Image 01 Image 03

Joe Biden Continues Undermining Public Confidence in Coronavirus Vaccine, Floats ‘Board of Scientists’

Joe Biden Continues Undermining Public Confidence in Coronavirus Vaccine, Floats ‘Board of Scientists’

“… give it to the board of scientists, have total transparency so independent operators and scientists and companies go out and take a look at it,” Biden said Wednesday.

The Democratic effort to, without evidence, paint President Trump as a reckless leader who has put pressure on scientists to skip safety protocols to approve a pre-Election Day Wuhan Coronavirus vaccine continued apace on Wednesday. This time, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden fueled conspiracy theories on the matter.

At a campaign event in Wilmington, Delaware, he conducted a coronavirus briefing with supposed health experts and gave a speech. Biden also took questions from reporters on the war of words between him, his campaign, and President Trump on the ability to trust a vaccine that could potentially be approved and distributed before the election or by the end of the year.

Biden was asked point-blank by a reporter if there was a “risk” he was undermining public confidence in a vaccine, which could have the effect of “preventing people” from taking the vaccine thanks to his message about not trusting Trump:

Reporter: “You just said that when it comes to a vaccine you don’t trust Donald Trump. Is there a risk that that message, that questioning the president on a vaccine, could prevent people from trusting the science, from trusting a vaccine when there finally is one?”

Biden responded by saying “no” and floating a “board of scientists” for final approval of the vaccine because Trump allegedly “doesn’t have any respect for scientists” or something:

“No, because they know he doesn’t have any respect for scientists. He basically said it. You saw what he said when he was out in California about wildfires, and scientists don’t know, and it’s going to go away like a miracle. It’s necessary so people can trust the vaccine,” Biden said.

“That’s why I said you have to have this board of scientists that are going to say, ‘This is why we think this is a good vaccine, why it’s approved,’ and it has to be total transparency. So scientists outside the government know exactly what is being approved, the context of which it’s being approved, and why it’s being approved. It’s the only thing that takes care of that,” he said.

The reporter then correctly pointed out that “for a vaccine to work,” you need a sizeable chunk of the population willing to take it. This reporter wondered if Biden was suggesting people trust one politician over another (him over Trump) when it came to fostering confidence in the effectiveness of a vaccine.

Biden denied that’s what he was doing, and then pivoted back to his “board of scientists” idea:

“No, I’m not. I’m saying trust the scientists. Trust the scientists. It’s one thing for Donald Trump to say the vaccine is safe. Okay. Then give it to the board of scientists, have total transparency so independent operators and scientists and companies go out and take a look at it,” the former vice president said.


Here are a few observations about Biden’s “board of scientists” idea:

1) Obviously, adding a “board of scientists” layer to the vaccine approval process would delay its release to the public even longer, which is exactly what Democrats want – not based on science, but the basis of their hatred for President Trump and unwillingness for him to get credit for it during an election year.

2) Think of how insulting Biden’s words are for the thousands of scientists and medical professionals who are already working all hours of the day and night and independent of any government influence to develop a vaccine. While there’s no double, there are some who are firmly in Biden’s camp. There are thousands more who would love nothing more than for him to stop intentionally downplaying the reliability and efficacy of what they’re working on.

3) Biden’s emphasis on an “independent” group of scientists to review the vaccine before approval is curious. Has he never heard of independent Data and Safety Monitoring Boards? Dr. Fauci cited such a board in remarks he made earlier this month concerning the possibility of political pressure being put on scientists to produce a vaccine:

Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said he trusts the independent members of the DSMB — who are not government employees — to hold vaccines to high standards without being politically influenced. Members of the board are typically experts in vaccine science and biostatistics who teach at major medical schools.

“If you are making a decision about the vaccine, you’d better be sure you have very good evidence that it is both safe and effective,” Fauci said. “I’m not concerned about political pressure.”

It’s rather comical (and not in a funny way) that Biden presents himself as the paragon of checks and balances on the safety of a Wuhan virus vaccine when you consider that the very “solution” he proposes to ensure safety protocols haven’t been abandoned is already in place.

He’s either staggeringly ignorant about how the clinical trial system operates or dangerously naive about how the vaccine approval process works (or both). The mainstream media won’t call him out on this, but maybe Trump will at the first debate, scheduled for September 29th.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


How about this – we throw away all of the worthless government mandates and let the people each decide how they will react to their individual degree of risk. You’ll find those with comorbidities and risk factors being more cautious, and the rest of us getting about with our lives. And shockingly, there won’t be any great surge of mortality.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to UnCivilServant. | September 18, 2020 at 9:13 am

    The issue with that is, the people don’t know what is best for them. “The masses” (how I detest that phrase!) require the wisdom and knowledge of Their Betters in Washingting to guide their lives. Who is better qualified than those who are A-listers on the Georgetown Cocktail Party circuit?

      In most ways, I agree with you, but I have to stick up for some government control here.

      People are stupid. People are greedy. Greedy people can kill and maim stupid people in the process of ripping them off, which is why we have the FDA and a whole rack of other alphabet labels. Example: China has no real problem shipping the US drugs that have no real drug in them, animal feed contaminated with industrial waste, or a whole host of deadly imports. Thank God for the FDA.

      In this case, if a company produces a safe, effective, and marketable C19 shot, the FDA is going to be under immense pressure from the Dems to stop it cold, and immense pressure from the Administration to conduct a fast but still accurate measurement of its risk before releasing it to the public. I hope a company does succeed with this task, and if the FDA approves it, I’ll be rolling up my sleeve. I have two immune-compromised people in my family, after all.

        The Friendly Grizzly in reply to georgfelis. | September 18, 2020 at 10:31 am

        if these agencies were consistent in their work, fine. But, they are often in the grasp of the very people who they are purported to regulate. And, don’t get me started on the Dept of Ag’s push of high carbohydrate diets.

          notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | September 18, 2020 at 1:53 pm

          It has been known for decades and decades that regulatory agencies are always captured by the industries they are supposed to regulate.

          notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | September 18, 2020 at 2:02 pm


          Biden CNN Town Hall:

          What Happened To Masks And Social Distancing?

          Social distancing only for the cameras.

          And this was after he flipped for the umpteenth time about a national mask mandate.

          Steve Krakauer
          Joe Biden and Anderson Cooper are making a point of social distancing during the CNN Town Hall while on the stage.

          But when they think they’ve gone to commercial break, they get so close to each other that Biden is whispering in Cooper’s ear:


    JusticeDelivered in reply to UnCivilServant. | September 18, 2020 at 11:12 am

    I am far less concerned about scientists than I am Pharma management.

The Friendly Grizzly | September 18, 2020 at 9:11 am

I suspect he is casting doubt on the vaccine because he and/or Hunter are cut out of the profits from the scam.

I love this game. Then Faucci, masks are a problem because people keep touching their faces. Now, Faucci ” we will need to wear masks for another year”

We need a Vaccine now. Oh we don’t trust the vaccine.

We need 40 K of ventilators. Oh we only needed 5K

We need 50 K of hospital beds. Geez we only used 25.

Please call these jerks out. They must get pleasure out of jerking us around.

Maybe they are mad because the Wall and the raids on the Epstein camp has cut off their pedophilia.

Would these be the scientists who said masks were useless outside of a medical context in February and then said they were vital in April?

Or the ones who went presented with a mountain of anecdotal evidence that a combination of HCQ + A + Zinc drastically improved outcomes when given early in a Covid-19 infection, disproved this by giving HCQ and HCQ + A late in a Covid-19 infection?

Or the ones who were CERTAIN people would DIE of our ventilator shortage? (I believed that one at the time but I didn’t confused belief and knowledge the way the alleged scientists did at least when talking to the media.)

Or the ones who think it’s okay to gather to protest alleged racial discrimination and cop behavior but not okay to gather for other reasons?

The scientists haven’t been very scientific lately. I don’t think it’s impossible Trump would exaggerate the evidence that a vaccine is working if it suits his purposes. But I KNOW from HCQ that some scientists will exaggerate the evidence that medications aren’t working if it suits their purposes, and that scientists en masse won’t call them on this.

The left corrupts everything it touches. The corruption of science and the scientific method has been ongoing for decades, e.g. anthropogenic climate change. This virus is only the latest example. The destruction of sports is earlier in it’s progress, but has rapidly built momentum this year.

The standard Dem response to everything is, “Let’s set up a committee to review….” This is call bureaucracy and that is not what a crisis needs. It needs somebody at the top who will review all the opinions from the various “boards of scientists”, because there will be multiple boards and all of them will have different recommendations. Most boards will recommend endless testing because that means more big bucks for researchers under the cover of one person having an adverse reaction.

Trump, is the only one qualified to make such a decision, but it will be based on multiple scientific opinions. Just maybe not the opinions that the media or Biden like.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to DanJ1. | September 18, 2020 at 1:57 pm

    In all our towns and all our cities, are no statues to committees, or boards.

    henrybowman in reply to DanJ1. | September 18, 2020 at 9:42 pm

    Absolutely. Biden should put America’s fears immediately to rest by committing to appoint Thomas Dolby as his administrations new Science Czar.

    No, wait, Biden probably never even heard of Dolby. Let’s go with Don Herbert. He’s dead now, but nobody needs to tell Joe.

“I’m saying trust the scientists.”

I’ll just note they say the same thing about the man-made global warming scam, including lying about how 99.9% of all scientists agree.

This should put to rest any notion the democrat party is interested is reducing the death count.

Gee, a cabal of the “best men” get to lord over us. That’s your grand idea Gropey Joe?

Fuck you, moron. Fuck you.

i’m all in favor of waterboarding a bunch of “scientists”, starting with that government gravy slurping fraud and liar, Faucci.

First of all, if Creepy Joe’s lips are moving, do not believe anything he says and look to see exactly whose hand is shoved up his butt working the controls. That being said, this COVID scam is far larger than simply denying Trump re-election.

First of all, the so-called “scientific response” to COVID has been resulted in an additional 30 million American workers being made dependent upon the largess of the various governments, most notably the federal government. It has damaged to American economy to the point where a significant portion of it will not recover for years and some will never recover [the airline industry will be reduced to government controlled carriers, a la Aeroflot]. Manufacturing will be reduced for a long time. The manufacturing industry requires a continual and expanding customer base to survive and grow and the entire Global Consumer economy is still mostly shutdown. The Dems will finally get what they want, government controlled health case, as politicians and political bureaucrats take over control of healthcare. The hospitality industry, food and lodging, has been significantly crippled by draconian restrictions. Travel restrictions have been put into place, which are highly unconstitutional [travel documents re now necessary in some locals to enter and remain there]. This COVID nonsense is far more reaching and dangerous than simply stopping the re-election of a single US politician.

Finally, about vaccines. Vaccines are a double edged sword. In order to work, a person is required to be infected with a mild form of a specific disease. The theory is that this infection will cause the body to produce various antibodies which will keep the person vaccinated from contracting the disease in the future. However, in certain individuals, the vaccine itself can cause the disease to be fatal or produce highly undesirable results. Hundreds of children die every year from reactions to the common MMR vaccine. Why do you think the US has a separate court simply to deal with cases of catastrophic vaccine results? Then there is the efficacy of the vaccine. Some vaccines have a failure rate as high as 60%. Flu vaccines only provide immunity for 1-2 years. We have discovered that the MMR, even with two doses, has to be boosted every 10-15 years to maintain immunity in the recipient. Vaccines are not the panacea that the medical profession has touted for a century.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Mac45. | September 18, 2020 at 2:04 pm

    Hear. Hear.

    nordic_prince in reply to Mac45. | September 18, 2020 at 2:25 pm

    Which is precisely why vaccine mandates are problematic, to say the least. Every body is different – different metabolisms, different sensitivities, different familial histories, and so on. It’s insane and irresponsible to keep pushing vaccines as a one-size-fits-all solution.

    There *has* to be vaccine choice – aka “informed consent.”

    DaveGinOly in reply to Mac45. | September 18, 2020 at 3:05 pm

    Concerning your comments about vaccines and how they work. This was true in the past of “whole virus” vaccines, but most are not made that way any more.

    The only part of a virus “seen” be the immune system is the coat or shell, the exterior of the virus (not the viral DNA or RNA that allows the virus to replicate within a host cell). Vaccines today are made by replicating viral proteins that are present on the exterior of the virus. It is these proteins to which the immune system reacts. The proteins selected must have two major qualities. First, and obviously, it must elicit an immune response. Second, it must be highly conserved. That is, it must be present on all viruses within a strain either because the virus requires it to access a host cell or because it’s produced by genes that are not subject to a high rate of mutation.

    Viral proteins alone cannot cause the disease. When there’s an adverse reaction to modern vaccines, it’s usually caused by additives that are necessary to stabilize the protein in the vaccine. (A single protein can fold into various shapes. The only shape that will elicit an immune response is the shape the protein has when part of the virus. The proteins and protein fragments in a vaccine must be stabilized so they don’t change shape, and remain perfect copies not only of how the protein is assembled, but also of how it is configured. Think, the difference between a convertible with the top down or the top up. Same parts, different configuration.)

    Even modern “whole virus” vaccines are not made with intact virus. The viral particles used in such vaccines today have had genes that allow them to reproduce disabled or excised from them that allow them. The more gene sequences that are excised or disabled, the less likely a virus is to repair itself in the wild, but care must be taken that changes made do not affect surface proteins that must remain identical to (or as nearly so as possible) the actual pathogen, so the body has an immune response that will respond to the wild virus, and not merely the edited version.

      DaveGinOly in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 18, 2020 at 3:15 pm

      The second sentence of the last paragraph should be:
      The viral particles used in such vaccines today have had genes that allow them to reproduce disabled or excised from them.

      Not exactly accurate.

      First, there are three different types of vaccines against viral agents: Live, attenuated vaccines, inactivated vaccines and subunit vaccines.

      Live, attenuated vaccines use a weakened form of the live virus to trigger the immune system. These vaccines include MMR and chickenpox vaccines.

      Inactivated vaccines inject a patient with a a complete virus which has been “killed” during the manufacturing process. Some polio vaccines use this method.

      Subunit vaccines inject only portions of the virus, usually outer protein coatings which trigger antigen reaction in the body.

      Now, the efficacy of these type of vaccines actual mirror the order above. Live virus produces the most immunity in the largest population and for the longest period of time. Dead virus vaccines produce lower levels of efficacy, in a smaller population for a shorter period of time. Subunit vaccines produce the lowest level of protection among the smallest population for the shortest period of time.

      So, one can have a vaccine which produces very few side effects, has a high failure rate and a very short efficacy period or one which produces higher rates of side effects, a low failure rate and with a long efficacy period. Which is better? People need to decide this for themselves, not be told that every vaccine is a magic bullet which will wipe out a given disease.

        RKae in reply to Mac45. | September 19, 2020 at 5:54 am

        I don’t see any talk here about the dangers of the adjuvants.

        And if the MMR vaccine needs a booster, then vaccine science is not what we’ve been told. There is clearly a difference between a body that’s naturally gone through the measles and one that’s been fooled into thinking that it went through the measles.

OK, but first release all the global warming models.

A “board of scientists” bought and paid for via university funding via federal funds and absurdly high tuition paid for through federal loans.

Even if Biden wasn’t suffering from dementia, his idea is classic “kick the can”.

Sh*t flows downhill.

In any event, this is all about the sinister Kamala Harris becoming president.

How can Biden undermine anything? No one with more than 2 brain cells takes him seriously.

I would have assumed that the FDA is an independent board of “scientists” such as what Sleepy Joe is now suggesting. I am pretty sure that the future Wuhan-vaccine will not be put into general use in the US without the approval of exactly this independent Board of “Scientists.”

By the way, exactly what is a “scientist”? I am a “doctor,” which means I have earned a doctorate from an institution of higher learning. But I do not think that there is any formal degree that is required for someone to call himself a “scientist.” Does my Bachelor of Science undergraduate degree make me a “scientist”?

Thus, it is now accurate to state that dim-witted, dotard-marionette, Biden, was for science, before he was against it.

Yet another flip-flop by the marionette’s handlers.

So, what if we call this board of scientist the “Drug Administration”?

You know what, we could also have them assess new food products to.

So what about the “Drug and Food Administration”? Anyone on board?

I will attempt to translate to English from Bidenese:

‘Shut up you bitter members of the proletariat, climbing to your gums and religion. Orange man is bad, Orange man wants a vaccine, therefore vaccine is bad you ignorant bigots.’

See that message is much more clearly stated. Your welcome Joe.