Mmr
- Thread starter andy2002
- Start date
Well let's look for someone who is 'qualified' to comment (I would have thought that Dr. Scheibner might be worth listening to having authored a book on the history of vaccine research, but clearly I'm getting that wrong)
How about Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.?
"Dr Robert Mendelsohn received his Doctor of Medicine degree from the University of Chicago in 1951. For 12 years he was an instructor at Northwest University Medical College, and an additional 12 years served as Associtae Professor of Pediatrics and Community Health and Preventive Medicine at the University of Illinois College of Medicine.
He was also President of the National Health Federation, former National Director of Project Head Starts Medical Consultation Service, and Chairman of the Medical Licensing Comittee of the State of Illinois."
I take it that he is qualified to comment. Here is some of what he has to say about measles and the MMR - before autism was an issue
"A vaccine to prevent measles is an-other element of the MMR inoculation given in early childhood. Doctors maintain that the inoculation is necessary to prevent measles encephalitis, which they say occurs about once in 1,000 cases. After decades of experience with measles, I question this statistic, and so do many other paediatricians. The incidence of 1/1,000 may be accurate for children who live in conditions of poverty and malnutrition, but in the middle-and upper-income brackets, if one excludes simple sleepiness from the measles itself, the incidence of true encephalitis is probably more like 1/10,000 or 1/100,000.
After frightening you with the unlikely possibility of measles encephalitis, your doctor can rarely be counted on to tell you of the dangers associated with the vaccine he uses to prevent it. The measles vaccine is associated with encephalopathy and with a series of other complications such as SSPE (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis), which causes hardening of the brain and is in-variably fatal.
Other neurologic and sometimes fatal conditions associated with the measles vaccine include ataxia (inability to coordinate muscle movements), mental retardation, aseptic meningitis, seizure disorders, and hemiparesis (paralysis affecting one side of the body). Secondary complications associated with the vaccine may be even more frightening. They include encephalitis, juvenile-onset diabetes, Reye's syndrome, and multiple sclerosis.
I would consider the risks associated with measles vaccination unacceptable even if there were convincing evidence that the vaccine works. There isn't. While there has been a decline in the incidence of the disease, it began long before the vaccine was introduced. In 1958 there were about 800,000 cases of measles in the United States, but by 1962-the year before a vaccine appeared-the number of cases had dropped by 300,000. During the next four years, while children were being vaccinated with an ineffective and now abandoned "killed virus" vaccine, the number of cases dropped another 300,000. In 1900 there were 13.3 measles deaths per 100,000 population. By 1955, before the first measles shot, the death rate had declined 97.7 percent to only 0.03 deaths per 100,000.
Those numbers alone are dramatic evidence that measles was disappearing before the vaccine was introduced. If you fail to find them sufficiently convincing, consider this: in a 1978 survey of thirty states, more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. Moreover, according to the World Health Organization, the chances are about fifteen times greater that measles will be contracted by those vaccinated for them than by those who are not."
How about Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.?
"Dr Robert Mendelsohn received his Doctor of Medicine degree from the University of Chicago in 1951. For 12 years he was an instructor at Northwest University Medical College, and an additional 12 years served as Associtae Professor of Pediatrics and Community Health and Preventive Medicine at the University of Illinois College of Medicine.
He was also President of the National Health Federation, former National Director of Project Head Starts Medical Consultation Service, and Chairman of the Medical Licensing Comittee of the State of Illinois."
I take it that he is qualified to comment. Here is some of what he has to say about measles and the MMR - before autism was an issue
"A vaccine to prevent measles is an-other element of the MMR inoculation given in early childhood. Doctors maintain that the inoculation is necessary to prevent measles encephalitis, which they say occurs about once in 1,000 cases. After decades of experience with measles, I question this statistic, and so do many other paediatricians. The incidence of 1/1,000 may be accurate for children who live in conditions of poverty and malnutrition, but in the middle-and upper-income brackets, if one excludes simple sleepiness from the measles itself, the incidence of true encephalitis is probably more like 1/10,000 or 1/100,000.
After frightening you with the unlikely possibility of measles encephalitis, your doctor can rarely be counted on to tell you of the dangers associated with the vaccine he uses to prevent it. The measles vaccine is associated with encephalopathy and with a series of other complications such as SSPE (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis), which causes hardening of the brain and is in-variably fatal.
Other neurologic and sometimes fatal conditions associated with the measles vaccine include ataxia (inability to coordinate muscle movements), mental retardation, aseptic meningitis, seizure disorders, and hemiparesis (paralysis affecting one side of the body). Secondary complications associated with the vaccine may be even more frightening. They include encephalitis, juvenile-onset diabetes, Reye's syndrome, and multiple sclerosis.
I would consider the risks associated with measles vaccination unacceptable even if there were convincing evidence that the vaccine works. There isn't. While there has been a decline in the incidence of the disease, it began long before the vaccine was introduced. In 1958 there were about 800,000 cases of measles in the United States, but by 1962-the year before a vaccine appeared-the number of cases had dropped by 300,000. During the next four years, while children were being vaccinated with an ineffective and now abandoned "killed virus" vaccine, the number of cases dropped another 300,000. In 1900 there were 13.3 measles deaths per 100,000 population. By 1955, before the first measles shot, the death rate had declined 97.7 percent to only 0.03 deaths per 100,000.
Those numbers alone are dramatic evidence that measles was disappearing before the vaccine was introduced. If you fail to find them sufficiently convincing, consider this: in a 1978 survey of thirty states, more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. Moreover, according to the World Health Organization, the chances are about fifteen times greater that measles will be contracted by those vaccinated for them than by those who are not."
In an otherwise excellent post this isn't completely correct. One main reason mumps flared up now is because many of this University cohort didn't get vaccinated for mumps as MMR was introduced after they'd passed the normal childhood vaccination age and the old mumps vaccine had been phased out of use.Kameron said:
Red Faction
Allez Les Rouges
I will accept Kameron's point to an extent, but I maintain that I was one of the few 1st years in my halls not to get mumps because 1) I HAD been immunised
2) I never smoked shisha (sp?) more than once
3) Someone in my year who did smoke shisha with everyone else had not been immunised and had thus contracted mumps
i accept no vaccination is 100% successful- and if you expose someone to a virulent pathogen for long enough, eventually they have to succumb to it
but still
The GMC is doing what is best for the population.
If there was a credible link between autism and the mmr there is NO WAY they would even give people the option of choosing the mmr
2) I never smoked shisha (sp?) more than once
3) Someone in my year who did smoke shisha with everyone else had not been immunised and had thus contracted mumps
i accept no vaccination is 100% successful- and if you expose someone to a virulent pathogen for long enough, eventually they have to succumb to it
but still
The GMC is doing what is best for the population.
If there was a credible link between autism and the mmr there is NO WAY they would even give people the option of choosing the mmr
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
Anyone who's had to go throught the dilemma of having their OWN CHILD immunised in such a way would be infinitely more qualified than you, Dr J.
Put it this way - when I needed serious advice on this matter before - I ignored your opinions until reading everything everyone else had to say.
I notice you're shy of admitting you are/were convinced that vaccines are a cover for government agents to plant us with tiny transmitters like you were so keen to point out before...
(for the record - as Zeedoodles previously mentioned - my child was immunised with the MMR and he's as happy as can be, the scaremongering and plain bollocks surrounding MMR has led to loads of kids not being immunised, so a pandemic may be around the corner for non-immune children - my advice would be not to risk it and get them jabbed, but that's my opinion - it's all a lot of fuss about nothing IMO - Autism has been around for far longer than the MMR has, no matter what you may have read on this thread thus far...
)pk said:Autism has been around for far longer than the MMR has, no matter what you may have read on this thread thus far...
Indeed it has.
From http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/autism/incidence.htm; oh, and please do pay attention, there's a baseline incidence of 100 not shown at the bottom of the graph (left-hand scale).
Why would the incidence be rising, though? I propose these much more tinfoil-hat friendly lines of investigation/confabulation:
- Mobile phones - first call made in 1972
- Other microprocessors - first arcade game widespread in 1972
- Yet others - first HP calculator, 1972
- Political conspiracy - Watergate 1972
- First recombinant DNA with bits from different species maybe they leaked and spread?
- Rock'n'roll - Stones' first 5k rig in... you guessed?
Batboy
Trumpeting is good for you...
Autism or measles?
From my recollections years ago people would take their children to get intentionally infected with measles in order to build up their resistance to it?
Was this good pratice? - probably not in hindsight.
From a personal perspective I have met people whose children are autistic and swear 100% that the MMR jab was responsible.
At the end of the day it is a personal choice and I think you should explore both sides of the argument and take a step back before deciding what to do.
My eldest son had the MMR jab, but they then fucked up and gave him a double dose. Is he Autistic -no? But he does have a learning difficulty whether this is linked to a double dose of MMR - who truly knows?
My youngest son has had single jabs.
Autism mainly affects boys (80%). A parent I met whose child had autism felt that if a child was ill or whose immune system was low at the time of taking the MMR had a greater risk of reaction to the jab.
My conclusions are; I do beleive it is wrong to give all three jabs at once.
The main reason this is done is as a question of economics The government argue for the MMR jab is because of these economics, the influence/arguments of the medical scientists and because they do not want to create panic amongst the populace. Of course the medical scientists and drug companies have been known to be wrong.
At the end of the day we have to work on a herd mentality when it comes to health issues and there are risks either way Measles v Autism. My view after listening to all the arguments is to go for single jabs (Especially if it is for boys). This way you cut down the risks both ways. The only problem is trying to find single jabs and obviously having to pay for them.
Measles is a killer but then in its own way so is Autism. Single jabs protect against measles Mumps and rubella and would eradicate most of the concerns over links to Autism/triple jabs.
Not really difficult to conclude I feel.
From my recollections years ago people would take their children to get intentionally infected with measles in order to build up their resistance to it?
Was this good pratice? - probably not in hindsight.
From a personal perspective I have met people whose children are autistic and swear 100% that the MMR jab was responsible.
At the end of the day it is a personal choice and I think you should explore both sides of the argument and take a step back before deciding what to do.
My eldest son had the MMR jab, but they then fucked up and gave him a double dose. Is he Autistic -no? But he does have a learning difficulty whether this is linked to a double dose of MMR - who truly knows?
My youngest son has had single jabs.
Autism mainly affects boys (80%). A parent I met whose child had autism felt that if a child was ill or whose immune system was low at the time of taking the MMR had a greater risk of reaction to the jab.
My conclusions are; I do beleive it is wrong to give all three jabs at once.
The main reason this is done is as a question of economics The government argue for the MMR jab is because of these economics, the influence/arguments of the medical scientists and because they do not want to create panic amongst the populace. Of course the medical scientists and drug companies have been known to be wrong.
At the end of the day we have to work on a herd mentality when it comes to health issues and there are risks either way Measles v Autism. My view after listening to all the arguments is to go for single jabs (Especially if it is for boys). This way you cut down the risks both ways. The only problem is trying to find single jabs and obviously having to pay for them.
Measles is a killer but then in its own way so is Autism. Single jabs protect against measles Mumps and rubella and would eradicate most of the concerns over links to Autism/triple jabs.
Not really difficult to conclude I feel.
_angel_
.
As I think I posted before my two boys are autistic, one had the MMR and the other just the single jabs.
I don't know whether the MMR is a factor or not but was too nervous to 'chance it' anyway.
The single jabs are expensive but worth it. Definitely get them immunised one way or the other.
I don't know whether the MMR is a factor or not but was too nervous to 'chance it' anyway.
The single jabs are expensive but worth it. Definitely get them immunised one way or the other.
Red Faction
Allez Les Rouges
Maddalene said:
I think this is all that really needs to be said on the argument
Unimmunised children more likely to die AND infect others!
If you are sure (as i am) the mmr is safe- go for it
If you aren't sure - no-one should force you to do anything you think might harm your kids
go for the single jabs- but GET IMMUNISED
KeeperofDragons
Crazy dragon lady
A lot of concern among doctors regarding the single jabs is that as these are spaced out illness can delay the next jab in line & there may be a case of having to start the cycle again. This happened with my son with one of his jabs that used to be given in 3 spaced doses.
KoD
KoD
No-one has touched on any of the arguments I have made, except to dismiss them out of hand. After showing that they were echoed by an immensely experienced paediatrician they have simply been ignored.
Why does the media hype up the MMR vs. single jabs debate? Because it is a complete red herring - either way, the cult of vaccination (and it is such a cult), supported by business interests whose turnovers dwarf corporations like McDonalds, is supported.
The real issue is vaccines vs. no vaccines. That so many think the latter proposition unthinkable to investigate shows how successfully programmed we have become.
Why does the media hype up the MMR vs. single jabs debate? Because it is a complete red herring - either way, the cult of vaccination (and it is such a cult), supported by business interests whose turnovers dwarf corporations like McDonalds, is supported.
The real issue is vaccines vs. no vaccines. That so many think the latter proposition unthinkable to investigate shows how successfully programmed we have become.
editor
hiraethified
FFS: JUST LOOK AT THE BONKERS SITES YOU ARE LINKING TO!DrJazzz said:
You're shoving your oar into a thread where parents - yes, those people with real living kids - are discussing something that's of real importance to them and all you can can do is post up ill-informed drivel from laughable sources.
That www.the7thfire.com site flogs ludicrous 'dream catcher kits' and no responsible parent would trust their kids' health on the fruitloop cod-hippy shite spouted by these nutters:
Bonkers. Nonsense.
editor
hiraethified
It gets worse!DrJazzz said:
That site is full of fucking UFO drivel and flogs books on 'mind control'.
I sincerely hope that if you ever have a child the mother stops you gambling with its health by consulting the fucking charlatans on these ludicrous sites.
Look at this fucking barking shite from that site: The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave
And look at this! Totally fruitloop!
Known Types of Aliens and Races
Helloooooo?
Fruitloop people?!
Reality's thataway --->
editor
hiraethified
You can refer me to as many of your posts as you like, but if you're going to steam into a serious thread about the welfare of children and post up advice spawned from fucking moronic conspiraloon UFO sites, I'm going to remain on hand to let posters know the truth about your sources.DrJazzz said:
It may all be part of an exciting obsession with conspiracies for you, but some people look to this site for grown up, intelligent advice on subjects that concern them deeply.
And as such, I intend to remind them about the complete lack of credibility of the dream-catching, mind controlling, UFO-obsessed, Alpha Draconian-babbling shite you keep sourcing your nonsense from.
Do you believe in Alpha Draconians by the way?
DrJazzz said:
And I refer you to my post no. 65
AND back to this thread where you took offence or was that the easy way out?
(note from editor: URL changed to stop users having to log back in to view thread- how come you're still using the old numeric address?!)
Edit to add: not to sure how that happened. Browser (Safari) isssues?
As for Dr. Robert Mendelsohn unlike Scheibner and Obomsawim he appears to have more than one paper, though I shall point out that he has around 20 odd.
Twenty papers throughout a research career really is not that impressive and further hardly any of them are cited by anyone else, not a good sign as to thier quality or impact.
Anyway to get to the *real issue*, the most important one. Not one of those papers, not a single one is on the dangers of vaccinations. They mainly are on fibrosis his area of expertise.
<waits for the expected "they couldn’t publish because it is against the medical Establishment" fucking tedium that you will inevitably spout back>
Twenty papers throughout a research career really is not that impressive and further hardly any of them are cited by anyone else, not a good sign as to thier quality or impact.
Anyway to get to the *real issue*, the most important one. Not one of those papers, not a single one is on the dangers of vaccinations. They mainly are on fibrosis his area of expertise.
<waits for the expected "they couldn’t publish because it is against the medical Establishment" fucking tedium that you will inevitably spout back>
He is a vastly experienced paediatrician.
Which of his comments do you take issue with? I wish we could actually debate facts, rather than judge arguments by how high in the church someone is. And yes, denounce Jesus and you won't get to speak from the pulpit. Dr. Mendelsohn confirms in his article that to question the vaccination paradigm is 'heresy'.
The cold, hard, facts show that measles was all but completely tamed before the advent of vaccination and the credit given to measles vaccination just doesn't add up. I am not aware of anyone disputing the statistics I have linked to for this. If anyone does, I suggest they find out what the 'real' ones are; after all, surely the pro-vaccine sites will be keen to have them?
Which of his comments do you take issue with? I wish we could actually debate facts, rather than judge arguments by how high in the church someone is. And yes, denounce Jesus and you won't get to speak from the pulpit. Dr. Mendelsohn confirms in his article that to question the vaccination paradigm is 'heresy'.
The cold, hard, facts show that measles was all but completely tamed before the advent of vaccination and the credit given to measles vaccination just doesn't add up. I am not aware of anyone disputing the statistics I have linked to for this. If anyone does, I suggest they find out what the 'real' ones are; after all, surely the pro-vaccine sites will be keen to have them?
Which of his words do you take issue with? And which of the facts about measles do you take issue with? Where letting things into our bloodstream is concerned it is absolutely vital that we are able to investigate all the facts, and are not bullied into obeying an apparent authority. Otherwise there is no such thing as 'informed consent'. Your last post is an attempt at silencing discussion by such bullying.
So far, I go with the arguments presented by anti-vaccinists because I find them well made and supported by statistics, and the philosophy that putting toxic matter into one's bloodstream is very likely something to be concerned about accords with my personal health experiences. Whereas the arguments put on behalf of vaccines are extremely shaky at best.
So far, I go with the arguments presented by anti-vaccinists because I find them well made and supported by statistics, and the philosophy that putting toxic matter into one's bloodstream is very likely something to be concerned about accords with my personal health experiences. Whereas the arguments put on behalf of vaccines are extremely shaky at best.
DrJazzz said:
Therein lies your answer Dr.Jazzz. Where are these facts? I do not see a single scientific study that has been peer reviewed presented by any of these ‘vaccine experts’ that you keep bringing up.
They are NOT facts. How are they facts? Because an expert paediatrician tells me? I am an expert in analytical neuroscience and neuroproteomics. If I were to publish a book tomorrow on how aids is transferred by mosquitos would YOU believe ME? You keep on harping on about your scientific training and gushing remarks on ‘vastly’, ‘immensely’ and ‘not to be sneezed at’ experts but the cold hard fact that I see is that not one of them has presented a scientific study.
Dr.Jazzz, I am a scientist and I do know what a good scientific study is and turning the tables slightly, I find your remarks such as “...vastly experienced paediatrician” and “cold, hard, facts...” equally patronising.
Look long and hard at the cartoon in post no. 65. I find it rather apt.
invisibleplanet
porter des cornes
DrJazzz said:
You are clearly off your rocker, Dr Jazz.
You haven't mentioned that the Japanese Vaccinations were not of the same 'type' as the UK vaccinations.
You haven't mentioned the threat of developing IRT after being exposed to measles virus in unvaccinated or partially vaccinated children.
You haven't taken into account that causal relations between mmr and autism are shaky at best, given that autism could be on the increase due to an increase in other factors - diet, environment: pollution/pesticides or some hitherto undiscovered genetic factor inherited from both parents.
Your scaremongering is outrageous and your links dire.
Mrs M's "why did I refuse MMR?" link again for those who don't/won't pay to read (cached).
invisibleplanet said:
I think it's worth repeating my post #69...
me said:pk said:Autism has been around for far longer than the MMR has, no matter what you may have read on this thread thus far...
Indeed it has.
From http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/autism/incidence.htm; oh, and please do pay attention, there's a baseline incidence of 100 not shown at the bottom of the graph (left-hand scale).
(Edited to add: observe how the rate in the US study - the upper line/left-hand scale - takes off after 1972.)
Why would the incidence be rising, though? I propose these much more tinfoil-hat friendly lines of investigation/confabulation:
- Mobile phones - first call made in 1972
- Other microprocessors - first arcade game widespread in 1972
- Yet others - first HP calculator, 1972
- Political conspiracy - Watergate 1972
- First recombinant DNA with bits from different species maybe they leaked and spread?
- Rock'n'roll - Stones' first 5k rig in... you guessed?
...mainly because today I had lunch with a very senior scientist who was tickled pink by the idea of blaming HP calculators
Similar threads
