More vaccine doubts

[Eilonnwy]

Rev Rye, that picture expresses my reaction perfectly.

Pippy, this is an example of exactly what we're talking about. You take the word of anyone standing on a soap box if it fits with your preconceived notion of what's wrong with an established organization. You didn't even bother to read who wrote it and took everything it said at face value.

The study has been extremely discredited for methodology and for the fact that multiple studies after the fact have never reproduced the results, and that's a staple of science.

Jenny McCarthy is a loon who thinks she knows better than doctors because she's a "mom". She was going to promote her son as a flower child, for fucks sake, before she went the anti-vax route. It's absurd and she is a joke.

She has said on TV that she's okay with devastating child hood diseases coming back to make vaccines safe. It's an atrocity to logic what that woman spews.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badast...something/

[Tiberius]

I think you mean "crystal child" rather than flower child, but the point still stands. She's a hypocritical dangerous person.

[Eilonnwy]

Actually I meant Indigo, but apparently Indigo and Crystal children are the same.

Damn hippies, confusing me.

[Pippy]

If I may repeat myself, I feel you are mis-characterizing me. I do not take anyone's word on anything because they fit my pre-conceived notion. I cannot disagree more strongly with that. I know you will tell me that I am lying, or that you know me better than i know myself (even though we've never met). But if I can please try to assure you, this is not "what you've been talking about". I don't think Vaccines are dangerous because fucking Jenny fucking McCarthy says. I did not see that she was the author of the article that linked to the discredited study.

But all I was asking was 'Hey, this may have merit, what do you guys think?" The response was clear, and I thank you all greatly for sharing what you thought. You are right, this is a discredited vaccine study, and the article was authored by movie stars. Thank you again for sharing that, I am happy to know. I am not arguing that Jim fucking Carrey is right, and that this is proof. I am accepting that you guys know this is discredited, and moving on. I pains me that you would think that my opinions on something as vast and important as Vaccine health would be based on one article (that I found after airing my views).

But keep telling yourself that I am a lone nut. I admit to puting my foot in my mouth with this one, but not to basing any opinion on it. I was asking if you guys thought this was valid. It is not, and you've made that point.

Thank you.

PS to VOID, you talked about how the children in the study were handpicked and mistreated. If I am not mistaken the study involved monkeys, not children. Clarification? Or am I still confused?

[Tiberius]

The original study (the discredited one, not the one that is yet to be published) breached several ethics laws, including the extraction of blood from 5 year olds at a birthday party in return for £5. He also picked a statistically weighted sample of children to study, such that his results would be skewed to support his position all along.

I don't have any opinion on the monkey study, since it hasn't been published yet. It is being written by 12 different people, and as long as no ethics laws are breached, and the research is valid, I won't have any problems with its findings.

[Rev. Rye]

I think this clip from the Squidbillies might be representative of the thoughts that Pippy is feeling about this thread. WHERE WAS MY ANALYTICAL MIND?!

[Pippy]

It's raining piss!

I doesn't rain piss!

It was raining piss.