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.
only in the last few years have scientists started finding genes and their connection...just 6 years ago did they finnaly find the huntingtons gene
I mention huntingtons becuase it ran in my family...if a person has it, its a 50/50 shot thier child will have it....my grandfather died from it...my aunt (mothers sister) also died from it..luckily my mother didnt get it, and it never skips a generation
I notice you have no answer for why vaccinating or not vaccinating does not make any difference to a country autism rates.
And what country would that be? What country has high autism rates that don't vaccinate?
On a much smaller scale, isolated communities such as the Amish here in the United States have shown virtually ZERO autism amongst their community who traditionally did not vaccinate. While those who have become less orthodox and more modern in their thinking began to vaccinate (very small minority) autism began to appear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader
There is something called "Occams razor". It basically means that if there are two conflicting explanations for something, the simplest one is most likly to be correct. And the more complex a rival theory has to be to explain something, the more likly it is to be wrong.
Yes, and it's quite sad that you are unable to see how this applies to this debate, when it is PRECISELY the point.
The entire debate about the potential for mercury poisoning from vaccines potentially causing the dramatic increases in autism rates BEGAN because of the correlation between the increases in the number of vaccines required for children, and those exploding rates ... a 500% increase between the 1980's and 1990's, following an increase in the number of vaccines given. Furthermore, given that autism is a neurological disorder, the most plausible explanation would be some environmental change producing an increased exposure to neurotoxins among the affected group ... KIDS. So now, you have correlation (which so many are quick to point out does not prove causation), but also have "causal mechanism" Mercury/Aluminum which are both neurotoxins and both present in vaccines, and no other identified increase in sources of environmental neurotoxin. Moreover, because these neurotoxins bioaccumulate, and because the rates of autism dramatically rose in correlation to the increase in the number of vaccines ... you had "explanation". Correlation .... Causal Mechanism ... Explanation.
Further data collection and testimony from the affected have showed THOUSANDS of cases of dramatic changes in previously normal behavior of these children occurring closely after vaccinations. Could it be that the vaccines MIGHT BE A FACTOR? Would this not be the most plausible area to investigate .... or is the conflicting theory more simple? .... The conflicting theory being that there is some heretofore unknown genetic disorder being triggered by a set of unidentified environmental variables (still unidentified variables and an unidentified genetic flaw) as the most reasonable conclusion ... while simultaneously dismissing the theory of DIRECT INJECTION OF NEUROTOXINS as the cause?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader
To work, your theory relies on a massive international cover-up, where every countrys medical education deliberatly keep doctors and biologists in the dark, as well as massive manipulation of every countrys data gathering, and post vaccination safety and efficiency reviews. A conspiracy of such size would have to involve thousands, if not tens of thousands of biologist, doctors, researchers, computer technicans,epidemologists and statisticans.
The vast majority of which would have not profit in any way from participating in such a conspiracy and would profit considerably if they could show any discrepancies in the safety studies.
The opposing theory would be that that the "vaccines are dangerous" theory is just another conspiracy theory.
I don't have time this morning to adequately describe what foolishness this is, because it is on so many levels.
One such conspiracy in similar scope is the Mainstream News Media ... which, at the end of the day is entirely controlled be a SMALL handful of owners. Now if you or anyone else is under some delusions that the mainstream news is not controlled ... I can't help you.
Secondly, a small handful of financial oligarchs control the finances of the freaking developed nations of the world through the controlled mechanisms of international banking .... here in the United States, the arm of that banking system is the private Federal Reserve .... and when you control the money, it's a piece of cake to control everything else.
Mainstream medicine is most definitely controlled by the multinational corporations otherwise referred to as the pharma cartel. They have locked down medicine ... through the FDA and Congress, this is what the Pharma Cartel has accomplished:
1) No substance other than a pharmaceutical drug can claim to cure or treat any disease ... it's against the law .... including such things as Vitamin C which is well established in medical science to cure scurvy, yet, according to law, a producer or seller of that vitamin cannot make that statement.
2) They have managed to have laws passed that protect them from liability damage occurring from the use of their products ... no other industry has such protection.
3) They have managed to have an entire judicial system dedicated to protect them ... the "vaccine courts" to hear cases of damage.
4) They OWN the FDA ... and have been caught numerous times in cover-ups and collusion with the FDA for approval of dangerous drugs.
5) They perform their own safety and efficacy testing on the products for approval ...
Now, just how many people do you think are involved in this list of issues that have circumvented the laws that have been in place for consumer protection for decades ? Would this not constitute a "conspiracy" ?
I have no more time at the moment to continue ... I'll be back.
only in the last few years have scientists started finding genes and their connection...just 6 years ago did they finnaly find the huntingtons gene
I mention huntingtons becuase it ran in my family...if a person has it, its a 50/50 shot thier child will have it....my grandfather died from it...my aunt (mothers sister) also died from it..luckily my mother didnt get it, and it never skips a generation
there is zero correlation to vacinations
autims is genetic
There has always been a 1/100 ratio of autism - and we just never knew it?
No clue? I AM autistic, and I have my own personal experiences.
Correlation does not equal causation.
That is true ... but there is more than simple "correlation" present here. That autism is a neurological disorder with symptoms that mimic in larger measure heavy metal toxicity, and that vaccines literally introduce neurotoxins into the bloodstream through direct injection, goes way beyond mere "correlation". This really shouldn't be so difficult to grasp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramirez2012
Great! Show your PhD/M.D. and all of the research studies YOU'VE conducted over the past 30+ years. Oh wait, you're just "some guy" who "knows an autistic person". That instantly qualifies you as an expert!
Show me yours? If a PhD/MD is required to have a legitimate opinion on the matter, then what makes YOUR position more valid than mine .... Doctor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramirez2012
Bottom line is, there has been no proof that vaccines are linked to autism. Unvaccinated kids can have autism as well.
This statement demonstrates such low level logic .. ..
Firstly, the claim of no proof of a link ... or the claim that a link has been disproven is totally false ... Secondly, you're attempting to make an EXTREMELY illegitimate "correlative" association here suggesting that because a condition can occur without a particular factor involved, somehow excludes another factor, which can be totally dismissed with a thousand examples proving otherwise. One such example could be liver disease ... one can suffer liver damage from Hepatitis ... so does that automatically exclude chronic alcoholism from also causing liver disease? Of course not. Same is true with lung cancer ... the fact is, a greater percentage of non-smokers suffer lung cancer when compared to smokers ... so does that exclude smoking as a cause?
The only "bottom line" here is that those who deny the probable link between vaccination and autism do so based on nothing more than a willingness to accept double talk and propaganda as facts.
Show me yours? If a PhD/MD is required to have a legitimate opinion on the matter, then what makes YOUR position more valid than mine .... Doctor?
There is a difference. I stated up front that I was simply giving my opinion, while you were "Telling everyone what I KNOW IS GOING ON". If you "know what is going on" then I assume you must be a professional in the field.
[i]
To work, your theory relies on a massive international cover-up, where every countrys medical education deliberatly keep doctors and biologists in the dark, as well as massive manipulation of every countrys data gathering, and post vaccination safety and efficiency reviews. A conspiracy of such size would have to involve thousands, if not tens of thousands of biologist, doctors, researchers, computer technicans,epidemologists and statisticans.
I wanted to follow up from yesterday on this ..... Ignorance does not require foreknowledge and secrecy. And of this plethora of individuals you cite ... biologists, researchers, doctors etc., they represent just ordinary "people" ... not some advanced version of the human species. From the moment you first attended "school", you were taught "what to think", and not "how to think". Your relative status as a student, no matter what level of education ... grade school to post graduate degree, is based on your ability to memorize and recount what you have been taught. The better you are at it ... the higher the scores you receive. One must remember that every one of them began life ignorant ... having to be taught that 2+2=4. And had you been taught from 1st grade to college that 2+2=5 ... that is what you would believe and insist is true.
This pattern applies to all disciplines, be it medicine, or finance or anything else. You are given a set of rules ... you are taught the fundamentals all the way through to the advanced concepts by other people who became your teacher through the same process you are now following. If what you are taught is wrong ... what you believe will be wrong.
And the process from "student" to "professional" follows the same path ... the only difference comes in the reward. The good student who follows the rules is rewarded with good grades, while the professional is rewarded with money.
And, medicine is one of the most belligerent of all professional disciplines when it comes to independent thinking ... independent thoughts and ideas are simply NOT TOLERATED at any level. From medical school to residency to private practice, conduct by the rules is strictly demanded, from diagnosis to treatment ... the established protocols must be strictly adhered to, else you face dire consequences. Step outside the lines, and you face those consequences. Follow the established rules and protocols and you are rewarded, often, very handsomely rewarded.
The system relies on procedure ... a particular set of "symptoms" are assigned to certain diseases which require an established protocol of diagnostic testing. The results of those tests demand a particular protocol of assigned treatment that must be followed. And these rules and protocols are established almost exclusively by pharmaceutical manufacturers and THEIR research "scientists". That is simply the fact of the matter. It's how the system is structured.
Therefore, this is not a "conspiracy" ... it is a "system" that demands strict adherence to the rules established by the system itself. And this system is designed to do one thing ... treat symptoms of disease with pharmaceutical drugs and or surgery. The rules are, however crude this may sound ... you attempt to kill a disease with a pharmaceutical poison, and if that fails, you cut the disease out with a knife. That is the crass definition of modern allopathic medicine.
And you might be surprised to find that a majority of doctors probably cannot even explain to you how a particular drug they prescribe you is supposed to work. They have simply been trained to give you Drug A if you exhibit the symptoms of Disease A.
But now ..today ... you need not even have symptoms ... they now have "procedures" to tests for potential risks of developing a disease to which they prescribe another Drug that does nothing but alter the results of those tests. And these "doctors" know even less about those drugs, and the potential harm that can come from using them. Often times, the fine print identifying potential side effects are more serious than the disease they are supposed to protect you from, while others may include the exact same symptoms of the disease. What a scam ... have headaches and dizziness ... take this pill 4 times a day ... if you experience headaches and dizziness, a rare but possible side effect ... notify your doctor. I mean, how freaking idiotic can it get?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader
The vast majority of which would have not profit in any way from participating in such a conspiracy and would profit considerably if they could show any discrepancies in the safety studies.
This is so ridiculous on the surface, I hesitate to legitimize it with a response. The vast majority not only profit from adhering to the rules of the system, they stand to suffer great loss by failing to do so precisely.
ANYONE who challenges the consensus opinions and rules of the system is committing professional suicide at the very least. From researchers at Universities who rely on grants (most of which come from pharmaceutical companies and government) will see those grants vanish if the results of their research should "upset" the system, right down to doctors who fully understand the consequences of not following the guidelines ... the system, by design, is structured to ensure participants police themselves.
The vast majority within the system need not even agree with, or understand why the rules are as they are, or recognize the consequences that result in following them ... so long as they understand the consequences of NOT following them ... which is learned very early, and is universally understood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader
The opposing theory would be that that the "vaccines are dangerous" theory is just another conspiracy theory.
Without repeating myself ... the claim of "conspiracy theory" is a tactic which is either purposely employed to derail debate when one is fresh out of facts, or employed by those woefully ignorant of how the world around them works, and how that world has always worked.
The terms "conspiracy" and "theory" are two separate terms that are too often combined as if they belong together. They do not. "Theory" is a term to describe an "idea" or a possible explanation to a situation which lacks an accepted explanation. While "conspiracy" is a concrete term that defines the act of two or more individuals planning to commit an act that is either illegal, harmful, or both. The fact is, not a day goes by that a conspiracy of one type or another is not in progress, ongoing, or being planned.
"Conspiracy Theory" suggests a rare and unlikely event, whereas conspiracy itself is as common and frequent as a sunny day.
I wanted to follow up from yesterday on this ..... Ignorance does not require foreknowledge and secrecy. And of this plethora of individuals you cite ... biologists, researchers, doctors etc., they represent just ordinary "people" ... not some advanced version of the human species. From the moment you first attended "school", you were taught "what to think", and not "how to think". Your relative status as a student, no matter what level of education ... grade school to post graduate degree, is based on your ability to memorize and recount what you have been taught. The better you are at it ... the higher the scores you receive. One must remember that every one of them began life ignorant ... having to be taught that 2+2=4. And had you been taught from 1st grade to college that 2+2=5 ... that is what you would believe and insist is true.
This pattern applies to all disciplines, be it medicine, or finance or anything else. You are given a set of rules ... you are taught the fundamentals all the way through to the advanced concepts by other people who became your teacher through the same process you are now following. If what you are taught is wrong ... what you believe will be wrong.
And the process from "student" to "professional" follows the same path ... the only difference comes in the reward. The good student who follows the rules is rewarded with good grades, while the professional is rewarded with money.
And, medicine is one of the most belligerent of all professional disciplines when it comes to independent thinking ... independent thoughts and ideas are simply NOT TOLERATED at any level. From medical school to residency to private practice, conduct by the rules is strictly demanded, from diagnosis to treatment ... the established protocols must be strictly adhered to, else you face dire consequences. Step outside the lines, and you face those consequences. Follow the established rules and protocols and you are rewarded, often, very handsomely rewarded.
The system relies on procedure ... a particular set of "symptoms" are assigned to certain diseases which require an established protocol of diagnostic testing. The results of those tests demand a particular protocol of assigned treatment that must be followed. And these rules and protocols are established almost exclusively by pharmaceutical manufacturers and THEIR research "scientists". That is simply the fact of the matter. It's how the system is structured.
Therefore, this is not a "conspiracy" ... it is a "system" that demands strict adherence to the rules established by the system itself. And this system is designed to do one thing ... treat symptoms of disease with pharmaceutical drugs and or surgery. The rules are, however crude this may sound ... you attempt to kill a disease with a pharmaceutical poison, and if that fails, you cut the disease out with a knife. That is the crass definition of modern allopathic medicine.
And you might be surprised to find that a majority of doctors probably cannot even explain to you how a particular drug they prescribe you is supposed to work. They have simply been trained to give you Drug A if you exhibit the symptoms of Disease A.
But now ..today ... you need not even have symptoms ... they now have "procedures" to tests for potential risks of developing a disease to which they prescribe another Drug that does nothing but alter the results of those tests. And these "doctors" know even less about those drugs, and the potential harm that can come from using them. Often times, the fine print identifying potential side effects are more serious than the disease they are supposed to protect you from, while others may include the exact same symptoms of the disease. What a scam ... have headaches and dizziness ... take this pill 4 times a day ... if you experience headaches and dizziness, a rare but possible side effect ... notify your doctor. I mean, how freaking idiotic can it get?
This is so ridiculous on the surface, I hesitate to legitimize it with a response. The vast majority not only profit from adhering to the rules of the system, they stand to suffer great loss by failing to do so precisely.
ANYONE who challenges the consensus opinions and rules of the system is committing professional suicide at the very least. From researchers at Universities who rely on grants (most of which come from pharmaceutical companies and government) will see those grants vanish if the results of their research should "upset" the system, right down to doctors who fully understand the consequences of not following the guidelines ... the system, by design, is structured to ensure participants police themselves.
The vast majority within the system need not even agree with, or understand why the rules are as they are, or recognize the consequences that result in following them ... so long as they understand the consequences of NOT following them ... which is learned very early, and is universally understood.
Without repeating myself ... the claim of "conspiracy theory" is a tactic which is either purposely employed to derail debate when one is fresh out of facts, or employed by those woefully ignorant of how the world around them works, and how that world has always worked.
The terms "conspiracy" and "theory" are two separate terms that are too often combined as if they belong together. They do not. "Theory" is a term to describe an "idea" or a possible explanation to a situation which lacks an accepted explanation. While "conspiracy" is a concrete term that defines the act of two or more individuals planning to commit an act that is either illegal, harmful, or both. The fact is, not a day goes by that a conspiracy of one type or another is not in progress, ongoing, or being planned.
"Conspiracy Theory" suggests a rare and unlikely event, whereas conspiracy itself is as common and frequent as a sunny day.
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.
