4 ms·

You didn't answer my question. > The first mRNA vaccine experiments were carried out by P. Felgner, J. Wolff, G. Rhodes, R.W. Malone and D. Carson. P. They com

You didn't answer my question. > The first mRNA vaccine experiments were carried out by P. Felgner, J. Wolff, G. Rhodes, R.W. Malone and D. Carson. P. They completed a number of mRNA vaccination studies that resulted in nine patents on mRNA vaccination with a shared priority date of March 21, 1989. One experiment documented that NEF (an HIV protein) mRNA vaccination in mice, followed by HIV challenge reduced positively stained cells by 2-fold and p24 expression was reduced by 50% at eight weeks Is that accurate or not? > Nobody is being banned for dissent, they're having incorrect claims challenged and removed from sources Dr. Robert Malone was banned from Twitter (and LinkedIn, and Youtube) for his views on the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. https://twitter.com/rwmalonemd https://twitter.com/rwmalonemd

acdha 5y ago
Again, nobody is saying that he wasn’t one of the people involved in the early days but as your own quote shows he wasn’t “the inventor” but one of a group and his work was only a small part of the work by hundreds of other scientists which lead to the vaccines in use 4 decades later. Since the question wasn’t how the vaccines work conceptually but rather whether they were safe, the people who actually did that work and got specific vaccines through rigorous safety testing have more relevant expertise and, of course, actual data. The bigger point you’re missing, however, is that it’s science, not religion, and is about testable claims rather than someone’s past reputation. The fact that he was involved in an advance doesn’t mean he’s authoritative about the entire field for all time or remove the need for any new claims he makes to be critically tested. His Twitter account was banned for lying, not asking questions. He would have been fine if he’d been participating in the scientific process — asking questions, submitting meta-analysis papers, running experiments, etc. are all easily available options to someone with his background should he be willing to hold himself to scientific standards again. He hasn’t done that because he knows these claims won’t hold up to scrutiny.

acdha 5y ago

Again, nobody is saying that he wasn’t one of the people involved in the early days but as your own quote shows he wasn’t “the inventor” but one of a group and his work was only a small part of the work by hundreds of other scientists which lead to the vaccines in use 4 decades later. Since the question wasn’t how the vaccines work conceptually but rather whether they were safe, the people who actually did that work and got specific vaccines through rigorous safety testing have more relevant expertise and, of course, actual data. The bigger point you’re missing, however, is that it’s science, not religion, and is about testable claims rather than someone’s past reputation. The fact that he was involved in an advance doesn’t mean he’s authoritative about the entire field for all time or remove the need for any new claims he makes to be critically tested. His Twitter account was banned for lying, not asking questions. He would have been fine if he’d been participating in the scientific process — asking questions, submitting meta-analysis papers, running experiments, etc. are all easily available options to someone with his background should he be willing to hold himself to scientific standards again. He hasn’t done that because he knows these claims won’t hold up to scrutiny.