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.

 

Study: Vaccines with Thimerosal not tied to brain problems

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Can you please explain...


Originally posted by annestacey
Even today, diseases like cancer can be treated and easily prevented using natural foods and herbs, but the FDA will deny it because their money is made by people being sick, not well.


How the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) "makes" money period, much less by people being sick?



The FDA and pharma companies make money from people being sick because they sell prescription drugs at a 500,000% markup. That's why they push drugs instead of healing foods and herbs.

Do your own research: www.newstarget.com...




posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Oh, no...


Originally posted by annestacey
The FDA and pharma companies make money from people being sick because they sell prescription drugs at a 500,000% markup. That's why they push drugs instead of healing foods and herbs.


There will be no bait and switch, you specifically said the FDA... No mention of "big pharma" (we can move on to that later) Once again, how does the FDA "make" money? What is the financial mechanism? How does a government agency that has a budget provided by Congress generate income? What are they "selling?" Where does the money go? As a taxpayer, where is my dividend? You made the claim... Don't tell me to go do the research.

Thanks.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
One of my children died of leukemia,


I am very sorry for your loss. I recently lost both a mother and a mother in law to AML.

But if you could have prevented this by a simply vaccination whould you have done so? I would not have hesatated for even a fraction of a second.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
But if you could have prevented this by a simply vaccination whould you have done so? I would not have hesatated for even a fraction of a second.


You have a confidence in the vaccines that I'm afraid I cannot muster. If I could be certain that the vaccine was as safe as possible given the nature of vaccines, I would certainly have made use of it to save my child -- but to save a child and visit it with other problems because of a vaccine improperly conceived and prepared -- that would have been a different kind of horror that is beyond my imagining.

Finally, please accept my condolences on the deaths of your loved ones. When death comes in such a way we would gladly tear out our own hearts if it could spare them suffering and even death itself.

I think in the end you and I are both expressing convictions based out of love -- love for our own and love for our neighbours. We may have very different conclusions, but I honour your efforts in this debate.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 04:02 AM
link   
Another unbiased study.. sure.. Nice....

have a look.. You knew sooner or later I would show my face in here..


Google Video Link


This pretty much covers what you don't see in this study..

I should add it to the media area also for easier reference.. You wanna talk about no links between autism and vaccinations watch this. If you do watch this.

::EDIT::
And no I dont know who these people are.. If you look at my history on this subject.. I am an advocate on the link between mercury and autism since 04.. Nothing new for me.

[edit on 9/27/2007 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Can you please explain...

How the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) "makes" money period, much less by people being sick?



They are appointed by people that get elected, which means they get money and power from the money given to them by drug and HMO lobbyist.

FDA Is not owned by Drug companies, but the politicians that decide to enforce laws or not, and appoints the members are.

So you are right, unless you look one degree of separation, then you see the people making money for helping the medical monopolies not treat people.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
I'm not convinced of the vaccine connection in any way. Considering our environment is so highly polluted these days, with people working with computers all day and being surrounded by more electrical devices than ever before, I personally think that singling thimerisol out as the single culprit is just making a scapegoat instead of looking at the whole picture and stopping whatever the real culprits are.


It's very clear that it is NOT linked to autism.

I grew up in the Army, during the time when thimerosol was in vaccines. As any military brat can tell you, we got moved every 3 years or so AND we had to have more shots than the civilian population did... and on a more frequent basis.

If there was a link to autism, we'd see huge rates of autism stretching back 50 years and more in military brats. diplomatic service kids, missionaries' children, and families who regularly traveled between different countries. It would be worldwide and it would be obvious.

I agree that there's something else going on. New Zealand has a high rate of vaccine compliance but a low rate of autism. Data like that is another counter to the scaremongering over vaccines.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redge777
FDA Is not owned by Drug companies, but the politicians that decide to enforce laws or not, and appoints the members are.


The new Food and Drug Administration Revitalization Act (S1082) will put the FDA into the pharmaceutical business.



This Revitalization Act, it turns out, seeks to create a new government-run pharmaceutical company headed by officials from the FDA. It would officially and unambigiously put the U.S. government in the drug business, where it could license pharmaceuticals and collect royalties on their sale. For obvious reasons, this is a particularly dangerous situation for consumers. Government should be regulating drug companies, not joining them as partners in profit.


Source: FDA, Inc.? Food and Drug Administration to enter drug business under new "Revitalization Act"


Another article a month later states that the act has been renamed to the "Enhancing Drug Safety and Innovation Act of 2007".
Source: FDA Revitalization Act renamed, amended and still hotly debated; floor vote is imminent


And here's some information that gives some insight into the beliefs of the FDA and how they operate:



These rules, by the way, are no joke. This is not a satire piece. This is a serious exploration of the beliefs under which much of modern medical science operates today. Once you read these and understand just how deeply they are embedded in the minds and actions of conventional medicine operatives today, you'll realize the magnitude of the medical collapse (and the related population collapse) that now awaits modern civilization. There is nothing in these rules that respects life, nature, compassion or humility. It's all about the power of man over nature, arrogance, control, exploitation and self delusion.



Source: The world according to the FDA and Big Pharma

Mod Edit: Please follow the quoting guidelines...thanks



[edit on 9/27/07 by FredT]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   
I'm in the UK, so possibly not the exact same situation but as a parent I have had to make the decisions regarding vaccinations.

My husband and I took the decision to have the MMR vaccination - we were wary because of all the adverse publicity regarding the links to autism. We researched the subject as best we could, spoke to health professionals and decided that the gains far out-weighed the risks. Our son has received all the recommended vaccinations.

Had he had any adverse reactions, which he did not, I would inevitably have felt responsible but in the end I know that I made the best decision. I could have, at my own expense, paid for him to have the triple vaccine MMR in three seperate doses - but I felt this in itself was unnecessary as the toxicity could still build up and my son would have had to suffer three needles instead of one.

Being a parent, I have discovered, is one big guilt-trip from beginning to end. The only solution is to do your best, keep informed but in the end trust your instinct/common sense. He was far more likely to contract measles, mumps and rubella than develop autism (by a very long chalk - the statistics are very low and the connection tenuous - though not dismissed entirely).

(incidently though I did note in the OP article that the study had NOT looked at autism, just neurological problems in general, not sure if this is pertinent)



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Perplexed...


Originally posted by Redge777
They are appointed by people that get elected, which means they get money and power from the money given to them by drug and HMO lobbyist.


Is the only word I can think of. The vast majority of the FDA employees are just that, government employees, only the top administrative positions are appointed:

www.fda.gov...

This "giving" that you speak of, how does it occur? You understand that these positions are under considerable scrutiny by the OMB and IRS.

Please also be aware that in this case, most of the appointees are doctors, and are rather well off. It may sound plausible when you say it, but when try to apply the actual financial mechanics to it, it just doesn't work.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
That is all fine and good...


Originally posted by annestacey
The new Food and Drug Administration Revitalization Act (S1082) will put the FDA into the pharmaceutical business.


But it has nothing to do with your claim that the FDA is "making" money. Please be aware the Senate Bill you have referenced is that, only a bill. It hasn't gone to a House vote as of yet, but the most telling aspect is the bill sponsor... Edward Kennedy... The esteemed murderer... Errr... Drunkard... Errr... Senior Senator from the People's Republic of Massachusetts. That alone has my hackles up on this one. My opposition to this legislation in no way supports your assertion.

Here is Senate Bill S1082:

www.govtrack.us...

On a side note, I notice you seem to only cite one source, is that because it's the only one that supports your position?



[edit on 27/9/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I believe you goverment Lead Mercury and poison are good for me!!!!!!

You said it must be true!



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by infamouskiller
 


Well... I'm now wondering if it's too late to change my position on the effects of Thimerosal...




posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Study: Vaccines not tied to brain problems


news.yahoo.com

LOS ANGELES - A mercury-based preservative once used in many vaccines does not raise the risk of neurological problems in children, concludes a large federal study that researchers say should reassure parents about the safety of shots their kids received a decade or more ago.

However, the study did not examine autism — the developmental disorder that some critics blame on vaccines. A separate study due out in a year will look at that issue, said scientists at the....
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 9/26/07 by FredT]


Who funded the study?

What was the relationship between the researchers and the funding.

Which members had conflicts of interest.

What were the parameters of the research and was it deliberately biased to find thimersol not gulty....?


questions that need to be answered.


FIRST.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by esecallum
 


Its all in the story

It was a CDC study

The review panel for the study did have some Pharma ties to them (grants, one worked for Merck previously etc. One was an anti vaccine person so her agenda is just as suspect IMHO)

The methodology for the study is not redialy avalible through mainstream media at this point.



[edit on 9/27/07 by FredT]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by esecallum
 


The following is a combination of an old comedy bit on Canadian television and then a film from the University of Calgary on mercury and brain neurons. Even though it is a bit dated I think it well worth viewing:




posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
It's very clear that it is NOT linked to autism.

I grew up in the Army, during the time when thimerosol was in vaccines. As any military brat can tell you, we got moved every 3 years or so AND we had to have more shots than the civilian population did... and on a more frequent basis.

If there was a link to autism, we'd see huge rates of autism stretching back 50 years and more in military brats. diplomatic service kids, missionaries' children, and families who regularly traveled between different countries. It would be worldwide and it would be obvious.



Maybe the military families are given the "safe" vaccines. As corrupt as the government is (and always has been), it wouldn't be surprising for there to be multiple vaccines being given... the safe ones for the military familes and the unsafe ones for the civilian population.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Also, male and female's are vacinated together and almost in the same numbers. Male children are more likely to be diagnosed with autism.

So in that light unless there is a mechanism of physiology that has yet been disovered, how do you explain the difference in rates?



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   
As an FYI the CDC has more info on the study

www.cdc.gov...

Included in this are the actual techical aspects of the methodology etc for those that have questions



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Also, male and female's are vacinated together and almost in the same numbers. Male children are more likely to be diagnosed with autism.

So in that light unless there is a mechanism of physiology that has yet been disovered, how do you explain the difference in rates?


I'll post a response that I just posted on another thread:

There are so many chemicals in everything that we consume and use everyday, that no one knows what effects will result from combined chemicals in our bodies. Everyone is in contact with different combinations of chemicals... it's not the same for everyone. That's why some people will react to certain chemicals and others will not... each person will have reactions to different combinations of chemicals.

Your kid may have a reaction to a vaccine because it mixes with bleach or chlorine that he is exposed to. And the neighbor's kid doesn't because he's not exposed to bleach or chlorine. The possibilities are endless.

It has already been proven that drinking diet soda and eating doritos causes neurological damage (a mixture of msg, aspartame and food coloring). That's just one combination of a few chemicals. There are hundreds of thousands of chemicals that people are exposed to on a daily basis. The deadly combinations are endless and the testing is just getting started.

The FDA, pharma and food companies know it's impossible to determine why some people get sick and others do not. That's how they can get away with it.

Boys and girls are different because they have different hormone levels. There's no way to know what results will come from the mixture of vaccines and hormones and chemicals. Also, let me add that some chemical poisoning is inherited from the mother due to the chemicals she is exposed to before and during the pregnancy.



new topics




 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join