Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[zooterkin]

http://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/Documents/vaccinestudies.pdf




That's just plain stupid.

Appeal to incredulity noted. Got anything else, or are you sticking to what you've got the most of?

 

[Clayton Moore]

any back up for this garbage?

And by the way I do have qualifications in Biology.

I can read.

http://www.nature.com/nature/insights/6968.html

18/25 December 2003

protein misfolding

ADAM SMITH
Adam Smith Editor, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

A huge variety of previously unrelated diseases, such as prion diseases, diabetes and cancer, share the pathological feature of aggregated misfolded protein deposits. This suggests the exciting possibility that these 'protein-misfolding diseases' are linked by common principles, and may therefore present common targets for therapeutic intervention.

Protein folding symposium Protein folding and disease
The Horizon Symposia series launched with this meeting at Palazzo Arzaga in Italy on 3rd-5th October 2002.

http://www.nature.com/horizon/proteinfolding/index.html

Protein folding and disease
For proteins to function properly, they need to fold into the correct shape, and protein misfolding is thought to underlie many diseases, including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, new variant CJD and type II diabetes. This meeting brought together an international panel of experts to discuss current thinking on protein folding research, from basic cell biology to therapeutic strategies for treating protein folding diseases.

 

[Clayton Moore]

http://revroum.getion.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/RRCh_4_2011/Art 03.pdf


You gotta hand it to them. Vaccines to remedy diseases quite possibly caused by vaccines.


I'm reminded of the plight of the man who had an elephant in his living room.

He had gotten a cat to get rid of a mouse, a dog to get rid of the cat.............

 

[zooterkin]

I can read.

http://www.nature.com/nature/insights/6968.html






Protein folding symposium Protein folding and disease
The Horizon Symposia series launched with this meeting at Palazzo Arzaga in Italy on 3rd-5th October 2002.

http://www.nature.com/horizon/proteinfolding/index.html

And...?

 

[zooterkin]

http://revroum.getion.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/RRCh_4_2011/Art 03.pdf


You gotta hand it to them. Vaccines to remedy diseases quite possibly caused by vaccines.

You seem, as usual, to have missed out the step where you show evidence to support your wild assertions.

Which diseases are caused by vaccines?

 

[Dcdrac]

Andrew Wakefield gets Golden Duck award for Quackery

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/23/struck-off-mmr-doctor-quackery-award

"Andrew Wakefield, the doctor struck off the medical register for his discredited research that claimed to find a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, can add another honour to his list this Christmas: the inaugural Golden Duck award for lifetime achievement in quackery, set up by the science writer Simon Singh.

Runners-up for the award were Prince Charles and David Tredinnick, the Tory MP for Bosworth and member of the Commons health select committee. The Good Thinking Society, a campaign group led by Singh, set up the annual Golden Duck award to recognise those "who have supported or practised pseudoscience in the most ludicrous, dangerous, irrational or irresponsible manner".

 

[Clayton Moore]

Andrew Wakefield gets Golden Duck award for Quackery

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/23/struck-off-mmr-doctor-quackery-award

"Andrew Wakefield, the doctor struck off the medical register for his discredited research that claimed to find a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, can add another honour to his list this Christmas: the inaugural Golden Duck award for lifetime achievement in quackery, set up by the science writer Simon Singh.

Runners-up for the award were Prince Charles and David Tredinnick, the Tory MP for Bosworth and member of the Commons health select committee. The Good Thinking Society, a campaign group led by Singh, set up the annual Golden Duck award to recognise those "who have supported or practised pseudoscience in the most ludicrous, dangerous, irrational or irresponsible manner".

You can always tell a lie because of all hate and ridicule needed to cover it up.

 

[gnome]

So, nobody is ever deservedly hated and ridiculed?

Interesting hypothesis. Can we hold you to that too?

 

[dafydd]

http://revroum.getion.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/RRCh_4_2011/Art 03.pdf


You gotta hand it to them. Vaccines to remedy diseases quite possibly caused by vaccines.

Name these diseases.

 

[crhkrebs]

http://revroum.getion.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/RRCh_4_2011/Art 03.pdf


You gotta hand it to them. Vaccines to remedy diseases quite possibly caused by vaccines.

The study you linked to shows that vaccination is a way to remove the neuritic beta-amyloid proteins that form the plaque associated with neuronal damage brought on by Alzheimer's Disease. This means that we may have a way to fight this horribly debilitating disease. I think, even you will agree, that this is a good thing.

You have stated emphatically that vaccination causes ASD, despite being shown evidence to the contrary. After numerous requests for any evidence to substantiate your claims, you have steadfastly remained mute. Your silence speaks volumes.

After all that, you are now hinting that Alzheimer's is also caused by vaccinations? What's next on the horizon, pray tell?

 

[crhkrebs]

I can read.

But, seemingly, not for comprehension.

How about you read some of the questions put to you, on this thread, and answer them? Try to have a conversation, you may learn something.

 

[crhkrebs]

Andrew Wakefield gets Golden Duck award for Quackery

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/23/struck-off-mmr-doctor-quackery-award

"Andrew Wakefield, the doctor struck off the medical register for his discredited research that claimed to find a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, can add another honour to his list this Christmas: the inaugural Golden Duck award for lifetime achievement in quackery, set up by the science writer Simon Singh.

In a fair world, not only would Wakefield have lost his ability to practice and have scorn and hatred rightfully heaped upon him, but he would also be brought up on charges of criminal negligence and manslaughter. He should be in jail.

 

[jdc324]

I have an idea: why don't we first extensively test these substances on cells in culture, then on all sorts of different animals. Then we can test them for safety in small numbers of human volunteers (perhaps we can call this phase I). Then test for safety, ideal dose, and efficacy on a larger group of humans in a controlled scientific study (call it phase II perhaps). Then, only if these studies show safety and promise should we test a larger group of volunteers (call it phase III perhaps?) Finally, and only if we know all three prior phases of tests indicate the drug is safe and effective would we allow it to be used clinically. Oh, let's keep monitoring the drug even after it is in use so we can detect and fix any unexpected problems.

Oh, in addition why don't we create an entire field of medical science that focuses on what happens to drugs when they are introduced into the human body? We can call it... pharmacokinetics

Would this type of rigorous testing program adequately address your concerns, Clayton?

By the way- the reason tetanus is so dangerous in a deep puncture wound is because the bacterium is so easily killed by oxygen. Although you've ignored the relevant posts, many organisms are more dangerous when eaten or breathed in than when injected. And many substances are much more quickly absorbed if inhaled than if injected im or sc.

That made absolutely no sense.

Clayton, I find it difficult to believe that you were unable to understand Giordano's clearly-written, concise post. If you were baffled by the use of the terms "im" and "sc", I suggest you do some reading up on something called "vaccination". Although, frankly, not knowing the abbreviations for intramuscular and subcutaneous is the least of your problems.

Can I ask: did anybody else reading this thread not understand Giordano's post? Anyone?

 

[Dcdrac]

he does not understand that Wakefield is a proven quack either

 

[dlorde]

Can I ask: did anybody else reading this thread not understand Giordano's post? Anyone?

I thought it was a very good summary of the current requirements.

 

[pakeha]

http://revroum.getion.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/RRCh_4_2011/Art 03.pdf


You gotta hand it to them. Vaccines to remedy diseases quite possibly caused by vaccines...

Oh, CM.
We're still waiting for your comments on the twins' srudy.
Why bring up yet another study?
Is there some reason you don't want to discuss the twins' study and those highly suggestive results?

 

[Clayton Moore]

he does not understand that Wakefield is a proven quack either

BTW Wakefield wasn't the soul source of the Lancet paper. If Wakefield had done something unethical in relation to the children who were discussed in the Lancet paper their parents would have sued him into next week.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/lancet-retracts-wakefield-article/

When this came to light the Lancet responded by contacting the co-authors of the article and essentially asking them if they still stand by the results of the study. Ten of the original 12 authors of the study retracted their support for the study and its interpretation. In 2004 the Lancet published a retraction. However, it was only a partial retraction, and the study remained as part of the published literature.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/04/the-lancet-should-reinstate-the-andrew-wakefield-paper.html

In March 1998, the then UK Medical Officer of Health convened a conference of selected experts under the auspices of the Medical Research Council to discuss the paper with Wakefield. One question asked was how the case series of 12 children with autism and bowel disease was selected. Thus began a further controversy that challenged the paper’s statement that the children were “consecutively referred to the department of paediatric gastroenterology” and sought clarification of its statement that “Intestinal and behavioural pathologies may have occurred together by chance, reflecting a selection bias in a self-referred group”. To many medical researchers it appeared that the child patients had been selectively chosen as a result of parents contacting Dr Wakefield to produce a biased sample.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/wakefield’s-lancet paper vindicated/

Wakefield’s Lancet Paper Vindicated – [Yet Again]
Posted on May 6, 2010 by ChildHealthSafety


And do vaccines cause autistic conditions? If you read nothing else we strongly recommend you read this PDF Download:– Text of email from US HRSA to Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News]. In it the US Health Resources Services Administration [HRSA] state to CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson

PDF Download:
http://childhealthsafety.files.word...il-exchanges-autistic-conditions-vaccines.pdf

 

[jdc324]

BTW Wakefield wasn't the soul source of the Lancet paper. If Wakefield had done something unethical in relation to the children who were discussed in the Lancet paper their parents would have sued him into next week.

He did do something unethical, and yet the parents did not sue him into next week - therefore your argument is false.

Just out of interest, what would they have sued him for? Is being unethical a civil wrong in England? Or were you thinking that his behaviour would fall under a specific category of civil wrong? If so, which one? Do please give us the benefit of your legal expertise Clayton. If you're as knowledgeable about the law as you are immunology and epidemiology then I am sure we will find your response highly entertaining.

 

[dafydd]

BTW Wakefield wasn't the soul source of the Lancet paper. If Wakefield had done something unethical in relation to the children who were discussed in the Lancet paper their parents would have sued him into next week.

Give us your legal opinion, oh wise one.

 

[Acleron]

BTW Wakefield wasn't the soul source of the Lancet paper. If Wakefield had done something unethical in relation to the children who were discussed in the Lancet paper their parents would have sued him into next week.

And if Wakefield had been wrongly accused he would also sue the pants off.

Now what happened there Clayton?