Vaccines and Autism

[steveh_131]

I'll try this again. this thread is about specific topic: Vaccines and how they related to autism. Whether *I'M* inconsistent or consistent *(which you don't know)with science has no bearing on what I've stated about the science majority for this topic. Surely you can see how my views on other subjects don't affect what scientists say about this specific subject?

You asserted that a majority consensus among scientists is a good indicator that something is true. I'm simply asking you if you apply that to all scientific endeavors, or just this one? Either it's a reliable standard or it isn't.

I don't think that 'majority consensus' among scientists is a very good indicator of truth, personally. I'm noticing a very serious herd mentality that seems to be driven by money and politics. Dissenters are driven out of the scientific community as quacks and 'hucksters'. In all seriousness, scroll back to the beginning of this thread and look at the response received by the OP for posting an interesting article from a highly competent scientist. Is she right? Shoot, I don't know. I have my doubts. But the spiteful retorts really shake my confidence in the majority consensus among scientists and the public at large.

If signs of autism has such a broad range of when it's noticed, could you really make a stance with any correlation to vaccination that I couldn't do with any other such event that may happen to a baby between the ages of 0-14 months?

No, I really can't. You're quite right, it's been a heck of a thing to try to track down.

I do not suggest blindly doing anything. I'm actually not even against questioning vaccines. However, your questions have widely been discussed and answered by leading scientists, not to mention peer reviewed studies to show a lack of a connection between the two. You don't really acknowledge that and you sort of lead people on to believe these studies MUST be cronyism but then in the same breathe believe a different scientist who happens to agree with you.

I think that if you go back and read this thread more carefully, you'll see that this is not what I was asserting. There have been no studies, that I am aware of, regarding aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines. This is a new wrinkle. They aren't used in all vaccines, therefore studies regarding vaccines in general are not pertinent. Additionally, I didn't say that I believe this scientist or that I agree with her. I find it interesting and worthy of consideration, and not deserving of the vicious response she received among scientists and even INGO members.

 

[Alpo]

And I'll go back to say that it is improper to give the families of those affected by this condition a false hope that the answer lies here. That's no better than the opposite approach which is selling cures for cancer in Mexico based on the pit/seed extact amgdalin. The difference between the two (besides money)? The latter case ends with the patient expiring. The former case ends up with people avoiding vaccination where they would have had a much higher chance of living.

 

[steveh_131]

Whatever caused this damage, nobody is pretending that there is a cure. Only prevention.

Check out my update to this thread: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...atest-cdc-vaccine-cover-up-3.html#post5985433

Representative Bill Posey just told Congress all about the fraud at the CDC.

"We all met and finalized the study protocol and analysis plan. The goal was to not deviate from the analysis plan to avoid the debacle that occurred with the Verstraeten thimerosal study published in Pediatrics in '03. At the September 5th meeting we discussed in detail how to code race for both the sample and the birth certificate sample. At the bottom of Table 7, it also shows that for the non-birth-certificate sample, the adjusted race effect statistical significance was huge. All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September '02 not to report any race effects for the paper. Some time soon after the meeting we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard-copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office, and I retained all associated computer files.
"I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper."

These people literally thew evidence in the garbage can to avoid having to publish anything resembling evidence of vaccine damage.

Is everyone still feeling as trusting of mainstream scientific consensus?

 

[sgreen3]

A baby can contract whooping cough for a wide variety of reasons. Interestingly, vaccinated children may be the more risky carriers of the infection.

1. Yes, an unvaccinnated child could catch it and spread it. However, unvaccinated children demonstrate visible symptoms when they are infected and any intelligent parent could prevent contact with the sick child.

2. A vaccinated child can become infected with the pertussis virus and be a carrier of it, spreading it around to other children while being completely asymptomatic. [CDC Source]

3. Your baby could contract whooping cough due to widespread yet under-reported vaccine failure. Fully vaccinated populations are reporting outbreaks of the virus. [Source]


4. Yes, a poorly functioning immune system (due to bad nutrition) could contribute to this sort of vaccine failure or prevent a proper natural immune response to the pertussis virus. [source]

5. Yes, sugar consumption drags down the immune response as well. [Source]



I would not suggest that anyone refuse vaccinations because of a fear of autism. I have stated several times already that I am unconvinced of any link between the two.

I would suggest that they consider the very real damaging and even fatal side effects of vaccines [FDA Source] and weigh them properly against the dangers of the diseases. I would suggest that they consider the bias of each source that they study and make a wise decision for themselves.



I said nothing mean-spirited. My point is that it is very difficult to control the immune systems of the children around you. Vaccines don't cut it. I had a newborn who was immuno-compromised for several years of her life. We were cautious to keep her home whenever possible, and try to avoid visibly sick children... but there is only so much that you can do. Placing all of the blame for communicable diseases on kids who aren't fully vaccinated is silly.

Not sure if this is your info or from what your quoting from the CDC but pertussis is caused by a bacteria not a virus. With that being said I think the moral of the vast amount of posts that you've made on this subject is to make an informed decision. Regardless of what that decision is in life, health questions or life questions in general its always best to have quality information at hand and base a reasonable decision from that. For that I commend you on saying so (if I'm right in my assumption, wrote a paper on that very subject for my Advanced Micro class). With that being said working in a clinical laboratory is a very sad thing to see a child contract an illness from something that can be prevented. We actually had a child that turned out to be positive for pertussis about a month ago, feel so bad for that child and as it turns out he was not vaccinated. Although I'm not a proponent of the GOV telling us what we can and cant do I think those that come to conclusion not to vaccinate need to know exactly what the repercussions' could be for not doing so and their child contracting MMR or DTAP.

 

[mbills2223]

The vast majority of people have no idea how to interpret scientific research. All I'm saying...

 

[steveh_131]

The vast majority of people have no idea how to interpret scientific research. All I'm saying...

For a self described scientist, it is remarkable how little you actually contribute to a discussion.

 

[mbills2223]

For a self described scientist, it is remarkable how little you actually contribute to a discussion.

Thank you...i get that a lot!

 

[steveh_131]

Sincerely: if my analysis is wrong, please show me where. I'd genuinely like to know. My goal is to separate fact from fiction. If I'm wrong then I want to be corrected.

Like the guy above corrected me on the virus vs bacterium. I welcome it. Dropping condescending remarks helps no one.

 

[Alpo]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mbills2223 again.

Outstanding reply! LOL!

 

[jbmayes2000]

Pointing out your potential hypocrisy is completely relevant to this thread. His use of an analogy to do so is perfectly acceptable. Why do you keep dodging the question unless you really are being a hypocrite and you just don't want to admit it?

Did you keep reading? "No.
I'll try this again. this thread is about specific topic: Vaccines and how they related to autism. Whether *I'M* inconsistent or consistent *(which you don't know)with science has no bearing on what I've stated about the science majority for this topic. Surely you can see how my views on other subjects don't affect what scientists say about this specific subject?"

Whether i'm a hypocrite or not has LITERALLY (and i mean that literally) nothing to do with the *FACT* that the general consensus of very smart leading scientists agree that there isn't a link. Do you follow this yet?

It's funny that so many people have absolutely zero foresight; in the grand scheme of things humans don't know squat compared to what we think we know. At one time the world was square and every scientist claimed so; anybody that gave a contrary opinion was ridiculed, and here were are hundreds of years later and the world is, in-fact, round. Pretty easy to look back and call the square-earthers fools, but they were the "general consensus" of their day. It only takes one smart person to prove them all fools...

To be clear, I'm not saying there is or is not a link, I'm saying it is foolish to be so closed-minded that you can't even consider what a scientist has to say and only parrot what the "general consensus" told you was true...

It doesn't matter whether you are saying there is or isn't a link..THERE.ISN'T.A.LINK.

Here is a list of peer reviewed articles:
:: Vaccinate Your Baby : Research & Studies ::
http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347?view=long&pmid=21209059 This website explains the fraudulent person that made the connection

This stuff is EVERYWHERE.

Now I'll concede that I don't know what *future* vaccines could do to someone but as it stands, the basic stuff we get, has no link to autism.

I'm not saying the comparison is exactly fair but..you don't hear people "keeping an open mind" about gravity.

I don't think that 'majority consensus' among scientists is a very good indicator of truth, personally. I'm noticing a very serious herd mentality that seems to be driven by money and politics. Dissenters are driven out of the scientific community as quacks and 'hucksters'. In all seriousness, scroll back to the beginning of this thread and look at the response received by the OP for posting an interesting article from a highly competent scientist. Is she right? Shoot, I don't know. I have my doubts. But the spiteful retorts really shake my confidence in the majority consensus among scientists and the public at large.

You are really covering a TON of extremely smart people by saying they are all "a herd". Who in your mind have they "driven out" that actually contributed something? I would love to see these amazing people who, most likely, couldn't get anything peer reviewed because it was more than likely, pseudo science.

We can seem spiteful because people are grasping. They see the facts and they continue to find ANY reason to not believe them. I apologize if I've came off mean to the OP but honestly, there is a mountain of evidence and people now WANT to blame someone. They WANT some sort of villain and all this and unfortunately, it isn't vaccines as this time. People struggle with "i don't know" but unfortunately, in MANY instances, it's the best answer we have for right now.

No, I really can't. You're quite right, it's been a heck of a thing to try to track down.

Exactly. And since peer reviewed tests have been done with vaccines and there hasn't been a connection, should we really keep beating that dead horse or maybe look elsewhere?

I think that if you go back and read this thread more carefully, you'll see that this is not what I was asserting. There have been no studies, that I am aware of, regarding aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines. This is a new wrinkle. They aren't used in all vaccines, therefore studies regarding vaccines in general are not pertinent. Additionally, I didn't say that I believe this scientist or that I agree with her. I find it interesting and worthy of consideration, and not deserving of the vicious response she received among scientists and even INGO members.

Fair enough. Again, I think the response is, it feels like people are REALLY grasping for something to blame.

EDIT: And the reason I wasn't answering your question is because this particular forum has an overwhelming amount of people that do not take the climate change facts as facts and I'm not here in this thread to debate that. So it was my attempt to not get side tracked but it's clear that there are those that can't see that it doesn't matter what i believe for something to be right.

 

[steveh_131]

Whether i'm a hypocrite or not has LITERALLY (and i mean that literally) nothing to do with the *FACT* that the general consensus of very smart leading scientists agree that there isn't a link. Do you follow this yet?

We all understand the general consensus. We aren't arguing that. I am asking you just how significant a general consensus is. Is a general consensus always correct? I don't think so, especially once money and politics come into play.

I just showed, upthread, that the government is actively hiding any possible evidence of vaccine damage. What do you think that does to your 'general consensus' theory?

THERE.ISN'T.A.LINK.

This statement is logically impossible. You can't definitively say that there is no link. You can say that we haven't found a link yet. And that statement remains true until we find one.

Here is a list of peer reviewed articles:
:: Vaccinate Your Baby : Research & Studies ::
How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed | The BMJ This website explains the fraudulent person that made the connection

First of all, your understanding of Wakefield is limited at best. If you'd like to become educated, here are the facts: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...362-legacy-dr-andrew-wakefield-myth-fact.html

Secondly, I'm not a fan of Wakefield and I'm not here to argue that vaccines cause autism. I've seen no good evidence that they do. I just didn't like the response that someone received when they presented some possible evidence.

I would love to see these amazing people who, most likely, couldn't get anything peer reviewed because it was more than likely, pseudo science.

Look at Dr. Thompsons co-authors. They felt that they had to hide anti-vaccine evidence. The pressure is there. All must conform.

I apologize if I've came off mean to the OP but honestly, there is a mountain of evidence and people now WANT to blame someone.

Show me the evidence contradicting the OP. Keep in mind that the research needs to be specific to vaccines with aborted fetal cell lines, since that is the assertion of the OP. I've not seen much on it. There is certainly no 'mountain'.

 

[jbmayes2000]

Did I miss something, did these two scientist pass a paper through peer review or is this an interview?

 

[steveh_131]

I posted a link to the study already.

 

[eatsnopaste]

can't we talk about something else? something we can agree on? Like open vs. concealed carry, climate change, calibers? When will Obama move back to Kenya? Should Rhino be allowed to have sharp objects? You know, important stuff!

 

[steveh_131]

Open carry is illegal, climate change is true, 22 is the best caliber.

 

[rambone]

The federal government insulates vaccine makers from all injury liability lawsuits. It then, by law, compensates the injured using tax dollars. Among those compensated has included quite a few autism brain damage victims.

Truth in Media: Vaccine Court and Autism - Ben Swann's Truth In Media

 

[steveh_131]

It is outrageous that a family of a vaccine-injured child cannot take that vaccine maker to court to seek justice.

Whether the jury finds damages or not, is it not our right under the justice system to make our case?

How can we expect any kind of accountability when we don't hold them accountable?

 

[jbmayes2000]

I posted a link to the study already.

So I missed something.

I'm being completely honest when I say, I don't understand all of the paper because I'm not a scientist so bare with me and correct me where you might see errors here but:

I would concede the perception of correlation but I didn't see where tests on these stem cells concluded to the causation of it, was that in there?

 

[CountryBoy19]

THERE.ISN'T.A.LINK.


Now I'll concede that I don't know what *future* vaccines could do to someone but as it stands, the basic stuff we get, has no link to autism.

Something tells me you didn't comprehend what I was saying... I'll just watch from the bleachers for a while... this is getting entertaining...

 

[jbmayes2000]

Something tells me you didn't comprehend what I was saying... I'll just watch from the bleachers for a while... this is getting entertaining...

And something tells me the same of you.

You are aware that, regardless of your stance on the subject and whether you "keep an open mind", so far the facts have shown no link. And that remains a fact, whether your support it or not. Again..there is a difference between "being open minded" and disregarding facts.

And I'm sorry I happen to agree with the majority of the worlds smartest human beings and don't believe that thousands of people are just in it to screw us all.