They certainly weren't clear about the methodology they used, and their data hasn't been peer-reviewed. Until that point, this is just nonsense.
I’ll ask again. What dog do you have in this hunt?
I have been a long-time FReeper and enjoy the site. My dog is the discrediting of the quack "science" that SANE Vax, Inc., released, and that FReepers are now posting as Front Page news. And why do you think it’s OK to give sex vaccines to kids?
Did you children get a Hep. B shot after they were born? If not, why?
I agree it would have more weight if it were peer reviewed, but until then, it has at least as much weight as the nonsense AP/Reuters/CNN churn out that we happily hold up as reasonable Front Page material.
They have cited their expert. Now it’s up to the reader to decide to what extent they agree with it, just as they would for any news.
The peer review process is not perfect either. just look at the lies that get published about Anthropogenic Global Warming. Those have been peer reviewed, and are still lies.
Your reflexive response to censor and hide this does not sit well with me.
“”Did you children get a Hep. B shot after they were born? If not, why?””
I think you meant to say, “If not, why not?”
The better question is “why would you allow it?”
It doesn’t make sense to give newborn babies that shot when tests run on the mother would give them the answers they’re seeking.
We who believe otherwise about ANY vaccinations are not falling for propaganda. Accepting without questioning is more indicative of someone swallowing propaganda.
You’re disappointed in freepers with a different viewpoint from yours. I’m disappointed in freepers who are against everything the government or any government agency does but don’t hesitate to fall into line over vaccinations!!