H1N1 - What's the Feeling in SL Community?

I'm surprised you haven't trotted out any of Kevin Trudeau's "Reserach".

Gosh Debra, are you the only one who is the authority on anything? I don't agree with you. I would believe the source I quoted before you. Amazing how something so obvious isn't obvious to you.


You like fighting, huh? I wonder what the reason for that is?

Then explain why there are now 1 in 166 children becoming autistic where 20 years ago it was more like 1 in 20,000. The only thing that has changed is the number of vaccinations they get. And since when does being one of the 155 prove that the vaccines don't do it. Children become autistic around the age of two years. The parents generally say that their child became autistic shortly after a vaccination when a few days before they were quite normal. Why is it that the Amish population do not have any children that have autism. Because they do not let their kids get vaccinated. However, they do have four children that are autistic, three of which were adopted and all four had vaccinations.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/science/autism_none_for_unvaccinated_amish.htm

It is absolutely obvious to me that you will take that stand because you'd look really stupid if you didn't. However, you also look stupid if you don't. Never mind though.

Probably more because their mothers eat too many meals of McDonalds and other processed junk and drink gallons of diet soda, than because of any vaccines. That and the EMF's from spending your life with a cell phone and/or computer monitor pemanently attcahed to one's self.

Yes, yes, I look really stupid, oh woe.

Oh, just for fun: Does the Carter Center count, or are they in the evil clutches of the FDA, too? What about WHO or the CDC?

And while we're at it, exactly how does the FDA go about suppressing this information? Like, is it before, during, or after peer review? And this is for all journals? NEJM, JAMA, Science, Cell, everybody?

And then, how does this land the authors in prison? The editors of the journal detect bad thoughts in a submission and call in--who?--the Ministry of Information?

They put on their Wizard Robe and tin foil hat.

Along with better diagnostic processes, more support services to get kids identified, autistic spectrum disorders being included in the figures...but I think I will finish now. This chick is like a cesspit of nonsense (not you Brenda, obviously). There's been a large decrease in vaccine uptake (+/- 20%) here mainly because of this suggested link, but as far as I know, no decrease in autism. There certainly have been measles outbreaks though, which is something I never saw when I was in school

I do think that there are more reported cases of thing because of better diagnostics and such, yes. Also things have different classifications. What we called just palin old dementia is now in many cases called Alzheimer's and such. Statistics are a funny thing, you can get them to say pretty much whatever you want them to say.

You I shan't mute I agree, classifications are much more precise, and there are more avenues for parents to investigate to get an answer.

Her figures are off anyway. Way off for 20 years ago, but what is new?

Very slick looking blog on blogspot. In fact its the best looking one I have ever seen. I wonder where the support for it comes from. You are going to have to do better than that.



So they are suspicious of “outsiders”, but quite happy to have their kids vaccinated.

Then what were they?

You're the one citing infowars.com and David Icke. Black helicopters and Lizardmen do not make for credible sources.

You said "... the Amish population do not have any children that have autism. Because they do not let their kids get vaccinated." Even the author of the article you cited backs away from such claims in trying to refute the article I cited. But he misses the whole point--one that Brenda called out in her post: there are *lots* of differences between the Amish and general populations, any of which might account for epidemiological differences. That's difficult in any such study, but the Amish pose special research challenges because there are so many possible factors including genetics as well as a host of environmental exposures and behavioral risks--and, yes, reporting of disorders.
Sure. The Amish are Plain, not crazy.

i wonder why someone would think the Amish don't get vaccinated..
All the clans are not the same..some are more lenient than others with things like diesel generators to power the pumps for their water and some of their tools for their trades..
a vaccine is not breaking their commandments..
Also they may have a lot of different problems because of how they mostly stick to the clans and clans are not huge so there is some inbreeding going no..not brother and sister .but cousins so on..
i've seen a couple of Amish men by us that do have an extra digit on their hands..

They deal with the public all the time..their shops are set up right outside of their homes and most have their rules they ask you to respect before entering their shops..no cell phones no cameras no electronic gadgets of any kind..things like that..
Some believe their salvation is all taken care of and some believe you have to earn it..there is no one set of standards for the amish by no means..just depends on the clan you are visiting at the time..

I can not prove anything to you. You can only be rational with rational people.

I would, as I posted above, look at Dr. Ben Goldacre's site at http://www.badscience.net/ for a view that is very skeptical of Big Pharma methods but is also very thorough in it's debunking of the MMR, AIDs denialism, snake-oil nutritionists, and other frauds, charlatans, and crazies that you support. I have seen many links to researched and peer-reviewed information in this thread that refutes your sites (most of which have a direct conflict-of-interest in promoting "alternative" treatments that is even more glaring than the conflicts you decry).

You seem to be placing the onus on established medicine with its peer-reviewed research and clinical trials to prove itself, with the assumption that your information is correct. However, there is a saying in research that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." That is, a one-size-fits-all cure or a novel theory that overturns decades of research needs to have solid, verifiable, replicable information to back it up before it becomes accepted. Many "fringe" thinkers take their lack of respect within their fields as evidence that they are "persecuted" like Galileo (a favorite example of the poor researcher with a novel idea) without realizing that what Galileo had that they did not was lots and lots of evidence. It is possible to overturn scientific consensus, and we have many examples that have, including universal gravity, elliptical movement of the planets, biological evolution, relativistic physics, quantum physics, genetics, and plate tectonics as proof that it is possible. But all of those theories won acceptance because a few novel thinkers started looking for a better explanation of the evidence, and worked (usually alone at first, but with increasing help) to find and publish the evidence necessary to support their model as a better explanation of nature. However, the fact that great minds have been ridiculed and persecuted does not lead to the conclusion that being ridiculed and persecuted is a sign of a great mind. For every Einstein, there have been countless individuals with great ideas that were, and are, wrong.

For proof, look back at the article I posted that examines the correlation of MMR inoculations and the rise in autism diagnoses. To recap, from 1988 to 1993, the rate of inoculations in Great Britain remained level at 95% while the rate of autism diagnoses increased. If MMR inoculations were the primary cause of autism and the diagnosis of autism usually follows inoculation by about 6 months as claimed by MMR opponents, than within a year or the inoculation levels stabilizing, the autism rates should also stabilize. The observed evidence is that instead the two variables moved independently, thus refuting a causal link between MMR and autism.

And please, add me to your ignore list as well. I'm feeling left out.

In 1990, the recorded rate of autism in America was 1 in 10,000 . Some say 3 in 10000. I didn't find any mention of 20,000, and that is quite a large difference.

Yup, it was the same here, and Dr Wakefield has the stench of fraud rather than sloppy about him.

Sure, leave me all alone

Happy Bonfire night. Nearly dark, I'm off.

While I see from http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Measles.htm that I remember having measles as a child. It was horrible.

You mean genetics like being German

Like being a tiny sub-set of mostly German lineage that restricts marriage so that they have a much smaller genetic variation than the population as a whole. In order to make a valid comparison, the two groups have to be as alike as possible. The restricted genetic pool of the Amish makes it difficult to draw conclusions from them that apply to large and genetically diverse populations.