Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tony Perkins
Well, no. You see unlike your mindset that follows ideas pre-constructed by your own mind without any supporting data whatsoever, I am "listening" to the evidence. It doesn't matter who supports or denies that evidence, so long as the evidence is procured in a legitimate and scientifically sound manner.1. Oh you will have to change your mind.
2. When the medical quacks change thiers.
3. Oh yes, be fucking safe, go with the crowd.
And that's perfectly fine. But rejecting legitimate evidence is where you cross the line into being a quack yourself, as well as a bad parent.4. I will not go with the crowd on this issue, never!
And once again I ask: what study or evidence do you have that supports that combination shots, compared to spacing them out or not offering them at all is superior with regard to autism? There isn't a SINGLE published study out there that even remotely suggests such a thing.7. What is needed is the health departments need to slow down the exposure, no more combo drugs!!!!!
8. No combo drugs with other shots, where they pile on many shots in one day!!!!
9. This is the *CRUX* of the problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's clear by this quote that you know little about a medical practice, let alone the intense education and experiences required to practice medicine. Your conspiracy theories are amusing, but still completely supported only by your paranoia.11. The way the system is now, from a administer point of view from doctors and nurses, is, *Get The Fucking Kids In Here And Shoot The Fuck Out Of Them So We Dont Have To See Them Again For Awhile, Lets Get This Fucking Over People!!!!!*, the children get too much, and burn out.
Not really. Lack of vaccination means not getting vaccinated. What's vague about it?you say lack of vaccination..how vague
Interesting theory. What do you have to support it? Meanwhile, in children who are vaccinated, the rates of hepatitis A, B, Hib, measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, rotavirus, and polio essentially drop to zero, where the kids who are NOT vaccinated still can and do get these diseases. You can bitch and moan all you want that there may be some magical cure all that descended upon the United States, but the fact still remains that historically and internationally, these diseases can and DO infect people who are not immunized.just because vaccines are able to protect against some illnesses does not mean that we sit and dine at the all you can eat vaccine buffet..and these statistics of benefits attribute all improvement in lessing the instances of these illness to vaccination when other factors may of significantly contributed to lowering rates of contraction and mortality from these illnesses
I had a few links a page or two back in one of my posts of the initial studies that showed these outcomes. Let me know if you can't find it. The evidence is very clear.Do you happen to have a site for that source? I have NEVER heard that.
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
1. Seldom does a child of a medical expert get *Autism*.
2. Hummmmm,.....why is that?
3. Funny how the laws of averages don't apply to the medical fields children???
3. (a) Thats the study I want to read about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tony Perkins
1.) The HPV vaccine is generally not administered in the shot series that people associate (erroneously) with autism.
2.) Tony: A vaccine is not a "drug".
3.) Of course Tony Perkins, the spokesman for the evangelical loons is going to oppose a vaccine that would prevent the spread of an STD (which he most likely feels is a well deserved punishment for "fornicators"). In fact, if you bothered to listen to his stump speech, you realize that was his entire objection. He made only one single point that was even remotely medically salient and that was along the lines of "It's so new we don't know if it's safe..." which is lame, because that same argument can be made about any drug or vaccine that is released on the open market and thus not a good reason to oppose gardasil. His entire objection to the vaccine was simply that it would prevent the spread of HPV and that it was "not like polio" because polio isn't transmitted by HPV.
In reality, the HPV vax is the one shot that people can get that will eradicate 99% of a certain type of cancer. This isn't about sex at all (at least not to anyone who isn't obsessed with other people's sex lives like Perkins), it's about preventing disease. The mission of modern medicine. This is why goofballs like Perkins with their bible thumping objections are not given any consideration by the medical community. Opposing a vaccination measure that can eradicate a form of cancer simply because you are opposed to people's lifestyle choices is asinine and illogical. Regardless of whether we have vaccines against HPV or not, people are still going to fuck around (as they have since the beginning of time) and spread HPV and cause women to get cervical cancer. So why not be pragmatic about it?
As for Holtorf, he is viewed as a quack by the medical establishment. He makes his living off of pimping treatment modalities that aren't supported by evidence based medicine and have not proven to be effective. He is also not an infectious disease expert nor does he specialize in the bullshit that he was spouting off on Fox news.
1. Seldom does a child of a medical expert get *Autism*.
2. Hummmmm,.....why is that?
3. Funny how the laws of averages don't apply to the medical fields children???
3. (a) Thats the study I want to read about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Once again, that's completely false. In one sentence you state a completely fabricated and unsupported claim, and in point number 3..... the second point 3 you made, you state there is no study. So if there is no investigation that determined it, from where are you drawing this paranoid fabricated conclusion?
Not really. Lack of vaccination means not getting vaccinated. What's vague about it?you say lack of vaccination..how vague
Interesting theory. What do you have to support it? Meanwhile, in children who are vaccinated, the rates of hepatitis A, B, Hib, measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, rotavirus, and polio essentially drop to zero, where the kids who are NOT vaccinated still can and do get these diseases. You can bitch and moan all you want that there may be some magical cure all that descended upon the United States, but the fact still remains that historically and internationally, these diseases can and DO infect people who are not immunized.just because vaccines are able to protect against some illnesses does not mean that we sit and dine at the all you can eat vaccine buffet..and these statistics of benefits attribute all improvement in lessing the instances of these illness to vaccination when other factors may of significantly contributed to lowering rates of contraction and mortality from these illnesses
I had a few links a page or two back in one of my posts of the initial studies that showed these outcomes. Let me know if you can't find it. The evidence is very clear.Do you happen to have a site for that source? I have NEVER heard that.
You seem very focused on "damn the man who wants profit". Good for you. But wanting money and doing good are not mutually exclusive things. You cannot disprove something is correct because someone is making money off it.it is about drug companies trying to legislate themselves billions of dollars on a products they decide are good for you...but you are just fine with that..
Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland
Three Polish doctors and six nurses are facing criminal prosecution after a number of homeless people died following medical trials for a vaccine to the H5N1 bird-flu virus.
Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland - Telegraph
This is just laughable. Do you really need me to tell you that this site is a joke? All it needs is a bad animated gif of like fire or something to really make it super awesome.eots said:
On the topic of doctor's children and autism? NOTHING! You just made that up! I have never come across an article which even remotely suggests doctor's children are somehow magically less susceptible to autism than matched counterparts. I just did a quick search and found nothing that supports it either.1. Inquiring minds want to know.
2. What you got?
1. And then there's, *THIS*
2. Link and sample:Autism News & More: The Age of Autism: One in 15,000 Amish[/url
Olmsteds most infamous gaffe was to be, as far as I can tell, the man who originated the myth that the Amish dont vaccinate and that as a consequence they dont get autism, a fallacy that Olmsted first reported in a two-part story entitled The Amish Anomaly (Part 2 here) and revisited time and time again. Of course, the Amish do vaccinate, and there are autistic Amish. In fact, Olmsted even missed a clinic in the heart of Amish country that treats autistic Amish children. Unfortunately, facts didnt stand in the way of a good myth, which has only grown in the five years since Olmsted first imagined it.
You seem very focused on "damn the man who wants profit". Good for you. But wanting money and doing good are not mutually exclusive things. You cannot disprove something is correct because someone is making money off it.it is about drug companies trying to legislate themselves billions of dollars on a products they decide are good for you...but you are just fine with that..
There's a one TRILLION dollar industry in the US that is mandated by the government to give to children as well. It's called FOOD.
Your error is believing that the companies who manufacture these products are the ones who regulate their use. This is simply not true. Last I checked, the FDA still exists. Doctors who independently read the scientific literature on double blind placebo or comparison drug trials ALSO have a strong hand in the matter. Or does your conspiracy theory extend to big pharma strong arming a federal organization to overlook specific data and guidelines?
you're funny..you make me laugh
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ5OxdIq5DY]YouTube - Monsanto: Extinction[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuK1t474ei4]YouTube - St. Petersburg Times Reports on Zyprexa[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISVlEb8P20Y]YouTube - Get the facts!!!FDA exposed!!![/ame]
So it looks like you provided a news story that shows a drug company paying millions of dollars in damages when it was found their drug had a bad side effect. And you think this somehow shows that the system is bad?
yes they were well aware of the dangers and sold it anyway
Unfortunately, the world is not perfect, and drugs which appear to be safe enough in trials can later be found to cause problems and are pulled or regulated accordingly. The problem is NOT that these companies pay for their mistakes and drugs are pulled when mistakes do occur. A problem would be the drug companies being allowed to continue harming people knowingly without repercussion after the evidence has presented itself. What do you suppose happens to doctor's prescribing habits if evidence came to light that showed a drug had horrible harmful side effects?
they got fined a billion and made 5.2 its like paying the paper boy
What you point to is the exception, NOT the rule. You point to the few that have caused drama instead of the majority which are safe and effective. Perhaps you believe all golfers are cheating bastards because you saw a news special on Tiger Woods? Perhaps all eggs everywhere in the world for the rest of time are infected with Salmonella because of the recent FDA recall?
the list of harmful drugs and substances sold knowingly is a lengthy one
So once again, you seem to be drawing conclusion from outliers, tangents, and poor reasoning. You assert that all vaccinations are bad because someone profits, when the two have nothing to do with one another. You assert that the FDA and drugs are bad because of specific case studies in the past which do NOT represent the norm. Lucky for me, paranoid conspiracy theories such as yours do NOT affect the reason and logic of this country's medical regulations
they have a healthier paranoia of drug companies in Europe and are healthier for it and btw I nevr made such a simplistic statement as all vaccines are "bad"
Oh? I'd very much like to see this list. Could you link to it please?the list of harmful drugs and substances sold knowingly is a lengthy one
Tony Perkins
1.) The HPV vaccine is generally not administered in the shot series that people associate (erroneously) with autism.
2.) Tony: A vaccine is not a "drug".
3.) Of course Tony Perkins, the spokesman for the evangelical loons is going to oppose a vaccine that would prevent the spread of an STD (which he most likely feels is a well deserved punishment for "fornicators"). In fact, if you bothered to listen to his stump speech, you realize that was his entire objection. He made only one single point that was even remotely medically salient and that was along the lines of "It's so new we don't know if it's safe..." which is lame, because that same argument can be made about any drug or vaccine that is released on the open market and thus not a good reason to oppose gardasil. His entire objection to the vaccine was simply that it would prevent the spread of HPV and that it was "not like polio" because polio isn't transmitted by HPV.
In reality, the HPV vax is the one shot that people can get that will eradicate 99% of a certain type of cancer. This isn't about sex at all (at least not to anyone who isn't obsessed with other people's sex lives like Perkins), it's about preventing disease. The mission of modern medicine. This is why goofballs like Perkins with their bible thumping objections are not given any consideration by the medical community. Opposing a vaccination measure that can eradicate a form of cancer simply because you are opposed to people's lifestyle choices is asinine and illogical. Regardless of whether we have vaccines against HPV or not, people are still going to fuck around (as they have since the beginning of time) and spread HPV and cause women to get cervical cancer. So why not be pragmatic about it?
As for Holtorf, he is viewed as a quack by the medical establishment. He makes his living off of pimping treatment modalities that aren't supported by evidence based medicine and have not proven to be effective. He is also not an infectious disease expert nor does he specialize in the bullshit that he was spouting off on Fox news.
it is about drug companies trying to legislate themselves billions of dollars on a products they decide are good for you...but you are just fine with that..