"Overall, this review article is basically a nothingburger. It’s far more speculation than anything else, as I mantioned before, a case of putting the cart before the horse. The authors carefully select three studies that they think they can point to as strong suggestive evidence in population studies that COVID-19 vaccination is associated with an increased risk of cancer. When these studies are examined in more detail, they all suffer from potential confounders that could easily explain their results, none more than the S. Korean study, which is about as obvious an example of healthy user/healthy vaccinee bias as I’ve ever seen. The authors also present a tiny number of case reports—at least the number is incredibly tiny relative to the billions upon billions of doses of vaccine that have been administered over the last four years—as though they suggested anything but the entirely predictable phenomenon that, if you administer a medication to a large enough number of people, you will find a number of bad things that happen to a number of people soon after receiving that medication by random chance alone. No convincing argument or evidence is presented to suggest causation.

Next, they list various mechanisms by which COVID-19 vaccines in general—and the spike protein in particular—might cause cancer. They then speculate wildly about these potential biological mechanisms and “gaps in knowledge” about COVID-19 vaccines and cancer. Most of these biological mechanisms strike me as a stretch, at best, particularly the invocation of “inflammation” as somehow activating dormant cancer cells that we all have in our bodies, again, because all vaccines cause transient inflammation, but the authors don’t address what is different about the inflammation caused by COVID-19 vaccines that it would lead to cancer.

There’s just one problem. If COVID-19 vaccines were truly responsible for a wave of “turbo cancers” or, as the authors would prefer to say, hyperprogression, then the epidemiological data would be there now, and it would be impossible to deny. By now, there would have been a worldwide wave of cancer correlating temporally and physically with the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines across the globe. We see no such thing. Related to this problem is the paucity of evidence that COVID-19 vaccines or the spike protein generated by them can cause neoplastic transformation (conversion of a normal cell to cancer) in cell culture or animal models, much less in humans. Again, this whole review article strikes me, more than anything else, as an exercise in—you guessed it!—putting the cart before the horse. Seriously, provide us with some compelling evidence, and we will change our minds, but Kuperwasser and El-Deiry don’t because they can’t. That evidence doesn’t exist, and it isn’t for lack of people trying to find it, either."

A Review and Agreement with an 1871 Medical Dissent

There is nothing in this case that links this situation to COVID vaccines. Nothing. This is not only pure
speculation in absence of facts. It is misinformation. We would expect more from Dr Philip McMillan. The article from the journal Stuff not even mentions the COVID vaccine or his vaccination status. What is happening here is simply that Dr Philip McMillan transforms himself in an ambulance chaser, hijacking’s one terrible disease to make a case where there is nothing to see, vaccine-wise. Shame…

📍 New evidence from Ethiopia shows that community engagement strategies like defaulter-tracing tools and personalised health calendars help close immunisation gaps by strengthening connections between caregivers and health workers. Shared responsibility and local communication are key to improving vaccine uptake.

#PublicHealth #Immunization #CommunityEngagement #VaccineCoverage #GlobalHealth

🔗 https://lnkd.in/dZxDJq5M

It was not journalism that was affected. It was a new breed of pseudo-journalism based on misinformation that emerged. One where pseudo-self-claimed experts tried to flood the social media space. Be reminded that the only significant contribution to science from these individuals should have been their silence.
Investigative journalism should be fact-based and science-based, not relying on anecdotes or unproven theories. Journalism should always check sources for credibility. Assess such and then, if appropriate publish. If not, not publish. These misinformation pushers may call being silenced censorship. I would call this journalistic critical appraisal and responsability… Vejon Health Ltd and its director may be among those where the lack of credibility may push you to consider more appropriate sources of information as appropriate information…

A generation ago, pediatric wards filled up every winter with babies dangerously dehydrated from rotavirus.

Most young pediatricians today have never seen that.

That didn’t happen naturally. It happened because of vaccination.

Before the rotavirus vaccine, about 70,000 children in the U.S. were hospitalized every year with severe dehydration. Parents couldn’t keep fluids down. Babies needed IVs. Entire wards revolved around this one virus.
After vaccination, those hospitalizations dropped to near zero.

The U.S. recently shifted rotavirus vaccination from a standard recommendation to “shared clinical decision-making.” On the surface, that sounds thoughtful. In reality, pediatricians are worried we’re reopening the door to a disease we already solved.

Rotavirus never disappeared. We just stopped it.

Doctors who trained before the vaccine remember what those winters looked like. If enough families opt out, hospitalizations will return quickly. This isn’t theoretical.

It’s what happens when population-level protection erodes.

The evidence is not subtle:
• Around 30 million illnesses prevented
• 819,000 hospitalizations avoided
• About 400 child deaths averted over 16 years
• Roughly a 94% reduction in severe disease and ER visits in clinical trials

Yes, the vaccine carries a small risk of intussusception. About 1 to 2 cases per 100,000 doses. What often gets left out is that rotavirus infection itself can cause intussusception, meaning vaccination prevents many of those cases as well.

This isn’t just about medically fragile children. Any infant can become dangerously dehydrated from rotavirus. That’s why pediatricians across the country are uneasy.

What’s also hard to ignore is how this policy change happened. No CDC advisory committee vote. No public discussion. No transparent review of the evidence. A sweeping change affecting millions of children, made quietly.
We’ve seen this pattern before.

When prevention becomes optional, disease doesn’t politely stay away.
The real question isn’t whether rotavirus will come back if vaccination rates drop. The virus is already circulating. The question is how many hospital beds need to fill again before we admit we unlearned a hard-earned lesson.

We eliminated a major cause of pediatric hospitalization once.

Undoing that isn’t a neutral experiment.

It’s a risk children will bear.

MAHA…in action! If this is “healthy”, I dont want it.

Join us as we delve into the effectiveness of COVID vaccines, exploring the science behind their development and the impact they've had on the global pandemic. With a critical eye, we examine the data and expert opinions to answer the question: did COVID vaccines really work? From vaccine efficacy rates to real-world outcomes, this video takes a comprehensive look at the role of vaccines in combating COVID-19. Whether you're looking for a deeper understanding of vaccine science or seeking to separate fact from fiction, this video aims to provide a balanced and informative perspective on one of the most critical public health issues of our time.

========================================================

FREE Humming Heroes Ebook
https://lnkd.in/eHvnD7bG

========================================================

You can also find us Here:

Substack: https://lnkd.in/ejXM5s68
Videos: https://lnkd.in/g3vJ8uXx
Courses: https://lnkd.in/ecmtMKhz
Rumble: https://lnkd.in/gG_HmbdN

#covid #medicine #research

Débat avec Sylvain Delouvée, maître de conférences de psychologie sociale à l’Université Rennes 2, figure médiatique des croyances collectives et de la désinformation, récompensé en 2025 de la médaille de la médiation scientifique CNRS – France Universités.
Enregistré jeudi 8 janvier 2026 à Rennes, Campus Santé de Villejean dans le cadre du cycle "Esprit critique et vaccination"

L'Université de Rennes, le CHU de Rennes, l'École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique et Sciences Po Rennes sont heureux de proposer 3 conférences - débats portant sur le développement de l'esprit critique face à l'enjeu sociétal qu'est la vaccination les jeudis 8, 15 et 22 janvier 2026.

e projet a bénéficié d’une aide de l’Etat gérée par l’Agence Nationale de la Recherche au titre de France 2030 portant la référence « ANR-22EXES-0008 »

Vaccines and mRNA injections disrupt immune balance while driving inflammation and chronic illness worldwide

No one will connect the dots if people won’t talk about vaccination status. And that is what Fauci and Offit and every politician banks upon, due to the influence of powerful industry lobby groups that ostracise you with the weaponised term ‘antivaxxer’ and conspiracy theorist’. If you were banned from clubs and restaurants etc in 2021 due to you reliance on natural immunity, (now proven to be overwhelmingly more beneficial than the falsely named mRNA “vaccine”), then make sure you talk about vaccination status wherever you can. That’s if you want to save your children and grandchildren from neurological and other damage due to unnecessary shots.

The risk of viral pathogen transmission between humans and animals (spillover events) and subsequent spread has been increasing due to human impacts on the planet, which lead to changes in the interactions between humans, animals, ecosystems and their pathogens. Key factors (drivers) that increase the risk of disease emergence include climate change, urbanization, land-use changes and global travel, all of which can alter human–animal–environment interactions and increase the likelihood of zoonotic spillovers and vector-borne diseases. Incorporating data on these drivers (such as ecological shifts and patterns of animal movement) into disease surveillance systems can help identify hot spots for disease emergence, which could in theory enable earlier detection of outbreaks and, in turn, increase the effectiveness of intervention strategies. A One Health approach, emphasizing the interconnectedness of human, animal and environmental health, is advocated for addressing these complex challenges. Although conceptually clear and widely endorsed, implementation of One Health approaches towards primary prevention of spillovers is extremely challenging. Here, we summarize current knowledge on disease emergence and its drivers, and discuss how this knowledge could be used towards primary prevention and for the development of risk-targeted One Health early warning surveillance. We consider integrating innovative tools for diagnostics, surveillance and virus characterization, and propose an outlook towards more integrated prevention, early warning and control of emerging infections at the human–animal interface. In this Review, Sikkema and Koopmans examine the drivers of viral emergence and how these insights could inform prevention strategies and the development of risk-targeted One Health early warning surveillance. They discuss tools for diagnostics, surveillance and virus characterization, and propose strengthening integrated One Health strategies for early warning, prevention and control of emerging infections at the human–animal interface.

Ignorance, bad faith or stupidity... Maybe the guy should have checked his sources, and get a better German translator. And mind his own business...

Peter Hotez MD PhD DSc(hon) posted images on LinkedIn

As mentioned by a pediatrician, « I heard from a parent just this week: "What vaccines are recommended now? I am so confused." This uncertainty is coming from families who previously made confident decisions to vaccinate. Amid fewer universally recommended vaccinesopens in a new tab or window and a vague emphasis on "shared clinical decision-making," the consistent theme in parents' concern is federal messaging that signals ambiguity without a clear explanation. »

https://lnkd.in/e9g8GDkx

Chez certaines personnes, les réponses immunitaires liées à une infection ou une vaccination contre la Covid-19 pourraient avoir des effet sur des cellules cancéreuses dormantes ou existantes. .

Debate with RFK Jr : why ? As RFK Jr said himself : ¨he doesn't think people should take medical advice from him.¨ As well, as he stated: his views on vaccines are irrelevant...
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Wednesday that he doesn't "think people should be taking advice — medical advice — from me."
Watch in our video player above.
"That's kind of your jurisdiction," said Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., in response.
Kennedy's comments came during a hearing before the House Appropriations Committee on the Trump administration's budget request for 2026. Pocan had asked the secretary if he had a child today, would he vaccinate that child for measles. "Um… probably for measles," Kennedy said before making his comment about his own advice. He also suggested that his own views about vaccines are irrelevant.
Kennedy is a former environmental lawyer and not a doctor. For nearly a decade, he led an anti-vaccine advocacy group, Children's Health Defense. As the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, he oversees multiple agencies that affect public health and Americans' access to health care.
Paul Offit should not debate a person like RFK Jr for obvious reasons, one being the guy has no medical knowledge, his views on vaccines are as irrelevant as is Children's Health Defense, and doing so would only give RFK Jr and Children's Health Defense a credibility they do not deserve. As well, from the disastrous experience of Pierre Kory and Steve Kirsch debating with two high school teachers ( Prof Dave), it would be a blood bath where RFK Jr would be demolished, totally. Just look at this to see how a joke such a debate was and would be.

https://lnkd.in/eG3G9f6s

https://lnkd.in/enEWPSQS
https://lnkd.in/exeVkS2G

The officlal HHS Rapid Response account posted a clip of some of HHS Secretary Kennedy's recent remarks. "We all know that trusting the experts is not a feature of science; it’s not a feature of democracy — it’s a feature of tyranny. And a feature of religion. But not science," he said in the below video from HHS Rapid Response.

HHS Secretary Kennedy also oversees the FDA, the CDC and the NIH. On Monday, they suddenly overhauled the US's recommendations for vaccinations including limiting access for US children & adults to a number of FDA-approved vaccines including the meningitis, rotavirus, RSV, HPV, and hepatitis vaccines that have a history of successfully preventing diseases, hospitalizations, and deaths. WSJ, Stat News & Bloomberg are among the news outlets that reported about HHS's vaccine decisions earlier in the week.

Here's a link to the HHS Rapid Response account on X in case business leaders want to see the video clips of Kennedy's remarks and aren't aware of the direction public health is going in the US. When there's a disease epidemic or if there's another pandemic, this is who is leading the US government's response and making the decisions. All US businesses were impacted by the US's lack of a response to Covid in the US in Q1 2020. The later success of the Operation Warp Speed initiative in Q3 and Q4 would be unlikely today with the current HHS leadership based on their track record with measles, whooping cough and flu in 2025. And so far in 2026. https://lnkd.in/eccAW3wa #FDA #CDC #RSV #meningitis #hepatitis #cancer #measles #pertussis