On a slight tangent, what determined the efficacy of vaccines without placebo, bias or other such things was simple.

Redundancy, redundancy, redundancy.

Do the test, do it again, have thousands of others do it thousands of additional times in the last 200 years, test on different critters in different conditions.

If Anti-Vax in general was as thorough you may find an easier time breaking into the "mainstream" with such ideas.

After all, trust but verify.

And importantly, make sure you don't contaminate the samples

number 1 has never been done

EVER

It has, a fair few times.

I believe one of the first was even in 1798

Following the first Smallpox trials

no it has not and they give a lame excuse why too lol

At least, the person was wholly blind

obvoiusly you have not done your research

never been a double blind placebo ever

I think you need to look a bit more into Edwards Jenner

And his experiments

Initial and otherwise.

yawn

Alright, I'll bite.

Define for me

"double blind placebo"

In your terms

omfg

I don't wish to take out of context your argument, after all.

are you fking kidding me right now

Preventing a strawman is useful.

I want you to define it so I am not debating my definition of such.

That would not be beneficial for you.

the one who has yet to provide 1 shred of evidence

btw edward jenner was a master mason lol nice try

part of the royal society

nice bias source

And you are apart of the Anti-Vax community, though I wouldn't use that to throw out your arguments in their face, either.

Even a broken clock is right once a day, after all.

Be it whatever you think of Edwards

But please

De elaborate what you mean

When you say

"double blind placebo"