Anti-vaccination stronghold in North Carolina hit with state's worst chickenpox outbreak in 2 decade

[fsu1jreed]

No. Damn this is dumb. Are vaccines given intravenous? Where on here does it talk about IM injection? Hint: It doesn't.

Your reading comprehension is terrible:

Most of the injected aluminium from vaccines will eventually enter the bloodstream, but it’s not taken up readily by the cells, it is not bioavailable.

And to help you out, because I doubt you understand what bioavailable means:

bi·o·a·vail·a·ble
/ˌbīōəˈvāləb(ə)l/
adjective
PHYSIOLOGY

1. (of a drug or other substance) entering the circulation when introduced into the body and so able to have an active effect.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Your reading comprehension is terrible:

Most of the injected aluminium from vaccines will eventually enter the bloodstream, but it’s not taken up readily by the cells, it is not bioavailable.

And to help you out, because I doubt you understand what bioavailable means:

bi·o·a·vail·a·ble
/ˌbīōəˈvāləb(ə)l/
adjective
PHYSIOLOGY

1. (of a drug or other substance) entering the circulation when introduced into the body and so able to have an active effect.

No my reading comp is just fine. Yes eventually most of the aluminum enters the bloodstream and out, but your bit fails to tell the rest of the story about the possibility of macrophages taking up the aluminum and depositing it into your lymph nodes, spleen, liver, and brain.

 

[fsu1jreed]

A LOST GENERATION: GROWING UP WITH AUTISM BEFORE THE "EPIDEMIC"

When she was born in 1968, autism was a diagnosis reserved for children with severe developmental delays.1 Experts believed autism affected only four or five out of every 10,000 children.2

Ms. Scriven was already an adult when American psychiatrists began expanding the borders of the diagnosis, moving first into the uncharted territory of atypical autism (Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified), and later, in 1994, into the milder Asperger's syndrome.3 As the definition expanded, so did the number of people diagnosed with it. Now one in 68 children has autism spectrum disorder, or ASD.

The Interactive Autism Network (IAN) interviewed almost a dozen people born in the 1950s to mid-1980s, about what it was like to grow up with autism in the time before. Before the "epidemic" of childhood diagnoses that began in the 1990s. Before pediatricians began specifically screening for it. Before people knew what it was.

And then there's this:

The Early History of Autism in America: A surprising new historical analysis suggests that a pioneering doctor was examining people with autism before the Civil War

And this:

Autism Through Ages Baffles Science

Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler first introduced the term autism in 1911. Autism and autistic stem from the Greek word "autos," meaning self. The term autism originally referred to a basic disturbance in schizophrenia, in short, an extreme withdrawal of oneself from the fabric of social life, but not excluding oneself.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The highly complex treatment of childhood autism began with the early-childhood development pioneers Leo Kanner and Hans Asperger, who each published accounts of this disorder. Kanner published his report in 1943 while at Johns Hopkins. He conducted a case study of 11 children who appeared to share a number of common characteristics that he suggested formed a "unique 'syndrome' not heretofore reported." He titled the article, "Autistic disturbances of affective contact," and characterized the children as possessing, from the very beginning of life, what he called an "extreme autistic aloneness." The following year, Asperger published "Autistic psychopathy in childhood." The article presented a case study of several children whom he described as examples of "a particularly interesting and highly recognizable type of child." Both Kanner and Asperger believed that the children suffered from a fundamental disturbance that gave rise to highly characteristic problems.

They both chose the word autism, a term coined by Bleuler in reference to the aloneness experienced by schizophrenic patients, in order to characterize the nature of the underlying disturbance. The common feature of this disturbance was that the children seemed unable to entertain normal relationships with people.

In contrast to Bleuler's schizophrenia, the disturbance observed by Kanner and Asperger appeared to have been there from birth. Kanner's paper has become the most quoted, while Asperger's paper, written in German during World War II, was largely ignored. The belief has grown that Asperger described quite a different type of child, not to be confused with the one Kanner described.

So Asperger's was diagnosed 9 years BEFORE the first vaccine.......how could this be? The "epidemic" is due to an increased in diagnosis.........nothing more. And then I came across this:

The Real Reasons Autism Rates Are Up in the U.S.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 1 in 68 children in the U.S. have autism. The prevalence is 1 in 42 for boys and 1 in 189 for girls. These rates yield a gender ratio of about five boys for every girl.

So why the HUGE difference in gender? One would expect that IF it really was a physiologically problem with the body's ability to process something in the vaccines that the numbers would be roughly the same in both genders.......but they are not. That in itself suggests that there's something else going on.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Injection vs Ingestion. Myths and Facts.

Aluminium

The aluminium in vaccines is not a heavy metal. It is not even in metallic form as portrayed by vaccine fearmongerers. It is in the form of a salt, usually aluminium hydroxide. The aluminium in aluminium hydroxide is not readily bioavailable and retention is extremely low from both ingestion and injection.

Aluminium salts that you ingest (eg. antacids, buffered aspirin, some processed foods) are mostly excreted before they get to enter the bloodstream. In healthy subjects, less than 0.3% of aluminium that you eat is absorbed via the GI tract and the kidneys effectively eliminate aluminium from the body. Intravenous infusion of products containing aluminium (ie injection directly into the bloodstream via a drip connected to a vein, as with intravenous nutrition pouches for patients in a hospital) or renal dysfunction are the only real scenarios where aluminium has the potential to accumulate.

Once aluminium is in the bloodstream, it is processed similarly regardless of the source. It just depends on the amount received and if the kidneys can keep up. Continuous infusion, we are talking litres here, of a nutrition product delivered directly into the bloodstream, is much more of a deal than a miniscule amount of aluminium hydroxide in a 0.5 ml vaccine injected into muscle. Most of the injected aluminium from vaccines will eventually enter the bloodstream, but it’s not taken up readily by the cells, it is not bioavailable.

Only a very tiny percentage of it will be “dissolved” in the blood – it’s in the form of precipitate bound to carrier proteins. Approximately 89 percent of this aluminium is processed by binding to a protein called transferrin, and the rest is bound to citrate. The majority of the bound aluminium will be processed and eliminated through the kidneys, a small amount through bile and feces, and a tiny amount is retained in tissues of the body.

About 50% of the aluminium in the bloodstream is eliminated in less than 24 hours, more than 75% is eliminated within two weeks and even more over time. A diminishingly small amount may be retained. But we’re talking about a fraction of two hundredths. The ability of the body to rapidly eliminate aluminium hydroxide accounts for its excellent record of safety as a vaccine adjuvant.

He's just going to vomit up that injected aluminum has a superhighway to the brain while ingested aluminum is handled differently. Interestingly, the morons never tried that tack with thimerosal. But if mercury isn't gobbled up by macrophages and taken directly to the brain...why would aluminum be handled differently? And yes, I know thimerosal isn't mercury, but the aluminum salts in vaccines aren't aluminum, either. It's like saying table salt is sodium so don't sprinkle table salt in water!!!

 

[tarheelbybirth]

So why the HUGE difference in gender? One would expect that IF it really was a physiologically problem with the body's ability to process something in the vaccines that the numbers would be roughly the same in both genders.......but they are not. That in itself suggests that there's something else going on.

Even mopre telling - from the same article, I think -

The prevalence [of autism diagnoses] in Colorado, for instance, is 1 in 93 children, whereas in New Jersey it is 1 in 41.

So...I suppose...vaccines are more likely to cause autism at higher elevations?

 

[fsu1jreed]

Even mopre telling - from the same article, I think -

The prevalence [of autism diagnoses] in Colorado, for instance, is 1 in 93 children, whereas in New Jersey it is 1 in 41.

So...I suppose...vaccines are more likely to cause autism at higher elevations?

You have it backwards........but your point is valid nonetheless. I didn't need to go any further than the gender differences, but that's data point #2 that suggests something else is going on.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

He's just going to vomit up that injected aluminum has a superhighway to the brain while ingested aluminum is handled differently.

I'm just presenting what the science has indicated. Do with it what you will.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

You have it backwards........but your point is valid nonetheless. I didn't need to go any further than the gender differences, but that's data point #2 that suggests something else is going on.

LOL...true...brain cells die screaming in agony every time I engage nbh. That's why I'm done.

 

[fsu1jreed]

I'm just presenting what the science has indicated. Do with it what you will.

But you are extrapolating what science says to causation between vaccines and autism, when there's absolutely no evidence to back that up that extra step.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

A LOST GENERATION: GROWING UP WITH AUTISM BEFORE THE "EPIDEMIC"

When she was born in 1968, autism was a diagnosis reserved for children with severe developmental delays.1 Experts believed autism affected only four or five out of every 10,000 children.2

Ms. Scriven was already an adult when American psychiatrists began expanding the borders of the diagnosis, moving first into the uncharted territory of atypical autism (Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified), and later, in 1994, into the milder Asperger's syndrome.3 As the definition expanded, so did the number of people diagnosed with it. Now one in 68 children has autism spectrum disorder, or ASD.

You come to the table with this and expect me to take you seriously? After looking at this garbage there's no wonder why Joe was having trouble finding something to post, and was eventually forcefully backed into the liar's corner where he belongs. More than likely he looked at it himself and thought it too stupid to post.

Let's bring some real science/scientists to the table. Everyone who holds the position that autism is not an epidemic needs to have a listen to Dr. Walter Zahorodny, the Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the New Jersey Medical School at Rutgers University, and Director of the New Jersey portion of the latest autism prevalence study. The study as a whole included 350,000 children, approximately 8% of all U.S. children. Interview and transcript linked below:
https://safeminds.org/news/autism-prevalence-examining-the-myths-and-truths-video-transcript/

I cut and pasted some of what I thought were the high points of the interview as it relates to our discussion:
Heidi Roger: Can you give us your interpretation of the study dispelling any myths and revealing the truth?

Dr. Walter Z.: Well, I’ll give it a try. I can point to five things, which were most important to me from this report. One, that across the network and in New Jersey, autism prevalence increased 20% between 2012 and 2014. Two, that this increase is part of a larger trend that being since 2000, autism prevalence by this network has increased 150%, so this is a very significant change with a relatively small period of time. Three, New Jersey, which is the state with the most comprehensive effort in surveillance is showing autism at 3%. Three percent is among the highest autism prevalence estimates by a population based study.

Dr. Walter Z.: Four, even though many people speak about better awareness of autism, when we looked at, that is when we, ADDM network, looked at the age of autism diagnosis, we saw that it didn’t change in the last 14 years. It’s been approximately 53 months throughout this period. If autism prevalence was affected by greater awareness, you would expect the age of first diagnosis or earliest autism diagnosis to decrease, which it hasn’t.

Heidi Roger: You said that you do not suspect that the increase is due to any of the changes in the diagnostic criteria or just any better awareness, better diagnosis.

Dr. Walter Z.: Yeah. The simplest thing to conclude, the most obvious thing to conclude is that these estimates are not at all due to changing definition of autism. I’m still surprised how frequently the media reports that this could be due to better, wider definition of autism or changing diagnostic criteria. Throughout the 14-year period of doing autism surveillance, we’ve only used one definition of autism, and that’s the one that was provided by the DSM IV. We never changed those criteria, so zero is due to shifting autism diagnosis.

Heidi Roger: Many people look at the ADDM data as the best source of prevalence over time, so if autism was one in 150 12 years ago, and is one in 59 now, is that a good estimate?

Dr. Walter Z.: It’s good from the perspective of recording correctly that there’s been a significant shift upward in autism prevalence. That goes without saying, pretty much every indicator, IDEA data, data from the NHIS study, data from the ADDM network and other sources of population based information show a significant rise in autism across the United States in the last decade to 15 years. Where the findings are somewhat incorrect or important to interpret is that some states are completing their surveillance more comprehensively or more likely to find all the true cases of autism. When you mix sites where they’re not finding all the cases with those that are probably doing a very complete job of ascertainment, you’re watering down the composite or overall estimate.

Dr. Walter Z.: In my opinion, autism really is in U.S. metropolitan regions likely to be in the 3% range or higher. We find that in New Jersey. In New Jersey, I’m even inclined to say that even at 3%, we may be under-estimating autism prevalence. It’s not really that autism varies probably so dramatically across the United States as some sites are not as capable in finding all the true individuals with autism.

Dr. Walter Z.: I’d say we’re getting better at identifying and diagnosing children who are less severely affected, but we are also seeing that the increase in autism prevalence is pushed quite significantly by children with significant levels of impairment and with co-occurring cognitive impairments, so it’s not just slightly affected children that are making the estimates percolate upward. Autism is increasing across the board and across all subtypes, I’d say.

Dr. Walter Z.: When we started doing surveillance, we looked at how long it took to get from first attention, the first visit with a professional to maybe identify a problem, when you first got to a neurologist or developmental pediatrician in comparison to age of diagnosis. It used to take about a year between the time you would bring your child for the first professional appointment to the time when he or she got an autism diagnosis. Now, in 2014, it was about seven months. Greater familiarity with autism, probably because more and more kids are coming with autism, gets the doctors to cut to the diagnostic inclusion a little bit faster.

Dr. Walter Z.: I have no doubt that autism prevalence at 3% is a very important public health concern, an urgent public health concern. I’m very disappointed that some of the leading media in the United States didn’t report our finding. It’s hard to justify or explain. If I were to try to explain it, I would say that with regard to the media, over 14 years, it seems like they’ve been one story or two stories. Autism is higher than anyone ever expected, and it looks like autism prevalence is increasing.

Dr. Walter Z.: Yeah. Autism is a true public health crisis. Autism prevalence is a urgent public health concern, and while awareness is important, we’ve had now a decade of great efforts to awareness. Now, we have to take actions. Public health actions are necessary to try to understand the factors that are leading to this unprecedented rise in autism and to offer the right services to this generation and to those who’ve been affected by autism in the past.

Here's some science for you:
The interview above is in response to the first study:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm?s_cid=ss6706a1_w

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10803-018-3670-2#enumeration

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113600/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15504445

https://vaccinesafetycommission.org/pdfs/11-2014-Env-Health-Nevison.pdf

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0890856709650243

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Injection vs Ingestion. Myths and Facts.

Aluminium

The aluminium in vaccines is not a heavy metal. It is not even in metallic form as portrayed by vaccine fearmongerers. It is in the form of a salt, usually aluminium hydroxide. The aluminium in aluminium hydroxide is not readily bioavailable and retention is extremely low from both ingestion and injection.

Aluminium salts that you ingest (eg. antacids, buffered aspirin, some processed foods) are mostly excreted before they get to enter the bloodstream. In healthy subjects, less than 0.3% of aluminium that you eat is absorbed via the GI tract and the kidneys effectively eliminate aluminium from the body. Intravenous infusion of products containing aluminium (ie injection directly into the bloodstream via a drip connected to a vein, as with intravenous nutrition pouches for patients in a hospital) or renal dysfunction are the only real scenarios where aluminium has the potential to accumulate.

Once aluminium is in the bloodstream, it is processed similarly regardless of the source. It just depends on the amount received and if the kidneys can keep up. Continuous infusion, we are talking litres here, of a nutrition product delivered directly into the bloodstream, is much more of a deal than a miniscule amount of aluminium hydroxide in a 0.5 ml vaccine injected into muscle. Most of the injected aluminium from vaccines will eventually enter the bloodstream, but it’s not taken up readily by the cells, it is not bioavailable.

Only a very tiny percentage of it will be “dissolved” in the blood – it’s in the form of precipitate bound to carrier proteins. Approximately 89 percent of this aluminium is processed by binding to a protein called transferrin, and the rest is bound to citrate. The majority of the bound aluminium will be processed and eliminated through the kidneys, a small amount through bile and feces, and a tiny amount is retained in tissues of the body.

About 50% of the aluminium in the bloodstream is eliminated in less than 24 hours, more than 75% is eliminated within two weeks and even more over time. A diminishingly small amount may be retained. But we’re talking about a fraction of two hundredths. The ability of the body to rapidly eliminate aluminium hydroxide accounts for its excellent record of safety as a vaccine adjuvant.

Let's talk common sense.

"Where are all the adults with classic autism? Where are the hand flapping, head banging, self-abusive, spinning, screaming, rocking, stimming, non-verbal and violent 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 year olds wearing autism helmets and diapers? Where are the grown-ups at the mall experiencing violent tantrums, seizures and GI tract problems? Extrapolating CDC’s 1 in 68 childhood prevalences to a population of 320 million, there should be 7 million American adults with autism. And they should be easy to find. Here’s what to look for. Twenty-five percent will be non-verbal. Half of them are prone to wandering. Thirty percent have seizures. Many of them will have horrific bowel disease and classic sleep disorders. Most of them will have extreme light and noise sensitivities. They will focus on spinning objects. They will endlessly repeat phrases (Echolalia). They will read without understanding (Hyperlexia). Their heads may be enlarged (Macrocephaly). They will be unable to point their finger or engage in eye contact. We see kids like this every day in our schools, neighborhoods and city streets. Where are the middle aged and elderly banging their heads and screaming? Silberman concedes that very few are in institutions.

Thanks to legislation originally sponsored by my father, those institutions were shuttered in the 1970’s and 1980’s. So why then aren’t we seeing these disabled populations? A search of group homes or hospitals will not reveal them. The darth of adult services is a universal lament. Nor are they living at home. How many 70 year old parents do you know who are staying at home to care for their 50 year old autistic son or daughter? CDC has never undertaken a study to show that autism prevalence in adults is the same as in children because everyone—except Steve Silberman—knows that it’s not!" -Robert Kennedy, Jr.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/autism-epidemic-real/

The following is from Olmstead and Blaxill's book Denial:

"Epidemic denial doesn't add up. Take the US population of 124 million in 1931 the year the eldest child in that first report on autism was born. Divide that number by the current autism prevalence of 1/68 children (now 1/36). There should have been 1.8 million Americans with autism in 1931. There weren't. We have scoured the medical literature for cases before then and there are essentially none to be found.

Back up a bit more: how many people have ever lived on earth? About 100 billion by 1931. Again, simple math yields about one-and-a-half-billion autistic individuals who have lived before 1930. Now we begin to glimpse the emptiness behind the Epidemic Denier's claims. There may have been scattered individuals with enough traits to qualify for an autism diagnosis, but 1.5 billion would have been far more visible. Someone would have said something. Given the distinctive profile of autistic children, it's impossible that no doctor or social observer commented on the ir markedly different behavior."

 

[Joes Place]

Three, New Jersey, which is the state with the most comprehensive effort in surveillance is showing autism at 3%.

'Member that part about "the more you look, the more likely you are to find examples"...particularly with definitions of the condition being expanded...??

Of course you don't. That was already a few posts ago....

 

[Joes Place]

"Epidemic denial doesn't add up. Take the US population of 124 million in 1931 the year the eldest child in that first report on autism was born. Divide that number by the current autism prevalence of 1/68 children (now 1/36). There should have been 1.8 million Americans with autism in 1931. There weren't. We have scoured the medical literature for cases before then and there are essentially none to be found.

...member that part about autism definitions being updated in the 70s and 80s?

Prior to the 60s and 70s, hardly any were categorized with autism; they were just 'dumb' or 'retarded'.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

So why the HUGE difference in gender? One would expect that IF it really was a physiologically problem with the body's ability to process something in the vaccines that the numbers would be roughly the same in both genders.......but they are not. That in itself suggests that there's something else going on.

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I have read in these debates from you guys, and that says a lot.

 

[Joes Place]

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I have read in these debates from you guys, and that says a lot.

No. It's actually making a very clear point. But, as with most scientific ideas and information, it went 80,000 ft over your head.

 

[fsu1jreed]

LMAO............childshealthdefense and safeminds?!?

Notice he didn't respond to Asperger's syndrome being diagnosed BEFORE vaccines even came about NOR the differences between genders (THEY SHOULD BE ROUGHLY THE SAME IF IT IS VACCINES), but he still continues to link BULLSHIT websites.............LMAO.

Oh, and here's the actual study:

Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 8 Years — Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2014

It talks about estimated prevalence versus real world prevalence, NOT an actual increase in real world prevalence. And he also discusses several limitations in the study:

• First, ADDM Network sites were not selected to represent the United States as a whole, nor were the geographic areas within each ADDM site selected to represent that state as a whole (with the exception of Arkansas, where ASD is monitored statewide).
• Second, it is important to acknowledge limitations of information available in children’s health and education records when considering data on the characteristics of children with ASD.
  
• Third, because comparisons with the results from earlier ADDM surveillance years were not restricted to a common geographic area, inferences about the changing number and characteristics of children with ASD over time should be made with caution.

So your bullshit site trying to use that interview to show that autism rates are rising is FULL OF SHIT!

 

[Joes Place]

LMAO............childshealthdefense and safeminds?!?

Notice he didn't respond to Asperger's syndrome being diagnosed BEFORE vaccines even came about NOR the differences between genders (THEY SHOULD BE ROUGHLY THE SAME IF IT IS VACCINES), but he still continues to link BULLSHIT websites.............LMAO.

Oh, and here's the actual study:

Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 8 Years — Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2014

It talks about estimated prevalence versus real world prevalence, NOT an actual increase in real world prevalence And he also discusses several limitations in the study:

• First, ADDM Network sites were not selected to represent the United States as a whole, nor were the geographic areas within each ADDM site selected to represent that state as a whole (with the exception of Arkansas, where ASD is monitored statewide).
• Second, it is important to acknowledge limitations of information available in children’s health and education records when considering data on the characteristics of children with ASD.
  
• Third, because comparisons with the results from earlier ADDM surveillance years were not restricted to a common geographic area, inferences about the changing number and characteristics of children with ASD over time should be made with caution.

So your bullshit site trying to use that interview to show that autism rates are rising is FULL OF SHIT!

Yeah.....when you go to the ACTUAL STUDY, instead of cherry-picked snips from the study that are fully mischaracterized, it's different, ain't it?

 

[fsu1jreed]

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I have read in these debates from you guys, and that says a lot.

LMAO, this coming from someone with the scientific knowledge of an 8th grader..........I've forgotten more about science that you'll ever know. How many biology classes have you had? I don't recall seeing you in my cell biology, genetics, etc. classes...........did you take them online or something.

 

[shank hawk]

 

[Joes Place]

View embedded media

Man....good thing we don't use Youtube and Crowdsourcing to decide our science policy, right!???

 

[shank hawk]

Man....good thing we don't use Youtube and Crowdsourcing to decide our science policy, right!???

I know you're really smart - because you keep telling anyone who'll listen that you are - but even you can't watch an eleven minute video and come up with such a succinct and well thought out rebuttal in less than sixty seconds. But then again your MO is well established on this subject.

If you had watched the video - and were being honest with yourself - you would know that our policy isn't decided by 'science', but rather by bribery, threats, slander, libel, cover ups and lies.

Oh, and money. LOT$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ of money.

 

[Joes Place]

I know you're really smart - because you keep telling anyone who'll listen that you are - but even you can't watch an eleven minute video

Why would I bother with watching propaganda?

Go link the publications the propaganda is based upon, so we can review the actual studies and data. Because, as already pointed out to you (and in past threads on this topic, I bitchslapped you assholes on it) they almost always use incorrect data intermixed from different sources - like pretending measles outbreaks in the US dropped before vaccinations by using British data, where vaccination started earlier.

Understand that "Youtube" is often not a valid source of factual information, so know the source material before you post stuff from it.

 

[fsu1jreed]

Other "science" proven on Youtube

 

[fsu1jreed]

Let's not forget about shape shifting reptilians proven on YouTube

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Why would I bother with watching propaganda?

As if you don't watch propaganda anytime you turn on the tv.

they almost always use incorrect data intermixed from different sources - like pretending measles outbreaks in the US dropped before vaccinations by using British data, where vaccination started earlier.

Lol he's still patting himself on the back for correcting one very minor item from from a 9 part article 5 yrs ago loaded with damning information for vaccines. Good for you Joe. You're the man.

Understand that "Youtube" is often not a valid source of factual information, so know the source material before you post stuff from it.

Backward thinking at its finest. It's called oral vs. written communication. If I'm listening to one of you yay-hoo's from HROT talk science on youtube, then yes that's not valid. If I'm listening to an interview from a scientist talk about one of their studies it might, just might be a different story. As far as full measure, there's little doubt that what they're talking about in that story isn't true and can be backed up with the full affidavit as we've seen here.

 

[Joes Place]

As if you don't watch propaganda anytime you turn on the tv.

I don't get my medical advice and science from TV propaganda, though.

 

[Joes Place]

Lol he's still patting himself on the back for correcting one very minor item from from a 9 part article 5 yrs ago loaded with damning information for vaccines. Good for you Joe. You're the man.

"Very minor"? No. It was THE key point claiming vaccines didn't work. And I'd randomly picked ONE piece of evidence from all the pages to look into, because I simply didn't have the time to go thru the rest of the bullshit.

My response demonstrated:

• The article was bullshit
• The data were improperly referenced
• Conclusions were drawn and touted w/o any actual evidence
• There were ample independent sources which supported my position

Yet, here you are, still stuck supporting that nonsense.

I've asked you once already to go dig up the source material for the video. Actual references and data, not the AnswersInGenesis tactics of sourcing more unsubstantiated internet material.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

LMAO, this coming from someone with the scientific knowledge of an 8th grader..........I've forgotten more about science that you'll ever know. How many biology classes have you had? I don't recall seeing you in my cell biology, genetics, etc. classes...........did you take them online or something.

Are you a UNI grad? If not, then why would I have been in your bio classes?

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Notice he didn't respond to Asperger's syndrome being diagnosed BEFORE vaccines

Nobody's denying the fact that these illnesses were around before vaccines. I've stated time and again that I don't believe vaccines are the only cause of autism. What's IS being denied is the idiotic notion that autism rates have been constant over time. Does Asperger's being diagnosed before vaccines prove that autism rates were exactly the same? If that is proof to you, then why don't you post your reasoning.

NOR the differences between genders (THEY SHOULD BE ROUGHLY THE SAME IF IT IS VACCINES)

Why don't you break it down for us how you know it's not vaccines because of the discrepancy between genders. Since you're the expert I'm honestly looking to be educated here.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

I simply didn't have the time to go thru the rest of the bullshit.

No, believe me if there was more wrong with the article you would have been all over it.

 

[Joes Place]

Since you're the expert I'm honestly looking to be educated here.

No. You're not.

 

[Joes Place]

No, believe me if there was more wrong with the article you would have been all over it.

As I'd stated, I picked one or two out of the litany of problems, because that was all i was willing to invest time in. And even despite that realization those points were fundamentally wrong, you and others STILL defended them.

 

[fsu1jreed]

Why don't you break it down for us how you know it's not vaccines because of the discrepancy between genders. Since you're the expert I'm honestly looking to be educated here.

You can't prove a negative, so how could I know that it's NOT vaccines? With that said, one would expect that because women are smaller and weigh less and that IF it is indeed the bioaccumulation of something in vaccines that the ratios would be reversed or be closer to each other.

 

[Joes Place]

You can't prove a negative, so how could I know that it's NOT vaccines? With that said, one would expect that because women are smaller and weigh less and that IF it is indeed the bioaccumulation of something in vaccines that the ratios would be reversed or be closer to each other.

OHSNAP!!!

Someone used LOGIC here!!!

 

[naturalbornhawk]

You can't prove a negative, so how could I know that it's NOT vaccines? With that said, one would expect that because women are smaller and weigh less and that IF it is indeed the bioaccumulation of something in vaccines that the ratios would be reversed or be closer to each other.

That's it then! Vaccines are probably not the cause because girls are generally smaller than boys. Any other possible variables between genders probably wouldn't matter. Damn I'm glad we have you here to figure these things out.

 

[shank hawk]

No my reading comp is just fine. Yes eventually most of the aluminum enters the bloodstream and out, but your bit fails to tell the rest of the story about the possibility of macrophages taking up the aluminum and depositing it into your lymph nodes, spleen, liver, and brain.

It’s a vicious cycle, isn’t it nat? With upwards of fifty million Americans suffering autoimmune disorders (you know, those immuno-compromised individuals that aren’t supposed to be vaxxed) how are the profiteers going to achieve herd immunity?

You understand the herd immunity thingy, don’t you? Please explain how we’re suppose to be 95% vaccinated as a society when 15% of us shouldn’t even be receiving shots.

Then explain why 95% of us should get the flu vaccine when those that get immunized shed six times more influenza A particles than those suffering from the actual flu. Talk about compromising the immuno-compromised!

As if you don't watch propaganda anytime you turn on the tv.

Lol he's still patting himself on the back for correcting one very minor item from from a 9 part article 5 yrs ago loaded with damning information for vaccines. Good for you Joe. You're the man.

Backward thinking at its finest. It's called oral vs. written communication. If I'm listening to one of you yay-hoo's from HROT talk science on youtube, then yes that's not valid. If I'm listening to an interview from a scientist talk about one of their studies it might, just might be a different story. As far as full measure, there's little doubt that what they're talking about in that story isn't true and can be backed up with the full affidavit as we've seen here.

Remember that Yellow Fever epidemic vaccination thread/troll from a few months back? That seems like it's going well

Dr. Martin Gore, a widely celebrated cancer doctor credited with "saving thousands of lives" died from "total organ failure" just minutes after receiving a vaccine shot yesterday. Dr. Gore was a professor of cancer medicine at the Institute of Cancer Research based in London. He "died suddenly yesterday after a routine inoculation for yellow fever," reports The Times (UK).

"His death highlights the increased risks associated with the vaccine for the growing number of older travellers visiting exotic destinations," the paper explains.

I wonder if the Yellow Fever is like the flu where people that get vaccinated are 6X more contagious than those with the actual illness? Yikes!

 

[fsu1jreed]

That's it then! Vaccines are probably not the cause because girls are generally smaller than boys. Any other possible variables between genders probably wouldn't matter. Damn I'm glad we have you here to figure these things out.

Is that what you got out of that or are you being purposely obtuse? Then again with your 8th grade understanding of science, I probably should have included a definition of bioaccumulation........so that's probably on me.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

Dr. Martin Gore, a widely celebrated cancer doctor credited with "saving thousands of lives" died from "total organ failure" just minutes after receiving a vaccine shot yesterday. Dr. Gore was a professor of cancer medicine at the Institute of Cancer Research based in London. He "died suddenly yesterday after a routine inoculation for yellow fever," reports The Times (UK).

These (scantily) reported deaths after vaccines seem to be happening a little more frequently lately.

 

[naturalbornhawk]

LMAO, this coming from someone with the scientific knowledge of an 8th grader..........I've forgotten more about science that you'll ever know. How many biology classes have you had? I don't recall seeing you in my cell biology, genetics, etc. classes...........did you take them online or something.

Well then fsu I believe we're left with a conundrum. If you're such a super science guy then why are your efforts to back vaccine safety science here so utterly dismal? Is it because you suck at science or is it because vaccine safety science sucks?

 

[Joes Place]

Sounds like we'll need a wall around NC....