June 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention posted a report on Tuesday that said evidence does not support a link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders, ahead of a two-day meeting of an advisory panel later this week.

    • hume_lemmy@lemmy.caEnglish
      6·
      6 months ago

      Way too coherent and clear. You forgot the proceeding “Uh wuh wuh buh bup wah we well…”

  • WeirdyBeansAt@lemmy.zipEnglish
    101·
    6 months ago

    That’s all well and good, but the people leading these organizations believe that science = jumping to a vibes based conclusion and then smashing a bunch of shit together calling it a process. It doesn’t matter if the sources are just made up or simply not there. Actual data driven results are for egghead gay communists who think chem trails are fake.

    • MPD@kbin.earth
      5·
      6 months ago

      I wonder if this is a last ditch effort to get info out before it all get rolled back pseudoscience becomes gospel.

  • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
    51·
    6 months ago

    Just wait until that son-of-a-bridge RFK Jr. gets to it. I hear he has a fresh shipment of Sharpies from the White House to make sure it is totally accurate.

    He will start by editing out the “not” in the above quote. See? Science works!

  • Brown5500@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    6 months ago

    I don’t think this headline belongs to this article.

    The article is talking about how the study referenced a non-existent source

  • besselj@lemmy.ca
    25·
    6 months ago

    I’m inclined to believe it, but the CDC has very little credibility right now

      • treadful@lemmy.zipEnglish
        31·
        6 months ago

        Unless you’re a trained scientist qualified to review their studies, you have to believe someone.

      • besselj@lemmy.ca
        14·
        6 months ago

        Indeed, but if just one person is caught fudging numbers to get desired results, all of their work gets called into question. Without transparency, all you can go on is credibility and “believing”.

          • besselj@lemmy.ca
            21·
            6 months ago

            It isn’t, but not all scientists can maintain scientific integrity when faced with significant external pressures (from people like RFK, for example). Those that can’t dont stay scientists for long.

            All findings can eventually be reproduced or disproven, but not without time and money. In the short term, trust and credibility is paramount.