re: Fully vaxxed, not jabbed. More than 6X more likely to get autism.

quote:

---

You can't have it both ways.

---

He is not intellectually impressive, but he does have training in a field which specifically focuses on argumentation and rhetoric.

quote:

---

If he's an idiot, someone should be able to take him down.

---

I mean, generally the target demographic who most needs the intervention are also less likely to listen to expert opinions. Hell, the interaction between physicians and laypeople on this forum makes that clear as hell. There isn't some utopian ideal of a marketplace of ideas. People reject evidence inconvenient to them all the time. Asking physicians to rebut RFK's insane claims isn't some panacea. I mean, we both know what you want here.

quote:

---

Dude just ignore that guy. For some reason he really hates doctors, but he’s not smart enough to debate anything of substance with them. So he just trolls. I must admit, I have fallen for his troll in the past, but I am a new man

---

Oh yeah I know. He's a massive idiot, but I pitched this school outreach program, quite stupidly, to my PD and COO, who suddenly had me giving lectures about vaccines to school kids. The damage that is being done by this nonsense is going to be immense in the long-term, if that experience is anything to go by.

quote:

---

There are many people that genuinely want to hear both sides and have it hashed out. That one side is willing to do so and the other side isn't, speaks volumes.

---

It has already been hashed out in the scientific literature. It's quite explicit too. That reference to the literature isn't meaningful to people like RFK and people like anti-vaxxers. They don't care. Part of understanding rhetoric is knowing your audience. I am all ears for how to reach these people, but I'm skeptical that giving time to a Kennedy failson and trying to rebut the Kermit the Frog-voiced gish-gallop that results will be of any value. You want it because you think you are a dispassionate observer or something. You are not and we both know that.

quote:

---

Hashed out as in both sides perspective?

---

Yes. As in exhaustively. From every angle imaginable.

quote:

---

If vaccine hesitancy and skepticism is a public health problem, one would think The Expert Class would relish a forum in which to trounce Science Deniers such as RFKjr.

---

Wow, a bunch of nerds who are taught to write and communicate in one very particular way can only communicate in one particular way, which is the exact way that laypeople seem to hate because it makes them feel inadequate or something.

quote:

---

But you don't... you retreat into "literature".

---

Where else am I supposed to retreat if not referencing the science?

quote:

---

Leaving RFKjr behind, you do realize there are Doctors that also have concerns about the volume and scheduling of vaccines in childhood, have one of your Public Health Experts have a forum with them.

---

Yes, and there has been no evidence that the volume has any real downsides. It's a notion built on other things created by public health initiatives, such as the massive decrease in childhood mortality. The choice here is is not going to be evidence-based. It's going to be based on vibes. There is some argument to suggest that the overall vaccine schedule might not fit for every child, but the associations of vaccines with symptomologies such as autism flies in the face of notions about how pathophysiology works. In other words, if you are suggesting there is a connection vaccines and autism, you are making a claim both on vaccines and how autism works. You can go look for evidence for that as well. There are very consistent pathological mechanisms in the body at the cellular level. If I were to suggest a connection for a disease, at the very least I would come with evidence of some pathological manifestation which relates to specific symptoms. Yet for one side, they never produce this data but screech all the same. Why is their dishonesty handwaved away?

quote:

---

I've made no such claims.

---

I'm using the 2nd-person plural here. The point is about a relationship between two disparate things and how we associate those things together. The point remains the same.

quote:

---

But I do agree that the schedule should be more tailored than a top down, lowest common denominator, physician ease situation.

---

Again, this makes no sense and is not evidence-based. It isn't how immunology works, it isn't how biology works and isn't how infectious disease works. And somehow I am supposed to take claims like this seriously?

quote:

---

Again, this makes no sense and is not evidence-based. It isn't how immunology works, it isn't how biology works and isn't how infectious disease works. And somehow I am supposed to take claims like this seriously?

---

Even you said

quote:

---

There is some argument to suggest that the overall vaccine schedule might not fit for every child,

---

Which is it? One size fits all or that some tailoring might be a good idea?

So I opened the chart to look more closely. The writing is almost impossible to read but the authors conclude that in every 22 condition the no vacced were better off, but where does the chart they have show that?

They also show some conditions where zero kids were NOT vaccinated, so how can they make that claim?

Here is the data table, I dont see where they get their conclusions.

LINK

quote:

---

Which is it? One size fits all or that some tailoring might be a good idea?

---

We have to go for the one size fits all approach because that is the easiest way of controlling externalities. There is even a name for this in epidemiology. It is called the 'prevention paradox.' Secondly, there is absolutely no evidence that the vaccine schedule as it is now causes any harm. There are already contraindications to vaccine administration. There has been no evidence that we should take the 'volume argument' seriously. Like I said, it is not evidence-based. The stated contraindications is tailoring enough. The volume of shots isn't going to overwhelm children. The amount of pathogens a child gets just from interacting with the world is almost infinite. Our immune system accounts for this by virtue of MHC class I and II loci having nearly infinite combinations. Again, the argument about volume is so stupid on its face I can't believe anyone believes it.

Cope bitch.

Yeah I'm glad you finally agree.