incompetent debunkers ( origins of polio

Both David Wright and Mark Probert have now shown their complete lack of
competence. Is this why they are such "sceptics"?

David and Mark were trying to cast doubt on the work of Dr. Bernard
Greenberg. Well, they lose...

Do incompetent or slow-witted individuals naturally gravitate to scepticism?
The world is eager to know...

I spent a few minutes on this problem, and did find some good evidence that
the statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg did work on how data had been
manipulated in order to promote the polio vaccine.

[quote]

http://www.whale.to/v/vran2.html

In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual
Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in
paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August,
1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and
ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr.
Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings,
revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and
ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that
the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the
criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)

[unquote]

All David and Mark had to do was go to whale.to site, but I guess they
cannot do that because of their sceptical religion...

Yuri.

"David Wright" wrote in message
t...
In article
,
Vaccine-man wrote:
On Nov 30, 12:35 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:

during a 1962 U.S. Congressional hearing, Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of
the
Department of Biostatistics for the University of North Carolina School
of
Public Health, testified that cases of polio not only increased after
mandatory vaccinations --up 50% from 1957 to 1958, and up 80% from 1958
to
1959 -- but that the statistics were deliberately manipulated by the
Public
Health Service to give the opposite impression.

Can you provide the reference to the complete text of Dr. Greenberg's
testimony?

I strongly doubt it. This supposed testimony by Greenberg has been
brought up before, in 2005 (and earlier), on m.h.a.

At the time, I wrote:

I just tried to track this one down. No luck. There was a Bernard
Greenberg at UNC in biostatistics, that much is true, but whether he
said what they say he did, and what *else* he might have said, is not
revealed, nor is it revealed whether anyone else might have rebutted
his testimony. You can find the claims on hundreds of web pages, but
all they do is cite each other. I won't believe this one till someone
cranks up original sources. In addition, if Greenberg did testify
about this, how come nobody else did? It's a cinch that the anti-vax
people would be citing it up the wazoo if someone else had.

Mark Probert wrote this in the same thread:

Quite right. A Google Scholar search found this:

Your search - polio author:Bernard author:Greenberg - did not match
any articles.

I did do a search on the number of the bill, HR10541, as it seemed
somewhat high. It means that during that session of Congress, 10541
bills had been submitted and indexed. If that number had been reached
during the 1994-2005 period, I would have had at least those hits.

The Library of Congress has no record.

http://search.loc.gov:8765/query.htm...&la=en&qm=0&st...

I also checked GPOAccess from 1994 through 2005.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/search.html

hr10541 does not occur in the database.

I then did a search at

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/multidb.cgi

and found:

hr10541 does not occur in the database.

The relevance of HR 10541 is that it's usually claimed that Greenberg
was testifying about such a bill.

Also, polio cases dropped like a rock starting in 1955; the idea that
they were surging in 1957 and 1958 is absurd.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly
dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Both David Wright and Mark Probert have now shown their complete lack of
competence. Is this why they are such "sceptics"?

David and Mark were trying to cast doubt on the work of Dr. Bernard
Greenberg. Well, they lose...

Do incompetent or slow-witted individuals naturally gravitate to scepticism?
The world is eager to know...

I spent a few minutes on this problem, and did find some good evidence that
the statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg did work on how data had been
manipulated in order to promote the polio vaccine.

[quote]

http://www.whale.to/v/vran2.html

In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual
Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in
paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August,
1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and
ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr.
Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings,
revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and
ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that
the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the
criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)

[unquote]

All David and Mark had to do was go to whale.to site, but I guess they
cannot do that because of their sceptical religion...

Why would we do that? The whale.to site is well recognized as being the
Internet's largest suppository for bull****. It has been cited by every
study of Internet accuracy as being in the bottom. BTW, the bottom of
the ocean is where whale **** winds up. The site is aptly named.




Yuri.

"David Wright" wrote in message
t...
In article
,
Vaccine-man wrote:
On Nov 30, 12:35 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:

during a 1962 U.S. Congressional hearing, Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of
the
Department of Biostatistics for the University of North Carolina School
of
Public Health, testified that cases of polio not only increased after
mandatory vaccinations --up 50% from 1957 to 1958, and up 80% from 1958
to
1959 -- but that the statistics were deliberately manipulated by the
Public
Health Service to give the opposite impression.
Can you provide the reference to the complete text of Dr. Greenberg's
testimony?
I strongly doubt it. This supposed testimony by Greenberg has been
brought up before, in 2005 (and earlier), on m.h.a.

At the time, I wrote:

I just tried to track this one down. No luck. There was a Bernard
Greenberg at UNC in biostatistics, that much is true, but whether he
said what they say he did, and what *else* he might have said, is not
revealed, nor is it revealed whether anyone else might have rebutted
his testimony. You can find the claims on hundreds of web pages, but
all they do is cite each other. I won't believe this one till someone
cranks up original sources. In addition, if Greenberg did testify
about this, how come nobody else did? It's a cinch that the anti-vax
people would be citing it up the wazoo if someone else had.
Mark Probert wrote this in the same thread:

Quite right. A Google Scholar search found this:
Your search - polio author:Bernard author:Greenberg - did not match
any articles.
I did do a search on the number of the bill, HR10541, as it seemed
somewhat high. It means that during that session of Congress, 10541
bills had been submitted and indexed. If that number had been reached
during the 1994-2005 period, I would have had at least those hits.
The Library of Congress has no record.
http://search.loc.gov:8765/query.htm...&la=en&qm=0&st...
I also checked GPOAccess from 1994 through 2005.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/search.html
hr10541 does not occur in the database.
I then did a search at
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/multidb.cgi
and found:
hr10541 does not occur in the database.
The relevance of HR 10541 is that it's usually claimed that Greenberg
was testifying about such a bill.

Also, polio cases dropped like a rock starting in 1955; the idea that
they were surging in 1957 and 1958 is absurd.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Saddam Hussein was a bad man, connected with some incredibly
dangerous
people: Cheney, Rumsfeld, George Galloway." -- Marcus Brigstocke

On Dec 5, 9:25 pm, Mark Probert wrote:
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Both David Wright and Mark Probert have now shown their complete lack of
competence. Is this why they are such "sceptics"?


Why would we do that? The whale.to site is well recognized as being the
Internet's largest suppository for bull****. It has been cited by every
study of Internet accuracy as being in the bottom. BTW, the bottom of
the ocean is where whale **** winds up. The site is aptly named.

Actually what is lower than whale **** on the bottom of the ocean?

Sceptics like the Marked Pervert and Wronger that Right.

Maybe even lower than greedy lawyers.

Drcee

wrote:
On Dec 5, 9:25 pm, Mark Probert wrote:
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Both David Wright and Mark Probert have now shown their complete lack of
competence. Is this why they are such "sceptics"?

Why would we do that? The whale.to site is well recognized as being the
Internet's largest suppository for bull****. It has been cited by every
study of Internet accuracy as being in the bottom. BTW, the bottom of
the ocean is where whale **** winds up. The site is aptly named.

Actually what is lower than whale **** on the bottom of the ocean?

Chuckie, since that is your realm, you must know what you are bleating
and braying about.


Sceptics like the Marked Pervert and Wronger that Right.

What is a sceptic? The dictionary does not list the word.

Maybe even lower than greedy lawyers.

Like the ones who file VIOXX and Vaccine class action suits?

In message , Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual
Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in
paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August,
1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and
ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr.
Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings,
revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and
ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that
the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the
criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)

So where are the iron lungs?

--
| Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable |
| e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. |
| There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions --------------+

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
news:M4J5j.8203$gs.1498@trndny08...
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Both David Wright and Mark Probert have now shown their complete lack of
competence. Is this why they are such "sceptics"?

David and Mark were trying to cast doubt on the work of Dr. Bernard
Greenberg. Well, they lose...

Do incompetent or slow-witted individuals naturally gravitate to
scepticism? The world is eager to know...

I spent a few minutes on this problem, and did find some good evidence
that the statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg did work on how data had been
manipulated in order to promote the polio vaccine.

[quote]

http://www.whale.to/v/vran2.html

In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th
Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing
rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the
August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as
a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel,
statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at
Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide
the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr.
Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases
was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)

[unquote]

All David and Mark had to do was go to whale.to site, but I guess they
cannot do that because of their sceptical religion...

Why would we do that? The whale.to site is well recognized as being the
Internet's largest suppository for bull****. It has been cited by every
study of Internet accuracy as being in the bottom. BTW, the bottom of the
ocean is where whale **** winds up. The site is aptly named.

This thread is not about whale.to.

This thread is about the incompetence of David Wright, and your own, Mark.

Aren't you ashamed of your incompetence?

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku

"Modern medicine" may well be defined as "the experimental study of what
happens when poisonous chemicals are placed into malnourished human
bodies." -- A. Saul, Contributing Editor, Journal of Orthomolecular
Medicine -- http://www.orthomed.org

On Dec 5, 5:10 pm, Yuri "Still Can't Provide Evidence" Kuchinsky
wrote:

I spent a few minutes on this problem, and did find some good evidence that
the statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg did work on how data had been
manipulated in order to promote the polio vaccine.

This is still not the original source. You haven't provided us the
original source for one of your other assertions regarding Dr. Sabin,
either. When you gonna 'put up or shut up?'

All David and Mark had to do was go to whale.to site, but I guess they
cannot do that because of their sceptical religion...

Yuri.

Nobody except AVW believe anything at www.whaleofastory.to.

There's only one reference in PubMed with author Greenberg and Polio:

GREENBERG BG, CAMERON CM Jr. N C Med J. 1955 Sep;16(9):391-5.
The probable influence of Salk poliomyelitis vaccine on reported
poliomyelitis in North Carolina.

I've put in an ILL request for the article - stay tuned!

On Dec 10, 2:35 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:

This thread is not about whale.to.

You're the one who brought it up.

This thread is about the incompetence of David Wright, and your own, Mark.

No, it's about your willingness to make assertions about what someone
might have said without providing any substantiating evidence to
support those assertions. It's up to you to back up any statement
you've made with evidence from the original source.

Aren't you ashamed of your incompetence?

You're apparently not ashamed of your intellectual laziness.

"Vaccine-man" wrote in message
...
On Dec 5, 5:10 pm, Yuri "Still Can't Provide Evidence" Kuchinsky
wrote:

I spent a few minutes on this problem, and did find some good evidence
that
the statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg did work on how data had been
manipulated in order to promote the polio vaccine.

This is still not the original source. You haven't provided us the
original source for one of your other assertions regarding Dr. Sabin,
either. When you gonna 'put up or shut up?'

Well, my slow-witted friend, there was a ref in there (that I supplied and
you snipped out) for his published testimony. How come you missed it?


All David and Mark had to do was go to whale.to site, but I guess they
cannot do that because of their sceptical religion...

Yuri.

Nobody except AVW believe anything at www.whaleofastory.to.

There's only one reference in PubMed with author Greenberg and Polio:

GREENBERG BG, CAMERON CM Jr. N C Med J. 1955 Sep;16(9):391-5.
The probable influence of Salk poliomyelitis vaccine on reported
poliomyelitis in North Carolina.

I've put in an ILL request for the article - stay tuned!

I'm sure it'll be a big revelation for you...

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku

"Official data have shown that the large-scale vaccinations undertaken in
the US have failed to obtain any significant improvement of the diseases
against which they were supposed to provide protection." -- Dr A. Sabin,
developer of the Oral Polio vaccine.

"Vaccine-man" wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 2:35 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:

This thread is not about whale.to.

You're the one who brought it up.

This thread is about the incompetence of David Wright, and your own,
Mark.

No, it's about your willingness to make assertions about what someone
might have said without providing any substantiating evidence to
support those assertions. It's up to you to back up any statement
you've made with evidence from the original source.

Aren't you ashamed of your incompetence?

You're apparently not ashamed of your intellectual laziness.

I've provided more evidence than you did...

What's your job here, to complain?

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku

"I have not seen autism with the Amish," said Dr. Frank Noonan, a family
practitioner in Lancaster County, Pa., who has treated thousands of Amish
for a quarter-century. "You'll find all the other stuff, but we don't find
the autism. We're right in the heart of Amish country and seeing none, and
that's just the way it is."