Reply #157: I suggest you re-read my posts. [View All]

[trotsky]

I've posted at least as much research and references as mzmolly, and have actually demonstrated the mathematics behind it. That's far more than she's done.

And I've posted more research in other threads she & I have been involved in. Feel free to check the archives - YES, I'm making you do that. Search LBN for "formaldehyde" and GD for "vaccines" in the subject.

I'm sorry that you feel science is biased in a way that the wealthier side gets the scientific results they want. I'm not saying that there is never faulty research, but you have to look at the bulk of the results. And when it comes in peer-reviewed journals, the likelihood of bias drops dramatically.

LOL, yes, counting the number of articles for or against something IS an indicator of its truth. That's how science works - by CONSENSUS. I'm not talking about articles in the NY Times, or whatnot. I'm referring to published papers in peer-reviewed journals. When you get into sweeping generalizations like you just made, you come up with false results like mzmolly does.