Vaccines and Autism

[corydoras]

just like the second mmr jab?

 

Here's a link to a bit of heavy duty reading anoracks only , however, it does not close the door to people who have considered that their kids have had an adversere reaction to the mmr jab. So as far as i'm concerned the debate continues.

 

http://www.fourteenstudies.com/pdf/MMR_5.pdf

No, no, no. You don't get away with changing the subject with me Mr Luxton. How would you like it if you had been given a lumber puncture that you did not need?

[The Flying Tench]

Maybe this will put this whole subject beyond doubt.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/05/a...ines/index.html

The medical profession has a pretty clear consensus now I must admit, but I am still puzzled by some of the individual cases- mothers who claim to have seen a change in their child's eyes immediately after the jab. 'I could tell I had lost him'.

 

And why did the legal firm ask Wakefield to do the study if they didn't have some suspicions about the drug?

 

On balance I guess I have to go with the majority view of the medical profession, but I, too, am one of those with some doubt.

[Ken L]

The medical profession has a pretty clear consensus now I must admit,

 

They always did have. The problem was that when you have 10,000 people saying one thing and 1 person saying something else, the view of some sections of the media seems to be that the way to put across a "balanced" report is to alow one person from one side to voice their opinion and one person from the opposing side to voice theirs - especially so if doing so generates fear and newspaper sales.

[chesters1]

medical profession or large drug companies?

the medical profession (whatever that is) rarely do research themselves drug companies do so any results are provided by the drug companies

why would they care if people died other than it would effect their profits

they ,the medical "profession" and governing bodies all have money foremost in their minds why on earth would they agree that one guy even if 100% right was right if it effected money?

 

once the death toll mounts the public or a decent government official (probably one who was forgotten in the "sweetener" list ) looks into it it may just get into the headlines .

 

i repeat my earlier post

 

"only time will tell ,perhaps if he said Mediator was bad 5 years ago i suspect he would also have been shouted down by the french press and hounded out of town by the drug companies

theres a comfy relationship between the companies that make drugs and the governing bodies who OK them ,i wouldnt believe 100% any of them "

this drug was on sale despite the doctors having doubts about it ,you forget big business runs the world not everyday people ,research results are usually biased top who-ever pays for them ,results are changed so the good parts are bulleted the bad hidden away ,why on earth would money come second to safety

 

http://www.connexionfrance.com/Mediator-sl...ew-article.html

 

Thalidomide was "safe" for 5 years untill the problems were so vast the company couldnt bribe enough people to keep quiet,its still used today

 

the drug codeine is purposely put in some drugs to get an addiction thus more profit (my mrs is addicted to hers without doubt ,even the doctor agrees and the amount of codeine in her pain killers would have no pain killing properties so why use it?) hmmmm because you give money to buy it? the drug companies dont give it away free.

the government are in cahoots ofcourse they will happily ban in an instant meow meow an underground stimulant that has (alledgedly) killed a handful of people because they get no tax from it but encourage drugs that kill or addict thousands because they do get tax from its makers ,strange that ofcourse the governing bodies agree with anything ,they can only base their reasoning on the bloody results the drug companies show them ,they dont have the inclination nor funds to run their own tests!

 

a chap says MMR bad (in reality MMR = profit) drug companies rally round and decry him ,there was nothing wrong with the old system except it meant the profit could be divided 3 ways (the gov could buy from 3 different companies the 3 different injections) now they get 100% because its a single injection PLUS the added bnefit they suggest a second dose making the 100% 200% money not safety makes the world go around

 

if the government really had safety in mind they would ban the real killer drugs fags and alcohol ,but what would happen when all that lovely tax was lost and the back handers from not banning it behind the scenes? MONEY not safety

drug companies even invent "diseases" so they can profit from it IE

Acid reflux ,hardly known 10 years ago ,and few people actually have it (i do its a problem when your stomach allows some acid to rise into your throat ) only really noted with a barium meal on a strange upside down table.

BUT now powerful dangerous drugs are openly available despite their known side effects for anyone who is convinced they have this rare "disease" malfunction in reality

 

aspirin well known drug but every few months a press release is out saying its bad ,profits slump press release suddenly say its good .wine one second bad the next second ( once profits drop) good ,you see its money money money where does "safety" come into it when money is involved?

Edited January 7, 2011 by chesters1

[barry luxton]

No, no, no. You don't get away with changing the subject with me Mr Luxton. How would you like it if you had been given a lumber puncture that you did not need?

 

Oh i am sorry for the delay, work takes over only some times though.

 

I,m not having this Mr doras, your trying to coerce me into going off topic, seeing that you have never had one of those lumber thingies, what makes you think that i have.

 

Second question, whats the mmr booster jab all about if it ain't money orientated.

[corydoras]

Oh i am sorry for the delay, work takes over only some times though.

 

I,m not having this Mr doras, your trying to coerce me into going off topic, seeing that you have never had one of those lumber thingies, what makes you think that i have.

 

Second question, whats the mmr booster jab all about if it ain't money orientated.

I'm not going off topic at all. This is central to the topic. How would you like it if you found out that you had been given a lumber puncture that was not medically necessary?

 

Whether if I had one or you have had one is a side issue.

Edited January 8, 2011 by corydoras

[corydoras]

Oh i am sorry for the delay, work takes over only some times though.

 

I,m not having this Mr doras, your trying to coerce me into going off topic, seeing that you have never had one of those lumber thingies, what makes you think that i have.

 

Second question, whats the mmr booster jab all about if it ain't money orientated.

Cat got your tongue then Barry?

[barry luxton]

Ha ha ha, why's that. Cat got the cream do you mean.

[chesters1]

don't mention breast is best

i can see the formula companies rubbing their hands in delight! .well until some other so called expert say it is of course

whats the "experts" opinion of wine this weak ,good ? bad?

Edited January 19, 2011 by chesters1

[John S]

whats the "experts" opinion of wine this weak ,good ? bad?

 

Absholutely feckin' delish-hic-ishious