Marc Girardot is a tech guy turned COVID-19 contrarian. His analogy to falsely “explain” why mRNA vaccines are deadly shows an astounding lack of understanding of basic chemistry.
The BMJ’s outgoing editor Fiona Godlee and incoming editor wrote open letter to Mark Zuckerberg over Facebook’s labeling Paul Thacker’s conspiracy-filled Pfizer story as lacking context. It did not go well. Actually, it was downright embarrassing.
The FDA’s VRBPAC and the CDC’s ACIP are the two committees that approve vaccines in the US and issue recommendations regarding who should receive which vaccine and when. Predictably, after the recent recommendation that children 5-11 receive the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is portraying committee members as thralls of big pharma.
Pfizer recently announced that its new drug Paxlovid was 89% effective in preventing hospitalization due to COVID-19 and is seeking emergency use authorization for it. Antivaxxers claim that ivermectin targets the same protease and is being “suppressed” to protect Pfizer’s profits, even coining the hashtag #Pfizermectin. What’s the real story? Hint: Antivaxxers…exaggerate. And distort.
The BMJ recently published an “exposé” by Paul Thacker alleging patient unblinding, data falsification, and other wrongdoing by a subcontractor. It was a highly biased story embraced by antivaxxers, with a deceptively framed narrative and claims not placed into proper context, leading me to look into the broader question: WTF happened to The BMJ? (Updated and revised from a week ago.)