Acetaminophen science is entirely misrepresented by NBC News. The JAMA "Twins Study" they cited is fatally flawed. Acetaminophen is a likely contributor, not the only causal factor.
"Safe and effective" only means one thing to those spewing it. "Nothing bad happened to me." They also leave out that their major source of income is derived from Phrma advertising.
I find it ironic that they also use the "be afraid, be very afraid" narrative when depicting a "measles outbreak." They share nothing about the history of measles, the mitigation of this childhood disease, nor the actual data.
When evaluating risks vs benefits, don't outsource your knowledge to NBC. Worse still, don't let the Government mandate what decisions about your health is best for you. It's about money and power.
If none of the above were true, why would we need the Congress to protect Phrma from liability ((NCVIA 1986) and suspend your due process rights under the Constitution?
The American people can handle the truth. Unfortunately, it's being hidden away.
I would like vaccine injuries to be highlighted with secondary possible reasons like Tylenol, other medicines, processed food, stratospheric aerosol injections (geoengineering), and glyphosate spraying to the list.
Some thoughts scream out to me (a statistically knowledgeable layman) as I scan this article.
First, the ‘news media’ are captured propagandists as opposed to investigators trying to find the truth. They can neither be trusted nor relied on.
Second, that reviewing scientific studies and providing the necessary ‘statistical’ and ‘design of experiment’ explanations is utterly beyond the news media’s skill set. But it is also beyond the skill set of the general public. Frankly, it is often beyond the skill set of a statically knowledgeable layman. That’s one reason I subscribe to this substack.
I’ve used technical testing throughout a long non-medical career. I found that it was always necessary to ask the question, “What is this test really telling us?” Sometimes it was, “We screwed this test up so badly that the data is worthless.” Sometimes it was “This test is not telling us what it seems to tell us.” Sometimes the test results were straight forward and we had actionable data and analysis. But we only knew that after we had thoroughly reviewed the results. I had an accomplished, experienced and educated team working for me. And still, in many cases, we’d just look at each other and say, “What the heck is this data telling us, other than what we’re doing isn’t working? Does anybody have any idea why?”
Throughout medicine there is way too much narrative adherence and way too little honest evaluation. I always read technical and medical papers inside out. Data first, Analysis and Discussion second, Conclusions third and Abstract at the end. It has always amazed me how often the data do not support the Abstract, or even the Conclusions. Usually the truth can be sussed out in the Discussion after you’ve reviewed the data. Sometimes not.
More studies on pre-dosing infants with acetaminophen before vaccination as recommended by pediatric practice. I believe William Shaw (Great Plains/Mosaic) looked into this.
I see that the media propaganda machine is already sowing doubt in any connection between APAP and Autism in the news cycles. This reinforces our free-thinkers' skepticism, as each iteration of prospective pharmaceutical questioning and change is opposed by some unseen force. We really seem to be living in a dystopian 1984, with it's thought police and mind control techniques. It seems quite obvious that the concern is not about children or acquiring a life-long neurodevelopmental disorder, but in maintaining the status quo and money grift.
Thank you for the excellent work you've done for so many years. I've added this post to a curation that offers verifiable context at a glance and makes it easy to access original sources.
1. Autism - Evidence-based root causes (114 references from 2011 to present):
2. Autism cover up - Evidence of establishment medicine and media suppressing and denying factual evidence and failing to address root causes (more than 100 references):
As I understand it , Acetaminophen is a centrally acting drug so in order to work it must go through the blood/brain barrier (as opposed to NSAID working peripherally). The hypothesis I remember floated when IV Acetaminophen was approved in the US was that Acetaminophen may work on the cannabinoid receptors so it makes perfect sense to me that any drug that works mechanistically this way should be used with caution.
"Safe and effective" only means one thing to those spewing it. "Nothing bad happened to me." They also leave out that their major source of income is derived from Phrma advertising.
I find it ironic that they also use the "be afraid, be very afraid" narrative when depicting a "measles outbreak." They share nothing about the history of measles, the mitigation of this childhood disease, nor the actual data.
When evaluating risks vs benefits, don't outsource your knowledge to NBC. Worse still, don't let the Government mandate what decisions about your health is best for you. It's about money and power.
If none of the above were true, why would we need the Congress to protect Phrma from liability ((NCVIA 1986) and suspend your due process rights under the Constitution?
The American people can handle the truth. Unfortunately, it's being hidden away.
I would like vaccine injuries to be highlighted with secondary possible reasons like Tylenol, other medicines, processed food, stratospheric aerosol injections (geoengineering), and glyphosate spraying to the list.
Some thoughts scream out to me (a statistically knowledgeable layman) as I scan this article.
First, the ‘news media’ are captured propagandists as opposed to investigators trying to find the truth. They can neither be trusted nor relied on.
Second, that reviewing scientific studies and providing the necessary ‘statistical’ and ‘design of experiment’ explanations is utterly beyond the news media’s skill set. But it is also beyond the skill set of the general public. Frankly, it is often beyond the skill set of a statically knowledgeable layman. That’s one reason I subscribe to this substack.
I’ve used technical testing throughout a long non-medical career. I found that it was always necessary to ask the question, “What is this test really telling us?” Sometimes it was, “We screwed this test up so badly that the data is worthless.” Sometimes it was “This test is not telling us what it seems to tell us.” Sometimes the test results were straight forward and we had actionable data and analysis. But we only knew that after we had thoroughly reviewed the results. I had an accomplished, experienced and educated team working for me. And still, in many cases, we’d just look at each other and say, “What the heck is this data telling us, other than what we’re doing isn’t working? Does anybody have any idea why?”
Throughout medicine there is way too much narrative adherence and way too little honest evaluation. I always read technical and medical papers inside out. Data first, Analysis and Discussion second, Conclusions third and Abstract at the end. It has always amazed me how often the data do not support the Abstract, or even the Conclusions. Usually the truth can be sussed out in the Discussion after you’ve reviewed the data. Sometimes not.
More studies on pre-dosing infants with acetaminophen before vaccination as recommended by pediatric practice. I believe William Shaw (Great Plains/Mosaic) looked into this.
I see that the media propaganda machine is already sowing doubt in any connection between APAP and Autism in the news cycles. This reinforces our free-thinkers' skepticism, as each iteration of prospective pharmaceutical questioning and change is opposed by some unseen force. We really seem to be living in a dystopian 1984, with it's thought police and mind control techniques. It seems quite obvious that the concern is not about children or acquiring a life-long neurodevelopmental disorder, but in maintaining the status quo and money grift.
Thank you for the excellent work you've done for so many years. I've added this post to a curation that offers verifiable context at a glance and makes it easy to access original sources.
1. Autism - Evidence-based root causes (114 references from 2011 to present):
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/although-establishment-medicine-has
2. Autism cover up - Evidence of establishment medicine and media suppressing and denying factual evidence and failing to address root causes (more than 100 references):
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/autism-more-than-100-references-providing
3. Vaccine research & evidence - serious & grievous harm (more than 45 references):
FDA & CDC Role
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/the-fda-and-cdc-have-not-published
Evidence & Research
https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/vaccines-part-2-evidence-and-research
As I understand it , Acetaminophen is a centrally acting drug so in order to work it must go through the blood/brain barrier (as opposed to NSAID working peripherally). The hypothesis I remember floated when IV Acetaminophen was approved in the US was that Acetaminophen may work on the cannabinoid receptors so it makes perfect sense to me that any drug that works mechanistically this way should be used with caution.