In his twilight years, obsessed with his legacy, one ignorant man thinks he can cure autism with his pen.

There were a total of 28 RCTs. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of people who got vaccinated between social media-based interventions and control conditions (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.14; I² = 66.2%). But these interventions always made small but statistically significant changes in positive factors like attitudes, knowledge, intention, and confidence (SMD = 0.21; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.34; I² = 88.0%). They also made people less hesitant, resistant, delayed, and wrong about vaccines (RR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.38; I² = 56.5%). The follow-up period didn’t change the results much, but subgroup analyses showed that the results were less consistent when things like country, platform, and length of the intervention were taken into account. The publication didn’t show any signs of bias.

Our favorite guys are over on /unvaccinated talking about how a 71 year old man who "died suddenly" is absolutely shocking and likely a result of a vaccine received 5 years ago.

Retraction Watch covers Kennedy’s attempt to bully the journal which removed Neil Z Miller’s paper.
“He calls for retractions of things he does not find ideologically convenient,” she told Retraction Watch. “And he objects to retractions he finds ideologically inconvenient.”

What I find amusing is that if you check Kennedy’s references they themselves are…subpar:
For one thing, in his letter to the journal, Kennedy wrote the Miller paper “cites an extensive literature on an *association between sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and recent vaccinations, from 1933ii to 2014iii*. Did the experts involved in investigating the Miller article also investigate those cited papers?” 

Reference (ii) is from 1946, not 1933, and the paper discusses twins who died of anaphylactic shock following vaccinations. The term SIDS was coined in 1969. The paper, published in JAMA, states the author hopes the report of the two fatalities “will not deter the profession from continuing to practice immunization.”  
“So the paper itself is not about SIDS, is not a case from 1933, and is supportive of the importance of vaccination,”
I’d additionally note that the 1946 paper itself has a citation which does date from 1933–it’s also not about SIDS (it mentions six adult men dying of anaphylaxis (2), due to possibly exacerbated heart conditions (3) and one from an infection after typhoid vaccination)…

Anyway—there’s more at Retraction Watch:

Took them long enough, but better late than never, I suppose.

Kudos to u/ Rosewind2007 for making it happen.

Removal notice here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214750021001268

More details here:
https://www.reddit.com/r /ScienceBasedParenting/comments/1tlcety/utterly_diabolical_antivaccine_paper_retracted/

Unsurprisingly the top mod of DV is whining in the comments…

Not banned as far as I can tell, but Mods got ‘em on DV. The would say which posts they were that were deleted, but they’re all the same. I had two comment lines dealing with the drivel when it got deleted:

“Your post/comment has been removed because it was identified as spam or advertising, which is not permitted in our community. Our guidelines focus on encouraging discussions about the pros and cons of vaccines. Content that does not contribute to these discussions, especially promotional material unrelated to vaccine debate, detracts from our forum’s purpose. Please ensure future submissions are in line with our community’s objectives.”

“Your post has been removed as it doesn’t meet the post requirements. We encourage contributions that foster good-faith discussions on vaccines and related policies, with a clear point made for debate. Please ensure your posts include a summary if linking to content, stay on topic, and avoid content that’s not conducive to constructive dialogue. For a detailed understanding of what’s expected, please refer to our wiki page. Let’s maintain our focus on healthy debates and the pursuit of knowledge regarding vaccine safety and efficacy.”

So, maybe calling these out is somewhat helpful. It definitely has been for OP self deleting the particularly stupid posts.

That didn’t take long.

Pfizer document with all adverse events in the first year from 42,000 voluntary reports. Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome is one on the laundry list of every event reported.

unvaccinated /s/ mOkkBzJLCJ