Lead Foil Hat XVI wrote:
So the authors stating opinion required to get through the review process without getting canned is now proof? What evidence do the authors show to debunk their own paper? They show no evidence of the need for vaccinations other than saying it is known in general to be important in most cases of disease spread. Why people think political opinions inserted into scientific articles is somehow scientific proof. The authors provide no data to support this assertion, they just assert it because they have to and they would get ruined by the public crazy mob. You are wrong here and the authors are being dishonest by making such claims without supportive evidence.
I think we are going to listen to the authors of the study rather than you who seems intent on misinterpreting the study to support your incorrect priors. Thanks for playing.