• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Quacks & Pseudoscience

scaramanga said:
If there are significant differences (as measured by a professional) then there's good reason to run more trials. Actual data from well-run clinical trials always trumps anecdotal evidence though.

This actually happened in the case of vaccines again and again. The trials have repeatedly shown no link between vaccines and autism.
Click to expand...

A long term third party independently funded study vaxxed / non vaxxed with an inert placebo would put this to bed once and for all.

As we have discussed elsewhere the only one done to this standard was the flu vaccine study which was limited to a few hundred people. Whilst us fighting for justice for vaccine damaged kid see it as important, the small sample size means that the Pharma apologists can dismiss it and say that it does not count.

Obviously if it was to be found that the risks of vaccines had been understated and/or the benefits overstated it would be the biggest medical scandal of all time. They are so many people that staked their careers and reputations on promoting more and more mass vaccination that it is difficult to see turkeys voting christmas by supporting this type of study. (see CDC refusal to release patient level data of their trials to third parties and alleged manipulation of data which is the subject of the film Vaxxed)

These are some of the major obstacles to overcome but I remain hopeful. The best bet rather frighteningly is Trump who remains very concerned about vaccine safety. He has a vaccine damaged child in his family. However, I fear that war would have destroyed the World before the trial could be completed if he was elected.
 
JPBB said:
A long term third party independently funded study vaxxed / non vaxxed with an inert placebo would put this to bed once and for all.

As we have discussed elsewhere the only one done to this standard was the flu vaccine study which was limited to a few hundred people. Whilst us fighting for justice for vaccine damaged kid see it as important, the small sample size means that the Pharma apologists can dismiss it and say that it does not count.

Obviously if it was to be found that the risks of vaccines had been understated and/or the benefits overstated it would be the biggest medical scandal of all time. They are so many people that staked their careers and reputations on promoting more and more mass vaccination that it is difficult to see turkeys voting christmas by supporting this type of study. (see CDC refusal to release patient level data of their trials to third parties and alleged manipulation of data which is the subject of the film Vaxxed)

These are some of the major obstacles to overcome but I remain hopeful. The best bet rather frighteningly is Trump who remains very concerned about vaccine safety. He has a vaccine damaged child in his family. However, I feel that war would have destroyed the World before the trial could be completed if he was elected.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about this being done in humans? If so, how do you do that ethically??
 
Millsy_Yiddo said:
Are you talking about this being done in humans? If so, how do you do that ethically??
Click to expand...

Well. We are stuck on this. We say it is ethical. Pharma say it is not. Nothing happens. More vaccines are added to the schedule, more (anecdotal) vaccine damage, more polarisation.

I am guessing it will take a major vaccine safety scandal that Pharma can't keep a lid on to change the current thinking on this. Or Trump. Both would be a catastrophe. .
 
Of course it wouldn't put it to bed, you'd come up with some reason or other that meant your view was still correct. See Millsy's post earlier.

Some people don't want to leave a load of children susceptible to a myriad of preventable disease. You ain't bothered about that apparently, but then you don't think measles kills people.
 
JPBB said:
A long term third party independently funded study vaxxed / non vaxxed with an inert placebo would put this to bed once and for all.

As we have discussed elsewhere the only one done to this standard was the flu vaccine study which was limited to a few hundred people. Whilst us fighting for justice for vaccine damaged kid see it as important, the small sample size means that the Pharma apologists can dismiss it and say that it does not count.

Obviously if it was to be found that the risks of vaccines had been understated and/or the benefits overstated it would be the biggest medical scandal of all time. They are so many people that staked their careers and reputations on promoting more and more mass vaccination that it is difficult to see turkeys voting christmas by supporting this type of study. (see CDC refusal to release patient level data of their trials to third parties and alleged manipulation of data which is the subject of the film Vaxxed)

These are some of the major obstacles to overcome but I remain hopeful. The best bet rather frighteningly is Trump who remains very concerned about vaccine safety. He has a vaccine damaged child in his family. However, I fear that war would have destroyed the World before the trial could be completed if he was elected.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. You would ignore the outcome of the trial the same as you do the countless others that show there is no link between vaccination and autism.

In the meantime, you would use the existence of a trial to cast doubt in peoples' minds about the safety of vaccines and scare parents out of immunising their children against preventable diseases.
 
Seedy Ron said:
Of course it wouldn't put it to bed, you'd come up with some reason or other that meant your view was still correct. See Millsy's post earlier.

Some people don't want to leave a load of children susceptible to a myriad of preventable disease. You ain't bothered about that apparently, but then you don't think measles kills people.
Click to expand...

I think that would be true from both sides but it would certainly be a compelling piece of evidence either way.

To clarify, I think that MMR is more dangerous than is disclosed and that the risk from measles is overstated.
 
I guess it is a concern when the ACP issue a warning about it.

And outright criticise the quality of the safety trials

So I guess you say they are not reputable and what they say does not count. And it is a coincidence.

But hey fudge it, it's only a few of our teenagers fudged up.
 
JPBB said:
I guess it is a concern when the ACP issue a warning about it.

And outright criticise the quality of the safety trials

So I guess you say they are not reputable and what they say does not count. And it is a coincidence.

But hey fudge it, it's only a few of our teenagers fudgeed up.
Click to expand...

I'd love to discuss that but you'd need to provide a link to what you are talking about for that to happen.
 
Are you suggesting that these scientist don't count?

Is that because they don't agree with you?
 
I'm just presenting people with the information you failed to present them with, as usual.

The people you choose to believe in do get curiouser and curiouser though.

Edit - I notice you did provide the link while I was typing, so fair play for that. Still, a little background on who the ACP are helps matters, and the science doesn't appear to stand up, definitely not to the ridiculously emotive levels of language that you're trotting out.
 
i agree their homophobic and neo christian views are disconcerting but nevertheless they are very eminent pediatricians.

The point is that they are just one of many raising real concerns about a new vaccine that is looking more and more like the vaccine disaster that will change our views on vaccine safety forever.
 
There's that ridiculous doom-laden language again, your posts should really be scored by John Williams. It's not looking more and more anything of the sort.

Who are the many?

I posted this link way back when all this started up:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-37211349

I would say halving cervical cancer rates is to be lauded, wouldn't you?
 
I've only read a few of the pages, but has anyone managed to establish a definition of 'vaccine-damaged kids' with some hard evidence that the vaccine itself caused damage (and didn't just highlight a pre-existing condition, or have a co-incidental condition develop over time)?

A moral question: If a vaccine was found to cause autism in 1 in a million kids but, for example, measles was found to cause death in 1 in 1000 kids, is it still 'evil vaxxers' (whatever a vaxxer is - never heard it as a negative term before this thread) causing autism, as opposed to 'clever vaxxers' saving 1000 lives?

A better question: @JPBB - you do know the diseases that people are vaccinated against can kill them, don't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back