STam:
1. Look up statistical power. Briefly say Leukemia has a prevelance of 1/2,000 comparing a group of 1,000 with vaccine vs. 1,000 without would not be expected to show a difference. If you want to include “Anything” in your study it would need to be powered to find a difference of prevelance in diseases much less prevelant than 1,000.
2. That wouldnt be randomised, a study like that would “prove” that suspicous people are less likely to develop diseases as much as it would prove unvaccinated are less likely.
3. I am not sure what you mean. Case studies wouldnt help in this case. If you mean Case controls they are looked at over years, but retroactivly. For example you take 1,000 people with Autism (cases) and “match” them to 1,000 without (controls) and you see if there is a difference in vaccination rates between the two. Which brings us to…
4. Forget the fact that he has been discredited. The very study you demand has been done. Pleas see sources above!
Can you agree to put that hoax aside? Now that several studies has been provided to you?
5. I’ll phrase my aside in the form of a direct question: Why do you think Vaccines casue problems? If it is just base don increase incidence of Autism this occured along with an increase in computer ownership, how do you know computers dont casue Autism? why vaccines?
6. “There is simply too much money involved to trust the govt. ” the government pays for vaccines they dont make money of them