World News

51464 readers

1969 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

US plan for $1.6m hepatitis B vaccine study in Africa called ‘highly unethical’ (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 5 days ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Experts decry ‘neocolonialist’ Guinea-Bissau study after Trump administration changed advice for US babies

The Trump administration has indicated that it will fund a $1.6m study on hepatitis B vaccination of newborns in the west African country of Guinea-Bissau, where nearly one in five adults live with the virus – a move that researchers call “highly unethical” and “extremely risky”.

The news follows an official change in recommendations on hepatitis B vaccines at birth from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which called the shots an “individual” decision, despite decades of safe and effective vaccination and no evidence of harm. It is part of sweeping changes to childhood immunizations by the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, which have global repercussions – including cutting funding for programs that bring vaccines to countries around the world.

“He has a fixed, immutable belief that vaccines cause harm,” said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an attending physician at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “He will do everything he can to try and prove that.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] c10l@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe reading the whole article will help, instead of focussing on a very small subset of the information therein.

[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

You seem confused, I did read the whole article and in fact that excerpt is not from the article but rather from the official bandin.org website which is referenced in the same article.

While they reference that page as source, and the page has clear points for more or less everything discussed in the article, they appear to disregard that.

It is a major breach of scientific ethics to withhold an intervention that has been proven safe and effective. “It’s highly unethical to choose to give a vaccine to some children but not others,” Offit said.

Clearly explained that all children will get the vaccine.

Yamey noted: “There’s already an RCT [randomized, controlled trial] showing superior outcomes with the birth dose, so why is another one needed?”

The trial does not focus on that, that is an already clear point. They're focusing on secondary health effects the vaccine may produce.

The study does not appear to be looking at whether the vaccine is more effective at birth, which Jacobs said was “concerning” as “nowhere in this do they say that they’re going to study the efficacy of the vaccine itself.”

No, the vaccine is effective and that's been widely shown in the past. No need to make a new trial for that.

The whole article is just a couple people worried about this study mainly because they are afraid the results of such study will be used by the US government to decrease the application of hepatitis vaccination.

“Because Robert F Kennedy Jr is an anti-vaccine zealot, he will somehow contort that study to look like the hepatitis B birth dose causes harm”

Financing of this kind of studies is normal. The whole article is painting this as uncommon and manipulated, however there is nor any proof of that nor any reason to show that could be true. The whole article is based off of speculation and false allegations. I'm not American myself and thus I do not care too much about your personal worries with this Kennedy, if you write an article regarding a problematic clinical trial please make the article about a problematic clinical trial and not about speculations of a manipulation of the plausible results which may be obtained through such a trial.

The article incorrectly depicts the trial setting and does not address what the problems with the trial are. Now regarding your reply, please rather than only reading the whole article; maybe also try to understand what it means and where they got their information from.

If you like we can discuss about this, I'm open to that, but I don't really want to waste my time. My original comment was just to advise readers to focus a bit more: I opened the webpage of the trial for you and gave you the idea that the article is not correctly describing what it is about. What you do with that information is up to you.