jump to last post 1-17 of 17 discussions (73 posts)

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? A majority say "yes" or "aren't sure".

  1. Sychophantastic profile image81
    Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago

    Here's a recent public policy poll on the subject:

    Q6 Do you believe there is a link between
    childhood vaccines and autism, or not?
    Do ................................................................... 20%
    Do not ............................................................. 46%
    Not sure .......................................................... 34%

    So 54% either believe vaccines cause autism or aren't sure.

    What do you think of this?

    1. profile image59
      retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      The root causes of autism are still unknown.  Autism and unknown in the same sentence frightens people.  Fear motivates us to assign a cause.  Evolution has favored this impulse.  Identifying the sound of a twig snapping as the sound of approaching danger is a good thing when it is a lion, tiger or bear approaching and not a bad thing if it is an elk, zebra or horse.  "It is better to be safe than sorry," is an oft spoken aphorism for a reason. 

      It is no wonder the "vaccines bad" crowd has grown as the amount of misinformation and its advocates have increased.  It is bad science to blame vaccines for autism and it is also understandable.

      It is also a mistake to elevate scientists to secular priesthood, though this too is happening.

    2. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Or...if you want to play games with numbers: 80% think vaccines do not cause autism or are not sure.

    3. savvydating profile image81
      savvydatingposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Please vaccinate your children. Autism is not related to vaccinations. There is an alarming trend of childhood diseases making a comeback because parents are afraid to vaccinate their children. This is horrible. Children are at greater risk for infecting others as a result of this foolishness. I blame Jenny McCarthy for spreading this dangerous nonsense.

    4. GA Anderson profile image83
      GA Andersonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      There you go with your factoids again. And again without staking a position. I understand the desire to spark a good conversation, but why do you never include your own view?

      You combine two numbers and make a declaration. So what is wrong with being unsure? Why didn't you combine the other two - 80% say vaccines do not cause autism, or are unsure?

      Do you wonder why 34% are unsure? Could it be because they don;t have enough information to form an opinion? Or as your combination of numbers attempts to imply - could it be because they think it does, but are unsure?

      Come on Sychophantastic, grow a pair. I like your conversation starters, but your inferences and lack of courage reflect poorly on your commitment.

      GA

  2. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    I think people are affected by scary myths.

  3. Zelkiiro profile image86
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    The obvious answer is "no," of course. But this isn't good enough for some people, so, as someone who has Asperger's Syndrome (a high-functioning form of Autism, for those unaware), this is the response I like to give regarding the subject:

    Would you rather your kid have Autism or Tetanus?

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      There is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence that anything in vaccines causes autism spectrum disorders.

      In fact, current SCIENCE is strongly suggesting that the spike in autism spectrum disorders may be connected to the age of the father. Science is suggesting that the children of older men have higher incidences not only of autism spectrum disorders, but of mental health problems as well.

      And yes, for anyone who does not "believe" in vaccinations: Perhaps you would rather you child die or have life-long disability related to polio or from one of the many so-called "childhood diseases"; disabilities ranging from deafness to paralysis.

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    What else would be causing it? I believe autism is caused by what is used to preserve the vaccine solution.  Mercury was included in the list of vaccine ingredients. Have they taken the mercury out?

    I also think too many inoculations at once, (whooping cough, measles, mumps, rubella, Hepatitis B) could cause it.

    Doctors insist that inoculations begin at 3 months old. Why?  The child who is breast-fed has natural immunities. Keep 'em out of parks and public places. You recover from measles and mumps. In fact, most of us over forty had those natural childhood diseases. You never recover from autism.

    In Japan they immunize their children at two years old. Not before. The population of Japan has less autism.

    No, not every child develops autism after being immunized. Its the luck of the genetic draw as far as the effect of the chemicals/heavy metals on the child. Some livers can filter out the chemicals/metals used in the solutions. Some cannot.
    I have spoken to many nannies (as a swimming teacher for children with special needs) who said they could show me with photos, (showing eye contact, smiling, happy, relating to others,) that the child in their care had no autism symptoms before the 18 month injections.

    I wonder if others have noticed the development of autism AFTER an inoculation???!

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      We do no normally assign causes to thing simply because we can't think of anything else.  Nor because we think something "could" be a cause, such as too many innoculations at once.

      No, we make tests we look at the results, and THEN decide if something is causal for something else.  In the case of immunize and autism there has never been such a relation show to exist; just the fears that it "might" be there.  And when we're talking about thousands or millions of deaths if we all stop the immunize programs that just isn't enough.  Fear seldom is; knowledge is far superior.

      No, no one has ever noticed the development of autism after inoculations, to anything like the degree necessary to assign a causal relationship.

      1. profile image0
        mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        No, in fact pediatricians report---virtually universally, that their records indicate developmental issues prior to immunization.

        Is the fluoride in the water still making us all sterile and commies or just gay now?

    2. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Read some current medical science (Kathryn) related to autism spectrum disorders and probable causes.

      There is ZERO evidence to support your "beliefs".

    3. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Not all children recover, as you wringly claim, from measles or mumps.

      Children die from complications of measles and suffer lifelong disabilities related to measles and mimps.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
        Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Well, what IS causing autism? I hope you all are right. My three month old grand-son was just immunized. He better be Okay!

        1. profile image0
          mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Science tells us age of the father, genetics, and perhaps, complex prematal conditions contribute to autism.

          Medical researchers also tell us that autism is bing over-diagnosed; becoming the "go to" for many things.

          I have several children and grandchildren---all immunized, all fine.

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I am not knowledgeable on this matter. So I can not justify my skepticism of the "vaccines cause it" claim.

            But... the perspective that the same "over diagnosing" problem was attributed to the explosion of ADHD cases - which appears to have been a valid criticism, makes me consider you might have a good point.

            GA

  5. Kathleen Cochran profile image84
    Kathleen Cochranposted 3 years ago

    I think that "what we think" isn't evidence.  And when you don't immunize your child on the schedule that is recommended by people who make it their lives work to figure out what is best for a world full of children, you put more than just your child at risk -as much evidence shows.

    I think there is definitive proof there is no connection between vaccines and autism, as desperate as parents are to know why this happens and how to protect their children.  Making the world more dangerous for children is not the answer.

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Exactly.

  6. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    If you think it is all down to thimerosal. then good news, no one will get autism any more. Thimerosal has not be used in routine childhood vaccinations in the US for years.

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Exactly.

      The "thing" they blame ain't in the vaccines anymore and has not been for decades.

      I am old enough to remember classmates who died from "childhood diseases" and who were suffering the after effects of polio.

      I think withholding of vaccination because---and let's be honest, CELEBRITIES promoted the autism crap on television, is criminal and deserving of prosecution.

  7. profile image0
    calculus-geometryposted 3 years ago

    People who think vaccines are dangerous and prefer anecdotes over scientific evidence ought to read this account from a woman whose parents chose not to vaccinate her.
    http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/growin … accinated/

  8. InsideTheMindofKT profile image62
    InsideTheMindofKTposted 3 years ago

    Awesome and informative blog!

  9. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    sannyasinman posted this:
    "The best defense against ANY disease or virus is a healthy immune system. Vaccines contain substances toxic to the human body, and serve to deplete the bodies natural defences, not strengthen them. 

    This is an example of what will be injected into your body, from Sanofi
    Pasteur’s own usage instructions for the swine flu vaccine:   
    - Thimerosal (mercury). Mercury is toxic to the human body.
    - Embryonated chicken eggs
    - Formaldehyde 100mcg max (they do not know how much exactly). It is classified as a probable cause of cancer in the USA.
    - Sodium phosphate
    - Sodium chloride (table salt)
    - Polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether. This is a toxic detergent.
    - Gelatin
    - 15 mcg hemagglutinin (HA) of influenza A/California/07/2009 (H1N1) v-like virus per 0.5 mL dose
    - Sucrose (table sugar)
    This is not a complete list of ingredients, as none is available.

    There are concerns that this vaccine, and others like it may also contain:
    - Aspartame.
    - Human fetus embryo
    - Dog kidney cells
    - Bovine cow serum
    - Mouse brain cells 
    - Squalene

    Quite a toxic cocktail . . ."

    pedrog profile image70pedrogposted 2 years ago in reply to this
    You forgot dihydrogen monoxide, it's also a chemical, spooky stuff…
    http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/95750

    1. profile image0
      calculus-geometryposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      There is a link between vaccines and aborted fetal tissue, but it's not what you think.  Vaccines are grown in human cells that come from abortions performed in the 1960s.  The cell lines are self-perpetuating, so vaccine manufacturers do not need a constant supply of newly aborted fetuses to produce the vaccines. All abortions could stop today and they would still make the vaccines with no problems.  Also, in the purification process the human cells are removed, so you aren't being injected with any human tissue.  Here is a more detailed explanation about it for anyone interested.

      http://www.drwile.com/lnkpages/render.asp?vac_abortion

      http://www.immunize.ca/en/publications- … fetal.aspx

  10. profile image0
    Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago

    My mother was six months shy of 40 when I was born.  My father was 50.  I received all of my vaccinations on schedule.  I have no food allergies and aside from Chicken Pox, had none of the childhood diseases against which I was immunized.  I don't have autism, never had ADD, and experienced nothing but routine colds and such as a child.  This is the case with most of the folks I grew up with.  It seems that these things suddenly sprung up at an almost epidemic level.  While I do NOT believe the majority of those on the autism spectrum are misdiagnosed, I do believe that they HAVE NOT YET FOUND A CAUSE.  More importantly than a cause at the moment, IMO, is learning to treat these kids and help to make them as comfortable as possible in a world that seems to think the only way to cure them is to go back in time and undo what's already been done.  Those with more severe symptoms of autism develop them far before the vaccine issue is even an issue. What's often been diagnosed incorrectly ISN'T the autism.  It's everything that they're diagnosed with prior to that.  Those incorrect diagnoses often keep the autism from being properly treated/managed until the symptoms become unbearable for these poor kids.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      What is the correct diagnosis for those mis diagnosed?? low IQ? Autism isn't a case of low IQ or mental retardation...It is a case of the nervous system being kept inside the brain. Kind of locked up.  The avenues of perception and expression are not typical.  Due to toxins in child's environment…?
      MAYBE in some cases from being injected.
      Repeating: The Japanese have less incidence of Autism and they inoculate their children at two years of age. Maybe some infants' livers are too immature to filter out all the gunk listed above... (and then some that are not even disclosed!!!!) Do you really think all little infants can filter out all those chemicals? What is wrong with playing it safe and waiting until two? Because the doctors are held liable and don't want to be sued by US! Thats why!
      One out of sixty children is autistic, according to the available data. I think it is time to take drastic measures. No immunizing until two years of age. And after about five to ten years, check the autism rate. No parks or outings until the child is immunized at two. (And no suing the doctors if something goes wrong.) It could be a national research project. Autism is the most heartbreaking condition.  We MUST find a cure and a CAUSE!

      1. profile image0
        Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Maybe I didn't explain myself well.  I'm saying that children on the spectrum are often MISdiagnosed with such things as low IQ, mental retardation, personality disorders.  We need to understand better what it actually IS before we will EVER understand what causes it.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
          Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          It is a screwed up nervous system... what is there to not understand?

          1. profile image0
            Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            That other issues are also a "screwed up nervous system" and we have no idea what causes those issues either.  Things like MS, Fibromyalgia, Parkinson's, Hodgkins.  Are all those a result of vaccines?

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
              Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Those are more body oriented are possibly age related with long exposure to environmental toxins. What is affecting the BRAINS of young little children as soon as they are out of the womb??

              1. profile image0
                mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Genetics, aged parents, diagnostic tools.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I do not agree.

                  1. Zelkiiro profile image86
                    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Yeah, you never were one for verifiable science and evidence.

          2. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Well, how about an understanding of degrees. Are we talking "Rain Man" or something less accute? Is it an all or nothing diagnosis?

            ps. if you missed my prior posts - I am not very knowledgeable on this topic, but my "baloney" detector works on a broad spectrum basis - it leaves the specifics of the warning evaluations to more qualified folks.

            GA

        2. GA Anderson profile image83
          GA Andersonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Look, you are missing the point of the OP's contention, and your sensible replies are a like a wet blanket on a picnic. If you don't have a firebrand to wave in the face of the 54% declaration, yea or nay, just step back and let the "big boys" show you how it is done.

          ps. I hope you know that was in jest - martini time started at 11

          GA

  11. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    "Bill Welsh, chairman of Action Against Autism, said: 'The USA statistics are incontrovertible proof of the autism epidemic which is sweeping the Western world. An epidemic which the health authorities are shamefully trying to cover up.
    'A request to the Scottish Executive, made almost two years ago, to establish a register, by year of birth, of autistics, would have confirmed that this tragic condition had gone from rare to common since 1990.'
     
    Dr Ed Yazbak, a retired American paediatrician, insists that the increase is real and argues that this can only be attributed to environmental factors. He says vaccination may not be the only cause but is convinced that it plays a part.
     
    He said: 'These statistics tell us, not only that there has been a huge increase in autism rates in the last 20 years, but also that this increase is not stopping.'
    He also argues that the increase cannot just be the result of better diagnosis because the same diagnostic techniques have been used since 1994."
    http://www.autismtoday.com/library-back … s_Soar.htm

    1. profile image0
      Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Haven't read this yet, but certainly will. Thanks for the link. smile

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
        Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        You are Welcome, Motown. We must ask God for help!

    2. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      The epidemic of autism is a function of over-diagnosis which is resulting from the fact that today things are labeled as "autism" that had other labels in the past; other labels related to developmental. cognitive, and behavioral disorders.

  12. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    " ...A virus must be given a medium in which to propagate. Many vaccines use viruses that can propagate in several kinds of mammal cells, but some viruses are so specific that they can only propagate in human cells. The viruses used in the above-listed vaccines are that specific. Thus, they must be grown in human cells.

    Where do the vaccine companies get the cells for these vaccines? They get them from companies like Coriell Cell Repositories, 403 Haddon Avenu, Camden, New Jersey 08103, 800-752-3805. This company has many cell lines, which are cultures of self-perpetuating cells. Each culture of cells is continually reproducing, making more cells. Those cells are sold to researchers, drug companies, and other medical technology firms. The specific cell lines used in vaccines are the MRC-5 and WI-38 cell lines1, and they have been supplying medical research of all types for more than 35 years. Where do these cell lines come from? That's where the grain of truth in this lie comes from. Both of these cell lines were cultured from cells taken from two abortions, one (MRC-5) that was performed in September,1962 and one (WI-38) that was performed in July, 1962…" (1962 !!!)
    http://www.drwile.com/lnkpages/render.asp?vac_abortion

    I don't know about anyone else, but to me... this sounds absolutely creepy.

  13. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    "Autism has serious effects, not just on an individual child's health but on education, health care and the economy "Autism incidence in California shows no sign yet of plateauing," Hertz-Picciotto and Delwiche said in their study."
    "Throughout the nation, the numbers of autistic children have increased dramatically over the past 15 years. Autistic children have problems communicating and interacting socially; the symptoms usually are evident by the time the child is a toddler."
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic … vironment/

    But, they enjoy life and their mothers love them. Working with them taught me to be happy for no reason at all. Just be happy. Thats how they are. Maybe they have come to teach us something.  I worked with many who learned to swim more quickly than the typical child. They loved being in water and swimming under water.

    This article explains possible environmental influences. We must work urgently to pinpoint and eradicate environmental causes and then ban whatever toxic chemicals are involved.

    And vaccines must be carefully scrutinized in my opinion.

    Eradicating Autism should be a TOP issue for the next presidential election.

    1. profile image59
      retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      That statement is, itself, bad science.  One can only say, with any sense of clear scientific certainty that, the number of children identified as having characteristics falling within the parameters of Autism Spectrum Disorder has increased in the past 15 years.

      The number of children with Autism was zero 100 years ago, if we adopt the thinking in the quote.  This is clearly false, because, although no definition of autism existed, autism itself was real and there were people who displayed characteristics of Autism.

      Clearly there has been progress in diagnosing and identifying those with Autism over the past 15 years and this, no doubt, accounts for some - if not all - of the "dramatic" (not a very scientific word) increase..

      1. Zelkiiro profile image86
        Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Most obvious example: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. His contemporaries merely saw him as an extremely eccentric fellow; hindsight tells us he was a major Aspie. And as they say, it takes one (Read: me) to know one.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
          Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Naw… you ain't!
          are you?

          1. Zelkiiro profile image86
            Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Most assuredly.

        2. profile image59
          retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I am HUGELY skeptical of hindsight diagnosis of any sort, they constitute miserable science.

          1. Zelkiiro profile image86
            Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I'm not saying we'll ever know 100% for sure, but his behaviors and his writings compared with the symptoms of high-functioning Autism are very compelling.

      2. profile image0
        mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Exactly.

        The so-called "epidemic" is a function of overly enthusiastic diagnosis and resulting misdiagnosis.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
          Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          ...totally wishful thinking. There are now classrooms full of young children with autism in EEELP programs where I live. They are not being mis-diagnosed.

          1. profile image0
            mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            If you think that vaccines cause autism you are wrong.

            There is ZERO scientific evidence to support this position and much scientific evidence to support what has been offered in this hub in terms of causes and contributing factors of autism.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
              Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              And you persist in downplaying it.

              1. profile image0
                mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                No...not "downplaying" anything.

                I deal with facts and science and not the work of entirely discredited researchers or celebrities.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  The statistics and data indicate that one out of every 68 children is diagnosed with it. And you say, No.
                  What is the basis of your belief that it is merely being mis-diagnosed?

                  1. profile image0
                    mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    The devil is in the details.

                    The CDC reports this: “The number of children identified with ASD (autism spectrum disorder) ranged from a LOW 1 in 175 children in Alabama to a HIGH of 1 in 45 children in New Jersey/

                    This means that  .6%  (less than 1%) of kids in in Alabama and 23% of kids in  in New Jersey are diagnosed with autism.

                    In Alabama LESS THAN 1% of kids are not vaccinated. This means that 99% of kids are vaccinated.

                    In New Jersey about 3% of kids are not vaccinated. This means that about 97% of kids are vaccinated.

                    So... in Alabama with vaccination rates are higher than those in New Jersey fewer kids are diagnosed with autism.

                    How can these be if there is a CAUSAL---and you are claiming causal, relationship between vaccines and autism.

                    I suspect the contributing factor here is affluence (as I mentioned in another comment posted to this forum).

              2. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                In 2012 there were 122,000 deaths from measles, in spite of some 80% of of children getting vaccinated. 

                "downplaying" is refusing to project the number of deaths without vaccinations and pretending it won't rise - rise back above the 7,500 deaths the US alone had in 1900.  "Downplaying" is refusing to accept there is no proven link between autism and vaccines while ignoring the tremendous good they do.

                1. profile image0
                  mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  And now---due to the anti-vaccine craze, there are reports of polio-like diseases in children particularly in California.

                  And here in New York---thanks to the anti-vaccine craze, we are seeing a spike in whooping cough and measles; a spike that has resulted in deaths of infants and children.

                  My response: I am actually going to get the DTP vaccine tomorrow. Health officials here are recommending it for adults---even us old Baby Boomers, who got these vaccines 1/2 century ago.

  14. Sychophantastic profile image81
    Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago

    Can we conclude that people who don't take established science seriously are idiots?

    1. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No. Perfectly intelligent people pay no attention to formal science.  They just also are not sway by the tides of hysterical rumor either.

    2. profile image59
      retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      As are people who take the idea of established science.  Scientific inquiry needs to be free wheeling, challenging, revolutionary, iconoclastic and irreverent.  It needs to be quixotic.  It needs to destroy and ruin.  It needs to build but never with concrete.  Science is not static and therefore not established.  Every scientific conclusion can be undone by new information.

      1. Sychophantastic profile image81
        Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        There is established science. The notion that you pose that science is not established is dangerous because it allows morons to claim that scientific facts are not facts at all, just some other belief system and that one belief system is just as good as another.

        Is it not established scientific fact that smoking is a carcinogen and that the earth revolves around the sun?

        1. profile image59
          retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Smoking is carcinogenic is a conclusion and an inaccurate one. If it was a factual certainty, than everyone who smokes would get cancer, they do not.

      2. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        How very true!
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

        1. profile image59
          retief2000posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Thank you.

  15. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    Are  these substances being injected into our very small children along with the necessary microbes?? Can their newly formed, innocent livers handle these substances? Why do these substance have to be included?

    - Embryonated chicken eggs
    - Formaldehyde 100mcg max (they do not know how much exactly). It is classified as a probable cause of cancer in the USA.
    - Sodium phosphate
    - Polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether. This is a toxic detergent.
    - 15 mcg hemagglutinin (HA) of influenza A/California/07/2009 (H1N1) v-like virus per 0.5 mL dose
    - Aspartame.
    - Human fetus embryo... probably preserved… with WHAT?
    - Dog kidney cells
    - Bovine cow serum
    - Mouse brain cells 
    - Squalene
    YUK!
    It stands to reason, if their livers cannot filter out these obnoxious sounding substances, then they end up in the BRAIN and affect its development!

    We, of course, are giving our children to science as guinea pigs… but we refuse to accept the findings!

    1. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So...if this is the case, which it is not, then why are not more children---perhaps ALL children affected?

      And, why in fact, are claims of complications from vaccines seen more frequently among the children of affluent parents?

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      "It stands to reason, if their livers cannot filter out these obnoxious sounding substances, then they end up in the BRAIN and affect its development!"

      You're right.  Bearing in mind that "obnoxious sounding" does not equate with "obnoxious", if their bodies cannot handle what is put into them it will affect the brain.

      All that is left is to show that their body cannot handle the substances, whether they sound bad or not.  And, of course, that the affects are negative and worse than if it were not put into their bodies.  As a group, not as "pick and choose" individuals.  With hard evidence and studies, not with "what if" statements or claims of ignorance like "Why do these substances need to be included?".

    3. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So now it is not thimerisol, but instead of say 'it could be anything from any source' you stick with vaccines.  Why?

      Kids breath, eat, absorb and otherwise assimilate a mind boggling amount of stuff -- any or none of which could be implicated.

      Looking for answers involves looking at all options, not just sticking with one of the best studied non-implicated agents there is, the vaccine.

    4. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Good evening Ms. Hill. How very nice it is to chat with you today.

      No causal relationship has ever been found between vaccines and autism. It is interesting, though, to see you begin your post with three questions. They confirm that you are approaching this list of vaccine ingredients, not from a plateau of knowledge, but from the depths of uncertainty rooted in fear of the unknown. You question the safety of vaccines because of how the ingredients sound rather than researching what each ingredient does.

      I encourage you to search the CDC and medical newsletters for information that explains the role of each of these ingredients.

      For example, the second item on the list is Formaldehyde. The anti-vax proponents remind us that it is associated with cancer in humans but they do not volunteer that the causal data reveal long histories of close contact with the chemical. Therefore, this half-truth becomes part of the strategy designed to instill fear in parents. What these folks also do not tell you is that formaldehyde is also produced naturally in a baby’s body as part of the normal functions that produce energy and build the basic materials needed for important life processes. This includes making amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins that the body needs. The amount of formaldehyde present in vaccines is so small compared to the concentration that occurs naturally in the body that it does not pose a safety concern for infants. {1}

      I encourage all parents, Ms. Hill, to seek the advice of knowledgeable medical professionals and to avoid the legions of blogging health merchants. Parents should examine the huge body of facts accumulated over hundreds of years and avoid the current ill-informed hysteria still circulating today.

      Discover for yourself that small pox has been virtually eliminated from the planet thanks to widespread and intense vaccination programs. Polio cases have decreased by over 99%, from an estimated 350,000 cases in 1988 to 406 reported cases in 2013 as a direct result of a global vaccination effort aimed at eradicating the disease. In 2014, only 3 countries (Afghanistan, Nigeria and Pakistan) remain polio-endemic, down from more than 125 countries in 1988. {2}

      The historical successes of vaccination programs continue to outweigh the minimal risks. Today’s vaccine opponents try to discredit decades of successful data with disconnected anecdotes designed to instill fear. Their tactics aim to expose infants once more to horrible and deadly communicable diseases. Illnesses that no longer spread unchecked thanks to safe and affective vaccines.

      I encourage you not to surrender to fear or anxiety over the well being of your three month old grandson. Millions of infants are immunized each year and they live normal and healthy lives. 
      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
      {1} http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccin … 187810.htm
      {2} http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs114/en/

  16. Sychophantastic profile image81
    Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago

    I should say "cigarettes are a carcinogen" or "smoking cigarettes is carcinogenic".

  17. Kathryn L Hill profile image88
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

    Well, I just found this ..  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8FCJ_VP … C3B9A0B23C

    what do you think?

    1. Sychophantastic profile image81
      Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      What you're doing is the exact opposite of science. You're looking for evidence to support your conclusions and/or fears.

      1. Sychophantastic profile image81
        Sychophantasticposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Actually, you can find a conspiracy anywhere you want. Keep in mind that something like 25% of all Americans believe the sun revolves around the earth and something like 8% actually believe that Obama is the antichrist.

 
working