Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Clayton Moore · Apr 25, 2011

Split from the "what do you guys believe?" thread here.

Posted By: LashL

The proof of the pudding that there are conspiracies at high levels of society is media's insistence that there are NONE.

Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group. They have convinced much of the American public that questioning the safety of vaccines is criminal.

Yet commercial after commercial airs up front and personal that if you've taken DRUG X, Y, or Z contact my law firm. Now you know those drugs, I think ZOLOFT is the star of the newer ripe for litigation drugs, were supposed to be tested with a control group! What happened.

And the media pretty much crucifies anyone who dares suggest a link between autism and vaccines. Why would the media trust and speak out for an industry/community with such a poor drug testing track record?

Sceptic-PK · Apr 25, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe

Nobody says that. There are inherent risks to anything you decide to put in your body. The risks however, are very low. Much lower than people like you would have other idiots believe.

Clayton Moore said:
but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

I have no idea about this specifically, but since you said it, I suspected it was nonsense. A 5 min Google suggests it is.

Clayton Moore said:
Yet commercial after commercial airs up front and personal that if you've taken DRUG X, Y, or Z contact my law firm. Now you know those drugs, I think ZOLOFT is the star of the newer ripe for litigation drugs, were supposed to be tested with a control group! What happened.

I do like the fact that ambulance-chasing lawyers are a good metric for you when determining the truth of a matter. Also, what does Zoloft et al have to do with vaccines?

I also like the fact that apparently

Clayton Moore said:
Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe

but here they are providing advertising for said ambulance chasers. Seems like the Main Stream Media is having it two-ways, those cunning buggers.

Clayton Moore said:
And the media pretty much crucifies anyone who dares suggest a link between autism and vaccines.

That's because there isn't any evidence to support it. You're basically complaining that the media is "crucifying" people for telling lies. Poor information convinces the easily led and gullible into making equally poor lifestyle choices (re vaccination), which can impact the lives of third parties.

And then the really gullible waste other people's time on the internet by posting petulant nonsense.

Scott Sommers · Apr 25, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
... close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

I am not a medical researcher, but you would need to clarify this.

Prevention of Meningococcal Disease by Group C Polysaccharide Vaccine

The 87 per cent reduction in Group C disease was statistically significant. Group B meningococci caused illness in four immunized and three control recruits, indicating the group specificity of the vaccine. Group C carrier acquisitions among vaccinated persons were markedly reduced.

Efficacy and safety of seven-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine in American Indian children: group randomised trial

Methods In a group-randomised study, we gave this vaccine to children younger than 2 years from the Navajo and White Mountain Apache Indian reservations; meningococcal type C conjugate vaccine (MnCC) served as the control vaccine

Vaccine Therapy In Recurrent Herpes Simplex

Prevention of recurrent herpes simplex, despite numerous recommended procedures, has remained a problem. In one of our previous studies, inoculation with a nonspecific vaccine gave results no better than those with the same vaccine which had been heatinactivated. It appeared possible that a specific vaccine might produce greater benefit. A double-blind study has recently been conducted in which one group of patients with recurrent herpes simplex received a series of injections of a specific herpes virus vaccine while the control group was given a placebo solution. No significant difference between the results in the two groups was obtained. It is concluded that the benefit observed is attributable to psychotherapeutic effects.

Induction of Immunologic Memory in Gambi an Children by Vaccination in
Infancy with a Group A plus Group C Meningococcal Polys a c cha r ide -Prot e in Conjugate Vaccine

Two hundred twenty-one Gambian children vaccinated previously with one, two, or three doses of a meningococcal conjugate vaccine or two doses of polysaccharide vaccine before the age of 6 months were revaccinated a t the age of 18-24 months with either meningococcal polysaccharide, conjugate, or inactivated polio vaccines. Children who had previously received one, two, or three doses of conjugate vaccine had significantly (P < .001) higher ant i -group C meningococcal antibody levels following revaccination than did children vaccinated with a polysaccharide vaccine for the first time. Children vaccinated previously with two doses of polysaccharide vaccine had a lower group C antibody response than did control children. Group A antibody responses following revaccination of children who had previously received polysaccharide or conjugate vaccine were not significantly higher than those in control children. Thus, immunologic memory was probably induced by the group C but not by the group A component of the conjugate vaccine.

Yawn...I got bored doing this. Perhaps you can tell us what you mean by no controls. I'm going to guess it's something you read somewhere, but don't understand, and go around posting places where you think no one will know better. Show me how wrong I am.

Clayton Moore · Apr 25, 2011

Scott Sommers said:
I am not a medical researcher, but you would need to clarify this.

Prevention of Meningococcal Disease by Group C Polysaccharide Vaccine

Efficacy and safety of seven-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine in American Indian children: group randomised trial

Vaccine Therapy In Recurrent Herpes Simplex

Induction of Immunologic Memory in Gambi an Children by Vaccination in
Infancy with a Group A plus Group C Meningococcal Polys a c cha r ide -Prot e in Conjugate Vaccine

Yawn...I got bored doing this. Perhaps you can tell us what you mean by no controls. I'm going to guess it's something you read somewhere, but don't understand, and go around posting places where you think no one will know better. Show me how wrong I am.

Being in a control group and not receiving a new vaccine is considered a danger to children because they do not receive protection.
FYI

http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-award-vaccine-autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/...another-antitreatment-autism-lawsuit-why.html

Chicago Tribune Trumpets Another Anti-Treatment Autism Lawsuit. Why?

While googling to find the Tribune article, I instead found Orac's site. Who is Orac? Well, suffice to say that he has some mysterious desire to want autism to be only a genetic disorder. He gets upset if you discuss vaccines or the environment as causative factors. The usual suspects of the neurodiverse world and the assorted anonymous Wackosphere characters were hanging out at his site with their typical sarcasm and "blood-thirsty" DAN! comments. Orac though was beyond his usual histrionic self as his comments were pointed at the exact wording of the lawsuit. He actually had the lawsuit in a pdf file for the taking on his site! Now how, within hours of the Trib posting and to be exact, the Trib article by Patricia Callahan was posted online at 5:19 p.m. CST, March 4, 2010 and Orac had his pdf and blog up at March 5, 2010 3:00 AM. Appears to be quite bizarre and a bit suspicious?

carlitos · Apr 25, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-award-vaccine-autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

Can you please link that article on a legitimate news site?

Can you please link to the court documents of the case?

Mongrel · Apr 25, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

But they are;

Safety is (mostly) tested in the Phase I - III trials.

Efficacy is tested against the current standard vaccine(s).
Simplisticly, the combination of these determines the risk\benefit ratio and whether the new vaccine is a suitable replacement

Everything is then checked with epidemiology when it's in use (handy for those 1 in 100,00 side effects)

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

Mongrel said:
But they are;

Safety is (mostly) tested in the Phase I - III trials.

Efficacy is tested against the current standard vaccine(s).
Simplisticly, the combination of these determines the risk\benefit ratio and whether the new vaccine is a suitable replacement

Everything is then checked with epidemiology when it's in use (handy for those 1 in 100,00 side effects)

Ouch I wish I had not made that search.

vaccines are tested with a control group.

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/back-to-basics/how-are-vaccines-evaluated-for-safety/

How are vaccines evaluated for safety?

A review of some Prevnar studies on InsideVaccines

*All data herein is from the manufacturer’s package inserts.

**All studies listed excluded children who weren’t healthy–roughly 60% of the general population of infants and children would not be accepted into a vaccine study.

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
Ouch I wish I had not made that search.

vaccines are tested with a control group.

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/back-to-basics/how-are-vaccines-evaluated-for-safety/

1) http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biolog...sConferences/TranscriptsMinutes/UCM054459.pdf

*Author’s note: Many people raise the issue of the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments in answer to these issues regarding placebo and safety studies. The Declaration prohibits the use of placebo control groups if there is already a “proven” treatment. (It is considered withholding treatment to use a placebo instead of the “approved” treatment.) Thus, you must only compare the “new” treatment to the “old” or existing treatment, when there is an “approved” treatment in place. However, others interpret this to mean that placebos can be used in safety studies, but cannot in efficacy studies.

So, we are not seeing proof that x vaccine is safe. What these studies prove is that x vaccine is safer than the ”other” vaccine.

**All studies listed excluded children who weren’t healthy–roughly 60% of the general population of infants and children would not be accepted into a vaccine study.

You ignored the above. It means the above unhealthy children will likely be required to get vaccinated with no "unhealthy" children involved in the study. 60 freaking percent. That is criminal.

Scott Sommers · Apr 26, 2011

Ohhhhhh...you mean placebo control groups. So you mean that even though there are probably hundreds of studies that compare vaccinated and unvaccinated groups under similar conditions, that's not a control group? Why do you think that?

You should understand that no one here believes things just because they were posted on an anti-vaccine website. Nor do most here feel the need to check these so-called facts. It is widely believed that such websites misquote people, use facts incorrectly or even make things up and pretend they are true. In short, I don't care what the Inside Vaccine website has to say because I believe neither you nor the people who made that website understand anything about clinical trials or medical research.

You would have more credibility if you stopped pasting excerpts from anti-vaccine websites and referred to actual studies.

CurtC · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-award-vaccine-autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

OK, I just poked my head into this thread, and clicked on one link to check it out. That case (the Hannah Poling case) had nothing to do with autism. The site that you cited lied.

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

CurtC said:
OK, I just poked my head into this thread, and clicked on one link to check it out. That case (the Hannah Poling case) had nothing to do with autism. The site that you cited lied.

Yeah sure.

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-03-06/...ury-compensation-hannah-poling/2?_s=PM:HEALTH

Vaccine case draws new attention to autism debate
PRIVATE PRACTICE

*

The parents of Hannah Poling, 9, sought damages after their daughter developed autism.

The parents of a 9-year-old girl with autism said Thursday that their assertion that her illness was caused by childhood vaccines has been vindicated by the federal government's decision to compensate them.

A federal program intended to compensate victims of injuries caused by vaccines concluded last November that Hannah Poling's underlying illness that had predisposed her to symptoms of autism was "significantly aggravated" by the vaccinations she received as a toddler and that her family should therefore be compensated.
Advertisement

But within 48 hours after receiving nine routinely administered childhood vaccines in July 2000, the girl's health rapidly declined, she said.

Sceptic-PK · Apr 26, 2011

The decision to award compensation in that case had nothing to do with a vaccine causing autism.

In this case, "CHILD [Hannah Poling] v. Secretary of Health and Human Services," the court "concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder. Therefore, respondent recommends that compensation be awarded to petitioners."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/13/poling

The vaccine aggravated a pre-existing condition and compensation was awarded accordingly. Saying otherwise is nothing short of dishonest.

Sword_Of_Truth · Apr 26, 2011

That does not contradict what Sceptic-PK said.

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

Sword_Of_Truth said:
That does not contradict what Sceptic-PK said.

It wasn't intended to. If the case is gonna give the parents a fair settlement the language of the settlement is of little importance to them but super important for the "record" that the vaccine company admits no guilt. Much more important.

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism. Certainly the girl was part of the 60% of all the children that were unhealthy and not allowed to take part in the survey mentioned in a previous post.

Sceptic-PK · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
The 9 vaccines did cause the autism.

Wrong (again). That's not what the court found. Either you're a liar or you're incapable of understanding the court's decision.

Does that mean vaccines caused Hannah to become autistic?

No. Look again at the court statement: Hannah has "an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autistic spectrum disorder." Throughout the document, both Hannah's doctors and lab results support the diagnosis of mitochondrial disorder.

Not a diagnosis of autism?

Right. Mitochondrial disorder does not equal autism. Generally speaking, mitochondria are the parts of our cells that help generate energy. When they fail, the body's cells go awry, which can lead to failures in any number of normal body functions. There are at least 40 known mitochondrial disorders, and probably many more we haven't yet found. But it's clear from the transcript of the court's decision that this was not a case of vaccines causing autism. Rather, this is a case where the court deemed it plausible that vaccines aggravated an underlying disease caused by bad mitochondria, and that some of the symptoms Hannah showed were similar to autism. As you'll see below, there are even questions about that conclusion.

Ibid.

Clayton Moore said:
Your view is also crap.

Coming from a supporter of junk science, I take that as a compliment.

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

Sceptic-PK said:
Wrong (again). That's not what the court found. Either you're a liar or you're incapable of understanding the court's decision.

Coming from a supporter of junk science, I take that as a compliment.

It wasn't intended to. If the case is gonna give the parents a fair settlement the language of the settlement is of little importance to them but super important for the "record" that the vaccine company admits no guilt. Much more important.

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism. Certainly the girl was part of the 60% of all the children that were unhealthy and not allowed to take part in the survey mentioned in a previous post.

The toddler had a condition but did not have autism.
48hrs after she got 9 vaccines, I'm guessing by inoculation, she got autism, she became autistic.

I don't give a crap what the decision says because the language of the decision was agreed to by opposing councils.

And neither should you.

Clayton Moore · Apr 26, 2011

I see you are 32. If you have young children or intend to have them I hope you ignore your faith in vaccines and space them, one at a time, as far apart as possible.
That's what my son and his wife have done for their little girl who will be 3 this summer. Both are special ed teachers.

aggle-rithm · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
The toddler had a condition but did not have autism.
48hrs after she got 9 vaccines, I'm guessing by inoculation, she got autism, she became autistic.

I don't give a crap what the decision says because the language of the decision was agreed to by opposing councils.

And neither should you.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc reasoning.

I get up every morning before the sun comes up. Does that mean my getting up in the morning makes the sun come up? Or could it be that sunrise and my scheduled wake-up time just happen to occur at close to the same time?

kookbreaker · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
I see you are 32. If you have young children or intend to have them I hope you ignore your faith in vaccines and space them, one at a time, as far apart as possible.
That's what my son and his wife have done for their little girl who will be 3 this summer. Both are special ed teachers.

Yeah, thanks a heap for the outbreaks, BTW.

Sword_Of_Truth · Apr 26, 2011

Clayton Moore said:
The 9 vaccines did cause the autism.

No, the mitochondiral disorder did.

Can't you frakking read?

Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Banned

Illuminator

Illuminator

Banned

"más divertido"

Begging for Scraps

Banned

Banned

Illuminator

Illuminator

Banned

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Illuminator

Banned

Banned

Ardent Formulist

Evil Fokker

Penultimate Amazing