Vaccine - Autism link

Moderators: DrVolin, Elvis, Jeff

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby DrEvil » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:05 pm

alwyn » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:33 am wrote:
I looked up Suzanne Humphries MD, author of the first link, and stopped right there. Here's a quote:

Vaccines are dangerous and should never be injected into anyone for any reason. They are not the answer to infectious diseases. There are many more sustainable and benevolent solutions than vaccines.


By "more sustainable and benevolent" she is of course talking about homeopathy (she's a homeopath too).


um, Doctor Suzanne Humphries is an MD, and Nephrologist (kidney specialist) http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CV-11.5.21031.pdf

So she certainly has her street cred. and she came to her position through watching her kidney patients tank after vaccination. her work on vaccines is compelling, well researched, well proven, and highly controversial. The vaccine companies hate her. this, in my book, is a recomendation.



And then I couldn't help myself and looked at the other links too. It didn't get any better.
Not sure who's misinformed here.


apparently you, on this


I know she's an MD, that's why I wrote Suzanne Humphries MD. She's also a homeopath.

She had several patients experience kidney problems up to six weeks after taking the flu vaccine.
At the time, millions of people were getting that same vaccine. The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good. Correlation does not equal causation.
Try again.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2690
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:39 pm

DrEvil » 02 Jul 2015 09:05 wrote:
alwyn » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:33 am wrote:
I looked up Suzanne Humphries MD, author of the first link, and stopped right there. Here's a quote:

Vaccines are dangerous and should never be injected into anyone for any reason. They are not the answer to infectious diseases. There are many more sustainable and benevolent solutions than vaccines.


By "more sustainable and benevolent" she is of course talking about homeopathy (she's a homeopath too).


um, Doctor Suzanne Humphries is an MD, and Nephrologist (kidney specialist) http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CV-11.5.21031.pdf

So she certainly has her street cred. and she came to her position through watching her kidney patients tank after vaccination. her work on vaccines is compelling, well researched, well proven, and highly controversial. The vaccine companies hate her. this, in my book, is a recomendation.



And then I couldn't help myself and looked at the other links too. It didn't get any better.
Not sure who's misinformed here.


apparently you, on this


I know she's an MD, that's why I wrote Suzanne Humphries MD. She's also a homeopath.

She had several patients experience kidney problems up to six weeks after taking the flu vaccine.
At the time, millions of people were getting that same vaccine. The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good. Correlation does not equal causation.
Try again.

I'm going to be pedantic for a moment just to illustrate that you are not as educated as you think you are. The comment "correlation does not equal causation" is a non-sequitur relative to your previous statement, "The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good." In fact, if the odds of an adverse renal event does not change with vaccination status, that is an example of a non-association, i.e. lack of correlation. Since causation must imply correlation, a lack of correlation implies a lack of causation. In other words, causal interpretation of an evident association is an entirely distinct issue. Of course your original point stands: it's likely that adverse events are going to appear in both vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, and Humphries has not presented any data that would demonstrate an association (or lack thereof), i.e. that the incidence of such an event differs between the two groups.

I'm being pedantic because you are presenting yourself as the lone rational voice when in fact your language reflects ignorance of basic epidemiology. I am inclined to agree that some, maybe even most, vaccines are safe and effective. The problem is that some vaccines, either existing or yet-to-be-developed, may not be safe. Because the FDA has a history of sometimes being lax in monitoring both safety and efficacy, it is dangerous to establish a government mandate for vaccination. The issue isn't vaccines per se, but ethical problems related to autonomy (one of the core principles of human subjects protections).
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby dbcooper41 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:39 pm

User avatar
dbcooper41
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:55 pm
Location: North Carolina
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby 82_28 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:59 pm

alwyn » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:16 pm wrote:
82_28 » Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:08 pm wrote:Again, because of vaccines in infanthood gave me very grave fevers in which I was hospitalized for weeks as the story goes -- As I don't remember, too young. My evidence based doctors, not no homeopaths or some shit, told me that the vaccines for me led to the fevers and the fevers led to my super rad OCD that has dogged me my entire life. My opinion doesn't mean shit, but vaccines can be harmful and thus not mandatory in my view lacking any modicum of syntax.


sorry 82_28... it was late, and i took issue with 'anti-vaxxers are dumb'. which we are not. nor was your syntax particularly lacking, it just skipped a few points that might have fleshed out your post.

pax. not vax. :angelwings:


Oh, no problem. I knew you meant no harm and all that. That is why I put "anti-anti" vaxxers. That may be where the syntax issue came from. I'm neither/nor. Just YMMV. No worries. It's morning for me right now but it is still late! :jumping: :lovehearts:
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11175
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby norton ash » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:26 pm

I remain convinced that the more American babies they kill at an early age, the better.

And hey-hey, they make big money while they're at it. Everybody wins.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 3850
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby alwyn » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:34 pm

slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 9:39 am wrote:

I'm being pedantic because you are presenting yourself as the lone rational voice when in fact your language reflects ignorance of basic epidemiology. I am inclined to agree that some, maybe even most, vaccines are safe and effective. The problem is that some vaccines, either existing or yet-to-be-developed, may not be safe. Because the FDA has a history of sometimes being lax in monitoring both safety and efficacy, it is dangerous to establish a government mandate for vaccination. The issue isn't vaccines per se, but ethical problems related to autonomy (one of the core principles of human subjects protections).


oh slomo.... :lovehearts:

If you actually read Suzanne Humphrie's book, which, btw, was well researched and well documented, you would know that the hospital she worked for vaccinated people who were admitted as a matter of protocol. Her kidney patients would be getting better, and then they started tanking immediately after vaccinating. She says every other drug she went to her bosses with and said it's affecting the patients adversely was removed from protocol. As soon as she said perhaps we shouldn't be vaccinating them, it was like she touched the third rail of medicine. This got her thinking a great deal about things, and her book was the result.

I wouldn't have thought about it much, except that my boy was vaccinated for Hep B, a disease i didn't have, and that he wouldn't even maybe be exposed to until the after vaccine wore off when he hit puberty. He was six weeks premature. Doing fine one day, the next, he had trouble breathing, nursing, muscle weakness, all known side effects from a vaccine mandated for all babies in california after one day of life, which he didn't need. Vaccinating premature babies? That's not about health, it's about $.

The two phrases that get bandied about by folks who like to tell me what happened to my boy didn't happen, are 'correlation does not equal causation' and 'anectdotal'. Believe me, when your child suffers, it is NOT anectdotal. We need to listen to the mothers, to pay attention. Something is wrong.
question authority?
alwyn
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:25 pm
Location: Laytonville
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:46 pm

alwyn » 02 Jul 2015 10:34 wrote:
slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 9:39 am wrote:

I'm being pedantic because you are presenting yourself as the lone rational voice when in fact your language reflects ignorance of basic epidemiology. I am inclined to agree that some, maybe even most, vaccines are safe and effective. The problem is that some vaccines, either existing or yet-to-be-developed, may not be safe. Because the FDA has a history of sometimes being lax in monitoring both safety and efficacy, it is dangerous to establish a government mandate for vaccination. The issue isn't vaccines per se, but ethical problems related to autonomy (one of the core principles of human subjects protections).


oh slomo.... :lovehearts:

If you actually read Suzanne Humphrie's book, which, btw, was well researched and well documented, you would know that the hospital she worked for vaccinated people who were admitted as a matter of protocol. Her kidney patients would be getting better, and then they started tanking immediately after vaccinating. She says every other drug she went to her bosses with and said it's affecting the patients adversely was removed from protocol. As soon as she said perhaps we shouldn't be vaccinating them, it was like she touched the third rail of medicine. This got her thinking a great deal about things, and her book was the result.

I wouldn't have thought about it much, except that my boy was vaccinated for Hep B, a disease i didn't have, and that he wouldn't even maybe be exposed to until the after vaccine wore off when he hit puberty. He was six weeks premature. Doing fine one day, the next, he had trouble breathing, nursing, muscle weakness, all known side effects from a vaccine mandated for all babies in california after one day of life, which he didn't need. Vaccinating premature babies? That's not about health, it's about $.

The two phrases that get bandied about by folks who like to tell me what happened to my boy didn't happen, are 'correlation does not equal causation' and 'anectdotal'. Believe me, when your child suffers, it is NOT anectdotal. We need to listen to the mothers, to pay attention. Something is wrong.

Yeah, the problem is population vs. individual medicine. At a population level, I am willing to concede that vaccines are generally safe and effective. However, there are always subpopulations that will experience adverse events or nonresponse or both. The crude instrument of the law cannot address the nuance involved in determining these subpopulations and making exceptions for them. Thus, patient autonomy is key in all medications, including vaccines.

It is indeed weird that vaccines uniquely prompt such cognitive dissonance, even among clinicians. I'm sorry about your boy!
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby DrEvil » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:48 pm

slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:39 pm wrote:
DrEvil » 02 Jul 2015 09:05 wrote:
alwyn » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:33 am wrote:
I looked up Suzanne Humphries MD, author of the first link, and stopped right there. Here's a quote:

Vaccines are dangerous and should never be injected into anyone for any reason. They are not the answer to infectious diseases. There are many more sustainable and benevolent solutions than vaccines.


By "more sustainable and benevolent" she is of course talking about homeopathy (she's a homeopath too).


um, Doctor Suzanne Humphries is an MD, and Nephrologist (kidney specialist) http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CV-11.5.21031.pdf

So she certainly has her street cred. and she came to her position through watching her kidney patients tank after vaccination. her work on vaccines is compelling, well researched, well proven, and highly controversial. The vaccine companies hate her. this, in my book, is a recomendation.



And then I couldn't help myself and looked at the other links too. It didn't get any better.
Not sure who's misinformed here.


apparently you, on this


I know she's an MD, that's why I wrote Suzanne Humphries MD. She's also a homeopath.

She had several patients experience kidney problems up to six weeks after taking the flu vaccine.
At the time, millions of people were getting that same vaccine. The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good. Correlation does not equal causation.
Try again.

I'm going to be pedantic for a moment just to illustrate that you are not as educated as you think you are. The comment "correlation does not equal causation" is a non-sequitur relative to your previous statement, "The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good." In fact, if the odds of an adverse renal event does not change with vaccination status, that is an example of a non-association, i.e. lack of correlation. Since causation must imply correlation, a lack of correlation implies a lack of causation. In other words, causal interpretation of an evident association is an entirely distinct issue. Of course your original point stands: it's likely that adverse events are going to appear in both vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, and Humphries has not presented any data that would demonstrate an association (or lack thereof), i.e. that the incidence of such an event differs between the two groups.


Fair point. Note to self: Try again. :)

I'm being pedantic because you are presenting yourself as the lone rational voice when in fact your language reflects ignorance of basic epidemiology. I am inclined to agree that some, maybe even most, vaccines are safe and effective. The problem is that some vaccines, either existing or yet-to-be-developed, may not be safe. Because the FDA has a history of sometimes being lax in monitoring both safety and efficacy, it is dangerous to establish a government mandate for vaccination. The issue isn't vaccines per se, but ethical problems related to autonomy (one of the core principles of human subjects protections).


I'm not trying to pass myself off as some crusader of rationality, I just happen to disagree with the anti-vaccine hysteria that's currently doing the rounds. I agree that there are some issues of concern in regards to lax monitoring and general dickery from corporations chasing profits, but the answer to that is most definitely not homeopathy, or stopping all vaccinations. Better oversight and testing, and harsher consequences (no exemptions from consequences, criminal liability for the people in charge, HUGE fines, etc.) for corporations that play fast and loose would be a better way to do it.

But my general sentiment still stands: I think vaccines have done far more good than bad.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2690
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby Nordic » Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:39 pm

http://m.livescience.com/51411-flu-vacc ... ponse.html

Flu Vaccine and Narcolepsy: New Findings May Explain Link
by Rachael Rettner, Senior Writer
Date: 01 July 2015 Time: 02:05 PM ET

A woman gets a vaccination
An unusual increase in narcolepsy cases in Europe was linked to a new flu vaccine used there, and now researchers may have figured out why: A protein in the vaccine appears to mimic one in the brain that plays a role in the sleep disorder.
People with narcolepsy experience severe daytime sleepiness and "sleep attacks," in which they suddenly fall asleep for a short time. The vaccine that was linked to the disorder was used in 2009 and 2010 to protect against the H1N1 strain of flu, which is sometimes called the swine flu.
The new findings also suggest that the immune system may play a role in the disorder, and that in rare cases vaccines or infections can trigger narcolepsy in people with a certain genetic mutation.

Still, the researchers emphasized that the risk of getting narcolepsy from the vaccine is extremely small, and that "the benefits of influenza vaccination currently far outweigh the risks of complications," they said.
What's more, for people who are genetically predisposed to narcolepsy, the risk of developing the disorder may be higher if they become naturally infected with the flu rather than getting the vaccine to protect against it, the researchers said.
Previous studies linked this version of the swine flu vaccine, called Pandemrix (made by GlaxoSmithKline), and cases of narcolepsy. For example, a study in England found that children who had narcolepsy were 14 times more likely to have been vaccinated with Pandemrix than other children in England of the same age.
In another study, researchers estimated that the chances of developing narcolepsy following vaccination in Finland and the United Kingdom were between 1 in 16,000 and 1 in 50,000. After the 2009 to 2010 swine flu outbreak, Pandemrix was withdrawn from the market.
Other versions of the swine flu vaccine havenot been linked with an increased risk of narcolepsy. [6 Flu Vaccine Myths]
In the new study, the researchers compared components of the Pandemrix vaccine with those of another H1N1 vaccine, called Focetria, which was manufactured by Novartis.
They found that part of a viral protein in the Pandemrix vaccine mimicked the structure of a brain receptor that binds to a hormone called hypocretin. This hormone is involved in keeping people awake, and people with narcolepsy have lower levels of hypocretin, which led the researchers to hypothesize that problems with hypocretin or its receptor could play a role in the sleep disorder.
In contrast to the Pandemrix vaccine, the Focetria vaccine contained much lower levels of the viral protein that mimicked the hypocretin receptor.
Next, the researchers analyzed blood samples from 20 people in Finland who developed narcolepsy after Pandemrix vaccination, and found that these people had antibodies in their blood that bound to the H1N1 virus and also to the hypocretin receptor. But people who received the Focetria vaccines did not have these antibodies.
The researchers speculate that, in people who are already predisposed to narcolepsy because of a genetic mutation, receiving the Pandemrix vaccination triggered an autoimmune response — these patients developed antibodies that not only attacked the virus, but also attacked the hypocretin receptor in the brain.
This could interfere with the brain signaling of hypocretin, leading to narcolepsy, said study researcher Dr. Lawrence Steinman, a professor of pediatrics and of neurology at Stanford University School of Medicine.
However, the researchers still need to prove that these antibodies against the hypocretin receptor do indeed get into the brain. This will be the next step in the research, Steinman said.
"This paper is really elegant, and establishes a mechanism for how this one specific pandemic flu vaccine may have caused narcolepsy in some patients," said Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious-disease specialist and a senior associate at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Center for Health Security, who was not involved in the study.
Although more work is needed to confirm the findings, "it seems to me, that this really is a likely explanation, based upon all these steps the researchers took to prove this hypothesis," Adalja said. He noted that the researchers had genetic evidence, as well as evidence from patients' blood, which both pointed to the same mechanism.
Steinman noted that people who are infected with the flu appear to generate higher levels of antibodies to this viral protein, compared with people who are vaccinated with Pandemrix. "Therefore, there is potentially far greater risk of getting narcolepsy with influenza infection compared to influenza vaccination in those genetically susceptible to narcolepsy," Steinman said.
The flu has been linked with other sleeping disorders. For example, after the epidemic of Spanish flu in 1918, there was an increase in people suffering a "sleeping sickness" known as encephalitis lethargica. (Patients with this condition were the subject of the 1973 book "Awakenings.")
In the new paper, the researchers speculate that, because the 1918 flu strain also contained this "mimic" viral protein, an autoimmune reaction might also explain the rise in encephalitis lethargica after the Spanish flu.
The study is published today (July 1) in the journal Science Translational Medicine.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby identity » Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:12 pm

Opening paragraphs from Michael Belkin's THE VACCINE BUBBLE AND THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, in the Vaccine Epidemic anthology, edited by Louise Habakus.

Vaccines can cause brain damage. Most people are completely unaware of this, but that is exactly how The Merck Manual, the largest-selling medical textbook, defines an adverse reaction to a vaccine: Encephalitis is inflammation of the brain that occurs when a virus directly infects the brain or when a virus or something else triggers inflammation . . . Encephalitis can occur in the following ways: A virus directly infects the brain. A virus that caused an infection in the past becomes reactivated and directly damages the brain. A virus or vaccine triggers a reaction that makes the immune system attack brain tissue (an autoimmune reaction).

An adverse vaccine reaction that causes brain damage (encephalitis) is the same thing as a complication from an infectious disease. Any pediatrician, doctor, or state or federal public health official who tells you that vaccines are completely safe, that adverse reactions to vaccines don’t exist, or that vaccine-induced injuries are so rare that they virtually never occur is either ignorant or is committing scientific fraud. Is it worse to have your child vaccinated by a doctor who does not know the possible adverse reactions, or to be lied to by a doctor or government bureaucrat who does know the terrible damage vaccines can cause?

This is no trivial matter. Every day, uninformed physicians administer vaccines to vast numbers of children and adults with little thought about the possibility of adverse reactions. When an adverse reaction occurs—in the form of brain inflammation, convulsions, or another injury—the typical first step is to blame someone else. Doctors and the government accuse parents of child abuse (i.e., shaken baby syndrome) or bad luck (i.e., defective genes) and accuse teenagers of bad behavior (i.e., using illicit drugs). Medical professionals do not step up and ask whether they hold any responsibility for causing an adverse reaction to a vaccine.

The Merck Manual further defines the symptoms of encephalitis: “Symptoms of encephalitis include fever, headache, personality changes or confusion, seizures, paralysis or numbness, sleepiness that can progress to coma and death.” Many tens of thousands of parents whose children were diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder reported that their kids were progressing normally until they received one or many vaccines, after which they had fevers, headaches, seizures, personality changes, and were never the same again. The symptoms reported by parents are the same symptoms of encephalitis that are defined in The Merck Manual. Health authorities in charge of defending and expanding universal immunization programs label these same symptoms “a coincidence.”

When my five-week-old daughter, Lyla, died hours after receiving her hepatitis B vaccine, the New York medical examiner was more concerned about examining our apartment for evidence of child abuse than about the possibility that a vaccine caused her death. The medical examiner initially told us, our pediatrician, and an investigating pathologist that Lyla’s brain was so swollen that it led to her death. After consulting with Merck (the manufacturer of Lyla’s hepatitis B vaccine), the medical examiner left me, a devastated father who just lost his precious firstborn child to an avoidable vaccine-induced death, with these parting words: “We’ve changed our minds; her brain was not swollen. Vaccines do a lot of good things for people, Mr. Belkin.” Former New York Times journalist Melody Petersen, who covered the pharmaceutical industry in her book Our Daily Meds, reports that doctors who fill out death certificates are instructed to call a ‘therapeutic misadventure’ a natural death.

Vaccine-caused diseases and deaths are an unacknowledged epidemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), state public health departments, Bill Gates, and doctors incessantly repeat the mantra calling for more vaccines to eliminate “vaccine-preventable disease.” However, my daughter experienced the opposite effect—the prophylactic treatment that was supposed to prevent a disease instead caused severe harm. The medical term for this outcome is iatrogenesis, the “inadvertent and preventable induction of disease or complications by the medical treatment or procedures of a physician or surgeon.” To put this in real world terms, you walk in to a doctor ’s office in perfect health and you walk out with a lifelong neurological disability, or you even die, from prescribed vaccines. That is what happened to my daughter. Through immunization programs, modern medicine is creating the epidemic of neurological damage that it takes credit for preventing.

THE VACCINE HOLOCAUST

If you doubt the existence of adverse reactions to vaccines, you must first examine with your own eyes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), which is available and searchable online at http://www.medalerts.org. As of November 17, 2010, VAERS listed 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events. Former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner David Kessler wrote in the Journal of the American Medical Association that “only about 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA.”

Using that FDA commissioner ’s own estimate, there have been 35.2 million adverse reactions since the inception of VAERS in 1990, the vast majority of which were never acknowledged by doctors or public health officials. Regulators pull drugs such as Vioxx, Rezulin and Lotronex from the market after a few hundred or one thousand adverse reaction reports. Yet vaccines remain on the market, with hundreds of thousands of adverse reaction reports. The double standard is clear.
User avatar
identity
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:00 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby identity » Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:25 pm

And the closing paragraphs from Michael Belkin's chapter:

The blowback from the vaccine bubble is a rising epidemic of neurological damage. Approximately one in ninety-one children (1.1 percent of children) in the United States now receives an autism diagnosis. This is thirteen times more than the average autism rate (0.08 percent) found in a 1993 survey—before the U.S. childhood vaccination schedule expanded dramatically. The latest CDC study shows that 9.5 percent of parents surveyed reported that their child had received a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

This plague of neurological damage is expanding in direct proportion to the greater number of vaccines imposed on an unsuspecting public. The future economic costs to society of medical care and welfare for a neurologically disabled population are staggering. Policy makers must consider these costs now—and Americans must hold the corporate perpetrators economically and criminally liable.

Every bubble contains an element of crowd psychology, or a collective conception that shepherds unsuspecting individuals into wholeheartedly participating in an ill-fated popular delusion. Examples of this include buying the NASDAQ at the 5,000 level in early 2000, and buying an unaffordable house in 2007. During a bubble, people are dying to participate. The bigger the bubble, the more powerful the promotional messages encouraging participation.

A similar force is at work regarding vaccination. Television, print, and online publications are constantly quoting CDC and public health officials, who tell everyone how dangerous the flu, measles, chickenpox, meningitis, pertussis, and cervical cancer are. Their messages include exhortations to vaccinate against vaccine-preventable diseases. These health authorities are essentially selling fear and disease. It appears that their intention is to whip up mass hysteria and persuade people to wait in line for the latest miracle vaccine against a deadly disease. These unsuspecting people remain unaware that adverse reactions to vaccines exist and are defined in medical textbooks as the same thing as infectious disease complications. We cluck at the bad judgment of those who invested their life savings in overpriced technology stocks when stockbrokers trumpeted a Dow advance to 24,000 (its peak was 14,164), and at others who bought Miami condominiums and Las Vegas ranch houses when mortgage brokers urged them to avoid missing the housing boom. Today, the pharmaceutical industry has convinced the government and the medical profession to do its bidding. Another group of jive-talking promoters, who have a vested personal and financial interest in fanning the flames of mass hysteria, is exploiting the public.

Incidentally, institutional portfolio managers (my clients) who resisted the NASDAQ and real estate bubbles lost customers who only wanted portfolio managers who purveyed the popular investment flavor of the month. In other words, there was tremendous institutional pressure to play the game, even though they did not believe in it and knew it would end in tears. There is undoubtedly similar pressure in the medical world for doctors to play along with CDC vaccination recommendations and to make patients into pincushions for pharmaceutical companies, even if they suspect that “something is rotten in Denmark,” as Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet. The overall result is that enormous psychological pressure is placed on people by medical professionals to receive vaccines, either in normal primary-care settings or during emergency-room visits for unrelated injuries or illnesses. The aftermath of deviant psychology bubbles is typically a backlash against the bubble promoters. In the old days, the perpetrators would be tarred and feathered, or dispatched. After the NASDAQ bubble, investors’ sentiments toward stockbrokers and bubble cheerleaders soured. As we now know, through endless stories of people losing their homes through foreclosure, the public’s sentiment toward estate brokers, mortgage brokers, politicians, and overpaid “banksters” is vindictive. Victims want retribution.

When the vaccine bubble finally bursts, public sentiment toward government health officials, pharmaceutical companies, and doctors is likely to turn negative in the same way that it did after the collapse of the stock market and real estate bubbles. Today, the vaccine regulatory system is primed to approve and advance all of the vaccines Big Pharma can dream up. The sales pitch is germophobia and protection against diseases you didn’t know you had or could get, such as genital and anal warts —Merck’s latest justification for giving male sixth graders the female-oriented human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer vaccine. In all likelihood, this will end badly (as if VAERS isn’t already disastrous enough). The greedy fearmongers will overstep their boundaries and create a catastrophically dangerous vaccine, like the 1976 swine flu vaccine that caused an estimated five hundred cases of Guillain-Barré-syndrome-induced paralysis and at least twenty-five deaths. A similar disaster would ignite today’s vaccine safety controversy and rapidly turn the tide of public ideology against vaccines and vaccination mandates. Fraud always becomes a public issue after a bubble bursts. All of the evidence is currently here before everyone’s eyes, including fudged safety studies, the revolving door of health officials and pharmaceutical executives, denial about the basic scientific definition of neurological damage, and more. The public simply needs to connect the dots.

THE REFUSERS

In the meantime, we must preserve the right to opt out of compulsory vaccination requirements for our children and ourselves. Infectious disease specialists use the term “refuser” pejoratively, to cast aspersions on those who are intelligent, informed, and strong willed enough to “refuse” the corporate and governmental assault on our families’ bodies with their ineffective, unsafe, and toxic vaccines. I admire their supposedly pejorative term “refuser” so much that I trademarked it and created a musical band around the concept—The Refusers. This is my attempt to raise public awareness about vaccination risks that the pharmaceutical industry and the CDC are foisting on us. I fully support the right of all parents to make informed vaccination choices for their children, whatever their decisions may be. Indeed, the CDC claims that over ninety percent of American children younger than three years of age are now fully vaccinated. So be it. After losing a daughter and investigating the socalled science behind our current vaccines, I am a refuser. Medical authorities and uninformed parents want to turn that informed decision around and paint people like me as a menace to society. The VAERS reports show that adverse reactions to vaccines are the real menace to society.

In my opinion, health officials and drug companies intend to abolish that right of refusal; meanwhile, they are causing an epidemic of neurological damage from vaccines and denying responsibility for it. They take credit for preventing neurological damage from disease epidemics. Nevertheless, The Merck Manual and VAERS tell us the truth. Public health officials have betrayed the public they pledged to protect. Postbubble forces will unleash a massive reform and bring the perpetrators of this vaccine bubble and the epidemic of neurological damage to justice. Until then, it is essential that we honor an individual’s choice to refuse a vaccine as a human right.
User avatar
identity
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:00 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby brainpanhandler » Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:32 pm

slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:46 pm wrote:Yeah, the problem is population vs. individual medicine. At a population level, I am willing to concede that vaccines are generally safe and effective. However, there are always subpopulations that will experience adverse events or nonresponse or both. The crude instrument of the law cannot address the nuance involved in determining these subpopulations and making exceptions for them. Thus, patient autonomy is key in all medications, including vaccines.


How then do you answer the question of whether children can attend public school without being vaccinated? Is there some limit on the medical autonomy of individuals when they pose a health risk to other individuals? The laws requiring vaccinations in order to attend public schools do not compel vaccination. Nor do they criminalize those who choose not to vaccinate. They simply provide an incentive to vaccinate. If you want your children to be able to attend public school they must be vaccinated.

http://www.publichealthlaw.net/Research/PDF/vaccine.pdf

What about quarantine and isolation laws?

http://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlaws ... ation.html
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4988
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby DrEvil » Thu Jul 02, 2015 5:40 pm

US sees its first measles death in a dozen years
Woman was on immunosuppressive drugs when exposed.
by John Timmer - Jul 2, 2015 10:40pm CEST

Today, Washington state health authorities announced that an autopsy revealed that a woman who had died earlier this year had succumbed to the measles, making her the first US casualty of the disease in a dozen years. The announcement comes just days after California's decision to tighten its vaccination requirements.

According to the announcement, the woman "had several other health conditions and was on medications that contributed to a suppressed immune system." Thus, even if she had been vaccinated (it wasn't clear if she had), her treatments put her at the mercy of herd immunity—having sufficient people immunized to prevent her from being exposed to the virus. But Washington has seen 11 cases of measles so far this year, half of them in the county where the woman was infected (Clallam, which covers the northern part of the Olympic Peninsula). The victim was apparently at a health clinic at the same time as an infectious individual.

In part because of her symptoms and other health conditions, the case was not diagnosed immediately but was only detected on autopsy.

Washington health authorities used the announcement to remind the public that "Public health officials recommend that everyone who is eligible for the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine get vaccinated so they can help protect themselves, their families, and the vulnerable people in their community."


http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/07/ ... zen-years/
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2690
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:25 pm

DrEvil » 02 Jul 2015 10:48 wrote:
slomo » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:39 pm wrote:
DrEvil » 02 Jul 2015 09:05 wrote:
alwyn » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:33 am wrote:
I looked up Suzanne Humphries MD, author of the first link, and stopped right there. Here's a quote:

Vaccines are dangerous and should never be injected into anyone for any reason. They are not the answer to infectious diseases. There are many more sustainable and benevolent solutions than vaccines.


By "more sustainable and benevolent" she is of course talking about homeopathy (she's a homeopath too).


um, Doctor Suzanne Humphries is an MD, and Nephrologist (kidney specialist) http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CV-11.5.21031.pdf

So she certainly has her street cred. and she came to her position through watching her kidney patients tank after vaccination. her work on vaccines is compelling, well researched, well proven, and highly controversial. The vaccine companies hate her. this, in my book, is a recomendation.



And then I couldn't help myself and looked at the other links too. It didn't get any better.
Not sure who's misinformed here.


apparently you, on this


I know she's an MD, that's why I wrote Suzanne Humphries MD. She's also a homeopath.

She had several patients experience kidney problems up to six weeks after taking the flu vaccine.
At the time, millions of people were getting that same vaccine. The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good. Correlation does not equal causation.
Try again.

I'm going to be pedantic for a moment just to illustrate that you are not as educated as you think you are. The comment "correlation does not equal causation" is a non-sequitur relative to your previous statement, "The odds of some people out of millions having kidney issues regardless are pretty good." In fact, if the odds of an adverse renal event does not change with vaccination status, that is an example of a non-association, i.e. lack of correlation. Since causation must imply correlation, a lack of correlation implies a lack of causation. In other words, causal interpretation of an evident association is an entirely distinct issue. Of course your original point stands: it's likely that adverse events are going to appear in both vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups, and Humphries has not presented any data that would demonstrate an association (or lack thereof), i.e. that the incidence of such an event differs between the two groups.


Fair point. Note to self: Try again. :)

I'm being pedantic because you are presenting yourself as the lone rational voice when in fact your language reflects ignorance of basic epidemiology. I am inclined to agree that some, maybe even most, vaccines are safe and effective. The problem is that some vaccines, either existing or yet-to-be-developed, may not be safe. Because the FDA has a history of sometimes being lax in monitoring both safety and efficacy, it is dangerous to establish a government mandate for vaccination. The issue isn't vaccines per se, but ethical problems related to autonomy (one of the core principles of human subjects protections).


I'm not trying to pass myself off as some crusader of rationality, I just happen to disagree with the anti-vaccine hysteria that's currently doing the rounds. I agree that there are some issues of concern in regards to lax monitoring and general dickery from corporations chasing profits, but the answer to that is most definitely not homeopathy, or stopping all vaccinations. Better oversight and testing, and harsher consequences (no exemptions from consequences, criminal liability for the people in charge, HUGE fines, etc.) for corporations that play fast and loose would be a better way to do it.

But my general sentiment still stands: I think vaccines have done far more good than bad.

I'm anti-homeopathy, principally because nobody will offer a reasonable mechanism as to how it can work. Even with the woo (some of which I can accept), I find explanations lacking. Re: vaccines, I'm not anti-vaccination either. I'll settle for keeping the status-quo, i.e. letting people decide for themselves and allowing them to opt-out without government intrusion.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Vaccine - Autism link

Postby Sounder » Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:43 pm

Given that so many young women in a country as small as Denmark are reporting health problems after taking Gardasil, with 6100 estimated deaths in the US (a larger country) from HPV associated cancers; where does the crisis need to get all people vaccinated come from?


http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/06/gar ... nmark.html

Health Rapporteur Liselott Blixt of the Danish People’s Party was one of the people who led the effort to get the HPV vaccine Gardasil introduced in Denmark in 2008. She now wants it abolished. She states:
The fact that we have so many, perhaps up to 5,000 young women who suddenly become so sick must have the consequence that we simply stop the vaccine. I was the first who said a big ‘yes’ to it, but now I will also be the first to abolish it, because we politicians must take responsibility for ensuring that we have adopted it. Not least in light of the fact that we do not actually have any treatment options to offer the most sick.
Let’s hope the authorities in Denmark follow expert advice and make sure that young women’s health is no longer sacrificed for the promise of a benefit fifteen to twenty years from now.





http://www.kegel.com/hpv/deaths/

Deaths per day due to HPV
In the US, if there are 6100 HPV cancer deaths per year, that's 16 per day, or one per 90 minutes.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 3869
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests