Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
This is still false. Contrary to popular belief, just because you're too uninformed to have heard of a medical concept does NOT mean medical professionals are as unintelligent. As GTH pointed out, autism was described hundreds of years ago. Previous to increased correct diagnosis, autistic individuals were just considered slow.1. Lets sum up.
2. Up until the late 1980's no one every really heard of *AUTISM*, and it wasn't because of some quack doctor didn't name the illness either.
Also proven incorrect. Similarly, I've pointed out other diseases which simply were not classified previously, despite being documented as existing. You tend to overlook these facts, pretending they don't exist.3. Before then it was not heard of because it was almost never seen.
4. Seeing it was nearly never seen, it didn't have a name.
Also still misleadingly false. While the number of needle sticks to complete the vaccination schedule has increased, the number of actual antigens exposed to each child has actually decreased. YOU received hundreds more bacterial parts than any child today. I'd have you read the evidence and manufacturing information about these vaccines in hopes you may educate other hicks around you, but I can't count on your literacy. Instead, I'll highlight a single sentence from the paper, and encourage you to look at this chart from it.6. So the medical trades kept doing what they were doing and adding more shots on top of more shots, over loading the children even more, till they have run it up too 1 in 150 children will likely get *AUTISM* now, GREAT JOB!!!!!!!
Sorry bout that,
1. Well I blew everyone away with my *Sum Up Post*.
2. I guess I win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
3. Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. Three cheers!!!!
5. Don't cho come back with a counter, I already proclaimed *VICTORY*!!!!!
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
Oh is that how it works in your universe? People are completely incapable of understanding or knowing anything about the world before they were born? What, in your opinion, is the reason children take History in school then?Sorry bout that,
1. Okay *ThickAsAhBrick*, just how old are you,......34,..i'm guessing...?
2. Then if your younger that 35 I would have to say, you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before 1985 at least!!!
Once again, it wasn't diagnosed as autism back then. It's no wonder you never knew anyone with the diagnosis. Similarly, people never had the diagnosis of trisomy 21 in the 1800s, because they didn't know enough about genetics to understand that Down Syndrome comes from too many chromosomes. And yet they still had kids with trisomy 21 even though no one had the diagnosis.you never knew anyone with *AUTISM* before 1975, if you were not born yet.
Oh is that how it works in your universe? People are completely incapable of understanding or knowing anything about the world before they were born? What, in your opinion, is the reason children take History in school then?Sorry bout that,
1. Okay *ThickAsAhBrick*, just how old are you,......34,..i'm guessing...?
2. Then if your younger that 35 I would have to say, you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before 1985 at least!!!
Well I suppose by your logic, you can't tell me who the first president of the country is. Perhaps no one anywhere knows, because "you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before [the year you were born] at least!!!" Do you wonder why people see you as a joke or doubt your sanity?
Once again, it wasn't diagnosed as autism back then. It's no wonder you never knew anyone with the diagnosis. Similarly, people never had the diagnosis of trisomy 21 in the 1800s, because they didn't know enough about genetics to understand that Down Syndrome comes from too many chromosomes. And yet they still had kids with trisomy 21 even though no one had the diagnosis.you never knew anyone with *AUTISM* before 1975, if you were not born yet.
Just curious: how many autistic people do you personally know now?
Oh is that how it works in your universe? People are completely incapable of understanding or knowing anything about the world before they were born? What, in your opinion, is the reason children take History in school then?Sorry bout that,
1. Okay *ThickAsAhBrick*, just how old are you,......34,..i'm guessing...?
2. Then if your younger that 35 I would have to say, you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before 1985 at least!!!
Well I suppose by your logic, you can't tell me who the first president of the country is. Perhaps no one anywhere knows, because "you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before [the year you were born] at least!!!" Do you wonder why people see you as a joke or doubt your sanity?
Once again, it wasn't diagnosed as autism back then. It's no wonder you never knew anyone with the diagnosis. Similarly, people never had the diagnosis of trisomy 21 in the 1800s, because they didn't know enough about genetics to understand that Down Syndrome comes from too many chromosomes. And yet they still had kids with trisomy 21 even though no one had the diagnosis.you never knew anyone with *AUTISM* before 1975, if you were not born yet.
Just curious: how many autistic people do you personally know now?
Oh is that how it works in your universe? People are completely incapable of understanding or knowing anything about the world before they were born? What, in your opinion, is the reason children take History in school then?Sorry bout that,
1. Okay *ThickAsAhBrick*, just how old are you,......34,..i'm guessing...?
2. Then if your younger that 35 I would have to say, you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before 1985 at least!!!
Well I suppose by your logic, you can't tell me who the first president of the country is. Perhaps no one anywhere knows, because "you don't know shit about what was going on on earth before [the year you were born] at least!!!" Do you wonder why people see you as a joke or doubt your sanity?
Once again, it wasn't diagnosed as autism back then. It's no wonder you never knew anyone with the diagnosis. Similarly, people never had the diagnosis of trisomy 21 in the 1800s, because they didn't know enough about genetics to understand that Down Syndrome comes from too many chromosomes. And yet they still had kids with trisomy 21 even though no one had the diagnosis.you never knew anyone with *AUTISM* before 1975, if you were not born yet.
Just curious: how many autistic people do you personally know now?
It's been years since I started studying the subject and I would have to research it again, but I believe that it was first diagnosed in the 50's and then among the children of the well off people, those most likely to get their kids the vaccines. They blamed it on the mother's saying they didn't bond with their children as infants. They called it "the refrigerator mom syndrome". All I know is that if some doctor told me my son is the way he is because I don't love him enough, he's not going to be able talk to anyone for awhile.
Autism existed well before 1975, though not in the numbers it exists now. Some of those numbers have increased because they are now including "mental retardation" under the Autism Spectrum. But that doesn't account for all of them. When it was first diagnosed it only affected 1 in 25,000 people.
It's no wonder when the Internet and television airwaves are full of personal stories that raise a question about the link. But the study that started the autism vaccine scare was recently retracted by the prestigious journal that published it 12 years ago, and the lead researcher had his medical license pulled.
Since that time, 18 controlled epidemiological studies have investigated the possible connection between autism and vaccines, and "they have all come back showing the same thing," says Alison Singer, founder and president of the Autism Science Foundation, and a mother of a 13-year-old with autism. "There is no link between vaccines and autism."
Those studies took up two primary theories: Wakefield's (lead publisher in the MMR/Autism study) hypothesis that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism, and another that thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines, was the culprit.
In a 2004 report analyzing the research into the possible connections, the Institute of Medicine (the organization charged with advising the nation on public health concerns) concluded: "the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship" between both the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, and autism.
That same year, 10 of the 13 authors of the Wakefield study retracted it.
The end of the autism/vaccine debate? - CNN.com
Discuss
What does one have to do with another? You're a nutcase. I have no desire to have you know anything about me. But if you really think age and experience is the end-all, I can assure you that your short-sightedness and lack of experience is by far trumped by all the old scientists who investigated this matter on a large scale, directly comparing groups of children who did and did not receive vaccinations, and found absolutely no causation.1. Like I said, your only 34, admit it and I might tell you just how many childern I know that have *AUTISM*.
Really? Didn't you say it all started in the 80s? What exactly do you think happened to those children? Perhaps in your mind they're still children, 30 years later?2. And its children, I have never met an adult with *AUTISM*.
yes, I have that problem of being trained to individually question everything, seeking out unbiased standardized evidence to support claims isntead of going on conspiracy theories or just buying opinions of quacks. THAT is how highly educated people are trained. And what is the extent of your education and training? High school GED? Perhaps you've been diagnosed with schizotypal personality disorder? Am I close?3. The problem is your very clinical, you've been brain washed my friend.
4. You think you know it all, but you were not there.
5. You been told a line of BS, and you bought into it.
6. Thats the way they educate in the *LIBTURD UNIVERSITIES/MED SCHOOLS*.
Oh yes. The incidence has still increased, despite the fact that we're diagnosing at a greater rate currently. The question still remains of WHY incidence has increased. Now it's true that vaccination came around the same time as the pickup, but as I've explained previously, the actual number of bacteria protein given to children today is a small fraction of the amount given historically, despite a larger variety of bugs. In other words, we can prevent far more with far less.It's been years since I started studying the subject and I would have to research it again, but I believe that it was first diagnosed in the 50's and then among the children of the well off people, those most likely to get their kids the vaccines. They blamed it on the mother's saying they didn't bond with their children as infants. They called it "the refrigerator mom syndrome". All I know is that if some doctor told me my son is the way he is because I don't love him enough, he's not going to be able talk to anyone for awhile.
Autism existed well before 1975, though not in the numbers it exists now. Some of those numbers have increased because they are now including "mental retardation" under the Autism Spectrum. But that doesn't account for all of them. When it was first diagnosed it only affected 1 in 25,000 people.
We don't give things to pregnant women as a default. Regarding your conspiracy theory about pharmaceutical companies: it's crap. It's hilarious because there's another thread on this forum where some other dumbass on the opposite end of the conspiracy theory believes pharma doesn't cure things because they make more money constantly trying to treat instead of prevent illnesses. While he was completely wrong about the desire to find cures, he was right that pharma would make a ton more money treating illnesses.I guess we're stupid and don't know what we're talking about and let us not forget big PHARMA would NEVER, NEVER hurt anyone intentionally which is why flu shots with the swine flu vaccine are labeled with a warning against giving the dosage to pregnant women. The same story is told again, again, and again but is dismissed as fantasy. But you have to wonder who is living in the fantasy world, your federal government whose ranks are filled with former pharmaceutical company management or the people who are actually the victims of their tyranny. Most of you idiots will by default side with your malevolent government eventhough it only exists for itself and couldn't give a damn about you.
What does one have to do with another? You're a nutcase. I have no desire to have you know anything about me. But if you really think age and experience is the end-all, I can assure you that your short-sightedness and lack of experience is by far trumped by all the old scientists who investigated this matter on a large scale, directly comparing groups of children who did and did not receive vaccinations, and found absolutely no causation.1. Like I said, your only 34, admit it and I might tell you just how many childern I know that have *AUTISM*.
So which is it? Is it large scale evidence that should determine the conclusion? Or is it age that should trump here? Either way you lose on both accounts.
Really? Didn't you say it all started in the 80s? What exactly do you think happened to those children? Perhaps in your mind they're still children, 30 years later?2. And its children, I have never met an adult with *AUTISM*.
Wait a minute now. You just said that you're so old and have all this experience and knowledge on the topic, and you have NEVER met an adult with autism!? By your logic, therefore, autism doesn't exist? Or perhaps your conclusion is that the government secretly kidnaps all the autistic kids in the middle of the night, disposes of them, and pays hush money to silence family?
yes, I have that problem of being trained to individually question everything, seeking out unbiased standardized evidence to support claims isntead of going on conspiracy theories or just buying opinions of quacks. THAT is how highly educated people are trained. And what is the extent of your education and training? High school GED? Perhaps you've been diagnosed with schizotypal personality disorder? Am I close?
Oh yes. The incidence has still increased, despite the fact that we're diagnosing at a greater rate currently. The question still remains of WHY incidence has increased. Now it's true that vaccination came around the same time as the pickup, but as I've explained previously, the actual number of bacteria protein given to children today is a small fraction of the amount given historically, despite a larger variety of bugs. In other words, we can prevent far more with far less.It's been years since I started studying the subject and I would have to research it again, but I believe that it was first diagnosed in the 50's and then among the children of the well off people, those most likely to get their kids the vaccines. They blamed it on the mother's saying they didn't bond with their children as infants. They called it "the refrigerator mom syndrome". All I know is that if some doctor told me my son is the way he is because I don't love him enough, he's not going to be able talk to anyone for awhile.
Autism existed well before 1975, though not in the numbers it exists now. Some of those numbers have increased because they are now including "mental retardation" under the Autism Spectrum. But that doesn't account for all of them. When it was first diagnosed it only affected 1 in 25,000 people.
A number of things have increased around the same time. Obesity. HIV. Antibiotic resistant bacteria. Why is it that none of these things are blamed on vaccines? Oh yes, because only crazy uneducated parents are rabid enough to flip out without an ounce of evidence. It's what parents do, I get that. But the data has come back. And it's not the vaccines. Furthermore, there's no benefit to anyone for such a conspiracy theory.
We don't give things to pregnant women as a default. Regarding your conspiracy theory about pharmaceutical companies: it's crap. It's hilarious because there's another thread on this forum where some other dumbass on the opposite end of the conspiracy theory believes pharma doesn't cure things because they make more money constantly trying to treat instead of prevent illnesses. While he was completely wrong about the desire to find cures, he was right that pharma would make a ton more money treating illnesses.I guess we're stupid and don't know what we're talking about and let us not forget big PHARMA would NEVER, NEVER hurt anyone intentionally which is why flu shots with the swine flu vaccine are labeled with a warning against giving the dosage to pregnant women. The same story is told again, again, and again but is dismissed as fantasy. But you have to wonder who is living in the fantasy world, your federal government whose ranks are filled with former pharmaceutical company management or the people who are actually the victims of their tyranny. Most of you idiots will by default side with your malevolent government eventhough it only exists for itself and couldn't give a damn about you.
So no, your crap idea that pharma does this to make money at the expense of causing autism is just foolish. EVEN IF the government was influenced by big pharma, you're accusing them of completely fabricating the raw data that was published on this very case. Do you really think it went that far when it is so easily disprovable?
I'm not suggesting anyone fabricated anything, rather, I'm simply saying that big pharma doesn't give a damn, anymore than BP gave a damn about the citizens of LA, or my company, Hewlett Packard, gave a damn about the thousands of people it layed off and jobs they gave to some stupid Indians or Coasta Ricans.
I trust large scale unbiased data coming from masses of people over the anecdote of a single person, yes. That's what science is. It means we define the forest for all the trees instead of from stories of just one or two.Further, I don't believe a shot in the arm necessarily causes autism or in the case of my uncle ALS, but I think it can. And that is the difference between you and I: You trust science over people, period. You'd just a soon call the mother of an autistic a delusional, conspiricist bitch than lose enough pride to admit that you "might" be wrong.
The pharma lobby can get any of their scientists to write up whatever they want, and every supporting official greased with enough money to back them. I call bullshit!
I witnessed first hand what happened after my son, born with an APGAR score of ten, got 3 in one day (as my objections were dismissed as ignorant or molly coddling by the public health nurse). He developed behavior problems, was speech delayed, and had troubles with reading growing up. He's overcome everything, but it didn't have to be so hard for him, and I blame the mercury he was needlessly poisoned with.
One shot containing thimerosal (a preservative used solely to save the drug manufacturers money in packaging, as it would be completely unneeded if packaged in single shot doses) has more mercury than adults are advised to consume through the consumption of fish in any given week. The smaller the child, the smaller the liver, and the greater the risk. And it isn't just autism, it is neurological problems up to and including autism.
It's no wonder when the Internet and television airwaves are full of personal stories that raise a question about the link. But the study that started the autism vaccine scare was recently retracted by the prestigious journal that published it 12 years ago, and the lead researcher had his medical license pulled.
Since that time, 18 controlled epidemiological studies have investigated the possible connection between autism and vaccines, and "they have all come back showing the same thing," says Alison Singer, founder and president of the Autism Science Foundation, and a mother of a 13-year-old with autism. "There is no link between vaccines and autism."
Those studies took up two primary theories: Wakefield's (lead publisher in the MMR/Autism study) hypothesis that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism, and another that thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines, was the culprit.
In a 2004 report analyzing the research into the possible connections, the Institute of Medicine (the organization charged with advising the nation on public health concerns) concluded: "the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship" between both the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, and autism.
That same year, 10 of the 13 authors of the Wakefield study retracted it.
Discuss
If the vaccines have nothing to do with autism, why the rider attached to the Patriot Act at the last minuted by a senator who then retired, that protects Ely Lily, the makers of thermerosal from being sued specifically for causing autism?
Why do the professionals in the business wait until their kids are 3 to get them vaccinated?
Why don't they tell us this stuff before the vaccines?
If the vaccines have nothing to do with autism, why the rider attached to the Patriot Act at the last minuted by a senator who then retired, that protects Ely Lily, the makers of thermerosal from being sued specifically for causing autism?
Why do the professionals in the business wait until their kids are 3 to get them vaccinated?
Why don't they tell us this stuff before the vaccines?
Because, as has been demonstrated in the civil courts and the courts of public opinion, even if something has been 100% disproven by science, you can still lose a lawsuit over it and people will still believe that they know better.
What professionals wait until their kids are 3 to get them vaccinated?
The one's in the autism profession.....you ask them if they had their kids vaccinated and they say yes. You go one step further and ask them when, and they say, they started vaccinating them at the age of 3. Trust me, I've been to enough seminars to know this stuff.
Pregnant women are told not to eat fish because of mercury yet they inject that same mercury directly into the infants, even before they leave the hospital and then they wonder why autism now affects one on 166 people.
Discuss
If the vaccines have nothing to do with autism, why the rider attached to the Patriot Act at the last minuted by a senator who then retired, that protects Ely Lily, the makers of thermerosal from being sued specifically for causing autism?
Why do the professionals in the business wait until their kids are 3 to get them vaccinated?
Why don't they tell us this stuff before the vaccines?
I am a professional in the industry and I did not wait until my kids were three to get them vaccinated. Where do you get this from?
It's no wonder when the Internet and television airwaves are full of personal stories that raise a question about the link. But the study that started the autism vaccine scare was recently retracted by the prestigious journal that published it 12 years ago, and the lead researcher had his medical license pulled.
Since that time, 18 controlled epidemiological studies have investigated the possible connection between autism and vaccines, and "they have all come back showing the same thing," says Alison Singer, founder and president of the Autism Science Foundation, and a mother of a 13-year-old with autism. "There is no link between vaccines and autism."
Those studies took up two primary theories: Wakefield's (lead publisher in the MMR/Autism study) hypothesis that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism, and another that thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines, was the culprit.
In a 2004 report analyzing the research into the possible connections, the Institute of Medicine (the organization charged with advising the nation on public health concerns) concluded: "the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship" between both the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, and autism.
That same year, 10 of the 13 authors of the Wakefield study retracted it.
The end of the autism/vaccine debate? - CNN.com
Discuss
It's no wonder when the Internet and television airwaves are full of personal stories that raise a question about the link. But the study that started the autism vaccine scare was recently retracted by the prestigious journal that published it 12 years ago, and the lead researcher had his medical license pulled.
Since that time, 18 controlled epidemiological studies have investigated the possible connection between autism and vaccines, and "they have all come back showing the same thing," says Alison Singer, founder and president of the Autism Science Foundation, and a mother of a 13-year-old with autism. "There is no link between vaccines and autism."
Those studies took up two primary theories: Wakefield's (lead publisher in the MMR/Autism study) hypothesis that the MMR vaccine was linked to autism, and another that thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines, was the culprit.
In a 2004 report analyzing the research into the possible connections, the Institute of Medicine (the organization charged with advising the nation on public health concerns) concluded: "the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship" between both the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, and autism.
That same year, 10 of the 13 authors of the Wakefield study retracted it.
The end of the autism/vaccine debate? - CNN.com
Discuss
My Son has mild ASD (autism Spectrum Disorder). He is very High Functioning and very Bright. Above average intel. A near Photo Graphic Memory. If you met him and I did not tell you he had it, you would not know. It is very subtle.
Anyways, Being a parent of someone who has a form of it, I have done extensive Research, and asked every doctor and expert I could talk to about it. IMO there is no connection between vaccines and Autism. The seemingly sudden rise in cases is almost totally attributable to our awareness of it. Millions of kids like my son went un-diagnosed in the past, or were miss diagnosed with Something else.
IMO anyways.
A study, published in the journal Nature, showed the unique characters of the frontal and temporal lobes had disappeared. Different genes should be active in each region, but autistic brains had the same pattern of gene expression. The National Autistic Society said the results could be important for future treatments. Autism spectrum disorders, including Asperger's syndrome, are common and affect more than 500,000 people in the UK.
They are thought to be caused by a combination of genetics and the environment. Professor Daniel Geschwind, from the University of California, Los Angeles, said: "If you randomly pick 20 people with autism, the cause of each person's disease will be unique. "Yet when we examined how genes and proteins interact in autistic people's brains, we saw well-defined shared patterns. This common thread could hold the key to pinpointing the disorder's origins."
Differences
The scientists in the UK, US and Canada compared samples from 19 autistic brains and 17 without. They noticed that 209 genes linked to the way brain cells work and talk to each other were working at a lower level in autistic brains while 235 genes linked to immune and inflammatory responses were expressed more strongly. The researchers said many of these genes had already been linked to the condition. They also noted that there was no longer a difference in the genes expressed in the frontal and temporal lobes in the brain. Professor Daniel Geschwind said: "Instead, the frontal lobe closely resembles the temporal lobe."
It is likely due to defective brain development, they argue. Richard Mills, director of research at the National Autistic Society said: "We are beginning to better understand the differences between the brains of people with autism and those without. "If replicated these findings are important for the development of interventions which may reduce the more disabling effects of autism. "They also confirm the importance of research that can shed light on underlying mechanisms. It is critical that we continue our investment in high quality research consortia."
BBC News - Autistic brains' 'genes differ'
