Dan Wilson & Dave Farina vs Steve Kirsch & Pierre Kory: Who won the Pangburn “Greatest Vaccine Debate”?
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/22
Hosted by Pangburn, the “Greatest Vaccine Debate in History” pits educators Dave Farina (“Professor Dave Explains”) and Dr. Dan Wilson (“Debunk the Funk”) against entrepreneur Steve Kirsch and critical-care physician Dr. Pierre Kory. Farina and Wilson emphasize methods over anecdotes, challenging claims about vaccines causing autism, aluminum adjuvant harm, and ivermectin efficacy. They note MMR never contained thimerosal, most childhood vaccines have been thimerosal-free since 2001, and COVID-19 vaccines, though waning, reduce infection and hospitalization. They also explain VAERS cannot establish causation. With clear definitions and study-by-study analysis, Farina and Wilson present the stronger case grounded in contemporary scientific evidence.
Dave Farina, known for the YouTube Channel “Professor Dave Explains,” is a professional science educator. Dr. Dan Wilson, known for the YouTube Channel “Debunk the Funk,” is a molecular biologist and science communicator.
Steve Kirsch is a Silicon Valley entrepreneur and inventor who is a prominent critic of the COVID-19 vaccine. Pierre Kory is an American critical care and pulmonary physician (ABIM revoked certifications) and president of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. They participated in a public debate hosted by Pangburn titled “Greatest Vaccine Debate In History | Dave Farina & Dr. Dan Wilson vs Steve Kirsch & Dr. Pierre Kory.”
Dan and Dave are part of a growing and necessary educational ecosystem that pushes back against pseudoscience and figures who misinform or disinform people, potentially costing lives and health, not just the lives of vulnerable sub-demographics in America, but also those with international influence.
This reflects an adaptive evolution, in some threads, of New Atheism, Militant Atheism, and/or Firebrand Atheism, with a less aggressive, healthier, assertive approach and a more targeted subject-matter style. This comes out in the rhetorical angle of the debate.
The expletives are not the point; they are punctuation. Dave is the father of a child with autism. The false claim of anti-vaccination activists, e.g., “Vaccines cause autism,” impacts real lives and is not an abstraction to him.
Dan’s greater specialization, combined with Dave’s general-knowledge pushback and Dan’s expertise, made for a formidable combination in the debate. Saying they won would be an understatement. Dave and Dan were the stronger side in the debate with Pierre and Steve.
Primarily, because Dave and Dan targeted the prime form of reasoning presented by Steve and Pierre—anecdote and narrative—while emphasizing that the preponderance of high-quality evidence is what matters in science, not anecdote.
Dave repeatedly identifies this flaw in Pierre and Steve’s arguments, while Dave and Dan return to the key questions about precise definitions, evidence, and analysis of the studies submitted as part of the preparation of the debate. At several points, they educate Steve and Pierre on the studies they submitted for the debate. It was a striking spectacle of pseudoscience being challenged by actual science. Distinct facts came forward.
Some of the debate’s most notable moments included the claim that mercury causes autism. Thimerosal is ethylmercury and clears from the body faster than methylmercury. There has been no demonstrated harm at vaccine doses. Most childhood vaccines were made thimerosal-free in 2001. Notably, MMR has never contained thimerosal. The MMR-autism study was fully retracted and adjudged fraudulent.
The claim that aluminum adjuvants are dangerous was addressed. Decades of observation and multiple reviews support their safety. Large-scale cohort work found no link to allergies, autoimmune or neurodevelopmental disorders.
Another claim was that vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission. However, effectiveness against infection and infectiousness is imperfect but real, and it wanes over time, which is why boosters matter. Vaccines reduce symptomatic infection and hospitalizations.
Another claim was that ivermectin works. Cochrane and subsequent large trials found no clinical benefit. Contrary claims rely on low-quality evidence or retracted work.
The American Board of Internal Medicine revoked certifications for two high-profile figures spreading COVID-19 misinformation; Kory is one of them. Kirsch repeatedly misused VAERS, a passive-reporting system, as if it established causation to claim massive vaccine deaths. Experts have shown why that inference is incorrect and why VAERS data alone cannot determine causality.
The debate was long, but the view was worthwhile. It represents an increasing need on the part of qualified people with the tolerance for dealing with pseudoscience and/or loons directly. So, a big debt of gratitude and appreciation for Dr. Dan Wilson and Dave Farina for their work on this debate.
In fact, it wasn’t up for debate who one the ‘debate.’ Dan and Dave crushed, and thank you for it.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
