Bicep is not being considered for a ban.
Even if someone has a different opinion than yours, they are free to express it (within reason). Relax everyone. 
5 Likes
I would be opposed to Bicep being banned just based on his reports from the farm alone. Everytime I see one of his posts, I read it eagerly in case there are more farm updates. I don’t have a big bucket list, and climbing Mt. Everest is not on it, but I do have a faint hope that one day, perhaps when I’m 90, I can tour Bicep’s farm.
6 Likes
Whereas I understand your point, I have to disagree again with you.
People on this forum may make arguments in favor of Rapamycin that you think are erroneous, but others will agree with you and everyone will have the freedom to decide what’s right.
The biggest problem with the COVID/vaccine issue was the lack of honest discussion of the many aspects of the issue. Things would have turned out much better in the long run if initial freedom of speech had been allowed.
8 Likes
a lie travels around the earth before the truth even has its shoes on
I’ve also heard that the truth is like a lion, Turn it loose and you don’t have to defend it, it’ll defend itself. I would say this isn’t true in the short run, but over time we should get there.
In human psychology, there is a huge bias towards us believing the first thing we hear and we weight that more heavily, even in the face of better evidence.
The other problem is that online, it’s incredibly easy for a small number of people to totally derail a conversation or post lots of bullshit.
many times dealing with high, drunk, or people who have e.g diagnosed or undiagnosed schizophrenia
You guys’ thesis is that anybody that questions that vaccines have saved us from misery and death is stupid, on drugs or crazy. I don’t think you have done all the reading necessary to make that conclusion. “Turtles all the way down” by Mary Holland and Zoey O’Toole explains that vaccines are tested against a placebo that may contain the thing causing the side effects. It’s not a real placebo.
Also a virus continues to evolve until it causes less and less damage to the host. These childhood diseases were virtually gone when the vaccine came out. There is much question about what would have happened without them. These things are detailed in this book and a few others. I don’t really know who they wrote the books for if people are all stupid and high.
I actually hope you’re right about vaccines and RFK proves it. Otherwise this was a pretty stupid chapter in our history. But I do want to know.
people cling to keto, or carnivore, or metformin, or resveratol and it becomes part of their identity and value system
I’ve tried all these things and I think keto is important to teach your body to be flexible and burn fat more. I use it off and on. It seems to help.
I saw an interview with Sam Bankman-Fried in prison where he was asked if he’s learned anything in prison. He said he was shocked to learn that the violent criminals he’s in jail with are great at chess. He thought they all were stupid.
My advice, which obviously you can take or leave, is to watch any vaccine trials underway and make sure they are done right. To prove your point. Don’t take anybody’s word for it. Also read what the stupid and high people have written. Vax-Unvax Let the science speak, by RFK. I know he has a brain worm and is on heroin, so find his mistakes and save us all a lot of trouble.
2 Likes
That is mostly the case but not necessarily true for all pathogens. If a virus has a long enough incubation time it can even evolve to become deadlier.
4 Likes
Is this measles cases as of March 6 for each of the prior years or should we be multiplying 2025 by 6 to get the correct number? Either way, what the hell was going on under Bush senior?
Googled it:
Large outbreak in New York and Philly. CDC (1998): Measles Outbreak -- New York City, 1990-1991
Unvaccinated kids! (story from 2019): How A Measles Outbreak Was Halted In The 1990s : Shots - Health News : NPR
It was the biggest year since the early 1970s.
3 Likes
Excellent depiction of the life health and saving power of a vaccine @LukeMV. Thanks for posting it. The small blips in 2025 are erupting in areas for which vaccination rates are so low that there is no effective herd much less individual immunity. The 2025 data also demonstrate the efficiency of the vaccine but you have to index the rate on the vaccination database.
4 Likes
Here’s what on this board, people being ok with people dying needlessly from measles in 2025 directly from antivax beliefs, and also saying “here’s why this is great!”
Please, share an example of when freedom of speech was not allowed.
Here is the most recent blog by Michael Eades. It’s never as clear cut as you want to think. I am not an expert in this area and do not wish to spend my time arguing any points, but provide the link for your perusal. I think from this arrow you can easily get to the previous one too where he explains his feelings on this subject. He’s a doctor and author of many books. He reads more than anybody I know of.
This is not correct. I started to explain it but decided the correct information can easily be looked up and most here are aware of the facts. The overall CFR for measles in the U.S. ranges from 1–3 deaths per 1,000 cases in unvaccinated individuals. Among vaccinated individuals, the risk is substantially lower—likely close to zero but depending on the year…
2 Likes
I don’t know anything about Michael Eades, but I’ve read that he’s a family practitioner and focuses on nutrition. As a general rule, I’d be much more likely to listen to an immunologist than a family practitioner or diet / nutrition focused doctor, when it comes to issues like vaccines. Look to the experts in a given discipline area, not generalists who seem to be working “outside their area of expertise”.
In his statements on the MMR vaccine it seems he’s relying on disproven / debunked data.
As a general check, I’ve found Chat GPT as something to use to check claims like his.
Here is the ChatGPT response , and it closely aligns with what @RobTuck has stated:
My Prompt:
Please compare the safety and overall CFR for measles vaccine in the U.S. in terms of deaths per 1,000 cases in unvaccinated individuals comparted to vaccinated individuals
ChatGPT response:
Measles is a highly contagious viral disease, and its case fatality rate (CFR) varies based on factors such as access to healthcare, nutritional status, and vaccination. Here’s a comparison of the safety and overall CFR in the U.S.:
Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of Measles in Unvaccinated Individuals
- In the U.S., the CFR for measles in unvaccinated individuals is estimated to be 1–3 deaths per 1,000 cases (0.1% to 0.3%).
- The risk is higher in young children, immunocompromised individuals, and those with malnutrition or vitamin A deficiency.
- Complications such as pneumonia (which accounts for most measles deaths), encephalitis, and long-term neurological damage contribute to mortality.
Case Fatality Rate for Vaccinated Individuals
- The Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine is highly effective (97% efficacy after two doses).
- Fully vaccinated individuals are extremely unlikely to contract measles. If they do, cases tend to be mild and rarely lead to complications or death.
- CFR for vaccinated individuals is near zero—there are no well-documented deaths in the U.S. directly attributed to measles in fully vaccinated individuals.
Vaccine Safety and Risk of Severe Adverse Events
- The MMR vaccine is extremely safe.
- Severe adverse events are rare:
- Severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis): ~1 per 1 million doses.
- Febrile seizures: ~1 per 3,000 doses (not life-threatening).
- Thrombocytopenia (low platelet count): ~1 per 30,000–40,000 doses (temporary).
- Deaths directly caused by the vaccine are exceedingly rare, with no confirmed deaths in the U.S. due to the MMR vaccine in recent decades.
Conclusion
- Measles itself is far deadlier than the vaccine. The CFR in unvaccinated individuals is 1–3 per 1,000 cases, whereas the risk of death from the MMR vaccine is essentially zero.
- The vaccine prevents severe illness and death, making it a crucial public health tool.
- Overall, the risk-benefit analysis overwhelmingly supports vaccination.
and here is the GROK response:
Comparison
- Unvaccinated CFR: Approximately 1–2 deaths per 1,000 cases (0.1%–0.2%), with recent outbreaks suggesting potentially higher rates (up to 8–9 per 1,000 in small samples, though likely an outlier).
- Vaccinated CFR: Effectively 0 deaths per 1,000 cases (less than 0.001%), with no documented deaths in fully vaccinated, healthy individuals.
- Vaccine Safety: Risk of death from the vaccine is negligible (<<0.0001 per 1,000 doses), far lower than the disease risk in unvaccinated individuals.
Conclusion
The measles vaccine dramatically reduces the CFR from 1–2 deaths per 1,000 cases in unvaccinated individuals to essentially zero in vaccinated ones, while posing a negligible risk of death itself. This stark contrast underscores the vaccine’s safety and efficacy, cutting mortality risk by at least 1,000-fold compared to the natural disease in unvaccinated populations. Recent outbreaks reinforce that unvaccinated individuals bear the brunt of measles mortality, while vaccination nearly eliminates this risk.
3 Likes
I do find it amazing that people don’t understand this simple equation.
Most people don’t seem to understand that science is hard and that is why there are so many specialties as no one can be proficient in all science, even though the 'science" may seem to be related.
This is also quite clear in the science of statistics. When you want to know about life span, you go to an actuary that specializes in that area. When you want to know about the bio-sciences like vaccines you go to a bio-statistician. Both are “statistics” based but require different levels of education to be proficient.
I follow a bio stat guy on LinkedIn and have learned a lot reading his posts over the past 5 years…
https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewdhealy/
Seek out board certified experts in their field, it does make a difference in the information, it may not be the echo chamber one is looking for but it will be closer to the truth. If you can handle the truth LoL!
4 Likes
Doesn’t really matter, evidence stands on its own two feet.
If the methodology is terrible so will the data be, so we should criticize the method if it’s terrible.
I have no interest in digging up the data, researching, learning, and making an argument against certain topics with its cited methods now, and besides, who makes the argument has the burden of proof. YMMV.
1 Like
For some matters scientific, the metaphor of data standing on its own feet can make sense. Unfortunately, a great many standing scientific propositions and generalizations in current science rest on facts, attributes, inferences, and relations which are not in any fashion obvious or knowable absent complex tools of investigative research that must be mastered to understand them. Beyond that, we are placing our trust in the skills and integrity of professionals to bring these generalizations to our attention. This is why it is crucial for science to be a transparent enterprise.
1 Like
That’s fine, but as said it’s not your battle as you don’t have the burden of proof.
the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies
what may be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
My apologies, didn’t mean to take this too far.
I did think it was a good illustration of one of the many sources of misinformation and how it becomes mainstream. It was quite informative and well presented.
Interesting but off-topic. Please, lets avoid this kind of stuff.
3 Likes
I’m sure everyone on here knows Sharyl Attkisson from NBC News fame. She spent lots of time in her career reporting on the pharma industry. Here she is doing an interview to sell her book “Follow the Science” with Jimmy Dore. I include it here not to try to prove anything, but so that people in this space can understand what those of us in the real world are thinking when we question the science. It is a very polite and politically correct (as much as possible) conversation:
1 Like
Totally normal to be on an allegedly science based forum and debate whether or not 2025 measles outbreaks actually occured because of anti vaxxers. Totally normal to be on this site where people spread videos about the long debunked autism linked to childhood vaccines.
Why here? Because this forum never will understand that nonmoderated sites historically lead to more misogyny, inceldom, naziism, science debasement etc. Gab, rumble, 4chan, historical parts of reddit, tiny pockets like furries are all examples.