If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Clinton wrote:
Mark Probert wrote: wrote: Mark Probert wrote: I would readily go through the same series, adjusted for weight, as a newborn, assuming that I would take the shots at the same rate of the newborn and that I would clear the ethyl mercury at the same rate. The weight and rate I am sure would be no problem to researchers. The "clear the ethyl mercury at the same rate" is not clear. Do you believe that all infants are equally good at clearing the ehyl mercury? I do know that infants rapidly clear ethyl mercury. In fact, there was one study where the researchers underestimated the clearance rate so much that the rapidity of clearance nearly blew the study. I'd like to see how they measured that! Chemical analysis of feces. YOu make it sound like Hg is vitamen C! Please read for comprehension. And, it is not elemental mercury. Even so what is more important is where the ethyl Hg that wasn't cleared ended up! What makes you think that there was any left behind and not cleared in the stools? And of course some infants could have an immune reaction which wouldn't even depend on the amount absorbed in the brain. Who is more likely to have an immune system inflammatory reaction to a toxin, an infant or an adult? Good question. I am allegic to things today that I never had a problem with before. Based on that, I would *guess* an adult. However, one person is not a basis for reaching such a conclusion. As for Sweden and Denmark I assume they have not used thimersol for years so I would ask what their autisim rates are right now. As they were when used. Add Canada. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Probert wrote: Clinton wrote: Mark Probert wrote: wrote: Mark Probert wrote: I'd like to see how they measured that! Chemical analysis of feces. Sounds problematic. 100% ends up in feces? Wasn't it quackwatch itself that also said Hg fecal testing is unreliable or am I mistaken? How do you know the concentration is uniform, etc.. And of course there would be no way to know if 1 in 100 absorbed less even if these tests were accurate. YOu make it sound like Hg is vitamen C! Please read for comprehension. And, it is not elemental mercury. Even so what is more important is where the ethyl Hg that wasn't cleared ended up! What makes you think that there was any left behind and not cleared in the stools? For one thing other studies posted here indicating absorbtion in the brain. For another the nature of Hg. I've seen no evidence that ethyl Hg is like vitamen C And of course some infants could have an immune reaction which wouldn't even depend on the amount absorbed in the brain. Who is more likely to have an immune system inflammatory reaction to a toxin, an infant or an adult? Good question. I am allegic to things today that I never had a problem with before. Based on that, I would *guess* an adult. If you have an allergic reaction reaction to something you sneeze. If a small amount of a chemical is given to a pregnant woment at the right time the baby might be born without arms. Anyone can see that any type of immune reaction in a developing nervous system is more harmful, EVEN if the frequency was less. However, one person is not a basis for reaching such a conclusion. As for Sweden and Denmark I assume they have not used thimersol for years so I would ask what their autisim rates are right now. As they were when used. Add Canada. That does not answer the question. What are the absolute rates of Autism in Denmark and Sweden right now compared to the US. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Probert wrote:
I am not *insisting* it is safe. I am saying that the amounts used are safe. Is that all the difference? People vary in their chemical makeup. Obviously, the amounts are safe to 166 out of 167 children. If the difference between safe and non-safe is a factor of 20, it's way too close for normal individual variation, because a normal bell curve would put some infants in danger range. So you should have been willing to take 20 times (relatively) the infant dosage, if you wanted to do a fair comparison. Also, cleanup abilities among different infants would be different, so you should have been willing to not worry about your cleanup ability. Instead, you have all these hedges. Of course, it would be very safe (166/167) to you to try out the infant dosage. At least 20 times that would be a realistic trial dosage for soneone insisting the *dosage* was safe. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Probert wrote:
http://weldon.house.gov/UploadedFile...donMDonIOM.pdf It covers the ground from a reasonable perspective. Note that in his personal past career as a doctor, Weldon has vaccinated thousands. Was Weldon aware of the protective effect? I doubt it. Let me quote from Weldon: "It appears to me, not only as a member of Congress but also as a physician, that some officials within the CDC's National Immunization Program, the NIP, may be more interested in a public relations campaign than getting to the truth about Thimerosal." "All of these studies were conducted by researchers with an interest in not finding an association." "They did find associations, but they changed the study and most of the associations disappeared." "the lead coauthor was forced to admit that many children in the study were too young to have received an autism diagnosis. He went on to admit that the study also likely mislabeled young autistic children as having other disabilities, thus masking the number of children with autism." "The news media to a large degree took the CDC's spin hook, line and sinker. Largely they chose not to read the study itself." "The numbers in Hviid's study were skewed..." Does it sound like he is the uncritically trusting or biased type, to just swallow the "protective effect" thing, hook, line and sinker? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Just don't vaccinate at all, mercury-based preservative or not. Keep
yourself and your children healthy. Look into natural health methods. It can be done! |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Majusmaximum wrote:
Just don't vaccinate at all, mercury-based preservative or not. Keep yourself and your children healthy. Look into natural health methods. It can be done! I am willing to believe it may be possible that immune systems could be made stronger without vaccinations. However, I don't see why vaccination itself is not "natural". A basic vaccination is no different from accidentally getting cut and rubbing against an infected tree or leaf or animal or something. Over a long period of time and trial and error, we have developed a very effective method of health called vaccination. There is no reason to throw away the whole method just because the system has become overly money driven and corrupt, and mistakes are covered up instead of admitted and fixed. Not that I am against alternative research -- if someone develops an effective method of making the immune system stronger, that would certainly be a very good thing. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Majusmaximum" wrote in message lkaboutparenting.com... Just don't vaccinate at all, mercury-based preservative or not. Keep yourself and your children healthy. Look into natural health methods. It can be done! Prove it. In the mean time: http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate...l/12317585.htm http://www.thejakartapost.com/detail...820.D06&irec=5 http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewAr...icleID=1120980 http://www.record-eagle.com/2005/aug/12whoop.htm http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...TL&type=health |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Majusmaximum wrote:
Just don't vaccinate at all, mercury-based preservative or not. Keep yourself and your children healthy. Look into natural health methods. It can be done! Got proof? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Clinton wrote:
Mark Probert wrote: Clinton wrote: Mark Probert wrote: wrote: Mark Probert wrote: I'd like to see how they measured that! Chemical analysis of feces. Sounds problematic. 100% ends up in feces? Wasn't it quackwatch itself that also said Hg fecal testing is unreliable or am I mistaken? Mistaken. You are thinking about the quackery known as hair analysis. How do you know the concentration is uniform, etc.. And of course there would be no way to know if 1 in 100 absorbed less even if these tests were accurate. The tests are quite accurate, and all children in the group were tested. YOu make it sound like Hg is vitamen C! Please read for comprehension. And, it is not elemental mercury. Even so what is more important is where the ethyl Hg that wasn't cleared ended up! What makes you think that there was any left behind and not cleared in the stools? For one thing other studies posted here indicating absorbtion in the brain. For another the nature of Hg. HgE. And, I have seen studies which show that HgE is cleared so rapidly it does not have time to cross the blookd brain barrier. I've seen no evidence that ethyl Hg is like vitamen C Strawman. And of course some infants could have an immune reaction which wouldn't even depend on the amount absorbed in the brain. Who is more likely to have an immune system inflammatory reaction to a toxin, an infant or an adult? Good question. I am allegic to things today that I never had a problem with before. Based on that, I would *guess* an adult. If you have an allergic reaction reaction to something you sneeze. Not all the time. If I eat mangoes, I get hives. When I was a kid, mangoes were a staple fruit for me. If a small amount of a chemical is given to a pregnant woment at the right time the baby might be born without arms. Depends on the chemical. Anyone can see that any type of immune reaction in a developing nervous system is more harmful, EVEN if the frequency was less. You are confusing an immune reaction with other forms of reactions. However, one person is not a basis for reaching such a conclusion. As for Sweden and Denmark I assume they have not used thimersol for years so I would ask what their autisim rates are right now. As they were when used. Add Canada. That does not answer the question. What are the absolute rates of Autism in Denmark and Sweden right now compared to the US. Look that up, and then explain why it makes a difference. The fact is, the rates in Sweden, Denmark and Canada did not go down after thimerosal was removed. That is the important fact. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Combination vaccines safe for children | Mark Probert | Kids Health | 50 | August 19th 05 06:43 PM |
HP: Outstanding Thread on Autism / Mercury Debate ... | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | July 28th 05 07:26 PM |
NY Times article on Vaccines | Cocoa Butter | Kids Health | 8 | June 29th 05 01:56 AM |
The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 31 | February 12th 05 01:43 AM |
NYTIMES: More and More Autism Cases, Yet Causes Are Much Debated | Ilena | Kids Health | 27 | February 23rd 04 02:32 PM |