• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Estellea said:
Actually, this has been done as a result of MMR withdrawal in Japan and autism rates actually increased after MMR was no longer given.

Tough luck Clay.

ETA: Eventually the monovalent vaccines were used and mumps and rubella incidence has gone up steadily since the withdrawal of MMR due to changes in vaccine recommendations.

Este
Click to expand...
There's also the studies discussed here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908388/ which address both rates of autism and age of onset.

"...investigators did not observe a clustering of autism diagnoses relative to the time that children received MMR vaccine, nor did they observe a difference in age at autism diagnosis between those vaccinated and not vaccinated or between those vaccinated before or after 18 months of age"

"...an increase in autism diagnoses despite stable MMR vaccination rates"

"...the increase in the number of autism diagnoses did not correlate with MMR vaccination rates"

"Autism rates increased coincident with a decrease in MMR vaccination rates."

"Of 309 children hospitalized for autistic disorders, no clustering occurred relative to the time of MMR vaccination."

"The authors observed no differences in the relative risk of autism between those who did and those who did not receive MMR vaccine. Among autistic children, no relationship between date of vaccination and development of autism was observed."

"The authors observed no differences in age at vaccination between autistic and nonautistic children, which suggests that early age of MMR vaccine exposure was not a risk factor for autism."

Clayton doesn't seem to understand the the questions he's seeking answers to have already been asked and answered by researchers. If he bothered to actually look at the evidence which is constantly spoon-fed to him on this thread he'd be well-aware of the research that has already been conducted: research that renders his proposed study redundant. He probably won't read what I'm about to post, either.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/the-early-course-of-autism/

Prior studies using home movies have shown that signs of autism can be detected between 8-12 months. A study looking at head circumference found statistical differences prior to 12 months. And one study looking at movements found differences between 4-6 months. So it seems the consensus of current evidence is that objective and detectable signs of autism emerge between 6-12 months. This study does not support detection prior to 6 months, but other studies do suggest this might be possible.
Click to expand...
I do wonder what Clayton might make of the claim that "the consensus of current evidence is that objective and detectable signs of autism emerge between 6-12 months" in light of the US vaccination schedule. I won't expect him to click on any links I provide, but I will point out that MMR, according to the schedule, should be given at 12-15 months. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/downloads/rec-iz-babies.pdf
 
Clayton Moore said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnxAsrAK2hw


Really? Take the time to view this.

We as humans have no way to process Mercury.
See 15 minutes into the video.
Click to expand...
No Clayton; I don't watch YooToob videos to obtain scientific data. I've read the OAP transcripts; I've read a good deal of Wakefield's GMC FTP transcripts and you simply do not have any data to support your claim that MMR causes autism nor that hundreds of thousands of parents claim so nor that heavy metals are in MMR. Come up with studies Clayton; I'm not interested in silly videos.

Clayton Moore said:
I'm sure the parent's whose two of three triplets became autistic after mmr vaccinations know what they are talking about..
Click to expand...
Actually they don't. A well known "autism mum" has three daughters who are autistic; the first two were vaccinated; the third was not. Mum still blames vaccines. Better than blaming their own genes in their minds.

Este
 
Clayton Moore said:
I'm sure the parent's whose two of three triplets became autistic after mmr vaccinations know what they are talking about..
Click to expand...

There are many parents in the world who are convinced their children became ill due to witchcraft. Do they know what they are talking about?

Honestly Clayton, you've returned to this argument over and over again: some tiny percent of parents believe vaccines caused autism in their children. Why would their anedoctal opinion have any validity, given their lack of knowledge of medicine, disease, and statistics, compared to the conclusions of doctors and scientists who have actually done detailed, large studies?? Having that pointed out to you over and over again, how on earth can you believe this is such a convincing point that you bother to repeat it?
 
Clayton Moore said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnxAsrAK2hw


Really? Take the time to view this.

We as humans have no way to process Mercury.
See 15 minutes into the video.
Click to expand...

Wrong- we process and excrete mercury in many different ways that help remove it from the body. See the past hundred years of scientific study. Here's one summary:

http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103_spring2003/mercury/mercdose.html

You would easily have found this information if you bothered to actually research the question rather than wasting your time watching a biased YouTube video.

As I've warned you before, the websites you cite are lying to you.
Remember the old saying, "Fool me once shame on you...?"
 
Estellea said:
Don't hold your breath. Clayton doesn't correct his errors nor apologise for insulting an entire population of people and their families.

Este
Click to expand...

Maybe Clayton thinks that my brother should just strangle his daughter?
 
Estellea said:
http://kimstagliano.blogspot.com/2007/02/36-vaccines-by-age-six-in-2007-versus.html
And Ms. Stagliano did not have a flu jab when she was pregnant; she was speaking in general. She is blaming her childhood vaccines on the unvaccinated child's autism. Anti-vaxx ignorance knows no depths.

Este
Click to expand...

OK, I'll let you think about this. Below is the recommended vaccination schedule for babies born in 2007 versus babies born in 1983. Each vaccine is tested individually for safety. The vaccines are not tested as a sum introduction to developing immune systems over a period of mere months. Too much water will screw up your system. You'd never take a Tylenol with a Motrin and an aspirin, although on their own, each pill works well.

How about too many vaccines? Autism rates are now at 1 in 150 from 1 in 10,000 a few decades ago. And don't forget peanut allergies, asthma, ADHD, severe mental illness like 5 year olds with bi-polar have risen dramatically too.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the stupid, not, link.
 
Check out page 56 of the December 2012 issue of Scientific American. Is Drug Research Trustworthy?

I'm sure Vaccine Research is also behaving just as badly or worse.
 
Do you think an argument made from incredulity is reason enough to put children and infants at risk of serious harm or death acceptable, Clayton? If so, why?
 
Clayton, why aren't you responding to polite, relevant posts that have been addressed to you? Don't you want to engage in honest debate? You might find the evidence you've been pointed to and the questions you've been asked inconvenient but I think it's rather rude to ignore them - and it makes it harder to have a proper discussion if people pick and choose which posts to respond to and which to ignore. (Particularly when those posts being ignored contain important evidence that is relevant to one or more strands of the discussion, or questions that would, if answered, make a viewpoint clear.)
 
pakeha said:
Why?
Click to expand...
I think what Clayton is doing is referring to the problems with drug company-funded research (the kind of thing documented in Ben Goldacre's Bad Pharma) and insinuating that because there are issues with research sponsored by Big Pharma there must be issues with the research people cite in this thread on vaccination. Which, as far as I can tell, tends to be work conducted by independent researchers (e.g. the research on MMR and autism that we keep posting and Clayton keeps ignoring).

I think there was some fairly detailed discussion of this earlier in the thread, where the nature of the research demonstrating that there was no link between MMR and autism was covered. Of course, that won't stop Clayton repeating canards that have already been debunked. There appears to be nothing that will.
 
Thanks, jdc324.
At the end of the day, CM's arguments seem based more on rumour and innuendo than anything else, don't they?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom