Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[dafydd]

So... why should I/we take your doctor at his word?

Because unlike you he actually knows something about the subject.

 

[dafydd]

he scientific evidence against you claim is overwhelming and its high time you addressed it.

How can he do that? He takes no notice of the scientific evidence so how can he comment on it? It's like asking a five year old to explain the theory of relativity.

 

[dafydd]

So you're saying that doctors don't vaccinate their kids because they don't have the final say on whether their kids are vaccinated? And, er, what is that supposed to prove?

That will remain a mystery. Clayton never answers questions.

 

[332nd]

So Dr. Oz says he believes in vaccines(his wife doesn't). Dr. Oz says/implies his wife has the final say on whether their children are vaccinated.

So you're saying that Dr. Oz's children do get the vaccines? In spite of his wife's negative view of vaccines?

No. Just pointing out how stupid your logic is.

As far as your doctor, what snake oil profiteer doesn't say his family ingests his snake oil?

So... why should I/we take your doctor at his word?

Yeah, that "logic" right there.

Also, where did I say that I simply took him at his word?

 

[Clayton Moore]

No. Just pointing out how stupid your logic is.





Yeah, that "logic" right there.

Also, where did I say that I simply took him at his word?

This ought to be good. What did you do?

 

[Clayton Moore]

So you're saying that doctors don't vaccinate their kids because they don't have the final say on whether their kids are vaccinated? And, er, what is that supposed to prove?

What I'm saying is Dr. Oz stated publicly his wife rules the roost as to whether their children are vaccinated.


I'm saying that doctors who don't have the final parental say on whether their kids are vaccinated don't vaccinate their kids.

 

[kid meatball]

What I'm saying is Dr. Oz stated publicly his wife rules the roost as to whether their children are vaccinated.


I'm saying that doctors who don't have the final parental say on whether their kids are vaccinated don't vaccinate their kids.

100% of spouses of doctors are against vaccination.

 

[mikado]

100% of spouses of doctors are against vaccination.

Well, obviously!!

 

[Mojo]

What I'm saying is Dr. Oz stated publicly his wife rules the roost as to whether their children are vaccinated.


I'm saying that doctors who don't have the final parental say on whether their kids are vaccinated don't vaccinate their kids.

What about plumbers who don't have the final say on whether their kids are vaccinated?

 

[Clayton Moore]

What about plumbers who don't have the final say on whether their kids are vaccinated?

What about them?

 

[Mojo]

What about them?

Well, exactly. If they don't have the final say on whether their children are vaccinated, then their opinion on whether their children should be vaccinated or not won't be reflected in whether their children actually get vaccinated, any more than the doctors' opinions will. If someone isn't making the decision, their profession isn't relevant to the argument from authority you are trying to make.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Well, exactly. If they don't have the final say on whether their children are vaccinated, then their opinion on whether their children should be vaccinated or not won't be reflected in whether their children actually get vaccinated, any more than the doctors' opinions will. If someone isn't making the decision, their profession isn't relevant to the argument from authority you are trying to make.

The term overruled comes to mind.

If I am right, and a doctor to boot, with an issue concerning the health of my children I don't get overruled by my spouse.
Getting or not getting a vaccine is not deciding whether your child should not be allowed to say up late.

 

[Mojo]

The term overruled comes to mind.

If I am right, and a doctor to boot, with an issue concerning the health of my children I don't get overruled by my spouse.

Unless your spouse thinks you are wrong, and has the final say.

 

[Tomtomkent]

If I am right,

You aren't.

and a doctor to boot,

I doubt this will ever be an issue.

with an issue concerning the health of my children I don't get overruled by my spouse.

That depends on custody rights.

Getting or not getting a vaccine is not deciding whether your child should not be allowed to say up late.

With any luck there will be a review to remove "controversial" status from vaccinations soon. A recent UK court case simply proved that one parent of joint custody should be more than enough to OK the use of a vaccine with out wasting any more court time.

 

[Clayton Moore]

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/...s.html?cid=6a00d8357f3f2969e20147e0324398970b

"No studies have compared the incidence of autism in vaccinated, unvaccinated, or alternatively vaccinated children (i.e., schedules that spread out vaccines, avoid combination vaccines, or include only select vaccines). These studies would be difficult to perform because of the likely differences among these 3 groups in health care seeking behavior and the ethics of experimentally studying children who have not received vaccines."

Health care seeking behavior? Ethics of studying kids who haven't gotten vaccines?

Let me get this straight: we have the most complex and raging health epidemic amongst our kids in modern times, and no plausible explanation for cause from the mainstream authorities. Meanwhile, we have tens of thousands of case reports of kids regressing into autism after vaccination, but it's just too complicated and unethical to study unvaccinated kids?

These studies would be difficult to perform because of the likely differences among these 3 groups in health care seeking behavior and the ethics of experimentally studying children who have not received vaccines.

 

[Tomtomkent]

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/...s.html?cid=6a00d8357f3f2969e20147e0324398970b


These studies would be difficult to perform because of the likely differences among these 3 groups in health care seeking behavior and the ethics of experimentally studying children who have not received vaccines.

Which is why there are other forms of study available that would not require a double or triple blinded test where children would not know if they were vaccinated or not.

Why exactly are you complaining that the wrong tool has not been used for this particular analysis?

 

[Mojo]

Why exactly are you complaining that the wrong tool has not been used for this particular analysis?

Because he didn't get the result he wanted.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Which is why there are other forms of study available that would not require a double or triple blinded test where children would not know if they were vaccinated or not.

Why exactly are you complaining that the wrong tool has not been used for this particular analysis?

aahhahahahahhahaha

Let me get this straight: we have the most complex and raging health epidemic amongst our kids in modern times, and no plausible explanation for cause from the mainstream authorities. Meanwhile, we have tens of thousands of case reports of kids regressing into autism after vaccination, but it's just too complicated and unethical to study unvaccinated kids?

 

[Dcdrac]

so one crank Dr will not vaccinate his children, more unnecessary suffering on the horizon for those children then.

clayton where is your irrefutable proof that MMR causes autism and vaccines cause asthma and somehow magically influence evolution?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Which is why there are other forms of study available that would not require a double or triple blinded test where children would not know if they were vaccinated or not.

Why exactly are you complaining that the wrong tool has not been used for this particular analysis?

There have been no studies of unvaccinated children.

The highlighted makes no sense. Rewrite it.