If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Jeff" wrote in message ink.net... "mike" wrote in message news On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:05:06 +0000, Jeff wrote: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And safe minds is not a disinterested party. Safeminds did NOT do the research. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
LadyLollipop wrote: "Jeff" wrote in message ink.net... "mike" wrote in message news On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:05:06 +0000, Jeff wrote: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And safe minds is not a disinterested party. Safeminds did NOT do the research. Damn right. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
mike wrote: On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:05:06 +0000, Jeff wrote: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. Not so. Read the study. In Denmark, regular outpatients, i.e., those who attended for daily therapy were also counted as hospitalised. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Indeed. As clearly acknowledged by the study. They also suggested that the increase after the withdrawal of thimerosal could be in part due to this factor, and in part due to increased awareness and therefore diagnosis of the condition. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. No, it was not. As clearly stated in the Acknowledgements: "The activities of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre and the National Centre for Register-Based Research are funded by a grant from the Danish National Research Foundation. This study was supported by the Stanley Medical Research Institute. No funding sources were involved in the study design." The only information garnered from the Statens Serum Institut was about vaccine coverage: "In March 1992 the last batch of thimerosal-containing vaccine was released and distributed from Statens Serum Institut in Denmark. All vaccinations were given free of charge and acceptance of vaccinations in Denmark has always been very high; from 1979 onward data on vaccination coverage was available and coverage rates of 90% were found (information was obtained from the State Serum Institute)." As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And it wasn't done here. But that didn't stop Safeminds from implying it had been. Cathy |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"LadyLollipop" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message link.net... "mike" wrote in message news On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:05:06 +0000, Jeff wrote: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And safe minds is not a disinterested party. Safeminds did NOT do the research. The putrid Safe Minds doesn't do research, because they already know the answers. By the way, I don't know if it's still there, because I can only read so much emetic material in a week, but Safe Minds once had a web page which mentioned the mercury in MMR. Still, why should I expect liars to not tell lies? -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message ... "LadyLollipop" wrote: "Jeff" wrote in message hlink.net... "mike" wrote in message news On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:05:06 +0000, Jeff wrote: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And safe minds is not a disinterested party. Safeminds did NOT do the research. The putrid Safe Minds doesn't do research, because they already know the answers. Incorrect, snide remark. remainder snipped -- Peter Bowditch |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Jeff wrote:
Just ask yourself: Where did you read about the Danish study? The journal Pediatrics. Where did you read about objections to it? I read objections to the study in sites by people who are against the use of vaccines or against the use of mercury in vaccines. Hardly disinterested parties. So you never asked yourself -- why are the journals and media presenting only one side of the argument? Why are you being given only one side of a controversy? If the other side of this controversy had no worthy arguments, then why would anyone bother to refute them? If the other side's papers are so full of errors, why not publicize them widely in major journals and media, then shoot them full of holes? Would you trust a judicial process that only allows one side's lawyers to present the case, saying the other side is "obviously" wrong? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Jeff wrote:
Sad, isn't it? People who have disabled kids wasting their time looking for a cause that isn't there. What's really sad is people making up their minds without being able to objectively study all the facts, and thereby actively refusing to help those they may have accidentally damaged. While the accidental damage may reasonably be considered a "mistake", the closed-mindendness following it is nothing less than a crime. Honest pediatricans that have practiced for a long time know that the rise in autism is real and was not at all due to increased awareness and diagnosis. Yet, many of them are perfectly willing to be dishonest about it, even to themselves. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Jeff wrote:
http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? Can you use your head even a tiny bit? If there was something to refute about these accusations, you would have been reading the refutation not only in Pediatrics, but in your local newspapers. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
wrote: Jeff wrote: http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...Pediatrics.pdf Interesting accusations. Have they backed them up? Can you use your head even a tiny bit? If there was something to refute about these accusations, you would have been reading the refutation not only in Pediatrics, but in your local newspapers. Is this person a halfwit? People make ridiculous accusations all the time that are ignored. The accusations weren't in Pediatrics, since they aren't peer-reviewed, and nor would any refutation be. Nor have I noticed them in my local rag. Has this person actually read the study, or just the Safeminds rubbish? Besides: Please provide evidence that the Danish study is crooked. Jeff Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. Not so. Read the study. In Denmark, regular outpatients, i.e., those who attended for daily therapy were also counted as hospitalised. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Indeed. As clearly acknowledged by the study. They also suggested that the increase after the withdrawal of thimerosal could be in part due to this factor, and in part due to increased awareness and therefore diagnosis of the condition. Since only a small fraction of autistics requires hospitalization (I imagine they must be involved in seriously aggressive or self-destructive behavior) the result was that the number of autistics increased after withdrawal of thimerosal. A neat trick, isn't it? And there are more. See http://www.safeminds.org/research/do...utismThimerosa... The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. No, it was not. As clearly stated in the Acknowledgements: "The activities of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre and the National Centre for Register-Based Research are funded by a grant from the Danish National Research Foundation. This study was supported by the Stanley Medical Research Institute. No funding sources were involved in the study design." The only information garnered from the Statens Serum Institut was about vaccine coverage: "In March 1992 the last batch of thimerosal-containing vaccine was released and distributed from Statens Serum Institut in Denmark. All vaccinations were given free of charge and acceptance of vaccinations in Denmark has always been very high; from 1979 onward data on vaccination coverage was available and coverage rates of 90% were found (information was obtained from the State Serum Institute)." As it is not a disinterested party this crookery is not surprizing. When the researcher a) knows which result is desired by employer and b) wants to keep his job, then he does not even have to be told what to do. On top of that the employer is free not to publish a study it does not like. So, the result is predetermined. This is why no research done by a party interested in a specific outcome can ever be trusted. And it wasn't done here. But that didn't stop Safeminds from implying it had been. Cathy |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
cathyb wrote:
But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Indeed. As clearly acknowledged by the study. They also suggested that the increase after the withdrawal of thimerosal could be in part due to this factor, and in part due to increased awareness and therefore diagnosis of the condition. I take it you don't understand the word "minimized". Did they provide how much of the increase could be due to this factor? Did they ever mention that their entire paper could be worthless and incorrect, because of this factor? Did they mention that no honest scientist who was smart enough to get a Ph.D., could make a stupid mistake of this magnitude? Did they mention they were not mistaken, but crooked criminals? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HP: Outstanding Thread on Autism / Mercury Debate ... | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | July 28th 05 07:26 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | May 30th 05 05:28 AM |
The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 31 | February 12th 05 01:43 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | November 28th 04 05:16 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | October 29th 04 05:23 AM |