lightandlove

(cont'd)
* Not only has aluminum also been in these vaccines - 2 neurotoxins, and accumulators to boot! - but it is my understanding that that is what the mfgrs replaced the thimerosal with. So there could well be a god reason right there that the figures haven't started dropping noticeably.
And so forth. Could we, really, cut to the chase in this matter? Could you and Orac & your whole camp admit that vaccines can cause neurological damage, and that your REAL issue is concern about the effect that awareness will/can have on the v schedule pickup rate? And let's get to that debate. That seems to be the real issue here.
As for the latest from JG: I agree with kellianndavis that there is a legitimate suspicion here that the CDC is trying to make the VSD off limits to independent investigation, 'not worth looking at'. The 2003 Verstraeten report may not be worth looking at, after all the 'static' had been run out of the figures. But the original figures are worth preserving, and accessing. posted 06/21/2008 at 17:41:37

autismnewsbeat:
* You and your 'vaccine defenders' on the one hand say the 'increase' in ASD is simply due to better diagnosing, not an increase per se, not to be making such a hullabaloo about; and on the other hand, quote the figures as saying it therefore couldn't have been the thimerosal. Which way do YOU want it?
Personally, I think it's true that the figures are iffy. California eg does seem to have moved the goal posts in the definition they're using now, which is always a bummer for trying to look at statistics. And it has to be a factor that some parents, who were not getting any support previously for their child, either medically or financially, may now be considered in to the stats for kids who DO get some looking after. And what parent WOULDN'T do all they could for their child. Anyway: Just looking at stats stinks, in trying to get to causation.
* For the CDC/p.h. authorities to start talking up the elimination of thimerosal from vaccines, but at the same time adding the flu shot to the v schedule, could be looked at as being decidedly unkosher; at the least, not helpful in trying to look at stats. And of course with that addition, there is more prenatal effect for pregnant women to add to the h. metal load from 6 mos. on, when the child starts getting its own flu v dose. As for "h. metal" instead of just mercury: (cont'd) posted 06/21/2008 at 17:28:06