It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Children deliberately given virus

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 10:10 AM
link   
There are other reasons for susceptibility, besides genetic disposition, f-ex. nutrition works both ways, perhaps their diet leaves many enzymes intact which help mitigate toxicicity?

Not to mention that vaccines given to children who remember don't really count (too old), it's all about the first year and a half or so, the fact that autism started slowly in the 1930's speaks volumes, too, doesn't it? i'd expect that early vaccine adopters were usually wealthier than average, so looking in the other direction is indeed a good idea, as long as you've got the data, that is.




posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
There are other reasons for susceptibility, besides genetic disposition, f-ex. nutrition works both ways, perhaps their diet leaves many enzymes intact which help mitigate toxicicity?


Metallonein is the main enzyme responsible for mercury metabolism. I highly doubt the Japanese have higher metallonein production/kinetics than anyone else.


Not to mention that vaccines given to children who remember don't really count (too old), it's all about the first year and a half or so,


I'm sorry, I must have missed the source that mentioned mercury only affects the CNS during the first year and a half of life...

Oh wait, there wasn't one. Any affects seen due to mercury in vaccines should be present as long as there is brain tissue, which would be your entire life.


the fact that autism started slowly in the 1930's speaks volumes, too, doesn't it?


Polystyrene was invented in 1930. Perhaps that is causing autism. I have just as much evidence supporting that as you do vaccines. Let's see...polystyrene contains a trace amount of toxic chemicals...it's used in a lot of things...it's available to the general public....yup, it MUST be polystyrene /sarcasm

Mariella



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
[

Not to mention that vaccines given to children who remember don't really count (too old), it's all about the first year and a half or so,


I'm sorry, I must have missed the source that mentioned mercury only affects the CNS during the first year and a half of life...

Oh wait, there wasn't one. Any affects seen due to mercury in vaccines should be present as long as there is brain tissue, which would be your entire life.





Há Hà, very funny, there are many things i could say now, the reasonable thing is to state that body weight, (if administered shortly after birth) limited excretion capability, speed of growth and therefore uptake of material will play a role, to say the least. of course, interrupting a child's early development phase results has to result in different damage characterisitcs, it's like exposing an unfinished vs. finished building to an earthquake.

I don't know about polysterene or some other factor I'm overlooking, but the following question is very simple: if it started in the 1930s but really took off in the 1990s and seems to have an affinity to developed nations, while opt-outs like the amish remain unaffected, then what is it?


PS: if diet doesn't affect your capability to deal with poison then i don't know what does, ever heard of antidotes?



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance
Há Hà, very funny, there are many things i could say now, the reasonable thing is to state that body weight, (if administered shortly after birth) limited excretion capability, speed of growth and therefore uptake of material will play a role, to say the least. of course, interrupting a child's early development phase results has to result in different damage characterisitcs, it's like exposing an unfinished vs. finished building to an earthquake.


Infants excrete faster a nd more often than adults do, and they also have a higher metabolism. This would lead one to suggest that any mineral/vitamin/nutrient entering their body would be used/excreted faster and would need to be replenished, thus the reason infants and young children need such nutrient rich food so often. That doesn't really jive with your idea, but then neither does the rest of medical science.


I don't know about polysterene or some other factor I'm overlooking, but the following question is very simple: if it started in the 1930s but really took off in the 1990s and seems to have an affinity to developed nations, while opt-outs like the amish remain unaffected, then what is it?


Well, Ford Motors became the number one car manufacturer in 1927, and has steadily increased the number of cars sold throughout the world, mostly in developed nations, and the Amish don't drive cars...OH MY GOD! HENRY FORD IS THE CAUSE OF AUTISM!

Again, see how I can take two totally unrelated events that happen to fall in the same time frame and make it seem like one is the cause of the other? That's how many of us see your vaccine-autism link.



PS: if diet doesn't affect your capability to deal with poison then i don't know what does, ever heard of antidotes?


An antidote isn't a diet. A diet is a normal consumption schedule without too much variance in amount or nutrient type. An antidote is a substance consumed for medicinal purposes only when need arises, not on a daily basis.

Mariella

[edit on 6/30/2006 by bsl4doc]



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   
bsl4doc, I gave you far too much credit, you are making foolish arguements. You haven't learned anything in the entirety of the 2 threads.

Vaccines had as a preservative a known neurotoxin injeccted directly into a baby bloodstream without a bloodbrain barrier.
Proven by the EPA to be far, far over the safe limit. Nobody on either side of the issue anywhere is trying to argue that... except you...

Your rates for Mercury Poisoning from your "big thick medical tome", are they for inhalation? Skin contact? or Injections? Because..... theres a big difference.
And when was that book printed.. originally?



[edit on 30-6-2006 by MonoIonic_Gold]



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by MonoIonic_Gold
bsl4doc, I gave you far too much credit, you are making foolish arguements. You haven't learned anything in the entirety of the 2 threads.





Vaccines had as a preservative a known neurotoxin injeccted directly into a baby bloodstream without a bloodbrain barrier.


Infants do indeed have a blood/brain barrier. And thimerosal isn't a "known neurotoxin" It is not neurotropic, it is simply lipid soluble, which makes is why it can affect the CNS in high concentrations. The CNS tissue contains many tissues with high lipid concentration.


Proven by the EPA to be far, far over the safe limit.


And due to their recommendation, the compound has been removed from all but the flu vaccine. Soo...are you complaining that the government has taken a proactive step to help it's people when it made a mistake?


Nobody on either side of the issue anywhere is trying to argue that... except you...


I never said mercury OR thimerosal was good for. I'm saying the amount currentl found in flu vaccines is not harmful.


Your rates for Mercury Poisoning from your "big thick medical tome", are they for inhalation? Skin contact? or Injections? Because..... theres a big difference.


They rates are for blood and urine mercury level. No matter the mode of exposure, the critical step is circulation in the blood.


And when was that book printed.. originally?


2004.

Mariella



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc

I never said mercury OR thimerosal was good for. I'm saying the amount currentl found in flu vaccines is not harmful.


Why do most of the Flu Vaccines still have the large doses of Thimerosal?
I would argue that the amount in them, even if the number is less than the max exposure, is still too much.

What is this strange logic that something toxic is ok as long as it isn't above some imaginary threshold in a book?
This threshold could be very different for different people.

Some people are more sensitive than others based on genetics.
You have to account for those people.

Like the contact lense solutions, the eye washes, the dog vaccines, the old teething powders, the pre-2001 childhood vaccines, they all have removed or reduced significantly the Thimerosal content, some of them years and years ago.

Why shouldn't the flu vaccines follow?





[edit on 30-6-2006 by MonoIonic_Gold]


Dae

posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by MonoIonic_Gold
What is this strange logic that something toxic is ok as long as it isn't above some imaginary threshold in a book?
This threshold could be very different for different people.

Some people are more sensitive than others based on genetics.
You have to account for those people.


Yes. Its an absolute disgrace when the medical profession uses adult males to set a standard for safe limits. Adult males are different from adult females and pregnant adult females are different again. You also have pre verses post menopausal females. Then of course you have a newborn which is physiologically different from a 10 year old.

But they know that right?



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Infants excrete faster a nd more often than adults do, and they also have a higher metabolism. This would lead one to suggest that any mineral/vitamin/nutrient entering their body would be used/excreted faster and would need to be replenished, thus the reason infants and young children need such nutrient rich food so often. That doesn't really jive with your idea, but then neither does the rest of medical science.



They also absorb faster and this includes toxins. HBV vaccine was /is adimisted within the first few hours after birth, do you believe a child is born fully acclimatized? i can't believe you're so dense, think about the tests (blood levels), the mechanism of toxicity (absorbed by neural tissue in this case) and how they might correlate but not necessarily be fully indicative. i mean it's not like the world revolves around lab tests, does it? i hope i'm wrong, but your previous comment about Metallothionein also strikes me as superficial, just because there's a compound which transports (heavy) metals, doesn't mean there aren't any other factors to be considered, which may influence cellular absorbtion patterns or resistance. besides, metallothionein starts out with a zinc ion, doesn't it? what about a zink deficiency, then? is that genetic, too? or are you going to tell me that nobody suffers from such a deficiency or any other which may indirectly affect zinc levels or its use in the body or the formation of the needed metalloprotein?


Finally, (as many others have said already) why are people setting thresholds for methylmercury exposure, when a much more toxic compound used parenterally and in similar quantities is supposedly not a problem?




Well, Ford Motors became the number one car manufacturer in 1927, and has steadily increased the number of cars sold throughout the world, mostly in developed nations, and the Amish don't drive cars...OH MY GOD! HENRY FORD IS THE CAUSE OF AUTISM!


the # of cars does not follow the trend, because there was no significant (say 100 fold) increase in car usage during the 90s. btw.,hyperbole doesn't invalidate our observations. sure, i may be wrong, but what we see is imho, severely incriminating, especially because next to nothing is being done to solve the investigate now well known anomalies.


PS: if diet doesn't affect your capability to deal with poison then i don't know what does, ever heard of antidotes?


An antidote isn't a diet. A diet is a normal consumption schedule without too much variance in amount or nutrient type. An antidote is a substance consumed for medicinal purposes only when need arises, not on a daily basis.


so, all that talk about antioxidants is a marketing sham, cute... btw. i know they aren't strictly antidotes, but the effect is the same it's simply less pronounced.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I see you took a warning ThickHeaded.


MODERATORS and good people in these medical threads:

Most of us discuss medical issues with a good deal of good faith. Such is NOT the case with our good doctor.


As participants in these threads, you NEED to be consciously aware of what here true purpose here seems to be based on her behavior... More important NOT rise to her CONSTANT BAITING.

Anybody that has any real concern for health issues basically needs to stay away from our good resident doctor. All she wants to do is get you so pissed off, you'll quit or get wracked up by the moderators when you explode...


She's is purely here as a disinformation agent. And even though she is basically a one trick pony, to the unwary her tactics of ODO (obstruct+disrupt+obfuscate) can be quite upsetting.

She makes NO ATTEMPTS WHATSOEVER to discuss any issue in good faith.

It is supremely unfortunate that ATS is allowing her to victimize the unsuspecting.

It is quite sad that she wracked up yet another victim in ThickHeaded.

How about a little relief guys?

I'll get off my soapbox now... And basically do the only thing a good participant on the ATS boards, basically ignore our good doctor.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by golemina
I see you took a warning ThickHeaded.


MODERATORS and good people in these medical threads:

Most of us discuss medical issues with a good deal of good faith. Such is NOT the case with our good doctor.


As participants in these threads, you NEED to be consciously aware of what here true purpose here seems to be based on her behavior... More important NOT rise to her CONSTANT BAITING.

Indeed.. I'm not always as diplomatic as I could be but I'm kind of disapointed that he's recieved a warning when she was not given one when she told me to 'get f-' in italian. It wasn't even edited to my knowledge.. instead a general warning was given for people to behave themselves. I didn't reply to her initial interrogation demanding 'proof' of an autism epidemic. It's an accepted fact in the medical community and she would know this if she were in it.. most GPs will freely admit it's an epidemic yet she demanded I jump through hoops justifying a personal opinion. IMO it was meant to antagonise me as she knows I'd already written several posts on this issue on another thread and I wasn't going to repeat myself on cue as though I hadn't already put the effort in.

I have an adult brother who 'changed' [as in the same day] after vaccinations.. and it's implied that I would be a bad parent for having concerns about the risks of vaccines on my own kids?!

Hmm.
Which one should I choose?:

-Child getting sick for a while.
-Child growing up and spending whole life in institutions because he/she was one of those 'unlucky' ones that has a bad reaction. 'Oops sorry these thing happen but it's for the greater good of society so can you just pretend it's a co-incidence so we don't have pandemics? We would prefer not havng to pour money into research to protect a minority.. it's not cost effective.'

IMO my genes are suseptable to these 'reactions'. Does the medical community really know that much about the immune systems of babies and the way their brains develop? NO.. they're intent on claiming that vaccines don't cause autism yet they don't know what does and admit to this ignorance. So how then can they confidently exclude it from the list of possible causes? They can't.

What is wrong with me trying to be on the safe side and wait till their older before bombarding their immune sytem with diseases that they didn't naturally catch? What is wrong with me waiting till I at least finnish breastfeeding? My immunity should cover us both shouldn't it? Why are they given so early when nature has already provided adequate protection for babies anyway? Why should they have three diseases in one jab? Why can't they be seperated by a month or two? Is this meant to make things easier on my child or is it a simple matter of not wasting the doctor's time? It sounds overly rushed and reminds me of cattle. There is even a vaccine for chicken pox now.. I know people can have problems when they're older but I recovered from it okay. Is that going to be one of the vaccinations parents are going to be bullied into giving their kids as well?



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley

IMO my genes are suseptable to these 'reactions'.



Genes, you know i'd bet my hat that, before helicobacter pylori was isolated as the cause of stomach ulcers, mainstream consenus was that there's a genetic component to it...

It's imho one of those unlucky carry-overs from the 1930s, when eugenics was still popular around the world. It's of course it had 'scientific' backing, that people don't just change because it's unpopular and that the higher (read hierachical and administrative) positions in any field are held by the same people for ages with predictable consequences.


Genetic disposition, like Irreversibility, is in the overwhelming number of cases an excuse when they don't know and probably don't want to know.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   


Infants excrete faster and more often than adults do, and they also have a higher metabolism. This would lead one to suggest that any mineral/vitamin/nutrient entering their body would be used/excreted faster and would need to be replenished, thus the reason infants and young children need such nutrient rich food so often. That doesn't really jive with your idea, but then neither does the rest of medical science.



bsl4doc.....I am shocked. Do you even know what TOXIC means? It doesn't matter how often an infant EXCRETES....the body has a difficult time ridding itself of toxins....or else they wouldn't be toxins. Like Acetaminophen (aka Tylenol)...is highly toxic and gets trapped in the liver (and damages it)....mixed with alcohol it's even worse.

Infants excrete faster? That's your argument?

Again bsl4doc....I have to ask....do you even understand the meaning of the word TOXIC??



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   
I will give you people a bit of history on Myself and Autism.

Mercury Is Good For Your Children
9/24/2004

This was my 1st post on anything remotely to do with Autism, then I didn't have any idea wtf I was talking about. The people named RedBallon on there ripped me a new one cause I really didn't have much to say on that subject at that time.

I did however start learning after kdx175 Came to my rescue and saved my ass with a raping from this RedBallon. He gave a 1st hand exp on his account with Autism and his kid.

I in the coming years will be subjected to the same thing KDX was facing then. I however have learned alot of what autism, mercury shots and such have to do with each other. I can honestly say that Autism is a bigger problem than most of us think.

According to some place we spend about 9 billion on treating autism in the post yr or so.

In 10 yrs its supposed to climb into around 25 billion.

Anyway my personal history. I have been learning that mercury and autism are link, My son who was diagnosed with autism a few months back was going to get the last of his mercury shots. I don't talk about this with my g/f cause every time we talk about it this conversation ends in a big fight. Anyway I told her when she took him to the doc to do what she felt was right. In the end she got him the shots and now he has autism.


To that Italian Doctor or supposed or whatever the hell you wanna call them. I do not take back anything I said about you, You are the most stupidest people I have ever met in my Life. In this thread and the past thread here about Childhood Vaccinations if you can't get a clue on 405 post most which contain excellent information then stfu and gtfo because there is no helping someone who don't open their mind and accept that things aren't always as they seem.

And to golemina and riley, Thanks for backing me up on that.

Unfortunately some people come into this area as parents who know the BS that mercury shots/autism is. I will take this personally every time because people like bsl4doc are to god damn stupid or something to even act something as simple at people to don't take mercury shots get one and say 1 million kids with autism to the US which is 1 and 166.. what the hell is there to figure out, its not rocket science... A Monkey can figure it out, a man made program can figure it out, A 1st grader can figure out that the stats aren't right.

Anyway this is all I have to say........... I am sorry if I pissed anyone off except bsl4doc for all I can they can well Take a really long walk off a very short pier.

I would guess to get another warn for this... But I am talking from personal exp, and all bsl4doc is doing is sh*tting on the fact of what I live thru everyday, I see the effects of Mercury shots everyday................................ well this is all I have to say...



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dae

Originally posted by MonoIonic_Gold
What is this strange logic that something toxic is ok as long as it isn't above some imaginary threshold in a book?
This threshold could be very different for different people.

Some people are more sensitive than others based on genetics.
You have to account for those people.


Yes. Its an absolute disgrace when the medical profession uses adult males to set a standard for safe limits. Adult males are different from adult females and pregnant adult females are different again. You also have pre verses post menopausal females. Then of course you have a newborn which is physiologically different from a 10 year old.

But they know that right?


I don't think that is anything to be griping about really, the give specific stats on it.

An Average 200 LB Man, so in that we can only surmise that if its not good for someone who is 200 lbs then we know for damn sure in some cases it might even kill a newborn child, which probably has happen in some cases.

They do however tell woman not to eat tuna because of high levels of Mercury.. I can say the same here why is it only women and not men included in this...

See manks no sense to fight about whatever in this.. fact remains Mercury shots suck, they cause autism and we need to do something about it.

[edit on 7/9/2006 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 02:32 AM
link   
the tuna is a red herring, it allows officials and insurance compamies to blame the victim, as usual.


Thiomersal is many times more dangerous than anorganic mercury and methylmercury (more complex compound, if broken up - boom, ethylmercury [~4 times as toxic as methyl..] right in the middle), which is bad enough, see

commons.ucalgary.ca...


PS: sorry to hear about your first hand experience, ThichHead it's a curse that you can't talk about his to anyne until it's too late.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Strayed from news topic, and it's getting personal. Again.

Thread closed.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join