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.
How disingenuous of you to cherry pick like that. Here's some more of his letter:
"I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits. . . . Reasonable scientists can and do differ in their interpretation of information."
In other words, he's not quite the "whistleblower" some of the anti-vax people think he is. And he's leaving the door open that he was in error in his interpretation.
Posting a snippet is not "cherry picking". Here's the paragraph that follows the one you chose which was after the ones that HappyTexan posted:
Quote:
My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.
He's not anti-vaccine but he is concerned with the decision to omit statistically significant data and the fact the risks were not conveyed to the public, but instead hidden. That is pretty serious.
Why were parents asked for the long form of their child's birth certificates? Is it common for parents to get a copy of a "long form" birth certificate for their child?
Why are you twisting this into a birth certificate argument? I'm not going to play this game. I'm saying, it's untrue that the information is not available on a birth certificate. Apparently it was available for the other kids in the study.
He's not anti-vaccine but he is concerned with the decision to omit statistically significant data and the fact the risks were not conveyed to the public, but instead hidden. That is pretty serious.
He also said other's interpretations could differ. He's hedging.
Why are you twisting this into a birth certificate argument? I'm not going to play this game. I'm saying, it's untrue that the information is not available on a birth certificate. Apparently it was available for the other kids in the study.
Why were parents asked for the long form of their child's birth certificates? Is it common for parents to get a copy of a "long form" birth certificate for their child?
Researchers doing an epidemiological study tried to gain as much data as possible. Clearly a sign of malfeasance.
Why are you twisting this into a birth certificate argument? I'm not going to play this game. I'm saying, it's untrue that the information is not available on a birth certificate. Apparently it was available for the other kids in the study.
If the kids who's parents could not produce a birth certificate were not included in the study results then why? The information that the researchers wanted wouldn't be on a birth certificate provided by a parent because parents don't typically have the long form of their child's birth certificates. That information would be stored with the state's vital statistics.
Researchers doing an epidemiological study tried to gain as much data as possible. Clearly a sign of malfeasance.
But why would they ask the parents for that info. Parents don't have the long form with that info. The long form with that info is stored with the state vital statistics. A regular birth certificate does not contain the info that the researchers claim they needed for the study.
Access to the information on the birth certificates allowed researchers to assess more complete information on race as well as other important characteristics, including possible risk factors for autism such as the child’s birth weight, mother’s age, and education. This information was not available for the children without birth certificates; hence CDC study did not present data by race on black, white, or other race children from the whole study sample. It presented the results on black and white/other race children from the group with birth certificates.
You would certainly know more about what's on a Georgia birth certificate than the researchers on the ground in Georgia.
Are you going to claim this is another conspiracy from the CDC?
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.
