-
Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Two articles in The Independent illustrate an alarming tendency to dismiss science, to be replaced by opinion, as if an opinion and a fact were the same thing. One concerns the Flat Earth hypothesis, the other the so-called controversy regarding the use of the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) Vaccine where in spite of the evidence the President of the USA endorses the argument that MMR causes autism, a theory which led one of its leading exponents to be struck off the Medical Register in the UK though he now lives in Texas and continues to advocate a policy that has destroyed lives.
The report on the Flat Earth Convention in the UK claims they did offer scientific 'proof' that the Earth is not a globe or a sphere but flat, although in precise terms I don't see how domes, ice walls, diamonds, puddles with multiple worlds inside, and even the Earth as the inside of a giant cosmic egg can be taken seriously. Critically, this is where the confrontation takes place:
While flat earthers seem to trust and support scientific methods, what they don’t trust is scientists, and the established relationships between “power” and “knowledge”.
And again,
A particular point of contention occurred when one of the physicists pleaded with the audience to avoid trusting YouTube and bloggers. The audience and the panel of flat earthers took exception to this, noting that “now we’ve got the internet and mass communication … we’re not reliant on what the mainstream are telling us in newspapers, we can decide for ourselves”.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8336946.html
The MMR controversy is far more serious because it impacts people's lives. It concerns Andrew Wakefield who
co-authored a now notorious and debunked medical paper that claimed to have found a link between autism and the use of a common children’s vaccine. The paper, later retracted by The Lancet, helped lead to a drop-off in vaccination rates and an increase in outbreak diseases such as measles, not only in Britain and Europe, but in the US. The doctor was subsequently found guilty by the British General Medical Council (GMC) of three-dozen charges, including dishonesty and abuse of children, and struck off the medical register.
Again, the key here is Wakefield's defence of himself and his dangerous ideas:
“I was discredited in the eyes of those who wanted to see me discredited. In other words, those who had an interest in maintaining the status quo,”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8331826.html
More alarming is that Wakefield and others met the President in the White House who interrupted their presentation-
“He interjected and said, ‘You don’t need to tell me that vaccines cause autism. I’ve seen it, I’ve seen it personally’. We went on to discuss the issue of the autism crisis that is set to affect 80 per cent of boys if nothing is done. He said if he was to be elected he’d do something about it.”
And also
On more than 20 occasions, Mr Trump has tweeted about there being a link between vaccines and autism, something experts at the government’s leading public health institute say is not true. He also repeated the claim during a Republican primary debate, a remark that was immediately dismissed as false by the Autistic Self Advocacy Network.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8331836.html
In practical terms it appears the President has done nothing; that this man is prepared to discard science for a 'feeling' that it 'just ain't right' may be an accurate estimate of his rank stupidity, but should he be allowed to endanger the lives of children because of that?
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
In the Business World, if you sell an inferior product, a cheap hammer, or a liter of sugar water, if you sell it cheap enough, people will buy it. In the Business World, not paying taxes is smart. Trump is a very successful Business Man, you can't argue that. You can make a lot of money selling shit.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
One could employ the ‘scientific method’ in the pursuit of knowledge on one’s own. You could design and construct your own instruments, perform your own experiments, analyze and interpret your own data, confirm or falsify your own theories and hypothesis. It’s always interesting to see how far you can get on your own.
This is true for larger communities and organizations too. Any industry, any union of scientists etc. can pursue a similar program. The difference will be that individuals will not be carrying out each and every task on their own. There will be a division of labor.
Any one professional chemist (working for industry, the academy, a government agency or the military) will have verified much of what she claims to know on her own. But not with all of her own equipment, and not without a great deal of guidance, not only from mentors but from the field itself as it developed before her and was set down in logs and eventually in textbooks. The modern sciences are vast and complex. To meaningfully progress and add to our present knowledge, to even know what our present knowledge is, we need to avail ourselves of a division of labor and trust the work of dedicated researchers other than our lone selves.
For anyone who has pursued a career in the sciences, this isn’t difficult. The difficult part is doing the science itself: but remaining true to the integrity of the enterprise is easy and pretty much a given. Truth is what we’re all in search of after all. Yes there are other motivations too. Winning the admiration of your colleagues, being the first to discover something new. But every ‘discovery’ is going to be scrutinized to the nth degree; both to ascertain its validity as well as to test the bounds of its application. Academia and government agencies (e.g. NASA and the CDC) are the most open venues and subject to the highest scrutiny. Industry and military research are less open and may perhaps be more subject to deliberate abuses.
Flat-Earthers and anti-vaxxers, who claim to view the evidence with a clear and unbiased eye, seem to me to be among the biggest cherry-pickers there ever were. There are so many ways to falsify the flat-earth hypothesis the mind boggles at the prospect that there’s any modern person who believes it. Nor can I imagine what must be the mental state of the anti-vaxxer who is willing to risk the health of her child and all the others she has contact with on the basis of a decade old rumor which has been debunked by the very same medical community to whom she takes her child for all other ailments.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
I'd say it's not just these two groups, but you picked good examples stavro.
To take your analogy a little further .
Anti vaxers tend to be on the left , and flat -earther's on the right of the politico spectrum. It seems to me.
I would add ,how about what science has to say about human nature,say ,Evolutionary Psychology's observations , for example, and how both right and left disregard it.
On the left,in my opinion.
Denying Nature ,over reliance on Nurture.
, no inherent differences, the Standard Social Science Model,,it's all nurture, therefore the potential of freewill and free agency.If only we have the right environment.Denying inherent differences ,immoral or irrational actors,
leading to ,tribalism, identity politics,no free speech .
And,from the right,I see...
Denying Nurture, and simplistic notions of Nature.
....trust the markets, it corrects itself.It's rational self interest so it all will work out. We have free will , we're rational agent's.
No such thing as, immoral or short sighted ,narrow self interested ,actors that take no heed of wide survival. Narrow ,short term profits, even at the cost of there offspring's well being.
Yia, Denying is delaying.
Delaying a better way of being , why not use the best tools civilization has come up with to try and manage our self's ?
Evolutionary Psychology,because it admits that it's both nature-nurture that have laid miserable suffering on all of us for all of history, and to change that ,it's really really difficult . Why can't we accept that an honest acceptance of human limitations can lead to an honest discussion about what we can implement and when it's not working,change it again with no loss of honor, we're imperfect . Thanks for starting the thread, and getting it off my nipples.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Of everyone I know closely, the only person I know who came out of College set for life, was my brother, who got a Chemistry Degree. Basically he MEMORIZED every lesson he got, until he was the book.
Personally, all that damn homework I had as a kid??..........total waste of time!
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nitron
Anti vaxers tend to be on the left , and flat -earther's on the right of the politico spectrum. It seems to me.
I don't think it makes sense to present the nature-nurture debate as a contrast between left and right. The point about the 'nature' school I assume, is that they believe categories -male and female, for example- are fixed and cannot be changed. If you add in the view of some that male and female have precise functions related to procreation, which is natural, the only way to explain homosexuality is to present it as an aberration, to be condemned morally if preferred though some can just label it 'wrong' and leave it at that. But if you believe in nurture as a presentation of the alternative, that gender categories are not just fluid but change as society changes, you can still argue that if nurture makes homosexuals, it can also unmake them. This could as easily produce a 'gay cure' from 'the left' as the 'right'. I don't know how to define male and female as 'left' or 'right' as people on the left have been and probably still are hostile to transexuality, and to assume that a liberal social movement must also be left-wing is I think too easy an assumption to make.
Thus I don't see how the 'anti-vax' brigade can be associated with the 'left' as would be the case with any conspiracy theory, as not all conspiracy theories are adopted or supported by 'right-wing' nutters, as nutters can be found in all walks of life.
It is simply a refusal to believe that what science produces as facts are indeed facts. Should the flat-earth brigade also argue against gravity as a scientific fact? Why this denial takes place may have more to do with the process as much as the consequences, thus people who in reality are opposed to the remedies that exist to combat the worst effects of climate change -taxation and the subsidy of alternative energy, for example- attack the science behind climate change in an attempt to undermine the politics. The anti-vax argument is an example of people who think medicine has too much power and is too closely linked to 'big pharma' that attack the science in order to undermine those who they think are making decisions for them they can make for themselves.
Many parents may think 'home schooling' is better as it protects their child from the indoctrination by the state, but it doesn't guarantee home schooling is a better alternative in educational terms.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
trish
Truth is what we’re all in search of after all.
From your robust reply, this expresses the core dilemma, because once it is argued that the truth is unreliable because its source is unreliable the potential exists to define the truth not on the basis of evidence, but on something that is not even scientific such as the claim 'the truth' only exists to achieve a political goal that can be challenged. Thus climate change as science is declared to be a hoax when the remedy is presented as carbon taxes by people who argue as a principle that 'all taxation is theft', and who oppose the subsidization of alternative energy solutions because it enables the state to interfere in markets where the state ought not to be.
If the argument against the science of climate change is in fact an argument about politics, the argument about the science of abortion is an argument that connects it to moral judgement, but only in a selective way.
The science behind the argument that abortion is murder is based on a definition of life that claims it begins with the creation of a foetus that can be seen through the science of electronics as the foetus can be observed by ultrasound developing into human form. But this is only as far as the science goes, for the greater weight of the moral argument is that it is wrong to abort life, an argument based either on religion, or on a more basic appeal to the idea that killing is wrong.
But this is where the same people appear to abandon their argument, for if it is morally wrong to abort a life in the womb at 10 weeks, is it not also wrong to abort a life when it is ten months old, if that life is being lived in a house in Baghdad destroyed by a bomb in a war supported by those who previously said abortion is a crime against humanity? After all the science also enters into the debate when a doctor pronounces the 10-month old baby is dead, even if the only evidence of life is half a torso.
When the truth is so challenged it loses its core meaning, there is no truth. But there is a difference between denying the existence of gravity and denying the scientific validity of the MMR vaccine; one is irrelevant to society (as is true of the flat-earth concept), the other has social consequences, and it is where science impacts on society that politics can get involved, but until recently, it was rare for politics to deny science its core activity to the extent that it now has. After all, science did badly as a result of the creation of nuclear weapons, just as nuclear energy in spite of its efficiency suffered greatly from the disaster at Chernobyl, but this can be understood as the potential for science to do good as well as bad, though ultimately there was never anything in the science of nuclear fission that insisted it be used to kill and destroy. And the science behind nuclear fission has survived.
The mere vulgarity of the language that has been used to dismiss science ought to be the warning sign that the alternative argument is based merely on prejudice. That a policy on climate change can be based on one man's resentment of another renders it worthless.
The real problem then becomes: how do you rescue the truth from the politics? It is not a politically good move to tell a potential voter 'you are stupid', but if they are convinced the earth is flat, that vaccines do more harm than good, how can their views be changed? Evidence can do that, and is the foundation of much science, but I suspect some people adopt a position for whatever reason and cannot be forced to change, and we can only hope they do not influence politicians and, over time change their views.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Anti-vaxers tend to fall on both sides of the political spectrum since mistrust in government, especially when it comes to people's personal lives, is not a party neutral belief. I also happen to think they're the worst of the conspiracy groups since their ignorance poses a threat to the well being of society.
The Flat-Earthers, I have no time for stupidity in my life and really don't pay no attention to them. Their belief is relatively harmless.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
This could be in the Climate Change thread but is resonant here too, the bizarre ideas of a Republican Congressman -Mo Brooks. Don't these people employ interns to do basic research?
Brooks represents Alabama's fifth district and - during a recent House Science, Space and Technology Committee hearing - said some pretty strange things about sea levels.
When asking questions to Philip Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Centre in Massachusetts, he asked whether rising sea levels are the results of eroding rocks and soil and nothing to do with humans whatsoever: What about erosion?
Every single year that we're on Earth, you have huge tons of silt deposited by the Mississippi River, by the Amazon River, by the Nile...and every time you have that soil or rock or whatever it is that is deposited into the seas, that forces the sea levels to rise, because now you've got less space in the oceans, because the bottom is moving up.
He then went on to ask Duffy how much ice there is in the Antarctic. Literally.
https://www.indy100.com/article/republican-congressman-mo-brooks-climate-change-denier-sea-levels-rocks-weather-8361471
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
There is a relation between erosion and sea level rise. Rising tides erode more beaches at faster rates.
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/i...-while-you-can
https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature...ing-shorelines
The scientific consensus is that ocean rise has three primary causes: thermal explansion, melting glaciers and ice caps, ice loss from Greenland and West Antarctica.
Imagine that, they don’t even consider falling chunks of chalk from the cliffs of Dover. But fuck that whole community of oceanographers and climatologists. The new hot theory from Rep Brooks is that too many rocks are falling from ocean cliffs and displacing too much water thereby raising the sea-level and razing the science of oceanography to its very foundations.
https://www.livescience.com/62613-er...mo-brooks.html
Brooks might have as well suggested we can counter ocean level rise by removing more fish from the ocean. If it had occurred to him, I’m sure he would’ve endorsed the idea. Fishing: Good for the Economy and Good for Beaches - not to mention Good Eating.
My own theory is that Americans have gotten so fat their weight is pushing the continent deeper into the ocean and displacing the water. Stop Sea Level Rise: Eat Less.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Maybe what your clever American engineers could do to save Florida from rising sea levels is to dig a series of deep holes around the coast of the state, so the water can flow into them and the state will be saved--??
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
Maybe what your clever American engineers could do to save Florida from rising sea levels is to dig a series of deep holes around the coast of the state, so the water can flow into them and the state will be saved--??
Was that dry British humour?
If this were a hundred years ago and they didn't have air conditioning yet, I kid you not, I couldn't survive. And if I had to pick lettuce in 100 degree heat, I couldn't do that either.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
Maybe what your clever American engineers could do to save Florida from rising sea levels is to dig a series of deep holes around the coast of the state, so the water can flow into them and the state will be saved--??
No, we just need to tilt the flat earth and tip the excess sea water into space.
Just wait till the worthy Rep Brooks finds out about plate tectonics and the new earth's crust that is being continually pushed up at mid-oceanic ridges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seafloor_spreading
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
If this were a hundred years ago and they didn't have air conditioning yet, I kid you not, I couldn't survive. And if I had to pick lettuce in 100 degree heat, I couldn't do that either.
You are such a wimp. Primitive men didn't complain about a little bit of climate change. They just got on with life, didn't they? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal
Why isn't RedVex here to point these things out?
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
I have a question. A serious one. What would it take for a "pro-vaxxor" to admit that vaccines are bad?
Every time I see this topic, the pro vaxxor says 'show me the proof' .. what proof? How much?
Im just curious.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
I have a question. A serious one. What would it take for a "pro-vaxxor" to admit that vaccines are bad?
Every time I see this topic, the pro vaxxor says 'show me the proof' .. what proof? How much?
Im just curious.
The same as for all scientific knowledge - when there is sufficient weight of evidence from research articles that satisfy accepted scientific standards.
Basically, in order to demonstrate that vaccination increased the risk of autism a researcher would need to show that there was a statistically significant effect after accounting for all other factors that could affect the risk of autism. Statistically significant means there must be less than a 1 in 20 chance that the results are actually consistent with zero effect. Articles also have to be peer-reviewed before they are published, which means that an independent expert looks at it to verify that it was done properly.
A single paper that found a significant effect would not necessarily be 'proof' because there are already other papers that found no significant effect. In order for the medical profession to change it's mind similar results would need to be found by enough independent researchers to convince them that the previous results were no longer valid.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
So basically you want some magical group of people to conduct research at their own expense and at no profit to themselves on testing the chemicals in somebody else's vaccines to some how conclusively "prove" that vaccines "cause autism" and then somehow have this research publicly known to the world to where it becomes "common knowledge".... Got it. lol
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
This is why the general public is so stupid. They dont understand the logistics on how incredibly difficult some things can be. Or how things work.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
So basically you want some magical group of people to conduct research at their own expense and at no profit to themselves on testing the chemicals in somebody else's vaccines to some how conclusively "prove" that vaccines "cause autism" and then somehow have this research publicly known to the world to where it becomes "common knowledge".... Got it. lol
Why a magical group of people? And what is wrong with scientists, many of whom have a significant personal interest in conclusively identifying the cause of autism, which at this point is thought to involve many genes and a whole host of environmental factors.
Do you honestly think there are not a sufficient number scientists and doctors who would not want to show that the causes of autism are entirely iatrogenic if they were? If an individual or group of individuals could demonstrate this, both by showing an increased incidence of autism among people who have been vaccinated, and positing a reasonable theory to explain why vaccinations would cause autism, would they not be strong candidates for a Nobel Prize in Medicine?
If the general public is stupid, this does not demonstrate why. You on the other hand....
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
If you are impressed with how incredibly difficult the scientific standards of proof are, then you should be very unimpressed by the “evidence” and arguments that attempt to establish a link a between autism and vaccines. These are the same standards used in all areas of scientific endeavor. It’s why we are reasonably certain that smoking increases the risk of cancer, mass and energy are conserved under physical all transformations, in a closed system entropy never decreases and the current climate change isn’t caused by increased solar activity. If you think the standard is too stringent to accommodate your belief system that’s fine, you don’t have to abide by it. You are free to be a crank.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
If anything, there is actually a bias towards publishing research results that will gain media publicity, as linking vaccination and autism would. According to the famous paper by John Ionnidas even stringent scientific standards don't prevent a lot of dubious research results from being published. http://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/bel...probably-false
The problem is that the standard test will give a false positive 5% of the time, and nobody has much interest in publishing papers that fail to find anything. That means there is an incentive to keep trying different approaches until you get a positive result.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
Why a magical group of people? And what is wrong with scientists, many of whom have a significant personal interest in conclusively identifying the cause of autism, which at this point is thought to involve many genes and a whole host of environmental factors.
Do you honestly think there are not a sufficient number scientists and doctors who would not want to show that the causes of autism are entirely iatrogenic if they were? If an individual or group of individuals could demonstrate this, both by showing an increased incidence of autism among people who have been vaccinated, and positing a reasonable theory to explain why vaccinations would cause autism, would they not be strong candidates for a Nobel Prize in Medicine?
If the general public is stupid, this does not demonstrate why. You on the other hand....
You missed the entire point of my post (not surprsing)
Who will pay a doctor or scientist to simply conduct tests to prove vaccines are bad? Is there some magical group of financiers that will fund this research? Will you pay for it? or should the doctors pay for it? lol And how can this be done?
The bulk of the "research" on vaccines and their effectiveness and testing of vaccines is paid for the pharmaceutical companies as they are the ones trying to get their drugs pushed forward. Naturally it will you know how it will turn out.
and 2. there are studies and papers that do show how vaccines are bad, but it will never be enough until it over powers the tremendous amount of "research" by the pharmaceutical industry that has way more money.
Here's a pdf with hundreds of articles/studies with links etc...
http://vaccine-injury.info/pdf/vaccinepeerreview.pdf
Will you read it? probably not. Can you dismiss them? not if you dont read them which you wont and if you did wouldnt understand it or wouldnt care because again, you are simply influenced by the fact that if vaccines were bad, it would be common knowledge. not taking into account that nobody is funding the research on determining that vaccines are dangerous. Who would? There isnt a company that profits from such tests etc. or the logistics are impossible. How can somebody test that? If you made everybody in the world drink a thimble of bleach it probably would not kill them, most still probably "be okay" some may react very badly, maybe even die, but the majority will probably not suffer too much or show any symptons too our of the ordinary and those that are ill affected will be relatively small. So, does that prove that it is safe or not that bad? or will you admit that drinking bleach may not be really safe or adviseable?
Do you think the FDA or CDC actually tests and monitors this stuff? No, for the most part they study the 'research' submitted by the drug company trying to get a drug approved.
But until it somehow just becomes magically common knowledge you will never accept it.
Also, Autism is not a disease you can get tested for with blood test. Proving a direct link is pretty much impossible. Autism is a measure of brain damage. So you may be able to publish a study that vaccines cause brain damage (maybe small) but it will never be enough. etc.
Youre asking for impossible "proof"
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
You missed the entire point of my post (not surprsing)
Also, Autism is not a disease you can get tested for with blood test. Proving a direct link is pretty much impossible. Autism is a measure of brain damage. So you may be able to publish a study that vaccines cause brain damage (maybe small) but it will never be enough. etc.
Youre asking for impossible "proof"
You missed the entire point of my post but I understood what you were saying. Pharmaceutical companies have deep pockets and fund research but they are not the only source of funding. There are independent organizations that research the causes of autism. They have millions of dollars worth of funding which I could link for you. Not only that, but I found a link saying the NIH allocated 169 million dollars to autism research in 2012. I have no reason to doubt that there is a great deal of money spent every year in the U.S. to understand autism and identify both genetic and environmental causes of it.
In the Wikipedia link on autism, valproic acid (an anti-epileptic drug also widely used in bipolar disorder) use during pregnancy is listed as a contributing cause of autism. Is there any money in identifying an anti-seizure drug as a cause of autism? If there is it's not obvious. Yet the fact that prenatal exposure to valproic acid can cause autism is not controversial. Who profits from that?
Your description of autism simply as a measure of brain damage makes you sound like a moron. It is a neurodevelopmental disorder but then again ADHD is classified that way as well. It involves all sorts of functional impairments but one of its characteristics is thought to be overconnectivity of neurons in certain parts of the brain. Without question many people with autism have significant impairments but not all brain damage results in autism. When adults damage their brains they do not develop autism (because it's neurodevelopmental; the hint is in the word developmental) and neither do children who suffer head injuries or hypoxia.
And no I'm not going to read a thousand plus page document that you're unable to summarize.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
In the Wikipedia link on autism, valproic acid (an anti-epileptic drug also widely used in bipolar disorder) use during pregnancy is listed as a contributing cause of autism. Is there any money in identifying an anti-seizure drug as a cause of autism? If there is it's not obvious. Yet the fact that prenatal exposure to valproic acid can cause autism is not controversial. Who profits from that?
I also found a bunch of studies on valproic acid and autism. One such study had even discovered an animal model for autism which makes your argument about the proof being impossible sound less than informed (there are problems I've read with extrapolating results from animal studies to humans but it was probably the statistical data in humans exposed to valproate that led to the animal studies). Again, how is this study of valproic acid profitable to pharmaceutical companies?
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
wow... You went through that pdf pretty quick. Im impressed. lol
"I also found a bunch of studies"
lol.
Site one. Explain it. And then I will here you. I doubt you have ever read an actual study. they would be too hard for you to understand. If anything you read reviews of studies. And I hardly doubt you put much time in it.
Site and source one study so we can scrutinize it. You will NEVER find a study that shows test studies of vaccinated vs truly unvaccinated. Ever. Never. Never. Never
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
wow... You went through that pdf pretty quick. Im impressed. lol
"I also found a bunch of studies"
lol.
Site one. Explain it. And then I will here you. I doubt you have ever read an actual study. they would be too hard for you to understand. If anything you read reviews of studies. And I hardly doubt you put much time in it.
Site and source one study so we can scrutinize it. You will NEVER find a study that shows test studies of vaccinated vs truly unvaccinated. Ever. Never. Never. Never
1. I read the abstracts of the studies in order to see what the subject matter was. The point I was making is that a potential cause of autism was identified and studied even though there was no financial motive. That was the entire point.
2. If you read my post, you would see that I said I wasn't going to read your pdf, which when I opened it was over 1000 pages. You could summarize what you believe it says, but you seem unable to.
3. The word you're looking for is cite not site. The word you're looking for is hear not here. I think when you say "reviews of studies" you might be talking about the abstracts of the studies. I find conspiracy theorists are often people like yourself without critical faculties who want to pretend they have some secret knowledge. Why is it you pretend to be an expert on all these various subjects but write less clearly than all of the people you argue with?
4. Saying lol doesn't make people think you're laughing out loud. It makes you sound desperate.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
2. If you read my post, you would see that I said I wasn't going to read your pdf, which when I opened it was over 1000 pages. You could summarize what you believe it says, but you seem unable to.
Pretty much sums it up.
You(not you)proof or studies and it is ignored.
I did summarize. They are studies that have shown ill effect of vaccines.
YOU refuse to even look at it. So its funny that you believe they dont exist.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
Pretty much sums it up.
My argument is contained in this link. When you're done with it we can discuss who's right. Deal?
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2600/2600-h/2600-h.htm
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
No arguement against vaccines? Didnt think so. Bye
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
1000 articles/studies conveniently put in a pdf is not enough. How much simpler do you have to put it to you freaks?
seriously . how much would it take?
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
The bulk of the "research" on vaccines and their effectiveness and testing of vaccines is paid for the pharmaceutical companies as they are the ones trying to get their drugs pushed forward. Naturally it will you know how it will turn out.
and 2. there are studies and papers that do show how vaccines are bad, but it will never be enough until it over powers the tremendous amount of "research" by the pharmaceutical industry that has way more money.
At the start of the Peer Review you linked there are three components to core main critique. The first concerns the commercial importance of the pharmaceuticals industry and the use it makes of its money to lobby Congress on behalf of its producers, but which is presented as 'institutional corruption'; second that this 'corrupt' lobbying system has resulted in Congress under-funding the FDA to the extent that it cannot properly monitor the activities of 'big pharma', and lastly that the commercial nature of the pharmaceuticals industry has in effect commercialized the role of physicians, and 'undermined their position as independent, trusted advisers to patients' (Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs, p7-8).
Much is made throughout the Peer Review of the extent to which the industry generates the product that it sells, that it uses its powers to 'correct' misleading impressions -to protect its business as much as its reputation (this is where it become 'corruption')- and that people suffer as a result.
But what is also of note is that while the documentation of adverse effects of vaccination are recorded, it is not necessarily the case that vaccination as a procedure is considered 'bad' to you use your term. In the article that begins on p725 (The Truth Behind the Vaccine Cover-Up) what Russell Blaylock is arguing that the fault may lie, not in the vaccinations per se, but the number of vaccinations administered to children within a short space of time, which is in no way claiming that vaccination is 'bad'.
It has always been the case, and still is, that vaccinations can have adverse effects on the child, but that remedies are also available to treat these cases -the link to the NHS documents below puts it into simple words. However, what is the alternative procedure to prevent a child from contracting Measles and Polio to name just two diseases that have been dealt with effectively by vaccination? Because that is the key point: the fact that Smallpox has been eradicated universally through vaccination; that incidences of Polio have been dramatically reduced though vaccination, but persists where vaccination is either absent due to war or law and order issues, or local opposition.
Vaccines work, and have save millions of lives. If you want to attack 'Big Pharma' then offer the medical profession an alternative means of inventing, testing and introducing medicines to treat illness. If not, or in addition, do regulate the industry more than it is at the moment, even though a generation of conservative politicians will insist the industry must regulate itself. Then ask why physicians in the US in particular prescribe addictive opioids which are not prescribed in the UK or, say, in Japan -suggesting that there may be a cultural issue in medicine in the US which is not met elsewhere.
There are some complex social and political issues here, but the basic format is tried and tested, and to deny the success of vaccines is to deny too many people the right to live without illness or even death.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccin...vaccines-work/
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
I got the impression you claimed to have hundreds of peer reviewed articles establishing a connection between vaccines and autism. In the middle of this discussion you post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaphneCruz
True enough the PDF links to hundreds of articles and studies. I’m scrolling down and choosing one at random now. ...Here it is.
“American Journal Of Public Health • April 1989
The role of secondary vaccine failures
in measles outbreaks
Author information
Mathias RG1, Meekison WG, Arcand TA, Schechter MT.
Department of Health Care and Epidemiology
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Abstract
An outbreak of measles in 1985-86 in a community where measles vac-
cine trials had been carried out from 1974-76 allowed the assessment of
the role of secondary vaccine failures in previously immunized children.
A total of 188 children from the vaccine trial were followed. Of these, 175
seroconverted initially while 13 (6 per cent) required re-immunization (pri-
mary failure). A total of 13 cases of measles, eight of which were laboratory
and/or physician-confirmed, were reported in this cohort. Of these, nine
cases occurred in the 175 subjects who had hemagglutination inhibition test
(HI) and neutralizing antibody responses following the initial immuniza-
tion. These nine cases represent secondary vaccine failures. An additional
four cases occurred in the 13 subjects with primary vaccine failure. We con-
clude that secondary vaccine failures occur and that while primary failures
account for most cases, secondary vaccine failures contribute to the occur-
rence of measles cases in an epidemic. A booster dose of measles vaccine
may be necessary to reduce susceptibility to a sufficiently low level to allow
the goal of measles elimination to be achieved.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2929807 “
I can’t help notice that it doesn’t even address the issue of vaccines and autism. In fact the article suggests that some children may need to be re-immunized against measles!
Hmmmm.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
The one article in the PDF (linked to above) that promises one-thousand pages of full-length reports linking vaccines to heavy metal toxicities, autism and other alleged risks is the ten year old 2008 Medical Veritas article by Russell L. Blaylock, MD entitled, “The truth behind the vaccine cover-up.” The link given there is https://app.box.com/s/xa75ta0j9jbe05e615gd5xto9ff1mz4a . The Box link has been updated and it now contains twenty reports. Not one-thousand. Not hundreds.
The first is a four page 2011 report published by vaccinationcouncil.org. Not an organization with an independent view. There are no detailed description of experiments or statistical analysis of data. The author doesn’t address the issue of autism. He does anecdotally suggest vaccines may induce atrophy of the immune system (presumably because the artificially immunized system doesn’t have to work hard enough) and he worries that the genes of the live or dead biological components of a vaccine might jump to the human host and be past on through their progeny. The evidence he cites is genes jumping in corn crops.
The second is an article by Bernard Rimland, PhD and Woody McGinnis, MD of the Autism Research Institute at San Diego, CA. The article appears in the Laboratory Medicine no.9 vol.22 Sept 2002. It makes a case against those vaccines that contain the preservative Thimerosal. Mercury, and other heavy metal based preservatives are no longer used in vaccines. I think, someone can check on this, that sort of usage is banned by the FDA.
etc.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
There was a time when science did some scary stuff, it probably still does, but with a 'fetal heartbeat' identified at six weeks -identified not by a doctor or a scientist but politicians ignorant of the life they seek to protect- we now have fossil fuels referred to by officials of the US Government as 'molecules of freedom'...The Big Bang Theory may have ended, but endless re-runs of this permanent self-deprecation and abuse by fake scientists has met its match in linguistic torture by the US Government-
Mark W. Menezes, the US under secretary of energy, and Steven Winberg, the assistant secretary for fossil energy introduced the new vocabulary.
“Increasing export capacity from the Freeport LNG project is critical to spreading freedom gas throughout the world by giving America’s allies a diverse and affordable source of clean energy, Mr Menezes said in the statement...
and
Meanwhile, Mr Winberg’s statement read: “With the US in another year of record-setting natural gas production, I am pleased that the Department of Energy is doing what it can to promote an efficient regulatory system that allows for molecules of US freedom to be exported to the world.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8935951.html
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
More depressing stuff from the zombie government. The only thing one can say in defence of the US is that there is clearly a chasm between the average American and the country's scientists, and the government, and that of the two, it is the latter that will change in a few years time -but after who knows what damage has been caused?
The Trump administration is disregarding science and expertise across a wide range of government work, as documented by whistleblowers and groups tracking agency decisions.
Trump officials are censoring warnings about the climate crisis, moving critical agencies out of Washington and enacting far-reaching changes in what facts regulators can consider when they choose between industry and the public good.
The White House and its agencies have kept their own experts from explaining how pollution from power plants and cars is increasing global temperatures, threatening both lives and economies.One former climate scientist for the National Park Service, Maria Caffrey, filed a whistleblower complaint this week and testified to Congress that she was blocked from publishing data about how coastal parks could flood as the seas rise.h
ttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/26/war-on-science-trump-administration-muzzles-climate-experts-critics-say
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
It's very American of me not to be up on English affairs, just like I'm not really up on French, German, Chinese, or Russian affairs. We pretty much have our hands full playing with ourselves, trying to picture a future where Gays and Evangelicals, Blacks and Rednecks walk hand in hand towards the future.
With so many different opinions, it's critical we find leaders to both understand, oversee, and see over
their individual commands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEbiXJ5-Icw
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
What are 'Englsh affairs'? And what does the above post have to say in response to the assault on science by the President and his supporters? Maybe Politics & Religion is a waste of time because people like you can't be arsed to think for a moment about what the real issues, as if nobody cares anymore, which is how the monsters devour their victims, when there is nobody opposed to them willing to take action to stop the slaughter. By your imbecile inaction, you sustain and embolden the Confederacy at the expense of the USA. So when it comes to make the final choice, where are your dollars? In the swamps of DC or the swamps of Louisiana?
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
What are 'Englsh(sic) affairs'?
What's wrong, Stavros, problems at home? Angry at me or your own demons? Your Country is in deep shit, what are you doing about it, standing on your soapbox orating on a porn forum? Where did you get your Science degree? Up your ass? Or is it arse? Ha ha ha!
Tell me exactly how your superior English intellect stopped your own Country from seceding from the Union? You're insulting the iceberg on the deck of the Titanic! In England and the USA, it doesn't matter which side you're on if the Country is split in half. Half my Family is from Mississippi! I really am related to Robert E Lee. The day after my 43rd birthday, I found out I am totally disabled. Always have been, always will be. That's what gives me the Authority to LAUGH at you! English Pride, Southern Pride, Foolish Pride. Insult me some more, gayboy, I'm here for the fight. You stand with Science, I'll represent Stupidity. Half the people will be on my side. That's my opinion, and that's a fact.
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
They don't call me broncofan mediator extraordinaire for any reason whatsoever. Still, I'm gonna take your best points.
Stavros: you're off-topic. What you wrote has nothing to do with your President's assault on science and your inaction enables him.
Buttslinger: To quote Nietzsche you point one finger at me and I'm gonna flip you off twice! Your country is headed toward disaster brexit and you have at least two dysfunctional political parties. Also a bunch of irrelevant stuff about my Mississippi relatives.
I decided to omit the gayboy remark because I think it is unbecoming of a member of intercontinental porn forum parliament. I find you both out of order and sentence you to ten minutes in the Jill Stein sweaty asshole thread. Now let's get back on topic. Thanks!
-
Re: Science and Stupidity:When Opinon replaces facts
I stand guilty as charged.
I will announce your punishment soon.