Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair enough, a lot of people in general obviously do that though. I guess my point is that I see people posting stuff here all the time that's contradicted by science, but people only call it out on socially acceptable issues. For example, if I had a dollar for every time I saw someone on HN criticizing the methodology of a study they haven't actually read then I wouldn't be doing a startup right now. And yet these p…
If you don't mind, can you cite an example?
Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
111–120 of 133 posts
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#112Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#113The sad thing is even though the study has been thoroughly discredited[1], it continues to hang around and be cited by anti-vaccine activists. [1] Even sadder is that they cite Wakefield being exposed as a fraud as evidence of tampering by "Big Pharma".
I get the impression that the tide has turned in the battle, and we should start seeing an improvement in vaccination rates over the next few years. Pity there will be a large lag as children who weren't immunized grow up and continue to get sick from these preventable diseases.
I have a two year old so have been doing the vaccination dance recently. We take her to a pediatric nurse practitioner at a rather alternative practice (they even have a shaman) and she advises getting the MMR vaccine. If the vaccine is standard there, then that is a strong indicator supporting your statement that the tides have turned.
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not really presenting any evidence, especially evidence particular to vaccines and autism. It doesn’t matter how nice and great the alternative health board is if they can’t muster satisfactory evidence. I would also think that if what you say is indeed true, many scientists would be very interested in your case.
You are not really presenting any evidence, especially evidence particular to vaccines and autism. It doesn’t matter how nice and great the alternative health board is if they can’t muster satisfactory evidence. I was not offering to give evidence particular to vaccines and autism. I don't even believe that vaccines directly and solely cause autism. (I do believe they are a contributing factor but I think it's more c…
[deleted]
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it is wrong to compare the current measles infection rate with MMR vaccines to the autism rate. If you remove Measles vaccination, the figures will return to much, much higher rates of infection in a short space of time. To use your prior analogy, it would be using crash statistics from an SUV-free highway to argue for or against the introduction of SUVs. You can't use the current measles infection rate to m…
I'm not debating the merits of MMR vaccines or arguing against vaccination. I'm not even making a statistical argument. All I'm saying is that the decision of people who forgo vaccination is often a justified rational belief, even if it is incorrect. Keep in mind that most parents know a child with autism and very few know a child who died from MM or R.
How is it a justified, rational belief if incorrect?
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Galileo did not introduce the new concept. And he was put under house arrest by scientists. Your point about Einstein just confirms that science is not about belief, but about proof. Your reference to science in quotes is really off-putting. Everyone who does that gets gradually sicker and sicker until they die, usually at a young age. Sounds like you know everyone and their condition. Can it be? Your position is bas…
I put a great deal of effort into trying to understand why people do not believe me. I am well aware that many don't because they are basically incredulous -- what I am saying flies in the face of everything they know to be true. It is not only hard to believe, it is very upsetting to believe because it calls into question the trustworthiness of their doctor, which is very threatening when you have a deadly medical c…
Anecdotally, most people -- whether they have CF or not -- would be well served to make significant dietary and lifestyle changes. Having a life threatening disease just provides more incentive for this to take precedence over many people's personal mantra of immediate gratification and lack of serious introspection.
This doesn't really have any bearing on the efficacy of vaccines, though. Perhaps certain lifestyle changes do dramatically reduce susceptibility to certain diseases, but that doesn't mean one should also rule out current scientific literature.
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not debating the merits of MMR vaccines or arguing against vaccination. I'm not even making a statistical argument. All I'm saying is that the decision of people who forgo vaccination is often a justified rational belief, even if it is incorrect. Keep in mind that most parents know a child with autism and very few know a child who died from MM or R.
How is it a justified, rational belief if incorrect?
While driving, it is rational and justified to believe that the vehicle's speed is 60mph when the speedometer reads "60mph." However, if the speedometer is miscalibrated your belief is incorrect.
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not paying attention. The single-dose versions that were targeted at administration to children explicitly do not. The nasal inhalation version that was targeted for pregnant women explicitly does not. The multi-dose vials are the ones that contain Thimerosal, and those are explicitly NOT for pregnant women nor young children. http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/expert.q.a/11/02/h1n1.thimero...
You are incorrect: In the US, two 2009 H1N1 vaccines distributed in multi-dose vials were approved for children >= 6 months. See: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/dosage.htm#table1
This is correct. And we had it administered to our then 14mo old son. He's fine.
Hooray for meaningless anecdotes!
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it a justified, rational belief if incorrect?
While driving, it is rational and justified to believe that the vehicle's speed is 60mph when the speedometer reads "60mph." However, if the speedometer is miscalibrated your belief is incorrect.
It cannot be said that being anti-vaccine is a justified rational belief when it has an unjustified irrational basis. It is justified and rational to believe you're going 60mph when the speedometer says so because we all have experience with the reliability of speedometers, even though it's possible to be incorrect.
To use a different analogy, imagine I believed carpet was lava and stepping on it would burn me and break my mother's back. While this would explain why I'd avoid stepping on carpet, it would hardly be accurate to describe it as a justified, rational belief.
Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds
#120I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd. I see no possible way for what they espouse to be morally responsible. Without vaccines the mortality rate of children to these diseases would be higher than the total rate of autism. This means that you would have more kids die than get autism even if every case of autism was directly caused by a vaccine. This leaves us with two options for the beliefs of the anti-vaccinati…
I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd. Although I certainly don't condone the anti-vaccine crowd, I do at least understand them: most of the "crowd" has only vaguely heard the idea that vaccines may be linked to autism. A distant relative (who had a seven year old and was pregnant with baby #2) repeated her worries about vaccines to me over Thanksgiving, and when I told her there was no real link to autism she re…
Another sad fact - in my experience, I have had more luck in convincing people to get their kids vaccinated by pointing out that the guy that did the study linking vaccinations and autism has been prevented from practicing medicine in the UK, than by explaining the studies that show that vaccines categorically do not cause autism. The science just doesn't interest them, they want an authority figure to do the thinking for them.