Oh Heck is one of my studies debunked? As far as I know, the Italian court ruling was not a "study", and in fact heavily relied on the fraudulent 1998 Wakefield article as evidence.
Incidentally your artcile written by Emily Willingham does not cite a linked study.
Why would it? It was a news article about the Italian case. If you want evidence that vaccines don't cause autism, I already told you that there have been no scientific studies to date showing a causal link. The findings have been unanimous, and I've already linked to a document from the American Academy of Pediatrics with citations of over 40 studies showing no evidence of an autism/vaccine link. Here, I'll post it again if you didn't take the time to read it the first time:
Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence
Do you deny that there are individuals that have been adversely harmed by "safe" vaccines?
This seems to be the same trick that all of you anti-vaxer folks play. You make a wild assumption that has no evidence to back it up, such as "vaccines cause autism", then when presented with evidence to the contrary, you hide behind platitudes like "vaccines are not 100% safe every time and can have side effects", which no one denies.
The risks are well documented and researched, and autism isn't one of them.
How about the fact that your links do not even state what you claim they do?
Please provide evidence of this. I see no reason to believe you've read any of my links at all, seeing as how you missed the link to the actual study in the press release.
Here, I'll link to the full study again since you can't seem keep up:
Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism
The entire study is there, with full references and even a couple of graphs. This is the same document I linked to in post #120.
Please try to pay attention.
Oh please.....you ignorant little troll. You lump me in with liberal anti-vax people so you do not have to address anything I say, but I have to take you seriously as if you are anything other than a poodle with enough dexterity to press the individual keys on the keyboard and posting on the Internet as if you are human. You dismissed an Italian court ruling. I dismissed your reasoning with just as much evidence.
Your evidence that there is no link between vaccines is similar to the link between texting and crashes. I have composed long emails while driving and did not cause an accident therefore, there is not link between texting and accidents. For that matter, I have sped, run red lights and stop signs without adverse effect. therefore, these things do not lead to accidents. Golly gosh, by applying your "science" to the universe so many things make sense. You claim autism is not one of the risks of autism, but I linked you to a FDA document that listed it as a potential risk. So, evidently, according to your august and undocumented resume were are to believe you but not the FDA. I am not as impressed with you as you are with yourself. Please provide documentation as to why you are more credible that the FDA.
Please provide evidence of this. I see no reason to believe you've read any of my links at all, seeing as how you missed the link to the actual study in the press release.
I told you exactly how long(21 pgs) your "study" was. I also ridiculed it as something less than a masters thesis. Perhaps you did not read all 21 pgs of your study enough to comprehend that it did not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Once again, you are welcome to provide documentation of your credentials of your expertise. I can not doubt that you are well credentialed since you seem so knowledgeable.