Not bogus, just smoke and mirrors, look carefully at the study then notice the difference with the headlines

Ok, because they didn't specify the mmr vaccine? is that what you have a problem with?

"These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD."

95,000 children studied. what's your take on that? so jama is now a bunch of paid shills working for the government and pharmaceutical companies?

Anything there peer-reviewed? :)

Just because a child skips the MMR doesn't mean they don't get another 50 jabs which can also cause them to regress into Autism, hence the study is pointless. It is like pretending that only one make of gun can kill.

At least 90 published peer-reviewed studies already condemn Thimerosal

Evidence for Thimerosal Risk - Page 1 | Vaccination News

Evidence for Thimerosal Risk - Page 2 | Vaccination News

jenny mccarthy ´s research gone :(

No I'm talking about a link between autism and the mmr vaccination.

Will you ever admit that there's a pretty good chance that there is no link at least between mmr and autism?

There is zero proof vaccines cause any problems.

50 vaccines

Fitty shots:helpme

How long have you spent looking for such research in total?

if any of you have done or published 'quantitative' research you'll know how easy it is to massage the data to fit your hypotheses. removing outliers, selecting a statistical method which will draw the right conclusion, etc.

but the bigger point is that you cannot in this case prove a negative, you can only show that there is a link between autism and vaccinnes, not the other way. think of the whole 'scientific' discussion about existence of god. you cant prove he doesn't exist. you can only prove he exists, which is obviously impossible.

so all these studies proving there's no link between vaccinnes & autism or any other neurological disease can come and go, all it will take is 1 single study show that there IS a link and all the others 'proving' the opposite go out the window. but there's no chance of that kind of study becoming accepted by the mainstream scientific community, there's too much pride, money and power involved :)

i'm sure if there was a peer-reviewed study with 95,000 children that showed there was a link between mmr and autism you would agree with it, so why not when it shows it doesn't?

what's the problem? can't admit when you're wrong?

don't feed the troll ;)

You should take a closer look at the study, you have looked at headlines rather than the study itself, the study does not show that MMR and Autism are not linked

i don't know about the US but canada stopped using mercury in vaccines a long time ago. there also seems to be much fewer vaccines given to kids in canada than the US.

Canada still has it in influenza and hep B vaccines, though most the vaccines contain Aluminum which is even more toxic

right from the peer-reviewed study:

Conclusions and Relevance In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.

so what the fuck does that mean? or does your brain not process things that you don't want to believe?

Anybody with common sense knows this.

That is why Jenny McCarthy and wehateporn are against them. They're both pretty dumb and were probably repeatedly dropped as babies.

Aluminum in and of itself is not toxic. Too much aluminum is toxic.

Do you know what else can kill you if you have too much? Water.

Almost everything in too high of a concentration can be toxic.

When Aluminum is injected it's toxic

So now let's look at an example

Bob gets all the childhood vaccines, regresses into Autism

Bill skips MMR, but gets all the other childhood vaccines, regresses into Autism

Does looking at samples in this way show if MMR is causing Autism or not? Of course not, because even when MMR is skipped there are generally many other vaccines being given, meaning many more chances for Autism. Bill's parents have him skip MMR so he has no MMR receipt, but he still went Autistic from the other jabs. This is why it's a smoke and mirrors study, to really test these we need completely unvaccinated people involved, we also need to focus on specific type of Autism which comes from vaccines (i.e. Regressive Autism), instead of including the genetic forms.

According to The Journal of the American Medical Association, which only accepts and publishes 9% of the manuscripts it receives, it does. So the journal is wrong and your layman's opinion is right?

Really?

They publish it for what it is, but it is not what you think it is

They publish it because their findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.

peer-reviewed.

95,727 children with older siblings, 994 (1.04%) were diagnosed with ASD - 1 fucking percent!

So would you care to enlighten us?

Would you at least admit that as far as mmr goes ( not any other vaccines because they weren't tested) but 95k + kids (kids that had siblings with ASD so they were at a much higher risk of developing) and they found only 997 out of 95k were diagnosed with ASD.

You know damn well if it were the other way around you would be throwing this down our throats left and right.

Anyways, I'm pretty sure you just can't let go and admit you're wrong.

The point I'm trying to get across is that there are many vaccines linked to Autism, not just MMR, so a child who is likely to go Vaccine Autistic won't be saved by skipping MMR. You are thinking "Ahh, this child went Autistic without MMR, so MMR is safe' but the reality is that they still had other vaccines so still went Autistic from them.

It's like if we made some fat people cut out McDonalds but then found that they were still fat and concluded 'So McDonalds doesn't make people fat'...problem is these people still went to Burger King. The reality is of course that both McDonalds and Burger King are capable of making susceptible people fat, just as the majority of vaccines are capable of making susceptible people regress into Autism.

As I was saying, think of each specific vaccine as a different Fast Food brand, then imagine each fat child is going to 20 different ones. If we examine the kids who avoid Krispy Kreme and discover they still have the same risk of being fat, does that prove that Krispy Kreme doesn't make you fat?

You don't have a "risk" of being fat without consistently eating more calories than you burn. Even your analogies are ignorant. You use very backwards logic to defend your narrative at any cost and it's a waste of time for anyone to attempt any sort of reasonable debate with you as there is 0 chance of you considering and facts which challenge your beliefs. You could just as easily be defending the fiber points of Scientology or any doomsday cult.

TheSquealer "You don't have a "risk" of being fat without consistently eating more calories than you burn."

Eating at those fast food joints makes you more likely to eat more calories than you burn, just as having a vaccine adjuvant makes people at risk of autoimmune disease more likely having autoimmunity induced

I'm talking about mmr. Can you answer the question? Pretend for a moment the only vaccine that children get is the mmr vaccine. Now with the study would admit that there's a pretty good chance mmr doesn't cause asd?

not sure who is dumber... whp for the complete and utter shit he posts, or people here for actually engaging and trying to reason with him :upsidedow :winkwink:

The study design would need to be as follows:-

Vaccinate one group with only MMR (no other vaccinations)

Have a second group which receives no vaccines at all

And have a third group which receives all vaccines

If only they would do such a study, but Big Pharma refuse it; they don't want their dirty secrets and crimes being hung out to dry for all to see

You are the dumbest for not taking my superb tip on-board the other week

I didn't vaccinate my kids just because of autism risk. We chose not to for all the other risks as well. Cancer...sv40, seizures, deafness, brain damage, auto immune responses. Read the inserts for side effects. However here's the thing vaccers always over look. You say we are subjecting your children to risk. How??? If your kids are protected by vaccination then they are safe. However you are exposing your germed up kid to my kid. All of the vac diseases are 100% treatable/curable. The logic hole is we are risking you if you are vaccinated...so GFY

Excellent argument! Great to see a GFYer with some good old common sense :thumbsup

LOL. Clueless.

It's sad how stupid you are. Poor children.