(that is not causation) that purport to show a link.
Do you know why experiments, or random selection are used? Because in large enough groups, the two groups are identical. Except...most "control" groups, those who have not had vaccines, are brought into the experiment in markedly smaller numbers.
Which means you can't ever assert a causal relationship.
Oh no, someone on the internet threaten to kick my ass and called me names.
Anyhow, why let things like reasoned debate and civil liberties get in the way of your opinions?
Yeah...that post in response to yours should have ended with "general you" and not specifically you. I should have specifically stated that...as I can completely see how that came out. My apology if you thought I was making a threat at you...it was a general sentiment at anyone who puts my kids in danger through their own selfishness.
And civil liberties be damned if your (general your) actions/inactions put others in danger. To choose not to vaccinate your children because of shit science and some talking twats should automatically negate your right to be a parent.
Ronnie, just playing devils advocate here, but if your kids are vaccinated then they shouldn't have to worry about the unvaccinated kids, no?
Not being a shit stirrer either, just sayin. The argument by government is that YOU could die by not being vaccinated. Not that you could cause a pandemic. At least that's the story I'm always told.
Vaccines are not 100% safe. Never have been claimed to be. Â
There will be significant adverse side effects, and potentially even death, among those who take it.
The correct comparison to make is looking at population health if there was no vaccine; this is what makes vaccines immeasurably worth it.
By the way, simple statistics state that the large numbers of studies, with large populations, spanning decades established as near to scientific certainty as you can get. It's about as likely to get tossed in the garbag bin of history as the Law of Demand.
Ronnie, just playing devils advocate here, but if your kids are vaccinated then they shouldn't have to worry about the unvaccinated kids, no?
Not being a shit stirrer either, just sayin. The argument by government is that YOU could die by not being vaccinated. Not that you could cause a pandemic. At least that's the story I'm always told.
As kicker stated, who's to say that my daughter's body was able to respond properly to the vaccine? And I have a 3 month old, who is too young to get the vaccine. So until he is old enough to get it, people purposely not getting it will just put him and others in potential danger.
It's about ensuring that those who can't get the vaccine are protected.
But vaccines are proven to prevent disease. The hype against them is just that. The government can't force you to vaccinate your kids. But they can refuse to allow them in schools or other places where they are required. Your choice.
Does anyone deny that vaccines work? Do even the most passionate anti-vaccine folks distrust the science behind vaccinations and what makes them effective?
If that's an argument, I haven't heard anyone make it. I think their skepticism is targeted more towards those who make and sell the vaccines.
I hope to hell their suspicion and skepticism are wrong because we've opted to have every vaccine applied to our son, but it sure as hell wouldn't be the first time something was simply accepted on faith to be safe and only eventually wound up being proven not to be.
Yes, there are people who doubt the vaccines work (they of course cite that they are not 100% as proof that they don't work) or worse, they say that the vaccine gives people the disease or causes autism. Now as I said, I don't have blind faith in doctors or pharmaceutical companies. But I'm more worried about getting a bad disease that I could have been vaccinated for, like tetanus. So I get the vaccine even though I do have auto-immune disorders and many people who do don't get vaccines. It's a matter of where you believe the greater risk to be. The fact that we had these vaccines and they have eradicated the disease for us for the most part, people don't understand how dangerous these diseases can be. And you have people like Beer Man say 'hey, what's the big deal, you get some spots on your face and stay home from school for a few days, relax!'. It's absurd.
An article about a very powerful letter Roald Dahl wrote about the death of his daughter to measles. You know, the disease that doesn't kill anyone? Link - ( New Window )
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
I have read several on the incident but all you quote is the dr's recommendation while the "gist" of the matter is he admits to omitting relevant data in the study under the CDC's direction, that's the point.
I'll see if I can find the link, but the "omitting" data part Â
And has been stated why repeatedly. If you want to utilize people as a control group, you have to have detailed information on the control groups, which is what they did not have. Again, it's basic statistics.
You can't establish a correlation OR a causation when your control group is compromised. If they told them to omit it, it's done because it's a correct (and routine) statistical procedure. Literally utilized in every study comparing two groups.
For a thorough analysis of the flaws and misinformation associated with the current CDC autism "cover-up" conspiracy theory, we recommend the posts on the subject at ScienceBlogs, which note of the claim at the heart of this matter (i.e, allegedly suppressed proof of a 340% increased risk of autism in African-American boys after MMR vaccination) that:
Vaccination data were abstracted from immunization forms required for school entry, and records of children who were born in Georgia were linked to Georgia birth certificates for information on maternal and birth factors. Basically, no significant associations were found between the age cutoffs examined and the risk of autism. I note that, even in the “reanalysis” by Brian Hooker, there still isn’t any such correlation for children who are not African American boys
Wakefield claims that African American boys were "neglected" [in Thompson's study]. He also claims that this is vindication for him, but, of course, it is not. Notice how he completely neglects to mention that in every other subgroup [examined in the study], even Hooker couldn’t torture the data to make it confess a relationship between age at MMR vaccination and autism in any other population other than a very small population in the study: African-American males. Whenever that happens as you slice epidemiological data finer and finer, you should be alert for the very distinct possibility that what you're really looking at is a spurious correlation. As I pointed out before, Hooker in reality merely confirmed that Wakefield was wrong about everyone except African-American males, and, given how small this subgroup was in the study, almost certainly didn’t find any evidence supporting Wakefield’s hypothesis (such as it is) for even African-American boys. Yet, Wakefield, as deluded as he is, spins it as "vindication." He even thanks Hooker for getting a "senior scientist at the CDC" to come forward and "confirm" that some of those "ideas we put forward" are true. Holy hell! Even if you spin Thompson’s statements in the most unflattering manner possible towards the CDC and his co-investigators, Thompson said nothing of the sort!
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp#CgPqAX07CvxgChGp.99
They are the bottom line, rarely you jest. The spin doctoring and watering down of this issue started a while ago. Still doesn't change the fact of omitting data under CDC direction. I only jumped into this to answer the torch and pitchfork crowd that people may have some reason behind their position. I realize that feelings on this issue are so strong that I am not going to change your mind and you certainly aren't going to change mine! I
If what he was saying was no big deal and explainable then why go to the press about it, what's newsworthy in that!
Really? The only time he "went to the press" was to set the record straight on how Hooker hoodwinked him.
Quote:
I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his beliefthat CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent. I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.
There's a game theory aspect to all of this, of course. Â
If 1% of a population is anti-vaxxers, it is really easy for them to justify in their own minds that the perceived risk FROM the vaccination--even if unmeasurable in any scientific sense--are greater than the perceived risks of not getting vaccinated. "See, I didn't get my kids vaccinated, and they didn't get sick."
As the proportion of the unvaccinated population grows, however, the perceived and real risks flip in the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations. That is why there are clusters of unvaccinated people in little pockets of California, who talked each other out of getting their kids vaccinated, and who are now seeing a sharply higher risk of measles than in the general population. The same thing happened with polio some places in Africa, and in the US with whooping cough.
Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said herd immunity is important because no vaccine can perfectly protect 100 percent of people.
"If everyone else is vaccinated, then the weak are protected, because they are surrounded with a cocoon of protection of others," Schaffner said. "The herd of strong protect the few weak." [...] measles is one of the most infectious viruses in existence. It will infect 90 percent of susceptible people if they are exposed [...] the fact that even a few people who were vaccinated have become infected shows how many people have been exposed to the virus [...] For every person who's vaccinated who comes down with measles you can assume that between 40 to 80 people who were exposed Link - ( New Window )
I've had a pretty much libertarian bent. I'm basically an individualist, never even joined a club or voluntarily joined a union, and rebelled at anyone telling me what to do. I have evolved over these many years to the view that we have progressed past the frontier era where the only one to suffer the consequences of our decisions and actions was ourselves, so leave me alone.
Distasteful as it is, government is necessary for a large diverse society. Rules for the individual in matters that affect society as a whole is one of the primary functions of government. It is unfortunate that it is seldom perfect, and we must remain vigilant against these imperfections, but it is a mistake to oppose rules just for the sake of rebellion against being told what we must do.
If the rules are in place to protect and promote the welfare of our fellow citizens and society as a whole, then scrutinize their utility, effectiveness and wisdom with an eye to guarding against unnecessary impingement on individual freedom, but don't simply and blindly rail against "big government" as a matter of principle.
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
This is a good study. I suspect there are more babies of older fathers born now than in the past thus accounting for some (though probably not all) of the increased incidence of autism. Link - ( New Window )
I've had a pretty much libertarian bent. I'm basically an individualist, never even joined a club or voluntarily joined a union, and rebelled at anyone telling me what to do. I have evolved over these many years to the view that we have progressed past the frontier era where the only one to suffer the consequences of our decisions and actions was ourselves, so leave me alone.
Distasteful as it is, government is necessary for a large diverse society. Rules for the individual in matters that affect society as a whole is one of the primary functions of government. It is unfortunate that it is seldom perfect, and we must remain vigilant against these imperfections, but it is a mistake to oppose rules just for the sake of rebellion against being told what we must do.
If the rules are in place to protect and promote the welfare of our fellow citizens and society as a whole, then scrutinize their utility, effectiveness and wisdom with an eye to guarding against unnecessary impingement on individual freedom, but don't simply and blindly rail against "big government" as a matter of principle.
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
So consider smoking.
Put it in your body if you like. But be prepared to pay exorbitant taxes to cover the real cost of smoking - the health effects that follow, cancer & emphysema.
So skip the vaccines, but please be prepared to pay the fines necessary to cover the real costs. Treatment for your child and other children who get sick.
very libertarian over the last 5 years. BUT that does not mean my wishes and rights should infringe up others. People seem to think that they have the ultimate right to do what they want but then want others to cover their asses when it goes bad.
Sorry but if you want top not vaccinate fine. There's got be some island we did nuclear testing on we can dump there people on.
The Jackses don't know the identity of the vaccine refusers who put their children in danger, but Anna Jacks said she knows what she would say to them if she ever met them.
"Your children don't live in a little bubble. They live in a big bubble and my children live inside that big bubble with your children," she said. "If you don't want to vaccinate your children, fine, but don't take them to Disneyland."
But Dr. Jack Wolfson said it's the Jacks family who should keep themselves at home, not him.
Wolfson, an Arizona cardiologist, refuses to vaccinate his two young sons. He said the family that didn't vaccinate and endangered the Jacks children did nothing wrong.
"It's not my responsibility to inject my child with chemicals in order for [a child like Maggie] to be supposedly healthy," he said. "As far as I'm concerned, it's very likely that her leukemia is from vaccinations in the first place."
"I'm not going to sacrifice the well-being of my child. My child is pure," he added. "It's not my responsibility to be protecting their child."
CNN asked Wolfson if he could live with himself if his unvaccinated child got another child gravely ill.
"I could live with myself easily," he said. "It's an unfortunate thing that people die, but people die. I'm not going to put my child at risk to save another child."
He blamed the Jacks family for taking Maggie to the clinic for care.
"If a child is so vulnerable like that, they shouldn't be going out into society," he said.
Despite a recent measles outbreak in California, a Valley doctor believes children should not get vaccinated and that they should be getting this kind of infection.
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
Good point. We really need some pre-requisites to living in this country and this would apply to everyone legal or not. Although we have our freedom, a list of things that are not debatable. The list would include vaccines for certain diseases.
RE: And I guess this jackass Wolfson has been making his rounds lately... Â
Despite a recent measles outbreak in California, a Valley doctor believes children should not get vaccinated and that they should be getting this kind of infection.
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
Link - ( New Window )
I looked this guy up (http://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology). Not surprising, he's not an MD, he's a DO -- the doctors who believe that spine adjustments will cure cancer or some shit like that.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul is standing by his statement that most vaccinations should be "voluntary," telling CNBC that a parent's choice not to vaccinate a child is "an issue of freedom."
In an interview with the network Monday, Paul said that vaccines are "a good thing" but that parents "should have some input" into whether or not their children must get them.
And he gave credence to the idea - disputed by the majority of the scientific community - that vaccination can lead to mental disabilities.
"I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," he said. Link - ( New Window )
I can understand the "vaccines should be voluntary" argument, but anyone who still thinks vaccines are to blame for autism, etc should be automatically prohibited from running for POTUS.
my primary care physician is a DO, who also happens to be a world class doctor. Practically every top-rated Doctor in every specialty on the UES or UWS knows and respects him, and I have gotten top-rated referrals in 6 different disciplines, including my knee replacement. He diagnosed my son's wheat allergy when his top-rated pediatrician missed it--and the symptoms started disappearing in about 3 weeks. Virtually every orthopedist at Special Surgery gets referrals from him and refers back. He is a board certified referring physician at Weill-Cornell.
DO's that stick to what they know can be a really important adjunct to what other doctors provide, INCLUDING spinal manipulation and cranial-sacral manipulation, which can work wonders with certain types of head and neck pain. And, some Eastern medicine that some DO's integrate into their work does actually do something.
But yeah, there are a lot of quacks. It really isn't easy to find a good one and separate them out from the wackos. Same with chiropractors at a lower level, only it's even harder to find a quality one.
RE: RE: And I guess this jackass Wolfson has been making his rounds lately... Â
Despite a recent measles outbreak in California, a Valley doctor believes children should not get vaccinated and that they should be getting this kind of infection.
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
Link - ( New Window )
I looked this guy up (http://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology). Not surprising, he's not an MD, he's a DO -- the doctors who believe that spine adjustments will cure cancer or some shit like that.
Sam! You of all people should know better than that. A DO goes through the exact same training as an MD but does a concentration in the musculoskeletal system. Not excusing that nut, but there's nothing lacking in a DO's training
He has my full trust when it comes to infectious diseases. But it seems like everything else he tries to write-off as a ruptured disc here or a ruptured disc there. I’d have to be a rodeo star to have ruptured as many discs as he thinks I have.
Do you know why experiments, or random selection are used? Because in large enough groups, the two groups are identical. Except...most "control" groups, those who have not had vaccines, are brought into the experiment in markedly smaller numbers.
Which means you can't ever assert a causal relationship.
Quote:
Oh no, someone on the internet threaten to kick my ass and called me names.
Anyhow, why let things like reasoned debate and civil liberties get in the way of your opinions?
Yeah...that post in response to yours should have ended with "general you" and not specifically you. I should have specifically stated that...as I can completely see how that came out. My apology if you thought I was making a threat at you...it was a general sentiment at anyone who puts my kids in danger through their own selfishness.
And civil liberties be damned if your (general your) actions/inactions put others in danger. To choose not to vaccinate your children because of shit science and some talking twats should automatically negate your right to be a parent.
Ronnie, just playing devils advocate here, but if your kids are vaccinated then they shouldn't have to worry about the unvaccinated kids, no?
Not being a shit stirrer either, just sayin. The argument by government is that YOU could die by not being vaccinated. Not that you could cause a pandemic. At least that's the story I'm always told.
The correct comparison to make is looking at population health if there was no vaccine; this is what makes vaccines immeasurably worth it.
By the way, simple statistics state that the large numbers of studies, with large populations, spanning decades established as near to scientific certainty as you can get. It's about as likely to get tossed in the garbag bin of history as the Law of Demand.
Not being a shit stirrer either, just sayin. The argument by government is that YOU could die by not being vaccinated. Not that you could cause a pandemic. At least that's the story I'm always told.
As kicker stated, who's to say that my daughter's body was able to respond properly to the vaccine? And I have a 3 month old, who is too young to get the vaccine. So until he is old enough to get it, people purposely not getting it will just put him and others in potential danger.
It's about ensuring that those who can't get the vaccine are protected.
Quote:
But vaccines are proven to prevent disease. The hype against them is just that. The government can't force you to vaccinate your kids. But they can refuse to allow them in schools or other places where they are required. Your choice.
Does anyone deny that vaccines work? Do even the most passionate anti-vaccine folks distrust the science behind vaccinations and what makes them effective?
If that's an argument, I haven't heard anyone make it. I think their skepticism is targeted more towards those who make and sell the vaccines.
I hope to hell their suspicion and skepticism are wrong because we've opted to have every vaccine applied to our son, but it sure as hell wouldn't be the first time something was simply accepted on faith to be safe and only eventually wound up being proven not to be.
Yes, there are people who doubt the vaccines work (they of course cite that they are not 100% as proof that they don't work) or worse, they say that the vaccine gives people the disease or causes autism. Now as I said, I don't have blind faith in doctors or pharmaceutical companies. But I'm more worried about getting a bad disease that I could have been vaccinated for, like tetanus. So I get the vaccine even though I do have auto-immune disorders and many people who do don't get vaccines. It's a matter of where you believe the greater risk to be. The fact that we had these vaccines and they have eradicated the disease for us for the most part, people don't understand how dangerous these diseases can be. And you have people like Beer Man say 'hey, what's the big deal, you get some spots on your face and stay home from school for a few days, relax!'. It's absurd.
Link - ( New Window )
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
Quote:
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
In comment 12117322 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
Quote:
In comment 12117367 gmenatlarge said:
Quote:
In comment 12117322 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
Quote:
In comment 12117379 River Mike said:
Quote:
In comment 12117367 gmenatlarge said:
Quote:
In comment 12117322 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
Quote:
In comment 12117390 gmenatlarge said:
Quote:
In comment 12117379 River Mike said:
Quote:
In comment 12117367 gmenatlarge said:
Quote:
In comment 12117322 JerryNYG said:
Quote:
Hmm, no agenda there. Just good, solid scientifically backed information.
Maybe but that doesn't mean the story isn't true, google dr William Thompson yourself!
And if you followed the link provided above to snopes, you will see that it's not the whole truth and that Dr Thompson has said that
Quote:
I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefit
You are skimming over the truth that they omitted data implicating the vaccine, I never said that dr Thompson recommended against vaccination, nor do I.
No, I'm not skimming over anything. It is a very long article explaining all the details and how Thompson was duped by the interviewer. The link was provided and there is no way that I'm going to cut and paste the whole thing. I pasted what I thought would be to the point, a quote by Thpmpson that he would never advise avoiding vaccines. I don't have the patience to or inclination to go over that long article point by point. Try reading it yourself.
I have read several on the incident but all you quote is the dr's recommendation while the "gist" of the matter is he admits to omitting relevant data in the study under the CDC's direction, that's the point.
And has been stated why repeatedly. If you want to utilize people as a control group, you have to have detailed information on the control groups, which is what they did not have. Again, it's basic statistics.
You can't establish a correlation OR a causation when your control group is compromised. If they told them to omit it, it's done because it's a correct (and routine) statistical procedure. Literally utilized in every study comparing two groups.
Vaccination data were abstracted from immunization forms required for school entry, and records of children who were born in Georgia were linked to Georgia birth certificates for information on maternal and birth factors. Basically, no significant associations were found between the age cutoffs examined and the risk of autism. I note that, even in the “reanalysis” by Brian Hooker, there still isn’t any such correlation for children who are not African American boys
Wakefield claims that African American boys were "neglected" [in Thompson's study]. He also claims that this is vindication for him, but, of course, it is not. Notice how he completely neglects to mention that in every other subgroup [examined in the study], even Hooker couldn’t torture the data to make it confess a relationship between age at MMR vaccination and autism in any other population other than a very small population in the study: African-American males. Whenever that happens as you slice epidemiological data finer and finer, you should be alert for the very distinct possibility that what you're really looking at is a spurious correlation. As I pointed out before, Hooker in reality merely confirmed that Wakefield was wrong about everyone except African-American males, and, given how small this subgroup was in the study, almost certainly didn’t find any evidence supporting Wakefield’s hypothesis (such as it is) for even African-American boys. Yet, Wakefield, as deluded as he is, spins it as "vindication." He even thanks Hooker for getting a "senior scientist at the CDC" to come forward and "confirm" that some of those "ideas we put forward" are true. Holy hell! Even if you spin Thompson’s statements in the most unflattering manner possible towards the CDC and his co-investigators, Thompson said nothing of the sort!
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp#CgPqAX07CvxgChGp.99
If only they understood why they were doo-doo...
Really? The only time he "went to the press" was to set the record straight on how Hooker hoodwinked him.
As the proportion of the unvaccinated population grows, however, the perceived and real risks flip in the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations. That is why there are clusters of unvaccinated people in little pockets of California, who talked each other out of getting their kids vaccinated, and who are now seeing a sharply higher risk of measles than in the general population. The same thing happened with polio some places in Africa, and in the US with whooping cough.
"Measles Spreads in California Due to Clusters of Unvaccinated Kids"
Link - ( New Window )
"If everyone else is vaccinated, then the weak are protected, because they are surrounded with a cocoon of protection of others," Schaffner said. "The herd of strong protect the few weak." [...] measles is one of the most infectious viruses in existence. It will infect 90 percent of susceptible people if they are exposed [...] the fact that even a few people who were vaccinated have become infected shows how many people have been exposed to the virus [...] For every person who's vaccinated who comes down with measles you can assume that between 40 to 80 people who were exposed
Link - ( New Window )
Distasteful as it is, government is necessary for a large diverse society. Rules for the individual in matters that affect society as a whole is one of the primary functions of government. It is unfortunate that it is seldom perfect, and we must remain vigilant against these imperfections, but it is a mistake to oppose rules just for the sake of rebellion against being told what we must do.
If the rules are in place to protect and promote the welfare of our fellow citizens and society as a whole, then scrutinize their utility, effectiveness and wisdom with an eye to guarding against unnecessary impingement on individual freedom, but don't simply and blindly rail against "big government" as a matter of principle.
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
Link - ( New Window )
Distasteful as it is, government is necessary for a large diverse society. Rules for the individual in matters that affect society as a whole is one of the primary functions of government. It is unfortunate that it is seldom perfect, and we must remain vigilant against these imperfections, but it is a mistake to oppose rules just for the sake of rebellion against being told what we must do.
If the rules are in place to protect and promote the welfare of our fellow citizens and society as a whole, then scrutinize their utility, effectiveness and wisdom with an eye to guarding against unnecessary impingement on individual freedom, but don't simply and blindly rail against "big government" as a matter of principle.
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
So consider smoking.
Put it in your body if you like. But be prepared to pay exorbitant taxes to cover the real cost of smoking - the health effects that follow, cancer & emphysema.
So skip the vaccines, but please be prepared to pay the fines necessary to cover the real costs. Treatment for your child and other children who get sick.
Sorry but if you want top not vaccinate fine. There's got be some island we did nuclear testing on we can dump there people on.
"Your children don't live in a little bubble. They live in a big bubble and my children live inside that big bubble with your children," she said. "If you don't want to vaccinate your children, fine, but don't take them to Disneyland."
But Dr. Jack Wolfson said it's the Jacks family who should keep themselves at home, not him.
Wolfson, an Arizona cardiologist, refuses to vaccinate his two young sons. He said the family that didn't vaccinate and endangered the Jacks children did nothing wrong.
"It's not my responsibility to inject my child with chemicals in order for [a child like Maggie] to be supposedly healthy," he said. "As far as I'm concerned, it's very likely that her leukemia is from vaccinations in the first place."
"I'm not going to sacrifice the well-being of my child. My child is pure," he added. "It's not my responsibility to be protecting their child."
CNN asked Wolfson if he could live with himself if his unvaccinated child got another child gravely ill.
"I could live with myself easily," he said. "It's an unfortunate thing that people die, but people die. I'm not going to put my child at risk to save another child."
He blamed the Jacks family for taking Maggie to the clinic for care.
"If a child is so vulnerable like that, they shouldn't be going out into society," he said.
What a selfish, idiot asshole.
Link - ( New Window )
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
Link - ( New Window )
Must be the sabretooth tigers and the dinosaurs. And I don't give a damn what science says...cavemen lived during times of the dinosaurs!
My sentiment is with those who want total control over what is put in their body, and in my gut it seems like a thing the government should not interfere with. But an objective evaluation of the situation, studies, data, and expert guidance, tells me that individualist sentiment is putting the rest of us at risk. We should have a say about being exposed to this risk, and a legitimate function of government is protecting citizens from harm that results from a minority of other citizens exercising their perceived rights.
Good point. We really need some pre-requisites to living in this country and this would apply to everyone legal or not. Although we have our freedom, a list of things that are not debatable. The list would include vaccines for certain diseases.
Quote:
Despite a recent measles outbreak in California, a Valley doctor believes children should not get vaccinated and that they should be getting this kind of infection.
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
Link - ( New Window )
I looked this guy up (http://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology). Not surprising, he's not an MD, he's a DO -- the doctors who believe that spine adjustments will cure cancer or some shit like that.
In an interview with the network Monday, Paul said that vaccines are "a good thing" but that parents "should have some input" into whether or not their children must get them.
And he gave credence to the idea - disputed by the majority of the scientific community - that vaccination can lead to mental disabilities.
"I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," he said.
Link - ( New Window )
I can understand the "vaccines should be voluntary" argument, but anyone who still thinks vaccines are to blame for autism, etc should be automatically prohibited from running for POTUS.
DO's that stick to what they know can be a really important adjunct to what other doctors provide, INCLUDING spinal manipulation and cranial-sacral manipulation, which can work wonders with certain types of head and neck pain. And, some Eastern medicine that some DO's integrate into their work does actually do something.
But yeah, there are a lot of quacks. It really isn't easy to find a good one and separate them out from the wackos. Same with chiropractors at a lower level, only it's even harder to find a quality one.
Quote:
Quote:
Despite a recent measles outbreak in California, a Valley doctor believes children should not get vaccinated and that they should be getting this kind of infection.
"We should be getting measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, these are the rights of our children to get it," said Dr. Jack Wolfson of Wolfson Integrative Cardiology in Paradise Valley.
Wolfson does not believe in vaccination. "We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system," he said.
The cardiologist also believes the key is to have a healthy immune system. In order to have that, he says, you have to avoid chemicals, get enough sleep, exercise, take good supplements, and have proper nutrition.
"I'm a big fan of what's called paleo-nutrition, so our children eat foods that our ancestors have been eating for millions of years," he said. "That's the best way to protect."
Link - ( New Window )
I looked this guy up (http://www.wolfsonintegrativecardiology). Not surprising, he's not an MD, he's a DO -- the doctors who believe that spine adjustments will cure cancer or some shit like that.
Sam! You of all people should know better than that. A DO goes through the exact same training as an MD but does a concentration in the musculoskeletal system. Not excusing that nut, but there's nothing lacking in a DO's training