Following the science -

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

Let's just do this one step at a time

Could you help me find the bit in those articles where Blair opposed the vaccines?

Without sounding like I’m repeating myself , I’m not your personal google search engine

This tends to speak volumes - inverted commas , basically as assumption

Blair baby 'has had' MMR jab

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

The ESRC report demonstrated the high awareness amongst the public of the Leo Blair issue, in spite of it not being the most prominent aspect of the media coverage. In December 2001, during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, Tony Blair was asked whether his infant son had been immunised with MMR. Mr Blair declined to answer on the basis that it was a private family matter. The perception in the media was that if Leo had been immunised, Mr Blair would have been happy to say so. His wife, Cherie Blair, had been the subject of media reports highlighting her interest in New Age alternative medicine which contributed to the suspicion that Mr Blair was promoting MMR in public but opting out in private. The impact of this issue on immunisation levels is hard to measure in isolation but uptake certainly fell in the wake of the publicity (Fitzpatrick, 2004).

Note - uptake fell in the wake of publicity - so that in itself suggests he was not actually acting in the public’s best interests- ok bra

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Following the science -

Hesitate to ask the same question - but did you read these articles?

Given that the "has had" headline came from a completely different Guardian article than the one he posted. Indeed there are 12 years between them, I think you have your answer!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/dec/23/uk.research

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

Given that the "has had" headline came from a completely different Guardian article than the one he posted. Indeed there are 12 years between them, I think you have your answer!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...23/uk.research

In your opinion, Lardy , sorry CEA , what’s funny though is that if you read an assumed story you agree with it , but if a person with a different opinion posts an assumed story you don’t

In conclusion ( which you have failed to mention) :-

The impact of this issue on immunisation levels is hard to measure in isolation but uptake certainly fell in the wake of the publicity (Fitzpatrick, 2004). There is nothing more to say in response the statement- There appears to be overwhelming evidence that, because of his profile at the time, he may have caused deaths in children (with the reduced uptake)

If you want to defend him then you’re a hypocrite.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Following the science -

Just doing my own research. What's not to like?

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

Just doing my own research. What's not to like?

Of course , when it suits ,MH

[Doucas]

Re: Following the science -

Without sounding like I’m repeating myself , I’m not your personal google search engine

This tends to speak volumes - inverted commas , basically as assumption

Blair baby 'has had' MMR jab

Hahahahahahaha you do this every single time. You spout utter nonsense, make a claim. Others ask for evidence of your claim, you reply 'google it', we then Google it and find nothing about the drivel you're speaking about.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Following the science -

Of course , when it suits ,MH

I guess during your extensive research you would have seen that the prime determinant for the MMR take up was the Lancet article that linked it to autism, which was partially retracted in 2004 and fully in 2010. Rates then rose from around 80% peaking at 93% in 2013/14.

Out of interest, given that take up rates were over 90% at the time of your son's stated 2nd birthday did you follow the science or your opinion or would you rather not say whether he "has had" it?

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/vaccination-coverage-for-children-and-mothers-1

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

Hahahahahahaha you do this every single time. You spout utter nonsense, make a claim. Others ask for evidence of your claim, you reply 'google it', we then Google it and find nothing about the drivel you're speaking about.

No offence but this is coming from a kid who is too sacred to have kids because of climate change

I bet you have a secret crush of Greta , she a great actress.

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

I guess during your extensive research you would have seen that the prime determinant for the MMR take up was the Lancet article that linked it to autism, which was partially retracted in 2004 and fully in 2010. Rates then rose from around 80% peaking at 93% in 2013/14.

Out of interest, given that take up rates were over 90% at the time of your son's stated 2nd birthday did you follow the science or your opinion or would you rather not say whether he "has had" it?

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/res...-and-mothers-1

Just like Tony Blair it’s a personal matter.Why do you press posters on their kids etc ?

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Following the science -

Just like Tony Blair it’s a personal matter.Why do you press posters on their kids etc ?

I think you introduced him to us from memory. Anyway, fully respect your desire to keep things private. I won't intrude anymore on what seems an extremely busy working day for you!

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

I think you introduced him to us from memory. Anyway, fully respect your desire to keep things private. I won't intrude anymore on what seems an extremely busy working day for you!

The joys of free Wi-Fi on the Trans Pennine Express and free drinks

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Following the science -

The joys of free Wi-Fi on the Trans Pennine Express and free drinks

Doh, how silly do I look. Still the free drinks bit explains a lot!

[TWGL1]

Re: Following the science -

Doh, how silly do I look. Still the free drinks bit explains a lot!

Always a little snide comment …..