@LBeesley this is a market about RFK Jr, not measles.

If there is a conspiracy, would you rather it was left unaddressed?

@GraemeStuart you went on your diatribe on a comment I made about a measles outbreak, then tried to pry into my medical history and then, failing that attempt, used a large block of words to boil your argument down to, “Just listen to the guy.” Every single hearing I’ve listened where he’s been brought to answer for the goings-on in his department shows me the depth of this man’s incompetence and unpreparedness for the role of top health official in the country. Try again.

@LBeesley then I doubt you watched the whole thing.

I think I understand your position. You think that he is unqualified and holds dangerous views. Perhaps that he is a grifter of some kind? Or a well meaning idiot?

@GraemeStuart it’s precisely who got placed in every single cabinet position. If the shoe fits, as they say.

@LBeesley ?

@GraemeStuart It’s called a sweeping generalization that seems to be reaffirmed every time a new news byte appears in my feed. But sure, act confused.

@LBeesley ok.

1) I was confused because your message didn't make any sense.

2) your feed is very different from mine

Did you see the latest autism figures? There have been huge increases in recent years.

https://youtu.be/P11PzjfUNiQ?si=jVa_TW9AHQQIy6Qo

Vaccinate your goddamned kids.

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/the-measles-outbreak-in-west-texas-and-beyond

@LBeesley when was your last COVID booster?

@GraemeStuart how is that relevant to a post about a measles outbreak? Covid boosters weren’t designed to address measles.

@LBeesley because its about informed consent and choice.

@GraemeStuart then you should have asked whether or not I’ve received an MMR vaccine, which I have.

@LBeesley this is about more than measles. Do you agree that it's ok for people to make informed choices about vaccines? For example if they have a religious objection to using material taken from foetuses or whatever? Is this ok in your opinion or do you think vaccines should be mandatory? Do you think vaccine safety profiles should be studied scientifically by independent experts before informed consent is possible?

@GraemeStuart the post you decided to comment on demonstrates a correlation between people opting out of a vaccine that was generally accepted to the point of appearing mandatory up until the year 2000 and a rise in cases of a once-thought “extinct” deadly disease. I fully support people making informed choices about vaccines, but the data tends to reflect people stopped doing that about 25 years ago.

@LBeesley then we agree

@GraemeStuart on supporting making informed decisions? Sure! I believe our disagreement is on whether or not it’s actually happening right now, because based on outbreaks of previously preventable diseases, it doesn’t appear that’s the case.

And much of this can be traced to the dumbass that has been placed in charge of health and human services.

@LBeesley how so? The outbreaks are perfectly normal and centered on religious communities that eschew vaccines for known reasons.

The difference this year is in how the facts are twisted to imply the interpretation you have absorbed without checking.

@GraemeStuart perfectly normal? No. The generally accepted and cited-dozens-of-times report from the National Institute of Health, published over 40 years ago, demonstrated optimism for the complete eradication of the disease within the borders of the United States thanks to the broad distribution of the MMR vaccine. Religious communities that “eschew vaccines for known reasons” are not among the people I consider making informed decisions no matter how that is twisted.

@LBeesley that is of course up to you. I'm just pointing out that informed consent implies that individuals can take their own risks and that your implication that this has anything to do with RFK Jr is spurious.

Outbreaks are typically associated with religious communities and your opinions about what they should or shouldn't put in their bodies is not really the point.

@GraemeStuart My critical stance on the top health official in the country sending out mixed signals about vaccines, to include misinformation and outright conspiracy rhetoric, is spurious? This is why I short this stock.

@LBeesley since we agreed this is about informed consent the signal must always be mixed. That is the entire point. It's not informed consent if we ignore the nuance.

To me it seems that RFK Jr is a huge force for good and his enemies are super powerful. For example, they fund the mainstream media. Which makes them rather influential. This is a kind of conspiracy hypothesis. Do you claim that conspiracy never happens? What about the tobacco industry? There are many examples.

Health is more important than profits and there does seem to be a dearth of health amongst an ocean of profits. I'm just saying it seems plausible that RFK Jr could be on to something here and that there is an information war being waged against him.

@GraemeStuart it’s equally if not more plausible RFK Jr is as looney tunes as the rest of the cabinet. I love Occam’s razor for this very reason.

There should never be mixed signals if you’re in a position to be a trusted and credible authority for hundreds of millions of people. You are the informed consent at that point, but I wouldn’t associate the word “informed” with this guy in any capacity.

@LBeesley Those are controversial opinions.

I'm not sure you and I have the same definition of informed consent. I'm talking about the concept laid out in the Nuremberg code created in the aftermath of world war 2. The bad guys did it your way.

Truth claims are not settled democratically. Just because you can find millions of people who agree with you, doesn't make it so.

@GraemeStuart that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying RFK Jr is in a position to be a voice of authority, which should clearly lay out what the guiding consensus on American health should be, and I’m not seeing consistent scientifically vetted statements from his office or from his delegates. That’s a dangerous position for all of us when a federally appointed office isn’t sure about its message. At least when doctors provide their recommendations for patients to choose how to suffer on their own accord, their information is supported by literal millennia of study that for whatever dumbass reason is being ignored by people opting to get their medical opinions from thoughts and prayers.

@LBeesley I don't really understand your point. Apparently you want to see certainty, consensus.

As far as I understand, this change in direction is an attempt to overturn decades of conflict of interest. The 'scientific consensus' has been manufactured by vested interests.

Have you not seen RFK Jr's latest interviews? Just listen to the man. He clearly knows exactly what he is doing. He has been consistent about this since the beginning of his presidential campaign. He is extremely well qualified to do it.

I just don't understand your perspective. Painting him as a looney seems like not really addressing the point.

@GraemeStuart the scientific consensus, backed by the numbers 40 years ago, said, “We have almost completely eradicated measles as a dangerous and deadly disease thanks to research, testing, and application of this thing called a vaccine.” And now, that isn’t the case. I figured that was pretty clear following the original comment of this thread involving the measles outbreak. You’ve been attempting to pivot by echoing unsubstantiated rhetoric about conflicts of interest, and I’m not having it. I understand the frustration.

@LBeesley ok I thought we were discussing RFK Jr. I thought we were discussing his stance on vaccines in general.

On measles specifically, it's a clear red herring. There are people out there who don't like using foetal material for their own reasons. They are willing to take the very small risk of contracting measles. This is called informed consent. As long as they understand the risk, it's their business.

As far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with RFK Jr. There have been outbreaks of measles regularly for many decades. No new patterns arose within weeks of his confirmation. This was just a tactic to scare people. His nuanced position on vaccines is appropriate and should not be misunderstood.

Vaccinse are an amazing technology. But because they have special legal status, they are the locus for making profits at the expense of health. Proper safety studies need to be done by independent researchers. This mostly relates to newer vaccines and in particular the mRNA platform. Though also some adjuvants associated with vaccines are under question.

There is a legal loophole which unfortunately means that pharmaceutical companies have no liability for the harms certain categories of products inflict on the population. This liability is what drives up the quality of safety studies. My understanding is that RFK Jr is essentially bringing this fact into the public consciousness. However, the studies he has commissioned are looking at a much wider range of health issues since there is a wider issue of externalities and industry monetising sick people in general.

@GraemeStuart more pivoting and attempts at gaslighting I did not ask for.

I post a thing about measles, you ask about a covid booster.

I clarify the thing about measles and state that a person in leadership should lead without sending out stuff about conspiracies. But here we are.