Which questions? Do you mean your reply to anonymous, that starts out with the reference to Phil Plaitt's website, Bad Science? I'm not as well versed on l'affaire Wakefield as others, but I can still tell you are seriously out of your depth on this subject. For instance, you wrote:
"Again, how do they really know that Wakefield detected human DNA with the Crohns study?"
The point is, I believe, that the methods used by Wakefield were unable to differentiate between the two. So we don't know if he was looking at human DNA or not.
BTW, measles is an RNA virus, IIRC.
Comment Reply
Which questions? Do you mean your reply to anonymous, that starts out with the reference to Phil Plaitt's website, Bad Science? I'm not as well versed on l'affaire Wakefield as others, but I can still tell you are seriously out of your depth on this subject. For instance, you wrote:
September 10, 2011 - 12:44pm"Again, how do they really know that Wakefield detected human DNA with the Crohns study?"
The point is, I believe, that the methods used by Wakefield were unable to differentiate between the two. So we don't know if he was looking at human DNA or not.
BTW, measles is an RNA virus, IIRC.
This Comment
Reply