Let's take a trip in the wayback machine. Who remembers when Robert Kennedy, Jr. spoke at an Autism One conference, calling out Dr. Paul Offit and the use of Thimerosal in vaccinations? Most of us were gobsmacked. His book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak: The Evidence Supporting the Immediate Removal of Mercury―a Known Neurotoxin―from Vaccines, published in 2015 is a clear message that he has been student of vaccine safety for  many years, and is no Johnny Come Lately. Boy howdy, since Covid, there are a LOT of them. Experts who actively ignored vaccine injury when it pertained to autism, but finally tiptoed out into the sunlight when the mRNA vaccines were pointed at their family and friends.

###

Answering Offit: Kennedy is Right on Thimerosal, Offit's Conflicts of Interest Are Real

By James Lyons-Weiler, from The Kennedy Beacon

Offit's misrepresentations and misdirections are easily revealed.

In a recent opinion piece, Dr. Paul Offit, the Merck-endowed Director of Vaccine Education at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), continues in a conversation with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., discussing the safety and efficacy of vaccines. While Dr. Offit is considered an authority in the field, it's crucial to scrutinize the evidence and arguments he presents. In this article, I provide a comprehensive, evidence-based rebuttal to Dr. Offit's claims, focusing on the science, logic, and reason that should underpin any discussion about vaccine safety.

Offit’s Logical Fallacies vs. Kennedy’s Call for Comprehensive Research

Dr. Offit's commentary, while persuasive to some, employs several logical fallacies that need to be addressed. For instance, he often resorts to ad hominem attacks, dismissing those who question vaccine safety as "anti-vaccine," rather than addressing the scientific concerns they raise. This tactic serves to undermine the credibility of his opponents without actually engaging with their arguments, a classic example of the ad hominem fallacy.

The need for more comprehensive research is not a fringe opinion but a scientific necessity. A study published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health highlights the limitations of existing research on thimerosal, calling for more thorough studies to understand its pharmacokinetics and toxicology. Another study in BMC Immunology emphasizes the need to study the interactions between risk factors for serious adverse events and vaccine doses, types, and co-administration—areas that have been insufficiently studied.

Offit also frequently cites “the consensus” as somehow being above scrutiny when vaccine safety is on center stage. Citing consensus among medical organizations does not provide definitive proof of universal nor sufficient vaccine safety. While consensus is important, it should not replace rigorous, unbiased scientific investigation. Science progresses by questioning established norms, and the field of vaccine safety should be no exception.

Furthermore, Dr. Offit employs a strawman argument, misrepresenting the positions of those who question vaccine safety to make them easier to refute. In this case, his strawman is created by labeling those who question vaccine safety as "anti-vaccine." This is a gross oversimplification of the nuanced concerns many people have - and ignoring them won’t make them go away. There are many who fully support vaccination but are calling for more rigorous studies to ensure that vaccines are as safe as they can be, especially for vulnerable populations. Labeling them as "anti-vaccine" serves only to shut down meaningful dialogue.

Dr. Offit uses the slippery slope fallacy, suggesting that questioning the safety of vaccines could lead to widespread disease outbreaks. Concern over vaccine safety does not necessarily mean wholescale abandonment of vaccination. But Offit’s concern does not mean that somehow all vaccines are equally safe or effective for all individuals, nor does it mean that the public shouldn't scrutinize new or existing vaccines for safety and efficacy. One cannot effectively replace rigorous data with fear.

While Dr. Offit is considered by many to be an authority in the field of vaccinology, his arguments often rely on logical fallacies rather than robust scientific evidence. These tactics may serve to sway public opinion, but they do little to advance a nuanced, evidence-based discussion on vaccine safety.

Thimerosal and Its Understated Risks

One of the most significant concerns regarding vaccine safety is the use of thimerosal, a mercury-containing compound included in multi-dose vials.

Dr. Offit asserts that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative used in some vaccines, is safe and does not contribute to adverse health outcomes. However, this claim overlooks a body of evidence suggesting otherwise.

Vaccine-Derived Inorganic Mercury Accumulation in the Brain[p2a-tag] 

A major point of concern is the accumulation of inorganic mercury in the brain, as indicated by a study involving monkeys exposed to methyl and ethyl mercury (See: Burbacher et al., Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Aug; 113(8): 1015–1021.PubMed: PMC1280342). While the clearance rate for inorganic mercury from methyl mercury could be estimated, the same could not be said for inorganic mercury derived from thimerosal, implying potential accumulation and long-term risks.

Contrary to Dr. Offit's assertion that ethylmercury (the type of mercury in thimerosal) is less toxic and is eliminated from the body more quickly than methylmercury, the study shows that inorganic mercury levels in the brain remained flat over time for monkeys exposed to thimerosal. This flat line suggests potential accumulation under repeated dosing, a finding that was not observed in monkeys exposed to methylmercury.

Read the rest of  Answering Offit: Kennedy is Right on Thimerosal,

Offit's Conflicts of Interest Are Real at The Kennedy Beacon

###

The Wuhan Cover-Up: And the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race (Children’s Health Defense) 

“Gain-of-function” experiments are often conducted to deliberately develop highly virulent, easily transmissible pathogens for the stated purpose of developing preemptive vaccines for animal viruses before they jump to humans. More insidious is the “dual use” nature of this research, specifically directed toward bioweapons development. The Wuhan Cover-Up pulls back the curtain on how the US government's increase in biosecurity spending after the 2001 terror attacks set in motion a plan to transform the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), under the direction of Dr. Anthony Fauci, into a de facto Defense Department agency.

Join us in congratulating Dr. Brian Hooker and Robert Kennedy, Jr. and the Children's Health Defense imprint on the huge news that Vax Unvax Let The Science Speak was #11 on the New York Times non-fiction best sellers list this week.  This is important because it tells those who feel they shouldn't question science, "Hey, it's OK to read, and learn and make your own decisions."  It's currently 124 on ALL of Amazon books.  Buy a copy HERE