argument.
Punctuation & flow – Some sentences are long enough to lose readers mid-way. Breaking them down would make the ideas land harder.
Overall
The piece is worth keeping for its sincerity and quirky personality, but if the goal is to convince, it would benefit from:
Tightening structure – Start with the main thesis, then move through supporting points in order.
Pruning references – Keep the ones that most clearly illustrate the point; drop those that could distract.
Sharpening tone – Decide whether it’s mainly serious, humorous, or satirical, and lean into that consistently.
If you want, I can rewrite it so it’s still in “Old Bob”’s voice but flows more like a clear, punchy essay—still witty, but less rambling. That would make the central message about anonymity and truth really stick.
You said:
yes plz
ChatGPT said:
Alright — here’s a tightened, sharper rewrite that keeps “Old Bob”’s candid personality but trims the digressions, organizes the ideas, and makes the central point about anonymity hit harder:
…
(It’s me again folks!) And chatGPT gave a far better version; offered a shorter that was even better followed by a one-liner that was better still. But as Thurber said (of a book of letters): “…[they look rewritten]…” (as letters to a friend?! – I never forgot it, ya gotta learn from The Master!) – I like seeing the toolmarks, they are far more telling, that’s where the gold is. Leave perfection for the gods (who will punish you for emulation).
“If you want, I can rewrite it”
1. Rewrite it
2. obtain a hard copy using a printer
3. mail the hard copy to yourself
4. when you receive the hard copy in the mail, read it in the frame of mind that it was written by someone else.
5. refine the text by repeating steps 1–4 until you are truly delighted with it.
6. put all electronic copies and hard copies where the sun don’t shine. Thank you.
Joshua Rys, lead regulatory scientist Johnson &Johnson explains that “None of that stuff was safe and effective”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNb4Dzv4QeM
@Old Bob
Why do you keep repeating lies all the time? In all these years, not a single comment of yours was ever proven true, yet you keep brainlessly regurgitating the same crap from other liars day in day out.
About this Rhys guy: he had nothing to do with COVID vaccines whatsoever; his work was about cosmetics and consumer skin care products.
See https://www.techarp.com/fact-check/jj-lead-scientist-admit-unsafe-vaccine/
“Why do you keep repeating lies all the time?”
BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT LIARS DO!
Old Bob is a TRUE BELIEVER (TM) in the religion of “Truthiness” and “Shit-Posting”. He prays to St. Donald and His Unholy Hosts of Conspirators and Liars.
When it happens to you or your loved ones, then you might understand but as the fella said, “[folks only learn from experience and most don’t even learn from that.]”
********
The US Blood Supply – Kevin McKernan & R. Clinton Ohlers:
https://substack.com/home/post/p-170708490
More lies from more idiots …
And yes, I’d be very upset if one of my loved ones would start believing this nefarious crap.
@DelusionalBob
When you cannot think of anything else, you pull the liar Kevin McKernan out of your hat. Once again.
https://www.pei.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/newsroom-en/notification/231222-testing-mrna-vaccinas-dna-contamination.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4
BTW, R. Clinton Ohlers is a theologian and holds a PhD in Intellectual History. He knows nothing about natural science or medicine.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/r-clinton-ohlers-phd-a276b152
From here:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-13234-6
this:
“The findings suggest a notable signal detection between several vaccine types (smallpox, influenza, and COVID-19 mRNA vaccine) and both forms of carditis. Notably, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine had the highest number of reports, underscoring the imperative for heightened clinical vigilance in monitoring potential carditis manifestations following administration of these drugs. Future studies should build on these results by investigating the underlying mechanisms, exploring patient-specific risk factors, and examining the long-term outcomes for these drug-associated carditis events.”
you have already shown us many times that you are scientifically illiterate – no need to insist any further, OB!
@Old Bob
Here’s the most important sentence from that paper, the one that you and other antivaccine liars no doubt ignored:
“Although our findings did not allow for causal inference …”
I’m getting the impression that you are using this blog as a fact-checking service, simply because you are too stupid and/or too lazy to do it yourself.
If so, make sure that you are also posting the corrections and explanations received here on those antivaxx and anti-science sites where you got the crap you’re parroting here in the first place.
I was hoping that something like that would allow you to take this more seriously but you jump on it as some sort of amazing revelation.
Meanwhile, every couple of days, a new presentation appears e.g. this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZrJraN2nOQ
@Richard
I doubt these stupid trolls care about facts. They are in their own delusional world where facts are what they make them up to be. Unfortunately, those of us who live in the real world must suffer the consequences of misinformation spread by these stupid yet dangerous trolls. Esp. in the US, science and scientists are under attack, literally by gunmen and figuratively by Trump, DOGE, RFK Jr et. al.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-director-tells-staff-misinformation-can-dangerous-agency-meeting-rcna224556
https://www.techdirt.com/2025/08/12/gone-fishin-the-cdc-shooting-rfk-jr-s-conspiracy-theories-and-a-sweet-catch-in-alaska/
“I doubt these stupid trolls care about facts”
Have you noticed that all of our regular trolls only ever punch upwards; never downwards?
There’s a very good reason for that!
@AntediluvianBob
Why should we take the trolling of a chronic truth-twister and scientific ignoramus (you) seriously?
Why should we take seriously a propaganda video on YT featuring the crème de la crème of so-called mRNA vaccine critics and anti-vaxxers, whose alternative “truths”, lies and false claims have been refuted hundreds of times?
Addendum
The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) revoked the board certification of Peter McCullough as he spread misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines.
Arne Burkhardt is a member of the German Querdenken movement.
Robert W. Malone has been proven to have spread lies about coronavirus vaccines. As a “reward,” he has now been appointed to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Paul E. Marik is a co-leader of the Independent Medical Alliance which advocates for various unapproved, dubious, and ineffective treatments for COVID-19. Paul E. Marik’s medical board certification was revoked.
Robert Redfield supports the hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic was a laboratory escape of SARS-CoV-2 without providing any solid evidence. He is essentially just going with his gut feeling.
Ryan Cole’s medical license was restricted as he spread misinformation about COVID-19.
Aseem Malhotra spread misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. He received the Rusty Razor award by the British magazine “The Skeptic”.
Childhood safety is progressing (after CHD sues HSS):
https://icandecide.org/press-release/breaking-hhs-finally-restores-task-force-on-safer-childhood-vaccines/
https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/hhs-reinstates-task-force-on-safer-childhood-vaccines.html
Hello OB; trying to disseminate BS under a different name?
How many pseudonyms do you employ?
Dunno, I lost count.