President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[YOhio]

we are still doing bs claims on covid vaccine on 1?

I'd think those concerned about government officials being truthful about vaccines would want to have an open discussion on the government messaging around the rollout of the COVID vaccines.

[frank ryan]

1- The largest vaccine misinformation campaign ever run in this country was under the Biden administration under the COVID-19 vaccine. It did not stop the virus as claimed and there were significant side effects, one of which I experienced. They violated the first amendment and coerced social media companies to censor information. So while I completely disagree with his more extreme views on vaccines, I'm a bit jaded by the official narrative.

2- Experience running a large organization is helpful, but I've never heard it used as a criticism of other nominees outside of Hegseth and Kennedy. But his work as an environmental lawyer demonstrated an ability to bring together multiple, disparate stakeholders to achieve consensus. That's better experience than most nominees.

3- He doesn't have relevant education. You're holding him to a standard to which you didn't hold Xavier Becerra (unless I missed your opposition during his hearings). He does have a history in his environmental law practice of achieving outcomes that benefit public health, including reducing industrial pollution, remediating brownfield sites, and protecting drinking water.

4. What's wrong with eating roadkill? Assuming it's thoroughly checked and properly prepared, I think it demonstrates an admirable respect for animal life and resourcefulness. Particularly from someone who grew up wealthy.

He's bringing visibility to public health in a way that no other nominee would. He's obviously not perfect, but disruptors rarely are.

Oh geez I don't where to start.

But I think you've kind of down the anti-Fauci/anti vax rabbit hole.

Im sure there have been loads of appointees without relevant experience. That's a valid criticism whether I pointed that out in every single case it applied to or not.

RFK has spread misinformation and he hasn't exactly corrected the record when called out. I don't think babies get autism from vaccines.

I don't like someone in charge of health related agencies eating roadkills regularly and getting brainworms from adventurous eating.

RFK is as qualified as your average yoga mom. As far as being a uniting figure he sold out his endorsement in exchange for being appointed

[frank ryan]

For the record, I am all for making immigration to the US easier. I always have been. I am not for an almost entirely unregulated border.

That's an incredibly rational position. I wish that drove the current state of events.

[Shaka]

You might also consider some sources that would be critical of RJK Jr.'s opinions and positions. At least, if you are interested in hearing both sides.

Why wouldn't I consider both sides?

[Northwestcoug]

This, in fact, is not where I was going.

I am curious about your perspective on his proposed removal of liability immunity for vaccine manufacturers. Is this a good thing or bad thing?

As for some of his other proposed policies, here's a good article comparing them to the policies of other countries.

Let's say for the moment that vaccine liability reform is needed. And let's play devil's advocate that RFK Jr. is the one person who can set this country on a track for better health. Would you grant my assertion that this will come at a real cost to all the progress we as a society have made in infectious diseases? He is on the extreme end of vaccine skepticism. And when a significant percentage of people are anti-vaccine curious in this privileged post-liberal existence we're in, the mere fact that he will oversee the HHS will give a green light to a minority of people to go their own way with vaccines. The epidemics our parents knew all too well, the ones that we've largely eradicated, will be back. And it's not just the historical ones. The emerging infectious diseases will require sustained work, on prevention, treatment, and vaccination. Having someone lead the nation in health services who has a baseline skepticism of vaccines and immunology will allow all other like-minded people to ignore science.

There has never been a perfect vaccine. They all have potentially bad side effects, thankfully most of them are extremely rare. That has to be weighed against the personal and societal benefits, which in every case that I'm aware of vastly outweigh the unfortunate harms. I'll give you an example where someone more serious than RFK Jr. is a benefit to epidemiology. Back in the polio days Salk's inactivated vaccine prevented a lot of polio cases. But when the virus was so endemic a live vaccine was needed to confer better immunity; people were still getting polio because the Salk vaccine was less effective. Sabin's live vaccine was wonderfully effective, but it came at a cost. Because if was live, it caused polio and polio-like symptoms in rare kids. This was an accepted societal cost, when the prevalence of polio was so high. Now that it has decreased in the wild (still there though), at least in the US we don't need the additional protection of the live vaccine. We're back to an inactivated one. But guess what? Serious people were following the data, and that informed decision was made.

And because we are rapidly becoming a post-liberal decadent society, we need to state for the record the modern miracle of the COVID vaccine. It transformed a novel, deadly virus that paralyzed the world into a more manageable flu-like illness. I get the frustration many have that the vaccine was generally claimed to eliminate the virus. But the lack of grace society has for all the world's resources marshaled to introduce an effective vaccine just months into a deadly worldwide pandemic is just astonishing to me. Never before in the history of civilization has this happened so quickly, and yet in our decadent state we start questioning fundamental principles of science just because those who have an axe to grind are mad upset that treating novel illnesses isn't the quick and perfect science everyone expects. And to have someone like RFK Jr. try to block the COVID vaccine, just short months after witnessing how relatively effective it was, should scare everyone who thinks he has good ideas about chronic illness.

His other fundamentally incorrect ideas about vaccination and immunology have been rehashed here, so I won't do it again. But rest assured, they are complete falsehoods and fly in the face of hundreds of years of scientific discovery. Should the nation feel comfortable rolling the dice on all the prosperity we've gained because of adherence to that body of science, just because he has good ideas on vaccine liability and chronic illnesses?

[myboynoah]

For the record, I am all for making immigration to the US easier. I always have been. I am not for an almost entirely unregulated border.

Same, especially to meet demand for labor in the U.S. (which is clearly needed). If Trump could buckle down and do something about this, he would be a hero. Given his rancor about illegal immigration, he is uniquely positioned to actually do something monumental (ala Nixon opening China). Make that your legacy, you dope. But that will never happen.

[YOhio]

Oh geez I don't where to start.

But I think you've kind of down the anti-Fauci/anti vax rabbit hole.

Im sure there have been loads of appointees without relevant experience. That's a valid criticism whether I pointed that out in every single case it applied to or not.

RFK has spread misinformation and he hasn't exactly corrected the record when called out. I don't think babies get autism from vaccines.

I don't like someone in charge of health related agencies eating roadkills regularly and getting brainworms from adventurous eating.

RFK is as qualified as your average yoga mom. As far as being a uniting figure he sold out his endorsement in exchange for being appointed

I'm open to being wrong and I very well could be on Kennedy or many other issues. But I try to be honest about my opinions and concerns, even if it makes me lose credibility. I've said nothing about Fauci and I'm not anti-vax. Saying I've gone down a rabbit hole rubs me the wrong way, but I can't do anything about that. I've had personal experience with the negative impacts of the COVID vaccine that color my perception of how it was marketed to me and the treatment of those who opposed it.

[YOhio]

Let's say for the moment that vaccine liability reform is needed. And let's play devil's advocate that RFK Jr. is the one person who can set this country on a track for better health. Would you grant my assertion that this will come at a real cost to all the progress we as a society have made in infectious diseases? He is on the extreme end of vaccine skepticism. And when a significant percentage of people are anti-vaccine curious in this privileged post-liberal existence we're in, the mere fact that he will oversee the HHS will give a green light to a minority of people to go their own way with vaccines. The epidemics our parents knew all too well, the ones that we've largely eradicated, will be back. And it's not just the historical ones. The emerging infectious diseases will require sustained work, on prevention, treatment, and vaccination. Having someone lead the nation in health services who has a baseline skepticism of vaccines and immunology will allow all other like-minded people to ignore science.

There has never been a perfect vaccine. They all have potentially bad side effects, thankfully most of them are extremely rare. That has to be weighed against the personal and societal benefits, which in every case that I'm aware of vastly outweigh the unfortunate harms. I'll give you an example where someone more serious than RFK Jr. is a benefit to epidemiology. Back in the polio days Salk's inactivated vaccine prevented a lot of polio cases. But when the virus was so endemic a live vaccine was needed to confer better immunity; people were still getting polio because the Salk vaccine was less effective. Sabin's live vaccine was wonderfully effective, but it came at a cost. Because if was live, it caused polio and polio-like symptoms in rare kids. This was an accepted societal cost, when the prevalence of polio was so high. Now that it has decreased in the wild (still there though), at least in the US we don't need the additional protection of the live vaccine. We're back to an inactivated one. But guess what? Serious people were following the data, and that informed decision was made.

And because we are rapidly becoming a post-liberal decadent society, we need to state for the record the modern miracle of the COVID vaccine. It transformed a novel, deadly virus that paralyzed the world into a more manageable flu-like illness. I get the frustration many have that the vaccine was generally claimed to eliminate the virus. But the lack of grace society has for all the world's resources marshaled to introduce an effective vaccine just months into a deadly worldwide pandemic is just astonishing to me. Never before in the history of civilization has this happened so quickly, and yet in our decadent state we start questioning fundamental principles of science just because those who have an axe to grind are mad upset that treating novel illnesses isn't the quick and perfect science everyone expects. And to have someone like RFK Jr. try to block the COVID vaccine, just short months after witnessing how relatively effective it was, should scare everyone who thinks he has good ideas about chronic illness.

His other fundamentally incorrect ideas about vaccination and immunology have been rehashed here, so I won't do it again. But rest assured, they are complete falsehoods and fly in the face of hundreds of years of scientific discovery. Should the nation feel comfortable rolling the dice on all the prosperity we've gained because of adherence to that body of science, just because he has good ideas on vaccine liability and chronic illnesses?

Appreciate the response and I hope to respond later when I can put more thought into it. But just to make sure I understand you correctly, you are opposed to vaccine liability reform?

[Northwestcoug]

Appreciate the response and I hope to respond later when I can put more thought into it. But just to make sure I understand you correctly, you are opposed to vaccine liability reform?

To be honest I don't know much about it. Is there a pressing need for it, after the Childhood Vaccine Injury act in 1986 was passed? Since the act allows for vaccine injury reporting and compensation, does it need to be updated? From what I understand, before it was passed some vaccine hysteria (turned out to be false) led to lawsuits that caused vaccine manufacturers to consider stop making vaccines.

[chrisrenrut]

"Square themselves with the law."

Those are different statements.

Left off the word “allowed”. Kind of changes the meaning and the party responsible for change, doesn’t it.

Securing the border is a much different thing than rounding up and expelling those already here. The Church also sees those two things very differently. The Church supports countries securing their borders.

[YOhio]

To be honest I don't know much about it. Is there a pressing need for it, after the Childhood Vaccine Injury act in 1986 was passed? Since the act allows for vaccine injury reporting and compensation, does it need to be updated? From what I understand, before it was passed some vaccine hysteria (turned out to be false) led to lawsuits that caused vaccine manufacturers to consider stop making vaccines.

I don't know about pressing need, but I do think the increase in transparency resulting from the legal process could be beneficial and increase public trust in vaccine safety.

[BlueK]

theres some BS ww2 era IIRC law that allows the president to do it *for national security* and congress never repealed it

Yeah, I'm aware of it. But toys from China are not something that affects national security. This obscure law was never challenged in court, as far as I know. It should be.

[Bo Diddley]

Yeah, I'm aware of it. But toys from China are not something that affects national security. This obscure law was never challenged in court, as far as I know. It should be.

Really strange that is hasn't been challenged, TBH.

[Maximus]

Really strange that is hasn't been challenged, TBH.

both maga and Ds love their protectionalism

[Bo Diddley]

both maga and Ds love their protectionalism

I would think there are plenty of other stake holders with skin in the game that would find it beneficial to reign in.