Jenny McCarthy Aims to 'smackdown' Autism

EntertainmentExtraJenny McCarthy Aims to 'smackdown' AutismJenny McCarthy Aims to 'smackdown' AutismThe Associated PressJenny McCarthy is taking her personal fight against autism into the ring on Saturday, during a special edition of the WWE's Saturday Night's Main Event on NBC. (Aug. 1)This video contains ONLY natural sound. No script is available.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• people
• jenny
• mccarthy
• aims
• 'smackdown'
• autism

[765lbsquat]

her kid doesn't even have autism.! She is just upset because her kid inherited the stupid genes from his mom and she is trying to come up with an excuse.

[Orionx30]

"The Institute of Medicine has concluded that evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism."

Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism. A report of the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy Press, Washington, DC 2004.

[michael0156]

nolies again lies

This time he repeats I'm not using current laws, w/o explanation

The CURRENT LAW applicable to vaccine injuries is The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act passed in 1986. This law DOESN'T protect kids, as implied. It protects vaccine makers from damages greater than $1000 & requires kids to file against the govt ONLY IN DC. The Justice Department defends vax, people pay a surcharge on vax which is used to pay claims

"Free market" drugs, socialized compensation

[noliesundead]

@michael0156 Add no insurance, lawyers or compensation awards, that tremendously increases profits

If vax are found to cause regressive autism & vax makers are held accountable it will cost 100s of billions

..AGAIN use the CURRENT LAWS, using the older ones is 1) deceptive 2) shows you care more about your argument then the truth. Why does nolies do nothing but lie?......how again then i lie? i cite source and you have not refuted ONE of them? attack the argument not me

[noliesundead]

@michael0156 He apparently compares vax profits overall to ALL drug profits. well yes, since none of those company's you name only survive on vax sales. again only 2% of there total profit, of course it looks like super big number if you cut out the rest of there income like you're trying to do, and if you have to be decepctive to make your point, then its a weak argument.

if you want to see how much they make from what you can, since their publicly traded companies

[noliesundead]

@michael0156 1An anecdotal statement from the IOM does not contradict the results of the study detecting anti-squalene antibodies in veterans & civilians with Gulf War Syndrome....again the study was not designed to find that, and when the vax's were tested no squalene was found. and i pointed to studies that contradict it,and the study you cite lacks proper controls

2, again squalene was not found in the vax's of that time.(J Pharm Biomed Anal 29 (1-2): 183–93)

[michael0156]

noliesundead continues to make unsubstantiated claims that vaccines are only 2% of profits

He apparently compares vax profits overall to ALL drug profits. When even large companies make 12-15 vaccines (like Merck, Glaxo, Novartis) they become a main revenue stream. Add no insurance, lawyers or compensation awards, that tremendously increases profits

If vax are found to cause regressive autism & vax makers are held accountable it will cost 100s of billions

Why does nolies do nothing but lie?

[michael0156]

nolies shows he is full of lies

1. An anecdotal statement from the IOM does not contradict the results of the study detecting anti-squalene antibodies in veterans & civilians with Gulf War Syndrome. That the IOM would ignore the results w/o contradicting evidence shows blatant drug industry bias

2. The study nolies quotes about squalene free vax tested anthrax vax from 1997 - completely unrelated to Gulf War Syndrome which occurred 1990-1991 when soldiers/civilians were injected with squalene

[SiouxGER]

Great that she does this, but she really says that she worries about prople getinng hurt etc at the WWE ? xD

[noliesundead]

@michael0156 US Institute of Medicine stated that "The committee does not regard this study as providing evidence that the investigators have successfully measured antibodies to squalene", since the authors did not perform the normal scientific controls needed show that their test was specific to anti-squalene antibodies.

The vaccines were also tested for squalene, and none was detected with standard methods-J Pharm Biomed Anal 29 (1-2): 183–93....so how does it fell to get the smackdown?