Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[Clayton Moore]

At first he was
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_12044504f8ef561fc2.jpg[/qimg]
O'rly?


Then he was all
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_12044504f6047f2bdc.jpg[/qimg]
Lulz!

The use of your healthy child to "prove" the safety of vaccines is pathetic.

 

[Tomtomkent]

How dare somebody flaunt the lack of harmful side effects!
Why is it pathetic? Does that make the use of a ten year old also pathetic?

 

[TSR]

What a waggery. I'm old and sagacious enough to remember when there was NO special education in schools. Mainly because there was no NEED for it. There wasn't a plethora of children who suddenly became unable to "communicate" between the ages of 1 1/2 and 2. A "retarded person" was a "curiosity." As a child you were sternly told not to stare. It was an extremely rare instruction.

Sadly, people who lie about the reality of the obvious danger of vaccines are likely to get their comeuppance.

No, there was no "special education" because the condition was ignored -- those students were just 'stupid' or 'slow' and were 'held back' to repeat the process that had had no progress in the first place.

Kind of like how your posts ignore contrary, objective information that contradicts you, and simply repeat the same old discredited crap.

Just like there used to be "white" schools and "coloured" schools -- the white kids could ignore that the coloured kids weren't getting the same level of education.

The only one here telling lies about the dangers of vaccines is *you*.

For example, we are all still waiting for you to document a *single* instance of "Big Pharma" or MSM asserting that vaccines are "absolutely safe".

Or to document the "plenty of medical people < that > have determined an association between MMR and autism, thimerosal and autism or the number of vaccines given and autism."

Or ... well I can't be arsed right now to back up more than five pages to find more of your lies.

 

[pakeha]

...2. I note your new-found enthusiasm for skepticism towards self-reported data submitted to websites. I trust that this will not be limited to a single instance and will apply to, for example, VAERS data. (You can fill in a report with a false name and bogus contact details on VAERS, by the way - I just checked this myself.)

Ouch.

 

[pakeha]

A genetic connection that emerges world wide in multiple genetically diverse communities?

When something that stupid is FOCUSED on you gotta understand a cover up is IP(in progress).

I can see your point of view, CM.
The thing is, genetics is a bitch.

What did you think of the information in Stellaphane's linked study?
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ColdFlu/survey-flu-pregnancy-linked-autism/story?id=17682648
It seemed to be a promising lead to me.

 

[000063]

@000063

Thanks for the Scott Adams quote.

It's from "Dilbert and the Way of the Weasel", which is actually rather good.

 

[robcasey]

There have been reports from long term statistical surveys (epidemiological) confirming suspicions that those who are vaccinated often don’t do as well with long term health as those who are vaccination free. Vaccine dangers are real, but those in power don’t want you to know about them.

...

Edited by LashL: 

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Please, do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of text from elsewhere. Instead, cite a short quote and an attribution to the source.

 

[000063]

A genetic connection that emerges world wide in multiple genetically diverse communities?

When something that stupid is FOCUSED on you gotta understand a cover up is IP(in progress).

I do? Based on what? Your baseless incredulity?

What a waggery. I'm old and sagacious enough to remember when there was NO special education in schools. Mainly because there was no NEED for it. There wasn't a plethora of children who suddenly became unable to "communicate" between the ages of 1 1/2 and 2. A "retarded person" was a "curiosity." As a child you were sternly told not to stare. It was an extremely rare instruction.

Sadly, people who lie about the reality of the obvious danger of vaccines are likely to get their comeuppance.

So Clay ignores the statistical evidence to deny it based on his own experiences.



I gotta wonder; if every doctor and researcher in the world is in on it, how do you have evidence vaccines are unsafe?

 

[000063]

There have been reports from long term statistical surveys (epidemiological) confirming suspicions that those who are vaccinated often don’t do as well with long term health as those who are vaccination free. Vaccine dangers are real, but those in power don’t want you to know about them

Unbacked.

"Dr. Andrew Wakefield and other respected scientists have been working on a historic vaccine study which looks at differences in development and health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated primates, following the same vaccine schedule which millions of babies follow today.

Could the results of this study, which are about to be published, be the real reason why members of the medical/vaccine establishment, aided by the media, have gone all-out to discredit Dr. Andrew Wakefield?

Argument by loaded question. I would bet money that you have no evidence of what you're implying, hence the rhetorical question format.

Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey think so, and it seems they are not alone in this opinion.

Appeal to false authority.

Below are highlights of a statement they wrote about the study and the media's vilification of Dr. Wakefield. These are direct quotes taken from their statement, "Andrew Wakefield, Scientific Censorship, and Fourteen Monkeys", as published at Generation Rescue.


Dr. Andrew Wakefield is being discredited to prevent an historic study from being published that for the first time looks at vaccinated versus unvaccinated primates and compares health outcomes, with potentially devastating consequences for vaccine makers and public health officials.

It is our most sincere belief that Dr. Wakefield and parents of children with autism around the world are being subjected to a remarkable media campaign engineered by vaccine manufacturers reporting on the retraction of a paper published in The Lancet in 1998 by Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues. ...

So, let's ask you some questions;

1. Every doctor and medical researcher and the world knows vaccines are bad, yet are willing to dose family and friends with them?
   
2. Or do they have some kind of placebo for those situations? If so, what happens if the doctor giving the shot happens to be unreachable?
   
3. Why has no doctor - including those on their deathbed - been willing to expose the conspiracy?
   
4. Why would people who take a vow to "do no harm" do harm on such a massive scale?
   
5. A poster here asked a doctor if all the doctor's kids got their shots. The doctor said yes. Clay said the doctor was lying. Do you agree with Clayton Moore?
   
6. Did you know that Wakefield lost his license over the vaccine nonsense, and is no longer a doctor?
   
7. Did you know Wakefield made over £400,000 as an "expert witness" for vaccine lawsuits, and bribed kids to give him blood samples?

 

[robcasey]

Unbacked.


Argument by loaded question. I would bet money that you have no evidence of what you're implying, hence the rhetorical question format.

Appeal to false authority.

So, let's ask you some questions;

1. Every doctor and medical researcher and the world knows vaccines are bad, yet are willing to dose family and friends with them?
   
2. Or do they have some kind of placebo for those situations? If so, what happens if the doctor giving the shot happens to be unreachable?
   
3. Why has no doctor - including those on their deathbed - been willing to expose the conspiracy?
   
4. Why would people who take a vow to "do no harm" do harm on such a massive scale?
   
5. A poster here asked a doctor if all the doctor's kids got their shots. The doctor said yes. Clay said the doctor was lying. Do you agree with Clayton Moore?

Wow such a quick response within like 30 seconds

 

[Dcdrac]

Andrew Wakefiled is no longer a Dr he was struck off for serious professional misconduct and is certainly not respected.

If he is operating as a Dr in the US then he is acting fraudulently, the UK GMC has struck him off.

The General Medical Council Decision

http://www.gmc-uk.org/Wakefield_SPM_and_SANCTION.pdf_32595267.pdf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8695267.stm

 

[robcasey]

Andrew Wakefiled is no longer a Dr he was struck off as a fraud and doer of harm and is certainly not respected.

If he is operating as a r in the US then he is acting fraudulently, the UK GMC has struck him off.

Can you provide a link please, if i am wrong about him i most humbly apologize

 

[zooterkin]

Can you provide a link please, if i am wrong about him i most humbly apologize

http://www.gmc-uk.org/Wakefield_SPM_and_SANCTION.pdf_32595267.pdf

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

 

[Dcdrac]

you may wnat to read this as well

http://www.care2.com/causes/the-real-damage-wrought-to-autistic-individuals-by-andrew-wakefield.html

The Real Damage Wrought to Autistic Individuals by Andrew Wakefield


The Real Damage Wrought to Autistic Individuals by Andrew Wakefield

by Kristina Chew
April 22, 2011
11:58 pm

The Real Damage Wrought to Autistic Individuals by Andrew Wakefield


Andrew Wakefield is the British doctor who, in a 1998 study, claimed that the measles vaccine might be linked to inflammatory bowel disease, and that this might be connected to autism. That study was retracted last year by The Lancet. Earlier this year, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a detailed report about how the case against the MMR was the result of “deliberate fraud” on Wakefield’s part; not only was he being paid by lawyers who were representing families involved in vaccine litigation, but five of the twelve children studied were found to have developmental delays that pre-existed their receiving the MMR vaccine.

None of this being widely known at the time Wakefield announced his findings at a press conference in London in 1998, a massive worldwide scare about vaccines and about the MMR resulted. Despite scientific studies refuting a vaccine-autism link, many parents remain fearful of immunizing their children, with the result that cases of such infectious diseases as whooping cough and measles have been on the rise. Further, many parents of autistic children, believing that their children have been “made autistic” by some environmental agent like a vaccine, have sought out experimental and often costly biomedical and alternative medicine treatments for their children, with varying results.

 

[dafydd]

What a waggery. I'm old and sagacious enough to remember when there was NO special education in schools. Mainly because there was no NEED for it. There wasn't a plethora of children who suddenly became unable to "communicate" between the ages of 1 1/2 and 2. A "retarded person" was a "curiosity." As a child you were sternly told not to stare. It was an extremely rare instruction.

Sadly, people who lie about the reality of the obvious danger of vaccines are likely to get their comeuppance.

Wrong again. There were always remedial classes for such children, at least in UK schools.

 

[robcasey]

Ok so he acquired funds dishonestly (politician type tactic) and fudged some data on the The Lancet paper (another politician type tactic).

What's to say his current study should not at least be looked at? As allot of people on this planet behave in a certain way and then change do they not? Can we not give him the benefit of the doubt?

Btw apologies for thinking he was beyond reproach

 

[000063]

Wow such a quick response within like 30 seconds

More like 8 minutes. Do you understand clocks as well as you do research? Did you so much as Google Wakefield for yourself?

 

[abaddon]

There have been reports from long term statistical surveys (epidemiological) confirming suspicions that those who are vaccinated often don’t do as well with long term health as those who are vaccination free. Vaccine dangers are real, but those in power don’t want you to know about them.


"Dr. Andrew Wakefield and other respected scientists have been working on a historic vaccine study which looks at differences in development and health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated primates, following the same vaccine schedule which millions of babies follow today.

Could the results of this study, which are about to be published, be the real reason why members of the medical/vaccine establishment, aided by the media, have gone all-out to discredit Dr. Andrew Wakefield?

Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey think so, and it seems they are not alone in this opinion.

A discredited, corrupt researcher, an bimbo and a mediocre comedian. How convincing.

Below are highlights of a statement they wrote about the study and the media's vilification of Dr. Wakefield. These are direct quotes taken from their statement, "Andrew Wakefield, Scientific Censorship, and Fourteen Monkeys", as published at Generation Rescue.

A woo site. How convincing.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield is being discredited to prevent an historic study from being published that for the first time looks at vaccinated versus unvaccinated primates and compares health outcomes, with potentially devastating consequences for vaccine makers and public health officials.

It is our most sincere belief that Dr. Wakefield and parents of children with autism around the world are being subjected to a remarkable media campaign engineered by vaccine manufacturers reporting on the retraction of a paper published in The Lancet in 1998 by Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues.


Here is a summary of the major points from "Andrew Wakefield, Scientific Censorship, and Fourteen Monkeys."

OK let's have a look at those.

•England's General Medical Council [is] a kangaroo court where public health officials in the pocket of vaccine makers served as judge and jury.

Evidence?

•Dr. Wakefield strenuously denies all the findings of the GMC and plans a vigorous appeal.

Of course he does.

•Despite rampant misreporting, Dr. Wakefield's original paper regarding 12 children with severe bowel disease and autism never rendered any judgment whatsoever on whether or not vaccines cause autism.

Sure, but Wakefield talked up the link afterwards.

•Dr. Wakefield is the co-author, along with eight other distinguished scientists from institutions like the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Kentucky, and the University of Washington, of a set of studies that explore the topic of vaccinated versus unvaccinated neurological outcomes using monkeys.

All of whom rejected Wakefield and removed his name as co-author of the research.

•The first phase of this monkey study was published three months ago in the prestigious medical journal Neurotoxicology.

By three months, I assume you mean three years, and by published in Neurotoxicology, I assume you mean withdrawn before publication, right?

•The results [of the study] ... were disturbing. Vaccinated monkeys, unlike their unvaccinated peers, suffered the loss of many reflexes that are critical for survival.

From the conclusion of the study:

This study design was not able to determine
whether it was the vaccine per se, the exposure to thimerosal, or a
combination of both, that caused these effects.

In other words, inconclusive.

•Dr. Wakefield and his scientific colleagues are on the brink of publishing their entire study, which followed the monkeys through the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule over a multi-year period. It is our understanding that the difference in outcome for the vaccinated monkeys versus the unvaccinated controls is both stark and devastating.

Three years is a long time on the brink.

•The fallout from the study for vaccine makers and public health officials could be severe. Having denied the possibility of the vaccine-autism connection for so long while profiting immensely from a recent boom in vaccine sales around the world, it's no surprise that they would seek to repress this important work.

Is it? Why would they not make more from selling separate vaccines?

•Behind the scenes, the pressure to keep the work of Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues from being published is immense, and growing every day. Medical journals take extreme risk of backlash in publishing any studies that question the safety of the vaccination program, no matter how well-designed and thorough the research might be.

Is it? Evidence?

•The press has been deeply misled in the way The Lancet retraction, and Dr. Wakefield's mock trial, have been characterized. Led by the pharmaceutical companies and their well-compensated spokespeople, Dr. Wakefield is being vilified through a well-orchestrated smear campaign designed to prevent this important new work from seeing the light of day.

Wakefield misled the press in order to promote his own patented vaccine.

The statement poses important questions:


What medical journal would want to step in front of this freight train? Moreover, why now, after 12 years of inaction, did The Lancet and GMC suddenly act? Is it coincidence that the monkey study is currently being submitted to medical journals for review and publication?

And suggests a question the media should be asking:


We urge the media to take a close look at the first phase of the monkey study discussed above and to start asking a very simple question: What was the final outcome of the 14 primates that were vaccinated using the U.S. vaccine schedule and how did that compare to the unvaccinated controls?

We agree with the statement's conclusion: "The work of Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues deserves to be shared with the world to further, rather than censor, scientific progress."

10 out of twelve co-authors rejected Wakefield's malarkey.

This has all been done to death already. Read up before posting three year old rubbish.

 

[robcasey]

More like 8 minutes. Do you understand clocks as well as you do research? Did you so much as Google Wakefield for yourself?

It was 30 seconds or a time dilation, as soon as I posted up you posted the reply; because I refreshed the page almost instantly!

And yes i did Google him but obviously forgot to include keywords like fraud Ect my bad i am guessing

 

[Dcdrac]

His current study will be the same fraudulent hogwash as his earlier ones.

No SERIOUS scientist has found any evidence for his contentions at all, if anything quite the opposite.

The man is a self serving fraud, and as his actions have casued REAL harm dangerous too.