WHY Won't They Do The Research?

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-17-2007
WHY Won't They Do The Research?
56
Tue, 11-24-2009 - 8:17am

http://autisminnb.blogspot.com/2009/02/vaccine-autism-war-why-wont-they-do.html

Apart from the many thousands of allegedly hysterical, delusional parents and allegedly fraudulent, huckster professionals who have raised safety concerns, particularly autism concerns, about vaccines two high ranking members of the American public health system have stated a need for more research of possible vaccine-autism connections.

Dr. Julie Gerberding, former head of the CDC and Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the NIH and the American Red Cross have BOTH indicated that more research of vaccine-autism issues COULD and SHOULD be done.

So WHY are public health authorities like the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee REFUSING to authorize funding to research possible vaccine-autism connections?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sat, 12-26-2009 - 2:59pm

And one more thing. STOP pretending that kids in the US get ONE vaccine, they don't. We all know that the MMR is not the only vaccine on the schedule, even a pharma-scientist should be able to see the lack of logic in pretending that its the only one. If you have no studies on the cumulative effects of vaccines then you have NOTHING.




Edited 12/26/2009 4:14 pm ET by crunchymomto2
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sat, 12-26-2009 - 3:20pm

Why don't you ever post peer-reviewed and published pieces? I really get sick of his blog. If I wanted to waste time, I would visit his sites...

I copied that blog into my word processor and marked through any of it which was considered personal attacks and MMR/Wakefield BS. I had nothing left when I was done, nothing of substance at all.

The first four paragraphs was nothing more than a barrage of personal attacks (as usual).

The middle of the piece gives me information about the MMR, but again, kids don't just get one MMR.

The rest of it is more character assassination.

Jon, do you not get it? We don't like reading his blogs, stop already. If we wanted to waste our time on such a merry-go-round, we would go directly to his sites. We do, only we don't waste time there. Give Orac and friends a rest, okay?

Thanks.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sat, 12-26-2009 - 3:30pm

"Mouden Bunk - http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Andrew_Moulden"

And it's hard to get past that first sentence:

"Andrew Moulden is a Canadian quack who pushes an extreme form of anti-vax woo..."

Damn, ain't that the kind of opening which makes one want to spend the afternoon reading?

What a waste of my time it was to read that piece!

Jon, you're smarter than this! Take ALL of his pieces, one by one, and cross-out any sentences that are not stating a scientifically proven fact. Now - what are you left with?

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sat, 12-26-2009 - 3:42pm

"The answer is simple, there is nothing to study which is not well defined by present research."

I don't consider being littered with conflicts of interest "well defined". And RARELY is the study itself (well-defined).

Even the conclusions of your beloved studies offer less-than-definite *conclusions*.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sat, 12-26-2009 - 7:36pm

I think Jon suffers from "optimism bias". It is an unwarranted belief in the value of interventions.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7574/0-f

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2005
Mon, 01-04-2010 - 11:27am
Hahaha I almost spit my drink onto the keyboard :)





Pages