Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To dare speak about Vaxxed on MN?

496 replies

thegoodfight · 20/02/2017 14:37

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??

OP posts:
Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 15:42

I would however like more studies done into the combination of vaccines and when given. At present, there is a blanket assertion that it doesn't matter if we are vaccinating against a hundred viruses or just one, the effect is the same.

I agree, and posted a link to a review on the non-specific effects of vaccination upthread. I think this is a massive assumption that hasn't been properly considered by the authorities drawing up the schedule.

I think that a lot of published research is of poor quality, but not necessarily out of malice - I just think that scientists aren't always that great at statistics and study design and it slips through the net.

Charlieismydarlin · 21/02/2017 15:47

you you cannot criticise scientists. They are experts and know it all!!!

We are very arrogant you realise.

I know someone who works in medical research (consultant level) on a completely different field and I was quite horrified at the way the studies were approached. I didn't think it was terribly robust (related to a drug)

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 15:51

Finally, we need to stop rubbishing and shutting down debate on the issue. I agree And that includes in relation to autism. I disagree.. and most of the 'shutting down' has been on this issue, one doctor and some seriously unethical journalism.

(I have just watched a summary of the Vaxxed film. In essence, it says a CDC study showing a link between autism and the MMR, specifically in younger males, was not published. Apparently the link was not shown after 3 years of age). Which is a lie. Well, a rabidly misleading statement made by the doctor who started all of this - early pages of this thread discuss him and that documentary.

I have no idea what to make of that to be honest but if we are at the stage of being unable to trust published research then we are in trouble And that is why charlatans, liars and child abusers like Wakefield MUST be shouted down at every opportunity. They are very, very good at editing the real world to suit their own ends.

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 15:52

Yes, working in science has definitely opened my eyes to exactly how fallible the whole process is. My (completely anecdotal) experience is that medics sometimes make the worst scientists!

Applebite · 21/02/2017 15:53

Nope, You - I would expect a lot of keyboard warriors bashing away at the internet, to be perfectly honest!

Applebite · 21/02/2017 15:54

"I welcome people questioning my expertise. It happens daily. It is called robust debate"

Well, no. That IS where you and I differ. I don't consider something that risks maiming or even killing people at its worst extreme if you make the wrong call to be as facile as "robust debate"!

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 15:54

My (completely anecdotal) experience is that medics sometimes make the worst scientists! I'd have to disagree.... almost always not sometimes Smile

I used to teach seminars on study design... I shudder to think back on some of the queries I had.

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 15:58

OurBlanche Grin

I was trying to be polite Wink

Charlieismydarlin · 21/02/2017 15:58

our I actually don't think the MMR causes autism tbh.

But I am going to look further into that withdrawn study.

We do not know what is a lie and what isn't. The scientist wasn't Wakefield

apple the first principle of medicine must be "do no harm". We must keep an open mind on vaccines but let's leave it there and agree to differ.

If vaccines are contributing even partly to autoimmunity and we can try to avoid that by timing/splitting differently, yet still benefit from the vaccine, that research would be very valuable.

Faithless · 21/02/2017 16:02

Please have a look a Ben Goldacre's website "Bad Science" - he attempts to communicate key issues around medical research (which is complex but actually has to be pretty transparent) in an accessible way. He used to have a Guardian column under the same name. Hopefully you will get a more balanced view of some controversial medical issues than you might do from a tabloid or conspiracy theory film. Link below:

www.badscience.net/

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 16:06

But I am going to look further into that withdrawn study. That was the lie! Anything and everything you are told about that study is a lie! There is a link about 4 pages back that explains it.

We do not know what is a lie and what isn't. The scientist wasn't Wakefield No, Wakefield is the director of the film. And he is a liar!

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 16:09

If vaccines are contributing even partly to autoimmunity and we can try to avoid that by timing/splitting differently, yet still benefit from the vaccine, that research would be very valuable. That research does exist... also upthread, dismissed for various issues, mainly to do with them not being able to meet impossible criteria.

Applebite · 21/02/2017 16:10

Also, how would you do that research without potentially exposing lots of children between singles or leaving them unvaccinated?

MimiTheWonderGoat · 21/02/2017 16:10

I think that a lot of published research is of poor quality, but not necessarily out of malice

I agree, and I may have said something similar pages ago. Years ago, I worked as a sales rep and tech support for statistical software (which included site visits and running training courses. Our main target was the pharma industry. Some of the queries that we received from users really showed up the lack of their statistical knowledge. It was appalling. We were forever referring them to online statistical textbooks....!! And those are the sorts of people that many folk on here think of as the "experts".

Faithless · 21/02/2017 16:11

Re You's post - it would be very unusual and lack credibility for a "scientist" - consultant, biologist, pharmacist etc to do research in isolation. In order to get funding they need experienced research teams and co applicants- statisticians, research design teams, research nurses etc, plus all research in the NHS has to be peer reviewed and is subject to robust ethical review and clinical governance. "Lone wolf" personal research rarely gets published precisely because it would lack credibility and validity.

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 16:14

Also, how would you do that research without potentially exposing lots of children between singles or leaving them unvaccinated? We may have to repeat that every 10 pages or so... the last time, when I was replying to having an unvaccinated cohort as a control group!!!!!!, seems to have worn off Smile

MimiTheWonderGoat · 21/02/2017 16:22

anecdote....an ex colleague of mine (PhD and supposed statistical expert) had some research published regarding childhood obesity. I had done some research into it as well for a conference I was attending and he (or someone he worked with, I can't remember exactly who) contacted me to argue that my figures were incorrect. I was pretty sure what I'd done was correct so I asked to see his syntax. Sure enough, he'd cocked up the code. So, he was completely wrong, but I doubt his statistics were ever publicly corrected. They were quoted in various articles etc...
It happens, all the time.

Merrymumoftwo · 21/02/2017 16:43

Charlie in relation to flu vaccine and questioning. I have no problem questioning the need for a vaccine and did so when sent a letter to give my daughter the flu vaccine with my GP who agreed it was not necessary because the distress she would suffer combined with her reaction to the first and only one she had meant it was not beneficial. Despite this the school wanted the school nurse to attempt the nasal spray needless to say the dealt with a very upset girl and sent a letter suggesting she have the injection. I had explained to them but the push was from government. So please don't think everyone does not ask questions, some of us do. We do become upset with the near hysterical response to vaccination and Autism though. I agree this was and is exacerbated by the media

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 16:45

Just lost a really long post. The gist was that you could investigate alternative schedules vs the current one without leaving children unvaccinated, perhaps by giving two vaccines a time. It would lengthen the time taken to get full courses by a few months, but this frequently happens anyway for a variety of reasons and no-one bats an eyelid. You could then follow each group over time to see if there were any changes in incidence of allergies, autoimmune disorders and childhood cancers (for instance). It would be politically awkward, but I think it would be scientifically valuable.

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 16:53

Just lost a really long post Ooch! That has to be really annoying Smile

MimiTheWonderGoat · 21/02/2017 17:01

Um, publishing a link between vaccinations and childhood cancers would open up a massive can of worms and be discredited in a flash! Nobody would get financial support to do such a study.

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 17:08

Mimi That's what I mean by politically awkward. To even start such a study would mean conceding that there may be a link between the vaccine schedule and longer term adverse outcomes, so that would probably kill it before it started. And, since it would need to consider the population as a whole to be robust (and so would need the support of the DoH), that's another nail in the coffin.

I know it's not realistically going to happen, I'm just musing about how to theoretically address the question.

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 17:12

To even start such a study would mean conceding that there may be a link between the vaccine schedule and longer term adverse outcomes, so that would probably kill it before it started. That's a level of paranoia/conspiracy theory too far, for me!

Not only because such studies exist.. for many vaccines and many conditions, Google it!

But that it is really hard to design a study into anything with children that would pass ethics... not only medical, any sort of research - they can't consent, for a start!

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 21/02/2017 17:28

I don't think it is paranoia OurBlanche, just common sense. And not for any 'Big Pharma are evil' type reasons either. The government needs to maintain herd immunity and so needs to maintain confidence in the vaccine schedule as it is. A trial such as I'm describing wouldn't be expected to lead to a drop in herd immunity, but I imagine the worry would be that the general public would lose faith in vaccines altogether and coverage would drop. Just read through the tone of the JCVI minutes when public perceptions are discussed.

I am genuinely unaware of any studies examining different infant schedules as a whole in a robust manner (i.e. not retrospectively from self selected groups). I'd (also genuinely) appreciate links to any such studies, as I can't find them.

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 17:43

You may not like them they are usually systematic reviews and meta analyses, for obvious reasons... but 5 minutes on Google Scholar and I found a few on Hep B, generic vaccine in series evaluation, BCG vaccination against TB and leprosy... over 25 years, a couple of continents and various vaccines.

I didn't even refine my search terms: Vaccination single or in series