(2017-12-15, 01:58 AM)Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Wrote: Not much of a burden of proof in these cases. Autism has also been listed as a side effect of a couple approved vaccines according to an official FDA document that the FDA interestingly removed shortly after posting. although archives of it exist https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/2017...101580.pdf
"The cure for bad information is more information."
(2017-12-15, 01:55 AM)Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Wrote: https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/healthimpactnews.com You knowe I had no idea such sites existed, I'll have to check them out to see how they work.
"The cure for bad information is more information."
Definitely bowing out of this for awhile. I think both sides have some good arguments and I think both sides also think they're right. I don't think much will change that. For what it's worth I am compelled to believe that, although vaccines are good in theory, they have not been adequately tested to prove they even work as advertised. Much of this is also documented. I also believe there is so much motivation to hide any falsehood that even in the absence of direct evidence for one or the other case the inertia of the many, many proven, documented cases of government and corporate collusion and coverups in the medical field and all the others makes it seem very unlikely that the government is not lying about vaccines as well. From teh FBI crime labs to Ross Ulbritch, from the WHO board members conflicts of interest around the H1N1 pandemic to Merk knowingly putting live viruses in their vaccines, from Google's collusion with the US government to Facebook running experiments on users to manipulate their opinions and emotions, from the DOD's Sentient world simulation to the rockefellers technocratic eugenic wet dream. There's so much out there already demonstrating the top to bottom corruption that a vaccine coverup seems pretty par for the course. I always recommend Corbettreport.com as a resource to start.
"The cure for bad information is more information."
Mediochre Wrote:Wait... is your argument that more people believe it, therefore it's probably true? Just gotta clarify this before continuing. Yes, her modus operandi seems to be to repeat like a broken record player something along the lines of "if you're not an expert your arguments are worthless". She's been repeating the same thing endlessly for ages without realizing any of the weaknesses of it or its shortcomings. It's just an endless loop of appeals to authority. 
(2017-12-15, 05:36 AM)Dante Wrote: Yes, her modus operandi seems to be to repeat like a broken record player something along the lines of "if you're not an expert your arguments are worthless". She's been repeating the same thing endlessly for ages without realizing any of the weaknesses of it or its shortcomings. It's just an endless loop of appeals to authority. How to you rate one authority against another? Is it a safe bet to back the non-mainstream horse in every race? I am starting to dismiss this as wilful trolling; contrary posturing for the sake of it.
(2017-12-14, 09:48 PM)Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Wrote: Why do you think the number of diagnoses is increasing? A large chunk of it is demonstrably due to changes in diagnostic criteria and to the relative importance attached to identifying ASD (as effective treatments became available). Whether there is a true increase in prevalence beyond that seems to still be an open question. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/52af/bf...d706ac.pdf Linda
(2017-12-15, 01:08 AM)Mediochre Wrote: Ummmm probably because it links to the primary source documents to backup it's claims? Did you seriously not even spend the effort to notice that? I did. I read through the article and the references. The bulk of the claims are not sourced. And the sources provided are poor (e.g. a lawyer who does not understand medicine tries to claim that seizures and encephalitis are equivalent to autism, for example), do not support the claims in the way they have represented (e.g. the article on the safety of aluminum as an adjuvant), grossly outdated (e.g. a 40+ year-old opinion piece represents the state-of-the-art in the understanding of phages?), grossly misunderstood (e.g. the list of conditions reported in post-marketing surveillance), etc. If safety is a concern, why not look at a more thorough review of safety and effectiveness, which includes a fair and accurate reporting on all the available information, presented by people with the most knowledge and experience in the field? https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/s...afety.html Linda
(2017-12-15, 01:11 AM)Mediochre Wrote: Wait... is your argument that more people believe it, therefore it's probably true? Just gotta clarify this before continuing. No. My argument is that it makes sense to look at the research through the eyes of those with the most knowledge and experience in the field. Linda
(2017-12-15, 01:43 AM)Mediochre Wrote: Well the us governments "vaccine court" has paid out about $3 billion for vaccine related injuries including autism This represents a very low rate of adverse events serious enough to warrant some compensation (1 in 1,000,000). And the documents state that 80% of the payments are cases where the HHS has not concluded that the vaccine caused the injury, but a settlement was negotiated in order to minimize loss of time, money and other resources, leaving 20% as reasonably vaccine-related. However, they haven't paid out for autism (although they have paid out for other conditions in children who also have autism). https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files...2-2017.pdf Linda
(2017-12-15, 02:00 AM)Mediochre Wrote: Autism has also been listed as a side effect of a couple approved vaccines according to an official FDA document that the FDA interestingly removed shortly after posting. although archives of it exist Not "listed as a side effect", but included on a list of conditions reported through voluntary surveillance for which it was not possible to establish a causal relationship. " Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine." |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
![[-]](https://psiencequest.net/forums/images/collapse.png)