Quote:
Originally Posted by lumberjim
there is no profit to be made in studies that are pure science.
|
I don't think that line of thinking is productive, or at least, it's not something you should draw direct conclusions from. You might say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis." But you should never say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis, therefore my hypothesis is true."
Unprofitable studies happening at CDC:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vsd/vsd_studies.htm
Including:
Quote:
In response to public concerns, VSD researchers have begun a case-control study to examine the association between thimerosal and autism rigorously. The study aims to determine whether exposure to thimerosal in infancy or in utero is related to development of autism. The study will also evaluate whether exposure to thimerosal in infancy is related to development of the subclass of autism predominantly associated with regression. As part of the study, researchers will use automated data and registries to identify children with autism (cases) and without autism (controls). In-person examinations, telephone interviews, medical chart reviews, and immunization tracking systems will be used to collect information on vaccine history and other possible covariates. Recommended by the Institute of Medicine, this VSD study will be the first rigorous, epidemiological study conducted on the issue of thimerosal and autism. Data from this VSD study should provide the best available scientific information on whether a causal association between exposure to thimerosal and the development of autism is possible.
This study is in the data collection phase.
|