Just now on Fox News, Vaccines cause Autism *LIVE*

Originally posted by bettwice33

Why do you keep calling me a quack? I'm just a father of an autistic boy who shared my experiences in helping him climb out of the abyss of autism.

Yes, all autistic children have been vaccinated with mercury. Some of them received that vaccine through their mothers before they were born. Of course, some kids who act more like Ari Ne'eman than they act like a real autistic person have been diagnosed with Asperger's, a condition that is not autism. We have a plethora of paid liars who claim that kids like this have autism and that they were not vaccinated. There are lots of liars promoting propaganda in the wacky world of autism.

Nobody has ever found one case of anything that remotely resembles autism in anyone born before 1931. The pack of professional liars associated with blogs that you quote is so dishonest that they equate autism with genius and claim that Thomas Edison and Einstein were autistic. Kanner didn't think these guys were autistic. He recognized autism as something so bizarre that it could never be missed by anyone. But, we do have liars like Kevin Leitch who claims his weird aunt and uncle were autistic because these liars will claim any screwball is autistic to try to prove that something besides mercury causes autism.

There are a few genetic factors in cases that are similar to autism, like Rhetts and fragile x. However, as these conditions have their own names, that in itself tells us that these cases are not autism. Then we have the APO-E4 protein which is the primary genetic factor in autism. We also have cases of mitochondrial disorder that never manifest themselves until mercury is added to the equation. We saw this in the case of Hannah Poling when the court agreed in private that thimerosal had set off the mito problems but sealed the records so they wouldn't have to admit this for the record and open the door for paying out billions. More lies.

Yes, Rubella in pregnancy can cause brain damage that results in behaviors similar to autism. Measles can also cause brain swelling that disables kids. Similar and maybe diagnosed as autism but different. We can test for autism though by doing hair tests for deranged mineral transport to determine the presence of mercury. If our medical profession was honest, they would do this test for every autistic child. Since the test does yield some false negatives though, the best test for mercury poisoning misdiagnosed as autism is to do some chelation and see if behavior improves. If it does improve, we conclude that mercury was was the cause. If not, we have to look elsewhere.

I keep calling you a quack because you are one.
That's obvious to everyone.

You really are saying that autism has only been around for 80 years or so? Really and you expect people to take you seriously? Leo Kanner was a very good scientist and he certainly paved the way in the acknowledgement and understanding of autism but to say there was none before that beggars belief. Kanner didn't coin the word autism (his work forms the basis of modern autism study). Autism was being used in European psychiatry decades before that. In fact the earliest printed version of it is in a German paper by Eugen Bleuler in 1911, twenty years before it even existed according to you.
Selective and agenda-led history at its finest and if anyone needed any further proof, you know and understand very little about what autism actually is let alone its aetiology.
Typical of quacks you like to pigeon-hole a particle disorder rather than accept that the likes of autism are extremely complex. You like to pigeon-hole these as it makes it easy to apply your "cure".

Everything's so simple in the mind of a quack, "There are a few genetic factors in cases that are similar to autism, like Rhetts and fragile x. However, as these conditions have their own names, that in itself tells us that these cases are not autism." Brilliant deduction, absolutely first class!!


I've already stated that the APOE4 gene is not related to autism yet, without proof, you still maintain it is.
www.nimhgenetics.org...
Just because there is some significance with this gene in Alzheimer's you automatically think there has to be a link to autism.
You're wrong again.

Essentially what you are getting at is trying to say that autism is only autism if there's mercury involved isn't it?
Children who have behavioural development problems who have no mercury inside them can't be autistic according to you?
Am I correct in that assumption?
Let's say I am, what do you call this immense substrate of patients? Do you have a name for it?
Do you actually care about them (I'd guess you don't as you can't chelate them).

Which brings me to your test....
Have you any idea how unethical and unscientific (actually medieval!) your proposed test is?
Again, you're living in a total self-delusional fantasy world.

Oh, in your Yahoo group you said that there's evidence of children who have been "cured" by your treatment.

Why then Mr Liar does it state very clearly in the FAQ's
"...As of this writing, no one on this list has completely cured their child..."

Originally posted by Pardon?
Oh, in your Yahoo group you said that there's evidence of children who have been "cured" by your treatment.

Why then Mr Liar does it state very clearly in the FAQ's
"...As of this writing, no one on this list has completely cured their child..."

The quote you cited was there in 2003 when I joined the group. It has never been updated. I've probably discussed this with you before when you were lying under a different pseudonym. BTW, in case you were unsure, my name is John Best. So, your next move is probably to link to "Joseph's" ancient blogpost full of out of context quotes to besmirch my character. You can't refrain from calling me "quack" so you might as well carry out the rest of your character assassinating and childish argument technique.

reply to post by Pardon?


Courts awarded money to 81 people on the basis of vaccines causing autism. Would you shut up already? It's quite ironic that you so vehemently oppose him, but never have anything but innuendo to add before ignoring me.

reply to post by Pardon?


I keep calling you a quack because you are one.
That's obvious to everyone.

You really are saying that autism has only been around for 80 years or so? Really and you expect people to take you seriously? Leo Kanner was a very good scientist and he certainly paved the way in the acknowledgement and understanding of autism but to say there was none before that beggars belief. Kanner didn't coin the word autism (his work forms the basis of modern autism study). Autism was being used in European psychiatry decades before that. In fact the earliest printed version of it is in a German paper by Eugen Bleuler in 1911, twenty years before it even existed according to you.
Selective and agenda-led history at its finest and if anyone needed any further proof, you know and understand very little about what autism actually is let alone its aetiology.
Typical of quacks you like to pigeon-hole a particle disorder rather than accept that the likes of autism are extremely complex. You like to pigeon-hole these as it makes it easy to apply your "cure".

Everything's so simple in the mind of a quack, "There are a few genetic factors in cases that are similar to autism, like Rhetts and fragile x. However, as these conditions have their own names, that in itself tells us that these cases are not autism." Brilliant deduction, absolutely first class!!


I've already stated that the APOE4 gene is not related to autism yet, without proof, you still maintain it is.
www.nimhgenetics.org...
Just because there is some significance with this gene in Alzheimer's you automatically think there has to be a link to autism.
You're wrong again.

Essentially what you are getting at is trying to say that autism is only autism if there's mercury involved isn't it?
Children who have behavioural development problems who have no mercury inside them can't be autistic according to you?
Am I correct in that assumption?
Let's say I am, what do you call this immense substrate of patients? Do you have a name for it?
Do you actually care about them (I'd guess you don't as you can't chelate them).

Which brings me to your test....
Have you any idea how unethical and unscientific (actually medieval!) your proposed test is?
Again, you're living in a total self-delusional fantasy world.

What was described in 1911 and, I believe, before that by Kraepolin was also known as childhood schizophrenia. Kanner knew this was different than autism or he would have related the two. This also gave us the word "crapola" to describe Kraepolin's work. The behavior of autistics is so bizarre that it could never be missed by anyone. You and the other liars from Neurodiversity have been presenting these same untrue arguments for ages and I already refuted all of them a long time ago. Yes, we had Mad Hatter's Disease which everyone knows was mercury poisoning and it was similar to Alzheimer's since it happened to adults. Autism happens to babies but the damage to the brain is identical, tangles of dead nerves.

You can state that the APO-E4 is not related to autism until you're blue in the face but that won't make it true. We know it's true since studies showed that 99% of autistic kids had the APO-E4 over ten years ago. The fact that we gain improvement in 75% of people who try chelation and that we gain imp[rovement in over 90% of cases who try methyl B-12 also confirm this. Lots of people quit on chelation without doing enough rounds to allow it to produce results. Results can be painfully slow in older children as I can attest to. There are also many "quack" doctors who practice chelation the wrong way. They don't use ALA and they use dosing schedules that hurt the patients or the really idiotic doctors use EDTA. I'll run out of characters before I can cover this subject in detail. What you should glean here is that decent people work towards curing victims and liars present nonsense that prevents people from learning how to cure victims. You are presenting nonsense. Please go away and present your nonsense to retards who want to "celebrate the joy of autism".

reply to post by bettwice33


Thanks for telling us your name.
Now everyone can see just what a thouroughly hate filled, nasty little man you really are. Especially when you're behind a keyboard.
Oh, I didn't have a clue who you were, just thought I'd call your bluff and your superman complex would do the rest.
It worked as well.

So, everyone who disagrees with you is a liar, a bullsh@tter, pure jackasses etc etc ad nauseam?
I'm guessing because of the way you are, not once have you stopped to think that you're wrong.
No, it can't be you. It must be everyone else mustn't it?

It's pointless countering your ideas with proven facts as you just won't accept them will you?
As you said, "you have all the answers".
Obviously you don't though.
It's like talking to a brick wall but without the engagement a brick wall would bring in comparison with you.

Instead of talking nonsense about your having a cure and focussing on using bully tactics to attempt to browbeat people into believing falsehoods, you should really channel some of your energy into therapy for yourself.
Believe me you really need it.

Because of your manner in this thread, your refusal to provide any tangible evidence whatsoever, your lack of empathy towards anything that has been said in disagreement to you, your obvious lies about being able to cure something which is essentially incurable, anyone who had the slightest doubts about whether or not you could indeed cure autism will be left in no doubt whatsoever that you're someone to be avoided at all costs and that your cure is all in your head.

You've never "debated" with me on any other place than here. I don't frequent autism blogs or forums and never have. The only conspiracy type site I visit is here as it's reasonably well balanced unlike most others.
I'll quite happily counter quack claims though. I hate quacks with an absolute passion.
If I can stop one person from being at best disappointed with some of these claims then I'm happy. That and that alone is my motivation.

Having had a look around at some of your comments on other forums and blogs since I now know your name it's apparent that your only motivation is feeding your ego.

Instead of using blogs etc to attack people, if you think your treatments are so successful, why don't you promote it properly? People might listen to you then. The way way you go about things now though you've got no chance of even getting people to listen.

reply to post by Pardon?


Wow, that's a lot of berating! I think I'm going to cry. I've seen other liars use lots of words to say absolutely nothing to refute what I say but I think this is the most words I've seen at one time from a degenerate liar who wants desperately to confuse the truth about autism. I don't think there are any fools here who fall for your BS though.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Pardon?

 

Courts awarded money to 81 people on the basis of vaccines causing autism. Would you shut up already? It's quite ironic that you so vehemently oppose him, but never have anything but innuendo to add before ignoring me.

edit on 10-12-2012 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)

Ah, sorry, are you feeling left out?

Isn't the number of autistic children now 1 in 88?
81 children isn't really that many when you look at it like that is it? Obviously it's still 81 too many but without understanding the individual cases you don't know whether it been awarded for causing or triggering autism.
There's a MASSIVE difference.
If all of the cases specifically stated that the vaccines were the root cause of autism you can bet your bottom dollar that there would be a hell of a lot being done about it. There isn't so discounting a huge conspiratorial cover-up there mustn't be that much real evidence.

Oh, the reason I haven't been as vehement in my responses to you is that unlike bettwice you've been providing as much evidence as you can. I'm more than happy to have a proper debate with you even though you seem to be getting a bit angry over it. You've done it properly and I can only applaud you for that.
I might even try some of that Procera now (if they do another study anyway...).

Originally posted by bettwice33
reply to post by Pardon?

 

Wow, that's a lot of berating! I think I'm going to cry. I've seen other liars use lots of words to say absolutely nothing to refute what I say but I think this is the most words I've seen at one time from a degenerate liar who wants desperately to confuse the truth about autism. I don't think there are any fools here who fall for your BS though.

Lol, I'm sure you're used to it.
Strangely you seem to get it everywhere you go so you should be.

I'm sure everyone will believe everything you've said. I mean with such persuasive debating skills and compelling evidence how could they not....?

reply to post by Pardon?


Im not angry with you; just felt like you were trying to sweep me under the rug so to speak.

reply to post by Pardon?


Please ask Amalgamated Trolls to send new agents.

Originally posted by bettwice33
reply to post by Pardon?

 

Please ask Amalgamated Trolls to send new agents.

Pointless.
You're beyond help.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
i am unsure that vaccines cause autism. i'm on the spectrum myself, and vaccines are administered around the same time the first symptoms start showing up, so it could be a case of association vs. causation.

just because two things coincide chronologically does not mean that they are a cause and effect pair. autism is passed on genetically, that much is clear, though the precise mechanisms that cause it are completely unknown and only theories exist.

it is folly to say that vaccines cause autism when the base neurological causes of autism aren't even known.

Well I disagree, I personally think it would be fair to say 'vaccines' are A cause of conditions known to be in the 'autism spectrum'. SOMETIMES in *some* people, and better to more accurately say they are one COMPONENT that contributes to a toxic overload and absolutely has potential to cause neurological damage,

This-- and just my opinion--- but of the *poisions* (imo) out there I would personally say vaccines are a MAJOR component of CAUSING disease in certain body types. When mercury and aluminum bind in the brains of people that are poor excreters of it, it has the potential to disrupt all sorts of brain functions. If you have lots of mercury amalgam fillings, maybe one who's mom passed mercury or lead or cadmium to them, who may have a problem getting enough natural magnesium or chromium or selenium, etc., who eats lots of high fructose empty carbs.. (all which can deplete neutrients--or bind sites- needed for detoxifying pathways) it is entirely likely to me over time your reaction to ANY shot might be 180 deg. different than someone who doesn't have those issues. And really how many kids today likely don't have some of them or even ALL of them (and more).?

reply to post by azrael36


This is a known fact. It's even published in my med school books. But what I don't understand, is if it's being realized in medical studies how come nothing is being done about it? Maybe the government wants us to be this way. Down fall of society via lack of socialization skills.

reply to post by bettwice33


This is not at all confirmed to be true. The term "Autism" was coined circa 1910 and only started gaining momentum within the scientific community in the 1940s. Thus, how could Autism cases even be categorized as "Austism" until the word itself entered the vocabulary? Along with some other of my peers, I've had to read an extensive amount of historical medical cases, in which some patients presented with classic symptoms of Autism but were diagnosed under the purview of another illness.
Once again, since the condition itself was medicalized at a much later date, you are NOT stating a fact when you say that Autism never existed prior to the 1930s- you're making a big, and rather careless assumption.

Just had to chime in with my two cents.

Originally posted by zroth

Why are you watching Fox News?

Just curious.

Hahaha, I'm actually curious as to this as well.

reply to post by deathproof


Most places, you can file for an exemption, and simply state that you don't approve of them on religious grounds. If they question that, point out that you are not required to have this or that specific religion for such an exemption. I would recommend checking the local laws for your state. The schools will push, and demand, but there is some legal leeway.

reply to post by insightout

Thus, how could Autism cases even be categorized as "Austism" until the word itself entered the vocabulary?

Perhaps I'm not understanding, but perhaps there was no need for the word "autism" early on because the symtoms attributed to this syndrome didn't occur frequently enough, and only when they started increasing (through vaccines?) did a label become attached.

But aside, I would like to know if anyone here is familiar with one of the adjuvants Thimerosal and also with the aluminum compound used in many flu shots. I work in a lab and am somewhat familiar with clinical trials and metabolism studies and though I haven't spent a huge amount of time on it (yet) I've been looking for safety data and studies to support Thimerosal, but they seem to be especially hard to come by. What I've been trying to locate are multiple studies showing the elimination times and metabolite profiles of IV administered Thimerosal and better yet where we have excretion data and met. profiles for IV dosed flu shots. I would have to think if these vaccines are being given to just month old children then there surely must be a plethora of easily accessable and interpretable safety data.

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by insightout

 

Thus, how could Autism cases even be categorized as "Autism" until the word itself entered the vocabulary?

Perhaps I'm not understanding, but perhaps there was no need for the word "autism" early on because the symtoms attributed to this syndrome didn't occur frequently enough, and only when they started increasing (through vaccines?) did a label become attached.

Yet, at least in the literature review I'm conducting, there is much evidence of the symptoms associated with Autism. Quite a good amount, actually. However, such symptoms were never scrutinized, isolated and then categorized together. Usually the practitioner would write such signs and symptoms of the patient as "being selectively mute", "solitary nature", "prone to social paranoia", "lacks sufficient communication and verbal skills". With a understanding of the overall symptoms of the case, most of the scientific community today would label such a patient as either someone with Autism or another closely related behavioral disorder.

Edit: I'd be glad to hear evidence to the contrary, though. That's what makes this stuff exciting!

reply to post by insightout

Yet, at least in the literature review I'm conducting, there is much evidence of the symptoms associated with Autism. Quite a good amount, actually. However, such symptoms were never scrutinized, isolated and then categorized together. Usually the practitioner would write such signs and symptoms of the patient as "being selectively mute", "solitary nature", "prone to social paranoia", "lacks sufficient communication and verbal skills". With a understanding of the overall symptoms of the case, most of the scientific community today would label such a patient as either someone with Autism or another closely related behavioral disorder.

Edit: I'd be glad to hear evidence to the contrary, though. That's what makes this stuff exciting!
edit on 1/13/13 by insightout because: added last sentence

I wonder though if any of the symptoms you mention could also be associated with heavy metal posioning? Vaccines aren't the *only* possible route of entry, maybe just an additional source. And again have you performed any research into the excretion rates of mercury and aluminum from the body as concerns IV injection? That IMO is a very crucial aspect of plausible vaccine damage that some people simply are not able to eliminate these toxic metals fast enough and that in certain people they have a tendency to bioaccumulate more than in others. What we need to find are mass balance studies that clearly show these metals when introduced by IV injection don' t bioaccumulate in the brain and other organs and can be completely accounted for or their metabolites.




: