Close friend pleading with me to not vaccinate our baby
- Thread starter HawkeyesAndCubs1023
- Start date
He asked you how they were getting paid, other than throwing shit against the wall, you didn’t answer the questions, legitimately respond with factual support if you want to throw out a preposterous statement.
Well shit Joe ya got me. On top of knowing literally everything, you know all the inner workings of the FDA since you've "met with reviewers" and "know how those fee-schedules "work"".
And somehow you'd know they would (in every instance no less) make more money by rejecting something and having them re-apply. Any ideas about the kickbacks from the drugs that people purchase to cover the side effects had they approved said drug?
Last edited:
There is not. Multiple studies have demonstrated this, and debunked the retracted paper from years ago you like to refer to.
Vaccines are the lowest margin products that most drug companies produce.
THESE are the studies you’re basing your statement on that ‘childhood infections have been shown to cause autism’? The ones you’ve posted ‘many times’?Here's another handful (aside from YOUR link that reaches the SAME conclusion)
Association between Viral Infections and Risk of Autistic Disorder: An Overview - PMC
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental condition of the central nervous system (CNS) that presents with severe communication problems, impairment of social interactions, and stereotypic behaviours. Emerging studies indicate possible ...pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Infections in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Study to Explore Early Development (SEED) - PMC
Immune system abnormalities have been widely reported among children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which may increase the risk of childhood infections. The Study to Explore Early Development (SEED) is a multisite case-control study of ...
Childhood infections and autism spectrum disorders and/or intellectual disability: a register-based cohort study - PMC
To explore the associations between childhood infections and subsequent diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disability (ID), and their co-occurrence. The association between specialized care for any infection, defined by ...
🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
The first study has nothing to do with childhood infections; it deals with maternal infections. And even then, the conclusions aren’t earth-shattering: In this paper, we reviewed the possible association between maternal infection during pregnancy and ASD; maternal immune activation involving cytokine network dysfunction may be the potential pathogenic process that link viral infections with the risk of ASD in children. Research must be continued to further understand the role of viral infection in the aetiology of ASD.
Your second study examined the relationship between kids WITH autism and subsequent infections. It makes no connection on infections CAUSING a disorder…that they already have.
The third study you posted is the exact study I posted earlier, and concludes thusly: It may be that children who are later diagnosed with ID or ASD have a higher liability to severe infections that contribute to the associations observed here but infections are not causing ID or ASD. Damn! Ya really got me there, Joe. 🥴
Your 4th link is a mouse study that certainly can prove no link between childhood infections and autism.
And your 5th and final study? It’s the exact same study as the second one you posted. Maybe you thought I wouldn’t notice.
"Cash cow" is less about margin and more about getting consistent revenue with minimal reinvestment or marketing. But yeah, they don't have the same profit margin as the drugs we see advertised aggressively on TV. (now THERE is correlation)
They are also a relatively inexpensive investment compared to drug research - like 35 TIMES more inexpensive (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3846654/).
And when you factor in an environment of mass panic like we had with covid, including calls for mandatory vaccinations, the few companies still in the vaccine business can make obscene profits in a very brief period.
Low margins…righhtttt. 🥱
This means the link is ESTABLISHED.
That sentence means to figure out HOW and WHY it happens.
No; low-margin vaccines are not the primary focus for Pharma.
They want the things they can get 10x-100x margins on
They are an extremely inexpensive measure compared to the outbreaks of the diseases they prevent.
The covid vaccines Trump rammed through gave Pfizer $80 billion + on a $2 billion investment.
Pretty, pretty, pretty good.
Yep.
You know it. I know it. Most Americans don't know it.
Oh well...more vaccines for me!
Trump didn't "ram through" anything.
Pfizer did their own development, and the testing followed established protocols and standards.
Bullshit.
The protocols for licensing a vaccine were reduced from a normal 6-10 year time frame down to 6-10 months.
The US pre-purchased $2 billion worth of vaccines.
Pfizer’s partner, BioNTech, received half a billion in subsidies to develop the vaccine.
Trump threatened to fire the head of the FDA if he didn’t grant the jab makers an EUA.
Trump’s FDA actually REPRESENTED Pfizer in their court filing to keep their safety and trial data sealed for 75 f****** years!
But, yeah. Trump had nothing to do with it.
🤡
A lot of the vaccine profits are made from drug/treatment sales on the back end for all the problems they cause.
Yeah, no doubt. That said it never hurts to have a slow consistent revenue stream as well..
Really?
Show me in "the protocols" where it defines a "6-10 year time frame".
Cite the specific clauses in those standards for us.
It's not their priority, though.
And they still have to follow the standards and QA for everything they produce. Which is not a trivial amount of effort.
It's clearly a priority.
QA on vaccines? If you're talking maintaining product storage temps, OK. If you're talking science to assure quality, LOL. No product liability = why care much about safety?
New study links vaccines to autism. A sign of things to come?
"The analysis of claims data for 47,155 nine-year-old children revealed that: 1) vaccination was associated with significantly increased odds for all measured NDDs; 2) among children born preterm and vaccinated, 39.9% were diagnosed with at least one NDD compared to 15.7% among those born preterm and unvaccinated (OR 3.58, 95% CI: 2.80, 4.57); and 3) the relative risk of ASD increased according to the number of visits that included vaccinations. Children with just one vaccination visit were 1.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than the unvaccinated (95% CI: 1.21, 2.35) whereas those with 11 or more visits were 4.4 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than those with no visit for vaccination (95% CI: 2.8, 56.84)."
"The results of this study add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that vaccination may be associated with significantly increased odds of various medical conditions, including NDDs. The evidence accumulated to date suggests that vaccination can precipitate unintended adverse outcomes and that cumulative exposure to vaccines, especially in preterm infants, may be associated with adverse neurological outcomes. New vaccines continue to be added to the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule on the assumption that they will have no effect on health other than protection against the targeted pathogens. However, the findings of this study suggest that routine vaccination may be associated with NDDs appearing in early childhood. These results signal an urgent need for research to identify biological mechanisms and potential causal relationships be-tween individual vaccines, or combinations of vaccines, and genetic, epigenetic, environmental and other biologic risk factors associated with NDDs. In the meantime, planned additions to the schedule should be delayed until research to determine the safety of its impact on children’s overall health is completed."
publichealthpolicyjournal.com
"The analysis of claims data for 47,155 nine-year-old children revealed that: 1) vaccination was associated with significantly increased odds for all measured NDDs; 2) among children born preterm and vaccinated, 39.9% were diagnosed with at least one NDD compared to 15.7% among those born preterm and unvaccinated (OR 3.58, 95% CI: 2.80, 4.57); and 3) the relative risk of ASD increased according to the number of visits that included vaccinations. Children with just one vaccination visit were 1.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than the unvaccinated (95% CI: 1.21, 2.35) whereas those with 11 or more visits were 4.4 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than those with no visit for vaccination (95% CI: 2.8, 56.84)."
"The results of this study add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that vaccination may be associated with significantly increased odds of various medical conditions, including NDDs. The evidence accumulated to date suggests that vaccination can precipitate unintended adverse outcomes and that cumulative exposure to vaccines, especially in preterm infants, may be associated with adverse neurological outcomes. New vaccines continue to be added to the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule on the assumption that they will have no effect on health other than protection against the targeted pathogens. However, the findings of this study suggest that routine vaccination may be associated with NDDs appearing in early childhood. These results signal an urgent need for research to identify biological mechanisms and potential causal relationships be-tween individual vaccines, or combinations of vaccines, and genetic, epigenetic, environmental and other biologic risk factors associated with NDDs. In the meantime, planned additions to the schedule should be delayed until research to determine the safety of its impact on children’s overall health is completed."
Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid - Science, Public Health Policy and the Law
Background: Vaccinations required for school attendance have increased nearly threefold since the 1950s, now targeting 17 infectious diseases. However, the
publichealthpolicyjournal.com
How can we believe that vaccines are not safe, when those peddling this theory are making money off of this as well?
How quickly do you think that study gets trashed, appears the goal of the study was to a show a link, so it was biased. Secondly the target group was medicaid patients in Florida (ie kids in situations where there is less financial resources, less parent interaction, increased behavioral issues, and lets be clear, more kids subjected to drugs, while in the womb, and more infectious diseases) all contributing factors compared to a base of non vaccinated kids. So of course when you look at a group that should have an increased level of NDD and autism, you see an increased level, surprise surprise. Any research that looks at the whole population of kids have not found any relationship between autism and vaccines.New study links vaccines to autism. A sign of things to come?
"The analysis of claims data for 47,155 nine-year-old children revealed that: 1) vaccination was associated with significantly increased odds for all measured NDDs; 2) among children born preterm and vaccinated, 39.9% were diagnosed with at least one NDD compared to 15.7% among those born preterm and unvaccinated (OR 3.58, 95% CI: 2.80, 4.57); and 3) the relative risk of ASD increased according to the number of visits that included vaccinations. Children with just one vaccination visit were 1.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than the unvaccinated (95% CI: 1.21, 2.35) whereas those with 11 or more visits were 4.4 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than those with no visit for vaccination (95% CI: 2.8, 56.84)."
"The results of this study add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that vaccination may be associated with significantly increased odds of various medical conditions, including NDDs. The evidence accumulated to date suggests that vaccination can precipitate unintended adverse outcomes and that cumulative exposure to vaccines, especially in preterm infants, may be associated with adverse neurological outcomes. New vaccines continue to be added to the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule on the assumption that they will have no effect on health other than protection against the targeted pathogens. However, the findings of this study suggest that routine vaccination may be associated with NDDs appearing in early childhood. These results signal an urgent need for research to identify biological mechanisms and potential causal relationships be-tween individual vaccines, or combinations of vaccines, and genetic, epigenetic, environmental and other biologic risk factors associated with NDDs. In the meantime, planned additions to the schedule should be delayed until research to determine the safety of its impact on children’s overall health is completed."
Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid - Science, Public Health Policy and the Law
Background: Vaccinations required for school attendance have increased nearly threefold since the 1950s, now targeting 17 infectious diseases. However, the
I am not even a researcher and can tell you what was wrong with this study.
Updated: Vaccine-autism study retracted — again
For the second time, a journal has quickly retracted a study that suggested vaccines raise the risk of autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders. The study first raised a furor last year, promp…
retractionwatch.com
You surprised that author has done it before and it was retracted before. Can only guess what is going to happen here. He obviously has a bias and it is coming through clearly.
Edit: It looks like this is based on a lot of the same information. Looks like used a different cohort this time. Similar time frame though.
Based on the records of 47,155 children enrolled in the Florida Medicaid program from 1999 to 2011
In 2011, first author Anthony Mawson at Jackson State University, filed a lawsuit against the Mississippi State Department of Health, in which he alleged that, after he advocated the need for more studies on vaccine safety, a state officer interfered with his then-position at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, resulting in his contract not getting renewed. The suit was dismissed the following year.
The last author of the study, Binu Jacob, is listed as a former graduate student at Jackson State.
They republished the article again in 2017, with just changing a few minor details, it was pulled again.
Exact same as the authors of this one.
Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid
Anthony R. Mawson *
Binu Jacob
Last edited:
We have already admitted that we can't say that vaccines do not cause autism. Or do you choose to ignore the experts? Also the retrospective studies have looked at 1 ingredient, and 1 vaccine type. Last I looked there are many multiples of both on the schedule. In addition, the clinical trials are ultra short-term, low powered, and none use an inert placebo. How many whammies do you want?
Pfizer had $37 billion in covid injections alone in 2021.Dumb. I'm sure questioning vaccines is a financial windfall.
That's a tall order for any company peddling vitamins or minerals to match.
I am ignoring that expert. And I have admitted squat. I am open minded, but there is no quality research out there showing any connection. People like you just keep looking for that magic elixir, and when you think you have it, your drink it down hole, not realizing what it was you just subjected yourself too.
Yes, I can assure anyone that questioning vaccines is not going to be financially friendly to the vast majority. In fact, quite the opposite. Brave people feel the need to tell the truth anyway so they can sleep at night.
Blah blah blah, talk about money, but we can't talk about the facts, anyone want to discuss these 2 researchers and why their studies keep getting pulled, which caused you 2 to deflect?
They had one study retracted, because people can't handle the truth. This ain't that study, that you posted in your link anyway.
🤣
Imagine this guy^ thinking he's open-minded when he vehemently attacks anything and everything negative, studies or otherwise, said about vaccines. As if they can do no wrong. It's a religion, and it's anything but open-minded.
Last edited:
They had that one study, that they tried to be published twice pulled. And if you read closely- the authors declare they have no conflict of interest. Woopty doo. Looks like I got you all lathered up as you have spammed the board. even you can acknowledge these 2 are basket cases.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funder had no role in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study did not require ethical approval.
