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.
False balance is the bane of a science communicator's existence. KATU's Genevieve Reaume provided false balance in abundance in a story about the measles outbreak and the antivaccine movement.
An antivaccine group in Washington is raising money for a dubious "vaxxed/unvaxxed" study for IPAK, James Lyons-Weiler, a bioinformatics scientist turned antivaxer, who plans on analyzing data from a large practice.
I've mentioned Dr. Paul Thomas before as a rising star in the antivaccine movement. A month and a half later, it occurs to me that I haven't given proper due to his co-author, Jennifer Margulis, as an equally prominent rising star in the same crank movement. Here, I rectify that oversight.
For credibility, the antivaccine movement needs antivaccine pediatricians, such as Dr. Jay Gordon and Dr. Bob Sears. Meet the pediatrician who is the latest rising star in the antivaccine movement, Dr. Paul Thomas. He even claims to have his very own "vaxed vs. unvaxed" study.
With very few exceptions, antivaccinationists labor under the delusion that they are not antivaccine. The reason is simple. Deep down, at some level, even the most dedicated antivaccine advocate knows that society quite rightly views it as a bad thing to be against a preventative intervention that has arguably saved more lives than any other medical intervention. Of course, as I’ve documented many times in the past, there are some who are openly antivaccine and proud of it, but they seem to be the minority. Most antivaccinationists, like Jenny McCarthy, hide behind a mantra resembling, “I’m not ‘anti-vaccine.’ I’m pro-safe …