Skepacabra vs. “Dr.” Rashid Buttar Round 2 – response to part 2

Because I don’t have all the time in the world to respond to every single point Dr. Buttar made in a 50-minute video presentation, I’ve decided to refute only some of the points. If anyone feels like I’m simply doing this to avoid answering certain questions they can ask on my blog, so long as they limit it to one argument at a time. I think this is fair, especially considering that as far as the overwhelming medical community (of which I’m not a part of) is concerned the debate is already over and Dr. Buttar’s conclusions have already been falsified.

I’m now responding to Part II of Dr. Buttar’s video response found here. To read my response to Part I as well as the original blog entry by his moderator and my initial comment in which Dr. Buttar is now responding to, go here. So let’s begin.

Part II response:

I can’t speak to the specific countries that may have received our vaccines and I have no idea to the level this information is being tracked, so I’ll have to know the sources he’s using here. But I do find it curious that Dr. Buttar is accepting reports from China so credulously. I don’t think it’s a big secret that China is under an oppressive government that frequently hides data that is considered embarrassing to the government. This isn’t conspiracy-mongering. This is a well-documented pattern of behavior. This is the same country that executed the head of its food and drug administration after the major contaminated food incident of last year. It’s not remotely a stretch to conclude that they may have viewed their autism records as a national shame and simply didn’t report it or greatly under reported it. If that’s changed in the past 2 years, it’s far more likely, at least in my opinion, that more accurate records were leaked forcing the Chinese government to acknowledge their autistic population. It’s certainly not compelling enough evidence to conclude that there has necessarily been a dramatic rise in the rate of autism in China, and we still haven’t even verified that autism is on the rise in the U.S. given the broadening of the definition and heightened public awareness. But even if we knew for certain that autism was on the rise in China, as you of course know, correlation is not necessarily causition and aside from what could easily be argued as a mere timing coincidence what evidence do you have to specifically link the vaccines to the autism, especially when facing mountains of evidence already pointing to genetic factors? And also, considering the population size of China and the current autism statistics, without actually sitting down to do the math, is a million new cases much higher than we’d expect?

Regarding success of trying to predict the current strain of flu vaccines each year, you asked “does anyone believe that?” Yes, the overwhelming medical community does and I’m sure the CDC will happily show you the studies showing the percentage of how successful those predictions are from year to year if you just ask for them. They can also show you studies indicating the benefits vs. risks ratio that is determined for any treatment you want. But again, you’re charging the CDC with serious fraud allegations. If you have sufficient evidence to prove the conspiracy take them to court and prove it before a judge. Indeed, if you did have such damning evidence of fraud against the CDC, I’d argue you were morally obligated to bring that evidence before the courts. Then a judge can decide if your charges have merit. But personally, I don’t find appeals to conspiracy a very compelling argument when I can look at the studies myself and check the evidence myself. Regardless of whether the CDC are evil liars or not the burden of proof is still on the claiment (those claiming vaccines cause/contribute to autism). Then you make the patently absurd gambit of stating that both times you got the flu, you’d taken flu vaccines prior after already acknowledging that flu vaccines are based on prejections and with full knowledge that flu vaccines are not 100% effective. This line of argument is no less silly than a pregnant teen concluding that because a condom was used that condoms must not work at all. This is a false continuum you’re presenting. Surely there’s a middle ground between 0% and 100% effectiveness. You’ve gone so far off topic by now you just seem to be just throwing random criticisms of vaccines out hoping that some will stick. Again, all you’ve done so far is dodge the issue and you’ve yet to present even a single piece of real evidence for the claim that vaccines cause/contribute to autism and you’re neck deep in logical fallacies.

Here’s some facts about the Hepatitis B vaccine provided by the CDC here. The way you say we give the vaccine to children and insist it’s important it sounds like you think they’re just nonchalantly making this stuff up off the top of your head. They’re not. They’ve had to justify the decision by backing it up with enormous evidence under intense scrutiny and had to weigh the risks vs. benefits. You’re deeply oversimplifying this process. And again, you’re failing to grasp the distinction of safe levels of a substance and dangerous levels of a substance. I return to my Vitamin C analogy from my first response. You want to know why we give children the Hepatitis B vaccine? To quote the CDC page I’ve linked to above, “Routine hepatitis B vaccination of U.S. children began in 1991. Since then, the reported incidence of acute hepatitis B among children and adolescents has dropped by more than 95% – and by 75% in all age groups.” Wouldn’t it have been easier to have JUST ASKED THEM! It took me 1 minute to acquire this data that seems to have completely baffled you.