This Just in! Vaccines STILL Do Not Cause Autism

[godfry n. glad]

Next thing, the good parson shall take up delivering flowers...

[Angakuk]

FTD ITT

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by erimir

So you're saying I should've assumed instead that F-X was making a nonsensical (i.e. completely irrelevant) statement, because that's more charitable, I guess?

I'm saying you denied that normal concentrations of chloride ions had been mentioned and you started insulting F-X for claiming they had been mentioned, when you knew you'd mentioned them. And I'm saying that was a dumb move.

[erimir]

Yes, I assumed he was saying something relevant. It wasn't a lie or a trick, I was interpreting his statement as if it had relevance to the discussion.

And the only dumb thing I've done in this thread is respond to you.

[mickthinks]

You denied saying what you knew you'd said and insulted F-X on a false pretext. This appeal to 'relevance' is just a pomo . But you are right that it was dumb to try to defend yourself when everyone can see you goofed.

[erimir]

It must be indicative of your condition that you think that "relevance" is a "red herring," something characterized by its very irrelevance! (And of course, as usual, it has nothing to do with postmodernism.)

Normally people respond to things others say as if they had relevance to the conversation. If you do not, that is because you are unusual (one might even say abnormal), not because I'm trying to use a red herring.

No, it's dumb to think that there's any chance of you conceding anything. Especially when it involves attacking me.

[mickthinks]

No, it's dumb to think that there's any chance of you conceding anything.
LOL It's not me faced with a truth they are desperately trying to avoid conceding here, my friend.

You are confusing the issues surrounding 'relevance'. You denied the truth of F-X's claim (that normal concentrations of chloride ions had been mentioned). Whether that claim was relevant or not to the previous discussion is an interesting question, but it is itself irrelevant to the discussion that you and I are having. You denied something which you knew to be true. I think that was a dumb move, and trying to defend it is even dumber.

[Naru]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

But you are right that it was dumb to try to defend yourself when everyone can see you goofed.

I don't see that erimir goofed. Am I lying, or are you engaging in dishonest hyperbole?

[Kael]

Perhaps it is you who is lying. Only valuing your loyalty to erimir more than you value truth would cause you to claim "I don't see that erimir goofed", I reckon.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

You are confusing the issues surrounding 'relevance'. You denied the truth of F-X's claim (that normal concentrations of chloride ions had been mentioned).

I was denying the truth of F-X's implication. His implication was that I had said or implied that normal concentrations of chloride ions were toxic.

I know you have trouble with what is literally said vs. what was implied... hence my expectation that you will continue to think that you're right, because you're incapable of making fine distinctions that require an understanding of pragmatics.

Or to put it more simply: You have ASD.

[mickthinks]

I was denying the truth of F-X's implication. His implication was that I had said or implied that normal concentrations of chloride ions were toxic.
I don't think so, bud. This :-

Originally Posted by F-X

It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned.

... implies nothing but that someone else (you, as it turns out) established the context that F-X's later remarks were addressing, and this:-

Originally Posted by erimir

When? By who? Please point it out specifically, preferably with a link (or a quoted post that thus links) to the original post. Because you just pulled that out of your ass.

... denies the truth of F-X's claim and insults him for a 'lie' which in fact you knew to be the truth. A dumb move, and trying to defend it with this pomo bullshit is even dumber.

You have ASD. LOL! Ad hominems 'Я' Us

[erimir]

Yeah the implication was "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned as toxic." And that's how I responded to it.

The reason you can't understand that is because you have some sort of linguistic-pragmatic deficiency. Either that or you're just trolling.

I have no need for an ad hominem, I'm just trying to explain why it is that you can't understand how Gricean pragmatics, specifically the maxim of relevance, explains how I interpreted F-X's statement, and how I responded to it. I've already explained how that implication works, your lack of engagement with my explanation of the implication and apparent inability to understand it means that we're done here. I won't respond any further unless you can demonstrate a familiarity with and understanding of Gricean pragmatics, and can formulate a counterargument that explains how my response can't be explained under them. A basic introduction to the concepts can be found easily on the web.

I'm going to guess that you cannot, and will not, because it seems that not only do you not know about or understand Gricean pragmatics in an academic sense, you don't even understand pragmatics in an intuitive sense (and the vast majority of people do have an intuitive understanding of pragmatics).

Retaining your delusions that you have no trouble with understanding others' language use is a dumb move.

[Naru]

Originally Posted by Naruto

I don't see that erimir goofed. Am I lying, or are you engaging in dishonest hyperbole?

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by erimir

Yeah the implication was "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned as toxic." And that's how I responded to it.

Okay, you misread "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned" as "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned as toxic". I understand.

[erimir]

That's dishonest mick.

[mickthinks]

That's dishonest mick.

Originally Posted by mickthinks

Ah, the classic tu quoque. Another pomo tactic - "We don't like talk of dishonesty. We punish those who raise the issue by flinging the accusation of dishonesty at them". LOL

Here comes that tu quoque again! LOL

I don't believe F-X meant to say "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned as toxic" and that's certainly not how I read it. So I believe it's a misreading.

[erimir]

It's an implication that follows from the assumption that F-X is saying something relevant.

Without assuming he's implying something of that sort, it becomes a non sequitur.

Do you think that F-X was making a non sequitur?

[mickthinks]

No, I think he was claiming to have said something relevant to the suggestion that low doses of mercury are non-toxic in the same sense that chloride ions in normal concentrations are non-toxic.

You misread "It was exactly normal concentrations of chloride ions that was mentioned" as "someone said normal concentrations of chloride ions were toxic" and started to insult him. As is your habit.

[seebs]

So!

A few months back, I read an article in Psychotherapy Networker that included the claim that it was "controversial" whether vaccination contributed to autism. I sent them a pretty negative letter, which, unbeknownst to me, they apparently chose to publish, along with a response from the author who made that claim.

Anyone here got familiarity with the literature such that, if I could find the studies he supposedly cited (I haven't seen the response, yet, my shrink mentioned it), I could find out how crazy he's being?

To the best of my knowledge, this is not a topic of any kind of controversy within the medical community.

[LadyShea]

I take it it's not in their web edition for you to view? Psychotherapy Networker

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by seebs

To the best of my knowledge, this is not a topic of any kind of controversy within the medical community.

It is not. It is like saying "evolution is controversial" and "many scientists do not believe in evolution," and "U2 has a positive impact on humanity."

Start with the links above. There are a lot of links contained to actual studies and stuff.

--J.D.

[Doctor X]

Just to round out this, QuackWatch released a statement on recent developments:

Vaccine scaremonger slammed.

The British General Medical Council (GMC), which registers doctors in the United Kingdom, has reported that Dr. Andrew Wakefield had acted dishonestly and irresponsibly in connection with a research project and its subsequent publication. The hearing, which started in July 2007, centered on a study of children by Wakefield and twelve others that linked the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine with autism and bowel problems. Subsequent studies found no connections, but sensational publicity caused immunization rates in the UK to drop more than 10 percent. Ten of the study's authors have since renounced its conclusions; and Lancet's editor said he should not have published the study and that Wakefield's links to litigation against the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine were a "fatal conflict of interest."

The GMC began investigating after learning that Wakefield had failed to declare he had been paid £55,000 to advise lawyers representing parents who belived that the vaccine had harmed their children. The GMC said that Wakefield had improperly recruited the patients at his son's birthday party, paid them £5 to give blood specimens, and later subjected some of them inappropriately to colonoscopy, lumbar punctures, and other tests without approval from a research review board. Wakefield was also criticized for not disclosing that he had filed a patent for a vaccine to compete with the MMR, and for starting a child on an experimental product called Transfer Factor, which he planned to market. The GMC panel concluded that the allegations against Wakefield could amount to "serious professional misconduct" and will deliberate on what action to take at a hearings scheduled to begin in April. http://www.casewatch.org/foreign/wak...c_findings.pdf

During the investigation, Wakefield relocated to Austin, Texas, where he helped found Thoughtful House Center for Children, a "nonprofit" clinic that offers many unsubstantiated treatments for autism. He does not have a medical license but oversees the clinic's research program. The clinic's latest (2008) tax filing lists his salary as $270,000. http://www.casewatch.org/990/thoughtful_house_2008.pdf

--J.D.

[Doctor X]

Lancet retracts Wakefield article.

The Lancet has retracted publication of a 1998 paper in which Dr. Andrew Wakefield and colleagues suggested that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine might be linked to autism. The paper didn't declare that cause-and-effect had been demonstrated, but at the press conference announcing its publication, Wakefield attacked the triple vaccine; and he has continued to do so ever since. Subsequent studies have found no connections, but sensational publicity caused immunization rates in the UK to drop more than 10 percent and have left lingering doubts among parents worldwide. The Lancet retraction came five days after The British General Medical Council, which registers doctors in the United Kingdom, reported that Wakefield had acted dishonestly, irresponsibly, unethically, and callously in connection with the research project and its subsequent publication. The paper remains publicly visible, but the online version displays the word "RETRACTED" in bright red letters on every page of the PDF version. For further details, see
Lancet Retracts Wakefield Paper

--J.D.

[LadyShea]

More evidence that vaccines don't cause autism arises from study - USATODAY.com

Infants exposed to the highest levels of thimerosal, a mercury-laden preservative that used to be found in many vaccines, were no more likely to develop autism than infants exposed to only a little thimerosal, new research finds.

The study offers more reassurance to parents who worry that vaccination raises their children's risk for autism, the researchers said.

"Prenatal and early life exposure to ethylmercury from thimerosal in vaccines or immunoglobulin products does not increase a child's risk of developing autism," concluded senior study author Dr. Frank DeStefano, director of the immunization safety office at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Oh and http://www.news-medical.net/news/201...alifornia.aspx

27 states that have low immunization rates for infants and toddlers are twelve of the twenty that currently allow parents to refuse immunizations based on a “strong personal belief”. California, Texas and Ohio all allow such an exemption and these three are the only states reporting over 1,000 cases of whooping cough in 2010 through September 11. 70% of the cases have been reported from these areas in the CDC's Week 36 MMWR report when an undercount from California of 2,603 cases is included. The twelve states with a personal belief exemption and vaccination rates below average make up 59% of the reported cases.

[Ensign Steve]

9th baby in California dies from whooping cough - CNN.com