Have you noticed that anti-vaccine folks like to elevate the status of anyone who says things that they agree with?
So a scientist or researcher who suggests that vaccines are dangerous is all of a sudden a leader in their field or the very best in the world.
In the real world, it doesn’t work like that…
You have to earn your reputation.
Who Is Romain Gherardi?
Well, I guess that works both ways.
Most of the researchers that anti-vaccine folks praise have indeed earned a reputation, just not the kind they would like.
So who is Romain Gherardi?
He is basically a French researcher who thinks that the aluminum in vaccines is bad and scares folks with his poorly done studies and his book, Toxic story: Two or three embarrassing truths about the vaccine adjuvants.
“Gherardi is a fierce advocate for the existence of a causal relationship between containing aluminum adjuvants and a clinical condition which he first called ‘Macrophagic Myofasciitis (MMF)'”
Gherardi : a media story (2 or 3 embarrassing truths about his research)
But what about Macrophagic Myofasciitis (MMF), isn’t that a real disease?
“There is no evidence to suggest that MMF is a specific illness.”
WHO on Questions and Answers about macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF)
Nope.
That’s not to say that some people do not get some inflammatory changes at vaccine injection sites that could be caused by the aluminum in a vaccine.
But these are local reactions. They are not part of a disease.
As far as his research, consider the critique of one of his recent papers that he co-authored with Christopher Shaw, Non-linear dose-response of aluminium hydroxide adjuvant particles: selective low dose neurotoxicity.
“The article states that it was supported by grants from CMSRI. What is not stated is that CMSRI (Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute) is funded by the vaccine-critical Dwoskin Family Foundation. It is also worth noting that three of the authors of this manuscript, Exley, Shaw and Gherardi, sit on the Scientific Advisory Board for CMSRI, with Shaw as the Chair and Gherardi as the Vice-Chair. Whilst it is unknown if any of these authors receive financial compensation for their role at CMSRI it is clear that these competing interests should have been disclosed.”
David Hawkes et al on Questions about methodological and ethical quality of a vaccine adjuvant critical paper
In addition to the funding issue, they found problems with the methods of the study and ethical problems.
Amazingly, the response to Hawkes’ letter had to be retracted by the journal!
It is not hard to find other criticism and complaints about his research either.
More on Romain Gherardi
- Gherardi : a media story (2 or 3 embarrassing truths about his research)
- Questions about methodological and ethical quality of a vaccine adjuvant critical paper
- Retracted letter about vaccine safety made potentially “slanderous” claims
- Biopersistence and brain translocation of aluminum adjuvants of vaccines
- Aluminum Is Put on Trial as a Vaccine Booster
- WHO – Macrophagic myofasciitis and aluminium-containing vaccines
- WHO – Questions and Answers about macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF)
- Aluminum toxicity in vaccines – here we go again with bad science
- Another “Frontiers In” journal steps in it
- A sad, premature death cynically exploited by antivaccinationists
- Wake up, Sheeple! Or how a dubious sheep study is being spun by antivaxers
- Professor Christopher Exley: The latest darling of the antivaccine movement
- Christopher Exley has Become the New Face of the Anti-Vaxx Aluminium Grift
Last Updated on April 6, 2024