As i said I was skimming... do you see a chart showing children broken down by number of antigens received? Is there any children listen in a zero group?(i am on my tablet and not going to attempt to open the pdf on here.)
New study shows no connection between full vaccine schedule and autism. - Page 2
Still waiting for an answer. After all, you DID (rather snarkily) say,
I'm sure folks will come along and explain how that's not what it means at all
And then you admitted that both the title of your thread and the article did not match the conclusion of the study itself:
Yeah when I wrote the original thread title, Kathy, the full study hadn't come out yet I was going based on the article. The study is definitely limited in scope to the concept of "too many too soon".
So what would you like to do now? Would you like to change the title of your thread?
And do you have any comment on the fact that the study ADMITTED the possibility that some autism cases may be related to vaccines? "It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposures in infancy, including vaccines..."
Or do you prefer to leave the title of your thread as is, which may mislead readers in to wrongly believing that the "new study shows no connection between the full autism schedule and autism?"
Okay... on page 4 I am seeing three charts called Distribution of total cumulative antigen exposure among asd cases and controls, by age range
0 - 3 months there were 48 and 42 percent in the 0-25 range, next when they include up to 7 months it drops to 0 and 1 percents, and lastly when it groups 0 to 2 years the number in the zero to 25 group is totally zero.
So what am I missing? Where would unvaccinated children receive antigens that would place them in higher level groups by the age of two?
Dr. Sear's response to the study:
I found it quite interesting.
I've often heard about how all the unintellegncia in the US are listening to NPR (sarcasm).
Actually I agree this study seems a bit disappointing. But I also think no matter how convincing it was we'd be here debating it in the same way.
You know, you seem to need to have the last word. Really! Giving me permission to have an opinion that differs from yours! That comes across as ego-centric. Is that your intention? If not, consider allowing an opinion to be posted without comment, if you've already given your opinion. It's that kind of reply that gives the impression that you're getting paid. Just some friendly info.