pull down to refresh

Study of 1.2 Million Children Finds No Risk From Common Vaccine Additivewww.sciencealert.com/study-of-1-2-million-children-finds-no-risk-from-common-vaccine-additive
236 sats \ 7 comments \ @south_korea_ln 13h science
A massive, 24-year-long study of more than 1.2 million children provides reassurance to parents around the world.
The research has found no compelling evidence that childhood vaccines lead to autism, asthma, or dozens of other chronic disorders.
Researchers in Denmark examined the safety of a specific vaccine ingredient – aluminum salts – which, despite frequent debunking, remains a common talking point among vaccine skeptics. Clinical trials have tested their safety extensively, and they've been used in non-live vaccines for more than 70 years to boost the immune system's response to lower doses of medicine.
It's good to keep studying the potential negative impacts of vaccines.
Only one author discloses links with big pharma. Disclosure information
write
preview
related posts
42 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 11h
I'm not up on the vaccine controversy at all, but wasn't mercury the supposed main suspect?
reply
78 sats \ 1 reply \ @96c0b276a3 11h
Ive seen blame laid on multiple additives as well as active ingredients.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 11h
Yes, I've seen mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde mentioned.
reply
50 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 11h
I have no dog in this fight, but this is yet another observational study.
It's very disingenuous for experts to say this should put the matter to rest, when the skeptics have specifically been complaining about a lack of clinical trials.
There are established methodologies that can be used without denying control group kids vaccines, which is the usual objection.
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @south_korea_ln OP 11h
Yeah, that's the risk when relying on agenda experts to interpret the original results.
Edward Belongia, a retired epidemiologist who studied vaccine safety for decades and who was not involved in the current research, told Stat News that this is "the largest and most definitive observational study on the safety of vaccine-related aluminum exposure in children" he knows of.
He said it "should put to rest any lingering doubts" about the potential health risks.
I'm sure the original authors are more nuanced than Edward here.
Incidentally, that's also how i found out about this study, a local Fauci-style expert who was also saying this is the final nail in the anti vaxxers coffin (it isn't, and it shouldn't be).
There are established methodologies that can be used without denying control group kids vaccines, which is the usual objection.
Can you elaborate? I'm not up to speed on this.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 10h
Yeah, there was a clever design to measure the harms of smoking while pregnant.
Obviously, you can't just assign one group of women to a treatment group and have them smoke two packs a day.
What you can use in these situations is an "intent to treat" strategy. In that study, one group of women received some extra literature and counseling about the harms of smoking. That group of women, who previously reported the same smoking rates as the control group, smoked less during their pregnancies. By attributing the reduction in smoking to the intervention (and assuming there was no other channel by which that intervention impacted health) you can treat the difference smoking as though it's exogenous.
In other words, it's almost empirically equivalent to actually assigning one group to smoke more, without being morally equivalent.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Macoy31 9h outlawed
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.