https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud in case anyone isn’t familiar with the study you’re talking about. Imagine being wrong so hard that you lose your license to practice medicine but keep up the act for decades afterward. Wakefield is such a piece of shit.
Figured the fraud mentioned in the wiki article covered the “dishonest” part and “wrong” was easier to prove. I can’t rule out the possibility that he’s in so deep that he really believes what he’s saying (not that it’d make the situation any better).
Sucks to hear that you’ve had bad reactions in the past but I’m glad it didn’t turn you against them as a whole. Hopefully enough of the rest of us can get them and lower the overall risk of illness when flu season rolls around.
I’m actually the same way, I’m one of those that got myocarditis after the vaccine, but I also understand that nothing is side affect free so while it stinks for me I still 100% support the use of vaccines… Thankfully after a few weeks/months the heart palpitations stopped.
I mean … Polio anyone? No? Chickenpox? Oh yeah that’s right, vaccines. They actually worked.
Chickenpox. Ahem. We didn’t have a vaccine for that when I was a child. We just caught it and were miserable for a few weeks.
I’m sorry to tell you that’s not what happened.
You had chickenpox for a few weeks whilst the shingles bedded down nice and cosy in your nerves ready to strike again when your immune system is down. It’s not over and it’ll be worse when it comes back.
There’s a whole industry of quacks exploiting families desperate for answers and solutions when they feel out of their depth with a child they don’t fully understand. Makes me sick.
I love when people claim to not trust the science of vaccines. Vaccines created using the same scientific method that allowed the invention of the smart phones they’re typing from. The same science that allows for all modern medicine, energy production, manuacturing, etc.
most cookers don’t understand what the scientific method is. my brother thinks it’s like some list of formulas scientists use to see if something is true or not, not the entire actual process around theory/observation/evidence/peer review. they thibk “science” indoctrinates people to think a certain way and that scientists somehow are told to ignore everything not in a textbook. no explaining how wrong this is in over 3 years has helped
I mean, the scientific method produces mistakes - it’s just that the scientific method is also intended to fix those mistakes over time. Being critical of research is helpful for the correct functioning of the scientific method, but this has nothing to do with conspiracy theorists who will question the overwhelmingly corroborated general principles that determine the functioning of AC or light bulbs.
I think you’re missing that she is a pediatrician and not just a “doctor.” Pediatricians administer a big majority of vaccines and care for the patients receiving them. They probably do learn a hell of a lot more about them than, say, an oncologist who spends all their time treating cancer in old people. And they see the effects of them up close in the field. Any doctor is constantly researching and staying up to date. A pediatrician worth their salt is very well educated on all relevant studies even if they didn’t conduct those studies with their own two hands. I reject the notion that you need to conduct the studies to know the science: that’s a ludicrous bar for us to set.
How is it not accurate? Someone’s titles or anecdotal evidence are irrelevant when statistics about millions of individuals are the only tool to reveal such tiny issues.
If one doctor would already notice issues with something, then the whole massive chain that led to the human use of that medicine completely failed in an unprecedented way - after all, even the most basic tests should have immediately revealed problems.
A doctor has access to totally different electronic information services than the average jackass on Facebook, if you didn’t know. Lawyers and journalists have their own versions of this too. So yeah, any doctor has better info than any private individual.
More importantly, they have well-informed judgment about how to consume those statistics, quality them, and apply them. This is quite important as the average Facebook jackass is bombarded by deliberately misleading information which they need to think critically about unraveling.
Have you tried to read a primary resource, scientific article? They are mostly behind a paywall, hospitals and universities pay for subscription access. So yes, doctors and researchers have easier access to papers than the public (and the expertise to critically evaluate the information presented). Also, those large cohort studies with thorough stats are a huge amount of work and always have a team of people to design the experiments, interact with patients, get the data, run the stats, and so forth. MDs would be in the mix there too, it’s not like a single immunologist would do the whole thing alone…
That is your argument? Paywall? And now it is just easier access, not actually some kind of different material all together as you claimed? There are things like Scihub, let alone any student in any university has essentially access to all papers anyway? How is that in any way anything special?
I also don’t get why you bring me into the discussion. Keep it about the topic at hand, you know nothing about me. It is irrelevant whether I read papers or not.
Nowhere did the woman in the image claim to be an “expert,” though, so why bring it up? Everyone giving advice about something doesn’t have to be an expert.
deleted by creator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud in case anyone isn’t familiar with the study you’re talking about. Imagine being wrong so hard that you lose your license to practice medicine but keep up the act for decades afterward. Wakefield is such a piece of shit.
deleted by creator
That guy committed crimes against humanity. What a thorough grifter
Figured the fraud mentioned in the wiki article covered the “dishonest” part and “wrong” was easier to prove. I can’t rule out the possibility that he’s in so deep that he really believes what he’s saying (not that it’d make the situation any better).
Sucks to hear that you’ve had bad reactions in the past but I’m glad it didn’t turn you against them as a whole. Hopefully enough of the rest of us can get them and lower the overall risk of illness when flu season rolls around.
deleted by creator
I’m actually the same way, I’m one of those that got myocarditis after the vaccine, but I also understand that nothing is side affect free so while it stinks for me I still 100% support the use of vaccines… Thankfully after a few weeks/months the heart palpitations stopped.
I mean … Polio anyone? No? Chickenpox? Oh yeah that’s right, vaccines. They actually worked.
deleted by creator
I’m sorry to tell you that’s not what happened.
You had chickenpox for a few weeks whilst the shingles bedded down nice and cosy in your nerves ready to strike again when your immune system is down. It’s not over and it’ll be worse when it comes back.
deleted by creator
Yeah I don’t believe you
deleted by creator
The anti vaxxer who claims to have gone through medical school though, everyone is gathering to hear what stupid bullshit they lie about
IIRC, he wasn’t even anti vax at the start. He was being paid to peddle separate vaccines and claimed it was just the MMR jab that could cause autism.
Which is still bollocks anyway, but people will do anything to deny that autism runs in their family…
He wasn’t just paid to peddle the separate vaccines. He owned the company that made them.
And if only, it was just him in the autism field. SBC isn’t better than him on the piece of shit scale.
There’s a whole industry of quacks exploiting families desperate for answers and solutions when they feel out of their depth with a child they don’t fully understand. Makes me sick.
I love when people claim to not trust the science of vaccines. Vaccines created using the same scientific method that allowed the invention of the smart phones they’re typing from. The same science that allows for all modern medicine, energy production, manuacturing, etc.
People that don’t trust or “believe” science are too stupid to connect those dots.
most cookers don’t understand what the scientific method is. my brother thinks it’s like some list of formulas scientists use to see if something is true or not, not the entire actual process around theory/observation/evidence/peer review. they thibk “science” indoctrinates people to think a certain way and that scientists somehow are told to ignore everything not in a textbook. no explaining how wrong this is in over 3 years has helped
deleted by creator
I mean, the scientific method produces mistakes - it’s just that the scientific method is also intended to fix those mistakes over time. Being critical of research is helpful for the correct functioning of the scientific method, but this has nothing to do with conspiracy theorists who will question the overwhelmingly corroborated general principles that determine the functioning of AC or light bulbs.
I think you’re missing that she is a pediatrician and not just a “doctor.” Pediatricians administer a big majority of vaccines and care for the patients receiving them. They probably do learn a hell of a lot more about them than, say, an oncologist who spends all their time treating cancer in old people. And they see the effects of them up close in the field. Any doctor is constantly researching and staying up to date. A pediatrician worth their salt is very well educated on all relevant studies even if they didn’t conduct those studies with their own two hands. I reject the notion that you need to conduct the studies to know the science: that’s a ludicrous bar for us to set.
The point is that her education or anecdotal evidence is not relevant to begin with.
That is neither accurate nor the point.
How is that not the point he made?
How is it not accurate? Someone’s titles or anecdotal evidence are irrelevant when statistics about millions of individuals are the only tool to reveal such tiny issues. If one doctor would already notice issues with something, then the whole massive chain that led to the human use of that medicine completely failed in an unprecedented way - after all, even the most basic tests should have immediately revealed problems.
A doctor has access to totally different electronic information services than the average jackass on Facebook, if you didn’t know. Lawyers and journalists have their own versions of this too. So yeah, any doctor has better info than any private individual.
More importantly, they have well-informed judgment about how to consume those statistics, quality them, and apply them. This is quite important as the average Facebook jackass is bombarded by deliberately misleading information which they need to think critically about unraveling.
How does a doctor have different access to papers with statistical analysis regarding such topics?
Does a lawyer have different laws than those I can look at?
Better judgement, yes, valid point.
Have you tried to read a primary resource, scientific article? They are mostly behind a paywall, hospitals and universities pay for subscription access. So yes, doctors and researchers have easier access to papers than the public (and the expertise to critically evaluate the information presented). Also, those large cohort studies with thorough stats are a huge amount of work and always have a team of people to design the experiments, interact with patients, get the data, run the stats, and so forth. MDs would be in the mix there too, it’s not like a single immunologist would do the whole thing alone…
That is your argument? Paywall? And now it is just easier access, not actually some kind of different material all together as you claimed? There are things like Scihub, let alone any student in any university has essentially access to all papers anyway? How is that in any way anything special?
I also don’t get why you bring me into the discussion. Keep it about the topic at hand, you know nothing about me. It is irrelevant whether I read papers or not.
In even more fairness, reading memes on Facebook makes you even less of an expert on vaccines.
deleted by creator
Nowhere did the woman in the image claim to be an “expert,” though, so why bring it up? Everyone giving advice about something doesn’t have to be an expert.
They’re trying to cast doubt. Doesn’t need to make sense, just needs to increase turmoil in the world.
Perhaps agree she’s not an “expert” but she’s certainly “educated”
Sure, but the person told her to educate herself which she responded to.
You can get into a research career as an MD too. It’s not strictly clinical practice.
We’re all encouraged to publish papers.
In all fairness downplaying medical school makes you ignorant
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Med school is definitely not a trade school. The amount of material I learned per day in med school was about the same quantity as a week of college.
First of all, fuck you. Nowhere did anyone say she was an expert. Like let me just pick up this goal post and move it.
Second of all fuck you. You don’t need to be an expert know the experts opinion.
Did I mention, fuck you?
You ok?
Better now
deleted by creator