I used to investigate foodborne illnesses. I'd see people who had been diagnosed with salmonellosis. Almost always, people were sure where they got it. It was often the last thing they ate, usually something they weren't happy with, right before they got sick.

Salmonella has an incubation period of 12-74 hours, with the average of 18-36 hours. I'd tell them that, but it didn't matter. FACTS didn't matter. It was the thing they ate right before they got sick. Salmonellosis is not even remotely as serious as autism.

The symptoms of autism seem to begin sometime around the same age as the kids are given the shots. That doesn't mean the shots have anything to do with autism. Especially when so much is available that says not.

While I think the possibilities should be thoroughly examined, I don't think the facts will matter. They haven't mattered yet. I think that what people choose to believe in takes precedence over facts that conflict with that believe, OR the question remaining because of a lack of facts, there is no point in discussing it. It's more about perception and belief than facts and intent to understand.

I'm thinking that any study not proving what some people "know" is true will be called "flawed".

I'm not saying I'm 100% sure autism couldn't have something to do with the vaccine, just that it doesn't seem likely. What else isn't likely is that anything positive will occur from me continuing to discuss this, as it's being discussed more like religion than science. I'm done.