Vaccine quote of the week by Bernard Rimland, PhD

In article , Mark Probert
wrote:

Rich wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Marcia wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
I am well aware of it. I have friends in Israel, some in Haifa, and
others in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. One of their son's has been on the
Lebanese border for two years.
You must be worried sick. Is he in the military? If not, can you get
him to come home? Like NOW?!
He is in the Israeli military and is a career officer. I met him a few
times when he has come to NY, and having attended his bris before his
family moved to Israel, I worry more about Hizbollah.

The missles are now
landing in Israel but it's won't be long before nuclear bombs and
chemical
bombs will be going off in America.
I doubt it.
I agree; I think this will be contained in the Middle East, but it
promises to be nasty, bloody, and protracted.
And, unfortunately, will not resolve the long term problem, unless
Hizbollah is eliminated and the Lebanese are allowed to run their own
country. Iran, and their client-state, Syria, will not be happy with that,
and I expect that there may wind up being a "revolution" in Lebanon with
the ultimate installation of a very virulent fundamentalist government.
Christians and Jews beware.

The citizens of Lebanon are the real victims in this mess, and yes, there
are many Lebanese Christians and Jews. The Lebanese government does not have
the wherewithall to kick Hisbollah out of their country. Hisbollah is a
large power block that is actually represented in their government. The
Lebanese army is neither as well armed nor as well trained as the Hisbollah
army, and besides, a large portion of the Lebanese army is Shiite and would
be ill disposed to picking a fight with Hisbollah. I doubt that Iran is any
threat to Isreal in this situation, though. They are still trying to develop
a nuclear arsenal, and they know that the Isrealis would, at even a hint of
military threat from Iran, jump at the excuse to destroy the Irani nuclear
reactors as they did in Iraq some years ago. The U.S. adevnture in Iraq has
upset a balance in the Islamic world between the Suni and the Shiite. While
Sadam was in power, the Suni ruled Iraq. Now, Iraq is sure to have a mostly
Shiite government, and that sect will be in power throughout the Middle
East. All in all, it's a mess, and I can't see a good outcome. Israel's
bombing is not going to eliminate Hisbollah. An actual Israeli invasion of
South Lebanon would probably not do so, either, and would involve great loss
of both military and civilian lives. The U.S. is in the best position to
broker a peace agreement, and it's time we started exploring the
possibilities. Do you really think a civil war in Lebanon is inevitable? For
the sake of the innocent citizens of that country, I hope not.

Unfortunately, and I hope I am wrong, I expect a civil war, again, in
Lebanon. If Israel really weakens Hizbollah, I also see a return of
Iran's client-state, Syria.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,
Hizbollah and the Muslims that support them have the SAME goal that Hitler
had--it's to take over every country in the World. They have already taken
over almost every country in the Middle East. They are in the process of
taking over the Sudan. They are not only killing Black Christians in the
Sudan but they are also killing Black Muslims in the Sudan. After they
take over Israel, they will eventually try to take over America and all of
the other countries. If they are smart, they will not try to take over
America until they have taken over all the other countries in the World
since we are the strongest country in the world. If you don't believe me,
read Newt Gingrich's newest book. Newt Gingrich was the former Speaker of
the House. He stated in a recent interview, "we are in the early stages of
WW III. I agree with him. We can fight them in Iraq and various other
countries or wait and fight them when they try to take over America. It
appears to me that the liberals in Congress want to pull all of our troops
out of Iraq and fight them many years from now when they try to take over
America.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jason Johnson wrote:
Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

I should point out that the only research I've done on autism is reading
the scientific literature. My full-time job doesn't involve autism;
rather, I'm an immunologist who studies aspects of inflammatory
responses in healthy people, as well as in septic and HIV patients.


There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to neurologic defects.

Yes, but:

1) Contamination was methyl mercury, not the form which is in vaccines.
Ethyl mercury (what thimerisol breaks down into) is a very different
chemical, with different toxicology and different effects on our body.
2) Neurological defects were not like those seen in the autistic, nor
were the symptoms anything like autism.

Keep in mind that neurological damage doesn't always lead to the same
things. Depending on the form of damage you can experience all kinds of
symptoms - from memory loss, to intelligence loss, to loss of motor
control, to loss of emotional control, to paranoia, to learning
disabilities, to language problems, and many more. The symptoms of
autism do not match those of mercury poisoning. In and of itself a lack
of similar symptoms wouldn't be enough to disprove a link between autism
and mercury, but given all of the other data out there destroying the
link, it amounts to another nail in the coffin.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.


Problem is that kids without autism have similar levels of mercury in
their systems. So why don't they have autism, if they have similar
mercury levels? This is why so many of these studies qualify as bad
science - if you don't look at non-autistic, or compare your group to a
group of people who didn't receive mercury-containing vaccines, how can
you make any conclusions at all?

Also, some forms of mercury testing (i.e. hair) are notoriously
inaccurate. Keep that in mind when reading some of those papers. Blood
testing is much more accurate, if preformed properly.


When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them?


Who says I discount them? In many cases (for both the pro-autistic
papers and anti-autistic papers) there are huge holes in their
scientific methodology. The original paper linking mercury to autism
being a classic example; I would have been embarrassed to have my name
linked to that.

If a paper passes the methodology/stats test, then I tend to consider
its results valid. This leaves a lot of papers showing no link b/w
autism and mercury, but still leaves a few which show a link. At this
point I rely on two things - the scientific consensus (which right now
is no link), as well as the overall conclusions of the studies. At this
point the only evidence which links mercury to autism is correlative,
which is the weakest form of proof (correlation cannot prove a link,
although a lack of correlation can disprove a link). In the case of the
no-link to autism papers, the data is much more robust. There are
animal experiments showing that continued exposure to ethyl mercury
doesn't do much at the doses people receive. Then there are human
studies showing that autism rates stay the same in populations where
mercury is removed from vaccines, as well as a few of those weaker
correlation studies I mentioned above.

Overall, the scientific literature screams "no link". There's only a
few, faint voices left saying there is a link.


You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.


The nature of the mental defects resulting in autism vs. mercury
poisoning are very different. Mercury poisoning tends to result in
nervousness/paranoia, trembling and dementia. Autism is characterized
by a poor interpersonal skills and communication defects. Very, very
different symptomology. So it is unlikely that there is a link - if
mercury was causing damage to infants I would have expected damage
similar to that seen in adults.

Bryan

In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
Bryan,
Since you have done lots of research related to autism, I hope that you
can answer a question for me.
This is the report that caused me to become interested in this issue:

I should point out that the only research I've done on autism is reading
the scientific literature. My full-time job doesn't involve autism;
rather, I'm an immunologist who studies aspects of inflammatory
responses in healthy people, as well as in septic and HIV patients.


There was a mercury catastrophe in Minamata Bay, Japan, involving ingestion
of methymercury-contaminated fish--it led to neurologic defects.

Yes, but:

1) Contamination was methyl mercury, not the form which is in vaccines.
Ethyl mercury (what thimerisol breaks down into) is a very different
chemical, with different toxicology and different effects on our body.
2) Neurological defects were not like those seen in the autistic, nor
were the symptoms anything like autism.

Keep in mind that neurological damage doesn't always lead to the same
things. Depending on the form of damage you can experience all kinds of
symptoms - from memory loss, to intelligence loss, to loss of motor
control, to loss of emotional control, to paranoia, to learning
disabilities, to language problems, and many more. The symptoms of
autism do not match those of mercury poisoning. In and of itself a lack
of similar symptoms wouldn't be enough to disprove a link between autism
and mercury, but given all of the other data out there destroying the
link, it amounts to another nail in the coffin.


I have seen other reports indicating that when they test the blood of
children that have autism--it (in most cases) reveals that the children
have high levels of mercury.


Problem is that kids without autism have similar levels of mercury in
their systems. So why don't they have autism, if they have similar
mercury levels? This is why so many of these studies qualify as bad
science - if you don't look at non-autistic, or compare your group to a
group of people who didn't receive mercury-containing vaccines, how can
you make any conclusions at all?

Also, some forms of mercury testing (i.e. hair) are notoriously
inaccurate. Keep that in mind when reading some of those papers. Blood
testing is much more accurate, if preformed properly.


When you read those same sorts of reports, why do you discount them?


Who says I discount them? In many cases (for both the pro-autistic
papers and anti-autistic papers) there are huge holes in their
scientific methodology. The original paper linking mercury to autism
being a classic example; I would have been embarrassed to have my name
linked to that.

If a paper passes the methodology/stats test, then I tend to consider
its results valid. This leaves a lot of papers showing no link b/w
autism and mercury, but still leaves a few which show a link. At this
point I rely on two things - the scientific consensus (which right now
is no link), as well as the overall conclusions of the studies. At this
point the only evidence which links mercury to autism is correlative,
which is the weakest form of proof (correlation cannot prove a link,
although a lack of correlation can disprove a link). In the case of the
no-link to autism papers, the data is much more robust. There are
animal experiments showing that continued exposure to ethyl mercury
doesn't do much at the doses people receive. Then there are human
studies showing that autism rates stay the same in populations where
mercury is removed from vaccines, as well as a few of those weaker
correlation studies I mentioned above.

Overall, the scientific literature screams "no link". There's only a
few, faint voices left saying there is a link.


You
already know that some people that have had mercury poisoning for several
years develop mental problems. If this is true, is it possible that when
an infant or small child has been exposed to mercury that it could cause
autism.


The nature of the mental defects resulting in autism vs. mercury
poisoning are very different. Mercury poisoning tends to result in
nervousness/paranoia, trembling and dementia. Autism is characterized
by a poor interpersonal skills and communication defects. Very, very
different symptomology. So it is unlikely that there is a link - if
mercury was causing damage to infants I would have expected damage
similar to that seen in adults.

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Thanks for your excellent post. This is a question that you may not know
the answer to unless you have a knowledge of the differences between the
brains of young children compared to the brains of adults. Is it possible
that mercury (regardless of the type) would cause autism in a young child
but an adult would NOT develop autism even if they were exposed to those
same levels of mercury?

Illena Rose made this statement in her excellent post:
Do you agree or disagree with her statement?

"It is our genetics that determines how we respond to various toxins and
poisons... some people are extremely sensitive to mercury." She discussed
how her father was extremely sensitive to even small amounts of mercury.

You made this statement in your post:

Problem is that kids without autism have similar levels of mercury in
their systems. So why don't they have autism, if they have similar
mercury levels? This is why so many of these studies qualify as bad
science - if you don't look at non-autistic, or compare your group to a
group of people who didn't receive mercury-containing vaccines, how can
you make any conclusions at all?

Is it possible that the reason some children (that are sentitive to
mercury) would develop autism as a result of taking vaccines containing
thimerosal whereas other children would NOT develop autism even if they
were exposed to those same levels of mercury that caused those other
children to develop autism?

Thanks in advance,
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Marcia" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rich wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marcia,
Let's change the subject to medical subjects or vaccines before the
net
cops
arrest us. We don't want to yank any chains by discussing political
issues
in a medical newsgroup. Do you have any health problems. I am not a
doctor
but according to the netcops, I play one in newsgroups even when I
say "I
am not a doctor" whenever I provide advice. Did I yank any chains?
Only
time will tell.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LOL. Okay. I have a blister on my right foot from new flip-flops. What
medical tests should I have?

Is it red? hot? tender? swollen? draining? If so, it may be infected. In
that case you should see a doctor, and, yes, a medical test may be
indicated
(a culture of the drainage). Oh, I'm not a doctor, either.
--


--Rich


I keep forgetting... are you friend or foe?

marcia

Friend, of course, unless you call me a liar or something.

;o) Rich

He claims he is not a liar.....

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....0e6d5d8?hl=en&

Hmmm.

Fact: There are at least four James Drews in Bloomington, IN.

Fact: Probert is a common Jewish name.

Fact: There are more Jews in New York than there are in Israel.
--

--Rich

Jan Drew wrote:
"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Marcia" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rich wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marcia,
Let's change the subject to medical subjects or vaccines before the
net
cops
arrest us. We don't want to yank any chains by discussing political
issues
in a medical newsgroup. Do you have any health problems. I am not a
doctor
but according to the netcops, I play one in newsgroups even when I
say "I
am not a doctor" whenever I provide advice. Did I yank any chains?
Only
time will tell.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LOL. Okay. I have a blister on my right foot from new flip-flops. What
medical tests should I have?

Is it red? hot? tender? swollen? draining? If so, it may be infected. In
that case you should see a doctor, and, yes, a medical test may be
indicated
(a culture of the drainage). Oh, I'm not a doctor, either.
--


--Rich


I keep forgetting... are you friend or foe?

marcia

Friend, of course, unless you call me a liar or something.

;o) Rich

He claims he is not a liar.....

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....0e6d5d8?hl=en&

Hmmm.

Fact: There are at least four James Drews in Bloomington, IN.

Fact: Probert is a common Jewish name.

Fact: There are more Jews in New York than there are in Israel.
--

--Rich

Oh, Jan. You still haven't figured out the difference between a mistake
and a lie?

Here is a lie, told by an expert (you):

Jan Drew wrote:
(of the article "Stupid Skeptic Tricks"):

"I posted it with permission from the author."

Everyone knew it was a lie.

And look what the author said:

'As the author of "Stupid Skeptic Tricks," I can state unequivocally
that Jan Drew never requested or received permission to reprint or
repost the article from me. I was doing a bit of ego-surfing, and her
dishonesty ****ed me off.'

"cathyb" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jan Drew wrote:
"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Marcia" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rich wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marcia,
Let's change the subject to medical subjects or vaccines before
the
net
cops
arrest us. We don't want to yank any chains by discussing
political
issues
in a medical newsgroup. Do you have any health problems. I am not
a
doctor
but according to the netcops, I play one in newsgroups even when I
say "I
am not a doctor" whenever I provide advice. Did I yank any chains?
Only
time will tell.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LOL. Okay. I have a blister on my right foot from new flip-flops.
What
medical tests should I have?

Is it red? hot? tender? swollen? draining? If so, it may be infected.
In
that case you should see a doctor, and, yes, a medical test may be
indicated
(a culture of the drainage). Oh, I'm not a doctor, either.
--


--Rich


I keep forgetting... are you friend or foe?

marcia

Friend, of course, unless you call me a liar or something.

;o) Rich

He claims he is not a liar.....

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....0e6d5d8?hl=en&

Hmmm.

Fact: There are at least four James Drews in Bloomington, IN.

Fact: Probert is a common Jewish name.

Fact: There are more Jews in New York than there are in Israel.
--

--Rich

Oh, Jan. You still haven't figured out the difference between a mistake
and a lie?

Indeed I have. One does NOT state some thing is a fact...without checking
to see if it
is a fact.

Rich was once again trying to protect Mark Probert.

He LIED. Period.



Here is a lie, told by an expert (you):

Jan Drew wrote:
(of the article "Stupid Skeptic Tricks"):

"I posted it with permission from the author."

Everyone knew it was a lie.

And look what the author said:

'As the author of "Stupid Skeptic Tricks," I can state unequivocally
that Jan Drew never requested or received permission to reprint or
repost the article from me. I was doing a bit of ego-surfing, and her
dishonesty ****ed me off.'

"Marcia" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rich wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marcia,
Let's change the subject to medical subjects or vaccines before the
net
cops
arrest us. We don't want to yank any chains by discussing political
issues
in a medical newsgroup. Do you have any health problems. I am not a
doctor
but according to the netcops, I play one in newsgroups even when I say
"I
am not a doctor" whenever I provide advice. Did I yank any chains?
Only
time will tell.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LOL. Okay. I have a blister on my right foot from new flip-flops. What
medical tests should I have?

Is it red? hot? tender? swollen? draining? If so, it may be infected. In
that case you should see a doctor, and, yes, a medical test may be
indicated
(a culture of the drainage). Oh, I'm not a doctor, either.
--


--Rich


I keep forgetting... are you friend or foe?

marcia


Well to start with, dingbat doesn't know what a blister is. The statement
wasn't "appears to be a blister".

vernon wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rich wrote:
"Marcia" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jason Johnson wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marcia,
Let's change the subject to medical subjects or vaccines before the
net
cops
arrest us. We don't want to yank any chains by discussing political
issues
in a medical newsgroup. Do you have any health problems. I am not a
doctor
but according to the netcops, I play one in newsgroups even when I say
"I
am not a doctor" whenever I provide advice. Did I yank any chains?
Only
time will tell.
Jason

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LOL. Okay. I have a blister on my right foot from new flip-flops. What
medical tests should I have?

Is it red? hot? tender? swollen? draining? If so, it may be infected. In
that case you should see a doctor, and, yes, a medical test may be
indicated
(a culture of the drainage). Oh, I'm not a doctor, either.
--


--Rich


I keep forgetting... are you friend or foe?

marcia


Well to start with, dingbat doesn't know what a blister is. The statement
wasn't "appears to be a blister".


For heaven's sake, Vernon; I was teasing Jason and "dingbat" was
teasing both Jason and me... it was a joke.

Okay, Rich... I've figured out your status based on others' interesting
responses. Good to "see" you, friend. (BTW, liar, liar, pants on fire,
nose... well, you know the rest, dingbat).

marcia
LSFC

In article , Bryan Heit
wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
Bryan,
Thanks for your excellent post. This is a question that you may not know
the answer to unless you have a knowledge of the differences between the
brains of young children compared to the brains of adults. Is it possible
that mercury (regardless of the type) would cause autism in a young child
but an adult would NOT develop autism even if they were exposed to those
same levels of mercury?


I don't think enough is known about autism, and the type of damage
associated with it, to determine this.



Illena Rose made this statement in her excellent post:
Do you agree or disagree with her statement?

"It is our genetics that determines how we respond to various toxins and
poisons... some people are extremely sensitive to mercury." She discussed
how her father was extremely sensitive to even small amounts of mercury.


Although this is a true statement in a broad sense, in the case of
mercury it is probably incorrect. Generally speaking, differential
sensitivity to toxins is a result of a person having a better gene for
dealing with the toxin, or a gene which is preferentially targeted by a
toxin. In the case of mercury there is neither a target gene, or any
genes mediating its removal. As such it is unlikely that there is a
genetic basis for susceptibility to mercury toxicity. I think I saw her
post (something about a dental filling, followed by a severe reaction?).
In that case I doubt her father had a case of mercury toxicity, and
rather had a hypersensitivity reaction to some component of the filling.



You made this statement in your post:


Problem is that kids without autism have similar levels of mercury in
their systems. So why don't they have autism, if they have similar
mercury levels? This is why so many of these studies qualify as bad
science - if you don't look at non-autistic, or compare your group to a
group of people who didn't receive mercury-containing vaccines, how can
you make any conclusions at all?


Is it possible that the reason some children (that are sentitive to
mercury) would develop autism as a result of taking vaccines containing
thimerosal whereas other children would NOT develop autism even if they
were exposed to those same levels of mercury that caused those other
children to develop autism?


On a person-to-person case we would expect to see this kind of
variability. It is inevitable in a complex disease like autism that not
everyone will respond equally to a given dose of the initiating agent.
This is why we use hundreds or thousands of people in these studies - it
allows us to determine general trends in the population, and effectively
"filter out" those odd people who respond differently then most of us.
Keep in mind that the studies I referred to used literally hundreds of
kids when they did these analysis, and saw no trend relating mercury
exposure to autism. We're not talking about a few individuals here, but
hundreds. As such, even given an uneven response to mercury, we would
have seen something significant if mercury was the causative agent of
autism. We did not.

Bryan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bryan,
Thanks for your post. I hope that Illena provides a response to your post.
I seem to recall that she stated that they had some mercury on a table and
that her father came in the room and had a terrible reaction to the
mercury without even touching it. It reminded me of another post that I
read in another newsgroup. The wife of a man that was driving a car almost
stopped breathing (asthma) as a result of inhaling diesel fumes. The
husband was not even effected by those same diesel fumes. Do you see my
point? It would be easy for scientists to determine whether or not there
are people like Illena's father that are extremely sensitive to mercury. I
hope that more research is done related to this subject. It could explain
why some children develop autism whereas other children exposed to those
same levels of mercury (in vaccines) do not develop autism.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
Jason Johnson wrote:
Bryan,
Thanks for your excellent post. This is a question that you may not know
the answer to unless you have a knowledge of the differences between the
brains of young children compared to the brains of adults. Is it possible
that mercury (regardless of the type) would cause autism in a young child
but an adult would NOT develop autism even if they were exposed to those
same levels of mercury?


I don't think enough is known about autism, and the type of damage
associated with it, to determine this.

The effects of a lot of chemicals are different in kids because they are
still developing. So something that affects the development of the brain
would have effects in kids that they don't have in adults, precisely because
the adult brain is not developing nearly as fast as it is in kids.

That said, there appears to be developmental damage in autism. This damage
is in structures that develop before birth, so whatever thing(s) cause(s)
autism, it appears that a large part of this is before birth.

(...)

Jeff