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.
That CBS newslink was from 2008. The link between vaccines and autism was debunked in 2010. You're basing your opinion on a 2-year-old news reporter's incomplete investigation about a fraudulent, licenced-stripped "doctor's" psuedo-research.
The news story talks about the link between funding and "independent" vaccine supporters. The article is not about a link between autism and vaccines.
BTW, there is much more to the Andrew Wakefiled's studies then what you heard about in the mainstream media. I don't believe the theory has been debunked and I don't believe that all 19 of the peer reviewed studies done by Wakefield and his colleagues, some of them leading researchers in their respective fields (like John Walker Smith) are all based on pseudoscience. There is more then one side to the story and to believe everything that you heard about this in the mainstream media is incredibly naive, imo.
It's no secret that big pharma makes a ton of money and aggressivley pushes their products and has impacted our medical system. However, what is also not a secret is that making and selling vaccines accounts for less than 1% of all operating profits for a pharmaceutical company. They make their big money pushing new treatment drugs. It's an old line that there isn't any money in cures, but there is big money in treating symptoms. Who knew it was true.
Billions of dollars are made each year from producing and selling vaccinations. It's no small drop in the bucket no matter how you look at it.
Just for attention? That doesn't really make sense as a motivator.
It's a great motivator. Makes people feel important.
By the way, if you go to the WHALE home page : Vaccine website ,
there is a picture and an supposed quote from "Dr. J. Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Officer and research virologist, USFDA" saying, " "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunization of children does more harm than good."
This is interesting. This same quote is attributed to Dr. James A. Shannon, director of the NIH, and has propagated all over the internet at antivaccine sites. The only site that I could find with a date for the quote says it was made in 2003, long after Dr. Shannon died in 1994.
Who said the quote? When? It appears to be total fiction, yet it is on a slew of web sites.
Attributing attention seeking as the motivation for WHALE is being kind.
Naturopathic medicine is based on the belief that the body has an innate healing ability. Naturopathic doctors teach their patients to use diet, exercise and lifestyle changes to enhance their bodies’ ability to fight disease and stay healthy. They often recommend supplements but they don't always sell their own supplements.
But they frequently do sell their own supplements, and they recommend supplements that have no proven effectiveness. Diet, exercise, and lifestyle changes will not prevent chickenpox if you are susceptible and exposed. Why should we believe a naturopath, who has no training in the science behind vaccines, when he says you do not need to vaccinate, just eat your veggies? Did naturopathy prevent any of the diseases for which we now have vaccines?
Why do people some people continue to go back to chiropractors over and over again if there is no health benefit. Many actually do experience real benefits.
I would have no problem if chiropractic just admitted that any benefit is limited to pretty much what a masseuse or physical therapist would be able to offer. I have a big issue with the ones who say they can pop your neck and cure your diabetes. And no one ever seems to get to the point where xrays and manipulations are no longer needed.
They were trained under the western model of medicine that many seem to hold so dear. How did they become so "ignorant"?
If they do not understand how vaccines work, then their training was poor or they are incapable of learning the material and they are ignorant.
You can't sue vaccine makers so it's not like they are profiting. Most parents know their children well enough to recognize when something is not right and when they see their child change overnight after getting vaccinated I think there is reason to believe them. There is more to vaccine injury then autism, btw.
This is one of the big problems in understanding the issue. Let's call it "why is this day different from all others?" Assume that a child has one of the conditions in which autism is genetic. The natural progression of the condition will produce the symptoms of autism at some point. It is inevitable, but the severity might vary because of the way genes work --- some are turned on, others turned off. The day --- "the day that is different from all others" --- arrives and the symptoms manifest themselves --- or are noticed for the first time. Now it happens that that day is programmed to happen between the ages of, say one month and one year. Now we overlay the recommended vaccine schedule. In a small number of children, "the day that is different from all others" coincides closely with the day on which a vaccine was administered. That does not mean that the vaccine caused or triggered the autism symptoms.
It takes studies that look at large numbers of cases to prove it. Those studies have shown that vaccines do not cause or trigger autism.
And there is money available from the vaccine compensation fund, so there are financial concerns in play.
So basically it is your belief that anyone who doesn't believe that vaccines are 100% safe and effective is just ignorant? Interesting.
I have not seen posts from any of us who feel vaccines are safe and effective stating that there are no risks to vaccines or that they are sometimes not effective. In fact, the switch to acellular pertussis vaccine was done to decrease the risk, perhaps with a slight decrease in the effectiveness.
If the people who oppose vaccination use arguments that are patently untrue and contradicted by scientific studies, then, yes, I would say they are ignorant. My sole purpose in posting here is to try to educate people. Ignorance is a correctable condition..
The news story talks about the link between funding and "independent" vaccine supporters. The article is not about a link between autism and vaccines.
BTW, there is much more to the Andrew Wakefiled's studies then what you heard about in the mainstream media. I don't believe the theory has been debunked and I don't believe that all 19 of the peer reviewed studies done by Wakefield and his colleagues, some of them leading researchers in their respective fields (like John Walker Smith) are all based on pseudoscience. There is more then one side to the story and to believe everything that you heard about this in the mainstream media is incredibly naive, imo.
Wakefield faked his data. The theory is well debunked. He had a financial interest on an alternative to MMR, by the way.
Suzy, do you need help learning how to use the quote function? It would make your responses much easier to read and respond to.
Quote:
It's a great motivator. Makes people feel important.
So groups such as the WHALE, Generation Rescue, DAN and others are all in it because they want to feel important? For the most part these groups are mocked and ridiculed. I don't buy it.
Quote:
But they frequently do sell their own supplements, and they recommend supplements that have no proven effectiveness. Diet, exercise, and lifestyle changes will not prevent chickenpox if you are susceptible and exposed. Why should we believe a naturopath, who has no training in the science behind vaccines, when he says you do not need to vaccinate, just eat your veggies? Did naturopathy prevent any of the diseases for which we now have vaccines?
Naturopathy is a legitimate field. A naturopath would never claim to be able to or even try to prevent people from contracting an illness such as chickenpox. They would recommend ways to boost the immune system, deal with the symptoms and ways to help the body fight off the illness and reduce the risk of complications.
Quote:
If they do not understand how vaccines work, then their training was poor or they are incapable of learning the material and they are ignorant.
Or maybe they became aware of other factors involved that made them change their thinking. Some of the physicians, scientists and researchers who have spoken out against vaccination have been highly respected and leaders in their fields.
Quote:
This is one of the big problems in understanding the issue. Let's call it "why is this day different from all others?" Assume that a child has one of the conditions in which autism is genetic. The natural progression of the condition will produce the symptoms of autism at some point. It is inevitable, but the severity might vary because of the way genes work --- some are turned on, others turned off. The day --- "the day that is different from all others" --- arrives and the symptoms manifest themselves --- or are noticed for the first time. Now it happens that that day is programmed to happen between the ages of, say one month and one year. Now we overlay the recommended vaccine schedule. In a small number of children, "the day that is different from all others" coincides closely with the day on which a vaccine was administered. That does not mean that the vaccine caused or triggered the autism symptoms.
I don't have any doubt in my mind that there is a genetic component to autism. I also believe that in some (not all ) cases of autism there is an environmental trigger and I believe that vaccines could possibly be one such trigger (among others). If a parent has a child who is developing perfectly normally, is talking and walking and reaching all milestones on time suddenly develops a fever after a vaccination and goes down quickly from there, stops taking, stops walking, develops digestive problems, screams in pain, stops sleeping, etc. I don't see how anyone can dismiss the possibility of a vaccine reaction.
Quote:
And there is money available from the vaccine compensation fund, so there are financial concerns in play.
Not much and the money comes from the government, not the vaccine makers themselves.
Billions of dollars are made each year from producing and selling vaccinations. It's no small drop in the bucket no matter how you look at it.
No, they aren't. Vaccines account for 1.5% of all revenue and less than 1% of all profits made by a pharmaceutical company. In fact, 80% of the worlds vaccines are poduced by 5 companies down from the 35 thirty years ago. Between 1988 and 2001 10 of the 14 GLOBAL producers of childhood vaccines partially or fully stopped production citing poor profit margins and revenue.
I agree that drug companies are primarily focused on money and profits, afterall they are a business. So it's real telling to me that so many are getting out of making vaccines since there are "billions" at stake. The anti-vaccine crowds inferrence that drug companies are in it for the money is complete BS.
More at the link, sorry no conspiracy theories on this site:
Ever hear of smear campaigns? Have you ever bothered to hear the other side to this story? It's quite fascinating. Wakefield did not fake his data. He did not have an alternative MMR vaccine in the works. After his first (of 19peer reviewed and published studies) he strongly recommended that people use the single dose, measles, mumps and rubella vaccines rather then the combined vaccine because the problem was not with the single dose vaccines, it was with the combined one. He was never anti-vax. He was very pro-vax, just in single doses in the case of MMR. Unfortunately the UK government took the single dose option away shortly after Wakefield' first study was published. Smith was a leader in his field and very respected. He was a victim of the smear campaign as well.
Ever hear of smear campaigns? Have you ever bothered to hear the other side to this story? It's quite fascinating. Wakefield did not fake his data. He did not have an alternative MMR vaccine in the works. After his first (of 19peer reviewed and published studies) he strongly recommended that people use the single dose, measles, mumps and rubella vaccines rather then the combined vaccine because the problem was not with the single dose vaccines, it was with the combined one. He was never anti-vax. He was very pro-vax, just in single doses in the case of MMR. Unfortunately the UK government took the single dose option away shortly after Wakefield' first study was published. Smith was a leader in his field and very respected. He was a victim of the smear campaign as well.
What is the reason these people are "smeared" and debunked? What is the reason the government and every major medical organization in the world strongly supports vaccinations? You questioned the possible motivation outside of altruistic reasons people are anti-vax and got the answer of attention and money.
So, why are the vast, vast majority pro-vax? As I feel I've proven, money isn't their motivation, so what is?
No, they aren't. Vaccines account for 1.5% of all revenue and less than 1% of all profits made by a pharmaceutical company. In fact, 80% of the worlds vaccines are poduced by 5 companies down from the 35 thirty years ago. Between 1988 and 2001 10 of the 14 GLOBAL producers of childhood vaccines partially or fully stopped production citing poor profit margins and revenue.
I agree that drug companies are primarily focused on money and profits, afterall they are a business. So it's real telling to me that so many are getting out of making vaccines since there are "billions" at stake. The anti-vaccine crowds inferrence that drug companies are in it for the money is complete BS.
What is the reason these people are "smeared" and debunked?
You would have to hear the whole story, so far only one side has been told my the media. If you're interested in hearing the other side the information is out there.
Quote:
What is the reason the government and every major medical organization in the world strongly supports vaccinations?
A lot of vaccinations are safe and effective for most people. Some are not safe and effective for all people.
Quote:
You questioned the possible motivation outside of altruistic reasons people are anti-vax and got the answer of attention and money.
I don't buy that people are in it for attention. Most of the attention they get is extremely negative. I also don't see as much of a money trail with supplements as I see with drug companies.
Quote:
So, why are the vast, vast majority pro-vax? As I feel I've proven, money isn't their motivation, so what is?
I don't agree that you've proven anything.
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.
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.
