Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post questions or suggestions here.
User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post by Tomas » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:46 pm

.

delete

.
Last edited by Tomas on Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Don't run to your death

User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post by Ryan Rudolph » Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:58 am

yes, the main problem I have with Homeopathic medicine is that they do not test their claims through the scientific methods like modern science, so many of their medicines are placebos or even worse.

For homeopathy to gain any respect in the scientific community, they would need databases of journals (studies), explaining the experimentation they did to come up with their claims. However, if they did that, they would actually be considered modern medicine anyway, and what the fun in that right? : )

User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Autism linked to cells from abortions in vaccines

Post by Tomas » Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:58 am

.

Autism linked to cells from abortions in vaccines

A new study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency shows a correlation between
the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines to an increase in autism rates.

"That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc
on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible," (photo)

Full article here >> http://www.lifenews.com/nat6272.html

.
Don't run to your death

Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post by Animus » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:02 am

Tomas wrote:Autism linked to cells from abortions in vaccines

A new study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency shows a correlation between
the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines to an increase in autism rates.

"That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc
on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible," (photo)

Full article here >> http://www.lifenews.com/nat6272.html
What a ridiculous article. Read the actual report they mutilate: http://www.all.org/pdf/McDonaldPaul2010.pdf

"possible explanations for the increases: (1) recent studies
include artifacts that produce a false increase, (2) the current
rate is correct but does not indicate a true increase, (3) and
the current increase is correct and indicates a real increase.
Distinguishing between whether the observed increases are
real increases in the incidence of autism or simply an increase
attributable to changes in reporting, clinical definitions, or
the kinds of services offered continues to be a source of
controversy (9, 23, 49, 50). The impacts of these issues have
been discussed extensively based on a number of different
studies (1, 6, 9, 11, 12, 16-19, 22, 51, 52) but without definitive
clarification of the overall reason for the increase. Thus, using
extant empirical data does not allow for discrimination as to
whether the observed increases are real or apparent (48)....."

This report says nothing about abortions, the DNA from aborted fetuses or vaccination. Other than to point out that the link between them has already been discredited:

"If some portion of the observed increases in autism cases
in recent studies is not due to various artifacts, then such
rapid increases would be unlikely to result from genetic
mechanisms alone. This suggests that such an increase might
be due to an increasing exposure to exogenous environmental
factors (27, 29, 30) affecting susceptible individuals during
vulnerable periods of their development (28). Some research
has examined possible contributing environmental factors,
including measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine (31),
thimerosal-containing vaccines (32), tetrachloroethylene,
trichloroethylene, and trihalomethanes in drinking water
(33), and certain metals (e.g., mercury, cadmium, nickel)
and chemicals (trichloroethylene and vinyl chloride) in the
ambient air around birth sites (34). Subsequent studies on
MMR vaccine (16, 18, 35, 36) and thimerosal-containing
vaccines (see review (37), 13, 18, 20, 38, 39) did not support
a relationship with autism. Ina 2004 report, the Immunization
Safety Committee of the Institute of Medicine determined
that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection
of a causal relationship between either MMR or thimerosalcontaining
vaccines and autism (40
). Work on tetrachlorethylene,
trichloroethylene, and trihalomethanes in drinking
water (33) also has not supported a relationship with autism.
Certain airborne metals and solvents still require confirmation
of any relationship to autism (34). New research studies
are continuing to evaluate other possible environmental
factors (24, 41).'

Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: Autism linked to cells from abortions in vaccines

Post by Animus » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:13 am

Tomas wrote:.

Autism linked to cells from abortions in vaccines

A new study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency shows a correlation between
the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines to an increase in autism rates.

"That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc
on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible," (photo)

Full article here >> http://www.lifenews.com/nat6272.html

.
Let me fix your lies here too Tomas, because you strategically removed sections of the article....

You said:

A new study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency shows a correlation between
the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines to an increase in autism rates.

The article reads:

Two pro-life advocates say a new study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency shows a correlation between the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines and an increase in autism rates.

Edit: Note here that you removed the section that reads "Two pro-life advocates say" and then capitalized the following "A" to make the modified version conform to grammatical standards and appear complete.

You said:

"That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc
on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible,"

The article reads:

"That virus-laden DNA of aborted babies could be wreaking havoc on the DNA of healthy children is completely plausible," she said. [ She = Jill Stanek, a pro-life BLOGGER]

If you are smart enough to read the report yourself, or at least read the sections I quoted, you can easily see that this article is fundamentally full of shit, so are the people quoted in it, and right now so are you.
Last edited by Animus on Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post by Animus » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:23 am

Heh, I guess I didn't have to go through all that myself, although it was well worth it, at the very top of the article you posted it reads: "Update: LifeNews.com has issued a followup to this news story featuring a response from the study author and a pro-life biologist."

Which reads in part:

But the study's author, Mike McDonald, and others, question that claim.

McDonald responded to an email from the Opposing Views web site, responded to the question and said the claims "incorrectly represent, and far overreach, our study findings."

"Our study draws no causal linkages with anything and the recent increase in autistic disorder, and certainly not to the use of fetal tissues in vaccines," he said. "Without additional screening approaches there are potentially a huge number of possible exogenous factors and explanations that could be associated with autism."

He concluded that, "in no case is a correlation with any of these things, including with the timing of the change point, with some other occurrence any indication of causation."

The claims also came under fire from pro-life advocates.

Rev. Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco, an Assistant Professor of Biology at Providence College, told LifeNews.com the study "suggests a link between exogenous environmental stressors and autism" but "does not say that this stressor was the vaccine."

"For example, another scientific study has suggested that it is the Tylenol that was given to babies after their vaccinations that may have led to their autism, and not the vaccines themselves. Tylenol replaced aspirin as the drug of choice given to babies after their shots in the early 1980’s just when incidence of autism increased," Austriaco said.

"Numerous studies have failed to uncover a link between vaccines and autism," he added.

"It is not surprising that the original paper published in Lancet that initially suggested a link between the two has since been retracted as flawed and erroneous. There is no credible scientific evidence that links vaccines and autism. Parents should be encouraged to have their children vaccinated, a great good for the preservation of the common good," he told LifeNews.com.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat6284.html

Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: Vaccines: Friend of Foe?

Post by Animus » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:32 am

I don't mean to be harsh Tomas, but its obvious to me you have bad case of confirmation bias, and you don't push far enough on these issues to gain a genuine understanding of them.

But look, I can google Autism +Vaccine and find 15,200,000 sites, probably half of which are claiming there actually is a link, while the other half claim there isn't. You can't trust this level of information, you have to get down deep in the actual reports that come out of the labs. Don't listen to what either pro-life or pro-choice bloggers say about the reports, read the reports and don't assume their is a link when you haven't found out yet if there really is.

Post Reply