And a parasitic brain worm to boot.

Yeah. Here's the section for those interested https://justpaste.it/k4rqx

He uses the terms in a muddled way rather than disputing germs existence. Eg:

>Miasma exponents posit that disease occurs where a weakened immune system provides germs an enfeebled target to exploit.

Doctors have tried lots of ways to treat obesity—drugs, diet and exercise recommendations, various surgeries, hypnosis, peer support groups. It’s not a problem they ignore and obviously one you can be richly rewarded for treating, as we see with the GLP-1 drugs.

It’s just difficult for many people to lose weight and keep it off.

> His point is we have 364 days a year to address obesity, but - in practice - the medical community waits until the last day and tries to develop a vaccine that will allow us to stay overweight and just kill the germ.

Maybe I need reevaluate my interpretation here, but this reads heavily like you’re not only blaming doctors for failing to “cure” people’s obesity, but also for waiting too long to address it, instead (incorrectly) opting to treat or prevent the virus that the patient is seeing them for. Am I reading that right? Basically “doctors refuse to treat the real problem - obesity - and instead wait until the last second and (wrongly) treat the virus”?

> His point is we have 364 days a year to address obesity, but - in practice - the medical community waits until the last day and tries to develop a vaccine that will allow us to stay overweight and just kill the germ.

That is a quite controversial claim and one I hope he did not make. Do you seriously mean we should not have developed a vaccine because fat people dying would have been preferrable? If we had not developed a vaccine I do not think people would have changed their habits, more overweight people would just have died.

The medical community has taken overweight very seriously and a lot of money has been put into developing weight loss drugs but it is not like CDC can magically make people eat better.

In which case he's misusing the term "miasma", oversimplifying modern medicine by labelling the entire practice as "germ theory", and presenting a false balance on the issue. And it's kinda dangerous to dog-whistle like that; vaccines have saved far more lives than simple nutrition and healthy living would be able to replace. We've seen the outcome of RFK spewing misinformation about the measles vaccine in Samoa. People suffer and die.

> no arguments against a virus causing respiratory disease being carried airborne

In the US this was not true. Authorities strongly asserted that the virus did not have "airborne" transmission properties, despite numerous people contracting it while locked in their cruise ship cabins.

>Why the WHO took two years to say COVID is airborne

>Early in the pandemic, the World Health Organization stated that SARS-CoV-2 was not transmitted through the air.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00925-7

P.S.

> This kind of messaging is a large part of the problem, because it's trivially verify-able to be a lie, muddying the waters of wherever it should be used.

How ironic.

I'm not going to respond directly to and get into an argument with someone who accuses me of bad faith, but I offer this from ChatGPT (these statements are readily verifiable):

Most side effects were mild and short-lived (injection site pain, fatigue, headache, fever).

Severe side effects were very rare — things like myocarditis (mostly in young men, usually mild and treatable), Guillain–Barré syndrome, or blood clotting events with adenovirus vaccines.

Surveillance data (VAERS, V-Safe, EMA, etc.) show that the incidence of these severe effects was in the range of a few per hundred thousand to a few per million doses — not “a lot of people.”

By contrast, COVID-19 infection itself caused severe illness in many more people, and even increased the baseline risks of myocarditis and clotting much more than vaccines did.

So the corrected takeaway:

Saying vaccines caused severe side effects “in a lot of people” is inaccurate.

The reality is that severe vaccine side effects were rare but carefully monitored, and the risk/benefit balance strongly favored vaccination.

I'm not sure how to take your statement seriously.

Do you not consider being bed ridden for months while suffering from symptoms similar to long covid severe?

Or did you interpret my "a lot of people" as "a high percentage of people getting the vaccine"? Because I agree it wasn't a high percentage, but still _a lot of people_ nonetheless.

If neither applies, I struggle to understand how you can make that claim in good faith.