Posted on 05/24/2010 8:44:47 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW
LONDON (AP) - Britain's top medical group on Monday banned a doctor whose research suggesting a link between a common vaccine and autism caused millions of parents worldwide to abandon the shot for measles, mumps and rubella.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield was the first to publish peer-reviewed research suggesting such a connection, even though the study was later widely discredited. The ruling by Britain's General Medical Council found him guilty of serious professional misconduct.
Wakefield, 53, then moved to the U.S. and set up an autism center in Texas, where he has a wide following, but faces similar skepticism from the medical community. The ruling in Britain only applies to his right to practice medicine in the U.K., not in other countries.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
Looks like it, doesn’t it.
Nah, I think DJ MacWoW is commenting in good faith, but has been deceived by these charlatans.
I noticed the Bush-Cheney comment. Interesting.
Yes. Retreads are common.
If you don't place much trust in scientific journals, who do you trust? Whackjob charlatans like Wakefield?
Wakefield was trying to discredit the MMR vaccine because he was involved in a competing vaccine. Enough fooled parents in the UK have prevented their children from being vaccinated that they've fallen below the levels needed for herd immunity against measles there and other children are dying than just their own.
“They are mostly in poor countries where the disease is more likely to result in encephalitis and pneumonia. Many of these poor kids die from the diarrhea and dehydration measles causes.”
A major contributor to these deaths are as a result of malnutrition, unsanitary living conditions, and squalor.
I had the mumps and chicken pox as well as my siblings, and a lot of other children we grew up with. No one died of these diseases. I am sure that the vaccinations helped in preventing a higher number of deaths, but I attribute this fact to a much higher quality of life and nutrition.
My children have had Scarlet Fever and Whooping Cough. Not something the family enjoyed, but they recovered quickly, and are healthy.
I do not support any form of vaccination for infants. Their immune system hasn’t fully developed and cannot battle the doses of diseases which are injected into their bodies.
I have been examining, though not on a scientific level, the conditions of a number of friends infants. Without exception, each infant has been rushed to the ER, or have had to see the doctor for medical reason. I believe most, if not all, had received the N1H1 vaccine. I realize that correlation does not equal causation, but I do find it interesting.
All of these infants I have mentioned live in different areas of the country. Two are related, but the only correlation between these children are that they were injected with the N1H1 vaccine as infants. They come from middle-class families.
I see your special for today is: Jumpin’ To Conclusions.
That could depend on the scientific journal.
Take a laxative, troll. It’ll clear your head.
You're irrational. It's not government that took away Wakefield's ability to practice medicine in the UK. It was the profession, other doctors who found his conduct and ethics to be unprofessional and also harmful to the health of their country.
And so you believe the propaganda that government and pharmaceutical companies are spewing as gospel? You accept their “evidence” as proof? I think that that is not only foolish and naive but is destroying our children.
You think that “scientists” are not bought off (Climategate and falsifications and vilifying of scientists has been going on for decades!!!! and there is a ton of proof!!!!!!).
Come on, “The Fugitive” was more than a great movie! Just imagine if you have an Eric Holder, Jr, instead of Tommy Lee Jones, as the FBI agent. Harrison Ford would have been killed and everyone would have thought that justice and truth was found. The naive public would have been so happy!
You have to look at the motives? Wakefield was crucified...his reputation was ruined. You think he was trying to gain “more” wealth and destroy everything he worked for years for by being a whistleblower? You think he was that naive? I read his report and I honestly think he was outraged by what was happening to those poor babies he was treating.
He had to record the facts and that is what is not controversial. (they attack his methods which had nothing to do with the facts of the children’s bodies). What is wrong with the facts? That is what is pertinent in scientific studies.
If I remember correctly, he didn’t even say that vaccinations caused the physical abnormalities, but that there was a correlation. It so happened that all the children who were suffering severe diarrhea had previously been vaccinated and there were certain found chemicals in their stools.
Maybe I am completely wrong on what I remember, BUT I DO remember thinking that his logic and reasoning was very sound. I had no position at that time on vaccination safety, so I had no bias.
Excuse me?
It was the profession, other doctors
Your point is? Just what is this post addressing? You have quoted a post that has nothing to do with your comments.
I suppose that would have to be your response now, wouldn't it?
Let's look at the references more closely so I can better understand the reasons for your mistrust:
The National Cancer Institute: They found, by reviewing the statistics, that there was no increased incidence of cancer in persons who may have received vaccine containing SV40. Can you offer us any statistics showing that what they published was incorrect and that cancer rates actually increased among those receiving the vaccine containing SV40? If not, we'll just have to accept their findings as factual.
Here's something from the British Journal of Cancer that comes to the same conclusion. You could spend years reviewing the referenced literature. What is it about this organization, and all the referenced publications, that you don't trust?
Journal of the American Medical Association: You don't trust this publication? Why not? Here's what they found:
Contamination of Poliovirus Vaccines With Simian Virus 40 (1955-1963) and Subsequent Cancer Rates
Now, look through the study, and the massive amount of referenced literature, and tell us what it is, specifically, that you take issue with.
Department of Vaccine Research - Sweedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control: I have to admit that I've never heard of these folks. Apparently you have. What is it about this organization that you don't trust?
Here's their conclusion: The use of potentially SV40 contaminated inactivated polio vaccines in Sweden has not been shown to be associated with increased cancer incidence.
Like I said earlier, death caused my mumps is rare in this country. However, thousands and thousands of children went deaf from the mumps prior to the vaccine. Chicken pox may not be dangerous for most children contracting it but it can be very dangerous for adults that do. This is just another reason, among many, for providing vaccines.
My children have had Scarlet Fever and Whooping Cough. Not something the family enjoyed, but they recovered quickly, and are healthy.
Great. Deaths from Pertussis still happen in the US with hundreds of thousands dying from it worldwide every year. Most deaths occur in children under a year of age. The symptoms are pretty horrendous and only the worst kind of parent would risk subjecting their kids to it rather than giving them the vaccine.
Their immune system hasn’t fully developed and cannot battle the doses of diseases which are injected into their bodies.
Then you are a Luddite who refuses to see the incredible benefits community immunity has brought to our society. Good grief, most deaths from pertussis happen to children when they are infants. Your conclusion cannot be based on science since the science categorically refutes what you believe. As with all medicines, there are risks and benefits and some children will react to vaccines in a way that causes serious medical issues and even death. However, the stats don't lie. We (and our children) are much better off with vaccines than without.
Modern vaccines contain only a tiny fraction of the protein components of early vaccines, so although the number of vaccines children receive is larger, the actual load on the immune system due to vaccine content has been reduced tremendously. I believe it is only about 10% of what it was fifty years ago.
Tell us about your scientific discipline, the years you've studied in that area, and what journals you find to be trustworthy.
I do see that you place a lot of trust in calling folks trolls when you don't like answering the questions they ask.
That you believe vaccines cause autism. Whether you will admit it or not is another issue. You are, most definitely, a believer. You wouldn’t have posted the article or argued as you have otherwise. Why can’t you just be honest about it?
Where did I state that? What post?
Well, I’m sure that although a number of individuals trust in the “Global Warming” scientists and their published “studies” in scientific journals, this doesn’t automatically conclude that articles in these scientific journals are flawless, or motivated by political bias, obviously.
“Tell us about your scientific discipline, the years you’ve studied in that area, and what journals you find to be trustworthy.”
An individual doesn’t have to be a scientist in order to hold an opinion. Sell that liberal diatribe to the Kool Aid drinkers.
“...trolls when you don’t like answering the questions they ask.”
False equivocations.
I waste little time on noobs who appear to be trolls. Time and words will tell whether or not this newbie is a troll.
Allan Bloom documented a "paradigm shift" in the thinking of American college students in the 1980's book The Closing of the American Mind. It is what Glenn Beck has labeled as "Progressive thinking".
We went from a God-centered moral-absolute, Christian paradigm to a "progressive" moral-relativism, social Darwinian atheism. A post-modern German philosophy that is steeped in Marxist ideology.
All educated elites have been indoctrinated into this way of thinking which defies logic and God's Law and Natural Law which is the foundation of this country. (although, not everyone is duped)
I will call this moral relativism as being really evil because it always leads to total chaos and tyranny eventually, after all Christian influence is annihilated.
Knowing how these people think (Margaret Sangers, John Deweys, Pres. Wilson) and what evil always springs from their godless ideas, I do not trust the people in the government or corporations. Power and money are their only motives. They are inhumane...They can't be otherwise.
Their power to destroy anyone who disagrees with their godless gospel is pretty much absolute. We see this systematic attack on Rush, Beck or whoever dares to challenge their worldview. A little known scientist has absolutely NO CHANCE whatsoever which should be so obvious to anyone.
What are their motives? It is obvious with all the power government has been usurping. They want a mass of non-thinking slaves to serve them and do whatever they say. Vaccination system is a great way to sterialize (as explained by Gates at population conference) and if Communist Chinese wanted to destroy the future thinkers in this nation wouldn't it be easy to poison them like they have done with pet food--all through the vaccination system. When governments mandate every child to have a shot, the potential danger can not be overlooked. By the time any contaminate would be discovered thousands of children would have been harmed, if not millions.
What about the contaminated vaccinations that caused the Gulf War Syndrome? Creating a sick group out of our young, healthy men who should be having families and raising brave sons and daughters? Brainwashing and cover-ups about vaccinations have been going on for over 50 years, whether they were contaminated with monkey viruses or whatever. I would NEVER trust govt. or the pharmaceutical companies or the ignorant pediatricians (and they are ignorant on what is in vaccines...just ask them).
Do your own research, trust your gut and debate with your doctor to come up with the best plan of action. Don't be a little uninformed zombie who accepts whatever someone says--Most people (even doctors) are pretty lazy when it comes to researching to confirm the truth, efficacy and the real results of their actions and the actual destruction to the body of most drugs.
You will note that I do believe that vaccines can be beneficial.
I would like to see a extensive scientific study (by an independent group) involving families whose children did not receive vaccinations as infants, but at a later age in adolescence.
Naturally, these families must come from developed countries.
So you can't offer anything specific as to why you find these journals unworthy of your trust? Just as I thought.
An individual doesn’t have to be a scientist in order to hold an opinion. Sell that liberal diatribe to the Kool Aid drinkers
You suggested earlier that you had the knowledge and experience that qualified you to judge the references offered by Wikipedia as insufficient. You don't. That makes you a poser which is akin to being a liberal Kool-Aid drinker.
waste little time on noobs who appear to be trolls.
It looks like you call people names like noob when they ask questions you can't answer or don't like to answer. How long does one need to be a member here to challenge your knowledge of a particular topic?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.