I haven't taken the time yet to look at the study but based on the, headlines, the paragraph here and the descriptions.
It looks like this study makes the vaccines look safe.
I have no problem acknowledging that AT ALL.
My problem is when i've posted studies and reports that seem to indicate the opposite they are rejected OUT OF HAND and not considered seriously.
Seems some posters here wonder how "anti-vaxers" will handle the study.
I can't speak for others but I'll handle it like... well... a study.
Another piece of seemingly valid info to weigh in the balance of ALL of the info available on the subject.
But I do have counter question.
If the study had shown the opposite would ANYONE here taken it seriously?
yes or no?
Or are only studies that confirm our "beliefs" considered valid and true?
I suspect that the FUNDING of the study would have been the main topic, if the study was brought up at all, and the result dismissed OUT OF HAND. Am i wrong? please be honest.
The only other thing I'll mention is this.
Seems the study was done to see if the vaccines caused brain related problems, in this case (based on what i see posted here) it appears that it does not. that's very good news.
But it does not show that vaccines are effective.
those are the 2 parts to the "anti-vaxers" arguments against them.
and the 2 parts to the pro-vaxers DEMAND that everyone use them or else.
That vacancies are "safe AND effective".
But some people are from Missouri on this issue.
(Noir BTW the State of Mossouri's motto is "SHOW ME")
Last edited by revelarts; 10-10-2015 at 08:03 AM.
It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God. 1 Peter 2:16