Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robrob said:
So let me get this right.

Mercury in vaccines causes autism. So the government removed the mercury. Then the CT changes to vaccines caused autism? Eventually it will devolve into needles cause autism.

Out of curiosity, sine the actual diseases in question don't cause autism? Then how can the vaccine?
Click to expand...

No, not according to the latest idea I posted which says that mercury does NOT cause autism. See my previous post.
 
Robrob said:
You didn't answer the question.

So again - the other CT nuts who think mercury causes autism, they're just nuts right?
Click to expand...

You mean 'nuts' as in misinformed? lol, then ok yes, but then even the government medical experts are nuts (at least misinformed in the past). IF my conspiracy theory is correct, which is quite uncertain.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
You mean 'nuts' as in misinformed? lol, then ok yes, but then even the government medical experts are nuts (at least misinformed in the past). IF my conspiracy theory is correct, which is quite uncertain.
Click to expand...


Parents noticed that their normal children would lose expression, a symptom of autism, after receiving a vaccine inoculation, MMR in particular.

A CT theory was conceived by a demonstrable and steady increase of a currently incurable condition, autism.

The CT theory was burgeoned by the seeming inability to find a cause of a currently incurable condition, autism.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Parents noticed that their normal children would lose expression, a symptom of autism, after receiving a vaccine inoculation, MMR in particular.

A CT theory was conceived by a demonstrable and steady increase of a currently incurable condition, autism.

The CT theory was burgeoned by the seeming inability to find a cause of a currently incurable condition, autism.
Click to expand...

Then you are going to have to explain why children who have never been vaccinated develop autism. That alone disproves you "theory".
 
Clayton Moore said:
Parents noticed that their normal children would lose expression, a symptom of autism, after receiving a vaccine inoculation, MMR in particular.
Click to expand...

Except that this is pure coincidence. It just so happens that the appropriate time to vaccinate is also when many of the symptoms of autism become noticeable. In communities with no vaccinations kids with autism still develop those symptoms at that same age.

A CT theory was conceived by a demonstrable and steady increase of a currently incurable condition, autism.
Click to expand...
As mentioned before it is only an increase in the number of kids diagnosed. If you have evidence that the actual incidence rate is up please show it.

The CT theory was burgeoned by the seeming inability to find a cause of a currently incurable condition, autism.
Click to expand...
Well actually there is a lot of research that shows it to be a congenital condition. And even if there was no clue as to the cause that does not mean you should automatically just latch on to some conspiracy.
 
As a desperate attempt to hide the continuing higher rate of autism even after the mercury was removed from the vaccines they changed the way autism is diagnosed to obscure the statistics.

The real cause of the increase in autism isn't the mercury as the governments were fooled to believe. The real cause is genetically modified viruses in the vaccines making the developing brains in the children to speed up the growth of certain types of neurons as an attempt to create super kids. Usually the vaccines don't cause any significant change in the children and instead of creating super kids 1 out of 100 children develop autism and only one child out of 10 000 becomes a super kid.
 
Travis said:
Except that this is pure coincidence. It just so happens that the appropriate time to vaccinate is also when many of the symptoms of autism become noticeable. In communities with no vaccinations kids with autism still develop those symptoms at that same age.

As mentioned before it is only an increase in the number of kids diagnosed. If you have evidence that the actual incidence rate is up please show it.

Well actually there is a lot of research that shows it to be a congenital condition. And even if there was no clue as to the cause that does not mean you should automatically just latch on to some conspiracy.
Click to expand...
An increase of a particular congenital condition doesn't cross state lines, multiple state lines, countries, nor oceans.

Without a common environmental factor.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
An increase of a particular congenital condition doesn't cross state lines, multiple state lines, countries, nor oceans.

Without a common environmental factor.
Click to expand...


If it was an actual increase in incidence this might be relevant. But because it is all just a matter of the diagnostic criteria changing it is not relevant.

If we changed the diagnostic criteria for the flu to: "Any ache or pain not associated with a specific injury" and then see a huge increase in people diagnosed with flu do we in fact have a huge new flu epidemic?
 
If I remember correctly, mercury has been used in vaccines for a looong time, something like for half a century, to remove very nasty side effects. If my latest super scary Nazi scientist Brave New World scenario is true then the increase in autism made a jump when the genetically modified Dolphin brain viruses started to be added to the vaccines. After that, the autism statistics has remained more or less constant and it's the change of diagnoses that has made it look like the cases of autism have increased. If this is true then the normalized statistics for vaccines and autism should show a sudden jump when the generically modified viruses started to be used, unless there was a test period where only some children were given that in the beginning, in which case it will show more like a hockey stick curve than a sudden jump in the correlation between vaccines and autism.
 
Anders Lindman said:
... the normalized statistics for vaccines and autism should show a sudden jump when the generically modified viruses started to be used, unless there was a test period where only some children were given that in the beginning, in which case it will show more like a hockey stick curve than a sudden jump in the correlation between vaccines and autism.
Click to expand...

:eek: I found this: http://www.whale.to/vaccine/image006.gif

http://www.whale.to/vaccine/yazbak1.html

Notice the hockey stick curve where the increase starts around 1992 and then flattens out around 2000. The statistics is for children under age 14 in Denmark. This means that the ramp curve has to be shifted 12 years back giving a starting date for the sudden increase in autism around 1980 if vaccines causing the increase were given to the children at an age around 1-2 years.
 
Travis said:
If it was an actual increase in incidence this might be relevant. But because it is all just a matter of the diagnostic criteria changing it is not relevant.

If we changed the diagnostic criteria for the flu to: "Any ache or pain not associated with a specific injury" and then see a huge increase in people diagnosed with flu do we in fact have a huge new flu epidemic?
Click to expand...

Diagnostic criteria?

Parents don't change their diagnostic criteria. And I doubt if the diagnostic criteria for autism by the medical communities of various countries becomes more "aggressive/sensitive" in tandem.
 
Anders Lindman said:
As a desperate attempt to hide the continuing higher rate of autism even after the mercury was removed from the vaccines they changed the way autism is diagnosed to obscure the statistics.

The real cause of the increase in autism isn't the mercury as the governments were fooled to believe. The real cause is genetically modified viruses in the vaccines making the developing brains in the children to speed up the growth of certain types of neurons as an attempt to create super kids. Usually the vaccines don't cause any significant change in the children and instead of creating super kids 1 out of 100 children develop autism and only one child out of 10 000 becomes a super kid.
Click to expand...

I am going to demonstrate my psychic powers, and say that you do not work in a medical field, nor are going to school for a medical profession.

From the standpoint of someone who is going to school to be in the medical profession, specifically those evil pharmacists you keep talking about, what you are saying is unintelligible hogwash, that would barely pass as a plot point in a film, let alone a commentary on something real.
 
sadhatter said:
I am going to demonstrate my psychic powers, and say that you do not work in a medical field, nor are going to school for a medical profession.

From the standpoint of someone who is going to school to be in the medical profession, specifically those evil pharmacists you keep talking about, what you are saying is unintelligible hogwash, that would barely pass as a plot point in a film, let alone a commentary on something real.
Click to expand...

Sure, I don't even know if viruses are real. That would be a pretty outrageous conspiracy theory, that viruses are a hoax. :D
 
Travis said:
Except that this is pure coincidence. It just so happens that the appropriate time to vaccinate is also when many of the symptoms of autism become noticeable. In communities with no vaccinations kids with autism still develop those symptoms at that same age.

As mentioned before it is only an increase in the number of kids diagnosed. If you have evidence that the actual incidence rate is up please show it.

Well actually there is a lot of research that shows it to be a congenital condition. And even if there was no clue as to the cause that does not mean you should automatically just latch on to some conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Stop using facts and logic. You are only confusing them.
 
Clayton Moore said:
An increase of a particular congenital condition doesn't cross state lines, multiple state lines, countries, nor oceans.

Without a common environmental factor.
Click to expand...
.
Really? So, oh let's say disproportionate dwarfism, that's limited to a particular state, country or continent?

Hemophilia?

<snip>
anencephaly?

What is the environmental factor for each of these?
.


Edited by Loss Leader: 
Uncivil personal insult has been excised. However, posters should take note that Rules 0/12 do not grant the right to escape debate without hurt feelings. Not every perceived insult will be acted upon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Clayton Moore said:
Parents don't change their diagnostic criteria.
Click to expand...
.
Really? Ever? Your parents had the demons exorcised from you when you had a case of the vapors?

Actually, that explains quite a bit...
.
Clayton Moore said:
And I doubt if the diagnostic criteria for autism by the medical communities of various countries becomes more "aggressive/sensitive" in tandem.
Click to expand...
.
And your singularly ill informed and untrained opinion matters to anyone you don't take to the barber for a blood letting... why?
.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Diagnostic criteria?

Parents don't change their diagnostic criteria. And I doubt if the diagnostic criteria for autism by the medical communities of various countries becomes more "aggressive/sensitive" in tandem.
Click to expand...

Parents are irrelevant to this discussion. They aren't diagnosing their kids with this.

I suppose you've never heard of the The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. In 1994 it was updated into what is known as DSM-IV. Guess one spectrum of disorders that had its criteria greatly expanded?

If you guessed Autism Spectrum Disorders you win! If you also guessed that the increase in kids diagnosed with Autism went up dramatically following its publication you also win. And if you further guessed that the number of kids diagnosed with basic mental retardation or generic social awkwardness also began to fall right around this time you are on your way to being an actual skeptic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom