Is it really too much to ask?

[corydoras]

http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html

[corydoras]

I just read this on the BBC site. Struck off? He should do time for what he did.

 

MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield awaits punishment verdict.

[chesters1]

its a case of the general public will never know the truth if he's right or wrong ,if governments save money by substituting one injection for 3 then generally money overrides "truth" ,even less chance of getting real proof from industry they are the ones making money selling it probably at a higher price than the constituants of all 3 former versions ,they make money selling the drug the government save money by scrapping 2/3rds of the cost of injecting it ,in both cases its win win whatever the truth behind it is .

if the government was so appalled at the rise in measles cases surely providing a single injection is safer than none at all? no? then safety isnt a priority over money and the whole thing is a sham over money not safety.

the gmc are just government and industry stooges on the take being told to pick on him whilst ignoring or encouraging bad practice within themselves in far more serious cases

 

in the mmr case (not condoning any other hearsay that may or may not be correct) then if the government were so concerned why was it introduced with even a negligible % kids may suffer ,what are the stats the abstaining of the injection is different pre and post mmr? IE how many kids didnt get the single measles injection compared to those not getting the mmr?

 

if we dont know what causes autism then its ludicrous to say something doesnt at one time MP's force fed kids to prove meat was safe ,not so bloody cocky now are they? or are they we dont know whats true we didnt test it ourselves did we? we just get hearsay from third parties with their own agendas.

democracy is about choice in the single injection scenario its only for those that can afford it which is hardly democratic is it?

Edited May 24, 2010 by chesters1

[Alan Stubbs]

Chesters, if we don't know what causes autism not only is it ludicrous to suggest something DOES cause it, it is morally wrong to assert something does cause it without concrete proof - as was the case in Wakefield's 'research'.

 

The whole sad affair taints medical research, investigative journalism and the law with a rancid whiff. Nobody comes ou of this with a reputation enhanced.

[chesters1]

i quite agree but then david kelly was slated when he disagreed with "popular" beliefs ,he was silenced using extreme methods to save government face

its perfectly reasonable to "suggest" links to this or that but as you say with nothing to back up anything more than a suggestion trouble looms but has anyone in real life seen anything more than speculation anywhere? on any side? one mans proof is another mans rambling.

when the government can sacrifice 100's of thousands of lives based on an agenda backed up with faulty "proof" i'm sure a "scientist" is easy to rid ones self of if money or power or just gullibility is involved.

i suggest cancer is related to chocolate (as an example),my proof is that the majority of cancer sufferers have eaten it at some time thus there is a link! just because i cannot prove it does does not mean it doesn't nor can you prove it doesn't but to be stupid enough to ban everything except chocolate is stupid to the extreme as it is with the mmr being the only NHS funded injection

Edited May 24, 2010 by chesters1

[Sportsman]

I see that he was struck off today.

Now he should be charged with child abuse

[corydoras]

I see that he was struck off today.

Now he should be charged with child abuse

The 12 victims of his research should be going for ABH/GBH.

[Ken L]

Not to mention the anguish and guilt that he generated for tens of thousands of families and the financail hardship caused to the hudreds of families that were persuaded to try to take the producers of MMR to court and nded up loosing their shirts. Then there's the kids that got ill and were damaged as a result of worried parents witholding vaccinations.

I suspect that there is now blood in the water and the sharks will soon be showing up.

[barry luxton]

While the finger is pointed at one person who had overstepped his brief, spare a thought for some of these parents and kids while your at it. Are they wrong or mis-guided?

 

http://www.jabs.org.uk/pages/home/home.html

 

quote:

 

The authorities still refuse to admit any link between autism and the MMR jab. Yet this mother tells for the first time how she made them concede it DID cause her child's death.

 

Last week, the parents of 1,000 children allegedly damaged by the MMR vaccine were sent letters by one of the drug manufacturers, threatening them with huge legal costs if they refused to drop their claims for compensation. One mother, Carol Buxton, found the news particularly shocking. Thirteen years ago, her daughter fell ill and died following the MMR jab. But Carol, a travel consultant who lives with her police officer husband Tony and three sons in Northampton, did get her day in court - with astonishing conclusions. Here, she reveals to BONNIE ESTRIDGE how she made the Government accept liability.

Edited May 25, 2010 by barry luxton

[Ken L]

Vaccine damage in a tiny proportion of recipients is a fact of life. It's not just vaccines though, it's all drugs. The question is one of how the risk of damage by the vaccine or drug compares to the risks of damage as a result of the disease or illness if no intervention is made. That's what informed consent is all about.

 

If Smallpox were ever to recur and really got itself established, would you choose to take (for instance) a 1:1000 chance of the vaccine killing you or would you take perhaps a 4:5 chance of avoiding the disease and a 3:1 chance of it killing you if you did get it ?