1083 replies to this topic

[Daniel Cooper]

Maybe he is a moron, but if what he's saying is correct, then he's not.

 

I'd share your skepticism if I had a specific reason to be skeptical (like I had with fomite and droplet transmission and the efficacy of masks), but I don't and I kind of doubt that nearly every scientist that has studied this issue and concluded that there's no link between autism and vaccines is mistaken. The only people who seem skeptical are anti-vaxxers like RFK.

 

Whether vaccines do or do not cause autism is really not the point.

 

What he's said is that he is not open to giving a fair hearing to new evidence. That's not science. As Mind points out, that's more like religion. This issue is not akin to the earth being flat. How many drugs have we previously thought were safe only to later find out otherwise?

 

Every drug that has ever been granted FDA approval that was later pulled from the market at one time had evidence that it was safe, only to later to have new evidence show that it was not.  Vioxx, Fen-Phen, etc.  

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 14 April 2025 - 08:13 PM.

[Florin]

Whether vaccines do or do not cause autism is really not the point.

 

What he's said is that he is not open to giving a fair hearing to new evidence. That's not science. As Mind points out, that's more like religion. This issue is not akin to the earth being flat. How many drugs have we previously thought were safe only to later find out otherwise?

 

Every drug that has ever been granted FDA approval that was later pulled from the market at one time had evidence that it was safe, only to later to have new evidence show that it was not.  Vioxx, Fen-Phen, etc.  

 

Anyone can claim that vaccines cause whatever, but why should I give them the time of day? Has anyone claimed that some drug caused disease X and it was pulled from the market because it caused disease X, even after it was previously shown not to cause disease X after studying millions of people over a long period of time? Should we run a bunch of never-ending, taxpayer-funded studies based on anyone's paranoid beliefs? Do you really think that the vaccines-cause-autism people will stop believing just because RFK will "prove" for the millionth time (according to Marks and probably almost every other expert) that vaccines don't cause autism? Some might but others (probably most, if flat earthers are any guide) will just say that RFK sold out.

Edited by Florin, 14 April 2025 - 11:28 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Anyone can claim that vaccines cause whatever, but why should I give them the time of day? Has anyone claimed that some drug caused disease X and it was pulled from the market because it caused disease X, even after it was previously shown not to cause disease X after studying millions of people over a long period of time? Should we run a bunch of never-ending, taxpayer-funded studies based on anyone's paranoid beliefs? Do you really think that the vaccines-cause-autism people will stop believing just because RFK will "prove" for the millionth time (according to Marks and probably almost every other expert) that vaccines don't cause autism? Some might but others (probably most, if flat earthers are any guide) will just say that RFK sold out.

 

I think you fail to appreciate the corrupting influence that money has had in our medical and pharmaceutical industry which has consequently spilled over into our FDA for some decades now.

 

There are literally billions and billions of dollars riding on the outcome of vaccine studies - which are largely being run by the vaccine makers themselves - providing a particular result. Therefore a prudent person would exercise a lot of skepticism regarding these studies.

 

Does that necessarily mean that vaccines cause autism? Of course not. It does mean that I can no longer accept the results of these studies at face value like I used to. We live in the world generated by the Scientific Revolution. Consequently science has become big business. And where business and science come into conflict it's generally business that is going to win. Science is the handmaiden of business, not the other way around. 

 

And anyone like Dr. Marks that says unequivocally that he's not willing to consider new evidence is telling me clearly which side he's working for on the Business - Science divide.  

[Florin]

I think you fail to appreciate the corrupting influence that money has had in our medical and pharmaceutical industry which has consequently spilled over into our FDA for some decades now.

 

There are literally billions and billions of dollars riding on the outcome of vaccine studies - which are largely being run by the vaccine makers themselves - providing a particular result. Therefore a prudent person would exercise a lot of skepticism regarding these studies.

 

Does that necessarily mean that vaccines cause autism? Of course not. It does mean that I can no longer accept the results of these studies at face value like I used to. We live in the world generated by the Scientific Revolution. Consequently science has become big business. And where business and science come into conflict it's generally business that is going to win. Science is the handmaiden of business, not the other way around. 

 

And anyone like Dr. Marks that says unequivocally that he's not willing to consider new evidence is telling me clearly which side he's working for on the Business - Science divide.  

 

That's like saying if you're not willing to accept new evidence that the earth is flat, you're working with the devil. Maybe you don't agree with that analogy, but people like Marks would agree with it. If there was some evidence that the MMR vaccine caused autism, don't you think that at least some experts would be foaming at the mouth about it regardless of what the FDA said? And what about regulatory bodies and experts in other countries? Did pharm bribe almost every expert and there has been a conspiracy of silence for decades? Unless you're a paranoid nutcase, the more you think about it, the less it makes sense.

 

Newer vaccines like the mRNA stuff are for another discussion.