View Single Post
  #96  
Old 07-26-2015, 11:21 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Default Re: Parents, do your due diligence on vaccination! There are serious risks!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
Neil Z Miller and Gary S Goldman
Did you ever figure out how Miller and Goldman arrived at their conclusions? Two years ago you refused to investigate the paper to find out how bad the methodology was nor even checked to see that neither author have any training or experience in medicine, immunology, or anything related to vaccines.

Our previous discussion on the topic where you demonstrated Weaseling
Miller has been investigating vaccines for over 20 years.
As a layperson activist with an agenda, not as a scientist.

Quote:
You keep talking about experience. He has experience in research although he's not an immunologist.
What kind of research? Not scientific or medical research.

Another Anti-Vaccine Book Science-Based Medicine
Encyclopedia of American Loons: #950: Neil Z. Miller & Gary S. Goldman
Some post-holiday antivaccine “science” – Respectful Insolence
Quote:
Opinions and Questions: Book review: Vaccine Safety Manual
I fear I must conclude that, in a similar fashion, Neil Z. Miller lacks the intellectual integrity for me to trust him. I will assume from the outset that Mr. Miller does not lie outright. In fact, I find him refreshingly forthcoming. On page 17, he writes, "I never intended to ratify traditional beliefs regarding vaccine safety and efficacy." On page 26, he writes, with considerable understatement, "this book does not emphasize vaccine benefits." I do not have access to many of the studies he quotes or summarizes, and even if I did, I do not have the time to follow up every reference. But here, on the first and last pages of the Introduction, he bluntly states that he did not conduct his research with an open mind and let the weight of evidence determine his conclusion. He had an agenda, which he explicitly sets out, and would report on whatever he could find that matches his already fixed decision. And having read three sections of the book, I conclude he writes about ONLY those things that support his predetermined viewpoint.

The book may be many things, but it is certainly not a fair, dispassionate, objective, or reliable guide to the risks of vaccinations (according to Mr. Miller, there are few if any benefits).

That's how science should be done - allow the evidence to determine your conclusion. Miller had already decided what his conclusion was, and sought the evidence to back it up. The difference is crucial. And that is why I will trust the Immunization Review Committee report, but not the Vaccine Safety Manual.


So, I take it you have not investigated the methodology used in that paper nor figured out why it is worthless?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
The Man (08-04-2015)
 
Page generated in 0.83574 seconds with 11 queries