Not at all. The part about associating an argument with a person and then attacking the person would be the ad hom part.

One-tailed tests for significance were pursued unless otherwise indicated, given the study objectives of determining whether MV sequences were more likely to be found in biopsy tissues of cases than controls, as previously reported by Wakefield and colleagues and as consistent with the MMR hypothesis [1], [9]–[10].

I am more than a little surprized that some of the cast of regulars here isn’t interested in giving the authors a lesson in statistics. One wonders if the authors understand even the most basic rules of statistical analysis.

– pD

PS: I didn’t even notice Wakefield made the same argument. But nice try with the Ad Hom argument.

Are you claiming that accusing someone of using a similar argument as Dr. Wakefield is an “ad hominem”?

If so, it is interesting how far Dr. Wakefield’s credibility has fallen, even amongst people I would expect to be his supporters.

This outlines the recommended Japanese schedule.

http://idsc.nih.go.jp/vaccine/.....mEN_05.gif

I believe that Honda et al did not include data on the actual vaccination records of the subjects which is unfortunate, since apparently Japanese parents are required to keep accurate information in a book which is brought to all doctor visits.

Ringside seat:
You can see Mumps is on the list. And it doesn’t matter what the average numbers for the country are? What matters is what the study group in the cohort with ASD received. I didn’t notice any such analysis in the study, which means they don’t know (or I missed it).

PS: I didn’t even notice Wakefield made the same argument. But nice try with the Ad Hom argument.

What “background” are you speaking of in your comment? I’ve read the Honda et al. paper. Are you speaking of some other “background.” If so, I’d be interested in some citations.

Except that many of the children still received M, M, and R all at the same time in Japan. How many we don’t know, because they didn’t measure it.

Read the background on that study before jumping to wide ranging conclusions.

Autism rates in Japan continued to rise after the withdrawal of MMR vaccine.
Reference
H Honda et al. No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 2005 doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01425.x

Since the MMR has been used in the USA since 1971, I would need lots of data to show me that your statement has any validity. Was there a dramatic increase of autism in the USA starting in the 1970s?

What real scientific evidence do you have that the MMR vaccine is worse than measles, mumps and rubella? And it has to be real actual factual science, something on the order of the list of papers here:
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdf