The proof solidifies of a vaccine-mercury-autism link

Isn't it a bit strange that I'm 49 years old and NO ONE I know, close to my age, has any autism? I have had this discussion with my friends and none of know of anyone close to our ages with autism. We were all vaccinated repeatedly. Maybe they were all just labeled, retarded, back then. I still get my vaccinations every 10 years, except for the flu vaccine.

I have horses and have a 2 acres fenced with old, rusty wire that I am tearing out. That's just the perfect combination for tetanus. If I have to die, I hope it's not from tetanus.

www.youtube.com...

Do some research on the effects of diseases like tetanus, polio, and meningitis. I'll take the vaccines, thank you.

Originally posted by Johnmike

Originally posted by 38181
This sux, who can I believe? The Doctors OR the articles with statistics, is it better to be safe and not do the vaccines or is better to have the vaccines and HOPE nothing hapens to my child? Does anyone have peer reviewed articles I can read up on, I don't want to have to give unesseary vaccines just because the Doc says to.

All the studies I've seen say that the thiomersal (the mercury preservative) in vaccines is perfectly safe as it is an extremely low dose.

They also make them without mercury now, as I've said. So get vaccines without thiomersal if possible.

Hey, Johnmike... Have you viewed the ingredients in vaccines? There's a link to them on my thread here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

And BTW, though they SAY vaccines are "mercury-free..." They sampled four different ones just for drill, and even the two that said they were mercury-free had unacceptable levels of mercury. But there's a link to all that as well on my thread.

Maybe you will be a bit more sure having scoped it out.

Originally posted by Lookingup
Do some research on the effects of diseases like tetanus, polio, and meningitis. I'll take the vaccines, thank you.

I will take the risk of disease over the surety of being injected with toxins, thank you.

I guess you know more than the medical researchers who insist that vaccines are safe. And all the doctors that agree with the practice. And I guess they think they know better than the little anti-vaccine groups out there.

Without looking, can you tell me which vaccines contain formaldehyde? And you know that the body naturally produces formaldehyde, right?

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Johnmike]

Originally posted by Johnmike
I guess you know more than the medical researchers who insist that vaccines are safe. And all the doctors that agree with the practice. And I guess they think they know better than the little anti-vaccine groups out there.

You do know that the doctors get payments for prescriptions...from the pharma corps? Their word is rather suspect, eh? You do know that many "research" programs are funded by pharma corporations? Their words are a bit suspect too, eh?

I look at the list of ingredients, and frankly... It does not take a whole lot of education to strongly suspect that these are a poor choice to inject into the human body. So it's not that I "know more..." It's that I do know enough, and believe the truly independent researchers who are showing that there are actually MAJOR issues with vaccines.

Their research wouldn't be suppressed, would it? Oh, couldn't be.

Surely you're bright enough to see the problems here. Surely you can see this as an effective way to eliminate "useless eaters..."

Without looking, can you tell me which vaccines contain formaldehyde? And you know that the body naturally produces formaldehyde, right?

Nope. Not without looking (though it would be a simple matter, and I suspect it is virtually all of them). And I bet formaldehyde is NOT injected in (relatively) large amounts into the bloodstream by the body.

[edit on 8/1/2008 by Amaterasu]

Originally posted by Lookingup
Isn't it a bit strange that I'm 49 years old and NO ONE I know, close to my age, has any autism? I have had this discussion with my friends and none of know of anyone close to our ages with autism. We were all vaccinated repeatedly. Maybe they were all just labeled, retarded, back then. I still get my vaccinations every 10 years, except for the flu vaccine.



www.youtube.com...

Many of the kids who were labled retarded in your day were quite communicative. Downs syndrome for instance is related to retardation but it is not related to a lack of communication skills. Autism is marked by a lack of communication skills. The only treatments which are effective against autism are behavioral therapy in combination with speech therapy. Once the ability to communicate is achieved, autistics frequently do well on IQ tests.If an autistic is able to speak before age 5,his chances of living a normal life are quite good.



[edit on 1-8-2008 by eradown]

reply to post by Lookingup
I once read an interveiw with a principle of a special school for "retarded children" . According to his observation, the children who were placed in those schools thirty years ago were communicative and had just fallen behind in key academic areas. Now days those sort of students are not placed in special education classes or schools.They are just tutored or moved from grade to grade. His school is now full of autistics and the treatment of autistics is very expensive. Because some of them are non comunicative, many teacher aids are reqired to insure the safety of the students. Of course autistics who were carefully trained go into normal classes and do not need any of this expensive care ,but it would be nice if people would make an effort to investigate why there has been a steep increase in the number of children who lack basic communication skills.


[edit on 1-8-2008 by eradown]

Originally posted by Amaterasu
You do know that the doctors get payments for prescriptions...from the pharma corps? Their word is rather suspect, eh? You do know that many "research" programs are funded by pharma corporations? Their words are a bit suspect too, eh?

Oh, most doctors love prescribing things. My doctor's an exception, he's more of a holistic guy (and a real family practice doctor). But yeah, you need to know what you're being prescribed and how necessary it is before you take anything... but don't refuse a doctor's advice in a situation where you can die or be permanently harmed.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Nope. Not without looking (though it would be a simple matter, and I suspect it is virtually all of them). And I bet formaldehyde is NOT injected in (relatively) large amounts into the bloodstream by the body.

I think this is a nice site.
www.chop.edu...

Originally posted by Johnmike
Oh, most doctors love prescribing things. My doctor's an exception, he's more of a holistic guy (and a real family practice doctor). But yeah, you need to know what you're being prescribed and how necessary it is before you take anything... but don't refuse a doctor's advice in a situation where you can die or be permanently harmed.

A doctor's advice is always a good thing if things look grim. But always try to get two or three opinions - and a holistic doctor is a better choice as a rule than one who is "establishment." I agree.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Nope. Not without looking (though it would be a simple matter, and I suspect it is virtually all of them). And I bet formaldehyde is NOT injected in (relatively) large amounts into the bloodstream by the body.

I think this is a nice site.
www.chop.edu...

Yeah. That was a nice site. I noticed that they addressed malignancies only, however. And that does not seem to be the issue with formaldehyde. It is more...

Formaldehyde is oxidised to formic acid which leads to acidosis and nerve damage. Acidosis can be described as a condition in which the acidity of the body tissues and fluids is abnormally high. The liver and the kidneys may also be damaged.

(Link: www.vaccination.inoz.com... )

With a VERY long list of secondary issues.

Did they test for brain damage? Changes in motor control? Intelligence changes?

It's easy to "prove" that something is safe if you don't test for damage it inflicts, but rather for something that is not an issue with it.

EDIT to add: I note that the formaldehyde is in all the vaccines listed... In "small amounts," but I wonder:

A) How much that is relative to the amounts present in one's system at any given time on average;
B) How much of the system-produced formaldehyde is in the bloodstream, and;
C) What does the addition of the amount of a series of vaccinations do to the overall formaldehyde content of one's body (one may have 1/5th of a gram, but five shots would be a full gram - as an example; the actual numbers likely vary greatly).

Knowing B would give an idea of whether the bloodstream is a good place for formaldehyde to be - given that the bloodstream will take it most anywhere in the body at large (brain, liver, heart, muscle, nerves, you name it), and both A and C speak for themselves.

[edit on 8/1/2008 by Amaterasu]

This is an interesting topic, that often results in a heated debate in the medical community. I am a speech-language pathologist, and when I was getting my master's degree I did a semester of internship at a clinic which solely treated autism. In addition, I did internships in public schools, as well as in additional speech and hearing clinics where I had numerous children with autism on my caseload. (I work in geriatric rehab now with stroke and Alzheimer's patients, so I'm not actively seeing children now, but I graduated in May, so it wasn't that long ago that I treated children with autism.) So....I'm only trying to establish my experience in the field before presenting my point of discussion. It's a bit off the topic at hand, but is highly relevant in any discussion of "mercury-based autism."

I have witnessed first-hand the results of "mercury-based autism." These children DO exhibit signs similar to those with true autistic disorder. HOWEVER, the problem with the label of "autism" is that SOOOOOO many disorders fall under the autism spectrum. For example, Rhett's Disorder is a genetic anomaly but it's categorized under the autism umbrella due to it's symptoms. The difference in the mercury-based autism is that the child will meet normal developmental milestones prior to injections of vaccinations (usually around 18 months old), and then begin to "lose" skills or show a regression in development (i.e. language, toilet training, social skills, etc.) Mercury poisoning mimics the symptoms of Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) - true autistic disorder - AFTER the injection of a poisonous vaccine.

My problem with lumping these children who have suffered mercury poisoning into the same category as other children with autism is that it's NOT TRUE AUTISM. It is mental retardation (slow growth in the brain) as a result of mercury poisoning. And, it should be labeled and treated as such.

Since there are so many children diagnosed with Autism these days, it is so important to differentiate between the various causes (if known) and separate them accordingly, if we are ever going to make any progress in its treatment.

I apologize if this sounds as though it's not relevant to this particular story, but it's something I feel very strongly about and something that is advocated for heavily in my field.

Now, as far as the "vaccines causing autism" - these poisonous vaccines have detrimental effects on normally developing children, and until you've seen it first-hand, it's easy to sit back and judge someone who wishes to withhold these immunizations from their children.

With that said, as far as I know - there are reportedly drastic measures that have been taken to ensure no poisonous vaccines are given. I am currently pregnant myself with my first child, and immunizations for my child is something that I'm very concerned about. However, the truth is - she can't even go to school without being vaccinated - at least that's the law in Texas.

Thanks for the post. Good discussion here.

I always found it interesting as a person who has NEVER been vaccinated, I've never suffered from any of the usual childhood diseases.. and at 38, I've had nothing more serious than the flu.. for which I don't get shots for either...

My flus last for 5 days. No more, no less.. but then, I still play outside in the dirt and fresh air..

Originally posted by optimistic skeptic
With that said, as far as I know - there are reportedly drastic measures that have been taken to ensure no poisonous vaccines are given. I am currently pregnant myself with my first child, and immunizations for my child is something that I'm very concerned about. However, the truth is - she can't even go to school without being vaccinated - at least that's the law in Texas.

Thanks for the post. Good discussion here.

Given this, you might want to take a look at the long list of ingredients in vaccines which are toxic and/or allergens. And BTW, even "mercury-free" vaccines are testing as containing mercury.

Visit: www.vaccination.inoz.com...

reply to post by optimistic skeptic


optomistic, through intimidation tactics, the government and the media have colluded together, lying and saying it is the law when it is not. The State's Attorney General for Prince George County, Maryland admitted on national radio last year that there is no law, state, local or federal that there is a law that children must be vaccinated to enter the camp....er, school. You can listen to that here

prisonplanet.com...

You can google vaccine exemption form yourstate 2008. But, here's the Texas Department of Health procedure for getting one.

www.dshs.state.tx.us...

Don't let your kids take this stuff when they don't have to. Even if you believe that vaccines are safe you have to admit that mercury is toxic in any amount even once, much less the multiple times that you are told to take it over time. Even the Illinois EPA admits this. Hope you see this, optomistic.

reply to post by King Crass


Thanks for the info...I'll definitely check it out. When I worked in the public school it was a major issue if kids didn't have all their vaccines, and the school would not allow them to come to school without them. However, I'm wondering if possibly there just aren't that many parents that put up much of a fight if it's not the law.

Anyway, thanks again.

reply to post by King Crass


Wow...I am blown away by what I just read. These are the reasons that your request for declining vaccinations will be approved: "Exclusions from compliance are allowable on an individual basis for medical contraindications, reasons of conscience, including a religious belief, and active duty with the armed forces of the United States."

I guess I would fall under the "reasons of conscience"....

Also, it says you can only request exclusion for 5 vaccines every 2 years. Since children have 4 times that many, I guess I'll just have to narrow it down to the ones I think are the most dangerous???? That's not much of an option.

I am really shocked. Also, I don't think parents are even made aware that this is an option....in Texas, at least.

reply to post by optimistic skeptic
Some people who experienced mercury poisoning with one child put off the MMR shot with the next child until after the next child is over two or speech is well established. It is also a good idea to have your pediatrician order single dose vaccines without thiemersol. These vaccines must be ordered a month in advance. Also many parents who suspect their child is a victim of Mercury poisoning never have more than one shot given at a time. Some children are allowed to attend school in Texas without all the shots because of religous or philosphical objections. There are special forms you can order from the state that will allow you to attend school without vaccines.


[edit on 2-8-2008 by eradown]