Courts Quietly Confirm MMR Vaccine Causes Autism

boncho

Consider that even if measles is not in epidemic proportions, any time someone incurs a hospital stay, that is a drain on the economy on a preventable disorder. In the case of an adult it's missed work, as in, if the child is young enough, the parent may have to stay home and take care of it.

So while you say "choice", especially in a country with universal health care, you are making choices for taxpayers. I believe in choice as well, but in this case I'd say if you decide not to get it, you foot the bill for medical costs. But then again, vaccinations work when everyone gets them, not having carriers of viruses walking around.

If you're healthy and well nourished your immune system can deal perfectly well with Measles, it's when people start doing silly things like surpressing their immune system with Tylenol / Paracetamol that we can see problems. We don't get warned about Paracetamol as it's a cash-cow for Pharma.

Pharma want the taxpayers money for themselves, that's why they want you injected with vaccines; if they manage to start up autoimmune diseases and allergies then you're on drugs for life; that's the game plan. Let's not be naive and pretend that Pharma are trying to reduce their profits through vaccines, surely you cannot claim to really believe such a thing? Time and time again Pharma have been shown to be completely unethical and greedy, you can't tell us you really believe that the Pharmaceuticals value our health over their own profits?

Can people please stop pretending that such unethical companies are here to save us, it's a complete lie and if you fall for that you're incredibly naive.

If you really believe that then you've got to learn the difference between Corporate Science and Real Science, with every study you read look carefully for conflicts of interest, stop taking every study at face value or the corporations will have you dancing to their lies and propaganda.

boncho

So while you say "choice", especially in a country with universal health care, you are making choices for taxpayers. I believe in choice as well, but in this case I'd say if you decide not to get it, you foot the bill for medical costs. But then again, vaccinations work when everyone gets them, not having carriers of viruses walking around.

Having the MMR vaccine doesnt guarantee immunity, only having had the disease guarantees immunity.
Fighting the real disease strengthens the immune system, it has its risks, but then so does the vaccine.
As long as the child is healthy with no vitamin A deficiency and no immune system weakness then the child should be fine. Complications from measles are most likely in under 5's AND over 20's.

Do you not accept that the fear mongering outweighs the risk?
Do you not think that forced vaccination is wrong?

You can argue costs, but I argue morality. If we have the money to jump into war with Syria, we can afford to look after our citizens. After all, it is OUR tax money.

Rubinstein
Can people please stop pretending that such unethical companies are here to save us, it's a complete lie and if you fall for that you're incredibly naive.

If you really believe that then you've got to learn the difference between Corporate Science and Real Science, with every study you read look carefully for conflicts of interest, stop taking every study at face value or the corporations will have you dancing to their lies and propaganda.

It doesn't work that way. If you want to prove your hypothesis right, prove it right. You don't make scientific discovery by claiming someone's work is shoddy, it's just not scientific. You know, the whole "method" part of it all.

If there is any truth to your anti-vax rhetoric, why not simply provide evidence? You realize the anti-vax crowd has been lying to you right? You realize they did studies awhile ago that had terrible conflicts of interest right? You realize they haven't been able to put out any legitimate studies and resort to bending the truth, telling half truths and flat out lies right?

You realize that nearly every anti-vax poster in this thread doesn't post sources right? Neither do the big ones. (you know, the "foundations" and "associations" [the one's soliciting for money]) It's all "Your government is trying to kill you this, and, my baby has autism that", just a giant blob of anecdotal bull snip.

Save the effort. I said before, people running the anti-vax circuit are either clipping monetary gains somehow, or useful idiots. What does that make you? Are you so angsty that you believe anything told to you because it has "Evil corporation" in the tagline?

boncho
It doesn't work that way. If you want to prove your hypothesis right, prove it right. You don't make scientific discovery by claiming someone's work is shoddy, it's just not scientific. You know, the whole "method" part of it all.

If there is any truth to your anti-vax rhetoric, why not simply provide evidence? You realize the anti-vax crowd has been lying to you right? You realize they did studies awhile ago that had terrible conflicts of interest right? You realize they haven't been able to put out any legitimate studies and resort to bending the truth, telling half truths and flat out lies right?

You realize that nearly every anti-vax poster in this thread doesn't post sources right? Neither do the big ones. (you know, the "foundations" and "associations" [the one's soliciting for money]) It's all "Your government is trying to kill you this, and, my baby has autism that", just a giant blob of anecdotal bull snip.

I very much doubt you're interested in the studies, your agenda is to market vaccines and neutralize those who speak out against vaccines. Here are some concerning studies for those who want to learn more:-


Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

"These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates."

Self-Organized Criticality Theory of Autoimmunity

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.../22014010/related

Conclusions/Significance

Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host's immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system's self-organized criticality.

Association between type 1 diabetes and Hib vaccine

www.bmj.com...

"the potential risk of the vaccine exceeds the potential benefit"

Human papilloma virus vaccine and primary ovarian failure: another facet of the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Whooping cough and pertussis vaccine: a comparison of risks and benefits in Britain

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

"It is concluded that, in children living in non-deprived circumstances in Britain, the risk of pertussis vaccine during the period 1970-83 exceeded those of whooping cough. In some deprived sectors, the risks from whooping cough might have been marginally higher but there was no evidence that this was associated with any increase in deaths or permanent disabilities."


Regarding the Polio Vaccines which Bill Gates sent to India. According to researchers the vaccines spread a disease more dangerous and twice as deadly as Polio.

Indian J Med Ethics. 2012 Apr-Jun;9(2):114-7.

"…while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere [First, do no harm] was violated."


Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

"The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. "


Here's a video of the former CDC Chief admitting that vaccines trigger Autism
CDC Chief Admits that Vaccines Trigger Autism

www.youtube.com...

OneManArmy

boncho

So while you say "choice", especially in a country with universal health care, you are making choices for taxpayers. I believe in choice as well, but in this case I'd say if you decide not to get it, you foot the bill for medical costs. But then again, vaccinations work when everyone gets them, not having carriers of viruses walking around.

Having the MMR vaccine doesnt guarantee immunity, only having had the disease guarantees immunity.
Fighting the real disease strengthens the immune system, it has its risks, but then so does the vaccine.

I don't get it, there was an outbreak recently, and 10% of the kids were hospitalized:

Measles is endemic worldwide. Although it was declared eliminated from the U.S. in 2000, high rates of vaccination and good communication with persons who refuse vaccination is needed to prevent outbreaks and sustain the elimination of measles in the U.S.[13] Of the 66 cases of measles reported in the U.S. in 2005, slightly over half were attributable to one unvaccinated individual who acquired measles during a visit to Romania.[14] This individual returned to a community with many unvaccinated children. The resulting outbreak infected 34 people, mostly children and virtually all unvaccinated; 9% were hospitalized, and the cost of containing the outbreak was estimated at $167,685. A major epidemic was averted due to high rates of vaccination in the surrounding communities.[13]

en.wikipedia.org...

Forget money for a second, you are speaking about morality. You nearly insinuate the vaccine doesn't work, but in stark contrast the disease rates in the US are almost nil today, just 50 years ago the rates were 250-750,000 cases a year. Vaccines were introduced, and pretty quickly dropped to 30-60,000 cases, and within two decades were down to a couple thousand people.

Recently, 10% of an outbreak were hospitalized. It's moral to risk people's lives like that when we have methods of eradicating disease? If we have a vaccine for HIV or Cancer, we shouldn't make it mandatory?

Here is a newsflash, people are self destructive and apathetic sometimes. Now of course if you were born during the disease heydays, you might not be. People were very welcome to vaccinations when their friends were being crippled with polio, a trip far away might land you TB, typhoid and you had to go through a bout of measles, or pertussis. And oh crap, couple of our kids died.

www.cdc.gov...&deaths.PDF
en.wikipedia.org...
www.historyofvaccines.org...

Do you not accept that the fear mongering outweighs the risk?

It's not fear mongering, it's preventative medicine. And we have empirical data. Hell, it wasn't that long ago 5% of the worlds population died from the flu.

By the way, the Anti-Vax crowd is FEAR MONGERING. You realize they haven't put any worthwhile studies together right? That it's all based off crap? Yeah, that's fear mongering.

Do you not think that forced vaccination is wrong?

You can argue costs, but I argue morality. If we have the money to jump into war with Syria, we can afford to look after our citizens. After all, it is OUR tax money.

What does Syria have to do with vaccinations? That's like saying we should stop eating bananas cause apples are red.

I don't know where has "forced vaccinations." Many are optional, some are mandatory. But in most circumstances when they become mandatory it's for good reason:

An estimated 300 million people died from smallpox in the 20th century alone. This virulent disease, which kills a third of those it infects, is known to have co-existed with human beings for thousands of years. As the world's population grew, and travel increased, so the virus that Edward Jenner called the "speckled monster" grasped every opportunity to colonise the world.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Dear god man, 300 million people. But I'm sure you care about morality. You would have run around back then warning people of evil government and evil vaccinations.

Not sure what generation you people are from but I spent my early childhood listening to horror stories from my great grandparents, grandparents, and parents.

Smallpox, polio, pertussis, flu, TB… I heard about them all. Met people that lived through them, met people that lost family members to them, etc.

The way vaccines work, requires people to continue taking them until the disease is gone. Stops popping up. With the way travel is today, probably until it's eradicated worldwide. But yes, if something like a small pox epidemic pops up, I am all for forced immunization. But as I said, most if not all are optional these days. Sadly people like yourself have been misguided, and most likely if you lived 100-200 years ago, you'd be the same person bitching for someone to save you when your city was hit with an epidemic.

reply to post by boncho


The more vaccines a country gives the worse the infant mortality rate. Also Small Pox was eradicated through quarantine, the vaccine was incredibly dangerous and would spread Small Pox itself.

For anyone who wants to learn more about the risks and benefits of vaccines, this doctor goes through them one by one and assesses which ones (if any) are worth receiving.

Vaccines - The Risks, The Benefits, The Choices

Rubinstein

boncho
It doesn't work that way. If you want to prove your hypothesis right, prove it right. You don't make scientific discovery by claiming someone's work is shoddy, it's just not scientific. You know, the whole "method" part of it all.

If there is any truth to your anti-vax rhetoric, why not simply provide evidence? You realize the anti-vax crowd has been lying to you right? You realize they did studies awhile ago that had terrible conflicts of interest right? You realize they haven't been able to put out any legitimate studies and resort to bending the truth, telling half truths and flat out lies right?

You realize that nearly every anti-vax poster in this thread doesn't post sources right? Neither do the big ones. (you know, the "foundations" and "associations" [the one's soliciting for money]) It's all "Your government is trying to kill you this, and, my baby has autism that", just a giant blob of anecdotal bull snip.

I very much doubt you're interested in the studies, your agenda is to market vaccines and neutralize those who speak out against vaccines. Here are some concerning studies for those who want to learn more:-


Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

"These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates."

It helps if you actually read the study or if you understand what they are about. I should have expected as much. So I take it you mined all this of Natural News or something thinking it was a big shotgun of anti-vax super juice.

The childhood SIDS "study" is by Gary Goldman, who if I remember correctly is part of an antivax foundation (he is either on the board or the director). Now, I could care less, but I thought you were touting the inhumanities of conflict of interest just a few posts ago?

You can read about Goldman at his anti-vax site.

I take it we are supposed to take his "study" as proof, since his background in…

… graduated with honors in 1977 from California State University, Fullerton (CSUF) with a double major: B.S. Engineering (Electronic emphasis) and B.S. Computer Science.

Ah yes, engineering and computer science.

And it doesn't take long to see familiar names pop up:

The first author, Neil Z. Miller, is described as an “independent researcher, and the second author, Gary S. Goldman, is described as an “independent computer scientist.” This is not a promising start, as neither of them appear to have any qualifications that would lead a reader to think that they have any special expertise in epidemiology, vaccines, or science. Still, I suppose one could look at the fact that these two somehow managed to get a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal as being pretty strong evidence for the democratic nature of science, where you don’t necessarily have to be affiliated with a university or a biotech or pharmaceutical company in order to publish in the scientific literature. On the other hand, even though it is stated that this was not funded by any grants or companies, I still see a conflict of interest. Specifically, the NaturalNews.com article points out that the “National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) donated $2500 and Michael Belkin donated $500 (in memory of his daughter, Lyla) for open access to the journal article (making it freely available to all researchers).” The NVIC, as you recall, was founded by Barbara Loe Fisher and is one of the oldest and most influential anti-vaccine groups in the U.S., having recently teamed up with Joe Mercola to promote anti-vaccine views.

No, most definitely not a promising start.

NVIC and Mercola, all profiting off the anti-vax movement. The real problem though is that all the study does is say that SIDS and vaccine rates are linked somehow. But it doesn't determine anything beyond that and somehow you think this is proof of something.

In order to address the unacceptable high rates of infant mortality due to SIDS, the American Academy of Pediatrics started a campaign called “Back to Sleep” in order to instruct parents to make sure that their infants slept on their backs, promoting the belief still in force today that a major cause of SIDS can be attributed to placing an infant on her stomach (in the prone position), rather than supine (on her back). As a result, the number of cases reported as SIDS decreased dramatically by 8.6%.

So what was it, vaccines or kids sleeping on their stomachs?

***

But that is not the meat of the mistakes in the study, to go into it further:

Arbitrary: they count number of vaccines in US bins (DTaP is one, hib is separate) and non-specific designations (some “polio” is still given as OPV in Singapore), rather than antigens. If they did that, Japan, still giving the live bacterial vaccine BCG, would immediately go to the top of the list. That wouldn’t fit the agenda, of course. But if you go by “shot” rather than by antigen, why are DTaP, IPV, hepB and hib counted as 4 shots for example in Austria, when they are given as Infanrix hexa, in one syringe?

Mistakes: The German childhood vaccination schedule recommends DTaP, hib, IPV AND hepB, as well as PCV at 2, 3 and 4 months, putting them squarely into the 21 – 23 bin. The fourth round of shots is recommended at 11 to 14 months, and MenC, MMR and Varicella are recommended with a lower age limit of 11 months, too, which means that a number of German kids will fall into the highest bin, at least as long as you count the Miller/Goldman way.

Cherry picking:

Actually, this third question is probably the most interesting of all. Miller and Goldman only looked at one year’s data. There are many years worth of data available; if such a relationship between IMR and vaccine doses is real, it will be robust, showing up in multiple analyses from multiple years’ data. Moreover, the authors took great pains to look at only the United States and the 33 nations with better infant mortality rates than the U.S. There is no statistical rationale for doing this, nor is there a scientific rationale. Again, if this is a true correlation, it will be robust enough to show up in comparisons of more nations than just the U.S. and nations with more favorable infant mortality rates. Basically, the choice of data analyzed leaves a strong suspicion of cherry picking.

Criticism from anti-vax:

Actually, this third question is probably the most interesting of all. Miller and Goldman only looked at one year’s data. There are many years worth of data available; if such a relationship between IMR and vaccine doses is real, it will be robust, showing up in multiple analyses from multiple years’ data. Moreover, the authors took great pains to look at only the United States and the 33 nations with better infant mortality rates than the U.S. There is no statistical rationale for doing this, nor is there a scientific rationale. Again, if this is a true correlation, it will be robust enough to show up in comparisons of more nations than just the U.S. and nations with more favorable infant mortality rates.

Rubinstein
reply to post by boncho

 

The more vaccines a country gives the worse the infant mortality rate. Also Small Pox was eradicated through quarantine, the vaccine was incredibly dangerous and would spread Small Pox itself.

Weird, I know dozens and dozens of people who have had the small pox vaccine. Nice little scar on the shoulder to boot. None of them got the disease though.

(Don't you love this anecdotal stuff… Sadly this is more convincing to anti-vaxers than a legit study)

The more vaccines a country gives the worse the infant mortality rate

Actually no. The authors used data from 2009 but didn't touch other data because it didn't fit there predesigned result. They omitted 4 countries because it would have bunked their predesigned result. And they failed to mention that the US is one of the few countries that gives "live birth" status to premature and other babies that are not considered live birth in other places. (The last was pointed out actually by someone in the anti-vax crowd.)

Forget the fact that when drug companies publish papers they give notice of conflict of interest, and while Goldman is connected to anti-vax entities, proponents, foundations, he didn't declare it.

All I know on this personally is that my son was fine, he was walking, talking, and developing normally. He rolled over at two weeks (both ways-which was considered early), he walked at 9 months, and was saying a few words whenever he got an injection (MMR) at 15 months. Within days he regressed and completely stopped talking. I should state that he was found to be allergic to the Pertussis vaccine to the degree that his Dr told me another could be fatal.

His father and I took him to specialists at two hospitals, one being Childrens Hosp. in Pittsburgh, where he was Dx'ed, but not with Autism. They say that he was tested for Autism, but I can't be sure. I've tried getting his records but they are 'lost' and cannot be located.

I'm not a healthy person, and my biggest fear is what will become of him when both his father and I are gone. Because of his disabilities, people are always trying to take advantage of him.. it's a sad and scary situation.

Nobody can tell me that the MMR didn't have something to do with my son regressing--just days after his injection.

Rubinstein
reply to post by boncho

 

Let's cut to the chase boncho, everyone here knows that you're paid to post up this information, maybe you will admit that to us or perhaps you're not allowed to. I know that you're just doing your job, but please do keep in mind the studies I posted above and think twice before vaccinating your own children if you have any.

WHoa here.... wait a minute.
Im against mmr in its current form and think it can be made in a less harmful way. The premise of vaccination is fantastic. Im the mother of a child who had a documented and reported vaccination injury... not just assume so, we KNOW and VAERS were filed so the CDC could take her medical info into account. I am not taking a side for vaccine companies.. but Boncho. I dont know him personally, but I have seen NO evidence he is a shill( and Ive been here since 07). These accusations here are getting out of hand and Im personally sick of seeing such indictments on our members having a discussion when one disagrees with another.
Big kids can debate a matter and disagree without using that tired and offensive tactic.

Advantage

Rubinstein
reply to post by boncho

 

Let's cut to the chase boncho, everyone here knows that you're paid to post up this information, maybe you will admit that to us or perhaps you're not allowed to. I know that you're just doing your job, but please do keep in mind the studies I posted above and think twice before vaccinating your own children if you have any.

WHoa here.... wait a minute.
Im against mmr in its current form and think it can be made in a less harmful way. The premise of vaccination is fantastic. Im the mother of a child who had a documented and reported vaccination injury... not just assume so, we KNOW and VAERS were filed so the CDC could take her medical info into account. I am not taking a side for vaccine companies.. but Boncho. I dont know him personally, but I have seen NO evidence he is a shill( and Ive been here since 07). These accusations here are getting out of hand and Im personally sick of seeing such indictments on our members having a discussion when one disagrees with another.
Big kids can debate a matter and disagree without using that tired and offensive tactic.

Thanks Ad, much appreciated. Truth is, I'd be happy if something concrete came out against the drug companies. I detest their history and their practices, (and in my advertising jobs I hated dealing with them), but, I will not simply sell into an idea because I'm disgruntled or because it goes against something I don't like.

So, my position is backed simply by science or what I can interpret while looking into subjects. I haven't seen anything to suggest the anti-vax is real, legitimate, or of any value. Even if autism was a result of vaccines in a 1 in 150 rate, I might still support them. But at the same time, I might not, but there's nothing concrete to imply this is the case, so I work with what I got.


As for the discussion in this thread:

In the Vaccine debate, first I'm told its the corporations, the media, theyre all in on it. How they all have conflicts of interest and how they lie, etc, etc.

Yet, I believe in this thread alone I have not only pointed out all these things about anti-vax personalities, the same reasons opponents claim is proof vaccines are wrong/bunk, etc, is the same thing they have been offering up back to me.

e.g. They are obviously lying because ___. You are just __. This is because ___ and its ___. And a few minutes later the exact same reasoning for drug companies and everyone else supposedly lying to us, is then used to prove the others stance on vaccines causing autism.

No sources, no research, no understanding. Ah but I got one spam of threads on one post to a bunch of papers the author never read. Wohoo, real tough intellectual debate.

As I said, either way, if it's a legitimate argument, I have no problem taking back or altering my position. The beauty of being rational is that you change your position when evidence supports it.

In any case, cheers for being a respectable conversationalist.

reply to post by boncho

So while people claim proving autism has causality with vaccines would destroy the industry, I have a feeling one bout of the Spanish Flu (or insert epidemic here), and a quarter of the population wiped out, no one will care about 1% which may or may not develop autism.

Probably not... unless it were [their-your] child.
This is a sensitive topic, especially in those cases where it hits very close to home.

As a mother with a (grown)child who is simply labeled 'mentally challenged', who has also been labeled with several disabilities, ie; ADD, MMR (ironically MMR=Mildly Mentally Retarded, and more..), was tested for Autism but ruled out, was given an IQ test in Kindergarten.. but tested as a first grader because I sent him to two yrs of (paid) pre-school (to give him an advantage-knowing at that time it was needed)-believe it when parents have real concerns about not only vaccines, but are searching for anything possible that may or may not have caused their childs disability.

When a child develops any type of illness, it is natural for the parent to search for answers as to the what, where, why, and how. If they have no idea of any of these, but there are articles pointing to vaccines, it then becomes at the very least.. a possible reason. My son is now 27 and I still want to know exactly what happened. Mothers also have a tendency to blame themselves often-times-so it makes very good sense if they can search out another possible reason outside of that, especially if the mother did all the right things and took care of herself during the pregnancy.

I don't know for certain what caused my sons disabilities, but I do tend to speculate that it was the MMR injection. I did have a scheduled C-section (for Aug. 23rd), but my water broke on Aug.3rd and so he was delivered that day instead. And I did give him childrens Tylenol on the day of this particular injection.. as a matter of fact, I gave him the Tylenol before we went to the Dr., because I wanted to help protect him against the pain from the injection, along with any adverse side effects (fever & discomfort). His physician advised me to give him the Tylenol. I only gave this personal information after reading through the thread about the C-sections and Tylenol.

Maybe it's a possibility that MMR causes disability(S) in certain people-those with an allergy, or some unknown reason(s), that we are unaware of as yet. To rule it out completely is just as irresponsible as is to blame the injection completely. It's obvious that something is the culprit, and if your child changed (drastically) just days after an injection, I think it's safe to say that anyone would be thinking this could be a reason.

Scientific-no, of course not.
Intuition-Of course.

reply to post by boncho

I was also diagnosed with ADHD as a kid. The doctors wanted to put me on drugs, but my mother cured it by beating the living piss out of me.

No disrespect here I assure you, although I feel you may have been misdiagnosed as a child. I don't know your age, but children can learn over time, how to live with their ADD, but it takes years and a lot of training, by both the parent(s) and the child with the Dx. ADD is hard to control as a parent it's difficult to manage, and I can't imagine how a child must struggle on a daily basis just living with ADD in their own mind.

I feel that you are belittling the disorder. I feel this because of what you said in an earlier post about getting the munchies after your MMR injection. Have you thought about the parents of those children who might be reading your posts--or does that just not matter to you?

You've given links and presented a decent argument for your case-or side of the issue. I would have much more respect but some of your innuendos are just uncalled for.

OneManArmy

boncho

So while you say "choice", especially in a country with universal health care, you are making choices for taxpayers. I believe in choice as well, but in this case I'd say if you decide not to get it, you foot the bill for medical costs. But then again, vaccinations work when everyone gets them, not having carriers of viruses walking around.

Having the MMR vaccine doesnt guarantee immunity, only having had the disease guarantees immunity.
Fighting the real disease strengthens the immune system, it has its risks, but then so does the vaccine.
As long as the child is healthy with no vitamin A deficiency and no immune system weakness then the child should be fine. Complications from measles are most likely in under 5's AND over 20's.

Do you not accept that the fear mongering outweighs the risk?
Do you not think that forced vaccination is wrong?

You can argue costs, but I argue morality. If we have the money to jump into war with Syria, we can afford to look after our citizens. After all, it is OUR tax money.

First things first, you ARE anti-vax. 100%.

Can you tell me how being vaccinated offers a different level of immunity from having the "real" disease please as I don't understand how they can be different.
How does getting the real disease "strengthen" the immune system more than a vaccine?
Since you're stating this as fact I will assume you understand this on a physiological level as I do so can you explain it in as much detail as you can please as I've obviously missed something in my training and studies.
(If you're talking about the very small minority in whom the vaccine doesn't work then that is two completely different scenarios).

To go back to one of your earlier post re Wakefield where you said he was a doctor who suggested we should study the link between MMR and autism more...
Are we talking about the same Wakefield here?

I'm talking of the one who offered himself as a legal witness to law firms litigating vaccine firms on the basis that he would have irrefutable proof they caused autism.
He was paid in the region of £400,000 for this.
This is the one who faked his study.
This is the one who stood in front of a press conference and lied about the study's conclusion whilst his colleagues looked at him in disbelief.
This is the one who had patented a single measles jab a year prior to publishing the results of his study knowing that if accepted he would make a small or rather large fortune on the back of the down-take of the MMR.
This is the one that coerced parents of autistic children to agree to let them undergo unnecessary colonoscopies!!!!!
This is the one who's initial study was performed on a massive cohort (sarcasm) of just 12 patients and which shouldn't have received any publicity at all due to the sample size anyway.
This is the one who's study has never been replicated by anyone else anywhere even though many attempts have been made to do so.
This is the one who was struck off the medical register in 2010; "the GMC verdict found that he had acted "dishonestly and irresponsibly", showed "callous disregard for children's suffering" and betrayed patients' trust. Had it been that he "just" faked a study he would have been reprimanded, however the true nature of his mis-dealings forced the GMC's hand.
This is the one who has begged for donations from autistic children's parents via his website to help pay for failed litigation attempts against the journalist who outed him whilst residing in a 16 bedroom mansion just outside of Houston.
This is the one who's pitching in the US to pilot a new reality TV show about autism.
This is the one who has asked for a televised debate with a vaccine supporter but when a vaccine expert accepted he suddenly went quiet then came back and moved the goal posts and now ignores Dr Michael Fitzpatrick completely. www.spiked-online.com...-2Fw

It can't be the same Wakefield we're talking about can it?

And as for fear-mongering, I think if you take a step back and read what you're writing I believe that you'll see that any fear-mongering is coming directly from your keyboard.

RobinB022
reply to post by boncho

 

I was also diagnosed with ADHD as a kid. The doctors wanted to put me on drugs, but my mother cured it by beating the living piss out of me.

No disrespect here I assure you, although I feel you may have been misdiagnosed as a child. I don't know your age, but children can learn over time, how to live with their ADD, but it takes years and a lot of training, by both the parent(s) and the child with the Dx. ADD is hard to control as a parent it's difficult to manage, and I can't imagine how a child must struggle on a daily basis just living with ADD in their own mind.

I feel that you are belittling the disorder. I feel this because of what you said in an earlier post about getting the munchies after your MMR injection. Have you thought about the parents of those children who might be reading your posts--or does that just not matter to you?

You've given links and presented a decent argument for your case-or side of the issue. I would have much more respect but some of your innuendos are just uncalled for.

He wasn't belittling any disorder at at all.
He used the analogy to show that correlation does not imply causation.

It's amazing how much they push the damn vaccines at my local Walgreens. They have these signs plastered all over the outside and on every aisle. Then I go to grab a drink from the coolers and it says "GET YOUR FLU SHOT!" on every cooler window! So I go to pay the cashier and first thing she says "did you get your flu shot yet?"

Seriously? Like it's not obvious now how much money these people make from this crap?

RobinB022
reply to post by boncho

 

So while people claim proving autism has causality with vaccines would destroy the industry, I have a feeling one bout of the Spanish Flu (or insert epidemic here), and a quarter of the population wiped out, no one will care about 1% which may or may not develop autism.

Probably not... unless it were [their-your] child.
This is a sensitive topic, especially in those cases where it hits very close to home.

As a mother with a (grown)child who is simply labeled 'mentally challenged', who has also been labeled with several disabilities, ie; ADD, MMR (ironically MMR=Mildly Mentally Retarded, and more..), was tested for Autism but ruled out, was given an IQ test in Kindergarten.. but tested as a first grader because I sent him to two yrs of (paid) pre-school (to give him an advantage-knowing at that time it was needed)-believe it when parents have real concerns about not only vaccines, but are searching for anything possible that may or may not have caused their childs disability.

When a child develops any type of illness, it is natural for the parent to search for answers as to the what, where, why, and how. If they have no idea of any of these, but there are articles pointing to vaccines, it then becomes at the very least.. a possible reason. My son is now 27 and I still want to know exactly what happened. Mothers also have a tendency to blame themselves often-times-so it makes very good sense if they can search out another possible reason outside of that, especially if the mother did all the right things and took care of herself during the pregnancy.

I don't know for certain what caused my sons disabilities, but I do tend to speculate that it was the MMR injection. I did have a scheduled C-section (for Aug. 23rd), but my water broke on Aug.3rd and so he was delivered that day instead. And I did give him childrens Tylenol on the day of this particular injection.. as a matter of fact, I gave him the Tylenol before we went to the Dr., because I wanted to help protect him against the pain from the injection, along with any adverse side effects (fever & discomfort). His physician advised me to give him the Tylenol. I only gave this personal information after reading through the thread about the C-sections and Tylenol.

Maybe it's a possibility that MMR causes disability(S) in certain people-those with an allergy, or some unknown reason(s), that we are unaware of as yet. To rule it out completely is just as irresponsible as is to blame the injection completely. It's obvious that something is the culprit, and if your child changed (drastically) just days after an injection, I think it's safe to say that anyone would be thinking this could be a reason.

Scientific-no, of course not.
Intuition-Of course.

If anything, the Tylenol possibly lessened the immune-response effect of the MMR.
Ideally, Tylenol or other pain relief should be given well after a vaccine and only if needed.
www.healthychildren.org...

It is indeed a very sensitive and emotive subject and at the same time it's perfectly natural to look for something which caused the issue.
However I would say that in the vast majority of cases of autism etc there isn't one specific cause or even trigger, certainly not an external cause anyway.
There's a recent study showing that autism presents itself well before the MMR is given.
www.autismspeaks.org...
The amount of children who have events which are considered severe after the MMR are very few indeed and the majority of those severe events are essentially allergic reactions to one of the ingredients.
However even these events are transient and the child will recover (given that they receive the proper medical care in time) so to suggest that there are permanent disabilities caused by MMR specifically has no basis in fact at all.