2020 · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
RETRACTED: Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses Along the Axis of Vaccination
Verdict
SCIENTIFIC
The study follows the scientific method and does not operate inside a theoretical framework. The verdict is scientific.
1·Study methodology · no theoretical framework
SCIENTIFIC
Follows the scientific method. No theoretical framework attached.
2·Paradigm · Basic Epidemiological Comparison
NOT APPLICABLE
No theoretical framework. The study verdict decides.
How the verdict is decided
This study does not operate inside a theoretical framework. Using hospital records, billing codes, or diagnostic names as labels on visible events is not the same as depending on that framework. The verdict is the study methodology score alone.
1·Study methodology
Did this study test its claim with methods that are independent, falsifiable, and non-circular?
SCIENTIFIC
This paper claims unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children, with vaccinated children showing significantly higher rates of office visits for numerous diagnoses including asthma, ADHD, anemia, allergic rhinitis, and behavioral issues. All three tests pass.
Independently Verifiable
Pass
The outcomes are office visits recorded in billing records during normal practice operations, and someone who rejects every medical model can still count how many times children in each group were brought to the doctor.
Falsifiable
Pass
If vaccinated children had equal or fewer office visits than unvaccinated children, the claim would have been disproved, and the study design allowed that result to appear in the data.
Non-Circular
Pass
Vaccination status is a physical fact independent of the billing records used to measure outcomes, and the practice created those records during normal care, not to support this study's conclusion.
Why
The study counted office visits and billing-code diagnoses in 2763 vaccinated and 561 unvaccinated children born into one pediatric practice over ten years. The groups are defined by a physical fact: did the child receive injections or not. The outcomes are visits to the doctor, recorded as billing entries during normal care. A child brought in for wheezing, fever, or behavioral problems is a visible event regardless of what framework you use to name it. The billing codes are filing labels applied after the fact to complaints a parent could see and a doctor could witness. The study did not use PCR, antibody tests, sequencing, or any model-dependent instrument to sort groups or classify outcomes. It used arithmetic on recorded events. The design allowed a null result. If vaccinated children had the same or fewer office visits, the claim would have died. The study reported null findings honestly for seizures and several developmental delays. The group definition, the outcome measurement, and the conclusion do not form a loop. The records existed before the study and would mean the same thing to someone who rejects the entire allopathic framework.
2·Paradigm · Basic Epidemiological Comparison
The three tests do not apply. There is no theoretical framework.
NOT APPLICABLE
Why
The study counts office visits and billing-code diagnoses across two groups of children sorted by vaccination status. That is arithmetic on visible events. A child being brought to the doctor for breathing problems, fever, or behavioral issues is something anyone can witness. The billing codes are filing labels applied to those visits during normal practice operations. The study does not use model-dependent instruments to sort groups, classify outcomes, or interpret results. It does not depend on virology, allopathic medicine, or any other theoretical framework to produce its numbers. Someone who rejects every medical model entirely could still count the visits and reach the same comparison. There is no paradigm to test because the methodology does not assume one. The study verdict alone determines the final verdict.
From the paper
The data source for this study was all billing and medical records of Integrative Pediatrics, a private pediatric practice located in Portland, Oregon.
Outcomes were represented by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes
For each unvaccinated patient, a patient with identical or closest DOC values was selected (without bias) from among the more numerous vaccinated patients.
There were no cases of ADHD in the unvaccinated group.
Source
RETRACTED: Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses Along the Axis of Vaccination
Lyons-Weiler, James; Thomas, Paul
2020 · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Scored from full text · Rubric 1.0