Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Trusting the experts is not a function of science. It is not a function of democracy. It is a function of religion and totalitarianism, and it does not make for a healthier population."
Twitter/X ^ | Jul 20, 2023 | Robert Kennedy Jr. via Citizen Free Press

Posted on 08/06/2023 5:56:27 PM PDT by ransomnote

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last
To: NobleFree
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled "Trusting the experts is not a function of science. It is not a function of democracy. It is a function of religion and totalitarianism, and it does not make for a healthier population.", NobleFree wrote:

“Fortunately not all questions need be answered by ‘statistical mathematics.’ I read the FDA filings for Moderna and Pfizer and discovered that they didn’t test their ‘vaccines’ for infectivity or transmission of the illness.”

That’s not a question of science, which was the topic of the sentence I addressed.

Actually it is a question of science - in this case, one of the experimental design which involves elements like controls and experimental factors. I saw that the pharmas did not evaluate the key points for which vaccines are created and then their research was misrepresented to the public.

That glaring failure to conform to scientific norms was true throughout all the 'vaccine' documentation I researched. Normally experimental drug trials utilize larger sample cohorts than did the Covid pharmas. Typically, they use a test valid for the virus they are experimenting on - but again the pharmas departed from that norm. Normally the control group is considered valuable and kept intact  whereas the pharmas 'vaccinated' their control group ASAP. Normally these drug trials are double blind, but of course the high instance onf adverse events exposed most of those in the control group. That's just the beginning - there are so many departures from standard experimental design and ethics I don't have time to list them, and would have to go research again to remember some of them.

21 posted on 08/07/2023 10:58:53 AM PDT by ransomnote (IN GOD WE TRUST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

“the high instance onf adverse events”

How high? High compared to what?

“exposed most of those in the control group.”

Exposed them to whom? Are you claiming the incidence of adverse events was so high in absolute terms among the test group, and so low among the control group, that any subject not experiencing one could validly assume themselves to be in the control group?


22 posted on 08/07/2023 3:45:41 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson