“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

[Eric Plumrose]

Fish also contain mercury in varying degrees, Shark. You can't subsist on a diet of sequels and numberplates.

[Tiplodocus]

Everybody should ask questions. It's really important.

Almost as important is listening to the answers.

[The Legendary Shark]

Jim, have a look at those links or don't, it's up to you.
.
Eric, I'm pretty sure there is such a thing as mercury poisoning in humans: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning
.
Tips, I agree.
.
Now I'm off to bed.

[IndigoPrime]

I'm with Jim here. Don't just post a load of links that have no scientific grounding. Hell, watch the video posted earlier, because that alone provides plenty of insight into precisely what harm mercury that USED to be in vaccines caused (i.e. none), and pointed out if mercury in and of itself was so dangerous as to cause brain disorders, the human race would essentially have died out long ago, given that BREAST MILK has mercury in it.

So, yeah, this is basically textbook trolling. People provide science. Someone says AND HERE ARE THE LINKS READ IT YOURSELF. Right.

[IndigoPrime]

Oh, and this cartoon, obv.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Been busy all day and now find that after updating the software on my 'phone I can no longer open pdfs or connect to my ancient laptop. Grrr.
.
Some links anyway:
.
www.dcclothesline.com/2015/02/05/bombshell-cdc-whistleblower-admitted-covering-mmr-vaccine-links-autism-granted-immunity-will-testify/

Do you really like asking questions Shark?

I will preface this by saying; if this is more of your sarcasm that I have failed to grasp then ignore all of the following. If it's not sarcasm I suspect you'll just ignore it anyways.

Here be questions:

How did you actually read that without ignoring everything else about that website?

"Airing Out America's Dirty laundry" is the subtitle for that website. Does that not imply, if not bias, then at least an agenda?

Barely three sentences in, I loudly ejaculated "WHAT THE FUCK?!" Prompting Her to ask, "What's wrong love?"

"Anti-vaxxers," was the only answer I could give. Do you have a better one?

Why were all the numbers and statistics just couched in URLsinstead of properly analysed?

Why the fuck should I take an online source seriously?





Wakefield's original study involved eighteen children, all of whom were diagnosed as autistic. Their vaccinations were the only common denominator.

Tony Blair refused comment on whether his baby was vaccinated. The slimy fuck.

I'll finish by citing Doctor Ben Goldacre form his excellent book Bad Science.

The most insidious thing about the anti-vax movement is that they keep insisting the link between vaccinations and autism has not been disproved. There is an important distinction to be made here. The link was never proved in the first place.

Of course I'm drunk.

[Fungus]

I can't believe this thread has chundered on and on and on and on. Incredibly tedious.

I read Ben Goldacre's Bad Science a couple of years ago. It covers this and other horrors of idiocy. The vaccine deniers need to shut up now and talk about comics. Please.

[Famous Mortimer]

Does anyone watch the other conspiracy-themed US shows, like "America Unearthed"? That one is lousy with stuff about the Jesus bloodline and the Templars and all that - all based on some idiotic bit of fraud in the 1950s, it would seem.

[The Legendary Shark]

KP, here are my answers:
.
1) Many websites have agendas - even this one. If we were all to ignore everything we read on websites with agendas we'd might as well switch off the internet.
.
2) I cannot answer the question that made you go WHAT THE FUCK?! because you neglected to say what the question was.
.
3) I don't know why all the statistics were couched in URLs, nor do I know why you linked this question to a photo of a man who appears to be on a train.
.
4) You shouldn't take any online source seriously - there is always room for mistakes and/or lies. I wonder if you show such healthy scepticism towards BBC, uk.gov or NASA websites?
.
5) That cartoon's too small to be read on my 'phone (I also can't watch videos on it).
.
6) Wakefield's original study may have been flawed (I don't know either way but I'm prepared to be convinced) and involve only eighteen cases. The second link I posted showed results from reportedly surveying 11,817 households. Maybe this is a blatant lie, I'm prepared to be convinced that it is.
.
7) I remember Tony Blair doing that, of course. I don't know why he did it. It might have been a security issue - if one of his children had not yet completed the vaccination battery and Tony explained which ones had been taken and were yet to be taken, it might provide terrorists/blackmailers/enemies of the state to tamper with vaccines scheduled to be taken - threatening the life of his child. Again, I don't know.
.
8) I think Dr Goldacre may be wrong. There are several studies in amongst those links, especially to the Facebook post, which seem to indicate a link. Having not read the book, which obviously has its own agenda (why should I believe anything with an up-front agenda?), I don't know if he has taken any of these studies into account or not.
.
9) Of course, I am not drunk.
.
I am not anti-vaccination but I do think the vaccination process should be as safe as we can make it.
.
IP, you are correct. According to the CDC, the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal was removed from production in 2001 "as a precautionary measure."* (Thimerosal is, however, still used in 'flu jabs in Europe and the United States and in most Third World vaccines.)  Why take precautions to remove something so unquestionably safe?
.
A study** linked to the CDC page claims several negative, and positive, links to thimerosal in a small number of cases. (This study is dated 2007, seven years after the CDC advised vaccine manufacturers to cease using the preservative.) The study, which did not factor in autism-spectrum disorders, concludes "The weight of the evidence in this study does not support a causal association between early exposure... and neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7-10 years" and that significant associations may have been chance findings stemming from a large number of statistical tests.
.
The associations detected were small, almost equally divided between positive and negative effects and mostly sex-specific. The authors seem most concerned about motor and phonic tics, a phenomena also recorded in a study concerning the effects of consuming mercury bearing fish which "...suggests the potential need for further studies."
.
The authors admit the study had several weaknesses and several strengths but does indicate thimerasol effects on a small number of subjects.
.
A small number of subjects is not an epidemic but a small number of a million people may be a lot of people. Thimerasol, then, does have an effect. So it was replaced with aluminium salts - which I have not had a chance to look into yet.
.

* www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/thimerosal/
.
** www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa071434#discussion

[Richmond Clements]

I think Dr Goldacre may be wrong.

That's the beauty of facts, they don't care what you believe.

[Famous Mortimer]

8) I think Dr Goldacre may be wrong. There are several studies in amongst those links, especially to the Facebook post, which seem to indicate a link. Having not read the book, which obviously has its own agenda (why should I believe anything with an up-front agenda?), I don't know if he has taken any of these studies into account or not.

Funny how you don't consider things that agree with your particular view of the world to have an agenda, eh? How about you read it, see the way he backs up his ideas and conclusions, and then form an opinion about it? Having an agenda =/= lying, by the way.

The one simple quote that Shark and people of his ilk seem to have forgotten is "keep your minds open — but not so open that your brains fall out."

[GordonR]

"We wish to apologise to viewers for mistakenly showing the same episode of Legendary Shark vs Science over and over again.  Normal service will hopefully be resumed shortly."

[TordelBack]

Shark, unless you plan to train as a doctor, then devote your career to exposing the methodological flaws and distorting biases of large scale medical studies and stating how they could be improved, and to clearly and logically explaining this to laymen like us, I think you have to accept that the fully-documented arguments of Ben Goldacre hold more weight than your questions, however you frame them.

Thiomersal mercury was removed because of the fuss made about it, not because any proven link with autism. Had that been the case one would expect autism rates to plummet in the subsequent dozen years, especially in tandem with the drop in vaccination takeup in general. Has this happened?  Whatever your thoughts about vaccines, the good ship mercury has sailed.

[Hawkmumbler]

Shark, questioning everything is all well and good. But when your refuting evidence procured by professionals much more qualified than yourself you should probably give up.

[JayzusB.Christ]

about the Jesus bloodline and the Templars and all that - all based on some idiotic bit of fraud in the 1950s, it would seem.

I was suckered by that one, I'm embarrassed to say, when I was in my early 20s: The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which clearly says that they sometimes deal with 'ripples' from possible facts rather than facts themselves.  Would that my understanding of Occam's Razor had been more developed.
Also, the authors later tried to sue Dan Brown for ripping off their idea - if it was in any way historical then they clearly didn't have a case.  (Better call Saul.)

Just wondering, Sharky, I know you can't be completely sure, but if you were pushed for a 'yes' or 'no' answer would you say that you believe vaccinations have ever caused autism?