I didn't see anything there that explains your specific case. Even if we know for certain that smoking causes cancer, that doesn't let us know that for a particular person who smoked and then got cancer, their smoking caused their cancer.
How did you know that the vaccine had caused his autism?
My son did not have any of the symptoms of Autism before his vaccines. Then the next day after his 18 month vaccines he was gone. There was nothing else that happened that day.
Sorry Joel I just came back to the string. Carl made a dramatic change after his shots. That is why we know it was the vaccines. Call has every reaction they talk about with the shots. He runs a fever, he gets hot at the injection site, etc etc. When these little babies have 3 and 4 shots at one time it truly pushes too many chemicals in their bodies.
You hid all the actually relevant information under "etc, etc". If his reactions to the shot was a fever and heat at the injection site, those are very typical reactions that don't necessarily suggest anything else.
Saying he had a dramatic change "after the shots" is an example of post hoc ergo propter hoc. It isn't even evidence of causality, much less justification for believing causality.
"When these little babies have 3 and 4 shots at one time it truly pushes too many chemicals in their bodies." Whether that's true or false, it doesn't justify a belief that a particular thing happened to a particular person. We know smoking increases your risk of cancer, but that doesn't let us say that for a particular person who smoked and then god cancer one caused the other.
See #vaxxed
I didn't see anything there that explains your specific case. Even if we know for certain that smoking causes cancer, that doesn't let us know that for a particular person who smoked and then got cancer, their smoking caused their cancer.
How did you know that the vaccine had caused his autism?
My son did not have any of the symptoms of Autism before his vaccines. Then the next day after his 18 month vaccines he was gone. There was nothing else that happened that day.
Punch "post hoc ergo propter hoc" into your favorite search engine.
Sorry Joel I just came back to the string. Carl made a dramatic change after his shots. That is why we know it was the vaccines. Call has every reaction they talk about with the shots. He runs a fever, he gets hot at the injection site, etc etc. When these little babies have 3 and 4 shots at one time it truly pushes too many chemicals in their bodies.
You hid all the actually relevant information under "etc, etc". If his reactions to the shot was a fever and heat at the injection site, those are very typical reactions that don't necessarily suggest anything else.
Saying he had a dramatic change "after the shots" is an example of post hoc ergo propter hoc. It isn't even evidence of causality, much less justification for believing causality.
"When these little babies have 3 and 4 shots at one time it truly pushes too many chemicals in their bodies." Whether that's true or false, it doesn't justify a belief that a particular thing happened to a particular person. We know smoking increases your risk of cancer, but that doesn't let us say that for a particular person who smoked and then god cancer one caused the other.