Will UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad "walk the talk" by agreeing to debate qualified scientists who disagree with him?
I hoped that he would, but I was wrong. He's happy to take softball questions from journalists, but he refuses to questioned by qualified scientists on his beliefs.
We have our answer! Professor Prasad is not going to be questioned by his peers. He just ignored the challenge. He won’t allow his beliefs to be challenged by qualified scientists. He’s not going to walk the talk.
What he did do is agree to be interviewed by Briahna Joy Gray. So he’ll take questions, but not from other scientists who disagree with him. In short, he won’t walk the talk.
The same is true for all the medical organizations claiming childhood vaccines are safe. Elizabeth Vargas listed them in this video at 10 seconds into the video saying
”nearly every scientific and medical organization including the CDC, the FDA, the AMA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, all say you’re wrong on this issue.”
Well, those organizations aren’t going to debate the issue because they consider it settled science. They are wrong.
I personally know a very large pediatric practice which eschews vaccines. The kids in the practice are incredibly healthy and do not suffer from chronic diseases. For example, they have had ZERO autism for the last 25 years in a row. But this is hardly an isolated case.
In every single study published in the peer-reviewed medical literature where the fully vaccinated have been compared with the fully unvaccinated, the unvaccinated kids do better on every measure.
If the medical community is telling the truth, then what I just wrote is impossible.
This is why they won’t debate. They will never debate because they don’t want anyone to learn the truth.
If Elizabeth Vargas hosted a debate between the two sides, the “vaccines are safe” advocates won’t show. I guarantee it. Prove me wrong.
This book by Neil Miller, Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers, has all the evidence.
I’m a big fan of UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad. I agree with him on nearly everything he writes about.
For example, he recently wrote a Substack, When should scientists debate, which I agree with.
But I disagree with him on his views on ivermectin and HCQ as being effective COVID treatments and whether vaccines can trigger autism. I (and others) believe both are true.
Will Professor Prasad walk the talk on what he wrote? I think he will, but the only way to find out is to put him to the test.
I’ve messaged him directly about this article (via Signal and SMS), and I’ll update it with his response.
Do vaccines trigger autism?
I believe the scientific evidence on this is crystal clear. I even have a $5M bet that this is true and as of today, not a single person in the entire world is willing to bet $10,000 or more that I’m wrong including the drug companies.
If everyone is so certain that vaccines are so safe and don’t trigger autism, why doesn’t anyone want to take my money? It should be an easy way for anyone to double their net worth in one “sure thing” wager.
Even though nobody has much confidence in their long-held beliefs, it’s still important to have a discussion about it.
Professor Prasad, are you willing to debate any of the following people, either individually or as a group on this issue? If you identify which people are acceptable to you, I’ll be happy to narrow the list to a final number for debate purposes. So if you think 7 people from this list are acceptable, but don’t want to debate more than 3 at a time, just identify the 7 and we’ll narrow it to 3.
Is ivermectin or HCQ an effective treatment for COVID?
The most obvious candidates are:
What do you think he’ll do?
I’m optimistic we’ll get at least one debate going so that the public can finally hear both sides of the story.