RE: A Must-read Study on Vaccine Safety.
It appears this study has several flaws. The study only draws from a pool of home schooled children, which makes it a poor indicator of overall population. It encompassed ~400 children, which is a fairly small sample size. It is also a survey, meaning these diagnoses are self reported. That is a very unreliable methodology. Children who are home schooled are more likely to have parents that hold anti-vaccine views, so the group chosen for this study combined with the survey methodology opens it up to bias. I have to wonder why the choice was made to limit this study to home schooled children.
As contact information on homeschool families was unavailable,
there was no defined population or sampling frame from which a
randomized study could be carried out, and from which response
rates could be determined.
That doesn't sound great.
“Dear Parent, This study concerns a major current health question:
namely, whether vaccination is linked in any way to children's long-term
health. Vaccination is one of the greatest discoveries in medicine, yet
little is known about its long-term impact. The objective of this study
is to evaluate the effects of vaccination by comparing vaccinated and
unvaccinated children in terms of a number of major health outcomes …”
That is how they recruited subjects for this survey. I think its fairly self apparent that the subject pool is going to be tainted as it is voluntary. Someone who believes their child has been damaged by vaccines is going to be more interested in responding than someone who doesn't.
The paper goes on to admit some of the weaknesses in its limitations section.
But, lets ignore the issues of the study for a moment. Lets say it is accurate and vaccinations do increase the risk for certain illnesses and conditions such as autism. Isn't this marginal risk far more preferable to the deluge of deadly illnesses children contracted prior to the use of vaccines?
Yes and no. Running water and good hygiene are great and to a long way in disease prevention!
Thanks for the comment. While I understand your concern about the population sample and biases, it seems you misread some parts of the report.
The reason for this is stated in the study.
This number is incorrect. The population sample is stated directly in the study.
The percentages of unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, and fully vaccinated children in this study are all around 30 percent.
It may be. As the paper says, however, much more research is needed. Inter Alia effects are almost completely without study, the VAERS database is full of unaddressed reports of illness and death, and the VICP (a government court) is paying out billions in damages.
The paper is not saying people should not vaccinate, but that more research is needed, and from the available data, I'd say they're correct.
There is no evidence that will influence you to open your mind on this major social problem. Please take a few moments to absorb what a well informed doctor has discovered about vaccines here -