Childhood Vaccinations??

Somewhere deep down...
I am hoping that bsl4doc is not a real person, and just a "character" who wants to keep this thread alive by posting the most ignorant and baiting comments, so that we will keep responding, to keep challenging us to provide additional evidence, and keep this thread on the radar.

Anyone who has read the thread can not possibly believe bsl4doc the italian medical student has presented a good pro-vaccine arguement.
I think the pro-vaccine people need a new spokesman. If I was pro-vaccine I might be embarrased having you defend my arguement.

bsl4 - If you are just a character, then thank you for keeping this thread alive, and providing us an example of the ignorant statements and cemented ideas, of many of the medical profession, including the newly initiated students.

If you truly believe the statements you stand by, then god help you, and your karma. All we ask of you is to listen, and learn about these new developments, and you won't.

The world of medicine is constantly changing, but you think you know it all already.



[edit on 7-2-2006 by KDX175DUEX]

bsl4 - If you are just a character, then thank you for keeping this thread alive, and providing us an example of the ignorant statements and cemented ideas, of many of the medical profession, including the newly initiated students.

Examples please?

Some mods would seem to diagree, I've gotten a few applauses in this thread. Also, I posted a very well thought out critique of Mott's spam posts. Can you pinpoint for me where I used faulty logic, stuck to ideas that aren't backed by research, or posted a blatantly false statement? Now be careful, you might want to read each of my posts in entirety. I know you'll try to say that I said mercury wasn't harmful, which I never said that despite what Excitable_Git has to say. I said thimerosal cannot be studied like mercury, although they both have harmful effects, I just don't believe either is tied to autism.

Ciao,
~MFP

[edit on 2/7/2006 by bsl4doc]

Originally posted by KDX175DUEX

Anyone who has read the thread can not possibly believe bsl4doc the italian medical student has presented a good pro-vaccine arguement.
I think the pro-vaccine people need a new spokesman. If I was pro-vaccine I might be embarrased having you defend my arguement.
..

Nah, at least he rightfully dissed the part about proteins 'clogging' the lymphatic system, didn't he? besides, i think mottdog is relying far too much on shock&awe here, i mean if he's apparently attributing every single degenerative disease to vaccines, and matter-of-facty states they are causing allergies... well, that's cool, since researchers around the world are struggling to even understand allergies So give some credit, without him, you wouldn't be having a discussion (i dunno if you consider it a blessing or a curse though)

All in all, i think we should focus more on what we think we know and categorize it wrt usefulness and probability, for example, bringing allergies and diabetes into this is neat but further increasing our burden of research, especially considering that there are various theories on the origins of diabetes, while autism is considered genetic or toxic - we can't even proove ONE alledged side effect, let alone three of them or more.

just 2c

Ok bsl4doc -

I opened my arguement with a 1991 Thimerosal MSDS direct from the manufacturer.
Thimerosal Material Safety Data Sheet 1991
Which states that Mental Retardation could be a side effect.
There it is... in black and white writing from the manufacturer.

You enter the debate with this stance:

bsl4doc -Also, if 3-6 in 1,000 children having autism is too high a rate of side effects for you, perhaps you should consider the other 994 children who won't contract measles, mumps, rubella, diptheria, etc. .

And later you responded with this:

bsl4doc - I don't see why you and a few other people think it's okay for a pandemic of measles, mumps, and rubella to occur just to prevent 3 out of 1000 children from developing an autism spectrum disorder.

So at this point everyone in the thread thinks you are aware of the problem, and explain it as a necessary causualty of the vaccine age.
Basically saying that it is ok to make new diseases if you can fight other diseases.

Somewhere along the line you realize this stance is xenophobic and not a defendable position.
You start backtracking to instead argue that Thimerosal does not cause autism afterall, in your OPINION.

You then get confused about the rates of autism and the beginning of the epidemic, and then confused about the ages of children in the California state data.
Others think it may have just been a language barrier, so we won't dwell on it, or quote it.

You become defensive and defend yourself with offensive and un-cultured comments. This is one example.

dsl4doc -Umm...why does me not being a doctor mean I can't make myself clear when someone asks me to explain my point? Maybe I just don't understand your strange Aussie logic, I mean, you guys are pretty far south and live with kangaroos, wombats, etc.

Then, this statement is not professional, and starts to make me wonder who you really are.

bsl4doc -Do YOU know I'm a medical student? I may say it, and I am in fact a medical student, but why would you immediately trust anyone you read a post from online, especially on a conspiracy theory website? It seems like you're just trying to pick a fight now.

Here is an example of you cementing your confidence based on someones "contempt" rather than science. Not a professional way to make important judgements.

bsl4doc -Thanks for cementing my confidence in my stance though! Your contempt tells me I have a solid enough argument that you have to resort to petty insults to make your bruised ego feel better.

You dis-regard the English Modern Hippocratic Oath, and somehow think that your OLD original oath is better.
You probably think medical books from 1930s are better than modern 2005 medical books too?

bsl4doc -We don't use the English Hippocratic Oath in my country. We use Italian, obviously. It is much closer to the original and doesn't include anything about "I know not". For a version closer to the ACTUAL Hippocratic Oath, check here:

Here is where your arguement ends up currently.

dsl4doc -I said that thimerosal is a much larger mercury containing molecule than molecular mercury and will thus behave differently. This invalidates studies that looked at the effects of plain molecular mercury instead of methylated mercury.

BUT way back in the thread, I had already provided this, which you should have read. Burbacher-EHP-Primates-April-2005.pdf

quote:
There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal
infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in
the brains of the thimerosal-exposed infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg
infants.

See.... it is comparing Thimerosal and Methylmercury(MeHG) in primate infants.
Read it again slowly....Thimerosal is used specifically in this study.

Now that leaves us with your final opinion:

bsl4doc -Thimerosal most definitely can have negative side effects. Do I feel autism is one of them? No, most likely not.

Just your opinion, with no science.

Which brings us to the Question of the Year 2006.
And Thichheaded's excellent point that you ignored.

15 percent of British children were not vaccinated between 1970 and 1980; only one autistic child has been found in this unvaccinated group, in contrast with an epidemic of autism among vaccinated children.

So Answer this: What is the rate of Autism in Un-vaccinated American children?

I could ask an even harder question if you want?
What is the rate of Autism, Asthma, ADHD, Alzheimers, Cancer, Diabetes, MS, and SIDS in Vaccinated -vs- Unvaccinated populations. Would you rather people started pushing for that answer?

Then health authorities like the CDC better step up and confirm this Thimerosal / Autism issue before those "other" questions are asked.

We can save vaccines if you tell the truth to people about Thimerosal Preservative, and show that the preservative was taken out.

If you constantly deny the issue entirely, then people will start to push harder for the whole truth.










[edit on 7-2-2006 by KDX175DUEX]

If I was pro-vaccine I might be embarrased having you defend my arguement.

Must not have been a member of the debate team.

Something that concerns me about the med student also is that he had no idea that acetomediphine (i.e. Tylenol) is toxic (and more toxic mixed with alcohol). Those med books must have been written by the Warren Commission.

*Sigh*
Let's go through this again, KDX and Excitable. First, KDX, I'll go through your most recent post and show how you lied/skewed my words:
1)

I opened my arguement with a 1991 Thimerosal MSDS direct from the manufacturer.
Thimerosal Material Safety Data Sheet 1991
Which states that Mental Retardation could be a side effect.
There it is... in black and white writing from the manufacturer.

You enter the debate with this stance:
quote: bsl4doc -Also, if 3-6 in 1,000 children having autism is too high a rate of side effects for you, perhaps you should consider the other 994 children who won't contract measles, mumps, rubella, diptheria, etc. .

And later you responded with this:
quote: bsl4doc - I don't see why you and a few other people think it's okay for a pandemic of measles, mumps, and rubella to occur just to prevent 3 out of 1000 children from developing an autism spectrum disorder.

So at this point everyone in the thread thinks you are aware of the problem, and explain it as a necessary causualty of the vaccine age.
Basically saying that it is ok to make new diseases if you can fight other diseases.

I never admitted that thimerosal was linked to autism. I said that if any treatment with a 3 in 1000 side effect rate is too dangerous for you, you need to reevalute many of your common medications. My autism spectrum disorder statement supports this. There is a great distinction between ASD and autism. Maybe you should research it.

2)

You then get confused about the rates of autism and the beginning of the epidemic, and then confused about the ages of children in the California state data.
Others think it may have just been a language barrier, so we won't dwell on it, or quote it.

No, there was no confusion. Your article said the children are diagnosed prior to age 6, but not entered into the system statistics until after age 3. This leaves out a large gap of the post-thimerosal vaccination group, and hinders this as a long term study.

3)

You become defensive and defend yourself with offensive and un-cultured comments. This is one example.
quote: dsl4doc -Umm...why does me not being a doctor mean I can't make myself clear when someone asks me to explain my point? Maybe I just don't understand your strange Aussie logic, I mean, you guys are pretty far south and live with kangaroos, wombats, etc.

This was in response to NJE's personal attack on me, saying that as a medical student, I'm not allowed to clarify a point when asked or misunderstood, which still doesn't make sense to me. The "aussie logic" part was a sarcastic remark which I pointed out as such in the next post when it was brought up. I'm sorry if sarcasm is hard to sense without facial gestures.

4)

Then, this statement is not professional, and starts to make me wonder who you really are.
quote: bsl4doc -Do YOU know I'm a medical student? I may say it, and I am in fact a medical student, but why would you immediately trust anyone you read a post from online, especially on a conspiracy theory website? It seems like you're just trying to pick a fight now.

Here, I'm trying to prove to NJE that no one is gullible/dumb enough to take medical advice from someone on a conspiracy message board. My question still stands. How do you know for certain I'm a medical student? You don't, you can only take me word for it. So, lacking this knowledge, would YOU take my medical advice? I would feel sorry for you if you did.

5)

Here is an example of you cementing your confidence based on someones "contempt" rather than science. Not a professional way to make important judgements.
quote: bsl4doc -Thanks for cementing my confidence in my stance though! Your contempt tells me I have a solid enough argument that you have to resort to petty insults to make your bruised ego feel better.

I believe the English word for this quote is a "dig". I was trying to show that you and Excitable have been reduced to insults as opposed to scientific research.

6)

You dis-regard the English Modern Hippocratic Oath, and somehow think that your OLD original oath is better.
You probably think medical books from 1930s are better than modern 2005 medical books too?
quote: bsl4doc -We don't use the English Hippocratic Oath in my country. We use Italian, obviously. It is much closer to the original and doesn't include anything about "I know not". For a version closer to the ACTUAL Hippocratic Oath, check here:

Not a disregard to the English Modern Hippocratic Oath. A disregard to the English language. Why, as an Italian living in Italy, would I use the English Oath? It seems your imperialism is peeking out from behind your ego now. Maybe you should leave that attitude in North America...and I guess the Middle East. All kidding aside though, and yes, the previous sentence was SARCASM again, why would an Italian speaker in Italy use the English version? We don't speak English in day to day life, we don't use YOUR version of books or holy texts, so why use the English Oath? I just don't get your point.

7)

BUT way back in the thread, I had already provided this, which you should have read. Burbacher-EHP-Primates-April-2005.pdf
External Source

quote:
There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal
infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in
the brains of the thimerosal-exposed infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg
infants.


See.... it is comparing Thimerosal and Methylmercury(MeHG) in primate infants.
Read it again slowly....Thimerosal is used specifically in this study.

Now that leaves us with your final opinion:
quote: bsl4doc -Thimerosal most definitely can have negative side effects. Do I feel autism is one of them? No, most likely not.

Just your opinion, with no science.

You're right about that, it IS my opinion. And your posts are...
Oh, and your study about methyl-Hg and thimerosal? That would be great if methyl-Hg were related to thimerosal. The reason they compared the two is because most mercury poisoning comes from methyl-Hg and they wanted to compare the symptoms of exposure to the two. However, thimerosal breaks down to ethyl-Hg in the body. Much different molecule. Source
Just for arguments sake, here's some long overdue research for you:

Research Summary
BBC - Japanese MMR vs. Autism Rate Comparison
Journal Article 1 - The Lancet
Journal Article 2 - The Lancet
Journal Article 3 - New England Journal of Medicine (READ THIS ONE, ESPECIALLY)

It seems the medical and scientific world have already addressed this issue numerous times, especially in both England and Denmark and show no link between vaccinations and autism. Curious.

And now for Excitable:

Something that concerns me about the med student also is that he had no idea that acetomediphine (i.e. Tylenol) is toxic (and more toxic mixed with alcohol). Those med books must have been written by the Warren Commission.

If taken in the recommended dosage, no, it's not toxic. And anyone who disregards the alcohol warning on ANY medication runs the risk of harmful side effects. Only an idiot would consume alcohol and then take medication. I just don't see how that transforms acetaminophen (not acetomediphine which sounds like a species of porpoise, hehe) into a horrid toxic compound. Meh, you crazy people with your alcohol consumption and drug problems.

~MFP

Still avoiding my questions for the 2nd time.. get with it.. Answer the questions I asked, since you after all are a Med student or Doctor or whatever.

I feel I did answer your questions. There has been no proven link between vaccines and autism, and research from England and Denmark within the last 4 years has shown this time and time again. I gave you the studies, what more do you want?

Much poor science has been done in recent years in order to save the MMR vaccine from careful scrutiny. Most of this has been in the form of poorly designed and executed retrospective studies on the epidemiology of autism with respect to the introduction of the MMR vaccine in the US and UK. A case-by-case, line-by-line discussion of these studies is beyond the scope of this talk, but I will attempt to address the most egregious (and laughable) errors seen in most of them.

1. Most studies treat autism as a single diagnosis, which it almost certainly is not. People with the diagnosis of "autism" are more different from each other than they are from "typical" people. Any epidemiologic study that fails to separate disparate diseases will fail to find existing associations.

2. All studies reviewed to date have assumed that the MMR vaccine was adopted universally and simultaneously, ignoring the vast amount of contemporary literature (articles, editorials and letters) that contradict this assumption. Since the vaccine was adopted over a period of several years, the impact of its introduction will be likewise spread over time.

3. Most studies assume there was a clean division in age between those who received the MMR and those who received separate vaccines. This ignores the numerous (and well documented) "catch-up" programs designed to vaccinate older children. This blurs the onset of the vaccine effect over several age groups.

4. All of the studies reviewed to date have assumed that the MMR vaccine has remained the same over time. The MMR vaccine in the US has had, at different times, three different mea-sles vaccine strains, three different mumps vaccine strains and two different rubella vaccine strains. At certain times, there were multiple versions of the MMR vaccine in use simultane-ously in the US.

Admittedly, these flaws do not prove that the MMR vaccine causes autism. What they do show is that the studies done so far do not exonerate the MMR vaccine.

While there is not yet a "smoking gun" pointing to the MMR vaccine, there are a large number of studies that indicate how it might potentially cause some of the problems seen in autism. The first of these are studies showing that the passive reporting of vaccine adverse effects grossly underestimates their incidence , . These studies undermine the comforting statistics proffered by the CDC and other public health organizations, since their vaccine safety statistics are based solely on such passive reporting.

When vaccine recipients are followed actively, the incidence of adverse effects rises by a factor of five or ten, even for serious complications such as meningitis and febrile convulsions. If these reactions, which occur soon after the vaccination and are not subtle, are under-reported, how much more so for something subtle in nature and delayed in onset, like autism?





[edit on 7-2-2006 by dirty_underground]

Dirty_underground:

If you take the time to look at the studies I linked to in my post a couple posts up, you'll see several of them, most notable the Japanese and Denmark studies, were performed over several years and took into account not only typical autism symptoms, but different neurologic disorders, some forms of cancers, and a form of bowel distress.

~MFP

Since we have no studies of links between vaccines and autism, I will throw these none existent links up here and hopefully I get a clue phone.

Study sees possible autism-vaccine link

A new study suggests a metabolic flaw in some children could trigger autism after exposure to mercury in vaccines.

The study, led by Dr. Jill James of the University of Arkansas, found 20 autistic children had less glutathione, an antioxidant that helps rid the body of toxic metals, when compared to a sample of healthy children.

Did that link just say STUDY, DR., and University. I think it just did. Opps the morons are at it again.. I wish these morons would just stay on conspiracy sites like ATS and stop infiltrating places like the University of AK and the US Congress and things like that. Its starting to make me wonder who is running this country.


Mercury, Vaccines and Medicine

Dr. Julio Licinio of UCLA, the editor of this medical journal said, "I believe this has enormous implications for public health. Showing that genetic background impacts on the outcome of thimerosal exposure is a major breakthrough." He added that the study clearly showed that there was a link between vaccines and autism "for some groups and not for others."

God damn it they said University and DR. again. WTF is up wit these people..

lets continue,

The FDA questioned thimerosal safety several times and decided in 1982 that it was "not safe for ‘over-the-counter’ topical use, because of its potential for cell damage." The FDA never did anything to question its use in childhood vaccines. Dr. Horning, Dr. Chian and Dr. Lipkin of the Department of Neurology and Pathology at Colombia University College of Physicians and Surgeons dismiss the CDC's conclusion that thimerosal is safe and has nothing to do with autism.

They state very clearly, "The developing brain is uniquely susceptible to the neurotoxic hazard posed by mercurials." They demonstrated that, "Autoimmune disease-sensitive SJL/J mice showed growth delay; reduced locomotion; exaggerated response to novelty; and densely packed hyperchronic hippocampal neurons with altered glutamate receptors and transporters."

The mice were exposed to thimerosal doses and timing equivalent to the pediatric immunization schedule. They found, "Profound behavioral and neuropathologic disturbances were observed after postnatal thimerosal in SJL/J mice, but not in strains without autoimmune sensitivity." This study, and many others that back up its findings, was not enough to prevent the IOM and the CDC from approving new vaccines for the childhood vaccine program that contain thimerosal.

OMFG there it is again, Now if I were to say this is a scientific study I would be off my rocker, how about you bsl4doc???

Cause you know what, since all these non scientific studies going on, who can tell what's real and what isn't??? You know isn't there are Universities involved and congressmen and well you know, we can never be safe with those morons at the helm, good thing for non scientific studies ehh bsl4doc??

and some more.

Mercury has been shown to induce a number of immunological and neurotoxic changes. Researchers at the University of California found that thimerosal:

1. Decreases mitochondrial membrane potential
2. Causes the release of both cytochrome c and apoptosis inducing factor (AIF) from the mitochondria.
3. Increases intracellular levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS).
4. Reduces intracellular concentration of glutathione (GSH). [Glutathione is an antioxidant that protects cells from oxidative stress-induced apoptosis.]

For more than 60 years, the medical community simply trusted the Eli Lilly and Co.'s assertion that thimerosal/merthiolate had a low potential toxicity if injected into humans. Based on unscientific and unethical studies done in the late 1920s, several generations of public health care officials, doctors and medical educators were duped into injecting the most toxic and lethal chemical known to man into infants.

Toxicity Revealed

Documents from the archives of Eli Lilly and Co., the original manufacturer of thimerosal, clearly demonstrates that the mercury-based vaccine preservative, implicated in a number of recent lawsuits as causing neurological injury to infants, was known as early as April 1930 to be dangerous.

In its apparent eagerness to promote and market the product, in September 1930, Eli Lilly secretly sponsored a "human toxicity" study on patients already known to be dying of meningococcal meningitis. Andrew Waters of the Dallas-based law firm of Waters & Kraus stated that, "Lilly then cited this study repeatedly for decades as proof that thimerosal was of low toxicity and harmless to humans. They never revealed to the scientific community or the public the highly questionable nature of the original research."

The tests were conducted in 1929 by a young researcher named K.C. Smithburn who injected 22 human subjects who were already dying with a 1 percent solution and then pronounced that all the patients were reported “without ill effect.”

That they all died was never mentioned. "It's apparent that Lilly didn't want to do the study themselves because it's apparent that there were enormous ethical problems with injecting people -- even people dying of meningitis -- with mercury," Waters said. "What Smithburn did was wrong, because he agreed to do the study for Lilly, and not only did he agree to do it, but he agreed to give them results that he knew were flawed."

There simply are no words that can be used to describe what Eli Lilly and Co., and then other pharmaceutical companies perpetuated through decades of use of a highly toxic compound like thimerosal. And there is no ethical explanation for current and former American administrations that have either tried or succeeded in providing protection to Lilly and other pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits for damages done to children from the use of their products.

I would quote the rest of this but I trust you will go to the link above and read the whole thing Mr Dr of Medicine.

When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data -- and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic.
by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

I wonder why this is? Could it be that this crap the put in kids is safe? or is it cause people are retarded and not seeing between the lines?

I would love to make simple small talk about no studies being made on the behalf of autism and vaccines but we get the general idea that its all a bunch of people who are bunch of morons doing these studies...... Kinda like people who make fake videos of UFO's right bsl4doc.

I may be unorthodoxed, but I can get my point across little sheep, just read and understand, unlike bsl4doc there.



[edit on 2/7/2006 by ThichHeaded]

By KDX175
So Answer this: What is the rate of Autism in Un-vaccinated American children?

Hey dude I couldnt find an autism connection but this should surfice for the time being till we find something on it.

Autism & Vaccines: A New Look At An Old Story

From the earliest days of pertussis vaccine use, it has been associated with development of asthma in previously healthy children (Koeng, 1953; Halpern & Halpern, 1955; Hopper, 1961; Hannik, 1969). In a 1997 issue of Epidemiology, New Zealand researchers reported that of 1,265 New Zealanders born in 1977, 23 received no childhood vaccinations and none suffered childhood asthma. Among the 1,242 who got DPT and polio shots, 23 percent later had episodes of asthma, 23 percent had asthma consultations and 30 percent had consultations for other allergic illness.

In a recent study (Hurwitz & Morgenstern, 2000) reviewing data from the National Center for Health Statistics from 1988 to 1994 and, comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated children, it was found that a child who received DPT or tetanus vaccination was 50 percent more likely to experience severe allergic reactions, more than 80 percent more likely to experience sinusitis and twice as likely to experience asthma as those children who were not vaccinated. The authors concluded that "asthma and other allergic hypersensitivity reactions and related symptoms may be caused, in part, by the delayed effects of DTP or tetanus vaccination."

Hmm, now let's read the WHOLE articles! =)

From your first article, which is NOT A STUDY, a few paragraphs down from your quote:

That theory -- discounted in a report earlier this year by the prestigious Institute of Medicine -- holds that the increasing number of childhood vaccinations during the 1990s exposed children to toxic amounts of mercury in the preservative, called thimerosal. The substance has since been removed from most vaccines given to children in the United States.

The IOM report said the evidence "favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism." It also recommended against further funding of research into that possibility.

Pediatrician Dr. Elizabeth Mumper, of Lynchburg, Va., is putting the study results to the test. Mumper, who is on the University of Virginia medical faculty, said treating autistic children with large doses of B vitamins and folinic acid is triggering increases in glutathione levels and "spontaneous reports of improvement" in mental and social functioning.

She acknowledged the reports are "anecdotal evidence"

Also, you're absolutely right, glutathione does play a part in defense against heavy metals. All this proves is that SOME heavy metal from SOME source may link to autism. This in no way links vaccinations to autism. Please read the entire article before you post it.

Your next source is from Dr. Mercola's personal site where he is trying to sell his fitness book. Wow! Great source! NOT!! It references a vague UCLA study but doesn't give any source material. Also, Mercola says the FDA has done nothing to reduce thimerosal when in fact it was the FDA that conducted the risk analysis and epidemiolgy studies and started the reduction of thimerosal in 1999. Amazing source there, Thicheaded.

Your last source is a story written by Robert Kennedy Jr. . I have a couple major problems with it. First of all, it cites the WHO vaccination specialists as part of the people who helped cover this up. Why would they want to do this, huh? They have nothing to gain from bad vaccines because they are outside the United States, were not the ones making the vaccines, are not to blame if companies gave them bad vaccines, and would not be liable in the lawsuits that followed.

All in all, shoddy work again. Show me real sources from real journals, not your Dr. Mercola crap. Sorry, try again.

~MFP

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Your next source is from Dr. Mercola's personal site where he is trying to sell his fitness book. Wow! Great source! NOT!! It references a vague UCLA study but doesn't give any source material. Also, Mercola says the FDA has done nothing to reduce thimerosal when in fact it was the FDA that conducted the risk analysis and epidemiolgy studies and started the reduction of thimerosal in 1999. Amazing source there, Thicheaded.


~MFP

Now the question is why are they reducing it?????

Cause its so damn healthy or what??

Originally posted by bsl4doc
This was in response to NJE's personal attack on me, saying that as a medical student, I'm not allowed to clarify a point when asked or misunderstood, which still doesn't make sense to me. The "aussie logic" part was a sarcastic remark which I pointed out as such in the next post when it was brought up. I'm sorry if sarcasm is hard to sense without facial gestures.

You then followed up with this:

Vaffanculo, Riley. Ciao,

Nope.. doesn't look like mere sarcasm there. I don't give a crap if mods have applauded you or how 'diplomatic' or 'professional' you insist you've been ..if I said this in english I would have recieved a warning or gotten banned. Congrats on finding a way to circumvent the censors.. I ignored it earlier because I didn't think you'd have the gall to start playing innocent after showing so much contempt and disrespect.

It's been several pages now and I still have not recieved an explanation as to why a significant number of autistics have mercury toxicity? Even a member here has an autistic child test positive for mercury.. are we suppose to just ignore this link?

[edit on 7-2-2006 by riley]

Originally posted by riley
It's been several pages now and I still have not recieved an explanation as to why a significant number of autistics have mercury toxicity? A member here had an autistic child test positive for mercury.. are we suppose to just ignore this link?

On a side note, my g/f wants to get my youngest tested also.. I already know the answer but we will see where it goes from there.

Thats right.. you're an italian...

That's why I didn't answer your questiong and why you got the response you did, Riley. You took my sarcastic remark to another user somehow as an insult, and then make baseless accusations towards me and generalize me as "an italian". So, no. I don't regret what I said.

~MFP

But the point being you arent answering the important question we wanna know. Stop pussyfooting around and just admit you dont know why.

Well, one study you (I believe it was you, may have been someone else, but it's on page 12) posted shows a very telling reason, ThicHeaded. Autistic children are shown to have lower levels of glutathione. This is an amino acid critical in heavy metal elimination. Now, don't you see it as fairly likely that children born with autism as a genetic birth defect, thus lacking glutathione, are more prone to mercury poisoning from the environment? I'll even go so far as to say these immune-compromised children may suffer more side effects from vaccinations. They key is that the glutathione deficiency pointed out in your study is GENETIC, not caused by vaccinations. This deficiency makes them more prone to heavy metal poisoning. This means the direct cause of autism may be glutathione deficiency.

So, basically, this is my opinion now that you posted that study:
1) Child is born with mutated allele causing glutathione deficiency
2) Glutathione is not produced as normal, and only half to 1/4 of the heavy metals that are normally eliminated are removed.
3) Vaccines with thimerosal can cause a build up of normally not so harmful ethyl-mercury. The small, safe increments found in vaccines are not removed from the glu-deficient child's body as normally expected. Since autism can't readily be diagnosed at birth or for a couple years, the vaccinations given at birth may build up due to lack of heavy metal removal.

So really, the vaccines are not tainted or anything like that. For 98-99% of the population, they are fine. For those with this genetic mutation, they are not. The same goes for diet coke. Those with phenylalanine deficient pathways (called phenylketonurics), diet coke can be harmful. For the other 99% of the population, it's not.

Ciao,
~MFP

Originally posted by bsl4doc

Some mods would seem to diagree

What does that mean? You feel because you have a Moderator 'supporting' your views, this make the anti immunisation contribution less worthy?...less credible??

Shame on you for relying on what "some mods" think. You think that this gives 'weight' to your argument?

Oh dear... clutching at straws now hey? If all else fails... you name drop???

So a Moderator has a superior view than everyone else here???

disgusting!