@JeremyMallin

#historymatters

I do so agree, disproven is not the same as unproven. Vaccines are the reason modern living with its airtravel has not come to a grinding halt *yet*.

Hans Asperger was in cahoots with the nazis and sent kids who did not respond to his liking to his tests to euthanasia clinics. No science there, just sadism.

Best not promote this 'illness' which is actually a normal healthy response to being surrounded by nazis too much.

@JeremyMallin

It has been proven false.

@JeremyMallin

Actually I don't think "disproven" is the scientifically correct word either.

The formally correct statement is... "There is no (statistically significant) evidence for a link"

@JeremyMallin
Discredited is better.

At least to me, disprovenis something you do to a valid hypothesis. Where as discredited implies that it never had any merit in the first place.

@JeremyMallin

Possible the most investigated vaccine in history. It's safe.

@JeremyMallin

Hey, y'all. Just some notes.

We live within and are complex organic systems where our reality can be discussed as statistical risk. Where our actions (cascading events we decide on) are instinctively decided on based on our perception of risk. The risk of a system (like your body) being affected by any individual event (ie intoduction of a vacine) is extremely complicated because so many events are happening at any one time inside and outside an individual. Often risk is assigned by our brains through simple association based on a simple series of events. Ex fire burned me stay far away from all fire is a normal gut reaction. However, a thoughtful risk assessment after seeing fire can keep me warm and alive if I contain it even if I might get burned occasionally can make my life better.

Scientific method is a process where a sufficient number of a certain event and its impact on a given system are studied to be able to assign a probability or risk to the likelyhood various changes in the system that occure could be impacted by the event being studied. Enough examples need to be studied to cover or exclude as many likely concurrent events (eg Vaccination concurrent w age, what was had for breakfast, what pets, health history, etc.) Big population studies use questionaires to get as much concurrent dats as possible. The results need to be analysed in terms of any observed intereactive risk associated with concurrent events. If you like math statisical analysis is an interesting illustrative approach to viewing your world.

Scientific method cannot say never for the simple fact that in as complex a system as our existence on earth is, every concurrent event to the one being studied cannot be anticipated. Results of studies are expressed in risk percentages. Its good to pay attention to those percentages and understand what they mean relative to other risks in your life. The observed co-occurance of autism with vaccinations, carrier material in the vaccines, or interaction with known concurrent events in huge population studies is so small that it is assigned to chance, not causation. This does not feel right if its your kid and your gut tells you there's got to be a direct cause.

There probably is a cause, but we aren't studying the right event yet. Its possible the cause is a beneficial event, such as increased intelligence of a certain kind that has been retained across the vast majority of human populations. Autistic people have recently published some excellent reasons to think this could be a possibility. There might be reasons why these factors aren't being studied and should be questioned.

Not all 'scientists' follow scientific method and public schools stopped teaching it because it tends to disallow for 'faith' and 'belief' which is upsetting to established religions. The government seems to want us to believe that we should discard scientific method and simply stop doing things like vaccinating our kids against deadly diseases that can kill them out of fear of having what may actually be a usefully intelligent child that our school systems can't handle and are generally very fitted to use scientific method to advance our lives.

We need to get away from the proven/unproven argument which is being used to obfuscate the actual war between advancement of understanding our potential as a species that is part of a wonderous planetary biosphere, and the old power structures of empire and army that are threatened by anything that threatens their culture of faith in big daddy.

Wew, is that radical enough? What's radical these days seems to be education. Take a statistics course focussed on scientific method and learn how to laugh at our ignorant billionaires and CDC.

😉