Wait...RFK Jr says the MMR vaccine contains aborted fetuses DNAš³..
- Thread starter shonuff253
- Start date
It should be easy to prove one way or another. Why say something so ridiculous unless you believe it. If the left truly wants him gone then they should bring out the data and humiliate him. I am not saying I believe it but I sure as hell don't trust out government or big pharma as much as you.
Pediatrics' Amy Edwards talks about the MMR vaccine
Fact Check: Does the MMR vaccine really contain āaborted fetus debrisā?Health: Amy Edwards, associate professor in the Department of Pediatrics at the School of Medicine, explained that there is no aborted fetus debris or DNA particles in the MMR vaccine. āOnce the virus has grown in the cell...
thedaily.case.edu
Iām not saying heās right, but the government and scientists arenāt always the most trustworthy people. The two have said a lot of things that werenāt true. So Iām weary to take anything either say as gospel.Pediatrics' Amy Edwards talks about the MMR vaccine
Fact Check: Does the MMR vaccine really contain āaborted fetus debrisā?Health: Amy Edwards, associate professor in the Department of Pediatrics at the School of Medicine, explained that there is no aborted fetus debris or DNA particles in the MMR vaccine. āOnce the virus has grown in the cell...
That is my point. As much fake news and flat out lies we have seen from our government, media and medical field you would think people would have some concerns or curiosity. But no, they know for certain this is fake and insane. Attacking people as nuts, racist or even Hitler kills all dialogue and we actually need more dialogue. I would hope this is false but I lost my faith in these people years ago. Perhaps a debate with RFK jr and this Amy Edwards would be a good start.
Whenever someone tells me or just insinuates that I should trust government and science, I just point to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study
Well RFK Jr just told the world not to take medical advise from him...even though thats all hes been doing. Does this not bother anyone?
Correct, we shouldn't. We should however, look at his claims and investigate what he says. Kennedy is a sharp guy and he has been talking about this stuff for decades. If even a small amount of what he claims is true I want to know. Why do we spend 10 times more on healthcare than any other country but have the poorest health? Maybe we are doing something wrong.
Wait...hold up are you serious?Youāre just now realizing Americans pay the most for healthcare and still get worse outcomes and dont know why? Buckle up sweetheart because hereās the plot twist you somehow missed: itās you Republicans that made sure it stays that way.
See most developed countries treat healthcare like a human right. We treat it like a Wall Street investment vehicle. Remember all the Republicans screaming healthcare isnt a human right? Thatās why we get $1,000 ER bills for Tylenol and pay more for insulin than some peopleās rent and weāre not even healthier we just die slower and broker.
Obamacare (yeah, that thing Fox News told you was āsocialismā) was actually a modest attempt to lower costs and expand access:
It stopped insurers from screwing you over for pre-existing conditions
It capped their profits (look up the ā80/20 ruleā)
It expanded Medicaid for low-income folks
It set up online marketplaces to foster competition
And guess who hated all of that? Republicans. They gutted Medicaid expansion in red states, sued to kill the ACA (repeatedly), and stripped the mandate that helped keep premiums lower. Now theyāre shocked itās not working perfectly? Thatās like slashing someoneās tires and asking why their car wonāt move.
So if you're mad about high costs and poor outcomes, great! Just aim that rage in the right direction: Republican the and Trump, the party thatās been fighting against affordable healthcare for over a half-century
The idea that Republicans are the only reason for high healthcare costs and bad outcomes is inaccurate. Specifically regarding Obamacare:
- It helped more people get insurance and protected those with pre-existing conditions, but it didnāt make healthcare much cheaper. Premiums went up 55% even with rules that limited insurance profits, but hospital and drug prices kept rising. (just like College costs, Government funding of anything inherently increases costs)
- Some red states blocked Medicaid expansion after a 2012 ruling. But even where Medicaid grew, patients often canāt find doctors because payments to providers are low.
- Republicans may have opposed it. But its problems (like high costs and limited doctor choices) came from how it was written when Democrats ran Congress.
- Dropping the mandate in 2017 barely changed premiums, largely due to how Obamacare wrecked the competitive field across states and left little choice in its wake.
- Saying healthcare is a right sounds nice, but other countries with universal systems have long waits or higher taxes and I follow the argument that making one person's "labor" another person's "right" is unethical and illogical. Rights are inherent, not dependent on outside forces.
- US health problems also come from things like obesity due to many problems like over-processed food and sugar/food additives, not just laws.
- Both parties have let hospitals, drug companies, and insurers keep prices high. Blaming just Republicans skips over years of everyone messing up.
- Expensive healthcare is a real issue, but pointing fingers at one side hides the truth. Push for clear pricing and more competition to fix it. Expand residency opportunities for Doctors, there are simply too many med school graduates compared to residency slots. Hopefully, recent attempts to lower prescription costs will have a positive impact.
- While it's not a "right", I do think healthcare is different than most 'products' and should have special political restrictions or carve-outs regarding their ability to lobby and make political donations.
The idea has data could convince an anti-vaxxer is a good one. Lol
Also, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim
Simple question then...how many peices of major legislation has the GOP passed that addresses the rising cost of Healthcare cost?
What legislation is the GOP controlled congress crafting that reduces Healthcare cost?
Where is Trump's "concept" of a Healthcare plan?
GOP inaction and failure to pass one single piece of major legislation to reduce Healthcare cost in America is telling.
Last edited:
We subsidize the pharmaceuticals for the rest the world. They literally had a press conference on this Monday.
Also, about half our country is either black or Hispanic. If you took fifty million blacks and Hispanics and put them in Norway, their health outcomes would also drop immediately.
I give Obama credit for trying to reform it. But in the end all he did was make it less affordable for people who could barely afford insurance to begin with, and given free to folks whose bills were already written off as non payers. It really is a socialist policy in essence. More expensive for folks capable of paying higher premiums. So they could pay for folks not already paying for healthcare. Just showing up to emergency rooms. The pre existing clause is a good one. And makes what he did in the end better than it was before. It is still a complete clusterf. Higher deductibles and more expensive. Covers less. The unconstitutional penalty given for folks who chose to be without it was just a cherry on top.
Now do obesity rates and legal settlements
I think I was pretty clear that neither party has done enough. But, Obamacare (that the Democrats wrote) didn't "fix" anything (because of the issues I addressed) and later modifications to it had no real effect, either. You made this a partisan issue, what about the last administration? I'm saying it's an everybody issue. Obamacare may have been an honest attempt to "fix" something, but it ended up being a boondoggle for Medical Insurance companies:
1. They gained customers through mandated coverage and marketplaces added millions of insured, boosting their revenue.
2. They received subsidies that ensured steady payments for premiums and cost-sharing.
3. They reduced their risk. Corridors, adjustment, and reinsurance protected against losses.
4. Markets were consolidated where regulatory pressures favored large insurers, leading to mergers.
5. They profited from Medicaid, as it expanded with new enrollees.
They certainly didn't lose money, as they simply raised premiums to offset any potential losses with the added risk.
Universal healthcare is not the answer, as there are scant examples in the history of mankind where government taking over a private enterprise reduced cost. The bureaucracy is too inefficient, especially for a country of any size. All the anger (and even violence) over insurance companies of late? All universal healthcare does is deny procedures & care at the start instead of denying coverage at the end. Plus, the wait times bloat.
Something has to be done and getting healthcare donor and lobbying money out of government would be a huge step. Both parties are knee-deep in it and that's why nothing real has been done to fix issues that could have an impact. Again, I think a big step would be for the pharmaceutical changes introduced by Trump to became law.
So, I decided to Google it and answer your question, since you seem to be implying nothing is happening:
Legislation Being Crafted by GOP-Controlled Congress to Reduce Healthcare Costs (2025):
Healthcare Freedom and Choice Act: This reinstates Trump-era short-term, limited-duration insurance (STLDI) plans for up to 36 months, offering cheaper alternatives to ACA plans.
Physician Payment Reform: The House Ways and Means Committeeās 2025 reconciliation budget proposal includes reforming physician payments to align with inflation, aiming to stabilize provider costs and prevent service cuts.
Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) Reform: GOP leaders, including Senator Mike Crapo, are pushing PBM reforms with bipartisan support, focusing on transparency, pass-through rebates, and divestiture of internal pharmacies. These aim to reduce prescription drug costs, potentially saving consumers billions if enacted, per CBO estimates.
340B Drug Pricing Program Reform: Congress is considering tightening eligibility and reducing contract pharmacies in the 340B program to align with its original intent, potentially lowering drug costs for low-income patients.
Medicaid Reforms: The House Energy and Commerce Committeeās 2025 budget resolution proposes $880 billion in Medicaid cuts over a decade, including work requirements and frequent eligibility checks for able-bodied adults. The CBO estimates $100 billion in savings from work requirements alone.
As far as Trump's concept:
PBM Reform: Trump prioritizes PBM reforms to lower drug costs, building on bipartisan momentum. This includes transparency and rebate reforms, potentially saving consumers billions.
Price Transparency: Trumpās 2025 executive order reinforces his 2019 directive for healthcare price transparency, aiming to help patients compare costs.
Medicare Drug Price Negotiations: Trump rescinded Bidenās order for new payment models to limit drug spending but supports ongoing Medicare negotiations for 15 drugs (e.g., Ozempic) in 2025, aiming to lower prices.
As I referenced, no more telling than Biden's first two years.
Any real efforts would take bipartisan support to remove political money out of it to get real reform done.
Your quote was that whenever someone says you should trust the government or science, you point to the Tuskegee study. So, in your mind, what exactly does this point out? You posted it, so it should have something that it points out to you.
Well the government injected hundreds of black men with Syphilis to study the disease and lied about what the shot was. Many men died because of it. Itās just another incident where the government and science lied to the American people, this time involving medicine which correlates to the vaccine issue of today.
I'd be happy if the plan was telling me I could buy any health insurance plan I wanted from any insurance company willing to sell the policy and the government's only involvement would be to play referee if a dispute arose.
Before ACA I was covering myself, my wife and granddaughter for $344.00 per month with a $3500 deductible per individual and $7000.00 family deductible and a max out of pocket of around 10K. The next yr I paid $1640 per month with a $6500.00 per person deductible with a $19000.00 family deductible. But hey, I'm covered if I decide I want to cut off my schlong. I now pay more in premiums than I would have paid in a yr should my entire family experienced a catastrophic illness. Thanks for acting government.
If youāre going to use Tuskegee as the crux of your argument, you should at least know what it is, right? No, the government did not inject anyone with syphillis.
These black men were having lots of unprotected sex and contracted syphillis on their own prior to the study. Some were administered medicine that cured it and some were administered placebo.
Although that protocol is still used to this day, now it is required to disclose that the patient may be receiving actual medicine or may be receiving placebo, but which one will not be disclosed to the patient.
The Tuskegee Experiment was a notorious and unethical clinical study conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama. Its goal was to observe the natural progression of untreated syphilis in Black men under the guise of receiving free health care from the federal government.
Key facts:
Participants: 600 Black men ā 399 with syphilis, 201 without (the control group).
Deception: The men were never told they had syphilis. They were told they had ābad bloodā and were promised free medical exams, meals, and burial insurance.
No treatment: Even after penicillin became the standard cure for syphilis in the 1940s, the men were deliberately denied treatment.
Outcome: Many died from syphilis-related complications, infected their partners, and passed congenital syphilis to their children.
Fallout:
The experiment was exposed in 1972, triggering national outrage.
It led to major changes in U.S. law and medical ethics, including informed consent requirements and the establishment of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs).
Actual facts on the Chat. That's an unique approach. Thanks Tivoli for sharing. Thanks Shonuff for elaborating.
Im sorry but this is just a little misleading considering the Tuskegee experiment was government run and funded. Did they inject these individuals with syphilis no, but they were full aware that they were sentencing these men, their partners and children to a lifetime of agony.
Last edited:
I dont trust the government I trust the scientific process that has held up for thousands of years. The issue is many of the people like RFK Jr and his followers refuse to back up any of their claims using the same type of scientific rigor.
Last edited:
@TivoliDawg, I was wrong on the details, but I think your explanation of it is a little trivial. The government misled them and contributed to their deaths. They may not have directly injected them, but they didnāt help them either.
Please provide link because I couldn't find this.
If this is like these recent GOP attempts I doubt it even gets out of committee:
1. Health Care Choice Act
2. Worldās Greatest Healthcare Plan of 2017š¤£
3. Graham-Cassidy Bill (2017)
4. Empowering Patients First Act (2013)
5. American Health Care Reform Act (2013)
6. Patient CARE Act (2014)
7. Healthcare Freedom Act (2017)
8. Preserving Employee Wellness Programs Act (2015)
9. ObamaCare Repeal Act (multiple years)
10. American Health Care Act (2017 ā original House version)
You may want to proof you ChatGPT responses before copying and pasting becasue did you just say that cutting $880 Billion from Medicaid over the next decade is going to make American Healthcare better? š¤
As I said in my response that you quoted:
I didn't keep the links it might have generated. But, feel free to look them up if you want more details, I assume Google AI referenced them from somewhere. On that same note, I kept the Medicaid portion of what Google AI provided because 1) It provided it (I was simply answering the question you posed) 2) I assume that's a reference to the fraud the administration is attempting to remove.
You may disagree with any/all of these attempts, but as a reminder to what I said at the top of the post: "you seem to be implying nothing is happening". You not agreeing with it is not the same as 'nothing happening'. Additionally, as I also said: with margins so tight in Congress, it's likely going to take bipartisan support to get anything passed.
Thanks for clarifying this. This and other government "secret" projects have come out over time. The point is clear, we should not trust our government.
Exactly. Iām not saying the government is always wrong or always lying, but Iām also very skeptical of everything they put out, including Trump and his administration. The problem that I have with some of the guys on here treat everything that Trump and his administration say his lies and everything that the left and the media that protect the left say as truth. The lack of transparency from our government throughout the years and the lies that they have told throughout the years suggest to me, and I would think would suggest to everybody, that we have to be very careful to believe everything they say. I put science in that same category. No, not everything they say or put out is incorrect. But when you have lobbyists throwing billions of dollars for particular outcome and the government threatening for a particular outcome, thereās a lot of incentives to just produce the outcomes that are requested.
Based on the history of the last Republican controlled congress nothing has or will be done to address Healthcare.
I still argue this is an issue that's non-partisan. Did you have similar concerns regarding the last Democratic controlled congress? What did they do to address Healthcare? They had a chance after 2020, but no significant reform has happened since 2010.
Get healthcare money out of politics and you'll see actual solutions happen, imo.
