The Vaccine Lies Are Over

[REM]

Originally Posted by 12vman

Why would what I do for a living factor in sir?

Well, there is this:

Originally Posted by 12vman

Ive studied the issue for 15 years.....professionally and personally

[12vman]

Originally Posted by MattB4

What a fascinating coincident. I feel exactly the same about what you write, with the exception you have no background to speak knowledgeably at all. You do not even practice the science of logic.

you know nothing of me.......dont act like you do......it doesnt help your cause

it speaks volumes when all I do Is ask questions pointing out the lack of logic in yours and others posts....then you flame me!!!


So what does Mr Barrett say on the subject of logic and science?????

LOL

[REM]

Originally Posted by 12vman

you know nothing of me.......

You asserted that you have some professional credentials, as well as personal research that give your opinions more weight.

You were asked to provide only your professional credentials.

You cannot gloss that over and keep rambling, can you?

[12vman]

Originally Posted by MattB4

Come now. Huffington post is bad enough of a source ( btw it was not a opinion regarding the journal retraction or Wakefields loss of license). Those sites are alternative medical proponents and anti-vaccine orientated. I give them zero credence.

.

agreed...they mostly are.....now what problem do you have w/ the material in the articles???........you know the articles that quote from a source other than the website that posted it???

sir i have piles of info on the Autism/MMR debate

Did you even read the papers???

pretend that the link came from source of your choice......now debate what is actually in the article...if you even read it...

[12vman]

Originally Posted by PrincessKraken

It's amazing the screaming over the MMR vaccine and autism. If Thimerosal is supposed to be the ingredient that causes the autism, how can MMR being causing autism when it NEVER contained Thimerosal?

cause the argument is far more complicated than that......and the original findings btw the MMR and autism had nothing to do w/ mercury..Wakefield and others noticed a correlation btw the MMR vaccine....the development of "gut" measles.....and autism

there are a multitude of issues regarding vaccines that could potentially cause brain issues....Mercury exposure being just one

personally I could care less about the mercury/autism connection...there are bigger fish to fry

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...94.2011.573736

[12vman]

Originally Posted by MattB4

People might want to read from the Autism Science Foundation http://www.autismsciencefoundation.o...dvaccines.html

soooooo....its OK to post a pro vaccine source...as evidence of one convictions.....but if one posts a anti vaccine source then that source is immediately discounted and poo pooed

makes sense?

Do you not think there are "foundation" sites for the exact opposite point of view????

BTW did you even look at some of those studies?

[12vman]

Originally Posted by REM

You asserted that you have some professional credentials, as well as personal research that give your opinions more weight.

It doesnt gv my posts more weight......it is what it is

he asked and I answered

You were asked to provide only your professional credentials.

You cannot gloss that over and keep rambling, can you?

and you cant get that it really shouldnt matter......I havent asked for their "credentials" now have I???

Why ??? cause it really doesnt matter..

posts should stand on their own merit

I mean really ....where do you want to go w/ this?????

What "credential" would be OK for me???

One that will pass professional muster??

If I say Im an MD does that throw a monkey wrench in the works???

If I say Im a plumber what does that do?????

[strvger]

well, i'm not seeing all the posts here. seems like i put 12vman on my ignore list quite some time ago. am i missing anything good?

[12vman]

Originally Posted by PrincessKraken

I know.

It's getting to be completely stupid.


Autism runs in my family on the paternal side. My nieces and nephews all have full blown autism, or aspergers.

Not one received a vaccine as an infant. Now they have them, and they're doing pretty well considering.

and no one ever said vaccines were the only cause of autism.......

[10 Bears]

Originally Posted by REM

You asserted that you have some professional credentials, as well as personal research that give your opinions more weight.

You were asked to provide only your professional credentials.

You cannot gloss that over and keep rambling, can you?

I think your avatar says who you see yourself as.
A person of death and darkness who stalks his fellow man.

[Chey's Daddy]

Originally Posted by 12vman

and no one ever said vaccines were the only cause of autism.......

and thats one of the biggest statements many get, but at the same time many dont get it

ive never seen a nonvaccer say that vaccines are the only cause of autism.

i dont think ive seen anyone but provaccine people state vaccines only cause autism

its a combo of environment, the parents lifestyle(drugs, chemical cleaners, bad diet, vaccines, pharmaceuticals,ect)
then its the combo of about 80-90+ vaccines
chemical cleaners used on baby
dead foods with gmo ingredients and hexane extracted chemicals


all that stuff plus is the reason for autism and brain problems due to chemical and metal poisoning

[Chey's Daddy]

Originally Posted by MattB4

Good grief I am grabbing a link from Huffington post on a quick google of Vaccine autism link debunked. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_805036.html and

again do you have court cases

john walker smith did the testing on the kids
john walker smith's science was found to be truthful. he was exonerated of all charges. his findings were truthful

his findings found that the kids tested fad vaccine strain diseases living in their bodies. that has not been contested

the findings never stated autism and the mmr vaccine, but the children had gut problems and they all had mmr vaccine strain living in them.

and again it was found bmj and the lancet lied about who they were and all ties originally. they were frauds from the beginning. rupurt murdoch and or his corporation where also implicated in knowing of the fraud.

[MattB4]

The lies are never over.

[aquensis]

Originally Posted by sluggyslugworth

There's no profit in curing cancer, but treating it you can make a fortune.

Its not possible to cure all cancers with one cure like people imagine because every instance of cancer is a different disease, even every instance of "breast cancer" or "skin cancer." Cancer occurs when DNA gets ****ed up, and it can get ****ed up in as many ways as there are nucleotides in the human genome (billions of ways). Its not a disease like small pox where everyone with it has a particular pathogen you can treat with one cure, its a category that is basically "things have gone wrong at the genetic level."

[Chey's Daddy]

Originally Posted by MattB4

The lies are never over.

http://www.ebcala.org/areas-of-law/v...nal-misconduct

Justice Mitting, reviewing Dr. Walker-Smith’s appeal in the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court, found that the GMC’s conclusions were “based on inadequate and superficial reasoning” and that “the finding of serious professional misconduct and the sanction of erasure are both quashed.”

and another
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_1326377.html
"its verdict followed 217 days of deliberation, making it the longest disciplinary case in the GMC's 152-year history.
Today the GMC suffered a serious blow when Mr Justice Mitting, sitting in London, ruled the verdict and the decision to strike off could not stand.
The judge criticised the disciplinary panel's "inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion".
The judge said: "It would be a misfortune if this were to happen again."
He urged that in future such cases should be "chaired by someone with judicial experience"."
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/3/prweb9262180.htm

[MattB4]

Well I read the entire judgment that was linked to from the site. The justice found that since there was no valid way to determine if Walker was doing unsanctioned research as opposed to acting as a physician to the patients that the court could not find him guilty of doing that. It was a very legalistic ruling based on that and did not substantiate the research conclusions of a link to autism.

Interesting exercise into the meaning of "is" is. Though I see it will be lauded as exoneration when it is by no means that at all.

[Chey's Daddy]

Originally Posted by MattB4

Well I read the entire judgment that was linked to from the site. The justice found that since there was no valid way to determine if Walker was doing unsanctioned research as opposed to acting as a physician to the patients that the court could not find him guilty of doing that. It was a very legalistic ruling based on that and did not substantiate the research conclusions of a link to autism.

Interesting exercise into the meaning of "is" is. Though I see it will be lauded as exoneration when it is by no means that at all.

In the 1988 Lancet paper the Wakefield findings said:
“We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to Neuropsychiatic dysfunction. In most cases, the onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps and rubella immunization. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine”.






so are you only saying he did unsanctioned work?
you arnt arguing the science and the findings but only the sanction of the work?

in most information i know, the 12 original tested kids and parents werent allowed to have their voices heard.
it was also found out that bmj, the lancet, brian deer, and murdoch lied about the whole ordeal

[MattB4]

Originally Posted by Chey's Daddy

so are you only saying he did unsanctioned work?
you arnt arguing the science and the findings but only the sanction of the work?

...

This case was not about the science of the research. The ruling was that the ability to distinguish between conducting unethical research as accused by GMC (not me) and Walker simply acting as a physician to the patients could not be proved. Walker claimed to just be their physician and the GMC said he had conducted research unethically. The judge found the Boards definition of research to be too vague to sanction Walker by it.

It really amounts to not much more than legaleese. In other words, his sanction was over turned on a technicality. I doubt most of the anti-vaccine folks will read and understand what the court ruled.

[PrincessKraken]

Originally Posted by aquensis

Its not possible to cure all cancers with one cure like people imagine because every instance of cancer is a different disease, even every instance of "breast cancer" or "skin cancer." Cancer occurs when DNA gets ****ed up, and it can get ****ed up in as many ways as there are nucleotides in the human genome (billions of ways). Its not a disease like small pox where everyone with it has a particular pathogen you can treat with one cure, its a category that is basically "things have gone wrong at the genetic level."

Well no not really.

There are different types of breast and skin cancer...but the types are essentially the same. Some tweaking, sort of like with a bacterial infection. But melanoma is melanoma, trip neg breast cancer is trip neg breast cancer.

[REM]

Originally Posted by 10 Bears

I think your avatar says who you see yourself as.
A person of death and darkness who stalks his fellow man.

You're way out there. Again.

It's from the comedy movie series, Pirates of the Caribbean, haha.