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.

 

Courts Quietly Confirm MMR Vaccine Causes Autism

page: 15
71
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Rubinstein
If someone gets an autoimmune disease directly after vaccination, by default it's logical to assume it was caused by the vaccine unless anyone can prove it wasn't, in the same way as if someone is run over by a car we assume the car caused their broken bones unless there is other evidence available.




Learn how to format quotes properly, your posts are difficult to understand enough as it is.

You comment is very wrong.
It's completely ILLOGICAL to assume anything in diagnosing any medical condition otherwise you could miss the actual reason.




posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   

OneManArmy

Im desperate for you to prove me wrong.

All im doing is providing my evidence for "fear mongering" in the face of official statistics, if thats ridiculous, then Im sorry.
edit on 201311America/Chicago11pm11pmSat, 23 Nov 2013 13:12:44 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)


How can you be proven wrong if you're not right in the first place?
And your "evidence" proves nothing you're trying to say.


But let's take a step back here.

Your first post states that "My daughter has autism...yes she has had the MMR...Dr Wakefields career has been destroyed, maybe he was right all along. Regardless of what you think. "(I'll come back to Wakefield...)
Then you post a couple of links about MMR & autism and basically saying "Well I had measles and I'm alright (Jack)".
Then another autism/MMR link.

But later on you post that you know the MMR doesn't cause autism.
So why post those links then?

A later post mentions fear-mongering (but you're posting links trying to show an MMR/autism link, if that's not fear-mongering, what is?)
The you start your back-tracking about your daughter and the MMR jab.

Then you chide someone for fear-mongering and then you whip out your "evidence" i.e. an unsubstantiated report in a newspaper...and a very unbalanced comparison of measles and vaccine complications. You top this off with a lie about measles being eradicated prior to vaccination.
Then it's a bit of cat & mouse and obfuscation by you over your anti-vax credentials although the outcome of that is obvious in the extreme.

You keep on saying that you're a concerned parent yet you dismiss out of hand the statistics on people who have been harmed or killed as a result of NOT being vaccinated.
Even though the evidence tells you that there is far less harm having the vaccine than not having it.
The evidence also tells you that there is absolutely no benefit in having single jabs.
Yet you bang on about having the single jabs...(even though that means you would rather give your child 3 needles rather than one (why?) even though it's the measles component both in the single variant and the MMR which can give a fever.

You're dismissal of any evidence which supports MMR but when a certain poster (who's very less than credible) posts a list of anti-vax stuff you exclaim "Hooray! That's what I'm looking for!".
Very balanced of you indeed.

You say you don't go on anti-vax sites then you post a link from Age of Autism which is probably THE most extreme of any anti-vax sites.
And you KNOW that autism isn't caused by MMR but you're happy to accept a report on an anti anti-vax doctor from a site that lies about the causes of autism...
You're really confused aren't you?

Going back to Wakefield again, it seems to me, judging from your comments that you are a supporter of his or at the very least a sympathiser.
That deceiving and conniving b*stard wasn't made an example of at all, as he should have been jailed for what he did to disabled children. He got off lightly.
I would really love to meet him face to face.

Irrespective of what anyone posts your mind is already made up (you effectively said so earlier) so why continue with the charade?

Yeah, you're a concerned parent alright.
A bit like I'm a professional footballer.

edit on 24/11/13 by Pardon? because: Fixed quote



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Pardon?

You comment is very wrong.
It's completely ILLOGICAL to assume anything in diagnosing any medical condition otherwise you could miss the actual reason.


You're completely wrong, the most logical first line of inquiry is the most obvious one e.g. broken bones from car crash, infection from yesterday's operation, autoimmune disease from yesterday's immune system tinckering vaccine. You think that somehow we have to assume by default that vaccines can do no harm, only the Pharmaceuticals should want that.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:06 AM
link   
You're completely out of touch with how the medical system works. Big Pharma fund the research, you really believe that Big Pharma are going to fund real research into MMR safety and completely shoot their industry in the foot? That's not how it works I'm afraid. This would require genuine indepedent regulation.

You also don't seem aware that there are many studies and scientists warning about MMR, even local doctors warn parents.


redshoes
reply to post by Rubinstein
 


Many scientists have studied the statistics, generated experiments and published results. I'm prepared to rely on the thousands of researchers who support MMR than on a nameless sceen name, with as far as I can see no actual data of his own to back up his argument.

We're not talking about aliens or space NAZIs or the holy grail here, where the facts cannot be isolated and proven or debunked, we are discussing facts that can be verified by science.

As to the big Pharma argument, There is as much commercial reward in proving a link between MMR and disproving one. If the only motive for a conspiracy by big pharma is an economic one, it would surely prove more profitable to manufacture and administer six injections, rather than two.




posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   

OneManArmy

Rubinstein
If someone gets an autoimmune disease directly after vaccination, by default it's logical to assume it was caused by the vaccine unless anyone can prove it wasn't, in the same way as if someone is run over by a car we assume the car caused their broken bones unless there is other evidence available.


Tis a point humorously made.
I chuckled.


Thanks OneManArmy, yes it helps illustrate the madness we're up against



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Studies around the world backup Wakefield's findings, yet the mainstream media stay silent. Big Pharma and their shills want us to believe this is about one doctor and a Playboy bunny, while we're told that everyone else disagrees with them; look into this folks, there are thousands of doctors on Wakefield's side, this is a cover-up at the highest level. Here are just some of the studies which back up Wakefield's findings. This battle is about Real Science Vs Corrupt Corporate 'Science'



The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63

The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372

Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517

Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005

Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103

Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3

Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85

The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10

Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11

Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98

Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161

Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6

Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13

Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.

Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35

Lancet. 1972;2:883–884.

Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62

Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372.

Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382.

American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605.

Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517.

Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34.

Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477.

Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16

Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465

Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991

Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.

Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303



edit on 24-11-2013 by Rubinstein because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-11-2013 by Rubinstein because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:19 AM
link   
To understand fully what's going on with MMR / Autism, we have to understand that the debate is no longer scientific, it is political, as is pointed out by Big Pharma Whistleblower and former UK Department of Health Chief Dr Peter Fletcher, he had access to documents which are not being released to the public, he is a distinguished man with over 40 years experience, every parent should take his warnings on board.

Dr Peter Fletcher, former UK Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health said

"it is the steady accumulation of evidence, from a number of respected universities, teaching hospitals and laboratories around the world, that matters here. There's far too much to ignore. Yet government health authorities are, it seems, more than happy to do so."

...

"the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history"

...

"There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."

....

"Clinical and scientific data is steadily accumulating that the live measles virus in MMR can cause brain, gut and immune system damage in a subset of vulnerable children,"



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:21 AM
link   
For those who are still trusting of Big Pharma, I would recommend listening to this former pharma exec turned whistleblower speak out, it will put things into perspective




edit on 24-11-2013 by Rubinstein because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Pardon?

OneManArmy

Im desperate for you to prove me wrong.

All im doing is providing my evidence for "fear mongering" in the face of official statistics, if thats ridiculous, then Im sorry.
edit on 201311America/Chicago11pm11pmSat, 23 Nov 2013 13:12:44 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)


How can you be proven wrong if you're not right in the first place?
And your "evidence" proves nothing you're trying to say.

I have addressed your posts point by point and will do so again.
Just by saying my evidence proves nothing doesnt make it so. PROVE IT.
The evidence suggests validity to my argument. PROVE OTHERWISE.



But let's take a step back here.

Your first post states that "My daughter has autism...yes she has had the MMR...Dr Wakefields career has been destroyed, maybe he was right all along. Regardless of what you think. "(I'll come back to Wakefield...)
Then you post a couple of links about MMR & autism and basically saying "Well I had measles and I'm alright (Jack)".
Then another autism/MMR link.

I think that MAYBE you missed the MAYBE.

maybe
ˈmeɪbiː,-bi/Submit
adverb
1.
perhaps; possibly.
"maybe I won't go back"
synonyms: perhaps, possibly, conceivably, it could be (that), it is possible (that), for all one knows; More
noun
noun: maybe; plural noun: maybes
1.
a mere possibility or probability.
"no ifs, buts, or maybes"



But later on you post that you know the MMR doesn't cause autism.
So why post those links then?

I never claimed MMR caused autism, I never claimed that it doesnt. I have always maintained I dont know.


A later post mentions fear-mongering (but you're posting links trying to show an MMR/autism link, if that's not fear-mongering, what is?)
The you start your back-tracking about your daughter and the MMR jab.

As I have shown on numerous occasions, you seem to be lacking in factual comprehension.


Then you chide someone for fear-mongering and then you whip out your "evidence" i.e. an unsubstantiated report in a newspaper...and a very unbalanced comparison of measles and vaccine complications. You top this off with a lie about measles being eradicated prior to vaccination.

You fail to mention the stats from the CDC, NHS and WHO. And I mispoke with regards the the eradication of measles before the vaccine I was factually wrong, but unlike you I admit mistakes. I meant to say the MORTALITY RATES OF MEASLES WAS PRACTICALLY ERADICATED PRE VACCINATION.


Then it's a bit of cat & mouse and obfuscation by you over your anti-vax credentials although the outcome of that is obvious in the extreme.

Your name calling is irrelevant to the argument.


You keep on saying that you're a concerned parent yet you dismiss out of hand the statistics on people who have been harmed or killed as a result of NOT being vaccinated.

And I repeatedly asked for evidence for the numbers of people killed or harmed by the vaccine so that a fair comparison could be made, Im still waiting for the evidence.


Even though the evidence tells you that there is far less harm having the vaccine than not having it.

What evidence?


The evidence also tells you that there is absolutely no benefit in having single jabs.
Yet you bang on about having the single jabs...(even though that means you would rather give your child 3 needles rather than one (why?) even though it's the measles component both in the single variant and the MMR which can give a fever.

Where is the evidence that you have shown that says there is no benefit in single jabs?
I would rather have a space between the separate jabs instead of overloading my childs immune system with 3 virus' at once. Why is that so damn hard to comprehend?


You're dismissal of any evidence which supports MMR but when a certain poster (who's very less than credible) posts a list of anti-vax stuff you exclaim "Hooray! That's what I'm looking for!".
Very balanced of you indeed.

I was applauding his use of very credible sources to back up his claims, in the very post I quoted and applauded. And the figures actually did back his claims, unlike yours.


You say you don't go on anti-vax sites then you post a link from Age of Autism which is probably THE most extreme of any anti-vax sites.
And you KNOW that autism isn't caused by MMR but you're happy to accept a report on an anti anti-vax doctor from a site that lies about the causes of autism...
You're really confused aren't you?

No I was simply raising the issue that the dr that was discrediting the debate had dubious issues of his own, on a blog that has no official value at all.


Going back to Wakefield again, it seems to me, judging from your comments that you are a supporter of his or at the very least a sympathiser.
That deceiving and conniving b*stard wasn't made an example of at all, as he should have been jailed for what he did to disabled children. He got off lightly.
I would really love to meet him face to face.

I have stated my position regarding Wakefield, you failed to comprehend it.
And you imply what by meeting him face to face? What do you intend to do?
Violence? Or give him a stern telling off?
If what he did was a crime then he would have gone to jail. So your suppositions and opinions are meritless.


Irrespective of what anyone posts your mind is already made up (you effectively said so earlier) so why continue with the charade?

My mind wasnt truly made up until I got involved in this thread and starting looking at the numbers. Then the evidence started to become apparent. And the distinct lack thereof any "complications caused by vaccination" data.


Yeah, you're a concerned parent alright.
A bit like I'm a professional footballer.

Just your opinion. Has no basis in fact.
You are good at sharing opinion, now bring the facts.
edit on 201311America/Chicago11am11amSun, 24 Nov 2013 08:04:01 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Rubinstein
To understand fully what's going on with MMR / Autism, we have to understand that the debate is no longer scientific, it is political, as is pointed out by Big Pharma Whistleblower and former UK Department of Health Chief Dr Peter Fletcher, he had access to documents which are not being released to the public, he is a distinguished man with over 40 years experience, every parent should take his warnings on board.

Dr Peter Fletcher, former UK Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health said

"it is the steady accumulation of evidence, from a number of respected universities, teaching hospitals and laboratories around the world, that matters here. There's far too much to ignore. Yet government health authorities are, it seems, more than happy to do so."

...

"the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history"

...

"There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."

....

"Clinical and scientific data is steadily accumulating that the live measles virus in MMR can cause brain, gut and immune system damage in a subset of vulnerable children,"


Fletcher, similar to Wakefield, likes gravy.
www.spiked-online.com...-2Fw



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Pardon?

Rubinstein
To understand fully what's going on with MMR / Autism, we have to understand that the debate is no longer scientific, it is political, as is pointed out by Big Pharma Whistleblower and former UK Department of Health Chief Dr Peter Fletcher, he had access to documents which are not being released to the public, he is a distinguished man with over 40 years experience, every parent should take his warnings on board.

Dr Peter Fletcher, former UK Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health said

"it is the steady accumulation of evidence, from a number of respected universities, teaching hospitals and laboratories around the world, that matters here. There's far too much to ignore. Yet government health authorities are, it seems, more than happy to do so."

...

"the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history"

...

"There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."

....

"Clinical and scientific data is steadily accumulating that the live measles virus in MMR can cause brain, gut and immune system damage in a subset of vulnerable children,"


Fletcher, similar to Wakefield, likes gravy.
www.spiked-online.com...-2Fw


With regards to Brian Deer, the main linked source for that article lead me to find this documentary, just for the sake of balance I post it here and have not yet watched it, but I will do right now.



Im 7.30 mins in and it already looks completely damning of Brian Deer.
Its becoming VERY VERY clear who the liars are in this debate.
edit on 201311America/Chicago11am11amSun, 24 Nov 2013 08:53:28 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   

OneManArmy


There is really no MAYBE about Wakefield.
He faked his study and used his position to abuse autistic children.
All for money.
Now he just ponces around from one anti-vax meeting to the other telling his sycophants how hard done he's been (even though he gets paid a fortune for doing so) before heading back to his mansion.
Why didn't he go to prison? Because although he conned the parents into signing the consent forms they couldn't prove outright that he had so that avenue went no further.
Where's the grey area there?

Outside of Wakefield's close cohort of merry men, NO-ONE has been able to replicate his trial.
No-one. Nowhere.
All studies show there's no causal effect.

So, since one of my friend's daughters was part of Wakefield's "study" I don't know if I would be able to control myself if I ever meet him.


Simply by posting "My daughter's got autism......she's had the MMR" implies that there's a relationship otherwise why did you post it? Like I said, everything else you say about it now is back-tracking.
You said that you have thought for some years that MMR doesn't cause autism.
So you're back-tracking again.
And back-tracking with your measles statement. You had no choice other than to admit you were wrong. Had you not been challenged about it you'd have carried it on.

The evidence against single jabs is that there is no evidence that single jabs are safer than MMR.
It also puts the child at risk of catching the other two diseases between jabs.
You are not overloading your child's immune system by getting the MMR. That's a typical comment from someone who doesn't understand the first thing about physiology.
As already mentioned, any fever from an MMR is due to the measles component of it. The same component which is in the single measles jab.
Why is that so damn hard to comprehend?

As for your applauding the other posters sources, yeah, right.
As for only using AoA for a critical argument against Orac, yeah, right.

I've not criticised your stats from the credible sources you posted as by their very nature, they're credible.
The one I had issue with was with the Telegraph article. Do I have to explain why yet again?

As for the evidence, exactly what evidence would you need to convince you either way?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   

OneManArmy

Pardon?

Rubinstein
To understand fully what's going on with MMR / Autism, we have to understand that the debate is no longer scientific, it is political, as is pointed out by Big Pharma Whistleblower and former UK Department of Health Chief Dr Peter Fletcher, he had access to documents which are not being released to the public, he is a distinguished man with over 40 years experience, every parent should take his warnings on board.

Dr Peter Fletcher, former UK Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health said

"it is the steady accumulation of evidence, from a number of respected universities, teaching hospitals and laboratories around the world, that matters here. There's far too much to ignore. Yet government health authorities are, it seems, more than happy to do so."

...

"the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history"

...

"There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."

....

"Clinical and scientific data is steadily accumulating that the live measles virus in MMR can cause brain, gut and immune system damage in a subset of vulnerable children,"


Fletcher, similar to Wakefield, likes gravy.
www.spiked-online.com...-2Fw


With regards to Brian Deer, the main linked source for that article lead me to find this documentary, just for the sake of balance I post it here and have not yet watched it, but I will do right now.



It doesn't particularly matter who obtained the information via the FoI act. The fact that the information is there is the critical issue, isn't it?



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Pardon?

As for your applauding the other posters sources, yeah, right.
As for only using AoA for a critical argument against Orac, yeah, right.


I also used 2 other sources as to the credibility of Orac.
I will not address your arguments any more, you are blind to the facts.
You are consistently using misdirection and other common shill tactics, like misrepresentation of the facts, and ridicule.(Doesnt make you a shill, but you use their tactics), I will not blatantly accuse you(unlike you), I will let the readers decide for themselves.
No amount of factual evidence will ever sway your opinion. Unlike you, as the facts change so does my opinion.
You have not admitted a single error or misrepresentation of facts in the face if "official" numbers.
You have provided no really credible evidence to back your claims, and as such I can only disregard what you have to say.
EDIT: Finally in the video I posted that is damning of Brian Deer, the very same parents of the "Lancet 12" who you claim are hard done by Andrew Wakefield (8 of the 12) are giving their own testimonies to how they have in your words been "wronged" it would appear that your claim is yet another blatant lie.

edit on 201311America/Chicago11am11amSun, 24 Nov 2013 09:13:40 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Pardon?

Fletcher, similar to Wakefield, likes gravy.
www.spiked-online.com...-2Fw


We're talking about the former chief of the UK Department of Health, yes he is similar to Wakefield, he's one of the best and is an honest man who doesn't sell out unlike your idol; vaccine patent holder and vaccine multi-millionaire Paul Offit



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Well said, Brian Deer is a snake, he's a hired hitman used by the Pharmaceuticals to take out honest scientists who are damaging profits. Anyone who's examined the case will easily see what's happened, it's just a smear campaign, you could do the same to 99% of doctors if you wanted to and had enough money behind you. Wakefield was always known as one of the best, he still is, but Pharma don't want us to know that.


OneManArmy

Pardon?

As for your applauding the other posters sources, yeah, right.
As for only using AoA for a critical argument against Orac, yeah, right.


I also used 2 other sources as to the credibility of Orac.
I will not address your arguments any more, you are blind to the facts.
You are consistently using misdirection and other common shill tactics, like misrepresentation of the facts, and ridicule.(Doesnt make you a shill, but you use their tactics), I will not blatantly accuse you(unlike you), I will let the readers decide for themselves.
No amount of factual evidence will ever sway your opinion. Unlike you, as the facts change so does my opinion.
You have not admitted a single error or misrepresentation of facts in the face if "official" numbers.
You have provided no really credible evidence to back your claims, and as such I can only disregard what you have to say.
EDIT: Finally in the video I posted that is damning of Brian Deer, the very same parents of the "Lancet 12" who you claim are hard done by Andrew Wakefield (8 of the 12) are giving their own testimonies to how they have in your words been "wronged" it would appear that your claim is yet another blatant lie.

edit on 201311America/Chicago11am11amSun, 24 Nov 2013 09:13:40 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
(Ex) Doctor Wakefield. Ruling by the General Medical Council...


Accordingly the Panel has determined that Dr Wakefield’s name should be erased from the medical register. The Panel concluded that it is the only sanction that is appropriate to protect patients and is in the wider public interest, including the maintenance of public trust and confidence in the profession and is proportionate to the serious and wide-ranging findings made against him.


Read the findings of the GMC Panel investigation into the corrupt scumbag, whose research was all wrong.. www.gmc-uk.org/Wakefield_SPM_and_SANCTION.pdf_32595267.pdf‎ opens as a PDF.

All those who smugly think Wakefield was good news support poor research.

Regards




edit on 24/11/2013 by paraphi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Rubinstein
Well said, Brian Deer is a snake, he's a hired hitman used by the Pharmaceuticals to take out honest scientists who are damaging profits. Anyone who's examined the case will easily see what's happened, it's just a smear campaign, you could do the same to 99% of doctors if you wanted to and had enough money behind you. Wakefield was always known as one of the best, he still is, but Pharma don't want us to know that.


OneManArmy

Pardon?

As for your applauding the other posters sources, yeah, right.
As for only using AoA for a critical argument against Orac, yeah, right.


I also used 2 other sources as to the credibility of Orac.
I will not address your arguments any more, you are blind to the facts.
You are consistently using misdirection and other common shill tactics, like misrepresentation of the facts, and ridicule.(Doesnt make you a shill, but you use their tactics), I will not blatantly accuse you(unlike you), I will let the readers decide for themselves.
No amount of factual evidence will ever sway your opinion. Unlike you, as the facts change so does my opinion.
You have not admitted a single error or misrepresentation of facts in the face if "official" numbers.
You have provided no really credible evidence to back your claims, and as such I can only disregard what you have to say.
EDIT: Finally in the video I posted that is damning of Brian Deer, the very same parents of the "Lancet 12" who you claim are hard done by Andrew Wakefield (8 of the 12) are giving their own testimonies to how they have in your words been "wronged" it would appear that your claim is yet another blatant lie.

edit on 201311America/Chicago11am11amSun, 24 Nov 2013 09:13:40 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)


What gets me is that Brian Deer has zero medical expertise, hes a journalist.
It seems much of the case against the doctors(not just wakefield) is this one mans "investigative" reporting.
And he shows himself to be a snake and blatant liar in the video I posted.
Who do you trust? lol.

Heres a correction to the BMJ's article discrediting Wakefield...

The BMJ should have declared competing interests in relation to this editorial by Fiona Godlee and colleagues (BMJ 2011;342:c7452, doi:10.1136/bmj.c7452). The BMJ Group receives advertising and sponsorship revenue from vaccine manufacturers, and specifically from Merck and GSK, which both manufacture MMR vaccines. For further information see the rapid response from Godlee (www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d1335.full/reply#bmj_el_251470). The same omission also affected two related Editor’s Choice articles (BMJ 2011;342:d22 and BMJ 2011;342:d378).


Source - BMJ Article calling Wakefield a fraud.
Note the correction is a later addition, and wasnt included in the original article.

Double Standards and The BMJ

Professor Sir Michael Rutter FRS of the Institute of Psychiatry in London gave expert evidence for the prosecution at the trial of Andrew Wakefield before the GMC in 2007. Sir Michael, an expert in conflicts disclosure, was of the opinion that even in 1997 when the Lancet paper was written, a researcher had an objective duty to disclose conflicting interests, both actual, and even those that might possibly be perceived as conflicts by a casual reader. [1] Professor Sir Michael's reason for the disclosure obligation, in 2007 and a decade earlier, was so that

... "the reader of the published research could judge for himself whether the quality of the reported science outweighs the potential for the conflict to bias the interpretation." [2]

However, the casual BMJ reader in January 2011 was not given the opportunity to judge the potential for the BMJ's conflicting interests to bias the editorial interpretation of Brian Deer's published research. Where are the competing interest corrections to the editorial, editor's choices and the published Deer research? "The BMJ should have declared competing interests in relation to this editorial by Fiona Godlee and colleagues (BMJ 2011;342:c7452, doi:10.1136/bmj.c7452)." But even the online reader is still unlikely to have the opportunity to honestly weigh up the potential for editorial bias in the interpretation of Deer's research.

[1] 'Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines - the truth behind a tragedy' by Andrew Wakefield 2010. Chapter Eleven: Disclosure.

[2] GMC vs Wakefield, Walker-Smith and Murch. Tr. 37-55D

Competing interests: None declared

Source - BMJ
edit on 201311America/Chicago11pm11pmSun, 24 Nov 2013 13:42:45 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   

paraphi


All those who smugly think Wakefield was good news support poor research.

Regards



Im finding it increasingly true, that those who smugly support biased research done by the very people making the drugs/vaccines support poor research.
It would seem bad research is on all sides of this argument.
No one has a right to be smug.

Lets hear what Wakefield has to say for himself..


edit on 201311America/Chicago11pm11pmSun, 24 Nov 2013 15:11:50 -06001113 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   
After listening to Wakefield himself, who sounds very sincere. I come to one conclusion.
The government health department gave immunity from prosecution to the pharma companies due to the dangers already known about the cheaper version of the MMR vaccine, thus making the government liable for prosecution.
It would seem that this whole damn debacle, is to protect government from lawsuits, due to their decision to save money at the expense of lives that were predicted to suffer as a result of the cheaper version of the vaccine.
The GMC has become a tool to protect government from prosecution instead of protecting the lives of children.
And this whole case sets a precedent for future cases.
Its quite sickening to say the least, and makes me angry to say the least.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join