RFK Jr, HHs & Public Health News | Measles outbreak, etc.

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 781
  • Views: 22K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:


“Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says his “Make America Healthy Again” Commission report harnesses “gold-standard” science, citing more than 500 studies and other sources to back up its claims. Those citations, though, are rife with errors, from broken links to misstated conclusions.

Seven of the cited sources don’t appear to exist at all.

Epidemiologist Katherine Keyes is listed in the MAHA report as the first author of a study on anxiety in adolescents. When NOTUS reached out to her this week, she was surprised to hear of the citation. She does study mental health and substance use, she said. But she didn’t write the paper listed.

“The paper cited is not a real paper that I or my colleagues were involved with,” Keyes told NOTUS via email. “We’ve certainly done research on this topic, but did not publish a paper in JAMA Pediatrics on this topic with that co-author group, or with that title.”

It’s not clear that anyone wrote the study cited in the MAHA report. …”

——
Did they have AI draft their report and it imagined up studies to support their pre-ordained conclusions that no one bothered to check? Or is this just sloppy human work either by the RFK team or, as MAHA and MAGA frequently argue, remaining deep state HHS employees intentionally sabotaging the report with fake references?

​
Click to expand...

White House blames 'formatting' for errors in RFK Jr.'s MAHA report. Authors push back.​


www.usatoday.com

White House blames 'formatting' for errors in RFK Jr.'s MAHA report. Authors push back.

Researchers listed in the MAHA report have come forward since its publication saying the articles cited don't exist or were used inaccurately.
www.usatoday.com www.usatoday.com

“… “I understand there were some formatting issues with the MAHA report that are being addressed and the report will be updated,” Leavitt told reporters May 29. “But it does not negate the substance of the report.”

She also didn't say whether the report was generated by artificial intelligence, or AI, as some have questioned.

Although it’s difficult to determine whether scientific articles are generated or “touched up” by AI, there are telling signs, said Yuan Luo, professor and chief AI officer at Northwestern University’s clinical and translational sciences institute.

Some of those signs may include citation gaps, factual inconsistencies and irrelevant conclusions derived from random research.

…The MAHA report erroneously said an article on the impact of light from computer monitors was published in the journal Pediatrics when it wasn’t, according to the study’s author Mariana Figueiro, a professor at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai….”
 
hedge said:
What was the story with Novavax's vaccine, nrsair? I remember it was being touted as a "better" alternative to the mRNA vaccines even by some quarters of the anti-vax crowd, but then I didn't hear anything else about it. Why did some anti-vaxxers seem at least somewhat OK with Novavax's vaccine? The stock price cratered, I assumed it basically just didn't work...
Click to expand...

Novavax’s vaccine is a protein subunit vaccine, similar to pertussis vaccines. Since that method is more conventional and has a long track record of safety and efficacy, there was a subset of people who preferred that over the mRNA shots.

The full approval for the vaccine was expected in late March/early April (approval dates are calculated from when the company submits the application, usually 10 months), but that was delayed due to the staffing changes and FDA saying they were still evaluating the data. Typically, endpoints and success criteria are agreed by companies and FDA early on in the process, so that was a big red flag and the reason why the stock tanked.

Earlier in May, it seemed like FDA asked Novavax to run a confirmatory trial to demonstrate efficacy after approval, which is a little unusual but not unheard of.

They did end up receiving full approval recently. However, under the previous emergency use authorization the vaccine was available to everyone 12 years and older. However, the full approval is narrower and aligns with the recommendations for COVID shots published by Makary and Prasad recently: 12-64 with underlying conditions, everyone 65 and older. It’s not clear to me if they still have to run the confirmatory trial:

ir.novavax.com

U.S. FDA Approves BLA for Novavax's COVID-19 Vaccine - May 19, 2025

Nuvaxovid™ is the only recombinant protein-based, non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccine available in the U.S. Biologics License Application approval triggers $175 million Sanofi milestone payment, with...
ir.novavax.com ir.novavax.com

This has a bit more information- appears as though COVID vaccines will have to file new applications every time the strain changes, which is a massive burden on both companies and FDA (which I’m sure is the point).


Hopefully that’s not the case for the flu vaccines, or my job is going to suuuuck.
 
Last edited:

Defiance: CDC directly contradicts direct demand from RFK Jr.​

www.rawstory.com

Defiance: CDC directly contradicts direct demand from RFK Jr.

Amid reports of a new Covid-19 subvariant spreading in several U.S. states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday failed to update guidance on receiving vaccines against the coronavirus that contradicted a controversial recent announcement from the nation's top health...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
 
evrheel said:

Defiance: CDC directly contradicts direct demand from RFK Jr.​

www.rawstory.com

Defiance: CDC directly contradicts direct demand from RFK Jr.

Amid reports of a new Covid-19 subvariant spreading in several U.S. states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday failed to update guidance on receiving vaccines against the coronavirus that contradicted a controversial recent announcement from the nation's top health...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
Click to expand...
“But the new guidance could stop insurance companies from refusing to cover the shots, as experts were worried they might after Kennedy's earlier statements, and will preserve the shots' availability for about 38 million low-income children who rely on the Vaccines for Children program.

The out-of-pocket cost for a Covid vaccine at a CVS pharmacy—where some patients could opt to go if their doctors don't want to administer the vaccine—is $198.99.”
 
DiehardHeelFan said:
“But the new guidance could stop insurance companies from refusing to cover the shots, as experts were worried they might after Kennedy's earlier statements, and will preserve the shots' availability for about 38 million low-income children who rely on the Vaccines for Children program.

The out-of-pocket cost for a Covid vaccine at a CVS pharmacy—where some patients could opt to go if their doctors don't want to administer the vaccine—is $198.99.”
Click to expand...
Isn’t the key phrase there “if their doctors don’t want to administer the vaccine?” If someone needs the vaccine and their doctor refuses, they have a doctor problem.
 
HintonJamesHeel said:
Isn’t the key phrase there “if their doctors don’t want to administer the vaccine?” If someone needs the vaccine and their doctor refuses, they have a doctor problem.
Click to expand...
Is it clear that the vaccine would be cheaper at the doctor's office if insurance isn't covering it or if it currently is, continue to be? These people are actively attacking the entire process. Do you expect them to leave this kind of loophole?
 
finesse said:
Is it clear that the vaccine would be cheaper at the doctor's office if insurance isn't covering it or if it currently is, continue to be? These people are actively attacking the entire process. Do you expect them to leave this kind of loophole?
Click to expand...
Yep. I have been getting all of my vaccines at CVS and insurance has covered everyone. Could I get it at my doctor’s office? More than likely. But while it is cheaper it is much less convenient. And some people don’t have a PCP so that makes it more difficult because you’re probably not an established patient anywhere. Novel idea. Maybe they should just stop f’ing with vaccines.
 
MAHA… That’s a new one. Means make “Make America Hell Again” ? Could happen if Trump and Doc Kennedy take us back to mid-1950s for vaccinology. Oh, “What Fools We Are” !
 
finesse said:
Is it clear that the vaccine would be cheaper at the doctor's office if insurance isn't covering it or if it currently is, continue to be? These people are actively attacking the entire process. Do you expect them to leave this kind of loophole?
Click to expand...
I have no clue. The article highlights that the cost would be insane at pharmacies if doctors refuse to give it in their office. That’s what I was responding to.
 
tarheelbillie said:
MAHA… That’s a new one. Means make “Make America Hell Again” ? Could happen if Trump and Doc Kennedy take us back to mid-1950s for vaccinology. Oh, “What Fools We Are” !
Click to expand...
I expect that the attitudes toward vaccines were a lot more favorable then than now. They had a much better idea of the risk/ gain side of things. I expect a lot more people either buried a child or knew someone who did because they didn't previously have a vaccine.

In fairness, autism wasn't even recognized at that time, but ,also in fairness, neither the scope or cause of autism is understood now. There's no reason to let that fear have any sway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top