03 Mar 05
Originally posted by eagles54Basically and mostly medical research.
What type of research?
For example:
- who funded the Yokohama Rehabilitation Center research into the MMR vaccine?
- who funded the latest research, stated by Ivanhoe, into the use of marijuana.
I'm having difficulties hunting it down. Surely there must be some engine out there or something?
03 Mar 05
As far as I know, no site exists. Your best bet would be to track down journal articles regarding the topic, and then look down to the acknowledgements section at the end. This should always have the funding body in... However, to access the journals you may need a University login, or be willing to fork out a few dollars
03 Mar 05
Originally posted by mmanuelThanks.
As far as I know, no site exists. Your best bet would be to track down journal articles regarding the topic, and then look down to the acknowledgements section at the end. This should always have the funding body in... However, to access the journals you may need a University login, or be willing to fork out a few dollars
I'll have to think about spending money...
04 Mar 05
Originally posted by shavixmirIf the research is public sector i.e. university then the funding body should be cited. Often it is a research body such as the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council which allocate money to the research institutes.
Thanks.
I'll have to think about spending money...
Extra funding is sometimes given by "industrial sponsors".
I seem to remember reading about pharmaceutical company funding being involved with MMR.
I have access to many journals through my institution if you want anything getting, I can get it for free.
05 Mar 05
Originally posted by shavixmirAll research costs money and most research centres have several funding sources. Even for a centre based in Yokohama University.
Basically and mostly medical research.
For example:
- who funded the Yokohama Rehabilitation Center research into the MMR vaccine?
- who funded the latest research, stated by Ivanhoe, into the use of marijuana.
I'm having difficulties hunting it down. Surely there must be some engine out there or something?
Do the findings disagree with your pre-conceived notions?
05 Mar 05
Originally posted by steerpikeNo. I have an open mind on the issue of the MMR vaccine.
All research costs money and most research centres have several funding sources. Even for a centre based in Yokohama University.
Do the findings disagree with your pre-conceived notions?
But...I smell something rotten in the State of Denmark...
The British government and the pharmaceutical industry are pushing heavily to have parents use the 3 in 1 vaccine. Going so far that they even threaten parents to take it.
3 single vaccines do cost more money, but why on earth isn't the pharmaceutical industry pushing for that then?
There was a report in 1998 (I believe) by a Scot who claimed that the triple vaccine leads to more cases of autism.
It's been damned and counter-argued a million-times. Every year more research is provided to counter his argument.
In fact, everywhere you look, the whole medical world believes his arguments to be false and go as far as calling him unprofessional, etc. etc.
This sets off this little bell in my head (which also could be due to drugs use...who knows?)...it just seems like so much over-kill.
Now, obviously if a link was established then the pharmaceutical companies and the government which pushes so hard to get people to use the triple vaccine would be held to ransom for billions by every parent with an autistic child who used that said vaccine.
There's a lot at stake.
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'd pay for the three single vaccines any day.
I guess it's the over-kill attitude which bothers me.
05 Mar 05
Originally posted by shavixmirI had the 3 in 1 vaccine and it didn't do annynynnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnny harm to me....
No. I have an open mind on the issue of the MMR vaccine.
But...I smell something rotten in the State of Denmark...
The British government and the pharmaceutical industry are pushing heavily to have parents use the 3 in 1 vaccine. Going so far that they even threaten parents to take it.
3 single vaccines do cost more money, but why on earth isn' ...[text shortened]... r the three single vaccines any day.
I guess it's the over-kill attitude which bothers me.
06 Mar 05
Originally posted by shavixmirYeah, you are paranoid. For once I'm pretty sure the establishment is right on this one.
No. I have an open mind on the issue of the MMR vaccine.
But...I smell something rotten in the State of Denmark...
The British government and the pharmaceutical industry are pushing heavily to have parents use the 3 in 1 vaccine. Going so far that they even threaten parents to take it.
3 single vaccines do cost more money, but why on earth isn' ...[text shortened]... r the three single vaccines any day.
I guess it's the over-kill attitude which bothers me.
For starters, there's a perfectly good reason why governments want people to take the 3 in 1 MMR vaccine and not the single vaccine alternatives. If you tell parents they've got to take their child to the doctor once, they'll maybe manage that. If they have to attend three separate appointments, the chances are they'll end up missing the second or third. And since 90 per cent of the population need to be vaccinated against each of the diseases to protect anyone properly, that's far too much of a risk to take.
Which also brings us to why there's still so much research coming out to counter the original, highly dubious, Andrew Wakefield study that claimed to have found an autism link. While almost all medical researchers now accept that there is no evidence whatsoever of any link with autism, levels of uptake of MMR, in Britain at least, obstinately refuse to recover. They currently run at 80 per cent, and as a consequence we have seen a 14-fold increase in mumps over the last year and could risk a measles epidemic.
In the US, vaccination is essentially compulsory (you can't send your kids to school unless they're vaccinated) and I think this is the way to go. People don't tend to realise that by taking the decision not to have a child vaccinated with MMR, you are not just putting your own child at risk, you are endangering everyone else's children too. Vaccines don't provide 100 per cent protection for individuals, and mainly work by building up what is called 'herd immunity', which is only possible if almost everyone is vaccinated.
Incidentally, the Andrew Wakefield study would probably never have been published if he had declared his funding sources as you are supposed to. He was receiving funding from a group bringing legal action over MMR and from a manufacturer of single vaccines. A dodgy dodgy geezer.
Rich.