Last updated on September 26th, 2020 at 05:34 pm
These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence based through the use of credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased and does not use emotional words. These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias, but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.
- Overall, Vaxopedia is a pro-science source that properly sources and adheres to the consensus of science regarding vaccines.
Factual Reporting: HIGH
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
Funded by / Ownership
The website is owned by Dr. Iannelli and does not appear to seek revenue as there is not advertising nor a donation link.
Analysis / Bias
In review, Dr. Iannelli’s main purpose is to debunk anti-vax myths and provide parents and people in general, with sound scientific knowledge about vaccines. The website features the Vaxopedia – A to Z Index, which lists in order, facts, myths, and scientific answers such as this: Aborted baby parts in vaccines? This report goes on to indicate that baby parts are not in vaccines and uses proper sources such as the CDC for evidence. The website also features a blog that publishes articles such as this Remembering the Measles Epidemics of the 1990s, which shows the correlation between a lack of vaccinations and measles outbreaks.
Overall, Vaxopedia is a pro-science source that properly sources and adheres to the consensus of science regarding vaccines. (D. Van Zandt 5/3/2019)