To vaccinate or not, page-4

One of the issues is that there were far too many unaccountable variables within the "study" to form ANY conclusion.

Peer review is not done by selecting/rejecting your reviewers (condition of one of the studies in OAT). That alone should ring alarm bells that all is not kosher with the article.

This "study" is so fatally flawed in its "due process" of research, that it really doesn't warrant any further research, time, or money.

I'm sure it will be dragged out again and again, this does not make it any "righter". It is still poor research methods, flawed design, and biased peer reviews (per statement by article linked by OAT).

Rise above that level of gullibility and do proper background searches of the linked articles and data source.