You also don’t know if the scientists that did the Finnish “study” were in the pockets of big pharma. Did you look at each bank account— or if they are on the boards of pharaceutical companies. Why should I take any “study” seriously when we know what billions of dollars can buy and haven’t done thorough checks on motives or bias of scientists? You think all scientists are moral and good? (oh, wait....Wakefield....ummmm!!!)Could he be the “only” bias, “evil” scientist out there?
For decades now we have a PC climate which attacks everyone who makes the common sense statement that when you inject toxins into healthy humans you get adverse results.
You make no mention of Kuhn or the pressure on scientists to “think inside the box” -—”all vaccines good—the more the healthier!!!
I think: More toxins injected into small immature bodies = more abnormalities and neurological damage. (Oh, but I am just a lowly mother).
Protections from “DEATH” and disease?????? Really. That is debatable in most circumstances. Rather the emphasis should be on the known damage of the accumulated toxins being intentionally injected into humans.
Now you're projecting the flaws of Wakefield on all scientists.
If you can prove the Finnish scientists took payoffs from lawyers and had their own vaccine they could make money from, after they fabricated their results, then I'll discount their results and call them scumbags. Until then, I'll just discount Wakefield and call him a scumbag.
Any luck finding the data to backup your lie about mercury?