Dr Andrew Moulden "What You Were Never Told About Vaccines"

[SuburbanHippie]

http://vactruth.com/2009/07/21/dr-an...bout-vaccines/

I'm not sure if this has been posted before (as the interview was published in late July). This is a great read!

[bbrandonsmom]

I only skimmed through so far. Very detailed. I wish when people say that other dr's agree, they would be listed or comment. It's like they're hiding. Especially as he stated they all agree 100% with him. Are there more articles about this making the news?

[ccohenou]

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...nt=channellink

This article describes some of the evidence we would expect to see if Moulden's hypotheses are correct. That is an important component of evaluating new claims.
Not interested in commentary on either author ad hominem.

[newmum35]

Great, indeed! I love this guy and his work. Revolutionary. I hope we've reached the tipping point. Love him and everything he stands for

[Scattershoot]

Originally Posted by newmum35

Great, indeed! I love this guy and his work. Revolutionary. I hope we've reached the tipping point. Love him and everything he stands for

I agree. Dr. Moulden is a special man. I can't imagine what he has been through on both a personal and professional level. It will be years before his research makes it through the court system with all the stalling they are doing, but the truth will always prevail.

[Cristiaz]

Awesome! And I loved the section on how reactions can be delayed because so many do not believe this. I do. You can get a vaccine as a kid and nothing happens until your 40, or you can get a vaccine that day and have convulsions that night. With all the books I've read, this just makes sense to me. Now, with his scientific input, its written in a way people will believe it.

[LisaSedai]

ccohenou

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...nt=channellink

This article describes some of the evidence we would expect to see if Moulden's hypotheses are correct. That is an important component of evaluating new claims.

(SNIP)1.There should be absolutely no evidence of autism before vaccination.
2.There should be evidence of alterations in blood flow consistent with microvascular strokes
3.In autistic children who die, sectioning of the brain should reveal evidence of vascular inflammation and small strokes.(SNIP)

http://www.vaccinerights.com/forensics.html

(SNIP)Baby M was a healthy child. At 15 months of age, this child received an MMR vaccination...A cerebral perfusion scan in hospital (while the patient was intubated) revealed no blood flow/perfusion to the brain, despite normal heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation (PaO2).....(from autopsy)“Although not well developed, there is evidence of incipient, acute, Hypoxic/Ischemic neuronal injury in patchy distribution in all (brain) sections. Edema and mild autolysis are also seen in patchy distribution.
“There is mild pervivascular infiltration of mononucleated chronic inflammatory cells around rare intraparenchymal vessels.” (SNIP)

Not an autistic child, just a vaccine-killed one

[Scattershoot]

Originally Posted by LisaSedai

ccohenou

(SNIP)1.There should be absolutely no evidence of autism before vaccination.
2.There should be evidence of alterations in blood flow consistent with microvascular strokes
3.In autistic children who die, sectioning of the brain should reveal evidence of vascular inflammation and small strokes.(SNIP)(

1. Since the diagnostic criteria for autism is found in a mental health book that requires no real diagnostic testing (outside of observor opinion) for the diagnosis, this 1st question doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Beyond that, autism is regarded as a spectrum with a variation of "symptoms." Beyond even that, there is a difference between those children with classic regression (those healthy babies who were doing just fine before the shots and immediately fell apart physically and developmentally afterward) and those individuals who are socially idiosynchratic. This 2nd group is often the group people are referring to when it is said "autism" existed before vaccination. Beyond even that, who is to say that other medical "treatments," such as the administration of mercury and arsenic, couldn't have caused these issues long before the diagnosis autism was invented?

2. Does the medical profession even look for real time alteration in blood flow in autistic children? Hard to find what you don't look for. Where is the data for premeasure and postmeasure proving there is NO blood flow alteration? Dr. Moulden does actually show blood flow alteration because he looked for it. Also, what if the impairment in blood flow is temporary, the damage occurs, then goes back to a somewhat normal state that is not obvious.

3. Again, it's hard to find something not measured. Also, as stated in #2, does the vascular inflammation have to remain long after the initial assault. If you are hit by a car and develop vascular inflammation in the brain, but then the inflammation subsides and you still die a couple weeks later, does that prove getting hit by a car did not cause the death?