This Just in! Vaccines STILL Do Not Cause Autism

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by F-X

And since it was the parents fault, nobody looked for a physical cause for autism.

And see? You FAIL right there: they were looking and continued to look. That they did not find it, at the time, and people sought "great and desperate cures" does not mean people were not looking.

I apologize for getting the topic all about mercury and thimerosal and how mercury is toxic and levels and all that WHO nonsense about acceptable levels and mercury being toxic.

It is okay, people get emotional. However, you miss the point--you have to demonstrate a level is toxic. This is something a number of posters have tried to demonstrate to you.

Mostly because it caused the "sodium is deadly" fallacy to appear, and I am really sorry the "water is deadly" thing showed up, but hey, it happens.

Well, they served to demonstrate to you the difference between "toxic" and "levels." What you should counter with is there is no evidence of a beneficial or necessary level of mercury. Neat. But the analogy was to warn you against absolutism--the mercury is a toxin does not mean it causes a significant risk at "such-and-such" level.

The point remains there is no evidence that vaccines are linked to autism. Period.

I'm also really sorry for making a lot of people feel stupid.

You did not make make anyone feel stupid; unkind man might observe you made yourself appear stupid by arguing in circles and missing the point. I am not, however, an unkind man--"measur'd in manner and speech."

You did refer to others as being "stupid."

. . .and you just keep telling people sodium and chlorine are deadly poisons.

They are: try eating some elemental sodium or inhaling some chlorine. However, methinks a brief review of hypernatremia and hyperchloremia will correct that misconception.

And mercury is really not that bad.

Argumentum ad veritatem obfuscandam: for I am unaware of anyone who has actually claimed that. What has been demonstrated is the lack of significant clinical--even observable--side-effects at the levels used for, say, vaccines, and dental amalgams. You cannot extend that into an advocacy for the consumption of mercury.

Your next analogy is irrelevant to the point of the discussion. Ask him how much sodium chloride or water he can add as well.

Relax.

--J.D.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by F-X

Hey Doc! I thought this was a waste of time?

"I have walked my way since the beginning of time. Sometimes I give, sometimes I take. But it is mine to know which and where."

Noblesse oblige.

--J.D.

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by Doctor X

Well, they served to demonstrate to you the difference between "toxic" and "levels." What you should counter with is there is no evidence of a beneficial or necessary level of mercury.

As he did. The problem is that this itself is compelling only if something has to have a beneficial or necessary level for normal metabolic function, in order to be justified in medical use. Since that's false, and its falsity can be shown with multiple familiar examples, which have been supplied and patiently explained... the point fails.

[F-X]

Mercury used to be used in medicine, but due to the carcinogenic nature of ammoniated mercury, in most countries it is no longer allowed. The nerve and kidney damage from the other compounds pretty much led to their demise as well.

Mercury is still found in medicines (both real and woo woo medicines), especially from backward stupid countries, like India. And the US.

The FDA used to have a page on their website called
"Mercury in Drug and Biologic Products" that listed current products and materials containing mercury.

Page Not Found

I don't know why it vanished in the spring 0f 2008, but you can view it through the wayback archive.
http://web.archive.org/web/200802232...mercury300.htm

If they changed the url for the page, then the courtesy of putting a redirect would have been nice.

Stupid FDA website.

[F-X]

Originally Posted by Doctor X

They are: try eating some elemental sodium or inhaling some chlorine.

I thought you were supposed to be arrogant? Stupid and arrogant are a bad combination.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by F-X

I thought you were supposed to be arrogant?

I am magNIfIcent, son.

Stupid and arrogant are a bad combination.

Which is why you should strive to cease to be both as well as unfunny.

Sorry to make you cry.







Relax.

J&D

[Plant Woman]

I got to page six of this tiresome thread and decided not to go on. I do want to know though, did anyone bring up anything about the accumulation of mercury in the body? Since mercury stays in the body, over time, can't small amounts build up to toxic amounts?

[LadyShea]

There some studies involving excretion of mercury in my link in this post Freethought Forum - View Single Post - This Just in! Vaccines STILL Do Not Cause Autism

Information on clearing and excretion can also be found in the the links to the FDA page on Thimerasol in one of my previous posts here Freethought Forum - View Single Post - This Just in! Vaccines STILL Do Not Cause Autism

[JamesBannon]

Originally Posted by Plant Woman

I got to page six of this tiresome thread and decided not to go on. I do want to know though, did anyone bring up anything about the accumulation of mercury in the body? Since mercury stays in the body, over time, can't small amounts build up to toxic amounts?

Yes, just like lead, arsenic, and other heavy metal poisons.

[JamesBannon]

Originally Posted by F-X

I never did tell you how impressed I was with your quick retraction and obvious intelligence in recognizing an error. The opposite of stupid.

Yes barium is toxic, and pure barium is reactive, so we don't find any pure barium on earth. It is dangerous in a soluble form, but barium sulfate, the kind we are forced to drink for an x-ray, is insoluble, so it doesn't make us deadly ill.

I don't like admitting making mistakes, but, on the other hand, I hate being wrong. There was something about my post that was nagging at me, so I looked up Beryllium and thought that's wrong, then, "wait, it's Barium stupid!".

On the second point, all the alkali metals are pretty reactive are they not?

I have no qualms about investigating what is a cause of autism, and, if it's environmental, taking appropriate action. However, this is very different from claiming that vaccines, specifically the MMR vaccine, actually cause autism. It has even been suggested that parents be "allowed to choose single vaccines", this in spite of the fact that a vaccine reaction is more likely to occur in such circumstances. Every vaccine we use has a chance of an adverse reaction occurring. Like all medicines, it is a case of weighing up the relative risks of using them versus not.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by F-X

If I was the type to stir up trouble ...

You are the type to stir, full stop. Please stop discussing this subject and (preferably) go away. Why? Because people getting exposed to dangerous and uncontrolled substances in vaccines may actually be a serious problem, yet you are ranting hysterically about it and detracting from useful discussion.

Either you're stupid, arrogant and insulting, as your posts in this thread indicate, or you're a troll.

show spoiler

Or carry on, because I do enjoy seeing you getting wiped on the floor by the posters here.

[F-X]

Originally Posted by JamesBannon

However, this is very different from claiming that vaccines, specifically the MMR vaccine, actually cause autism.

Did you see the British study I linked to? If more studies like that were done, especially in multiple countries, it would clear up a lot of confusion and fears about autism.

If the British study is correct, and repeated in a larger study, then it means almost everything contentious about autism has been a waste of time.

It would mean it isn't vaccines, it isn't mercury in vaccines, it isn't refrigerator mothers, and it isn't too many vaccines.

I for one, simply want to know what the figures actually are.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by F-X

I'm also really sorry for making a lot of people feel stupid.

As Doc X said, you didn't make anyone else feel stupid.

You, however, did make many other feel that you are stupid. You misrepresented other people's arguments, and contradicted yourself while acting like an arrogant ass.

Originally Posted by F-X

I thought you were supposed to be arrogant? Stupid and arrogant are a bad combination.

[F-X]

Do you ever get the feeling one of your legs is getting longer than the other?

[ceptimus]

I'm the one here who thanked your (F-X) posts and critisized some of the arguments used against you.

But even I think that if you really want to deal with the subject of the thread, rather than just entertain, then a less contentious style might be advisable.

People, even F-X, might learn more. Then again perhaps the lulz are of greater value than mere learning.

[Angakuk]

I think we need to solicit an opinion from mickthinks on the relative value of lulz vs learning in this thread.

[Garnet]

* Garnet throws rotten grapefruit at Angakuk

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by JamesBannon

Yes, just like lead, arsenic, and other heavy metal poisons.

Maybe, it depends on exposure levels continuing. Inorganic mercury is excreted in urine and feces and has a half-life of about 30-45 days, meaning amounts in the body would be reduced by half in that time if exposure to mercury stops. Methyl mercury compounds half-life is 45-70 days, but it's still excreted.

[seebs]

Wait, chlorine's not toxic?

So why the fuck do they chlorinate water to sanitize it? I mean, fuck, man. That's just too stupid for words. Chlorine is used for the exact same reasons as mercury -- because it kills cells.

[F-X]

Studies on children show thimerosal mercury is excreted much faster.

Autism and Mercury: The Pediatrics thimerosal study - Child Psychology Research Blog

[LadyShea]

And some studies show that autistic children do not excrete it, or excrete less, as I have linked to.

Originally Posted by Ceptimus

People, even F-X, might learn more

Not everyone is going for lulz, a lot of data has been linked to, but he doesn't seem to be inclined to address it.

[seebs]

If thimerosal caused autism, removing thimerosal from the vaccine supply would reduce the incidence of autism. It doesn't. We're done here, can we go back to some kind of clever explanation of how chlorine isn't toxic, even though it's used as a disinfectant?

[F-X]

Originally Posted by seebs

Wait, chlorine's not toxic

No, chlorine is not toxic, in fact, your life depends on chlorine. It is an essential element for life. It occurs in nature dissolved as chloride ions, or as solid compounds. There is no natural source of Cl2, (dichlorine). source

Your mistake is confusing chlorine, Cl, a natural element of life, with an industrial product created by electrolysis of sodium chloride.

When you imagine a dangerous toxic substance, you are thinking of elemental chlorine (dichlorine) Cl2.

But even that isn't what is in pool water or drinking water. When combined with water Cl2 reacts and you end up with hydrochloric acid and hypochlorous acid.

Both of those compounds are also produced by your own body.

Go read up on Wikipedia. You will be amazed to find your body not only depends on chlorine for life, but it produces chlorine and compounds made from chlorine, on demand, all the time.

With out it, you would die.

[F-X]

Just in case there is real stupid reading this, yes, dichlorine and concentrated products made with it are very dangerous. Chlorine gas is deadly, because it reacts with water in your lungs and forms hydrochloric acid, which is great for digesting steak, but not good at all to have in your lungs.

[Doctor X]

Noblesse Oblige

--J.D.