x-ray peat
Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 2,343
After reading it and reading a critic of that article i am not very impressed of Dr. Perkins conclusions. It seems like another article not backed up with facts. See for example his use of the graph:
Perkins uses this graph to dismiss the effectiveness of polio (he goes on and on about that old story that modern medicine and sanitation ended polio). First of all, he lies about the “actual release” date of the Salk Vaccine. It had been used in clinical trials for at least a year before the vaccine was launched. In fact, nearly 2 million children were vaccinated against polio in 1954, a year prior to the launch, so the effects of vaccine prevention started earlier than Perkins states. But Perkins tries to use this graph to show that polio was decreasing. Furthermore, that’s not an appropriate way to use the graph. The incidence of polio infection is only down for 2 years after a peak, and it’s clear that every 3-4 years, polio incidence peaks again, and every peak was 10-20% greater than the prior peak. When the Salk vaccine was actually introduced in massive clinical trials in 1954, it was a naturally low point of the cycle of polio incidence, and we can easily predict that in 1955-1956, the incidence of polio would have peaked again without the vaccine.
But even if you’re to believe that the disease had decreased by some other means, what was that? Did we suddenly install sanitation in the USA in the three years between 1952 and 1955? I can’t find any evidence that there was a massive investment in the sewage infrastructure of the USA in that time period. Perkins either lacks knowledge of mathematics (and given his lack of knowledge in other sciences, I’m betting on it) or simply wants to lie, but that graphic provides powerful evidence that the 3-4 year cycles of polio outbreaks was crushed, absolutely crushed, by the polio vaccine. And within seven years, polio had nearly been eradicated in the USA.
Shocking news–antivaccine chiropractor ignores science
Well if you think that Skeptical Raptor, who works in business development for big Pharma, is a quality unbiased source for medical information, that is your choice.he has his own agenda. he has created a method "to uncover and address the underlying causes of your illness"
An initial visit cost about 175 dollar. He does not contract with any insurance carriers, of course.