• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Link between MMR & autism is apparent

So don't try and correct him because it will encourage him and don't encourage him because it will encourage him?

He doesn't want to be corrected, he wants to preach his gospel.

(Judging by some of his threads lately, he's thriving on the attention, gives him more chances to sermonize.)
 
Last edited:
He wants to feel like the special one who's found the secret info Anf will enlighten us


It's a normal part of the process of the stuff he's into. The "everything you know is wrong but I know what's right" phase.


This part feeds off being told you're wrong and gang upped on by those who want to live in the status quo. It's how to feel revolutionary without doing anything revolutionary what so ever.
 
Last edited:
I watched about an hour of the Wakefield talk that redruM posted. It's actually quite interesting. After watching that, I do have my doubts now about whether Wakefield falsified the histopath data. It's quite interesting, and he does cite documented facts and publications to back up many of his assertions. I did find one issue about his talk about when Merck transitioned into criminal fraud regarding data manipulation surrounding MMR adverse events; actually if what he was saying was true, they were already well within the realm of criminal fraud long before that, so that was a little puzzling.

Anyway, I don't still think that his argument for the MMR-autism correlation holds any water, especially since the proposed gastroenterological mechanism is poorly supported. And the huge abundance of data indicating the opposite is too much to ignore.

That said, I do think the vid is worth a watch for anyone who's interested in diving deeper into the issue. At least you'd know how the seeds of the anti-vaccine movement are sown and grown.

I think posting walls of references without any discussion of the contents of the studies is and unconvincing and distracting logical fallacy. If the number of studies presumably concluding "A" is greater than the number of studies concluding "B," it doesn't mean that "A" is true.

Also, I find it somewhat ironic to tout the scientific method, and then thoroughly violate it, by not reexamining assumptions, to make an "argument" supporting a well-accepted idea.
 
Giving weight to anti-vaxxers is like giving weight to flat earthers.
There are still people who claim the world is flat despite a big photo from space.

\
 
Giving weight to anti-vaxxers is like giving weight to flat earthers.
There are still people who claim the world is flat despite a big photo from space.

\

IMO ignoring valid points in the name of what you think is true is no different than Jenny McCarthy's approach to the issue. It's the exact same brand of intellectual dishonesty, especially when you are discussing scientific hypotheses.

I simply acknowledged what I felt was valid, and also stated that I still don't agree with the basic argument. Too nuanced? Then ignore me.
 
IMO ignoring valid points in the name of what you think is true is no different than Jenny McCarthy's approach to the issue. It's the exact same brand of intellectual dishonesty, especially when you are discussing scientific hypotheses.

I simply acknowledged what I felt was valid, and also stated that I still don't agree with the basic argument. Too nuanced? Then ignore me.

Not every opinion has value. He is flat out anti-science. What valid points am I ignoring, the scientific community is ignoring?
 
The scientific community is not ignoring. They are addressing the flaws in the research that the anti-vaxx movement seizes on.

It's the majority of the people posting their strong opinions about it are just ignoring everything out of hand. Why not consider the argument first, then disassemble it? Don't just skip to the ad hominems, which is what 90% of this thread is.
 
The issue is pretty settled. Only people like yourself, the OP and idiot celebrities are discussing it seriously.

Do you want to discuss if the earth revolve around the sun or not? I mean, perhaps there are flaws in the research to exploit.

You're as bad as promoting any form of pseudo-science from flat earth to lizard men. Your arguments can be used exactly for those things.
 
Not vaccinating your children is bordering on child abuse. Sending them out into a school unvaccinated is bordering on assault/manslaughter if they die.
 
Giving weight to anti-vaxxers is like giving weight to flat earthers.
There are still people who claim the world is flat despite a big photo from space.

\

It's clearly a flat circle.

NASA-Earth_Space2a.jpg


You're as bad as promoting any form of pseudo-science from flat earth to lizard men. Your arguments can be used exactly for those things.

Coors has repeatedly been one of the best on this board in terms of understanding the actual science and breaking it down for those of us without the pertinent background. We're better off around here with that.
 
And Dr. - you have yet to share your thoughts about your peer Dr. Humphries’ view regarding polio. Was hoping for some intellectual honesty on your part regarding her sentiment and the logic/reason she uses to fuel it.

Interested to see if you're as objective as you claim to be.

I've finally gotten to trying to read the literature cited by Dr. Humphries. Here's the list that's used to support her thesis...

[1] Statement from Clinton R. Miller, Intensive Immunization Programs, May 15th and 16th, 1962. Hearings before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce House of Representatives, 87th congress, second session on H.R. 10541.

[2] Meier, P. 1978. “The biggest public health experiment ever: The 1954 trial of the Salk poliomyelitis vaccine.” Statistics: A Guide to the Unknown, Ed. J. M. Tanur, el al., pp. 3-15. San Francisco: Holden Day.

[3] Scobey, R. 1952. “The poison cause of poliomyelitis and obstructions to its investigation.” Arch. Pediatr. April;69(4):172-93.

[4] Goldman.2003.”What was the cause of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s paralytic illness?” J Med Biog, 11:233-240.

[5] Opening brief of Defendant and Appellant Cutter Laboratories Gottsdanker v. Cutter Laboratories (1960) 182 Cal. App.2d 602 pp. 31-33.

It's not really clear what the thesis of Humphries is as there seems to be an attack on vaccination in general and a very poor understanding of the disease poliomyelitis. It is very clear that the highly contagious poliovirus causes poliomyelitis, a form of acute flaccid paralysis. This indeed became painfully obvious in the Cutter incident when the manufacturers failed to follow the protocols put forward by the scientist that developed the vaccine, which resulted in a failure to inactivate the virus during vaccine manufacture. As a result many kids contracted polio.

It is well known that other viruses can cause acute flaccid paralysis but not to the levels of polio and, if memory serves me correctly, is reversible, which is typically not the case for polio. Again, the polio vaccine has withstood the test of time. There is a gargantuan amount of scientific data that supports the role of poliovirus in disease and the efficacy of the vaccine.

Let me focus on the citations. I could not access any of them directly so I cannot comment on their content, which is frustrating. What I did manage to get hold of was an excerpt from the second reference...

http://www.stat.luc.edu/StatisticsfortheSciences/MeierPolio.htm

Table 1 is from the original research article and clearly demonstrates the efficacy of the polio vaccine in an unprecedented case controlled study in 1954. The data are very tight for a vaccine that was in the preliminary stages of development.

The data on the majority of vaccines is very tight. Regardless of the concerns around vaccination it is a safer alternative that being exposed to the agent that causes the disease. There are a lot of nuances in infectious diseases that are being used to nullify the effectiveness of vaccination.

As an aside, smallpox is not the only deadly pathogen that has been eradicated from the earth by vaccination. Have you ever heard on Rinderpest? It was a devastating infection of livestock that could kill up to 90% of the animals infected. Here's a link...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinderpest

Without the process of vaccination we would still be facing this scourge in Africa, Asia and Europe. Thanks to the success of vaccination this disease no longer happens. Importantly, this disease was caused by a morbillivirus, which is the same type of virus that causes measles. Vaccination eradicated measles from the USA. Vaccination simply works.

Should we be concerned about childhood vaccination? No. Both Wakefield and Humphries raise arguments against vaccination that have either been looked at a long time ago already or have been addressed in extensive recent studies. What both Humphries and Wakefield do not provide is compelling evidence, numbers, that support their ideas. If there were numerical evidence to support their ideas I very much doubt we would be debating this on BARF.
 
I think posting walls of references without any discussion of the contents of the studies is and unconvincing and distracting logical fallacy. If the number of studies presumably concluding "A" is greater than the number of studies concluding "B," it doesn't mean that "A" is true.

This is a fair point. The aim was to draw attention to the availability of research from both sides of the discussion and the ease with which it can be accessed rather than relying on seminars from the protagonist.


Not every opinion has value. He is flat out anti-science. What valid points am I ignoring, the scientific community is ignoring?

The issue is pretty settled. Only people like yourself, the OP and idiot celebrities are discussing it seriously.

Clearly the issue is not settled otherwise there would not be a problem of poor vaccine uptake in some areas of the USA. I would rather engage with individuals and discuss the evidence on a particular topic. Simply say "you're flat out wrong" really has no value in a scientific debate, which vaccination has become.

The scientific community is not ignoring. They are addressing the flaws in the research that the anti-vaxx movement seizes on.

It's the majority of the people posting their strong opinions about it are just ignoring everything out of hand. Why not consider the argument first, then disassemble it? Don't just skip to the ad hominems, which is what 90% of this thread is.

This sums it up nicely. We've all called for evidence, which has been provided in the form of YouTube videos. It is my opinion that these are not the strongest of evidence to support the arguments put forward in this discussion. They certainly draw attention to how people put forward convincing arguments. That is something I can learn from.
 
not that you or anyone else read this doctor's linked work, but her main point is that there are many other ways to keep children healthy other than injecting them with disease matter, chemicals, animal DNA, animal proteins, detergents and surfactants that inflame and weaken the blood brain barrier, potentially causing inflammation and other problems.

Can she list some peer-reviewed studies of her theories?

And you really better look at what is in the polio vaccine. I wouldn't want you take any "disease matter, chemicals, or animal dna."
 
The big deception here is treating every autism data point over the last century as if they have equal value. They don't because the definition of the disorder has become vastly broader over time, correlating closely to the chart showed the apparent rise in cases.

Although the term “autism” has been around for more than a century, it didn’t start taking on a meaning we would recognize today until the 1940s, and it remained linked to schizophrenia, a completely unrelated psychiatric disorder, until the 1960s. The definition has continued to expand and become more detailed, and thus autism prevalence has been adjusted accordingly over the years.

Source

The article goes on to say that the real rates of autism in the US are essentially unchanged for the past couple of decades.
 
[x] not rekt

Coors was just being the gentleman-and-a-scholar that he is. My biased interpretation? "Whore mouths; shut 'em!" to a good number of you :laughing so now... who caught wreck? :twofinger

back OT!

This new 'Vaxxed' film (on which this thread was originally based) sure is making the establishment uncomfortable!

Huffington Post censors VAXXED documentary article and blocks writer account after discredited science troll David Gorski hijacks Wikipedia to trash the film

In a stunning example of outright journalism censorship and medical totalitarianism, Arianna Huffington's HuffPo content platform has gone "police state" on veteran contributor Lance Simmons. According to this article from Truth Barrier, Simmons has been an 8-year contributor to the Huffington Post, publishing over 200 articles through the content hub.

HuffPo had no problem with all 200 of his previously posted articles, but when he posted an honest, heartfelt review of the VAXXED documentary, he got targeted for censorship and had his account shut down by the Huffington Post.

As Simmons told Celia Farber of Truth Barrier:

I saw a premier of VAXXED the other evening and was so moved by the presentation and discussion that followed that I felt compelled to write a piece asking that we at least begin a serious national dialogue on the allegations contained in the documentary. I also drew attention to the spate of events that have unfolded over the past several years, where there has been a massive governmental failure to do its essential job which is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens.

But he soon discovered that HuffPo is actually run like a Chinese gulag of censorship about vaccine truth. Writers aren't even allowed to ask rational questions about vaccine safety without being severely punished by HuffPo:

It turns out that they pulled down the original piece and when I tried to rewrite it I was alerted that permission was denied to my account. I have made at least a half dozen attempts to reach someone at HuffPo to alert them that there was a malfunction and over the course of the last two days have not received one response. I even went so far as to email Arianna herself. It never crossed my mind that this might be some sort of censorship because it has never happened to me and the article, while provocative, is not beyond any bounds of journalistic or political propriety.

http://www.naturalnews.com/053720_HuffPo_censorship_VAXXED_documentary_David_Gorski.html
 
Go away until your address Dr_SLO's post

Natural News? lol

David H. Gorski is an American surgical oncologist, Professor of surgery at Wayne State University School of Medicine, and a surgical oncologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, specializing in breast cancer surgery. He is a critic of alternative medicine and the anti-vaccination movement. He is the author of a blog, Respectful Insolence, and is the managing editor of the website Science-Based Medicine.
 
Last edited:
"If you have nothing to hide..."

In addition to being a cancer surgeon with ties to the Karmanos Cancer Centers of Detroit -- where Gorski's colleague Dr. Farid Fata recently admitted to committing felony health care fraud and is now going to prison -- David Gorski is also a discredited internet science troll who was outed after trying to hide his identity as "ORAC" for several years. Widely known as a sociopathic, vindictive purveyor of personal hatred and pharmaceutical filth, Gorski is infamous for publishing false and defamatory information about natural medicine and its advocates. With financial ties to drug research related to autism, David Gorski stands to financially benefit from children with autism, which may explain why he so aggressively pushes vaccines while fraudulently denying that they harm so many children.

Gorski is one of an ever-shrinking fringe group of Vaccine Holocaust Denialists who show increasing desperation as the truth about vaccines continues to emerge. The VAXXED documentary showcases CDC scientist and whistleblower Dr. William Thompson, who publicly confessed to committing scientific fraud at the CDC to hide links between vaccines and autism. Yet the Wikipedia entry on VAXXED, authored in large part by David Gorski, according to reports, deliberately misrepresents the subject matter and focus of the film, characterizing it as "anti-vaccine propaganda."
 
Last edited:
lol for all I know you wrote that.

I'm sorry you just keep poster dumber and dumber shit.

Gorski is one of an ever-shrinking fringe group of Vaccine Holocaust Denialists who show increasing desperation as the truth about vaccines continues to emerge.
Ever shrinking, eh?
 
Back
Top