Page 2 of 2 [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

draelynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,304
Location: SE Pennsylvania

04 Jul 2011, 3:55 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Last I checked there were still Thimerosal hanging around, but that was a couple of years ago. In fact, health care practitioners offered the public a choice between Thimerosal containing vaccines and vaccines without it and, surprise, the vaccines without it ran out way before the ones containing it did so there was nothing but the ones containing it left. Then there wasn't a choice. The consumer, by and large does not want the Thimerasol containing vaccine, for whatever reason, and they shouldn't have to be injected with it just to be protected from the flu.

The aluminum is thought to exaggerate the effects of the mercury exposure, not cause a similar outcome without the mercury.
Another thing, how do I know for sure there is no Thimerosal or something similar in the vaccine? There are so many loopholes, drug manufactures might be able to sneak it in if it is under a certain amount without telling anyone or listing it, if it is proprietary. It might not even have to be under a certain amount. Who can deny industry isn't greedy, just wanting to get the most money it can make? If pretending a vaccine is lacking a certain ingredient is necessary to make more money, who is stopping them from doing it?


Thimerisol is being fazed out... that doesn't mean that manufaturers are going to simply throw away all of their existing stock.

You honestly believe drug companies are trying to sneak in a controversial preservative when they have cheap, easily available alternatives available? Yes, corporations are greedy but they generally aren't stupid.

Our environment is full of potential suspects. Vaccines may be causing harm to a small percentage of the population but no one is willing to possibly look at any other aspect of them. Why must it always be something in the vaccines causing all this autism despite the research to the contrary? Autism isn't a degenerative disorder, it is a developmental disorder. You don't 'trigger' a developmental disorder - you can 'trigger' a degenerative disease, illness or condition though. The simplest answer is usually the correct one. The 'autism causes vaccines' arguement keeps getting more and more complicated yet simple answers like 'let's test for OTHER conditions just to make sure' fall by the wayside.

How about we try exhausting some other possiblities besides vaccines?



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Jul 2011, 3:59 pm

draelynn wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Last I checked there were still Thimerosal hanging around, but that was a couple of years ago. In fact, health care practitioners offered the public a choice between Thimerosal containing vaccines and vaccines without it and, surprise, the vaccines without it ran out way before the ones containing it did so there was nothing but the ones containing it left. Then there wasn't a choice. The consumer, by and large does not want the Thimerasol containing vaccine, for whatever reason, and they shouldn't have to be injected with it just to be protected from the flu.

The aluminum is thought to exaggerate the effects of the mercury exposure, not cause a similar outcome without the mercury.
Another thing, how do I know for sure there is no Thimerosal or something similar in the vaccine? There are so many loopholes, drug manufactures might be able to sneak it in if it is under a certain amount without telling anyone or listing it, if it is proprietary. It might not even have to be under a certain amount. Who can deny industry isn't greedy, just wanting to get the most money it can make? If pretending a vaccine is lacking a certain ingredient is necessary to make more money, who is stopping them from doing it?


Thimerisol is being fazed out... that doesn't mean that manufaturers are going to simply throw away all of their existing stock.

You honestly believe drug companies are trying to sneak in a controversial preservative when they have cheap, easily available alternatives available? Yes, corporations are greedy but they generally aren't stupid.

Our environment is full of potential suspects. Vaccines may be causing harm to a small percentage of the population but no one is willing to possibly look at any other aspect of them. Why must it always be something in the vaccines causing all this autism despite the research to the contrary? Autism isn't a degenerative disorder, it is a developmental disorder. You don't 'trigger' a developmental disorder - you can 'trigger' a degenerative disease, illness or condition though. The simplest answer is usually the correct one. The 'autism causes vaccines' arguement keeps getting more and more complicated yet simple answers like 'let's test for OTHER conditions just to make sure' fall by the wayside.

How about we try exhausting some other possiblities besides vaccines?

There's still a lot of unanswered questions, who can deny that? I absolutely wouldn't put anything past a company that is determined to make a magnificent profit and I know how ingredients are made proprietary, like the special sauce on the Big Mac, to protect the profits of the manufacturers and shareholders. No one, by law, knows what's in it except the manufacturing big cheeses. Not even the ones making the drugs. It happens over and over throughout industry.
Don't for a second believe everything you read on a label because companies lie about what's in their products all the time and it's legal.



draelynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,304
Location: SE Pennsylvania

04 Jul 2011, 4:10 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
There's still a lot of unanswered questions, who can deny that? I absolutely wouldn't put anything past a company that is determined to make a magnificent profit and I know how ingredients are made proprietary, like the special sauce on the Big Mac, to protect the profits of the manufacturers and shareholders. No one, by law, knows what's in it except the manufacturing big cheeses. Not even the ones making the drugs. It happens over and over throughout industry.
Don't for a second believe everything you read on a label because companies lie about what's in their products all the time and it's legal.


Thimerisol isn't proprietary - it's been used for decades. Odd then that there wasn't an outbreak of autism back in the 50's, 60's, or 70's... Thimerisol is simply a preservative - nothing more.

Don't get me wrong. I do not 'trust' big business in the least. The only thing I do trust them to do is to protect their bottom line at all cost - right through living human beings if necessary. I simply do not believe that this is one of those cases.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Jul 2011, 4:12 pm

It's not proprietary but what it's mixed with could be. How do you know for sure? New vaccines come out, can their ingredients be made proprietary? Don't new ones come out every year? How do you know for sure what's in it? You need an unbiased chemist testing a sample from every batch to know for sure. Does this happen?



draelynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,304
Location: SE Pennsylvania

04 Jul 2011, 5:38 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
It's not proprietary but what it's mixed with could be. How do you know for sure? New vaccines come out, can their ingredients be made proprietary? Don't new ones come out every year? How do you know for sure what's in it? You need an unbiased chemist testing a sample from every batch to know for sure. Does this happen?


Proprietary ingredients are protected by patents. That is why pharma companies do not want anything to do with medications that cannot be patented - patented medications mean big bucks. Thimerisol isn't even on their radar - it's just a preservative - one of many that is easily replaced. It's not a medication. Anyone can have a vaccine independantly tested.

Are your processed foods tested this way? OTC drugs? The large and growing number of injectable medications? Not adequately - no. That does not mean that people are intentionally putting poisons in our food and drug supplies.

Facts still stand - autism has been with us for a long time. It is only being defined in clear terms now. Everyone wants something to blame it on. Try genetics. That is the only factor that most people do not dispute. How those multiple genes are turned on and off is the debate and I just don't buy that a 'developmental' disorder only begins after vaccination. No one can tell me why my red hair, lefthandedness and hazel eyes genes were turned on after four generations of righthanded brunettes with brown eyes either. The more we learn about the genes, the more we realize that we don't know as much as we thought we did.

I had this discussion with a mom with a child with 'regressive autism' after vaccination. I presented her with a list of symptoms of vacccine induced encephalitis. She was floored. It matched her son's symptoms right down to the timeline of when certain effects would occur. No one EVER suggested that possibility to her. He was never tested for it. He was even admitted to the ER and no tests were done despite her informing them that he had recently been vaccinated. A pediatric neurologist simply stated 'your son has autism' and that was that. She's exploring what testing they can do now even though the damage may already be done.

This proves nothing. It is a hypothesis. One that can do no harm. Are vaccines injuring people - yes. The adverse reporting system is in place exactly for that reason. Nothing is 100% safe for everyone. Nothing. Vaccines have a damn good track record considering how many people have received them for decades worldwide. Autism is not being 'created' by vaccines. You either have the genetics for it or you don't.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

04 Jul 2011, 5:41 pm

What I meant is Thimerosal or something similar is part of a new vaccine patent. I am not saying it's by itself, but mixed in with the vaccine so it's not required to be listed as an ingredient because new vaccines are still under patent and it isn't required to be listed. So, there's your loophole. It might not be that Thimerosal has been phased out at all. Of course, it's in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to make us think it's been phased out because of the panic surrounding it but it doesn't mean it actually has been phased out.



draelynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,304
Location: SE Pennsylvania

04 Jul 2011, 6:20 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
What I meant is Thimerosal or something similar is part of a new vaccine patent. I am not saying it's by itself, but mixed in with the vaccine so it's not required to be listed as an ingredient because new vaccines are still under patent and it isn't required to be listed. So, there's your loophole. It might not be that Thimerosal has been phased out at all. Of course, it's in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to make us think it's been phased out because of the panic surrounding it but it doesn't mean it actually has been phased out.


It would need to be listed. An existing product cannot be re-patented because it is now mixed with a new drug. It does nothing for the effectiveness of medications. It is simply an additive to preserve shelf life. What reason would drug companies have for doing what you suggest? There is no monetary reason for it. It is an old school drug additive first patented in 1927. Again, if thimerosol was causing autism, there would have been a significant increase when the product was first added to vaccines, not now, at the end of its use.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

05 Jul 2011, 12:15 am

draelynn wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
What I meant is Thimerosal or something similar is part of a new vaccine patent. I am not saying it's by itself, but mixed in with the vaccine so it's not required to be listed as an ingredient because new vaccines are still under patent and it isn't required to be listed. So, there's your loophole. It might not be that Thimerosal has been phased out at all. Of course, it's in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to make us think it's been phased out because of the panic surrounding it but it doesn't mean it actually has been phased out.


It would need to be listed. An existing product cannot be re-patented because it is now mixed with a new drug. It does nothing for the effectiveness of medications. It is simply an additive to preserve shelf life. What reason would drug companies have for doing what you suggest? There is no monetary reason for it. It is an old school drug additive first patented in 1927. Again, if thimerosol was causing autism, there would have been a significant increase when the product was first added to vaccines, not now, at the end of its use.

It wouldn't be re-patented, it would be part of a new product. Kind of like with Big Mac special sauce as an example. It has sweet pickle relish in it. Sweet pickle relish is not proprietary by itself, but it is when it's in special sauce. That's what I am getting at. Thimerosal or similar products are like the sweet pickle relish, in there but not listed as an ingredient because of patents and proprietaries concerning new vaccines.
What do vaccine manufacturers have to gain by lying? Billions of dollars and a way to keep using a product the consumer has lost confidence in.
Ever see the new commercials concerning high fructose corn syrup? That stuff has become very unpopular lately. People think it causes health problems and obesity when it's in products like soft drinks. Makers of high fructose corn syrup and manufacturers of products containing it stand to lose money because of all the negativity associated with high fructose corn syrup so they came up with an ad campaign to convince people it's no worse than regular refined cane sugar when the body processes it. Who knows where the truth lies. It could be a thousand times worse than refined cane sugar for all anyone knows but since that makes the product unsellable telling the truth is not an option.



StuartN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2010
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,569

05 Jul 2011, 3:30 am

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Who knows where the truth lies.


Peer-reviewed scientific journals containing repeated, large-scale studies are a good place to start.

Yes, corn syrup does cause obesity.

No, vaccines do not cause autism, no matter how much the anti-vaccine lobby mutate their conjectures each time they are disproven.



draelynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,304
Location: SE Pennsylvania

05 Jul 2011, 9:01 am

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
It wouldn't be re-patented, it would be part of a new product. Kind of like with Big Mac special sauce as an example. It has sweet pickle relish in it. Sweet pickle relish is not proprietary by itself, but it is when it's in special sauce. That's what I am getting at. Thimerosal or similar products are like the sweet pickle relish, in there but not listed as an ingredient because of patents and proprietaries concerning new vaccines.

What do vaccine manufacturers have to gain by lying? Billions of dollars and a way to keep using a product the consumer has lost confidence in.
Ever see the new commercials concerning high fructose corn syrup? That stuff has become very unpopular lately. People think it causes health problems and obesity when it's in products like soft drinks. Makers of high fructose corn syrup and manufacturers of products containing it stand to lose money because of all the negativity associated with high fructose corn syrup so they came up with an ad campaign to convince people it's no worse than regular refined cane sugar when the body processes it. Who knows where the truth lies. It could be a thousand times worse than refined cane sugar for all anyone knows but since that makes the product unsellable telling the truth is not an option.


Quote:

From McDonalds website under nutrition information;

Big Mac® Sauce:
Soybean oil, pickle relish [diced pickles, high fructose corn syrup, sugar, vinegar, corn syrup, salt, calcium chloride, xanthan gum, potassium sorbate (preservative),
spice extractives, polysorbate 80], distilled vinegar, water, egg yolks, high fructose corn syrup, onion powder, mustard seed, salt, spices, propylene glycol alginate,
sodium benzoate (preservative), mustard bran, sugar, garlic powder, vegetable protein (hydrolyzed corn, soy and wheat), caramel color, extractives of paprika, soy
lecithin, turmeric (color), calcium disodium EDTA (protect flavor).


They need to list all ingredients except specific spices (spice blends ARE proprietary), in order, according to the volume of content. The first ingredient is always the primary one and the rest follow suit.

And, as you can see HFCS, needs to be listed as many times as it is added to the recipe - in this case - 3 times.

HFCS is a whole different issue - apple to oranges. It is an industry unto itself and it is overused in food processing because it is cheaper than cane sugar. Thimerosol is neither of those things. No industry will crash if people stop using it. It is not the ONLY cheap vaccine perservative. There is no monetary benefit to using it. Companies are not sneaking it in and failing to report it's inclusion on purpose for some nefarious plot. People have been receiving Thimerosol in vaccines since the thirties yet we only have an 'autism crisis' now? Odds are... it is not the Thimerosol. And extensive testing has proven as much.

Perhaps the recognition of an entire new class added to the autism spectrum disorder diagnosis right around the time of this 'autism explosion' might be a more viable explanation. Autism was 'on the rise' in the mid 90's. Asperger's was added to the DSM in 1994. And there are a WHOLE LOT of undiagnosed Aspies. No one is even sure how prevalent Asperger's is in the population yet. And may never since it is being removed as a classification from the DSM IN 2013 (?).



Indy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 950

05 Jul 2011, 11:35 am

Mikelight wrote:
I found this video earlier today and thought it was some interesting information. The video is about an hour and thirty minutes long if you have the time. I'd love to hear thoughts and opinions on it.

I think it's wrong and outdated. The argument has moved on since 2005.

Firstly, he calls autism an epidemic. This is the language of disease. Autism is not a disease, and if it was it still wouldn't qualify as an epidemic.

Secondly, Thiomersal does not cause autism. The diagnosis of autism is continuing at the same level despite Thiomersal being phased out. Also, every major health organisation in the world, including the World Health Organisation, has established, through lots of research, that there is no link. The researcher that made the original claim has been banned from practising because be committed professional misconduct. He lied.

The people making these claims are doctors who offer medical solutions that they have invented and that cost a lot of money. If nobody believes their lies, they can't sell their snake oil.



Ettina
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,494

05 Jul 2011, 12:10 pm

Besides which, autism isn't even increasing.

In the middle ages, there were 'changelings', kids who'd supposedly been stolen away and replaced by supernatural imposters. Many of those kids in reality had regressive autism.

In the 1800s, John Langdon Down (of Down Syndrome fame) coined the term 'idiot savant' to describe some kids he saw who had startling strengths combined with severe disability. He also talked about what he thought was a genetic susceptibility to stress that caused kids to regress either at first dentition (infancy), second dentition (around school age) or puberty. The ones who regressed the earliest fit the modern description of autism.

In the 1960s, childhood schizophrenia was a common diagnosis. Most special education classes had a couple of schizophrenic kids, and there were tons of special schools catering solely to these kids. The cardinal features of the condition were social withdrawal and bizarre behavior. Now, childhood schizophrenia is vanishingly rare and only diagnosed in children who are clearly hallucinating and/or delusional.

Every era calls these kids something different, but they've always been around.



Rasta
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 7 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 72
Location: Moved to Alberta, Canada

06 Jul 2011, 2:28 pm

I think autistic people hold onto other metals & have other sensitivity's besides mercury, that's just one of the things we're prone to "suck up". :P



AardvarkGoodSwimmer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,225
Location: Houston, Texas

06 Jul 2011, 7:20 pm

Ettina wrote:
. . . In the middle ages, there were 'changelings', kids who'd supposedly been stolen away and replaced by supernatural imposters. Many of those kids in reality had regressive autism.

In the 1800s, John Langdon Down (of Down Syndrome fame) coined the term 'idiot savant' to describe some kids he saw who had startling strengths combined with severe disability. He also talked about what he thought was a genetic susceptibility to stress that caused kids to regress either at first dentition (infancy), second dentition (around school age) or puberty. The ones who regressed the earliest fit the modern description of autism.

In the 1960s, childhood schizophrenia was a common diagnosis. . .

. . . Every era calls these kids something different, but they've always been around.

Thank you, Ettina. I do think we can learn from history.

And one question we might ask, on the optimistic side, Were there ways in which people on the spectrum were accepted and appreciated and treated decently and with kindness, and might we be able to duplicate some of these today?