New study shows no connection between full vaccine schedule and autism. - Page 5 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 148 Old 04-01-2013, 07:59 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So you'd rather see a study that looked just at the number of vaccines rather than antigens?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#122 of 148 Old 04-01-2013, 08:16 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

So you'd rather see a study that looked just at the number of vaccines rather than antigens?

You said people were concerned about too many too soon, and I agreed - but said I did not think (based on far too many internet conversations over the years) that antigens are what they are worried about.


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#123 of 148 Old 04-01-2013, 08:26 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So a study that looked at number of vaccines vs antigens would better address those concerns? Or still no?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#124 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 06:38 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

So a study that looked at number of vaccines vs antigens would better address those concerns? Or still no?

or how about vaccinated vs unvaccinated. Oh wait that's right..........nevermind eyesroll.gif

dalia and BeckyBird like this.

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#125 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 07:29 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

champagne.gif OT, but congrats Rrrrrachel you are MDC's poster of the month. Number 1! Top poster!  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is offline  
#126 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 07:37 AM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)

I'm not on the list :( 


               "Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses."

                ~Captain Hammer (j/k, it was Plato)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

beckybird is online now  
#127 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 09:07 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh good I get my bonus.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#128 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 09:41 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Oh good I get my bonus.

It shows admirable dedication to the cause of ridding MDC of anti-vaccine lies and misinformation, especially as you have a job and a toddler to take care of.

 

#WhereDoYouFindTheTime? wink1.gif


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is offline  
#129 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 11:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's not my goal at all, in all seriousness. I don't consider the stuff posted here lies.

My daughter did reach over and take my phone from me yesterday. Not my finest hour.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#130 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 12:05 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

That's not my goal at all, in all seriousness. I don't consider the stuff posted here lies.

My daughter did reach over and take my phone from me yesterday. Not my finest hour.

Just ignorance posted by the misguided???


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#131 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 12:22 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No, sincerely held beliefs of people who care very much about the health of their kids.
Turquesa likes this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#132 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 12:36 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

No, sincerely held beliefs of people who care very much about the health of their kids.

Yeah!  At last we agree on something joy.gif


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#133 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 01:10 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

That's not my goal at all, in all seriousness. I don't consider the stuff posted here lies.

My daughter did reach over and take my phone from me yesterday. Not my finest hour.

We are all wondering what your goal is, in all seriousness.

Taximom5 is offline  
#134 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 01:21 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My goal is to keep hearing what the arguments are against vaccination so I can keep reassessing them and be sure I continue to make the best choices for my family. I apparently take most of the posts around here more seriously than y'all think I do. I think the back and forth I get here is really valuable and not something I can get from reading blogs, etc.

Also, I'm not gonna lie I like discussion and debate for its own sake. I like a good compelling (issues based) argument that I can sink my teeth into and that will spur me on to do research. On a variety of topics but I guess this is one of them.
Imakcerka and prosciencemum like this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#135 of 148 Old 04-02-2013, 08:58 PM
 
JulieWojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Corpus Christi, Tx
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thats really good to hear!  Like Taximom said, I was wondering....

JulieWojo is offline  
#136 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 06:46 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

My goal is to keep hearing what the arguments are against vaccination so I can keep reassessing them and be sure I continue to make the best choices for my family. I apparently take most of the posts around here more seriously than y'all think I do. I think the back and forth I get here is really valuable and not something I can get from reading blogs, etc.

Also, I'm not gonna lie I like discussion and debate for its own sake. I like a good compelling (issues based) argument that I can sink my teeth into and that will spur me on to do research. On a variety of topics but I guess this is one of them.

I believe you  but I seem to remember reading in another thread in the mindful vaccination forum that you also get caught up at times in "being right". Perhaps that may play a role too? winky.gif


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#137 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 07:03 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,706
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Reading this thread I could speculate that a lengthy discussion of Rrrrrachels motivations has been started to avoid providing any real objections to the study which was the original topic.

Is it possible we could all agree we're all here because we care about the health of children and just return to the discussion?

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#138 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 07:12 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Reading this thread I could speculate that a lengthy discussion of Rrrrrachels motivations has been started to avoid providing any real objections to the study which was the original topic.

Is it possible we could all agree we're all here because we care about the health of children and just return to the discussion?

Plenty of real objections have been posted on this tread. No need for avoiding tactics.

 

But yes, we are all here for the health of our children. I would also say we some of us are also here for the health freedom rights for our selves and our children. Studies like this, which have been spun by the mainstream media into to something they are not, are most definitely a potential threat to those freedoms.


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is offline  
#139 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:42 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

The topic of the thread itself is totally misleading. Perhaps intentionally. The actual paper is entitled: "Increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not associated with risk of autism," 

 

So not Vaccines, but Proteins & Polysaccharides in Vaccines, which didn't even stop the JPeds authors from misleading folks in their editorial about this article, which is entitled "The Risk of Autism Is Not Increased by "Too Many Vaccines Too Soon" which the study did not evaluate, it evaluated 'too many proteins & polysaccharides (antigens) too soon' . . . All these verbal slights of hand undermine informed consent right at the source, before it is further undermined by outlets like MSNBC & NPR with have an agenda on this issue that is NOT to inform & stimulate debate, but to increase compliance.

 

I have heard NPR overtly and clearly lie about Vax info that can be so easily fact checked on the Pkg Inserts (last year I heard them say the effectiveness of DTaP was 98%, now the effectiveness after 4 doses varies by brand (and also component, it is more effective against T than aP, for example) but it NEVER approaches anything resembling 98% from any manufacturer) . . . I would consider it a simple mistake if NPR didn't do things like this so consistently around this topic alone. 

 

That is not science, that is something other than science . . . Call it governance, public health, public policy, but it is NOT science. And if we live in a time that calls this type of study and media behavior 'science' then that is scarier than 100 vaccines. Because it signals that the ProVax side has become so enraptured with DOGMA & a Pharma can do no wrong ethos, that they have lost all allegiance to SCIENCE and a spirit of inquiry . . . 

 

Science is a spirit of accuracy, informed consent, and inquiry . . . So for a scientific article on any other topic, the actual article would be titled 'Are increasing exposures to antibody stimulating proteins and polysaccharides associated with a risk of Autism Spectrum Disorders?'. But since the study's authors & data contributors had already made up their minds ahead of time (a priori) the title does reflect their true heart and intention . . . Insofar that it is a declarative title. Look @ scientific literature, you will find that Vax literature is very unique: the studies are held to a lower standard (no true placebos, rarely if ever blinding) and there are more declarative titles like this and more non-study, single author 'position papers' . . . 

 

If I had to make a decision ONLY on the behavior of the two camps, in terms of a spirit of inquiry and accuracy, my decision would be very very clear @ this point . . . 

dinahx is offline  
#140 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:48 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

My goal is to keep hearing what the arguments are against vaccination so I can keep reassessing them and be sure I continue to make the best choices for my family. 

Of the nearly 3,000 posts you have made here, the vast majority have been about vaccines.

 

I have yet to see you reassess a single vaccine.

Mirzam likes this.
Taximom5 is offline  
#141 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:52 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

The topic of the thread itself is totally misleading. Perhaps intentionally. The actual paper is entitled: "Increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not associated with risk of autism," 

 

So not Vaccines, but Proteins & Polysaccharides in Vaccines, which didn't even stop the JPeds authors from misleading folks in their editorial about this article, which is entitled "The Risk of Autism Is Not Increased by "Too Many Vaccines Too Soon" which the study did not evaluate, it evaluated 'too many proteins & polysaccharides (antigens) too soon' . . . All these verbal slights of hand undermine informed consent right at the source, before it is further undermined by outlets like MSNBC & NPR with have an agenda on this issue that is NOT to inform & stimulate debate, but to increase compliance.

 

I have heard NPR overtly and clearly lie about Vax info that can be so easily fact checked on the Pkg Inserts (last year I heard them say the effectiveness of DTaP was 98%, now the effectiveness after 4 doses varies by brand (and also component, it is more effective against T than aP, for example) but it NEVER approaches anything resembling 98% from any manufacturer) . . . I would consider it a simple mistake if NPR didn't do things like this so consistently around this topic alone. 

 

That is not science, that is something other than science . . . Call it governance, public health, public policy, but it is NOT science. And if we live in a time that calls this type of study and media behavior 'science' then that is scarier than 100 vaccines. Because it signals that the ProVax side has become so enraptured with DOGMA & a Pharma can do no wrong ethos, that they have lost all allegiance to SCIENCE and a spirit of inquiry . . . 

 

Science is a spirit of accuracy, informed consent, and inquiry . . . So for a scientific article on any other topic, the actual article would be titled 'Are increasing exposures to antibody stimulating proteins and polysaccharides associated with a risk of Autism Spectrum Disorders?'. But since the study's authors & data contributors had already made up their minds ahead of time (a priori) the title does reflect their true heart and intention . . . Insofar that it is a declarative title. Look @ scientific literature, you will find that Vax literature is very unique: the studies are held to a lower standard (no true placebos, rarely if ever blinding) and there are more declarative titles like this and more non-study, single author 'position papers' . . . 

 

If I had to make a decision ONLY on the behavior of the two camps, in terms of a spirit of inquiry and accuracy, my decision would be very very clear @ this point . . . 

 

 

This is quite possibly the best post EVER on this forum.yeahthat.gif

dinahx likes this.
Taximom5 is offline  
#142 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:55 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Of the nearly 3,000 posts you have made here, the vast majority have been about vaccines.

I have yet to see you reassess a single vaccine.

Well you haven't been very convincing.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#143 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:57 PM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

The topic of the thread itself is totally misleading. Perhaps intentionally. The actual paper is entitled: "Increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not associated with risk of autism,"
 


So not Vaccines, but Proteins & Polysaccharides in Vaccines, which didn't even stop the JPeds authors from misleading folks in their editorial about this article, which is entitled "The Risk of Autism Is Not Increased by "Too Many Vaccines Too Soon" which the study did not evaluate, it evaluated 'too many proteins & polysaccharides (antigens) too soon' . . . All these verbal slights of hand undermine informed consent right at the source, before it is further undermined by outlets like MSNBC & NPR with have an agenda on this issue that is NOT to inform & stimulate debate, but to increase compliance.


I have heard NPR overtly and clearly lie about Vax info that can be so easily fact checked on the Pkg Inserts (last year I heard them say the effectiveness of DTaP was 98%, now the effectiveness after 4 doses varies by brand (and also component, it is more effective against T than aP, for example) but it NEVER approaches anything resembling 98% from any manufacturer) . . . I would consider it a simple mistake if NPR didn't do things like this so consistently around this topic alone. 


That is not science, that is something other than science . . . 
Call it governance, public health, public policy, but it is NOT science. And if we live in a time that calls this type of study and media behavior 'science' then that is scarier than 100 vaccines. Because it signals that the ProVax side has become so enraptured with DOGMA & a Pharma can do no wrong ethos, that they have lost all allegiance to SCIENCE and a spirit of inquiry . . . 


Science is a spirit of accuracy, informed consent, and inquiry . . . So for a scientific article on any other topic, the actual article would be titled 'Are increasing exposures to antibody stimulating proteins and polysaccharides associated with a risk of Autism Spectrum Disorders?'. But since the study's authors & data contributors had already made up their minds ahead of time (
a priori) 
the title does reflect their true heart and intention . . . Insofar that it is a declarative title. Look @ scientific literature, you will find that Vax literature is very unique: the studies are held to a lower standard (no true placebos, rarely if ever blinding) and there are more declarative titles like this and more non-study, single author 'position papers' . . . 


If I had to make a decision ONLY on the behavior of the two camps, in terms of a spirit of inquiry and accuracy, my decision would be very very clear @ this point . . . 

Excellent points.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
#144 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 03:58 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Dinah, as some background, a similar study was previously done that counted number of DOSES. It found no relationship. It was supposed that counting antigens might be more accurate, since vaccines varied greatly (at the time at least) in the number of antigens they contain. Both of these variables - doses and antigens - are stand ins for "the schedule." If you want to study it you have to quantify it somehow.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#145 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 04:47 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

Vaccines and Autism - Answering the Wrong Questions

 

 

 

Quote:
Due to the large amount of antigens in the old DTP vaccines, the study is really a comparison of the antigen load between the old DTP and new DTaP vaccines.  The overwhelming number of antigens in the DTP would make any impact of any other vaccines irrelevant in terms of categorizing the children as low vs. high exposure.  The authors also knew that the DTP was being phased out starting in the early 1990’s so antigen load was decreasing even as autism prevalence was going up.  There was no reason to do this study since these children were born in 1994-1999 and the trends were going in opposite directions.
BeckyBird likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is offline  
#146 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 04:50 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I know this is off topic, but I'm really bothered by how that website characterizes children with autism.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#147 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 06:12 PM
 
TCMoulton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 4,640
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Of the nearly 3,000 posts you have made here, the vast majority have been about vaccines.

I have yet to see you reassess a single vaccine.

Taxi I casually paged through your post history since you joined last spring and in the 30+ pages I browsed I found only maybe 5 posts outside of the Vaccination forums. Seems like you are equally as passionate as Rrrachel since you haven't changed your stance on any vaxes either.
TCMoulton is offline  
#148 of 148 Old 04-03-2013, 06:23 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


Taxi I casually paged through your post history since you joined last spring and in the 30+ pages I browsed I found only maybe 5 posts outside of the Vaccination forums. Seems like you are equally as passionate as Rrrachel since you haven't changed your stance on any vaxes either.

I'm not the one claiming to be here to hear arguments against my position "so that I can keep reassessing my position to make the bast decision for my family."

 

i also don't claim to enjoy a good debate.

 

I've always been up front with the reason I'm here.

Taximom5 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off