Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rene Toko is a chiropractor who works with autistic kids. She believes the vaccine - autism link, which has been definitively disproved.
Warren Levin left CT when he was about to be disciplined for using chelation therapy --- a disproved treatment for heart disease --- and other infractions:
On his web site he offers HCG for weight loss --- it does not work.
Stephen Marini is a chiropractor who believes vaccines cause asthma and autism.
He thinks we " know how to handle" childhood diseases for which there are vaccines. Appears not to realize these illnesses kill kids.
Mary Toko. No medical training. Believes vaccines cause autism.
Lawrence Palevsky. Articles on his web site reveal a shocking lack of medical knowledge about immunology. One article references Wakefield. Would not want him treating anyone in my family.
And Wakefield himself!
You believe these people and not the scientists that actually do hands on study of vaccines?
Sounds like he does pretty much what you say you do, doesn't it?
It's funny that you feel comfortable and entitled to post links to some random person's blog and then turn around and try to discredit purehuman for not posting links from credible sources.
It's funny that you feel comfortable and entitled to post links to some random person's blog and then turn around and try to discredit purehuman for not posting links from credible sources.
I guess you missed the section of the blog with links to all of the relevant scientific studies? Not his studies or opinions, but the peer-reviewed scientific studies of people with domain expertise.
Regarding peer-reviewed studies, it still confounds me that naysayers will question and criticize experts in the field, experts with a multitude of relevant qualifications and decades of experience, but will take anecdotal information and opinions of people with no education in the field as fact. I'd really love to understand the logic behind that, because it makes no sense to me.
I guess you missed the section of the blog with links to all of the relevant scientific studies? Not his studies or opinions, but the peer-reviewed scientific studies of people with domain expertise.
Regarding peer-reviewed studies, it still confounds me that naysayers will question and criticize experts in the field, experts with a multitude of relevant qualifications and decades of experience, but will take anecdotal information and opinions of people with no education in the field as fact. I'd really love to understand the logic behind that, because it makes no sense to me.
The particular blog post that was linked was one making assumptions about all people who choose to forgo vaccinations (or under vaccinate). It was not based on anything other then one person's opinion. If there are scientific links on the bolg, great but one can find those themselves so I'd hardly call someone who can link to studies an expert. Scientific evidence had absolutely nothing to do with the post linked nor is the writer of the blog a doctor or a scientist or credited researcher or an alternative health practitioner.
If there are scientific links on the bolg, great but one can find those themselves so I'd hardly call someone who can link to studies an expert. Scientific evidence had absolutely nothing to do with the post linked nor is the writer of the blog a doctor or a scientist or credited researcher or an alternative health practitioner.
Good grief, I suggest you reread my post. I did not call the blogger an expert, he merely provided a repository for relevant studies. I called the publishers of the studies experts in their field.
The particular blog post that was linked was one making assumptions about all people who choose to forgo vaccinations (or under vaccinate). It was not based on anything other then one person's opinion. If there are scientific links on the bolg, great but one can find those themselves so I'd hardly call someone who can link to studies an expert. Scientific evidence had absolutely nothing to do with the post linked nor is the writer of the blog a doctor or a scientist or credited researcher or an alternative health practitioner.
What you are doing is making the mistake of saying that all opinions expressed on a subject are of equal weight. All people have the right to express their opinion, but that should never be confused with the notion that all opinions are equal.
The difference between PH's video and the opinion of the blogger is that one opinion reflects solid scientific research which has been published and the other does not.
I can have an opinion that the moon is made of green cheese. However, that opinion that has been conclusively debunked by both astronomers and astronauts who have been to the moon.
Actually, opposition to vaccination is hardly new or novel. There was opposition to the small pox vaccine when it was used. That opposition disappeared about the time that vaccine successfully eradicated small pox all around the world. Andrew Wakefield's lies about the MMR vaccine resulted in a reoccurrence of red measles in the United Kingdom and at least three children died because of that. Measles, too, ought to be on its way to eradication as a disease. However, that can't happen as long as anti-vaccination groups continue to spout misinformation about the MMR shot and terrorize gullible people.
Science is a not a democracy where we count votes to determine facts (or see who makes the most noise). Facts are determined by scientific research and study.
Good grief, I suggest you reread my post. I did not call the blogger an expert, he merely provided a repository for relevant studies. I called the publishers of the studies experts in their field.
I have provided many "repositories' for relevant studies......studies done by experts in their fields.....each time you have shot the imformation down without even looking at it.....and your reason was......"Oh...that's just a blog..., or some other inane reason.
Good grief, I suggest you reread my post. I did not call the blogger an expert, he merely provided a repository for relevant studies. I called the publishers of the studies experts in their field.
Google scholar provides a repository for relevant studies. I don't need to look that up on someone's blog.
I have provided many "repositories' for relevant studies......studies done by experts in their fields.....each time you have shot the imformation down without even looking at it.....and your reason was......"Oh...that's just a blog..., or some other inane reason.
I do not recall ever seeing your posts, be they blogs or otherwise, link to a peer-reviewed scientific study.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
