[lotuseclat79]

Vaccines and Autism in the Chicago Tribune.

-- Tom

[valis]

reopened per request.

[lotuseclat79]

Revealed: Secret businesses which aimed to exploit vaccine fears.

Andrew Wakefield, the disgraced doctor who claimed a link between MMR and autism, planned secret businesses intended to make huge sums of money, in Britain and America, from his now-discredited allegations.

Jenny McCarthy may not like it, but the evidence is adding up!

-- Tom

[TooBad]

Originally Posted by lotuseclat79

Vaccines do not cause autism.

Quote “The evidence is in. The scientific community has reached a clear consensus that vaccines don’t cause autism. There is no controversy.”


Reference: Vaccines & Autism: A Deadly Manufactroversy.

Read the 1st link about the 2nd link.

-- Tom

Any time the words scienctific community and consensus are used together, it is pure BS. Science does not rely on consensus, it flies in the face of those that conform. There is not enough real science in any area of human conditions due to the morality of controlling for all variables. There are way too many variables and controlling for most of them would kill the patient. All they can offer is conjecture based on observed patterns. When anyone dares to say anything but the "official consensus" line, they are immediately shouted down and deemed a pariah, even if all they suggested was more study. That is the sorry state of most science today.

[Brigham]

This controversy has been around for some years now.I have discussed it with quite a few people, and my impression is, that the people who believe vaccination is dangerous will never change their mind, no matter what the scientific proof. The same can be said for the vaccine believers, myself included. We are just as intransigent.

[Paquadez]

Whilst the apparent data on immunisation against Measles, Mumps and Rubella (German Measles) would suggest there is no danger, there would appear there is danger in vaccinating a child, simultaneously, against all three diseases: rather than vaccination against all three given separately, over time.

Which allows the human auto-immune system space to absorb what is factually a toxin.

However, Big Pharma make more profit and doctors too, by giving the vaccine, simultaneously.

Additionally, Big Pharma enjoy huge budgets with which to seduce governments and mount significant and robust PR campaigns.

[Brigham]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Whilst the apparent data on immunisation against Measles, Mumps and Rubella (German Measles) would suggest there is no danger, there would appear there is danger in vaccinating a child, simultaneously, against all three diseases: rather than vaccination against all three given separately, over time.

Which allows the human auto-immune system space to absorb what is factually a toxin.

However, Big Pharma make more profit and doctors too, by giving the vaccine, simultaneously.

Additionally, Big Pharma enjoy huge budgets with which to seduce governments and mount significant and robust PR campaigns.

Not true. Separate vaccines make more profit for the pharmaceutical companies. (3x) Doctors make more money as well. (3x consultations)
Another thing to remember is that all new pharmaceutical breakthroughs are produced by private companies. I can't recall any pharmaceutical advance produced by any country's government. This is why governments don't kerb the profits. It would stop advancement

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by Brigham

Not true. Separate vaccines make more profit for the pharmaceutical companies. (3x) Doctors make more money as well. (3x consultations)

'Tis true, I'm afraid.

The furore concerning the MMR vacine is because innoculation for all three separate and disparate diseases is completed in one injection: not three.

Read what I wrote again, please.

[Brigham]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

'Tis true, I'm afraid.

The furore concerning the MMR vacine is because innoculation for all three separate and disparate diseases is completed in one injection: not three.

Read what I wrote again, please.

I reread what you wrote. There is no evidence that the three injections in one, puts anymore strain on the immune system, than separate ones. Wakefield is the only person to suggest otherwise, and now he has been discredited.The other point is, even if the immune system is compromised, there has never been any association between a compromised immune system and autism. Although it is understandable that mothers would have their doubts, in the face of our present knowledge, to not have any vaccinations at all is extremely foolish.

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

However, Big Pharma make more profit and doctors too, by giving the vaccine, simultaneously.

For purposes of discussion, assume this statement is true. Isn't the point of a business to make a profit at a price point that is sustainable?

[Brigham]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

For purposes of discussion, assume this statement is true. Isn't the point of a business to make a profit at a price point that is sustainable?

Of course. Pharmaceutical companies need big profits to do the research for new products. When you consider that for every new molecule that is a medical advance, over 100 fail to make the grade. This makes the research very costly, however these companies are not squeaky clean. They do tweaks to existing molecules just to maintain their profits. That is why we have a proliferation of NSAID's (non steroidal anti-inflammatories) with very little difference between them. The same is happening in most fields of therapeutics. The anti's should be reminded that without the big drug companies there would be no new medicines.

[xico]

Apparently this question has been going on longer than I realized.

"At present, intelligent people do not have their children vaccinated, nor does the law now compel them to. The result is not, as the Jennerians prophesied, the extermination of the human race by smallpox; on the contrary more people are now killed by vaccination than by smallpox."

--George Bernard Shaw (August 9, 1944, the Irish Times )

[Nekochanpurr]

Originally Posted by xico

Apparently this question has been going on longer than I realized.

Huh. Gee, i wonder why things like whooping cough are coming back...

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by Bastiat

For purposes of discussion, assume this statement is true. Isn't the point of a business to make a profit at a price point that is sustainable?

Agreed, GB.

However ethics creep in here insofar as I am concerned: and often, the moral imperative ought surely to enjoy more value than the profit ethic.

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by xico

Apparently this question has been going on longer than I realized.

And still goes on.

Indeed, there is current growing evidence that a number of vaccines and treatments are causing serious health problems.

Example:

The old adage: the cure is more dangerous than the disease.