It isn't just that it is 40 participants, it is also a self-selected group of only 40 participants and those self-selecting reporters are reporting their recollection of events in the past, the order that they happened and the severity of the instances without any confirmation from the contemporaneous reporting done by the actual investigating physicians. Oh and the P-value reported was 5% which is pretty much the most marginal rate anyone would consider accepting as statistically significant.
So, in short, only 39 people responded and they were asked to remember what happened, in what order, in what severity from an indeterminate time previous with no corroborating evidence from their doctors. It certainly could be that there are legitimate incidents of adverse reactions specifically from the vaccine, I'd totally believe that. However, this study doesn't show it. Judah On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Larry Lyons <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is a very big issue here I see, this study had a sample size of under > 40 participants. For this sort of study that is nowhere near enough to give > these results any statistical power. It's such a small blip on the extreme > edge of the population curve, that you cannot really generalize from it. It > needs an independent replication with a larger sample. > > >>long term data = watch and wait >> >>As for studies of safety, see this report: >> >>http://home.comcast.net/%7Etarsell/report0526.pdf >> >>In the report you see that the authors acknowledge the limitations of their >>own study and point out that the FDA has acknowledged limitations in their >>own study. In other words, data is incomplete. A known unknown. >> >>Mandating any vaccine surrounded by such uncertainty seems unwise. At the >>end of the day, the issue is about freedom of choice, the choice to weigh >>risks and benefits for yourself and your family. Why mandate a vaccine for >>an STI that can be avoided by personal choices about sexual behavior? Just >>doesn't make sense. >> >> >>On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:27 PM, William Bowen <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> You seem to be looking at data and repudiating it because you *feel* >>> there must be something wrong. >>> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:342155 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
