Unbiased Science

A brief recap on the measles outbreak in the US. Note, you'll notice differences in some of the stats reported based on source-- some (like the CDC) cite all confirmed cases of measles, whereas other sources (like Brown's Pandemic Center-- an incredible resource), focuses on outbreak-associated confirmed and presumed cases. We hope this is helpful!

Have you listened to this week's episode on autoimmunity with Aimee Pugh Bernard, PhD? You don't wanna miss this. Tune in wherever you listen to podcasts...or watch us on YouTube! 🔗https://lnkd.in/eymSDPye

In our recent post about childhood vaccinations, we explained how today's vaccine schedule actually contains fewer antigens (the parts of germs that trigger immune responses) while protecting against more diseases than in previous decades. Modern vaccines are more precisely designed, using only the essential components needed to create immunity. As part of that discussion, we mentioned a theoretical calculation suggesting an infant's immune system could handle 10,000 vaccines simultaneously. This statistic caught many readers' attention, and we received a great question asking where this number comes from. The 10,000 vaccines calculation was developed by Dr. Paul Offit, a respected pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases, to help illustrate the incredible capacity of a baby's immune system. Dr. Offit's calculation gets a bit technical, involving B-cells, antibody concentrations, and epitopes (specific recognition sites on antigens) - but we wanted to share the science behind this frequently cited statistic. While purely theoretical (no one would ever receive thousands of vaccines at once!), this calculation helps put into perspective why the current vaccine schedule is well within the natural abilities of even a newborn's immune system, which routinely handles trillions of challenges from the environment every day. 🔗https://lnkd.in/euwSya2b

Dear Science, I write to you today after reading the news that HHS Secretary Kennedy has announced plans to "determine the cause of autism by September." My pen is heavy with disbelief, my mind reeling at the implication that all this time, you've simply been too lazy or incompetent to find the answer that apparently can be discovered in just a few months. For decades, you've been championed by countless dedicated researchers who have worked tirelessly to unravel the complex tapestry of autism—examining genetic threads, environmental patterns, and neurological landscapes with meticulous care. Your practitioners—geneticists, epidemiologists, neurologists, psychologists, data scientists, and many others—have devoted innumerable hours to collecting robust data, conducting rigorous analyses, and designing methodical studies that acknowledge the intricate nature of this condition. Yet somehow, you now find yourself dismissed. Apparently, your methods weren't good enough. Your careful approach—the peer reviews, the replications, the acknowledgment of complexity—is to be replaced by a rushed "massive testing and research effort" with a convenient September deadline. The truth is, you haven't failed us. You've illuminated significant contributing factors—the strong genetic components, the influence of parental age, environmental exposures, and neurological development patterns. You've shown us that autism isn't one condition but many, with diverse presentations and likely diverse origins. You don't claim to know everything, but you've built a foundation of understanding that acknowledges both what we know and what we don't yet comprehend. How unfair that people expect you to provide simple answers to complex questions, as if you've been holding back all along. They don't understand that you weren't designed to deliver absolute certainties, but rather to illuminate possibilities through evidence, to build knowledge brick by methodical brick. They'll come now with their p-hacking and predetermined conclusions. They'll ignore confounding variables and twist methodology to support what they've already decided. And when they present their "findings," they'll claim your decades of careful work were all for naught. What they fail to realize is that your greatest strength lies in your humility—your willingness to say "we don't know everything yet" while continuing the search. Your power comes from acknowledging complexity rather than oversimplifying it. I stand with you, Science, as you face this latest challenge. I understand that your purpose isn't to provide comfortable certainties but uncomfortable truths. And when September comes, and simplistic answers are offered to complex questions, I'll remember that real understanding comes not from deadlines but from dedication—something you've never lacked. With respect and solidarity, Read our full letter here: 🔗https://lnkd.in/etqxwwyq

Community water fluoridation is one of the most effective public health measures implemented in modern times. At the optimal level of 0.7 parts per million (ppm), studies indicate it reduces tooth decay by approximately 25-29% while being highly cost-effective. The benefits extend across a lifetime, with research showing that children who consumed fluoridated water continue to benefit well into adulthood, even in their 40s and 50s. The positive impacts of water fluoridation are extensive, including preventing dental disease, reducing healthcare costs, promoting health equity across socioeconomic groups, and improving overall quality of life. These benefits have led to water fluoridation being recognized as one of the great public health achievements of the 20th century. Despite this, water fluoridation has become a controversial topic in some communities, with increasing calls to remove it from public water supplies (including at the national level). One of the most common arguments against fluoridation is the claim that it constitutes "forced medication" of the population without consent. This characterization, however, misunderstands the nature of fluoride and the practice of water fluoridation. Fluoride is not a medication but a naturally occurring mineral that already exists in virtually all water supplies, though rarely at optimal levels for dental health. Water fluoridation simply adjusts the concentration to beneficial levels, similar to how we add iodine to salt, folic acid to breads and cereals, and vitamin D to milk. U.S. courts have consistently ruled that fluoride is "not a medication, but rather a nutrient found naturally in some areas but deficient in others." At the concentrations used in community water systems (0.7 ppm), fluoride functions as a nutrient supplement rather than a pharmacological intervention, with levels far below therapeutic doses used in medical treatments. https://lnkd.in/eZJCZmaT https://lnkd.in/e76nd37X

"The prospect of David Geier leading the review into alleged links between autism and measles vaccine is deeply concerning for scientific integrity," says public health expert and Unbiased Science CEO Jessica Steier, DrPH, PMP in Australian Doctor's article here https://bit.ly/4ju3ZRz, with thanks to Paul Smith for publishing this article. "His studies demonstrate fundamental methodological flaws including temporal mismatches between case and control groups, cherry-picked endpoints, biased study designs, and inappropriate statistical reporting." says Jess #healthcommunications #sciencecommunications #vaccines #immunization

Norovirus is the wooooooooorst. (Spoken like John-Ralphio)

We hope this post helps explain why the second dose of the MMR vaccine is important. If you had to navigate choppy waters in a life raft, would you rather it be 93% full of air or 97%? When you're miles from shore, every bit of extra protection counts. The same goes for vaccines — that second dose isn’t overkill, it’s peace of mind.

The real conspiracy isn't among public health officials working to prevent disease - it's among those who systematically undermine evidence-based health policy for personal or ideological gain. While we're busy looking for shadowy cabals of scientists plotting world domination, we're missing the very real, very well-funded network of anti-science actors who are dismantling public health protections one by one. 🔗https://lnkd.in/ergaDJqm

Spreading falsehoods about a life-saving vaccine under the guise of "informed consent" amidst an active measles outbreak is surely making Hippocrates turn in his grave. Sources: https://lnkd.in/eprhCRae https://lnkd.in/eDKpCqp3 https://lnkd.in/eHfyw6z7 https://lnkd.in/etpC3ZcJ