It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Vaccines MAY BE safe. That is a truer statement.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Realtruth
What is your first sentence? Let's look at it again:
Proof that Vaccines do indeed cause autism-like issues, and that ATS members are being validated on their past threads, comments, and concerns regarding government cover-ups, and corruption regarding some vaccines.
I've emphasized the portion of your comment that you seem to be desperately trying to avoid.
Notice that you did not say "some Vaccines do indeed cause autism-like issues" nor did you say "a few" or "the MMR Vaccine" ...
Nothing in this information that is routinely dredged up from mid-2014 regarding a study from 2002-2004 is "new."
The report on the CBS affiliate in Atlanta (your vid) was generated from a recent protest outside the CDC. I know, I heard the protesters from my front yard as I left for work. It was a bit interesting for a day's news cycle, and a young reporter making a name for himself took advantage of it.
The information however, is from 2014 regarding a study in 2002-4.
I wonder, how is it you distrust thousands of doctors and medical professionals and accuse them basically of lying and shilling for the CDC and big Pharma, and yet this one doctor is telling the absolute truth? I'll let you contemplate the logic of that position.
I posted information from August of this year in which these claims are clearly disputed with evidence.
Participating in your thread pointing to the facts that disprove your vastly exaggerated initial assertion is hardly derailing anything
If "Some" vaccines are detrimental to young, old, or people with underlying physical issues then this needs to be out in the open.
Lying, cheating, and hiding scientific data is nothing more than pseudo-science not fit for anyone.
The Editor and Publisher regretfully retract the article  as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings. We apologise to all affected parties for the inconvenience caused.
We felt pressured to inject # into my child that most doctors don't even have the ingredients to, and the kid will suffer in all social functions if we don't shoot him up, because the vast majority of idiot Americans blindly follow Fear Money and Big Business, under the guise of "It's good for you."
originally posted by: ManFromEurope
Oh, another round of "vaccines are from the DEVIL!"?
Polio was the devil.
Don't believe everything the internet tells you. Those people are not the wardens of knowledge. Everyone here has his/her own agenda.
Mine would be to deny ignorance about science.
"I shoulder that the CDC has put the research ten years behind. Because the CDC has not been transparent, we’ve missed ten years of research, because the CDC is so paralyzed right now by anything related to autism. They’re not doing what they should be doing. They are afraid to look for things that might be associated."
originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: MotherMayEye
That didn't answer my question. "Science agrees with that". Ok, what does science say about the dose? Formaldehyde is toxic at high doses but absolutely critical to cell function in the human body and produced as part of the metabolic process. Saying something is a neurotoxin without mentioning dose is misleading at best.
"The dose makes the poison" (Latin: ''sola dosis facit venenum'') is an adage intended to indicate a basic principle of toxicology. It is credited to Paracelsus who expressed the classic toxicology maxim "All things are poison and nothing is without poison; only the dose makes a thing not a poison." This is often condensed to: "The dose makes the poison" or in Latin "Sola dosis facit venenum". It means that a substance can produce the harmful effect associated with its toxic properties only if it reaches a susceptible biological system within the body in a high enough concentration (i.e., dose).
The principle relies on the finding that all chemicals—even water and oxygen—can be toxic if too much is eaten, drunk, or absorbed. "The toxicity of any particular chemical depends on many factors, including the extent to which it enters an individual’s body." This finding provides also the basis for public health standards, which specify maximum acceptable concentrations of various contaminants in food, public drinking water, and the environment.
However, there is no linear relationship and also more to chemical toxicity than the acute effects caused by short-term exposure. Relatively low doses of contaminants in water, food, and environment can already have significant chronic effects if there is a long-term exposure. Many pollutants, drugs and natural substances adhere to this principle by causing different effects at different levels, which can as a result lead to health standards that are either too strong or too weak.
Generally the effects of different doses can be very different at different levels (not only bigger and smaller impacts depending on dose). Very low doses of some compounds can even induce stronger toxic responses than much higher doses as well as just different impacts.
I'm not sure what you are asking me exactly