Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Ocean1]

Are you being deliberately evasive or just monumentally misinformed and stupid?

Since when have they been mutually exclusive?

[Katman]

More fool them.

So they expected their word alone was all they needed?

You do understand that the interview and the documentary are two separate things, don't you?

[scumdog]

You do understand that the interview and the documentary are two separate things, don't you?

Yup

[Katman]

Yup

So in other words, they're not asking us to accept it just on their word alone.

The documentary supposedly supplies the documentation.

(As I pointed out to Drew yesterday).

[TheDemonLord]

The documentary supposedly supplies the documentation.

supposedly
səˈpəʊzɪdli/
adverb
adverb: supposedly

according to what is generally assumed or believed (often used to indicate that the speaker doubts the truth of the statement).

Truer words were never spoken

[Katman]

Truer words were never spoken

I say supposedly because I haven't seen the documentary yet.

[Oscar]

Since when have they been mutually exclusive?

Good point.
The equation seems to be that the more outlandish the theorem and the further from the mainstream that it emanates, the less supporting evidence is required.

[Oscar]

What do you know of his intentions? What? He just brought kids in to experiment so he could get his name in the paper and some money in his pocket? Then why did he bother with a machine when, as every dumb fucker on here keeps pointing out, he coulda just been paid by the anti-vaccination lobby? Yet Wakefield maintains that he is not anti-vaccination, but as the kangaroo court of public opinion says otherwise, then he must be lying.

Oh, and by the way, I didn't say Wakefield was treating the kids. I said that that was the other fella. Eat some cake you moron.

I know about his intentions because he discussed them with the press, and in fact anyone that would listen.

However, in fact you are right (for the first time), he is not anti-vax.
He had his own replacement for the MMR ready to go, a fact that he failed to mention when publishing his results.
I didn't say he was treating the kids either, I said he was inventing a new syndrome that he could get rich treating.
He tested those kids (which he pre-selected to support his theory) and then told the NY Times how much money he was going to make.

As far as moronic goes - a exhaustive hearing by the UK General Medical Council, a retraction by Lancet and various other publications is not a kangaroo court.

[Woodman]

I say supposedly because I haven't seen the documentary yet.

So let me get this straight.... The last umpteen pages are you asking someone to watch an interview about a documentary that may or may not have some evidence to back your claims, but you haven't even seen the documentary the interview is about. Am I missing something here?

[Katman]

Am I missing something here?

No, that sounds about right.

(Not entirely sure what 'claims' you're referring to that I've supposedly made though).

[Woodman]

No, that sounds about right.

(Not entirely sure what 'claims' you're referring to that I've supposedly made though).

Thought you may have claimed there was some evidence or something. Could be wrong, can't be assed checking.

[Katman]

Thought you may have claimed there was some evidence or something. Could be wrong, can't be assed checking.

So are you asking if there's any evidence of evidence in the documentary?

If I ever figure out where I can watch the documentary I'll let you know.

[mashman]

I know about his intentions because he discussed them with the press, and in fact anyone that would listen.

However, in fact you are right (for the first time), he is not anti-vax.
He had his own replacement for the MMR ready to go, a fact that he failed to mention when publishing his results.
I didn't say he was treating the kids either, I said he was inventing a new syndrome that he could get rich treating.
He tested those kids (which he pre-selected to support his theory) and then told the NY Times how much money he was going to make.

As far as moronic goes - a exhaustive hearing by the UK General Medical Council, a retraction by Lancet and various other publications is not a kangaroo court.

He had his own ready to go . I'm sure he was going to be able to produce it without having it passed by trials. As for inventing a syndrome... your ironical level just peaked. Nice sinker bro. Like I said, have some cake.

[Oscar]

He had his own ready to go . I'm sure he was going to be able to produce it without having it passed by trials. As for inventing a syndrome... your ironical level just peaked. Nice sinker bro. Like I said, have some cake.

I suggest that you search "autistic enterocolitis".
Once you've done that we'll discuss his proposal for a vaccine...

[mashman]

I suggest that you search "autistic enterocolitis".
Once you've done that we'll discuss his proposal for a vaccine...

I suggest that you stop throwing up strawmen... but it won't stop you. It wasn't just Wakefield. There was a team theat signed the science off. There is a high ranking member of the CDC claiming he destroyed data that would have proven the link that the three ringed circus said that Wakefield had stated, but didn't.

That's why I . You got shares in a vaccination company?