MMR the rights and wrongs

[chesters1]

having been in R&D the report is always biased to the payer ,the bits supporting the "thing" become prevalent whilst those not sit at the end ,its simple bad report no more funding .the R&D ers are not biased but their work goes through several "layers" before being given back to the funder.

whilst all the findings are there the bullet points in the final paper end up being prominent to the funders point of veiw.If ofcourse the findings are grossly against the funders thinking then the whole lots shredded and not mentioned ,companies cannot deliberately let out dangerous things so the research showing they knew is hushed up.

statistics also are easily biased.

a poll taken outside a shop of those coming out will show a higher % of shoppers using that shop than if it were down the road outside another.

a report on traffic congestion will always show more vehicles using that road in the rush hour ,even more in the rush hour on schooldays but would be completely different at 11 am .you want something to support you then you do the research the way it always does

 

we take things at face value usually but how many "facts" being reinvestigated are the opposite or biased to what is published ,theres been several "facts" outed purely because the research wasnt carried out correctly ,finding the funding to disprove a theory is far harder than getting it to approve it in the first place so it becomes a "fact" even if entirely wrong until some researcher later working on something similar finds the error and even then as its a "fact" and scientists names hanging on them by not doubting it the research hits a wall of abuse ,the chap that said bugs lived in our guts comes to mind ,his name was mud for years until someone else found them.

now stomach ulcers which were said to be caused by injury to the gut and scientists and surgeons made money curing the incurable are now obselete simply with a prescription because the research was totally wrong but excepted by the "scientists" as a fact and no doupt fortunes made selling crap medicine that was supposed to help the condition (belladonna for one) but didnt do much at all.

 

the high "bran" diet was disproved when they studied it closer ,the green tea wonder drug disproved as rubbish when all the facts were included etc etc at the time they were front page miracle discoveries now swiftly dropped in the shredder.

now a complete planet has become a rock but scientists believed it was a planet and eventually it became a fact

 

who's to bet the sudden increase in overweight humans doesnt boil down to simple over eating but a un natural ingrediant in the food that fools fat cells into storing fat .i predict transfats are part of it ,will the suppliers or makers of food fund the research? ,not a hope they have far to much money to lose and research centers need money for research so cant fund independent research or if they did would swiftly lose funding by the very same companies if it were supposed they were!

Edited May 20, 2008 by chesters1

[poledark]

So I am to expect that all research by various goverments around the world are corrupt and done by liars? Of course this only applies to the results that you don't like. What about all the other research (like most antibiotics) that is done by mainly the same people/labs ?

 

When someone...anyone...can show a def link to autism and the MMR jab, then I will bet my last penny that the gov't will pull it from the shelves so fast even Chesters won't have time to give us his expert OPINION on it.

 

Den

[Guest Rabbit]

i meant new as in over here Newt

we tend to follow america but never note the recent actions in america about what were following ,I.E we have positive discrimination and now were going to use polygraph machines ,despite both being chucked out nearly everywhere in Newt land

and by now even agreeing with the 000.1 bits of my ramblings that maybe agreeable with you should know it only brings scorn and social AN outcasting apon those in agreement ,beware you can quickly change that post to

 

Chesters -except for the idea that the 3-in-1 MMR is new, I can argue with any/ all your ideas you smuck!

It has been around longer than at least half of our members have been alive.

 

and be excepted by all

i am AN' s virtual Sin Eater ,mad? pick on chesters ,Mad pick on spelling! Chesters will do , gotta call someone a bigot its a shame to not use such a great word! poke it in a reply to chesters etc etc its great to help people

 

Finally lost it, I knew it would happen...but Is there a cure?

Perhaps a jab?

[corydoras]

,the chap that said bugs lived in our guts comes to mind ,his name was mud for years until someone else found them.

now stomach ulcers which were said to be caused by injury to the gut and scientists and surgeons made money curing the incurable are now obselete simply with a prescription because the research was totally wrong but excepted by the "scientists" as a fact and no doupt fortunes made selling crap medicine that was supposed to help the condition (belladonna for one) but didnt do much at all.

Your thinking about the Australian Nobel Prize winner Dr Larry Marshall. In 1982 he DISCOVERED, the Helicobacter pylori bactrium, before then nobody knew the bug even existed. It's true, many doubted his hypothesis that Helicobacter pylori was the cause of stomach ulcers. In order to prove his case he drank a culture of Helicobacter pylori. This almost killed him, but he devolop stomach ulcers and proved his point. He and his colleague Warren Robin were awarded the Nobel Prize for medicine in 2005.

 

You can read much more about it here.

 

I really don't get where you are coming from sometimes chester. It's like you expect science to come up with the 100% correct answer first time, every time.

 

A lot of the stuff you are complaining about is not what was written by scientists but was written by a journalist who did not understand the science he or she was reporting on. Once upon a time, British newspapers had real science reporters who understood their subject. Nowadays this is not the case.

[chesters1]

many didn't doupt it they (the scientists) slated his name worldwide for even suggesting things could survive in the stomach

and yes i do expect experts/scientists to be right every time after all peoples lives are at stake if they F up ,to many grab attention on merely an opinion or half researched theory NOT fact

a fact is truth according to the dictionary not a widely believed opinion

Edited May 21, 2008 by chesters1

[chesters1]

So I am to expect that all research by various goverments around the world are corrupt and done by liars? Of course this only applies to the results that you don't like. What about all the other research (like most antibiotics) that is done by mainly the same people/labs ?

 

When someone...anyone...can show a def link to autism and the MMR jab, then I will bet my last penny that the gov't will pull it from the shelves so fast even Chesters won't have time to give us his expert OPINION on it.

 

Den

Den i never said once that there was a link between MMR and autism merely that the 3 vacines of old are perfectly good enough and it was a money orientated change rather than a better vaccine ,and yes all research is biased the findings are ALL based on someones oppinion thats why there is always someone that doupts it even scientists not just me.

remember scientists on the whole dont do research they put their name on papers ,the works done by dopes like me because its cheap,labs throughout the world are full of technicians (poorly paid as well) whos training is on the job or in some college not all the works done by university grads with diplomas in everything! if the techs dont understand exactly what their doing mistakes are made and if the "scientists" are to busy playing golf to check thoroughly at each step of the research then it could very well be completely wrong

theres plenty of papers in circulation on work i did but my names not on them! the prof or head of department grabs the accolades not those that do the work ,in most the senior never appeared but to see the final findings ,you can get believable findings using dodgy work .......well until someone redoes everything which is my point.

most work from eminent scientists or profs is excepted at face value ,lab work is very expensive so companies fund labs and uni's to do it for them ,its also far harder to contradict findings because

1) is expensive

2) how the findings are made is hush hush because of copyright issues

3) a lab cant set aside expensive time to re examine someones work because they are being funded to do other work,without funding theres no labs

4)then you have to show it to scientists so they can see the original work was faulty ,trouble is its probabably the very same people that backed the other findings anyway and no way are they going to admit being fools!

5) if the works done in a uni by students on a project then if resulting findings are copyrightable the uni grabs them ,if the works funded by a company then both get a cut ,its a certainty both are not going to let anyone in the uni or company to fund work that takes money away from them! you cant even think about something whilst at a uni even if you do the work at home because thinking in uni time belongs to the uni

 

for instance the skull fragment sent from jersey for tests ,the forensic "scientists" were unable to gleam anything from it ,perhaps because it turned out weeks later NOT to be a bit of bone after all ,did these "scientists" in the first instant say "hey this isnt a bit of bone" nope they still tested it believing it was bone ,how it took weeks to discover it wasnt bone is beyond me ,perhaps scientists were playing golf and some techi did the work not knowing any better.

 

wasnt it "professionals" and scientists agreeing with them that said there was a devil worship ring going on in some Scottish isle and then took a large number of kids away from their devil worshipping parents? turns out it was all ****s after all ,what happened to all the "facts" that got those kids taken away ?

 

as i said things scientists or professionals say are taken at face value ,was the world thought to be flat when columbus went on his trip err NO it was known to be round a thousand or so years earlier ,columbus found america in 1492 errr NO he didnt ,yet its in every book you can imagine.the more lies are said to be true the truer they appear to get

 

we had lots of "professionals" and no doupt scientists telling us saddam had nukes that in 15 minutes were coming our way ,they said it enough times to make most people believe them ,was it true ,was it

 

even darwin was fed up with false facts

Edited May 21, 2008 by chesters1

[Huge_Vitae]

Just a quick word from me, Wasnt the so called research by that guy Wakefield totally discredited?

 

A 2007 hearing with the General Medical Council is examining charges of professional misconduct against Wakefield and two colleagues involved in the Lancet paper.

 

The charges include:

 

He was being paid (reportedly in excess of £400,000) to conduct the study by solicitors representing parents who believed their children had been harmed by MMR, and failed to disclose this in his IRB.

 

He ordered investigations "without the requisite paediatric qualifications".

 

Acting "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in failing to disclose how patients were recruited for the study, and that some were paid to take part.

 

Performing colonoscopies, colon biopsies and lumbar punctures ("spinal taps") on his research subjects without proper approval and contrary to the children's clinical interests, when these diagnostic tests were not indicated by the children's symptoms or medical history.

 

Conducting the study on a basis which was not approved by the hospital's ethics committee.

 

Purchasing blood samples - for £5 each - from children present at his son's birthday party, as described by Wakefield himself in a videotaped public conference.

 

Wakefield denies the charges. On 27 March 2008, Wakefield began his defence in the hearing

[corydoras]

many didn't doupt it they (the scientists) slated his name worldwide for even suggesting things could survive in the stomach

and yes i do expect experts/scientists to be right every time after all peoples lives are at stake if they F up ,to many grab attention on merely an opinion or half researched theory NOT fact

a fact is truth according to the dictionary not a widely believed opinion

Your expectations are totally riduculous. Scientists are human just like the rest of us. We all make mistakes from time to time or are you infallible? Edited May 21, 2008 by corydoras

[Newt]

Sorry but I don't see that expecting conclusions drawn in published scientific research to be accurate is at all unreasonable.

 

That is a matter apart from expecting a scientist to be infallible which by the way, is something chesters did not say.

 

If you are going into attack mode again, at least please get it right.

[corydoras]

Sorry but I don't see that expecting conclusions drawn in published scientific research to be accurate is at all unreasonable.

 

That is a matter apart from expecting a scientist to be infallible which by the way, is something chesters did not say.

 

If you are going into attack mode again, at least please get it right.

Chesters said

and yes i do expect experts/scientists to be right every time after all peoples lives are at stake if they F up ,to many grab attention on merely an opinion or half researched theory NOT fact

a fact is truth according to the dictionary not a widely believed opinion[/qoute]

 

Right every time sounds pretty infallible to me. If I were 'right every time' 100% of the time I would be infallible or do you disagree?

Edited May 22, 2008 by corydoras