-
The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
This timely article is from the Onion
https://www.theonion.com/articles/i-dont-vaccinate-my-child-because-its-my-right-to,37839/
I Don’t Vaccinate My Child Because It’s My Right To Decide What Eliminated Diseases Come Roaring Back
As a mother, I put my parenting decisions above all else. Nobody knows my son better than me, and the choices I make about how to care for him are no one’s business but my own. So, when other people tell me how they think I should be raising my child, I simply can’t tolerate it. Regardless of what anyone else thinks, I fully stand behind my choices as a mom, including my choice not to vaccinate my son, because it is my fundamental right as a parent to decide which eradicated diseases come roaring back.
The decision to cause a full-blown, multi-state pandemic of a virus that was effectively eliminated from the national population generations ago is my choice alone, and regardless of your personal convictions, that right should never be taken away from a child’s parent. Never.
Say what you will about me, but I’ve read the information out there and weighed every option, so I am confident in my choice to revive a debilitating illness that was long ago declared dead and let it spread like wildfire from school to school, town to town, and state to state, until it reaches every corner of the country. Leaving such a momentous decision to someone you haven’t even met and who doesn’t care about your child personally—now that’s absurd! Maybe I choose to bring back the mumps. Or maybe it’s diphtheria. Or maybe it’s some other potentially fatal disease that can easily pass among those too young or too medically unfit to be vaccinated themselves. But whichever highly communicable and formerly wiped-out disease that I opt to resurrect with a vengeance, it is a highly personal decision that only I and my family have the liberty to make.
The bottom line is that I’m this child’s mother, and I know what’s best. End of story. Politicians, pharmaceutical companies—they don’t know the specific circumstances that made me decide to breathe new life into a viral infection that scientists and the nation at large celebrated stamping out roughly a century ago. It seems like all they care about is following unexamined old rules, injecting chemicals into our kids, preventing ghastly illnesses that used to ravage millions and have since been erased from storming back and wreaking mass havoc on a national scale, and making a buck. Should we really be listening to them and not our own hearts?
I am by no means telling mothers and fathers out there what to do; I’m simply standing up for every parent’s right to make his or her own decision. You may choose to follow the government-recommended immunization schedule for your child, and that’s your decision as a parent. And I might choose to unleash rubella on thousands upon thousands of helpless people, and that’s my decision as a parent.
It’s simple: You don’t tell me how to raise my kids to avoid reviving a horrific illness that hasn’t been seen on our shores since our grandparents were children, and I won’t tell you how to raise yours.
Look, I’ve done the research on these issues, I’ve read the statistics, and I’ve carefully considered the costs and benefits, and there’s simply no question in my mind that inciting a nationwide health emergency by unleashing a disease that can kill 20 percent or more of its victims is the right one for my child. People need to respect that and move on.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Sarcasm has nothing to do with real truth and statistics.
Measles Transmitted By The Vaccinated, Gov. Researchers Confirm
https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/me...rchers-confirm
The Disney Measles Outbreak: Evidence Reveals a Failing Measles Vaccine is to Blame
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-di...-blame/5426016
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by bill shearer:
...
I Don’t Vaccinate My Child Because It’s My Right To Decide What Eliminated Diseases Come Roaring Back
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
Regarding the "Gov. Researchers Confirm" link, the non-doctor, non-medically trained writer of this blog is also claiming there is a link between thimerosol-containing vaccination and autism. I followed the links in the blog to the PubMed site where I found numerous studies (more current) that came to similar conclusions as this one:
CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous scientific studies have not identified links between autism and either thimerosal-containing vaccine or the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine.
So I'm questioning if this blogger is really the best source of the truth.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
To know the truth, you'd have to at least know the details of each "scientific study", who it was done by, for how long, how it was paid for, etc. and then, dig even deeper to figure out who might benefit from the outcomes.
Who really benefits the most from vaccines? Who benefits the most from drugs? Who's looking out for our health? We may discover a "difficult" truth....
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
Regarding the "Gov. Researchers Confirm" link, the non-doctor, non-medically trained writer of this blog is also claiming there is a link between thimerosol-containing vaccination and autism. I followed the links in the blog to the PubMed site where I found numerous studies (more current) that came to similar conclusions as this one:
CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous scientific studies have not identified links between autism and either thimerosal-containing vaccine or the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine.
So I'm questioning if this blogger is really the best source of the truth.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Always good to question things. And when you give the reference to doctors who are funded by corporate medicine, I personally doubt that is what is called independent research. Especially with the article implying that thimersol doesn't cause harm...it's Mercury! Check how toxic Mercury is. The Medical establishment refuses a placebo controlled (defined as complete absence of any interference with control group subjects) and double blind study determining vaccine safety and effectiveness.Anyways, there has been a blackout with corporate media in even saying that.
https://worldtruth.tv/courts-quietly...tism%E2%80%8F/
Dr. Gayle DeLong wrote, “Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Safety Research”. In the citation, the Committee described Dr. DeLong’s publication as “an excellent exposition of ethical issues and biases in the examination of conflicts of interests related to vaccine safety research. The main thrust of this paper is the questioning of the ethics of industry sponsorship of vaccine use.
https://healthimpactnews.com/2013/re...e-autism-link/
Dr. Brian S. Hooker, PhD, PE, an Associate Professor of Biology at Simpson University in California commented, "Of all of the papers I have reviewed over my 26-year career as a research scientist, this is perhaps the most flawed and disingenuous study I have encountered.”
https://www.examiner.com/article/ph-...k-study-flawed
In a 2012 class action lawsuit and court trial that you probably never heard about — United States v. Merck & Co. and Chatom Primary Care v. Merck & Co. – two virologists from Merck showed that the drug giant “falsified testing of the efficacy of the drug and misstated the drug’s efficacy to the government as having a 95 percent efficacy rate.” It was discovered that, “Merck incorporated the use of animal antibodies to artificially inflate the results, but it too failed to achieve Merck’s fabricated efficacy rate. Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having reached the desired, albeit falsified, efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) and European Medicines Agency (“EMA”).”
Dr.Larry Palevsky a former fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics and trained at the New York University School of Medicine, says:"I think that if you ask most of my colleagues where they get their information, they will say that they read it from the American Academy of Pediatrics, from the AMA, from the CDC, and in their journals. But I would like to challenge most of my colleagues to look through the studies themselves to actually see if the proper scientific studies were done using a proper study group and a proper control group.
- Were the ingredients in vaccines properly studied?
- Is there a difference between being exposed to a virus, bacteria, heavy metal or toxin through the air, food, your intestines and your skin, versus when it's injected into your body?
- Have we really looked at what happens to vaccine materials once injected into a child? And is an antibody sufficient to provide protection for a child against disease?
More and more studies are coming out to show that:
- The proper studies haven't been done and antibodies are not the final way in which your body is protected
- There is a difference between how children process material through air and food versus through injection
- There are particles in vaccines that do accumulate in your body and cause impairments in your immune system
- There are particles in the vaccines that get into your brain and there are foreign DNA particles that get into your body
[I]For many health professionals, it is a shock to discover that there is such a lack of information on the safety and efficacy, and a mounting degree of information that actually raises suspicions about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and whether or not they have been properly studied...
in my research of the vaccines, and of the basic microbiology and virology that we're trained to know in our medical training, I cannot understand how a vaccine with a virus can be safe."
And for more info, check the movie, "Bought:
https://www.yekra.com/bought
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
Regarding the "Gov. Researchers Confirm" link, the non-doctor, non-medically trained writer of this blog is also claiming there is a link between thimerosol-containing vaccination and autism. I followed the links in the blog to the PubMed site where I found numerous studies (more current) that came to similar conclusions as this one:
CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous scientific studies have not identified links between autism and either thimerosal-containing vaccine or the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine.
So I'm questioning if this blogger is really the best source of the truth.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
Check how toxic Mercury is. The Medical establishment refuses a placebo controlled (defined as complete absence of any interference with control group subjects) and double blind study determining vaccine safety and effectiveness....
Whether that is true or not, that wasn't at all what I was addressing, so I'm not sure why you were specifically responding to me with this. I can understand why some people have some hesitancy giving their one-year-old child multiple shots with mercury, etc. What I was objecting to was the claim by the blogger that vaccination is linked to autism which so far isn't supported by any solid evidence or science (as no linkage has been supported by solid science) and was long ago discredited by virtually every credible institution and professional working in the field throughout the world.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
I guess I misunderstood what you were asking about. I do have the studies and they have only been discredited by corporate interests not true science. If you can understand why people would be hesitant giving a one year old child multiple shots with mercury, or a 6 year old, 48 shots with mercury, you're on a more open path to investigate. Since most of my links were not read, I'm not going to go further with the 55 pages of links that I have about this issue. But I'm grateful that you were open.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
Whether that is true or not, that wasn't at all what I was addressing, so I'm not sure why you were specifically responding to me with this. I can understand why some people have some hesitancy giving their one-year-old child multiple shots with mercury, etc. What I was objecting to was the claim by the blogger that vaccination is linked to autism which so far isn't supported by any solid evidence or science (as no linkage has been supported by solid science) and was long ago discredited by virtually every credible institution and professional working in the field throughout the world.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
I do have the studies and they have only been discredited by corporate interests not true science.
To clarify, are you saying that the linking of vaccination to autism has only been discredited by corporate interests and not by true science?
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Yes. I have already put this in past links, but people aren't reading them. And it's a race issue as well...just like the CDC doctors gave Afro-American men syphilis in Tuskegee in the 30's, Afro-American boys rates of autism skyrocket after vaccines. They know it too. Dr. Hooker tried for over 10 years to obtain data from the CDC that was suspected of revealing the link between mercury in vaccines and autism. With the help of Congressman Bill Posey, he was able to obtain much of that data in 2014, but apparently Dr. Thompson (CDC Whistleblower) has revealed even more disturbing data concealed by the CDC. I invite you and anyone who keeps asking similar questions, to watch it, to know the truth. Dr. Thompson admits all this with great regrets (3:55). I applaud his courage.
CDC Whistle Blower admits MMR Vaccine causes Autism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q62DcaNs_0M
https://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cd...ink-to-autism/
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
To clarify, are you saying that the linking of vaccination to autism has only been discredited by corporate interests and not by true science?
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
.
Huffington Post, 2.5.2015
6 Dangerous Anti-Vaccination Arguments Analyzed, Explained, And Shut Down
Science has provided ample evidence that childhood vaccines are safe and effective, and public health authorities maintain that vaccines are as important as seat belts in protecting our children. Even President Obama has urged parents to have their kids vaccinated.
So how can it be that many parents opt against having their children vaccinated--even in the face of the measles outbreak that has sickened more than 102 people in 14 states?
It's complicated, of course. Trust in government--or the lack thereof--has been identified as a key factor. But many parents become anti-vaxxers as a result of plain-old misinformation.
Here are six misguided anti-vaccination arguments--and the truth about each.
Bad argument #1: There's no proof that vaccines don't cause autism. It's hard to prove a negative. But the American Academy of Pediatrics has released a list of more than 40 studies showing no link whatsoever between vaccines and autism.
Bad argument #2: One study from England did show a link between vaccines and autism. Yes, a study published in The Lancet in 1998 did find such a link. But the study was retracted, and the physician-researcher who led it, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, was shown to have falsified the data and was stripped of his medical license.
Bad argument #3: There are lots of anecdotes about children developing autism after being vaccinated. But anecdotes aren't proof, and there's no reason to believe that vaccines caused the children to become autistic. As scientists put it succinctly, correlation simply doesn't imply causation, despite the assumption that many parents make.
To point out how misguided this assumption is, Redditor Jasonp55 posted research showing that organic food sales and autism diagnoses increased at the same rate and time. He pointed out that organic food is no more to blame for rising rates of autism than vaccinations are, despite the correlation.
Bad argument #4: It's nobody's business whether my children get vaccinated. Actually, parents who fail to vaccinate their kids may be jeopardizing the health of other children who are unable to get the vaccine because they are too young or for other reasons. When the number of unvaccinated children rises above a certain threshold, so-called "herd immunity" is compromised--and preventable diseases get a toehold in the community.
Bad argument #5: Vaccines can "overload" a child's immune system. That's simply not true. From the moment babies are born, they're exposed to all sorts of illness-causing viruses. So most doctors -- and even the CDC and the Institute of Medicine -- agree that a child's immune system can handle the immune-stimulating antigens in multiple vaccines. In fact, as San Francisco-based pediatrician Dr. Laurel Schultz wrote in a recent article, children are exposed to more antigens in the environment every day than to those in all of their vaccinations combined.
Bad argument #6: "Natural" immunity is better than the immunity that comes from vaccination. So-called "natural" immunity results from the body contracting and successfully battling an infectious illness--and research shows that the immune response of people who have been vaccinated against various diseases is just as good as that of people whose immunity comes from an infection.
Seth Mnookin is the author of "The Panic Virus," contributed to this article.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
6 Dangerous Anti-Vaccination Arguments Analyzed, Explained, And Shut Down
Edward, it would seem that the fringe of the right wingers and the fringe of the left wingers are the anti vaccine folks. Which goes to show you that the real shape of the political spectrum is an omega, where the extreme left and right are close. Think Hitler and Stalin.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Some other points to consider:
The media continues to ignore the most likely cause of the recent measles outbreak, viral shedding, which occurs after a child is vaccinated:
https://www.naturalnews.com/048519_vaccines_measles...
Another fact the media ignores is that CDC reports reveal no deaths from measles in 10 years but more than 100 deaths from the vaccinations:
https://www.naturalnews.com/048518_measles_vaccines...
The American Cancer Society is also completely ignoring science. They're telling us food choices play little or no role in reducing and preventing the disease:
https://www.naturalnews.com/048515_American_Cancer...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
Corporate media again. No reading of what has been posted... just corporate rhetoric. No independent peer review studies.
Corporate-tied scientists + lab results not expected or wanted – lack of independent peer review = Falsified results + fraudulent claims/statistics = Pseudo science
When you scream that corporations can vote, and the Koch brothers pay for the corporate takeover, why? They have you right here believing them anyways. You're voting for them! So when you talk about how these corporations are affecting many of you in other national topics of concern, I will know it's not true.
And others attempting to put us in boxes of political parties and extremists when 100's of 100's of doctors, nurses, medical professional associations, lawyer associations say differently than you...this is not progressive to me.
Be well.
Our world faces a crisis as yet unperceived by those possessing power to make great decisions for good or evil. The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and we thus drift toward unparallel catastrophe. ~ Einstein
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
so this does kind of come down to who you find more believable as a source: the big-pharma shills at the American Cancer Society, relying on the CDC and major university researchers, or the reporters at Natural News and their representation of the same studies. "Completely ignoring science" is actually applied to the wrong target; the NN reporter completely misunderstands science. Even in their own article, they acknowledge that the sin of the ACS is that they think the "evidence regarding these factors [is] 'unclear.' " That's indicative to me that they don't have studies that are strong enough to substantiate that claim as fact.
I think it's funny that critics of 'big science' take opposite views on this depending on the issue. Those who don't believe in climate change think the scientific community leaps to unsubstantiated conclusions, while the anti-vaxers article thinks they're unwilling to reach conclusions on what they're claiming (and to me, credibly) is too weak evidence to support such conclusions.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Hi folks,
Dodie here, Bills partner and the one who started this thread with the excellent satire from The Onion.
I want to say that I do so appreciate people who are skeptical and are not willing to take things at face value; who want to examine the evidence; and are willing to change their minds when better evidence becomes available. Good for you! This is the very basis of scientific method and is by far the most effective way of understanding reality.
Now, upon critical examination of the antivaccine arguments versus following the medically recommended vaccine schedule, I have to say that the evidence is extremely one sided that vaccines do work. The antivaccine arguments mostly consist of accusations from non experts. Compared to more than a hundred years of dramatic reduction of vaccine preventable disease wherever vaccines are used and a near universal consensus of experts in the field.
The antivaccine movement very much resembles the climate science denial movement in that in both cases one must ignore mountains of actual evidence assembled by nearly unified qualified experts in their fields, in order to support ones unfortunate belief. And just like the climate science deniers standing in the way of taking steps to slow global warming, deciding to withhold the recommended vaccines has tragic real world consequences for all of us.
I totally get it that getting vaccinated is scary and you want to do the best thing for yourself and especially for your children. This is why I encourage all of you, for all of our sakes, to take a close critical look at the evidence and then do the right thing for yourself, your family and your community by getting protection for all of us from preventable disease by being vaccinated.
Peace out,
Dodie
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
"So this does kind of come down to who you find more believable as a source:"
This reminds me of religion, and how we choose the one that will tell us how to live when our own conscience is unreliable. I realize that science is very different from religion, but they can both tweak things to their advantage in an attempt to substantiate a hypothesis.
Trusting that any entity will provide us with the "truth" is a serious mistake. People have been told that they would never "walk again", but they refused to believe that "truth" handed down by a well educated medical doctor.
The "truth" may be related to your perspective, like the 3 blind men describing the elephant in 3 very different ways.
Also, vocabulary lends itself to leading people in a desired direction, and fear is a strong motivator of belief. Oh, I just realized that I made a full circle back to religion!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
so this does kind of come down to who you find more believable as a source: the big-pharma shills at the American Cancer Society, relying on the CDC and major university researchers, or the reporters at Natural News and their representation of the same studies....
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Interesting take, Shandi. Just one thing though. Not everyone believes in a religion. Your argument falls pretty flat from the point of view of an atheist.
Just saying.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
...
This reminds me of religion, and how we choose the one that will tell us how to live when our own conscience is unreliable....
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
To clarify, are you saying that the linking of vaccination to autism has only been discredited by corporate interests and not by true science?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
Yes.
....Dr. Hooker tried for over 10 years to obtain data from the CDC that was suspected of revealing the link between mercury in vaccines and autism. With the help of Congressman Bill Posey, he was able to obtain much of that data in 2014, but apparently Dr. Thompson (CDC Whistleblower) has revealed even more disturbing data concealed by the CDC.
The entire thing with Dr. Hooker and Dr. Thompson is fraudulent as detailed here in Snopes.com: https://www.snopes.com/medical/disea...stleblower.asp
Florida Republican Bill Posey is famous for introducing a bill requiring presidential candidates to submit an original birth certificate, related to charges Obama is not an American citizen.
The claim that the linkage of vaccination to autism has not been discredited by science is refuted by these studies below, which is just a small smattering:
From the Institute of Medicine:
https://www.iom.edu/Reports/2004/Immunization-Safety-Review-Vaccines-and-Autism.aspx
With the National Academy of Sciences:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20669467
Department of Health, UK:
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130107105354/https://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4002972
The Cochrane Library:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...5B357BC.f03t02
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080407015528/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/mmr_autism_factsheet.htm
Canadian Pediatric Society:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...?dopt=Abstract
European Research Program for Improved Vaccine Safety Surveillance (EUSAFEVAC) Project:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...64410X03002718
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12922131
Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics:
https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...tent/134/2/325
The list goes on and on, with probably dozens of other institutional and independent scientific studies confirming the same thing. A good overview can be found in this Wikipedia article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy#cite_note-136
If you don't consider Wikipedia a good source then just follow the source links.
Can you cite one respected institution, Government agency or NGO, university, medical institution, or hospital, or any professional journal from any country that supports a link between vaccination and autism? Or for that matter, any gold-standard, peer reviewed study?
Again, I am not addressing issues around vaccination other than the link to autism.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
(Related to the argument that vaccination is scientifically linked to autism and not related to misgivings about vaccination for other reasons.)
Some of the discussion on this thread has inspired me to identify a new term to be added to the Wacco New Terms Dictionary.
Inepticism (noun)
A belief system often found on Waccobb.net where all authoritative sources of information are dismissed by definition merely because of the fact they are authoritative. In this belief system all expertise, particularly if supported by respected institutions whether they be NGO's, professional organizations, non-profit institutions, professional journals, universities, medical institutions, and particularly governmental agencies regardless of the country, is not to be trusted, leaving remaining only amateur bloggers and those with little or no training in the field to be cited as sources of truth. The anti-authority excesses of inepticism readily dismisses hundreds of thousands of trained professionals who have dedicated their lives to a given field in the belief that they have all either been paid off or are beholden in one way or another to corporate interests or shadow government conspiracies and have all sacrificed their integrity to harm the public good. As in, "I cited the CDC report on Wacco and it was immediately poo-pooed by some inepticists as obviously misinformation simply because it came from the CDC."
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
typical vaccine propaganda, most of these arguments are not the main ones made by vaccine careful caregivers. lets examine #6 which is. the study cited for "just as good" actually provides evidence that disease survival is better than the vaccine. all the authors could conclude is that both are effective. the study was linked out of context to support a lie.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
...
Bad argument #6: "Natural" immunity is better than the immunity that comes from vaccination. So-called "natural" immunity results from the body contracting and successfully battling an infectious illness--and research shows that the immune response of people who have been vaccinated against various diseases is just as good as that of people whose immunity comes from an infection.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
.
The Young Turks Network, 2.3.2015
Measles Vaccine Now A Debate Thanks To Ugly Stupid Politics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnWk...-2uvRJlEQQQ7Sq
“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged Americans to vaccinate their children against measles as the number of people hit by a new outbreak of the disease climbed past 100.
CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden said in an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday that he was “very concerned” about the possibility of a large outbreak and said the best way to prevent the disease was with vaccinations he called “safe and effective.” He blamed a lack of vaccinations for the resurgence of a disease that the CDC said was eliminated in the U.S. in 2000.
“What we’ve seen is, as over the last few years, a small but growing number of people have not been vaccinated. That number is building up among young adults in society, and that makes us vulnerable,” Frieden said. “We have to make sure that measles doesn’t get a foothold in the U.S. It’s been actually eliminated from this country for 15 years. All of our cases result, ultimately, from individuals who have traveled and brought it back here.”
The CDC said that 102 people from 14 states have been reported to have measles, and that most of those cases were tied to a December outbreak at Disneyland or Disney California Adventure Park in Anaheim, Calif.”* John Iadarola (Think Tank), Jimmy Dore (The Jimmy Dore Show) and Dave Rubin (The Rubin Report) break it down.
*Read more here:
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...s-exceeds-100/
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
My post wasn't an argument for or against anything. I was just sharing my personal perspective.
You're right of course, not everyone believes in a religion. Not everyone believes in science either! But many people believe that health professionals and organizations are looking out for their well-being. Just as people believe that vets are looking out for their pet's well-being. And even when confronted with facts, people won't allow themselves to let go of these beliefs. As more is revealed, some people have faced the "difficult" truths of those unquestioned beliefs. Remember the slogan from the 60's..."Question Authority". It's become more important as time goes on.
Atheists have done some rational thinking with regard to religion. It takes a lot more than that to wade through the ocean of information on vaccines, etc. Even when confronted with certain "facts", people will be influenced by their personal experience or belief system. However, that can also be challenged by "fear", and if parents are threatened with fines or jail time for not vaccinating, or if their kids are barred from school, then they will probably re-consider.
I personally do not get vaccines. My immune system has been pretty good, and at 72 I've only had a handful of colds/flu. Each time my Kaiser doctor asks me about getting vaccines, I just smile and say "You know it's against my religion."
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
Interesting take, Shandi. Just one thing though. Not everyone believes in a religion. Your argument falls pretty flat from the point of view of an atheist.
Just saying.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Oh, I love it!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
(Related to the argument that vaccination is scientifically linked to autism and not related to misgivings about vaccination for other reasons.)
Some of the discussion on this thread has inspired me to identify a new term to be added to the
Wacco New Terms Dictionary.
Inepticism (noun)...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
So, you have never gotten any vaccine in your entire life? Not even as a child? Not even once since you were born in 1943?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
...I personally do not get vaccines. My immune system has been pretty good, and at 72 I've only had a handful of colds/flu. Each time my Kaiser doctor asks me about getting vaccines, I just smile and say "You know it's against my religion."
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
"So this does kind of come down to who you find more believable as a source:"
This reminds me of religion, and how we choose the one that will tell us how to live when our own conscience is unreliable. I realize that science is very different from religion, but they can both tweak things to their advantage in an attempt to substantiate a hypothesis.
Trusting that any entity will provide us with the "truth" is a serious mistake.
yeah, my bad for bringing the word "believable" into it. That's the real difference, science isn't a matter of belief at all, at least in the same sense as religion is.
The scientific method is a way of observing the world and trying to draw conclusions about how it works. It provides a way to evaluate data as more or less credible, (ok, that's Latin for believable - I've done it again) and ways to use that data to either generate new hypothesis about the mechanisms we see operating in the world, or to test the plausibility (ok, belief again.. damn) of existing hypotheses.
The flaw we see in so many arguments here is that a few pieces of data (studies, often) are interpreted as either strongly supporting or strongly challenging some hypothesis when in a broader context, they don't. Wakefield was pretty thoroughly discredited, so from a statistical point of view alone it make his data less useful for either proving or disproving any hypothesis. You have to assume that he was discredited unfairly if you want to rely on his data; that alone introduces another term of uncertainty into the weighting of his data's contribution to his thesis. Of course, you have to weigh everyone's data the same way. The odds that CDC's data is good are better than the odds that Wakefield's data is, just because there's more evidence of good data from CDC in the past. Not so much from Wakefield. There's evidence of bad data from CDC too, but the ratio's better for them than him.
Bringing in the word "truth" is the giveaway, though. That's not something science is able to offer. Some say religion is...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
I write this approving your entry into the WNTD with some trepidation lest my sanctioning you cause peripheral damage to your credibility.
My source for my thinking is in print {on a bumper sticker] If you idiot proof it they'll build better idiots
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
(Related to the argument that vaccination is scientifically linked to autism and not related to misgivings about vaccination for other reasons.)
Some of the discussion on this thread has inspired me to identify a new term to be added to the
Wacco New Terms Dictionary.
Inepticism (noun)
A belief system often found on Waccobb.net where all authoritative sources of information are dismissed by definition merely because of the fact they are authoritative. ...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
And here, from the LA times, is an outline of the history of measles. This isn't particularly subjective and certainly isn't advocacy. It's just a clear description of why the issue's a bigger deal than many others that otherwise seem similar.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Scott, this is brilliant !
Have you considered writing for The Onion?
Cheers, Dodie
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
Inepticism (noun)
A belief system often found on Waccobb.net where all authoritative sources of information are dismissed ...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
My father was against vaccines, but I do believe I got the polio vaccine, tetanus, and smallpox as a child because it was required. Also got a booster tetanus a couple of times.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:
So, you have never gotten any vaccine in your entire life? Not even as a child? Not even once since you were born in 1943?
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Please read about your source (naturalnews,com) in Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaturalNews
It made me more than a little skeptical of anything that Mike Adam's asserts.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
This is the first paragraph about Mike Adams and Natural News: Do any Wacco members believe any of these claims?
NaturalNews (formerly Newstarget) is a website founded and operated by Mike Adams.[2] It is based in Cedar Creek, Texas.[3]
It is dedicated to the sale of various dietary supplements, promotion of alternative medicine, (often controversial) nutrition claims,[4] and various conspiracy theories,[5] such as "chemtrails",[6] the purported dangers of fluoride in drinking water[7] (as well as those of monosodium glutamate[8] and aspartame), and purported health problems caused by "toxic" ingredients in vaccines,[4] including the now-discredited link to autism.[9]
Characterized as a "conspiracy-minded alternative medicine website", NaturalNews has approximately 7 million unique visitors per month.[10]
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Ronaldo:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
.
The Young Turks Network, 2.5.2015
You Won’t Believe Where Anti-Vaxxers Get Their Information
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtFt-B6i80w&list=PLTpcK80irdQhYeepMPCTPNVWw5A98fZWT
“As the vaccination wars continue to escalate, a new study suggests that trusted doctors and experts may be no match for the loud and often inaccurate wisdom of Internet commenters.
In a first-of-its kind experiment, researchers at Washington State University have shown that people tend to be persuaded less by credible pro- and anti-vaccination information published online than by individual users who hang around in comments threads on the topic kicking up dust.
The findings, which will appear in an upcoming Journal of Advertising, underscore the powerful influence of information disseminated by word of mouth. Moreover, they offer a striking insight into the ability of the anti-vaccination movement to flourish despite mounting outrage and overwhelming scientific evidence that supports vaccination.”
Read More Here: https://www.vocativ.com/culture/society/vaccination-debate/
John Iadarola (https://www.twitter.com/jiadarola), Dave Rubin (https://www.twitter.com/rubinreport) and Hannah Cranston (https://twitter.com/hannahcranston_) of The Young Turks discuss.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
the interesting thing about wakefield is not that he was discredited. he was a small part of questioning mercury in early childhood vaccination. it took years of parent pushback to get the mercury out. the cdc et al was scared shitless that autism rates would drop with reformulated vaccines. this would have led to huge public health liability lawsuits.
since the rates didn't drop, though they did stabilize, industrialized medicine had been crowing told you so and touting wakefield as the whipping boy for antivaccers. thank the parents that early childhood vaccines are safer! we are enculturated to think its an us vs them world. but perhaps a subject as complicated as human health takes all to sort through the options offered by medical science.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
comparing public debates about climate, vaccination, and also fluoridation is silly. the use of science can be both beneficial and a mistake. in evaluating scientific claims it is very important to follow the money, because money influences science.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
so this does kind of come down to who you find more believable as a source: the big-pharma shills at the American Cancer Society, relying on the CDC and major university researchers, or the reporters at Natural News and their representation of the same studies. "Completely ignoring science" is actually applied to the wrong target; the NN reporter completely misunderstands science. Even in their own article, they acknowledge that the sin of the ACS is that they think the "evidence regarding these factors [is] 'unclear.' " That's indicative to me that they don't have studies that are strong enough to substantiate that claim as fact.
I think it's funny that critics of 'big science' take opposite views on this depending on the issue. Those who don't believe in climate change think the scientific community leaps to unsubstantiated conclusions, while the anti-vaxers article thinks they're unwilling to reach conclusions on what they're claiming (and to me, credibly) is too weak evidence to support such conclusions.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
To hold Snopes as a good source for unbiased medical information is quite interesting. I'm glad I question just like you do. Even the Mikkelsons admit that Snopes is only as reliable as the sources it cites, and they invite readers to look for the truth themselves. Their sources include mainly the CDC's info; and what was said on Snopes, in the statement by the CDC ,wasn’t true of Dr. Hooker’s intention or him retracting it. The removal of CDC statements happen quit often when the results show things the corporate entities don't want us to know.
This Rubella study below had also been removed...
https://childhealthsafety.wordpress....C2%A0vaccines/
“… rubella (congenital rubella syndrome) is one of the few proven causes of autism.” Walter A. Orenstein, M.D. US as Assistant Surgeon General,Director National Immunization Program in a letter to the UK’s Chief Medical Officer 15 February 2002...rubellavirus is one of the few known causes of autism.” US Center for Disease Control.
“FAQs (frequentlyasked questions) about MMR Vaccine & Autism” [ED 8/Apr/12: This is the web archive of the CDC page – you will need to search in or scrolldown the page to see the text. As papers cited on the original page by the CDC as evidence for no link with the vaccine have been steadily discredited, it seems the CDC has decided to remove the page and it seems someone has been deleting the archived versions of the page from the web archive too].rubella can cause autism“ The Pediatrician’sRole in the Diagnosis and Management of Autistic Spectrum Disorder in Children – PEDIATRICS Vol. 107 No. 5 May 2001
And the CDC removed this page where it had been said that 98 million Americans received the polio vaccine that was contaminated with SV40 simian monkey virus in the 50's and 60's. https://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/20...cer-virus.html
The Courts have already said that vaccines cause autism which also supports Wakefield claims (if you want to bring him up again, Podfish… only discredited by the intention false reporting of Brian Deer, corporate-hired journalist, who also lied about families with vaccine injured children).
https://healthimpactnews.com/2013/ne...-autism-again/
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html
Here's an independent study from Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medical University of Białystok, Poland https://www.rescuepost.com/files/pro...accination.pdf
And when you got your study from PubMed, I found these...A positive association found between autism prevalence and childhood vaccination uptake across the U.S. population.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
And here's 22 studies that show vaccines cause autism which connects to the additives and adjuncts https://www.pakalertpress.com/2013/0...-cause-autism/
NOTE: Studies with unvaccinated control groups have never been done with humans, but have with animals. And the CDC refuses to do a study on the health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. I wonder why. This is an amazing collection of studies (particularly if you have pets) in what health issues arise from the vaccine tests that even Merck has stated. https://www.dogsadversereactions.com...ineDamage.html
When you make your comments, in placing those who are doing research that disagree with yours into your defined box/es, I find the tactics you use to stop dissent similar as to what censored media uses on whistleblowers and anyone who would dare question authority. Authority dictates is way different than true conscious leaders in their fields. Defining and categorizing those who won't give up their personal power to your Authority Gods, by calling it Inepticism, just limits the conversation that can occur at a mature emotional level...which is maybe your goal...to limit dissent. It would have been fine showing the studies you researched, but when you added your other post, it became more than obvious that your openness was not aligned there at all...because when one wants to prove a point rather than educate, that attitude, with someone calling it 'righteousness' in another post, becomes the predominant energy rather than true available exchange of information. I call these dissenters, these whistleblowers, courageous...150 scientists and doctors who are risking their careers to stand up to those govermental 'authorities' about vaccines.https://www.greatergoodmovie.org/new...bout-vaccines/
And when people stop putting others, who care about humanities welfare and freedoms, into political parties, we might have a flow of information that is independent of limitation or censorship of the real facts. That is what the Occupy movement was about…open up the differences and find a common ground. This is how dialogues in world peace can flourish. Just because a person is in a particular political party doesn't make me want to throw out the baby-with-the bathwater when it comes to information that supports those who risk their livelihood to bring forth truth.
I wonder Scott, or podfish or Edward or Dottie, if you have children. I wonder if you have seen vaccine-injured children or children who have died from vaccine injury. . https://vaccineimpact.com/2015/young...r-mmr-vaccine/ My grandson gets febrile seizures that occurred after vaccinations. My friends' son is autistic from vaccine injury. My other friend’s grandchild became autistic after vaccines. My acupuncturist has many patients who bring in their autistic children due to vaccine injury. And I wonder if you have heard the stories of what the parents have gone through with their doctors to prove their children are vaccine injured which many can’t, but they know, they were there. I wonder if you have seen how the child protection agency is now accusing parents of abusing their new babies due to vaccine injuries (because they have swollen, encephalitic heads and bloated bodies), and is 'kidnapping' children from loving families that make choices different than the 'authorities'...like homeschooling or breastfeeding. Did you know that your 'authorities' are telling lactating mothers they should stop nursing to boost their child's vaccine immunity? Nature's medicine minimized to support corporate interests. Wow! https://vaxtruth.org/2012/01/the-cdc...ness-not-true/ How many other false concepts are going to be accepted due to those gullible to corporate interests?
Dr. Boyd Haley, Professor and former chair, Dept of Chemistry, University of Kentucky, says that, “A single vaccine given to a 6 lb. newborn is equivalent to giving a 180 lb. adult 30 vaccinations on the same day.” Are you or the rest that think these vaccinations are so safe, willing to take 30 vaccinations in one day soon? And he puts himself and his career on the line by being a very vocal whistleblower which then had the FDA going after him because he knows how to chelate the toxins out of the body. Typical, just so typical! Another doctor and scientist acquaintance had this happen to them as well.
Children today receive as many as 49 doses of 14 vaccines before they reach age six, which is roughly 12 times higher than the number of vaccines administered to children back in 1940. With more than 220 new vaccines in the developmental pipeline for children and adults...and no end in sight...the question you must ask yourself is 'ARE YOU CERTAIN you will be 100% comfortable with vaccines that are added to the mandated list in the future?'
I truly doubt that any critical thinker would ever sign off on the sight-unseen vaccine schedule of the future. And yet that's what you're doing when you and your group condemn the people who are speaking about this...with all of our rights to refuse what we have researched to be harmful. YOU have the right to refuse, should you ever choose to use it, because the very "anti-vaccine" people you mock have been standing up to the 'authorities', researching, being courageous. Once we enter the slippery slope of removing an individual's right to refuse medical procedures that carry a risk of injury or death, once we remove an individual's right to speak for him/herself and his/her children, we open ourselves up to an insidious new era, where other drugs and other procedures can be mandated.
For those who are really interested, we can start to change this trend by reversing the law that grants vaccine manufacturers total immunity from vaccine injury lawsuits. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...-kind/HW1B3YKz Because as it stands, you can't sue a vaccine manufacturer if your child is injured or killed by a vaccine, [though Merck, Bayer, Ely Lily etc can be sued for other drug violations] even in cases where they could've made a safer vaccine and chose not to (which I know a once-head CEO of a vaccine company who was thrown off his own board for refusing to add the corporation-demanded adjuncts and additives) or when they failed to recall a contaminated lot# in a timely manner. Think about that. You can't sue the manufacturer. That immunity from liability, that total lack of accountability raises the status of the vaccine corporations to that "Godly" level that some of you are against.
As having vaccine-injuries myself from childhood, which I'm in the midst of detoxing by alternative methods for the last few years, I'm complete on this topic with all of you. Whatever other words you need to write, unless you want to take all those vaccines in one day, I'm sure your 'rally' group will enjoy your comments.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Thank you for sharing your own heartbreaking experiences, in addition to the in depth research you've provided. I did come across a list of vaccine related lawsuits, and will try to post some of them. The information is extensive, and most people won't take the time to read it.
More and more, corporations are being protected for the physical, mental, and emotional harm they cause, with profit as the bottom line. Buying people off is common, and especially in the area of BigPharma, where there's plenty to share with supporters.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
To hold Snopes as a good source for unbiased medical information is quite interesting. ...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Here's a great video of Bill Maher discussing vaccinations. I particularly appreciated Marianne Williamson's remarks:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Thanks for posting.
I wish someone would have asked, "Who does the studies that proves vaccines are safe?" or probed about how corporate interest could sway those studies. I was disappointed that they were all so confident of the safety of the measles vaccine without addressing the concerns being raised right now, like the ones that Sharing Wisdom mentioned in detail. And, it is my understanding that GMOs are in vaccines.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Here's a great video of Bill Maher discussing vaccinations. I particularly appreciated Marianne Williamson's remarks...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
I believe the formal word for what "Natural News" is spouting is "bullshit".
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
This is the first paragraph about Mike Adams and Natural News: Do any Wacco members believe any of these claims?....
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Dave, does this mean you believe that these things are beneficial? Flouride, aspartame, monsodium glutamate, etc. and these things are harmful? dietary supplements, alternative medicine ....and that conspiracy theories, chemtrails are BS?
Just wondering if you think it's all BS or just some of it. Your opinion is as valid as anyone's.
It is dedicated to the sale of various dietary supplements, promotion of alternative medicine, (often controversial) nutrition claims,[4] and various conspiracy theories,[5] such as "chemtrails",[6] the purported dangers of fluoride in drinking water[7] (as well as those of monosodium glutamate[8] and aspartame), and purported health problems caused by "toxic" ingredients in vaccines,[4] including the now-discredited link to autism.[9]
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by dave1021:
I believe the formal word for what "Natural News" is spouting is "bullshit".
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
If it comes from "Natural News," I'll look for other sources. Just like I do with ads from "Whole Foods".
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:
Just wondering if you think [Natural News is] all BS or just some of it. Your opinion is as valid as anyone's....
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
(I have restored my greatly moderator interfered with post which reduced this list to 1 not of my choice, and mischaracterized the aggregate point I was making.)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
...
sharingwisdom wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/image...post-right.png
...This Rubella study below had also been removed...
..rubellavirus is one of the few known causes of autism. US Center for Disease Control,,,.
..98 million Americans received the polio vaccine that was contaminated with SV40 simian monkey virus...
...The Courts have already said that vaccines cause autism which also supports Wakefield claims...
...Brian Deer, corporate-hired journalist, who also lied about families with vaccine injured children...
..here's 22 studies that show vaccines cause autism which connects to the additives and adjuncts,,,
..NOTE: Studies with unvaccinated control groups have never been done with humans...
..CDC refuses to do a study on the health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations...
..150 scientists and doctors who are risking their careers to stand up to those govermental 'authorities'....
...A single vaccine given to a 6 lb. newborn is equivalent to giving a 180 lb. adult 30 on the same day.
..you can't sue a vaccine manufacturer if your child is injured or killed by a vaccine, [Merck, Bayer, Ely Lily...
...
I have the greatest respect for your standing for what you know regardless of any ridicule SharingWisdom. But the indignant slammed door responses as if it's a threat rather than an offer of help really heavies my heart. The big picture your posts paint overflowing with crucial questions, examples and sources that add up to one of the biggest health warnings this lifetime is instead being attacked without any real understanding like it's too dangerous to look. What bigger example of ineptitude? And we haven't even dared bring up the other agendas and ramifications including level of bio-technological advancement factor doubtlessly underlying at the deeper levels.
The biggest hypocrisy to me is this gigantic fear being propagated. What do the people who vaccinate have to fear if they are so protected?
How about we move on and discuss instead how to eliminate the toxins and curtail the damage done from childhood vaccines before we could take control. Do you have any info on 1950/60/70's specific toxins and especially effects that appear later in life? What are the prominent effects? What do you do to cleanse, especially the pineal? I've read many suggestions, not really sure what is effective and feel a need to be as proactive as I can now.
The biggest thanks.
-
I’m Autistic And It’s A Lot Better Than Measles
I’m Autistic, And Believe Me, It’s A Lot Better Than Measles
Vaccines don’t cause autism. But even if they did, is being like me really a fate worse than death?
The autistic brain is not particularly good at understanding irony, and yet most people I’ve met on the autism spectrum have, over time, developed a pretty strong grasp of the concept. Many of us have even managed to teach ourselves how to wield it. I’ve begun to suspect that this is due to our constant hands-on experience.
Having an autism spectrum disorder in an ableist world means that you’re constantly exposed to cruel irony. Most frequently, this comes in the form of neurotypical (i.e. non-autistic) people who tell you, incorrectly, that you can’t or don’t feel empathy like them, and then stubbornly refuse to care about your feelings when they claim that you’re lost, that you’re a burden, and that your life is a constant source of misery for you and everyone who loves you. There’s also my current favorite: parents who are willing to put the lives of countless human beings at risk because they’re so afraid that the mercury fairy will gives their kids a tragic case of autism if they vaccinate. Gotta protect the kids from not being able to feel empathy — who cares whether other children live or die?
No matter what other lofty ideas of toxins and vaccine-related injury anti-vaxxers try to float around in their defense, that’s really what all of this is about: we’re facing a massive public health crisis because a disturbing number of people believe that autism is worse than illness or death. My neurology is the boogeyman behind a completely preventable plague in the making.
Please click here to read remaining article
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sharingwisdom:
To hold Snopes as a good source for unbiased medical information is quite interesting.
The Courts have already said that vaccines cause autism which also supports Wakefield claims (if you want to bring him up again, Podfish… only discredited by the intention false reporting of Brian Deer, corporate-hired journalist, who also lied about families with vaccine injured children).
Once again, I am not responding to the overall issue of vaccination. I too can respect the skepticism to give a large battery of vaccine shots to one-year-olds. What I am responding to is the contention that science has proven a link between vaccination and autism and that there has been no science discrediting the link between vaccination and autism. Much of this post was about vaccination in general and I will just respond to the autism-vaccination link.
Where to begin...
First of all, most serious investigative reporters publish their stories in major news outlets, which by their very definition are "corporate". Even non-profits (such as Mother Jones, etc.) are technically "corporations". Dismissing all professional journalists who publish in publications owned by companies fundamentally leaves only amateurs as sources to be trusted.
I invite everyone to read some of Brian Deer's reporting (3rd in a series) here on his own blog:
https://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm
And yes, he is a professional journalist. Here is from Brian Deer's Wikipedia page:
One of Deer's early investigations caused uproar in the drug industry when in 1986 he revealed that research into the safety of the
contraceptive pill was fabricated at
Deakin University, Australia, by scientist Professor Michael Briggs, employed by the German company
Schering AG.
[3] In 1994, his investigation of The
Wellcome Trust led to the withdrawal in the UK of a blockbuster antibiotic,
Septrin,
Bactrim, and the sale of the trust's pharmaceutical subsidiary
Wellcome Foundation.
[4] In 2005, the withdrawal of the painkiller
Vioxx was followed by an investigation by Deer into the people responsible for the drug's introduction.
[5] In 2008, a celebrity psychiatrist,
Raj Persaud, was suspended from practising medicine and resigned his academic position after being found guilty of
plagiarism following a Deer investigation.
[6][7] Deer's documentary "The drug trial that went wrong",
[8] nominated for a
Royal Television Society journalism award, investigated the experimental monoclonal antibody
TGN1412.
Regarding "studies", just because something is written and labeled as a "study" does not give it equal weight to all other studies. And just because some institution, such as a university, may post a study somewhere on one of their websites doesn't mean the institution is endorsing the conclusion. This is an understanding that often seems severely lacking on Wacco. Going through the list of "studies" linking vaccination to autism posted here I could find nothing substantial.
Here is a review of the entire list related to vaccination and autism. First of all, many of the "studies" were not about vaccination at all but about environmental mercury which is methylmurcery and an entirely different thing than ethylmurcury that was used in vaccines.
The first link supposedly proves government compensation for autism caused by vaccination, and the quote given on the site (said by someone from the US Health Services and Resources Administration) was this:
"We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.”
Scary, huh? However, I actually followed the link to the source and here is the actual full unedited quote:
"The government has never compensated, nor has it ever been ordered to compensate, any case based on a determination that autism was actually caused by vaccines. We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.
Some children who have been compensated for vaccine injuries may have shown signs of autism before the decision to compensate, or may ultimately end up with autism or autistic symptoms, but we do not track cases on this basis."
A bit different than the scare-mongering.
With the second link I couldn't find anything supporting a linkage between autism and vaccination, but rather quite a lot saying the opposite.
The third link seems broken. But the title of the link does not include anything about vaccination so I can't tell if it has anything to do with vaccination or not.
Fourth link has nothing to do with autism.
The fifth link to "Health Impact News" supposedly proves "the courts have already said that vaccines cause autism" but give no source links that aren't broken to back that claim up.
The sixth link supposedly proves the same thing but it's all about the exact quote from HSRA posted above. Totally deceiving.
The seventh link is the Polish review report that deals mostly with non-autism related risks and is all about thiomerosal that was discontinued in vaccines in the late 90's and is not even part of the infomous Wakefield fraud. The study cited regarding autism in the report was by Mark Geier.
Here is from Mark Geier's Wikipedia entry:
Mark R. Geier (born 1948, Washington, D.C.) is a self-employed American physician and controversial professional witness who has testified in more than 90 cases regarding allegations of injury or illness caused by vaccines.[2][3] Since 2011, Geier's medical license has been suspended or revoked in every state in which he was licensed, over concerns about his autism treatments, and his misrepresentation of his credentials to the Maryland Board of Health (he falsely claimed to be a board-certified geneticist and epidemiologist).[4]
Geier and his son, David Geier, are frequently cited by proponents of the claim that vaccines cause autism. Geier's credibility as an expert witness has been questioned in 10 court cases.[5] In 2003, a judge ruled that Geier presented himself as an expert witness in "areas for which he has no training, expertise and experience."[2] In other cases in which Geier has testified, judges have labeled his testimony "intellectually dishonest," "not reliable" and "wholly unqualified."[2] Another judge wrote that Geier "may be clever, but he is not credible."[6]
It gets worse on his page.
The eight link is a "study" by DeLong. All I can say is here are a few of the many critiques about DeLong. Read them for yourself:
Link nine is a report by VK Singh. Here is from Singh's Wikipedia page:
Singh's findings on autism have been criticized by other scientists as flawed, unreproducible, or dubious. Mary Ramsay of the Health Protection Agency wrote that the evidence for the "specific" MMR-type antibody Singh claims to have detected was "not credible."[10] Paul Offit wrote in Autism's False Prophets that "...a closer look at Singh's science revealed two critical flaws: children with autism didn't have evidence of nerve cell damage, and, according to measles experts, the test that Singh had used to detect measles antibodies didn't actually detect them."[11] A 2006 review of literature on vaccines and autism found that Singh's results "have been called into question due to issues of cross-contamination, as well as the use of unsubstantiated and un-validated biochemical techniques", citing a report by the World Health Organization,[12] and a number of other studies have failed to find a difference in immune response to the measles virus between autistic and neurotypical children.[13][14][15][16] Peter Lachmann, the president of the Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom, stated: "Singh's work in these papers is not particularly reproducible or good... There are many diseases which show raised antibodies to measles, for example chronic active hepatitis or multiple sclerosis, yet there is nothing to associate these with MMR. There is no persuasive evidence that autism is caused by autoimmunity."[17]
Lasty, link 10 is supposedly a list of 22 studies that show vaccines cause autism. I looked at each one of these. Many are about either vaccination and other issue, or autism linked with high levels of environmental mercury not related to vaccination. Of the "studies" linking autism to vaccination in this "list", Here are some rebuttals to listed "study" # 1:
Study # 2 concludes:
"Clearly, we cannot draw definite conclusions regarding the link be-ween Al adjuvants and autism based on an ecological study such asthe present one and hence the validity of our results remains to be confirmed."
And here is one critique of the study:
https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2...d-by-the-decr/
In particular, note:the authors are plotting ASD incidence in each year (1991-2008) against total aluminium content for the pediatric schedule *in that year*. Not (as you might expect) the aluminium exposure for the ASD cases themselves, according to the pediatric schedules of 6 to 21 years previously, but no, that same year.In effect they are looking for a correlation between the number of people who developed ASD decades earlier, and the number of vaccinations given to other children, in the current year. This is an interesting model of causality!
Study # 3. DeLong again.
I could go on with this list of junk science. I know this may be "cheating" by invoking a blog myself, but If interested in getting critiques on all of these so-called "studies" here is a good site: https://angryautie.wordpress.com/201...e-autism-myth/
My original question remains:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
Can you cite one respected institution, Government agency or NGO, university, medical institution, or hospital, or any professional journal from any country that supports a link between vaccination and autism? Or for that matter, any gold-standard, peer reviewed study?
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by dave1021:
If it comes from "Natural News," I'll look for other sources. Just like I do with ads from "Whole Foods".
Hi Dave, I have to agree with you partially about Natural News, there is a lot of pure BS there lately, but I don't think that it is all BS.
NN does have some very informative and good articles about food and nutrition, and some of the commenters are knowledgeable and helpful too.
I liked NN much better a few years ago but I think that their slant has changed for the worse, especially about technical subjects. Most of the authors at NN know absolutely nothing about anything technical, they just parrot other amateur science fiction articles, amateur video producers and the "microwave activists" that think that all radio is microwave. It's kind of funny to read their copying of other propaganda/science fiction articles that were written over 6 years ago, they act like this is breaking news hoping that people will have forgotten all the BS that has long since been debunked many years ago.
Their slant on the ACA is hilarious, they have a Libertarian view that all healthcare corporations are god-like, and they claim that these corporations are now run by the government. They don't understand that all Obamacare is, is private-for-profit healthcare insurance. Even people in California now who earn under $16,116 per year are eligible for Medi-Cal under the new Obamacare guidelines. And guess what, all people who apply for Medi-Cal are now automatically enrolled with a private insurance company called "Partnership HealthPlan of California Inc. The goal of the ACA was to get everyone enrolled in some sort of private healthcare insurance plan, to make sure that there would never be any form of government run medical care delivery system except the VA.
I still look at NN, and I do read some of their articles about vaccines. Some seem to make sense, and I do believe most of what they write on the subject. I am an "anti-vaxer" and I have never had a flue shot. When my doctor asks if I want a flu shot, I simply say "no thank you", I don't need that, and nor do I need any blood tests or colonoscopies either. Then I add that I have never had the flu, or been to an emergency room in my life.
A story that cracked me up was that of the man in Tiburon who said that he doesn't want his child vaccinated for various reasons due to some other allopathic medical treatments that doctors have his son on. So he wants the Reed School District to forbid all children like his who are unvaccinated to attend the school that his unvaccinated child goes too, but he wants an exemption for his kid ! To me, that seems kind of selfish on his part, vaccinations should be a choice that parents and even kids should be able to decide on. Vaccines or any other kind of injections , medical tests or procedures are very intimate and personal, and should never be mandated.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Well, I AM no expert on anything much, but I have now listened to many of the doctors and others who have really done the research and risked the retaliation we know many thought leaders have suffered for going against the mainstream. I am now convinced the real story is coming out now and these vaccines will soon be a thing of the past. I AM thanking God that I did not get many of the shots myself, but suspect an autoimmune component in my own health as a result of the early childhood vaccines. I remember lining up to get the polio sugar cube and being grateful they had it because my older brother was actually hospitalized and made to be in an iron lung for some time. Of course, for me, tonsillitis followed, pneumonia, chicken pox (apparently, because I had Shingles last year), mumps, measles, swollen glands, all sorts of illness. I decided long ago not to get shots and not to take medicines for these illnesses; we did not have Nyquil and Dayquil and all the stuff on the shelves today. We lived far from medical attention and rarely saw a doctor. My brother did recover from alleged polio and seemed relatively healthy up through his teen years, while I was not so fortunate. The one time I weakened and allowed a doctor to give me a penicillin shot, I had a terrifying reaction much worse than the problem which caused me to get the shot. So, no more shots for me! I did have to take some antiviral and steroid meds for the Shingles last year, but I believe prayer stopped it from spreading because it came and went in five days and there was no itching or pain.
For people who have not had adverse reactions to drugs and these horrors have not invaded their personal lives, I say: Good for you! But for those who have had similar experiences to mine and those described by these many doctors and experts, I say: I AM personally grieved to realize the fraud and deception we have all experienced and I pray for ways we can put an end to this scandal once and for all.
Rev. BE :heart:
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
I suspect you did not bother to click those links and listen to what those people discovered when they did the research... I clicked those links and listened and it broke my heart to realize they are not conspiracy theorists; they are serious researchers, scientists, doctors, and others who have the time, wherewithall and courage to press on in the sincere attempt to discover the truth about vaccinations and all the related matters. And we've really just been writing about the MMR vaccinations, but so much fraud and deception has been revealed that I find it almost impossible to comprehend how anybody today still thinks vaccinations are a good thing! :hmmm:
Rev. BE :heart:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Scott McKeown:
... What I was objecting to was the claim by the blogger that vaccination is linked to autism which so far isn't supported by any solid evidence or science (as no linkage has been supported by solid science) and was long ago discredited by virtually every credible institution and professional working in the field throughout the world.
Scott
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by AllorrahBe:
I suspect you did not bother to click those links and listen to what those people discovered when they did the research... I clicked those links and listened and it broke my heart to realize they are not conspiracy theorists; they are serious researchers, scientists, doctors, and others
Scott clicked a lot more links than I have patience for, and I applaud him for that.
Some of the links I did click were heavy on what seems to have appealed to you: personal testimonials and anecdotes, or mini-documentary style editorials. This kind of thing is compelling and, because they aren't obvious waccos in either sense of the word, because they're 'serious' people, does raise questions. But that's not where the trail ends. Often the people being interviewed aren't in control of the way their interviews are edited or the context they appear in. I know how that works, I've been in that position myself. Most of the sites hosting this information are full of content that is advocacy, not data. Which is fine if you're looking for context, but not fine if you're trying to evaluate data so you can make a rational conclusion. Scott's post analyzed a lot of those links and made specific comments about the credibility of the evidence there.
Just to give one example: our 'whistleblower' CDC doctor has issued this (maybe under duress at gunpoint, I can't tell):
Quote:
"I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits." And about his treatment by the CDC, Dr. Thompson went on to declare: "My colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been entirely professional since this matter became public. In fact, I received a performance-based award after this story came out. I have experienced no pressure or retaliation and certainly was not escorted from the building, as some have stated."
but i'll append my mandatory disclaimer - none of the above is expected to change anyone's mind, because it's pretty apparent we've all seen more than we care to about "evidence" that seems to convince those on the opposite side of this debate.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by AllorrahBe:
... My brother did recover from alleged polio and seemed relatively healthy up through his teen years, while I was not so fortunate. ...
"alleged polio" ?????????????????????????????????????????
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Hypothetically speaking since smallpox has been eradicated, would the same folks who oppose vaccinations also oppose the vaccination of their children and themselves were this virulent disease still extant?
After all measles does kill, remember Charles Hamilton died from it only two weeks after he married Scarlett O'Hara!
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Ronaldo:
Hypothetically speaking since smallpox has been eradicated, would the same folks who oppose vaccinations also oppose the vaccination of their children and themselves were this virulent disease still extant?
After all measles does kill, remember Charles Hamilton died from it only two weeks after he married Scarlett O'Hara!
What more than repeating something you've heard and believed all your life do you really know about smallpox... and it's primary decline around the world in relationship to other factors besides vaccine? Same for polio. There was no hysteria surrounding the past statistics that are still findable. I'll give you hint, use the word myth in your search.
Another point about measles that I remember being true in my childhood is that pre-MMR vaccine the medical establishment had long viewed it as bad if you didn't get this relatively mild, short lived world-common ailment in childhood as excellent for your lifetime natural immunity.
If you're really willing to look, I suggest you focus on independent studies concerning the many immediate issues and lifelong ramifications surrounding the factors of injecting any of these live, dead and toxic vaccine ingredients directly into the amazingly strong and sterile bloodstream you were born with.
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Alex:
... the amazingly strong and sterile bloodstream you were born with.
?? can't resist commenting on how Sterling Haydenish that sounds...
-
Re: The Onion totally nails it again (Vaccinations)
