Thus far:
Big pharma friendly head of NIH
Big pharma friendly head of CDC
RFK ignores FDA reforms and focuses on chasing his own tail with autism stuff
Swamp drained? Lol
-
102
-
Moge gen wrote:
Newname wrote:
This is a thread on autism cause and you turned it into a whine about Jewish victimhood.
Since you did, explain what you think I have said that is not accurate about Israel likely being the assassin. And I didn't even bring up how JFK was trying to get Dimona inspected and AIPAC registered
You are proving the point of my original post every time you post.
Once again as you seem to want to stay on this:
I noted that of all the named suspects, the Mob, the Cubans, the intelligence agencies, and Israel, only the intell agencies and Israel and their Lobby have the power to cover up for over 60 years. And Israel has a far greater need to keep it covered up if they were involved than does the CIA (which has survived several other huge crimes they have committed ).
And why would Israel do this? JFK/RFK requiring "The Lobby" to register as a lobby for a foreign nation meaning a lot more oversight and, of course, Israel's secret nukes program at Dimona that JFK was insisting be opened for inspection.
211 -
Newname wrote:
Moge gen wrote:
You are proving the point of my original post every time you post.
Once again as you seem to want to stay on this:
I noted that of all the named suspects, the Mob, the Cubans, the intelligence agencies, and Israel, only the intell agencies and Israel and their Lobby have the power to cover up for over 60 years. And Israel has a far greater need to keep it covered up if they were involved than does the CIA (which has survived several other huge crimes they have committed ).
And why would Israel do this? JFK/RFK requiring "The Lobby" to register as a lobby for a foreign nation meaning a lot more oversight and, of course, Israel's secret nukes program at Dimona that JFK was insisting be opened for inspection.
Just shut the f*ck up you delusional moron.
Do you regret voting for Trump now that your tin foil hat is 25% more expensive?
91 -
good wrote:
Before people come in here to claim that the link between autism and vaccines has long been debunked, let me say this: IT HAS NOT.
Some time in the 90s, a researcher authored a scientific paper that did not pass peer review. Thats it. Nothing was debunked. That a paper does not pass peer review does not invalidate the hypothesis. The media has been lying to you guys all along.
Lol this is completely made up
111 -
Go away, dumb*ss wrote:
Newname wrote:
Once again as you seem to want to stay on this:
I noted that of all the named suspects, the Mob, the Cubans, the intelligence agencies, and Israel, only the intell agencies and Israel and their Lobby have the power to cover up for over 60 years. And Israel has a far greater need to keep it covered up if they were involved than does the CIA (which has survived several other huge crimes they have committed ).
And why would Israel do this? JFK/RFK requiring "The Lobby" to register as a lobby for a foreign nation meaning a lot more oversight and, of course, Israel's secret nukes program at Dimona that JFK was insisting be opened for inspection.
Just shut the f*ck up you delusional moron.
Do you regret voting for Trump now that your tin foil hat is 25% more expensive?
I made my argument. Based on facts and logical conclusions.
Your argument is STFU! The emotional response with no attempt to make an argument would appear to point to you inability to overcome your programming
211 -
good wrote:
Before people come in here to claim that the link between autism and vaccines has long been debunked, let me say this: IT HAS NOT.
Some time in the 90s, a researcher authored a scientific paper that did not pass peer review. Thats it. Nothing was debunked. That a paper does not pass peer review does not invalidate the hypothesis. The media has been lying to you guys all along.
Indeed it largely has. Because researchers aren't stupid, they looked to see whether there is a protective effect against autism of non-vaccination. In other words, if vaccination raises autism risk, then unvaccinated populations should have lower rates of autism than vaccinated populations. And they do not. There is no protective effect for autism of non-vaccination. Separately, the increase in autism can be entirely accounted for by parental age, and largely by paternal age, as men accumulate mutations in their germline DNA as they age, and those mutations appear to contribute to the risk of autism. So you have: 1) a falsified hypothesis that skipping vaccines is protective against autism 2) another mechanism that accounts for the entirety of the increase in autism.
31 -
KXPhD wrote:
good wrote:
Before people come in here to claim that the link between autism and vaccines has long been debunked, let me say this: IT HAS NOT.
Some time in the 90s, a researcher authored a scientific paper that did not pass peer review. Thats it. Nothing was debunked. That a paper does not pass peer review does not invalidate the hypothesis. The media has been lying to you guys all along.
Indeed it largely has. Because researchers aren't stupid, they looked to see whether there is a protective effect against autism of non-vaccination. In other words, if vaccination raises autism risk, then unvaccinated populations should have lower rates of autism than vaccinated populations. And they do not. There is no protective effect for autism of non-vaccination.
Where did you find this data?
36 -
IDEA/“Child Find” laws require schools to locate, evaluate, and accommodate students that are suspected to have disabilities.
31 -
Newname wrote:
KXPhD wrote:
Indeed it largely has. Because researchers aren't stupid, they looked to see whether there is a protective effect against autism of non-vaccination. In other words, if vaccination raises autism risk, then unvaccinated populations should have lower rates of autism than vaccinated populations. And they do not. There is no protective effect for autism of non-vaccination.
Where did you find this data?
Unkle: one of the authors of the study appears to be JEWISH.
checkmate
32 -
PCRF-Guy wrote:
Newname wrote:
Where are all the studies "proving" other things are not responsible for autism? Pollution, foods, etc?
The establishment seems very invested in saying its not vaccines.
Which means it probably is.
This is the same esablishment that denied Covid could have come from a lab, forced untested emergency use experiments "vaccines" on Americans, shut down schools, gyms, beaches while allowing Amazon, Walmart, liquor stores to remain open, made up a 6 foot "social" distancing rule, claimed $5 face masks would keep us safe, prevented families from visiting the elderly in nursing homes and hospitals.
They are corrupt and not looking out for us
The reason you don't know about any of the research done on autism is because you don't look... it's not "the establishment that is invested in saying it isn't vaccines", it's the people who are determined that vaccines are the cause of everything they don't like, and don't bother looking at anything other possibilities.
That includes RFK Jr. No scientist says, "I will have an answer by September". People doing research put together a hypothesis, develop and experiment to test it, and if the data proves or disproves it, they recalibrate and build on the results. Politicians decide the answer in advance, and then keep repeating the same "investigation" until they find what confirms their pre-existing beliefs. HHS doesn't have a hidden vault of data; when a study is done, it's listed on the website of the entity that issue the funding for it, and the results are submitted to publishers, not the grant issuer or the gov't.
This may appear to be nitpicking, but data generally "supports", "does not support", or is "inconclusive" regarding a hypothesis. "Proves or disproves" is a rarity.
The distinction is important because persons with relevant expertise tend to give qualified or nuanced answers and the absence of such is typically a sign of nonobjective punditry.
20 -
It's hard to believe people as stupid as Trump and RFK Jr exist, yet they do, and they are running the country. We're watching dystopia rise up in real time and its nuts.
31 -
do you understand what words mean? wrote:
"did not pass peer review" is literally what debunked means.
Experts considered the evidence and rejected the paper as being unscientific. What else could debunked mean?
Remember when the experts said you can’t get Covid if you get a Covid vaccine!? And that natural immunity has been “debunked”!? And that Ivermectin has been “debunked”!?
I remember all of that :)
79 -
Monkeys Skyping wrote:
This may appear to be nitpicking, but data generally "supports", "does not support", or is "inconclusive" regarding a hypothesis. "Proves or disproves" is a rarity.
The distinction is important because persons with relevant expertise tend to give qualified or nuanced answers and the absence of such is typically a sign of nonobjective punditry.
Fair enough. I just used regular layman language. I didn’t mean “unimpeachable truth”. One of the ways antivaxxers attack research is the language of never committing to “proving” anything, as if that confirms their conspiracy.
40 -
good wrote:
do you understand what words mean? wrote:
"did not pass peer review" is literally what debunked means.
Experts considered the evidence and rejected the paper as being unscientific. What else could debunked mean?
"Debunked" can be applied to the paper, or it can be applied to the hypothesis. i grant that the scientific community has debunked the paper. he didnt follow the correct procdures.
But "debunked" can also be applied to the hypothesis, and here it would mean that they found the real cause of autism and it wasnt vaccines. This hasnt happened.
Because something wasnt proven once doesnt mean that that it has been disproven.
The paper was debunked, and there is zero peer reviewed evidence to support the hypothesis that vaccines cause autism. None. There is just as much evidence that celery causes autism.
You can still have that as a hypothesis but unless new evidence comes to light, it has not been supported. Unless you have a bias against vaccines, it would logically make sense to look elsewhere. That’s how science works.
80 -
Scientistfor20years wrote:
good wrote:
"Debunked" can be applied to the paper, or it can be applied to the hypothesis. i grant that the scientific community has debunked the paper. he didnt follow the correct procdures.
But "debunked" can also be applied to the hypothesis, and here it would mean that they found the real cause of autism and it wasnt vaccines. This hasnt happened.
Because something wasnt proven once doesnt mean that that it has been disproven.
The paper was debunked, and there is zero peer reviewed evidence to support the hypothesis that vaccines cause autism. None. There is just as much evidence that celery causes autism.
You can still have that as a hypothesis but unless new evidence comes to light, it has not been supported. Unless you have a bias against vaccines, it would logically make sense to look elsewhere. That’s how science works.
And the Covid jab is safe and stops transmission.
And oxycontin is not addictive.
48 -
hard to believe wrote:
It's hard to believe people as stupid as Trump and RFK Jr exist, yet they do, and they are running the country. We're watching dystopia rise up in real time and its nuts.
So easy to spot TDS in people. They can’t articulate facts or formulate a successful argument so they start name calling.
24 -
81
-
Newname wrote:
Scientistfor20years wrote:
The paper was debunked, and there is zero peer reviewed evidence to support the hypothesis that vaccines cause autism. None. There is just as much evidence that celery causes autism.
You can still have that as a hypothesis but unless new evidence comes to light, it has not been supported. Unless you have a bias against vaccines, it would logically make sense to look elsewhere. That’s how science works.
And the Covid jab is safe and stops transmission.
And oxycontin is not addictive.
And you have an IQ over 35.
30 -
Yeah, so glad the dude is such a fine scientist.
20 -
forty seven wrote:
Dying with, not from, Covid
05
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.