Doctor Who Linked MMR and Autism Struck Off

[leeslover]

Reminds me a lot of Christopher Columbus and everyone laughing and getting their pitchforks out demanding he be killed when he said the world was round........who has the last laugh now?

Anyone barring a few retards knew the world was round by the time Columbus found an Western route to India.

 

Oh no, he didn't, he just thought he had done, because he was a muppet who refused to listen to the best science available at the time. That will be why the West Indies are half way round the globe from the Indies.

[Ackey]

Just because a scientist or medical profession or other "expert" says something doesn't mean it has to be right. Equally, just because MMR immunisation is the most cost efficient way for the NHS to immunise our children doesn't mean that it's wrong to investigate the safety of the vaccine. But the publicity around such investigations needs to be appropriate and responsible.

Hell Yeah, there should be appropriate research. Hell, I'd be quite happy to see someone continue to investigate MMR now and establish further that there is no link or conversely come up with some solid information which suggests a link does in fact exist. If the latter were the case I'd expect further professionals to use due care and process to review that report and come up with their findings.

 

If these findings continue to show a concerning link then the MMR should be placed under review.

 

However one study of 8 people which had vital flaws running throughout it and which was conducted under - at best - dubious moral conditions has seen a catastrophic rise in the number of people refusing the MMR vaccine and as a direct result a rise in the number of people suffering from the measles.

 

The only thing which equates to the outrage I feel towards this sub-human scumbag is the editors of our scandal-seeking media outlets who instead of taking 5 minutes to review the basics of the paper - such as it's sources, case study quality and so forth, blindly and willing fed it to parents facing a difficult decision.

[opinions4u]

But like you said, that is another debate

Sod it, I'll bite.

 

I agree... But when you are going up against the vast amount of already scientific verified / proven research

None of it has conclusively proven man made global warming.

 

global opinion / common sense...

Opinions and common sense have nothing to do with good science.

 

Observation, experiment, measurement, mathermatics and replication would be a better starting point.

Edited May 24, 2010 by opinions4u

[leeslover]

Opinions and common sense have nothing to do with good science.

 

Observation, experiment, measurement, mathermatics and replication would be a better starting point.

We need a name for this new way of thinking. Science, maybe?

[oafc0000]

Sod it, I'll bite.

 

 

None of it has conclusively proven man made global warming.

 

Many scientists believe it has been proven. Some arseholes largely funded by huge American oil companies and such like have managed to pick some holes in some of the research done.

 

The evidence is stacked massively in favour of it being man made.

 

Opinions and common sense have nothing to do with good science.

 

Observation, experiment, measurement, mathermatics and replication would be a better starting point.

 

The good science has already done showing man is causing global warming.

Edited May 24, 2010 by oafc0000

[opinions4u]

We need a name for this new way of thinking. Science, maybe?

I'm afraid state education has replaced that with eco-brainwashing of primary school children.

[leeslover]

I'm afraid state education has replaced that with eco-brainwashing of primary school children.

So, how would you feel if you were a 12th century peasant?

[opinions4u]

So, how would you feel if you were a 12th century peasant?

Given the high temperatures today (oh the irony in the context of my previous ramblings) and my lack of a shower since getting home, I think I probably smell like one at the moment.

 

I don't doubt that once we have spent what is left of our wealth on fighting the supposed curse of global warming then we'll end up back in caves or something.

Edited May 24, 2010 by opinions4u

[leeslover]

Many scientists believe it has been proven. Some arseholes largely funded by huge American oil companies and such like have managed to pick some holes in some of the research done.

 

The evidence is stacked massively in favour of it being man made.

 

 

 

The good science has already done showing man is causing global warming.

I would argue otherwise - it has been an orthodoxy on a quasi-religious scale for at least a decade that it is man made, which in turn will have made funding for research into alternative explanations hard to come by. Most of the funding to put the case forward will have it's roots in the US of A, so it's not as clear cut as you think. I don't know the truth - I believe that global warming is happening come what may, and I believe the best thing we can do about it is ti get richer and allow others to do the same - but I don't think any case is proven one way or another.

[oafc0000]

I would argue otherwise...

 

I don't know the truth....

 

I believe the best thing we can do about it is ti get richer and allow others to do the same...

 

Given these quotes I think I will stick with the majority scientific view point...

 

[opinions4u]

Given these quotes I think I will stick with the majority scientific view point...

... which has failed to prove (or disprove) the theory.

 

While that remains the case I will remain on the fence.

 

Science is not a popularity contest.

Edited May 24, 2010 by opinions4u

[oafc0000]

... which has failed to prove (or disprove) the theory.

 

While that remains the case I will remain on the fence.

 

Science is not a popularity contest.

 

Well I hope our leaders and global leaders stick with following the vast majority of scientific opinion and findings...

[leeslover]

Well I hope our leaders and global leaders stick with following the vast majority of scientific opinion and findings...

Our leaders play a large part in creating the vast majority of scientific opinion, therein lies the danger. Al Gore for example is shown to be an uneducated quasi-relgious fool by any number of his public utterances. He may turn out to be right, but the point is that he has no solid basis for knowing that he is right, if he is it's just guesswork/whatever fits your fancy. I just don't know about the science, my policy solutions work equally well either way, as even the most pro-global warming models suggest that it doesn't make much difference what we do, we may as well have resources to deal with the :censored: if it does come our way.

[Matt]

I've pointed these out before:

 

This site is the best laid out and most comprehensive summary available online. It is updated and maintained by climate scientists, and is well documented with the real science behind this issue.

http://realclimate.org/

 

This is the IPCC site. The report put out by the IPCC represents the current scientific consensus in climate issues, especially climate change and man's contribution to it.

http://www.ipcc.ch/

 

The scientific consensus puts a very high probability (pretty f*****g sure in science terms) on the amount that humans have contributed to the current trend of warming.

 

Let's put into perspective that Al Gore is alarmist, as are many others, but the fact that humans are contributing to climate change is established science.

 

[Ackey]

Speaking of links: http://bit.ly/twUp

[Matt]

Speaking of links: http://bit.ly/twUp

Heh, yeah. JREF were blogging about that a while back and I was meaning to catch up to see what the numbers where. Bookmarked.

[Ackey]

Heh, yeah. JREF were blogging about that a while back and I was meaning to catch up to see what the numbers where. Bookmarked.

It's scary to think that's her death count. What's Dr Wakefields?

 

Also, it saddens me greatly that this is no longer a featured story on the BBC. Already drifted out of the limelight for those who may be on the fence to continue to be misguided.

[oafc0000]

I've pointed these out before:

 

This site is the best laid out and most comprehensive summary available online. It is updated and maintained by climate scientists, and is well documented with the real science behind this issue.

http://realclimate.org/

 

This is the IPCC site. The report put out by the IPCC represents the current scientific consensus in climate issues, especially climate change and man's contribution to it.

http://www.ipcc.ch/

 

The scientific consensus puts a very high probability (pretty f*****g sure in science terms) on the amount that humans have contributed to the current trend of warming.

 

Let's put into perspective that Al Gore is alarmist, as are many others, but the fact that humans are contributing to climate change is established science.

 

The only people who contest this stuff are people who want to make money or want to save money regarding the issue... As LeesLover so brilliantly highlighted...

[Matt]

It's scary to think that's her death count. What's Dr Wakefields?

 

That's MISTER Wakefield.

[Ackey]

That's MISTER Wakefield.

Not in the USA it's not?

[Stevie_J]

Dalendless shid.

Dodal dwadding cund.

[rudemedic]

It's scary to think that's her death count. What's Dr Wakefields?

 

I think in the time since his article was published there have been 2 deaths from measles- in this country who should have been vaccinated . There may have been a couple of deaths from mumps- but since there was a huge outbreak amongst university students (who were too old to receive MMR) I don't think any of them would have been the result of Dr. Wakefield's work. However, since Dr. Wakefield published his paper and it got worldwide coverage he could be responsible for all of Ms McCarthy's as well (plus more).

 

Incidentally he is still Dr. Wakefield- he earned that title by passing medical school the fact he is no longer on the general medical register doesn't take away his doctorate- in fact he might even have a PhD. as well.

 

I'm not sure he is employed in the states either as when his employers found out he was up in front of the GMC they fired him. Plus even if he was found to be correct and there is a link between MMR and autism (there ain't) it wouldn't matter- he was removed from the General Medical Register because of his research METHODS not the results.

[Ackey]

I think in the time since his article was published there have been 2 deaths from measles- in this country who should have been vaccinated . There may have been a couple of deaths from mumps- but since there was a huge outbreak amongst university students (who were too old to receive MMR) I don't think any of them would have been the result of Dr. Wakefield's work. However, since Dr. Wakefield published his paper and it got worldwide coverage he could be responsible for all of Ms McCarthy's as well (plus more).

That outbreak was a result of a decline in herd immunity and can therefore be linked, not definitively - I accept, to Dr Wakefield and his research.

[leeslover]

The only people who contest this stuff are people who want to make money or want to save money regarding the issue... As LeesLover so brilliantly highlighted...

The people who I was thinking particularly need to get rich aren't you or me, it's the likes of Bangladesh. The scientists behind Kyoto estimated that if fully implemented it would delay rising sea levels by 6 years in 100, at a cost of $300 trillion in economic growth worldwide. If I lived in a dirt poor country below sea level I would rather give you the six years in have a cut of that money to prepare for what's coming anyway, or it will kill an awful lot more kids than this doctor did.

[rudemedic]

That outbreak was a result of a decline in herd immunity and can therefore be linked, not definitively - I accept, to Dr Wakefield and his research.

 

Yeah that played a part but a lot of it was down to the age of the students- they were too old to get the MMR vaccine, quite a few of them would have had a single measles vaccine (I know I did), some of the young ladies would have had the rubella vaccine and I would think some had already had the mumps (so didn't need vaccinating). Another factor was the behaviour of students- mumps spreads nicely when there is a lot of kissing etc. going on (certainly why there was a big outbreak at my uni about 5 years ago).

 

In some ways Dr. Wakefield isn't responsible for the outbreak- he didn't tell a bunch of non-science graduates to print it in their papers. (Something I think you might be familar with- since you are a big fan of Dr. Goldacre's work).