How do you expect me to show you something the CDC has admitted to throwing away?
Are you daft?
Show me Lois Lerner’s hard drives!
(see how that works?)
Perhaps you are willfully ignoring my question, which of course is your choice. If the data that was discarded was indicative, it would show up in the overall population.
Does it?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/autism-rates-higher-among-certain-immigrants-minorities-1403543838
It would seem that there is not a 300% increase in the incidence of black males getting the MMR vaccine and having autism.
So, knowing that the data does not pan out for the population, what scientific use is this data that demonstrates that there is a 300% increased incidence of autism among black males after the MMR vaccine?
Oh, right, the CDC tossed out this bad data in their report, so they are reaching into other reports. Perhaps their influence stretches to the recent Danish report? Which just about mirrors the same percentages in the WSJ report. Again, no 300% increase in the incidence of autism among black males.
Show me ANY report on the planet from ANY country which indicates that there is a 300% increased incidence of autism among black males. Aside from the one dataset which was tossed out in the Georgia study, none has mirrored these results.
Now of course, you’ll yet again ignore this.