| Author |
Message |
john
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 186
|
 Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 7:46 am Post subject:
Thimerosal quotes (mercury vax ingredient)
|
|
|
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/quotes19.html
"I think that the biological case against Thimerosal is so dramatically
overwhelming anymore that only a very foolish or a very dishonest person
with the credentials to
understand this research would say that Thimerosal wasn't most likely the
cause of autism."--- Interview of Dr. Boyd E. Haley by Teri Small: |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bryan Heit
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 105
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
john
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 186
|
| Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 3:02 pm Post subject:
Re: Thimerosal quotes (mercury vax ingredient)
|
|
|
"Bryan Heit" <bjheit@NOSPAMucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:e5cnj2$909$1@news.ucalgary.ca...
| Quote: |
Most scientists and doctors disagree:
|
Appeal to the majority (Argumentum ad populum)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority
| Quote: | The last one is pretty harsh in their conclusions:
"Epidemiologic studies that support a link [between vaccination and
autism] demonstrated significant design flaws that invalidate their
conclusions."
|
Epidemiologic Evidence Is Insufficient to prove connection or not
http://www.whale.to/a/epidemiology_q.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alath
medicine forum beginner
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 4:45 pm Post subject:
Re: Thimerosal quotes (mercury vax ingredient)
|
|
|
| Quote: | Most scientists and doctors disagree:
|
| Quote: | Appeal to the majority (Argumentum ad populum)
|
Not necessarily a fallacy when those appealed to have expertise
relevant to the issue in question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
john
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 186
|
| Posted: Mon May 29, 2006 9:30 pm Post subject:
Re: Thimerosal quotes (mercury vax ingredient)
|
|
|
"alath" <alath@gateway.net> wrote in message
news:1148921144.136997.154460@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Most scientists and doctors disagree:
Appeal to the majority (Argumentum ad populum)
Not necessarily a fallacy when those appealed to have expertise
relevant to the issue in question.
|
that's authority ploy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy/Appeal_to_Authority
see experts also http://www.whale.to/a/experts.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bryan Heit
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 105
|
| Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject:
Re: Thimerosal quotes (mercury vax ingredient)
|
|
|
john wrote:
You should read your links, this little gem was found right at the bottom:
"Statistics are a form of argumentum ad numerum applied to objective
criteria, such as the health effects of smoking. In this case, the data
are not a survey of belief, but an accounting of facts. However, due to
the nature of probability, even statistics may accidentally measure a
rare outcome rather than the norm, and unconditional reliance on
statistics is therefore fallacious."
And I would point out again that the material I listed to was based on,
and in several cases contained, statistical data. This included
risk/benefit ratio's and standardization of other studies findings. In
the case of the articles I just linked to, all were reviews going over
the scientific findings of at least 21 other studies, all of which also
used statistical analysis.
That's the point of statistics - they make it very, very clear what is
actually happening.
Actually, you only have that half right. Scientifically we phrase it
"correlation does not equal causation". Basically, if two things occur
together there are two possibilities; a) one phenomena causes the other,
or b) they are unrelated, and other factors lead to the correlation.
However, absence of correlation is considered to be valid evidence for
absence of a link between two factors. Simply because if two things are
related there has to be a correlation between them. Here is a primer:
http://www.pinkmonkey.com/studyguides/subjects/stats/chap6/s0606401.asp
I would also recommend the text "Statistical Research Methods in the
Life Sciences" by P.V. Rao. Contains a whole section on correlation,
linear regression, and causation.
This all stems from the fundamental flaw of statistics - you can never,
with 100% certainty, prove anything. But you can always disprove a
hypothesis. Correlation is no exception.
Bryan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Medicine forums
»
nursing
