« Bill Donohue - even more vile than previously thought | Main | SkeptiCal 2010 »

April 08, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Good call. I was going to write that one up, but there is something about Adams' M.O. that makes me vomit blood.

Thanks for the takedown Skep. I'm sure someone will forward me this guy's article as "proof" vaccines are eeevilll

I will promptly direct them here.

Good work again on this clown, Skeptico.

56% effective huh....well, I guess the sun even shines on a dog's arse once a day too. Seeing how the flu shot has been a complete failure the last few years, I would say I'm unimpressed.

I will take my 100% effective approach of not getting the flu shot and not getting the flu.

BTW, do you think the increase in getting the H1N1 has anything to do with the seasonal flu shot HAVING H1N1 in it? At least that is what it says on the insert...

"I will take my 100% effective approach of not getting the flu shot and not getting the flu."

Ah yes indeed - the old "Rely on Dumb Luck" ploy. Great track record, that one. It ranks right up there with "Don't wear seat belts and don't have an accident".

do you think the increase in getting the H1N1 has anything to do with the seasonal flu shot HAVING H1N1 in it? At least that is what it says on the insert..

oh really now, and perhaps you can link to an actual picture of that insert from a 2009 era flu vax?

H1N1 ANTIGENs, not the virus, is going to appear in the 2010 seasonal flu vaccine because its still around as a common strain.

get your facts straight before you start babbling around like that. The number of dumb things you compressed into one post is astounding.

Great write up, this is essential a "classic" case here. Picking out one part of one study and running with it to make a blanket statement, conveniently in line with your particular ideology.

Skepticism is hard work at times (Often tedious and arduous work... Not fun), a glancing read through of the study may have yeilded ANYONE with a similar conclusion as Adams... But when you look at the whole picture (Other studies on the same issue and factors associated with the study) it becomes much more involved.

Yes, the good Dr. Cannell of the Vitamin D Pushers Association became convinced that Vitamin D prevents the flu when, after giving vitamin D to all the patients of his ward, NOT A ONE CAUGHT THE FLU, that season. So, he gave up criminal psychiatry, and become a respected pill pusher, that's as good as it gets for scientific proof.

Oh, and if you do get the flu despite the megadoses of vitamin D Dr. Cannell recommends, (50,000 UI ?), just take 2 pills (100,000 UI) and it will go away.

Arthur, if you wish to prove Vitamin D works, cite a study, not random claims by your woo woo doctors.

Besides Dr. Canell did not use a control group with placebos, and did not use another group with standard medicine.

Nico: duh !


Are you trying to be funny? Irony can be tough to pick up on the Nternets, especially when it's done poorly.

I was kinda trolling, maybe I'm out of practice.

I get it. The usual suspects here are typically on their toes though. So you may want to go full-on believer or use a little more sarcasm.

Have fun trolling.

Arthur, you were being sarcastic? sorry, my apologies

I see getting my sarcasometer calibrated last week paid off. I did recognize the sarcasm!


Hey, hold the phone - "I took my 100% effective approach of getting both shots and not getting the flu."

Would theo care to do the analysis of our two data points?

No need - Theo's report is obviously rigorous data, while yours is merely anecdote and can be safely dismissed.

Wait, I got both flu shots and did not get the flu! Add that to Lady Lizards and you get:

Anecdote + anecdote = data!



That is the woo-woo definition of science:

I can make up whatever I like the sound of and if other people agree with me, I'm right.

Great points from Theo and L.Lizard, a sample of two totally unverifiable anecdotes is irrefutable evidence.

1.03 is barely significant. It could be a chance finding. If it's a real effect, I wonder why it might happen that way.

However, it should be noted that countries in the Northern Hemisphere had a mild H1N1 season, and I think that's simply because people got vaccinated, the vaccine worked, and there's probably some herd immunity at play.

I say that because if you look at trends.google.com results for, say, the word "cough" narrowed for Australia vs. the US, the search patterns are very different. (Australia had its season mid year, before the vaccine, obviously.) There were early indications that the season could be a bad one for the US, but then it went away, right at the time the vaccine was introduced.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search site