ADVERTISEMENT

For You Anti-Vaxxers...

How many times throughout history has the minority opinion been flat out wrong?
Then provide answers to the questions about the safety science in this thread! If these questions can't be reasonably answered then the questions that are being asked are legit. It's really that simple.
 
I can tell you this with certainty. The internet is littered with doctors and scientists who carry the same stance I do. Of course those willing to speak out are in the minority....for now. That speaks nothing to the truth of the matter. I wouldn't dwell on it. How many times throughout history has the majority opinion been flat out wrong?
Well...you got the litter part right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalbornhawk
Your claiming so does not make it so. Do you think all the families are making this shit up after being vaccinated? Is it some sort of grand conspiracy that untold #'s around the globe got together via Skype and said to just cry MMR when their child has changed irrevocably for the worse?
There are lots of people who claim they've been abducted and probed by aliens. Hell, they might believe it. Their claims don't make it so. Why do you have such a difficult time understanding this? Untold numbers? There's your problem...you don't even have a number. Meanwhile there's a meta-analysis covering nearly 1.3 MILLION that found:

no relationship between vaccination and autism

no relationship between vaccination and ASD [autism spectrum disorder]

no relationship between [autism/ASD] and MMR

no relationship between [autism/ASD] and thimerosal

no relationship between [autism/ASD] and mercury (Hg)

Are your "untold #'s" bigger than that?
 
Then provide answers to the questions about the safety science in this thread! If these questions can't be reasonably answered then the questions that are being asked are legit. It's really that simple.

Nothing provided to you will change your opinion. This has been proven a number of times in this thread. I don’t care to change it either way, I just enjoy poking holes in your ridiculous “logic.”
 
Moller filed for an encephalopathy Table injury in 2003, unaware her daughter would be diagnosed with ASD(autism spectrum disorder). Government lawyers insisted that Emily had suffered neither a vaccine injury nor encephalopathy. But every alternative cause they suggested “made no sense, because she showed no signs of those things before that vaccination,” Moller said.

The case dragged on for years, with motions and counter-motions, status reports and expert medical reports. In 2007, Moller filed for summary judgment. That also took years, as more medical records were submitted to bolster Emily’s case.

After the ASD diagnosis, the judge reportedly became convinced that Emily would prevail. “My attorney said she(the judge) was angry, she felt forced into a corner with no choice but to find for us,” Moller said. “She said, ‘Emily has autism, and I don’t want to give other families who filed autism claims any hope.’”

HHS did not admit that vaccination caused encephalopathy or autism, but merely decided not to dedicate more resources to defending the case.

Perhaps the feds were loath to concede yet another vaccine case involving autism. Four cases in the Autism Omnibus Proceedings were recently compensated. Three of those cases are marked with asterisks, indicating the government did not conclude that autism can be caused by vaccines. But the fourth autism case that was paid out in 2013 (Ryan’s case? We don’t know) has no such caveat.

Meanwhile, as HHS says it “has never concluded in any case that autism was caused by vaccination,” it is still underwriting autism treatments such as ABA for children in its vaccine-injury program.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html
 
Nothing provided to you will change your opinion. This has been proven a number of times in this thread. I don’t care to change it either way, I just enjoy poking holes in your ridiculous “logic.”

No holes have been poked in the logic, and NONE of my questions have been answered. 2 of my questions have been attempted but the answers were clearly shoddy, broken, and dead ended answers that made absolutely no sense. My other questions were never even attempted, not once. Sorry, but this debate will continue to rage on until the questions are sufficiently answered..
 
No holes have been poked in the logic, and NONE of my questions have been answered. 2 of my questions have been attempted but the answers were clearly shoddy, broken, and dead ended answers that made absolutely no sense. My other questions were never even attempted, not once. Sorry, but this debate will continue to rage on until the questions are sufficiently answered..

Holes have definitely been poked. Your riskier, plenty, and throughout history statements have been used against you. They were terrible arguments.

Sufficiently answered? Are you the authority that determines sufficient?
 
"Rubbish" because they did their research, chose to side with the truth of their findings in exchange for their and their family's well being, and their reputation, and question vaccine safety? That's what you'd call rubbish?
CHEMTRAILS!!!!
 
I'm a doctor. There is no pressure. I look around me and say, "Damn, thankfully I'm not seeing small pox. Or better yet, thankfully I don't have smallpox."
Yeah...but that vaccine isn't responsible. Smallpox was already in decline and...and...hardly anyone was dying from it anyway...and....and...it had SHTUFF in it!!! People used to have smallpox parties to give their kids smallpox so they had natural immunity...which is waaaay better than that nasty unnatural vaccine immunity!!! And AUTISM!!!
 
Holes have definitely been poked. Your riskier, plenty, and throughout history statements have been used against you. They were terrible arguments.
Before you go patting yourself on your back too much, let's actually look at what happened.
1) Riskier: I'm not quite sure exactly which point you're referring to here but I'm guessing it has to do to your perception that my cost/benefit calculation is off in light of the "releasing measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox" comment. "Riskier" because you feel all potential problems associated with vaccines is incomparable to the terrible risk of the public being susceptible to those diseases if we stopped vaccinating. My proposal is to move closer to the 80's vaccination schedule that would eliminate that risk, yet move the schedule closer to a time where chronic disease rates, including ASD, in the US were much, much lower. Call me crazy but in this scenario you'd be eliminating the measles, mumps rubella, polio risk component while at the same time eliminating the possible vaccine-causing chronic disease component the pro-choice vaccine doctors and scientists have been screaming about. Problem potentially solved. If chronic disease rates don't drop at all, then screw it. All those doctors and scientists were wrong.
Moving back to the early/mid 80's schedule is not something original to myself, believe it or not it's actually a common thought among the vaccine pro-choice circles. I didn't see a counter response to this idea, so I'm not sure what logic poking you're referring to. If you had a different point in mind, I'm sure you'll let me know.
2) Plenty. In no way am I out of bounds with use of that word. Plenty, meaning enough, or sufficient. Those subjective words must be used unless I or others want to take a head count of every single doctor and scientist I've come across speaking out against the current vaccine schedule in every video or article or research paper I've ever read which not something I particularly have time for. In other words, it's too numerous to count, which essentially is plenty, or sufficient. You can take it or leave it, but at the end of the day a hard number doesn't even matter. If you want to talk about holes in logic, look no further than the implication that the majority opinion is the right one. If one person speaks the truth about something and everyone else on the planet does not, then that one person is still the right one. History will indicate this can and does happen. I think the vaccine skeptic movement has gained in numbers over time (article posted earlier in the thread by shankhawk), and I believe a study posted here in a past debate also by shankhawk pointed out the movement consists largely of educated people. If trends continue, you'll see the movement continue to gain in number, if that's what you're concerned about. Increasing, on what is already a large base of highly educated minds.
3) Throughout history: You said:
How many times throughout history has the minority opinion been flat out wrong?
Though you're right that sometimes the minority opinion has been flat out wrong, that's not a claim I said can't happen. The claim I made is sometimes the majority opinion does not hold the truth which is correct. Since history indicates minority opinion is right some of the time, the argument that majority opinion holds the truth cannot be used, which renders this argument useless:
Your many many doctors and scientists are <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the rest of the world's doctors and scientists.
At the end of the day, the status of all my questions here remains the same: unanswered.
Are you the authority that determines sufficient?
Everyone must be their own judge. For me, none of the answers I've gotten from anyone here amount to a darn thing. If the attempted answers to the questions were sufficiently answered in your opinion, then it seems reasonable to me that you should go hunt any one of them down and tell me your reasoning as to why you feel the answer provided is sufficient. Hopefully that will be your next post.
 
My proposal is to move closer to the 80's vaccination schedule that would eliminate that risk, yet move the schedule closer to a time where chronic disease rates, including ASD, in the US were much, much lower.
And when that had absolutely NO effect on autism rates, would you STFU?

NO...you'd find some other reason to blame vaccines for autism or you would fault the studies that showed autism rates rising or you would switch diseases and start blaming vaccines for f'n AIDS. And you would still be thinking that water has memory and believing that diluting a disease causing substance to ppt has some kind of beneficial pharmacological effect.
 
Before you go patting yourself on your back too much, let's actually look at what happened.
1) Riskier: I'm not quite sure exactly which point you're referring to here but I'm guessing it has to do to your perception that my cost/benefit calculation is off in light of the "releasing measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox" comment. "Riskier" because you feel all potential problems associated with vaccines is incomparable to the terrible risk of the public being susceptible to those diseases if we stopped vaccinating. My proposal is to move closer to the 80's vaccination schedule that would eliminate that risk, yet move the schedule closer to a time where chronic disease rates, including ASD, in the US were much, much lower. Call me crazy but in this scenario you'd be eliminating the measles, mumps rubella, polio risk component while at the same time eliminating the possible vaccine-causing chronic disease component the pro-choice vaccine doctors and scientists have been screaming about. Problem potentially solved. If chronic disease rates don't drop at all, then screw it. All those doctors and scientists were wrong.
Moving back to the early/mid 80's schedule is not something original to myself, believe it or not it's actually a common thought among the vaccine pro-choice circles. I didn't see a counter response to this idea, so I'm not sure what logic poking you're referring to. If you had a different point in mind, I'm sure you'll let me know.
2) Plenty. In no way am I out of bounds with use of that word. Plenty, meaning enough, or sufficient. Those subjective words must be used unless I or others want to take a head count of every single doctor and scientist I've come across speaking out against the current vaccine schedule in every video or article or research paper I've ever read which not something I particularly have time for. In other words, it's too numerous to count, which essentially is plenty, or sufficient. You can take it or leave it, but at the end of the day a hard number doesn't even matter. If you want to talk about holes in logic, look no further than the implication that the majority opinion is the right one. If one person speaks the truth about something and everyone else on the planet does not, then that one person is still the right one. History will indicate this can and does happen. I think the vaccine skeptic movement has gained in numbers over time (article posted earlier in the thread by shankhawk), and I believe a study posted here in a past debate also by shankhawk pointed out the movement consists largely of educated people. If trends continue, you'll see the movement continue to gain in number, if that's what you're concerned about. Increasing, on what is already a large base of highly educated minds.
3) Throughout history: You said:

Though you're right that sometimes the minority opinion has been flat out wrong, that's not a claim I said can't happen. The claim I made is sometimes the majority opinion does not hold the truth which is correct. Since history indicates minority opinion is right some of the time, the argument that majority opinion holds the truth cannot be used, which renders this argument useless:

At the end of the day, the status of all my questions here remains the same: unanswered.

Everyone must be their own judge. For me, none of the answers I've gotten from anyone here amount to a darn thing. If the attempted answers to the questions were sufficiently answered in your opinion, then it seems reasonable to me that you should go hunt any one of them down and tell me your reasoning as to why you feel the answer provided is sufficient. Hopefully that will be your next post.

A lot of typing just to acknowledge that some of your arguments made are indeed subjective and/or hold little weight. I illustrated why all three are worthless arguments. You haven’t sufficiently proven otherwise.
 
A lot of typing just to acknowledge that some of your arguments made are indeed subjective and/or hold little weight. I illustrated why all three are worthless arguments. You haven’t sufficiently proven otherwise.
Worthless point. Sorry none of these points are worth any more of my time. You're all fluff and I figured you wouldn't be able to answer the tough questions, just like everyone else. That's where the rubber meets the road. Until those questions that are so damning to vaccine safety are answered this debate will have to continue.
 
And when that had absolutely NO effect on autism rates, would you STFU?

NO...you'd find some other reason to blame vaccines for autism or you would fault the studies that showed autism rates rising or you would switch diseases and start blaming vaccines for f'n AIDS. And you would still be thinking that water has memory and believing that diluting a disease causing substance to ppt has some kind of beneficial pharmacological effect.
More worthless strawman points.
 
Worthless point. Sorry none of these points are worth any more of my time. You're all fluff and I figured you wouldn't be able to answer the tough questions, just like everyone else. That's where the rubber meets the road. Until those questions that are so damning to vaccine safety are answered this debate will have to continue.
LOL...your "questions" have been answered multiple times across multiple threads. You simply dismiss the source. You're a one-trick pony.
 
Worthless point. Sorry none of these points are worth any more of my time. You're all fluff and I figured you wouldn't be able to answer the tough questions, just like everyone else. That's where the rubber meets the road. Until those questions that are so damning to vaccine safety are answered this debate will have to continue.

Why answer you? You have proven time and time again to ignore information provided. You admitted you will deem what is sufficient. The combination of confirmation bias and ignorance (certainly not a subject matter expert) will always have you feeling all counter points are insufficient (see this thread).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
Worthless point. Sorry none of these points are worth any more of my time. You're all fluff and I figured you wouldn't be able to answer the tough questions, just like everyone else. That's where the rubber meets the road. Until those questions that are so damning to vaccine safety are answered this debate will have to continue.

Fluff would be using subjective terms to identify how pervasive a view is. Fluff would be making the claims you have without any real numbers.
 
You're the one who claimed value in homeopathy while apparently having no idea what it's tenets involve. I would quote the posts but you're not worth the time.

To be fair.....he thought it was homo-opathy, and meant something very very different.
 
More of the same: propaganda in place of science/medicine. Now they're using letters to the editor under a 'newsy' headline to give legitimacy to the Vac-zi Party platform. (https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/m/5...740b504606/ss_pediatricians-who-hand-out.html)

I guess they've run out of mentally retarded, institutionalized children to experiment on so now they just appeal to our emotions? SOP I guess.

Well....THANK GOODNESS we don't base our medical or science policies on "letters to the editor"!!! (we might consider them, but they are generally not considered "evidence based medicine".

Of course, 'homeopathy' isn't evidence-based medicine, either. But you guys don't seem to comprehend that concept.
 
More of the same: propaganda in place of science/medicine. Now they're using letters to the editor under a 'newsy' headline to give legitimacy to the Vac-zi Party platform. (https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/m/5...740b504606/ss_pediatricians-who-hand-out.html)

I guess they've run out of mentally retarded, institutionalized children to experiment on so now they just appeal to our emotions? SOP I guess.
LOL...the "Vac-zi Party". That's so f'n stupid it's hilarious.

And, FTR, physicians who refuse to provide proper quality of care should be disciplined. Like Wakefield who you still refuse to condemn.
 
And, FTR, physicians who refuse to provide proper quality of care should be disciplined.

There are indeed, valid medical reasons for non-vaccination.
Fear of "autism" is not one of those reasons. There are >7 billion people on the planet, today, BECAUSE vaccines have been so effective in eliminating mass outbreaks; in fact, we live in far closer quarters and in much higher population densities than we did 50 or 500 years ago (in times when even in sparsely populated areas, diseases would wipe out large fractions of the populations.

EVEN IF vaccines caused autism, at a virtually undetectable rate, that's still a no-brainer - because it is probably NOT the vaccines causing the autism, it's the body's immune response to viruses. So our options are: 0.001% autism, NO deaths from communicable diseases, or 0.001% autism PLUS 10% to 30% death and/or permanent side effects from diseases.

When those are your two options, the decision is simple.

(and YES, we have formal evidence that viruses CAN cause long-term, unrelated diseases and/or behavioral changes in mammals)
 
Anti-vaxxers on here should search out people who have dealt with the side effects of Lyme disease, and ASK them if they would have considered being vaccinated for that....IF a vaccine existed....

Imma guess 100% of them would have JUMPED to get a vaccine, if they could go back in time and get one...

(Hell, you could even tell them there's 0.001% chance you'd end up autistic, and see if that changes the answer. I'll bet that answer is 'no, I'd totally have taken a vaccine to avoid the side effects from Lyme')
 
Sure as hell does when you're claiming to quote scientific information.

Like when you posted that measles had already declined in the US before vaccines were administered. But that was fake. Based on British data (where the vaccine was introduced earlier). That's when "typos in years" means something.

Dipshit.
You're being a little harsh on yourself, aren't you? There's no need to sign off as Dipshit. We all know you logged on as Joe's Place. No need for your nom de plume.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalbornhawk
3 and I do vaccinate. I oppose compulsory vaccination and over vaccination.

Now, try and imagine you are a parent of a child with some form of immune issue (like maybe a kid being treated for leukemia, who's immune system is wiped out for months as part of the therapy, which probably WILL cure them), and you have everyone in your neighborhood who "decided NOT to vaccinate".

If anyone who comes in contact with your kid gives them measles or mumps or rubella, YOUR kid probably dies. Virtually 100% chance.

You still want "voluntary" vaccinations?

Herd immunity works. It is established science. It protects those who CANNOT be vaccinated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrunoMars420
Now, try and imagine you are a parent of a child with some form of immune issue (like maybe a kid being treated for leukemia, who's immune system is wiped out for months as part of the therapy, which probably WILL cure them), and you have everyone in your neighborhood who "decided NOT to vaccinate".

If anyone who comes in contact with your kid gives them measles or mumps or rubella, YOUR kid probably dies. Virtually 100% chance.

You still want "voluntary" vaccinations?

Herd immunity works. It is established science. It protects those who CANNOT be vaccinated.
I don't agree with your fascist system of healthcare that brings smiles to the likes of Dr. Mengele. How free are you when you have others decide what can be placed in your body? You think you have nothing to worry about when your guy is in power. Hard as it is to believe, but, what will you do when a guy comes along worse than Trump? What if everyone is their guinea pig?

Maybe children are getting cancer from vaccines destroying their immune systems and a host of other disorders. Maybe Guillane Barre as is stated on the MMR insert.

This from Dr. Don Miller:

One benefit of having measles is that a person so infected will then have lifelong, permanent immunity to it. Mothers transfer antibodies against measles to their babies, which protect them from this disease during their early critical months of life. The MMR shot, however, does not provide lifelong immunity to measles. It only lasts several years, and successively less effective booster shots are required.

There is a second, major benefit of measles that health authorities overlook. Measles helps a child’s immune system grow strong and mature.



Once past the immunologic barriers of skin and mucosa, our (2-trillion-cell) immune system has two components: An innate system, which all animals have; and an evolutionarily more recent adaptive system that vertebrates have. The childhood diseases—measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox—play a constructive role in the maturation of the adaptive immune system. Two kinds of helper T-cells (Th) manage this system: cellular T-cells (Th1); and humoral T-cells (Th2), which make antibodies. The Th1 cellular T-cells are especially important because they attack and kill cells in the body that run amok and become cancerous. And they also kill cells that become infected with viruses.

Measles (and other viral childhood diseases) stimulate both the Th1 and Th2 components. The MMR vaccine stimulates predominately the Th2 side. Overstimulation of this part of the adaptive immune system provokes allergies, asthma, and auto-immune diseases. Since the Th1 side thwarts cancer, if it does not get fully developed in childhood a person can wind up being more prone to cancer later in life. Women who had mumps during childhood, for example, have been found to be less likely to develop ovarian cancer compared with women who did not have mumps. (This study was published in the mainstream medical journal Cancer.)

Could the fact that cancer has now become a leading cause of death in children be connected to vaccinations? Only a well-controlled, randomized, blinded, long-term scientific trial would be able to conclusively answer this question. But societal entities that could fund such a study, like the government’s National Institutes of Health (NIH), drug companies that make the vaccine, or the CDC do not feel that it is necessary to conduct one.

The benefits of having measles (at the right age) trumps the MMR vaccine’s benefits, for these two reasons: 1) suffering through the disease bestows lifelong immunity to it; and 2) measles strengthens and helps mature a child’s helper T-cell adaptive immune system, and most importantly its cancer-preventing Th1 side.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/02/donald-w-miller-jr-md/more-dangerous-than-measles/
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalbornhawk
Anti-vaxxers on here should search out people who have dealt with the side effects of Lyme disease, and ASK them if they would have considered being vaccinated for that....IF a vaccine existed....

Imma guess 100% of them would have JUMPED to get a vaccine, if they could go back in time and get one...

(Hell, you could even tell them there's 0.001% chance you'd end up autistic, and see if that changes the answer. I'll bet that answer is 'no, I'd totally have taken a vaccine to avoid the side effects from Lyme')

Better is rocky mountain spotted fever with a 10-20% mortality rate. How many people would scream....."Aluminum! Are you crazy? I'll take my chances!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
I don't agree with your fascist system of healthcare that brings smiles to the likes of Dr. Mengele. How free are you when you have others decide what can be placed in your body? You think you have nothing to worry about when your guy is in power. Hard as it is to believe, but, what will you do when a guy comes along worse than Trump? What if everyone is their guinea pig?

Maybe children are getting cancer from vaccines destroying their immune systems and a host of other disorders. Maybe Guillane Barre as is stated on the MMR insert.

This from Dr. Don Miller:

One benefit of having measles is that a person so infected will then have lifelong, permanent immunity to it. Mothers transfer antibodies against measles to their babies, which protect them from this disease during their early critical months of life. The MMR shot, however, does not provide lifelong immunity to measles. It only lasts several years, and successively less effective booster shots are required.

There is a second, major benefit of measles that health authorities overlook. Measles helps a child’s immune system grow strong and mature.

Except 1 in 500 will die of the measles. 1 in 1000 will develop encephalitis that causes deafness or intellectual disability. I'll just say when I got my medical degree, on the back side of the diploma in secret ink that I can hold up to a lunar eclipse it says, "MMR causes autism." So since I am outed about the secret is out....I'll give you that the vaccine causes autism for the sake of argument. The disease itself causes encephalopathy. However, that fact is probably irrelevant to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
LOL...your "questions" have been answered multiple times across multiple threads. You simply dismiss the source. You're a one-trick pony.
That's a cop out and a lie and I'm not letting it happen here. Dismiss the source? You mean the argument that the health institutions say so - that's why? Of course that's not going to work here if those sources aren't trusted. With the recent findings of the proof that HHS hasn't been fulfilling their crucial obligations with regard to ensuring vaccine safety (among a barrage of other things), there's damn good reason for the distrust.
So, we're going to get to the bottom of this right here and now. I'm going to post my questions, again, in hopes of getting them answered. The old lie saying they've already been answered will not do. A couple of these were attempted and clearly failed.
I've been told many times here how dumb I am, so I'm going to need a good, clear, reasonable analysis of these questions.
Here are the unanswered questions that have been on my mind lately:
1) This one, unlike the others, is not related to safety specifically, but is central to this debate as a whole. It's going to require some reading: https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/6/7/herd-immunity-a-dishonest-marketing-gimmick
Don't come back and talk about JB and how he's not a good source of information. That's not going to fly here. If that's true, then we have some smart people here who should be able to slam dunk him on this point. I want to see some good solid reasoning why this article is wrong. The question here is, in light of the information in this article, explain how herd immunity is actually being observed among today's US populations for these vaccine preventable diseases.
2) How is possible that it's OK that medical institutions cite oral aluminum dosing studies to determine safe pediatric dosing levels for intramuscular injection of aluminum adjuvant, in light of the recent science that says that intramuscular injected aluminum can be taken up by macrophages and then easily be taken to the brain? Joe says there is a small difference between oral and intramuscular, and TH says there is absolutely no difference. I think I'll listen to the scientist that has over 40 peer-reviewed studies on the subject (who indicates there's a major difference). Here, again, is a recent study that was done that indicates just how terrible the Mitkus study is (the study frequently cited as backing for proof that aluminum adjuvant is safe):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17300950
3) Why can't they use the Vaccine Safety Datalink to look at vaccination rates in autistic patients before autism diagnosis, since they did for a very similar study (below) looking at vaccine rates in children after an autism diagnosis?
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2676070
4) Why is it a good idea to give a newborn the hep B vaccine on day one of life in cases where the mother tests negative for hep B (most cases), especially given the recent work done by Dr Yao....: http://vaccinesafetycommission.com/...s-of-mice-transiently-in-early-adulthood..pdf
....that comes to this conclusion?:
"This work reveals for the first time that early HBV vaccination induces impairments in behavior and hippocampal neurogenesis. This work provides innovative data supporting the long suspected potential association of HBV with certain neuropsychiatric disorders such as autism and multiple sclerosis (Gallagher and Goodman, 2010; Stubgen, 2012)."
5) HHS is the mothership in charge of the oversight of vaccine safety. Congress agreed to indemnify vaccine manufacturers AS LONG AS HHS would take the following steps to ensure vaccines are as safe as possible:
http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?...-title42-section300aa-27&num=0&edition=prelim
Not one bit of this crucial work has been done since the 31 years this act was put into place, and Congress didn't even report that it wasn't being done. What a devastating admission (for both ends), and this information had to be discovered forcefully through a lawsuit, no less. The question here I believe must be - with such a cataclysmic admission, how is it we can trust or take seriously this system we've created for vaccine safety oversight if this is the way they're going to conduct business? Del and RFK wanted to see the what exactly HHS was using to satisfy congress because they knew any science they were using was complete bunk. Well, it turns out there was absolutely nothing. Nothing.
6) 1 vaccine and 1 ingredient has been "thoroughly" studied for it's connection to autism (albeit very poorly, as we've learned in previous debates).
JB+Chart.jpeg

Now, if this chart is not correct, thoroughly argue against it, complete with the studies. If this chart is correct, then thoroughly explain how we can know for sure there is no vaccine - autism connection? Tarheel attempted to explain how aluminum could be assured to be safe through mmr studies, but through all his db responses and questions his argument ended up sounding a lot like the guy below. I'd recommend someone else give it a shot
anigif_enhanced-19636-1421005826-24.gif

Now, if these questions get thoroughly and reasonably answered, then I'll stop hounding you guys with them. If not then you're going to continue to hear about them.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT