> We show that the recombinant vaccine is associated with a significantly lower risk of dementia in the 6 years post-vaccination. Specifically, receiving the recombinant vaccine is associated with a 17% increase in diagnosis-free time, translating into 164 additional days lived without a diagnosis of dementia in those subsequently affected. The recombinant shingles vaccine was also associated with lower risks of dementia than were two other vaccines commonly used in older people: influenza and tetanus–diphtheria–pertussis vaccines. The effect was robust across multiple secondary analyses, and was present in both men and women but was greater in women.
You're calling a handwaving blog with no citations to scientific studies published by a company that just happens to offer consulting to identify possible risks associated with a made up term not generally accepted by the medical community that their service can detect as data?
The "blog" belongs to a Canadian scientist who's been talking about turbo cancers after mRNA vaccines for years now! He's citing studies, theory, etc. So, if it's PubMed you will call it "a site," right? It's a serious online publication, not "a blog"!
As for your appeal to authority, Andrew Wakefield was once considered a scientist as well. The fact that a scientist talks about something for years or gets papers published means little. What matters is actual, independently reproducible data.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03201-5
> We show that the recombinant vaccine is associated with a significantly lower risk of dementia in the 6 years post-vaccination. Specifically, receiving the recombinant vaccine is associated with a 17% increase in diagnosis-free time, translating into 164 additional days lived without a diagnosis of dementia in those subsequently affected. The recombinant shingles vaccine was also associated with lower risks of dementia than were two other vaccines commonly used in older people: influenza and tetanus–diphtheria–pertussis vaccines. The effect was robust across multiple secondary analyses, and was present in both men and women but was greater in women.