Human DNA contained in vaccines could be causing autism - human tissue is currently used in 23 vaccines (Congress, attorney)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, I am not. You are the one that says Dr. Offit should not provide any advice about rotavirus vaccines because he is biased.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
He is biased.
Whatever bias you perceive --- straight out of the anti-vaccination play book --- the fact remains that he did not personally have anything to do with approval of either the initial rotavirus vaccine or his own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
How far can you possibly misconstrue something?
I haven't misconstrued anything. You just are not willing to admit the rotavirus vaccine is a good one that would have been approved without any input from Dr. Offit.
Quote:
No, I'm not counting on herd immunity. We had it. I know that adults can get it.
Breastfeeding and watching for signs of dehydration works pretty well too.
But your child had a sickness that might have been prevented with a vaccine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
For the life of me I cannot understand why this was better for your child than giving a vaccine which could possibly have prevented it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I can't understand how you can be so fearful and dogmatic.
At the risk of an "APpeal to authority" logical fallacy, I'd honestly rather believe someone who is actually experienced in the field rather than idiots screaming "IT CAUSES AUTISM" with no actual proof.
That's probably an illustration of a weak grasp of logic, as conflicts of interest are generally considered immediate disqualification in most rational assessments.
Of course, then we have the interesting coincidence that the increasing incident rates of autism following the increases in the number of vaccines on the childhood schedule.
Maybe it's just a conflict of coincidence, and of course, the insinuation that autism diagnosis has been broadly expanded for financial reasons, but financial reasons couldn't be the reason for all of the vaccines being pushed.
This kind of circular reasoning is enough to give a rational thinker a massive headache.
The vaccines triggered autism due to her unknown (at the time of vaccination) mitochondrial condition. In her case, the vaccines were a contributing factor to her autism. That's not to say that all cases of autism are tied to vaccines, but hers was. The defendant did not pay because "someone needed to pay". That's absurd.
Have you ever heard the term "deep pockets" and understand what it means?
Having no faith in the medical community BUT full faith in the legal one make me giggle.
The big money is in treating $ickne$$, not preventing it, though I admit that is a difficult concept for some to understand.
Wow Suzy .... we finally agree on something!! That statement is profoundly true, and applies equally to treating diseases and curing them. This explains why we have so many treatments, and so few cures.
Of course, the insinuation you make ... that vaccines are not money makers, suggests that there is some other motive at play. And really, we have limited choices ...
1) pharmaceutical companies are not like every other corporation whose universal goal is to generate increasing profits, and instead are these altruistic entities whose goal is to prevent the very diseases that would add to their profits.
2) vaccines actually do make lots of money.
3) the outcome of mass inoculation creates more profits by creating future customers damaged by the vaccine
Have you ever heard the term "deep pockets" and understand what it means?
Having no faith in the medical community BUT full faith in the legal one make me giggle.
I did not interpret this statement in the same way. I didn't see anything claiming full faith in the legal system or no faith in the medical community either. Vaccine related issues aren't even dealt with in the same way other medical liability cases are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court
quote: Vaccine court is the popular term which refers to the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which administers a no-fault system for litigating vaccine injury claims. These claims against vaccine manufacturers cannot normally be filed in state or federal civil courts, but instead must be heard in the Court of Claims, sitting without a jury. The program was established by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA),
That's probably an illustration of a weak grasp of logic, as conflicts of interest are generally considered immediate disqualification in most rational assessments.
Of course, then we have the interesting coincidence that the increasing incident rates of autism following the increases in the number of vaccines on the childhood schedule.
Maybe it's just a conflict of coincidence, and of course, the insinuation that autism diagnosis has been broadly expanded for financial reasons, but financial reasons couldn't be the reason for all of the vaccines being pushed.
This kind of circular reasoning is enough to give a rational thinker a massive headache.
I am often amazed by this myself. Money makes the world go round. Limiting liability and repeated regular traffic are what many businesses would love to have.
Now at institutionally held corps like CVS one can have all your data tracked, what you buy, name, address etc..., get your vaccinations and make your ACA pmts now it appears. The one stop shop model, lol.
Wow Suzy .... we finally agree on something!! That statement is profoundly true, and applies equally to treating diseases and curing them. This explains why we have so many treatments, and so few cures.
Of course, the insinuation you make ... that vaccines are not money makers, suggests that there is some other motive at play. And really, we have limited choices ...
1) pharmaceutical companies are not like every other corporation whose universal goal is to generate increasing profits, and instead are these altruistic entities whose goal is to prevent the very diseases that would add to their profits.
2) vaccines actually do make lots of money.
3) the outcome of mass inoculation creates more profits by creating future customers damaged by the vaccine
1) Pharmaceutical companies would indeed make more money if there were no vaccines, probably just on antibiotics alone for the bacterial diseases, not to mention all the drugs needed to support someone on a ventilator in an ICU.
2) Vaccines do not make as much money as you seem to think.
3) No one who actually administers vaccines seems to see all these people you claim are damaged by vaccines. You can forget autism. The weight of the evidence shows vaccines do not cause autism.
Childhood vaccines reduce illness, save lives, and save money:
"The study concluded that the routine [childhood] immunization schedule is estimated to prevent 42,000 early deaths and reduce the disease burden by 20 million cases. This accounts for $13.5 billion in direct costs, and $68.8 billion in societal costs."
Sorry, Tex, the "vaccines are just to make money for Big Pharma" argument just does not hold water. You can pay a little for vaccines or a whole lot more if we did not have them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.