Rick Reuben wrote: Andrew Wakefield is being prosecuted to scare away other researchers.
What evidence do you have for this?
Rick Reuben wrote: Andrew Wakefield is being prosecuted to scare away other researchers.
Rick Reuben wrote:His Lancet article didn't 'confirm findings', or even argue a causal link. Andrew Wakefield is being prosecuted to scare away other researchers.Josef K wrote:Wakefield based his findings on the study of something like 12 patients, not enough to confirm his findings.
gjhardwick wrote:shut up you massive baptist
Rick Reuben wrote:The fact that you think it is impossible confirms it.johnnyshape wrote:Rick Reuben wrote: Andrew Wakefield is being prosecuted to scare away other researchers.
What evidence do you have for this?
Rick Reuben wrote:The fact that you think that such motives would be spoken about openly explains why you ask such questions about motives.johnnyshape wrote:Rick Reuben wrote: Andrew Wakefield is being prosecuted to scare away other researchers.
What evidence do you have for this?
Rick Reuben wrote:Except that you will only listen to research that is beholden to the medical establishment, so your blah blah blah about 'we must rigorously study' is about as serious as someone like Newberry's is.Yngwie Einstein wrote:At best, you can say the link between vaccines (some, particularly mercury-based ones) and autism needs to be rigorously studied.
Rick Reuben wrote:These babies aren't developing their own antibodies in response to the challenges.
Rick Reuben wrote:Josef K wrote:The vaccination strategy is called Herd vaccination or something and requires something like 90% of the population to be vaccinated for it to be effective.
If the vaccine itself is effective as claimed, then it's effective if 20, 40, 60, or 80% take it- for those who take it. If the vaccine is effective as claimed, then one person can take it, and everyone else can not take it, and the one who does is protected- if the vaccine is effective as claimed.
Herd immunity theory proposes that, in diseases passed from person-to-person, it is more difficult to maintain a chain of infection when large numbers of a population are immune. The more immune individuals present in a population, the lower the likelihood that a susceptible person will come into contact with an infected individual
Rick Reuben wrote:Unrelated: if you let your daughter get the Gardasil vaccine, you're ignoring growing evidence that it is both unnecessary and dangerous.
Rick Reuben wrote: you have no business asking for evidence...
Rick Reuben wrote: You are motivated to ask by your shame over your refusal to consider any contradictory evidence.
johnnyshape wrote:Rick Reuben wrote: you have no business asking for evidence...
Rampantly hilarious megalomania. What are you, some feudal lord of the internet?
new york times 8-21-08 wrote:Two vaccines against cervical cancer are being widely used without sufficient evidence about whether they are worth their high cost or even whether they will effectively stop women from getting the disease, two articles in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine conclude.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/21/healt ... ne.html?hp
Return to “General Discussion”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests