Post AxwD74WT5aSXBSrDii by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
 (DIR) More posts by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
 (DIR) Post #Axses97JkHStAovOme by AskPippa@c.im
       2025-09-04T20:45:09Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       This is from a few years ago, but the point remains the same. THEN is before vaccines, and NOW is after vaccines.
       
 (DIR) Post #AxshZ3PB3eLroormHg by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
       2025-09-05T01:59:12Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       (1/2)@AskPippa> THEN is before vaccines, and NOW is after vaccinesThis proves correlation, not causation. @publius
       
 (DIR) Post #AxshnYxIYEobiykDmS by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
       2025-09-05T02:01:51Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       (2/2)Since public health experts have strong biases in favour of vaccines, there should be well-funded, large-scale studies aiming to prove null hypotheses. That vaccines don't prevent infection, don't reduce the seriousness of infection, don't reduce transmission, etc.If studies like this have been done, and failed to prove their hypothesis, I suspect I'm not the only one who'd find that much more convincing than infographics based on cherry-picked results.
       
 (DIR) Post #AxtCaRwMQ39smXX73Y by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
       2025-09-05T07:46:51Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @strypey Aside from the obvious ethical problem that to attempt to prove the null hypothesis in such a case would involve deliberately killing tens of thousands of children by infecting millions with diseases known to cause death (and, more frequently than death, life–long health problems), this fundamentally misconstrues what public–health interventions are all about.Banning the administration of aspirin to small children with fevers prevents Reyes’ syndrome. WE DON’T KNOW WHY.
       
 (DIR) Post #AxufPI9PZFq540d4IC by strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
       2025-09-06T00:44:29Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @publius > to prove the null hypothesis in such a case would involve deliberately killing tens of thousands of children by infecting millions with diseases known to cause death1) Not at all. You seem to be assuming placebo-controlled studies. These are many other ways epidemiologists could investigate this.2) This is begging the question. Maybe vaccination is deliberately infecting millions? The only way to know for sure is to do science that doesn't set out to prove its own assumptions.
       
 (DIR) Post #AxwD74WT5aSXBSrDii by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
       2025-09-06T18:36:47Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @strypey “Infecting” with what? In the 1970s, a poorly conducted polio immunization campaign in Egypt resulted in an outbreak of hepatitis. This led to a high rate of refusal of vaccines in Egypt, and an overall higher rate of diseases which can be vaccinated against, with accompanying higher disease mortality and shorter lifespans, than in comparable countries.
       
 (DIR) Post #AxwDEEcVwf72Wn6Jmq by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
       2025-09-06T18:37:58Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @strypey Anyway, not only is it obviously true that you cannot rigorously test the proposition “vaccines prevent children from dying of infectious disease” without killing children, but such testing would not add anything useful or meaningful to our store of knowledge. The available evidence is overwhelming that vaccinations reduce disease mortality, and that no competing cause is available which shows similar effects. Sanitary water supplies, for instance, do nothing against smallpox.