Thinking of getting vaccinated?

**Virago** · 30th June 2016, 19:05

Originally Posted by Katman

Well clearly the answer to the question 'is science reliable?' is a resounding 'not when humans try doing it'.

It would suggest that any medical research needs to be treated with scepticism - even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.

Would it then be fair to say that any non-scientific conspiratorial waffle should also be treated with scepticism?

**Katman** · 30th June 2016, 19:06

Originally Posted by Virago

Would it then be fair to say that any non-scientific conspiratorial waffle should also be treated with scepticism?

Probably just as much as any story from an official source.

Didn't you watch the video?

**mada** · 30th June 2016, 19:30

The only source one can truly trust:

**bogan** · 30th June 2016, 19:41

Originally Posted by Katman

I did watch the video, you stupid cunt.

Did you?

Fuck off noddy, if you watched it you'd know how dumb your '- even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.' addendum was

in addition to the 'medical' precursor...

**Katman** · 30th June 2016, 20:02

Originally Posted by bogan

Fuck off noddy, if you watched it you'd know how dumb your '- even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.' addendum was

in addition to the 'medical' precursor...

Of course I watched it, you stupid fuck.

It starts off telling how difficult it can be to replicate someone else's test results (especially if you're not looking for the exact same thing) and questions the validity of a lot of stuff that gets published in medical journals. It then goes on to explain how easy it is to make mistakes in your research if the pharmaceutical company hasn't been entirely honest in their description of the antibodies they've provided you with, than moves onto the suggestion that medical journals don't much like publishing 'negative' results anyway.

Gotta admit, the bit about the P values tested my endurance limits but unless from now on you only produce test results with a P value of over 0.05 I'm going to ignore them.

All in all, the gist of the video is that science needs to be questioned - regardless of whether you end up with the answers you wanted or not.

So did you watch it?

**bogan** · 30th June 2016, 20:24

Originally Posted by Katman

Of course I watched it, you stupid fuck.

It starts off telling how difficult it can be to replicate someone else's test results (especially if you're not looking for the exact same thing) and questions the validity of a lot of stuff that gets published in medical journals. It then goes on to explain how easy it is to make mistakes in your research if the pharmaceutical company hasn't been entirely honest in their description of the antibodies they've provided you with, than moves onto the suggestion that medical journals don't much like publishing 'negative' results anyway.

Gotta admit, the bit about the P values tested my endurance limits but unless from now on you only produce test results with a P value of over 0.05 I'm going to ignore them.

All in all, the gist of the video is that science needs to be questioned - regardless of whether you end up with the answers you wanted or not.

So did you watch it?

There we go, now we've established you can summarise videos and shit. So no excuse for not doing so in future.

Dance little puppet, dance

Brings up the point that demon and many other have made before, why don't you question the science you post?

**Katman** · 30th June 2016, 20:26

Originally Posted by bogan

There we go, now we've established you can summarise videos and shit. So no excuse for not doing so in future.

Dance little puppet, dance

How old are you?

**bogan** · 30th June 2016, 20:27

Originally Posted by Katman

How old are you?

Down boy, I'm just not that into you.

**Katman** · 30th June 2016, 20:29

Originally Posted by bogan

Down boy, I'm just not that into you.

Well, you know where I am if you ever want to test out that purdy little mouth of yours.

**Katman** · 1st July 2016, 08:46

https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-br...liam-thompson/

http://wakeup-world.com/2016/06/22/c...ing-documents/

**TheDemonLord** · 1st July 2016, 09:13

Originally Posted by Katman

https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-br...liam-thompson/

http://wakeup-world.com/2016/06/22/c...ing-documents/

That's $5 you owe me.

Also - none of those either produce the evidence that Dr Thompson claims to have nor do the science to prove what levels of Toxic Metals cause adverse affects in children.

So that would be 0/10 - It's the same BS you trotted out several pages ago, nothing has changed since, it's still just as wrong as when you first posted it.

What's more, you still haven't got the balls to discuss Japan (No MMR Vaccine, Multiple Measles outbreaks, dead children and hundreds of thousands of cases and one of the highest instances of Autism in the world)

What's the matter? Afraid a little hard truth might expose your batshit insane and dangerous beliefs for what they really are?