Replies

"No that was not a scientific journal, nor did I claim it to be so. Yes you did. And you even quoted your own words where you claimed it was. When I said, "How many scientific studies have you read? How long do you think they are?", you said, "The one I linked was 1271 pgs."

Good Grief! You cannot discern the difference between a scientific journal article and a scientific study. Are you really that stupid? I am sorry I am not published enough on the Internet that you could Google an argument to copy and paste against me.

"Conversely, a medical history of Herpes type II and recent mosquito multiple bites was noted. Causal relationship with the vaccination was unlikely."

That is word for word from page 209. Do you have any original thoughts?

You do remember that this a document from the vaccine manufacturer trying to prove their product safe?

Don't cherry pick!!!

How about this little bit from page 170 of the same report that sounds a bit more scary.

"The subject was hospitalised and the physician considered the events were disabling. The vaccination course with Infanrix hexa was discontinued. Follow- up information was received on 05 August 2011 via the German regulatory authority (PEI). The subject was born with umbilical cord around neck, but APGAR score was 10. In the evening after vaccination with Infanrix hexa and Prevenar, the subject could not keep the head straight (head posture abnormal) and had rolling eyes and restless head. The next day the subject developed sweating, tiredness and after three day s high - pitched cry ing and regression of development (loss of known skills, speech and bod y control). I n second week the subject was twitching and developed West sy ndrome. Medical stabilisation was difficult. At last (in July 2011), the subject was treated with sultiam (Ospolot). The subject had developed well until vaccination. Starting in the evening after vaccination and throughout the next three weeks, the subject developed problems holding the head with waggling the head, tiredness, pallor, diarrhea, sweating, stiff neck, was not responsive, stopped laughing, became more and more stiff, with high - pitched cry ing, twitching, headache and abdominal pain. The subject was hospitalised from 07 to 18 March 2011, 30 March to 09 April 2011, 16 to 18 May 2011 and 18 May to 10 June 2011. The hospital re ports stated the following. The subject had two health y siblings. After normal pregnancy, the subject was born spontaneously with a weight of 4040 g. Newborn screening and childhood examinations U1 to U3 were normal. On 31 December 2010 the subject had bro nchitis, phary ngitis and purulent rhinitis. High amounts of Klebsiella pneumoniae were found in nose swab. U4 showed trunk hy potonia and phy siotherapy was prescribed. On the same day vaccination was administered. After vaccination the subject's development was regressive, with less contact, tiredness, not responsive, rolling eyes, no sounding, loss of skills. When first hospitalised, the subject had h ypotonia and movement disorder, but no infection, fever or diarrhea. Diagnoses included epileptic encephalop ath y with developmental regression, West sy ndrome, d ys kinetic movement disorder and muscular hy potonia. Electroencephalogram (EEG) was pathologic with hy psarrhy thmia. Several convulsions were observed in hospital. "

Wow that is pretty causal....but you will still deny it won't you? Also pretty severe...but you have eloquently and thoroughly debunked this...atleast in your own head.

"First of all, I doubt you have degrees from anywhere other than diploma mills.
And yet you have never produced your credentials. Please enlighten us or don't try to dismiss someone else's education. You are clearly dodging this, but you can rationalize it some more for us. You are clearly an ignorant tool who uses Google, albeit well, rather than any real expertise. I first called into question your credentials back around post 121, and you still stay silent. You must be embarrassed that you went to Caltech instead of a good school.

You cannot discern the difference between a scientific journal article and a scientific study. Are you really that stupid?

Apparently it's you who can't discern the difference, which is why you were claiming that it's relevance was based simply on its length in pages.

Look, the whole point here was that you were claiming an article I posted was "pathetic" because it was 21 pages long. I've provided ample evidence that peer-reviewed scientific studies on the subject are of comparable length, even those you posted, so consider the matter closed. You didn't back up your argument, and we can all agree that your page number argument is invalid.

That is word for word from page 209. Do you have any original thoughts?

Of course it's word for word, you jackass. That's why I said "The company itself even notes one case:", and then posted the quote in italics. Is your reading comprehension really that bad, or are you just drifting back into sociopathy?

Wow that is pretty causal....but you will still deny it won't you?

Of course I will. Not only does West or Lennox–Gastaut not mean that the kid has autism, but they couldn't even determine a causal relationship to the vaccine and West/Lennox–Gastaut. I'm going to put this in quotes and italicize, just so you don't get confused:

"This 4-month-old female subject was diagnosed with West Syndrome/ Lennox-Gastaut syndrome less than one month after 1st dose of Infanrix hexa and Prevenar. Causal relationship to vaccination could not be formerly assessed and other etiologies were considered (metabolic, viral encephalitis)."

This has no relevance to the court decision, which was the whole reason you posted this report. So nice try and dragging us into a tangent.

And yet you have never produced your credentials. Please enlighten us or don't try to dismiss someone else's education.

I'm not appealing to any credentials, and I have no published peer-reviewed work on vaccines. That's why I'm using scientific evidence of those who have the credentials and have done the research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, while you've used Age of Autism and other dubious blogs.

After all of this time you have yet to provide one peer-reviewed scientific journal entry that backs up your point, while I've given dozens.

My estimation of your education is based more on the lack of reading comprehension that you've displayed. You can't seem to discern source types, and you often get confused when I quote something, then accuse me of not having "any original thoughts".

I dare you to find one sentence I've written that is not sourced, quoted, or italicized in any of my responses and find copied from another source.

Go on, find one.