What happens when anti-vaccination propaganda is listened to?

[Amused]

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
I'm not so certain some of those fears are irrational. If they were, I doubt states would be passing anti-thimerosal legislation.

Yeah, and irrational fears over silicone implants didn't bankrupt Dow Corning either, right? :roll:

There is no valid scientific evidence for the proposed bans on thimerosal. They are simply knee-jerk reactions to fear mongering.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/faqs-thimerosal.htm

You may want to go back a bit and take a look at how well connected the leadership of the CDC is to the major drug companies. I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research.

This is always the first response and it's sad. Typical Mercola propaganda.

Let me put it this way: There are no valid, peer reviewed and repeated studioes showing harm. None.

Maybe this would have something to do with the fact that the CDC will not release valid data to independent researchers.

Was this while they were on the grassy knoll?

Awesome comeback! Way to further your case.

You might want drop out of your debating club.

You might want to make a valid argument instead of mindlessly parroting paranoid propaganda.

My argument isn't valid to you simply because you don't agree with me. I've taken the time to view both sides of this issue. As I had stated in a previous post: I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research. If I wasn't stuck at work today, I could come up with citeable proof of this statement.

Instead of backing up your position with anything valid, you resort to snide remarks. This debate has no further interest for me. I thought there would be some intelligent discourse on this. I was clearly mistaken.

The problem is you offered up a long parroted conspiracy theory with absolutely no valid evidence to support it.

And I've seen your side of the argument. It's invalid because there is no valid proof to support it. None whatsoever.

I DID back up my position with facts. You countered with unfounded conspiracy theories and tin foil hat claims.

 

[mrsdxkj]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
I'm not so certain some of those fears are irrational. If they were, I doubt states would be passing anti-thimerosal legislation.

Yeah, and irrational fears over silicone implants didn't bankrupt Dow Corning either, right? :roll:

There is no valid scientific evidence for the proposed bans on thimerosal. They are simply knee-jerk reactions to fear mongering.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/faqs-thimerosal.htm

You may want to go back a bit and take a look at how well connected the leadership of the CDC is to the major drug companies. I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research.

This is always the first response and it's sad. Typical Mercola propaganda.

Let me put it this way: There are no valid, peer reviewed and repeated studioes showing harm. None.

I did a quick search and found more than one study on this topic. Here is one:
Geier, D., & Geier, M. (2006). An Evaluation of the Effects of Thimerosal on Neurodevelopmental Disorders Reported Following DTP and Hib Vaccines in Comparison to DTPH Vaccine in the United States. Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health: Part A, 69, 1481-1495.

Significantly increased odds ratios for autism, speech disorders, mental retardation, infantile spasms, and thinking abnormalities reported to VAERS were found following DTP vaccines in comparison to DTPH vaccines with minimal bias or systematic error. Additional ND research should be undertaken in the context of evaluating mercury-associated exposures, especially since in 2005 the Institute of Medicine issued a report calling into question handling of vaccine safety data by the National Immunization Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The DTP has higher amounts of mercury than the DTPH.
Don't get me wrong, I am definetly for vaccination. But I do believe we need to be concerned about what is currently in the multiple vaccines we are pumping into infants.

 

[chusteczka]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: eits
i think that not immunizing your children is pretty dumb, to be honest. i've heard cases from both sides of the argument and i just really think that child immunizations are necessary in maintaining proper health of your child in the future. although, i do have a friend who never was immunized and doesn't get vaccines and has literally never had anything more than a common cold... however, he lives a healthy lifestyle and eats right and works out, which goes a very long way in boosting the immune system and preventing illness.

If everyone is immunized and one person is not, that one person benefits from the lack of disease in the community brought about by the immunization of everyone else.

When enough people act like your friend, a break down occurs and the previously virtually eradicated disease makes a comeback.

And contrary to popular myth, a strong immune system does not keep you from contracting illnesses you have no natural immunity to. It will help you get over the illness faster and with less discomfort, but you will still get sick if exposed to the virus or bacteria you have no immunity for.

pretty much true. for once, i agree with your post. :beer:

Wow, is this a sign of Armageddon?

Hopefully not.

Kudos to you, Amused, for your continued efforts towards intellectual discussion through insightful comments while attempting to debunk popular misled beliefs. Even when I do not agree with you, your comments always give me reason to consider other aspects to a topic. :thumbsup:

 

[chusteczka]

Originally posted by: mrsdxkj
...
Don't get me wrong, I am definetly for vaccination. But I do believe we need to be concerned about what is currently in the multiple vaccines we are pumping into infants.

This is very true. :thumbsup:

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: mrsdxkj

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
I'm not so certain some of those fears are irrational. If they were, I doubt states would be passing anti-thimerosal legislation.

Yeah, and irrational fears over silicone implants didn't bankrupt Dow Corning either, right? :roll:

There is no valid scientific evidence for the proposed bans on thimerosal. They are simply knee-jerk reactions to fear mongering.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/faqs-thimerosal.htm

You may want to go back a bit and take a look at how well connected the leadership of the CDC is to the major drug companies. I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research.

This is always the first response and it's sad. Typical Mercola propaganda.

Let me put it this way: There are no valid, peer reviewed and repeated studioes showing harm. None.

I did a quick search and found more than one study on this topic. Here is one:
Geier, D., & Geier, M. (2006). An Evaluation of the Effects of Thimerosal on Neurodevelopmental Disorders Reported Following DTP and Hib Vaccines in Comparison to DTPH Vaccine in the United States. Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health: Part A, 69, 1481-1495.

Significantly increased odds ratios for autism, speech disorders, mental retardation, infantile spasms, and thinking abnormalities reported to VAERS were found following DTP vaccines in comparison to DTPH vaccines with minimal bias or systematic error. Additional ND research should be undertaken in the context of evaluating mercury-associated exposures, especially since in 2005 the Institute of Medicine issued a report calling into question handling of vaccine safety data by the National Immunization Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The DTP has higher amounts of mercury than the DTPH.
Don't get me wrong, I am definetly for vaccination. But I do believe we need to be concerned about what is currently in the multiple vaccines we are pumping into infants.

true.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: mrsdxkj

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
I'm not so certain some of those fears are irrational. If they were, I doubt states would be passing anti-thimerosal legislation.

Yeah, and irrational fears over silicone implants didn't bankrupt Dow Corning either, right? :roll:

There is no valid scientific evidence for the proposed bans on thimerosal. They are simply knee-jerk reactions to fear mongering.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/faqs-thimerosal.htm

You may want to go back a bit and take a look at how well connected the leadership of the CDC is to the major drug companies. I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research.

This is always the first response and it's sad. Typical Mercola propaganda.

Let me put it this way: There are no valid, peer reviewed and repeated studioes showing harm. None.

I did a quick search and found more than one study on this topic. Here is one:
Geier, D., & Geier, M. (2006). An Evaluation of the Effects of Thimerosal on Neurodevelopmental Disorders Reported Following DTP and Hib Vaccines in Comparison to DTPH Vaccine in the United States. Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health: Part A, 69, 1481-1495.

Significantly increased odds ratios for autism, speech disorders, mental retardation, infantile spasms, and thinking abnormalities reported to VAERS were found following DTP vaccines in comparison to DTPH vaccines with minimal bias or systematic error. Additional ND research should be undertaken in the context of evaluating mercury-associated exposures, especially since in 2005 the Institute of Medicine issued a report calling into question handling of vaccine safety data by the National Immunization Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The DTP has higher amounts of mercury than the DTPH.
Don't get me wrong, I am definetly for vaccination. But I do believe we need to be concerned about what is currently in the multiple vaccines we are pumping into infants.

now you did it.

thats going to set Amused off. he is going to call you a bunch of names and post a bunch of articles saying something difrent.


for the record i have my kids up to date on all of them. I just think it should be the parents choice and not forced on t hem.

 

[Midlander]

Originally posted by: ironwing
The whooping couch vaccine has been found to be impermanent so there are lots of folks who got immunized as kids who are now suspectible.

I can attest to this. I was immunized as a kid and went through a bout of whooping cough about 5 years ago. It wasn't a pleasant experience.

By the way, I was very surprised when I received the diagnosis. I thought it was a dead disease. It wasn't getting the press it has received recently.

 

[Midlander]

I also believe the benefits of immunization far outweigh the risks.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: CKent

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
Infer much? There isn't a single mention in that article about anti-vaccination.

Agreed, misleading title.

Yup. Pretty ironic, actually.

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: GalvanizedYankee
Throwing open our borders inorder to get that cheap labor that the neocons love has brought this on us.
We have cases of polio and a real increase in TB. The middle class will always pay the price for the upper class' profit...Just the way it is.


...Galvanized

Don't forget BOTH parties are equally guilty for wanting to gain more votes from the hispanic community. Many of whom are legal to vote, but won't vote for those that prevent thier family and friends from coming into this country legally or not.

PS: I am sure there are some Democrat voters that are also in charge of businesses taking advantage of the cheap labor that illegals provide.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mrsdxkj

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: elektrolokomotive
I'm not so certain some of those fears are irrational. If they were, I doubt states would be passing anti-thimerosal legislation.

Yeah, and irrational fears over silicone implants didn't bankrupt Dow Corning either, right? :roll:

There is no valid scientific evidence for the proposed bans on thimerosal. They are simply knee-jerk reactions to fear mongering.

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/faqs-thimerosal.htm

You may want to go back a bit and take a look at how well connected the leadership of the CDC is to the major drug companies. I'm not saying that there are clear links one way or the other. I'm suggesting that way more research needs to happen to examine the possible links, and the CDC is unwilling to promote this kind of research.

This is always the first response and it's sad. Typical Mercola propaganda.

Let me put it this way: There are no valid, peer reviewed and repeated studioes showing harm. None.

I did a quick search and found more than one study on this topic. Here is one:
Geier, D., & Geier, M. (2006). An Evaluation of the Effects of Thimerosal on Neurodevelopmental Disorders Reported Following DTP and Hib Vaccines in Comparison to DTPH Vaccine in the United States. Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health: Part A, 69, 1481-1495.

Significantly increased odds ratios for autism, speech disorders, mental retardation, infantile spasms, and thinking abnormalities reported to VAERS were found following DTP vaccines in comparison to DTPH vaccines with minimal bias or systematic error. Additional ND research should be undertaken in the context of evaluating mercury-associated exposures, especially since in 2005 the Institute of Medicine issued a report calling into question handling of vaccine safety data by the National Immunization Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The DTP has higher amounts of mercury than the DTPH.
Don't get me wrong, I am definetly for vaccination. But I do believe we need to be concerned about what is currently in the multiple vaccines we are pumping into infants.

Now you see, herein lies the problem.

First off, this is a lone study that has not been reproduced.

Secondly, upon peer review, it has been found to be flawed and invalid:

http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/news/newsitem.php?id=46

http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2005/03/mark-geier-untrustworthy-autism.html

And the list goes on if you look at this study critically.

One of the major flaws with the study? It flies in the face of the result of many previous studies that were reviewed, repeated and found to be sound.

You see, for the scientific process, a unbiased third party MUST be able to repeat the same study and receive the same results. No one can repeat the study you posted and numerous previous studies have found exactly the opposite result.

Finally, Geier is an anti-vaccination activist who set out to prove that vaccinations cause autism... and surprise! He found just that. In fact, Geier is so grossly unqualified that both US and UK courts have found him unsuitable as a witness in lawsuits against vaccine companies.

Sorry, but your study fails, completely, to prove anything but activist bias and is not accepted by the scientific community. In fact, the only people who publish this nonsense are anti-vaccination nutjobs.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: waggy

now you did it.

thats going to set Amused off. he is going to call you a bunch of names and post a bunch of articles saying something difrent.

Why would I call them names? It's easy to be duped by the pseudo science put out in the anti-vaccination paranoia propaganda. It's also very easy to shoot that down once people learn how the scientific process works.

 

[whistleclient]

History has shown that Amused takes a position and ignores all information which conflicts with his position. His fallback defense is to claim you're a tin hat conspiracist because you dare question him or his position. He doesn't live in the real world where data is juked, studies buried, and Senators receive "contributions" from the pharmaceutical industry.



Deadly Immunity

"Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children."


"In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism."

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

History has shown that Amused takes a position and ignores all information which conflicts with his position. His fallback defense is to claim you're a tin hat conspiracist because you dare question him or his position. He doesn't live in the real world where data is juked, studies buried, and Senators receive "contributions" from the pharmaceutical industry.



Deadly Immunity

"Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children."


"In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism."

Ah yes. An article who's author is not in the medical profession, but is an environmental activist lawyer, has no valid references, and flies in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies.

Of COURSE I should believe that over valid evidence! WTF was I thinking???

 

[whistleclient]

Originally posted by: Amused
[
Ah yes. An article who's author is not in the medical profession, but is an environmental activist lawyer, has no valid references, and flies in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies.

Of COURSE I should believe that over valid evidence! WTF was I thinking???

you can read the CDC transcript if you want.

link

Do you dispute the CDC as a valid source?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

Originally posted by: Amused
[
Ah yes. An article who's author is not in the medical profession, but is an environmental activist lawyer, has no valid references, and flies in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies.

Of COURSE I should believe that over valid evidence! WTF was I thinking???

you can read the CDC transcript if you want.

link

Do you dispute the CDC as a valid source?

First off, the source for the transcript is suspect. Safeminds is an activist organization.

I read that and it says nothing of the sort that RFK jr claims it does. There is a suggestion of harm from one study while many others show no harm. Until that study is repeated by a third party, it's suspect.

RFK Jr's conspiracy is, in fact, just the scientific community working as it should.

Oh, and the source is not the CDC. Nice try, though.

 

[whistleclient]

why do you start these threads, amused?

it's obviously not to have an open and honest discussion about the POSSIBILITY of a link between thimerisol and neurodevelopmental disorders in children. it's never a discussion with you. it's just you doggedly refuting any ideas but your own.

what motivates you? do you hold pharmaceutical stock? did you want to feel intelligent today? why does this stuff so rile you up? even if a link hasn't been clearly established to your satisfaction would it kill you to admit precaution dictates that thimerosal exposure should be decreased until more studies have been done?

that's an easy solution that hurts no one.

 

[lyssword]

I think the last time I received any shots was like 7 yrs ago Uh oh im gonna die

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tangent1138

why do you start these threads, amused?

it's obviously not to have an open and honest discussion about the POSSIBILITY of a link between thimerisol and neurodevelopmental disorders in children. it's never a discussion with you. it's just you doggedly refuting any ideas but your own.

what motivates you? do you hold pharmaceutical stock? did you want to feel intelligent today? why does this stuff so rile you up? even if a link hasn't been clearly established to your satisfaction would it kill you to admit precaution dictates that thimerosal exposure should be decreased until more studies have been done?

that's an easy solution that hurts no one.

I own no pharmaceutical stock.

My motivation is the aggravation I experience when otherwise intelligent people fall for irrational paranoia. I fight against it with facts and rational argument.

I'm not refuting "ideas."

We had a discussion. I asked for peer reviewed and repeated studies showing harm. I got none. Instead, I got half-baked claims of conspiracy theories and cover-ups.

I don't want to die from some virtually eradicated and preventable disease because enough ignorant people listen to these nut balls and do not vaccinate their kids. I have parents who lived before there were vaccinations. They KNOW the horror of those times.

Finally, thimerosal is just one of the many paranoid delusions of the anti-vaccination croud. Stopping the use of this perfectly harmless, yet totally effective preservative will do nothing to shut them up.

 

[whistleclient]

Relax, Amused. don't be so paranoid. everything will be okay.

well... we'll be okay until the avian super-flu gets us all.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: tangent1138


Relax, Amused. don't be so paranoid. everything will be okay.

well... we'll be okay until the avian super-flu gets us all.

Actually I'd be more concerned about antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria. Especially Staphylococcus Aureus.

And I talked to our Chief of Infectious Disease at the hospital today, she was telling me how the benefits of being vaccinated far outweigh the risks, and moreover in a few years you'll see a push for adults to get boosters of common childhood vaccine, especially DTP.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Amused
I own no pharmaceutical stock.

My motivation is the aggravation I experience when otherwise intelligent people fall for irrational paranoia. I fight against it with facts and rational argument.

I'm not refuting "ideas."

We had a discussion. I asked for peer reviewed and repeated studies showing harm. I got none. Instead, I got half-baked claims of conspiracy theories and cover-ups.

I don't want to die from some virtually eradicated and preventable disease because enough ignorant people listen to these nut balls and do not vaccinate their kids. I have parents who lived before there were vaccinations. They KNOW the horror of those times.

Finally, thimerosal is just one of the many paranoid delusions of the anti-vaccination croud. Stopping the use of this perfectly harmless, yet totally effective preservative will do nothing to shut them up.

I'm not trying to pick sides, but if you're seriously afraid of dying from a disease with a vaccine for, as opposed to fear mongering some hyperbole, you can get all the vaccines that you're parading around for everyone else.

 

[Canai]

The only thing scarier than the tinfoil hat community are the people who accuse everyone else of wearing metal bandannas.

Discussion? More like "agree with me or die you tree hugging hippie!"

Oh and as far as studies / opinions / ideas that "flies in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" ... Isn't that how new truths are discovered? Didn't Galileo's ideas about the universe fly "in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" when he first made them public? If we look to history to guide our daily lives we'll never move forward. Questions must be asked about everything that surrounds us. Entrenching yourself behind "years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" will leave you with naught but a sense of what other people have done in the past. The world is changing and we can no longer trust work that was done even five or ten years ago to apply to our current situation. Looking for a "valid study" from the past is not always a reliable method to come to a firm idea about the present.

You can't stick with what's already been done to guide you in the future. How long did it take America to realize that cigarettes cause cancer? How long will it take America to learn that injecting it's youth with chemicals at a critical stage in their development is not such a grand idea?

You can't revolutionize a system from within.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: Amused
I own no pharmaceutical stock.

My motivation is the aggravation I experience when otherwise intelligent people fall for irrational paranoia. I fight against it with facts and rational argument.

I'm not refuting "ideas."

We had a discussion. I asked for peer reviewed and repeated studies showing harm. I got none. Instead, I got half-baked claims of conspiracy theories and cover-ups.

I don't want to die from some virtually eradicated and preventable disease because enough ignorant people listen to these nut balls and do not vaccinate their kids. I have parents who lived before there were vaccinations. They KNOW the horror of those times.

Finally, thimerosal is just one of the many paranoid delusions of the anti-vaccination croud. Stopping the use of this perfectly harmless, yet totally effective preservative will do nothing to shut them up.

I'm not trying to pick sides, but if you're seriously afraid of dying from a disease with a vaccine for, as opposed to fear mongering some hyperbole, you can get all the vaccines that you're parading around for everyone else.

It's not that simple.

Many vaccines offer finite immunity and are most effective when used in the young at eradicating a disease. Hence this story. The same was true with small pox.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Canai
The only thing scarier than the tinfoil hat community are the people who accuse everyone else of wearing metal bandannas.

Discussion? More like "agree with me or die you tree hugging hippie!"

Oh and as far as studies / opinions / ideas that "flies in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" ... Isn't that how new truths are discovered? Didn't Galileo's ideas about the universe fly "in the face of years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" when he first made them public? If we look to history to guide our daily lives we'll never move forward. Questions must be asked about everything that surrounds us. Entrenching yourself behind "years of valid peer reviewed and repeated studies" will leave you with naught but a sense of what other people have done in the past. The world is changing and we can no longer trust work that was done even five or ten years ago to apply to our current situation. Looking for a "valid study" from the past is not always a reliable method to come to a firm idea about the present.

You can't stick with what's already been done to guide you in the future. How long did it take America to realize that cigarettes cause cancer? How long will it take America to learn that injecting it's youth with chemicals at a critical stage in their development is not such a grand idea?

You can't revolutionize a system from within.

The problem is these recent studies that seemingly find harm where all previous studies do not were suspect from the beginning because they were conducted BY activists with one outcome in mind. When one study finds harm, and dozens before and after do not, that one study is invalid.

You need to learn how the scientific process works, as your post shows you are woefully ignorant on the subject.

The scientific process is based on the ability of being able to repeat, at will, the outcome of the test in question.

It didn't take America long at all to realize tobacco caused cancer and a host of other health problems. As soon as the medical community had the ability to identify and do studies for it, it was known. The negative health effects of tobacco were scientifically proven in 1938. The medical community spent the 50s and 60s telling people about these risks. And the health problems associated with smoking are assumed in literature hundreds of years before proven by science.

And your last sentance is absurd. Just as the activist studies do, you assume harm before proving it. You have an irrational bias.