What is the proof that vaccines work? - Page 2

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by Taximom5 

As long as it contains ANYTHING that could (and does) have a harmful effect on a subgroup of people, it is not a placebo, and no amount of twisting the truth will make it one.  Saying that "it functions as a placebo" does not minimize the harmful effects; it just confuses people into believing so.

No. The definition of a placebo is "a simulated or otherwise medically ineffectual treatment for a disease or other medical condition intended to deceive the recipient." (that's from wikipedia at least). 

So it has to be something that the person thinks is medicine (or prevention) for the disease, but actually isn't. Research ethics would say it should also be something which the researcher believe is not harmful based on the best available evidence, but that has nothing to do with it being called a placebo.

A placebo is something which has no positive medical effects, and anyone who thinks otherwise just has a misconception. 

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by Taximom5 

Neither can the 2000 people whose brain damage was admitted to be vaccine-induced by the US government, nor the 40+ people whose vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders were admitted by the US government to be caused by vaccines.  

You've posted those figures before (http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1359577/newborn-vaccines-eye-drops-vitamin-k-and-hep-b/20 for example). I'm curious to follow them up. Where do they come from? Over what date range? 

[Pookietooth]

The fact that I have talked to people whose children were vaccine damaged whose doctors refused to do anything or report their children's adverse vaccine reactions leads me to suspect that the figures are vastly under-reported. Situations like the child went into convulsions and passed out, then continued to have regular convulsions (with no family history of seizure disorder) and eventually die (a few years later). 

I do know that I am still immune to rubella, and I probably had that vaccine 40 years ago or so. At least I was 3 years ago when I was getting pregnant with my dd. I also was vaccinated for mumps, but got it anyway when I was 8 or so, which makes me wonder about how effective they are.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by tonttu 

Also , when saying , that autism rates have gone up , we always have to remember , that the way children are being checked for problems , have really advanced and many children , that may have been considered simply " misbehaving " ( I am not just talking about autism now ) a few years or decades ago , are now being looked at from a totally different angle

Not true.

The diagnostic criteria changed in 1994 with DSM IV. Nothing has changed in terms of diagnosis in nearly 20 years. But those who deny a vaccine-autism link like to pretend that it has so that they can justify the enormous increase in autism.