I haven’t come to any conclusion — that’s you. I’m simply responding to a blanket assertion that there are no studies that show correlation. Factually, that is false. There are at least 24 peer reviewed and published in scientific publications. I have not made any assertion about how those fit in with greater scientific consensus. Again, that’s you making assumptions. D. Andre said that the studies were about as valid as conspiracy theories and I simply pointed out that the abstract from the one I read sounded like something that would be reasonable to further investigate, since Al is a known nuerotoxin. In other words, it’s clearly not an ascientific assertion (not a conspiracy theory).
Precision in debate seems to be severely lacking in this discussion across the board.
Similarly to Lorelei Weldon, I’ve simply said that although vaccines are largely safe and effective, they clearly aren’t for some people, and that we should pay greater attention to how to better understand and improve that. We know that they aren’t safe for some people because there is a special Federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
I have a background in sociology and I have to say that it’s fascinating from that perspective to see how really non-controversial concepts like looking to improve the safety get blown up into a big brouhaha when it’s about this topic.