A Midwestern Doctor @MidwesternDoc - I have always tried to give readers the information needed to reach their own conclusions rather than pressure them to adopt mine. For this article, I brought together Mendelsohn’s 1979 critique, Humphries’ hospital experience, and Aaron Siri’s work on the legal and scientific assumptions surrounding vaccination. I wrote this article in part because of the vital work Aaron Siri has done over the years to support vaccine safety, and in part because his book ties together critical pieces around the religious ritual of vaccination. Here I examine that history, the specific problems with safety research, and why questioning vaccination can provoke such an intense institutional response: https://x.com/MidwesternDoc/status/2107462293705400467
A Midwestern Doctor @MidwesternDoc - Video: A related issue is the use of another vaccine or an aluminum-containing preparation as the control in a vaccine trial. In the examples I discuss, Prevnar 7 was compared with another experimental vaccine, while Gardasil trials included an aluminum-containing comparator. A small difference between two groups tells us something about those two groups. It does not, by itself, establish how either compares with receiving neither intervention. Likewise, the 4–5-day monitoring windows in the hepatitis B studies I discuss cannot resolve questions about conditions that develop much later. The comparator and the monitoring window limit what these studies can establish about safety. Note: a medical condition occurring after vaccination is not automatically caused by it. Determining causation is precisely why the comparison group and follow-up matter.