Tgeorgescu (talk | contribs) Reverted 6 edits by 134.139.33.92 (talk): WP:NOTFORUM, block evasion? (TW) Tag: Undo |
134.139.33.92 (talk) Undid revision 892104199 by Tgeorgescu (talk) Tag: Undo |
||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
== "Claims of autism" vs. "False claims of autism" == |
== "Claims of autism" vs. "False claims of autism" == |
||
{{u|Tgeorgescu}}: You reverted my changes |
{{u|Tgeorgescu}}: You reverted my changes —on this article, and left a message on my talk page. The right place to talk about changes to this article is here, on it's own talk page. You say you reverted my edits I "added commentary, my own point of view, or my own personal analysis" this WP article. That's a straight out '''lie'''. I did nothing of the sort. I didn't add anything. All I did was remove one word: "false". That word is in breach of [[WP:POV]]. There should be no confusion about this; it's pretty easy to establish a [[WP:POV|NPOV]]: any qualification of anything or anyone in the text must be attributed to someone rather than left unattributed. If, for instance, the article says the claims (if any) are considered false, they '''must''', to retain its [[WP:POV|NPOV]], also cite '''who''' considers them false. WP is not a [[Ministry of Truth]]; it's an [[encyclopaedia]]. [[User:WisdomTooth3|WisdomTooth3]] ([[User talk:WisdomTooth3|talk]]) 22:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
:I won't play by your game. In scientific matters [[WP:SPOV]] ''is'' [[WP:NPOV]]. There are guidelines like [[WP:FRINGE]] and [[WP:MEDRS]] which you should never violate. We don't do [[WP:GEVAL]]. Jimbo agrees, see [[WP:LUNATICS]]. [[User:Tgeorgescu|Tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:Tgeorgescu|talk]]) 22:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
:I won't play by your game. In scientific matters [[WP:SPOV]] ''is'' [[WP:NPOV]]. There are guidelines like [[WP:FRINGE]] and [[WP:MEDRS]] which you should never violate. We don't do [[WP:GEVAL]]. Jimbo agrees, see [[WP:LUNATICS]]. [[User:Tgeorgescu|Tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:Tgeorgescu|talk]]) 22:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
We are not pro-disease, we are pro-safe vaccines. These vaccines are NOT safe. Send a placebo based study vaxxed vs unvaxxed from an indpendent non-pharma-backed organization that proves the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. Otherwise, stop being a vaxhole and do your research! [[Special:Contributions/134.139.33.92|134.139.33.92]] ([[User talk:134.139.33.92|talk]]) 06:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC) |
We are not pro-disease, we are pro-safe vaccines. These vaccines are NOT safe. Send a placebo based study vaxxed vs unvaxxed from an indpendent non-pharma-backed organization that proves the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. Otherwise, stop being a vaxhole and do your research! [[Special:Contributions/134.139.33.92|134.139.33.92]] ([[User talk:134.139.33.92|talk]]) 06:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC) |
||
Watch 24 experts not compensated by pharma explain why vaccines are not safe, nor effective. <ref>https://www.stopmandatoryvaccination.com/parent/vaccine-injury/exclusive-dtap-vaccine-shatters-ufc-fighters-family-after-killing-their-boy/</ref> [[Special:Contributions/134.139.33.92|134.139.33.92]] ([[User talk:134.139.33.92|talk]]) 06:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Autistic-sweetiepie-boy-with-ducksinarow.jpg|500px|thumb|alt=Sleeping boy beside a dozen or so toys arranged in a line|A young boy with autism, a '''lifelong condition''', who has arranged his toys in a row]] |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{archive bottom}} |
{{archive bottom}} |
Revision as of 06:58, 12 April 2019
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Frazon (article contribs).
"Autism claims" vs. "Autism scientific fraud"
After re-reading Wikipedia's policy regarding keeping a neutral point of view, I believe that the article should not use the headline "Autism scientific fraud" as it violates this policy. The previous headline of "Autism claims" was much more in line with a neutral point of view. The policy states that Wikipedia articles should "describe disputes, but not engage in them." and "Avoid stating opinions as facts." I believe that the "fraud" headline both states an opinion as a fact, and engages in the vaccination dispute. I'd be interested to see what other members of the community think. – Majora4 (leave a message) 04:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
- All reliable sources say that this was a fraud. Only the anti-vaxxers call it a controversy or a claim. A "claim" is something unproven that is stated in good faith. This wasn't. Definition of Claim: an assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt. This is not disputed or in doubt. It is disproven as a fraud as of 2011. On Wikipedia fringe theories get no weight when determining neutral point of view. We can and should cover this idea because it is notable, but we cannot "buy into it", not even a little bit. Jehochman Talk 11:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
- To me, this section is wider than the fraud issue. Plainly there are a bunch of people out there who make claims that MMR causes autism, and one would assume most are not and never have been involved in fraud. The whole debate about this vaccine's safety cannot always be compressed to Wakefield's malfeasance, which is fully covered under MMR controversy. To me, this article is about the vaccine. In this context, 'fraud' is inappropriate in this section heading. Dallas66 (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
- There was a fraud, and the sequelae are various people and media repeating the false statements of Wakefiend. It's important to be clear that this is not a controversy or a debate. Not a drop of truth to the idea that this vaccine is harmful. No reliable source says that there's any doubt. I would agree with "fraud and conspiracy theories". Jehochman Talk 20:23, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
- While I do agree that Dr. Wakefield's original article should be considered fraud, I don't think there's sufficient reason to say that there isn't a controversy or a debate. There's a large portion of the populace who 100% believe that the MMR vaccine causes autism (and many have extended these beliefs to all vaccines as well). Although I personally don't think these beliefs hold any merit, I think there's a sufficient number of people who believe it such that we can't really justify treating it as a "fringe theory." The belief is even popular enough to warrant its own article, so that counts for something, right? – Majora4 (leave a message) 20:13, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
- We actually do need to treat the MMR Vaccine Fraud/Controversy as a "fringe theory," just because a lot of people believe it does not make it anymore scientifically valid. Take Global Climate Change as an example, lots of people don't believe it is occurring, that doesn't mean there belief it is not a fringe position from a scientific point of view. In order to comply with NPOV and Fringe we should state in the heading this is based on fraud. Very few people who believe this theory have committed the fraud it's true, however it all started because of a fraudulent paper/press conference.--VVikingTalkEdits 13:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
- I have amended the heading and the text. The previous impression was of a sober and careful article about the vaccine, but then going off into an angry outburst about Andrew Wakefield: all of which is covered elsewhere. I guess current events arouse more passion, but that's something to guard against IMO Dallas66 (talk) 16:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on MMR vaccine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070623134938/http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3793/4705/20155.aspx to http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3793/4705/20155.aspx
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615000359/http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/ to http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913173824/http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/basics/truths.php to http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/basics/truths.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:15, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
"Claims of autism" vs. "False claims of autism"
Tgeorgescu: You reverted my changes —on this article, and left a message on my talk page. The right place to talk about changes to this article is here, on it's own talk page. You say you reverted my edits I "added commentary, my own point of view, or my own personal analysis" this WP article. That's a straight out lie. I did nothing of the sort. I didn't add anything. All I did was remove one word: "false". That word is in breach of WP:POV. There should be no confusion about this; it's pretty easy to establish a NPOV: any qualification of anything or anyone in the text must be attributed to someone rather than left unattributed. If, for instance, the article says the claims (if any) are considered false, they must, to retain its NPOV, also cite who considers them false. WP is not a Ministry of Truth; it's an encyclopaedia. WisdomTooth3 (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- I won't play by your game. In scientific matters WP:SPOV is WP:NPOV. There are guidelines like WP:FRINGE and WP:MEDRS which you should never violate. We don't do WP:GEVAL. Jimbo agrees, see WP:LUNATICS. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Tgeorgescu: You're misquoting and misapplying the policy.
- The policy literally states that WP:SPOV "for science articles is consistent with WP:POV."
- This article is a WP:BLP, not a science article. WP:BLP are about someone did and what happened in their lives, not character evaluations.
- WP:LUNATICS has nothing whatsoever to do with this. My edits do not give credence to Andrew Wakefield et al (1998); they only correct the article's wording to simply say what he said and did, and what others said and done in relation to that.
- WisdomTooth3 (talk) 07:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Tgeorgescu: You're misquoting and misapplying the policy.
- Yup, you try to present facts as if they were opinions, see WP:ASSERT. Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
When opinions are clearly factual, and the opposing views are fringe ones pushed mostly by unreliable sources, we state the facts and ignore the fringe by giving the fringe the weight it deserves, in some cases no mention at all. Framing factual opinions as mere "opinions" poisons the well and serves to undermine the factual nature of the content. It would serve to frame facts as mere opinion which can be ignored, and frame debunked conspiracy theories as factual. "Sky is blue" type facts need not be attributed, because that would debase the facts. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 07:46, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Flat Earth doesn't give equal weight to flat and spherical earth, for example. Gah4 (talk) 08:21, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- I agree with most of what BullRangifer says, except "factual opinions" is a contradiction, facts are by definition not opinions, and opinions are by definition not facts. But if you replace "factual opinions" with "facts" in BullRangifer's comment, then I agree completely. Tornado chaser (talk) 15:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. That was clumsily written. I suspect I was describing the situation where people think it's an opinion which must be attributed, but when that opinion is correct and factual, then why do it? Just write it. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 16:21, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- I agree with most of what BullRangifer says, except "factual opinions" is a contradiction, facts are by definition not opinions, and opinions are by definition not facts. But if you replace "factual opinions" with "facts" in BullRangifer's comment, then I agree completely. Tornado chaser (talk) 15:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
CDC Whistleblower Dr. Thompson
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
SHould we include Dr. Thompson's statements he made in 2014, regarding the fraud of the 2004 MMR-autism study? Dr. Thompson provided 10,000 legitimate documents to back up his claim.[1] We cannot trust any of the pharma-funded companies on vaccine safety, as liability was taken away from them as part of the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Act. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 04:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- No. – bradv🍁 04:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
We should definitely include a source for Dr. Thompson's documents because the CDC can no longer be trusted to perform vaccine safety studies. No placebo based vaxxed vs. unvaxxed studies were conducted on the MMR vaccine. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 04:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- This is patently false. Please stop. – bradv🍁 04:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
If this is false, then why aren't you suing Del Bigtree or Andy Wakefield? Why isn't Merck suing them? Why isn't Senator Richard Pan suing them? 134.139.33.92 (talk) 04:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Show me a placebo study done by an independent organization not funded by the pharmaceutical industry that proves that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. That means no CDC studies, no Institute of Medicine studies, no studies done by pharma-funded companies and manufacturers. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 04:46, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- You are promoting a conspiracy theory which has been persistently and consistently debunked. Please see WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:FRINGE. – bradv🍁 04:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This is not a conspiracy theory. If you watch Vaxxed, you will find many of the 10,000 documents that Dr. Thompson uses to back up his claim on his phone call with Dr. Brian Hooker. Go do your research. If you are going to keep saying that this is false, then send a placebo study vaxxed vs. unvaxxed done by an independent organization not funded by the pharmaceutical industry. That means no studies from the IOM, the CDC, Merck, any vaccine manufacturer or organization funded by pharma. Thanks 134.139.33.92 (talk) 04:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- We do not make WP:PROPAGANDA for WP:LUNATICS. Tgeorgescu (talk) 05:02, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- This. And Vaxxed is not a reliable source. You may be interested in this article from the Washington Post, which is. – bradv🍁 05:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
The Washington Post gets a lot of its money from the pharmaceutical industry, so of course it is going to say bad things about Vaxxed. The co-author of SB277, Senator Ben Allen, watched Vaxxed and said that "Vaxxed is not an anti-vaccine film". Dr. Thompson still works at the CDC today. Send a placebo-based study comparing Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed done by an independent organization or independent commission not funded by the pharmaceutical industry in any way. Until then, you guys are quoting vaccine safety science that does not exist. Thank you. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:07, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Read Dr. Hooker's official statement on Dr. William Thompson here.[2] More facts. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Then find a placebo study from an indpendent organization not funded by the pharmaceutical industry that proves that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. That means no newspapers, nothing from the news agencies, the CDC, the IOM, the AAP, vaccine manufacturers, politicians funded by the pharmaceutical industry like Senator Richard Pan, and any other source that is funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Just because the CDC, the IOM, and almost all of the most reliable sources say that vaccines do not cause autism, does not mean it is true. They all are funded big amounts of money from the pharmaceutical industry, which is protected from liability when it comes to vaccines. Until you show an independent placebo-based vaxxed vs. unvaxxed study from a non-pharma-funded organization regarding the MMR vaccine and autism, you are just promoting pharma's propaganda. Go do your own research. Be smart about your research and don't be a vaxhole. Thanks 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:21, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- There's nothing smart about what you say, don't waste our time. And... it this characteristic for the California State University? Tgeorgescu (talk) 05:24, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This is not characteristic for the CSU. This is a crisis here. Too many children are being hurt by these vaccines and until you can find a placebo vaxxed vs unvaxxed study from an independent organization not funded by the pharmaceutical industry, there is no proof that this vaccine is safe. That means no articles from news organizations, major medical journals, newspapers, the CDC, the IOM, the AAP, politicans funded by big pharma like Senator Richard Pan, and any other pharma-funded organization. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Unless you have the placebo vaxxed vs. unavaxxed science from a non-pharma-funded organization proving that vaccines are safe, don't tell me that vaccines are safe, because they are NOT. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by this word "vaxhole" but it sounds like you are trying to cause offense.But seriously, think about what you asking. You say that we should "do our own research", but yet you're telling us to ignore all scientific and academic research performed by the experts that work in the area of health and medicine. That makes zero sense. Please take your pro-disease nonsense elsewhere. – bradv🍁 05:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
But are the experts working for us, or for money from the pharmaceutical industry? Which companies are they working for?: I betcha most, if not all of them, are lobbied by the pharmaceutical industry in some way. Find that placebo-based study from an independent non-pharma-funded orgaqnization to back up your claim, or stop making these claims by these careless companies. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I will never back down and until you find actual evidence from a company who is not being funded by pharma at all, you are just saying things without reliable sources from non-pharma-funded companies! I stand for the truth, not for propaganda! It's better to get measles than to get a lifelong disability. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
What do the doctors that focus specifically on autism, like Dr. John Green and Dr. Lynne R. Mielke, say? The vaccine can can autism. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 05:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- Let me tell you something: Wikipedia is a front for mainstream science, mainstream medicine, QuackWatch and organizations of skeptics. Our choice is already made. Tgeorgescu (talk) 05:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
But can the mainstream media be trusted? They received a good chunk of their money from the pharmaceutical industry, which is immune from vaccine injury liability. Why are there so many doctors, especially autism doctors that tell their patients that vaccines can cause autism. Look, Wikipedia should be a place where real truth with evidence from reliable sources that are not bought out by the pharmaceutical industry are releasedl, not a place to support a powerful industry's evil agenda. And until this mission is accomplished, I will never back down! 134.139.33.92 (talk) 06:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- You cannot convince us and the power of WP:RULES is against your WP:POV. Neither seek we to convince you, it is futile to convince true believers of anything else than they believe. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:06, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Why don't you say that on our end too. You cannot convince us, nor force us to believe what pharma and many news agencies say, because we, by heart, know the truth.. Go find a placebo study comparing vaxxed vs. unvaxxed from an independent organization not funded by the pharmaceutical industry that proves the vaccine is safe. Otherwise, stop talking like a vaxhole, a person who quotes vaccine safety science that does not exist. 134.139.33.92 (talk) 06:10, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- WP:THETRUTH: you'd rather die as a martyr for your cause than accept mainstream science. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:13, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
- This is the way of the pro-disease advocates. If only they didn't affect the innocent too. – bradv🍁 06:17, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
The truth is that mainstream science is flawed when it comes to vaccines. If Del Bigtree and Andy Wakefield are sharing fraudulent data, why isn't Merck or any vaccine manufacturer going out to sue them? Go read those 10,000 documents Dr. Thompson put out. No, I will never accept their position on vaccines, because all of those studies by these pharma-funded companies are a fraud, according to producer Del Bigtree. Now go do your own research and stop being a vaxhole! We are never going away! 134.139.33.92 (talk) 06:16, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
We are not pro-disease, we are pro-safe vaccines. These vaccines are NOT safe. Send a placebo based study vaxxed vs unvaxxed from an indpendent non-pharma-backed organization that proves the MMR vaccine does not cause autism. Otherwise, stop being a vaxhole and do your research! 134.139.33.92 (talk) 06:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Watch 24 experts not compensated by pharma explain why vaccines are not safe, nor effective. [3] 134.139.33.92 (talk) 06:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ http://vaxxedthemovie.com/download-the-cdc-autism-mmr-files-released-by-dr-william-thompson/
- ^ https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-brian-hooker-statement-william-thompson/
- ^ https://www.stopmandatoryvaccination.com/parent/vaccine-injury/exclusive-dtap-vaccine-shatters-ufc-fighters-family-after-killing-their-boy/