Anti-vaccine attitudes based on that false claim still exist

[Cyclone]

You realise that IQ is not measured as a percentage scale...

 

It's amusing that you think your opinions are logical though. A logical opinion can only follow from having some data to apply logic to, yet you dismiss without good grounds the best source of data we have. Except when it happens to agree with your already formed opinion, then it's okay to quote the Cochrane Foundation.

 

Have you read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre? You should, it would give you some perspective about how to apply your logic.

 

---------- Post added 23-02-2016 at 14:11 ----------

 

As test, you can avoid having tetanus booster shots for the rest of your life, and let us know how that's working out for you when you get a cut and contract tetanus.

I meanwhile will have my tetanus booster and won't ever contract it.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Cyclone

[Obelix]

One this thread, having pretty much given up on trying to communicate with certain individuals, I tried the approach of introducing some of the established experts who are arguing that the medical trials system is no longer fit for purpose, in the hope that said individuals would take it more seriously if acknowledge experts in the field were saying it.

 

And has been said before - you haven't done that.

 

You've taken a third party site that selectively quotes them and failed conspicuously to actually provide the data that they are using.

 

You are a smart guy I suspect. But it's clear that you don't understand the scientific method, even if you think that you do. In that respect you are a prime example of someone stuck in the Dunning-Kreuger effect.

 

As others have said, you can apply as much logic as you like but you are starting from an erroneous point based on false data, and have an idea of where to go (you think vaccines are bad but have no hypothesis - just gut feel.)

 

This is why you are walking into a completely incorrect conclusion and why we keep telling you to actually do the basics right. The analogy of the prisoners in the cave springs to mind.....

[onewheeldave]

.....yet you dismiss without good grounds the best source of data we have. Except when it happens to agree with your already formed opinion, then it's okay to quote the Cochrane Foundation.

My grounds for, dismissing medical trails conclusions are that they are severely compromised by financial and political interests.

 

I haven't quoted the Cochrane foundation/Collaboration, I quoted the co-founder of the Cochrane foundation/Collaboration. There is a big difference, I doubt his views match those of the organisation.

Have you read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre? You should, it would give you some perspective about how to apply your logic.

No, I've not. Have you read "Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare" by Dr. Peter Gotzsche, co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration? It would give you some insight as to how deeply corrupted the medical study system is by political and financial interests, by someone who knows the system inside and out.

 

As test, you can avoid having tetanus booster shots for the rest of your life, and let us know how that's working out for you when you get a cut and contract tetanus.

I meanwhile will have my tetanus booster and won't ever contract it.

That should be 'if'. It's little logical lapses like that that lead to mistaken conclusions in the big, complicated arguments. My advice is, when it comes to logic, get the foundations right.

 

---------- Post added 23-02-2016 at 16:29 ----------

 

....The analogy of the prisoners in the cave springs to mind.....

It does, doesn't it? It's been springing to my mind as well

[MAC33]

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine”

 

 

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/01/25/mercks-former-doctor-predicts-gardasil-to-become-the-greatest-medical-scandal-of-all-time/

[Cyclone]

 

That should be 'if'. It's little logical lapses like that that lead to mistaken conclusions in the big, complicated arguments. My advice is, when it comes to logic, get the foundations right.

 

That wasn't a logical lapse OOD, that was a little bit of hyperbole and a semi serious statistical prediction.

 

---------- Post added 23-02-2016 at 16:42 ----------

 

My grounds for, dismissing medical trails conclusions are that they are severely compromised by financial and political interests.

And where's the evidence to support this assertion that then leads to the conclusion?

 

I haven't quoted the Cochrane foundation/Collaboration, I quoted the co-founder of the Cochrane foundation/Collaboration. There is a big difference, I doubt his views match those of the organisation.

No, I've not. Have you read "Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare" by Dr. Peter Gotzsche, co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration? It would give you some insight as to how deeply corrupted the medical study system is by political and financial interests, by someone who knows the system inside and out.

Perhaps you're confusing the US medical system with that of the entire world.

I'm happy to swap books with you though, so we can both read a little bit more.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Cyclone

[flamingjimmy]

In my experience people who go round saying 'I'm highly logical' tend to be the opposite.

[onewheeldave]

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine”

 

 

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/01/25/mercks-former-doctor-predicts-gardasil-to-become-the-greatest-medical-scandal-of-all-time/

 

Interesting link

- I'll be following up some of the stuff on that page.

 

Depressing as the situation with medical research is, it's heartening to see so much whistle-blowing going on, with experts within the system very publicly getting out the facts that the pharmaceutical companies would much prefer to be kept hidden.

[Obelix]

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine”

 

 

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/01/25/mercks-former-doctor-predicts-gardasil-to-become-the-greatest-medical-scandal-of-all-time/

 

And their evidence for such an assertion is...?

[onewheeldave]

In my experience people who go round saying 'I'm highly logical' tend to be the opposite.

 

That's my experience too

 

Then again, not many of them have the objective medical evidence (i.e. IQ test results) to back up their claim.

[flamingjimmy]

That's my experience too

 

Then again, not many of them have the objective medical evidence (i.e. IQ test results) to back up their claim.

 

Oh so reliable and standardised IQ tests yeah.

 

You performed well on an IQ test, and have translated that to 'I am the logic champion' and everyone who disagrees with me on the internet is '"logically challenged" and "of low intellect".

Edited February 23, 2016 by flamingjimmy