5 ms·

It's a review of this paper [1]. Why do you consider it pseudoscience? [1] "Assessment of Hair Aluminum, Lead, and Mercury in a Sample of Autistic Egyptian Chi

by spraak 7y ago

It's a review of this paper [1]. Why do you consider it pseudoscience? [1] "Assessment of Hair Aluminum, Lead, and Mercury in a Sample of Autistic Egyptian Children: Environmental Risk Factors of Heavy Metals in Autism" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4609793/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4609793/

morpheuskafka 7y ago
As is stated on their homepage[1], vaccinepapers.org takes the position that no currently marketed vaccine is acceptably safe for use because of long-debunked concerns over aluminum adjuvants causing autism. [1] http://vaccinepapers.org/about/ http://vaccinepapers.org/about/
- spraak 7y ago
  I asked you about the paper specifically - why do you consider it pseudoscience? And long-debunked? There is really recent research about the dangers of aluminum as an adjuvant. What safety studies of aluminum as an adjuvant are you aware of? I haven't found any really.
- yehosef 7y ago
  https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]