James Lyons-Weiler has published an analysis claiming that Paul Thomas' "Vaccine-Friendly Plan" is safer than the current CDC-recommended vaccine schedule because contains less aluminum. Unsurprisingly, The modeling behind the analysis is risibly incompetent. Same as it ever was.
Zoe O'Toole, aka "The Professor" at an antivaccine crank blog known as The Thinking Moms' Revolution, likes to think she's figured out this whole science thing. Her falling for "crooked theory," an impressively daft piece of antivaccine pseudoscience by Forrest Maready, shows her self-delusion on that score.
Last week, I told Christopher Shaw to move over, because there was a new antivaccine scientist in town. This week, Christopher Exley speaks and proves why it's correct to call him antivaccine.
Move over, Christopher Shaw, there's a new antivaccine scientist dedicated to demonizing aluminum adjuvants in town. His name is Christopher Exley. He's got a fluorescence microscope, and he's not afraid to use it.
"Nobel disease" is a term designed to describe whatever it is that drives some Nobel laureates to embrace pseudoscience or quackery later in their careers. One of its most prominent victims, Luc Montagnier, co-discoverer of the AIDS virus, recently demonstrated that he's still suffering from Nobel disease when he laid down a barrage of antivaccine pseudoscience in Paris earlier this month.
Christopher Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic are known for producing dubious scientific studies in the service of antivaccine pseudoscience. Last month, they published a paper purporting to show that aluminum adjuvant causes neuroinflammation in mice that was roundly criticized for poor experimental design and manipulated images. Guess what? It's soon to be retracted.
Last week, I wrote about a truly execrable bit of science by Christopher Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic purporting to show that aluminum adjuvants cause brain inflammation, which causes autism. Since then, I've learned that, not only is it bad science, but that there are red flags about several of the figures to raise the specter of fraud. This might not be just bad science. It might be fraudulent science. The only way to resolve this would be for the authors to release the original full resolution images of their blots.
Over the last couple of days I noted a disturbance in the antivaccine force, another study claimed to be slam dunk evidence that aluminum adjuvants in vaccines cause autism. It's not. Also, a word to antivaxers challenging Orac to look at this study: Be very careful what you wish for...
Believe it or not, I frequently peruse Retraction Watch, the blog that does basically what its title says: It watches for retracted articles in the peer-reviewed scientific literature and reports on them. Rare is it that a retracted paper gets by the watchful eyes of the bloggers there. So it was that the other day I noticed an post entitled Journal temporarily removes paper linking HPV vaccine to behavioral issues. I noticed it mainly because it involves a paper by two antivaccine “researchers” whom we’ve met several times before, Christopher A. Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic in the Department of Ophthalmology …