Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[Scott Sommers]

Clayton, I want to ask you a question. A while back, you and I had a conversation about the meaning of the term 'control group' in vaccine research. I know you have a different understanding of this than I do and your understanding is also different from the researchers who did that work. Both these researchers and I have very deep understanding of research methodology and I'm not at all worried about this. In fact, I have been vaccinated several times as an adult.

So my question is, why do you think you have enough understanding of the concept of experimental control to question us on this? I don't mean to be rude or condescending about this. I'd just like to know what would make you think you could question our interpretation that vaccine trials do have adequate controls to justify their conclusions. And what is this understanding of yours based on? Do you read widely in statistics and experimental design? Why do you think you have more than just a folk understanding of what a clinical trial is and how the results of these are transformed into verbal descriptions?

 

[The Don]

How many fevers will a baby get from vaccines before he gets a seizure while he's "sleeping unattended" in another room?

I don't know, do you have any figures for this ?

 

[excaza]

There are so many gaps. For instance, if a vaccine trial is done with 40% of the healthiest children how will the "unhealthy" 60% of children receive the vaccine?

FFS, this was already explained to you. Do you really still not understand how clinical trials work, or are you just being intentionally dense?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

There are so many gaps. For instance, if a vaccine trial is done with 40% of the healthiest children how will the "unhealthy" 60% of children receive the vaccine?

...and Clayton hits the RESET button, bringing us back to square one.

 

[excaza]

How many fevers will a baby get from vaccines before he gets a seizure while he's "sleeping unattended" in another room?

From your own link and quote:

"Febrile" means "relating to a fever." In some children, having a fever can bring on a seizure. During a febrile seizure, a child often has spasms or jerking movements--larger or small--and may lose consciousness. Febrile seizures usually last only a minute or two. They are most common with fevers that go up fast and reach 102;° F (38.9;° C) or higher, but can also occur when a fever is going back down. Febrile seizures may happen with any condition that causes a fever, including common childhood illnesses like ear infections and, rarely, vaccination.

But yeah, continue quote mining.

 

[excaza]

Can someone explain to me why a disease or condition has to be life-threatening for us to try to prevent it?

Because suffering makes you stronger, so you should do it? Because hey, you won't die!

Who the **** knows...

 

[Scott Sommers]

FFS, this was already explained to you. Do you really still not understand how clinical trials work, or are you just being intentionally dense?

I don't want to be rude to Clayton. I sincerely want to know what he thinks he knows about clinical trials and how he came to know about this. I am also wondering why he thinks he knows more than I do. I say I have read many vaccine studies and the use of the term 'control' is correct and these studies so completely demonstrate their safety I am willing to get and have been vaccinated based on such results.

So Clayton, I don't want to this to be a brawl. I would seriously like to know what you have done to learn the things you need to know to tell me I am wrong about this.

 

[excaza]

I don't want to be rude to Clayton. I sincerely want to know what he thinks he knows about clinical trials and how he came to know about this. I am also wondering why he thinks he knows more than I do. I say I have read many vaccine studies and the use of the term 'control' is correct and these studies so completely demonstrate their safety I am willing to get and have been vaccinated based on such results.

So Clayton, I don't want to this to be a brawl. I would seriously like to know what you have done to learn the things you need to know to tell me I am wrong about this.

For your reference in this grand adventure, this discussion happened earlier in this thread already (beginning around #98).

 

[Scott Sommers]

For your reference in this grand adventure, this discussion happened earlier in this thread already (beginning around #98).

Thank you, but I think I meant something different. I don't just mean what studies he's read or what links he has or even what the dictionary says about something.

Research methodology is very complex. Typically, authorities who deal in this have PhDs and have taken very specialized training as part of obtaining that degree. Clinical trials are especially technical because of the ethical issues involved. The statistics that are used in these studies are quite different from what most students learn, unless they study them directly and whole bodies of new statistics are now being developed and adapted for this kind of work.

I have studied all of this for many years. And I say, control is established in these studies and the safety of vaccines is well-demonstrated. I want to know why Clayton thinks I am wrong. But I don't mean for him just to cite another study. I would like to know what expertise he bases this judgement on. It would be enough for me for him to write about the extensive reading he has done in clinical trials methodology or what he knows about odds ratio test.

But I would like to know why he thinks he knows that adequate control has not been established.

 

[kookbreaker]

How many fevers will a baby get from vaccines before he gets a seizure while he's "sleeping unattended" in another room?

I don't know what this line even means. It sounds like a line from a police drama where the cop is interrogating a suspect in an infant beating death case.

 

[excaza]

Research methodology is very complex.

Yes, but the core concept behind control groups is not complex: minimize the variables. It's fundamental to experimentation in general, but apparently this escapes Clayton completely.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Yes, but the core concept behind control groups is not complex: minimize the variables. It's fundamental to experimentation in general, but apparently this escapes Clayton completely.

I agree that the principle of control is simple. I do not believe Clayton doesn't understand this. His comments follow this logic. But he is unable to understand why these procedures assure a level of control and correct interpretation. Or at least that's what I think, and I am somewhat of an expert in this - but only somewhat.

The actual mechanisms of doing this in clinical trials and the extracting verbal conclusions from results which are based in a complex numerical form is quite difficult. Without this knowledge, I don't believe a person can properly understand what's going on in the kind of research, even if they have a clear understanding of the principles. It's this that I believe Clayton lacks. He seems to be arguing from a kind of folk science of research methodology. It's kind of like the 9/11 crowd on both sides that seem to worship the idea of a probability sample.

The idea of medical and social science research is deeply ingrained in popular culture. It's interesting for me to see what people know, but more significantly, why they think they know it. I am genuinely interested in knowing why Clayton thinks he can understand a study that was analyzed with log odds ratios, as is typical in vaccine research.

 

[Tomblvd]

I still want CM or any other anti-vax person out there to tell me why evil "Big Pharma" wants people NOT to get sick. The entire premise is borderline insane. Do they really think the pharm. companies make more money on a few vaccines than all the other meds they could be producing to treat the actual diseases? And how about the physicians? What will make them more money, giving kids jabs or admitting them to the hospital to treat Whooping Cough?

 

[Scott Sommers]

I still want CM or any other anti-vax person out there to tell me why evil "Big Pharma" wants people NOT to get sick. The entire premise is borderline insane. Do they really think the pharm. companies make more money on a few vaccines than all the other meds they could be producing to treat the actual diseases? And how about the physicians? What will make them more money, giving kids jabs or admitting them to the hospital to treat Whooping Cough?

These guys can always make up a story. That's easy. What I want to know is why these guys think they understand what is arguably the most technical of all scientific research. Why does Clayton think he understands what they studies he cites are actually concluding?

 

[Tomblvd]

These guys can always make up a story. That's easy. What I want to know is why these guys think they understand what is arguably the most technical of all scientific research. Why does Clayton think he understands what they studies he cites are actually concluding?

I think its obvious, Scott. These people go to anti-vaccination sites and merely copy whatever they find without bothering to read what is in the link. And that is especially true concerning studies.

I was debating this subject on a site many years back and someone tried a link-dump to prove his point. I took the time to look up the studies that were on the net and it turned out that not one of the studies I read supported their side of the argument. These studies get tossed around so often that they become taken for granted by these people.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Clayton, I want to ask you a question. A while back, you and I had a conversation about the meaning of the term 'control group' in vaccine research. I know you have a different understanding of this than I do and your understanding is also different from the researchers who did that work. Both these researchers and I have very deep understanding of research methodology and I'm not at all worried about this. In fact, I have been vaccinated several times as an adult.

So my question is, why do you think you have enough understanding of the concept of experimental control to question us on this? I don't mean to be rude or condescending about this. I'd just like to know what would make you think you could question our interpretation that vaccine trials do have adequate controls to justify their conclusions. And what is this understanding of yours based on? Do you read widely in statistics and experimental design? Why do you think you have more than just a folk understanding of what a clinical trial is and how the results of these are transformed into verbal descriptions?

Intelligence is the key here. I can see past obvious double talk and purposeful agenda driven misspeak. Just plain inability of most here to perceive around a corner let alone beyond and down the road gives you three strikes.

 

[Clayton Moore]

And here we see CM casually toss 450 deaths out as if it were nothing. Of course he ignores all the other complications:

Complications with measles are relatively common, ranging from relatively mild and less serious diarrhea, to pneumonia, Otitis media and acute encephalitis (and rarely subacute sclerosing panencephalitis); corneal ulceration leading to corneal scarring. Complications are usually more severe in adults who catch the virus.

But hey, what's a few thousand blind or comatose people?

That's beyond stupid.

If 450 died in 1950 during 1950 level of cure of measles capability how many would die with the 2011 level of cure of measles capability?

 

[Clayton Moore]

I still want CM or any other anti-vax person out there to tell me why evil "Big Pharma" wants people NOT to get sick. The entire premise is borderline insane. Do they really think the pharm. companies make more money on a few vaccines than all the other meds they could be producing to treat the actual diseases? And how about the physicians? What will make them more money, giving kids jabs or admitting them to the hospital to treat Whooping Cough?

Maybe a sport's analogy will help. A jab is pretty much a walk off transaction with no obvious paper trail.

And about 35 billion dollars.

 

[Tomblvd]

If 450 died in 1950 during 1950 level of cure of measles capability how many would die with the 2011 level of cure of measles capability?

I'm not talking about deaths, I'm talking about the more common complications like blindness and encephalitis.

 

[Tomblvd]

Maybe a sport's analogy will help. A jab is pretty much a walk off transaction with no obvious paper trail.

And about 35 billion dollars.

You didn't answer the question, nor did you make any sense at all. What makes more money for the pharmaceutical companies, fit kids, or sick kids? Also, why would physicians be complicit in removing their very livelyhood? Are you really saying a doctor makes more money giving vaccinations than they would treating kids sick with measles, whooping cough, chickenpox and all the rest?