Dr. Andrew Wakefield is not vindicated according the Wikipedia - maybe they need to update their non-neutral page. Here is the research that vindicated Dr. Wakefield: January 10, 2012, the American Society for Microbiology published, “Application of Novel PCR-Based Methods for Detection, Quantitation, and Phylogenetic Characterization of Sutterella Species in Intestinal Biopsy Samples from Children with Autism and Gastrointestinal Disturbances.”
Is Gary Null the last or 1st word on vaccines? Never. Mercola? NOT! The recent article on Dr Wakefield in the NY Times Magazine was hackery. The issue is buried behind $ & lies. The child treated with the intestinal procedure was not harmed by the procedure & it reportedly save the child's life. IMO, Dr Deer is a total liar, Null somewhat, Wakefield has been forced into lying. The procedure on the child would have been overlooked except that Wakefield is unfortunately on fire.
Sorry buddy, but your messiah is a fraud. The emperor has no clothes. 10 of his co-authors removed their names from his "research," for which he was in fact paid by trial lawyers to do as a means of discrediting MMR. He then tried to patent his own rival measles vaccine, which would have made him millions had he succeeded in discrediting MMR. The GMC investigated his work for 2 full years before finding his work unethical. & he lied about each & every 1 of his 12 subjects.
Even if we assumed Deer lied, his investigation's been exhaustively fact-checked by numerous organizations in many fields across the world. & if you know he's lying, why doesn't Wakefield, whom Deer has repeated dared to sue him for libel. But despite having his reputation destroyed, Andy's yet to make any attempt since 2005 to sue Deer. Better hurry before the statute of limitations runs out.
mjr doesn't stop lying, supporting the drug industry, like LBRB does... without logic, honesty or integrity... everything to protect profits, even injuring or killing children
Here he claims Deer's lies have been exhaustively fact checked. I challenge him to list Deer's "facts" that were checked & by whom
mjr ignores the evidence supplied by HRSA (FDA's parent org) & Merck who both state vax are proved to cause or are associated with DOZENS of permanent neurological injuries, including death
@mjr256 Buddy? As mentioned, ALL the actors are lying. Who is the bigger liar? If I was listed with Wakefield on research I would have my name removed purely for career self-preservation If you had read the Times article you might agree that there is more to his story that's positive just by the quality of the writing. That said, the article did convey that Wakefield is a self-serving crooked SOB. Among certain types in his field - not unusual. Among lawyers? In the media? It's expected
They didn't just pull their names from the paper but flat-out rejected Andy's work. & I think THEY make better authorities on THEIR positions than you. But you do have a wonderful imagination. And again, if you can prove even a single lie in Deer's piece, why not tell Andy before the statute of limitations on libel runs out so Deer's alleged lies can be exposed? Though it's not just one article but a decade of careful & well-fact-checked investigation by countless organizations.
mjr simply lies again about 10 co-authors of Dr Wakefield's 1998 paper
They did not "pull their names from the paper". In their retraction they support the paper & it's conclusions stating "The main thrust... was the 1st description of an unexpected intestinal lesion in the children reported. Further evidence has been forthcoming in studies... to support & extend these findings"
The paper never claims MMR causes autism. That was a media mis-interpretation
Michael, you make me laugh. You take a superficial look at the 1st 10 abstracts of studies relevant to vaccine efficacy & safety in the random order they're presented on Pubmed (OUT OF THOUSANDS), and then conclude that because none of those random 10 happened to address childhood vaccines specifically, that they must not exist. Sorry, to call that lazy research is an insult to lazy researchers. Yet he feels this makes him more knowledgeable than all every reputable health org in the world. Wow!
I've repeatedly explained to Michael why his shifting the burden of proof is logically preposterous. It's always the claimant's job (in this case HIM) to prove their accusations. I told him repeatedly that if he can indeed prove his claims as he claims he can that he should take his case to a court of law where there is an objective standard of evidence. He won't do it. He knows he's got only bark w/ no bite & only has the power to convince laypeople who are ignorant of the science.
Now he's unsurprisingly promoting the thoroughly debunked vaccines/autism link. Here, I certainly can narrow the field of well-designed, independent studies:
Michael will undoubtedly plagiarize the bogus refutations of JB Handley & co by simply asserting sans evidence that the studies are lies paid for by pharma but he'll fail to present any actual scientific errors or proof of fraud, nor will his fraud accusations to a court of law
Michael also uses transparent misdirection. None of the studies he cites links vaccines & autism; what they DO say is autism may have environmental factors contributing to biological predisposition, something medical authorities don't deny. Just like no1 denies vaccines carry some risks & that different vaccines vary in their efficacy. This sort of scattershot mudslinging is only impressive to those who just desperately want to sow doubt & confusion w/o any interest in scientific truth.
@mjr256 - If he WAS in court he'd be making a negative averment, with some very interesting evidence too (on top of the studies that Null cites in this video), you however are the one making a positive claim the vaccines are 'safe'... But you are right, he who claims has the burden of proof, he finds yours lacking. Billions in settlements to those with standing (but without pharma's deep pockets and bent judiciary) to take a case to court make a mockery of your dismissive statement.
There's already 200 years of research demonstrating vaccines as both safe & effective. Much of it's published in peer-reviewed journals & every reputable relevant health organization on planet Earth as well as the overwhelming consensus of those w/ the most knowledge & experience w/ vaccines enthusiastically endorse vaccines. It's YOU who are now making positive claims challenging vaccines & making conspiracy accusations. Thus the burden of proof is on YOU to back up YOUR accusations.
You've yet to make 1 legitimate claim that holds up to scrutiny. & like any scientifically illiterate crank who can't align their ideology w/ the facts, you've done the only thing you can do, drum up baseless charges against any1, including the experts, who disagrees w/ you in a misguided attempt wave away the facts. Unfortunately, science doesn't work by authority. Scientists actually show their work & since you don't understand it, you can't point to any actual errors in their work
& now that I've called you on your BS, asking you to put your money where your mouth is in court since you claim to have proof vaccines are far more dangerous than advertised, you run away like a coward. If what you claimed was true, you'd be sitting on the largest fraud case in human history. It'd be much bigger than the recent federal case that forced Pfizer to pay $2.1 billion. But I guess you're just not interested in making billions of dollars while winning your cause, huh.
@mjr256 - Ah yes the old fall back of 'science by consensus' with the conspiracy 'nut' derogatory and all because 'everybody who is anybody says so.' -- It must be true! -- But I think it more accurate to say we are counter-claiming... So which came first, the chicken or the egg...?...
Ah yes, the old, "I'm not a conspiracy nut; I just insist sans evidence that the mountains of evidence against my beliefs is a giant lie & every relevant expert in the world is lying" gambit. It's far more plausible every reputable health org on Earth is wrong &/or lying than just you & a vocal minority of non-experts are. & sorry, but as the reluctant plaintiff against the big pharma conspiracy, the burden of proof is still yours. Demanding proof for your claims is not a counter-claim
"Package Insert" MMR-II - The warnings & adverse events start & end on pages 4 & 8 and COMPLETELY FILL pages 5-7
Merck says these effects were noted during short clinical trials but none are proved... NO RESEARCH IS BEING DONE TO FIND OUT IF MMR CAUSES THESE EFFECTS... Listing them in the package insert protects Merck from liability
Govt admits MMR causes encephalitis, seizures w/ & w/o fever, chronic arthritis & more in the Vaccine Injury Table
@mjr256 - As anyone can see I looked up the 2,780 PMID studies mjr blindly referred to and went through the first 10
Not one had anything to do with childhood vaccination reactions
1 study on measles containing vax was withdrawn
1 on a pox virus therapy for chronic hepatitis was quoted as having limited efficacy, adverse events & high costs
Over a month ago I challenged mjr to present the next 10 in his list of 2700 PMID studieso show where his evidence of "thousands" starts. He won't do it
mjr blindly refers to 2,780 studies from a PMID search of "vaccine efficacy safety". 1st 10 don't support him & he blames me for not looking for the right studies
mjr won't post or defend the 2 best studies he can find proving vax are safe
mjr's evidence is 0 for 10. mjr should list the next 10
1. PMID 21735387 - Meta-analysis of MCCV vax, WITHDRAWN
1. I said he is "paid by industry". No, I said he is a sociopathic shill, defending the drug industry with propaganda & lies (which I exposed) & injures kids. If he isn't getting paid, then he is a stupid sociopathic shill
2. I never said "every study in history [disagreeing with me about vaccines] is fraudulent". I want mjr to post his 2 BEST studies w/lead authors etc. He refuses
Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to back up your accusations that I am paid by industry and that every single medical study in human history that disagrees with you about vaccines is fraudulent. And when's the court date where you show all the amazing evidence you've amassed exposing the largest fraud case in human history? Or are you just all bark and no bite?
WOW! 10 whole studies in the random order they were presented out of thousands! And of those 10, you couldn't find one first-hand study into the safety of childhood vaccines specifically. Must not exist then. What other conclusion could one reach? And I guess that means you know far more than all those medical professionals who are familiar with all the research and have personally produced some of it. Clearly no one could ever accuse you of being a lazy researcher.
Studies... Most have been epidemiological in nature, the examination of LARGE data sets and are notoriously unable to identify 'specific' causes, period. For the laymen that means, if you want specifics, stop generalizing.
Profit streams, corporatism, access to public policy and the resulting conflicts of interest... research grants, funding, stipends, royalties, patent fees, advisory panels, marketing / promotions, manufacturing, litigation (gotta keep the lawyers sweet), money, money, money!
The FDA claims to only have ensured that mercury (thimerisol) has been removed from single does vaccines. The multi dose vaccinations would still have it in them as a preservative (required by law) which means children might still be getting it. This could essentially voids that argument against Wakefield using the thimerisol version of Hep B in his monkey study.
mjr has no evidence vaccines are not linked to autism & declares he won't post any
I list facts from the FDA HRSA & MERCK that vaccines are proved to injure some kids & Merck admits its MMR-II is linked to dozens of severe injuries & death, but NO ONE is investigating to see if MMR is the cause
mjr turns a blind eye to facts, refuses to post evidence, declares I am nuts, have no knowledge & implies I have to give vaccines to be informed
You asked for the 2 best studies & I explained that 2 studies alone are inadequate to make such a conclusion. I'm also know if I cite a thimerosal study, you'll move your goalpost to MMR or to "too much, too soon", etc., which would just demand citing another study addressing the next claim & so on & so forth. I absolutely can link to more than 2 studies debunking the autism hypothesis:
@mjr256 Again you refuse to post any evidence. If your 2 best studies are manipulated irrelevant or simply wrong then the rest of your "evidence" is garbage. I don't have the time to disprove the hundreds of studies the drug industry has paid for, but I can easily refute ANY 2 you support as the best most truthful scientifically sound you can find declaring vaccines safe & not associated with causing autism
The LBRB link you cite is to a website devoted to defending the drug industry
Back for more, eh. As any1 reading our entire exchange can plainly see, I've pointed you directly to thousands of studies refuting your inane arguments (which you even admit to, refuting your own claim that I've presented you w/ no evidence) & I've explained repeatedly why I have no interest in playing your game of shift the burden of proof while moving the goalpost as well as explained that science is cumulative. There's simply no scientific principle adequately proven in 2 studies
cont'd You on the other hand have yet to present any evidence vaccines carry unreasonable risks, that all disconfirming studies are funded by pharma, that studies that are funded by pharma in part or in whole have been corrupted, or that I'm a paid pharma shill. Funny you're the only 1 w/ a get-out-of-evidence free card. You say you can't disprove centuries of research--too bad, Science is hard & there's no shortcut. Science answers to evidence, not childish "pharma ate my evidence" excuses.
mjr continues his excuses. He has ZERO legitimate, sound studies based on true scientific method showing vaccines are safe & not associated with autism. His refusal to stand by 2 exposes him as a lying shill
FACTS-
Vaccines are temporally associated with autism, this cannot be disproved
MANY vaccines cause neurological, gastrointestinal & immunological damage. All could cause or contribute to damage leading to autism
No cause of our autism epidemic is as sound or as supported as vaccines
The MMR vaccine has been given to children for many years. However children today are given many more vaccines than before which would increase the childrens' load of toxic ingredients from these vaccines. With this in mind, this argument is invalid. Maybe children could actively dispose of these toxins in the past when they had maybe 9 vaccinations, however today they get 30+ vaccinations. To pin all this on one vaccine is not helpful and can be harmful because it can be readily proven wrong
@Typhoonbladefist - I don't necessarily disagree with you, up to a point... These injections are of course cumulative, that is all but indisputable by any reasonable thinker, but there is also the added burdens of extra environmental elements and most critically the METHOD of delivery of these vaccines...
@Typhoonbladefist - Injections, irrespective of the number and dangerous frequency and I know the spin, and its lame, as to why these drugs are injected directly into the blood, but how many will stop to consider one thing... That being that if the these drugs were ingested normally, our natural immune systems would dump most of those ingredients where they belong... In the colon with all the rest of the shite.
Though there are more vaccines, the amount of antigens in those vaccines is fewer than the previous generation. & of course vaccines are not "injected directly into the blood." Rather, as even the worst 1st-year med student could tell you, they're injected into the MUSCLE. I'd like to know your source claiming vaccinating orally is a superior method given that it requires a live virus & has up till now proven mostly ineffective. See: Pubmed & search this number set: 10699269
@mjr256 - You again? Still at it I see... But yes thank you for pointing out that little foo-pah of mine there I did not realize I had specified 'blood', but you never refuted my point about them bypassing some of the bodies best natural defenses. Twist it any way you like, that IS what happens, and even that is worse... All those chemicals leeching through the body. And I never made any claim or even stated a preference of HOW these chemicals are put into the body.
Don't look at me. Your friend michael0156 summoned me back to this silly video. But your faux pas is anything but little. Rather, I'd dare say knowing where to stick the jab is arguably the single most basic knowledge one should learn when studying vaccines. It's the equivalent of you insisting your the world's leading mathematician and then making the mistake of saying 2+2=5 w/o it being simply a typo. If you don't even know where the jab goes, you're hopelessly in over your head.
Given you don't even know the 1st thing about the very subject you're criticizing, it's hardly worth my time. A conversation w/ a table would be more productive. But of course as any vaccine expert can tell you, vaccines work by stimulating the body's immune system, not hindering it as you suggest. That's probably the 2nd most basic fact about vaccines. There's 21,609 entries in Pubmed alone on vaccine immune response. & you specifically stated drugs "ingested normally" worked better.
@mjr256 - I did no such thing I don't advocate ANY of these chemical nightmares, period, I said IF ingested, as in if you took that chemical concoction 'as is' (orally) and instead of BYPASSING the bodies natural defenses by injecting it directly into muscle... would it be a surprise to find that your body's defenses would stop most of that 'vaccine' getting. And I never declared myself to be an 'expert', but I know enough and will keep questioning all the statist vaccine apologists.
Backpedal, Backpedal, Backpedal. You don't know where doctors stick the needle. You don't understand how vaccine immune response works. You can't even structure a coherent if-then sentence. Here's a hint: it has two parts.I've already pointed you to 21,609 entries on Pubmed alone that unequivocally demonstrate the exact opposite of what you claim. And by dissenting from the consensus of global medical opinion on the matter, you are implicitly claiming greater expertise. What a joke.
@mjr256 - Get a grip "dissenting", OMG are implying that I'm a denialist now, next I'll be a racist anti-Semite... lol... "implicitly", no no my little pharma lover, I'm EXPRESSLY telling you I know enough to question a "consensus" that is far from "unequivocally demonstrated"... And as to using aluminium adjuvants (for an example) to enhance the immune response, well that is deranged, oh, but then I'm sure you'll just point to some pharma funded study... Yawn, better things to do with my time.
Sorry. I didn't mean to imply it so much as say it straight out. Given you don't even know where doctors stick the needle, I find it amusing that you think you know enough on the subject to seriously challenge those who have researched vaccines for decades & see both their benefits as well as the serious consequences of the diseases they prevent 1st-hand every single day. Even Oedipus didn't have that much hubris. And ah, the conspiracy theory, the last refuge of the scoundrel.
@mjr256 - So finally, I'm to be labelled a 'conspiracy theorist', oh dear, the last refuge of the hopelessly indoctrinated, who sir, are these 'theorists' if not those that see the need to label everything and everyone to enforce their will upon their fellow man? Hubris, scoundrel? I who have never advocated force over another. No no, my little pharma lover, I am the man on the street, the ordinary man, the one who seen 1st hand one his child's development affected by one of these concoctions.
When you blindly reject all disconfirming evidence as part of an evil conspiracy w/o feeling any responsibility to substantiate the accusation w/ evidence, you are a conspiracy theorist. Especially when the conspiracy includes millions of people in medicine, gov't & media all over the world over the span of decades. Oh, such a humble, "ordinary man" who insists he knows better than every reputable health org in the world. So, so humble.
@mjr256 Lame, I'm not "blindly" doing anything... I seen it 1st hand, as have far too many. And for the record it is your lot that make the claims, we question/rebut them, so it up to you to prove those claims not us to disprove. It's quite clear you are like your fellows, far from objective and at best incapable of thinking outside your little boxes, at worst, a paid shill or useful idiot. You who claim WE blindly discount your studies, those self same studies that are invariably not impartial.
You may have seen symptoms appear 1st hand but attributing it to vaccines is your interpretation, not fact. Just because I get the big promotion after finding a penny on the ground doesn't mean the penny caused the promotion. This is superstitious thinking. Science recognizes these pitfalls in human perception & rules them out w/ double-blind controlled testing of lots of people, comparing them w/ a control group. Anecdotes & wild accusations are no substitute for evidence.
@mjr256 - One word "fluoroscopes", just one example of "accepted" practice that turned out to be a crock of shit, "anecdotes & wild accusations" -- Hardly, with pharma settlements into the billions...
And to quote Dr. Verstraeten, simpsonwood transcripts on links between neurodevelopmental delays and "other" disorders and vaccines, page. 40-41: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes."
So your making your case against vaccines by bringing up something completely unrelated that science got wrong in the past? Okay, so what? Science is a self-correcting trial & error process that is expected to be wrong more often than right. For the record, it was the methods of science that determined the dangers of fluoroscopy & they drew that conclusion through EVIDENCE. Being wrong about something in the past has no baring on whether one is wrong about something else in the present
It's a common anti-intellectual argument because it can justify anything. Science was once wrong about X, therefore they're wrong about the shape of the Earth, or therefore they're wrong about leprechauns. Nice try but it's an incredibly asinine & silly means of arriving at a conclusion. We're still going to need your evidence.
@mjr256 - "Anti-intellectual", you really are not that good at twisting my words, I speak plainly and you sir dance around any point made in opposition, that is a shills tactic. But you are dead wrong, there is nothing "unrelated" about my reference. I.e. They withdrew the (established & accepted) single vaccine that concerned (not anti-vaccine) parents preferred in favor of the MMR to "protect the program", follow the money, every time.
If I'm twisting your words & your reason for bringing up fluoroscopy was not the "science has been wrong before" gambit, then why did you bring it up? And if you're going to insist on accusing me of being paid by industry to make comments on YouTube every other sentence, I'm going to have to ask you to either back it up the accusation or admit it's a shameless attempt to poison the well. And professor, selling 3 vaccines for the price of 1 makes less money than 3 for the price of 3.
@mjr256 - Ah! So you admit that science is a process, a "self-correcting trial & error process"... Great! You may just be wrong then, cheers. Shame about those darn conflicts of interest and such, and the fundamental drive within some to express the very worst aspects of human nature. Be it control of others or self aggrandizement , these types tend to gravitate to those positions that dictate the policy and procedures of the professions. Self interest negates natural correction in any system.
Post 2 best pieces of EVIDENCE vaccines are safe & not correleated to autism. List lead authors sponsors conflicts conclusion
I will show they are frauds wrong or too conflicted
Why only the 2 best? There are 100s of studies & articles WEAKLY claiming "no evidence found" or a "lack of association" for a vax/autism link. The link is obvious, denying the obvious delays scientific investigation
If their 2 best are frauds... what do drug shills have?
@optionsupdate - I know, it's a bit big, I uploaded it in 16 parts previously, I highly recommend this one though. He methodical states the case, rebuts the critics without their ad hominem attacks, readily provable fact, complete with cited references etc... More than enough for one prepared to research it themselves and make an informed decision.
That's funny because I'd be willing to put serious money on you, like Gary, not having a proper science education. No, I have not listened to 4 hours of Mr. Null foaming at the mouth about all the evil boogymen out to get you, nor do I need to. I've heard his claims before & probably know his arguments as well as he does. The anti-vaccine movement hasn't invented a new argument in years. And none of their old arguments have stood up to even the slightest scrutiny. 4 hrs of Gary is not research.
Apparently I haven't, as my point is not that "anti-vaccine people suck". My point is that Wakefield is a proven fraud who had a financial interest in deceiving the public about MMR, that his research has repeatedly failed to be replicated, and that anti-vaccine activists have killed children by perpetuating dangerous misinformation.
@mjr256 - I'd be willing to put serious money on you not having watched all 4 hours of the show, nor having bothered your arse looking up all the information and sources he quotes. You're welcome to your opinion, but frankly I have better things to occupy my time with than argue about it, none of my business. And the "anti-vaccine people suck" comment came from my noticing a video YOU favoured. Say whatever you want, I don't bother blocking people, except when they get abusive.
@mjr256 The only people killing kids are like yourself, shilling for the drug industry. Forcing vaccines for all ignores kids susceptible to damage that vax are PROVED to cause & kids with impaired immunity damaged by live bacteria/virus in some vax
The Vaccine Injury Table lists dozens of known vaccine-caused injuries
Finding those children who are sensitive to vax toxins or who have impaired immune systems is necessary
YOU stand in the way of the knowledge & science that could save them
Love how every anti-vaxxer invents criminal accusations against every1 who disagrees w/ them w/o feeling any responsibility to back up the accusation w/ any evidence. It only demonstrates your contempt for intellectual honesty, as it did that for your predecessor, Joe McCarthy. The fact is medical exemptions exist in all 50 U.S. states & those w/ immunodeficiency disorders that prevent them from being vaccinated are the most vulnerable to the diseases spread by the unvaccinated.
@mjr256 Did you know that all the people on this radio recording are not anti-vaccine? Just keep in mind that everyone that appears to be opposed to vaccination, wouldn't necessarily be opposed to it if they were proven safe and effective, which they effectively have not been. In the case here of Deer, the criminal accusations are actually warranted because of potential patient privacy violations. I work with sensitive patient information and I can lose my job if I abuse that power.
Actually, they would & they are. No1 claims vaccines are 100% safe. Nothing is 100% safe. Vaccines are however the safest medical intervention we have. Serious injury is rare & the benefits far outweigh the risks. What I'd like to know from you is what would you consider safe enough?
As Deer has pointed out, if the accusations are legit, then either sue him or shut up. Dozens of organizations in multiple industries have failed to find any fault in his actions.
@mjr256 Actually vaccines are not the safest medical intervention we have. Check out the study of aluminum in vaccines causing neurological problems and possible links to Gulf War syndrom on Pubmed and you are way off with the benefits outweighing the risk especially when there have been cases where vaccinated children become infected with the same disease they were vaccinated for. Did you even listen to this or did outright dismiss it without listening to the facts like I originally did?
Can you be more specific on that study? What's the epidemiological data show? What's the risk vs. benefit ratio? What is the sample size? How big are the experimental & control groups? What are the error bars? What kind of neurological problems? What does "possible links" links mean? Does the study suggest further research is needed? You seem to be jumping to rather large conclusions considering, again, every reputable health organization in the world endorses vaccination.
Soldiers who never even got sent overseas to fight in the Gulf War, came down with the same Gulf war syndrome that soldiers that did. Well, they were all vaccinated against anthrax and some other things as well. I think it was attributed to the Squalene additive.
Funny how 10,000s of studies that disagree w/ you are blindly assumed to have been funded by pharma, who are assumed to be lying in the studies that you assume have no protocols to avoid bias. Yet any studies you find that even superficially supports your ideology is viewed as gospel. Must've slipped past those shill journal editors, huh. It's almost like your only standard of evidence is it supports your views. Of course, this is just 1 mouse study & military only hires HUMANS
@mjr256 Do you want me to do your homework for you too? Why don't you look at both sides of the story yourself and research it instead of making up some random number claiming it to be the gospel yourself. Many, if not all, vaccine studies operate on the short term and also do not factor in the total vaccine schedule we are giving our children. Vaccines have not been safe for everyone, adults and infants have come down with problems after taking certain vaccines.Something is obviously wrong here
I am quite versed in the arguments on both sides. It's not my fault the health officials are the only ones bringing honest arguments. Nor did I invent random numbers, as you dishonestly state. Go to Pubmed yourself & type: vaccine safety efficacy. Currently, there's 2,780 entries. Some will show possible harms & can easily be cherry-picked to suggest those harms are common, but the over-all body of long-term medical literature shows the benefits outweigh the few risks.
@mjr256 List 2 best studies showing vaccine benefits outweigh risks. Lead authors sponsors conflicts summary.
Don't just refer to studies that, w/o evidence, simply state this is a fact. List studies that PROVE a healthy child is better off with vaccinations than without
Just as you refuse to list the 2 best studies you can find that vaccines are safe & not correlated to autism, you will refuse to list 2 best studies (ONLY 2) proving benefits outweigh risks of vaccines
I've already addressed your disingenuous call for the "2 best studies" so you can invent excuses to deny their validity like a Birther invents excuses to deny Obama's birth record. Again, science is cumulative & there aren't even 2 studies that alone can prove gravity. Neither health professionals nor I have anything to prove to you, who lack even rudimentary knowledge on the subject. How many vaccines have you personally administered or even held? You got a case? Take it to court.
@Typhoonbladefist Aluminum is a known neurotoxin and is present in many if not all vaccines in levels beyond the safety limit set by the FDA. It's shown problems in mice, and as outlined in this video, monkeys when given the same vaccine schedule we give infants today. I need to find a link to that study though. Not every single human body is the same, some may be able to dispose of the toxins, but if there is even ONE case linking problems to the vaccine, then alarms should be raised but aren't
Aluminum is absorbed by the human body each day in greater quantity than is in any vaccine, which again is injected into the muscle & not the bloodstream...cus I know how easy it is for you to confuse. & alum.'s actually in few vaccines & never beyond safety levels. Mice & monkeys are not human beings. While you can't seem to tell the difference, most vaccine experts have no such problem. Got any actual HUMAN studies? Preferably by those w/ a better sense of priorities than you
So you oppose vaccines, which have proven beyond reasonable doubt to be both incredibly safe & incredibly effective in saving lives but support acupuncture, a barbaric superstition involving people w/ no education in the human body stabbing people w/ sharp objects, which has yet to ever sufficiently demonstrate it's an effective procedure in treating any health issue. How could I have ever questioned your priorities or medical expertise?
Google - "vaccine injury table"- A list of injuries PROVED caused by vaccines. It includes encephalitis, meningitis, immune disorders (arthritis & blood), seizures, intestinal, death & many others
Google - "Package Insert" & any vax- you will find mfg's warnings "Package Insert" MMR-II - Live vax virus is in breast milk, throat & nose of vaccinated for 28 days- Merck says many diseases are linked to MMR, but causation isn't proved- Vax are PROVED UNSAFE for some kids
I've already address this straw man argument. No1 disputes that vaccines can cause some injuries. What every reputable health org says is vaccines cause few serious injuries & that the benefits of vaccines to both the individual & the society outweigh the risks. And the very reason medical exemptions exist is because some have autoimmune disorders. We detect this early & these are the very people most hurt by healthy people around them who choose not to vaccinate.
mjr tries to inflame the argument with insults & derogatory associations rather than use studies
MMR & other live vax spread disease to people with known immune disorders (genetic or acquired) & to those kids with immune impairments from poor nutrition or poisons
Most kids don't qualify for exemptions. Even the immune deficient have vax recommended for them by the drug industry
Post your 2 best studies. lead authors, conflicts, sponsors. I will expose your lies again
But you've yet to do that even once. Rather, it's YOU who have used character attacks. I just called you out on it & refuted specific arguments w/ facts. Point to a single post of mine w/ insults & no arguments. I've already pointed you to 10,000s of studies on Pubmed that address vaccine efficacy & safety. But no, I'm not going to play your game so that you can parrot J.B. Handley or whoever in just dismissing studies on bogus grounds. If you can prove corruption, take it to court.
mjr again making excuses not to post 2 BEST pieces of evidence to show vax are safe or not correlated to autism. List lead authors sponsors conflicts & summary. I will show the best 2 he finds are fraud wrong irrelevant or too conflicted
Vaccines are forced on kids in the USA, by law (The NCVIA) no one can sue a vaccine maker for vax-caused injuries, vax are called "unavoidably unsafe" & have "side effects which are unavoidable"
HRSA "Vaccine Injury Table" lists dozens of PROVED vax injuries
Again, the question is flawed from the outset & your dismissive response is assured. The burden of proof lies w/ those claiming the medical consensus & its well published body of evidence is wrong. If you want to make a specific claim, I'll try to respond to it, but scientific literature is cumulative & I have no interest in pretending any firmly established science rests on any 2 studies or see you anomaly-hunt. What's YOUR best case against vaccines?
The issue of vaccines being "forced" has been addressed: fas(dot)org/sgp/crs/RS21414(dot)pdf. The gov't also forces people to obey traffic laws, not drink & drive, or not beat their children to death. Most vaccines are only recommended. Of course none of this politics says anything of the veracity of your claims that vaccines are not safe & not effective.
NCVIA only says manufacturers can't be sued for the unavoidable risks we know of & accept because they are vastly outweighed by the benefits. This is similar to strict liability laws in every industry w/ an increased likelihood of injury. For instance, the construction industry. The vaccine court compensates those who may have suffered a side effect. But vaccine manufacturers absolutely can be sued for negligence. Again, no1 says vaccines can't cause harm so stop pretending it's disputed
Again mjr repeats the lie that vaccine benefits outweigh the risks. He has no evidence to support this claim
He also lies about the purpose of the NCVIA, but this time he traps himself with his lies
He posts "vax makers "can't be sued for the unavoidable risks we know of and accept..." The NCVIA exempts drug companies from ANY side effect they list in their package inserts which mjr now calls "unavoidable". Merck lists dozens of such injuries, which mjr now declares are "unavoidable"
On the contrary, ALL the available evidence, when compiled, demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that vaccine benefits outweigh the risks to any1 w/ a reasonable sense of priorities.
As for the NCVIA, it's you who are wrong. Very wrong as this issue of what "unavoidable" means here has been thoroughly clarified at this point. It was further clarified in the recent Bruesewitz v. Wyeth decision:
Actually, I said there were 2,780 entries on Pubmed alone that address vaccine safety & efficacy. I'm not simply asserting it; I'm saying any1 can see for themselves by going to Pubmed & typing into the search bar: vaccine safety efficacy. Some entries will indeed show possible harms, but only if cherry-picked will one get the impression those harms are common & reasonably outweigh the enormous benefits.
Merck warns MMR-II is linked to these side effects (GOOGLE - merck package insert MMR-II). Under NCVIA Merck's can't be sued for ANY listed injury. Some are proved, NO ONE IS CHECKING IF MMR CAUSES THE REST
On the contrary, health professionals CONSTANTLY look for causal relationships btw vaccines & all manner of illnesses. Just because you haven't bothered to look at the medical literature, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Take GBS for example. An analysis of side effects recorded among 90 million Chinese vaccinated during the 2009–2010 flu season found only 11 were later diagnosed w/ GBS, no more than what normal. The study appears online in the New England Journal of Medicine
mjr is fully exposed as a lying drug industry shill. Unable to post 2 best studies he can find & defend them. He ignores facts of vax damage I posted that is admitted by Merck, FDA, CDC, HRSA
Vaccine caused damage to kids is INDISPUTABLE. In light of the facts mjr lies, insults & makes excuses for not posting evidence. He deliberately puts children in harm's way & extends the suffering of kids & their families dealing with vax-caused injuries & diseases
The conspiracy theory's a favorite for the paranoid. It's a convenient answer when the numbers just don't add up. It takes no real proof & often the absence of proof is just proof it exists! They just KNOW they have "The Truth" & are uninterested in anything that might challenge that belief. Science & evidence don't matter, other than how they can be twisted to reach the desired conclusions & any scientific evidence conflicting w/ that belief is seen as part of a cover-up. It's how cults operate
Pharmaceutical companies don't own 90% f medical research. That is a contemptible lie. You're living in a fantasy world. Stop believing every tall tale you read on the internet that reinforces your anti-science bias. There is no one cure for all cancer and there never will be because all cancer is different. You've been horribly misled by quacks who want to sell you their bogus cures. But if you're not going to better educate yourself, maybe I should just offer to sell you my magic beans
Yeah, I have a Wordpress blog too. They employ no fact-checkers. So I prefer to use primary sources such as the studies themselves & reputable health organizations w/ a long, demonstrated history of expertise in actually practicing & researching medicine w/ all their accountability & copious protocols for weeding out fraud. Just because it's written on the internet, doesn't make it true. Nor is simply sharing your ideology itself a proper standard of evidence.
@mjr256 ...nor is youtube a proper forum for discussing these matters. So about this video. Did you actually watch it or did you come here to start a fight?
There's no more a media smear campaign against Wakefield than there was against Madoff. Andy's fraud's been exposed. Fact checkers from around the world have reproduced all of Deer's research. & even before we knew it was fraud, we knew it was bad science, which is how he lost his license. As I said, in the last days, the convicted are always forced into grandiose conspiracy theories because what else can they say? & for the true believers, that's all they need to keep believing.
Andrew Wakefield is Bernard Madoff with a body count. His fraud has been exposed & his profits from it, accounted for. And like any madman who knows his days are numbered, his last recourse is to invoke a grand conspiracy against him. And for the truly indoctrinated, that's good enough because they've opted to forgo all critical thought in favor of blind obedience to the charismatic leader. It worked for Jim Jones, for Koresh & for Qaddafi. People have an amazing capacity for self-deception.
@mjr256 No mate, you are an ignoramus who should actually look into the fact. the evidence actually shows he did no wrong and everything was above board. He didn't fiddle any data either as he never gave any diagnosis. Also what would the world's leading gastrointerologist want to ruin his life and career to tell the truth and be ruined by drugs companies who acted fraudulently and stand to lose trillions if the truth is allowed to be accepted.
@mjr256 They have everything to lose. it's not the only incident where honest doctors have been ruined by drugs companies who control 90% of medical 'reearch'. Plenty whistleblowers have said there are many cures for cancer , all shut down because a cure would end the gravey train of $400billion a year from drugs companies and cancer research. this is not the only scandal, and yes evidence does exist for all this....if anyone honest enough wants to check it out.
@mjr256 The media smear campaign againts Dr Wakefield has been exposed anyway, as have the false allegations and lies which don't stand up and hold water. the kangeroo court at the BMJ who is heavily funded by the drugs companies, found 5 'judges' to have links to the drugs companies producing the vaccines, or related to big people in those drugs companies ! A farce and conflict of interest to say the least ! Wakefield has been vindicated recently anyway !
Dr. Andrew Wakefield is not vindicated according the Wikipedia - maybe they need to update their non-neutral page. Here is the research that vindicated Dr. Wakefield: January 10, 2012, the American Society for Microbiology published, “Application of Novel PCR-Based Methods for Detection, Quantitation, and Phylogenetic Characterization of Sutterella Species in Intestinal Biopsy Samples from Children with Autism and Gastrointestinal Disturbances.”
mujaku 1 week ago
danger0usknowledge 6 months ago
@danger0usknowledge
Sorry buddy, but your messiah is a fraud. The emperor has no clothes. 10 of his co-authors removed their names from his "research," for which he was in fact paid by trial lawyers to do as a means of discrediting MMR. He then tried to patent his own rival measles vaccine, which would have made him millions had he succeeded in discrediting MMR. The GMC investigated his work for 2 full years before finding his work unethical. & he lied about each & every 1 of his 12 subjects.
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
Even if we assumed Deer lied, his investigation's been exhaustively fact-checked by numerous organizations in many fields across the world. & if you know he's lying, why doesn't Wakefield, whom Deer has repeated dared to sue him for libel. But despite having his reputation destroyed, Andy's yet to make any attempt since 2005 to sue Deer. Better hurry before the statute of limitations runs out.
"Wakefield has been forced into lying."
LOL. You Wakefield worshipers are too much.
mjr256 6 months ago
mjr doesn't stop lying, supporting the drug industry, like LBRB does... without logic, honesty or integrity... everything to protect profits, even injuring or killing children
Here he claims Deer's lies have been exhaustively fact checked. I challenge him to list Deer's "facts" that were checked & by whom
mjr ignores the evidence supplied by HRSA (FDA's parent org) & Merck who both state vax are proved to cause or are associated with DOZENS of permanent neurological injuries, including death
michael0156 6 months ago
danger0usknowledge 6 months ago
Comment removed
mjr256 6 months ago
They didn't just pull their names from the paper but flat-out rejected Andy's work. & I think THEY make better authorities on THEIR positions than you. But you do have a wonderful imagination. And again, if you can prove even a single lie in Deer's piece, why not tell Andy before the statute of limitations on libel runs out so Deer's alleged lies can be exposed? Though it's not just one article but a decade of careful & well-fact-checked investigation by countless organizations.
mjr256 6 months ago
@mjr256 I have a wonderful imagination?
I think certain writers for the NY Times can
outperform me and get paid for it. She had an
easy target in "Andy" & she blew it.
My point was no one is my Messiah in
this mess as I MADE CLEAR. I don't trust the
vaccine & vaccine/ autism argument ON EITHER SIDE.
They all have lawyers & I would never listen
to Wakefield's or yours for that matter.
BTW, has your name been mentioned?
danger0usknowledge 6 months ago
mjr simply lies again about 10 co-authors of Dr Wakefield's 1998 paper
They did not "pull their names from the paper". In their retraction they support the paper & it's conclusions stating "The main thrust... was the 1st description of an unexpected intestinal lesion in the children reported. Further evidence has been forthcoming in studies... to support & extend these findings"
The paper never claims MMR causes autism. That was a media mis-interpretation
mjr knows this & lies anyway
michael0156 6 months ago
Michael, you make me laugh. You take a superficial look at the 1st 10 abstracts of studies relevant to vaccine efficacy & safety in the random order they're presented on Pubmed (OUT OF THOUSANDS), and then conclude that because none of those random 10 happened to address childhood vaccines specifically, that they must not exist. Sorry, to call that lazy research is an insult to lazy researchers. Yet he feels this makes him more knowledgeable than all every reputable health org in the world. Wow!
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
I've repeatedly explained to Michael why his shifting the burden of proof is logically preposterous. It's always the claimant's job (in this case HIM) to prove their accusations. I told him repeatedly that if he can indeed prove his claims as he claims he can that he should take his case to a court of law where there is an objective standard of evidence. He won't do it. He knows he's got only bark w/ no bite & only has the power to convince laypeople who are ignorant of the science.
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
Now he's unsurprisingly promoting the thoroughly debunked vaccines/autism link. Here, I certainly can narrow the field of well-designed, independent studies:
autismsciencefoundation(.)org/autismandvaccines(.)html
Michael will undoubtedly plagiarize the bogus refutations of JB Handley & co by simply asserting sans evidence that the studies are lies paid for by pharma but he'll fail to present any actual scientific errors or proof of fraud, nor will his fraud accusations to a court of law
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
Michael also uses transparent misdirection. None of the studies he cites links vaccines & autism; what they DO say is autism may have environmental factors contributing to biological predisposition, something medical authorities don't deny. Just like no1 denies vaccines carry some risks & that different vaccines vary in their efficacy. This sort of scattershot mudslinging is only impressive to those who just desperately want to sow doubt & confusion w/o any interest in scientific truth.
mjr256 6 months ago
@mjr256 - If he WAS in court he'd be making a negative averment, with some very interesting evidence too (on top of the studies that Null cites in this video), you however are the one making a positive claim the vaccines are 'safe'... But you are right, he who claims has the burden of proof, he finds yours lacking. Billions in settlements to those with standing (but without pharma's deep pockets and bent judiciary) to take a case to court make a mockery of your dismissive statement.
28318511 6 months ago
@28318511
There's already 200 years of research demonstrating vaccines as both safe & effective. Much of it's published in peer-reviewed journals & every reputable relevant health organization on planet Earth as well as the overwhelming consensus of those w/ the most knowledge & experience w/ vaccines enthusiastically endorse vaccines. It's YOU who are now making positive claims challenging vaccines & making conspiracy accusations. Thus the burden of proof is on YOU to back up YOUR accusations.
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
You've yet to make 1 legitimate claim that holds up to scrutiny. & like any scientifically illiterate crank who can't align their ideology w/ the facts, you've done the only thing you can do, drum up baseless charges against any1, including the experts, who disagrees w/ you in a misguided attempt wave away the facts. Unfortunately, science doesn't work by authority. Scientists actually show their work & since you don't understand it, you can't point to any actual errors in their work
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd
& now that I've called you on your BS, asking you to put your money where your mouth is in court since you claim to have proof vaccines are far more dangerous than advertised, you run away like a coward. If what you claimed was true, you'd be sitting on the largest fraud case in human history. It'd be much bigger than the recent federal case that forced Pfizer to pay $2.1 billion. But I guess you're just not interested in making billions of dollars while winning your cause, huh.
mjr256 6 months ago
@mjr256 - Ah yes the old fall back of 'science by consensus' with the conspiracy 'nut' derogatory and all because 'everybody who is anybody says so.' -- It must be true! -- But I think it more accurate to say we are counter-claiming... So which came first, the chicken or the egg...?...
28318511 6 months ago
@28318511
Ah yes, the old, "I'm not a conspiracy nut; I just insist sans evidence that the mountains of evidence against my beliefs is a giant lie & every relevant expert in the world is lying" gambit. It's far more plausible every reputable health org on Earth is wrong &/or lying than just you & a vocal minority of non-experts are. & sorry, but as the reluctant plaintiff against the big pharma conspiracy, the burden of proof is still yours. Demanding proof for your claims is not a counter-claim
mjr256 6 months ago
@mjr256
Here is evidence autism is triggered by sensitivity to environmental triggers (toxins) & NOT genes. More toxins (like vaccine) = more autism
04-2011 PMID 21522181 "despite the strong influence of genetic factors, [Autism] association studies have yet to identify... major effect genes"
07-2011 PMID 21727249 "Susceptibility to ASD [shared twins] has MODERATE genetic heritability & a SUBSTANTIAL...environmental component"
mjr refuses to list even one specific study, quote it, defend it
michael0156 6 months ago
Google "Package Insert" & ANY VACCINE
"Package Insert" MMR-II - The warnings & adverse events start & end on pages 4 & 8 and COMPLETELY FILL pages 5-7
Merck says these effects were noted during short clinical trials but none are proved... NO RESEARCH IS BEING DONE TO FIND OUT IF MMR CAUSES THESE EFFECTS... Listing them in the package insert protects Merck from liability
Govt admits MMR causes encephalitis, seizures w/ & w/o fever, chronic arthritis & more in the Vaccine Injury Table
ONE vax
michael0156 6 months ago
@mjr256 - As anyone can see I looked up the 2,780 PMID studies mjr blindly referred to and went through the first 10
Not one had anything to do with childhood vaccination reactions
1 study on measles containing vax was withdrawn
1 on a pox virus therapy for chronic hepatitis was quoted as having limited efficacy, adverse events & high costs
Over a month ago I challenged mjr to present the next 10 in his list of 2700 PMID studieso show where his evidence of "thousands" starts. He won't do it
michael0156 6 months ago
mjr blindly refers to 2,780 studies from a PMID search of "vaccine efficacy safety". 1st 10 don't support him & he blames me for not looking for the right studies
mjr won't post or defend the 2 best studies he can find proving vax are safe
mjr's evidence is 0 for 10. mjr should list the next 10
1. PMID 21735387 - Meta-analysis of MCCV vax, WITHDRAWN
2. PMID 21734465 - Rabies vaccine, irrelevant to childhood vaccines
3. PMID 21729731 - WHO article on vax production, not use
continued
michael0156 8 months ago
continuation of mjr's 1st 10 studies of 2,780 "proving" kids' vax safe/effective
4. PMID 21718744 - Method of testing vax in guinea pigs
5. PMID 21711190 - Typhoid vax for chicks
6. PMID 21708998 - Mouse vax safety
7. PMID 21708205 - Vax for fish
8. PMID 21703206 - Anti-viral med (not vax) for chronic hepatitis
9. PMID 21703032 - Vax for pig disease
10. PMID 21699798 - Quote- "Poxvirus vaccine therapy for chronic hepatitis C has limited efficacy, adverse effects, high costs"
michael0156 8 months ago
mjr marks his posts as spam & blames me
His lies -
1. I said he is "paid by industry". No, I said he is a sociopathic shill, defending the drug industry with propaganda & lies (which I exposed) & injures kids. If he isn't getting paid, then he is a stupid sociopathic shill
2. I never said "every study in history [disagreeing with me about vaccines] is fraudulent". I want mjr to post his 2 BEST studies w/lead authors etc. He refuses
He also ignores the evidence I have posted
michael0156 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to back up your accusations that I am paid by industry and that every single medical study in human history that disagrees with you about vaccines is fraudulent. And when's the court date where you show all the amazing evidence you've amassed exposing the largest fraud case in human history? Or are you just all bark and no bite?
mjr256 8 months ago
Comment removed
mjr256 8 months ago
WOW! 10 whole studies in the random order they were presented out of thousands! And of those 10, you couldn't find one first-hand study into the safety of childhood vaccines specifically. Must not exist then. What other conclusion could one reach? And I guess that means you know far more than all those medical professionals who are familiar with all the research and have personally produced some of it. Clearly no one could ever accuse you of being a lazy researcher.
mjr256 8 months ago
Comment removed
mjr256 8 months ago
Studies... Most have been epidemiological in nature, the examination of LARGE data sets and are notoriously unable to identify 'specific' causes, period. For the laymen that means, if you want specifics, stop generalizing.
Profit streams, corporatism, access to public policy and the resulting conflicts of interest... research grants, funding, stipends, royalties, patent fees, advisory panels, marketing / promotions, manufacturing, litigation (gotta keep the lawyers sweet), money, money, money!
28318511 8 months ago
fda(dot)gov(slash)BiologicsBloodVaccines(slash)SafetyAvailability(slash)VaccineSafety(slash)UCM096228
The FDA claims to only have ensured that mercury (thimerisol) has been removed from single does vaccines. The multi dose vaccinations would still have it in them as a preservative (required by law) which means children might still be getting it. This could essentially voids that argument against Wakefield using the thimerisol version of Hep B in his monkey study.
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
mjr has no evidence vaccines are not linked to autism & declares he won't post any
I list facts from the FDA HRSA & MERCK that vaccines are proved to injure some kids & Merck admits its MMR-II is linked to dozens of severe injuries & death, but NO ONE is investigating to see if MMR is the cause
mjr turns a blind eye to facts, refuses to post evidence, declares I am nuts, have no knowledge & implies I have to give vaccines to be informed
2 best studies mjr, I'm still waiting
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
You asked for the 2 best studies & I explained that 2 studies alone are inadequate to make such a conclusion. I'm also know if I cite a thimerosal study, you'll move your goalpost to MMR or to "too much, too soon", etc., which would just demand citing another study addressing the next claim & so on & so forth. I absolutely can link to more than 2 studies debunking the autism hypothesis:
ht tp leftbrainrightbrain(dot)co(dot)uk/2011/04/studies-on-the-autism-vaccine-hypothesis
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 Again you refuse to post any evidence. If your 2 best studies are manipulated irrelevant or simply wrong then the rest of your "evidence" is garbage. I don't have the time to disprove the hundreds of studies the drug industry has paid for, but I can easily refute ANY 2 you support as the best most truthful scientifically sound you can find declaring vaccines safe & not associated with causing autism
The LBRB link you cite is to a website devoted to defending the drug industry
michael0156 6 months ago
@michael0156
Back for more, eh. As any1 reading our entire exchange can plainly see, I've pointed you directly to thousands of studies refuting your inane arguments (which you even admit to, refuting your own claim that I've presented you w/ no evidence) & I've explained repeatedly why I have no interest in playing your game of shift the burden of proof while moving the goalpost as well as explained that science is cumulative. There's simply no scientific principle adequately proven in 2 studies
mjr256 6 months ago
cont'd You on the other hand have yet to present any evidence vaccines carry unreasonable risks, that all disconfirming studies are funded by pharma, that studies that are funded by pharma in part or in whole have been corrupted, or that I'm a paid pharma shill. Funny you're the only 1 w/ a get-out-of-evidence free card. You say you can't disprove centuries of research--too bad, Science is hard & there's no shortcut. Science answers to evidence, not childish "pharma ate my evidence" excuses.
mjr256 6 months ago
mjr continues his excuses. He has ZERO legitimate, sound studies based on true scientific method showing vaccines are safe & not associated with autism. His refusal to stand by 2 exposes him as a lying shill
FACTS-
Vaccines are temporally associated with autism, this cannot be disproved
MANY vaccines cause neurological, gastrointestinal & immunological damage. All could cause or contribute to damage leading to autism
No cause of our autism epidemic is as sound or as supported as vaccines
michael0156 6 months ago
The MMR vaccine has been given to children for many years. However children today are given many more vaccines than before which would increase the childrens' load of toxic ingredients from these vaccines. With this in mind, this argument is invalid. Maybe children could actively dispose of these toxins in the past when they had maybe 9 vaccinations, however today they get 30+ vaccinations. To pin all this on one vaccine is not helpful and can be harmful because it can be readily proven wrong
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist - I don't necessarily disagree with you, up to a point... These injections are of course cumulative, that is all but indisputable by any reasonable thinker, but there is also the added burdens of extra environmental elements and most critically the METHOD of delivery of these vaccines...
28318511 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist - Injections, irrespective of the number and dangerous frequency and I know the spin, and its lame, as to why these drugs are injected directly into the blood, but how many will stop to consider one thing... That being that if the these drugs were ingested normally, our natural immune systems would dump most of those ingredients where they belong... In the colon with all the rest of the shite.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
Though there are more vaccines, the amount of antigens in those vaccines is fewer than the previous generation. & of course vaccines are not "injected directly into the blood." Rather, as even the worst 1st-year med student could tell you, they're injected into the MUSCLE. I'd like to know your source claiming vaccinating orally is a superior method given that it requires a live virus & has up till now proven mostly ineffective. See: Pubmed & search this number set: 10699269
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - You again? Still at it I see... But yes thank you for pointing out that little foo-pah of mine there I did not realize I had specified 'blood', but you never refuted my point about them bypassing some of the bodies best natural defenses. Twist it any way you like, that IS what happens, and even that is worse... All those chemicals leeching through the body. And I never made any claim or even stated a preference of HOW these chemicals are put into the body.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
Don't look at me. Your friend michael0156 summoned me back to this silly video. But your faux pas is anything but little. Rather, I'd dare say knowing where to stick the jab is arguably the single most basic knowledge one should learn when studying vaccines. It's the equivalent of you insisting your the world's leading mathematician and then making the mistake of saying 2+2=5 w/o it being simply a typo. If you don't even know where the jab goes, you're hopelessly in over your head.
mjr256 8 months ago
cont'd
Given you don't even know the 1st thing about the very subject you're criticizing, it's hardly worth my time. A conversation w/ a table would be more productive. But of course as any vaccine expert can tell you, vaccines work by stimulating the body's immune system, not hindering it as you suggest. That's probably the 2nd most basic fact about vaccines. There's 21,609 entries in Pubmed alone on vaccine immune response. & you specifically stated drugs "ingested normally" worked better.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - I did no such thing I don't advocate ANY of these chemical nightmares, period, I said IF ingested, as in if you took that chemical concoction 'as is' (orally) and instead of BYPASSING the bodies natural defenses by injecting it directly into muscle... would it be a surprise to find that your body's defenses would stop most of that 'vaccine' getting. And I never declared myself to be an 'expert', but I know enough and will keep questioning all the statist vaccine apologists.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
Backpedal, Backpedal, Backpedal. You don't know where doctors stick the needle. You don't understand how vaccine immune response works. You can't even structure a coherent if-then sentence. Here's a hint: it has two parts.I've already pointed you to 21,609 entries on Pubmed alone that unequivocally demonstrate the exact opposite of what you claim. And by dissenting from the consensus of global medical opinion on the matter, you are implicitly claiming greater expertise. What a joke.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - Get a grip "dissenting", OMG are implying that I'm a denialist now, next I'll be a racist anti-Semite... lol... "implicitly", no no my little pharma lover, I'm EXPRESSLY telling you I know enough to question a "consensus" that is far from "unequivocally demonstrated"... And as to using aluminium adjuvants (for an example) to enhance the immune response, well that is deranged, oh, but then I'm sure you'll just point to some pharma funded study... Yawn, better things to do with my time.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
Sorry. I didn't mean to imply it so much as say it straight out. Given you don't even know where doctors stick the needle, I find it amusing that you think you know enough on the subject to seriously challenge those who have researched vaccines for decades & see both their benefits as well as the serious consequences of the diseases they prevent 1st-hand every single day. Even Oedipus didn't have that much hubris. And ah, the conspiracy theory, the last refuge of the scoundrel.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - So finally, I'm to be labelled a 'conspiracy theorist', oh dear, the last refuge of the hopelessly indoctrinated, who sir, are these 'theorists' if not those that see the need to label everything and everyone to enforce their will upon their fellow man? Hubris, scoundrel? I who have never advocated force over another. No no, my little pharma lover, I am the man on the street, the ordinary man, the one who seen 1st hand one his child's development affected by one of these concoctions.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
When you blindly reject all disconfirming evidence as part of an evil conspiracy w/o feeling any responsibility to substantiate the accusation w/ evidence, you are a conspiracy theorist. Especially when the conspiracy includes millions of people in medicine, gov't & media all over the world over the span of decades. Oh, such a humble, "ordinary man" who insists he knows better than every reputable health org in the world. So, so humble.
See: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 Lame, I'm not "blindly" doing anything... I seen it 1st hand, as have far too many. And for the record it is your lot that make the claims, we question/rebut them, so it up to you to prove those claims not us to disprove. It's quite clear you are like your fellows, far from objective and at best incapable of thinking outside your little boxes, at worst, a paid shill or useful idiot. You who claim WE blindly discount your studies, those self same studies that are invariably not impartial.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
You may have seen symptoms appear 1st hand but attributing it to vaccines is your interpretation, not fact. Just because I get the big promotion after finding a penny on the ground doesn't mean the penny caused the promotion. This is superstitious thinking. Science recognizes these pitfalls in human perception & rules them out w/ double-blind controlled testing of lots of people, comparing them w/ a control group. Anecdotes & wild accusations are no substitute for evidence.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - One word "fluoroscopes", just one example of "accepted" practice that turned out to be a crock of shit, "anecdotes & wild accusations" -- Hardly, with pharma settlements into the billions...
And to quote Dr. Verstraeten, simpsonwood transcripts on links between neurodevelopmental delays and "other" disorders and vaccines, page. 40-41: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes."
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
So your making your case against vaccines by bringing up something completely unrelated that science got wrong in the past? Okay, so what? Science is a self-correcting trial & error process that is expected to be wrong more often than right. For the record, it was the methods of science that determined the dangers of fluoroscopy & they drew that conclusion through EVIDENCE. Being wrong about something in the past has no baring on whether one is wrong about something else in the present
mjr256 8 months ago
cont'd
It's a common anti-intellectual argument because it can justify anything. Science was once wrong about X, therefore they're wrong about the shape of the Earth, or therefore they're wrong about leprechauns. Nice try but it's an incredibly asinine & silly means of arriving at a conclusion. We're still going to need your evidence.
ht tp skeptico(.)blogs(.)com/skeptico/2005/11/science_wrong(.)html
skeptics(.)org.uk/article(.)php?dir=articles&article=science_has_been_wrong_before(.)php
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - "Anti-intellectual", you really are not that good at twisting my words, I speak plainly and you sir dance around any point made in opposition, that is a shills tactic. But you are dead wrong, there is nothing "unrelated" about my reference. I.e. They withdrew the (established & accepted) single vaccine that concerned (not anti-vaccine) parents preferred in favor of the MMR to "protect the program", follow the money, every time.
28318511 8 months ago
@28318511
If I'm twisting your words & your reason for bringing up fluoroscopy was not the "science has been wrong before" gambit, then why did you bring it up? And if you're going to insist on accusing me of being paid by industry to make comments on YouTube every other sentence, I'm going to have to ask you to either back it up the accusation or admit it's a shameless attempt to poison the well. And professor, selling 3 vaccines for the price of 1 makes less money than 3 for the price of 3.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 - Ah! So you admit that science is a process, a "self-correcting trial & error process"... Great! You may just be wrong then, cheers. Shame about those darn conflicts of interest and such, and the fundamental drive within some to express the very worst aspects of human nature. Be it control of others or self aggrandizement , these types tend to gravitate to those positions that dictate the policy and procedures of the professions. Self interest negates natural correction in any system.
28318511 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist nevermind, this video pretty much explains it all. This is great, thanks!
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
Not one shill has met a simple challenge
Post 2 best pieces of EVIDENCE vaccines are safe & not correleated to autism. List lead authors sponsors conflicts conclusion
I will show they are frauds wrong or too conflicted
Why only the 2 best? There are 100s of studies & articles WEAKLY claiming "no evidence found" or a "lack of association" for a vax/autism link. The link is obvious, denying the obvious delays scientific investigation
If their 2 best are frauds... what do drug shills have?
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156 - kudos to you Michael
28318511 8 months ago
a 4 hour programme?
optionsupdate 1 year ago
@optionsupdate - I know, it's a bit big, I uploaded it in 16 parts previously, I highly recommend this one though. He methodical states the case, rebuts the critics without their ad hominem attacks, readily provable fact, complete with cited references etc... More than enough for one prepared to research it themselves and make an informed decision.
I was riveted, many wouldn't be, I know this.
28318511 1 year ago
That's funny because I'd be willing to put serious money on you, like Gary, not having a proper science education. No, I have not listened to 4 hours of Mr. Null foaming at the mouth about all the evil boogymen out to get you, nor do I need to. I've heard his claims before & probably know his arguments as well as he does. The anti-vaccine movement hasn't invented a new argument in years. And none of their old arguments have stood up to even the slightest scrutiny. 4 hrs of Gary is not research.
mjr256 1 year ago
@mjr256 - Thank you, my point is proven.
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."
-Albert Einstein
28318511 1 year ago
Apparently I haven't, as my point is not that "anti-vaccine people suck". My point is that Wakefield is a proven fraud who had a financial interest in deceiving the public about MMR, that his research has repeatedly failed to be replicated, and that anti-vaccine activists have killed children by perpetuating dangerous misinformation.
mjr256 1 year ago
@mjr256 - I'd be willing to put serious money on you not having watched all 4 hours of the show, nor having bothered your arse looking up all the information and sources he quotes. You're welcome to your opinion, but frankly I have better things to occupy my time with than argue about it, none of my business. And the "anti-vaccine people suck" comment came from my noticing a video YOU favoured. Say whatever you want, I don't bother blocking people, except when they get abusive.
Cheers.
28318511 1 year ago
@mjr256 The only people killing kids are like yourself, shilling for the drug industry. Forcing vaccines for all ignores kids susceptible to damage that vax are PROVED to cause & kids with impaired immunity damaged by live bacteria/virus in some vax
The Vaccine Injury Table lists dozens of known vaccine-caused injuries
Finding those children who are sensitive to vax toxins or who have impaired immune systems is necessary
YOU stand in the way of the knowledge & science that could save them
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
Love how every anti-vaxxer invents criminal accusations against every1 who disagrees w/ them w/o feeling any responsibility to back up the accusation w/ any evidence. It only demonstrates your contempt for intellectual honesty, as it did that for your predecessor, Joe McCarthy. The fact is medical exemptions exist in all 50 U.S. states & those w/ immunodeficiency disorders that prevent them from being vaccinated are the most vulnerable to the diseases spread by the unvaccinated.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 Did you know that all the people on this radio recording are not anti-vaccine? Just keep in mind that everyone that appears to be opposed to vaccination, wouldn't necessarily be opposed to it if they were proven safe and effective, which they effectively have not been. In the case here of Deer, the criminal accusations are actually warranted because of potential patient privacy violations. I work with sensitive patient information and I can lose my job if I abuse that power.
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
Actually, they would & they are. No1 claims vaccines are 100% safe. Nothing is 100% safe. Vaccines are however the safest medical intervention we have. Serious injury is rare & the benefits far outweigh the risks. What I'd like to know from you is what would you consider safe enough?
As Deer has pointed out, if the accusations are legit, then either sue him or shut up. Dozens of organizations in multiple industries have failed to find any fault in his actions.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 Actually vaccines are not the safest medical intervention we have. Check out the study of aluminum in vaccines causing neurological problems and possible links to Gulf War syndrom on Pubmed and you are way off with the benefits outweighing the risk especially when there have been cases where vaccinated children become infected with the same disease they were vaccinated for. Did you even listen to this or did outright dismiss it without listening to the facts like I originally did?
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
Can you be more specific on that study? What's the epidemiological data show? What's the risk vs. benefit ratio? What is the sample size? How big are the experimental & control groups? What are the error bars? What kind of neurological problems? What does "possible links" links mean? Does the study suggest further research is needed? You seem to be jumping to rather large conclusions considering, again, every reputable health organization in the world endorses vaccination.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 ncbi (dot) nlm (dot) nih (dot) gov (slash) pubmed (slash) 17114826
Soldiers who never even got sent overseas to fight in the Gulf War, came down with the same Gulf war syndrome that soldiers that did. Well, they were all vaccinated against anthrax and some other things as well. I think it was attributed to the Squalene additive.
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
Funny how 10,000s of studies that disagree w/ you are blindly assumed to have been funded by pharma, who are assumed to be lying in the studies that you assume have no protocols to avoid bias. Yet any studies you find that even superficially supports your ideology is viewed as gospel. Must've slipped past those shill journal editors, huh. It's almost like your only standard of evidence is it supports your views. Of course, this is just 1 mouse study & military only hires HUMANS
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 Do you want me to do your homework for you too? Why don't you look at both sides of the story yourself and research it instead of making up some random number claiming it to be the gospel yourself. Many, if not all, vaccine studies operate on the short term and also do not factor in the total vaccine schedule we are giving our children. Vaccines have not been safe for everyone, adults and infants have come down with problems after taking certain vaccines.Something is obviously wrong here
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
I am quite versed in the arguments on both sides. It's not my fault the health officials are the only ones bringing honest arguments. Nor did I invent random numbers, as you dishonestly state. Go to Pubmed yourself & type: vaccine safety efficacy. Currently, there's 2,780 entries. Some will show possible harms & can easily be cherry-picked to suggest those harms are common, but the over-all body of long-term medical literature shows the benefits outweigh the few risks.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 List 2 best studies showing vaccine benefits outweigh risks. Lead authors sponsors conflicts summary.
Don't just refer to studies that, w/o evidence, simply state this is a fact. List studies that PROVE a healthy child is better off with vaccinations than without
Just as you refuse to list the 2 best studies you can find that vaccines are safe & not correlated to autism, you will refuse to list 2 best studies (ONLY 2) proving benefits outweigh risks of vaccines
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
I've already addressed your disingenuous call for the "2 best studies" so you can invent excuses to deny their validity like a Birther invents excuses to deny Obama's birth record. Again, science is cumulative & there aren't even 2 studies that alone can prove gravity. Neither health professionals nor I have anything to prove to you, who lack even rudimentary knowledge on the subject. How many vaccines have you personally administered or even held? You got a case? Take it to court.
mjr256 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist Aluminum is a known neurotoxin and is present in many if not all vaccines in levels beyond the safety limit set by the FDA. It's shown problems in mice, and as outlined in this video, monkeys when given the same vaccine schedule we give infants today. I need to find a link to that study though. Not every single human body is the same, some may be able to dispose of the toxins, but if there is even ONE case linking problems to the vaccine, then alarms should be raised but aren't
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
Aluminum is absorbed by the human body each day in greater quantity than is in any vaccine, which again is injected into the muscle & not the bloodstream...cus I know how easy it is for you to confuse. & alum.'s actually in few vaccines & never beyond safety levels. Mice & monkeys are not human beings. While you can't seem to tell the difference, most vaccine experts have no such problem. Got any actual HUMAN studies? Preferably by those w/ a better sense of priorities than you
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 oh and accupuncture is, by a huge margain, a vastly safer medical intervetion than vaccines/injections.
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
So you oppose vaccines, which have proven beyond reasonable doubt to be both incredibly safe & incredibly effective in saving lives but support acupuncture, a barbaric superstition involving people w/ no education in the human body stabbing people w/ sharp objects, which has yet to ever sufficiently demonstrate it's an effective procedure in treating any health issue. How could I have ever questioned your priorities or medical expertise?
dangeroustalk(dot)net/a-team/Acupuncture
mjr256 8 months ago
mjr insults w/o evidence
Google - "vaccine injury table"- A list of injuries PROVED caused by vaccines. It includes encephalitis, meningitis, immune disorders (arthritis & blood), seizures, intestinal, death & many others
Google - "Package Insert" & any vax- you will find mfg's warnings "Package Insert" MMR-II - Live vax virus is in breast milk, throat & nose of vaccinated for 28 days- Merck says many diseases are linked to MMR, but causation isn't proved- Vax are PROVED UNSAFE for some kids
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
I've already address this straw man argument. No1 disputes that vaccines can cause some injuries. What every reputable health org says is vaccines cause few serious injuries & that the benefits of vaccines to both the individual & the society outweigh the risks. And the very reason medical exemptions exist is because some have autoimmune disorders. We detect this early & these are the very people most hurt by healthy people around them who choose not to vaccinate.
mjr256 8 months ago
mjr tries to inflame the argument with insults & derogatory associations rather than use studies
MMR & other live vax spread disease to people with known immune disorders (genetic or acquired) & to those kids with immune impairments from poor nutrition or poisons
Most kids don't qualify for exemptions. Even the immune deficient have vax recommended for them by the drug industry
Post your 2 best studies. lead authors, conflicts, sponsors. I will expose your lies again
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
But you've yet to do that even once. Rather, it's YOU who have used character attacks. I just called you out on it & refuted specific arguments w/ facts. Point to a single post of mine w/ insults & no arguments. I've already pointed you to 10,000s of studies on Pubmed that address vaccine efficacy & safety. But no, I'm not going to play your game so that you can parrot J.B. Handley or whoever in just dismissing studies on bogus grounds. If you can prove corruption, take it to court.
mjr256 8 months ago
mjr again making excuses not to post 2 BEST pieces of evidence to show vax are safe or not correlated to autism. List lead authors sponsors conflicts & summary. I will show the best 2 he finds are fraud wrong irrelevant or too conflicted
Vaccines are forced on kids in the USA, by law (The NCVIA) no one can sue a vaccine maker for vax-caused injuries, vax are called "unavoidably unsafe" & have "side effects which are unavoidable"
HRSA "Vaccine Injury Table" lists dozens of PROVED vax injuries
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
Again, the question is flawed from the outset & your dismissive response is assured. The burden of proof lies w/ those claiming the medical consensus & its well published body of evidence is wrong. If you want to make a specific claim, I'll try to respond to it, but scientific literature is cumulative & I have no interest in pretending any firmly established science rests on any 2 studies or see you anomaly-hunt. What's YOUR best case against vaccines?
cont'd
mjr256 8 months ago
cont'd
The issue of vaccines being "forced" has been addressed: fas(dot)org/sgp/crs/RS21414(dot)pdf. The gov't also forces people to obey traffic laws, not drink & drive, or not beat their children to death. Most vaccines are only recommended. Of course none of this politics says anything of the veracity of your claims that vaccines are not safe & not effective.
cont'd
mjr256 8 months ago
cont'd
NCVIA only says manufacturers can't be sued for the unavoidable risks we know of & accept because they are vastly outweighed by the benefits. This is similar to strict liability laws in every industry w/ an increased likelihood of injury. For instance, the construction industry. The vaccine court compensates those who may have suffered a side effect. But vaccine manufacturers absolutely can be sued for negligence. Again, no1 says vaccines can't cause harm so stop pretending it's disputed
mjr256 8 months ago
Again mjr repeats the lie that vaccine benefits outweigh the risks. He has no evidence to support this claim
He also lies about the purpose of the NCVIA, but this time he traps himself with his lies
He posts "vax makers "can't be sued for the unavoidable risks we know of and accept..." The NCVIA exempts drug companies from ANY side effect they list in their package inserts which mjr now calls "unavoidable". Merck lists dozens of such injuries, which mjr now declares are "unavoidable"
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
On the contrary, ALL the available evidence, when compiled, demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that vaccine benefits outweigh the risks to any1 w/ a reasonable sense of priorities.
ht tp iom(dot)edu/Reports/2002/Immunization-Safety-Review-Multiple-Immunizations-and-Immune-Dysfunction(dot)aspx
ht tp holykaw(dot)alltop(dot)com/the-great-vaccination-debate-infographic?tu2=1
I can cite exidence till the end of time but if you refuse to accept it no matter what, what's the point?
mjr256 8 months ago
cont'd
As for the NCVIA, it's you who are wrong. Very wrong as this issue of what "unavoidable" means here has been thoroughly clarified at this point. It was further clarified in the recent Bruesewitz v. Wyeth decision:
rescuepost(dot)com/files/supreme-court-bruesewitz(dot)pdf
scientificamerican(dot)com/blog/post(dot)cfm?id=bruesewitz-v-wyeth-decision-sotomay-2011-02-24
ht tp theness(dot)com/neurologicablog/?p=2896
mjr256 8 months ago
mjr AGAIN refuses to list 2 best studies showing vaccines are safe or not correlated to rising autism
He claims there are 10,000 studies on PubMed. Instead of standing by 2 best he wants me to disprove 10,000
FACTS exposing his lying rhetoric
Merck's Package Insert on MMR-II states persons have live vax-rubella in breastmilk & throat/nose secretions FOR 28 DAYS AFTER VACCINATION
Google "Vaccine Injury Table" - Dozens of PROVED vax injuries (seizures, death, arthritis, auto immunity ETC)
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
Actually, I said there were 2,780 entries on Pubmed alone that address vaccine safety & efficacy. I'm not simply asserting it; I'm saying any1 can see for themselves by going to Pubmed & typing into the search bar: vaccine safety efficacy. Some entries will indeed show possible harms, but only if cherry-picked will one get the impression those harms are common & reasonably outweigh the enormous benefits.
ht tp holykaw(dot)alltop(dot)com/the-great-vaccination-debate-infographic?tu2=1
mjr256 8 months ago
Merck warns MMR-II is linked to these side effects (GOOGLE - merck package insert MMR-II). Under NCVIA Merck's can't be sued for ANY listed injury. Some are proved, NO ONE IS CHECKING IF MMR CAUSES THE REST
Merck MMR-linked injuries, PARTIAL LIST- Encephalitis Guillain-Barré Syndrome Febrile/Afebrile-convulsions Seizures Diabetes Chronic-arthritis MIBE SSPE Polyneuritis/neuropathy Ocular-palsies Pancreatitis Diarrhea Vomiting Parotitis Thrombocytopenia Leukocytosis Arthralgia Myalgia
michael0156 8 months ago
@michael0156
On the contrary, health professionals CONSTANTLY look for causal relationships btw vaccines & all manner of illnesses. Just because you haven't bothered to look at the medical literature, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Take GBS for example. An analysis of side effects recorded among 90 million Chinese vaccinated during the 2009–2010 flu season found only 11 were later diagnosed w/ GBS, no more than what normal. The study appears online in the New England Journal of Medicine
mjr256 8 months ago
continuation
6. PMID 21708998 - Brucellosis study of mouse vax SUGGESTS safety, for mice, possible human use
7. PMID 21708205 - Vax for fish (Nile tilapia)
8. PMID 21703206 - Anti-viral med for chronic hepatitis (not a vaccine)
9. PMID 21703032 - Vax for pig respiratory disease
10. PMID 21699798 - Abstract quote - "Poxvirus therapy for chronic hepatitis C has limited efficacy, adverse effects & high costs"
mjr lies & doesn't read his "proof"
He DELIBERATELY hurts kids everyday
michael0156 8 months ago
I reviewed the first 10 of 2,780 PubMed entries for a search of "vaccine efficacy safety"
ONLY ONE is a childhood vaccine study, it was a meta-analysis (a restudy of other studies), & it was WITHDRAWN.
1. PMID 21735387 - Meta-analysis of MCCV vax, WITHDRAWN
2. PMID 21734465 - Rabies vaccine, irrelevant to childhood vaccines
3. PMID 21729731 - WHO article on vax production, not use
4. PMID 21718744 - Method of testing vax in guinea pigs
5. PMID 21711190 - Typhoid vax for chicks
continued
michael0156 8 months ago
mjr is fully exposed as a lying drug industry shill. Unable to post 2 best studies he can find & defend them. He ignores facts of vax damage I posted that is admitted by Merck, FDA, CDC, HRSA
Vaccine caused damage to kids is INDISPUTABLE. In light of the facts mjr lies, insults & makes excuses for not posting evidence. He deliberately puts children in harm's way & extends the suffering of kids & their families dealing with vax-caused injuries & diseases
A true sociopathic shill
michael0156 8 months ago
@mjr256 What drives you to lie and hurt kids?
michael0156 8 months ago
The conspiracy theory's a favorite for the paranoid. It's a convenient answer when the numbers just don't add up. It takes no real proof & often the absence of proof is just proof it exists! They just KNOW they have "The Truth" & are uninterested in anything that might challenge that belief. Science & evidence don't matter, other than how they can be twisted to reach the desired conclusions & any scientific evidence conflicting w/ that belief is seen as part of a cover-up. It's how cults operate
mjr256 1 year ago
@mjr256 - Right, you've made your point, 'anti-vaccine people suck' we get it already, good grief.
28318511 1 year ago
Pharmaceutical companies don't own 90% f medical research. That is a contemptible lie. You're living in a fantasy world. Stop believing every tall tale you read on the internet that reinforces your anti-science bias. There is no one cure for all cancer and there never will be because all cancer is different. You've been horribly misled by quacks who want to sell you their bogus cures. But if you're not going to better educate yourself, maybe I should just offer to sell you my magic beans
mjr256 1 year ago
@mjr256 benefits of vaccination? truthpills (dot) wordpress (dot) com (slash) 2010 (slash) 02 (slash) 12 (slash) mumps-outbreak-spreads-among-people-who-got-vaccinated-against-mumps
77% of the people that were infected with the mumps were vaccinated for it. Explain that please.
Did you even watch this video or did you come here just to start a fight?
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
@Typhoonbladefist
Yeah, I have a Wordpress blog too. They employ no fact-checkers. So I prefer to use primary sources such as the studies themselves & reputable health organizations w/ a long, demonstrated history of expertise in actually practicing & researching medicine w/ all their accountability & copious protocols for weeding out fraud. Just because it's written on the internet, doesn't make it true. Nor is simply sharing your ideology itself a proper standard of evidence.
mjr256 8 months ago
@mjr256 ...nor is youtube a proper forum for discussing these matters. So about this video. Did you actually watch it or did you come here to start a fight?
Typhoonbladefist 8 months ago
There's no more a media smear campaign against Wakefield than there was against Madoff. Andy's fraud's been exposed. Fact checkers from around the world have reproduced all of Deer's research. & even before we knew it was fraud, we knew it was bad science, which is how he lost his license. As I said, in the last days, the convicted are always forced into grandiose conspiracy theories because what else can they say? & for the true believers, that's all they need to keep believing.
mjr256 1 year ago
Andrew Wakefield is Bernard Madoff with a body count. His fraud has been exposed & his profits from it, accounted for. And like any madman who knows his days are numbered, his last recourse is to invoke a grand conspiracy against him. And for the truly indoctrinated, that's good enough because they've opted to forgo all critical thought in favor of blind obedience to the charismatic leader. It worked for Jim Jones, for Koresh & for Qaddafi. People have an amazing capacity for self-deception.
mjr256 1 year ago
@mjr256 - Don't they just, I could not have said it better myself.
28318511 1 year ago
@mjr256 No mate, you are an ignoramus who should actually look into the fact. the evidence actually shows he did no wrong and everything was above board. He didn't fiddle any data either as he never gave any diagnosis. Also what would the world's leading gastrointerologist want to ruin his life and career to tell the truth and be ruined by drugs companies who acted fraudulently and stand to lose trillions if the truth is allowed to be accepted.
steffyweffy777 1 year ago
@mjr256 They have everything to lose. it's not the only incident where honest doctors have been ruined by drugs companies who control 90% of medical 'reearch'. Plenty whistleblowers have said there are many cures for cancer , all shut down because a cure would end the gravey train of $400billion a year from drugs companies and cancer research. this is not the only scandal, and yes evidence does exist for all this....if anyone honest enough wants to check it out.
steffyweffy777 1 year ago
@mjr256 The media smear campaign againts Dr Wakefield has been exposed anyway, as have the false allegations and lies which don't stand up and hold water. the kangeroo court at the BMJ who is heavily funded by the drugs companies, found 5 'judges' to have links to the drugs companies producing the vaccines, or related to big people in those drugs companies ! A farce and conflict of interest to say the least ! Wakefield has been vindicated recently anyway !
steffyweffy777 1 year ago