The problem with this is that it is not a scientific poll. It is limited to Steve's readers, limited further by those willing to reply. Not that it won't glean data, but you can't derive meaningful statistics from it. A REAL, random poll, will have to be done to learn the true percentages.
The problem with this is that it is not a scientific poll. It is limited to Steve's readers, limited further by those willing to reply. Not that it won't glean data, but you can't derive meaningful statistics from it. A REAL, random poll, will have to be done to learn the true percentages.
I was a physician and fully admit Steves followers have bias. The problem is the "independent "unbiased peer review" process is broken due to financial conflicts of interest. So, we are left with anecdotal stories and evidence from the vaccine injured and retired doctors that speak openly on vaccine damage. The media is gone. Just try questioning vaccine safety and see what happens to you. Any real random poll that goes against big pharma will be suppressed.
The problem with this is that it is not a scientific poll. It is limited to Steve's readers, limited further by those willing to reply. Not that it won't glean data, but you can't derive meaningful statistics from it. A REAL, random poll, will have to be done to learn the true percentages.
I was a physician and fully admit Steves followers have bias. The problem is the "independent "unbiased peer review" process is broken due to financial conflicts of interest. So, we are left with anecdotal stories and evidence from the vaccine injured and retired doctors that speak openly on vaccine damage. The media is gone. Just try questioning vaccine safety and see what happens to you. Any real random poll that goes against big pharma will be suppressed.