/sci/ - Science & Math

Life expectancy is pretty good and mostly increasing.

How many people in your family have died from smallpox?

>>9956177
They saved millions upon millions of lives. Just because they're great doesn't mean they can't be improved or they don't carry certain risks. Imagine if engineers just stopped giving a fuck about vehicle safety after Volvo gave out the patent for the seatbelt, and people got really angry when you pointed out that cars could be made even safer still.

https://youtu.be/I5b9xsGZs1E

>>9956177
There is none, unless you are talking about the statistical studies that tells us that it is beneficial for a population.
but there is no molecular research on the differential risks on the individual.

idk but the worst fever of my life was from the Hep B vaccine.. i got it late thank god so i was able to handle it.. i could imagine it would fuck a younger kid up

What is the point of this thread, OP? You're not gonna convince anyone that vaccines aren't safe so this could only be bait but, then again, what do you gain by having people arguing over it? Seriously, OP. What's your endgame here? Do you just want the attention? You know this is an anonymous site, right? Why would you waste your time doing this? Didn't school start a few weeks ago? Don't you have homework or something?

There is no proof vaccines are safe, they refuse to do vaccinated vs unvaccinated, long-term, cumulative and refuse to do a true placebo. The entire industry is based off of tobacco science. The original polio vaccine was the cause for the polio epidemic in the 1950's and after they changed it, they then put tens of millions of people at risk for cancer and their children as well. Great job polio vaccine, you ruined the lives of tens of millions of people to "save" us by changing the definition and diagnosis criteria.

>>9956930
mostly because too many of the unvaccinated controls die

>>9956478
isn't she the nutcase claiming aborted fetuses are used to make vaccines?

>>9956177
Do you know anyone with polio?

>>9956935
>unvaccinated dying because they didn't inject miscellaneous toxic chemicals into their body
I'm sure, thats why first world countries with poor vaccine rates and less vaccines overall have better standards of life and lowered death rates from disease, sids, autism rates, chronic illnesses, cancer.

>>9956940
https://youtu.be/nPu3vTSwRhA
Fetal tissue is used in the MMR vaccine as stated by THEIR OWN INSERT. Pan is such a fucking tool, constantly lying and then getting his shit rocked when he has to face anyone who knows what they are talking about.
https://youtu.be/KzvhgikbQUI
Here is him LITERALLY running from people who came with questions and wanted to speak with him.

why does this board attract nothing but cranks and trolls picking a fight?

>>9956940
>isn't she the *insert word similar to schitzos here* who claims *strawman*?

Spooks gotta leave this board

everyone in the USA gets them and the number of people who die from them is vanishingly small

>>9956958
it's used in the production of the vaccines, that's a very different thing from actually being in the vaccines. and there's like two fifty year old cell lines used for the purpose it's not like they're constantly harvesting tissue

>>9956958
>schizophrenic people stalking you so they can rant at you
I would run too

>>9957025
>stalking guy whose job is literally to answer these questions
Nobody wants to talk to them because if they do they won't be able to give them an answer that doesn't criminalize the use of vaccines.
>>9957010
No, the number is very high it's just nobody wants to check it, take vaers for example, it only records 1% of all adverse reactions. Of course some people like to respond to that with "oh hurr thats just for minor things, they report serious events" yet they also report that only a fraction of serious events as well according to the FDA. The reason we don't see large amounts of people reportedly dying is because VAERS is a passive voluntary system and so if get a vaccine, die 2 months later from a heart attack, that wont get reported. This is very bad that this isn't being done, people will whine "thats becuase it will blame vaccines unfairly" except that it wont, it will show a clear causation of vaccine injuries, if after 2 months from being vaccinated the rate of deaths spike upwards from heart attacks we can clearly see that vaccines have a relation to heart attacks which is what the system is intended to catch. However because the system is passive and doctors just write off everything as "coincidence" it never gets reported and thus we don't see trends in deaths or vaccine injuries.
http://truthsnitch.com/2017/10/24/cdc-silence-million-dollar-harvard-project-charged-upgrading-vaccine-safety-surveillance-system/#sthash.Cdd0nT9O.dpbs
>Data was collected from June 2006 to October of 2009 on a total of 715,000 patients. Of those 715,000 patients, 376,452 were given 1.4 million doses of 45 different vaccines. A total of 35,570 possible adverse reactions were identified, so 2.6% of vaccinations were followed by a possible adverse reaction.
There may be much more vaccine injuries reported that are minor but compare this to our current VAERS which only reports 30,000 every year, clearly the system is broken and needs to be fixed.

>>9957092
>it only records 1% of all adverse reactions
no it records every adverse reaction and 1% of those reactions are truly vaccine related

>>9957097
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Safety/MedWatch/UCM201419.pdf
"Only about 1% of serious events are reported to the FDA, according to one study."
"Although the FDA receives many adverse event reports, these probably represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events encountered by providers. "
https://www.congress.gov/106/crpt/hrpt977/CRPT-106hrpt977.pdf
"Former FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler has estimated that VAERS reports currently represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events"
"The quality of VAERS data has been questioned. Because reports are submitted from a variety of sources, some inexperienced in completing data forms for medical studies, many reports omit important data and contain obvious errors. Assessment is further complicated by the administration of multiple vaccines at the same time, following currently recommended vaccine schedules, because there may be no conclusive way to determine which vaccine or combination of vaccines caused the specific adverse event. As a database for epidemiological studies, VAERS has serious weaknesses. One major problem is that since unvaccinated people experiencing adverse events are not reported to VAERS, there is no control group to study. Given that over 10,000 reports are filed annually, it is difficult to assure the accuracy and completeness of the database. IOM recognizes that there are limits to the detection and response systems currently in use. In a forum convened on this subject, they concluded: ‘‘[E]fforts can be made to improve the quantity, quality, accessibility, and usefulness of VAERS reports.‘‘"
How does it feel to be retarded and not know how to actually research the actual system? Don't feel too bad, they try to hide these things as best as they can so people like you who only do a quick google search only find the first result from the CDC themselves to dispel any critical thinking skills you may possess.

>>9956177
Pretty much all of it.

But also note that absolute safety is not the only thing you need to be looking at. You need to look at whether it is MORE safe to be vaccinated, or not.

Enjoy not dying of smallpox.

>>9957130
1% of nothing is still nothing

What's with all the anti-vaccine crap on /sci/ right now? Did the shitposters get tired of pretending to be flat-earthers?

>>9957439
It's not anti-vaccine, it's pro-science and pro-choice. You only treat it as anti-vaccine because it's finding the real flaws in them that the people in charge don't want to admit because then they'll be held liable for trillions of dollars in damages. I'd be more than happy to use a vaccine that doesn't injure the vast majority of people who use it.

>>9957572
>I'd be more than happy to use a vaccine that doesn't injure the vast majority of people who use it.
So, current vaccines that we use right now you are fine with?

>>9957579
No, because these ones are causing chronic illnesses, autism, sids, infertility, and other issues. The rates are not low either, they are insanely high and we are over dosing, even if I chose to vaccinate I would never vaccinate against literally everything like they want us too. They have us vaccinating against children diseases like measles, mumps, chicken pox and things like HPV they have both males and females vaccinating for, when 95% of women clear it naturally and only 5% of that 5% who do not actually develop it, and if its caught early on it's very easily treatable so for that tiny fraction of the human population that has something that can be treated we are vaccinating everyone against.

>>9956177
The general argument for pro-vaccine is basically: would you
1) let 100 people risk slight mental deficiencies or
2) let 95 people die and 5 people live
No economy would survive letting these epidemics run rampant so any rational government will choose option 1.
This is why the wealthy, even doctors, try their best for delayed vaccinations when it comes to their own kids.

>>9957587
Do you not know what vast majority means?

>>9957587
>these ones are causing chronic illnesses, autism, sids, infertility, and other issues
Did you hear this from a mommy blogger?

>>9957596
I do, I believe the majority of people who are using vaccines are being injured by them, not necessarily in short term but long term, such as cancers, chronic illnesses and immune disorders. Take SV40 for example, they caused tens of millions of people to be at risk as well as their lineage. Why do you think they refuse to do long-term studies, they know damn well if they show the difference in health between the unvaccinated and vaccinated that nobody will want to vaccinate anymore. Many doctors come forward and boast about the health of their unvaccinated patients, saying how they are in peak health with no health disorders, meanwhile the vaccinated are always shit.
>>9957605
No, I learned it from reading actual scientific studies and not from listening to the CDC propaganda because they are totally unbiased with their patents for millions on vaccines. You keep believing those lies though, all we need is 1 study to win, when we get it, it's game over. Vaccinated vs unvaccinated when? While we're at it, lets do some other REAL science for placebo, long-term, cumulative, that sure would be nice.

>>9957615
Ahuh, sure you did. You're barely above a flat-earther. Go write about it on your blog that no-one reads.

>>9957615
>actual scientific studies
anecdotes are not evidence

Show me 1 study that looks at the ingredients and vaccines in relation to autism beyond thimerosal and MMR done by the CDC, I'll wait.

>>9957642
Ah, Buckley, the famous pedophile

>>9956930
>>9956951
>>9956958
>>9957092
>>9957130
>>9957572
>>9957615
>>9957655
I'm so tired of you shitting on every vaccine thread in /sci/, you even shit ot /med/ threads. Did /pol/ send you, you fucking degenerate? Your claims are backed only by anecdotes and don't make sense. I bet you don't know shit about imunology too. I hate myself for taking the bait, but god you make so fucking angry. REEEEEEEEEEEE

>>9957675
You're only angry because you don't want to have to face the truth, I'm not the only one thats been calling out vaccines, my claims are backed by science, can you say the same? Vaccines are backed by tobacco science, fake, garbage, try doing grade 10 high school science with vaccines, it'll show you how bad vaccines are, compare a group of people who got the product to a group who didn't. You people wonder why vaccines never show signs of injury, you inject a group of people with toxic chemicals, then compare them to ANOTHER group of people with toxic chemicals and go "wow, 20 people died in one group and 18 died in the other, obviously it's safe to give people the vaccine in the 18 group".

>>9957688
>my claims are backed by science
nope

>>9957692
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3505292/
Vaccines haven't even done the "gold" standard or anything close to it, literally blind medicine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBRwOohhHuA
Thimerosal never tested since 1929 and we used it up to 2003 and still use it in the flu shot that is recommended for PREGNANT WOMEN which it has never been tested for either.
http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx
>Using epidemiologic and mechanistic evidence, the committee developed 158 causality conclusions and assigned each relationship between a vaccine and an adverse health problem to one of four categories of causation:
>However, for the majority of cases (135 vaccine-adverse event pairs), the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship. Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines.
>135 commonly reported adverse event reactions have absolutely no data
>we didn't do the science therefore vaccines are safe
What a joke your vaccine "science" is, vaccine safety has never been a priority. Even for the studies that looked at vaccine and autism for MMR and thimerosal those ones are garbage as well, Poul thornsen is a wanted criminal and they've never verified the studies he was a part of. Meanwhile William Thompson whistle blowed, revealing science that was being destroyed and censored because it PROVED that the MMR was increasing rates of autism. Vaccine science is a joke to anyone who researches it, the real science is growing and more people are becoming aware of it. All these "products" have been deemed safe by "science" at one point, look at lead, cigarettes, vioxx and glyphosate, vaccines are on the same path, you can't hide the truth forever.

>>9957572
>it's not anti-vaccine, it's against vaccines
This is why I keep coming back to /sci/

>>9957709
I want safer vaccines, anti-vaccine implies I want them to stop vaccinating and stop doing science, I want more science done, real science. Am I anti-car if I asked for more safety tests after the seatbelt was created? I think vaccines currently are not as safe as they should be and a huge portion of that is because there is profit involved. I'm not going to inject myself with miscellaneous chemicals I am not allowed to know about, I am also not ok with forcing a product on people where the manufacturer has zero liability for murdering people.

>>9957615
>I learned it from reading actual scientific studies
>Posts a study so awful it was retracted twice.
Stop posting.

https://retractionwatch.com/2017/05/08/retracted-vaccine-autism-study-republished/


>>9957702
>Vaccines haven't even done the "gold" standard or anything close to it, literally blind medicine.
>Thimerosal never tested since 1929 and we used it up to 2003 and still use it in the flu shot that is recommended for PREGNANT WOMEN which it has never been tested for either.
Citing Youtube and The Journal of Rectal Retrieval isn't going to convince anyone.
Also, that "never tested since 1929" claim is complete bullshit. Just how little research did you do?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49771994_Toxicokinetics_of_Mercury_after_Long-Term_Repeated_Exposure_to_Thimerosal-Containing_Vaccine
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265174124_A_systematic_study_of_the_disposition_and_metabolism_of_mercury_species_in_mice_after_exposure_to_low_levels_of_thimerosal_ethylmercury
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2010/09/13/peds.2010-0309

>http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx
>we didn't do the science therefore vaccines are safe
Congratulations on failing to read one of the least technically worded papers I've ever seen.

>it PROVED that the MMR was increasing rates of autism.
You literally posted a paper that rejected the MMR-autisim link three sentences ago.

>the real science is growing and more people are becoming aware of it.
And yet you've posted none.

>>9957724
>I want more science done, real science.
Real science HAS been done. You appear to be wilfully ignoring it in favour of conspiracy theories.

>>9956177
All the disease we vaccinated for were already on huge declines and the vaccines were introduced at the tail ends.

>>9957753
>citing youtube
Are you trying to tell me congressional meetings are not important? If more studies had been done, why did he not proclaim them as an OFFICIAL representative.
1st study doesn't event look at mercury in brain, lul joke study
>The present study could not, however, assess the fraction of inorganicmercury in the brain, which may have increased due to the slowhalf-life of this fraction.
second study I'm not bothering with because I have to share contact details, retard site.
third site is
>They didn't get thimerosal but they more than likely all got every other vaccine, containing things like Aluminum, fetal tissue, formaldehyde, glyphosate, etc, therefore Thimerosal is safe.
Your sources are all shit and you should feel bad, they don't even address the issue they juggle around it like faggots becuase they can't do real science, compare a vaccinated to an unvaccinated, zero control studies and not even looking at the main issue at hand makes you look like a fool.
>Least technically worded papers
Institute of medicine is a joke I guess.
>your sources concluded from data that blah blah
I posted it to show they haven't done the science, do you think I care what their conclusion is? They showed there was no science for 135 vaccine adverse events out of 158 they looked at and somehow concluded that vaccines had no relation to them. Vaccine safety is not being done. You just read conclusions, thats not where the science is, you need to read the methods to get the real data, they'll just twist to get the answer they want from it.
>he doesn't know about the gold standard
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/280574.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial
https://iancommunity.org/cs/understanding_research/randomized_controlled_trials
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2841/2d96e8fd9ec54e7dc7f0bf1365b238fd68c1.pdf
It's literally the best form of study we have and vaccines have never done it.

>>9957753
Thank you for taking the time to fight this asshole.
I just wish natural selection happened faster.

Vaccines literally didnt do shit
its not even debatable
all the diseases were in huge declines before vaccines were introduced
vaccines dont benefit you in any way

>>9957882
also vaxxers have changed the definition of herd immunity
they are fucking retards
literally

>>9957838
>Are you trying to tell me congressional meetings are not important?
They're considerably less important than actual research.

>1st study doesn't event look at mercury in brain
So? You said their were any studies. It's a study.

>second study I'm not bothering with because I have to share contact details, retard site.
It's fucking ResarchGate. And you can use any other site, incluing SciHub, if you'd prefer.

>They didn't get thimerosal but they more than likely all got every other vaccine, containing things like Aluminum, fetal tissue, formaldehyde, glyphosate, etc, therefore Thimerosal is safe.
If thimerosal caused ASD, there would have been a correlation between thimerosal exposure and ASD. The study clears shows that is not the case. Don't move the goalposts after the fact.

>Your sources are all shit and you should feel bad, they don't even address the issue they juggle around it like faggots becuase they can't do real science,
Again, you claimed that no studies like those existed. There are pages of studies, and I just selected a few at random.
Also, "they don't even address the issue they juggle around it like faggots" is possibly the vaguest criticism of a scientific paper I've ever heard.

>compare a vaccinated to an unvaccinated
That's a terrible idea. Intentionally withholding vaccination is unethical, and taking anti-vaccine parents as a control would produce enormous biases.

>zero control studies
Do you mean case-control studies? Because I linked to one of those.

>not even looking at the main issue at hand
You posted: "Thimerosal never tested since 1929". I gave you post-1929 studies on thimerosal. What exactly is "the main issue at hand"?

>Institute of medicine is a joke I guess.
?????
What?

>>9957838 (cont)
>I posted it to show they haven't done the science
You posted research they'd done to show they hadn't done any research?
Or do you mean something else by "done the science"?

>They showed there was no science for 135 vaccine adverse events out of 158 they looked at and somehow concluded that vaccines had no relation to them.
Re-read the study.
They considered evidence for 158 vaccine-impact pairs, and were able to make confident conclusions about the impact of vaccination on 23 of them. I don't understand how you can interpret that as "there was no science".

>Vaccine safety is not being done.
I linked to vaccine-safety studies. YOU linked to vaccine-safety studies. A quick Google search turns up pages of vaccine-safety studies. What parallel universe do you live in where there are no vaccine-safety studies?

>vaccines have never done randomised controlled trials
For fuck's sake:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=vaccine+randomised+controlled+trial
Look!

>>9957913
>Why wont you accept my safety study that proves nothing
You expect me to take a joke study seriously.
>Only thimerosal has a relation to ASD
You're retarded, Aluminum is a neurotoxin and is thought to be even worse than Thimerosal yet the people in that study were likely exposed to it, it's a terrible study because we don't know how many other heavy chemicals they've gotten.
>IOM is a joke
It really is, they showed no science had been done therefore vaccines are safe.
>>9957917
>There was data for 23/158 commonly reported adverse events, obviously vaccines are safe! If you actually read the study they only reject 5 of them, the other 18 are actually favored. You have 153/158 vaccine adverse event reports that either favor causation or have zero science, take your pick because it's not looking good either way.
>>9957917
>Hurr, use googles first results from CDC, they show vaccines are safe
It's tobacco science, it's not real safety science, it's completely flawed, proves nothing and it's only there to pretend and appease the faggots who only read the conclusion that says "vaccines are safe and effect and save lives now roll up your sleeves"
>I don't know what an RCT is
Group A gets the product, group B does not get the product, compare! This science is not done on vaccines, are you actually this retarded? Literally the first few studies are comparing a group of vaccinated to a group of vaccinated.
The main argument of the pro-choice group is that the science backing up vaccine industry is garbage, it proves no safety has been done and that we are literally shooting in the dark blind here and that until actual science is done

Unbelievable. This guy is just going to wave away any actual evidence he sees.

>>9958072
>Why wont you accept my shitty science, we did a study, who cares about how well-founded it is, the fact that a study that looked at something means the vaccine is safe!

>>9958068
>You expect me to take a joke study seriously.
First, you've done nothings to justify your claim it's a joke study.
Second, you claimed there were no studies.

>it's a terrible study because we don't know how many other heavy chemicals they've gotten.
You've spent all those characters shouting about controlled studies, but you don't understand what they're for?
So long as the exposure of control and study groups is equally distributed, the study is valid. It doesn't matter what else they've been exposed to, because they study controls for things that aren't thimerosal.
And again, you claimed there were no studies.

>IOM is a joke, they showed no science had been done therefore vaccines are safe.
What the hell does "no science had been done" even mean?

>There was data for 23/158 commonly reported adverse events, obviously vaccines are safe! If you actually read the study they only reject 5 of them, the other 18 are actually favored.
You're completely ignoring the frequency of the adverse effects. The authors themselves point out that the primary reason they were unable to reach a conclusion about vaccine-incident pairings was low occurrence rates. Learn how risk and safety works.

>It's tobacco science, it's not real safety science, it's completely flawed, proves nothing and it's only there to pretend and appease...
Repeating your claims often enough won't make them true.

>I don't know what an RCT is
I've noticed. You sure as hell like talking about them though.

>This science is not done on vaccines
I'll post it again, because you clearly missed it the first time:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=vaccine+randomised+controlled+trial

>Literally the first few studies are comparing a group of vaccinated to a group of vaccinated.
There are plenty comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated.

>The main argument of the pro-choice group is that the science backing up vaccine industry is garbage
All science looks like garbage when you're this unwilling to actually read it.

>>9958079
>theres no mercury in their blood, we didn't check brain tho, that would be silly.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280342/
>People didn't get thimerosal but we aren't going to check what other toxic chemicals they got that could heavily influence the data
>IOM does a report that highlights the fact that 153/158 of commonly reported adverse events, some we've known since 1991 have no data, or favor causation obviously the safety science has been done, we found 5 that reject, vaccines are safe.
>HURR LEMME LINK YOU TO VACCINATED VS VACCINATED STUDIES
There are no vaccinated vs unvaccinated studies, give me a specific one, I'll show you it's either a vaccinated vs vaccinated or it doesn't even look at neurological/health issues.

>>9958093
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280342/
>The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg.
The reason thimerosal was withdrawn was out of concern it would harm to the brain in a similar way to methylmercury. That study shows thimerosal has significantly lower residence time than methylmercury, and less of it will be in a harmful form. Are you sure you mean to post that?

>People didn't get thimerosal but we aren't going to check what other toxic chemicals they got that could heavily influence the data
So long as the distribution is the same between the sample and control groups, the influence will be negligible.

>IOM does a report that highlights the fact that 153/158 of commonly reported adverse events, some we've known since 1991 have no data, or favor causation obviously the safety science has been done, we found 5 that reject, vaccines are safe.
Either you don't understand that study, or you're doing a very bad job of conveying your criticism of it. This read like gibberish to me.

>HURR LEMME LINK YOU TO VACCINATED VS VACCINATED STUDIES
The very first study I clicked on included a no-vaccine group.

>There are no vaccinated vs unvaccinated studies
Oh really? How sure are you about that?

>>9958093
>Phase 2 Placebo-Controlled Trial of Two Vaccines to Prevent Ebola in Liberia
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1614067

>Safety of Russian-backbone seasonal trivalent, live-attenuated influenza vaccine in a phase II randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial among children in urban Bangladesh
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X15005125

>Randomized, Controlled Trial of a 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Administered Concomitantly with an Influenza Vaccine in Healthy Adults
https://cvi.asm.org/content/19/8/1296.full

>A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effect of Pertussis Vaccineson Atopic Disease
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/104/Supplement_2/358.1

>A double-blind placebo-controlled study of the effect of influenza vaccination on airway responsiveness in asthma
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/82448171.pdf

>Delayed Hypersensitivity to Tuberculin, Total Immunoglobulin E, Specific Sensitization, and Atopic Manifestation in Longitudinally
Followed Early Bacille Calmette-Guerin-Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Children
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/107/3/e36.full.pdf

>A Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Phase IIb Trial to Test FLU-v Vaccine
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02962908

>Sustained efficacy and immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine: analysis of a randomised placebo-controlled trial up to 6.4 years.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19962185

>A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and immunogenicity of live, oral type 4 and type 7 adenovirus vaccines in adults
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X08003708

>Influenza Vaccination of Pregnant Women and Protection of Their Infants
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1401480

>Efficacy and safety of pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in Japan
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.4161/hv.24846

>>9958195
if you read the first study it shows
>Data from the present study support the prediction that, although little accumulation of Hg in the blood occurs over time with repeated vaccinations, accumulation of Hg in the brain of infants will occur. Thus, conclusion regarding the safety of thimerosal drawn from blood Hg clearance data in human infants receiving vaccines may not be valid, given the significantly slower half-life of Hg in the brain as observed in the infant macaques.
>There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal monkeys than in the brains of MeHg monkeys (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed monkeys were approximately twice that of the MeHg monkeys.
it shows that it's not a suitable risk, but it shows that the thimerosal is going into the brain, so looking at total blood levels and not brain blood is stupid.
>iom report
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK190010/If you actually take the time to read, only 5 are favored for rejection.
>The committee concluded the evidence favors rejection of five vaccine–adverse event relationships.
literally 5/158 are rejected the rest either have no science or are accepted
>My first study included a no vaccine
No it didn't, it just said they didn't get that specific thimerosal vaccine, it never mentions they are completely unvaccinated, dont lie.

>>9957702
This garbage was refuted ever time you posted it before. Fuck off and go back to /pol/

>>9958207
I have more pages of links, but 4chan thinks they're spam.

>it shows that it's not a suitable risk, but it shows that the thimerosal is going into the brain, so looking at total blood levels and not brain blood is stupid.
It also measures the relationship between levels in the blood and brain, which suggests that blood tests would make a good proxy for brain ethylmercury levels in Humans.

>literally 5/158 are rejected the rest either have no science or are accepted
On the basis of the evidence they looked at, 4 were rejected and 5 accepted. The rest had no conclusion reached. That doesn't mean "no science exists", it means the IOM has accepted no conclusion.

>No it didn't, it just said they didn't get that specific thimerosal vaccine, it never mentions they are completely unvaccinated, dont lie.
What?
The first study I clicked on was this one: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1614067
>Volunteers 18 years of age or older who consented to the requirements of the protocol (available at NEJM.org) were randomly assigned in a 2:1:2:1 ratio to receive an intramuscular injection of the ChAd3-EBO-Z vaccine (2 ml, at a concentration of 1×1011 particle units per milliliter), 2 ml of placebo, the rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine (1 ml, at a concentration of 2×107 plaque-forming units per milliliter), or 1 ml of placebo

>>9958249
Use pastebin to post the rest of the links.

>>9958260
There's not really any point. Just plug "vaccine randomised controlled trial" into Google and copy the address of each trial that a) is significantly concerned with safely/reactions and b) uses a proper placebo group. For some reason there's a lot of them about HPV.

>>9958205
>2nd study
"The active vaccine used the Russian master donor virus backbone and the placebo contained all components of the vaccine without the influenza viruses included. "
Yep, totally vaxxed vs unvaxxed.
>3rd study
"The placebo was formulated similarly but without the CRM197-conjugated pneumococcal saccharides. PCV13 and placebo were filled in identical containers, so that the appearance of the placebo matched that of PCV13."
But it still got all the other garbage, not a saline injection, literally vaxxed vs vaxxed.
>4th study
"and DT vaccine used as a placebo."
vaccinated vs vaccinated
>5th study
puny study that doesn't even mention what the placebo is, saline? vaccine alternative?
>6th study
They considered children who didn't get BCG as unvaccinated, that doesn't mean they never received vaccines moron.
>8th study
what even is the placebo.
>9th study
cant access the full study, nice
>last study
"A total of 762 infants were randomized to the RV5 or placebo group and 761 received at least 1 dose of vaccine"
Wow, so all those "unvaccinated" kids got a vaccine, what a great vaccinated vs unvaccinated study.
Honestly, I don't have time to look at them all, but judging from this, you dont even know what a real vaccinated vs unvaccinated study is, they all either received a vaccine in the study or had likely been previously vaccinated with no record of such being mentioned.
But keep googling the first results without even looking at what the placebo is, good job researching garbage. I am asking for a fully vaccinated vs unvaccinated study that looks at the health of both groups, group A gets vaccines, group B has not gotten any vaccines, it's totally diluting the results when you compare a group who got every vaccine except MMR to a group who got every vaccine including MMR, obviously they'll have similar results.

>>9958205
Anon why would they test the safety of ingredients of which lethal dosage was tested for years ago, and/or the saftey of which is already known? In the first study the only thing that could possibly harm someone is the aluminum phosphate which has no chronic health effects. And the dosage is much too small for any immediate health effects either. The problem isn't that the research doesn't exist but that these questions are almost similar to asking if earth has gravity.

>>9958311
Meant third study. But a lot of your concerns could be solved by objectively look g ta the data and not allowing your biases to allow your brain to offer any explanation for why your misunderstandings do not mean thta vaccines are bad.

everyone knows that vaccines are the newest lie by the corporations to make money, DO NOT take any vaccines, don't give these corporations any of your money, stand up to them. why pay for "medication" if you are not sick. do not let them convince you that you are sick when are healthy.

>>9958329
>everyone knows that

>>9958329
Corporations make comparatively almost no profit off of vaccines because the r and d cost is huge and the lifespan of these things are in months. Vaccines are not new and your parents probably did some sort of primitive vaccination by inviting you to play with kids that had chicken pox.

>>9958329

I know, exactly, i am tired of people still asking this question. its been 20 years, come on. everyone knows not to take vaccines, the world has not ended. we are still here and we are healthy.

>>9958340
Playing with kids is not vaccines, it is natural immunity. i will NEVER give poison to my kids.

>>9958341
The world hasn't ended because most people are still getting vaccinated but the percent of the population that needs to be unvaccinated for out reaks to occur is a simple mathematical equation based on contagiousness. For less contagious illnesses it's around 85% thta needs to be vaccinated and 95% for more contagious ones.

>>9958288
>But it still got all the other garbage, not a saline injection, literally vaxxed vs vaxxed.
That's the whole idea - you test with the control as close as possible except for the thing under test.

>They considered children who didn't get BCG as unvaccinated, that doesn't mean they never received vaccines moron.
>or had likely been previously vaccinated with no record of such being mentioned.
Wait, you want a random, controlled study where the control group NEVER has a vaccine in their life? How would that even work? Keep moving those goalposts.

>I am asking for a fully vaccinated vs unvaccinated study that looks at the health of both groups, group A gets vaccines, group B has not gotten any vaccines
You're not going to get one, because that's completely stupid. Have you put any thought into this at all?

>it's totally diluting the results when you compare a group who got every vaccine except MMR to a group who got every vaccine including MMR, obviously they'll have similar results.
Having an effective control group is not "diluting the results". If you're testing a MMR vaccine, you're not going to do it by comparing fully-vaccinated people with a group who've never seen a vaccine in their life.

>>9958345
How do you think vaccines were discovered. What the fuck do you think vaccines do. I really hope this is just bait. Actually I'm glad you believe this. I hope your genetic line dies of polio or whatever.

>>9958350
Also there is no scientific evidence. they just makeup these formulations to make you "just a little sick" so you come for more. everyone knows that. We have been living on this earth for 1000s of years, we didn't have vaccines back then, and we are still here. is this enough "scientific" evidence?

>>9958354
my genetic line will be very healthy because we live naturally and organically. no "scientific" poison in us.

>>9958358
What the fuck are you talking about? Why would you come back for more if you were a little sick? Vaccines dont make you a little sick. Many vaccines dont have live pathogens either.

>>9958363
Believe that. If this isn't a bored larper I truly hope you get culled off in the next polio wave. Oh wait your parents were responsible and got you vaccinated but you did not do the same for your children.

>>9958368
back then we did not have the internet, it was easy for the "fake new" to lie to people and have them vaccine everyone and make lots of money. i will not repeat my parent's mistakes.

yes i did get vaccinated when i was a child, probably why i ended up with leaky gut syndrome.

I live and eat naturally and organically and if there is an outbreak i will survive, just our family did for the bird and swine flue and ebola and all these outbreaks that infected weaker people

>>9958373
OK definitely a larper. There are too many memes for this to possibly be a real person. Also why would a soccer housewife be on 4chan?

>>9957130
>reported
Not "shown to cause"

Ironically these are the reports made by the anti vax nutters.

Once again you anti-science twats are shifting burden of proof to disproving a negative
Fuck off

Measles is back with a vengeance in Europe because muh vaccines cause autism

>>9958373

These infect healthy people, thats why they are dangerous. The healthier the host, the longer they can lurch around, infecting others.

Please get your leaky gut problems under control. Elimination diets take a long time and vigilant record keeping. Blaming a non-proximal cause is just bs

you have no proof that vaccines work.

I came here with an open mind, show me proof that they make us healthy and I will be convinced.

>>9958729
>I came here with an open mind
Show us proof you came here with an open mind.

>>9956177
Autism is actually a Good Thing, Here's why:
Spergs are good at Math

>>9958731
I am not arguing against anyone, just stating the facts, so far you have shown no proof that vaccines work, you only take the "word" of others.

if vaccines do work, and you have proof, then I will be unable to bunk your statements/evidence. simple logic.

>>9958735
>just stating the facts
>you only take the "word" of others
And where pray tell did you get your "facts"?

>if vaccines do work, and you have proof, then I will be unable to bunk your statements/evidence
Except for the fact that you can just say you bunked them without actually doing anything.

>>9958756
again, if you had hard evidence you won't be dancing around the topic. you "should" be able to shut me up with it. but you don't because you don't have any evidence.

>>9958765
Nobody here can shut you up because you don't believe anything here is valid evidence even if we link multiple studies and scientific findings.

>>9958732
Autism brings the world forward. Neuronormative just keep it together.

Must be nice to live in the delusional world where autism is not a national health crisis. Autism now costs more than cancer and diabetes and is still expected to rise exponentially, costing the U.S 1 trillion dollars by 2025. Most autistic children are not these magic "quirky" and "high functioning" asperger kids, they are low functioning, cannot work and are a burden on the economy because they require aide 24/7. I'm sure we missed these hundreds of millions of children that are now literally going to cost tax payers trillions of dollars, we just diagnose them better, we see a kid thats slightly weird and then slap the label on him and now he no longer has the ability to speak or learn or develop any further mentally or communicate emotions, thats definitely how it works. Feels like none of you have ever known an autistic kid besides your own faggoty selves, they are not angels, they are not something you go "I'm glad my child is autistic and not dead" it feels like being imprisoned by your own child because if you leave them for even a moment they could die like an infant and you fear for their lives becuase you know when you can no longer take care of them, they wont be able to fend for themselves.

>>9957439
Yes. We beat the shit out of them on FE, so they're trying something new.

>>9959160
If you spend a lot of time on 4chan, you may have an inflated sense of the prevalence of autism.

>>9959223
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/10214
Well, sarcasm aside, it is actually quite true on the rates, we are seeing huge costs.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/website-archive/newsAndMedia/newsArchives/2014/06/Autism.aspx
The rates and severity of autism are not something only the pro-choice people are worried about. Even those who don't think vaccine cause autism know that autism is on the rise and that it is clearly not just a diagnosis issue, there are "unknown environmental issues" that are definitely causing it, you can't just brush it off anymore.
Regardless of your stance on vaccines, autism is now a national health epidemic and is expected to cost trillions in the upcoming years, there are no signs of it slowing down, in fact it appears to be rising exponentially, purely by coincidence does it follow the increased rates of vaccines but hey thats correlation not causation, amirite? But keep blaming those enormous numbers on those "quirky" kids for getting an extra hour on their exams, the numbers definitely aren't coming from the kids in wheel chairs requiring 24/7 aides to be paid out in taxpayer money.

>>9959262
>https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/10214
>Leigh hopes his findings inspire policy changes that emphasize early intervention to reduce ASD symptoms,
What exactly is he hoping to do?

>>9959534
He isn't hoping to do anything himself, he is hoping that his findings that autism is costly is going to inspire somebody to come forward with the skills needed to really figure out why we have this sudden epidemic on our hand. COUGHvaccinesCOUGH, but sure, lets blame it all on women having kids in their 30's, and diagnosis issues, thats why kids are now at 1 in 59 rates of autism and why it's still expected to grow tremendously with zero signs it is slowing down and why whenever you look at the increased rates of autism by PURE COINCIDENCE they follow the exact same line as increased rates of vaccine usage.

>>9959562
>why we have this sudden epidemic on our hand
We don't know that there is an epidemic. That's conjecture.

>COUGHvaccinesCOUGH
Vaccines are probably one of the most thoroughly tested and rejected potential causes of autism. Why keep assuming they're the cause?

>PURE COINCIDENCE
Despite what the people have told you, allcaps isn't actually evidence.

>they follow the exact same line as increased rates of vaccine usage
Are you really going with "correlation proves causation"?

>>9959590
>if I keep repeating "vaccines are safe and effective and save lives" then maybe it will come true!
We KNOW it's an epidemic because it's costing us more than cancer and diabetes and it's expected to rise, where the fuck is all the money going to come from? The tax payers.
>vaccines thoroughly tested for autism
Wow you tested thimerosal and MMR, congratulations you tested 1 vaccine and 1 ingredient and declared vaccines safe from causing autism. Now look back at those studies and realize that you had 1 criminal leading some of those studies and he was never verified and on the other side you have a whistle blower coming out saying that the vaccines DO cause autism and that the CDC was destroying evidence that proved it because it didn't align with their agenda.
>C-correlation doesn't prove causation therefore it has no scientific value!
Correlation may not prove causation but correlation always precedes causation and should be more researched.

It is a FACT that vaccines cause autism, why are people still questioning this. its common knowledge now. stop giving vaccines to children.

>>9960059
How? What is the mechanism?

>>9960153
you are injecting poison into your body, of course it will mess with your body and brain. simple logic really.

>>9960153

And the rising incidents of autism is the biggest proof. The pharma companies vaccinated all these children for profit and now look: more children than ever have autism. The correlation is as clear as the sun, i am shocked that there are people out there that still cannot WAKE UP.

>>9960059

>>9957615
>I learned it from reading actual scientific studies
>anecdotes

If you have problems with vaccines it's because of allergic reaction or immune response. If you think it's anything else you've spent too much time researching in all the wrong places. Please, take a biology class to learn how vaccines work.
Since, retards will probably reply to me all triggered, you should know that they work by triggering an immune response to an inert virus that matches the cellular footprint of the real thing.

>>9961914
And then all of the chemicals like aluminum and mercury go straight into your brain. Meanwhile your body is not just attacking the virus but also everything else it deems a threat like the animal products like egg found in vaccines making you anaphylactic, but don't worry you wont get chicken pox.

>>9959590
Just a side thing but *usually* people that spout the whole
>correlation isnt causation XDDDD
after being shown evidence almost never if ever produce any counter evidence beyond examples like your pic related
why is that?
>>9961914
Care to give a more indepth explanation on how they work then?

>>9963804
>almost never if ever produce any counter evidence beyond examples like your pic related
>why is that?
Because it's not nessisary. "Correlation, therefore causation" is a dumb argument and I try to avoid writing clever responses to dumb arguments.

>>9963804
Correlation doesn't mean causation, but holy fuck does it point fingers and gestur like a madman.
Birth rate increasing and stork population increasing is correlated, but neither causes the other DIRECTLY. Birth rate increase does mean they need more space, so more houses are built, so more chiminies are available for storks to roost on. So correlation doesn't mean causation. But treating that as a law if the universe, aka correlation NEVER means causation, is wrong too. It's a case by case basis.