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.

 

Scientists fear MMR link to autism

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Facts speak for themselves so there is no need for a debate, just read the article and spread the word.

Scientists fear MMR link to autism




posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Certainly interesting and definitely warrants more study, however weren't the original findings by Andrew Wakefield proved to be falsified?

www.bmj.com...

edit on 7-2-2011 by MattC because: Exorcising the typo gremlin



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
What a hoot. First Dr. Andrew Wakefield is a genius, then he's a quack, now he's a genius again. Sounds like someone wants to tarnish Dr. Wakefields name. Perhaps some vaccine companies who would suffer terribly if the truth got out.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


The only people who ever considered him a "genius" are the folks who either didn't actually READ his study, or who have little to no education in the sciences.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Why is there no need for a debate? Because we should believe everything the media tells us in an obvious bias article such as this one?

An unbiased article would have covered both sides of the story, not only one. This is the kind of rhetoric that dumbs down the population. Don't believe everything that is fed to you, question everything, look at everything angle, it's your duty to do so.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Wakefield was and still IS a quack IMHO! His study was a sham and seriously flawed. Not only did he cherry pick data but his study was too small. The number of subjects studied were no where near enough to form any sort of conclusive result. He was never able to reproduce his results and he refused to be peer reviewed. And when offered full funding to reproduce his study with a far larger group of subjects he declined. IIRC there was also a huge conflict of interest in his study - he was either developing his own vaccine or was being funded by a group which was developing their own alternative. It was in his financial interest to make MMR look bad.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Autism is on the rise, and I know that this is a favorite theory espoused.

There is a link to fevers experienced during a critical brain development milestone possibly being a contributing factor in autism.

Boys hit those milestones at different times than girls usually.

Vaccines can trigger a fever or simulate the immune responses that happen when someone has a fever.

Perhaps they need to reconsider the TIMING of the vaccine, and then see if that reduces the statistical incidence of autism reports. That the timing of the jab is during a critical brain development period. Simple solution.

I would also like to point out that hormonal birth control may be contributing to the problem. It changes the men that women are attracted to - to men who are more like them. More children being born to women whose natural instincts are being compromised from 13 on. Those women are choosing mates whom are too genetically similar to them. A factor which is more common in the exact same regions where autism reports are more common, over a period of time which corresponds with a large section of the population being on this medication for most of their fertile life.

edit on 2011/2/7 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Keep on giving these mercury laced vaccine to your children if you want too..If they die or become autistic I hope they hate you for it. That is, if they live through it...



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Caji316
Keep on giving these mercury laced vaccine to your children if you want too..If they die or become autistic I hope they hate you for it. That is, if they live through it...


Thanks - I did for all three. Though, I delayed almost all of them.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
There is a link to fevers experienced during a critical brain development milestone possibly being a contributing factor in autism.

Boys hit those milestones at different times than girls usually.

Vaccines can trigger a fever or simulate the immune responses that happen when someone has a fever.

Perhaps they need to reconsider the TIMING of the vaccine, and then see if that reduces the statistical incidence of autism reports. That the timing of the jab is during a critical brain development period. Simple solution.


Timing vs Content would definitely be a better study. There is nothing wrong with MMR or the vaccines themselves and it saddens me that so many are buying into the "MMR = Autism" argument mostly based on a bad study done by a fraud trying to line his pockets. In the long term they aren't helping their children.

Still though, the evidence so far supports that there is no correlation between MMR and Autism.


Originally posted by Aeons
Perhaps they need to reconsider the TIMING of the vaccine, and then see if that reduces the statistical incidence of autism reports. That the timing of the jab is during a critical brain development period. Simple solution.

I would also like to point out that hormonal birth control may be contributing to the problem. It changes the men that women are attracted to - to men who are more like them. More children being born to women whose natural instincts are being compromised from 13 on. Those women are choosing mates whom are too genetically similar to them. A factor which is more common in the exact same regions where autism reports are more common, over a period of time which corresponds with a large section of the population being on this medication for most of their fertile life.


I would definitely buy this over the vaccine argument any day. There isn't enough diversity in the gene pool. It's why most royalty (the ones that limit marriages between bloodlines) and imbreds have all sorts of medical problems. You have to keep introducing diversity into the gene pool in order to filter out all of defects.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   
The original article is from 2006. The date keeps being updated.

www.whale.to...

As for Wakefield being a quack and fraud.. even if he is why take away the option of having measles, mumphs and rubella vaccines seprately? They are no longer available.. parents either have to choose the MMR shot or nothing at all. They cannot even decide to space them out. The medical community blames him completely yet they have opted to take vaccine options away fom parents that may otherwise fully vaccinate their children if given the seperate vaccine option. The media also blames Wakefield completely yet that same media runs all those scary stories where kids have severe or fatal vaccine side reactions. Selective memory.. the media have provided plenty of other reasons for parents not to trust vaccine safety that have nothing to do with Wakefield.
edit on 7-2-2011 by riley because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
why take away the option of having measles, mumphs and rubella vaccines seprately? They are no longer available.. parents either have to choose the MMR shot or nothing at all.


Switching back to separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines did not alter the rate of autism diagnosis in Japan..

Additionally, studies on reverting back to separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines in America showed parents are more likely to forget the next appointment or not fully immunize their children, leading to development of disease.

As I've said several times to you, Riley, just because you personally don't understand something, doesn't mean that everyone else is in the same boat.
edit on 2/7/2011 by VneZonyDostupa because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
I would also like to point out that hormonal birth control may be contributing to the problem. It changes the men that women are attracted to - to men who are more like them. More children being born to women whose natural instincts are being compromised from 13 on. Those women are choosing mates whom are too genetically similar to them. A factor which is more common in the exact same regions where autism reports are more common, over a period of time which corresponds with a large section of the population being on this medication for most of their fertile life.


Can you provide a source for this? I find it more than a bit hard to believe.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by Aeons
I would also like to point out that hormonal birth control may be contributing to the problem. It changes the men that women are attracted to - to men who are more like them. More children being born to women whose natural instincts are being compromised from 13 on. Those women are choosing mates whom are too genetically similar to them. A factor which is more common in the exact same regions where autism reports are more common, over a period of time which corresponds with a large section of the population being on this medication for most of their fertile life.


Can you provide a source for this? I find it more than a bit hard to believe.


You do?

Hormonal birth control mimics pregnancy. It essentially tricks one's body into believing it is already pregnant.

When pregnant, women's preference for men change to men who are more alike to them. This is fairly understandable as a selection trait - the most common time for women to die or be hurt is by the man who got them pregnant, while they are pregnant. Women who prefer the company of their birth family have been safer, and therefore slightly more babies have been born to them. Making this a selection trait.

This tendency for pregnant women has been noted in anthropology texts. There have a couple of articles on this studied preference in science mags.

I'll take a look about. Maybe someone with a PhD has made the obvious logic jump and done a study specifically on hormonal birth control. If you know what it is that hormonal birth control is doing, and you know how hormonal pregnancy hormones effect women's brains and preferences, the link should be apparent.

Of course, perhaps an actual study isn't that likely when most of them are funded by pharm companies that market hormonal birth control. Not the best advertizing I suppose. Take Pregancy-Stopper and Love Men that Are Like Your Brother.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Roid_Rage27
 


Very cool. There has been some really interesting stuff coming out in the last couple months about how the gut, bacteria, the vagus nerve, viruses, and the immune system may be interacting to cause all sorts of stuff. I was waiting for someone to link it to autism.

Thanks for posting.

Two articles below on how bacteria, the gut, and the vagus nerve may be connected in some pretty big disease processes. The nice things is, it opens the door to possible treatments, (antibiotics, fecal transplants, etc.) for some conditions and at least gives new lines of research to pursue for others.

What is becoming increasingly clear, however, is your bacteria and virus tenets in your body play a much, much bigger role in our well being, and even our behavior and mood than we ever suspected.


www.dana.org...

natmednews.posterous.com...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

I'll take a look about. Maybe someone with a PhD has made the obvious logic jump and done a study specifically on hormonal birth control. If you know what it is that hormonal birth control is doing, and you know how hormonal pregnancy hormones effect women's brains and preferences, the link should be apparent.


Well someone has done studies showing that where in your cycle you are effects the type of male you find attractive.

And here is an article about birth control and mate selection.

www.usatoday.com...

psy2.ucsd.edu...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

When pregnant, women's preference for men change to men who are more alike to them. This is fairly understandable as a selection trait - the most common time for women to die or be hurt is by the man who got them pregnant, while they are pregnant. Women who prefer the company of their birth family have been safer, and therefore slightly more babies have been born to them. Making this a selection trait.


I have a lot of skepticism about this portion, in particular. You have yet to provide any sources, which I find disquieting.


This tendency for pregnant women has been noted in anthropology texts. There have a couple of articles on this studied preference in science mags.


Then post them, rather than posting vaguely sciencey concepts.


If you know what it is that hormonal birth control is doing, and you know how hormonal pregnancy hormones effect women's brains and preferences, the link should be apparent.


You understand that there are many types of hormonal birth controls, with different hormone receptors targets, longevities, and mechanisms, right?

How can you generalize about a broad category of drugs when they don't share pharmacologic properties?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
As I've said several times to you, Riley, just because you personally don't understand something, doesn't mean that everyone else is in the same boat.


As I have said several times to you.. continued personal attacks or trying to "pull rank" claiming you know more than ANYONE who disagrees with you does not make you right by default and it does not mean they do not understand a subject.
edit on 8-2-2011 by riley because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by riley
 


I never claimed I know more than you. I posted studies that show your statements are without merit. Your claims have no basis in science, and have been refuted by several pieces of solid science, as demonstrated in the links I provided.

Where are your sources?
edit on 2/8/2011 by VneZonyDostupa because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Caji316
 


You know..

I haven't seen a vaccine with preservatives in years.
The last 5 or so I have received were all preservative free. So there's a shift in what medical companies are buying and producing for distribution. At least with my health care provider.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join