TCC
Well-known
RFK Jr giving families ‘false hope’ on autism, says outgoing US vaccine official
Dr Peter Marks, forced to resign by Trump administration, sees no ‘possible way’ to determine cause by September
www.theguardian.com
The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, should not offer “false hope” to families by boasting he can figure out what causes autism as soon as September, says the physician who resigned as the nation’s top vaccine official amid what he called anti-vaccination misinformation from the Trump administration cabinet member.
In an interview during which he alluded to his help helming Operation Warp Speed – the initiative that took only about nine months to develop, manufacture and distribute the vaccines protecting the public from Covid-19 – Dr Peter Marks warned that autism “is an incredibly complicated issue”.
“If you just ask me, as a scientist, is it possible to get the answer that quickly? I don’t see any possible way,” Marks said on CBS’s Face the Nation in a pre-recorded discussion airing Sunday.
. . . . .
I posted this article because this is an interesting case study to me. Not in health science. But in hopeful ways to navigate media spin. In this article a doctor supports the article title by saying 5 months is too short. And to give that small window of hope in discovery is false hope. Yet this is coming from a doctor who helped guide the Warp speed process. In getting a COVID vaccine done in such a short time. So while he is saying that RFK should not offer false hope, this doctor is rhetroactively dismissing the gargantuan false hope involved in the fast tracked COVID vaccine. He does not consider that false hope.
So I find this combination very odd. I think we should have a healthy distrust of RFK and what is going on in general at those official levels. Avoiding extreme views on either side is not always easy. Our bias will lean one way or another. However, if we can suspend as much of our bias as possible to just sample media spin Trajectory, I believe it can help in sensing more so what is possibly going on at the media level by sampling its oulayers. In other words, I believe in today's age, one way of getting a sense of what the story "is not" is by just evaluating how news stories are compiled and in what way they are shaped. It may not give us clear answers of what to think about the literal issues discuseed, but it can prime us to have a better working framework as info comes out down the road.
At best, we can better discern what is being glossed over, covered, or avoided to be said. What agendas are at play. And what are the ingredients of spin in certain instances. Compare those values with an overall develpment of stories can help fill in some blanks along the way. So that at the end of the day, we have a lap full of criteria that can function as a filter by which to read between the lines.
. . . . .
Like in the case of RFK and vaccines. What is he actually interested in? Is his seemingly changing opinions due to blackmail, payoffs possibly (bribes), or something else? How would we be able to tell? I believe one way is to hear what is said. Hear what is not said. Understand surrounding criteria. Watch what is the overall direction certain conditions are flowing. And compare all of that over time. That may sound like a very burdensome way to do news evaluation. But I believe it can aid in granting us the most probable sense of a filter by which to even start to approach the truth on the matter.
An example, to me of RFK, is that he has made statements that seem to honor vaccines (while coming from a long standing anti-vax position himself personally--having vaccinated his own chldren). JFK recently even seem to affirm MMR vaccines. But as we read other articles too, we come to find out that RFK will say MMR is the best preventative we know of. While also saying it should not be mandated. And while also saying that it has not been properly tested. So what do we do with the contradictions?
I am not sure what is up with finding out the reason for increased autism within 5 months, but you can be sure this Gaurdian article was put out to sound the alarm that RFK will likely claim it is due to vaccines. That is the whole point of this article. Exhibit A. Then we have RFK's confusing double talk (angering many). Exhibit B. And furthermore, we have media spin as well as controversies of an RFK affair.
So it seems the affair stuff is out. There could be more blackmail material. But could there be another reason for RFK's contradory positions? I've seen artles that say that RFK says that the Federal Government should not mandate vaccines. This is subtle. But what RFK was saying is that "government" should not mandate. Not "Federal Government." Although that is obvious. RFK was pointing out in one article that state governments mandating school attendance should not mandate. That government. But the article made it seem like RFK meant that Federal government. Pointing out how stupid that is because the Federal Government does not mandate vaccines. Which is a nice position for the left media to have coming out of their own mouths...lol. But the way that fact is used is to make RFK look misinformed. When in fact it is just a way to color details for an audience that is not really paying attention.
I post this because there is obviously a lot of controversy around RFK. I don't exactly trust the man. But with all that is going on, what seems like a likely scenario is the following: RFK is demonstrating being one of the common people with his varying opinions. Maybe vaccines are safe. Maybe they are not, kind of vibe. Like a parent trying to reason whether or not to give their child a vaccine--RFK seems to be publicly emulating (or modeling) the thoughts of an average American parent. And he's doing it in the media before all. Getting hit from all sides (the left and the right). This rising the level of attention (controversy), while demonstrating or modeling a parent "thinking through the issues." The take away to me: "RFK is thinking through the issue."
Why does that matter? What comes to mind for me is that, like this article is concerned about, RFK will likely come out stronger against vaccines as we understand them in September. Off course the opposite could be true (I hope not). But what all this mess looks like to me is just simply the government holding the people's hand, taking them for a walk, and at the end of the day seemingly presenti to have walked a mile with the public. And then come to this decision or that decision. So it is clear that the government thought about it. Because we went on that journey with them. Or so it may appear. Whether that is wrong or right, or helpful or not helpful....I guess we will have to see. But if we only look at this social media case study as RFK is compromised, or just wants fame and will say anything...I don't think those views go far enough. The left painting him as flip-flopping seems to ruffle the easily led. Or emotionally based thinker. Some may see flip-flp though because there is a reasonable measure of it actually being the case too though..lol. But, although I do see an agenda at play, I don't presume by "agenda" it has to be nafarious. It could be an average Joe approach in good but perhaps immature faith come to reason with the population. It could be a government trying to honestly be "human" but still be kind of FEDish anyway. Whether or not this is good or bad or can lead to good or bad is something I suspend. Because getting accuainted with the social tools at use currently is fascinating itself to watch. And there is so much hidden and it is too high a pile of confusion to make sense of at this point anyway. I believe it will more likely be helpful to see what is actually going on as we move along...and more is revealed and discoverable. Just a thought. Blessings.
