Autism Study Being Conducteed- Anyone can Sign up

[emmy526]

http://study.vaccineresistancemovement.org/

Quote:

Just to clarify this study is open to EVERYONE. The absence of autism in your family/household or the fact you haven't vaccinated your children does not preclude you from taking part in the study. The control parameters are wide open this time. All the data we receive will be pertinent in determining the paths that lead to autism. VRM will be continuing to collect your invaluable data for as long as possible. That being said we still encourage everyone to enroll in the study while it's openly available.

[chickabiddy]

Just what we need -- another unscientific "study" (control parameters are wide open?) with a self-selection bias right from the start.

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

Just what we need -- another unscientific "study" (control parameters are wide open?) with a self-selection bias right from the start.

sure the results will make you feel just as good too 

thanks for posting emmy526

[emmy526]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

sure the results will make you feel just as good too 

thanks for posting emmy526

i can't wait to see the results

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

Just what we need -- another unscientific "study" (control parameters are wide open?) with a self-selection bias right from the start.

While I agree it will be an unscientific study with wide open parameters, the results may be interesting, thought provoking perhaps. Why not do it? go ahead and include your fully vaccinated, non autistic children. Why not?

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Marnica 

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

Just what we need -- another unscientific "study" (control parameters are wide open?) with a self-selection bias right from the start.

While I agree it will be an unscientific study with wide open parameters, the results may be interesting, thought provoking perhaps. Why not do it? go ahead and include your fully vaccinated, non autistic children. Why not?

I included my vaccinated, extremely heathy, non autistic (but mild ADD) child in this survey along with my equally healthy, non autistic unvaccinated children. 

[chickabiddy]

Originally Posted by Marnica 

While I agree it will be an unscientific study with wide open parameters, the results may be interesting, thought provoking perhaps. Why not do it? go ahead and include your fully vaccinated, non autistic children. Why not?

I might.  I'm not especially keen on giving personal information to the Vaccine Resistance Movement, though.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

I might.  I'm not especially keen on giving personal information to the Vaccine Resistance Movement, though.

why? and what kind of personal info do you think needs to be shared (other than the obvious health related questions)

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

I might.  I'm not especially keen on giving personal information to the Vaccine Resistance Movement, though.

How ironic.

Anyone resisting or even just delaying vaccines has to give all their personal information the Let's Mandate Vaccines Movement.  Sometimes Child Protective Services gets called in, sometimes children are denied entry to school, sometimes adults are fired from their jobs.

[prosciencemum]

Taxi - that's not true in the UK for example. No exemptions are required here.

Can you show us proof that child protective services have been called in for vaccine exemption only (ie no other issues in that family). I find that hard to believe.

How will this Internet survey prevent people registering fake children (e.g. With made up severe reactions to vaccines)?

[Rrrrrachel]

Psm taxi is taking some extreme examples and acting like they're commonplace.

[Dakotacakes]

Originally Posted by Marnica 

While I agree it will be an unscientific study with wide open parameters, the results may be interesting, thought provoking perhaps. Why not do it? go ahead and include your fully vaccinated, non autistic children. Why not?

 I will answer for myself the answer to this question.  Considering they are not adhering to the guidelines of scientific inquiry in the sample, the data collection or the data analysis I would be concerned that they will not adhere to conventional confidentiality and protection of human subjects either.  I don't want private information of any kind given to random people on the internet conducting a study that is not associated with a reputable research organization that has been through a human subject review board to insure confidentiality and protection from harm, spam and other undesirables.

This is elevated for myself because as it isn't a scientific study and it is coming from a clearly biased organization it doesn't matter anyway.  I don't participate in research that is clear the researcher is going to "cook the books" until they get their desired results.  Generally the protection from this comes from peer review and HSRB boards this is going through none.  I know what the results will be "vaccines cause autism" the vaccine resistence movement wouldn't put forward anything but that.  SO there is no point in providing data since the "results" have likely already been written

[Rrrrrachel]

Yes, typically deciding what you're going to control for and how you're going to analyze your data after its already been gathered is not a recipe for quality results. My guess is they take data not gathered in a rigorous way and run multiple statistical tests until one or more come up as significant by random chance, then that starts showing up as headlines.

[chickabiddy]

Originally Posted by Dakotacakes 

 I will answer for myself the answer to this question.  Considering they are not adhering to the guidelines of scientific inquiry in the sample, the data collection or the data analysis I would be concerned that they will not adhere to conventional confidentiality and protection of human subjects either.  I don't want private information of any kind given to random people on the internet conducting a study that is not associated with a reputable research organization that has been through a human subject review board to insure confidentiality and protection from harm, spam and other undesirables.

This is elevated for myself because as it isn't a scientific study and it is coming from a clearly biased organization it doesn't matter anyway.  I don't participate in research that is clear the researcher is going to "cook the books" until they get their desired results.  Generally the protection from this comes from peer review and HSRB boards this is going through none.  I know what the results will be "vaccines cause autism" the vaccine resistence movement wouldn't put forward anything but that.  SO there is no point in providing data since the "results" have likely already been written

All of that, plus, you can't participate in the study without registering on the Vaccine Resistance Movement site.  I don't care to support that site or increase their membership.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by Dakotacakes 

 I will answer for myself the answer to this question.  Considering they are not adhering to the guidelines of scientific inquiry in the sample, the data collection or the data analysis I would be concerned that they will not adhere to conventional confidentiality and protection of human subjects either.  I don't want private information of any kind given to random people on the internet conducting a study that is not associated with a reputable research organization that has been through a human subject review board to insure confidentiality and protection from harm, spam and other undesirables.

This is elevated for myself because as it isn't a scientific study and it is coming from a clearly biased organization it doesn't matter anyway.  I don't participate in research that is clear the researcher is going to "cook the books" until they get their desired results.  Generally the protection from this comes from peer review and HSRB boards this is going through none.  I know what the results will be "vaccines cause autism" the vaccine resistence movement wouldn't put forward anything but that.  SO there is no point in providing data since the "results" have likely already been written

Hmmmmm I guess you should never participate in Pharma funded research then either 

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Dakotacakes 

  I don't participate in research that is clear the researcher is going to "cook the books" until they get their desired results.  Generally the protection from this comes from peer review and HSRB boards.

Right. So you can't participate in any studies funded by and directed by the pharmaceutical industry, because they have been proven over and over to "cook the books" until they get their desired results.

Several mainstream scientists, including Marcia Angell (former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine) and the scientists from the Cochrane Collaboration who reviewed the flu shot studies, agree that there is significant publication bias in peer review, and that there is no longer sufficient protection against "cooking the books."  The Cochrane scientists made a point of writing that the existing flu shot studies are of poor quality, and that the studies that did not show what the pharmaceutical industry wanted were much less likely to get published.

Under those circumstances, peer review has become a joke; the system is corrupt.

[Escaping]

Originally Posted by chickabiddy 

Just what we need -- another unscientific "study" (control parameters are wide open?) with a self-selection bias right from the start.

Exactly what I was thinking... the site doesn't even have field validators. There is nothing to stop some disgruntled person from sitting there all afternoon and submitting their answer over and over again... which I imagine if someone has time to argue with same point for days with someone they've never met, they'd have time to warp the survey as well lol

Edited by Escaping - 3/27/13 at 1:08pm