(January 10, 2017 at 6:33 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: So you think he'll lie about the results of a study?
Sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative aND I'm not an anti vaxxer. I just don't see what the huge deal is about this.
Are you, perhaps, familiar with Andrew Wakefield, the one who began the anti-vaxxer hysteria? In particular, the immense conflicts of interest and fudging of data in his study that eventually led him to lose his license?
What I'm saying is, anti-vaxxers of a particular stripe have a history of not letting the facts get in the way of promulgating their narrative. They'll falsify or skew studies to preserve their conclusions, if a poorly formulated study gives them what they want while a properly done one doesn't, they'll take the former and ignore the latter. The point is that to be an anti-vaxxer at all requires a certain willingness to ignore the majority of studies that disagree, and cleave to those that conclude the presupposed conclusion, no matter how malformed or biased they are.
The concern that lies and unscrupulously produced studies will be employed is more than real.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!