(Quote) Andrew-899116 said: After reviewing the British Colombia article in question, I can perhaps explain to our readers that car...
(Quote) Andrew-899116 said: After reviewing the British Colombia article in question, I can perhaps explain to our readers that careful scrutiny of the inclusion criteria for their review showed inclusion of only small scale clinical trial numbers and excludes large amounts of post -market data. The statistical methods used are inferior in power to the meta-analyses I have shared previously and the conclusion is heavily editorialized. A previous poster made a good point in that a Review study published by an Ophthalmology department no less lacks the heft of a CDC multi-center trial and review. In response to the previous poster's "disconcertment" I would say that I am not ignoring this particular study. In fact it's aim seems to be to temper specific claims such as the 70% reduction in cervical cancer rates. That number however is impossible to validate in a clinical trial as the only way to design such a study would be to compare a vaccinated and unvaccinated group while exposing both strains to HPV which is clearly unethical. For this reason studying epidemiological data for cervical cancer rates (and a change in response to vaccination) will only ever be correlational without any ability to sort out other confounding population variables. Correlation is not equal to causation. We know that HPV causes cancer and we know the vaccine is protective against HPV. The correlation between these in driving, vaccination is sound, the article simply tempers exaggerated claims of
Weeel you could design a trial, I am not saying I would agree with it or encourage it, but it has been done before. That is use the Developed world against the Developing world. Vaccinate the developed world, and not the developing world and after a couple of years, say 10 years compare cancer rates. As I say not exactly PC or ethical but it has been done before.
1962 to 1973 the effect of "Agent Orange" which is a compound of many substances most are responsible for birth defects and cancers.
or the US Army tests in 1950s of PCP on servicemen.
so it does have a historical place. And Lister tested His smallpox on himself!!!!!!!!!
Just a thought