Gavin de Becker

Immediately, a guy named Dr. Berg interrupts.

And this is where I think it's funny.

I'll try and do it without cracking up.

This is what Dr. Berg says.

He says, I don't know how long it will take for us to figure out what the question really is.

I'm a veteran of one panel that took six days for a group about this size to figure out what the question was.

It can be a formidable issue.

I don't know what the question is, whether it is MMR or whether it is measles vaccine.

And somebody tries to answer him and he says, excuse me, we're going to have to have a method for how we focus the question.

This is one of the questions we need to focus on.

How are we going to form the question?

What process are we going to use to form the question?

The issue of specifying the question is a very important step.

I would like to know how this panel is going to specify the question.

In other words, this guy is a fucking chucklehead.

And this is what he's obsessed with and talking about.

The next guy, Dr. Goodman, he talks all through the thing, and he's impossible to understand, literally impossible to understand.

Here's his quote.

In the end, the bottom line is the only verdict that matters or is of importance is whether we say a causal relationship.

Between vaccines and autism is likely or suggested or unlikely or inadequate.