Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
907
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 166:
Line 166: + + + + + +
→vaccine panels: new section
My edit concerning the fraudulent research done by Andrew Wakefield was just reverted. Is there any reason for this revert? I don't see any legal issue, as Wakefield's fraud has been conclusively proven. --[[User:BernardC|BernardC]] 18:00, 4 October 2011 (EDT)
My edit concerning the fraudulent research done by Andrew Wakefield was just reverted. Is there any reason for this revert? I don't see any legal issue, as Wakefield's fraud has been conclusively proven. --[[User:BernardC|BernardC]] 18:00, 4 October 2011 (EDT)
== vaccine panels ==
''Many people assume that official vaccine recommendations are based on recommendations of independent panels of experts after reviewing risk-benefit and cost-benefit analyses. They are not. The government panels are dominated by vaccine industry representatives and they have no consumer representatives. The meetings are not open to the public. They do not usually do much analysis, and tend to recommend whatever vaccines are available''
This statement throws out some pretty big accusations. I haven't been able to find any evidence that this is even remotely true. I'll give it a few days and if no-one finds a credible source then it'll be removed. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 19:53, 4 October 2011 (EDT)