You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Can the Scientific Community Better Respond to 'Fake News' in Science?
Statistics explains that it works. Give people cowpox as a vaccine, see reduction in small pox cases that is statistically relevant over a long period of time? Well guess what bub, then the coxpox inoculation is the causative agent for protection from the small pox.
All you are showing me is that the vaccination does not provide 100% immunity, okay. So what? Again you are misinterpreting things.
Which statistics? Your assertion is not fact, you are regurgitating scientific fraud purported for over 200 years. Look into the book The Poisoned Needle, everything in that book is sourced and verifiable, unlike Sherri's Medical Microbiology which offered ZERO sources or citations.
Look into the book "How to lie with statistics".
Without methodology and causation shown clearly and not through mere inference and conjecture based on what is thought to be happening there is nothing to understand besides assumptions and unproven claim for those mechanisms.
Prove:
and
So what? So study/infer into how/why it works and don't blindly accept explanations that have no methodology for testing such things.
Statistics never EXPLAIN, they show causation. Word games.
I didn't show anything, you did with your own article where it said that epidemics happen in spite of vaccination. How smallpox was eradicated when only a small minority of the population was ever vaccinated: because vaccinations.