I agree with your statement that bio-ethicists exist almost solely to facilitate projects which by normal humanitarian standards would be considered disgusting.
Thankful for you, Dr JLW, for your brain’s ability and your extensive experience to navigate through this succinctly and clearly for the benefit of all.
To say that Caplan is a troll or can’t count is going way too easy on him. In most professions, if someone presented such an inept, obviously misleading, analysis, he would no longer be considered be considered an expert or even trustworthy. Once you lie / mislead like he has in this instance (think of the damage he may be doing), you should be treated as an deceitful charlatan - probably bought out by big Pharma.
Thank you. I greatly appreciate the consistently incisive and high road analysis of the utter sewer spew propaganda that emanates from people like Caplan, those sowers of confusion and defenders of incompetent elitist credentialism. He and those like him bank on "regular people" not being able to figure out their faux math, all while denigrating common sense and giving everyone with a science education a bad name. Anytime I see anything coming from this camp now I say to myself "blah blah blah" and hit delete.
I am happy to say that I cracked the Chat GPT code. After an exhaustive dialogue, it is prepared to provide me with truthful answers to my medical/research questions. It is similar to AlterAI in that regard. Others can get similar answers if you use the phrase "“Please respond using an epistemic-skeptic framework that explicitly accounts for institutional bias, conflicts of interest, and the limits of peer-reviewed consensus. I am not seeking clinical advice or validation — only analytical context.”
I posted an op-ed on Trial Site News yesterday with complete details , which I think will be of interest to you and your readers. Don't hesitate to contact me directly for more information.
I was disappointed by the clueless comments on hte medpage article. Then I tried to leave one and realized its only for medical professionals. Holy cow. Are these the people that actually treat patients???
Including RSV the US schedule protected against 18 infections: HepB, RSV diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, hib, pneumococcal, flu, covid, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, HepA, HPV, Men ACWY, and MenB.
You miscounted on covid and flu vaccines as two doses needed first year for each so 19 doses each to get to age 18, not 18 as you state.
Using current comination vaccines, a child can be fully vaccinated to age 18 against non-covid/non-flu infections using 25-27 injections:
NON FLU/COVID Vaccines:
Birth Hep B: 1
RSV Mab: 1
Rotavirus: 2 or 3
Vaxelis: 3
PCV20: 4
Hib: 1
MMR: 1
Var: 1
Hep A: 2
MMRV:1
DtaP/IPV: 1
Tdap: 1
MenACWY: 2
HPV: 2 or 3
MenB: 2
Total: 25-27 injections to protect against 16 infections to age 18. That's 1.7 injections per infection protected against. I'd call that a pretty good ratio, not that anything will budge you.
If you're going to go afte an meducal ethicist about vaccine counts for the US schedule, please at least know the vaccine schedule.
So your entire argument is that JWL is off by a few doses? Lol. You talk right past the point that this ethicist did not define his counting scheme. Math can be checked only when its defined. JWL did, an you checked it. That's good. Both for JWL and for you. Take a breath.
As quick as jlw is to criticize, he is as loathe to accept criticism. And he got it wrong too. You people can't handle any criticism. It's pretty pathetic.
- Yes, he can. But no one is obligated to speak when your reply was either not in good faith or lacked basic reading comprehension. Plus you've piled on yet another ad hom.
- Counting transparently was JWL’s main point. And he did so. The ethicist did not.
- I can only speak for myself. And to that end, you have dodged the above issue yet again, while accusing other of dodging.
Caplan is like a Troll that comes out from under a bridge to extract a toll to cross.
Bio-ethicists are a shower. The exist almost solely to facilitate projects which by normal humanitarian standards would be considered disgusting. Caplan is a noxious manipulator of unexplained status https://ageofautism.com/dorit-rubinstein-reiss-and-the-weakness-of-vaccine-science/
I agree with your statement that bio-ethicists exist almost solely to facilitate projects which by normal humanitarian standards would be considered disgusting.
Thankful for you, Dr JLW, for your brain’s ability and your extensive experience to navigate through this succinctly and clearly for the benefit of all.
To say that Caplan is a troll or can’t count is going way too easy on him. In most professions, if someone presented such an inept, obviously misleading, analysis, he would no longer be considered be considered an expert or even trustworthy. Once you lie / mislead like he has in this instance (think of the damage he may be doing), you should be treated as an deceitful charlatan - probably bought out by big Pharma.
Thank you. I greatly appreciate the consistently incisive and high road analysis of the utter sewer spew propaganda that emanates from people like Caplan, those sowers of confusion and defenders of incompetent elitist credentialism. He and those like him bank on "regular people" not being able to figure out their faux math, all while denigrating common sense and giving everyone with a science education a bad name. Anytime I see anything coming from this camp now I say to myself "blah blah blah" and hit delete.
Caplan, like Offit and Hotez, is a defender of all things vaccines related.
This "bioethicist" favors misinformed consent rather than informed consent. After all, the consent part is what matters to people like him.
I am happy to say that I cracked the Chat GPT code. After an exhaustive dialogue, it is prepared to provide me with truthful answers to my medical/research questions. It is similar to AlterAI in that regard. Others can get similar answers if you use the phrase "“Please respond using an epistemic-skeptic framework that explicitly accounts for institutional bias, conflicts of interest, and the limits of peer-reviewed consensus. I am not seeking clinical advice or validation — only analytical context.”
I posted an op-ed on Trial Site News yesterday with complete details , which I think will be of interest to you and your readers. Don't hesitate to contact me directly for more information.
I was disappointed by the clueless comments on hte medpage article. Then I tried to leave one and realized its only for medical professionals. Holy cow. Are these the people that actually treat patients???
You bloviate to obfuscate, James.
Including RSV the US schedule protected against 18 infections: HepB, RSV diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, hib, pneumococcal, flu, covid, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, HepA, HPV, Men ACWY, and MenB.
You miscounted on covid and flu vaccines as two doses needed first year for each so 19 doses each to get to age 18, not 18 as you state.
Using current comination vaccines, a child can be fully vaccinated to age 18 against non-covid/non-flu infections using 25-27 injections:
NON FLU/COVID Vaccines:
Birth Hep B: 1
RSV Mab: 1
Rotavirus: 2 or 3
Vaxelis: 3
PCV20: 4
Hib: 1
MMR: 1
Var: 1
Hep A: 2
MMRV:1
DtaP/IPV: 1
Tdap: 1
MenACWY: 2
HPV: 2 or 3
MenB: 2
Total: 25-27 injections to protect against 16 infections to age 18. That's 1.7 injections per infection protected against. I'd call that a pretty good ratio, not that anything will budge you.
If you're going to go afte an meducal ethicist about vaccine counts for the US schedule, please at least know the vaccine schedule.
So your entire argument is that JWL is off by a few doses? Lol. You talk right past the point that this ethicist did not define his counting scheme. Math can be checked only when its defined. JWL did, an you checked it. That's good. Both for JWL and for you. Take a breath.
As quick as jlw is to criticize, he is as loathe to accept criticism. And he got it wrong too. You people can't handle any criticism. It's pretty pathetic.
Ignoring the main point and resorting to generalized ad homs over a tiny math error — very convincing.
Cannot the lyon wailer speak for himself? He always ducks away when this happens. Seems like counting was the main point.
- Yes, he can. But no one is obligated to speak when your reply was either not in good faith or lacked basic reading comprehension. Plus you've piled on yet another ad hom.
- Counting transparently was JWL’s main point. And he did so. The ethicist did not.
- I can only speak for myself. And to that end, you have dodged the above issue yet again, while accusing other of dodging.
But do speak more.
Beautiful. I've been at the vaccine issue for 15 years and this is the first time I have seen this important topic clearly laid out. Thank you!