Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Katman]

Psssst His son (who also administered the treatment) was not.

You tell me.

You should probably look a little deeper into the Geiers

Perhaps you could take a read of this and point out exactly where it states that David Geier 'also administered the treatment' of Lupron.

http://www.mbp.state.md.us/BPQAPP/or...rder07.302.pdf

[TheDemonLord]

Perhaps you could take a read of this and point out exactly where it states that David Geier 'administered the treatment' of Lupron.

http://www.mbp.state.md.us/BPQAPP/or...rder07.302.pdf

Are you suggesting that someone who illegally (in the few instances outlined in the court case):

diagnosed patients
Ran medical Tests
Operated Medical equipment

Never did anything further?

I call BS - especially when reading the transcript on page 14 - that level of Cretinous weasling would do a Politician proud.

[husaberg]

Except we're talking about the link at post #3422 - not the one at #3418.

(You know, the one you're going to have to convince TDL to edit in order to adequately cover up your 'fraud'. But don't worry, I've made sure to grab a screenshot of his one.)

What fraud?
you posted the link. post 3418
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/s...post1131050511

http://web.archive.org/web/201408261...-9158-3-16.pdf

Are you now trying to suggest you didn't?, because thats pretty funny, funnier even that you clearly didn't know what was in it.

All based on Wakefield a well known fraud.

Then also based on a couple of studies by the same people (Geier) where they also made up data.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/why...causes-autism/

http://epiwonk.com/?p=55
http://epiwonk.com/?p=57
http://epiwonk.com/?p=59

This is just not done. It’s not valid. It’s not ethical. Adding imaginary cases into a data set borders on scientiific fraud. I’ve been trying to wrap my mind around some sort of rationale for the authors “imputing” extra cases and to me it’s just fudging the data. What they’ve done bears some relationship to a procedure called “direct age standardization,” but age standardardization might be useful in a situation where invesigators were comparing birth cohorts — not where the birth cohorts are the units of analysis (more on this “units of analysis” concept later). I don’t think this is downright scientific fraud for two reasons. First, they carried out this procedure of “imputing” imaginary cases for the control disorders, as well as autism and five other neurodevelopmental disorders. (I’ll explain this in more detai in upcoming posts.) Second, they come right and admit that they cooked the data by adding imaginary cases — it’s not as if they’re trying to hide anything.

The “ecological” study design is strange, weird, and downright bizarre. It’s true that the authors could not link the separate data files, but this “ecological” design was not necessary. Instead of using a total “population at risk” of 278,624 children, the authors should have used person-time (e.g., person-months) in the denominator to calculate true rates. This is the standard approach in epidemiological studies in which there is “right censored” data, i.e. in this case, children who might eventually be diagnosed with a neurodevelopmental condition, but who had not been followed up long enough.
Despite appearances, from a statistical point of view this is not an analysis of 278,624 children. The “ecological” analysis actually comes down to a regression analysis of a sample size of SEVEN (7) units — the seven birth cohorts. Picture a scatter plot of 7 points were the X axis is Hg dose, the Y axis is the prevalence of a given disorder, and the 7 points are where the mean Hg dose for each birth cohort intersects the prevalence for that birth cohort. Aside from the fact that a regression analysis based on an N of 7 is unstable and not robust at all, it has been known in the social sciences since 1950 and in epidemiology since about 1973 that in general, regression estimates from ecological analyses tend to be hugely magnified compared to individual-level analyses. (By individual-level analysis I simply mean the type of study where individual exposure data and individual level outcome data is used in the analysis for every study participant.)

[Katman]

Are you suggesting that someone who illegally (in the few instances outlined in the court case):

diagnosed patients
Ran medical Tests
Operated Medical equipment

Never did anything further?

I call BS - especially when reading the transcript on page 14 - that level of Cretinous weasling would do a Politician proud.

So that's a "sorry no, I can't point out where it states that David Geier also administered the treatment of Lupron" then?

And you have the gall to accuse me of speculation?

[husaberg]

So that's a "sorry no, I can't point out where it states that David Geier also administered the treatment of Lupron" then?

And you have the gall to accuse me of speculation?

Pg 13
http://www.casewatch.org/board/med/g...er_charges.pdf

You really should do a bit of basic research, before actually making such stupid statements.
Actually don't stop posting, your paranoia and continued lack of ability to make rational conclusions is rather amusing.

So when do we start the next katman gish gallop?

[Katman]

You really should do a bit of basic research, before actually making such stupid statements.
Actually don't stop posting, your paranoia and continued lack of ability to make rational conclusions is rather amusing.

Do you understand the difference between the words 'documented' and 'administered'?

[riffer]

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...Q318?url_veThe mercury inr=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dpubmed

TL/DR: The alleged autism-vaccine connection Is, perhaps, the most damaging medical hoax of the last 100 years.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23401210

TL/DR: The amount of thimerosol used is so small it's highly unlikely to cause damage; however if you fed 1000 tonnes of it to a rat you'd probably fuck it's shit up royally.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...t-cause-autism

TL/DR: the mercury in vaccines does not cause autism.

[Katman]

Sounds like the Maryland State Board of Physicians don't much care who they allow to practice medicine in their State - just as long as they don't question vaccines.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/m...112-story.html

[husaberg]

Do you understand the difference between the words 'documented' and 'administered'?

Cool another gish gallop.......
He perscribed it you dork..........#Hint he is not a doctor............
Thats why it formed one of the many charges (this was the 47th) that he was found guilty of.

[Katman]

He perscribed it you dork..........#Hint he is not a doctor............
Thats why it formed one of the many charges (this was the 47th) that he was found guilty of.

The report says he 'documented' it.

[husaberg]

The report says he 'documented' it.

Giddy up for another Katman gish gallop..........
see charge 47 he authorised 6 refills of a perscription, #Hint it wasn't a charge of documentation.
http://www.casewatch.org/board/med/g...er_charges.pdf
Note its not a report, its a list of charges, Ones that he was found guilty of............
Practising unlicenced medicine, under the Marryland practice medical act
If you can actually fathom that you are even thicker than i thought.

[Katman]

see charge 47 he authorised 6 refills of a perscription, #Hint it wasn't a charge of documentation.
Note its not a report, its a list of charges, Ones that he was found guilty of............
Practising unlicenced medicine, under the Marryland practice medical act
If you can actually fathom that you are even thicker than i thought.

Did you notice the bit where the administrative law judge who presided over the evidentiary hearing recommended that the Board dismiss the charges?

[husaberg]

Did you notice the bit where the administrative law judge who presided over the evidentiary hearing recommended that the Board dismiss the charges?

Gish gallop away................

David Geier was charged with practicing medicine without a license.
He was found guilty then he was fined $10,000 .
http://www.mbp.state.md.us/BPQAPP/or...rder07.302.pdf

Did you notice he was found guilty of perscribing drugs, he was not a doctor, yet you claim he wasn't perscribing the drugs.
So how is it you know more then the people who seen all the evidence and heard all the testimony then found him guilty?

[Katman]

So how is it you know more then the people who seen all the evidence and heard all the testimony then found him guilty?

Do you mean to say the administrative law judge didn't see all the evidence?

[husaberg]

Do you mean to say the administrative law judge didn't see all the evidence?

The administive law judge wasn't in charge of the hearing now was he.
So again was David Geier found guilty and charged $10,000 for practicing medicine by the Maryland medical board or not, you seem to be avoiding that fact.
Was he found guilty of perscribing drugs without a medical licence or not?