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: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by annestacey

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...



I agree to a degree that there is big biz in keeping people sick. Using the Red Yeast fiasco as an example of where things are heading. Whereas natural remedies, will come at a cost due to some patent.
I believe the chemical in question in this thread does do harm. Creating patients for life who will be dependent upon chemical maintenance. If you want to take it into the twilight zone, here this. Let's say the channel works like this. The known agent is administered during a specific window of development, with the knowledge that said agent will induce a specific reaction within a known percentile of subjects. The subjects are then administered mind agents to control side-effects (desired effects) derived from original agent. These subjects then develop a dependency for these agents. Therefor becoming long term clients for the producers of these mind agents.
Now lets go to the X-Files. These agents open gateways to the mind that allow for subtle integration. Through mass media (movies, music, tv, internet) these subjects have been subliminally coded. The nation has been dumbed down with these innoculations into country of zombies who can see somethings amiss right in front of their face, but are oblivious of it. Mulder where are you?
At one time in the past, tomatoes were thought to be poisonous. All along it was the a reaction to the pewter plates, the tomatoes leeched the lead or something like that. What we believe today maybe harmless, may turn out to be deadly on it's own or in combination tomorrow.
No one knows a kid like the mother, and in my readings and videos I've viewed on the subject of these vaccines and mind drugs, the mother's stories cannot be wrong. The kids stories, are incredible. Not so many. There are alternatives, I am sure, because they are not patentable, we will never hear about them.
As far as studies, lab rats.
Guess who the rats are...




posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
As I was discussing in the other thread on this subject, the specific type of Mercury that is found in Thimerosal is called Ethylmercury (EtHg: Chemical name). This type of mercury cannot bioaccumulate in the human body due the actions of cellular membranes, which work to not allow this type of mercury to enter the cells. In contrast, Methylmercury which is primarily found in contaminated food products, is far more of a risk factor than its Ethyl counterpart for several reasons. For instance, when EtHg has been exposed to human cell cultures in laboratories it has been noted that Human Polymorphonuclear Leukocyte cells and Monocytes break down and degrade EtHg into inorganic mercury. Although inorganic mercury has been known to cause adverse side effects in large amounts, a few things become very clear. That is, inorganic mercury has a half life of only 40 days and is absorbed at such a slow rate that most current figures show only around 7 to 15% (many sources will quote around 10% average) of it is absorbed into human cells. One can take in lieu of the fact that on average the doses of Thimerosal in Vaccines is relatively low. In fact, the average Influenza vaccine only contains around 12.5 micrograms per dose and most other vaccines like MMR contain anywhere from 0.001 micrograms to 0.01 micrograms (which would be roughly anywhere from 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 10,000). Even with vaccine regimens consisting of several doses over a certain period of time these amounts do not equal enough to produce a toxicity effect that would cause mental disorders such as Autism.

Most MMR vaccines, no matter who they are manufactured by contain around 1,000 cell culture infective doses (CCID for short) of measles, 5,000 CCID's of mumps, and another 1,000 CCID's of rubella virus. Some other addatives are sorbitol, sucrose, sodium phosphate & chloride, hydrolyzed gelatin, and of course Thimerosal in some vaccines (MMRII contains no preservative of EtHg). As previously mentioned, Thimerosal is in relatively low doses in the MMR vaccine and is still being phased out. There have been no scienfic or peer reviewed studies that confirm abnormal levels of MMR produced EtHg in Autistic children, which leads me to believe that the body's own ability to detoxify these chemicals is sufficient enough to not cause adverse neurological reactions.

On top of this, new diagnostic criteria established with the advent of updated clinical definitions in 1990 directly coorelates with the surge in cases of Autism within the United States. This essentially means that under these new established criteria autistic behavior could be categorized under a broader spectrum. If one were to look at the statistical analysis of the aforementioned they will see a drastic rise in the number of Autism cases since the publication of the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual" in 1990.



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I am a parent of a child with autism and I am completely convinced that there is a link to autism and vaccine preservatives. In my opinion, and in some articles that I've read, children with autism have a genetic pre-disposition to an inability to breaking down heavy metals in the blood stream. Basically, what this means is that while som children can take the vaccine and be fine (Which BTW contains 2000% of the daily recommended allowance from the FDA). Other children that can't break the heavy metal(mercury) down as fast, keep it in there system longer. As a result, depending on the amount of vaccines your giving your child, combined with the amount of mercury in it, body weight, and finally the genetic markers, determine how badly your child is impacted by autism. I am lucky in that my wife and I were poor. Becuase of that, we couldn't afford to go to the doctors office and get them at regular scheduled times. We delayed them by 2 years. As a result, we saw a drastic change occur at 4, for my daughter, and as a result got her the help she needed immediately. Additionally, because of her increased weight, I believe she was able to absorb it better, then if we had gotten it as scheduled. As a result she is diagnosed as high functioning.

This being said however. We have absolutely refused to vaccinate my son until he was 5 and entering kindergarden. He is almost normal. Although He has been diagnosed as ADHD(which has links to Autism).

Realistically though, I don't see any really true evidence coming out about this. Could you imagine the lawsuits the drug companies would have if that link ever came out. Additionally, what about the FDA dropping the ball on it. There would be massive suits against the government as well for having to care for these children for life, pain and suffering, etc. I'm just one parent, but I would sue for 10 million. combine that with 1 out of 150 kids that have it, divide that by 280 million(population of U.S.) You'd have almost 2 million people with it, which would come out to almost 20 trillion dollars.

Additionally, if there was infact a legitamate link made, the government would pass legislation to prevent us(the people) from suing them(the government and the drug companies). I know if I had inside knowledge on this, and part of this, I would do everything possible to prevent that as well.

Regards,

Camain



posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mantic
 


mantic... I think you are on the right track. Those who "think" they know the science and facts... do not know that the "science" is wrong and the facts are skewed.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Mercury is good for me I believe you cause your a doctor.

I want to shoot these people giving these shot they should be burned.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 07:26 AM
link   
I found this article in my local newspaper claiming that a urine test can confirm whether autism is caused by mercury poisoning or not.
www.baytoday.ca...



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I have four kids. The two who are not my biological children received some, but not all, vaccinations due to life-threatening reactions. One biological child received all vaccinations (this was in the early 90's) and is in that "autistic spectrum". He did not have any autistic "signs" until after his last series of shots. After his immunizations, he was very ill. I told the doctor that I thought something was wrong and the answer I got was that it was normal after immunizations for kids to become sick and that some kids react worse than others. Looking back at the timing, reaction, etc, I have a strong suspicion about those vaccines.

Many years later, along comes my 4th child. After just a couple of vaccinations I decided to stop. She started having the same reactions as my son. She ran high fevers, was lethargic and very ill for several days after. As a matter of fact, I took her to the emergency room one night because she was so bad. The docs again told me that this was normal. I have a very hard time believing that I child being that ill is "normal". So my gut told me to stop.

I have since moved to a different town and talked to different doctors about this. They have all supported my choice to not vaccinate at this time. They told me that she can still get her immunizations when she is older when her body is more mature and better able to handle it. Will I get her vaccinated at that time? I don't know. But I figure this way not only will her body be more mature, but I'll have more time to research and hopefully more definitive studies will have been done.
Maybe some children are predisposed to have bad reactions?



Originally posted by KilgoreTrout


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.



This, I believe, is the best you can do. Use that instinct. YOU know your child best. (Love the guilt-trip comment!)


I read somewhere (have no idea where, sorry) that some people have a theory that autism happens when a child gets the "bottom of the barrel" vaccine. Like the needle is sucking from the bottom of the vial or the vial is filled from the bottom of whatever the vaccine is made in, therefor there is a higher concentration. This, they believe, is why some kids get it and others don't.
Has anyone else heard this? Anyone know if this is even a possibility?



Also, for those of you who haven't seen it, this is an interesting read, written by Robert Kennedy Jr.:
Deadly Immunity


Whew. Done for now.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Parents are typically the first ones to diagnose their children with behavioral problems. As is typical with Autism the first signs begin to show somewhere around age 1, when the parents often notice difficultly in speaking or smiling, and some physicians believe their are even earlier signs. The interesting thing about this is that the MMR vaccine is administered to children around 12-15 months of age, which coincides directly with the first signs of the disorder. It's no wonder that people begin to think that the vaccine can cause Autism when they really don't understand what the vaccine is composed of and how the low Ethylmercury levels are not significant enough to cause toxicity, even at such an early age. Thimerosal has been used in Vaccines since the early part of the 1930's, shortly after its discovery in the 1920's, yet Autistic prevalence rates have not coincided with it's introduction into vaccine programs.

With the publication of the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" (specifically DSM-III-R and DSM-IV) back in the early 1990's we see a direct correlation between the numbers of new Autism cases and the diagnostic criteria used to determine the aforementioned. This manual changed Autism into a spectrum disorder characterized by a number of different criteria than it was previously. In other words, children displaying characteristics of Rett's Syndrome or Childhood Disintegrative Disorder may not have been diagnosed with Autism before the publication of this manual. Here is a bit more on Spectrum Disorders:

Autistic Spectrum Disorders, Prevalence


Originally posted by otherhalf
I read somewhere (have no idea where, sorry) that some people have a theory that autism happens when a child gets the "bottom of the barrel" vaccine. Like the needle is sucking from the bottom of the vial or the vial is filled from the bottom of whatever the vaccine is made in, therefor there is a higher concentration.


Doubtful. This would require a number of different factors including chemical seperation and viral inactivity. While I will not say it is impossible for this to happen, it would generally not make sense because the handling of a vaccine would generally be enough to cause disruption. I see no scientific evidence that this has ever happened, and until I see said evidence I would not want to speculate on ideas originating from "a friend of a friend's uncle told me" stories.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Jazzerman
 


Hey Jazzerman, good to run into you again!

It's way past my bedtime, so bear with me on this one.

As you said, most autistic children begin to show signs at a very early age. Even with mild cases there are usually obvious signs. Which is why I was left scratching my head when my son's signs started appearing when he was school age. Enough to make a correlation to vaccines? No. But the onset happened after his last set of shots (which he had late), and an especially bad reaction to the shots.

I understand what you are saying about the rise of autism being related to other syndromes being incorporated under the same umbrella. But, to play devil's advocate for a minute, turn that theory around. If they were not diagnosing other syndromes as autistic spectrum, maybe there was a rise in autistic disorders that were either misdiagnosed or undiagnosed at the time, considering autism was not as well known or understood as it is now.

As far as the "bottom of the barrel" theory: it was just something I ran across online and had never heard before. While I can see how chemicals could settle to the bottom in the manufacturing process, I am totally uneducated on how vaccines are actually made. Which is why I asked.

Just going to throw this out there (after all it is ATS):
What if it's not Thimerosal that's the problem? That's the main theory that everybody concentrates on. But what if it's actually an allergic reaction to one of the other substances? There's a lot of stuff put in there. Which would explain why some children react and others don't.

I have to say I'm not convinced that vaccines are the cause. I know the lives they have saved and the pain that has been spared. But I believe that if there is a question that they might cause harm in some children it needs to be studied. I'm glad to see it is slowly, but finally, being done.

I am pretty familiar with autism and Rett Syndrome. I am very well acquainted with Asperger's. I know the feeling of laying awake at night, heart breaking, because you can't make it all better. I also know what it's like to stand at the finish line at a track meet, and cry with pride in front of dozens of people because not only did he finish the race, he came in second. I think that's why the vaccine debate rages on. Those parents who live with it want to know if that vaccine they were required to give their child is what started it all. And those parents who don't live with it have that little gut twinge when that needle pierces the skin and send up a prayer for everything to be fine.


Going to go quietly kiss some angel heads and go to bed.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by otherhalf
Just going to throw this out there (after all it is ATS):
What if it's not Thimerosal that's the problem? That's the main theory that everybody concentrates on. But what if it's actually an allergic reaction to one of the other substances? There's a lot of stuff put in there. Which would explain why some children react and others don't.


Very good post otherhalf! I do agree that other chemicals manufactured into Vaccines could be responsible, and might be why some show signs of Autism at a later age, due to a sort of allergic reaction. Of course as usual I would need to see some hard evidence to support this, but on a basic level it sounds justifiable. However, I would like to inquire into your particular case if I could be so obliged. Do you remember what vaccines your child was receiving at the time that caused the adverse effects? I'm pretty familiar with Immunology and the processes of Vaccinology, but would need to know the names of the vaccines your child received, so as to research the chemical composition therein.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Not going to comment directly on otherhalf's story. I think I've made it pretty clear that I don't think thimerosol is the culprit. When I was little I had a bad reaction to my first tetanus shot. 104 degree fever for two days. this was in the 60's or 70's. But I didn't get autism.

The allergy reaction might have some points to it, it's worth looking at. But I still am of the opinion that it is a complex issue, not just one thing. Maybe environmental factors that are meshing up with something in the vaccines acting as a trigger.

They'll figure it out one of these days, that's the only thing I'm certain of right now.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   
To Jazzerman:
I'd be happy to give you the info. Just give me some time to remember where I stuck it. And keep in mind that this was 10-15 years ago, so the stuff that wasn't documented has to come from memory.

MajorMalfunction:
First of all, thank you for being respectful. This is obviously a personal (read emotional) issue for me.

I hope you are not misunderstanding me (I was very tired when I wrote that and, as a matter of fact, don't make myself clear on good days). As far as my own personal experience, I don't know what happened. The timing just made me wonder about the vaccinations. He could have had the signs from birth and they were mild enough that nobody noticed. He's had other medical issues that may or may not be related to Asperger's. So, actually, a genetic anomaly, stroke, or a hundred other things are more probable be the cause by themselves or in combination. I spent years researching different syndromes to try to find an answer. Because even Asperger's doesn't encompass everything we're dealing with, but it's the closest thing. So I realize that there are so many different syndromes and so many variables that go into it that we just can't blame it all on vaccines.

However, let me give you an example (and I know I'm comparing apples to oranges, but just to show you what I mean):
We've all heard stories like this. There is a large chemical company in town. Most people in town are employed there. After years of working there, people start getting gravely ill. The rate of this illness is hundreds of times higher in this town than in the general population. People put 2 and 2 together and decide that the chemicals are making people sick. They go to the company and get turned away. They start screaming that the chemical company is killing people and start to sue. The chemical company does studies to show that the chemicals are not the cause. The research they show might very well be legit, however they are trying to prove that the chemicals aren't bad and don't research the evidence to show otherwise. The townspeople have studies to prove that the chemicals are bad, but they are trying to prove their point. And even though their research is correct, it also might not be all-encompassing. In cases like this, most of us are outraged that the government doesn't step in and do objective research to find out for sure if this chemical is harming people.

If so many people are questioning vaccines, why hasn't the general population been screaming for years that thorough studies be done in order to be sure we aren't harming our children. Yes, a handful of studies have been done. But one study only looks at mercury, another doesn't take into account that the rise in autism might be due to better diagnosing, and on and on. I'm just surprised that people will accept a study that either doesn't take into account all the factors, or that was done by someone who has an agenda (from either side). After all, it's our children we are talking about.

Another example:
Vioxx was a miracle drug for people in chronic pain. It was FDA approved, studies had been done. But when it was used by the general population, a small number of people started dying. Even though hundreds or thousands of people were finally able to live more normal lives without terrible pain by taking Vioxx, it was unacceptable that there was a small risk of dying and they took it off the market.

Just like anything, vaccines pose a risk to a percentage of people. Setting aside a possible autism link, you have a certain number of kids who contract the disease even if they have been vaccinated (and I'm not sure but I think there are some who actually get the disease from the vaccine, but I'm not stating this as fact so don't jump on it). You also have a certain number who react to the vaccine and get very sick, have lasting effects, or even die. Is this acceptable? That's something we all have to decide for ourselves. And I'm not advocating that we pull vaccines off the market, just food for thought.

I hope there are studies being done to see why some kids react so that we can know beforehand and it's not just a gamble. Vaccines were an absolute miracle when they were invented. But maybe they can be improved upon. Or maybe we need to “reinvent the wheel” and find an alternative so that those who will be harmed have a different option, or something so much better that we can all benefit. I hope we have not decided that this is good enough, why bother going forward.

As to the autism link, maybe there is something in there that kids are reacting to. Maybe some kids have a genetic predisposition and the vaccine brings it out. Maybe this theory was all started because a parent needed a reason why or a place to put blame (I don't know the origin of this idea). For now I just have an open mind to all possibilities. There are still too many unanswered questions for me to believe either way. I'm just a big advocate for having those questions answered as quickly and honestly as possible.

Sorry for getting long-winded. I'll get down off my soapbox now and go terrorize someone else.



posted on Oct, 18 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Just a few years ago we could bank on at least seeing 10-15 meningiococcimia cases in the PICU each and every year. Two years ago we had 2, last year 1, none so far this year. Why? immunzations have changed this life threating disease from a routine part of the year to an anomoly.


That may be nothing more than vaccination PR. Please prove vaccines have removed life threatening diseases from our midst.

These illnesses were declining well before vaccines came on the scene and there is little or no evidence to suggest vaccines made the slightest difference.

See my posts here for graphs of illnesses and deaths pre and post vaccines:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 18-10-2007 by RogerT]



posted on Oct, 19 2007 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Myself, I have a hard time pointing a finger at just the mercury in the vaccine shots, on the other hand, I think at times, the vacicnations themselves can be hazardous, as well as I can easily see how some people can be especially sensitive to the chemicals in the immunos.

Now, they might or might not be a contributing factor, but what I want to know is, what is causing all these various diseases that make it seem like the younger generations are just about falling apart?

I'm a 32 year old single white male. Sometimes in my journeys of picking up women I hit someone in their early to mid 20's. sort of a generation behind me as far as socialization and happenings. Yo know what, I haven't met one person that doesn't have some sort of problem that needs to be maintained. Peanut allergies, wheat allergies, asthma, cancer, autism, panic attacks, ad(h)d, you name it, someone seems to have it. and if you find one of those rare ones that doesn't have something, they seem to have come from either some really small backwoods town, or another country and didn't arrive here until after high school.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join