LOL - Now its perfumes that cause autism - Page 2 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 54 Old 04-17-2013, 01:15 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

Oh, and you could also use all the different studies published at the Autism Science Foundation: http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/autismandvaccines.html which they use to conclude no link. 

 

Oh looky look, guess who is on the Board of Directors of the Autism Science Foundation, none other than millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit. No wonder they conclude "no link".

Marnica and BeckyBird like 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 online now  
#32 of 54 Old 04-17-2013, 01:20 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)

Well people reading the thread can decide for themselves about the tens of peer reviewed papers showing no link between autism and vaccines authored by I suspect hundreds of scientists (OK so I'll admit here I've counted neither the number of papers or the number of authors - this was an estimate on my part, I'll edit with correct numbers if someone is that bothered to check). Should this all be dismissed because it's linked to by an organization with Dr. Paul Offit on the board, and because Dr. Paul Offit made some money out of a vaccine he developed which saves hundreds of lives in the developing world and prevents hundreds of children from suffering from nasty tummy bugs in the developed world. 

 

I know what I think. I think I probably know what most of the people who post here regularly think too. 


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  
#33 of 54 Old 04-17-2013, 03:42 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Well people reading the thread can decide for themselves about the tens of peer reviewed (industry-funded and industry-tweaked) papers showing noset up to hide the link between autism and vaccines authored by I suspect hundreds of scientists well-paid Pharma employees (OK so I'll admit here I've counted neither the number of papers or the number of authors - this was an estimate on my part, I'll edit with correct numbers if someone is that bothered to check).


Fixed that for ya!

It always amazes me when vaccine defenders point to "peer review" as though it means something these days. How on earth does publishing a {Pharma-funded, Pharma-directed, Pharma-interpreted, and Pharma-marketed} "study" in a Pharma-funded journal carry any weight?

Connect the dots, and you have the industry saying that its own corrupt "peer-reviewed" journals prove what a trustworthy industry it is, and that we should all buy their products for life.
Taximom5 is online now  
#34 of 54 Old 04-17-2013, 03:48 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

That's fine. Well just use all the peer reviewed science which says there's no link between autism and vaccines. 

 

Like this: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13164

 

"It finds that while no vaccine is 100 percent safe, very few adverse events are shown to be caused by vaccines. In addition, the evidence shows that vaccines do not cause several conditions. For example, the MMR vaccine is not associated with autism or childhood diabetes. Also, the DTaP vaccine is not associated with diabetes and the influenza vaccine given as a shot does not exacerbate asthma."

 

This just says MMR is not associated with autism.  I am not sure I agree, but even if I did - it says MMR not vaccines.  


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  
#35 of 54 Old 04-17-2013, 09:18 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
If the MMR is not associated with autism, why did the US Department of Health and Human Services recently admit and compensate 2 cases of vaccine-induced autism, in addition to Hannah Poling's case?
applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#36 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:18 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)

I know you like the Cochrane reports Taximon (or at least you like some of them). I already linked the one on this post which shows no link between MMR and autism: 

 

 

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004407/using-the-combined-vaccine-for-protection-of-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

Quote:
We could assess no significant association between MMR immunisation and the following conditions: autism, asthma, leukaemia, hay fever, type 1 diabetes, gait disturbance, Crohn's disease, demyelinating diseases, or bacterial or viral infections.

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 


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  
#37 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 06:07 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 

 

Where are you getting this from? It sounds like you are repeating a rant from Orac or some other skeptic blog.


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 online now  
#38 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 06:24 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 

This sounds really callous.   What would a mistrial entail - people going to court AGAIN?  Possibly losing the money they were granted?  All for what - the vindication of pro-vaxxers?????  

 

If courts used the Wakefield study I sincerely doubt it was weighed too heavily.  The study had 12 kids, which has obvious limitations.  

BeckyBird likes this.

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  
#39 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 12:03 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 prosciencemum View Post

I know you like the Cochrane reports Taximon (or at least you like some of them). I already linked the one on this post which shows no link between MMR and autism: 

 

 

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004407/using-the-combined-vaccine-for-protection-of-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 

dizzy.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  
#40 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 02:53 PM
 
rachelsmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,559
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

I know you like the Cochrane reports Taximon (or at least you like some of them). I already linked the one on this post which shows no link between MMR and autism: 

 

 

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004407/using-the-combined-vaccine-for-protection-of-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 


The finding of "no significant association"  doesn't mean the court cases got it wrong.  The courts were judging whether individual human beings were damaged, not whether they were statistically significant.

rachelsmama is offline  
#41 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:05 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It still doesn't rise to the level of scientific evidence. Those rulings are also being misrepresented.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#42 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:08 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It still doesn't rise to the level of scientific evidence. Those rulings are also being misrepresented.

So scientific evidence is more imporant than human beings? 


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 online now  
#43 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Huh?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#44 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:28 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

I know you like the Cochrane reports Taximon (or at least you like some of them). I already linked the one on this post which shows no link between MMR and autism: 

 

 

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD004407/using-the-combined-vaccine-for-protection-of-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

 

Court cases are not the same as scientific evidence. And in fact I think several of those rulings relied on results from Wakefields now debunked and discredited 1998 paper which has been retracted by Lancet. Perhaps they should declare a mistrial and try again.... 

Why, prosciencemum, did you misread the report?  Or did you just not bother to read it?

It actually says,  "We could assess no significant association between MMR immunisation and the following conditions: autism, asthma, leukaemia, hay fever, type 1 diabetes, gait disturbance, Crohn's disease, demyelinating diseases, or bacterial or viral infections. The methodological quality of many of the included studies made it difficult to generalise their results."

 

That's VASTLY different from saying "these studies show no link."   THEY COULD NOT ASSESS WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A LINK BECAUSE OF THE POOR METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY OF THE STUDIES.

Taximom5 is online now  
#45 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 03:44 PM
 
Katie8681's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Northern Cali
Posts: 676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
That means the null hypothesis- that there is no relationship between MMR and autism, asthma, etc- stands.

At home amongst the redwoods treehugger.gif with my husband and my son, born 7/5/11 familybed1.gif  Instant CNM, just add caffix.gif !

Katie8681 is offline  
#46 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 07:46 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
No, it means that they couldn't properly assess because of poor quality studies. That doesn't prove that there's no relationship.

But nice try.
applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#47 of 54 Old 04-18-2013, 10:32 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
It's the way scientists say there's no link. If there's no link they will continue to find no evidence for a link forever.

For example - I can find no evidence that there's a link between the cuteness of kittens and the rate of autism.

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  
#48 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 06:36 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
No, actually, that's not how scientists say there's no link. I suggest you talk to one.

The researchers, epidemiologists, and attorneys I have talked to all say that studies are set up to show whatever conclusion the funding organization wants, but that they have to be very careful with how they word things so it doesn't come back to bite them later.

Legally, "we see no link" carries a different meaning than,"we could assess no link....because of poor study quality," or "we were unable to assess a link...because of poor study quality." And the epidemiologists have no control over the media (fed by the pharmaceutical dollars, and therefore by Pharma agenda) twisting that into, " this proves that there's no link!"

By the way, thank you for illustrating the "Twist and Spin" so nicely. You've done a beautiful job of illustrating how study conclusions are twisted to "show" something that isn't there at all.
Mirzam and rachelsmama like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#49 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 09:04 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)

Not that it's a competition, but I'd bet a lot of money I've talked to more scientists than you have. Most of my friends are scientists, as are all of the people I work with. I even married a scientists. Oh and I am one..... 

 

Continue to think they're hiding something if you like. Please stop claiming I'm trying to spin things though. It's getting really old. 


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  
#50 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 11:02 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Not that it's a competition, but I'd bet a lot of money I've talked to more scientists than you have. 

 

Nice, mature response, there.

 

 

 Please stop claiming I'm trying to spin things though. It's getting really old. 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

You are cherry picking the result Taximon. I do wonder if you are doing this deliberately to misinform, or if you're just parroting something from an anti-vax site which has posted it to deliberately misinform.

 

 

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...2whistle.gif

Taximom5 is online now  
#51 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 11:08 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You can't statistically prove there is no link. All you can do is say you didn't find one. That's the strongest statement an epidemiological study can make. Anyone who's telling you different is misleading you.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#52 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 11:28 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

You can't statistically prove there is no link. All you can do is say you didn't find one. That's the strongest statement an epidemiological study can make. Anyone who's telling you different is misleading you.

What they all agree on is that, if Merck et al do not want anyone to find a link to problems with their products, they set up studies so that a link is not evident.

 

Vaccine manufacturer:  "Ho, hum, I don't want anyone to see that there is a link between vaccines and autism.  I'll set up a study, and before we even start, I'll eliminate all subjects who are at known higher risk of autism (family history of  autism, autoimmune disorders, seizures, learning disabilities, celiac disease, thyroid disorders, vitamin D deficiency, mitochondrial diosrders, etc)

 

Then, after the study has started, if children exhibit symptoms of autism, I'll exit them from the study, and say that they didn't complete the study.

 

Or, I'll put children with obvious symptoms of autism (but no official diagnosis) in my "control" group.


Oh, and I'll make sure my "control" group gets just as high a cumulative dose of thimerosal and aluminum as the "test" group, but we'll focus on something that we already know isn't related...like, umm...I know!  Antigens!  We'll focus on antigens!"

 

And looky here!  My study shows NO relationship between vaccine antigens and autism!  

Pharma-funded medical journal: "No link between vaccines and autism"

 

Pharma-funded news media:  "Another incontrovertible proof that vaccines are COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO AUTISM!!
 

 

Anyone who's telling you that this isn't standard procedure is misleading you.

applejuice, Marnica and BeckyBird like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#53 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 05:42 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)

Let's get this straight: Wakefield's paper was a collection of CASE REPORTS. That is all it ever was, all it ever claimed to be. Journalist/Hack Brian Deer (not a scientist in any way) led the attack on Wakefield. Brian Deer has been shown to have significant ties to Rupert Murdoch who has significant ties to OMGosh: Merck!

 

Anyway, I am 100% sure that NO Vax Court awards have had anything to do with Wakefield's retracted Lancet paper, as all the awards have happened SEVERAL years after the retraction . . . 

Marnica and BeckyBird like this.
dinahx is offline  
#54 of 54 Old 04-19-2013, 05:44 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)

And it is fundamental to my moral, ethical, and religous belief that there is no HUMAN CHILD that is 'not statistically significant. KThxBi!

dinahx 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