France is one of the worst European pupils in terms of vaccination.

[Janic]

Is what he says in his article false or refuted?
http://cecinestpasinitiativecitoyenne.b ... bias.html

We have seen and seen, through the menu, detail after detail, that Beer's speech was a joke sanctioned by royal judgment and accusations against the team without foundation. The zigoto that makes this site, does not take it into account and he just wants to make the buzz, or he is one of those influencers that the Minister launched on the net, to thwart, discredit, everything that harms the labs and even censor non-conformists to the dogmas of BP.

[pedrodelavega]

Beer’s speech was a joke sanctioned by royal judgment

False: Wakefield lost in defamation. His study is retracted and denied by those who followed.
https://www.bilan.ch/opinions/david-del ... e-publique
https://www.pourquoidocteur.fr/Articles ... in-autisme
https://translate.google.fr/translate?h ... l_activism

[GuyGadebois]

Beer’s speech was a joke sanctioned by royal judgment

False: Wakefield lost in defamation. His study is retracted and denied by those who followed.

True, Wakefield has been the victim of a witch hunt with the complicity of official organizations responsible (on hand) to defend the interests of pharmaceutical laboratories and other various lobbies.
http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... ception%2F

[GuyGadebois]

Beer’s speech was a joke sanctioned by royal judgment

False: Wakefield lost in defamation. His study is retracted and denied by those who followed.
https://www.bilan.ch/opinions/david-del ... e-publique
https://www.pourquoidocteur.fr/Articles ... in-autisme
https://translate.google.fr/translate?h ... l_activism

Shit in the bar.

[pedrodelavega]

True, Wakefield has been the victim of a witch hunt with the complicity of official organizations responsible (on hand) to defend the interests of pharmaceutical laboratories and other various lobbies.

To cover a vaccine that would give autism to children ..... Come on. And don't all the people who cover this have children, parents, friends, who are going to get vaccinated?
How is it that all the studies that have followed done around the world do not have the same conclusions as his own on 12 cases?
How is it that he lost his 3 trials in 2 different countries? (a global plot involving justice?)

[GuyGadebois]

To cover a vaccine that would give autism to children ..... Come on.

Not at all, not systematically. It was just observed, notified. Yes, to "cover", indeed.

[Janic]

janic wrote: Beer's speech was a joke sanctioned by royal judgment

pedrodelavega wrote: False: Wakefield lost in defamation. His study is retracted and denied by those who followed.

All this has already been seen and carefully reviewed and all your arguments are hollow, empty, for who knows the subject. But you like to mix everything to mislead an uninformed reader. You can continue, it won't change anything, it's hollow, it sucks!

GuyGadebois wrote: True, Wakefield was the victim of a witch hunt with the complicity of the official bodies responsible (undercover) for defending the interests of pharmaceutical labs and other various lobbies.

To cover a vaccine that would give autism to children ..... Come on.

Well let's see, this is neither the first nor the last time that politicians and other cover this stuff and scandals of all kinds bear witness

And don't all the people who cover this have children, parents, friends, who are going to get vaccinated?

This is what can disturb individuals.
A few years ago now, the professional population using the most tobacco was ..... the doctors! Which, professionally, were most directly confronted with the victims and what did that change in their own behavior? Nothing!
The human mind is weird and even when faced with the greatest evidence, people see nothing to reassure themselves, to take refuge in their beliefs in religious myths as scientific (as far as there is a difference) because they are their only landmarks and it is human!

So still to mix everything! Autism is not an infectious disease that could be reduced to ineffective vaccines elsewhere, but it is the consequence of cumulative effects due to multiple causes including chemicals added everywhere and not only in vaccines , except that there it is injected DIRECTLY into the body. Whether it is aluminum, mercury or any other toxic product, the effects will be the same: degrading health by attacking the immune systems that protect physiological and even psychological integrity with autism.

How is it that all the studies that have followed done around the world do not have the same conclusions as his own on 12 cases?

For the simple reason that few universities and academics were interested in it, since that has changed and THE S cannot muzzle everyone, one day or the other it bursts in broad daylight, it is just a question of time and means, that you and your lobbies fear precisely.

How is it that he lost his 3 trials in 2 different countries? (a global plot involving justice?)

Again this misleading, cheating and lying mixture. He lost lawsuits in defamation that have nothing to do with the effectiveness or otherwise of MMR or autism because no civil court, no judge, is presumed to have sufficient medical competence. So it's a form judgment, no background of the subject. If I said that you are an idiot, that could be considered as defamation even if the bottom of the subject is right, but who would dare to defame you?

[pedrodelavega]

He lost lawsuits in defamation that have nothing to do with the effectiveness or otherwise of MMR or autism because no civil court, no judge, is presumed to have sufficient medical competence. So it's a form judgment, no background of the subject.

He lost his defamation lawsuit against the Deer article which detailed the entire history of the Wakefield fraud.
If Deer had said bullshit in his article, Deer would have lost.

If I said that you are an idiot, that could be considered as defamation even if the bottom of the subject is right, but who would dare to defame you?

No, it's an insult.

[Janic]

He lost lawsuits in defamation that have nothing to do with the effectiveness or otherwise of MMR or autism because no civil court, no judge, is presumed to have sufficient medical competence. So it's a form judgment, no background of the subject.

He lost his defamation lawsuit against the Deer article which detailed the entire history of the Wakefield fraud.
If Deer had said bullshit in his article, Deer would have lost.

Always so bad and bad times. A civil judgment, do not decide on the scientific part, but on the subject itself: diffamation. If a judge considers that there is no defamation compared to the laws on this one, the complainant is dismissed. But nothing on the medical side.
The “Deer bullshit,” was viewed as superficial by the royal court in England.

If I said that you are an idiot, that could be considered as defamation even if the bottom of the subject is right, but who would dare to defame you?

No, it's an insult. [/ Quote] Which would be considered defamation since public! We have already dissected the subject on your lies on Wakefield and you persevere in wanting to deceive the readers.

DIFFAMER, verb trans.
Seeking to damage someone's reputation or honor by writing or speaking.
https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/diffamer

[GuyGadebois]

If I said that you are an idiot, that could be considered as defamation even if the bottom of the subject is right, but who would dare to defame you?

No, it's an insult.

Or a diagnosis.