To dare speak about Vaxxed on MN?

[thegoodfight]

NC for this but a regular.

So I've just watched the documentary Vaxxed. I know how vaccine threads unfold on MN, so I'm ready to be told IABU however I feel like everyone should see this whatever your views - it's about the cover up around studies into autism and MMR

There is an admission from a CDC insider that he worked on the study and hid data which proved a link (a strong an quite frankly astounding one) and the data was sent to an external biologist who saw it for himself. There are first hand accounts from parents, scientists, doctors and politicians. The CDC haven't denied anything or called their lawyers despite it being an allegation of the biggest medical fraud ever (not exact words but something along those lines)

I just can't believe it's not been in the news! AIBU to ask if anyone else is planning to watch it??

Mimi the bit about once having done something it becomes impossible to unravel the changes that something makes.

The problem is that, in this instance, it is lives that are being discussed. Your choice seems to be that we make no attempt to prevent any disease just in case we make it worse for some. You will chance the disease, a known and often devastating factor, rather than chance the vaccine, a less dangerous, not as well known factor.

Current logic is that we attempt to save the majority and ameliorate the negatives as much as possible.

And don't forget we are talking about doubts that were raised by a lying charlatan!

mimi that is my bugbear.

For all those proclaiming the research proves vaccines are safe, what on earth is the control group? More importantly, how can longer term studies ever be carried out?

winter the fact that I question "science" in the first place probably points to a more curious mind than those that don't. Why such trust?

So, again, what would you do?

Absolutely nothing, just in case the monster shouters are right? Just allow diseases to kill.

Go with our best research and keep on looking, doing all we can to make drugs better and better.

Inaction kills too! You seem just to want clean hands... never ever going to happen!

winter the fact that I question "science" in the first place probably points to a more curious mind than those that don't. Why such trust?

It really doesn't. Science is constantly questioning, that is what makes it science. It doesn't need quotes. What are you trying to imply by calling it "science"? It just makes you look very silly.

And is your curious mind actually qualified to question anyway? Lay people aren't able to understand a lot of the science, though some like to think they can (often the kind of people who put it in quotes, for a start)

Are you a "scientist"?

Oh, and as noble said, there is always a control group during research and testing.

Do you want to volunteer to choose the kids that are denied all medication for their whole lives, so removing the effects of any and all drug related variables? How would you go about that?

noblegiraffe , clinical trials are not often large scale and they don't often do a long term follow up.

I ignored that Winter I wasn't sure how to respond to the suggestion that I may not be inquisitive, that Einstein maybe didn't question his own hypotheses enough... he just blindly trusted his own science, silly man, no curiosity, no imagination, so trusting.

clinical trials are not often large scale and they don't often do a long term follow up. ???

I am not sure you understand sample size and power. Sample size is strongly tied to the specific study and biostatisticians and physician-researchers spend decades gaining expertise in medical samples.

Here, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933537/ that might help!

mimi the HPV vaccine went through large scale clinical trials involving thousands of subjects.

All drugs have to go through large Phase III trials to be approved by the FDA and EMA.

Individual clinical trials may be small, but that doesn't mean that they're the only trial ever run.

Mimi FYI here's how the drug development process goes: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phases_of_clinical_research

Why on earth can't we use inverted commas around science? I use them only to empathise the ridicule anyone who who questions such an industry receives.

I'm not medical and do not need to be to question or have concerns.

Why is there no consensus on a myriad of issues, not just in relation to vaccines but anything? Because our knowledge and experience is constantly shifting.

And I maintain that it is not possible to conduct proper long term studies into the effects of vaccines precisely for the reasons stated above - it would be immoral to have a control.

You think I'm "silly". I think there are many sheep!

Mock me all you like. But tell me, for example, why rates of childhood leukaemia are increasing? Why do more children suffer hideous food allergies? Why are so many children eczematic or asthmatic? Why are autoimmune diseases on the rise?

Not solely down to vaccines, I will agree but I firmly suspect that multiple vaccines on babies and toddlers is adding fuel to the flames.

What do you consider to be large? The jcvi considered the safety of the men B vaccine based on clinical trials with a total of 6000 participants but recognised that "Data were too limited to identify rare adverse reactions to the vaccine, however the Committee agreed that the infrastructure and expertise available in the UK would allow the acceptability and safety of the vaccine to be assessed."

Do you want to volunteer to choose the kids that are denied all medication for their whole lives, so removing the effects of any and all drug related variables? How would you go about that?

No, but no other drugs are rolled out to practically an entire generation of kids in a population.....just vit K and vaccinations...so it's not the same issue for any other drugs.

Data were too limited to identify rare adverse reactions to the vaccine

Rare adverse reactions are defined as those occurring in less than one in a thousand patients so trials would have to be very large to identify them and link them to the vaccine. However, vaccines are not rolled out and ignored, they are subject to further monitoring using the Black Triangle and Yellow Card scheme.

Sample size and power are mainly related to proving efficacy, not collating side effects.

The thread has moved on but here are the two Italian cases where the courts decided the pharmaceutical companies should pay out due to the children acquiring autism from vaccines containing a) thimerosol and
b) aluminium.
www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/24/court-finds-causal-link-between-childs-autism-vaccine-family-to-be-compensated/

The thread has moved on but here are the two Italian cases where the courts decided the pharmaceutical companies should pay out due to the children acquiring autism from vaccines containing a) thimerosol and
b) aluminium.
www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/24/court-finds-causal-link-between-childs-autism-vaccine-family-to-be-compensated/

However, vaccines are not rolled out and ignored, they are subject to further monitoring using the Black Triangle and Yellow Card scheme.

Have you ever reported a side effect of any drug using the Yellow Card scheme? If it is not also reported by your gp (to corroborate your story) it is not included in published figures. My own gp was contacted by Bayer when I reacted to an antibiotic. He was too busy being a gp to report it. Bayer chased me to chase him, which I did, but he still didn't report it.

I will mock you, mercilessly. Sheep indeed, the call sign of the conspiracy nut!

Obviously you are not medical, that is easy to see. Have you any background in science at all? A degree? An A-level? Anything to mean you actually understand what you think you do but so clearly don't?

Anyhoo...I'm not "anti vaccination". I'm anti my littlest child being vaccinated (for medical reasons including family history of (non MMR and non autism) vaccine reactions. Older child is fully vaccinated.
What I am is pro evidence, and pro research.....but not research done by the same companies who are peddling their own drugs.

Not solely down to vaccines, I will agree but I firmly suspect that multiple vaccines on babies and toddlers is adding fuel to the flames

Oh you suspect, do you? Based on your own indepth research, at your home lab? Do tell us more!

Italian court decision overturned, found to be based on shoddy science:

www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/italian-mmr-autism-decision-overturned/

not research done by the same companies who are peddling their own drugs.

It's obviously not great, leaving drugs in the hands of for-profit companies, but you do seem to be unaware of the huge amounts of scrutiny that clinical trials undergo. The amount of paperwork, independent ethics committee reviews and approval that needs to go on before you're allowed to experiment on humans is huge. Then at the end your data needs to be good enough to be approved by the FDA/EMA. Obvious shoddiness like not having a control, a study not being double blinded or a tiny sample size, like you so often see in homeopathy and other similar quack literature just doesn't happen as it would be too expensive to run such an obviously poor trial.

Have a read of Bad Pharma (Ben Goldacre). I went to one of his lectures on the topic, and although I found him quite twattish, he really made some very interesting points about fakery in pharma.