Reply To: Studies on vaccines you might have missed.👨‍🔬💉🚫

Home Forums Controversial Topics Studies on vaccines you might have missed.👨‍🔬💉🚫 Reply To: Studies on vaccines you might have missed.👨‍🔬💉🚫

#1644603
keej123
Participant

I started reviewing some studies and i have some questions…

Journal of pediatrics vol. 162 No. 2 (from CDC website)

Proposed conclusion: Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism

Evidence: Normal children, same age/gender as autistic children, not developing autism, despite receiving comparable amount of vaccine exposure – measured according to autistic children. Suggesting that vaccine exposure in those amounts, are not the cause of autism.

Proposed conclusion seemingly not supported by the evidence.

Fact: These children are autistic and the others are normal. So we know that there is an unknown variable here – “unknown variable x”. Question is: does this variable: a) cause autism by itself, b) cause autism in conjunction with a vaccine, or c) cause autism in conjunction with anything else not identified here.

Error: The normal children received that amount of exposure, showing that the exposure itself isn’t the determining cause of autism. But the normal children lack “unknown variable x”, which is why the vaccine exposure didn’t affect them. The autistic children, who have the unknown variable, are becoming autistic as a result of the vaccines.

Possible choices:
A. “Unknown variable x” is the full determining factor behind autism. No relation to vaccines.

B. “Unknown variable x” + something else not identified causes autism. No relation to vaccines.

C. “Unknown variable x” + vaccines, together create autism. The normal children got the vaccines, but remained normal because they lack “unknown variable x”.

Provided evidence can support either option. Anything else would be a wild guess, not supported by the evidence.

D. Vaccine exposure is the full cause of autism – has been eliminated.

True conclusion: vaccines aren’t the only and full determining factor behind autism, something else must be at the least a primary determining factor causing autism either: a) alone, b) in conjunction with something else, c)or in conjunction with vaccines. Correlation between vaccines and autism not debunked by this study.

—–

JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077

Proposed conclusion: No harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD

Evidence: Normal children received the MMR in similar exposure amounts to those who developed autism, and still remained normal. Suggesting those MMR exposure amounts don’t cause autism.

Error: The normal children received that amount of MMR exposure, showing that the exposure itself isn’t the determining cause of autism. But the normal children lack “unknown variable x”, which is why the MMR exposure didn’t affect them. The autistic children, who have the unknown variable, are becoming autistic as a result of the MMR.

Same flaw as above.

Possible choices:
A. “Unknown variable x” is the full determining factor behind autism. No relation to MMR.

B. “Unknown variable x” + something else not identified causes autism. No relation to MMR.

C. “Unknown variable x” + MMR, together create autism. The normal children got the MMR, but remained normal because they lack “unknown variable x”.

Provided evidence can support either option. Anything else would be a wild guess, not supported by the evidence.

D. MMR exposure is the full cause of autism – has been eliminated.

True conclusion: MMR isn’t the only and full determining factor behind autism, something else must be at the least a primary determining factor causing autism either: a) alone, b) in conjunction with something else, c)or in conjunction with MMR. Correlation between MMR and autism not debunked by this study.

What am I missing here? I did simplify the details, but I don’t believe I omitted anything that will change the conclusion.

The other arising objection is: “process of elimination” by itself is not a valid means of identifying a potential suspect, until a basis for suspicion can be established first. So in your perspective, vaccines are an innocent little puppy getting blamed unfairly. This was expressed earlier as the “avocados” and “green jelly beans” issue. (Not ready yet for this one)