Childhood Vaccinations??

page: 15
4
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by dirty_underground
Maybe I am contradicting myself here (and misunderstanding some of the others), but I believe our real concern here is the Thimerosal being added and the mercury poisoning being obtained from it.


Hey DU

It sort of seems to go on and off topic! I agree that it was about 75% thiomersal until about Page 9/10 when all hell broke loose.
And then MMR usually gets brought up, just to confuse everyone some more.



You yourself had your own child vaccinated Thimerosal free, you must see there being some problem with it (if this was for another reason, please clarify).


I just *couldn't see the point*, when there were equally effective free versions out there. We did a lot of research on Pubmed before he was born, and I guess you could say I was operating under a 'precautionary principle'. I think good epidemiology shows that it is safe on the *vast majority* of the population.

probably safe

This is all culled from the pubmed stuff on page 9/10 of this thread - there seems to be a scientific consensus that it is safe. Probably.

The only thing I worry about is that *big* studies could maybe 'average out' fine points/data, and there is maybe some evidence about low birthweight children being more sensitive; also the methionine synthetase thing and ?possible? inhbition of this and an effect on neurological development.

So yes - I'd be a hypocrite if I said I was full-on in favour of thiomersal.

But I *would* like the anti-people to produce a good population study showing a link between ASD and any TM-containing vaccine of their choice. I've seen various extracts from books, anecdotes etc, but not a single study.

I could have missed this - the thread is huge, but I've tried to read every link posted. Again, if I have missed it, please U2U me the link and I'd be very grateful.



Otherwise I would like to see a study where it shows Thimerosal is SAFE.


Probably the one I posted above, there are a few others on page 9/10 of this thread.



Sure the vaccinations themselves may be safe and prevent harmful diseases, but I'm sure most everyone on this thread is concerned with the "accused" mercury poisoning being recieved by the Thimerosal. I know that they have passed an ACT to remove this from vaccines, but many still contain the preservative. This continues to be a problem for those parents who are not aware of the dangers.


I don't think that anyone really would have a problem with TM being eliminated from vaccines - in the West, it's probably not needed any more - as far as I can make out, it was used because it was/is cheap and effective. And like I said, a precautionary principle is just fine by me.

The only thing that I get slightly concerned about (as FredT has mentioned a few times, with pictures of iron lungs etc), is that we are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here - we are starting to lose 'race memory' of just how bad infectious disease was before vaccination, and I get slightly irritated when I read some wild claims (this isn't a dig about TM, but rather some of the stuff that was cut and pasted en masse around 10/11 of this thread) about vaccination in general.

I think all some of the 'pro' camp ask is that claims are backed with good evidence - and that probably means a population study showing a link between TM and ASD.






Another one from the CDC (I will post my reference link at the end of my post) which CONFIRMS a LINK between MERCURY CONTAINING VACCINES AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS!!!!


I read the link and I see what was said by the CDC and AAP, my only beef would it would be that this appears to be an injury claims lawyer writing that this is what the CDC and AAP have said. And I don't trust any damn lawyer to interpret any damn paper impartially.


I don't think he has linked to the articles so I can't comment on them - although I agree that governments are eliminating TM from vaccines. But is this just the use of precautionary principle now that there are other preservatives available?




As I'm sure this site has already been posted within this thread, I found it to be VERY informative and they aren't trying to sell you anything. But here is the link again

Thimerosal News



I think he's a lawyer because the 'contact us' thing goes to a stuff about a lawsuit.


I'm sure this link will not qualify as being GOOD ENOUGH evidence, biased, or otherwise "anecdotal" but seeing as how I saw the government affiliated CDC, FDA, AAP, I thought this MIGHT be sufficient in atleast making a point on our part of the issue.


As I said, I'm just a little dubious that the claim has been made without giving the articles directly. If you could bring up the CDC, FDA, AAP articles I'd be very grateful, because I could well have missed them due to the size of this thread.



****Also MMR is not listed as containing Thimerosal, we have stated that, yet we still seem to be related back to studies showing MMR vaccine statistics.**


Yup - not arguing with you about that, but again, vaccines and thiomersal both seem to get lumped together in this argument - despite attempts to keep them apart.

Have a good night!
TD




posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
Hey Riley

Hello TaupeDragon.


I did read the link - it was a rebuttal written by someone who tests for mercury toxicity,

Among other things. I also asked my doctor, the diagnostic place handeling my blood tests if what 'quackwatch' said was correct and my response from both was "If the tests were not reliable they would not be used."

but to be fair, Quackwatch is listed at the top of this forum section as being a useful information source. I don't think it completely invalidates the points raised in the original article.

It does invalidate them [like the last page you submitted from there which cited a study of the WRONG age group of children] and IMO should be removed from ATS as a credible source of information. This place is meant to deny ignorance and should not promote sites that have a mixture of half truths, facts and fiction.. 'quackwatch' has proven itself to be innacurate and therefore not in keeping with what I understand to be the philosphy of ATS. I guess you could always argue the article I provided but I don't like your chances considering they actually work in the field in question. I'm also annoyed at Quackwatch as they're pretending that they are working for the common good yet a discouraging parents of autistics from getting them tested by calling it pointless. What could this lead to? Parents assuming their kids have mercury poisoning anyway and getting them treated for it with potentially deadly drugs without medical supervision.

I think all I was really asking for was a level playing field. PLEASE - U2U me with a population study supporting an anti-vacccination viewpoint - I can't see any this thread, although it's getting so big I could well have missed it.

I'm fairly certain adequate studies/comparisons have already been provided and have yet to be fully addressed. Thimerosal is not safe, this is why it was recommended for removal.. even the vaccination sites do not dispute this.

BSL,

I think children born with glutathione deificiencies may very well be more vulnerable to the ethyl mercury in vaccines, but it is not enough to cause neurologic disorders. When compounded with environmental heavy metals, maybe.

I suspect these are the kids that are testing positive to mercury poisoning; their bodies are not properly equipped to filter it out. They have enough in their sytems to test positive.. so why wouldn't this be enough to cause neurological disorders/damage? Their brains are at a very crucial stage of development.. that is why they are 'vulnerable'. Even the adolescent brain is suseptable to schitzophrenia and bipolar if they ingest the wrong things.. why would you assume a baby's brain can cope with unsafe levels of heavy metals?



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Hey Riley

I've lost your post/link from the guy rebutting the Quackwatch article on mercury testing!
Or at least I can't find it in the 14 pages here! This is what happens when threads get too long! Could you repost it or U2U me it?


Thanks - have a good evening!

TD



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Hello Dirty Underground

Just found the CDC site about thiomersal here:

www.cdc.gov...


and they don't seem *that* concerned about TM, at least IMO. I wonder if the site you linked to/quoted used anything from here when they were talking about the CDC and thiomersal?


Riley

If you hated the Quackwatch link, just get a look at this one


autism-watch.org...


Oh well. My brain hurts. Goodnight!


TD




[edit on 11-2-2006 by TaupeDragon]



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   
TaupeDragon

You know I hate to admit it, but you maybe right about the site I linked to. I have sent a letter to the CDC to inform them of the claim and to ask them to verify or deny it, and if they do verify the claim I asked for reports from them directly. I doubt I'll find out any info that way, but you never know.

I am still thumbing through the many pages of reports listed on the *credited* sites and should have some more postings (so long as I can keep it all organized).




[edit on 11-2-2006 by dirty_underground]



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Byrd


Why aren't the children of people who eat fish having a high rate of autism? Why don't countries where the principle protein source is fish have a high rate of autism?


I wasn't going to keep posting this thread, because my angle is kind of off topic and people were getting nasty anyway, but the question you posed drew me back.

Mercury can be metabolized and eliminated in heroic quantities by healthy individuals, right?

Autism is predicted by an inability to metabolize mercury, right?

Countries with a history of eating shellfish and ocean fish high in mercury would presumably be less likely to produce people unaccustomed to processing the toxic metal. After all, if their ancestors retained mercury in an environment where shellfish and predatory ocean fish constitute a significant portion of the diet, there wouldn't be any descendants to speak of, right?

I would wager that native Americans who can trace their lineage to a coastal tribe suffer markedly fewer cases of autism than those who descended form the plains dwellers - the latter group faced no evolutionary pressure to de-select poor mercury metabolism, since a child with poor mercury metabolism could probably live a normal life and breed as long as their diet was low in mercury. A coastal tribe would have more incidents because of their diet, but each successive generation would be less likely to exhibit mercury intolerance, right?

The Japanese have a diet very high in Mercury, but their diet hasn't changed a great deal over the course of history, so they've been under constant, steady pressure to develop a metabolism capable of handling the load.

We know diet plays a huge role in preventing illness, and diet in synch with our genetic predispositions seems to be a safe bet for staying healthy. I'm thinking of the Irish right now. Something like 10% of America is Irish, right? On the order of 30 million people I think.

They come from a tradition of Potassium rich potatoes, and small game, pheasants and hares and such - their body chemistry is presumably geared accordingly. Now, the Irish living in America have diets dangerously low in potassium, but dangerously high in sodium (and mercury). Is it any wonder heart disease and high blood pressure are serious problems in that group?

Anyway, just some thoughts on the issue you raised with the Japanese diet.



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   

BSL,
quote: I think children born with glutathione deificiencies may very well be more vulnerable to the ethyl mercury in vaccines, but it is not enough to cause neurologic disorders. When compounded with environmental heavy metals, maybe.

I suspect these are the kids that are testing positive to mercury poisoning; their bodies are not properly equipped to filter it out. They have enough in their sytems to test positive.. so why wouldn't this be enough to cause neurological disorders/damage? Their brains are at a very crucial stage of development.. that is why they are 'vulnerable'. Even the adolescent brain is suseptable to schitzophrenia and bipolar if they ingest the wrong things.. why would you assume a baby's brain can cope with unsafe levels of heavy metals?


Hey, sorry if my wording may have been a bit weird, it can do that at times. I wasn't trying to say children who test as having large amounts of mercury can't tie that to neurologic disorders. What I was was saying was that these high levels may possibly be due to glutathione deficiencies This could explain why only 3-6 children per 1000 develop autism. That sounds like a good rate for a genetic glutathione deficiency, and thus an inability to bind mercury to urea.

~MFP



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Hey, sorry if my wording may have been a bit weird, it can do that at times. I wasn't trying to say children who test as having large amounts of mercury can't tie that to neurologic disorders. What I was was saying was that these high levels may possibly be due to glutathione deficiencies This could explain why only 3-6 children per 1000 develop autism.

We agree?!

The theory is that those deficiencies cause the membranes in the body [specifically the blood/brain barrier in the case of autism] to become weakened and vulnerable to damage [and continued] while developing. This would account as to why there has been such jump in diagnosis from apx 1 in ten thousand 15 years ago [earlier vaccinations now and much more toxins overall in the enviroment] and why most kids seem relatively uneffected. No doubt there are varying degrees of 'toxin immunity' in everybody and autism may be an extreme result while other things manifest as asthma and other auto immune diseases like lupus.

[edit on 11-2-2006 by riley]



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Byrd

[quot]
Autism is predicted by an inability to metabolize mercury, right?


Hey WyrdeOne

I don't think anyone really knows what causes autism - genetics, enviroment. One web site has even postulated congental rubella! Which will probably go down well.


autism hypotheses

Not sure if it references itself, but it's a good read.


Countries with a history of eating shellfish and ocean fish high in mercury would presumably be less likely to produce people unaccustomed to processing the toxic metal. After all, if their ancestors retained mercury in an environment where shellfish and predatory ocean fish constitute a significant portion of the diet, there wouldn't be any descendants to speak of, right?


I thought that the Japanese-Mercury thing was due to pollution due to industrialisation, rather than seafood per se, although I've got to confess it is not something I am an expert on.

mercury cycle and diet

Certainly the *big* posioning was in Tokyo Bay in the 50's, right?

Would this be enough time to cause a 'genetic resistance'?

The Brits and Icelanders certainly fish a lot for cod, and know the North Sea is polluted now, but there's no history of mercury poisoning amongst us historically


I would wager that native Americans who can trace their lineage to a coastal tribe suffer markedly fewer cases of autism than those who descended form the plains dwellers - the latter group faced no evolutionary pressure to de-select poor mercury metabolism, since a child with poor mercury metabolism could probably live a normal life and breed as long as their diet was low in mercury. A coastal tribe would have more incidents because of their diet, but each successive generation would be less likely to exhibit mercury intolerance, right?


It's a very interesting notion, but *I* would wager there's no study supporting it.


I also reckon that the mercury contamination 'evolutionary pressure thing' wouldn't have kicked in until we started industrialising and polluting properly. Because at *natural* levels, we appear to cope with trace levels OK.



We know diet plays a huge role in preventing illness, and diet in synch with our genetic predispositions seems to be a safe bet for staying healthy. I'm thinking of the Irish right now. Something like 10% of America is Irish, right? On the order of 30 million people I think.

They come from a tradition of Potassium rich potatoes, and small game, pheasants and hares and such - their body chemistry is presumably geared accordingly. Now, the Irish living in America have diets dangerously low in potassium, but dangerously high in sodium (and mercury). Is it any wonder heart disease and high blood pressure are serious problems in that group?


All I know is....enviroment plays a huge role.

Those crazy Japanese have massively low rates of heart disease in Japan, probably because of diet, but move them over to North America and introduce to them to Ronald McDonald, and....

just stay in japan

Although I think there is maybe more to it than diet alone. BSL Doc will probably know about it than me!

Time to walk the dog!

TD

[edit on 11-2-2006 by TaupeDragon]



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 08:31 AM
link   

We agree?!


It would seem that way. Shocking, I know, hehe.


The theory is that those deficiencies cause the membranes in the body [specifically the blood/brain barrier in the case of autism] to become weakened and vulnerable to damage [and continued] while developing. This would account as to why there has been such jump in diagnosis from apx 1 in ten thousand 15 years ago [earlier vaccinations now and much more toxins overall in the enviroment] and why most kids seem relatively uneffected. No doubt there are varying degrees of 'toxin immunity' in everybody and autism may be an extreme result while other things manifest as asthma and other auto immune diseases like lupus.


Eh, that's one theory. That's not the exact deficiency I'm thinking of, however. Glutathione plays a role in helping mercury bind to urea and fecal matter. Although, I suppose it could play a role in formation of certain neural tissues. It's a fairly commonly occuring amino acid. I'll have to look into this.

As to your comments on toxin immunity, I think you're dead on and we agree completely. These genetic deficiencies may lead to an inability to process heavy metals to varying degrees, thus aiding in creating certain conditions in the human body. This mechanism can be seen in various other pathogens in the human body.

~MFP



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Eh, that's one theory. That's not the exact deficiency I'm thinking of, however. Glutathione plays a role in helping mercury bind to urea and fecal matter.

Yes.. so it can be expelled from the body. I think that has something to do with the small intestines.. [something to do with the production of bicarbonate?] if mercury can't be adequately filtered what I mentioned earlier would compound the problem [even though it's connected] and it therefore stays in the body.

Although, I suppose it could play a role in formation of certain neural tissues. It's a fairly commonly occuring amino acid. I'll have to look into this.

I've been have been look into tryptophan of late as well.. I can't exactly explain why this interests me but you could add it into your cross referencing and hopefully get more of an idea of what I'm getting at.

These genetic deficiencies may lead to an inability to process heavy metals to varying degrees, thus aiding in creating certain conditions in the human body. This mechanism can be seen in various other pathogens in the human body.

Well said.



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
Riley

If you hated the Quackwatch link, just get a look at this one


autism-watch.org...

Blimey.. he certainly has an axe to grind. I have more of an idea of where he's coming from now.. there are alot of frauds who are selling hope. There have also been alot of 'legit' doctors selling bull.. it's difficult to see who knows what they're talking about as there's only a very small amount known about autism so it's kind of a level playing field 'professionally'. Usually parents know as much than the doctors.. and of course they have more motivation to find answers.. making them vulnerable to con-artists.

That site you requested:

www.traceelements.com...

[edit on 11-2-2006 by riley]



posted on Feb, 11 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
Blimey.. he certainly has an axe to grind. I have more of an idea of where he's coming from now.. there are alot of frauds who are selling hope. There have also been alot of 'legit' doctors selling bull.. it's difficult to see who knows what they're talking about as there's only a very small amount known about autism so it's kind of a level playing field 'professionally'. Usually parents know as much than the doctors.. and of course they have more motivation to find answers.. making them vulnerable to con-artists.

That site you requested:

www.traceelements.com...


Thanks for the link Riley - I'm going to be sitting on a beach smoking Cohibas and knocking back Cuba Libres for a little while (precautionary principle my ass), and don't intend to get anywhere near a computer until at least the 20 of February.

By which time this thread will no doubt be 50 pages and/or will have been locked by Thomas Crowne.


But I will read it when I get back and will U2U if this topic has gone the way of the dinosaurs. Or possibly even Project Serpo.

Cheers and have fun!

TD

[edit on 11-2-2006 by TaupeDragon]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   
yanno
if we are going to question the integrity of the Doc who released info without the approval of the ethic's committee well I think its best to consider everything on the subject.

so the guy went off and did what he did without approval...

reminds me of the woman translating in the Ukraine elections...what a brave woman...and what a brave Doctor to challenge the lies of the medical profession.





posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Hi everyone!

It's been a long time. My new baby is now four months old and has had both sets of shots. The first set seemed to go just fine. The second set however, had some drawbacks. He seemed to regress with his developmental skills he had mastered (rolling over, grabbing objects, etc...) he also seemed to be very lethargic (even after 2 weeks had past). He also seemed to have developed a "tic" so we scheduled a visit to the doc, to which he said everything was normal not to worry. Sometimes babies loose skills they have developed but that he should get them back. Has anyone ever heard of this happening and is it normal? Also, what about the tic, it's been 3 weeks and the tic is still there. I am concerned about this issue. Also, just a question for the docs (and anyone else who might actually know the answer to this). Let's say you never received any shots from your childhood (and escaped the dreaded diseases that they protect us from), then as you got into adolescent or adulthood decided to get the vaccinations. Would that work, and how would that go.



posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 03:30 AM
link   
I found these videos and dug up this thread to post this on. I thought this to be a relevent update. This a very informative video and I encourage everyone to watch this.

Mercury, Autism and the Global Vaccine Agenda


Also check out,

Vaccination-The Hidden Truth



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I know I haven't posted in a couple of years because I have now have two children and they keep me pretty busy when I get home from work. One of my children was recently diagnosed with PDD and my wife and I think that it was the ethyl mercury in the vaccinations was the cause.

Here is why:

EPA says that the allowable limit is .1 mcg of mercury per kilogram of weight. if a child is 20 pounds when they receive the second round of vaccinations, their safe dosage would be .8 mcg of mercury.

If the vaccine has 25 mcg of mercury on the dosage, that means that the child just received a dose 35 times the safe limit.

Sadly, when a child goes into get vaccinated during the second round, they will get more than one vaccination. Let's theorize that only three of the vaccinations have 25 mcg of thimerosal (ethyl mercury). That means that the dosage is now 75 mcg of ethyl mercury and has just received 93 times the safe dosage. Ask yourself how many vaccinations a child gets when they go to the doctor. My son just received 15 in one day including the flu vaccine which does indeed contain 25mcg thimerosal.

I fail to understand how anyone could be arguing about whether or not thimerosal is causing problems. The proof is in front of everyone and no one wants to pay attention. They get caught up in the small details which mean nothing.

The mercury dosage is actually higher with newborn children and first round vaccinations due to their weight, but I am sure you get the point.

Fact:
mercury is a neurotoxin.

Fact:
thimerosal contains mercury (most vaccines with thimerosal contain 25 mcg)

Fact:
tuna contains approx 20 mcg per 6oz can

Fact:
FDA/EPA/CDC states that pregnant women, women who are nursing, and children should not eat tuna due to mercury toxicity. They also state that mercury poisoning causes language and information processing disorders.

Why then is it okay to inject 25mcg mercury into an infants blood when using the same guidelines, that same infant shouldn't eat 20 mcg found in tuna?

How do the facts change when it is in a vaccine? How do the facts change when someone says that you should vaccinate your kids to keep them safe? how do the facts change when the pediatrician says that vaccinations are safe because it has the same amount of mercury as a can of tuna? Well, my child isn't supposed to eat tuna because of the mercury.

I feel I have let my children down by not protecting them from a government and policies gone amok. I should have done the math myself and just said no. I will never forgive myself for letting this happen.

Sadly, it is too late to prevent this for my children, but by me putting this on here, hopefully it will not be too late for YOUR children.

This is not rocket science. This is basic math and logic.

Show me one parent who would be willing to take a syringe of 25 mcg of mercury and inject it into their child and I will show you a parent who doesn't care about their child. The argument vanishes when you state it this way.

Remove the mercury from the vaccines. Destroy the vaccine stockpiles which contain it. Stop arguing for proof that mercury causes autism. Sure it may, but the point is that we should stop injecting children with mercury at levels way beyond what is considered safe.

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!

If you are a pediatrician, GP, RN, red cross worker...

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!

Wake Up! I will repeat it again for those who may not have gotten the point:

STOP INJECTING CHILDREN WITH MERCURY!





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join