At least now I understand your way of thinking.
said, "Correlation is not causation, the bacterial infections have nothing to do with vaccination status. "
What your saying is there is no evidence of what creates these infections. You maybe right but you're creating law based on assumptions not science.
Given there are far more kids that have this pattern of getting infections and then becoming autistic. Since there is a pattern we need more study.
As you said, "Correlation is not causation" it also means it could be causation. Without facts it's an unknown.
Since there are no studies on the pattern of how these kids are getting these infections that lead to autism. A mandate to force the kids to take a scientific unknown is illogical course of action.
Are you even familiar with the genetic research into the heritability of autism?
The fact that the vast majority of children receiving vaccines do not get sick with any infections following the vaccination is confirmation that correlation is not causation.
What your saying is there is no evidence of what creates these infections.
Uh no, I did NOT say that. They know exactly what causes secondary bacterial infections following a cold virus, there are multiple factors, the primary one being the the shape, size and slant (really lack of slant) causing poor drainage in the small child's eustachian tubes resulting in a nice warm pool of fluids for bacteria to incubate in, the inability of small children to effectively blow their nose, the hesitancy of mothers to effectively use that rubber bulb snot sucker to clear their child's nasal passages, etc.