Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Guess who is Sicker?

[Astargath]

''Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing,''

Stop cherry picking, are you badecker's brother?

And as I said, ''One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation'' Scientific theories are the best explanation we have right now, they might not be 100% true but unless you can prove otherwise they remain as true. Note that evolution is tested and has been tested for a long time.

There is no opposing scientific theory to evolution, at most some scientists disagree on specific things inside the evolution theory but no one has been able to present a better theory, not even fucking close.

It doesn't matter how much you test it, how much data there is, or how well it is accepted, a "theory", or "scientific theory" is still a theory. As a theory, as with all science, nothing is ever settled, and everything is up for debate if new contradictory data is presented. You may not agree with the data, you may think it is inaccurate, but it is a fact this is how scientific theory operates. There is no such thing as settled science, and things that were "facts" 5 years ago, 5 months ago, or 5 minutes ago are often not "facts" a moment later because new data is discovered.

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Then since we know that nothing will ever be true, why even try?

The point is that we are finding that the whole medical is full of lies. Lies are the opposite of truth. And this among a whole lot more is proving it - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/.

Prove it. That's just an article saying stupid shit, no evidence.

[BADecker]

Prove it. That's just an article saying stupid shit, no evidence.

LOL. Prove that vaccines are beneficial, and that the article is wrong.

[Astargath]

Prove it. That's just an article saying stupid shit, no evidence.

LOL. Prove that vaccines are beneficial, and that the article is wrong.

[TECSHARE]

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Yeah pretty much. Everything is relative. That doesn't mean there is no truth, just you are statistically unlikely to ever see or know it. We can make educated guesses about things. That is literally the best science has to offer. That doesn't make it useless or something we shouldn't strive for, but if you don't understand this, what you are practicing is not science, it is religion.

I don't really give a fuck about any of the other points argued here so don't bother arguing them with me. I am not here to defend them.

[Astargath]

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Yeah pretty much. Everything is relative. That doesn't mean there is no truth, just you are statistically unlikely to ever see or know it. We can make educated guesses about things. That is literally the best science has to offer. That doesn't make it useless or something we shouldn't strive for, but if you don't understand this, what you are practicing is not science, it is religion.

I don't really give a fuck about any of the other points argued here so don't bother arguing them with me. I am not here to defend them.

'' That is literally the best science has to offer'' Which was my point all along? What's your point exactly? Do you think scientific theories are useless or not?

[BADecker]

Prove it. That's just an article saying stupid shit, no evidence.

LOL. Prove that vaccines are beneficial, and that the article is wrong.

Finally we are starting to see where you are messing up. These are government and medical charts. Who knows that they are true, now that the https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/ court has proves that government doesn't have vaccine proof?

You are so silly. You get the proof right from a court case, and you want to go on believing fictitious charts... that even if they were true, there is no proof that it was vaccines and not nature that kicked in and got rid of the disease, and the vaccines were simply taking the credit because they used timing rather than doing the job themselves.

Go on back to that website where vaccines produced more polio than nature. Probably polio was induced by some other medicine, so that there were outbreaks, so that the vaccine could be used to make more outbreaks, so that it could be shown later, when the natural drop came about, that it was vaccines that did it, even though they didn't.

Lies all over the place about the effectiveness of medicine. So, I don't blame you for being skeptical. But when you won't accept facts, you must be part of the medical, and this must be one of the ways that you make money.

[Astargath]

Prove it. That's just an article saying stupid shit, no evidence.

LOL. Prove that vaccines are beneficial, and that the article is wrong.

Finally we are starting to see where you are messing up. These are government and medical charts. Who knows that they are true, now that the https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/ court has proves that government doesn't have vaccine proof?

You are so silly. You get the proof right from a court case, and you want to go on believing fictitious charts... that even if they were true, there is no proof that it was vaccines and not nature that kicked in and got rid of the disease, and the vaccines were simply taking the credit because they used timing rather than doing the job themselves.

Go on back to that website where vaccines produced more polio than nature. Probably polio was induced by some other medicine, so that there were outbreaks, so that the vaccine could be used to make more outbreaks, so that it could be shown later, when the natural drop came about, that it was vaccines that did it, even though they didn't.

Lies all over the place about the effectiveness of medicine. So, I don't blame you for being skeptical. But when you won't accept facts, you must be part of the medical, and this must be one of the ways that you make money.

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

[BADecker]

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

If you did a bit of research, you would find that the whole premise for vaccines is false. Simple cuts, or injecting water or simple H2O2 into the blood, has the same, basic effects of vaccines, without the side effects. What do cuts or water injections do? They activate the immune system (and H2O2 even kills off disease and neutralizes toxins). But they do it without the side effects of things like mercury which are found in vaccines.

How in the world goofy are you? In some public places, if florescent light bulbs that contain mercury accidentally break, they evacuate everybody in the building until they can decontaminate. Back a few years ago, mercury in fish was warned about by government in a big way, and the warnings are still there. Decades ago they got rid of mercury in thermometers because of how dangerous it is. You can check it out with simple Internet searches.

Now even the CDC and government warn us that there is mercury in at least some vaccines. What?!?!?!?!? How in the world crazy can that be? That they would even allow stuff injected into people to come near mercury. But they don't simply, accidentally, without-proper-care, mistakenly allow it. Rather, they PUT the mercury into the vaccines intentionally!

And here you are, trying to tell people that vaccines are safe and good for you. You and a bunch of people like you are all menaces to society. What's your real purpose? Are you trying to promote the formal policies of people like the Illuminati, who are trying to reduce the world population formally? The populace needs to be warned about people like you.

[Astargath]

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

If you did a bit of research, you would find that the whole premise for vaccines is false. Simple cuts, or injecting water or simple H2O2 into the blood, has the same, basic effects of vaccines, without the side effects. What do cuts or water injections do? They activate the immune system (and H2O2 even kills off disease and neutralizes toxins). But they do it without the side effects of things like mercury which are found in vaccines.

How in the world goofy are you? In some public places, if florescent light bulbs that contain mercury accidentally break, they evacuate everybody in the building until they can decontaminate. Back a few years ago, mercury in fish was warned about by government in a big way, and the warnings are still there. Decades ago they got rid of mercury in thermometers because of how dangerous it is. You can check it out with simple Internet searches.

Now even the CDC and government warn us that there is mercury in at least some vaccines. What?!?!?!?!? How in the world crazy can that be? That they would even allow stuff injected into people to come near mercury. But they don't simply, accidentally, without-proper-care, mistakenly allow it. Rather, they PUT the mercury into the vaccines intentionally!

And here you are, trying to tell people that vaccines are safe and good for you. You and a bunch of people like you are all menaces to society. What's your real purpose? Are you trying to promote the formal policies of people like the Illuminati, who are trying to reduce the world population formally? The populace needs to be warned about people like you.

No no, don't try to run away from your article which was proven to be complete bullshit, don't switch like you always do, admit the article was trash.

[BADecker]

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

If you did a bit of research, you would find that the whole premise for vaccines is false. Simple cuts, or injecting water or simple H2O2 into the blood, has the same, basic effects of vaccines, without the side effects. What do cuts or water injections do? They activate the immune system (and H2O2 even kills off disease and neutralizes toxins). But they do it without the side effects of things like mercury which are found in vaccines.

How in the world goofy are you? In some public places, if florescent light bulbs that contain mercury accidentally break, they evacuate everybody in the building until they can decontaminate. Back a few years ago, mercury in fish was warned about by government in a big way, and the warnings are still there. Decades ago they got rid of mercury in thermometers because of how dangerous it is. You can check it out with simple Internet searches.

Now even the CDC and government warn us that there is mercury in at least some vaccines. What?!?!?!?!? How in the world crazy can that be? That they would even allow stuff injected into people to come near mercury. But they don't simply, accidentally, without-proper-care, mistakenly allow it. Rather, they PUT the mercury into the vaccines intentionally!

And here you are, trying to tell people that vaccines are safe and good for you. You and a bunch of people like you are all menaces to society. What's your real purpose? Are you trying to promote the formal policies of people like the Illuminati, who are trying to reduce the world population formally? The populace needs to be warned about people like you.

No no, don't try to run away from your article which was proven to be complete bullshit, don't switch like you always do, admit the article was trash.

The article I listed wasn't proven to be BS. Rather, the article you provided simply shows how government and the medical often try to make it look like they are doing something, when they are not, really. Anybody who sits down and takes your article apart, word by word, can see that there is nothing that is actual proof for vaccines in it. The only proof it shows is that there are a bunch of people, both in government and the medical, who set up methods for supposedly finding vaccine proof, and supposedly for protecting the public. But the proof is not proffered. If it were, the people who won in my article, would not have won, because government would have shown the proof of the vaccine tests.

That's always the way it is with you and the medical. You make it sound like you have proof for the medical point in question. But it winds up only being proof that you set up guidelines to find the proof. It takes court actions like the one I showed to prove that you, the medical, and government don't have the actual proof - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/.

[TECSHARE]

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Yeah pretty much. Everything is relative. That doesn't mean there is no truth, just you are statistically unlikely to ever see or know it. We can make educated guesses about things. That is literally the best science has to offer. That doesn't make it useless or something we shouldn't strive for, but if you don't understand this, what you are practicing is not science, it is religion.

I don't really give a fuck about any of the other points argued here so don't bother arguing them with me. I am not here to defend them.

'' That is literally the best science has to offer'' Which was my point all along? What's your point exactly? Do you think scientific theories are useless or not?

I literally answered your question in this post, but you didn't stop frothing at the mouth long enough to actually read it. Loving the personal attacks in the reputation section because you can't handle a legitimate debate too.

[Astargath]

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Yeah pretty much. Everything is relative. That doesn't mean there is no truth, just you are statistically unlikely to ever see or know it. We can make educated guesses about things. That is literally the best science has to offer. That doesn't make it useless or something we shouldn't strive for, but if you don't understand this, what you are practicing is not science, it is religion.

I don't really give a fuck about any of the other points argued here so don't bother arguing them with me. I am not here to defend them.

'' That is literally the best science has to offer'' Which was my point all along? What's your point exactly? Do you think scientific theories are useless or not?

I literally answered your question in this post, but you didn't stop frothing at the mouth long enough to actually read it. Loving the personal attacks in the reputation section because you can't handle a legitimate debate too.

If your point is that scientific theories are the best we have, then why are you arguing with me? That has been my position all along. My point was that badecker is a moron who dismisses scientific theories, calls them a ''hoax'' You can certainly disagree on some aspects of any given theory, gravity, evolution but calling them hoaxes simple makes you an idiot.

[BADecker]

If your point is that scientific theories are the best we have, then why are you arguing with me? That has been my position all along. My point was that badecker is a moron who dismisses scientific theories, calls them a ''hoax'' You can certainly disagree on some aspects of any given theory, gravity, evolution but calling them hoaxes simple makes you an idiot.

If somebody made a scientific theory pertaining to the evaluation of scientific theories in general, many scientific theories would be evaluated by it to be hoaxes... not really scientific theories, but rather hopes and dreams of scientists and others who wished that these hoax theories were true.

In addition, when the media and other people who can make money off a scientific theory, twist it into being reality, when nobody knows that it is reality, and then the scientists accept the media and universities, and start calling scientific theories fact when nobody knows that they are, that's when scientific theory validity starts to fail.

Rather than show the dividing line between what exists, scientific theories about it, and scientific theories that try to prove the existence of something, you would rather badmouth people who try to clarify things.

Scientific theories exist.
Some STs try to prove that something else exists.
Some STs try to prove how something that is known works.
Some STs have been proven false, yet remain.
Some STs have been proven factual, yet remain STs.

It all has to do with a consensus of a lot of people for all kinds of reasons, many of which are not based in good-faith thinking. And you like the idea of keeping the muddle there, rather than clarifying the differences regarding what the STs are trying to prove, and if they are even valid. You show yourself to be a person who does not have good faith, but rather, one who is trying to manipulate the minds of people for deceitful reasons.

[Astargath]

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

If you did a bit of research, you would find that the whole premise for vaccines is false. Simple cuts, or injecting water or simple H2O2 into the blood, has the same, basic effects of vaccines, without the side effects. What do cuts or water injections do? They activate the immune system (and H2O2 even kills off disease and neutralizes toxins). But they do it without the side effects of things like mercury which are found in vaccines.

How in the world goofy are you? In some public places, if florescent light bulbs that contain mercury accidentally break, they evacuate everybody in the building until they can decontaminate. Back a few years ago, mercury in fish was warned about by government in a big way, and the warnings are still there. Decades ago they got rid of mercury in thermometers because of how dangerous it is. You can check it out with simple Internet searches.

Now even the CDC and government warn us that there is mercury in at least some vaccines. What?!?!?!?!? How in the world crazy can that be? That they would even allow stuff injected into people to come near mercury. But they don't simply, accidentally, without-proper-care, mistakenly allow it. Rather, they PUT the mercury into the vaccines intentionally!

And here you are, trying to tell people that vaccines are safe and good for you. You and a bunch of people like you are all menaces to society. What's your real purpose? Are you trying to promote the formal policies of people like the Illuminati, who are trying to reduce the world population formally? The populace needs to be warned about people like you.

No no, don't try to run away from your article which was proven to be complete bullshit, don't switch like you always do, admit the article was trash.

The article I listed wasn't proven to be BS. Rather, the article you provided simply shows how government and the medical often try to make it look like they are doing something, when they are not, really. Anybody who sits down and takes your article apart, word by word, can see that there is nothing that is actual proof for vaccines in it. The only proof it shows is that there are a bunch of people, both in government and the medical, who set up methods for supposedly finding vaccine proof, and supposedly for protecting the public. But the proof is not proffered. If it were, the people who won in my article, would not have won, because government would have shown the proof of the vaccine tests.

That's always the way it is with you and the medical. You make it sound like you have proof for the medical point in question. But it winds up only being proof that you set up guidelines to find the proof. It takes court actions like the one I showed to prove that you, the medical, and government don't have the actual proof - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/.

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

[BADecker]

If you did a bit of research you would know your post is full of bullshit. https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/

But of course, if it's anti vaccines it has to be 100% true always, right?

If you did a bit of research, you would find that the whole premise for vaccines is false. Simple cuts, or injecting water or simple H2O2 into the blood, has the same, basic effects of vaccines, without the side effects. What do cuts or water injections do? They activate the immune system (and H2O2 even kills off disease and neutralizes toxins). But they do it without the side effects of things like mercury which are found in vaccines.

How in the world goofy are you? In some public places, if florescent light bulbs that contain mercury accidentally break, they evacuate everybody in the building until they can decontaminate. Back a few years ago, mercury in fish was warned about by government in a big way, and the warnings are still there. Decades ago they got rid of mercury in thermometers because of how dangerous it is. You can check it out with simple Internet searches.

Now even the CDC and government warn us that there is mercury in at least some vaccines. What?!?!?!?!? How in the world crazy can that be? That they would even allow stuff injected into people to come near mercury. But they don't simply, accidentally, without-proper-care, mistakenly allow it. Rather, they PUT the mercury into the vaccines intentionally!

And here you are, trying to tell people that vaccines are safe and good for you. You and a bunch of people like you are all menaces to society. What's your real purpose? Are you trying to promote the formal policies of people like the Illuminati, who are trying to reduce the world population formally? The populace needs to be warned about people like you.

No no, don't try to run away from your article which was proven to be complete bullshit, don't switch like you always do, admit the article was trash.

The article I listed wasn't proven to be BS. Rather, the article you provided simply shows how government and the medical often try to make it look like they are doing something, when they are not, really. Anybody who sits down and takes your article apart, word by word, can see that there is nothing that is actual proof for vaccines in it. The only proof it shows is that there are a bunch of people, both in government and the medical, who set up methods for supposedly finding vaccine proof, and supposedly for protecting the public. But the proof is not proffered. If it were, the people who won in my article, would not have won, because government would have shown the proof of the vaccine tests.

That's always the way it is with you and the medical. You make it sound like you have proof for the medical point in question. But it winds up only being proof that you set up guidelines to find the proof. It takes court actions like the one I showed to prove that you, the medical, and government don't have the actual proof - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/.

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

However you want to say it, the lawsuit shows that there aren't any vaccine tests that prove their safety. Medical certifications that vaccines are safe are not backed up by anything. The lawsuit showed it.

[TECSHARE]

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

[Astargath]

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though.

[BADecker]

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though.

What?!?!?!  LOL!

We are talking about injecting things into people, into children, into babies.

What if they showed thousands of reports. But what if there were one or two that were missing, or were in doubt. But they didn't even have ONE report.

Hancock - What kind of bastard must I have been...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0aN8oU7ePY

Nobody? Not ONE report?

[TECSHARE]

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though.

Ok, now that you are past the point of trying to dismiss this source, and that you have been provided a premise with a source to back it up, what is your evidence this is NOT something that has serious implications? On what evidence do you base the conclusion that they are meeting every other requirement?

[Astargath]

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though.

Ok, now that you are past the point of trying to dismiss this source, and that you have been provided a premise with a source to back it up, what is your evidence this is NOT something that has serious implications? On what evidence do you base the conclusion that they are meeting every other requirement?

The Health and Medicine Division (HMD) division (previously known as the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has published a number of vaccine safety reviews and reports under commission of HRSA, an agency of HHS

the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC), established in 1987, has had regular meetings and published regular reports about vaccine safety

a number of other vaccine safety oversight advisory committees and government groups were established, including the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Review Advisory Committee (MIDRAC) of NIAID, and the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, with the Vaccine Interagency Group of the National Vaccine Program Office providing overall coordination. They all report to the Secretary of HHS.

the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) and Vaccine Safety Datalink were established in 1990, but it is important to keep in mind that VAERS was created from a merger of the CDC Monitoring System for Adverse Events Following Immunization (MSAEFI) and the vaccine reports contained in the FDA Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) programs. It’s not like we just start following adverse events following immunization in 1990.

a Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines was established and completed a report, “identifying key issues and enhancing collaboration on behalf of vaccine safety” in 1996. Did someone forget to send it to Congress?

the Salk inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) replaced the oral polio vaccine (OPV) in 1996 because of a small risk of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP), beginning with a sequential IPV-OPV vaccine schedule and then going to an all IPV schedule in 2000

the DTaP vaccine, which is supposed to have fewer side effects than DTP is licensed, and replaces DTP for all required doses by 1997, although DTP is never actually shown to have caused seizures or brain damage

RotaShield, the first rotavirus vaccine is licensed in 1998 but is soon withdrawn from the market in 1999 after it is associated with an increased risk of intussusception, a form of bowel obstruction

the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project was established in 2001


So hey, if you want to continue acting like nutjobs go ahead but stop hindering science like you have always been doing, science will always prevail because it works, religion does not.