RFK claims about vaccines fact checked by Senator Dr Bill Cassidy.

Grim Reaper said:

1. What VAERS is​


  • VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) is a U.S. national system for monitoring vaccine safety.
  • It is co-managed by the CDC and FDA.
  • Anyone can submit a report: doctors, nurses, patients, or caregivers. ✅


2. “No doctors used it”​


  • This is false. Many reports are submitted by healthcare professionals.
  • Doctors are encouraged, and in some cases required, to report certain adverse events following vaccination.


3. “VAERS is a joke”​


  • This is misleading. VAERS is not perfect, but it is a real and legitimate early warning systemfor vaccine safety:
    • Strengths: Helps detect rare adverse events that might not appear in clinical trials.
    • Limitations:
      • Reports are unverified and do not prove causation.
      • Anyone can submit, so data quality varies.
  • Misrepresenting VAERS as “proof that vaccines are dangerous” is a common anti-vaccine tactic.


✅ Bottom line​


  • VAERS is real, used by doctors and public health authorities, and is important for safety monitoring.
  • It is not a database of confirmed vaccine-caused injuries, and using it that way is misleading.
Click to expand...
if you asked a doctor you would know it was rarely used.

unproven assertion by AI are not automatically true.
 
QP! said:
No Kennedy was flat out lying in how he represented the study. The part he left out absolutely counters his claim and he said the study proved his claim. The opposite was true as Senator Dr Cassidy points out clearly.
Click to expand...
No. Not the point RFK Jr was trying to make however faulty his delivery.
 
QP! said:
The site you posted from "lies often? and is often filled with "Ad hominenm attacks and poisoning of the well and made up lies", so by your own reasoning we DO NOT then have to read any single article you post to address it specifically.

By YOUR OWN reasoning we now get to hand wave it away and dismiss it.
Click to expand...
no.

its full of facts.

apples and assholes.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
no.

its full of facts.

apples and assholes.
Click to expand...
No it is not. Vaccine news is known source of misinformation, thus by your own point we do not have to read any information they post and engage the actual points made, just as you say because AI makes mistakes you therefore do not have to read any information posted and engage that information.

If it is true for one, then it is true for both. You either engage the data and claims made independent of the source and its history or you do not.
 
Knuckles Z said:
No. Not the point RFK Jr was trying to make however faulty his delivery.
Click to expand...
No you are simply wrong and if you thought you were correct you would counter specifically what Senator Dr Cassidy so clearly lays out as Kennedy's comprehension or misrepresentation errors from the studies.

Dr Cassidy makes clear points you could easily quote and then post for us what is wrong in how he applies it to Kennedy.

But you do no such thing while just maintaining 'Kennedy was right' while not offering a bit of evidence on what the Dr got wrong.
 
QP! said:
No it is not. Vaccine news is known source of misinformation, thus by your own point we do not have to read any information they post and engage the actual points made, just as you say because AI makes mistakes you therefore do not have to read any information posted and engage that information.

If it is true for one, then it is true for both. You either engage the data and claims made independent of the source and its history or you do not.
Click to expand...
you need to attack the study.

you're not doing that.

you're a fraud and an idiot.
 
QP! said:
You need to attack the data and information posted in the Ai summaries.

You are not doing that.

You are a fraud and idiot.
Click to expand...
the ai has bad arguments.

its the equivalent of ad hominem attacks.

the ai does not address the study either.

it just another lib idiot spouting random talking points.

that's what LLM's are, a fount of random talking points.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
if you asked a doctor you would know it was rarely used.

unproven assertion by AI are not automatically true.
Click to expand...
Wrong again,

VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) is used quite frequently, but usage varies depending on the context. Let me break it down clearly:



1. Who submits reports​


  • Anyone can submit a report: healthcare providers, patients, caregivers.
  • Healthcare providers are encouraged and sometimes required to report certain events after vaccination (e.g., death, hospitalization, serious reactions).


2. Volume of reports​


  • Historically, tens of thousands of reports per year are submitted to VAERS in the U.S.
  • For example:
    • 2020–2021 (COVID vaccine rollout) saw a huge spike, with hundreds of thousands of reports due to the large number of vaccinations.
    • In “normal” years, the system gets about 30,000–50,000 reports annually, but this includes all vaccines.


3. Purpose of VAERS​


  • VAERS is a passive reporting system, not a confirmation system.
  • It is primarily used to detect unusual or unexpected patterns, which can then trigger further investigation by the CDC or FDA.


4. How often doctors use it​


  • Most reports are submitted by healthcare professionals, especially for serious events.
  • Not all doctors submit every mild adverse event, but serious or required events are routinely reported.


✅ Key points​


  • VAERS is widely used, especially by healthcare providers for serious events.
  • Anyone can submit a report, which sometimes leads to over-reporting or incomplete information.
  • It is a signal-detection tool, not a verified dataset of confirmed vaccine-caused injuries.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
you need to attack the study.

you're not doing that.

you're a fraud and an idiot.
Click to expand...

Ichabod Stain : i refuse to engage any AI data or information as AI make mistakes thus i will not even look at the data or information.

Person 2 : but the web site you post information from also makes mistakes and posts provable false info all the time?

Ichabod Stain : that is ok. Ignore that and engage the material they post and not their past reputation or history

Person 2 : but you refuse to do that for the AI material. Why not address the facts and data instead of hand waving it away saying "i won't because Ai makes mistakes'

Ichabod Stain : because i am too stupid to see I am telling people they have to do what i refuse to do.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
the ai has bad arguments.

its the equivalent of ad hominem attacks.

the ai does not address the study either.

it just another lib idiot spouting random talking points.

that's what LLM's are, a fount of random talking points.
Click to expand...
Your website you post from has bad arguments.

is has the equivalent of ad hominem attacks.

It often does not address the actual topic and makes false claims

That is what they sites you post from are, a fount of misinformation and known to be so.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
vaccines are big pharma death jabs that killed more than COVID itself.
Click to expand...
That claim is false and extremely misleading. Let’s break it down carefully:

1. Vaccines are not “death jabs”​

  • COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, Novavax) have been extensively tested in clinical trials and monitored through systems like VAERS, VSD, and other safety networks.
  • They are designed to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death.
  • Millions of people have received COVID vaccines worldwide, with a very small fraction experiencing serious adverse events.

2. COVID vaccines did not kill more people than COVID​

  • Data from the CDC, WHO, and independent researchers show:
    • COVID-19 caused millions of deaths worldwide (over 1.1 million in the U.S. alone).
    • Serious adverse events from vaccines are rare, and deaths causally linked to vaccination are extremely rare—on the order of less than 1 per million doses.
  • The claim that vaccines killed more than COVID itself is not supported by any credible evidence.

3. VAERS context​

  • VAERS reports are sometimes misused online to suggest vaccines are extremely dangerous.
  • Important nuance:
    • VAERS reports are unverified, anyone can submit them, and they do not prove causation.
    • Most VAERS reports are minor events (e.g., soreness, fever) or coincidental deaths unrelated to the vaccine.

4. Safety monitoring​

  • Vaccine safety is continuously monitored globally.
  • Serious adverse events are investigated, and policies are updated if necessary (e.g., age restrictions on certain COVID vaccines).
  • Overall, vaccines prevent far more deaths than they cause, which is supported by decades of data.

✅ Bottom line​

ClaimFact Check
COVID vaccines are “death jabs”False; vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and prevent deaths
Vaccines killed more than COVIDFalse; COVID caused millions of deaths, vaccines caused extremely rare serious events
 
Grim Reaper said:
Wrong again,

VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) is used quite frequently, but usage varies depending on the context. Let me break it down clearly:



1. Who submits reports​


  • Anyone can submit a report: healthcare providers, patients, caregivers.
  • Healthcare providers are encouraged and sometimes required to report certain events after vaccination (e.g., death, hospitalization, serious reactions).


2. Volume of reports​


  • Historically, tens of thousands of reports per year are submitted to VAERS in the U.S.
  • For example:
    • 2020–2021 (COVID vaccine rollout) saw a huge spike, with hundreds of thousands of reports due to the large number of vaccinations.
    • In “normal” years, the system gets about 30,000–50,000 reports annually, but this includes all vaccines.


3. Purpose of VAERS​


  • VAERS is a passive reporting system, not a confirmation system.
  • It is primarily used to detect unusual or unexpected patterns, which can then trigger further investigation by the CDC or FDA.


4. How often doctors use it​


  • Most reports are submitted by healthcare professionals, especially for serious events.
  • Not all doctors submit every mild adverse event, but serious or required events are routinely reported.


✅ Key points​


  • VAERS is widely used, especially by healthcare providers for serious events.
  • Anyone can submit a report, which sometimes leads to over-reporting or incomplete information.
  • It is a signal-detection tool, not a verified dataset of confirmed vaccine-caused injuries.
Click to expand...

Correct.

VAERS is vital for 'SIGNAL INFORMATION', meaning if there is a developing suspected break out of a new Ebola strain somewhere in Africa, it will be VAERS that provides some of the first data pointing towards it.

Nothing on VAERS is proof, even though magats tried to use VAERS reports during covid to prove covid jabs were "harming people". That is not how it works. It SIGNALS or indicates issues which then trigger follow up and investigation.

If you have hundreds or thousands of people indicating the same type symptoms and illness across a geography, that is a good SIGNAL, that there may be an issue and further investigation is needed.

Magats are incapable of understanding science or medicine so they get this wrong too.
 
QP! said:
Your website you post from has bad arguments.

is has the equivalent of ad hominem attacks.

It often does not address the actual topic and makes false claims

That is what they sites you post from are, a fount of misinformation and known to be so.
Click to expand...
you need to focus on the one article.

again. this effectively an ad hominem attacks.
 
Ichabod Stain said:
you need to focus on the one article.

again. this effectively an ad hominem attacks.
Click to expand...
You need to focus on just the data and information posted in the AI summary and not just say "ai makes mistakes' in the same way your 'web site makes mistakes'.

You are effectively using an ad hominem attack against the AI summaries by refusing to address the actual data and information and just addressing the delivery system (web site or ai).
 
Grim Reaper said:
That claim is false. It’s a common misinformation narrative. Here’s a careful breakdown:


  1. COVID-19 death data:
    • COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. are tracked by the CDC and state health departments. The vast majority of confirmed COVID-19 deaths were caused by the virus itself, not vaccines.
  2. Vaccine safety data:
    • COVID-19 vaccines authorized in the U.S. (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, Novavax) have undergone rigorous safety monitoring. Serious adverse events are extremely rare. Deaths directly caused by the vaccine are a tiny fraction of reported cases, far below 1% of total COVID-19 deaths.
  3. Misinterpretation of data:
    • Sometimes people confuse “deaths reported after vaccination” with “deaths caused by the vaccine.” Reporting systems like VAERS collect all post-vaccination events, but reports alone do not establish causation.

✅ Conclusion: There is no credible evidence that 74% of COVID-19 deaths were caused by vaccines. COVID-19 itself is responsible for the vast majority of deaths.
Click to expand...
AI response. Do better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top