I saw someone yesterday who was in his 30's with measles, his mother sitting next to him explaining why she didn't get him vaccinated because she thought it would make him sick.
Freedom is slavery!
The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
31–40 of 83 posts
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an extremely funny statement if it's meant to be ironic. Almost like "unless you are a %w[Politician, Clergyman, Philosopher] you have no business making up your own mind about %w[politics, religion, the meaning of life]."
Unlike politicians, clergymen or philosophers, scientists have pretty universally established standards for establishing when "your own mind" about a causal relationship between x and y is almost certainly wrong; rejecting their approach to doing it (i.e. go to school and learn for several years so you can critique the research rather than basing your view on anecdotes collected by yellow journalists ) is tantamount…
The thing is that this article isn't about how the public was wrong, it's an example the rampant corruption in mainstream science. And it's one of hundreds of examples of how the current states of science, peer review, and publishing are horrifically broken.
Let's look at the facts of this case. The author didn't cite his financial connections, but the journal failed to catch this. The author made up data, but the journal failed to catch this. The public demanded an investigation into the vaccines, but the government refused to start an investigation or even answer their questions. When the government finally did start an investigation many years later they did it behind closed doors, and the public wasn't even allowed to read the transcript of the conversation for several more years. The scientific establishment has been in the wrong here at literally every turn, and yet you're spinning the story and trying to use it as an example of how the general public shouldn't be allowed to make their own medical decisions. Yes, the anti-vaccine crowd was also in the wrong for putting excessive weight on this study in the first place, but this apologism for the scientific establishment is completely unwarranted.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you are a trained medical professional in this particular area of study, you have absolutely no business making up your own mind.
A sufficiently intelligent and reasonable person should be able to, with enough consideration, make up his mind about just about anything that lives in a knowledge domain. It's not like the medical profession emerged fully-formed from the head of Zeus.
If someone just has to make up his mind, then he needs to be neither intelligent nor reasonable. I suspect you mean that a person can come to some sort of opinion that would be "good" in the sense that they have chosen the one that most likely prolongs their life, prevents illness, etc.
Perhaps that is true, if "enough consideration" is equivalent something like 2 years of basic medical education and 2 years of clinical experience. Instead, most people have to make do with their own trusts, biases, limited information, etc. I think it's unreasonable to think that an untrained person is going to catch up enough after reading a few articles that they are going to make an informed decision. That's why we have doctors, to help us make informed decisions about our health. We can use their synthesis of education and experience to guide our values to make decisions that are not only self-satisfying but also reasonably accurate.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. A one-in-a-million coincidence happens 7,000 times in the world's population. There will always be anecdotes, correlation doesn't prove causation.
Exactly the point the doctors used (without the statistics). Sure, it could have been coincidence but why say there was no chance it was a side effect? In fact, since her symptoms are a known side effect it is more likely it was not just a coincidence, not so?
As another person pointed out, "adverse events in the PDR or on product packaging are simply a list of all reported adverse events, with little data to demonstrate causality."[1] It is not implausible that the same symptom occurred in another person the vaccine was tested on while being entirely unrelated to the vaccine. If you throw away statistics - say that while it could be correlation it is much more likely to be causation - you replace science with superstition.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because some vaccines are not always good for individuals, however the MMR vaccine has been found completly safe.
Absolute rubbish, there is no such thing as a completely safe vaccine.
Other things there is no such thing as a completely safe version of: Cars. Airplanes. Computers. Lamps. Electricity in general. Boats. Food. Ovens. Buildings. Knives. Trees. Swimming pools. Public transportation. Flash cameras. Paper. Other people.
Nothing is completely safe. NOTHING. However, when something is safe for the vast majority of people and there's no demonstrable correlation between using it and detrimental effects (and if there is such a correlation but the net detrimental effects are outweighed by the benefits), then it doesn't matter that it's not completely safe.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#36Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…
Buddy, do you know how thoroughly disproven thimerisol complications are? Even mainstream (if they can be called that) vaccine denial has moved away from this claim. You get more environmental mercury average urban life.
And let's say this might have been a legit concern (it is proven that it isn't) for the sake of argument. Thimerisol hasn't been used in single-dose vaccines in the West for the last 7-10 years! It's only used as a stabilizing agent in multi-dose vials; Vials typically seen as part of low-budget vaccination programs in Africa and Asia.
There are potential side effects from the MMR vaccine. Autism is not one of them. A mountain of money and research effort has gone into this. There is no credible correlation.
He'll, the man who proposed this correlation (Wakefield) has been forbidden to practice in the UK because he was illegally taking spinal fluid sample from children without consent or a proper medical review of his study. He recklessly endangered the lives of children and caused them undue pain to try and prove his theory. He then lied about his data because it didn't show what he wanted it to show.
PLEASE let this crazy idea rest. Any rational person examining the evidence can only find overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If you want to claim that you're a responsible adult worthy of making reasonable decisions then you should demonstrate that you've examined even a few of the salient facts about the subject. My reading of your comments suggests you have not.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unlike politicians, clergymen or philosophers, scientists have pretty universally established standards for establishing when "your own mind" about a causal relationship between x and y is almost certainly wrong; rejecting their approach to doing it (i.e. go to school and learn for several years so you can critique the research rather than basing your view on anecdotes collected by yellow journalists ) is tantamount…
The thing is that this article isn't about how the public was wrong, it's an example the rampant corruption in mainstream science. And it's one of hundreds of examples of how the current states of science, peer review, and publishing are horrifically broken. Let's look at the facts of this case. The author didn't cite his financial connections, but the journal failed to catch this. The author made up data, but the jo…
I think it's pretty evident the scientific establishment isn't perfect and thus has differences of opinion, and you make a good point about lack of openness. But the pertinent facts are that the majority of medical professionals and the NHS that paid for the treatments stood behind the drug companies' testing and the vaccination's safety record whilst the angry parents' law firm, their outspoken shill medic and the media coverage all encouraged large segments of the British public to wrongly challenge the balance of medical opinion.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#38Argh, just noticed his top navigation LOOKS like a breadcrumb nav but in fact is not. At all.
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#39Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…
Can you please provide credible (i.e. peer-reviewed) references to the symptoms you describe being a known side-effect of MMR vaccination? And to doctors being "encouraged" not to admit said side-effects? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying what you are describing is really unusual. Which brings me to my next point: any decision has consequences. If there is a 1 in 1 billion chance of a side-effect, and a 1…
[deleted]
Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud
#40Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…
That is unusual. The doctor I know (she is sat on my lap :)) tells me that it was probably just a doctor mistaking the danger signs of "vaccine moaner" and trying to avoid an argument.
Which is inexcusable "bedside manner" and they should be held up for it.
But the bottom line is; yep, maybe it was caused by the MMR vaccine. Maybe not.
The real secret is that medicine, even tried and tested medicine, causes all sorts of random and unexpected results in a tiny amount of people - which is why those boxes list silly numbers of symptoms (i.e. I challenge you to find a medicine that doesn't potentially cause nausea :)). It's not so much that doctors are encouraged not to admit these side effects, it is that they know it is a product of random variance.
The actual problem is; you can't rationally explain this to people. The majority simply don't "get it" and it risks persisting fear over proven (and safe) medicines. So the question is; is it morally right or wrong to do so?
So... yeh it could have been a Vaccine. It could have been a random coincidence (that happens a LOT, particularly in young children when parents happen to be looking for a change). It could have been simply the fact someone stuck a needle in her triggering some medical phenomena (also relatively common).
The doctor should have told you all this, and they need a kicking for failing to be open with you :)
However:
My point is, examine any claims by government or big Pharm or sensational reports about autism very carefully and make up your own mind.
Is a point I wholeheartedly agree with.