Mandatory vaccinations vs. right to choose

POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Thursday, December 7, 2006 07:56
VIEWED: 21145
PAGE 14 of 21

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
You make completely bogus statements like:
correlation is not causation.

---

Ok, just this once, I will engage and reply to your insults.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! Oh my God (catching my breath)... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm rolling on the floor and my ass is hanging out. Wiping tears from my eyes....

Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
Correlation is not causation.
--Any textbook on scientific methodology

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Since then, I have met dozens of others online who also developed CFIDS shortly after vaccination. In addition, Gulf War Syndrome, which is identical to CFIDS, is also often attributed to vaccination. Moreover, CFIDS and autism share quite a number of biomarkers and other features in common, and vaccination has also been implicated in autism. This doesn't prove vaccines did it, but it does suggest the possibility that a subset of the population may react to vaccination with immune system, neurological, and autonomic dysregulation.

---

Since correlation does not causation, why do you draw this correlation to mean causation of CFIDS and autism? I mean, you take your persoanl reaction... which could have been due to a lot of things (just like you say that "polio" could actually have been a lot of things) and you draw a whole constellation from a single point.

EDIT: Usually in order to determine causation you have to have a mechanism worked out. The process of vaccination and the elicited immune responses are reasonably worked out. Not fully... but the basics are there. But your connection between CFIDS, autism, and vaccines is less than a thread, not EVEN statistically visible.

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by freeradical42:
I'm not sure what anyone means by "good science" since all the stuff I've been reading is peer-reviewed research, meaning it's good science. Bad science is rarely published, especially in well established fields.

---

Actually, that is a very good question. VERY good question.

Each field establishes its own standards for publication. Standards in chemistry and physics are probably the highest. I have heard my share of comments from various scientists about biology's lower standards. And there, at the bottom of the totem pole, is medicine. Medicine's standards would be considered "junk science" by chemists and physicists.

To get a PhD in a science, you have to conduct original publishable research and find something that no one else has found in your field. You have to prove you can think for yourself.

In contrast, MDs take 4 years of classes. That's it. They take tests to show they can memorize what they were taught. They have never been trained to do research, to design a study, to use appropriate statistics. They aren't trained as scientists, so as a group, they don't know how to do good research. There are notable exceptions to this rule, but by and large, most papers authored by MDs are just...silly.

Medical studies, generally speaking, are very poorly designed, very poorly controlled, and have ludicrous conclusions. An easy example: "Such-and-such study has found that eating fish lowers your risk of heart disease. So eat fish." What if people who ate a lot of fish also lived near the ocean, and it is the cleaner air that contributed to their health, not the fish? Or some other factor? Eating fish wouldn't make a difference, would it?

Bad science oversimplifies and studies only how one or two factors influences the outcome. Good science considers a multitude of factors and sets up control groups for all the variables that could conceivably affect the outcome. The more controls the better.

Here is an example of bad controls in medical research. In 1953, researchers tested gamma globulin to prevent polio. One group got gamma globulin injections, the other group got gelatin injections.

Quote:

---

In a 30 day follow-up of a total of 90 paralytic polio cases occurring in these children, there were 64 cases of paralytic polio in the group that did not receive gamma globulin and 26 cases among those who had received gamma globulin...."The field trials demonstrated quite conclusively that an injection of a sufficient quanity of gamma globulin will confer significant protection against the disease."
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/goldenage/wonder/Archive/Popular/betterhomes
0653.htm

---

Later, it was found that gelatin injections can actually cause paralysis, and that may have been why there were more cases of paralysis in the gelatin group. It wasn't necessarily that gamma globulin was effective, but it LOOKED effective because it didn't cause paralysis and the control injection did. When they compared both groups to controls that didn't get any injections, the gamma globulin group was about the same as not doing anything at all.

Quote:

---

[Researchers] appreciated the possibility that inoculation of gelatin, like that of many other substances, might provoke paralytic poliomyehitis in certain cases, and so give gamma—globulin a false reputation for protective action. (Lancet. March 13. 1954. p.558). (No link available.)

---

Their research design did not set up enough controls.

Modern day vaccine research often makes the same egregious error in design. Almost all of them give the test vaccine to one group, and a different vaccine to the control group. I have not come across any studies on childhood vaccines that use a never-vaccinated control group or a saline placebo control group. So most efficacy studies on childhood vaccines are done comparing how one vaccine protects vs. another vaccine.

Now we all know that vaccines cause immune system changes, and that some of these changes are unpredictable. What if the control vacc

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

cantttakesky wrote:
This doesn't prove vaccines did it, but it does suggest the possibility that a subset of the population may react to vaccination with immune system, neurological, and autonomic dysregulation.

---

Since correlation does not causation, why do you draw this correlation to mean causation of CFIDS and autism?

---

Correlation does not PROVE causation. However it certainly can suggest possibilities for causation, which should be researched to determine the precise mechanisms, if any, between the two variables. I was suggesting a hypothesis for further research of both mechanism and incidence of the reactions. [Edited to add: I shouldn't have said reactions. It implies causation. The correct phrase is, vaccine adverse events.]

Also, I explained earlier that there is a difference between a scientific opinion, and a personal opinion. My scientific opinion is there is no conclusive proof that vaccinations cause CFIDS or autism, etc. Personally, I am convinced that vaccination was a factor in my disability.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I've found it!), but 'That's funny...'
--Isaac Asimov

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Here's my next segment:

Vaccine Effectiveness in Question
Examples of outbreaks in fully and highly vaccinated populations:

Quote:

---

Pertussis

"This report describes a statewide outbreak of pertussis in Vermont (1995 population: 584,771) in 1996 in a highly vaccinated population, affecting primarily school-aged children and adults, and underscores the need to include pertussis in the differential diagnosis of cough illness in persons of all ages."
-- Pertussis outbreak -- Vermont, 1996. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1997 Sep 5;46(35):822-6

"Coverage studies for pertussis vaccine in Cape Town indicated that between 81 and 93 per cent of children were fully immunized by 13 months of age...However, it was not able to prevent a moderate scale outbreak, even in the presence of high vaccination levels."
-- Strebel P, Hussey G, Metcalf C, Smith D, Hanslo D, Simpson J. An outbreak of whooping cough in a highly vaccinated urban community. J Trop Pediatr 1991 Mar;37(2):71-6

"Outbreaks [of pertussis] in highly vaccinated populations have been reported, raising the issues of vaccine efficacy, of the long-term effect of vaccines on the transmission of the disease, and of genetic selective pressure."
--Simondon F, Guiso N. [Genetic evolution under vaccine pressure: the Bordetella pertussis model (French title)] Bull Soc Pathol Exot 2000 Jul;93(3):202-5

Measles (Rubeola)

"This was the largest outbreak of measles in the United States since 1996."
--Transmission of measles among a highly vaccinated school population, Anchorage, Alaska, 1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1999 Jan 8;47(51-52):1109-11

"The study suggested that, within highly vaccinated populations, a proportion of individuals had measles antibody levels which may be insufficient to protect against reinfection or clinical disease."
--Cox MJ, Azevedo RS, Massad E, Fooks AR, Nokes DJ. Measles antibody levels in a vaccinated population in Brazil. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1998 Mar-Apr;92(2):227-30

"From the 1970s through early into the recent measles epidemic, the majority of measles cases were in highly vaccinated, school-age children. This was due primarily to a 1 to 5% primary measles-mumps-rubella vaccine failure rate and nonrandom mixing patterns among school-age populations."
-- Wood DL, Brunell PA. Measles control in the United States: problems of the past and challenges for the future. Clin Microbiol Rev 1995 Apr;8(2):260-7

"In early 1988 an outbreak of 84 measles cases occurred at a college in Colorado in which over 98 percent of students had documentation of adequate measles immunity... As in secondary schools, measles outbreaks can occur among highly vaccinated college populations."
-- Hersh BS, Markowitz LE, Hoffman RE, Hoff DR, Doran MJ, Fleishman JC, Preblud SR, Orenstein WA. A measles outbreak at a college with a prematriculation immunization requirement. Am J Public Health 1991 Mar;81(3):360-4

"Despite high vaccination levels, explosive measles outbreaks may occur in secondary schools due to 1) airborne measles transmission, 2) high contact rates, 3) inaccurate school vaccination records, or 4) inadequate immunity from vaccinations at younger ages."
-- Chen RT, Goldbaum GM, Wassilak SG, Markowitz LE, Orenstein WA. An explosive point-source measles outbreak in a highly vaccinated population. Modes of transmission and risk factors for disease. Am J Epidemiol 1989 Jan;129(1):173-82

"An outbreak of measles occurred in a high school with a documented vaccination level of 98 per cent."
-- Nkowane BM, Bart SW, Orenstein WA, Baltier M. Measles outbreak in a vaccinated school population: epidemiology, chains of transmission and the role of vaccine failures. Am J Public Health 1987 Apr;77(4):434-8

"This outbreak demonstrates that transmission of measles can occur within a school population with a documented immunization level of 100%."
-- Measles outbreak among vaccinated high school students--Illinois. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1984 Jun 22;33(24):349-51

"Eighty-seven laboratory-confirmed

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME