Whistleblowing virologists sue Merck for alleged falsification of mumps data

OK you Conspiracy Theory "vacinnes are great" bunk busters; is this bunk (fake), Junk (mis-represnted info) or Funk as in "Holy Funk, A Big Parmaceutical COmpany Did Manage To Enagae In A Conspiracy To Cover Up The Truth About A Vaccine"!

If the lawsuit is real (even if the claim is not) this still raises a question about conspiracy of media as in why does a Google search on this not return any hits from the major news outlets especially cosnidering that the thing first ccurred in 2010 but is only now been unsealed. Again, thats only if this is real.


Thanks

Lawsuit Story @ http://www.examiner.com/article/whi...merck-for-alleged-falsification-of-mumps-data
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
This Forbes article says it best

 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Indeed, vaccines are great. This is not a story about vaccines not being great, it's about Merck allegedly fudging the numbers on one particular vaccine.

In order to get any milage out of this story, the anti-vaccine people have to simultaneously accept that vaccines works as science describes them, and also reject them as being a dangerous con. They can't have it both ways.
 

Lee Wilson

New Member
OK you Conspiracy Theory "vacinnes are great" bunk busters; is this bunk (fake) . . . [?]

Why ask ? No one knows as all the article presents is allegations, to know whether it is bunk or not would take an investigation.

The one point I would make about the article is that it does engage in a fair amount of fallacious and emotional appeals, which for me is never a great sign of a well researched piece:

(It's rare to see so many logical fallacies in a single short paragraph outside of Alex Jones' food diary).

Of course Merck denies all alleged accusations to today's breaking news report. Readers may want to know about a study published in 1998 in the medical journal Lancet by Dr. Andrew Wakefield that reported a link between the MMR vaccine and the incidence of autism in children.

This reference to Wakefield was, shockingly, written in June 2012 . . . . . . !
 

Lee Wilson

New Member
Indeed, vaccines are great. This is not a story about vaccines not being great, it's about Merck allegedly fudging the numbers on one particular vaccine.

In order to get any milage out of this story, the anti-vaccine people have to simultaneously accept that vaccines works as science describes them, and also reject them as being a dangerous con. They can't have it both ways.


Absolutely !

http://kent.academia.edu/RobbieSutt..._Beliefs_in_contradictory_conspiracy_theories
 
Indeed, vaccines are great. This is not a story about vaccines not being great, it's about Merck allegedly fudging the numbers on one particular vaccine.

In order to get any mileage out of this story, the anti-vaccine people have to simultaneously accept that vaccines works as science describes them, and also reject them as being a dangerous con. They can't have it both ways.

So then we agree that the story is real in as far as Mercks knowingly providing falsified information regarding the effectiveness and safety of a vaccines, correct?

Assuming the answer is yes then this establishes precedence that a pharmaceutical can and will provide false information regarding one of its products, the kind of information that is seriousness enough to warrant more than just a fine and verbal warning. Would you agree?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So then we agree that the story is real in as far as Mercks knowingly providing falsified information regarding the effectiveness and safety of a vaccines, correct?

Assuming the answer is yes then this establishes precedence that a pharmaceutical can and will provide false information regarding one of its products, the kind of information that is seriousness enough to warrant more than just a fine and verbal warning. Would you agree?

It's real as in the allegations were made. What actually happened is less clear.

If there was significant fraud involved, then people should go to jail.
 
It's real as in the allegations were made. What actually happened is less clear.

If there was significant fraud involved, then people should go to jail.

Amen to that. Sadly though I doubt anyone will see any real punishment. At least no executive will do any jail time. A mid to low-level patsy they can pass the blame onto may wind up serving time but not the executives. Its like the corporate entities that enage in some illegal or unethical act and the fine the get while large compared to what the avergae worker makes, ends up being a fraction of the profits they make from engaging in said act.
 

Charlie Primero

Active Member
In order to get any milage out of this story, the anti-vaccine people have to simultaneously accept that vaccines works as science describes them, and also reject them as being a dangerous con. They can't have it both ways.

This is not true.

They can have it both ways. A vaccine can indeed inoculate against a particular pathogen, in other words "work", yet still have side effects so dangerous as to warrant avoidance.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
This is not true.

They can have it both ways. A vaccine can indeed inoculate against a particular pathogen, in other words "work", yet still have side effects so dangerous as to warrant avoidance.

....but the accusations aren't about "dangerous side effects", they are about fudging the numbers as to it's efficiency.
So, if someone is going to complain that the efficiency rate is less than reported....in a way they are agreeing that the vaccine works, just not as good as reported/promised.
 

Charlie Primero

Active Member
....but the accusations aren't about "dangerous side effects", they are about fudging the numbers as to it's efficiency.
So, if someone is going to complain that the efficiency rate is less than reported....in a way they are agreeing that the vaccine works, just not as good as reported/promised.

I think you mean "efficacy".

I actually don't know a lot about the vaccination controversy. I've heard SkepChick do her childish ridicule shtick on it. I've heard the usual conspiracy fear porn guys rant about it.

My understanding of the controversy is that some people don't want to be forced to take medicines because they fear the scientific studies on them have been twisted for the benefit of giant pharmaceutical corporations, both exaggerating their efficacy and hiding their dangers.

Is that accurate?
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Rico The "Whistleblowing" Chinese Doctors Coronavirus COVID-19 12
Related Articles

Top