На линкот што го ставив убаво се опишани сите глупости што се случиле во судот и зошто судовите не се места на кои треба да се носат вакви одлуки.
1. Mr. Andy Wakefield‘s paper alleging a connection between MMR and autism has been retracted by the Lancet. The Italian court pretended that real science did not retract the article and, instead, used the retracted article as a basis of their ruling.
2. Mr. Wakefield perpetrated a fraud, described in detail in a series of articles in the British Medical Journal, here, here, and here. The investigations revealed that Wakefield committed fraud in an attempt to make money from trial lawyers who were seeking to sue MMR vaccine manufactures. That’s bad enough, but it was also discovered that Wakefield owned rights to another measles vaccine, and by destroying the credibility of the MMR version, he had planned to make significant amounts of money in marketing his own. All of these intents to commit fraud, along with the actual commission of fraud, lead to Wakefield being stricken from the rolls of physicians and surgeons in the UK. Of course, none of these points mattered to the Italian Court.
3. Of course, those Italian courts decided that geologists who were not able to predict an earthquake (nearly impossible to do, scientifically) were guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to six years in jail. The Italian courts obviously are clueless about science, but they have a long tradition of suppressing science.
4. But let’s be clear. Legal systems are not built on the scientific method. They are incapable of deciding which evidence is scientifically sound and which is not. Courts decide on the law, they are mostly incompetent on deciding on the value (or non value) of scientific evidence, that’s not how they’re constructed. In fact, most court’s foundations are based on what science calls “false equivalency,” because it gives each side the right to make its own claims irrespective of the quality of evidence, and a panel of non-experts (a jury) is supposed to determine which side’s evidence is better. That doesn’t work in real science.
5. Despite a very large list of peer-reviewed scientific studies (listed below) that completely debunks any link between MMR vaccines and autism, why on earth would the Italian court decide the exact opposite? Well, courts are not infallible, so they occasionally make errors. The ruling of the provincial Italian court of jurisdiction, approximately at the level of a US state district court, can be appealed, which is ongoing. Apparently, the Italian Health Ministry also didn’t present the list of information to that court that I just did above–from comments made in Italian language skeptics blogs, it appears that the Health Ministry laughed off this court case, because it appeared to be a nonsense claim.
6. Finally, to play the conspiracy game that the tin-hat wearing vaccine deniers love, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Luca Ventaloro, is a well known Italian anti-vaccine advocate who provides legal advice on how to avoid compulsory vaccinations. Ventaloro used, as his “expert medical witness,”, Massimo Montinari, who has not authored any biomedical research papers on autism, MMR or vaccines; however, Dr. Montinari did author the book “Autismo: i vaccini fra le cause della malattia” and sells his own autism “cure” protocol. As the tin-hat types always say, “follow the money.”
7. But one more thing. The Italian Appeals court thought it was bogus too. So, I guess if the antivaccine cult wants to believe that courts decide science, oh well, you lose.
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/mmr-vaccines-do-not-cause-autism/Уште еден текст на слична тема:
http://aeon.co/magazine/society/how-can-we-rid-the-legal-system-of-bad-science/
