The ultimate appeal of anti-vaccine advocacy: it flatters the ignorant

Superhero girl. Confident young woman

One of the most attractive aspects of anti-vaccine advocacy, indeed of all alternative health, is that no particular knowledge is necessary to declare yourself an expert.

It doesn’t matter that you don’t have even the most basic knowledge of science and statistics. It doesn’t matter that you don’t have any understanding at all of the complex fields of immunology or virology. Your personal experiences count for more than the collective wisdom of doctors, scientists and public health officials. Hence Jenny McCarthy, a B movie actress with no training of any kind in science is touted by herself and others as an “expert” on vaccines. Hence Modern Alternative Mother Kate Tietje and similarly undereducated mommy bloggers parade themselves as “experts” on vaccination.

You don’t have to listen to experts; you are an expert.

As the paper The Persuasive Appeal of Alternative Medicine explains:

The person-centered experience is the ultimate verification and reigns supreme in alternative science… Alternative medicine makes no rigid separation between objective phenomena and subjective experience. Truth is experiential and is ultimately accessible to human perceptions… [O]bjective diagnostic or laboratory tests that discern what cannot be felt never replace human awareness… [A]lternative medicine, unlike the science component of biomedicine, does not marginalize or deny human experience; rather, it affirms patients’ real-life worlds. When illness (and, sometimes, biomedicine) threatens a patient’s capacity for self-knowledge and interpretation, alternative medicine reaffirms the reliability of his or her experience.

On its face, such an appeal seems ludicrous, but it provides powerful validation for people who are frightened and confused:

  • You don’t have to listen to experts; you are an expert.
  • It doesn’t matter what studies show about whether vaccines cause autism; it only matters that it seems to you that vaccines cause autism.
  • Your personal experience isn’t irrelevant to determining whether vaccines cause autism; it is the central, perhaps the only, thing you need to know to make a determination.

Anti-vax advocacy reflects the conviction that no particular knowledge is necessary to pontificate on a topic. Merely having a child who is autistic and has been vaccinated (against anything, at any time) automatically qualifies them to pontificate on “vaccine injuries.” It’s the equivalent of claiming that their personal experience of gravity qualifies them as experts on Einstein’s theories.

Anti-vaxxers attempt to justify the lack of understanding of immunology and infectious diseases by making disparaging claims about the value of science itself. These types of claims are made by people who clearly feel threatened by knowledge (or their lack of it). It is not coincidence that these claims have been invoked by flat-earthers, creationists and climate science deniers as well.

These claims include:

  • Statistics cannot tell us everything about what happens.
  • Science tells us something different than experience tells us.
  • Science does not tell us the truth because it is manipulated by scientists for their own ends.
  • Science does not tell us the truth because it is manipulated by business people for their own ends.
  • There is no such thing as scientific truth.

These claims are not merely a justification of lack of knowledge; they are an affirmative celebration of ignorance.

Anti-vaccine advocacy is not simply based on factual errors and a pervasive failure to understand basic science and statistics, not to mention immunology and infectious diseases. It is also based on a denial of the need for specific knowledge and a disparagement of such knowledge. By elevating personal experience to the same or even higher level than knowledge of the relevant subject matter, anti-vax advocacy makes everyone an “expert.”

In other words, instead of imparting new knowledge, instead of protecting children, it merely flatters the ignorant.

 

Addendum: Anyone want to claim that vaccines are unsafe or ineffective?

Please post citation to at least 10 large scale meta-analyses from high impact journals that support your contention that vaccines are not safe.

If you cannot, or if you post links to old, obscure papers in low impact journals, I will consider that an admission of defeat.

 

Adapted from a piece that first appeared in May 2009.

  • Sara Cbn

    instead of bullying and name calling, why don’t u address why so many scientists are coming forward against childhood vaccines? Fraud is so pervasive in the US, it is everywhere, the editor of NEJM said 50% of the data is fraud! the truth is, most vaccines don’t work, at best.

    • libertypole1

      I’m sorry: are you daft? The percentage of doctors who support your anti-vaxxer, anti-science claptrap is miniscule … by most estimates less than 1%. Among clinicians and researchers that percentage drops to near ZERO.

  • mark

    Well, lots of people seem to love your opinions, but here is an interesting study excerpt as to who is the more illogical generally;

    “Both sides expressed similar levels of anger, but the
    most significant finding was that the pro-vaccine comments were more
    emotional and fearful, while the anti-vax comments were more logically
    structured, and tended more toward ideas related to health, biology,
    research, and science.

    According to study co-author Leslie R. Martin, PhD., a researcher
    specializing in personality and psychosocial predictors of health and
    mortality risk at La Sierra University in Riverside, CA, it was a “very
    surprising” outcome.

    “What we really expected going in was that the people who are
    anti-vaccination or who are hesitant would be more inflammatory, much
    more negative, very emotional, and not demonstrating logical thought
    processes, and that those on the pro side would be very logical and
    persuasive in a thoughtful and complex way,” Martin said.”

  • mark
  • All the anti-vaxx people brigading the comments have obviously been taking crazy pills.

    • mark

      and no fluoride : )

      • Nick Sanders

        Wanna bet?

        • mark

          fluoride dulls and stiffens the brain doesnt it?

          • Nick Sanders

            It’s also a natural part of groundwater the world over.

          • mark

            so they drink borewater and dats why deys got dees ideeas?

  • Clocks

    Okay, I am having trouble putting this into perspective. A gynecologist that went to medical school thirty years ago is making an argument about human pscyhology, a field she knows nothing about, in response to vaccinations/immunology, a field that changes from one year to the next. I assume the picture of the young woman at the top is the author’s interpretation of the aforementioned “ignorant” woman.

    I just read through the comments. I don’t see any responses to the “vaccine papers” peer reviewed scientific articles. In fact, I am noticing now that many of those comments are being deleted. These actions serve primarily to stifle freedom of speech and the spread of accurate information. Given Ms. Tuteur’s blatant confirmation bias, I find it hard to read her comments.

    “Post 10 large scale meta-analyses from high impact journals” is NOT a response to the supposed toxicity of aluminum adjuvant!!!

    • Amy Tuteur, MD

      We’re discussing the safety and efficacy of vaccines NOT aluminum.

      • Clocks thats not yet banned

        Once again, Ms, Tuteur, you have decided that banning and deleting comments is the appropriate measure in “winning” an argument.

        My understanding is that aluminum is used as an adjuvant in vaccines and subsequently injected into infants. Therefore, I am sure we can agree that aluminum adjuvant is relevant in the topic “the safety of vaccines.”

        Furthermore, since you mentioned efficacy, I am sure you are aware that two whistleblowing scientists from Merck have now admitted to using rabbit antibodies to improve the efficacy rate of the MMR vaccine?

        http://ahrp.org/former-merck-scientists-sue-merck-alleging-mmr-vaccine-efficacy-fraud/

        • Mike Stevens

          “I am sure we can agree that aluminum adjuvant is relevant in the topic “the safety of vaccines.””
          Probably.
          But the topic of this article is “antivaccine advocacy”, and not vaccine safety. Or are you on the wrong internet?

          PS: I hadn’t realised that the court case was complete.
          Tell me, did it find Merck guilty of fraud or not?

          • mark

            last I heard it had been five years of delays, might make another five, like dickens jarndice and jarndice

          • Mike Stevens

            So, no answer I see.
            Get back when the guilty verdict is in, will you?
            Till then we’ll just have to label Merck as innocent until proven guilty, no?

          • mark

            guilty of obfuscation and delaying tactics, it doesnt take much to hypothesise why

          • Mike Stevens

            I am always amazed at how the government and journals who are supposedly entirely in the pockets of Big Pharma seem to be so ineffective when it comes to suppressing publication of things like research fraud. You’d think Pharma would get more protection fr their trillions of dollars of handouts, no?

          • mark

            It took six years of fighting, court challenges, paid for out of ? to get raw data on study 329… delay long enough and people either forget or theres a new drug to bandwagon…
            Are you answering the EMA & CDC coi/corruption questions yourself?

          • Mike Stevens

            The EMA addressed the science relating to the safety of HPV vaccine. Nordic Cochrane, influenced by the rogue researcher Brinth, complained the EMA had not followed due process in their review.
            EMA gave a detailed response refuting these claims.
            At no time has Nordic Cochrane challenged the science – they are just whining because their Danish pal’s “science” got trashed. That’s not how science works.

          • mark

            And CDC protection? Are you aware of the spyder letter? The revolving door they get wont be to Merck as CEO

          • Mike Stevens

            Why do I have to be aware of every conspiracy theory you throw at me?
            I am not in the US, so don’t follwo the CDC as closely as I do the EMA.

          • mark

            thanks for your discussions

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Yes, so is OJ Simpson. .

          • Mike Stevens

            And Wakefield.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Merck is innocent all they did was murder like 100,000 people with vioxx a few years ago. Wall St is innocent, cops are innocent, rich rapists are innocent. Do you understand how, if you rely on the justice system to make decisions for you, you may come to the wrong conclusion? A much better response would be to read the testimonials of the whistleblowers

          • Mike Stevens

            I think you are getting rather carried away.
            Merck were found guilty regarding the Vioxx marketing and research misinformation. They were guilty alright. Where did I say they were innocent?*
            I assumed that they would have your presumption of innocence regarding this vaccine mumps laboratory case, that’s all. And so we will wait and see.
            I don’t tend to automatically believe “testimonials” of “whistleblowers”, not when those same whistleblowers have axes to grind against the companies they blow the whistle on.
            Let’s just see how this pans out, and until then, resist the urge to automatically believe everything you hear or read against vaccines on the internet, just becuase it confirms your own antivax bias.

            *PS – The estimates were that Vioxx still saved more lives than it cost (by reducing the frequency of severe acute UGI bleeding) btw.

          • Mike Stevens

            Says the guy moaning about “logical fallacies”.

          • Azuran

            But if they are found guilty, doesn’t that kinda prove that they are not above blame and are being held accountable? Why would the government even allow a lawsuit against Merck to happen if there was a global vaccine conspiracy?

          • Mike Stevens

            Wow! …Deep conspiracist thoughts. Abolish them completely, now!!!

          • shay simmons

            Shame on you for raining on their lovely tinfoil-hat parade.

        • corblimeybot

          Dr Tuteur or fuck off.

        • mark

          New Experiment – how long till the thought police delete clocks thats soon to be banneds comments?
          Or the rest of mine?
          psDisquss has somehow dissappeared my disparaging remarks of a month ago on the epipen issue

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            All you have to do is ask the author if the picture included at the top is a picture of an ignorant lady, then demand studies that show AL adjuvant (nanoparticulate AL) is safe. That should do the job. Free speech doesn’t exist when the mods have confirmation bias

          • mark

            does the self flattery go hand in hand with the confirmation bias?

          • Box of Salt

            “show AL adjuvant”

            I didn’t know the state of Alabama was an adjuvant. If you are trying to present yourself as someone who is not ignorant (in contrast to your suggested description of the photo illustrating the post), you might want to type chemical symbols correctly.

      • H.L.

        how does that make any sense? alum adjuvant is found in most childhoold vaccines, and discussion about its toxicity is absolutely essential to any discussion about safety and efficacy. afterall, the national rate of neuro disoders is now 1in6, with autism continuting to skyrocket to 1in42 for males.

        similarly, should Caltech and UC Davis never have conducted its studies connecting vaccinations -> maternal immune activation -> autism because they contradict your opinions?

        https://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-researchers-find-evidence-link-between-immune-irregularities-and-autism-4219

        • Nick Sanders

          Skyrocket?

        • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

          I don’t think you got it.

      • 655321

        You DO understand that many vaccines contain aluminum?

        • Charybdis

          You DO understand that that has diddly-squat to do with vaccine safety and efficacy?

          • 655321

            I would understand that, if it were true.

          • Charybdis

            I seriously doubt that. It is still true, though.

          • 655321

            Prove it.

          • 655321

            knew that would send you running for cover.

    • momofone

      Dr. She’s Dr. Tuteur.

    • Mike Stevens

      Look again. I have posted several rebuttals to the VP comments.
      He is determined to turn this thread away from the topic of antivax advocacy and draw people to his own website which discusses his obsession with aluminium.
      I am unsurprised commenters are dismissive.

    • kfunk937

      Please give a chance to interpreting the perspective on VP’s comments to the fact that we find them boring.

      His comments have been repeatedly refuted, here and elsewhere, with citations to back them up, over and over again. VP also “moderates” his own site, which he spams here and elsewhere, with a heavy hand. There is no conversation, save what he authorises. He will not speak to what his cites say on any other forum than his own (weirdly in the third person) and will abide no conversation there.

      • Clocks thats not yet banned

        I don’t see any refuting. I see comments like “oh come on, really?!” And comments like “there’s no way an autoimmune disease could be caused by stimulating the immune system!!” I see logical falacies, vaccine fanboys frequently dodging questions, deleting comments and banning users. You guys are so obsessed with your current way of thinking and whether that is accepted by the majority of people you can’t even begin to respond to the toxicity of nanoparticulate aluminum or the (well understood) immune response which causes autism. I haven’t seen a paper show nanoparticulate aluminum is not toxic. This entire thread of comments persists the way it does because you can’t prove the VP articles wrong. …and if nanoparticulate AL hasn’t been proven to be safe for injection why do we use it? That’s most likely the question people are going to be asking over the next couple decades

        • mark

          agreed Clocks (thats soon to be banned,)
          go recklessly fishing for heightened immune response with adjuvants (or peanut oil) youre likely to get it…and thats training the immune system to be paranoid and hair-trigger on edge
          guns ready!
          but no proper education,..
          who’re we shootin!
          Dont worry jus shoot!
          Anaphylaxis here we come…
          in my mind thats how it seems

        • kfunk937

          What you are missing is the long, sorry history. You came in late apparently. But you could catch up, if you felt like it.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            “VP is wrong”

            “Why?”

            “Because VP is an ignorant layperson using copy paste skills”

            Was an argument used by the author in the comments section, after deleting peer reviewed scientific papers. That is the definition of the logical fallacy “begging the question” and also ad hominem

            You complain when VP links to his site, then delete papers VP posts here in the comments. Where is the long history I am missing and why would I want to catch up

          • kfunk937

            I can lead you to water, but cannot make you drink. Sorry ’bout that.

        • N
          • Nick Sanders

            I appreciate that you are sharing that list that I put together, but just highlighting and copying doesn’t work, because Disqus truncates how much of the link it displays, so you get a bunch of partial URLS if you don’t right click and use “copy link”. Here’s the list with with working links:

            https://www.aap.org/en-us/Documents/immunization_vaccine_studies.pdf

            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367

            http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444

            http://www.jpeds.com/content/JPEDSDeStefano

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17928818

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22184954

            http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa071434

            http://www.diet-studies.com/open/Andrews2004.pdf

            http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=197365

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17168158

            http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=1239

            http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(98)24018-9/fulltext

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10376617

            http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2004/immunization-safety-review-vaccines-and-autism.aspx

            http://www.nimh.nih.gov/news/science-news/2013/autism-risk-unrelated-to-total-vaccine-exposure-in-early-childhood.shtml

            http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134

            http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/793.short

            http://nationalacademies.org/HMD/Reports/2013/The-Childhood-Immunization-Schedule-and-Safety.aspx

            http://nationalacademies.org/HMD/Reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx

            http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mcgovern/files/mcgovern_vaccination_0.pdf

            Personally, I take it as a compliment that people use things like this after I put them together. I will say, however, that the majority of these deal with autism and either the MMR or thimerosal, as that was until recently the most common claim I encountered.

          • N

            Oh. Thank you.

          • Nick Sanders

            I use it so often that I keep it in a handy little text file on my desktop, which I update from time to time. Saves so much hassle.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            I mean seriously looking through these… “a retrospective cohort study does no support association” do you understand how that study is flawed? Why would you include these studies in your defense of the safety of vaccinations???

          • Nick Sanders

            No, please explain the flaws.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Because a non randomized retrospective study can’t even come close to matching the populations. It’s not scientific and therefore it is worthless. This is coming from the horse’s mouth, Paul offit:

            “Confounding by contraindication is especially problematic for non-experimental designs. Specifically, individuals who do not receive vaccine (e.g., because of a chronic or transient medical contraindication or low socioeconomic group) may have a different risk for an adverse event than vaccinated individuals (e.g., background rates of seizures or sudden infant death syndrome may be higher in the unvaccinated). Therefore, direct comparisons of vaccinated and unvaccinated children is often inherently confounded and teasing this issue out requires understanding of the complex interactions of multiple, poorly quantified factors.”
            –Vaccines, 5th ed, 2008, page 1631

          • Nick Sanders

            Difficult is not the same as impossible. And they are hardly “unscientific” or “worthless”.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            100% unscientific when retrospective data is used disregarding thousands of variables

          • Nick Sanders

            What variables did that study disregard?

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Okay, here is another autism/auto immune study for you to look at..
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310922
            This is important because it shows that when the brain is developing, maternal immune activation causes neurological damage. This is the reason why stimulating an infant’s immune system with aluminum is a bad idea.

            and the following is my list of reasons why the pediatrics study I mentioned above, at a first glance, is useless:

            1. It is known that the AAP receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from Merck yearly. This doesn’t mean its studies are inherently flawed, just some perspective here on potential motivations to use retrospective data to try and prove injecting infants with aluminum is safe.

            2. “Ethylmercury has a much shorter half-life than methylmercury, being rapidly excreted via the stools after parenteral administration such that blood levels remain substantially below the safe threshold.”
            This is actually very misleading. Ethylmercury has been shown in this study to remain in the brain at higher concentrations, despite ‘blood levels’
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079072
            I find in my two or three days of research on this issue that many other highly cited studies measure toxic metals in the blood and urine and not in the brain/other organs, coming to the conclusion that ‘vaccines are safe’

            I can probably go through this study and find other inconsistencies like this.

            3. This is studying Thimerosal, specifically, when the actual issue is the danger of immune stimulation in infants.

            4 – and this is truly hard to believe. It seems unnecessary to discover and point out potential variables that have been ignored in the conclusions of the presented (retrospective) data when the HR of ‘general development disorders’ for vaccinated kids is ‘0.87’. From my understanding, this conclusion would insinuate that injecting kids with aluminum/thimerosal actually decreases their risk of cognitive dysfunction. I’d like to hear an explanation on that one.. perhaps we should trust the study and inject people for fun… or perhaps I am reading this wrong..? ?!?!

          • Nick Sanders

            That first study was modeling full blown infection, not vaccination. It is not a valid comparison. The second is about thimerosal because people like you spent decades proclaiming it was the cause of autism, and only recently started moving away from it now that it’s more or less completely untenable.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Okay so to clarify: “people like me” have made an argument in the past, therefore you are responding to them, and not to me. Sounds like a straw man fallacy. Also, you don’t see how a study could be flawed, even though it concludes you are at a less risk of mental disease if you are injected with mercury.

            Indeed, with this low quality of science you are presenting today, a medical consensus on the safety of immune activation/aluminum adjuvant would never be reached. Now it’s my job go ask questions about your vaccine religion you’ve believed since 1920… but it’d be too earth shattering for you, presumably with the knowledge of scientific method, to go through your studies and realize how little they prove. After all, that would require understanding that you’ve been supporting the biggest medical scandal in history. My job is easy: vaccines have never been proven safe and I’ve presented an obvious way they can be damaging.

          • Nick Sanders

            I’m not responding to them, you’re the one who posted the study then turned around and complained it was about thimerosal instead of aluminum. I just explained why the study was done.

            Also, you don’t see how a study could be flawed, even though it concludes you are at a less risk of mental disease if you are injected with mercury.

            A few things:
            1. No one is being injected with mercury. Thimerosal is used, but it’s not mercury.
            2. You are disputing a study because you don’t like the results. You don’t actually make any specific complaints about it other than you don’t like the results. Science requires an open mind. Going in with a preconceived notion and trashing anything that ends up contradicting that notion is not science. It’s far closer to the religion you accuse me of.
            3. Even where we injecting mercury, and even were the study flawed in design or execution rather than just producing results you don’t like, the symptoms of autism poisoning and the symptoms of mercury poisoning differ immensely. We should no more expect mercury to cause autism than we should expect cyanide to cause hyperoxia.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            http://www.drgreenmom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Neuro-Activation-and-Inflammation-Vargas.pdf

            another study on immune response/activation and autism that’s been cited one billion times on pubmed.

            This is my comment:

            “It seems unnecessary to discover and point out potential variables that have been ignored in the conclusions of the presented (retrospective) data when the HR of ‘general development disorders’ for vaccinated kids is ‘0.87’. From my understanding, this conclusion would insinuate that injecting kids with aluminum/thimerosal actually decreases their risk of cognitive dysfunction. I’d like to hear an explanation on that one.. perhaps we should trust the study and inject people for fun… or perhaps I am reading this wrong..? ?!?!”

            your response is “You don’t actually make any specific complaints about it other than you don’t like the results.” No. I am trying to explain to you that it is IMPOSSIBLE for that conclusion to be accurate, therefore there is some sort of bias present in the study. Since the data is retrospective, I imagine it would be difficult to match people by other known associations with autism, such as mild inflammation from obesity or vitamin D deficiency.
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17027526

            Other variables might include maternal infections, drug use, cigaratte use, socioeconomic class, etc. “A person that is likely to vaccinate their kids is also likely to feed them better” could be true… or “A person that is likely to vaccinate their kids also is less likely to smoke during pregnancy” My point is the study does not correct for or mention any of these variables. It’s child’s play to pick it apart, unless I am wrong in my analysis, which you haven’t really responded to.

            Since you continue to defend this study as definitive, I assume you are unable to recognize the flaws in other studies that show these conclusions. Your position that the current vaccine schedule is safe is impossible to prove, scientifically, with the currently published studies and is 100% your opinion. Meanwhile rates of autism increase to 1/50… but this has become pointless. I feel like I have articulated my argument pretty well. Thanks for your time

          • Nick Sanders

            From my understanding, this conclusion would insinuate that injecting kids with aluminum/thimerosal actually decreases their risk of cognitive dysfunction. I’d like to hear an explanation on that one.

            Off the top of my head, I can give you one: even if aluminum or thimerosal did have a negative effect on the central nervous system at the doses present in vaccinations, and I don’t believe for a minute that it does, that might very well be outweighed by the prevention of illness by those same vaccines. Acute inflammation, prolonged fevers, and viral infection are all pretty bad for the developing brain.

        • Nick Sanders

          the (well understood) immune response which causes autism.

          [citation needed]

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898160/
            A review of evidence up to 2010 that autism is indeed an autoimmune disease.

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22326555/
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26972722

            Some of the specific cytokines at play.

            I mean honestly it’s a waste of time copy pasting studies that show autism is caused by an immune response since, like I said before, it’s well understood and hopefully you can use Google.

            Now, your argument that an auto immune disorder can’t possibly be caused by immune activation is as irrational as it is incorrect. That said, if you really want me to go through all of those links and show you why the science is inadequate and the conclusions are flawed, I will. Just understand that there has never been a randomized study (of 3-5 years) of the vaccine schedule. It is impossible to prove that it is safe, therefore, and you are defending science the stems from the 1920s, when doctors injected mercury and arsenic in people to cure syphilis and people were drinking radium.

          • Nick Sanders

            Your first link is nowhere near as certain about it as you are. It posits that there is much interplay between immunity and autism spectrum disorders, including relatively high levels of comorbidity with autoimmunity and other immune issues. However, not even the authors take it as a confirmation of causation.

            Your second link is about Leigh syndrome, and utterly irrelevant.

            Your third link has all of two and a half sentences that aren’t behind a paywall. A one sentence summary on pubmed, and the barest beginning of the article on the journal website. Even from as reputable a source as Nature, I wouldn’t take that as proof that the sky was blue.

          • Mike Stevens

            But..but..
            Interleukins in mice! That’s just gotta mean vaccines cause autism in humans! Couldn’t possibly indicate anything else.

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            Better inject infants with aluminum to stimulate immune response… that sounds safe, my retrospective data told me so

          • Mike Stevens

            I see you don’t distinguish between autoimmunity and immune response.
            They are different, you know.
            Natural infection is the commonest cause for immune activation and for autoimmunity.
            Your review on the issue of autism and autoimmunity is remarkable for the absence of the word “vaccine” within its 28 pages.

          • sdsures

            Every time I’ve ever posted “citation needed”, the conversation mysteriously stops.

    • guest

      It’s so true. Last year, vaccinations/immunulogy was all about skinny jeans, this year it’s all about flu shots. What’s up for next year? Continental philosophy?

    • 655321

      The Dr. in question is demanding evidence that vaccines cause harm, while she knows these studies have never been adequately done. She has no concrete evidence to back her own opinion, so she uses the propaganda technique of asking people who disagree with her to prove a negative.

      • Nick Sanders

        Prove a negative? No, asking for proof of harm is not telling you to prove a negative! Fucking hell…

        • 655321

          She is demanding evidence of harm without being able to produce evidence of safety. If the studies have never been done, that is the definition of proving a negative. Maybe you can google that too.

          • Nick Sanders

            Except studies have been done, they’ve been provided to you, and the medical consensus is that they are safe. If you dispute the established consensus, burden of proof is on you.

          • 655321

            There are non pharmaceutical studies that compare vaccinated groups to non-vaccinated groups? Sweet, cite em and I’ll take a look.

          • Nick Sanders
          • 655321

            Nick, you’re full of s@#t and you know it. If you have any studies that do not compare vaccinated kids against other vaccinated kids, please post them. Otherwise maybe increase your mercury intake to boost your IQ.

          • Nick Sanders
          • 655321

            You’re a joke. Go troll the Sesame Street blog where you’ll possibly have more credibility.

          • crazy grad mama

            You obviously don’t watch Sesame Street—you’d be a lot smarter if you did.

          • 655321

            wow….you come up with that yourself? Give some credit to whatever “grad” means, genius….wow.

          • crazy grad mama

            Solid effort, but relies on clichés and practically begs for a response about the nice book called a dictionary. Sad troll comeback grade: C-

          • Mishimoo

            I think your grading is a bit generous, I would have awarded this troll a D- due to the overuse of ellipses.

          • 655321

            The comeback was on par with the material you gave me to work with…..sad.

          • crazy grad mama

            Correct capitalization and punctuation this time, but a low word count, and I’m afraid we’re looking for something a little more advanced than “I know you are but what am I?” Sad troll comeback grade: D+

          • 655321

            Get a real hobby. Very sad for you.

          • crazy grad mama

            Tries for a classic shame-your-opponent tactic but fails due to the overwhelming irony. Repetitive vocabulary. Sad troll response grade: F

          • 655321

            You’re still at this?

          • crazy grad mama

            Repeated use of the same tactic; continued low word count. See notes above re: overwhelming irony. Sad troll response grade: F

          • 655321

            You’re incredibly boring.

          • crazy grad mama

            Shows a lack of creativity and an astonishing lack of self-awareness. Points awarded for correct punctuation of “you’re.” Sad troll response grade: D-

          • 655321

            Just fail me and get it over with!!

          • crazy grad mama

            Engages with the method, but shows questionable understanding of the meaning of past grades. Excessive use of exclamation marks. Sad troll response grade: D-

          • Clocks thats not yet banned

            I just reviewed one of nicks infamous studies below… uses retrospective data and concludes that if a kid gets 3 doses of mercury he’s less likely to get cognitive disorders.

          • 655321

            Nick is a real winner. Maybe he received so much mercury he’s genius?

          • corblimeybot

            Outside observers of the conversation between you, clocks, and Nick Sanders can easily identify that Nick is intellectually fluent and makes well-supported arguments, while you two just make armpit farts.

          • 655321

            Define intellectually fluent.

          • Nick Sanders

            Well, for starters I have more of an argument than “nuh-uh” and name calling.

          • 655321

            You are posting irrelevant links trying to give the illusion of some false credibility. I’m just calling out your nonsense.

          • Nick Sanders

            You claim they are irrelevant but give no good reason why. You asked for studies of vaccinated compared to unvaccinated, which I provided, and your response was to call me a joke and a troll.

            You’ve made negative statements about my IQ, said I am full of shit, and called me a liar. Meanwhile, for evidence on your part you’ve put up fuck all. At least clocks and VP made an effort to substantiate themselves. So you know what? I’m not the problem here, you are, and you can bite me.

          • 655321

            Only idiots or bottom shelf trolls post the thoughtscapism link as proof in the vaccine discussion. Did you even read it? Unfortunately I have, several times.

          • Nick Sanders

            And this is why we’re done here.

          • 655321

            You haven’t read your own links. You’re a fraud and/or liar.

          • Mike Stevens

            You keep asking stupid questions.
            Yes, you really are dumb.

          • 655321

            I’ll keeping asking questions until someone intelligent enough can answer them.

          • Mike Stevens

            You mean someone more intelligent than you, who knows the answers you don’t?

          • 655321

            I see you refuse to answer and continue to play word games.

          • Mike Stevens

            You asked what “intellectually fluent” meant.
            Ergo, you don’t know, and want someone more aware, more articulate and more intelligent than you are to explain it to you.

            I am happy to oblige:
            It means having the facility to easily communicate through one’s superior abilities in higher cerebral function such as cognition, comprehension and reflection.

          • Verboten

            Saw on Press Herald that you are pro-Hillary…Not a surprise that a pro-vaxxer is also pro-globalist. Fortunately, the globalists are losing elections around the world, and in due turn, we will solve this vaccine crisis that you idiots have been covering up for the past couple of decades.

          • Mike Stevens

            Yeah, funny that – someone who values life and the health of all children and people on the planet also supports vaccination… who would ever have thought it?

          • Verboten

            You were in support of the pro-death party. Hillary is well-known for laughing about the child rapist she kept out of prison while openly supporting late-term abortions. Hillary is also known for allowing 10,000 Haitians die while she enriched her donors. Hillary also laughed about overthrowing Libya, which allowed ISIS to gain a stronghold and ultimately resulted in the deaths of 4 Americans.

            What was that about life?

            While you try to push your brainwashed mentality on other people, you have to wonder, how is it that you “know so much” about vaccines? It couldn’t be that big pharma has been “informing” you for decades…no, couldn’t be that…bet you wouldn’t even be able to figure out how to tell.

          • Mike Stevens

            Let’s see… Measles vaccination has saved an estimated 17 million lives in the last 15 years alone, and in the US over 20 years saved 732,000 lives.

            But I assume the deaths of 4 people in Benghazi which was due to a combination of complex factors outweighs all of those.

            http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/measles-vaccination/en/

            http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/p0424-immunization-program.html

          • Verboten

            1) Murder is murder, whether it be 4 people or 6 million.

            2) How many lives have been lost due to the conflict in Syria? More of Hillary’s and her party’s handiwork.

            3) “An estimated 17 million” Estimated by who and by what? I know people that have gotten measles and they were vaccinated in the midst of vaccinated people.

            Anyway, I’m not here to fight against the theory of vaccines, I am here to demand better oversight.

            How about you address the thousands of parents that have had children alter their behavior after taking vaccines?

          • Mike Stevens

            “”An estimated 17 million” Estimated by who and by what?”

            I provided the links for you to look and see for yourself.

          • Verboten

            You have no idea about anything. You would trust anyone wearing a lab coat.

            http://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html

          • Azuran

            Sure, murder is murder. But no, killing 4 people and killing 6 millions is not equal.

          • Verboten

            Did I say they were equal?

          • Azuran

            ”Murder is murder, whether it be 4 people or 6 million.”
            Seems to me like you are saying those things are of equal gravity.

            But even then, you are obviously very simple minded in how you think world politics works.
            4 people died in Bengazi. Clinton didn’t kill them. When you have a position of power, every single decision you make, even decisions that have nothing to do with war. has a risk of killing people. And they don’t have cristal balls.
            Are you also blaming Bush and the republican for all the soldiers who died in Afghanistan and Iraq? and all the civilians as well? And the deaths of 9/11? Or for the death of all the American citizens who where taken hostages and beheaded by Al-Qaeda?
            Bengazi was a very complex situation and it’s not as simple as that.

          • Verboten

            So, we should diminish the murder of 4 people because in the past someone has killed 6 million?

          • Amy Tuteur, MD

            What are your professional qualifications in immunology? None, right? So why should we pay any attention to you?

          • Verboten

            You jumped in on the wrong comment. Please address an appropriate comment and I will respond. Thanks.

          • Amy Tuteur, MD

            I already know that you have no professional qualifications because I can see who you are. You are thoroughly ignorant about vaccines or immunology, but are so clueless that you don’t even know it.

          • Verboten

            Let me get this straight, you believe because you have MD in your handle that you get to dictate reality? No, you do not. Why don’t you start with quoting where I have given medical advice to people? While you are at it, why don’t you point out all of the people that are giving out medical advice who have no business doing so? Ah right, it conflicts with your agenda. Neat.

          • Amy Tuteur, MD

            Science is true whether you are capable of understanding it or not.

          • Verboten

            Science is a method that is accomplished by humans with agendas. I should not have to inform a medical doctor of the atrocious history that “science” has had with the truth. Science is supposed to be about looking at the facts. The FACTS are that thousands of people are reporting the same thing while those who are making money off it are saying something else. In essence, you are asking people to deny science by having them deny facts and instead to put their “trust” in big pharma.

            NEWSFLASH: Modern medicine is not supposed to be a religion.

            Also, if vaccines are so safe, let the American populace sue freely whenever there is cause, else, stop calling vaccines safe.

          • 655321

            Science may be true, but you are full of s@#t. Let us know when you actually cite some.

          • N

            And someone like Trump is going to solve the problems in Syria??? How? Will he just bomb the whole country??? What IS his miracle cure against IS???

          • Verboten

            He will stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda for one. For two, he will work with the Russians and the Syrians to bring peace. You clearly know nothing about the reality of the situation. Please, inform yourself before making any replies.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Hillary is well-known for laughing about the child rapist she kept out of prison

            The one thing that this election showed overall is that reality has no meaning.

            It doesn’t matter that Clinton neither laughed about the child rapist nor kept him out of prison (he plea bargained, and pled guilty; he got a 5 year sentence, and the JUDGE suspended most of it, not HRC).

            And her laughing? She laughed at things like a polygraph test that the prosecution wanted, but how it backfired on them.

            But hey, in Trump world, it’s ok to just make shit up.

          • Verboten

            Was she laughing about a child rapist getting out of jail or was she not?

          • Houston Mom

            I heard the tape played on the radio. She said her client passed the lie detector test and that forever destroyed her faith in lie detector tests. She laughed at that point. She was not laughing at the victim herself. She said this was not a case she wanted to take in the first place but ethically once she was the man’s attorney she did.have to provide him an adequate legal defense.

          • Verboten

            I also watched the video, what I saw was a woman that was gleeful about winning whatever the consequences. The same woman who gleefully talked about overthrowing Libya, a disaster both politically and humanitarianly. The same woman that allowed 10,000 Haitians to die. The same woman that was writing a speech full of lies to protect herself while Americans were being killed in Benghazi.

            You are defending one of the worst people alive today. Why? Because your democratic leaders told you to. Sad.

          • N

            And Trump is not lying? Will he not kill people? Sure? Trump the most honest person alive today? The nicest person ever? Full of love for mankind?

          • Verboten

            What does this have to do with the evils of Hillary Clinton?

          • N

            I thought that was somehow your logic. If Clinton is the bad guy, Trump must be the good one.

          • Verboten

            Obviously you thought wrong and you should stop trying to conflate issues.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Says the person who did a Gish gallop after having been exposed in a lie about her keeping the child rapist out of prison…

          • Verboten

            Oh, the child rapist defender is back, everyone! Too bad there isn’t a “tar and feather” button here…

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Gish gallop away….

            You can’t defend your bullshit about her getting a child rapist out of prison and laughing about it, so you better change the subject…

          • Verboten

            You cannot defend it. You are clearly a psychopath that does not care about anyone else except for yourself. Disgusting.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Re: Benghazi

            After 8 congressional hearings, Republicans found NOTHING to pin on her. Not a fucking thing.

            So you have to pretend it’s evil instead. As I said, reality means nothing any more.

          • Verboten

            I don’t care what they “found”. I’ve looked at the evidence myself, and anyone with a brain knows what happened was purposeful and it was evil.

            THANK GOD HILLARY LOST.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            I’ve looked at the evidence myself, and anyone with a brain knows what happened was purposeful and it was evil.

            Interesting, we have come to an agreement. Republicans in congress do not have brains.

            I’m glad we agree on that.

          • Verboten

            Sadly, we do agree on that D:

          • Houston Mom

            This was an audio recording no video so you didn’t SEE anything. http://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/clintons-1975-rape-case/ I am not defending anyone. I am pointing out misinformation.

          • Verboten

            Yes, I did see the interview, thank you very much. You are supporting misinformation.

          • Houston Mom

            The interview was five hours of audio recordings. There was no video of her laughing. There is a video of the audio paired with a still photo of Clinton. Maybe that is what you saw. http://freebeacon.com/politics/the-hillary-tapes/ You can repeat that you “saw” it but that doesn’t make it true.

          • Verboten

            Oh, sorry, you are right, I was confusing the time she was laughing about deposing and having the leader of Libya killed with the time she was laughing about a rapist passing a lie detector test. My bad.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            No, she wasn’t. Of course, that doesn’t matter to you.

            Starting with the fact that the child rapist DIDN’T GET OUT OF JAIL!!!!

          • Verboten

            What are you blabbering about? What charges did the rapist end up with? What happened to the girl that was raped? Why don’t you care about her? No, you’d rather care about what your democrat leaders tell you to care about. Disgusting.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            What are you blabbering about?

            The guy pled guilty to a lesser charge and got a 5 year jail sentence. So much for “getting out of jail.:”

            You are the one who claimed she kept him out of prison. It’s just not true. She did not keep him out of prison.

            So what are YOU blabbering about? Something invented.

          • Verboten

            What “lesser charge” did he plead to? Sort of raping a 12 year old???

            You are disgusting. You are defending a criminal and discarding a raped 12 year old girl as though she doesn’t matter because your leaders told you to. Pig.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            What “lesser charge” did he plead to? Sort of raping a 12 year old???

            I don’t know, child molestation or something.

            It matters not. The fact that he pled guilty and was sentenced to jail contradicts your bullshit claim that she kept him out of prison.

            All your attempts to divert onto a different topic don’t change the lie.

          • Verboten

            “I don’t know, child molestation or something.
            It matters not.”

            My exact point. You are out of your f***ing mind.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Let’s rehash:

            YOU dumbfuck claimed she kept him out of prison.

            In fact, he got sentenced to prison.

            You never said that she got him out of prison for child rape. Therefore, it matters not what he went to prison for, the fact that he went to prison for something shows that your initial claim was wrong.

            I realize it’s not easy for you to keep up because you invent whatever you want to say, and therefore have a hard time keeping up with yourself. But we have your words above.

          • Verboten

            I don’t care how I worded it, idiot. You can tell from my posts my meaning. She got a rapist off and she laughed. You are a disgusting pig and thank all that is decent in this world that your candidate LOST.

            And, it is people like you that caused her to lose. More than 50% of the conservatives did not want to vote Trump, until we started seeing the maniacal left in action. Everyone headed to the polls to stop the insanity. Your time is up. Expect conservatives on the Supreme Court until the day you die.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            I don’t care how I worded it, idiot. You can tell from my posts my meaning.

            Yeah, your meaning is to make up anything you can to make Clinton look bad. Even if that means not telling the truth.

            You want to start getting precise? OK, your objection is that she plea bargained down to a lesser sentence and that her client was never charged with child rape?

            1) The prosecutor agreed to that plea bargain, so the blame, if there is any, should go just as much there. But that’s ok, because I am perfectly willing to blame prosecutors for being light on criminals.
            2) You know who else wanted a plea bargain? THE VICTIM. She and her parents didn’t want to go through the humiliation of a trial, and were, at the time, completely satisfied with the outcome. They were happy to get the criminal convicted, even it were a lesser charge, in order to make it quick and easy.

            What should Clinton have done? Bring it to trial and force the victim to have to go through it, against her wishes? Clinton had an ethical and professional obligation to defend her client. She did that (others have noted that she did not volunteer for the case, and took it out as a case of professional ethics).

            But make no mistake. Had she brought it to trial, you could just as well be claiming that she forced this poor girl to go through a humiliating trial. If she had not tried to get him a lesser sentence, you would (and this would be legit) say she failed in her responsibility as a lawyer.

            Instead, she worked with the prosecutor to get a deal that was mutually beneficial to all parties involved. Evil, for sure.

          • Verboten

            Are you seriously still defending this?

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            Defending what?

            Defending her for arranging a plea agreement for her client that was satisfactory to the prosecutor and to the victim? Yeah, why shouldn’t it be defended?

            Answer the question: what should she have done?

            I realize that professional ethics is another area where Trump fails.

          • Verboten

            She should have done her duty as a lawyer, given the evil sob a defense, and she should have cried when he passed the lie detector test, she should not have laughed.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa

            She should have done her duty as a lawyer, given the evil sob a defense,

            She did. Good.

            she should have cried when he passed the lie detector test, she should not have laughed.

            As noted, in the interview, she laughed at how the lie detector was nonsense.

            And that is a perfectly fine response to anyone attempting to use a lie detector. Lie detectors SHOULD be laughed at.

          • Verboten

            No, if a person actually cares, genuinely, the very thought of the rapist getting a light sentence over poor procedure should have disgusted Hillary. She is actually an evil person. Democrats should have stuck with Bernie, he would have won easily.

          • Verboten

            Eloquence and facts are two divorced concepts. Something the low IQ posters of Disqus have a hard time grasping.

  • sean j

    I’m not a MD,but I am well versed in historical facts,and if not for vaccines,this country’s history might have been a lot shorter if we hadnt come up with the smallpox vaccine.We have almost eradicated many infectious diseases with vaccines,in fact if not for vaccines,many anti vaxxers may not even be alive today if not for vaccines,these people live in a fantasyland

    • Kevin

      Hi there,It seems to me that anti vaxxers are living in fantasyland

    • Clocks

      I don’t see any mention of smallpox or the toxicity of the smallpox vaccine anywhere in the comments, but thank you for your admittedly uneducated opinion. The topic of conversation is the toxicity of Al adjuvant and the damaging effects of immune activation.

      You are making a strawman argument, since nobody on here is arguing the smallpox vaccine is ineffective, dangerous, or unworthy of recognition.

      • corblimeybot

        He wasn’t only talking about the smallpox shot. Good work accusing him of doing the exact fallacy you performed yourself.

      • Mike Stevens

        No that isn’t the topic.

  • Amy Tuteur, MD

    Vaccine Papers, until you post those meta-analyses I will be deleting everything else you post.

    • Only some types of studies are amenable to meta-analysis. There are plenty of review papers I could cite.

      • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

        A study about maternal infections and schizophrenia. Do you not understand that live vaccines are not given in pregnancy? Nothing about vaccines.

        • This is the problem with reading just one paper. Many other papers in this field also show:

          1) Immune activation in the mother causes immune activation in the fetal brain.
          2) Its the immune activation (cytokines) in the developing brain that cause the brain injury. In other words, the brain is damaged by exposure to cytokines.
          3) Cytokines can damage the developing brain after birth, with no involvement of the mother.
          4) The human brain develops for years after birth, and can be damaged by cytokines during this period. And up to about age 10 years, at least.
          5) Vaccine adverse reactions induce the same cytokines (e.g. IL-6) in the brain that cause brain damage in the immune activation experiments.
          6) The experiments have been repeated with monkeys (looking at both behavioral and physiological outcomes).
          7) Much more than behavior is affected. Immune activation causes physiological injury also present in autism. That would be Purkinje cell damage, microbiome disruption, mitochondrial damage, excitotoxicity and chronic brain inflammation.

          A leading researcher in this field has written:

          “These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
          –Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Oh, come on!

    • H.L.

      Scientific fraud has occurred on numerous occasions.

      CDC Whistleblower:
      http://www.ecowatch.com/cdc-vaccines-autism-2051536402.html

      The $20+ million Hanna Poling vaccine-autism injury judgement is just the tip of the iceberg.

      Good Morning America interview with the Poling family:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5Ru-Tp27AM

      Also:

      Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 40: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays which are two separate ICD9 codes. Exposures at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders

      Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 44: “Now for speech delays, which is the largest single disorder in this category of neurologic delays. The results are a suggestion of a trend with a small dip. The overall test for trend is highly statistically significant above one.”

      Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 76: “What I have done here, I am putting into the model instead of mercury, a number of antigens that the children received, and what do we get? Not surprisingly, we get very similar estimates as what we got for Thimerosal because every vaccine put in the equation has Thimerosal. So for speech and the other ones maybe it’s not so significant, but for the overall group it is also significant….Here we have the same thing, but instead of number of antigens, number of shots. Just the number of vaccinations given to a child, which is also for nearly all of them significantly related.”

      Dr. Guess, pg. 77: “So this essentially is a 7% risk per antigen, an antigen is like in DPT you’ve got three antigens.”

      Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 77: “Correct.”

      Dr. Egan, pg. 77: “Could you do this calculation for aluminum?”

      Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 77: “I did it for aluminum…Actually the results were almost identical to ethylmercury because the amount of aluminum goes along almost exactly with the mercury one.”

  • Amy Tuteur, MD

    Anyone want to claim that vaccines are unsafe or ineffective?

    Please post citation to at least 10 large scale meta-analyses from high impact journals that support your contention that vaccines are not safe or don’t work.

    If you cannot, or if you post links to old, obscure papers in low impact journals, I will consider that an admission of defeat.

    • Post citations to at least 10 large scale meta-analysis from high impact journals that support your contention that aluminum-containing vaccines do not cause autism or other brain disorders.

      Note: MMR-autism studies do not count because MMR does not contain aluminum adjuvant.

    • Can you cite at least 10 large scale meta-analyses from high impact journals that support your contention that aluminum adjuvant does not cause brain injury?

    • Mike Stevens

      At this point, I’d take as evidence even one large scale study indicating that vaccines are ineffective or not generally safe.
      But there isn’t even that.

      • mark

        ten large meta studies? well that will be about ten years after the leading edge has noted there are complications with vaccines,.. so folks, dont look for new insights here,.. The moderator is looking for aged science, mashed hypothesis and averaged,.. and its fine if the original studies had conflicts of interest that were never acknowledged?
        Mike Stevens, I like your interest and diligence! It is the very stuff that inquiring truth seeking science is made of. It is the antithesis of the scribes and pharisees searching the books and studies daily, but like the EMA neglecting evidence.

        There was a study I heard of, Swedish, actually a lifestyle study, but the group that un vacced had had measles then had a fraction of all the other atopic diseases… that might be lifelong? http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(98)09344-1/fulltext
        Moderator, I would say individual studies are looking into individual questions and are infinitely helpful in providing details for the big picture,… but then who am I? No Doctor, not even a PENN state rocks degree as one of the erudite here raised…
        And as to benefits, I wouldnt mind a study of vacced vs unvacced,.. with full raw data,.. not assessing immune response at one month, but assessing health and productivity across thirty years, then we would know the benefits. Amy can you advise me on anything like this? Individual is fine, ?

        • Mike Stevens

          I think you should find this review of atopy in childhood insightful.
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1765943/pdf/v055p000S2.pdf

          Vaccines are not the problem you imagine them to be.
          One study of it in over half a million kids with measles/measles vaccination demonstrated that there was more atopy in the children who suffered natural measles.
          http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/192309

          • mark

            Thanks Steve for these links. You are aware the “Measles History and Atopic Diseases” study looks at post MMR vaccination. If anything this would be used to confirm the vitality body view… ie the children that contacted measles, after MMRshock became more asthmatic atopic.
            If the study contrasted those who didnt get MMRshock then we could see what the differences were??

            The review is interesting – gut flora is back in vogue – might even play into a future exhonoration of Wakefield– but My hypothesis wouldbe that in the single child family there is a whole lot less rough and tumble, less challenges and more constriction (expectations) which is like overly damming the vital forces till they break the dam wall…again personal views
            but interesting study

    • H.L.

      based on Caltech’s recent findings, worldwide policy for the vaccination of pregnant mothers should be heavily debated and possibly ceased. or, were you unaware of such new findings?

      https://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-researchers-find-evidence-link-between-immune-irregularities-and-autism-4219

      “Obviously, the safe thing to do is to go with the experts, and the experts are the CDC,” said Paul Patterson, a professor of biology at the California Institute of Technology and one of the leading researchers into the link between maternal infections and schizophrenia. “However, if it was my wife, I would not [want] her vaccinated.”

      • Box of Salt

        Your link is a press release from 2012 about a study in mice.

        • H.L.

          Caltech and UC Davis replicated the 2012 autism findings in monkeys in 2014.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24011823

          so, why is the CDC recklessly promoting vaccinations during pregnancy if it increases the likelihood of autism?

          it also proves they haven’t been doing their homework or looking in the right areas. the fact that all of these finding are based on immune activation is troubling for vaccines in general.

          • Box of Salt

            Both studies are model full blown viral infections during the first trimester of pregnancy. The 2014 abstract reads: “Maternal infection during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of schizophrenia and autism in the offspring.”

            This is not a study of vaccines.

            I don’t have access to journals on a Sunday morning and have not read the full paper. I wonder if you have.

            I’m also wondering where you pulled that Paterson quote above from, because it was not in the press release you linked.

          • H.L.

            a simple search would allow you to find patterson’s quote. (hint: WaPo)

            you haven’t read their findings, so it is no surprise you would use the “this is not a study of vaccines” copout.

            their autism findings center on the requirement of IL-6, which is completely relevant to vaccinations. vaccinations, after all, are immune activation.

          • Box of Salt

            Why would I search for the quote when you posted a link? I assumed you were quoting your link. If you need to quote another source, post a second link. This site does allow you to do that.

            You think it’s a cop out? I think your opinion is stretching things.

            Enjoy your day.

          • H.L.

            It never occurred to you that if a quote is not found within one link, it was probably taken from elsewhere? are you still not able to find patterson’s quote?

            well, it is a copout. even patterson stated the Caltech and UCDavis findings are related to vaccines, which is why he is quoted he wouldn’t want his wife vaccinated to begin with.

            do you need help with searching online? please advise, i can help you.

          • Box of Salt

            “It never occurred to you that if a quote is not found within one link, it was probably taken from elsewhere?”

            Your English composition or History grades in high school were about as good (cough, cough) as your science grades, huh? Or grade inflation since my day in school has happened.

            If you can’t back up your argument, you don’t have one.

            Post the links with the quotes.

            And – yeah – I checked back after enjoying my day.

          • H.L.

            you made absolutely no sense.

            since you’re apparently not intelligent enough to conduct a simple search:

            enjoy your crow.

            http://lmgtfy.com/?q=caltech+patterson+if+it+were+my+wife+i+would+not+want+her+vaccinated

            make sure you use your left mouse button and press downwards, also known as a “click”. lol.

    • 655321

      Last I checked, it is up to the person/party claiming something to be true, ie vaccines safe and effective, to prove their hypothesis right. But you know the adequate safety studies have never been done. So to hide your lack of evidence, you call for others to prove a negative, an effective propaganda technique.

      • Nick Sanders

        Define “adequate” please.

        • 655321

          Look it up if you’re not sure of the meaning. Dictionary.com

          • Nick Sanders

            Except you’ve been provided data that meets the dictionary definition of adequate, then winged that it was insufficient without explaining why. Until you give an explicit standard to meet, you’re just going to twist and dodge no matter what is shown to you. So either set a bar, or get lost.

          • 655321

            “Except you’ve been provided data that meets the dictionary definition of
            adequate, then winged that it was insufficient without explaining why.
            Until you give an explicit standard to meet, you’re just going to twist
            and dodge no matter what is shown to you. So either set a bar, or get
            lost”

            This post is the definition of twisting and dodging. You’re not very clever, despite your best efforts. BTW, were you able to find the definition of adequate in the on-line dictionary? I’ll be careful to use smaller words next time we exchange posts.

  • Amy Tuteur, MD

    Anti-vaxxers: Citing single papers or even dozens of papers is not particularly meaningful in a discipline that has tens of thousands of papers. For a discussion like this, you need to cite large scale meta-analyses that support your viewpoint.

    None of the people currently posting are anything other relatively ignorant laypeople with cut and paste skills. How do you explain the fact that nearly all doctors, immunologists and public health officials agree on the efficacy and safety of vaccines, but we’re supposed to listen to you instead?

    • They are wrong and not keeping up with the science on aluminum adjuvant toxicity/kinetics and immune activation.

      Vaccines cause brain injury and immune disorders, and you can see the overwhelming evidence at vaccinepapers.org

      • Mike Stevens

        Bring your “overwhelming evidence” here then, rather than trying to boost visits to your own blog.

  • I see the Vaccine Papers spambot is in the house and has taken over the comments as it has historically tried to do on every vaccine article in order to post innumerable links to the home website.

    Just put me down for a Flag as Inappropriate for each vp post with a link and an explanation for the flagging of “vp spam”.

    • mark

      surely you are brave enough to consider an outsiders point of view cought22?

      • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

        http://www.skepticalob.com/2014/05/six-red-flags-you-need-to-recognize-to-quack-proof-yourself.html
        1. The secret knowledge flag “When someone implies they are sharing secret medical knowledge with you, run in the opposite direction. There is no such thing as secret medical knowledge.”
        2. The giant conspiracy flag “In the entire history of modern medicine, there has NEVER been a conspiracy to hide lifesaving information among professionals. Sure, an individual company may hide information in order to get a jump on competitors, or to deny harmful effects of their products, but there can never be a large conspiracy because every aspect of the healthcare industry is filled with competitors.”
        3. The flattery flag “Quacks invariably try to flatter potential customers by implying that those customers are uncommonly smart, insightful and wary. They portray non-believers as “sheeple” who are content to accept authority figures rather than think for themselves.”
        4. The toxin flag: “I’ve written before that toxins are the new evil humors. Toxins serve the same explanatory purpose as evil humours did in the Middle Ages. They are invisible, but all around us.”
        5. “The “brilliant heretic” flag: The quack often has no training in the relevant discipline, be it obstetrics, immunology or cancer care? No problem. A pervasive theme in quackery is the notion of the brilliant heretic.
        Believers argue that science is transformed by brilliant heretics whose
        fabulous theories are initially rejected, but ultimately accepted as
        the new orthodoxy.”
        (This is one of VPs biggies, and your argument!)
        6. The “quantum” flag: “Quacks love to baffle followers with bullshit, hence the invocation of esoteric scientific theories that they don’t understand. Quantum mechanics and chaos theory are two incredibly abstruse scientific disciplines, heavy on advanced math. If you don’t have a degree in either one, you aren’t qualified to pontificate on them. The same thing applies to new, imperfectly understood areas of science like epigenetics or the microbiome. Both are genuine scientific concepts, but we are in the earliest stages of elucidating them. There is real danger in insisting that they have
        current practical implications.”
        (Another one of VPs tactics, with all this Th-1 stuff and such that s/he/it probably has no clue about.

        • mark

          science has had to change for the last few hundred years,.. there is always an avant-guard that the “learned” wish to ostracise

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Snort! Flag #2: ” The giant conspiracy flag”. And this drivel about vaccines has been going on since Jenner. It’s not avant-garde. It’s troglodytish. Only the language has changed; the arguments are pretty much the same. And WHY won’t VP tells us his/her/its credentials. When did s/he/it last take a science course? At what level-middle school; high school; undergrad; grad school? How about you? What was the course? “Rocks for Jocks” as a geology course at Penn State was called when my brother went there?

          • mark

            you need an overview as well as specialisation. the thoughts vp offers seem sound to me, they are their own verifiers,..if you are falling back to authority(name/creds) thats what we left leaving roman catholicism isnt it?
            that said, read nordik cochranes latest complaint to the eu ombudsman over the ema, …seems to me the ema are the troglodytes here

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            That Nordic Cochrane thing was an outlier. The EU equivalent of the FDA concluded there’s nothing to it. And WHAT are VP’s qualifications? We’ve never heard.
            http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/

          • mark

            they are going over EMAs heads to the ombudsman, theres lots of angry parents in the background,.. hows this, Theres no evidence of harm,.. (but we are discontinuing that strain of vaccine)… how do you like that for cognitive dissonance…

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Ooh, black helicopter time!

            No vaccine strain was discontinued; a new Gardasil vaccine with 5 more strains was released.

          • mark

            and the ingredients are trade secrets?

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Not at all! http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM111263.pdf

            Good heavens, you aren’t very curious, are you? This information is available on the web.

          • mark

            thanks for the link but my curiosity coulndt find ingredients in that pdf

          • Azuran

            Page 12, section 11.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            You didn’t try very hard:
            “3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS GARDASIL is a suspension for intramuscular administration available in 0.5-mL single dose vials and prefilled syringes. See Description (11) for the complete listing of ingredients. . . . 11 DESCRIPTION GARDASIL, Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent (Types 6, 11, 16, and 18) Vaccine, Recombinant, is a non-infectious recombinant quadrivalent vaccine prepared from the purified virus-like particles (VLPs) of the major capsid (L1) protein of HPV Types 6, 11, 16, and 18. The L1 proteins are produced by separate fermentations in recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae and self-assembled into VLPs. The fermentation process involves growth of S. cerevisiae on chemically-defined fermentation media which include vitamins, amino acids, mineral salts, and carbohydrates. The VLPs are released from the yeast cells by cell disruption and purified by a series of chemical and physical methods. The purified VLPs are adsorbed on preformed aluminum-containing adjuvant (Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate). The quadrivalent HPV VLP vaccine is a sterile liquid suspension that is prepared by combining the adsorbed VLPs of each HPV type and additional amounts of the aluminum-containing adjuvant and the final purification buffer. GARDASIL is a sterile suspension for intramuscular administration. Each 0.5-mL dose contains approximately 20 mcg of HPV 6 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV 11 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV 16 L1 protein, and 20 mcg of HPV 18 L1 protein. Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine contains approximately 225 mcg of aluminum (as Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate adjuvant), 9.56 mg of sodium chloride, 0.78 mg of L-histidine, 50 mcg of polysorbate 80, 35 mcg of sodium borate, <7 mcg yeast protein/dose, and water for injection. The product does not contain a preservative or antibiotics. After thorough agitation, GARDASIL is a white, cloudy liquid."

            This is actually for Gardasil4. The only difference in it and Gardasil9 is that Gardasil9 contains proteins for 5 more HPV types.

            "GARDASIL 9, Human Papillomavirus 9-valent Vaccine, Recombinant, is a non-infectious recombinant 9-valent vaccine prepared from the purified virus-like particles (VLPs) of the major capsid (L1) protein of HPV Types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. The L1 proteins are produced by separate fermentations using recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae and self-assembled into VLPs. The fermentation process involves growth of S. cerevisiae on chemically-defined fermentation media which include vitamins, amino acids, mineral salts, and carbohydrates. The VLPs are released from the yeast cells by cell disruption and purified by a series of chemical and physical methods. The purified VLPs are adsorbed on preformed aluminum-containing adjuvant (Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate or AAHS). The 9-valent HPV VLP vaccine is a sterile liquid suspension that is prepared by combining the adsorbed VLPs of each HPV type and additional amounts of the aluminum-containing adjuvant and the final purification buffer. GARDASIL 9 is a sterile suspension for intramuscular administration. Each 0.5-mL dose contains approximately 30 mcg of HPV Type 6 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV Type 11 L1 protein, 60 mcg of HPV Type 16 L1 protein, 40 mcg of HPV Type 18 L1 protein, 20 mcg of HPV Type 31 L1 protein, 20 mcg of HPV Type 33 L1 protein, 20 mcg of HPV Type 45 L1 protein, 20 mcg of HPV Type 52 L1 protein, and 20 mcg of HPV Type 58 L1 protein. Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine also contains approximately 500 mcg of aluminum (provided as AAHS), 9.56 mg of sodium chloride, 0.78 mg of L-histidine, 50 mcg of polysorbate 80, 35 mcg of sodium borate, <7 mcg yeast protein, and water for injection. The product does not contain a preservative or antibiotics. After thorough agitation, GARDASIL 9 is a white, cloudy liquid." http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM426457.pdf

          • mark

            taa

        • Ancient Traveler

          Thank you for this interpretation of the conspiratorial philosophy. Its astounding people cling to these world views, in such a strong way. I have actually coined a term that perfectly describes this behavior.
          “Evangelical conspiracist”
          Pick a topic, anti-vac, chemtrail, NWO, Soros, holocaust denial, your six flags fit seamlessly into the equation.

      • corblimeybot

        Stupid ≠ brave

    • Melissa Wickersham

      We can block users like the Vaccine Papers spambot.

      • Thats a great way to deal with “inconvenient” scientific evidence!

    • Melissa Wickersham

      Disqus has a “block this user” function.

    • I see that vaccine promoters cannot deal with the scientific facts we have assembled, preferring instead to make straw man arguments and ad hominem attacks.

      • Michael McCarthy

        In order to make a straw man argument, another argument would have to have been presented first.
        Your understanding of ad hom is equally poor.

        • This was the argument I made:

          Vaccines are dangerous and cause brain damage (autism, schizophrenia) and immune disorders (allergies, autoimmunity). Science has proven that autism and schizophrenia are caused by immune activation during brain development. When activated by an infection or vaccine, the immune system produces proteins (cytokines) that cause defects in brain development. This can manifest as autism or other brain disorders (e.g. depression, ADHD, schizophrenia). Vaccines are designed to cause immune activation and stimulate the specific cytokines that cause this damage. Google “immune activation autism” and you will be amazed at what the science shows.

          Immune activation has also been proven to cause the physiological damage observed in autism: mitochondrial dysfunction, damaged/missing Purkinje cells, microbiome disruption (dysbiosis), angiogenesis (excessive blood vessel growth), and long-term brain inflammation.

          It is proven beyond any doubt that autism is caused by immune activation during brain development. Even the specific cytokines that cause autism are now known: interleukin-6 and interleukin-17a. IL-6 is produced in the brain by vaccine adverse reactions.

          The greatest danger is probably aluminum adjuvant. Aluminum-containing vaccines have been little-studied in relation to autism. It is proven that aluminum adjuvant causes brain and immune system damage at dosages infants receive from vaccines. It is proven that Al adjuvant nanoparticles travel into the brain after injection, and stay there. Also, Al adjuvant has been shown to cause the specific type of immune activation (the cytokine IL-6) proven to cause autism. These results have been replicated several times. Most vaccines contain aluminum.

          Only the MMR vaccine has been much studied in relation to autism. But every one of the MMR-autism studies is fatally flawed because of selection bias. They are not randomized or properly controlled. Consequently, children with pre-existing neuro- or immune disorders (caused by prior Al-containing vaccines) are concentrated in the “control” group of these studies. This makes the damage caused by the MMR vaccine unobservable in the MMR-autism studies. All of the MMR-autism studies have this systematic bias.

          The most dangerous vaccines are likely the ones that contain aluminum, and are given at the youngest ages, when the brain is most sensitive to immune activation. So, the Hep B vaccine, which contains aluminum and is given on the day of birth, is probably the most dangerous of all. There are only two studies of the Hep B vaccine and autism, and they both found an association with autism.

          The MMR vaccine stimulates an immune signal (a “chemokine” called MCP-1) that causes white blood cells to transport aluminum particles (received from prior vaccines) into the brain. Hence, the MMR vaccine may greatly amplify the brain damage caused by aluminum adjuvant.

  • Amy Tuteur, MD

    Thanks so much to the folks parachuting in to confirm that anti-vaxxers are astoundingly ignorant, yet inexplicably proud of their ignorance!

    • Not me!

      See vaccinepapers.org

      Perhaps you can explain what I get wrong?

      • Kevin

        Went to your site,Suzanne Humphries,really.?She has as much credibility as Wakefied.

        • What does Humphries get wrong?

          None of the content on VP was written by Humphries.

          • Sarah

            Nearly everything…

          • Be more specific?

            She is correct about aluminum adjuvant toxicity.

            I suggest you look at the VP website content, which is different from what Humphries covers in her lecture.

          • Sarah

            An average adult consumes about 7-9 mg of aluminum a day just through what we get in certain foods. She is not correct. With the minuscule amount we receive in vaccines, it should be out extremely quickly.

          • Al in vaccines is particulate, which cannot be eliminated and has higher toxicity. It is trapped in the body for years, and travels into sensitive tissues like the brain.

          • Mike Stevens

            Yet the lowest levels are in brain tissue, and at tiny concentrations.

            If aluminium adjuvant is so “special”, being nonoparticulate, why has it taken 40 years of vaccination of children with aluminium before we started to see significant numbers of autism?

          • Sarah

            Years? No.

          • demodocus

            Why aren’t people getting sick from using aluminum pots and tin foil?

          • mark

            try feeding it to a baby,.. different thresholds

          • demodocus

            Like the brown rice I’ve cooked in my aluminum pot for the 5th time this week? She quite likes it, as does her big brother.

          • mark

            tried injecting it? blend it first?

          • demodocus

            They’re both also vaccinated. When you’re deaf or blind from an once-common childhood illness, you likely will have a different view on vaccines.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Aluminum is in breast milk and formula.

          • Heidi_storage

            Oh, we probably are; cytokines inflammation blah blah blah. Maybe it’s causing autoimmune disorders; I read something about cytokines and RA, after all. We’re just too dumb to notice. Anyway, it isn’t being INJECTED into BABIES!!

            (I shouldn’t need to mention that I’m being sarcastic, but sadly, the actual antivaccine replies are at least as loony as mine.)

          • mark

            by 22 we can drink a few bottles of scotch, shoot up and snort…and maybe wake up tomorrow,.. is it the same for a one year old?

          • Heidi_storage

            In other words, dose makes the poison…which is something doctors and scientists take into account when developing vaccines.

          • Not when it comes to aluminum. They screwed up the toxicology by ignoring the particulate nature of Al adjuvant.

          • mark

            further, what can be tolerated after five might be intolerable at 6 months?

          • mark

            due to very different growth and development phases

          • corblimeybot

            I wasn’t allergic to all-natural pollen when I was a baby. i tolerated it in any airborne dose. Now it can give me asthma attacks. Just a side note, since you seem to think age and body mass is an absolute predictor for whether someone can tolerate a massive dose of something. And because you don’t have any concept of why OD’ing on scotch and cocaine isn’t the same thing as using a carefully-developed medical product.

          • Azuran

            As a totally average person, I can eat 4 hamburgers, I’ll probably feel very full and a little bloated, but nothing more.
            But if I pumped 4 burgers into a newborn’s stomach, it would more than likely kill him.

            The only thing this mean is: doing totally random very stupid things for no freaking reason can be deadly. But killing babies with burgers, scotch or heroin is absolutely meaningless in a discussion about vaccine safety, or the safety of any other medication or medical procedure for that matter.

          • Verboten

            “But killing babies with burgers, scotch or heroin is absolutely meaningless in a discussion about vaccine safety”

            Are you saying vaccines affect newborns the same way that they do adults?

          • Azuran

            I’m saying that making stupid comparison with heroin and scotch is stupid and has no basis in science and physiology.
            Babies and adults are different, but not ‘proportionally’ different.
            You can’t just take anything in adult size and divide it by 20 to make it appropriate for babies. Same as you can’t take anything baby size, multiply it by 20 and apply it to adult. That’s not how any of this works, especially in immunology.

          • Verboten

            Clearly, it isn’t the same, even a small number of vaccines could potentially harm a small child much, much worse than scotch or hamburgers. You are acting like we understand these things so well…we don’t….at all.

          • Azuran

            We do, YOU don’t.

          • It takes a very long time. Oral absorption of aluminum is about 0.3%. And about 98-99% of that is eliminated via urine. Al adjuvant cannot be eliminated in urine.

            Al from vaccines is nanoparticulate, which has higher toxicity and different kinetics. Also, dosage in infants is far higher.

          • N

            Oh no, tin foil is a good thing. You know, you can make those nice little hats out of tinfoil. They will protect you against vaccines, I mean illness, I mean alien abduction, … well they protect you, tin foil hats.

          • mabelcruet

            Well actually, tin foil is really dangerous. If you accidentally eat a bit and it touches an amalgam filling in your teeth it hurts like hell. The stuff should be banned immediately…

          • Kevin

            The fact that you have a Humphries video on your site sets off alarm bells for me and also indicates the lack of credibility in relation to your site,I also notice you link you own site when trying to back yourself up.Perhaps posters here would take more notice if you provided links to more credible sites.thank you.

      • Azuran

        Dude, post something other than your own freaking blog if you want people to take you seriously

        • Our blog contains detailed scientific articles and citations.

          • Mike Stevens

            Whose blog exactly?
            Who are you people? If you wish to run what you hope is an educational and informative blog/website, one of the first prerogatives is establishing your bona fides, not remaining anonymous.

      • Amy Tuteur, MD

        You want to claim that vaccines are unsafe or ineffective?

        Please post citation to at least 10 large scale meta-analyses from high impact journals that support your contention that vaccines are not safe.

        If you cannot, or if you post links to old, obscure papers in low impact journals, I will consider that an admission of defeat.

      • Mike Stevens

        Where do we start….?
        ..Cherrypicking
        ..Misrepresenting
        ..Ignoring evidence contrary to your own opinion
        etc.

        Admittedly, you seem reasonably intelligent, and have some grasp of scientific matters and can do math, which is more than 99% of your fellow antivaxers.
        So not all bad then….

        • Jonathan Graham

          IMHO VP kind of fakes their math. There are a number of places where they either seem unaware of a problem or simply unwilling to correct. When they proclaimed that Gadad et al. was designed to fail. I wasted weeks trying to straighten them out. Gadad isn’t a great study but IMHO it’s a classic example of what happens when you have a lot of ideas and a pretty fixed budget. You end up designing an experiment that’s trying to do too much but claiming that it couldn’t have got right answers or that it was deliberately designed to come up with a negative response is silly.

    • Verboten

      Anti-vaxxers are not ignorant, you are brainwashed.

      How do you know what you know about vaccines? It wouldn’t be by reading and listening to materials from people that work for big pharma could it?! I bet you never even checked…

  • DavidPatrick

    “Anti-vax advocacy reflects the conviction that no particular knowledge is necessary to pontificate on a topic.”

    Asimov’s Cult Of Ignorance. The Dunning-Kruger world, where dolts breed and dumb down the population.

    • Nick Sanders

      I agree that it’s a product of ignorance, but I’m not going to even tangentially support eugenics.

    • Anti-vax advocacy is based on the best available new science on aluminum adjuvant toxicity and immune activation brain injury.

      • Azuran

        well, you obviously haven’t been hanging around a lot of antivaxxers.
        Most of them are spouting out nonsense about vaccine ‘toxins’ travelling through 7 generations to shed mutant diseases on their child and how they can tell if someone’s grandparents were vaccinated by looking at their eyes.

        • Yes I agree there is a lot of nonsense out there. People often confuse our content with this nonsense.

          People on both sides have been getting it wrong for a long time.

          Our content is logical and rigorously supported by scientific evidence.

          • MaineJen

            So you guys have the “good” nonsense?

          • We have a correct understanding of the science.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            The “brilliant heretic” flag

  • Sue

    Good article – thanks. Indeed, we are all subject to confirmation bias – our ability to make cognitive errors is notable.

    “We are all experts on our won bodies” is one such misconception. We might be “experts” in what our bodies feel like, but not how they work.

    • demodocus

      We know if something is different, but aye, expert is not a word we should use there.

  • Grim Beard

    “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’” ― Isaac Asimov
    (http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/84250-anti-intellectualism-has-been-a-constant-thread-winding-its-way-through)

  • Nick Sanders
    • Gkiter

      “Let food be your medicine” is medicine 101 before considering the pill. I don’t have a grief against the pills, I benefited form it on occasion but they should be the last resort not the first one, especially if they are loaded with side effects, which some alternative medicine carry as well but generally speaking to a much smaller extent. The main grief I have with modern medicine is that it usually does not cure, it mitigates the symptoms while natural medicine and food tend to treat the underlying problem that is causing the symptoms and promote the immune system to do its job. A chimo will kill the symptoms but won’t fix the origin of the cancer while in the same time it destroys the immune system for years which eventually is causing a relaps or other complications people die from. Even oncologists know that, it’s not a secret or conspiracy theory.

      • Azuran

        We all agree here that food and exercise is important. But it’s not medicine. It’s going to help with some things, but rarely cure anything, and won’t cure or help with many other things. And when it does help, it’s not going to be overnight. It’s going to take months, in the meantime, the illness still needs to be treated.

        • Ironically, the reason that chicken broth and the like helped was because it was:

          A)Liquidy
          B)Reasonably Salty
          and
          C)There were some sugars

          In other words….it wasn’t an entirely terrible precursor to things like pedialyte.

          • Azuran

            Nah, it’s clearly because the chicken broth was made with love by the mother (and perhaps a squirt of breastmilk) 😉

          • N

            I always thought, that chicken broth helped ill people because
            A) eating chicken broth was better (like your ABC) than eating nothing or old bread
            B) If there was an ill person in the family that needed special food to get over it, to kill a chicken was easier and cheaper than to kill a cow.

          • Well, those too.

      • Sue

        “Let food be your medicine” is an oft-repeated quote that applied to ancient, pre-technological.

        IF he were alive today, I expect Hippocrates would say something like “Let your brain acknowledge modern science”. In Greek.

        • Verboten

          You act like getting sick or getting a disease is random. IT IS NOT. You get sick from being unhealthy and one of the major contributors to health is your diet, genius.

      • The troubling thing to me about these kinds of ideas is that they tend to boil down to vitalism, the pre-scientific concept of a vague, indefinable “life force.”

        Medicine is limited by the balancing of good against harm. Cold medicine treats the symptoms because the human body is usually pretty good at fighting a viral infection on its own. Cold medicines just improve your quality of life while your body fights the infection. The underlying cause is neither mystical nor complicated — the problem is the presence of infectious virions. A cancer patient’s underlying problem is the presence of mutated cells, and chemotherapy tries to address this. It is certainly destructive, but not as destructive as something like black salve.

        Vitalism feels intuitive and simple, though, so it’s a very seductive idea. It’s tempting to believe that medical outsiders have simple, natural, effective cures that work “holistically” to treat the “underlying causes,” but more often than not, they do nothing at all or just take credit for what the body can do normally.

      • N

        Ok, but as I understand it, for example, some cancers kill fast. Or they spread through the whole body even before you notice they are there. What can you do in those situations? Tell your doctors to take the chemo themselves and eat more apples??? I’m sure that my mother in law would already be dead if not for major surgery and chemo, even if she still has a long way to go until definitively cured, and even if, yes, the chemo destroys more than just the cancer. Apples or any other food or form of diet wouldn’t have done anything at all. And she would already be dead. Apples or any other food or form of diet wouldn’t have caused a relaps, they would have led to death sooner. And natural medicine wouldn’t have done anything good either.

        • Erin

          Take my Father. Healthy eater, marathon runner…collapsed last year with small cell lung cancer in both lungs. In hospital we were advised that the rest of his life would probably be measured out in weeks.

          He had chemo and radiotherapy and now 15 months later, he’s still here. His last scan showed no cancer and the Consultant is quietly hopeful that he will be one of the lucky ones who is still here 5 years after diagnosis.

          If he is, it will be that pesky modern medicine which saved him not food or natural medicine.

          • N

            Yes, my mother in law looked after her health too. She is in her 70s. Before cancer hit her, she tried to walk every day for a couple of hours, she always ate a healthy diet. She was never overweight. Went to regular check ups to doctors and dentists etc… Oh, ok, she probably caught ovarian cancer at her gynaecologist. She shouldn’t have had all those check-ups. :-/

        • Charybdis

          Just ask Steve Jobs how the alternative cancer treatments work. Oh, wait…….

      • corblimeybot

        Thank god we didn’t listen to idiots like you when our daughter developed a form of pediatric cancer.

      • Charybdis

        What about measles? You know, one of those “mild childhood illnesses” that can have devastating effects on a person’s health for YEARS?

        Common measles complications include ear infections and diarrhea.

        Ear infections occur in about one out of every 10 children with measles and can result in permanent hearing loss.

        Diarrhea is reported in less than one out of 10 people with measles.

        Some people may suffer from severe complications, such as pneumonia
        (infection of the lungs) and encephalitis (swelling of the brain). They
        may need to be hospitalized and could die.

        As many as one out of every 20 children with measles gets pneumonia,
        the most common cause of death from measles in young children.

        About one child out of every 1,000 who get measles will develop
        encephalitis (swelling of the brain) that can lead to convulsions and
        can leave the child deaf or with intellectual disability.

        For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it.

        Measles may cause pregnant woman to give birth prematurely, or have a low-birth-weight baby.

        Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE) is a very rare, but fatal
        disease of the central nervous system that results from a measles virus
        infection acquired earlier in life. SSPE generally develops 7 to 10
        years after a person has measles, even though the person seems to have
        fully recovered from the illness. Since measles was eliminated in 2000,
        SSPE is rarely reported in the United States.

        Among people who contracted measles during the resurgence in the
        United States in 1989 to 1991, 4 to 11 out of every 100,000 were
        estimated to be at risk for developing SSPE. The risk of developing SSPE
        may be higher for a person who gets measles before they are two years
        of age.

        http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

        I’m sure we’d all LOVE to hear about how natural medicine and food will help prevent these long-term effects of measles. Using reputable sources, of course.

      • Nick Sanders

        Why the hell are you blathering on about chemotherapy in a discussion of vaccines vs alternative medicine?

      • J.B.

        Umm, you know that chemo is poison right? Oncologists know this. The faster growing cancer cells are expected to take up more of it than other cells. Side effects are known.

        Not that it has anything to do with vaccines.

      • Juana

        Childhood leukemia:
        up to the 1950s (and a bit longer): invariably fatal
        2010s: 80% cure rate (as in _no_ relapse, long time survival)

        Clearly, this modern medicine is a failure.

    • Sue

      Yep. THIS ^^^.

      SHould be graphed against health outcome benefit.

  • MaineJen

    Wow, 2 parachuters appear at the same time, present the same arguments and like each other’s posts! *I wonder if they could possibly have any relationship*

    • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

      Sockpuppets come in pairs.

      • Charybdis

        But do they get lost in the washer?

        • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

          If you hold their heads under long enough….

  • Gkiter

    Wow, what a lame article full of I know it better as an MD than practices which have been helping people’s health for centuries or thousand of years. Did you know that radish juice works better to calm a cough than the expensive drugs you have your patients pick up at the pharmacy?

    Your almighty gods are called Bayer, Sanofi or Lili. Not to discount some of their great drugs but there is more to medicine that these for profit corporations and their patented molecules with countless side effects and it is also science. There is not one science, there are many sciences and all of them evolve. MD’s like you are certainly prescribing statins and PPI which do more harms than good while natural medicines which you despise because you have been indoctrinated that way in med school and refuse to admit that not all you have learned is good science, including on vaccination, and proper nutrition can replace these Lipitor and Prilosec pills. Yes I have been my own doctor at times, I said no to my MD when he suggested statins and I fixed my heatburns and stopped taking the PPI’s which were damaging my kidneys, which my MD was not even aware of. Do you tell your patients that they can get cancer from the Lipitor pills you prescribe to them? Because I’m sure they did not hear the “fine prints” when they watch the beautiful commercial on TV in between a dead cop and a pipeline protest telling them to be a good sheep by asking their doctor if it was right for them.

    Do no harm, you seem to have forgotten, vaccines do harm, unlike what you want to believe, or not to believe, it has been proven all over the world.

    • Nick Sanders

      Such a beautiful demonstration of the article’s point.

      • Gkiter

        from the article perspective indeed it is but the article is dead wrong, I guess it’s a matter of what you know, don’t know and what you are willing to learn outside of your own knowledge. Heck, people even believe in God, can you believe that?

        • MaineJen

          Dude, don’t drag atheism into this. You’re giving us a bad name.

      • Sue

        Isn’t it great when they do that?

        Oh – and where is Brooke? I feel a limerick coming on…

    • Grim Beard

      “practices which have been helping people’s health for centuries or thousand of years” What I really like about your post is that you’ve cited some high quality evidence, including recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have been published in the peer-reviewed academic literature.

      Oh, hang on… no, you haven’t, have you.

      • Gkiter

        Get your own evidences if you are interested. Oh nice peer-reviewed literature, you should not trust all your that you read in the Lancet or the JAMA it is not because there are peer-reviewed that peers or the authors are being honest, there are lots of fake papers out there, more often than not sponsored and dictated by pharmaceutical companies.

        • Azuran

          And somehow, hypothetical papers published by alternative medicine companies would be above this kind of unethical behaviour?

        • Nick Sanders

          Money hasn’t bought the climate scientists, so why should we think it will do any better at buying the medical ones?

          • Lots more money involved. And vaccine brainwashing/spin has been going on for decades.

            And powerful psychological factors at work: doctors do not admit when they injure someone for life or cause brain damage in a baby. Very traumatic for the doctors, so the easiest thing for them is to deny the evidence.

          • Azuran

            I’m pretty sure Big Oil is a LOT more powerful than Big Pharma. And somehow they couldn’t shut up the climate scientists? Hiding the truth about climate change would be a lot easier than hiding the ‘truth’ about vaccines

          • Pharma has a far stronger grasp of gov agencies like FDA and CDC. Pharma is by far the biggest lobby spender.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c21b8db005712cf0925071c457865fe86466ee7d412e9d86d71a986642680bbd.jpg

          • Azuran

            Cute how you think that money used to bribe all of the world governments would be made public domain. Clearly any organization strong enough to hide the ‘truth’ about vaccines would also clearly be strong enough to hide the trail of money. Don’t you think?

          • Money has influence, and not just through “quid pro quo” bribery. Money influences research agendas, it elevates voices that agree with money, and suppresses voices that disagree, in thousand different ways.

          • Azuran

            Yet you do not prove my point wrong. Like I said, Hiding the truth about climate change is a lot easier than hiding the truth about vaccines. There are a LOT less people involved in climate change than in health care. So obviously they would need way less money.
            And this graph is only about the USA. In the rest of the world, things are entirely different. There are countries that are basically build on the oil trade. Which makes Big Oil a lot more powerfull than Big pharma worldwide.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym

            You do know that that red bar is “pharma/healthcare/HMO”, right? In fact, it seems not unlikely that supplement manufacturers are grouped in with the rest of healthcare lobbyists.

          • mark

            compromise the health of 300million people, by just 0.5% and your society wide cost is far more,..75 billion and thats per year,..have you thought of it that way yet?
            and with infant mortality at 6/1000, worst in the developed world have you done a cost analysis on that?? No? big pharma is selective in what it spoon feeds governments, lobbyists and politicians

          • Got that backwards. Vaccines cause chronic health problems, which are treated with long term drug therapy. Conditions include, allergies, asthma, colitis, mental illnesses, autoimmune disorders.

            The companies making the vaccines also make the drugs used to treat these conditions. Vaccine revenue is tiny compared to drug revenue for these disorders.

          • Mike Stevens

            So, vaccines cause “allergies, asthma, colitis, mental illnesses, autoimmune disorders.”?
            Really?

            Can you provide the scientific evidence for this, including some degree of frequency of causation, so we can judge the scale of the problem?

            To give an example, please state what proportion of “mental illness” is due to vaccine side effects, and provide evidence supporting your claim

          • corblimeybot

            You think that fossil fuel interests have less money than pharma interests? Really?

          • momofone

            I’d love to see your (credible) evidence of this.

        • Box of Salt

          Gkiter “you should not trust all your that you read in the Lancet or the JAMA
          it is not because there are peer-reviewed that peers or the authors are
          being honest, there are lots of falsified papers out there”

          Andrew Wakefield’s retracted-due-to-fraud paper (from the Lancet) which incorrectly suggested a link between vaccines and autism is a prime example of that.

        • Grim Beard

          “Get your own evidences if you are interested.” Obvious attempt to shift the burden of proof is obvious.

        • momofone

          Oh, ok, so just take your word for it.

    • Charybdis

      Radish juice is disgusting and having to drink 5+ ounces a day to deal with a cough is insane. Especially when you can take a tablespoon or less of a highly effective cough syrup that, if you are lucky, will contain codeine to quiet the cough. It doesn’t STOP the cough, you will still cough and hack up gunk in your lungs, if you have a productive cough. It just makes the coughing spells milder and allows you to actually rest.

      Plus, codeine. 🙂

      • Mishimoo

        I personally prefer cough medicine which contains bromhexine hydrochloride because it makes productive coughs less painful and thins the mucus making the gunk easier to get out. Plus it doesn’t make my throat close 😉 (codeine allergy)

  • The science on this issue is shifting, but vaccine promoters are failing to notice.

    Vaccines are dangerous and cause brain damage (autism, schizophrenia) and immune disorders (allergies, autoimmunity). Science has proven that autism and schizophrenia are caused by immune activation during brain development. When activated by an infection or vaccine, the immune system produces proteins (cytokines) that cause defects in brain development. This can manifest as autism or other brain disorders (e.g. depression, ADHD, schizophrenia). Vaccines are designed to cause immune activation and stimulate the specific cytokines that cause this damage. Google “immune activation autism” and you will be amazed at what the science shows.

    Immune activation has also been proven to cause the physiological damage observed in autism: mitochondrial dysfunction, damaged/missing Purkinje cells, microbiome disruption (dysbiosis), angiogenesis (excessive blood vessel growth), and long-term brain inflammation.

    It is proven beyond any doubt that autism is caused by immune activation during brain development. Even the specific cytokines that cause autism are now known: interleukin-6 and interleukin-17a. IL-6 is produced in the brain by vaccine adverse reactions.

    The greatest danger is probably aluminum adjuvant. Aluminum-containing vaccines have been little-studied in relation to autism. It is proven that aluminum adjuvant causes brain and immune system damage at dosages infants receive from vaccines. It is proven that Al adjuvant nanoparticles travel into the brain after injection, and stay there. Also, Al adjuvant has been shown to cause the specific type of immune activation (the cytokine IL-6) proven to cause autism. These results have been replicated several times. Most vaccines contain aluminum.

    Only the MMR vaccine has been much studied in relation to autism. But every one of the MMR-autism studies is fatally flawed because of selection bias. They are not randomized or properly controlled. Consequently, children with pre-existing neuro- or immune disorders (caused by prior Al-containing vaccines) are concentrated in the “control” group of these studies. This makes the damage caused by the MMR vaccine unobservable in the MMR-autism studies. All of the MMR-autism studies have this systematic bias.

    The most dangerous vaccines are likely the ones that contain aluminum, and are given at the youngest ages, when the brain is most sensitive to immune activation. So, the Hep B vaccine, which contains aluminum and is given on the day of birth, is probably the most dangerous of all. There are only two studies of the Hep B vaccine and autism, and they both found an association with autism.

    The MMR vaccine stimulates an immune signal (a “chemokine” called MCP-1) that causes white blood cells to transport aluminum particles (received from prior vaccines) into the brain. Hence, the MMR vaccine may greatly amplify the brain damage caused by aluminum adjuvant.

    • MaineJen

      “It is proven beyond any doubt that autism is caused by-”

      Imma stop you right there. No one knows the cause of autism “beyond any doubt.” Your argument is invalid.

      • Gkiter

        I would not be so sure, drug companies and the CDC are masters at manipulating data and covering up studies that contradict their own “findings”.

        • MaineJen

          Let me take a wild guess: you have some awesome supplements you’d like to sell us.

          • Gkiter

            I don’t have anything to sell, but I’m tired of this natural medicine and anti-vax bashing by know it all MD’s who had been brain washed or work for these drugs manufacturers who are so scared to lose profit when people start doubting their products. It’s all about money, nothing else. We are not telling you not to take these drugs like you are telling us we should take yours, knock yourself out with the pills, who gives a shit after all, we just want the liberty to chose our own path in life without being treated of practicing witchcraft. Everybody is entitled to an opinion and a style of life of their choosing and it is not because the majority believe in something that it makes it right for everybody. It is not because the majority believe in some sort of god that there is a god. We have more proofs than vaccines are dangerous drugs than proof there is a god, yet more people believe in god than people believe vaccines bring very serious side effects on occasions.

          • Nick Sanders

            And the people who sell these “natural medicines” aren’t in it for profit?

          • Gkiter

            Of course they are, but they don’t jam their products down people’s throats forcefully or through marketing manipulations every 3 minutes on TV.

          • Sue

            OK, Dr Amy come clean. You invented this “Gkiter” sock to illustrate your point, didn’t you? Very clever 😉

          • Who?

            Well to the extent that’s correct, it’s partly because there are laws to prevent people telling untruths about their products. So here, where I’m on holidays, there are apparently no such laws, and there are back to back ads for products that will cure your bad back, obesity, blotchy skin, etc.

            At home, where there are laws about lying in advertisements, there are not so many of those ads.

          • Azuran

            Where I live, advertisement laws prevent pharmaceutical companies to both the name of the drug and what it does if it’s a prescription drug. It’s one or the other.
            So basically, the only prescription medication add we have is: Ask your doctor if Viagra/cialis is good for you. with extremely vague hints as to what it does (sometime resulting is weird, somewhat suspicious things)
            They are the only ones who bother, because everyone knows what Viagra is.

          • Who?

            Interesting. I don’t know whether the ads here are for prescription-only drugs or not: inadequate language skills. Though many are clearly mail order. At home, prescription drugs may not be advertised. Some non-prescription painkiller ads recently drew the regulator’s wrath by claiming to be targeted. Fines ensued.

          • Azuran

            All we are really asking for is for you and other alternative health practitioner to be able to back up their claims.
            We have nothing per say against natural products (many current drugs are actually derived from natural products). But we expect that you’d be able to show valid evidence of their efficacy and safety. The problem is that natural health practitioners often don’t hold themselves to the same standard as they hold MD’s and pharmaceutical companies.
            You want to sell a natural product, prove that is does what you say it does and nobody is going to bash you about it.
            But things like ‘it’s natural’ ‘it has been around for centuries’ ‘I used it and if works’ are not valid proof and are not going to be accepted by the scientific community.

          • Gkiter

            What standards do MD’s hold themselves to? Nice dinners and travels paid by the drug companies to promote their Lipitor pills? Nice standards. Did you know that in France 60% of people visit homeopath doctors rather than allopath doctors? And guess what, it’s reimbursed by the government. Germany goes much further by allowing “alternative drugs” that are not in France like dry extracts of animal pancreas or things like that.

          • Gkiter

            I think the evidences are out there for those who want to look for them, it’s not because you don’t know that they don’t exist. I like the standards pharmaceutical companies bring to the table, expensive dinners and 5 stars travel to talk about their new drugs. That’s called corruption, well, lobbyisme but it’s corruption in plain English.

          • Azuran

            Oh but you knew that’s not what I meant by standards. I was talking about scientifically proving that your products works and is safe.

            I don’t think that Pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to do this kind of lobbyisme. (after all, I did say in my first comment that I didn’t think they were perfect or blameless)
            But you think alternative health practitioners don’t do it too? That nowhere in the history of alternative health, there has NEVER been any gift given, any dinner paid or any free samples handed over?

          • Nick Sanders

            Burden of proof is on you.

          • DelphiniumFalcon

            You do know that even in the evil, capitalist united States you can look up who is paying your doctor what, right?

            https://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/

            Oh no! I just looked up my doctor and drug companies have given him *gasp!* $50 in food! What is the world coming to?!

            Also it was from a drug company that makes statins that my doctor refused to put my dad on after he had an extremely awful episode of rhabdomyolysis. And my dad’s a perfect candidate with high LDL anf triglycerides off the charts. They’re looking in to alternatives so his kidneys don’t threaten to shut down again. So much for being bought.

          • Azuran

            I did have a really fancy dinner paid by a pharmaceutical company about 6 months ago, where there was actually 0 talk of any kind of drugs, it was a charity thing about giving goats to poor families in Africa.
            I had no idea who they were before the dinner, I can’t remember who they were now. And even if I did, I have no freaking clue which drug company does which drug.

            I just prescribe whatever medication my clinical expertise it telling me a patient needs…..and when I have different equally effective and safe choices I go with the cheapest. A dinner and a few pens isn’t going to change that.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            I’ve gotten a few sandwiches, and a ticket to a Colorado Rockies game from pharmacy reps. The Rockies ticket was when I worked at a health department, where the state chose which brand of vaccines we got. Plus, some vaccines only have one manufacturer, such as the MMR used in the US is Merck.

          • Charybdis

            And you are free to do just that. But, you have to be willing to accept the consequences of your choice and some of them might be unpleasant for you and your family. If you don’t vaccinate, then you can’t enroll your child in public school, and in some countries, you aren’t eligible for other governmental benefits (day care subsidies, etc). This is NOT a violation of your rights to not vaccinate, it is simply the consequences of your choice. But anti-vaxxers will raise holy hell about the repercussions of their choices and that they are being “persecuted”. Siddown, shuddup and suck it up buttercup! If you firmly believe in not vaccinating, then you should be comfortable accepting the consequences of that choice.

            Plus, the anti-vax assertions that “I keep my kids home when they are sick, so they can’t infect anyone else, so they aren’t a danger to anyone. Because I keep them home if they are sick.” are poorly thought out. Heard of “incubation periods”? That is when you are infected with an illness but are not showing symptoms yet. You spread the viruses around every time you cough, sneeze, talk, spit, yawn, eat, drink, kiss, hug, etc. You can infect someone without being sick yourself yet. And most people don’t think you are doing a public service by allowing your disease vectors out among the general population so that more people can experience “natural VPD’s”.

          • Heidi

            Seriously, you conspiracy theorists throw around the word “brainwash” a little too much to be taken seriously. Anyone can freely go to these BS websites and read all the anti-vax propaganda they want. No one can force you to take Prilosec or Lipitor and I could frankly care less if you do or don’t. Your viewpoint isn’t getting deleted. I’ve read your ramblings (meaning I’m being exposed to your opinion so I’m hardly being brainwashed one way or the other) and I haven’t set out to persecute you and hang you. Has anyone tried to do that to you? In fact, you can practice witchcraft freely in much of the world!

        • zapp7

          Note how conspiracy theorists invent conspiracies when they lack the data to support what they believe to be true.

          • Gkiter

            I wish it was a conspiracy theory

          • Azuran

            Well you can rest easier, it absolutely is.
            No one here is going to argue with you that pharmaceutical companies are perfect and above blame for anything.
            But there is no massive vaccine cover up. You’d need basically all of the pharmaceutical companies of the worlds, all of the worlds government, the health department and drug approval agencies of all those government, all the health insurance companies, all vaccine researchers of the world, all the doctors, all the nurses, all the veterinarians and veterinary technician, all the immunologists, all the epidemiologist and many other people to be in on it and being willing to lie about it. For what? Money? You seriously think that they can buy this many people?

          • Gkiter

            I am bi cultural and I can tell you than in my home country, where vaccines are not even mandatory we are going through the same thing, so much in fact that the government has allowed national debates on the subject, There is no smoke without fire.

          • Azuran

            Actually, there is very often smoke without fire. I slightly burned my toasts this morning, there definitively was smoke, but no fire.
            Care to share what country you are talking about and some links as to this ‘national debates’ it is having?

          • kfunk937

            Gkiter is apparently French, or at least a francophone. The “national debate” to which she refers is most likely that which followed this 2014 case* wherein two French parents were prosecuted for neglect based on vaccine refusal. SkepticalRaptor also had a nice earlier piece on antivaccine sentiment in France generally, here.

            [*Lilady’s comment was particularly en pointe, highlighting the 2011 European measles cases and deaths, at that time around 26K with 14K French cases, and “nine deaths, including six in France, and 7288 hospitalizations.” Because measles vaccination was not included among those mandatory in France, but perhaps should be, hence the debate (plus the vaccine refuser noise).

            You may want to ignore the troll response that followed. Or not, as that particular zombie’s language is diagnostic, when he pops up again. And again. And again… ]

          • Who?

            Where are vaccines mandatory?

          • mark
        • Azuran

          Please, if they knew what caused autism, you can be sure they’d be selling some kind of drug for it.
          Vaccines are not a good investment for drug companies. Treating a disease is making them a lot more money than preventing it. Just the raise in tylenol sales, from parents giving it to their children whenever they got any kind of VPD, would probably net them more money than the vaccines do.

      • Its proven that autism is caused by IL-6 and IL-17. Vaccine adverse reactions induce these cytokines in the brain.

        • Azuran

          You are severely extrapolating here.
          Some studies have found a potential link.
          That is FAR from proven.
          And the potential association so far is that when a pregnant mice get in infection that causes a raise in IL-17 and/or IL 6, it might raise the chances of autism like behaviour in the pups.

          It means nothing about about vaccines.
          It does not appear either to be the sole cause of autism

          • No its proven. Lots of controlled animal experiments prove causality. Biochemical mechanisms have been studied. And its consistent with epidemiology, biochemical, and interventional studies in humans. Thats proof.

            vaccines impact brain development. No question.

            See this for example: http://vaccinepapers.org/two-vaccines-opposite-effects-brain/

            It means everything for vaccines, because the aluminum adjuvant in vaccines stimulates IL-6 in the brain and vaccine adverse reactions stimulate IL-6 in the brain.

            I would never assert its the sole cause (vaccines are probably 80-90% responsible). But anything that induces IL-6/IL-17 in the brain causes autism and other brain damage. And thats what vaccines do.

            There is plenty enough science today to connect the dots. Its not hard or complicated. But the implications are very upsetting and disturbing, especially to those in positions of power.

          • Azuran

            Basic biology lesson here: What happens in the womb during the development of the brain and what happens after birth are not the same.
            So no, it does not mean that vaccines cause autism. It means that infection or inflammation in the pregnant mother can raise the risk of autism in her child.
            Like I said, you are extrapolating way too much out of this.

          • Brain development is a continuous process through birth and the brain remains sensitive to immune activation injury for years after birth.

            We have an article on this specific topic:

            http://vaccinepapers.org/postnatal-immune-activation/

            You are not familiar with the scientific literature here. it shows that cytokines cause the injury. And vaccine reactions and Al adjuvant induce cytokines in the brain.

          • Azuran

            And why should I not consider your links as being biased and having cherry picked information?. After all, you are only linking to things on your own blog.

          • Mike Stevens

            Stop pimping your own website.
            If you can’t explain yourself here, then go away.

          • Many articles are designed to answer the FAQs. Your questions are not unique or novel.

          • Mike Stevens

            Yet you seem to be unable to adress the substance of my questions.
            Odd, seeing as how you say they are not unique or novel. Do you mean like how you never answered them the previous times I asked?

          • Which question has not been answered adequately?

          • momofone

            Oooh, I’ll play–the one about who you are, for one.

          • Mike Stevens

            You seem to be familiar with only the scientific literature that you imagine supports your case.

          • The literature i cite is generally consistent with everything thats been reported in the field.

            http://vaccinepapers.org/response-to-charges-of-cherry-picking/

          • mark

            and organ stem cell damage leading to compromised organs lifelong

          • Citation?

          • mark

            personal discussions september, not studied yet, indicative through new microscopic technologies able to 3d isolate the stem cells and later their immunochallenged deformity

          • Mike Stevens

            You have a link to the randomised, controlled studies, I trust?

            After all, you were highly scathing about vaccine studies that were not performed in this manner when responding to the evidence Nick Sanders gave you about vaccines not causing autism.

            I assume you will be consistent, and maintain your standards of acceptable evidence.

          • randomized controlled studies of what?

            There are NO randomized controlled studies of the vaccine schedule, or neuro effects of Al adjuvant.

          • Mike Stevens

            Randomised controlled studies where levels of IL-6 in the brain are measured between groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, of course.
            Don’t tell me these don’t exist?

          • Dont exist and never will exist. IL-6 is increased in the brain only in cases of adverse reactions like seizure. Normal vaccine response does NOT induce IL-6 in the brain or anywhere else and does not cause brain injury.

            But in seizure, the IL-6 levels match the levels that cause brain injury in animal experiments.

            See this article: http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-reactions-aluminum-il-6/

          • Mike Stevens

            So, you only accept evidence that vaccine do not cause autism when they are randomised, double blinded trials, yet you are happy citing observational, uncontrolled studies to support your own POV… Yup, we got it.

            “Normal Vaccination response” does not induce IL-6 in the brain?
            So why accuse vaccines of causing autism through IL-6?
            You have a lot of randomly drawn dots, and no way to join them up, VP.

            You do realise, I hope, that seizure post vaccine is far rarer than seizure following natural infections like measles?
            So again, if anything, your attempts to blame vaccines just seem to implicate natural infections in the pathogenesis of brain damage.
            But for some reason you can’t see that.

          • Well vaccine safety should be established with randomized trials, and to some extent that is done already. Cannot ethically or practically do that with adverse effects however. So, ethical considerations force an asymmetry here.

            “So why accuse vaccines of causing autism through IL-6?”

            Because we are talking about the outliers, the unusual reactions. Autism occurs in 1/50 or so.

            “seizure post vaccine is far rarer than seizure following natural infections like measles?”

            Not as rare as you think. And when all vaccines are aggregated, it can explain a substantial portion of autism cases. Also, IL-6 can be induced in the brain (by Al adjuvant) WITHOUT seizure!

            Natural infections cause autism by the same mechanism that vaccines cause autism (interleukin-6).

        • Mike Stevens

          “Its proven that autism is caused by IL-6 and IL-17”

          Since IL-6 is induced primarily by natural infections, you are also saying that natural infections are the cause of autism.
          Interesting.

          • Yes. Infections during pregnancy or in children can cause autism.

            http://vaccinepapers.org/postnatal-immune-activation/

            But natural infections do not come with a dose of injected aluminum hydroxide nanoparticles…which are proven to travel into the brain and induce IL-6 in the brain.

          • Mike Stevens

            That’s YOUR claim.
            For the sake of objectivity and consistency, can you insist that you will not accept any studies as valid unless they have appropriate comparative control groups, and have been conducted in a randomised double blinded fashion?
            That’s only fair, considering your prior comments.

            So can we see some?

          • See the above article. I dont understand your question.

            Studies of what?

            Its sometimes impossible to study things in a randomized double blinded method. Like vaccine adverse reactions for example or effects of toxins. Not ethical to do randomized, blinded studies of poisons on humans.

            I accept good quality science, wherever it is from and whatever it reports.

          • Mike Stevens

            Well, it’s rather odd to blame raised IL-6 levels in the brain on vaccination, unless you can also say that unvaccinated kids show no raised IL-6 levels.
            You’d need to control for other confounders that raise IL-6 also.
            Is that such a hard concept to understand?

          • No, because only cases of adverse reactions are at issue. Normal vaccine reactions do NOT cause autism, and do not induce IL-6.

            Though there are some studies showing that normal vaccine reactions can sometimes induce a mild IL-6 response. Not enough to injure the brain though.

            Also, the IL-6 must be induced IN THE BRAIN. Peripheral IL-6 (e.g. in the blood) will not cause autism. its very difficult or impossible to obtain IL-6 measurements in the brain or CSF in humans. Only a couple studies on that. But they are clear and consistent: seizures always induce huge rise of IL-6 in the human brain.

            Take a look at this study:

            http://vaccinepapers.org/two-vaccines-opposite-effects-brain/

            It shows that the Hep V vaccine induced IL-6 (long term) in animal brain and caused other adverse effects.

          • Azuran

            seriously, what is even your point in all of this? What are you even arguing? Because now you seem to be saying that only vaccines with aluminum are a problem. But only when you have some kind of special adverse reaction to those vaccines.

            But really it all comes down to this: Supposing your claim is true (even though many studies have shown no increased rate of autism in vaccinated children), how many additional cases of autism would those specific vaccines be causing. And how does this compares with the additional autism cases that would be caused if we stopped using those vaccines.
            Because by your own admission: Infection in pregnant woman will also cause the inflammatory response that causes the raise in autism. And infection in children will do so as well. Less vaccines = more infection = More autism.
            And here we are just comparing autism, we aren’t even talking about all those additional miscarriages, birth defect, permanent sequels or dead kids caused by all those additional infections.

            Because no one else is denying the existence of vaccine reaction or side effect. But we understand that their negative impact is FAR outweighed by all the positive ones.

          • I am arguing several things:
            1-vaccines are far more dangerous than claimed
            2-aluminum adjuvant causes brain injury and the evidence that its safe is bogus
            3-that vaccines cause autism, mental illnesses and other brain injury.
            4-that the mechanism for brain injury is largely understood (cytokines, immune activation).

            I am a vaccine reform activist. For me its political.
            There are lies being told about vaccine safety. Vaccines are causing enormous health damage.

            “even though many studies have shown no increased rate of autism in vaccinated children), ”

            Thats ONLY for MMR, which does not contain aluminum. Studies of Al-containing vaccines show association with autism.

            “Less vaccines = more infection = More autism.”

            This is erroneous for several reasons:
            1) natural infections do not include a dose of injected AlOH nanoparticles, which induce IL-6.
            2) Vaccines impair immune function and can INCREASE risk of infection.
            3) Autism rates INCREASED with increasing vaccination (in the 1990s-2000s).

            Asthma, autoimmune disorders, mental illnesses, depression and allergies have also increased in parallel with vaccines. And there is powerful evidence that vaccines cause all these disorders.

            According to your logic, these disorders should have decreased, and should have been very high before massive vaccination use. But the opposite has happened.

            People are denying that vaccines cause autism, asthma, allergies etc. But the science shows otherwise.

    • Nick Sanders
      • I have read all those papers. They relate only to MMR, which is my point. Thats ONE vaccines among many.

        its a misuse of the science to claim that “vaccines” in general do not cause autism and then cite only studies of MMR.

        And MMR does not contain aluminum. Aluminum adjuvant is probably the main cause of autism.

        None of those papers relate to aluminum.

        Here is one study of many on aluminum adjuvant:

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23932735

        • Nick Sanders

          No, they don’t. Several of them relate to aluminum, or receiving multiple vaccines at once, or thimerosal, and a few even study the entire schedule.

          • Nope.

            One studies number of antigens, which makes no sense (since this amounts to a comparison of the old and new DTP vaccines). This paper also fails to include any unvaccinated subjects.

            One (Smith 2010) compares vaccine timing, but includes no unvaccinated subjects.

            None test the safety of aluminum adjuvant or the vaccine schedule per se.

            Here is a critique of the garbage Smith 2010 study: http://vaccinepapers.org/critical-review-smith-2010-pediatrics-journal

          • Which paper relates to aluminum?

          • Nick Sanders
          • Ah yes the Mitkus study. I have reviewed that garbage in detail here:

            http://vaccinepapers.org/debunking-aluminum-adjuvant-part-2/

            The Lancet paper on Al adjuvant is wrong because it reviews papers that only look at short term effects and none look for neurological adverse effects.

            Same is true for the other 2 studies. For example, the Kanra study states: “After each vaccination parents filled out a diary for 7 days.”

            THAT was the outcome data? This is not much evidence for safety.

            The statement from CHOP is absolutely wrong, for starters because it gets the kinetics and absorption wrong (ingested Al absorption is about 0.2-0.3%).

            http://vaccinepapers.org/the-foundation-for-al-adjuvant-safety-is-false/

            http://vaccinepapers.org/dr-paul-offits-aluminum-deceptions-academic-misconduct/

          • Mike Stevens

            I debunked your analysis before, VP.
            Major flaws included your misinterpretation of how MRLs are calculated, and misinterpretation of the Golub toxicity study, if I recall correctly.

          • The Mitkus MRL is wrong, and Golub is outdated.

            http://vaccinepapers.org/the-foundation-for-al-adjuvant-safety-is-false/

          • Mike Stevens

            Stop pimping your own antivax website.
            I’ve been through your misinterpretations of Golub before, at some length. I CBA’d to do it all again. If you failed to realise your errors first time round, telling you again isn’t going to convince you.

          • The page above shows that Golub is irrelevant. Have a go at the other studies cited. Several are from 2015 and 2016.

          • Mike Stevens

            Stop trying to pimp your own website.
            If you have a valid argument, make it here, in your own words.

          • Regarding CHOP on aluminum.

            Do the math:

            Birth (Hep B): 74 mcg/kg (250 mcg for 3.4 kg infant)
            2 month: 245 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 5 kg infant)
            4 month: 150 mcg/kg (975 mcg for 6.5 kg infant)
            6 month: 153 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 8 kg infant)

            Total: 3675 mcg

            Oral absorption of aluminum is 0.3%.

            Over the first 6 months, a baby will absorb (these number are from CHOP):
            From milk: 7mg x 0.3% = 21 micrograms (0.021 mg)
            From formula: 38mg x 0.3% = 114 micrograms (0.114 mg)
            From soy formula: 117mg x 0.3% = 351 micrograms (0.351mg)

            Vaccines give 3675/21 = 175 times more aluminum than human milk.

            This should be cause for concern, to anyone with common sense.

          • Nick Sanders

            OK, first, you need to provide a citation that only 0.3% of orally ingested aluminum is absorbed. Then you need to confirm that this hasn’t already been factored into the CHOP numbers. Lastly you need to explain WHY I should be concerned about either amount.

          • Lots of citations for this, and review papers. Here is one.

            Its not factored into CHOP numbers. CHOP made another gigantic mistake here.

            Food Additives
            Edited by Prof. Yehia El-Samragy
            ISBN 978-953-51-0067-6
            Hard cover, 256 pages
            Publisher InTech
            Published online 22, February, 2012 Published in print edition February, 2012

            Oral bioavailability (fractional absorption, a.k.a. uptake) is the amount absorbed compared to the amount administered. For Al, systemic bioavailability, the fraction that reaches systemic circulation (blood) from which it has access to the target organs of its toxicity, is most relevant.

            Oral 27Al bioavailability from water from a municipal water treatment facility was estimated to be 0.36% in a study of 21 humans (Stauber et al. 1999). Two studies that had only two human subjects each estimated oral Al bioavailability to be 0.1 and 0.22% (Hohl et al. 1994; Priest et al. 1998). The bioavailability of hydrophilic substances that are not well absorbed can be determined by comparing the area under the curve (AUC) × time for the test substance given orally and intravenously (Rowland and Tozer 1995). Using a modification of this approach the oral Al bioavailability in the rat averaged 0.28% and 0.29% (Yokel et al.2001a; Zhou, Harris, and Yokel 2008). These studies indicate oral Al bioavailability from water is ∼ 0.1 – 0.3%.
            Oral Al bioavailability from food has been estimated to be ~ 0.1 to 0.15% based on average daily urinary Al excretion compared to average daily Al intake from food (Powell and Thompson 1993; Priest 1993; Nieboer et al. 1995; Ganrot 1986; Priest 2004). Using the AUC × time method, oral Al bioavailability in rats that ate ~ 1 gm of biscuit containing [26Al]- labeled acidic SALP averaged ~ 0.12% (Yokel and Florence 2006) and 0.1% to 0.3% from basic SALP incorporated into cheese (Yokel, Hicks, and Florence 2008). Concurrent consumption of citrate, and to a lesser extent other carboxylic acids, can increase oral Al absorption, as can increased solubility of the Al, a more acidic environment, uremia, and perhaps fluoride (Krewski et al. 2007). Absorption of Al from injected Al in vaccines and allergy immunotherapy is probably completely absorbed over time (Flarend et al. 1997).

            From ATSDR:
            “Yokel and McNamara (2001) and Powell and Thompson (1993) suggest that the bioavailability of aluminum from the typical U.S. diet was 0.1%; the bioavailability of aluminum from drinking water ranges from 0.07 to 0.39% (Hohl et al. 1994; Priest et al. 1998; Stauber et al. 1999; Steinhausen et al. 2004).”

          • Mike Stevens

            I think the accepted figure is between 0.1% and 5% I believe, depending on the compounds.
            VP should clarify why he sticks to the 0.3% estimate.

          • Nick Sanders

            Ok, then I was clearly misremembering, because I thought it was 3% for some reason. I’m not as informed about aluminum because it’s a relatively newer objection and I haven’t done as much reading on it as I have older ones.

          • Mike Stevens

            In patients with renal failure, who cannot clear aluminium, the safe level of parenteral aluminium is <5mcg/kg/day.
            This is far in excess of the burden from vaccines.

          • Big problem with using parenteral Al data is that it ignores the fact that Al adjuvant comprises poorly soluble nanoparticles. The particulate nature of the adjuvant affects the toxicity, and has a huge effect on the kinetics.

          • Mike Stevens

            So you say.
            That is supposition, not fact.

          • Well we have experimental data on the kinetics and toxicity of AlOH nanoparticles, and it shows high toxicity and transport into the brain.

            And see this paper:

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703119/pdf/nihms748093.pdf

            Which states:

            “Particle size and surface area are crucial material characteristics from a toxicological point of view, as interactions between nanomaterials and biological organisms typically take place at the surface of the NP. As the particles’ size decreases, the surface area exponentially increases and a greater proportion of the particles’ atoms or molecules will be displayed on the surface rather than within the bulk of the material. Thus, the nanomaterial surface becomes more reactive toward itself or surrounding biological components with decreasing size, and the potential catalytic surface for chemical reactions increases.”
            AND
            “The nature of the interface between nanomaterials and biological systems affects the in vivo biocompatibility and toxicity of NPs.”
            AND
            “Particle shapes and aspect ratios are two additional key factors that determine the toxicity of NPs. Nanomaterials can have very different shapes including fibers, spheres, tubes, rings, and planes.”
            AND
            “Surface charge also plays a role in toxicity, as it influences the adsorption of ions and biomolecules that may change organism or cellular responses toward particles.”
            NPs = nanoparticles

          • Mike Stevens

            Problem is, current adjuvants (and previous aluminium adjuvants) don’t consist of nanoparticles.
            Again, you are desperately trying to join the dots to make a theoretical picture, but the dots aren’t even in the same puzzle book.

          • Yes they are nanoparticles. The AlOH nanoparticles are aggregated into larger microparticles up to 10 microns or so. But they are nanoparticles.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bbd690373173f9d2c601eea6c200547056d9c4bc38586ea764c8a8054c990277.jpg

          • Mike Stevens

            Quite, in solution aluminium hydroxide forms particles. Using applied high intensity ultrasound, these can be broken down into “micro-particles”.
            These are not nanoparticles.

            Your article does not even mention the word “nanoparticle” anywhere.
            As evidence that aluminium adjuvant consists of nanoparticles in its given state, it comes up with absolute zero.

            Nice try, but distorting the science and deliberately misinterpreting it doesn’t help your case.

          • The particles are not “broken” by the ultrasound, but de-aggregated. This is common technique in nanoparticle processing.

            The paper does mention the nanoparticulate nature of the adjuvant: “Following treatment of Alhydrogel with relatively gentle water-bath ultrasonication (5, 10 and 30 min) in a Grant XB2 it is clear that the size of the micro-crystal clusters decreases (∼50–300 nm), as shown in Fig. 2”

            Also I note the sonication was “gentle”.

            Its clear from Fig 2 and others that the particles are merely aggregates.

            Nanoparticles almost always aggregate. In this field, such aggregated nanoparticles are still described as nanoparticles. And there is no reason to expect toxicity to disappear when aggregated. Do you have evidence that nanoparticle toxicity vanishes when aggregated?

            Regardless, the point is that the AlOH particles-of whatever size-have not been demonstrated to be safe to inject.

            You cannot use studies of dissolved aluminum salts (e.g. studies of parenteral solutions containing Al3+) to predict the toxicity of particles (micro- or nano-), as you have done.

            But thats a mistake made by many vaccine promoters. They assume the particles have ZERO toxicity and only consider the dissolved ions. This is completely contradicted by what is known today about particle toxicity.

          • Mike Stevens

            So, if I understand you, you have shown that nanoparticulate aluminium adjuvant is better at inducing an immunological response than standard adjuvant.
            Yet you are claiming that all aluminium adjuvant is nanoparticulate in nature. That being the case, why was “autism” (since you imply that is the result) not more common in the past? And why are vaccine researchers only now claiming to produce enhanced, nanoparticulate adjuvants?

            You also admit standard vaccines don’t cause autism, it is only when they cause seizures that autism will then happen, since you think seizures cause autism, mediated by IL-6 release in the brain.
            Yet seizures are quite common from the childhood infections. With diseases like measles, febrile convulsions happened around 2-3% of the time, and up to 5% of all children have an infection-induced seizure in infancy.
            With those rates, you must agree that autism would be quite frequently encountered in the prevaccine days, when virtually all kids got measles, rubella, chickenpox, mumps etc.
            Yet rates of febrile seizure following MMR and seperate varicella are only around 0.35% (and even with the quadrivalent MMRV are 0.7%).
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a8e8e8931f108090e73ae61773c44cff8848f46207b6c57a9e54634c9189d724.jpg

            So the question I ask is:
            If seizures are the cause of autism, why is autism not around 4 or 5 times more common follwing natural infection (in the prevaccine era) than it is now (in the vaccine era), seeing as how seizures were 5 times more frequent back then?

          • Sarah

            If it can flow through that tiny little needle into the muscle with ease, I’m gonna say its’s all liquid. Nothing the blood can’t flow through it if that’s what you’re trying to say.

          • Its definitely not all liquid. Al adjuvant comprises microscopic particles, and thats what makes it dangerous and hard for the body to eliminate. Thats also what makes it transportable into the brain.

          • 0.3% is reasonable and commonly used. The highest oral absorption i have seen reported is about 0.7-0.8% for Al lactate, which has unusually high absorption. There are NO reports of absorption of 5% or even >1%.

          • Mike Stevens

            “There are NO reports of absorption of 5% or even >1%.”

            Perhaps you’d better inform the toxicology experts from the DHSS who produce the ATSDR for Aluminum toxicity, since they seem to think up to 5% oral aluminum citrate can be absorbed.
            To be fair, they do say the absorbtion of most other forms is around 0.3-0.4%

          • OK. Al citrate would be an extreme outlier. I recall that Al citrate has absorption of about 1%. Not relevant anyway since this is not the form in water or food.

          • I have the full text Lancet 2004 paper and can send it if you like. You can contact me at vaccinepapers at gmail

        • Mike Stevens

          “I have read all those papers. They relate only to MMR, which is my point. Thats ONE vaccines among many.
          Its a misuse of the science to claim that “vaccines” in general do not cause autism and then cite only studies of MMR.”

          The first paper I linked to, at random, was this:
          http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/793.short?sso=1&sso_redirect_count=1&nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token
          “Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Autistic Spectrum Disorder: A Critical Review of Published Original Data

          Now, only 2 possibilities spring to mind.
          1) That you erroneously thought that MMR contains thimerosal, and mistakenly thought that the article referred to MMR, or

          2) You knew MMR did not contain thimerosal, but were lying when you claimed to have read all the papers.

          So which is it?

        • kfunk937

          They relate only to MMR and thimerosal, which is my point. Thats ONE vaccines among many.

          The MMR contains no thimerosal and never has. If that’s the ONE vaccine to you, then it’s obvious that you have no idea what you’re on about.

          • I am well aware that MMR does not contain and never did contain thimerosal. MMR is a live vaccine and thimerosal is a preservative.

            MMR also does not contain aluminum.

            Which is an important reason why studies of MMR cannot be applied to other (aluminum-containing) vaccines. But vaccine promoters do that anyway.

            The aluminum is more dangerous than the thimerosal.

        • MMR has never had thimersoal in it. You know this.

          • MaineJen

            You know…I really don’t think they do.

    • zapp7

      It’s quite interesting that you point out any flaw possible in the MMR papers, yet you trumpet the Hep B papers that don’t even have the statistical power to reach any conclusions. Your sciencey-sounding fallacious arguments would be laughable if they weren’t so dangerous.

      • MaineJen

        Oh, there’s no danger here. This page is filled with actual scientists.

        • zapp7

          Not here, but Vaccine Papers has a blog with all kinds of misleading articles that are fooling parents into not vaccinating their kids.

          • MaineJen

            Yeah, I took a brief gander at their site (I hate to give them the page views tho)…”they” don’t even identify themselves in the About section. And they consider that a selling point. “Soon” they will reveal themselves and how they came by their information. Soon…

          • Explain what we get wrong, if you can.

          • momofone

            Oh, how exciting! Something to look forward to!

          • What specifically is misleading on the VP website?

            Smart parents today are avoiding vaccines, especially in infants.

          • zapp7

            I don’t even know where to start. Your inability to acknowledge the ridiculousness of your reanalysis of Jain’s study shows that it would be a waste of time anyway. Other colleagues in immunology have perused your site and it was decided that countering all of the erroneous conclusions would require several full time jobs.

          • And you cannot name one error.

            The field of immunology is in denial about what is being discovered. its a threat to their jobs/career for them to acknowledge the truth. No wonder they run away from the science and make up nonsense to avoid the obvious implications.

            Jain et al is a joke, but its consistent with the rest of the nonsense used to assert vaccine safety: uncontroilled trials shot through with severe selection bias.

    • Grim Beard

      “Google “immune activation autism” and you will be amazed at what the science shows.” What I’m not amazed at is what a Google search shows – which is your anti-vaccine misinformation website among the top results.

      Instead of Googling, why not do what I did and run the search terms through Medline? You get a very different picture than that which you portray with your misleading cherry-picking.

      • MaineJen

        Oooh, somebody did google ad words. Talk about being in it for the money…

        • Nope. we dont spend anything on advertising or adwords.

          • Mike Stevens

            Who is “we”?

      • Cherry picking you say? Like I haven’t heard that before.

        http://vaccinepapers.org/response-to-charges-of-cherry-picking/

        Autism is caused by IL-6 and IL-17 in the brain. And thats what vaccines do.

        The scientific literature implicates vaccines with little doubt. The implications are very damaging for medical institutions, so they dont like to talk about it. It will be very bad for them as the truth becomes more widely understood.

        • corblimeybot
          • I hear it from ignorant people who are not familiar with the scientific literature.

          • Grim Beard

            “I hear it [being called out for cherry-picking] from ignorant people who are not familiar with the scientific literature.”

            You also just heard it from someone with full access to a very well-stocked academic library and the ability to use Medline too. Those ‘ignorant people’ must have just made a lucky guess, eh?

          • Go look up the full text papers for yourself:

            http://vaccinepapers.org/response-to-charges-of-cherry-picking/

          • I’m definitely pro-vaccine, but that’s an interesting collection of papers. I’m skeptical, but I’m genuinely impressed by some of your cites. I’ll give credit where credit is due, and you deserve some credit for not lazily listing bogus shill studies like my friend, Mr. Hubbs.

          • Thank you. Vaccine activists have largely done a terrible job of analyzing the science. The science strongly supports vaccine refusers, but this is definitely not apparent from reading most anti-vax websites.

            We decided to take a different approach. We ONLY cite peer reviewed studies.

          • Mike Stevens

            Who is “we”?
            You are brimming with self promotion, so you need to tell us who you are, instead of hiding.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Be careful with this one. S/he claims to have all this “scientific” information, but when you really parse it, it’s not all that scientific. And s/he/it shills his/her/its website all the time on here, pretty unprofessional.

          • Thats what you claim, but you have never been able to make specific arguments why.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            I don’t read your stuff. NWMT.

          • If you don’t read my content, then you have no right to say anything about it.

            This also means your mind is closed and you live in an echo chamber. You only read content that you agree with? Thats a guaranteed way to never learn anything new.

            I seek out contrary information. This is one reason why I have the correct answers in the vaccine controversy.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            I’ve read enough of it on here. “Contrary” doesn’t mean correct. Going against all the current world-wide scientific evidence is not “correct”.

          • What I have provided here is a tiny sliver of the evidence assembled at the VP blog.

            “all the current world-wide scientific evidence”

            Does not mean what you think it means.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            I’ve seen enough.

            http://www.skepticalob.com/2014/05/six-red-flags-you-need-to-recognize-to-quack-proof-yourself.html
            1. The secret knowledge flag
            5. The “brilliant heretic” flag

          • Mike Stevens

            “I have the correct answers in the vaccine controversy.”

            Ahh….I love a bit of Dunning Kruger with my nightcap.

          • Maybe so, but to be perfectly frank, I’m seeing more genetic fallacies used against VP than specific critiques. I’m a layman, so perhaps the flaws aren’t as apparent to me as they might be to you. I’m seeing PubMed-listed studies from serious journals, and I’m not seeing the kinds of red flags I’m used to. I don’t have a religious belief in vaccine safety — I reached that position first by believing authorities, then by examining evidence. New evidence calls for new and impartial examination.

            I’m not trying to sound like an anti-vaxxer, but I can’t start my inquiry by saying “I’m right, now I just need to find out why.” I could be wrong!

          • Sonja Henie just admitted she has not read my content. I get this all the time. Vaccine promoters love to bash and attack our articles…without having read them.

            I receive lots of accusations, but rarely thoughtful critiques.

            Isn’t that interesting?

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            http://health.spectator.co.uk/eight-slogans-that-quacks-love-to-use-if-you-hear-these-find-a-proper-doctor/
            http://www.skepticalob.com/2016/05/the-theology-of-quackery-how-pseudoscience-has-become-a-secular-religion.html
            http://www.skepticalob.com/2014/05/six-red-flags-you-need-to-recognize-to-quack-proof-yourself.html

            These cites above explain what’s going on here. They are quite similar.

            Also, VP quotes Suzanne Humphries and asks “What does Humphries get wrong?” http://disq.us/p/1dcpdn8

            The VP website is referenced by numerous anti-vax websites, such as VacTruth (anything with the word truth in it is a lie).

          • Grim Beard

            Why on earth would I want to go back to your anti-science website and view a cherry-picked set of articles (and contribute further to your click count and revenue) when I‘ve already run a search for published, peer-reviewed scientific articles on Medline?

          • momofone

            Please share this literature.

          • Kevin

            Yes I had a quick read and all I saw was references to mice and rats and inflamation,nowhere did I see that vaccination causes autism or damage.

          • The detailed explanation is more than a few sentences long.

            Vaccine adverse reactions cause inflammation in the brain.

          • Kevin

            From what I gather the experiments were carried out on mice and rats and as I said elswhere,the mere fact that you have a Humphries video on your site rings alarm bells.thank you.

          • They have also been replicated in monkeys.

            The consensus in the field is that these are excellent models for autism and schizophrenia. From a recent review paper:

            “These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
            –Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

            Also, these studies match up well with human studies (eg epidemiology) that show humans also suffer brain injury from immune activation.

          • Kevin

            “Finally, the need for more research”.This is the key phrase in link you provided.There is more research needed,You realise Immune activation can be caused by anything eg catching a cold,no one is denying that vaccines are not perfect but it is better than the alternative.

          • “These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
            –Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

          • Mike Stevens

            I liken it all to someone trying to join dots but finding they are in different pages of the puzzle book.

            VP strings together some scientific cites, supposing they are linked in a coherent chain, when they are not. Providing a paper showing something may happen is not evidence it does happen or that it links to another event. He is woefully short of this evidential chain, and to someone in the medical field it is immediately apparent. To laypersons, the science can be confusing, and it might be easy to imagine that because A and B exist, that A causes B. Vaccine papers does this all the time, sewing seeds of confusion.

            For example, I can “prove”, using journal publications and press articles that the cause of buildings being destroyed in London is a cow farting in Wales.
            How?
            Well, several buildings were badly damaged near Victoria station a couple of years ago in a helicopter crash. We know that some helicopters flying over London are emergency air ambulances transferring ill patients to intensive care units. We also know that because of pressure on beds, some patients were transferred from Wales by air ambulance. Some patients in ITU are there for brain haemorrhage. Brain haemmorrhage is linked with severe headaches. Headaches are caused by exposure to methane. Methane is produced by cows farting in Wales. We can conclude that inhalation of methane may cause headaches severe enough to warrant someone needing admission to ITU with suspected brain haemorrhage, and they may need transferred to London because of a lack of ITU beds in Wales. Helicopters are linked to crashes over London air space.
            QED.
            All of these facts can be “proven”, and if someone wants me to provide citations I would be able to do so.

            This is the VP scientific method. To someone unfamiliar with the UK and the workings of modern society, say an amazonian native, the evidence that farting Welsh cows cause buildings to collapse in London would appear very plausible. To anyone else, not so.

            Vaccine Papers relies on people looking at his website acting like the apochryphal amazonian native. He relies on the public’s unfamiliarity of the scientific method and scientific ignorance among his readers to convince them what he says is true.
            My fear is that he even believes it himself.

          • Kevin

            You are spot on,as I am not a medical person myself,I did find the site confusing but what rang the alarm bells for me is that there is a Suzanne Humphries video promoted on that site.need I say more?

          • Azuran

            Anti-vaxxers are just so damned concentrated on one leaf of one tree
            that they completely forget about the tree itself AND the entire forest.
            VP
            is just so intent on proving the mechanism of how vaccines causes
            autism that he’s working totally backward. You don’t need to figure out
            HOW to be able to know IF a link is possible. If any kind of vaccine
            causes a significant increase in autism, we would most likely have
            noticed. You don’t start trying to find how something happens before
            you even proved that it is a problem that exists.

            So even if all
            his talk about aluminum could theoretically explain a link between
            vaccines and autism. If, in real life, there is no measurable or
            significant changes in the rates, nobody cares.

            And even IF,
            eventually, some new scientific data came out that showed an increased
            risk of autism after vaccination (which would still be a small increase,
            considering how we haven’t been able to measure it yet despite many
            studies on the matter) The entire world isn’t going to suddenly stop
            vaccinating over night because of this.
            Vaccines have side effects,
            we all know this, no one is trying to hide this, they will never be 0
            risks. So they are only going to compare this new small risks against
            the overwhelming advantages and the risks of stopping vaccination (which
            could even result in higher rates of autism).
            If anything, even if
            VP was 100% right, the most likely outcome would be a recommendation
            that we try to find something other then aluminum in the next 10-20
            years or so. Ant it would take probably a few more decades before we can
            even be sure that this new product is safer than aluminum…Maybe it
            would turn out to be worst.

          • The VP and woowoo (woo²) method of “connecting-the-dots resurch” to get the predetermined outcome needed:

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/88a89eabbf4f58ff78d58914aafd0b66d8253e1f0623ad5d3983a36716b9ced3.jpg

        • Grim Beard

          “Cherry picking you say? Like I haven’t heard that before.”

          Well you will do if you keep cherry picking. That’s like Donald Trump saying “Sexism you say? Like I haven’t heard that before.” It’s not exactly a robust defence of your position.

        • The Computer Ate My Nym

          Cite a primary, peer reviewed source or forget about it. Your unreviewed self cites are unconvincing.

    • Mike Stevens

      “The science on this issue is shifting”
      What is shifting are the goal posts, as antivaxers desperately try to conjure up new ideas as to why vaccines must be the cause of autism, after every previous claim of theirs is debunked.

      • Goalposts at our website have never shifted. Focus has shifted to aluminum and immune activation as the science has progressed. r

        • Mike Stevens

          Well who is “we” then?
          I don’t tend to accept information from websites unless I have some idea who is producing the information. Provenance is everything.

          • Provenance is nothing. Science is everything.

            The vaccine reform movement is slowly shifting focus to aluminum and immune activation.

          • Mike Stevens

            “Scientific evidence is everything.”
            So let’s see some.
            Start by providing scientific evidence that conditions such as colitis and mental illness are caused by vaccines, and provide indicators of the frequency please.

            I predict now you will wimp out of this.

          • mark
          • Mike Stevens

            Non sequitur.
            I was wanting to know who the “royal we” was at the Vaccine Papers website. I guess I won’t find out, since VP wants to keep that hidden from everyone. I can’t think of any reasonable reason to do that. Can you?

          • DelphiniumFalcon

            I thought it was refering to skler and all the cytokine damaged mice in shklee’s pocket.

      • mark
        • Mike Stevens

          Yes, I believe that the EMA tore the Nordic Cochrane a new a-hole over this saga.
          No wonder they are upset. But it is interesting that they are challenging not the medical science of HPV vaccine, but making complaints over the way the EMA operate.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym

      Sources for these extraordinary claims?

    • Kelli Mikulec

      Science has proven that autism has been found in babies still in the womb. Anti vax families have autistic children even when they have generations of parents that didn’t vaccinate. Vaccines don’t cause autism. You are not going to convince anyone who believes in science and peer reviewed accredited research that they do.

      • The only vaccine that has been much studied in relation to autism is MMR. Vaccine promoters misuse these studies by applying them to ALL vaccines. This is dishonest and wrong.

        Yes sometimes autism starts in the womb. Predisposition to autism can start in the womb, and become full autism after birth, by exposure to immune activation.

        Immune activation is the cause of autism, and thats what vaccines do. Vaccine adverse reactions induce the specific cytokine that causes the damage: interleukin-6.

        Vaccines definitely cause autism. The science has effectively proven this, but people refuse to acknowledge the obvious.

      • mark

        aged parents predisposes….there arent generations of unvacced parents any more, that was 50 years ago.
        science needs to ask the right questions to set the right trials.. lots of work to do yet

        • Kelli Mikulec

          There are most certainly generations of anti vax parents. Spend any time in one of the groups and you find plenty of people whose parents didn’t trust vaccines when they were younger and the same with their grandparents. They ignorance was passed down through generations of fear mongering in their own families.

          • mark

            fear mongering? like polio?

    • mark

      this cytokine problem isnt just the brain, HMRI researchers made mention of the infant stem cells when challenged prematurely then develop into compromised organs… ie lifelong ill health… they hadnt connected it to vaccine adjuvant induced cytokine storm,..needs to be looked into,

  • Who?
    • Vaccines cause allergis/atopic disorders. I expect that vaccines could be developed to manipulate the immune system with the opposite effect as well.

      Al adjuvant induces Th2 polarization and IL-33 expression, which induce allergic disorders and food allergies.

      Its clear that the increasing use of vaccines is the cause of the increase in food allergies and asthma.

      • MaineJen

        Do you know what Th2 means?

        I’ll wait.

        • Yes of course. Al adjuvant induces Th2 polarization, which is associated with allergies and autism. Th2 polartization has adverse effects on brain development.

          See this article on an important new study relating Th1/Th2 balance to brain development.

          http://vaccinepapers.org/two-vaccines-opposite-effects-brain/

          • Poogles

            “Al adjuvant induces Th2 polarization, which is associated with allergies and autism. Th2 polartization has adverse effects on brain development.”

            But that doesn’t answer the question…

      • Poogles

        “Its clear that the increasing use of vaccines is the cause of the increase in food allergies and asthma.”
        [Citation Needed]

      • Mike Stevens

        Pertussis used to be a frequent cause of asthma.
        Vaccines do not cause significant atopy or allergy in large scale clinical studies, despite some theoretical indications they may predispose to them.

        Studies showing lower frequencies of asthma in those who delayed DTP vaccine were confounded by the fact that vaccines were deferred in that subgroup because subjects had contraindications to vaccination at the time like other infections (and we know natural infections with some pathogens decreases asthma risk).
        DTaP vaccine has not been linked with asthma, even in a poor study.

    • KLB999

      I’m so excited! I have a shellfish allergy and would love to get a vaccine and be able to eat lobster again!!!

  • Ayr

    I was a member of a forum for expectant mothers before my son was born, mostly for the support as none of my friends were pregnant. Anyway, there used to be regular posts about how vaccines are eeeevil and no one should ever vaccinate their child. They would spout all this crap about statistics, papers, and articles in medical journals that supported their view but could never provide the proof. I can understand not giving a certain type of vaccine because of a history of bad/allergic reactions to it. But to not vaccinate at all is reckless, selfish, and should be considered child endangerment. Certain diseases are no longer around because of vaccines, not because of whatever crazy reason they come with on any given day.

  • Heidi_storage

    I’ve mentioned before how one of my friends insists that she’s seen with her own eyes the damage caused by vaccines. What could I say in response? “You’re misinterpreting what you see” is the truth, but not really an effective reply.

    • Kelly

      What damage has she seen?

      • Heidi_storage

        One of her friends has a child who “just totally changed” after he was given his one-year shots. He has lots of learning and behavioral problems–not sure if he’s on the spectrum or not.

        Of course, one-year-olds normally change dramatically and suddenly, and it may become possible or easier to start to diagnose problems in the kid’s development. I have no idea what’s going on with this kid, which makes it unconvincing to say “Vaccines didn’t cause this.” I could cite studies until I’m blue in the face, and it would make no difference whatsoever to my friend’s perception that a) her friend’s son was given several shots at once, and b) shortly thereafter changed from a normal, happy, bright baby to a screaming child with loads of problems. And how DARE I say that it wasn’t the vaccines, when I don’t know what caused it?

        • Roadstergal

          It’s really tough. It’s been seen in the Omnibus that when experts look at videos of children pre-vaccine, they see the behaviors/diagnosis that the parents only notice post-vaccine, but that’s hard to explain to CERTAIN PERSON STANDING IN FRONT OF YOU.

          • EmbraceYourInnerCrone

            I have seen this sort of parental obliviousness in my family as concerns vision issues. First with my younger brother who had lazy eye but my parents did not realize his eye would “drift” despite having been through it with me. It took my Aunt’s visit for someone outside the immediate family to notice the issue.

            My nephew would, when sitting always tilt his head almost 90 degrees. Even though he does this in every photo of him as a baby, it took months and my cousin mentioning it to his mom/my sister for us to all notice he had a problem. Turned out to be a weird version of lazy eye as well…

            Sometimes you don’t notice something you see every day.

          • Clorinda

            Just had one of my kids in to evaluate walking. Took quite a while for me to realize that every so often one pigeon-towed foot would cant inward ever more so at almost a 90 degree angle. Kind of like putting the foot down like you are planning on turning around, but never doing it. I think it started hitting my awareness a while ago but I put it off thinking it was just heavy shoes or something, but then I noticed it while they were barefoot or in sandals too. Took child in today and, even though the gait was more normal because the child knew they were being observed, the doctor could still tell something was weird about it. It’s probably been happening for a couple years but it has only been the last few months that it really started bugging me and last few weeks that I really noticed WHAT was bugging me.

        • Steph858

          I’m not sure if my personal story (feel free to claim it as your own) will help, but a common myth is that the flu jab can cause one to come down with a cold. Well, I got the flu vaccine when I was 31 weeks pregnant and, lo and behold, a week later I came down with a cold.

          Except I didn’t get the flu vaccine. I was SUPPOSED to get it; I’d booked my appointment and my GP to get it. Unfortunately, a few days before my flu jab appointment I had an ultrasound which revealed that the IUGR my pregnancy was plagued with was getting worse by the week; my OB ordered twice-weekly ultrasounds, the next one of which would clash with my flu jab appointment. I explained this to my OB and she said:

          “Unfortunately there are no other appointments available around that time and, given that you’re pregnancy hasn’t got long to go before I’ll be sending you in for a C-Section (due to the IUGR), I’d say that the risks of you skipping your ultrasound and potentially missing warning signs indicating a more immediate C-Section is required are greater than the risks of you being unlucky enough to happen to catch the flu in the 2 or 3 weeks left of your pregnancy.”

          I never did get the flu vaccine as my GP surgery was too busy to reschedule until long after I’d given birth and in the UK the flu jab is only available to at-risk groups (pregnant women, children, the elderly etc) on the NHS.

          This little personal anecdote nicely demonstrates the dangers of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies IMHO.

          • swbarnes2

            Yup. Kind of like the small number of kids who have adverse symptoms 5 minutes before they have their vaccine.

          • BeatriceC

            I’ve read a number of similar stories here and in other places. Person was had appointment for X. For whatever reason, X got cancelled. Later that day or the next (or in whatever short time frame), Y happened. Y is sometimes blamed on X, but this illustrates the whole “correlation is not causation” thing. I can’t recall any of the specific stories, but I know I’ve read several of them.

            In my own experience, my oldest kid had major seizures within an hour of his 4 month shots. Now he already had some minor seizure issues (cause never determined, resolved by age 3, generally blamed on hypoxia at birth from SD/getting stuck). Those specific seizures could have been the shots, sure. They could have also been simply made worse by the shots. Or, and this is what I think, they would have happened that day with or without the shots, and it’s just a matter of coincidental timing.

          • guest

            I had awful sinus problems a few days and then a week after my flu shot. Chalked it up to either weakened immune system after the shot, or rhinitis of pregnancy. NOPE. I have developed a reaction to chocolate, and it’s halloween so chocolate has been flowing freely in the house.

            The flu shot had nothing to do with it, but my symptoms were almost identical to the “flu” people claim they get after the shot. It’s almost like our bodies change all the time, as I’ve been eating chocolate for 29 years with no problems and in the last 3 months, it’s been causing odd painless migraines that culminated in sinus-like pain before I figured out the problem.

          • Erin

            I got a cold shortly after the flu vaccine when I was pregnant with my son but what’s more likely:

            A. It was the vaccine.

            B. I left the Doctors after getting the vaccine, went to a Christmas Market, did a load of shopping in the very busy Edinburgh city centre and then took my nephews (both of whom were showing signs of a cold) to IKEA and then out for tea.

            It’s obviously A right?

          • AnnaPDE

            I’d actually put it down to someone infecting you at the doctor’s. After all, that damn waiting room is full of sick people. My kid loves to pick up stuff every time we’re there.

          • corblimeybot

            Isn’t that the truth. I was in my doctor’s lobby once, waiting for an appointment and a flu shot. Then a guy comes out of the back from talking to his wife’s doctor (I think she had cognitive issues) and says, “you’ve got the flu! Put on this mask, we’ve got to get out of here before we spread germs!”

          • Erin

            Our practice is actually very good at that with four separate waiting rooms. When you’re pregnant regardless of what you’re in for, they keep you away from all the ill people. I had a midwife check up and then went straight to the nurse for the vaccinations.

          • Yes, the science shows that flu vaccine causes respiratory and flu-like illnesses.

            http://vaccinepapers.org/influenza-vaccine-immune-suppression/

          • Poogles

            No, it doesn’t, and posting an anti-vaccine website as “proof” isn’t going to convince anyone here.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Do note, VP is shilling his/her own website, as well.

          • Charybdis

            Let me tell you about my Legitimate Vaccine Injury. In September, I received my flu shot, as it is provided free by my workplace. That very evening, I started a load of laundry and in the middle of a rinse/spin cycle, I heard what can only be described as a waterfall in my kitchen. I had water pouring out of one of the recessed light fixtures (my laundry is on the second floor)!!! Big mess in the kitchen to clean up, plumber had to be called at 8 pm, madness ensued.

            This was OBVIOUSLY caused by the flu shot, because that was the only thing different that happened that day. I had used the washer only the evening before and had no issues AT ALL. I get the flu shot, and THAT VERY NIGHT my washer decided to flood my kitchen. The problem got resolved, but my kitchen is just not the same after my flu shot; it’s like it is a whole different kitchen. 🙁

          • So you are mocking people that suffer vaccine injury. Classy.

            How about reading the science reviewed on that page?

            Your mocking dismissal of the evidence is typical of vaccine promoters. Really disgusting and further confirmation that vaccine promoters cannot deal with the facts.

          • Charybdis

            Legitimate vaccine injury, nope. Someone has to be the statistic. But ALL the other crap they claim is vaccine related? You bet your ass I’m mocking them. A fussy baby, a low grade fever, general achiness, tenderness at the injection site, etc…those things are NOT vaccine injuries. They are side effects that they inform you about, tell you to watch out for and how to handle them and the doctors and manufacturers KNOW about them.

            So, prove to me that my washing machine issue was not vaccine related. That is the ONLY thing that was different that day, so it is OBVIOUSLY the vaccine that caused the problem. I am firmly convinced that is the case.

          • Poogles

            ” A fussy baby, a low grade fever, general achiness, tenderness at the injection site, etc…those things are NOT vaccine injuries.”

            Also, autism, ADHD, allergies, etc. are not vaccine injuries either; they have nothing to do with vaccines at all.

          • Charybdis

            True. I was thinking only of things that *could* be attributed to vaccines and not things that clearly aren’t.

          • Verboten

            And how are you making these claims? By regurgitations from your big pharma bible?

          • See the papers I cite. Illness is a “legitimate vaccine injury”. Proven by controlled scientific studies on both humans and animals, in the case of the flu vaccine.

            Fussiness, achiness etc are not the things vaccine critics are warning about. They are warning about brain damage, autism, seizure disorders, allergies, asthma etc. Serious chronic illnesses.

          • Charybdis

            None of those are caused by vaccines.

          • Problematic results for you. Flu vaccine caused illnesses in this placebo controlled study. Two other studies also show the same thing.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7e22f7ea62ce26244adb0f57c87734af961a47b15cfc6dea07b83c6949029e96.jpg.

          • Charybdis

            Nope, not problematic at all. Correlation does not equal causation.

          • This was from a prospective interventional, randomized, double-blind placebo controlled study. That proves causation. This is not mere association.

          • Thats from a randomized, double-blind placebo controlled study, so it proves causation.

          • KLB999

            Or there was someone in the doctor’s waiting room with a cold.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            I was just going to say that.

          • Sullivan ThePoop

            I have an aquaintance that lost her daughter to SIDS the day she was supposed to have her 2 month checkup and shots, but they had to reschedule. I also met a man who said he took his daughter to the health department to get her 2 month vaccines, but left because they were too crowded and she died from SIDS that night.

          • Sonja Henie-Spinning Jenny!

            Sad.

        • DelphiniumFalcon

          Maybe his body doesn’t react well to vaccines temporarily and the other behaviors are coincidental so if A happened after vaccination then B must be caused by vaccines too when B was always there.

          If anecdata is what she wants you can use me. Talking to my mom lately apparently I used to have absolutely awful vaccine reactions. It never failed, especially after the DPT boosters, I’d start turning red, puking, screaming, crying in pain, and when older saying I had headaches within a couple of hours of a shot like clockwork.

          Even if I didn’t see them or barely felt them give me a shot I got so ill. I remember some of the later ones and it wasn’t because I was scared because I had a good attitude about vaccines because getting a shot without crying was being a brave girl, now I won’t get awful disease that I could understand the concept of at six, etc. Still ended up running fevers, body aches, vomitting, and headaches by end of day every time. It’s just how it went. I don’t have as violent reactions now and it probably has to do with the vaccines being reformulated, especially from the whole cell to acellular with the diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis. I can’t tell you how happy I was to get my.last booster for that and not ending up a total mess.

          As mentioned in previous posts I’m also autistic. Same song and dance, started being “off” after I started getting vaccines but looking back my mom has said I had odd behaviors especially compared to my neurotypical sister as a baby. I’ve probably had noise sensitivity since I was born for one. It was just easier to see around vaccination age because that’s when kids actually start interacting in a way you can observe social deficits. I also have confirmed autistic family members on her side of the family and a heavy suspicion for a few relatives on my dad’s side so we’re pretty sure it’s genetic.

          Now even with all that I still got most of my vaccines on time. Borderline post partum psychosis made my mom hyper paranoid around the time of my first shots so they got slightly delayed but she knows it was irrational fear. It was better to endure the crappy side effects than the actual illnesses. My parents are old enough to have seen people in their older peer group that were disabled or killed by polio, deaf from measles, had congenital rubella syndrome, and got to experience the “Hong Kong flu” for themselves. They knew which risk was safer to take.

        • Kelly

          That is tough. I have been through the one year old temperament change three times and if you didn’t know it was normal, you could think it was a lot of things. Although mine all start at six months and they progressively their temperament gets worse until it fully shines through at one. I just wish that they hadn’t started to try to accuse vaccinations of autism because it is now being blamed for all sorts of things.

          • Heidi_storage

            I know, right? So-called typical development is crazy enough. My two kids are happy, blissful, mellow sweethearts from about 8 months to 1 year, and within the course of a month turn into moody, whiny, clingy toddlers who melt down because the Elmo plate is unavailable. (Probably no accident that Kid 2 and Kid 3 were both conceived during those “easy” months.)

            Or maybe they’re just vaccine-damaged and I haven’t noticed.

          • BeatriceC

            Just wait until they’re teenagers and you don’t even need the unavailability of the Elmo plate to cause a meltdown. One of mine recently flew off the handle because I was “cooking too loud”. Ummm, okay then.

          • FormerPhysicist

            My daughters are clearly vaccine-damaged by the HPV shots. Moody, nasty, hormonal, whip-smart but stupid. Oh wait, they’re adolescent. And the younger hasn’t had the shots yet.

          • Bombshellrisa

            Oh wow. My two year old yelled at me to “stop talking, I am sleeping”. Clearly vaccine injured. I assume that he will be telling me I am cooking too loud in the coming years.

        • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

          So….her baby turned into a normal toddler? How did she go thru life never hearing of the Terrible 2s?

          • Steph858

            Oh, you’d be surprised. My son had a tantrum when it was time to go home from a trip to the park with daddy. This prompted some busybodies to ask “Are you his father? So then why is he kicking and screaming like that?” His dad took the time to explain that no, he wasn’t a kidnapper, it was just that his son wanted to stay in the park forever and ever but unfortunately this was not possible. If it had happened to me, I’d have replied with “Um, because he’s 2, and that’s what 2-year-olds do.”

        • Immune activation and Al adjuvant cause this damage.

          No, it is not normal for children to change personality etc suddenly.

          • VP drooled, “it is not normal for children to change personality etc suddenly.”

            Are you a teenager?

            Ever hear of “The Terrible Twos”?

            How about your sweet adolescent child becoming a surly, moody, self-centered teenager?

            Yep, kids don’t change personality whatsoever as they develop into autonomous individuals and parents who expect them to remain sweet, loving, carefree babies for the rest of their lives aren’t batsh!t insane.

          • kfunk937

            Did you catch VP getting his azz handed to him recently at RI? It’s really worth searching the comments, and was a thing of beauty. Many of the arguments are useful when he splotches about elsewhere on the interwebz, thinking his arguments will find a more gentle audience. (Or, mebbe he just likes to hear himself expound talk.)

    • MI Dawn

      Yeah…I have a friend who swears vaccines caused his son to die (official cause of death SIDS). So none of his other children were vaccinated. And he and his new wife are totally into woo. Auras, chakras, essential oils…sigh.

      • There are good reasons to believe that vaccines cause SIDS and death.

        • Nick Sanders
        • Mike Stevens

          Not really. If anything, vaccines have been shown to reduce the incidence of SIDS, not increase it.
          In addition, if vaccines caused SIDS, then as the vaccine schedule has expanded several-fold since the 1960/70s, one would anticipate a proportionate rise in SIDS cases. Yet they have dramatically fallen.

          • mark

            us has worst developed world infant mortality 6/1000…and countless explanations to cover up why

          • Mike Stevens

            “us has worst developed world infant mortality 6/1000…and countless explanations to cover up why”

            Well, the fact that the US counts smallbirth weight infants who die within 24 hours as “live births” whereas other countries count those as “still births”, therefore not counting them in infant mortality data might have something to do with it.

            If IMR is so bad in the US because of vaccines, why has it steadily fallen as the vaccine burden has risen? Shouldn’t it have gone the other way?

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ffbfd2e5ce54542003c53074f722c3e86a7b80ae7e4b4df84879fcdc8ce9d84.jpg

          • mark

            emergency response has improved at every level over the last century…thats the background data

          • Mike Stevens

            So the massive impact on the IMR data that evil vaccines have by killing babies has been overwhelmed by the effect of better care from conventional medicine?

      • mark

        loss of a loved one often leads to a quest for supernatural ie away from love of material possessions

    • Yes its especially not effective today, because we now have science that validates the observation.

      Immune activation and aluminum adjuvants cause brain damage and immune disorders.

      • Sue

        Yeah – water can cause brain damage too. And oxygen can damage lungs.

        • Vaccines damage the brain at dosages recommended by the CDC.

      • Mike Stevens

        The commonest and most powerful cause of “immune activation” is natural infection.

        If you feel immune activation causes brain damage, you should logically support vaccination.

        • Vaccines also cause immune activation. Critically, aluminum adjuvant causes the type of immune activation (IL-6) in the brain that causes autism.

          Natural infections do not come with a dose of injected AlOH nanoparticles.

          Do you have any scientific evidence demonstrating the safety of injecting infants with AlOH nanoparticles?

    • Ayr

      Reminds me of a friend who is on an ‘alternative’ vaccination schedule because she wanted to make sure her kids didn’t have an adverse reaction, even though there is no history in hers or her ex-husbands family of allergic reactions. The worst reaction has been a fever, but then she thinks she can prevent her kids from getting lice by spraying them down with lavender and other essential oils… she’s not the brightest crayon in the box.

  • demodocus

    That quote sounds like something one of the loopier college kids in philosophy club would come up with. I tagged along with my boyfriend, so I know what that sounds like.