« More on Autism, mercury and chelation | Main | Shields hits back at Cruise »

May 29, 2005


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

sorry if i am wrong about this but i looked at the link to geiers research (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/eletters/114/3/584) and the conclusion that you quoted seems to be from another study which is stated in a reply to his peice not his actual peice which concluded:
"In conclusion, we are, and always have been, strong supporters of the US vaccine program and of pediatricians that administer vaccines, but given the fact that many US states now have either banned (Iowa), or are in the process of banning thimerosal, (California, Missouri, Nebraska, and New York, among many others) and given that fact that there is now a bipartisan national bill introduced in the US House of Representatives (Weldon/Maloney bill) to ban it nationally, we now strongly suggest that the United States pediatricians should insist on giving only thimerosal- free vaccines, lest they become involved in the terrible morass of lawsuits that are already beginning on this issue."


Yes, I incorrectly credited Geier with the study – thanks for spotting that. I followed Geier’s link to a study and clicked on the “Abstract” link which took me to the study abstract. This was not Geier’s study – my apologies and I will correct the post.

Having said that, Gordon did link to the study I quoted, and Geier’s criticism of it was below the fold at the bottom. Some points are worth noting though:

1. Gordon linked to a study that showed no evidence of neuro-developmental disorders from thimerosal.
2. Geier again criticized the supposed conflict of interest of the experimenters. To demonstrate a weakness in the study you have to actually demonstrate an actual weakness in the study, not just smear the experimenters.
3. Nothing on that link is evidence of a causal link between thimerosal and autism – nothing. There is some whining about the weakness of the study and its lack of applicability to the US, but nothing showing a link. So when Gordon wrote “The Institute of Medicine chose to ignore excellent research supporting a link between thimerosal and autism. Look at Dr. Geier’s presentation in particular” (with the link I quoted), he was blowing smoke. He needs to cite a study or several that do show causal links.

What vaccination obsession? We haven't mentioned the subject at all on The Puffington Host. ;)

LOL - I had no idea. My sincerest apologies. ;-)

Dammit, Skeptico, I hate it when someone makes me think harder.

Yes, I love reading and quoting research which agrees with me. Now I have to look harder at Geier and Geier and others because people like you are out there ready to shoot down my posts when my reasoning's too facile. And yes, you did mix up two studies. Correction accepted without prejudice, sir.

I still believe that the current vaccine schedule is not the best for babies and that the manufacturers are less than candid about side effects and problems. I also believe that some of the vaccines are no longer relevant to American children and musttherefore be subject to a new risk/benefit analysis.

BUT, now I have to get better documentation.


Jay Gordon

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search site