This Just in! Vaccines STILL Do Not Cause Autism

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by F-X

My comments about autism, regarding the numbers being bandied about, is about the numbers of children being born with autism. Or autistic spectrum disorders, or what ever benchmark they are using to create the numbers.

1 in 100
1 in 160
What do those numbers even mean?

It means that 1 in however many kids is diagnosed on the autistic spectrum...including Aspergers.

I'm familiar with the arguments over how autism is defined, and that it is a different method of diagnosing autism that has caused the rise.

Then why did you post that all autistics are in need of lifelong care and can't work when that severe level of disability is rare? ETA: That's like saying everyone with brain damage is unable to work and needs lifelong care...see what I mean?

Then others say no, it is a real rise in cases. Which is it? How can you tell?

How about looking at actual data?

I probably fall into some category of autism or autistic like behaviors myself, but it's not autism, it's brain damage from a terrible childhood accident. Severe brain trauma, as in, my head was split wide open.

Okay, then it isn't autism.

I don't remember it, but it was apparently a bad thing to have your skull split open, what with the brains falling out and all that.

Well yeah

Don't feel sorry for me, like certain autistic people I know, I have amazing gifts with some things. It's all a trade off.

Good for you

[F-X]

One of the first things I thought of when I read the study in the OP was, "Where are they getting these kids from?". Because they talk about mercury levels from vaccines in the study.

They talk a lot about mercury in the study. How old is this study?

If mercury was removed in 2001, and on the shelf vaccines were used by 2003, then there shouldn't even be any mercury in the vaccines, in the kids in the study.

They don't give all the data, they don't even mention what vaccines could be the source of the mercury, in fact, the study is lacking in a whole lot of information.

It says Oct 19, 2009 on the cover. When was it done?

The extensive data in the study on dental mercury levels is interesting in it's own regard.

[F-X]

Originally Posted by Adam

Hint: They don't mean that every person with an ASD is faced with crippling medical expenses and an inability to work.

What do they mean? What number will require care for the rest of their lives?

1 in 200?

1 in 300?

Does anyone have real data about this?

Or better yet, is there an autism thread languishing somewhere that might already have all kinds of interesting things in it?

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by F-X

One of the first things I thought of when I read the study in the OP was, "Where are they getting these kids from?". Because they talk about mercury levels from vaccines in the study.

They talk a lot about mercury in the study. How old is this study?

If mercury was removed in 2001, and on the shelf vaccines were used by 2003, then there shouldn't even be any mercury in the vaccines, in the kids in the study.

They don't give all the data, they don't even mention what vaccines could be the source of the mercury, in fact, the study is lacking in a whole lot of information.

It says Oct 19, 2009 on the cover. When was it done?

Gosh, if only there was a way to extract this information from the text of the study itself, which is so frustratingly concealed on pages other than the first one.

Unfortunately my brain fell out this one time so I can't do it for you.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by F-X

One of the first things I thought of when I read the study in the OP was, "Where are they getting these kids from?". Because they talk about mercury levels from vaccines in the study.

If mercury was removed in 2001, and on the shelf vaccines were used by 2003, then there shouldn't even be any mercury in the vaccines, in the kids in the study.

What the fuck are you talking about? The objective states it is looking at fish consumption as the source of mercury.

[F-X]

So you went and read it?

[LadyShea]

Yes. It's right there on the first page, as Chuck also mentioned

[Adam]

Originally Posted by F-X

What do they mean? What number will require care for the rest of their lives?...Does anyone have real data about this?

Let me Google that for you!

[F-X]

We measured and compared post-diagnosis blood Hg concentrations in preschool aged children with and without autism, adjusting for recent exposures through diet, personal care products, vaccines, and dental amalgams.

Page 9

From the ref pages, it clearly isn't an old study. So what vaccines are they talking about when they mention mercury from vaccines?

The other obvious wtf is the discussion about dental amalgams.

wtf?

[F-X]

Originally Posted by Adam

Let me Google that for you!

So you don't know, do you?

[LadyShea]

Well, let's see if we can deduce from what we have learned so far.

1. Flu shots still have some mercury as do some fillings
2. They were adjusting for exposure to mercury other than fish consumption
3. Therefore, they probably adjusted for the amount of mercury that might have been present in those kids that had flu shots, and those with dental fillings or other exposures to mercury

ETA: Depending on exactly when the study was done they may have been adjusting for those who were vaccinated prior to 2001

[Adam]

Originally Posted by F-X

So you don't know, do you?

No, I don't, which is one reason I'm not introducing made up statistics about it as evidence in arguments I'm having with myself.

[Demimonde]

Christmas came early for you Lady Shea!

[F-X]

Looking at their website
Welcome to CHARGE Study
doesn't clarify much. (The OP study isn't listed)

But from the dates there it would seem this is an old study. The 2-5 year olds involved would have been born before the thimerosal change.

So mercury from vaccines would be an issue.

[LadyShea]

An issue they adjusted for seeing as how they were studying fish consumption

[yguy]

I've never seen a cause-effect relationship demonstrated between vaccination and autism. Then again, I've never seen one demonstrated between most vaccines and and avoidance of the diseases they're intended to prevent, either.

[F-X]

Ouch!

[F-X]

I notice nobody responded to my point about how Doctors used to blame mothers for autism.

Or how medical science missed catching Pink disease was caused by mercury in teething formula.

Or how we just don't know if Thimerosal can even cause autistic type brain damage in primates.

[LadyShea]

Medical science, like all science, is ever changing as new information is gathered

They used to think disease was caused my bad humors and miasmas too.

[Crumb]

I know like and this one time the doctors were all like "Wash our hands? Why the fuck should we wash our hands? Let's just cut this bad boy open and get elbow deep in his guts!"

[yguy]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

They used to think disease was caused my bad humors and miasmas too.

Modern medicine is of course far too sophisticated to concern itself with anything but symptoms.

[ChuckF]

I know, so little of medical research is devoted to studying dark spirits these days.

[BDS]

I've never heard of Pink disease. But it scares the hell out of me.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Gosh, if only there was a way to extract this information from the text of the study itself, which is so frustratingly concealed on pages other than the first one.

Unfortunately my brain fell out this one time so I can't do it for you.

[F-X]

This place has the best smilies.