The FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox despite acknowledging its dangerous side effects, including cardiac inflammation.

Natural News

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The recent approval of the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has sparked controversy due to its acknowledged risks, particularly cardiac inflammation. This article aims to review the claim that the FDA approved the vaccine despite knowing its dangers.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>The ACAM2000 vaccine, developed by Emergent BioSolutions, was initially approved for smallpox in 2007. On August 29, 2024, the FDA expanded its approval to include individuals at high risk for monkeypox, such as members of the LGBT community.</p>
<h2>Claim Analysis</h2>
<p>The claim suggests that the FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine despite knowing its risks. The FDA's medication guide for ACAM2000 lists numerous side effects, including the potential spread of the live vaccinia virus to close contacts and serious complications such as myopericarditis (heart lining and/or muscle inflammation).</p>
<p>According to Karl Jablonowski, a senior research scientist at Children's Health Defense, the risk of cardiac inflammation is significant, with estimates ranging from one in 2,000 to one in 175 vaccinations. Dr. Meryl Nass, an internist and biological warfare expert, also highlighted the CDC's acknowledgment of this risk during a June 2022 meeting.</p>
<p>However, it is crucial to understand the FDA's approval process. The agency evaluates the benefits and risks of a vaccine, especially in the context of public health emergencies. The approval of ACAM2000 for monkeypox was likely based on the assessment that the benefits outweigh the risks for high-risk individuals.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>The risk of myopericarditis associated with ACAM2000 is well-documented. A study published in the <a href="https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/160/7/642/136637?redirectedFrom=PDF#google_vignette">New England Journal of Medicine</a> &nbsp;reported cases of myopericarditis following smallpox vaccination, highlighting the need for careful monitoring and risk assessment.</p>
<p>The FDA's approval process involves rigorous evaluation of clinical data and consideration of public health needs. While the risks are acknowledged, the decision to approve the vaccine reflects a balance between these risks and the potential benefits in preventing monkeypox.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that the FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox despite acknowledging its dangerous side effects is partially true. While the vaccine has known risks, the FDA's approval process considers the benefits versus the risks in the context of public health emergencies. It is essential for individuals to be informed about the potential side effects and for healthcare providers to monitor vaccinated individuals closely.</p>

Claim Review: FDA Approves Monkeypox Vaccine Despite Known Risks

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Remdesivir, an antiviral drug, has been widely promoted as a treatment for COVID-19 patients. However, the effectiveness and safety of this drug have been subjects of debate. This article aims to review the claim that Remdesivir is an effective treatment for COVID-19 patients and to provide a thorough analysis based on scientific evidence.</p>
<h2>What is Remdesivir?</h2>
<p>Remdesivir is a broad-spectrum antiviral drug that inhibits RNA polymerase, disrupting the production of vital RNA. It was initially developed to treat Ebola but has been repurposed for COVID-19 treatment.</p>
<h2>Claim Analysis</h2>
<p>The claim that Remdesivir is an effective treatment for COVID-19 patients is based on its approval by regulatory bodies such as the FDA, EU, and UK's drug regulator. However, several studies have cast doubt on its efficacy and safety.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>The World Health Organization's Solidarity Trial found that Remdesivir does not reduce mortality or the time COVID-19 patients take to recover. A study published in <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31022-9/fulltext">The Lancet</a> also found no statistically significant benefit from the treatment.</p>
<p>Furthermore, a review of Remdesivir on <a href="https://www.drugs.com/comments/remdesivir/">drugs.com</a> showed that 47% of reviewers had a negative experience with the drug, compared to 19.38% who had a positive experience.</p>
<h2>Side Effects and Safety Concerns</h2>
<p>Remdesivir has been associated with several side effects, including fast, pounding heartbeats, trouble breathing, wheezing, shivering, itching, sweating, facial swelling, severe headache, and a feeling of being about to pass out. Subsequent side effects may include nausea and abnormal liver function tests.</p>
<p>The UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) reports that Remdesivir interacts with twelve other drugs, including chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and phenytoin. Doctors prescribing Remdesivir should be aware of these interactions to avoid potential harm to patients.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Based on the available scientific evidence, the claim that Remdesivir is an effective treatment for COVID-19 patients is not supported. The drug has shown minimal efficacy in clinical trials and is associated with significant side effects. It is crucial for healthcare providers to consider the risks and benefits carefully before prescribing Remdesivir to COVID-19 patients.</p>

Claim Review: Remdesivir as an Effective Treatment for COVID-19

<p>The claim that ultraviolet blood irradiation (UVBI) treats a wide range of conditions and reactivates the body’s innate ability to heal itself has been circulating in various articles and publications. This claim review aims to evaluate the scientific evidence behind this assertion.</p>
<h2>Historical Context of UVBI</h2>
<p>Ultraviolet blood irradiation (UVBI) emerged in the 1930s as a treatment for various medical conditions. Initially, hospitals across America adopted UVBI, reporting successful outcomes for conditions such as infections, autoimmunity, cardiovascular disease, and pregnancy issues. However, the American Medical Association (AMA) published a flawed study that discredited UVBI, leading to its decline in the US. Despite this, Russia and Germany continued to research and use UVBI, finding it effective for various medical conditions.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>Several studies have explored the potential benefits of UVBI. A 20-year study of 29,518 Swedish women found that those who avoided sunlight were 130% more likely to die and had a higher risk of developing significant medical conditions, including cancer (<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4051701/">Lindqvist et al., 2014</a>). This study highlights the importance of sunlight, including its ultraviolet component, for overall health.</p>
<p>UVBI has been shown to have various physiologic effects, such as improving blood circulation, reducing inflammation, and enhancing immune function. These effects may explain why UVBI is effective against both infections and autoimmune conditions. However, the exact mechanisms by which UVBI reactivates the body’s innate ability to heal itself are not fully understood.</p>
<h2>Current Use and Controversies</h2>
<p>In America, UVBI is primarily used by integrative practitioners to treat complex illnesses that do not respond to other therapies, such as Lyme disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, and chronic migraines. However, the use of UVBI remains controversial due to the lack of large-scale, randomized controlled trials and the historical suppression of this therapy by the medical establishment.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>While there is some scientific evidence supporting the use of UVBI for various medical conditions, the claim that it reactivates the body’s innate ability to heal itself requires further validation. The historical context and current use of UVBI suggest that it may have therapeutic potential, but more research is needed to fully understand its mechanisms and efficacy. It is essential to approach this claim with caution and consult healthcare professionals for evidence-based medical advice.</p>

Claim Review: Ultraviolet Blood Irradiation as a Miracle Cure

<h2>Claim Review: Aluminum in Vaccines and Autism</h2>
<p>The claim that aluminum in vaccines causes autism has gained traction in certain circles, particularly among those who are skeptical of vaccines. This claim is often supported by anecdotal evidence and personal testimonials rather than robust scientific research. However, it is crucial to examine the scientific evidence to determine the validity of this claim.</p>
<h3>Understanding Aluminum Adjuvants</h3>
<p>Aluminum compounds, such as aluminum hydroxide and aluminum phosphate, are commonly used as adjuvants in vaccines. Adjuvants are substances added to vaccines to enhance the immune response, making the vaccine more effective. Aluminum adjuvants have been used in vaccines for decades and are considered safe by regulatory bodies such as the FDA and CDC.</p>
<h3>Scientific Evidence on Aluminum and Autism</h3>
<p>Several studies have investigated the potential link between aluminum adjuvants and autism. A study by Dr. Chris Exley of Keele University found high levels of aluminum in the brain tissue of individuals with autism. However, this study has been criticized for its methodology and lack of control groups. Other studies have not found a consistent link between aluminum exposure and autism.</p>
<p>A comprehensive review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in 2012 concluded that the evidence does not support a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. The IOM reviewed numerous studies and found no consistent evidence linking vaccines, including those containing aluminum adjuvants, to autism.</p>
<h3>Neurotoxicity of Aluminum</h3>
<p>While some studies suggest that aluminum adjuvants may have neurotoxic effects, the majority of research indicates that the levels of aluminum in vaccines are safe. Aluminum is a common element in the environment, and humans are exposed to it through various sources, including food, water, and air. The body has mechanisms to eliminate aluminum, and the levels in vaccines are well below the toxic threshold.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>The claim that aluminum in vaccines causes autism is not supported by the current body of scientific evidence. While some studies suggest potential neurotoxic effects of aluminum adjuvants, the majority of research indicates that vaccines are safe and effective. The link between aluminum and autism remains unproven and speculative. It is important to rely on robust scientific evidence when making decisions about vaccines and public health.</p>
<h3>References</h3>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17308763?ref=pdf_download&amp;fr=RR-2&amp;rr=8d27ece3eb5605e1">Aluminium in brain tissue in autism</a>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13164/adverse-effects-of-vaccines-evidence-and-causality">Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/autism.html?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html">Vaccines and Autism</a>&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Aluminum in Vaccines and Autism

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "The FDA approved the ACAM2000 vaccine for monkeypox despite acknowledging its dangerous side effects, including cardiac inflammation." is Half True

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: