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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
JohnDoe wrote:
If the speculation was worthwhile researching, it was definitely worthwhile publishing. The results of the research got published. You have been duped. The original "speculation" was a very well researched paper that presented a statistical correlation from data. There was absolutely nothing sloppy about it. Obviously, at the time it wan't meant to be taken as a 100% proven finding. A lot of research papers present this type of statistical correlations. Some of the correlations turn out to be valid. Some are not. All that happens in full public view. In this case, only half the research happened in public view. And in this case, data that supported the correlation turned out to be valid (if you read the work, which can be found, but not in major journals.) All the research that refuted the correlation, eventually has been found to be sloppy/crooked. Make your own conclusions. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"JohnDoe" wrote in message . .. wrote: Jeff wrote: Honest pediatricans that have practiced for a long time know that the rise in autism is real and was not at all due to increased awareness and diagnosis. Yet, many of them are perfectly willing to be dishonest about it, even to themselves. Yet that doesn't mean that vaccines have anything to do with the rise of autism. No, it doesn't necessarily mean that. But the point is, the possible mercury connection was not something to be dismissed out of hand, but wass worthwhile investigating. And it has been, and it has been dismissed. W R O N G!!!!!!! And the investigation should have happened in daylight. What was hidden about it? The research was done and published openly in journals, ie Pediatrics. What secrecy! Instead, one side of the issue has been summarily dismissed as "sloppy" without pointing out any sloppiness. Has it occured to you that one side of the issue has been dismissen as sloppy because they are sloppy? Take the Danish study, was it not sloppy, to say the very least? Nope, it wasn't. (Well, to me it's clear it was crooked, but I don't think anyone who is even the least bit unbiased can say it was not totally sloppy.) Ohoo, this looks suspiciously like 'have you stopped beating your wife yet'. And now it's not sloppy, it's crooked. Make up your mind will you. So why did it get press? So first you complain about it being done hidden in the dark, and now you complain about it being brought out in the open? You're a bit confused, maybe you should think it over for a while before coming with more of this. Even if the "mercury" side is truly sloppy, it is a serious enough issue that the sloppiest paper with any substantial arguments needs to be published for all to review (and to tear to shreds, if that's what happens.) Truly sloppy stuff does not deserve to get published in serious scientific journals. That is why we have peer review, to weed out truly sloppy stuff. And the writers always have a chance to improve their work. If they don't, it doesn't get published and you should not blame the messenger. But this is not for some referees or editors to decide on their own in total darkness. Luckily, there are websites such as whale.to and people like Mr. Kennedy that'll give any crap the publicity they want so things balance out in the end anyway. Dismissed as crap!!!!!!!! Dismissed as done in a mouse!!!!!!!! ANY excuse will do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.flu.org.cn/news/2004986362.htm Thimerosal,New study reopens debate on vaccinations Published: Sep ,8,2004 16:21 PM By ### Special to The Wall Street Journal & Medicalnewstoday By Tara Parker-Pope The Wall Street Journal Just a few months after the nation's top medical adviser rejected a link between vaccines and autism, a mouse study has reignited the debate and raised new fears among parents considering vaccinations and flu shots for their kids. For years, a cadre of parents and physicians have contended that thimerosal, an ethyl-mercury compound that has been one of the most widely used vaccine preservatives, is partly responsible for an apparent rise in autism in recent decades. But broad population studies haven't supported the claim. In May, a major report from the Institute of Medicine's Immunization Safety Review Committee rejected a link between autism and vaccines. But today, a congressional committee will review a June study from Columbia University, which found that a preservative used in vaccines can cause autism-like symptoms in a specific strain of mice. The research raises questions about whether some people might be genetically vulnerable to the effects of thimerosal. The study also raises questions about a new push by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to add flu shots to the immunization schedule for school-age kids. The vast majority of flu shots given still contain the preservative. In the study, researchers administered thimerosal to four strains of young mice. Three of the mice strains were unaffected by thimerosal, but the fourth developed problems consistent with autism such as delayed growth, social withdrawal and brain abnormalities. The mice were known to have a genetic susceptibility to mercury. Thimerosal, found in childhood vaccines, can increase the risk of autism-like damage in mice A new study indicates that postnatal exposure to thimerosal, a mercury preservative commonly used in a number of childhood vaccines, can lead to the development of autism-like damage in autoimmune disease susceptible mice. This animal model, the first to show that the administration of low-dose ethylmercury can lead to behavioral and neurological changes in the developing brain, reinforces previous studies showing that a genetic predisposition affects risk in combination with certain environmental triggers. The study was conducted by researchers at the Jerome L. and Dawn Greene Infectious Disease Laboratory at the Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University. Over the past 20 years, there has been a striking increase--at least ten-fold since 1985--in the number of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. Genetic factors alone cannot account for this rise in prevalence. Researchers at the Mailman School, led by Dr. Mady Hornig, created an animal model to explore the relationship between thimerosal (ethylmercury) and autism, hypothesizing that the combination of genetic susceptibility and environmental exposure to mercury in childhood vaccines may cause neurotoxicity. Cumulative mercury burden through other sources, including in utero exposures to mercury in fish or vaccines, may also lead to damage in susceptible hosts. Timing and quantity of thimerosal dosing for the mouse model were developed using the U.S. immunization schedule for children, with doses calculated for mice based on 10th percentile weight of U.S. boys at age two, four, six, and twelve months. The researchers found the subset of autoimmune disease susceptible mice with thimerosal exposure to express many important aspects of the behavioral and neuropathologic features of autism spectrum disorders, including: Abnormal response to novel environments; Behavioral impoverishment (limited range of behaviors and decreased exploration of environment); Significant abnormalities in brain architecture, affecting areas subserving emotion and cognition; Increased brain size. These findings have relevance for identification of autism cases relating to environmental factors; design of treatment strategies; and development of rational immunization programs. The use of thimerosal in vaccines has been reduced over the past few years, although it is still present in some influenza vaccines. Identifying the connection between genetic susceptibility and an environmental trigger for autism--in this case thimerosal exposure--is important because it may promote discovery of effective interventions for and limit exposure in a specific population, stated the lead author Dr. Mady Hornig. Because the developing brain can be exposed to toxins that are long gone by the time symptoms appear, clues gathered in these animal models can then be evaluated through prospective human birth cohorts--providing a powerful to tool to dissect the interaction between genes and the environment over time. Citation source: Molecular Psychiatry 2004 Volume 9, advance on line publication doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001529 For further information on this work, please contact Mady Hornig, MD, Columbia University, Mailman School of Public Health, Greene Infectious Disease Laboratory, 722 W 168th St, New York, New York 10032, United States of America, phone: 212-342-9036; FAX: 949-824-1229; e-mail: ARTICLE: "Neurotoxic effects of postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain-dependent" M Hornig, D Chian, W. I. Lipkin Greene Infectious Disease Laboratory, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W 168th St, New York, New York 10032 That they are suppressing it on their own, indicates clear bias to me. It would to you, if you could retain any objectivity on the issue. There it is again: 'have you stopped beating your wife yet'. Typical. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
The Wall Street Journal is not a medical journal.
And last time I checked, mice are not humans. Jeff |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"Jeff" wrote in message news The Wall Street Journal is not a medical journal. And last time I checked, mice are not humans. Jeff Do check to see what researchers use to do studies. Perhaps you would like to volunteer so we would have a human instead of mice? Need I call you stupid??????? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
LadyLollipop wrote:
Need I call you stupid??????? Mirror mirror |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Jeff wrote:
I don't recall either side being dismissed as sloppy. Rather, one side was dismissed as not having any evidence to back it up. Just like the people who This is totally bogus. One side of this controversy was not presented in journals like Pediatrics, or major media. There were vague allegations like "no evidence", "sloppy work", etc. However, the papers were full of evidence (such as volumes of data,) and there was no sloppy work. Notice that Jeff presents not a single point of substance, as to in what way the work was sloppy, or what was wrong with the evidence presented. Because he has nothing substantial that to present! Notice how Jeff has no comments on the Danish study either. Again, he has nothing to support the study, except for his personal emotional preference. Notice how Jeff has no comments on the original subject matter of the thread -- the Amish. Again, he simply chooses to turn a blind eye to this evidence, perhaps categorizing it as "sloppy work", or "no evidence" or "not backed up." The reason for such emotional phraseology is a pre-implanted imotional preference. Such emotional preferences have no facts behind them. For those who are affected, the choices are blind faith in people like Jeff, or diligent work to discover remedies. Fortunately, remedies do exist to help, so the one's who stay hurt only have their protectors' blind faith and illogic to blame. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 05:16:31 -0700, cathyb wrote:
Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. Not so. Read the study. In Denmark, regular outpatients, i.e., those who attended for daily therapy were also counted as hospitalised. Yes. DAILY. A small minority. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Indeed. As clearly acknowledged by the study. They also suggested that the increase after the withdrawal of thimerosal could be in part due to this factor Can it be interpreted as an admission that the whole thing is invalid? and in part due to increased awareness and therefore diagnosis of the condition. And they also say "Our data cannot, of course, exclude the possibility that thimerosal at doses larger than used in Denmark may lead to neurodevelopmental damage." The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. No, it was not. As clearly stated in the Acknowledgements: "The activities of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre and the National Centre for Register-Based Research are funded by a grant from the Danish National Research Foundation. This study was supported by the Stanley Medical Research Institute. No funding sources were involved in the study design." The only information garnered from the Statens Serum Institut was about vaccine coverage: Statens Serum employed 3 of the 7 researchers. Another 2 were employed by Danish Epidemiology Science Centre. Its headquarters are housed by the same Statens Serum Institut. I admit that "Research was done by Statens Serum Institut" was an overstatement but its participation was much more significant than just providing the data. Let's say "it controlled the study". |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
mike wrote: On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 05:16:31 -0700, cathyb wrote: Simple. The Danish study counted autistics before and after 1992 when thimerosal was removed from the vaccines. When counting the numbers before 1992 the researchers counted only hospitalized patients. Not so. Read the study. In Denmark, regular outpatients, i.e., those who attended for daily therapy were also counted as hospitalised. Yes. DAILY. A small minority. The study states that "The proportion of outpatient to inpatient activities was about 4 to 6 times as many outpatients as inpatients with variations across time and age bands." Whether this is a small poportion of autistics generally, I have no idea, since I don't know what are the normal treatment protocols in Denmark. But from 1995 on, they counted everybody. Indeed. As clearly acknowledged by the study. They also suggested that the increase after the withdrawal of thimerosal could be in part due to this factor Can it be interpreted as an admission that the whole thing is invalid? It can hardly be interpreted as crookery. and in part due to increased awareness and therefore diagnosis of the condition. And they also say "Our data cannot, of course, exclude the possibility that thimerosal at doses larger than used in Denmark may lead to neurodevelopmental damage." Yes, they do, don't they. Rather strange for crooked people attempting a cover-up. The study has been done by Statens Serum Institut, a vaccine manufacturer. No, it was not. As clearly stated in the Acknowledgements: "The activities of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre and the National Centre for Register-Based Research are funded by a grant from the Danish National Research Foundation. This study was supported by the Stanley Medical Research Institute. No funding sources were involved in the study design." The only information garnered from the Statens Serum Institut was about vaccine coverage: Statens Serum employed 3 of the 7 researchers. Another 2 were employed by Danish Epidemiology Science Centre. Its headquarters are housed by the same Statens Serum Institut. I admit that "Research was done by Statens Serum Institut" was an overstatement but its participation was much more significant than just providing the data. Let's say "it controlled the study". Or let's not. The Statens Serum Institut is wholly owned by the Danish government, which provided all of the vaccines free, according to the study. It would appear that all of the scientists worked in various government enterprises. Roll on more conspiracy theories. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HP: Outstanding Thread on Autism / Mercury Debate ... | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | July 28th 05 07:26 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | May 30th 05 05:28 AM |
The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 31 | February 12th 05 01:43 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | November 28th 04 05:16 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 3 | October 29th 04 05:23 AM |