Has anyone read "The Real Anthony Fauci"? I've got a question. \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Has anyone read "The Real Anthony Fauci"? I've got a question.

96 sats \ 33 comments \ @satoshisat 28 Jun 2023 bitcoin

RFK likes to boast about how he has citations for all of his claims in his book. I started reading it and already found what I would consider a statement that's not backed by facts/citations (aka. a lie). I'm hoping someone on here can prove me wrong (prove him right) because this is such a blatant falsehood that I cannot continue reading until it's proven to be true.

On page xxii of intro: "69 recommended vaccines doses by age 18". Neither of the book's own citations (55, 70) substantiate this claim. I'm all ears if someone can provide a link where it shows the 69 doses.

view all related items

21 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 28 Jun 2023

Each state mandates vaccines for children, so this number will vary. RFK jr has lived in NY and CA over the past few decades, and both states require a lot of vaccines, as I can personally attest. Still, I can't specifically state whether the number is 69 in any particular state.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

His citation is the CDC government so even if what you’re saying is true, that is not what he’s referring to. He’s referring to CDC vaccine schedule.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 28 Jun 2023

In that case I don't know. Does the CDC provide a number?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

No. You have to manually add up the doses using the CDC Vaccine schedule table.

0 sats \ 12 replies \ @byzantine 28 Jun 2023

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/index.html

0 sats \ 11 replies \ @byzantine 28 Jun 2023

also add to this schedule yearly ( 18 total) influenza vaccines since age 1

10 sats \ 10 replies \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

Even if you add those 18, you still don’t get 69. What number are you getting? Maybe I’m counting wrong.

0 sats \ 9 replies \ @byzantine 28 Jun 2023

here is his math - i think he overcounts the DtaP and the TdaP https://childrenshealthdefense.org/vaccine-secrets/video-chapters/today-a-child-receives-50-doses-of-14-vaccines-by-the-age-of-6-and-69-doses-of-16-vaccines-by-the-age-of-18/

i got 57 when i did it

his heart is in the right place but he takes everything a little too far and is prone to embellishment

460 sats \ 2 replies \ @satoshisat OP 3 Jul 2023

That link is working for me now and I agree with you. Seems like he's overcounting Dtap. How the hell is he getting 15 total doses for Dtap?!

EDIT: Ohhh now I get what he's doing. He's counting a vaccine that is considered "three in one" as three. So then if Dtap has five doses but he considers it three separate vaccines in one, then that's how he gets 15.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @byzantine 4 Jul 2023

Ahh yea! so technically he is correct

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 4 Jul 2023

Technically yes. See this is why I posted this question here. To get to the bottom of this. Thank you for taking the time to help me :)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @byzantine 28 Jun 2023

deleted by author

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

That link is down for me.

Problem with his heart being in the right place but lying or misrepresenting numbers means you can't take anything he says as fact. It undermines his credibility. Very unfortunate since he could have said the correct number and still had the same effect.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @byzantine 29 Jun 2023

he is a politician and a lawyer

and who knows if he even wrote the book

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @satoshisat OP 3 Jul 2023

Did you get 57 by going to the cited CDC vaccine schedule site or by going to RFK's own site (childrenshealthdefense)? Because the former is what the book cites and what should be used to verify the count. The latter could very well be wrong since RFK himself seems to be inflating the number. In the book he states 69 and in recent interviews he's now saying 72.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @byzantine 3 Jul 2023

i got 57 by counting from cdc

his website says 69 which is wrong as he overcounts dtap

and then he augments his wrong 69 with covid boosters to get to 72

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 3 Jul 2023

Hmm, not sure how you're getting 57 from CDC. I can't get anywhere near that.

EDIT: Just counted again and if you count flu vaccine once per year for 18 years, the dengue one which is only recommended for places where dengue is prevalent, and the COVID shots with boosters then I get close to 57. Still nowhere near 69.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @broadmode 29 Jun 2023

Add them up; he's close enough.

10 sats \ 6 replies \ @satoshisat OP 29 Jun 2023

I have added them up. He's not close and recently he debated and said 72!

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @broadmode 30 Jun 2023

If you want to load your kids up with adjuvant, be my guest, just don't pretend there is any science there.

10 sats \ 4 replies \ @satoshisat OP 30 Jun 2023

What number do you get when you add them up? If someone wants to debate facts, then present facts. The worst thing you can do when trying to be a credible source of information is provide incorrect information (in this case, incorrect numbers).

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @broadmode 30 Jun 2023

Is it as bad as fixating on a single gotcha as opposed to engaging his actual argument? #npc

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @satoshisat OP 30 Jun 2023

If he lies about something as simple and easy to look up and fact check as number of doses in vaccine schedule, how are you to believe other things he states that are not as simple or easy to fact check? It's a matter of credibility and he's losing it by stating incorrect numbers.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @broadmode 3 Jul 2023

One of the plebs in this thread counted 57 without doing much leg work. This false moral panic isn't fooling anyone.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 3 Jul 2023

That pleb used the numbers in RFK's own website (childrenshealthdefence.org), not the CDC vaccine schedule as cited in RFK's book. In other words, even RFK's own website does not say 69 nor does it say the 72 he has recently started using as the new number and even if it did say it, the website you should be looking at and counting from is the CDC vaccine schedule site which has nowhere near 69.

So it's not "moral panic" (whatever that means), it's math.

reply on another page

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @byzantine 28 Jun 2023

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @BBitcoinUSA 28 Jun 2023

I don’t have a copy of the book / can’t view the sources but is he talking about 69 different/unique vaccines or 69 total doses spread out over some smaller number of unique vaccines? I’m wondering because 69 sounds does very high, even in NY, but I recall that some vaccines are administered over the course of 2, 3, maybe 4 doses in some cases, especially for newborns and infants

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @BBitcoinUSA 28 Jun 2023

Another example, does “69 recommended doses” include 18 flu shots (ie 1 vaccine, 18 doses), spread out over the first 18 years / flu seasons of the child’s life?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that it does, still doesn’t get to 69.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

He says “doses”. If I count all doses on cdc schedule I get somewhere around ~30

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Jun 2023

I appreciate your diligence as a reader. I'm also getting interested in this issue and find it frustratingly difficult to vet quality resources.

I'm curious if there's a timing issue on the citation issue. Did the source that recommends 70 vaccine doses add one since the time of writing?

31 sats \ 1 reply \ @satoshisat OP 28 Jun 2023

Yeah I want to believe him based on my own personal experiences but if right from the get go (introduction pages) he’s printing falsehoods, then I can’t continue reading or believing.

Not sure where you got 70 from. He says 69 repeatedly and his citation for it is CDC Vaccine schedule which by my count is 30ish

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Jun 2023

I misunderstood your post. I thought the citation numbers you gave were the values being cited.