Talk:Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Peer review
I have moved the above discussion, which took place as the peer review was opened, to the peer review. The peer review is transcluded below: LT90001 (talk) 00:02, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Judges = special masters
This needs to be clarified but I don't have the time right now. To the uninitiated it does appear as if they are different people.--Daffydavid (talk) 15:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Images
Not every article requires images and adding images that are at best peripheral is not the way to go. The measles image is debatable but the latest added image (I assume it is thimerosal) is not labeled properly and even it was it would still be debatable. Are there no images of protesters outside the court during the trial or something similar? Maybe an image of one of the claimants that is free use.--Daffydavid (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140209235500/http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/omnibusautism.html to http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/omnibusautism.html
 * Added tag to http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/autism/Expert%20Reports/Cedillo_98-916V/Mot_IL_Att_4_Bustin_Affidavit_98-916.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Cedillo is NOT the Omnibus Autism Proceeding
I don't know how this happened, but the Omnibus Autism Proceeding contains 6 test cases, and Cedillo is one of them, but not all of them that established for the Vaccine Court that vaccines were not linked to autism. To conflate the Omnibus Autism Proceeding with Cedillo gives the reader a wrong impression on how this process happened. I don't even know where to start to fix this article, but I'd remove the redirect from Omnibus Autism Proceeding to this article. OAP requires its own article which would link to Cedillo. SkepticalRaptor (talk) 00:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. I just removed the bolded OAP from the lead so it's not being portrayed as synonymous with this specific case, and I just tagged Omnibus Autism Proceeding for speedy deletion. Every Morning (there's a halo...) 01:04, 7 February 2018 (UTC)