P.A.’s review of The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health > Likes and Comments
319 likes · Like
John, my review of the book pertains to Kennedy's presentation, the disinformation, and misleading references. It is not on the actual events that have occurred during this 2-year pandemic.
The comment about food poverty deaths is missing the mark. If a country's leadership decides to spend money on vaccines, because of Fauci's influence, that money is not spent on improvements in agriculture, clean water, and sanitation. The false position that vaccines have improved lives over the decades is patently false. In many underdeveloped countries, the expenditures on deadly vaccines and other drugs has diverted funds from more important and more healthy uses.
I speculate that he WHO has more influence than Dr. Fauci in the international realm. And we have no idea how those impoverished nations spend their funds. Since 2010, the Gates Foundation has donated vaccinations to the world's poorest nations, $10 billion worth to ensure that preventable diseases could be reduced.
Probably no way to say this without offending; your speculation P.A., is not accurate. Fauci has influence worldwide, as does Gates. Gates' philanthropic donations have netted a ROI of 200 to 400%, or more, because with the donation comes an agreement that said country will participate in his latest vaccination program. So we do know how that money is spent. Virtually zero of these programs have resulted in increased health or the reduction of preventable diseases. Most all have caused suffering and death.
Follow the money. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donates the money, it comes back to the Trust when vaccines are purchased, is laundered and transferred back to the Foundation. The IRS is aware of the sham, and turns a blind eye. The cycle repeats, with each one producing absolutely obscene levels of cash for Gates.
Fauci pushes on other countries vaccines that have failed clinical trials in the U. S. Because the oversight is less rigorous, often the placebo group is disbanded and the results are falsified to show safety and effectiveness. Neither are true. Sometimes, this false 'success story' is used for a subsequent attempt to get FDA approval in the U. S. There are myriad examples; this has been going on for decades.
Where do you get that damning information please?
P.A., it is in the book and in a 4-part video produced by James Corbett, online at corbettreport.com. (Search for Bill Gates, or just Gates.)
Also in the book, Gates and Fauci met in 1999 or so and decided they'd form an informal partnership that would benefit both of them immen$ely. The rightly figured out that working together they could reduce the population and make million$, or in Gates' case, billion$.
Gates owns controlling interests in virtually all of the media, including ones that insist they are conservative. They are not. He is also represented by the world's largest PR firm, which I am sure helps him with his public image. He's not smart enough without them. He is ruthless, however.
My god, you people and your conspiracy theories. Just stop. This book is sheer garbage disinformation propaganda.
James Corbett is not exactly credible, IMO. Also some of the ‘studies’ that RFK JR refers to had as few as 9 participants. Really? How reliable are those? Unless you check all of his references and see their lack of relevance, you’ll not understand me personal review.
P.A. Welch, sounds like you read some of the references, but did you read the book? Sounds here like you're defending Fauci and Gates. Are you? Based on what? And after reading this book, tell me, if you got a bad case of Covid, would you follow established hospital procedures and wait a while, then eventually get admitted, then eventually take Remdesiver and maybe get put on a ventilator? Or would you quickly obtain some hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin? Just wondering...... If you're unsure, then you haven't read this book. If you have read this book and you'd still follow Fauci-mandated medical procedures, you're entirely without logic and common sense.
I just started this book (also a gift from a misguided family member) but it’s not kindle so I have been laboriously checking the citations and they are absurd. His leaps he makes to get from point A to point B are impressive. Everyone keeps talking about all the “research” he did but no one should applaud this book for the sheer number of citations when most of them are laughable.
W..M.- I have read the book. It has taken *forever* because I check the citations on info that seems questionable. I will defend Fauci & Gates. After reading bios & stories on Fauci, one in Smithsonian Magazine in 2017 about his work on HIV, I have enormous respect for the man. If you go to the NIH website and look up the patents based on the work his team did that have allowed drug companie to develop therapies, you wil see the technical work his team has done to help mankind. Gates has supplied millions in combating malaria and turberculosis in Africa, purchasing things as simple as bed nets to keep mosquitoes off beds. Fauci has certainly not made money off of his research. Gates has given away billions. If I got Covid, I would accept the standard treatment. If I suspected Covid, I wouldn't wait to see my doc, get tested, BEFORE I deveoped symptoms that required hospitalization. The ivermectin is for my horse and dog. RFK Jr is a mountebank, nothing more. His citations, as Rachel said, are mostly laughable. Many people he cites in this book are from the same anti-vax ilk as RFK Jr., doctors that have no background in the specific science yet we are to take their anecdotal instances as solid scientific work? Studies using 9, 15, or 30 participants as proof of a theory he used are questioned by peers, no substantial sampling. And who uses their own quotations from a TV interview as a citation in their own book? Other than RFK Jr...?
Oh dear. P.A Welch you know very little about Gates or Fauci. Do your research befor canning this book. Do your research on Fauci. He should be in jail.
My review was on the book itself. RFK Jr is persuasive, uses a lot of "big words", & speaks with a voice of authority. However, most of his references do not support what he says, with a simple example I used in my initial review, the last paragraph in Ch 2. Many of the doctors and scientists that he quotes & provides references, have been proven as unqualified. He cites studies that had no peer reviews or used ridiculously low sample sizes to make them of no statistical value, and quotes doctors that published articles in medical journals that were later pulled due to faulty data. I have read articles on Dr. Fauci that go back years before he became "famous" and found him to be a dedicated scientist and physician. He's not in it for the money. RFK Jr, on the other hand, has been a radical spreading disinformation on vaccinations for years. He should stick to his successful efforts on environmental issues.
You do realize shutting down the US impacts food production and the ability of others to offer assistance to other countries right? Wake up
As I have said twice, I reviewed the book, not the actual pandemic ramifications. RFK Jr is using misinformation, disinformation and outright lies to promote his agenda. His references are proof of such if the reader takes time to link to them and read them in whole.
Hi Mr. or Ms. Welch. As another commenter mentioned earlier on, you don't seem to address the basic point of the book in your criticism, which I think is that there are broadly used inexpensive treatments for this virus which have been very successful where used while panned by Fauci in favor of much more expensive and dubious options including primarily vaccines. Did you review any of the supporting evidence in that regard and if so can you cite how it is faulty? I know it wasn't you, but, calling a medicine that has been in use for decades to fight multiple medical issues in humans as well as other animals safely and effectively "horse medicine" is a rather weak argument from my perspective. But my question for you is, if one can't effectively criticize the important points of a book, why take the time to criticize it at all?
Hank, my review is not on the efficacy of treatments. If the reader takes the time to read the references that RFK Jr uses to 'backup' his views on many points, he/she will see that a vast number do not. My examples above on Ch 2 are proof. His points of financial gain by Fauci and Gates are skewed & misleading. He cites medical doctors as authorities yet who have been proven to have used faulty data in Covid studies and been sanctioned by medical journals. As you read the book, did you look at the references as you progressed? Did you read them? Did you go to the Gates Foundation and view the grants given since 2020? The hundreds of thousands to African companies to develop rapid Covid tests? Millions to combat malaria, polio & TB in African nations? Millions in maternal & child health education in those countries & in Asia? $3.9 million to a Kenyan company to speed manufacturing of syringes to support the Covid vaccine program as it also is affecting the supply of syringes for childhood immunization programs in Africa? (Most syringes are made in Indai and China. Supporting an African company reduces shipping time and increases availability.) RFJJr's rhetoric leads the reader to view the Gates Foundation as a money-making machine when the data shows that is not the case. I'm a retired data analyst and researcher. Objective & factual data is critical in preparing reports and developing strategies. Subjective data is for opinion pundits.
PA, you are transparently a shill for the Great Reset and New World Order. May God have mercy on your soul!
Rachel wrote: "I just started this book (also a gift from a misguided family member) but it’s not kindle so I have been laboriously checking the citations and they are absurd. His leaps he makes to get from point..."
How much are you being payed?
Jonah wrote: "PA, you are transparently a shill for the Great Reset and New World Order. May God have mercy on your soul!"
Well, exxxcccuusseee me for having an opinion on a poorly written book.
It is obvious you didn't read the book. All research in this book was painstakingly vetted and true.
I don't think you dug into those citations. They were NOT "painstakingly vetted and true". As I noted in my first post, RFK Jr totally twisted the reference that Fauci made on his "Godfather" philosophy. I don't believe that Covid studies that have only 9 participants can be used as statistically sound. And his notations on the Gates Foundation's money donated to the NIH was not for devious means but to support the studies in malaria, polio and other diseases in poor African nations to which GF makes no money. Some of the studies that he cites in his book were debunked by the scientific world as they were conducted or represented by doctors that had no previous experience in epidemiology, infectious diseases or pharmacology. RFK Jr. didn't tell you that in the book, did he? No, he did not.
P.A. wrote: "And his notations on the Gates Foundation's money donated to the NIH was not for devious means but to support the studies in malaria, polio and other diseases in poor African nations to which GF makes no money."
In the same sentence that you think you're rebutting a false point and making a valid point, you shoot yourself in the foot. Gates et al exploit "philanthropy" for their goals and agendas. It is not altruistic, it's just how they can maneuver large sums of money to achieve their personal whims while convincing people like you that they are humanitarians.
I don't trust a dime from Gates or his Foundation. People like him are not full of goodwill. If you knew how to gauge people at a deeper empathic level rather than a superficial "Gates donated millions to help sick people, what an angel!" level, you'd see it for yourself.
No one can force you to see for yourself, so I'm not even trying. We others can only contribute what we have seen for ourselves. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean we will go blind to please you.
I looked at the data and also past articles on Gates Foundation to determine if RFK's take was accurate. What has its money gone to? Where? One example-Purchasing mosquito nets for beds in Africa where malaria is prevalent. Purchasing medicines for those infected. I am not assessing "altruism" but what was accomplished. But on a personal thought, how hard is it to believe that the ultra-rich look at their bounty and think that the excess can be used to benefit the poor rather than hoard more money? After all, ya can't take it with you. Why is it hard to believe that some people think outside of themselves? What's wrong with having a goal to reduce disease in countries that don't have the means to do it when one has the money to do so? Celebrities like Matt Damon, Leo DeCapprio, Sting, et al have taken up humanitarian causes like clean water and sanitation, blood diamonds and decimation of the Amazon jungle, without benefiting financially.
Thanks for taking time to give such a long answer to my question, P.A. But I must say that I feel you really once again dodged the main point. And I further find it quite contradictory for you to claim to be a thorough researcher while also in a later comment referring to Ivermectin as horse and dog medicine. I have audio version of this book so can’t provide specific counterpoints from the text, however, it only took me 30 seconds to find this recommendation of the drug for use by people for another ailment on the CDC web site: “ The treatment of choice for onchocerciasis is ivermectin, which has been shown to reduce the occurrence of blindness and to reduce the occurrence and severity of skin symptoms.” I’ve come to the conclusion that you are not an objective critic.
I guess I was being a bit facetious about ivermectin being a horse & dog wormer. I do know it's an anti-parasitic for lice, worms that humans can get, like strongyles, and as you pointed out "river blindness". I also know that IDIOTS were using the horse wormer, treating themselves. I have a horse and was appalled to see the price for a tube go from $1.99 to $8.99, assuming the local feed store had them in stock! Local stores had to start asking folks why they were buying it. Tubes meant for 1000 lb horses! Some early studies have indicated ivermectin (for humans) when paired with a couple of other meds may be effective in treating Covid though other treatments have greater efficacy. But as I said before, I was reviewing the book as a whole and the bottom line is RFK, Jr misled readers with numerous references and citations that do not support his claims.
I don’t think you understand how policy in the US affects the entire world.
However, I do understand when people that claim to have 'knowleddge', spread disinformation through books with misleading citations that can negatively influence their readers. That is the point of my review of this book.
I can agree with the point that sheer number of footnotes in and of itself is not admirable. I’m listening to audio version of the book so don’t have access and generally speaking rarely check footnotes even when they are available to me. I find what you describe very common across authors, P.A.
On the other hand if he has validating footnotes on key points, like that a number of countries where ivermectin and hydroxycloroquin (sorry too lazy to make sure I’m getting that second one right) are in regular use banned them for periods and saw COVID numbers surge only to lift bans and see them drop back—that is key. Maybe I’ll have to get a paper copy and check it out.
And I can imagine the Gates Foundation has done some good work, but if one can’t refute Kennedy’s evidence that they pressured their grant recipients to pan ivermectin when they knew it could reduce suffering and death in order to increase the value of their investments in vaccines, that is clearly condemnable.
And P.A. If buying the horse version of a drug was/is the only way people could/can get an effective treatment for this disease, how can you blame them? Seems to indict our medical system more strongly than the individuals who’ve been forced to maneuver around it, don’t you think?
I understand you disagree with my review. Perhaps you have posted yours somewhere here as well. However, this Goodreads review page is not appropriate for debating our views on Covid, Gates, Fauci, etc. One final note: people taking the worming paste have said in interviews that they were taking the veterinary med as a PREVENTATIVE, not as a treatment, heeding a conspiracy theory. To easily flip between the text and the footnotes, the Kindle version is the easiest way to do so.
Thank you, PA, for your careful review. I would not have invested $29 CAN for it, nor would my library have purchased this type of misinformation, so you have provided me with the gist without my having to slog through it.
Your review has helped me to see its many shortcomings. Thanks also for patiently responding to those who disagree with your assessment.
Thank you for your review P.A. -- I bought this last night and am only on chapter 1, but have already found considerable issues with it (I too have been clicking each link to read the "source"). This will take me months to finish, but I plan on finishing it.
I consider myself a good match for reviewing this book because I don't necessarily have "a side." I lack the abundance of bias that most people have. I am not anti-vax or a conspiracy theorist, but I'm also not gullible enough to believe that the powers-that-be aren't corrupt. I am certain there is a great deal of corruption that exists in and between the U.S. Government and the pharmacuetical industry - particularly the revolving door between heads of pharmacuetical companies and the very organizations meant to oversee them (conflict of interest much?)
With regard to covid, I am vaccinated, wear my mask, social distance, and tend to trust the experts. We have practiced safe covid precautions the entire pandemic.
That said, I went into this with every single bias set aside. Completely blank slate. I was ready and willing for RFK Jr to convince me. Well... We aren't off to a great start. Sources and quotes are taken out of context. There are humongous leaps taken to reach certain conclusions from these sources. You mentioned one above: Fauci's interview about masks in March 2020. Anyone who understands science will know that science is constantly evolving as it is being added to. Recommendations will change as time goes on. It seems like common sense that the information that gets passed down from experts is going to evolve over time. 🤷🏼♀️ Anyway... That's just one example.
I'm going to continue reading. I'm going to maintain an open mind. But this isn't turning out to be the "shocking proof" of corruption it claims to be.
We shall see.....
Shelby, I also set aside biases when accepting this gift. I'm vaccinated, still wear a mask and clean my hands after touching store doors and gas pump handles. I have COPD and very small grandchildren that I don't want to possibly infect. But like you, I couldn't get through Ch 1 and ignore the faulty citations. That one at the end of Ch 2 about the Godfather quote really took the cake. Oh, and his using his own quotes from his own website and interviews as "proof". LOL After just those, it was hard to keep an open mind. And yes, it takes an enormous amount of time to go through the citations. I have also gone to the NIH site to see their grants as well as the Gates Foundation to compare what RFK Jr writes.
Actually this is the correct place to debate your review. I’m not letting people lie anymore about the plandemic. Stop spreading lies. Covid is over. It was never more then a cold anyway.
This site is for book reviews, not to debate politics, etc. RFK Jr used quotes out of context, medical studies that were proven to be unreliable, twisted data to fit his agenda. This is evident when the reader delves into the citations. If one is going to market a book as non-fiction, then one should leave out the fiction.(Covid just a cold? That’s almost a million Americans who died from a cold? )
Mr. Kennedy never blamed Dr. Fauci for those children's deaths. He very clearly stated those deaths were the result of the POLICIES Fauci hammered on to the US public. It's precisely this kind of going into a book with one's confirmation bias Superglued in place and immediately criticizing the author for things they never said that keeps the propaganda rolling.
Dr. Fauci did NOT set policy. He serves as medial advisor. The CDC and WH set policy.
You guys should be embarrassed 🤣. I'm a public health professional and all i can say is, that is not how is that works, it's not how any of this works. Just admit that none of you know how this works and go about your day. Fauci is an advisor, HCQ and Ivermectin do not work to treat covid, they never worked, and idiots pursued it against all public health recommendations because people like Kennedy, are so sure they are right. Vaccines efficacy are well proven, they have not caused deaths, you are just stating imaginary problems that do not exist. Fauci is an advisor and researcher, that is all. If you idiots decided to take HCQ and ivermectin that's on you. Both treat parasites, NOT viral infections. Why any of you thought a dewormer or marial drug would cure a respiratory viral infection is really unclear. You do know a worm and virus are the not the same thing right ?
Thanks for sharing your front line perspective, Johanna!
I still haven't gotten my hands on anything but the audio version of the book, but, Johanna are you saying that Kennedy's reference to scientific studies that showed those two drugs to be roughly 80% effective in treating COVID is flawed? If so, can you elaborate and/or provide your counter-evidence? Also, are you saying that Mr. Fauci does not in fact control billions of dollars in research budgets around the globe and thereby heavily influence which drugs are successful and which fail? Or if he does, what specifically are you referring to as "not how it works?" Based on your comments here, I'm not certain if either of you or Margaret read the book. I myself was quite put off by Kennedy's clearly biased language, but, overall I saw this as a classic leftist attack of the industry and its captured government "regulator" using COVID and AIDS outbreaks as primary examples. Regardless of anyone's personal bias, it seems a rather complicated problem rather than a yes or no question.
Have a look at this , please watch it all.
I can't post the URL but its on bitchute , just insert www bitchute
com before :video/p7pp4QZOQS8b/
it may enlighten you somewhat, a lot is Pfizer's own research.
Not interested. My review was not on the pandemic vaccine processes but on the flagrant annotations that RFK Jr used in his book. Many were twisted words (Ex: Fauci's "Godfather" reference), citing studies that had poor statistical samplings claiming they were legit and were debunked by peer reviews, as well as using his own words from previous interviews to support his claims in this book.
Can you cite one or more specific examples of these faulty footnote, P.A.? I’m getting a Kindle copy of the book from the library soon and would like to check it out.
I listed two in my original post. I encourage you to click on those reference links throughout the book. When individuals, like scientists and doctors, are used, do an extra Google on those names and read about their credibility & validity of their 'studies'. And remember, the Children's Defense League is RFK's own organization.
If you need a dictionary to get through this you either need to go back to high school or start reading more.
I am not the only one to have commented on his vocabulary, the use of obscure words. Columnists that rate books for a living have said as such.
Thank you P.A., I've started reading this book and found similar issues. I love how you point out specific and clear issues and people say that you're wrong and the book was impeccably researched without addressing your claims in any way and calling you a paid shill... I've been called the same, I'd like to at least receive the money I've been accused of receiving.
Obviously, those that actually check the citations for accuracy are the sheep....
I hope you meant the'sheep' reference in a facetious way. I'm a retired data analyst and report writer. I'm used to doublechecking facts, statements, etc. If not so compelled to do so, I'd have believed RFK's poppycock. He's quite an orator.
back to top
John, my review of the book pertains to Kennedy's presentation, the disinformation, and misleading references. It is not on the actual events that have occurred during this 2-year pandemic.
The comment about food poverty deaths is missing the mark. If a country's leadership decides to spend money on vaccines, because of Fauci's influence, that money is not spent on improvements in agriculture, clean water, and sanitation. The false position that vaccines have improved lives over the decades is patently false. In many underdeveloped countries, the expenditures on deadly vaccines and other drugs has diverted funds from more important and more healthy uses.
I speculate that he WHO has more influence than Dr. Fauci in the international realm. And we have no idea how those impoverished nations spend their funds. Since 2010, the Gates Foundation has donated vaccinations to the world's poorest nations, $10 billion worth to ensure that preventable diseases could be reduced.
Probably no way to say this without offending; your speculation P.A., is not accurate. Fauci has influence worldwide, as does Gates. Gates' philanthropic donations have netted a ROI of 200 to 400%, or more, because with the donation comes an agreement that said country will participate in his latest vaccination program. So we do know how that money is spent. Virtually zero of these programs have resulted in increased health or the reduction of preventable diseases. Most all have caused suffering and death. Follow the money. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donates the money, it comes back to the Trust when vaccines are purchased, is laundered and transferred back to the Foundation. The IRS is aware of the sham, and turns a blind eye. The cycle repeats, with each one producing absolutely obscene levels of cash for Gates.
Fauci pushes on other countries vaccines that have failed clinical trials in the U. S. Because the oversight is less rigorous, often the placebo group is disbanded and the results are falsified to show safety and effectiveness. Neither are true. Sometimes, this false 'success story' is used for a subsequent attempt to get FDA approval in the U. S. There are myriad examples; this has been going on for decades.
Where do you get that damning information please?
P.A., it is in the book and in a 4-part video produced by James Corbett, online at corbettreport.com. (Search for Bill Gates, or just Gates.)Also in the book, Gates and Fauci met in 1999 or so and decided they'd form an informal partnership that would benefit both of them immen$ely. The rightly figured out that working together they could reduce the population and make million$, or in Gates' case, billion$.
Gates owns controlling interests in virtually all of the media, including ones that insist they are conservative. They are not. He is also represented by the world's largest PR firm, which I am sure helps him with his public image. He's not smart enough without them. He is ruthless, however.
My god, you people and your conspiracy theories. Just stop. This book is sheer garbage disinformation propaganda.
James Corbett is not exactly credible, IMO. Also some of the ‘studies’ that RFK JR refers to had as few as 9 participants. Really? How reliable are those? Unless you check all of his references and see their lack of relevance, you’ll not understand me personal review.
P.A. Welch, sounds like you read some of the references, but did you read the book? Sounds here like you're defending Fauci and Gates. Are you? Based on what? And after reading this book, tell me, if you got a bad case of Covid, would you follow established hospital procedures and wait a while, then eventually get admitted, then eventually take Remdesiver and maybe get put on a ventilator? Or would you quickly obtain some hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin? Just wondering...... If you're unsure, then you haven't read this book. If you have read this book and you'd still follow Fauci-mandated medical procedures, you're entirely without logic and common sense.
I just started this book (also a gift from a misguided family member) but it’s not kindle so I have been laboriously checking the citations and they are absurd. His leaps he makes to get from point A to point B are impressive. Everyone keeps talking about all the “research” he did but no one should applaud this book for the sheer number of citations when most of them are laughable.
W..M.- I have read the book. It has taken *forever* because I check the citations on info that seems questionable. I will defend Fauci & Gates. After reading bios & stories on Fauci, one in Smithsonian Magazine in 2017 about his work on HIV, I have enormous respect for the man. If you go to the NIH website and look up the patents based on the work his team did that have allowed drug companie to develop therapies, you wil see the technical work his team has done to help mankind. Gates has supplied millions in combating malaria and turberculosis in Africa, purchasing things as simple as bed nets to keep mosquitoes off beds. Fauci has certainly not made money off of his research. Gates has given away billions. If I got Covid, I would accept the standard treatment. If I suspected Covid, I wouldn't wait to see my doc, get tested, BEFORE I deveoped symptoms that required hospitalization. The ivermectin is for my horse and dog. RFK Jr is a mountebank, nothing more. His citations, as Rachel said, are mostly laughable. Many people he cites in this book are from the same anti-vax ilk as RFK Jr., doctors that have no background in the specific science yet we are to take their anecdotal instances as solid scientific work? Studies using 9, 15, or 30 participants as proof of a theory he used are questioned by peers, no substantial sampling. And who uses their own quotations from a TV interview as a citation in their own book? Other than RFK Jr...?
Oh dear. P.A Welch you know very little about Gates or Fauci. Do your research befor canning this book. Do your research on Fauci. He should be in jail.
My review was on the book itself. RFK Jr is persuasive, uses a lot of "big words", & speaks with a voice of authority. However, most of his references do not support what he says, with a simple example I used in my initial review, the last paragraph in Ch 2. Many of the doctors and scientists that he quotes & provides references, have been proven as unqualified. He cites studies that had no peer reviews or used ridiculously low sample sizes to make them of no statistical value, and quotes doctors that published articles in medical journals that were later pulled due to faulty data. I have read articles on Dr. Fauci that go back years before he became "famous" and found him to be a dedicated scientist and physician. He's not in it for the money. RFK Jr, on the other hand, has been a radical spreading disinformation on vaccinations for years. He should stick to his successful efforts on environmental issues.
You do realize shutting down the US impacts food production and the ability of others to offer assistance to other countries right? Wake up
As I have said twice, I reviewed the book, not the actual pandemic ramifications. RFK Jr is using misinformation, disinformation and outright lies to promote his agenda. His references are proof of such if the reader takes time to link to them and read them in whole.
Hi Mr. or Ms. Welch. As another commenter mentioned earlier on, you don't seem to address the basic point of the book in your criticism, which I think is that there are broadly used inexpensive treatments for this virus which have been very successful where used while panned by Fauci in favor of much more expensive and dubious options including primarily vaccines. Did you review any of the supporting evidence in that regard and if so can you cite how it is faulty? I know it wasn't you, but, calling a medicine that has been in use for decades to fight multiple medical issues in humans as well as other animals safely and effectively "horse medicine" is a rather weak argument from my perspective. But my question for you is, if one can't effectively criticize the important points of a book, why take the time to criticize it at all?
Hank, my review is not on the efficacy of treatments. If the reader takes the time to read the references that RFK Jr uses to 'backup' his views on many points, he/she will see that a vast number do not. My examples above on Ch 2 are proof. His points of financial gain by Fauci and Gates are skewed & misleading. He cites medical doctors as authorities yet who have been proven to have used faulty data in Covid studies and been sanctioned by medical journals. As you read the book, did you look at the references as you progressed? Did you read them? Did you go to the Gates Foundation and view the grants given since 2020? The hundreds of thousands to African companies to develop rapid Covid tests? Millions to combat malaria, polio & TB in African nations? Millions in maternal & child health education in those countries & in Asia? $3.9 million to a Kenyan company to speed manufacturing of syringes to support the Covid vaccine program as it also is affecting the supply of syringes for childhood immunization programs in Africa? (Most syringes are made in Indai and China. Supporting an African company reduces shipping time and increases availability.) RFJJr's rhetoric leads the reader to view the Gates Foundation as a money-making machine when the data shows that is not the case. I'm a retired data analyst and researcher. Objective & factual data is critical in preparing reports and developing strategies. Subjective data is for opinion pundits.
PA, you are transparently a shill for the Great Reset and New World Order. May God have mercy on your soul!
Rachel wrote: "I just started this book (also a gift from a misguided family member) but it’s not kindle so I have been laboriously checking the citations and they are absurd. His leaps he makes to get from point..."How much are you being payed?
Jonah wrote: "PA, you are transparently a shill for the Great Reset and New World Order. May God have mercy on your soul!"Well, exxxcccuusseee me for having an opinion on a poorly written book.
It is obvious you didn't read the book. All research in this book was painstakingly vetted and true.
I don't think you dug into those citations. They were NOT "painstakingly vetted and true". As I noted in my first post, RFK Jr totally twisted the reference that Fauci made on his "Godfather" philosophy. I don't believe that Covid studies that have only 9 participants can be used as statistically sound. And his notations on the Gates Foundation's money donated to the NIH was not for devious means but to support the studies in malaria, polio and other diseases in poor African nations to which GF makes no money. Some of the studies that he cites in his book were debunked by the scientific world as they were conducted or represented by doctors that had no previous experience in epidemiology, infectious diseases or pharmacology. RFK Jr. didn't tell you that in the book, did he? No, he did not.
P.A. wrote: "And his notations on the Gates Foundation's money donated to the NIH was not for devious means but to support the studies in malaria, polio and other diseases in poor African nations to which GF makes no money."In the same sentence that you think you're rebutting a false point and making a valid point, you shoot yourself in the foot. Gates et al exploit "philanthropy" for their goals and agendas. It is not altruistic, it's just how they can maneuver large sums of money to achieve their personal whims while convincing people like you that they are humanitarians.
I don't trust a dime from Gates or his Foundation. People like him are not full of goodwill. If you knew how to gauge people at a deeper empathic level rather than a superficial "Gates donated millions to help sick people, what an angel!" level, you'd see it for yourself.
No one can force you to see for yourself, so I'm not even trying. We others can only contribute what we have seen for ourselves. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean we will go blind to please you.
I looked at the data and also past articles on Gates Foundation to determine if RFK's take was accurate. What has its money gone to? Where? One example-Purchasing mosquito nets for beds in Africa where malaria is prevalent. Purchasing medicines for those infected. I am not assessing "altruism" but what was accomplished. But on a personal thought, how hard is it to believe that the ultra-rich look at their bounty and think that the excess can be used to benefit the poor rather than hoard more money? After all, ya can't take it with you. Why is it hard to believe that some people think outside of themselves? What's wrong with having a goal to reduce disease in countries that don't have the means to do it when one has the money to do so? Celebrities like Matt Damon, Leo DeCapprio, Sting, et al have taken up humanitarian causes like clean water and sanitation, blood diamonds and decimation of the Amazon jungle, without benefiting financially.
Thanks for taking time to give such a long answer to my question, P.A. But I must say that I feel you really once again dodged the main point. And I further find it quite contradictory for you to claim to be a thorough researcher while also in a later comment referring to Ivermectin as horse and dog medicine. I have audio version of this book so can’t provide specific counterpoints from the text, however, it only took me 30 seconds to find this recommendation of the drug for use by people for another ailment on the CDC web site: “ The treatment of choice for onchocerciasis is ivermectin, which has been shown to reduce the occurrence of blindness and to reduce the occurrence and severity of skin symptoms.” I’ve come to the conclusion that you are not an objective critic.
I guess I was being a bit facetious about ivermectin being a horse & dog wormer. I do know it's an anti-parasitic for lice, worms that humans can get, like strongyles, and as you pointed out "river blindness". I also know that IDIOTS were using the horse wormer, treating themselves. I have a horse and was appalled to see the price for a tube go from $1.99 to $8.99, assuming the local feed store had them in stock! Local stores had to start asking folks why they were buying it. Tubes meant for 1000 lb horses! Some early studies have indicated ivermectin (for humans) when paired with a couple of other meds may be effective in treating Covid though other treatments have greater efficacy. But as I said before, I was reviewing the book as a whole and the bottom line is RFK, Jr misled readers with numerous references and citations that do not support his claims.
I don’t think you understand how policy in the US affects the entire world.
However, I do understand when people that claim to have 'knowleddge', spread disinformation through books with misleading citations that can negatively influence their readers. That is the point of my review of this book.
I can agree with the point that sheer number of footnotes in and of itself is not admirable. I’m listening to audio version of the book so don’t have access and generally speaking rarely check footnotes even when they are available to me. I find what you describe very common across authors, P.A.On the other hand if he has validating footnotes on key points, like that a number of countries where ivermectin and hydroxycloroquin (sorry too lazy to make sure I’m getting that second one right) are in regular use banned them for periods and saw COVID numbers surge only to lift bans and see them drop back—that is key. Maybe I’ll have to get a paper copy and check it out.
And I can imagine the Gates Foundation has done some good work, but if one can’t refute Kennedy’s evidence that they pressured their grant recipients to pan ivermectin when they knew it could reduce suffering and death in order to increase the value of their investments in vaccines, that is clearly condemnable.
And P.A. If buying the horse version of a drug was/is the only way people could/can get an effective treatment for this disease, how can you blame them? Seems to indict our medical system more strongly than the individuals who’ve been forced to maneuver around it, don’t you think?
I understand you disagree with my review. Perhaps you have posted yours somewhere here as well. However, this Goodreads review page is not appropriate for debating our views on Covid, Gates, Fauci, etc. One final note: people taking the worming paste have said in interviews that they were taking the veterinary med as a PREVENTATIVE, not as a treatment, heeding a conspiracy theory. To easily flip between the text and the footnotes, the Kindle version is the easiest way to do so.
Thank you, PA, for your careful review. I would not have invested $29 CAN for it, nor would my library have purchased this type of misinformation, so you have provided me with the gist without my having to slog through it. Your review has helped me to see its many shortcomings. Thanks also for patiently responding to those who disagree with your assessment.
Thank you for your review P.A. -- I bought this last night and am only on chapter 1, but have already found considerable issues with it (I too have been clicking each link to read the "source"). This will take me months to finish, but I plan on finishing it. I consider myself a good match for reviewing this book because I don't necessarily have "a side." I lack the abundance of bias that most people have. I am not anti-vax or a conspiracy theorist, but I'm also not gullible enough to believe that the powers-that-be aren't corrupt. I am certain there is a great deal of corruption that exists in and between the U.S. Government and the pharmacuetical industry - particularly the revolving door between heads of pharmacuetical companies and the very organizations meant to oversee them (conflict of interest much?)
With regard to covid, I am vaccinated, wear my mask, social distance, and tend to trust the experts. We have practiced safe covid precautions the entire pandemic.
That said, I went into this with every single bias set aside. Completely blank slate. I was ready and willing for RFK Jr to convince me. Well... We aren't off to a great start. Sources and quotes are taken out of context. There are humongous leaps taken to reach certain conclusions from these sources. You mentioned one above: Fauci's interview about masks in March 2020. Anyone who understands science will know that science is constantly evolving as it is being added to. Recommendations will change as time goes on. It seems like common sense that the information that gets passed down from experts is going to evolve over time. 🤷🏼♀️ Anyway... That's just one example.
I'm going to continue reading. I'm going to maintain an open mind. But this isn't turning out to be the "shocking proof" of corruption it claims to be.
We shall see.....
Shelby, I also set aside biases when accepting this gift. I'm vaccinated, still wear a mask and clean my hands after touching store doors and gas pump handles. I have COPD and very small grandchildren that I don't want to possibly infect. But like you, I couldn't get through Ch 1 and ignore the faulty citations. That one at the end of Ch 2 about the Godfather quote really took the cake. Oh, and his using his own quotes from his own website and interviews as "proof". LOL After just those, it was hard to keep an open mind. And yes, it takes an enormous amount of time to go through the citations. I have also gone to the NIH site to see their grants as well as the Gates Foundation to compare what RFK Jr writes.
Actually this is the correct place to debate your review. I’m not letting people lie anymore about the plandemic. Stop spreading lies. Covid is over. It was never more then a cold anyway.
This site is for book reviews, not to debate politics, etc. RFK Jr used quotes out of context, medical studies that were proven to be unreliable, twisted data to fit his agenda. This is evident when the reader delves into the citations. If one is going to market a book as non-fiction, then one should leave out the fiction.(Covid just a cold? That’s almost a million Americans who died from a cold? )
Mr. Kennedy never blamed Dr. Fauci for those children's deaths. He very clearly stated those deaths were the result of the POLICIES Fauci hammered on to the US public. It's precisely this kind of going into a book with one's confirmation bias Superglued in place and immediately criticizing the author for things they never said that keeps the propaganda rolling.
Dr. Fauci did NOT set policy. He serves as medial advisor. The CDC and WH set policy.
You guys should be embarrassed 🤣. I'm a public health professional and all i can say is, that is not how is that works, it's not how any of this works. Just admit that none of you know how this works and go about your day. Fauci is an advisor, HCQ and Ivermectin do not work to treat covid, they never worked, and idiots pursued it against all public health recommendations because people like Kennedy, are so sure they are right. Vaccines efficacy are well proven, they have not caused deaths, you are just stating imaginary problems that do not exist. Fauci is an advisor and researcher, that is all. If you idiots decided to take HCQ and ivermectin that's on you. Both treat parasites, NOT viral infections. Why any of you thought a dewormer or marial drug would cure a respiratory viral infection is really unclear. You do know a worm and virus are the not the same thing right ?
Thanks for sharing your front line perspective, Johanna!
I still haven't gotten my hands on anything but the audio version of the book, but, Johanna are you saying that Kennedy's reference to scientific studies that showed those two drugs to be roughly 80% effective in treating COVID is flawed? If so, can you elaborate and/or provide your counter-evidence? Also, are you saying that Mr. Fauci does not in fact control billions of dollars in research budgets around the globe and thereby heavily influence which drugs are successful and which fail? Or if he does, what specifically are you referring to as "not how it works?" Based on your comments here, I'm not certain if either of you or Margaret read the book. I myself was quite put off by Kennedy's clearly biased language, but, overall I saw this as a classic leftist attack of the industry and its captured government "regulator" using COVID and AIDS outbreaks as primary examples. Regardless of anyone's personal bias, it seems a rather complicated problem rather than a yes or no question.
Have a look at this , please watch it all.I can't post the URL but its on bitchute , just insert www bitchute
com before :video/p7pp4QZOQS8b/
it may enlighten you somewhat, a lot is Pfizer's own research.
Not interested. My review was not on the pandemic vaccine processes but on the flagrant annotations that RFK Jr used in his book. Many were twisted words (Ex: Fauci's "Godfather" reference), citing studies that had poor statistical samplings claiming they were legit and were debunked by peer reviews, as well as using his own words from previous interviews to support his claims in this book.
Can you cite one or more specific examples of these faulty footnote, P.A.? I’m getting a Kindle copy of the book from the library soon and would like to check it out.
I listed two in my original post. I encourage you to click on those reference links throughout the book. When individuals, like scientists and doctors, are used, do an extra Google on those names and read about their credibility & validity of their 'studies'. And remember, the Children's Defense League is RFK's own organization.
If you need a dictionary to get through this you either need to go back to high school or start reading more.
I am not the only one to have commented on his vocabulary, the use of obscure words. Columnists that rate books for a living have said as such.
Thank you P.A., I've started reading this book and found similar issues. I love how you point out specific and clear issues and people say that you're wrong and the book was impeccably researched without addressing your claims in any way and calling you a paid shill... I've been called the same, I'd like to at least receive the money I've been accused of receiving.Obviously, those that actually check the citations for accuracy are the sheep....
I hope you meant the'sheep' reference in a facetious way. I'm a retired data analyst and report writer. I'm used to doublechecking facts, statements, etc. If not so compelled to do so, I'd have believed RFK's poppycock. He's quite an orator.
For your disdain for Kennedy's work to be accepted, at least one af the following must be true:
1 HCQ & IVM must be ineffective and or dangerous in treating covid AND Fauci's dismissal of the successes of other countries and regions that seriously lower mortalities with widespread distribution of the widely used drugs is 2well-founded in science. Or
2 Fauci actively pursued use of these drugs and never actively worked to supress their distribution and use. Or
3 Fauci did not advise only active pursuit of vaxes and was actively supporting development of other treatment regimens.
Which is it P. A.?