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.
It also maintains that CDC whistle-blower William Thompson wants to be subpoenaed by a Congress that has thus far not done so; that for him to speak about official business otherwise has legal implications. Much of what transpired is revealed in the film by a fellow CDC employee.
A CDC study plan wasn't adhered to, numbers that contributed to a statistical significance were dropped after evaluation. A CDC official is on record as telling a Congressional committee that a 'vaxxed vs. unvaxxed' study was never conducted.
Impossible. I was repeatedly informed it had been a victim of censorship.
Incidentally, if I had something important to convey, I don't think I'd choose as spokesperson a guy who's already caught committing fraud with his research, but perhaps that just me.
Impossible. I was repeatedly informed it had been a victim of censorship.
Incidentally, if I had something important to convey, I don't think I'd choose as spokesperson a guy who's already caught committing fraud with his research, but perhaps that just me.
It's largely a movie about William Thompson.
And the documentary was--and is--the subject of a censorship campaign by the New York Times and the Tribeca Film Festival.
The very basis for the allegations against Wakefield was thrown out by the High Court in Prof. John Walker-Smith's appeal.
And the documentary was--and is--the subject of a censorship campaign by the New York Times and the Tribeca Film Festival.
Ehm - saying "this is a person who has problems with telling the truth and his movie is not something you'd want your name associated with" is not censorship. It's an opinion.
Quote:
The very basis for the allegations against Wakefield were thrown out by the High Court in Prof. John Walker-Smith's appeal.
Sure they were. It's completely impossible to imagine that an upstanding character like Wakefield bamboozled a colleague. When's Wakefield's appeal? I mean, he's certain to win now, right?
Ehm - saying "this is a person who has problems with telling the truth and his movie is not something you'd want your name associated with" is not censorship. It's an opinion.
Sure they were. It's completely impossible to imagine that an upstanding character like Wakefield bamboozled a colleague. When's Wakefield's appeal? I mean, he's certain to win now, right?
"Oh my God. I cannot believe we did what we did. But we did." -Dr. William Thompson, CDC Senior Scientist
CDC colleague Brian Hooker relates, extensively and in detail, the data discoveries he made when following Thompson's research.
A lot of interviews in the documentary. More accounts that bolster the families that report almost immediate symptoms of febrile seizures and other neurological sequelae, intestinal disorders, following the officially promoted schedules. There's a reported higher correlation with the age range at when the MMR is administered.
Requests made for individual measles, mumps, and rubella constituent shots are followed by manufacturers terminating production of them.
And guess who Julie Gerberding took a job with after CDC?
You want to walk in the footsteps of that particular Pied Piper, have at it. Just don't pretend you're somehow being oppressed when people say it's a bad idea.
You want to walk in the footsteps of that particular Pied Piper, have at it. Just don't pretend you're somehow being oppressed when people say it's a bad idea.
Who are you talking about? William Thompson? Brian Hooker?
I won't blame the vaccines because I am not a scientist. I can just tell you that my son was normal until he took the rest of his shots at age 2. He was diagnosed at 4 as autistic. Something did it, because we could watch him regress.
It also maintains that CDC whistle-blower William Thompson wants to be subpoenaed by a Congress that has thus far not done so; that for him to speak about official business otherwise has legal implications. Much of what transpired is revealed in the film by a fellow CDC employee.
A CDC study plan wasn't adhered to, numbers that contributed to a statistical significance were dropped after evaluation. A CDC official is on record as telling a Congressional committee that a '' vaxxed vs. unvaxxed study was never conducted.
It's a big movie.
Paper being shredded does not mean data was destroyed. This was pointed out to you in response to your previous iteration of this topic.
The data in the study for which the "papers" were allegedly "destroyed" is still available from the CDC. Anyone with the credentials to understand it is welcome to get it and re-analyze it.
"Objective. To compare ages at first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination between children with autism and children who did not have autism in the total population and in selected subgroups, including children with regression in development."
What did Thompson say about the garbage can incident?
"Sometime soon after the meeting where we decided to exclude reporting any RACE effects, also between August 2002 and September 2002, the coauthors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. Dr. Coleen Boyle was not present at the meeting even though she was involved in scheduling that meeting. The remaining 4 coauthors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all our hard copy documents that we thought we should discard and put them in the large garbage can. However, because I assumed this was illegal and would violate both FOIA laws and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all my documents in my office and I retained all the associated computer files. This included all the Word files (agendas and manuscript drafts), Excel files with analysis and results, and SAS files that I used to generate the statistical findings. I also kept all my written notes from meetings. All the associated MMR-Autism Study computer files have been retained on the Immunization Safety Office computer servers since the inception of the study and they continue to reside there today."
Get that? No data was destroyed! Thompson says so himself!
More on the study and Hooker's failed attempt to re-analyze the data himself. The author is a statistician with expertise in designing research studies.
"The criticism that the study discarded data from African American subjects just doesn’t hold water. No data was discarded. For the subjects who were linked to birth certificates, the researchers performed additional analyses. In this light, I see a careful observational study that assessed the role of potential confounders.
The biggest weakness that I see for this study is that the researchers could not compare subjects who were vaccinated for MMR to those who were not vaccinated at all. The authors wrote that they “lacked an unvaccinated comparison group.” The truth is that the vast majority of kids are vaccinated. Consequently, this study compared the distribution of vaccination ages for case and control children to see if the timing impacted the risk of autism. It didn’t.
DeStefano et al. cite a large Dutch study that did include an unvaccinated group of nearly 100,000 subjects. This study found no increased risk for those who were vaccinated compared to the completely unvaccinated group."
The movie is garbage.
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.
