Vinay - If vaccines are as "miraculous" as you say, then it should be non-confrontational to repeal the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which protects Pharma from any liability associated with their product and and also to make it illegal to mandate vaccines. These two factors are glaring red flags that destroy public trust, especially after what we just saw with Covid. I think it is still unclear for many people what is propaganda and what is true coming out of our public health institutions, since it is clear they are captured by Pharma. Furthermore, there may be validity that some of the earlier vaccines were and continue to be great products (Polio/Measles); however, the massive ramp up in the vaccine schedule for kids (Hep B, RV, Hib, Chickenpox, etc) against a backdrop of zero liability for harms is untenable. Public health and the medical community need to stop treating people asking questions as "dangerous". What is truly "dangerous" are mandates and regulatory capture.
Please explain and justify why we vaccinate neonates for Hep B which is overwhelmingly spread by IV drug use and sex? The shot wears off in about a decade, so how does injecting one-day old babies make sense if the mother does not test positive for Hep B infection (mothers are tested)? Why do other countries not follow this practice? Why do we have the highest day-one mortality? Day one and our vaccine schedule flunks any rational risk/benefit analysis. Our infants are being served up as a market for drug companies. Thanks for defending them!
I appreciate Dr. Prasad’s point of view. But it’s all unsubstantiated opinions. This whole piece reads “I’m a doctor many of you trust so you should believe me when I tell you RFKjr is wrong on medical issues because I’m a doctor and he’s not.” Yet, he doesn’t cite any actual science, research, or studies in this piece. He uses the same kind of sweeping generalizations that other public health officials did that led to the pandemic in the first place. I would have hoped for a more nuanced discussion of the facts and science. Perhaps Dr. Prasad would debate RFKjr on JRE. I’d love to see that.
For those who may not know, Dr. Prasad was a stalwart on Twitter providing a reasonable voice in opposition to the captured CDC and the credentialist tyrants like Hotez, Yamey, etc during the darkest days of the Covid response. He fought the fight against closed schools, forced masking, and vaccine mandates, and he fought it well. I am eternally grateful to him for that.
The fact RFK Jr is willing to debate, and no one is willing to debate him speaks volumes. Instead we get article after article, mostly from news outlets funded by the pharmaceutical industry, that dismiss his claims without a shred of evidence showing how he’s got it wrong. I expected more from The Free Press, but not surprised to find more of the same.
I totally disagree with you that trials proved IVM and HCQ ineffective. There are ways to skew trial results and much has been written about the late stage infection status of patients, the very high dosages, and the compilation of data weeks out from initial dosage that watered down the results. Further, clinical data from frontline doctors Pierre Kory, Paul Marek and Zev Zelenko proved without doubt that these medications worked--very few of their patients were hospitalized, let alone died, and we’re talking about the elderly, many with co-morbidity. Tens of thousands of saved lives.
IVQ was effective in all stages of the illness, but especially when treatment began early. Time for randomized control trials amounted to a death sentence, and the State propaganda calling IVQ a horse paste was not relying on any government study--they smeared it despite the clinical results from front line Covid critical doctors--none of who had a political ax to grind, all of whom were highly experienced, credentialed and qualified.
IVM has been administered billions of times, is proven safe at correct dosages, and is inexpensive. Your assertion that after unremarkable RCT results the case for IVM should have been closed is outrageous and suggests to me that you yourself are captured and what they call controlled opposition.
The experimental Covid gene therapy has injured or killed millions of people, and it serves the public to dig deeper into the harms that other vaccines have caused. Ed Dowd, Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, and Michael Yeadon, among others, have documented the harms and questioned the pseudoscience promoted during the lockdowns.
This was a totalitarian play, well rehearsed - and RFK has it right. We have to question EVERYTHING we are being told about EVERYTHING!
I wonder how many patients you lost during the pandemic. I’d wager those prescribing IVM off label did much better.
I keep referring back to this page (https://c19ivm.org/), which appears to show quite a bit of pretty good data in support of IVM for COVID. Am I reading it wrong?
When I used to counsel a vaccine-reluctant mother, I would take this line. All vaccines can have side-effects. Some, very rarely, can have very serious side-effects. The diseases they prevent can also be dangerous, sometimes frequently, sometimes rarely. The only question to ask yourself is this: is it safer to have the vaccine, or not have it and risk the disease? Many mothers (it always seemed to be the mothers) would reply that childhood diseases are now rare, and as long as other kids had the vaccine then their child would be safe. The only arguments to counter that is that for herd immunity to work, some highly infectious diseases (measles for example) require a very high vaccination rate, and if two in every ten parents think that way your unvaccinated child will get measles. Also, just because you've never heard of anyone getting diphtheria, doesn't mean the disease has gone—look at what happened after the collapse of the USSR: 4,000 deaths from diphtheria withing two years of the vaccination schedule being disrupted.
I'm old enough to have seen children die of chickenpox encephalitis and whooping cough, be born disabled from rubella, seen measles kill babies, and watched meningitis kill children. All preventable. Even the earaches that destroyed most of my hearing are prevented with pneumococcal, meningococcal and H.influenzae vaccinations. The pancreatitis I had after mumps doesn't happen now, if you have your MMR. Even the old pertussis vaccine that really did cause encephalitis in 1:10,000 doses was safer than the death rate from whooping cough (the new acellular vaccine doesn't have that issue).
I'm afraid RFK Jr. is totally wrong, dangerous even, to be against vaccination. Certainly there is a question of individual liberty, but remember you are making a decision on behalf of your child, not for yourself, and that public health considerations—herd immunity— are important. I have had to put my money where my mouth is, having recently had a bone marrow transplant for leukemia, which leaves me with a brand new immune system and no immunity to anything, so I have had to have the full childhood immunization schedule in my sixties! Same consideration for me as for infants: is it safer to have them, or not to have them? Easy decision.
"The BIG question that has never been asked of nor answered by Big Pharma: Why has there been no research on the cumulative effect of all the childhood vaccines introduced since the 1986 Vaccine Act? None. Not only that, there have been no studies conducted on the combination of vaccines given at the same time in the same ‘well child’ visit. As mentioned, up to 9 different antigens can be introduced into a developing child’s immune system in one visit (and more now, see footnote ‘1’ below). No studies. Nada. None. Except the uncontrolled one that has been going on real-time in our children for going on 3 decades now."
I really wanted to hear something substantial in this article - I did not. Correlation is not causation - sure we get this. However, the national disregard for the drastic increase in autism in this country is shocking. Something is causing it. Perhaps it is not vaccines but there is something - and older parents seems like an unlikely answer. I think your article points to RFK's bravery to challenge a system that has obviously run amuck. As an oncologist you know this all too well Dr. Prasad. Oncologists live and die off of the chemo rebates.
RFK Jr questions what is in the vaccines. You never address his points that mercury in vaccines could be behind the rise in autism. He cites a study that the mercury disappears in the blood rapidly but crosses the blood brain barrier and thus could be at root to brain damage and autism. He is not against vaccines but wants to have Big Pharma make SAFE vaccines. Who opposes that desire?
An excellent analysis, Dr. Prasad. However, as someone who knew Dr. Zelenko and whose “Zelenko Protocol” results from Rockland County were validated by a study, as well as hundreds of studies around the world showing that early treatment of COVID with hydroxychloroquine, zinc and Azythromycin showed efficacy, I remain skeptical about the dismissal of all of these studies. Have you looked at them? I would trust you more if you said you had looked at them and determined all were flawed compared to the negative studies. Remember that highly touted Lancet study about hydroxychloroquine that was withdrawn after results were found to be fraudulent. This, along with the censorship, diminishes public trust.
Hey there, the argument is not an absolute one: no vaccines or produce vaccines with zero harm. Rather, we should treat vaccines as we treat every other medication provided to the general population, namely that they should be properly tested via double blind studies and that corporations face legal and financial liability for negligence. Also, there should be a strictly enforcement mechanism to track any harms. It is the lack of transparency that is making folks refuse to take any vaccines which may cause more harm in the end. Again, pharmas have so captured the debate that they make us believe in an all or nothing approach: either free us from all risk or there are no vaccines. A false choice that we and corporations do not accept for other medical treatments. agree re your response on hep b... point was to point that corporations are pushing vaccines onto children for no apparent health reason.
What continues to be missing in the vaccine conversation is the understanding that how they are made is different from vaccine to vaccine. They are not all the same. Just because they have the same name does not mean they are all made the same. Different mechanisms of actions, live virus, dead virus, different adjuvents, MRNA, etc. How about this for a change - what if it is not the theory of vaccination that is the issue, but how they are made and how and when they are administered. The devil is in the details. Why can't we all get behind the idea that some of the practices that are now conventional wisdom are showing to be problematic and adjust accordingly? It also feels very appropriate to me that in a new born infant there is all sorts of "permeability" happening, their skin is so fragile, their immune system just beginning to be formed, their skull isn't even fully formed, their digestive system still fragile and growing, doesn't it seem also reasonable that the blood brain barrier is also still forming? Gosh even adults have leaky gut and leaky brain. To me, that all seems so obvious and it's a shame that we make the conversation so polarized and there is no understanding of nuance. As well, we all understand that too much of a good thing can also become a bad thing. Why can't we understand that overloading a newborn's system, or heck even an adult's system with massive doses of a vaccine's mechanism of action could be problematic? Finally, why can't we also agree that as our understanding of health and immunity and the human body evolves, so too does our understanding of science. We used to get behind so many things that now make us laugh, we also didn't get behind things that now would be seen as inconceivable, why can't we also allow the conversation about vaccines to evolve as well without triggering people and ostracizing, cancelling or just plain disregarding those who are offering a different viewpoint?
I cannot wait to cast my vote for RFK, he is much much more than an opinion on vaccines. Wake up people.
I get incredibly frustrated when i see anybody—doctors, politicians, anybody—reinvent the wheel. When Sweden kept lower and middle schools open and Finland didn’t and they compared stats, no difference in teacher covid rates was reported. But no, we Americans knew better and handicapped a generation of low income kids for life.
Then when docs Fareed and Tyson in southern CA treat thousands of Covid patients with no deaths, we ignore their successful protocol and in fact, try to outlaw it. Overcoming the COVID-19 Darkness: How Two Doctors Successfully Treated 7000 Patients https://a.co/d/2Z5fPJo
Vinay - If vaccines are as "miraculous" as you say, then it should be non-confrontational to repeal the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which protects Pharma from any liability associated with their product and and also to make it illegal to mandate vaccines. These two factors are glaring red flags that destroy public trust, especially after what we just saw with Covid. I think it is still unclear for many people what is propaganda and what is true coming out of our public health institutions, since it is clear they are captured by Pharma. Furthermore, there may be validity that some of the earlier vaccines were and continue to be great products (Polio/Measles); however, the massive ramp up in the vaccine schedule for kids (Hep B, RV, Hib, Chickenpox, etc) against a backdrop of zero liability for harms is untenable. Public health and the medical community need to stop treating people asking questions as "dangerous". What is truly "dangerous" are mandates and regulatory capture.
Please explain and justify why we vaccinate neonates for Hep B which is overwhelmingly spread by IV drug use and sex? The shot wears off in about a decade, so how does injecting one-day old babies make sense if the mother does not test positive for Hep B infection (mothers are tested)? Why do other countries not follow this practice? Why do we have the highest day-one mortality? Day one and our vaccine schedule flunks any rational risk/benefit analysis. Our infants are being served up as a market for drug companies. Thanks for defending them!
I appreciate Dr. Prasad’s point of view. But it’s all unsubstantiated opinions. This whole piece reads “I’m a doctor many of you trust so you should believe me when I tell you RFKjr is wrong on medical issues because I’m a doctor and he’s not.” Yet, he doesn’t cite any actual science, research, or studies in this piece. He uses the same kind of sweeping generalizations that other public health officials did that led to the pandemic in the first place. I would have hoped for a more nuanced discussion of the facts and science. Perhaps Dr. Prasad would debate RFKjr on JRE. I’d love to see that.
For those who may not know, Dr. Prasad was a stalwart on Twitter providing a reasonable voice in opposition to the captured CDC and the credentialist tyrants like Hotez, Yamey, etc during the darkest days of the Covid response. He fought the fight against closed schools, forced masking, and vaccine mandates, and he fought it well. I am eternally grateful to him for that.
The fact RFK Jr is willing to debate, and no one is willing to debate him speaks volumes. Instead we get article after article, mostly from news outlets funded by the pharmaceutical industry, that dismiss his claims without a shred of evidence showing how he’s got it wrong. I expected more from The Free Press, but not surprised to find more of the same.
I totally disagree with you that trials proved IVM and HCQ ineffective. There are ways to skew trial results and much has been written about the late stage infection status of patients, the very high dosages, and the compilation of data weeks out from initial dosage that watered down the results. Further, clinical data from frontline doctors Pierre Kory, Paul Marek and Zev Zelenko proved without doubt that these medications worked--very few of their patients were hospitalized, let alone died, and we’re talking about the elderly, many with co-morbidity. Tens of thousands of saved lives.
IVQ was effective in all stages of the illness, but especially when treatment began early. Time for randomized control trials amounted to a death sentence, and the State propaganda calling IVQ a horse paste was not relying on any government study--they smeared it despite the clinical results from front line Covid critical doctors--none of who had a political ax to grind, all of whom were highly experienced, credentialed and qualified.
IVM has been administered billions of times, is proven safe at correct dosages, and is inexpensive. Your assertion that after unremarkable RCT results the case for IVM should have been closed is outrageous and suggests to me that you yourself are captured and what they call controlled opposition.
The experimental Covid gene therapy has injured or killed millions of people, and it serves the public to dig deeper into the harms that other vaccines have caused. Ed Dowd, Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, and Michael Yeadon, among others, have documented the harms and questioned the pseudoscience promoted during the lockdowns.
This was a totalitarian play, well rehearsed - and RFK has it right. We have to question EVERYTHING we are being told about EVERYTHING!
I wonder how many patients you lost during the pandemic. I’d wager those prescribing IVM off label did much better.
I keep referring back to this page (https://c19ivm.org/), which appears to show quite a bit of pretty good data in support of IVM for COVID. Am I reading it wrong?
This is why I subscribe to The Free Press. Thank you!
When I used to counsel a vaccine-reluctant mother, I would take this line. All vaccines can have side-effects. Some, very rarely, can have very serious side-effects. The diseases they prevent can also be dangerous, sometimes frequently, sometimes rarely. The only question to ask yourself is this: is it safer to have the vaccine, or not have it and risk the disease? Many mothers (it always seemed to be the mothers) would reply that childhood diseases are now rare, and as long as other kids had the vaccine then their child would be safe. The only arguments to counter that is that for herd immunity to work, some highly infectious diseases (measles for example) require a very high vaccination rate, and if two in every ten parents think that way your unvaccinated child will get measles. Also, just because you've never heard of anyone getting diphtheria, doesn't mean the disease has gone—look at what happened after the collapse of the USSR: 4,000 deaths from diphtheria withing two years of the vaccination schedule being disrupted.
I'm old enough to have seen children die of chickenpox encephalitis and whooping cough, be born disabled from rubella, seen measles kill babies, and watched meningitis kill children. All preventable. Even the earaches that destroyed most of my hearing are prevented with pneumococcal, meningococcal and H.influenzae vaccinations. The pancreatitis I had after mumps doesn't happen now, if you have your MMR. Even the old pertussis vaccine that really did cause encephalitis in 1:10,000 doses was safer than the death rate from whooping cough (the new acellular vaccine doesn't have that issue).
I'm afraid RFK Jr. is totally wrong, dangerous even, to be against vaccination. Certainly there is a question of individual liberty, but remember you are making a decision on behalf of your child, not for yourself, and that public health considerations—herd immunity— are important. I have had to put my money where my mouth is, having recently had a bone marrow transplant for leukemia, which leaves me with a brand new immune system and no immunity to anything, so I have had to have the full childhood immunization schedule in my sixties! Same consideration for me as for infants: is it safer to have them, or not to have them? Easy decision.
Vinay - This has never been asked, so it will never be answered. #BigPharma will not allow it:
https://outsidein51.substack.com/p/pro-vaccine-safety-in-2023-where
"The BIG question that has never been asked of nor answered by Big Pharma: Why has there been no research on the cumulative effect of all the childhood vaccines introduced since the 1986 Vaccine Act? None. Not only that, there have been no studies conducted on the combination of vaccines given at the same time in the same ‘well child’ visit. As mentioned, up to 9 different antigens can be introduced into a developing child’s immune system in one visit (and more now, see footnote ‘1’ below). No studies. Nada. None. Except the uncontrolled one that has been going on real-time in our children for going on 3 decades now."
I really wanted to hear something substantial in this article - I did not. Correlation is not causation - sure we get this. However, the national disregard for the drastic increase in autism in this country is shocking. Something is causing it. Perhaps it is not vaccines but there is something - and older parents seems like an unlikely answer. I think your article points to RFK's bravery to challenge a system that has obviously run amuck. As an oncologist you know this all too well Dr. Prasad. Oncologists live and die off of the chemo rebates.
RFK Jr questions what is in the vaccines. You never address his points that mercury in vaccines could be behind the rise in autism. He cites a study that the mercury disappears in the blood rapidly but crosses the blood brain barrier and thus could be at root to brain damage and autism. He is not against vaccines but wants to have Big Pharma make SAFE vaccines. Who opposes that desire?
An excellent analysis, Dr. Prasad. However, as someone who knew Dr. Zelenko and whose “Zelenko Protocol” results from Rockland County were validated by a study, as well as hundreds of studies around the world showing that early treatment of COVID with hydroxychloroquine, zinc and Azythromycin showed efficacy, I remain skeptical about the dismissal of all of these studies. Have you looked at them? I would trust you more if you said you had looked at them and determined all were flawed compared to the negative studies. Remember that highly touted Lancet study about hydroxychloroquine that was withdrawn after results were found to be fraudulent. This, along with the censorship, diminishes public trust.
Hey there, the argument is not an absolute one: no vaccines or produce vaccines with zero harm. Rather, we should treat vaccines as we treat every other medication provided to the general population, namely that they should be properly tested via double blind studies and that corporations face legal and financial liability for negligence. Also, there should be a strictly enforcement mechanism to track any harms. It is the lack of transparency that is making folks refuse to take any vaccines which may cause more harm in the end. Again, pharmas have so captured the debate that they make us believe in an all or nothing approach: either free us from all risk or there are no vaccines. A false choice that we and corporations do not accept for other medical treatments. agree re your response on hep b... point was to point that corporations are pushing vaccines onto children for no apparent health reason.
What continues to be missing in the vaccine conversation is the understanding that how they are made is different from vaccine to vaccine. They are not all the same. Just because they have the same name does not mean they are all made the same. Different mechanisms of actions, live virus, dead virus, different adjuvents, MRNA, etc. How about this for a change - what if it is not the theory of vaccination that is the issue, but how they are made and how and when they are administered. The devil is in the details. Why can't we all get behind the idea that some of the practices that are now conventional wisdom are showing to be problematic and adjust accordingly? It also feels very appropriate to me that in a new born infant there is all sorts of "permeability" happening, their skin is so fragile, their immune system just beginning to be formed, their skull isn't even fully formed, their digestive system still fragile and growing, doesn't it seem also reasonable that the blood brain barrier is also still forming? Gosh even adults have leaky gut and leaky brain. To me, that all seems so obvious and it's a shame that we make the conversation so polarized and there is no understanding of nuance. As well, we all understand that too much of a good thing can also become a bad thing. Why can't we understand that overloading a newborn's system, or heck even an adult's system with massive doses of a vaccine's mechanism of action could be problematic? Finally, why can't we also agree that as our understanding of health and immunity and the human body evolves, so too does our understanding of science. We used to get behind so many things that now make us laugh, we also didn't get behind things that now would be seen as inconceivable, why can't we also allow the conversation about vaccines to evolve as well without triggering people and ostracizing, cancelling or just plain disregarding those who are offering a different viewpoint?
I cannot wait to cast my vote for RFK, he is much much more than an opinion on vaccines. Wake up people.
I get incredibly frustrated when i see anybody—doctors, politicians, anybody—reinvent the wheel. When Sweden kept lower and middle schools open and Finland didn’t and they compared stats, no difference in teacher covid rates was reported. But no, we Americans knew better and handicapped a generation of low income kids for life.
Then when docs Fareed and Tyson in southern CA treat thousands of Covid patients with no deaths, we ignore their successful protocol and in fact, try to outlaw it. Overcoming the COVID-19 Darkness: How Two Doctors Successfully Treated 7000 Patients https://a.co/d/2Z5fPJo