Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mumps and the MMR vaccine
thisislondon.com ^

Posted on 08/14/2002 1:42:48 PM PDT by krodriguesdc

Mumps and the MMR vaccine

Evening Standard editorial comment

Parents have good reason to be concerned about the possibility of a mumps outbreak in London. The epidemiological history of this infectious disease suggests that mumps is unpleasant but hardly ever fatal to children. In rare cases it causes meningitis or encephalitis; it can also cause infertility in boys. Before there was a vaccine for mumps, it tended to kill no more than five people a year.

Yet it is impossible to be certain that half a century of vaccination against the disease will not have weakened our natural immunity to the extent that a renewed outbreak would produce unusually severe symptoms.

This is why the near quadrupling of mumps cases in the capital to 112 in 2001, and the 30 per cent rise in the last quarter over the previous three months, is particularly worrying, given that clinics across the country have been without supplies of the mumps vaccine for up to six months and do not know when they can expect fresh supplies.

The Government will be blamed for creating this situation, and endangering childrens' lives, by insisting that the triple MMR vaccine be used to inoculate children against measles, mumps and rubella, but it is not directly the fault of the Department of Health. The reason why there is such a shortage of mumps vaccine is that not much of it is being manufactured (none to UK licence specifications) and the logical reason for this is that every country in the developed world except Britain has accepted the overwhelming scientific evidence that MMR does not trigger autism in young children. This is not to say that blame should rest with parents who refuse the triple vaccine.

Ever since Dr Andrew Wakefield produced his own variant findings, which suggested a possible link between MMR and autism and bowel disorders, enough anecdotal evidence has emerged that the MMR vaccination appears to coincide with the onset of autism in young children to convince many parents that they must be connected. Pressure is therefore growing to make it the responsibility of the Government to accelerate the production of mumps vaccine and then provide all three vaccinations separately on the NHS. This will be the first major challenge for the new public health minister David Lammy, and perhaps the toughest he will ever have to face.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: vaccine; weakimmune
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-274 next last

1 posted on 08/14/2002 1:42:48 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
For anyone interested in the FACTS concerning the bogus autism/MMR link and what krodriguesdc considers to be good evidence, see this thread.
2 posted on 08/14/2002 1:56:35 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomB
mumps is unpleasant but hardly ever fatal to children.

From post 107 of the other thread:

"Before the mumps vaccine was introduced in 1967, the United States had about 200,000 cases of mumps every year, with 20 to 30 deaths. Mumps was also the most common cause of acquired deafness and of viral meningitis, an infection of the lining of the brain. Up to 40 percent of males infected with mumps after puberty develop a painful swelling of the testicles called orchitis, which in rare cases can lead to sterility and testicular cancer. Today the United States has about 350 cases of mumps each year."

That is MUCH MORE than "unpleasant".

You don't have a lot of luck with your information, do you?

3 posted on 08/14/2002 2:04:01 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TomB
Good day TomB - what do you think about this?...

Federal judge strikes down religious exemption to Arkansas vaccination law

By JAMES JEFFERSON

The Associated Press

8/14/02 11:23 AM

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- A federal judge has struck down a religious exemption to a state statute requiring vaccinations before children can attend public school.

The exemption, granted only to members of "recognized churches," violates the establishment and free association clauses of the First Amendment, Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled Tuesday.

The decision left intact the state's vaccination requirement, meaning students still are subject to the requirement with no religious exemption to immunization.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by Cynthia Boone, the mother of a student who refused to be vaccinated. The lawsuit said that although Ashley Boone is not a member of a recognized religious group with tenets against vaccinations, she personally believes that vaccinations "are against the will of her God."

Cabot High School officials had barred Ashley from classes during the 2001-2002 school year because she refused to be vaccinated against hepatitis B, a sexually transmitted disease.

Boone filed a federal lawsuit against the school district and the Arkansas Health Department, claiming the state selectively allows religious exemptions from vaccinations.

After the suit was filed, Wright temporarily ordered the district to allow Ashley to return to classes. The order was later extended to allow her to finish the school year.

As a result of the ruling, she will have to be vaccinated in order to return for her senior year.

The effect of Arkansas' religious exemption, Wright said in Tuesday's ruling, was to discriminate against individuals with sincerely held individual religious beliefs.

"It is difficult to imagine how the state would have a compelling interest in limiting the religious exemption to some religious sects and individuals over others," the judge wrote.


4 posted on 08/14/2002 2:36:59 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
what do you think about this?...

I don't.

We are discussing the bogus science behind MMR/autism, not the politics.

5 posted on 08/14/2002 2:49:58 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TomB
did scinece prove that one is seperate from the other?
6 posted on 08/14/2002 3:00:17 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
did scinece prove that one is seperate from the other?

One what? Please try to be more concise.

7 posted on 08/14/2002 3:06:38 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TomB
We are discussing the bogus science behind MMR/autism, not the politics.

I have not been convinced of either side, but tell me: do you have a child with autism?

8 posted on 08/14/2002 4:04:10 PM PDT by conservative cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TomB
One what? Please try to be more concise.

unfortunately - IMHO politics sometimes controls science - I think they call it follow the money...

9 posted on 08/14/2002 4:23:16 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
unfortunately - IMHO politics sometimes controls science - I think they call it follow the money...

Great. I still have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

10 posted on 08/14/2002 4:27:44 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: conservative cat
I have not been convinced of either side, but tell me: do you have a child with autism?

No, but I have a brother with Down's Syndrome, does that count?

Although I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

11 posted on 08/14/2002 4:29:08 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
Do you believe in the germ theory of disease?
12 posted on 08/14/2002 4:40:57 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TomB
as for your question on my study of the germ theory of disease - I am a microbiologist...

but I do recognize that a person must have a healthy functioning immune system function that is able to handle the pathogens we are exposed to each an everyday...

for instance - why is it that some people get a cold while others, though exposed to the same pathogen, stay healthy and without a cold or flu?

Anti-Science Activists Label Pro-Vaccine Safety Advocates "Anti-vaccine"

in June 26 JAMA Article

A Response

Barbara Loe Fisher, Co-founder and President

National Vaccine Information Center

In the latest efforts by anti-science activists to label pro-vaccine safety advocates "anti-vaccine," a trio from Northwestern University have published an article in the June 26, 2002 Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) entitled "Content and Design Attributes of Antivaccination Web Sites." In what must surely be a lull in the careers of Robert M. Wolfe, M.D., Lisa K. Sharp, Ph.D., and Martin S. Lipsky, M.D., these three have spent a lot of time and effort pouring over the content of what they have dubbed "antivaccination" websites in order to come up with an analysis purporting to get to the heart of the thinking and motives behind organizations and individuals who operate websites questioning the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) which operates the oldest and largest vaccine safety advocacy website, offers the following observations about the content of the article and the thinking and motives of its authors:

1. This is not science, it is an op ed piece.

2. The information on the internet, thank goodness, is not peer reviewed by doctors like these authors or we wouldn't be able to believe what is on the internet anymore than we are able to believe what is published in JAMA.

3. They need to include a dictionary in their article. What exactly is their definition of "antivaccination?" Is it the label they apply in the second sentence of the first paragraph to those challenging "the safety and effectiveness of recommended vaccines?" If that is the definition of anti-vaccine, we can label these authors anti-science for suggesting that challenging and testing existing knowledge in science be abolished in favor of protecting the status quo.

4. The hallmark of good science is replication. We call for a public release of the names of all the websites these authors have labeled anti-vaccine so their analysis can be independently analyzed.

5. In just one of the many examples of intellectual bias, the authors perseverate about the internet access the public has to personal and emotional experiences of families with vaccine injured children. They, however, apparently have no problem with the use of visual images of children who were injured or died from polio as an incentive to the public to get vaccinated.

6. This article is a sophomoric attempt to label the vaccine safety and informed consent movement as "anti-vaccine" in order to deflect attention from the very real gaps in scientific knowledge about the biological mechanisms of adverse responses to vaccination. Should the Institute of Medicine be labeled anti-vaccine for repeatedly publishing reports over the past decade calling for increased scientific research into outstanding questions about vaccine safety? Instead of analyzing websites which are pointing out and asking for answers to outstanding scientific questions about vaccine safety, these doctors should be pulling their microscopes out of storage and finding out why some children are not able to handle the 36 doses of 11 vaccines they are now getting. They could work to develop genetic and other biomarkers to identify and screen out high risk children. That would go a long way toward re-instilling trust in national vaccine policies and eliminating some of the nagging doubts about vaccines that parents of learning disabled, hyperactive, epileptic, autistic, asthmatic, diabetic and mentally retarded children talk about on the internet.

7. History shows that challenge to the status quo, which is embodied in much of the free speech that is taking place on the internet, is a first necessary step to meaningful reform of powerful institutions. We proudly stand by the content of our website at www.909shot.com which details our 20 year public record of working to institute vaccine safety and informed consent protections in the mass vaccination system, including playing a major role in obtaining a safer pertussis vaccine for American babies licensed in 1996. We will stand by that accomplishment any day even if we haven't published peer reviewed articles in JAMA.

Finally, this kind of pretentious posturing by doctors who claim that they engaged in "critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content" did not remove the responsibility from JAMA editors to exercise a little self discipline and pass on this one. What the publishing of this kind of junk science does is fuel the suspicions of parents that those in power are determined to silence the voices of people suffering because science will not listen and does not care. It is a sad commentary on an even sadder reality that faces many families with vaccine injured children.

To view the JAMA article: To view the JAMA article


13 posted on 08/14/2002 4:59:09 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc; aruanan
as for your question on my study of the germ theory of disease - I am a microbiologist...

I noticed you used the term dis-ease in the previous thread. Does that differ from disease?

14 posted on 08/14/2002 5:09:58 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TomB
yes it does...
15 posted on 08/14/2002 6:06:12 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
So what does dis-ease mean?
16 posted on 08/14/2002 6:07:10 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TomB
are you associated with a website named quackwatch.com?
17 posted on 08/14/2002 6:08:18 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TomB
link to below...

Vaccinosis

Dr. Richard Pitcairn D.V.M. Ph.D., Discusses Chronic Disease Caused By Vaccines

By Laura Wallingford

"In this article we begin to address the subject of vaccinosis, the general name for chronic dis-ease caused by vaccines.

For some readers the very idea that vaccines are anything but wonderful and life-saving may come as a surprise, and it's not a very pleasant one. After all, the general population pictures vaccines as one of modern medicine's best and brightest moments, saving literally millions from the scourge of diseases like poliomyelitis and smallpox."

"In the process of training as a doctor or veterinarian, one goes in as a relatively naive young person. The conditioning is heavy; it costs a lot of money, and of course you want to do well. Students are told how wonderful vaccines are, and they don't really question it; they accept as a fact that they're these great boons to health, are never harmful, and have saved a lot of lives—it's black and white.

The companies making the vaccines have great amounts of money and influence to campaign and advertise. You have a situation on the one hand where doctors are conditioned to accept, and on the other hand companies powerful enough to squelch negative comment."

Please read the rest of this excellent article

Immune-mediated hematological disease and transient bone marrow failure are increasingly recognized sequelae of...vaccination. ... Postvacinal polyneuropathy is a recognized entity associated with...vaccines. ...Adverse reactions to vaccination have also recently been reported with increasing frequency in cats." (Dr. Dodds, 1990)

"Homeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they provide benefits. Vaccinations represent a major assault on the body's immune system." Dr. Charles E Loops DVM


18 posted on 08/14/2002 6:15:04 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
I find your complete inability to answer a question with anything other than a cut-and-paste from somewhere else to be quite juvenille.

Do you really have that much trouble formulating independent thoughts?

19 posted on 08/14/2002 6:38:40 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TomB
I find your complete inability to answer a question

answer my question TomB - are you associated with quackwatch.com?

20 posted on 08/14/2002 6:40:36 PM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc; TomB
answer my question TomB - are you associated with quackwatch.com?

I don't think he is, but if he were, he should be proud to be associated with it. It's one of the best sources there is on the web for information on quackiness in matters of health and medicine.
21 posted on 08/14/2002 7:49:45 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TomB
No, but I have a brother with Down's Syndrome, does that count?

Although I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

No, Down's Syndrome is absolutely not the same thing as Autism and is not caused by vaccines. I do have an autistic son, and my experience and the experience of others have caused us to wonder if there is a link between vaccinations and Autism.

22 posted on 08/14/2002 7:53:40 PM PDT by conservative cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
I don't think he is, but if he were, he should be proud to be associated with it. It's one of the best sources there is on the web for information on quackiness in matters of health and medicine.

that's your opinion...

barrett seems to think that when things don't make sense to him it's quackery...

HMMMM... seems like a double standard - fortunately there are those like myself who make their own decisions on these things...

Village Voice Questions Credibility of "Quackwatch.com"

The Village Voice, a weekly newspaper that symbolized the "new journalism" when it was founded in New York City in 1955 by Dan Wolf, Ed Fancher and Norman Mailer, still represents an alternative media voice in U.S. journalism. The award-winning publication, with the largest circulation of any weekly newspaper in the U.S. (250,000), continues in its iconoclastic way to report on the cultural and political trends that shape the nation. Most everyone is aware of the cultural shift toward "alternative" forms of health care. In 1997, an estimated 83 million Americans visited an alternative provider at least once during the year; there were 628,825,000 visits to alternative care providers, compared to only 385,919,000 visits to all primary care physicians.1

Coinciding with the rise in visits to alternative care providers is the increasing number of people using the internet for health-related information. In June, the Wall Street Journal reported that nearly 40 percent of all American adults on line, roughly 22 million, searched for health information on the internet last year.

Donna Ladd, writing for the Village Voice, took up just this issue in the June 23-29 issue.2 Her article begins by relating the consensus of the Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health, a group of doctors, insurers, HMO representatives and online health providers: that, surprise, health information on the Web can be inaccurate! The panel, which was appointed by the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, recommended that the government not get involved in regulating online health information.

The HHS director of the panel, Dr. Thomas Eng, however, did cause a stir by mentioning in a press conference that Quackwatch.com was a good site for exposing bogus health information. That raised the hackles of those in the alternative care field, because Quackwatch.com (n‚ December 1996) has been operated by retired psychiatrist Stephen Barrett,MD, certainly the most vocal and often-published detractor of alternative health care, including chiropractic. Quackwatch.com's slogan is "Your Guide to Health Fraud, Quackery, and Intelligent Decisions."

Dr. Barrett also administers the Chirobase.org website (n‚ Oct. 1998) that is "A Skeptical Guide to Chiropractic History, Theories, and Current Practices." Chirobase is cosponsored by the National Council Against Health Fraud, Inc., and Victims of Chiropractic. Helping Dr. Barrett operate Chirobase is William Jarvis,PhD, and Charles DuVall Jr.,DC.

Ms. Ladd noted in her article in the Village Voice that if a study shows that alternative therapies do not work, Dr. Barrett has no problem with it, but if a study shows positive results, he labels that study as unreliable.

"It's easy to look at something like chiropractic, see what they're doing, and describe what they're doing wrong," Dr. Barrett told the Village Voice.

It's a curious condition that allows Dr. Barrett to assess the chiropractic profession, in which he has no professional training, yet not take the medical profession to task for any of its shortcomings. Criticism of the medical profession, he said, is "way outside my scope." Dr. Barrett told the Village Voice that most alternative therapies should be disregarded without further research. Why? "A lot of things don't need to be tested (because) they simply don't make sense."

Mary Jo Deering, the Health Communication and Telehealth staff director at HHS, made a good point to the Village Voice. She said consumers "really need to be able to avoid quackery and bias. Bias can be as damaging as outright quackery."

Peter Barry Chowka, a consultant to NIH's Office of Alternative Medicine, former national affairs editor of New Age Journal, a writer, editor and lecturer on the limitations of conventional medicine and the promise of alternative therapies, added his commentary to the Village Voice article: "He (Barrett) seems to be putting down trying to be objective." Mr. Chowka said Quackwatch.com was "consistently provocative and entertaining, and occasionally informative," but said that Dr. Barrett was "running against the tide of history."

Mr. Chowka, observing the medical profession's efforts to thwart alternative therapies, called for an end to "medical McCarthyism." He has confidence in people to make decisions about health care. "We no longer need a nanny state or a government-appointed watchdog to filter information for us," he told the Village Voice.

The Web is opening a whole new world of information. People are ordering supplements on line, asking their doctors questions, and even getting their prescriptions filled. Chiropractic patients can get referrals to DCs and access to thousands of chiropractic articles (ChiroWeb.com).

The trend toward alternative forms of health care will continue to grow, and the internet will be a driving force behind it. Meanwhile, while some in the medical profession are creating websites to discourage and disparage alternative health care, the AMA has made the astounding decision to unionize! It would seem a decision that will be a boon to alternative therapies and drive even greater numbers of people away from the MD's office.

You'll recall Peter Chowka characterizing Dr. Barrett's Quackwatch.com as "running against the tide of history." It would seem that the AMA is rowing against the same tide.

References

Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, Appel S, Wilkey S, Rompay MV, Kessler RC. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-97. JAMA 1998;280:1569-75.

Ladd D. Doctor who? Diagnosing medical fraud may require a second opinion. Village Voice June 23-29, 1999.


23 posted on 08/15/2002 3:33:46 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
You know, doc, you really need to address those interpersonal relationship skills. You have no clue how to carry on a discussion.

No, I am not from quackwatch.

So let me ask you, doc, do you believe that vaccines have been effective in eliminating or reducing polio, smallpox, and other diseases?

And you never answered my question, what, exactly, is "dis-ease"?

And what do the letters "dc" at the end of your screen name mean?

24 posted on 08/15/2002 3:50:15 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TomB
again I have answered all of your questions in my posts - what is Dis-ease?...

Here is your answer from post #18 - "In this article we begin to address the subject of vaccinosis, the general name for chronic dis-ease caused by vaccines".

secondly, I think there are questions that need answers concerning the true efficacy of vaccines - so - in essence I am unable to give you a definitive answer on this - more research is needed to sort that out...

for instance consider the work of Edward Hooper who reports in his book The River that the AIDS epidemic was caused by the administration of a million doses of an experimental vaccine for polio in Africa in the 1950's...

this is troubling to me because Hooper makes a very convincing case...

thirdly - you called me doc - why - I have never referred to myself as doc in any of my posts on FR...

25 posted on 08/15/2002 4:45:44 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TomB
please read the article below and tell me if you think that vaccinations alone will help these people?

in fact some of these people who will die probably have been vaccinated yet they still succumb to disease...

...link to below

Press Release/WHO 63

Health conditions aggravate Southern Africa famine

Food aid must be accompanied by the provision of basic health services to avert tremendous loss of life triggered by the ongoing drought, the World Health Organization says today.

Devastating health conditions are putting 12-14 million people within Southern Africa at particular risk during the ongoing shortage of food. Rainfall failure has trigged a crisis which is being exacerbated by a combination of long-term deterioration in health services, the ravaging AIDS epidemic and serious economic problems facing countries in the region.

"Weakened by hunger, many people will die of diseases. They could have survived these if properly nourished - if they had produced adequate food or been able to purchase the food they need," says Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, WHO Director-General. "We are particularly concerned about data coming in from the field showing a doubling of life-time risk of maternal mortality in some areas, the continuing rise in tuberculosis, acute respiratory infections and malaria. We fear there could be at least 300,000 “extra” deaths during the next six months because of this crisis."

The conditions are resulting in increased malnutrition levels particularly among children. One Malawi survey, for example, showed child malnutrition levels increasing from 6% - 19% in three months. These children are more susceptible to illness. This is already causing higher mortality rates in all groups, with a crude mortality in some areas exceeding one per 10,000 people per day which means we are already facing a severe humanitarian crisis.

"We're staring catastrophe in the face - unless we get food aid fast to millions of people whose lives are in the balance because they are starving," said World Food Programme Executive Director James Morris, who is also the UN Secretary General's Special Envoy to the region. "With each passing month the situation will get worse if we don't receive more food, water and medicine," he added.

WFP is currently doing a second round of assessments with results expected in mid August; these may well show a marked increase in the number of people at risk. According to present estimates, seven million people require food now, rising to a peak of 12.8 million at the end of the year. To date, WFP has been feeding 4.6 million.

People living with HIV have reduced immunity leading to increased death rates. HIV/AIDS in the region has severely hit the working population, often leaving households headed by very young or very old people. People with AIDS are less able to work in the fields, and the cost of caring for them also puts further pressure on families.

The prevalence rates in the six countries average at around 24.9%, ranging from 16.4% IN Malawi to 33.7% in Zimbabwe. In Malawi 470,000 children have lost one or both parents to the epidemic.

Figures from Malawi show that while the number of deliveries at health facilities have decreased by 7%, maternal mortality rates recorded in these health facilities increased by 71%, due to malnutrition and poor health status, lack of prenatal care and the weak capacity of the health system.

As of April this year, WHO has reported a total of 22 023 cases, including 609 deaths( case-rate fatality rate, 2,8%) in Malawi while WHO considers that a case-fatality rate should be of less than 1% for cholera. This is a clear indication that people, weakened by the lack of food, more easily succumb to disease.

The number of deaths can be greatly reduced by improving basic health care for particularly vulnerable groups in parallel with distributing food aid. In addition to encouraging essential help from international and non-governmental aid agencies, WHO is working to strengthen the countries' own capacity to provide health care in the worst affected areas. WHO is supporting health ministries with access to medicines, improve staffing and ensure that the health situation is carefully monitored. WHO is also assisting governments in co-ordinating the relief efforts carried out by aid agencies, non-governmental agencies and other actors, to ensure the most effective response possible.

The emergency appeal for Southern Africa includes $40m for health and nutrition activities in addition to the need for over $500m for food. This financial support is essential to avert a major humanitarian catastrophe over the coming months.


26 posted on 08/15/2002 5:06:23 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc; aruanan; bonesmccoy
please read the article below and tell me if you think that vaccinations alone will help these people?

Yes, we have yet to come up with a vaccine for malnutrition. But what your point is, I can only guess.

It should be noted that the diseases these people are succumbing to (AIDS, tuberculosis, acute respiratory infections, and malaria) are all diseases that HAVE NO VACCINE. Strange that they don't mention polio, whooping cough, rubella, etc.

in fact some of these people who will die probably have been vaccinated yet they still succumb to disease...

So you are saying that vaccines are ineffective. Can you post real proof of that, instead of a news article?

So what does the "dc" mean at the end of your name, doc?

27 posted on 08/15/2002 7:08:58 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
Here is your answer from post #18 - "In this article we begin to address the subject of vaccinosis, the general name for chronic dis-ease caused by vaccines".

That tells me nothing except that you consider vaccinosis to be a "dis-ease", but that isn't a definition of "dis-ease".

If you use the word, it MUST have a meaning. Please define it, not use it in a sentence.

28 posted on 08/15/2002 7:12:12 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
this is troubling to me because Hooper makes a very convincing case...

Since we're having a cut-and-paste party here:

The River without a paddle

Four new studies may finally have put paid to the polio-vaccine hypothesis for HIV's origins.

26 April 2001


The controversial theory that researchers developing polio vaccines in Africa in the 1950s accidentally triggered today's global AIDS epidemic has today been dealt what could finally be a fatal blow. Four new studies have found no evidence for the main claims of the theory.1,2,3,4

In his 1999 book The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV and AIDS, journalist Edward Hooper promulgated a disturbing theory about the origins of AIDS. Hooper's assertions threatened to capture the public's imagination until they were largely discredited by preliminary investigations presented at the Royal Society in September last year. At the time, Hooper dismissed the results as "irrelevant" to his hypothesis.

Hooper claimed that by using chimpanzee kidney tissues infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) when developing an oral polio vaccine (OPV), researchers at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania inadvertently contaminated their vaccine stocks with the virus. He alleges that when these vaccines were tested in as many as one million people in the Congo between 1957 and 1959 they seeded the human population with HIV-1 -- the strain that most commonly causes AIDS.

Four independent research groups have now found no trace of chimpanzee tissue in any of the remaining stocks of the original vaccine, including a vial of the stock used to create the OPV tested in the Congo. They also detected neither HIV nor its primate form and closest ancestor, simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV). Furthermore, they present evidence that the virus emerged in human populations before the Congo vaccine trial.

The researchers admit that their findings cannot disprove Hooper's theory. "It's the old problem of proving a negative," says Neil Berry of the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NISBC) in Potters Bar, UK. "But the data really don't provide any support for his hypothesis."

Out in the cold

Perhaps the most compelling evidence against Hooper's theory comes from Berry's group1. They analysed a vial of the same vaccine stock as was used to treat people in the Congo and is directly blamed in The River for the outbreak of HIV in humans. When The River was published, the Wistar Institute could not produce a sample of that vaccine; the one that has now been tested was later found in a freezer at the NISBC.

Berry's team did not detect HIV or SIV in the suspect vaccine. What's more, the only tissue identified was from macaque monkeys -- which Wistar researchers insisted that they had used -- and not from chimpanzees. "We used a sensitive assay for both tissues and only one was positive," says Berry.

Philippe Blancou at the Pasteur Institute in Paris and his colleagues looked at the remaining samples of the original vaccine stock from the Wistar Institute. Again, they found only evidence of macaque tissue and no chimpanzee DNA2. In a separate study Svante Pääbo and colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany scrutinised the same stocks. They too found no evidence of chimp DNA, only macaque4.

Finally, having examined samples of HIV collected in the Congo in 1997, Edward Holmes at the University of Oxford and his colleagues conclude that the multiple sub-types that characterize modern-day HIV could not have originated from contamination with chimpanzee tissue in the 1950s3. According to Holmes' team, the last common ancestor of the variants known in the Congo today was present in a human host and was not, as Hooper alleges, transferred from a primate.

Proof positive

The genetic history of HIV-1 strains, says Holmes, "fits a classic exponential epidemiological spread and says nothing at all about multiple transfer" from vaccination with a contaminated oral polio vaccine. "It's appealing to point the finger at someone rather than admit it may be a natural, ecological process, which is what I believe it is," Holmes adds.

Edward Hooper was not available for comment but has so far stood firmly in support of his theory. He has said that the only evidence he will accept is proof that HIV existed in humans before 1957. "He's going to fight until someone finds a blood sample from the 1940s that's HIV-positive," says Holmes.

Simon Wain-Hobson, a member of the Blancou team at the Pasteur Institute sympathizes with Hooper's "compelling" theory. "Such an outrageous thing [as HIV] requires an outrageous explanation." But, he argues, the scientific evidence for the origins of HIV tell a less dramatic tale. "You can play conspiracy theories 'til you're blue in the face, but the onus is now on [Hooper] to provide proof," he says.

References

* Berry, N. et al. Analysis of oral polio vaccine CHAT stocks. Nature 410, 1046-1047 (2001).

* Blancou, P. et al. Polio vaccine samples not linked to AIDS. Nature 410, 1045-1046 (2001).

* Rambaut, A., Robertson, D. L., Pybus, O. G., Peeters, M. & Holmes, E. C. Phylogeny and the origin of HIV-1. Nature 410 1047-1048 (2001).

* Poinar, H., Kuch M., Pääbo, S. Molecular Analyses of Oral Polio Vaccine Samples. Science 292 743-744 (2001).

29 posted on 08/15/2002 7:19:06 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TomB
I present something to you - you refute it with a barrage of criticism...

why bother?

30 posted on 08/15/2002 8:03:50 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TomB
That tells me nothing except that you consider vaccinosis to be a "dis-ease", but that isn't a definition of "dis-ease".

If you use the word, it MUST have a meaning. Please define it, not use it in a sentence.

Yes that is the context in which I used the word...

OK if it must be explained and spelled out to you here goes:

dis

1. A prefix from the Latin, whence F. d['e]s, or sometimes d['e]-, dis-. The Latin dis-appears as di-before b, d, g, l, m, n, r, v, becomes dif-before f, and either dis-or di- before j. It is from the same root as bis twice, and duo, E. two. See Two, and cf. Bi-, Di-, Dia-. Dis-denotes separation, a parting from, as in distribute, disconnect; hence it often has the force of a privative and negative, as in disarm, disoblige, disagree. Also intensive, as in dissever.

ease

n.

The condition of being comfortable or relieved.

Freedom from pain, worry, or agitation: Her mind was at ease knowing that the children were safe. Freedom from constraint or embarrassment; naturalness.

Freedom from difficulty, hardship, or effort: rose through the ranks with apparent ease.

Readiness or dexterity in performance; facility: a pianist who played the sonata with ease.

Freedom from financial difficulty; affluence: a life of luxury and ease.

A state of rest, relaxation, or leisure: He took his ease by the pond.

you I believe use the word disease to denotes sickness due to pathogenic cause...

31 posted on 08/15/2002 8:15:37 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc; TomB
Sir,

Is there a reason you have no confidence in the published reports in dozens of medical journals for scores of years?

If so, please write. I would like to see your thinking.

Dr. McCoy

32 posted on 08/15/2002 8:44:07 AM PDT by bonesmccoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TomB
That's not true. We came up with a vaccine for malnutrition a long time ago, it's called food. It's 100% effective but requires frequent boosters. Inappropriate levity, that's my specialty.
33 posted on 08/15/2002 8:54:21 AM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
All you've "presented" is half a dozen op-ed pieces. Opinion isn't fact. Just check out Gore's "Earth in the Balance", 200 pages of opinion none of it backed up by one single fact. Spew forth some peer reviewed research, preferably actually on topic, and published since the Viet Nam war ended (definitely no 19th century psuedo medicine). And if you really want to convince anyone that understands science you still have to address the burning question: how did the MMR cause a spike in the autism rate 10 years before the MMR went into common use?
34 posted on 08/15/2002 8:59:14 AM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: discostu
That's not true. We came up with a vaccine for malnutrition a long time ago, it's called food. It's 100% effective but requires frequent boosters. Inappropriate levity, that's my specialty.

On a related note, one of the reasons that malnutrition results in increases in certain diseases is because of lack of vitamin A. Supplements of this vitamin, even though the overall caloric intake may not be optimum, greatly reduce incidence and severity of disease.
35 posted on 08/15/2002 8:59:29 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
you always quote what you feel is superior research - you knock one research with another research study while saying that all I do is cut n' paste, etc. etc...

are you familiar with Dr. Kilmer's story...

he too had research which the experts deemed to be quackery...

low and behold Dr. Kilmer was right!

read on TomB...

so much for quackery as it's seen in eyes like yours...

if the experts had taken Dr. Kilmer's research more seriously many people who died an untimely death would be alive today!

my point - who on this earth is qualified to diagnose quackery?

...the link for below

Known for Over Two Decades

July 1997

By Paul Frankel, Ph.D. and Terri Mitchell

None of this suprises Dr. Kilmer McCully. In 1969, while doing research at Harvard, McCully noticed that children with elevated levels of homocysteine (in a genetic condition known as homocystinuria) showed vascular degeneration similar to that which occurs in middle-aged people with heart disease. Children with homocystinuria often die of thromboembolism. Because this condition causes high levels of homocysteine to build up, McCully theorized that homocysteine might be a causal factor in heart disease. He then proceeded to prove that his theory was, in fact, correct.

His work was not met with applause in the scientific community, which coalesced in a herd mentality around the concept of cholesterol.

McCully was denied tenure, and soon left Harvard. In 1995, Meir Stampfer of Harvard recalled for NBC's Tom Brokaw what McCully went through for daring a different idea.

Now, almost 30 years after he made his discovery, the scientific community has finally acknowledged that homocysteine is a strong predictor of heart disease. Today, McCully is continuing his homocysteine research at the Veteran's Administration Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island. His long-standing theory has finally been confirmed and accepted by the medical community.

In 1969, Dr. Kilmer McCully examined the records of an 8-year-old boy who had died of a stroke. Strangely, the boy's arteries looked like the arteries of grown men who die of heart attacks. The only clue to what had gone wrong was that the boy had been diagnosed with "homocystinuria". Homocystinuria is a condition of enzyme deficiency that allows homocysteine to accumulate. Homocysteine is a by-product of methionine metabolism, which becomes toxic if allowed to accumulate. While the boy's case and others were dismised as medical oddities, McCully was astute enough to realize that homocysteine might be connected to cardiovascular disease.

In 1969, he published his theory in the American Journal of Pathology. In order to test his theory, McCully experimented with cells in culture-his hypothesis held up. He then went to animals. Within 20 days of being fed a high protein diet rich in methionine, the animals developed heart disease. The amount of protein was equivalent to typical human protein intake.

After seeing what homocysteine did in cell culture and animals, McCully was convinced that heart disease could be caused by homocysteine.One would think that discovering what could be the cause of the biggest health problem in North America would garner McCully some praise.

For his efforts, McCully was effectively fired from Harvard.

He subsequently went to the VA Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island, and continued his studies. He is still there.

In 1988, he published a study showing that men with homocysteine levels only 12% higher than average have a 3.4 time greater risk of having a heart attack.

Four years later, researchers at Harvard published data from a large study (the Physicians' Health Study) verifying what McCully had been saying since 1969.

Today, McCully has refined his theories and moved on to study other effects of homocysteine in the human body. He has published papers about homocysteine's role in cancer and aging. His new book, The Homocysteine Revolution: Medicine for the New Millennium, will be released shortly.


36 posted on 08/15/2002 9:03:38 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
Sir,

Is there a reason you have no confidence in the published reports in dozens of medical journals for scores of years?

If so, please write. I would like to see your thinking.

Dr. McCoy

see post #36...

37 posted on 08/15/2002 9:10:40 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: discostu
And if you really want to convince anyone that understands science you still have to address the burning question: how did the MMR cause a spike in the autism rate 10 years before the MMR went into common use?

link to graph and info below...

Rising rates of autism in California (long curve) and in U.K. (short curve). Start of MMR vaccination shown by arrows (CA, 1978; U.K., 1988). (Reference on request)

if you look at this graph you will see that after the administration of MMR the rate of autism explodes...

of course this in and of itself will prove nothing to you...

The Autism Explosion

Bernard Rimland, Ph.D.

Autism Research Institute

4182 Adams Avenue

San Diego, CA 92116

"Rubbish!" That is what Bennett Leventhal was quoted in the Chicago Sun-Times as saying in reply to a reporter's question regarding my position. I had said that the increase in autism is real, and that vaccinations are a prime suspect as a cause of the increase (ARRI, 9/3, 1995, 12/1, 1998). Leventhal, who is a professor of child psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Chicago, says the autism/vaccine link is just a coincidence and "there is increasingly powerful evidence that this is a genetic disorder."

How ironic! "rubbish" is what Leventhal's predecessor at the University of Chicago, Bruno Bettelheim, said in response to my insistence in the mid-1960s that genetics played an important role in causing autism! No doubt genetics do play an important role in some cases of autism. Neither is there any doubt, despite the strange skepticism of Leventhal and many others, that the prevalence of autism is increasing at an alarming rate in the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere in the world (see graph). The only open question is the role vaccines may play as a potential causal agent in the autism epidemic. There is no plausible alternative to vaccines as the most likely cause. I have never heard of a genetic epidemic disease.


38 posted on 08/15/2002 9:30:16 AM PDT by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
I look at the graph and I see the rate is already going up, especially in England, before the MMR is introduced. In both curves you've got a significant spike right before the MMR. your graph proves beyond any doubt that the rate was climbing BEFORE MMR.

Remember, temporal link does not prove causality (ie if the graphs said what you say they said that wouldn't prove anything), but lack of temporal link does DISPROVE causality. You lack the temporal link. Whatever is causing the rise in autism was well under way pre-MMR. Your own graph shows this unequivocally.
39 posted on 08/15/2002 9:38:22 AM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc; TomB
Parents have good reason to be concerned about the possibility of a mumps outbreak in London. The epidemiological history of this infectious disease suggests that mumps is unpleasant but hardly ever fatal to children. In rare cases it causes meningitis or encephalitis; it can also cause infertility in boys. Before there was a vaccine for mumps, it tended to kill no more than five people a year.

Yet it is impossible to be certain that half a century of vaccination against the disease will not have weakened our natural immunity to the extent that a renewed outbreak would produce unusually severe symptoms.

This is why the near quadrupling of mumps cases in the capital to 112 in 2001, and the 30 per cent rise in the last quarter over the previous three months, is particularly worrying, given that clinics across the country have been without supplies of the mumps vaccine for up to six months and do not know when they can expect fresh supplies.


You do notice, don't you, the extremely poor reasoning in the above paragraphs? It would not be surprising at all to find, in the wake of a fad of parents eschewing vaccination, leaving their children unprotected, that the incidence of a particular disease, such as mumps, would increase in a population in which it had formerly been decreased due to vaccinations. This is the most direct explanation rather than invoking nonsense about vaccinations resulting a reduction in "natural immunity". It also confuses increased incidence of the disease with increased severity of clinical signs of the disease (not to be confused with "symptoms"). Vaccinations would have no effect at all if not for the body's immune system. "Natural immunity" for any particular disease is simply the percentage of people who, in the absence of either immunization or quarantine and following exposure to the pathogen, do not become infected. The body does have wonderful overlapping immune systems, but it is in spite of this that people, if challenged with a sufficiently large load of pathogens, become infected. Depending upon the exposure, the virulence of the pathogen, and the state of health, the person will either have no detectable sign of the disease (except as revealed through antibody titers), a slight case, a severe case, or a fatal case. Immunization is the most effective way of working with the body's immune system to protect someone against a future encounter with the wild-type pathogen. No amount of good diet, subluxation "therapy", proper mental attitude, or alignment of the chakras will do as much to protect one against a disease as immunization .
40 posted on 08/15/2002 10:05:02 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Whatever is causing the rise in autism was well under way pre-MMR. Your own graph shows this unequivocally.

No it wasn't, and the graph demonstrates nothing of a kind.  There was a "catchup campaign" initiated in NW London in 1988 involving non-vaccinated children born in 1986.  These children were inoculated with MMR in 1988, but the autism incidence rates were recorded by birth year, as the graph clearly shows.

Please see a discussion of this very question in a letter printed in the Lancet:

Wakefield, A, "MMR vaccination and autism," Lancet, 354 (Sep 1999): 949-950.

Next, I'll be hearing that the Lancet is a non peer-reviewed journal.  LOL.

41 posted on 08/15/2002 11:01:49 AM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Al B.
Yes it does. In England in 1978 we see 100 autistic kids, in 1986 two years before the vaccine we see 250, and there's a relatively steady steady climb through that whole period. Even if you back up two years because it's graphing by birthdate instead of diagnosis date you still see a 100% increase in autistic kids BEFORE MMR. Same kind of thing going on in the California graph. The rate is CLEARLY increasing in both sample sets before MMR.
42 posted on 08/15/2002 11:11:52 AM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: discostu
What the hell are you talking about? The number of new cases is the axis on the right and the UK line is for NW London ONLY! Go read the Lancet article where the graph was originally printed before you start spouting non-factual nonsense.

You might also be interested to know that in California, DSM-IV criteria for autism yields an estimated incidence of autism of 105-263 cases in 1998, when in actuality there were 1,685 new cases reported.

Nah, on 2nd thought you're probably not interested.

43 posted on 08/15/2002 11:27:10 AM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Al B.
Concerning the California study:

    Follow-up analysis and complete study A follow-up analysis of the data published in 2001 showed that there is no association between autism rates in California and the proportions of young children in this state who have received Measles Mumps Rubella (MMR) vaccine.

    There are no recommended childhood vaccines or any other vaccines that are known to cause autism in children.

    The complete study by authors Dales L, Hammer SJ, Smith, NJ. Entitled 2001 Time Trends in Autism and in MMR Immunization Coverage in California, published in JAMA 285, 1183-1185.

    Facts of the study

    * The study looked at the percent of children born in 1980-1994 and enrolled in California kindergartens who received the MMR vaccine, by age when the vaccine was received, and the number of autism cases enrolled in the California Department of Developmental Services regional service center system.

    * The number of autism cases in California increased greatly, over 373%, compared to only a small 14% increase in MMR vaccine coverage in children for the same time period.

    * If there were a relationship between MMR vaccination and autism, one would expect the shape of the MMR immunization level curve to be very similar to the shape of the autism case number curve. This is not the case, thus the analysis in this study does not support any link between MMR vaccination and autism.

View the proper graph here.

44 posted on 08/15/2002 11:46:10 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Al B.
And since you find the Lancet such a good source of information:

Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association

Brent Taylor, Elizabeth Miller, C Paddy Farrington, Maria-Christina Petropoulos, Isabelle Favot-Mayaud, Jun Li, Pauline A Waight

Department of Community Child Health, Royal Free Campus, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, London NW3 2QG, UK (Prof B Taylor FRCPCH, M-C Petropoulos MRCP, I Favot-Mayaud MD, J Li PhD); Immunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London (E Miller FRCPath, P A Waight BSc); and Department of Statistics, Open University (C P Farrington PhD)

Correspondence to: Prof Brent Taylor

Summary

Background We undertook an epidemiological study to investigate whether measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may be causally associated with autism.

Methods Children with autism born since 1979 were identified from special needs/disability registers and special schools in eight North Thames health districts, UK. Information from clinical records was linked to immunisation data held on the child health computing system. We looked for evidence of a change in trend in incidence or age at diagnosis associated with the introduction of MMR vaccination to the UK in 1988. Clustering of onsets within defined postvaccination periods was investigated by the case-series method.

Findings We identified 498 cases of autism (261 of core autism, 166 of atypical autism, and 71 of Asperger's syndrome). In 293 cases the diagnosis could be confirmed by the criteria of the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD10: 214 [82%] core autism, 52 [31%] atypical autism, 27 [38%] Asperger's syndrome). There was a steady increase in cases by year of birth with no sudden "step-up" or change in the trend line after the introduction of MMR vaccination. There was no difference in age at diagnosis between the cases vaccinated before or after 18 months of age and those never vaccinated. There was no temporal association between onset of autism within 1 or 2 years after vaccination with MMR (relative incidence compared with control period 0·94 [95% CI 0·60­1·47] and 1·09 [0·79­1·52]). Developmental regression was not clustered in the months after vaccination (relative incidence within 2 months and 4 months after MMR vaccination 0·92 [0·38­2·21] and 1·00 [0·52­1·95]). No significant temporal clustering for age at onset of parental concern was seen for cases of core autism or atypical autism with the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccination. This appeared to be an artifact related to the difficulty of defining precisely the onset of symptoms in this disorder.

Interpretation Our analyses do not support a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism. If such an association occurs, it is so rare that it could not be identified in this large regional sample.

Lancet 1999; 353: 2026­2

45 posted on 08/15/2002 11:55:58 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
why bother?

Seeing all the incorrect information you've been posting, I've been wondering the same thing, doc.

"Why bother" indeed.

BTW, congrats on completing a post without any cut-and-paste.

46 posted on 08/15/2002 12:05:16 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Al B.
I don't read opinion pieces, I read peer reviewed research. I'm sorry if you can't read the graph. It's clear the rate of autism is climbing steadily before the MMR. It's clear that as with so many psychological symptoms the definition of autism is expanding. Observe this list of "symptoms" of Asperger Syndrome (one of autism's subspecies, only diagnosed since the 80s):
lack of empathy
naive, inappropriate, one sided interaction
little or no ability to form friendships
pedantic, repetitive speech
poor nonverbal communication
intense absorbtion in certain subjects
clumsy and ill coordinated movements and odd postures

Now go over to a WOD or crevo thread and tell me how many FReepers are autistic. When the definition keeps expanding you're bound to get an "epidemic". To blame that epidemic on medicine that didn't even start getting used until after the epidemic has begun is fool hardy. Let's lock down the definition of autism and see what happens to the rate of diagnosis before we cast aspersions on vaccines that have saved thousands, possibly millions, of lives.
47 posted on 08/15/2002 12:22:25 PM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
Four years later, researchers at Harvard published data from a large study (the Physicians' Health Study) verifying what McCully had been saying since 1969.

So he published a study, and then further, independent research confirmed his findings. Just the way it is supposed to work.

Now, all Wakefield has to do is get someone to reproduce his findings. But while it's been tried, no correlation has been found.

48 posted on 08/15/2002 12:22:32 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
Whoops, looks like you've got another bad article. While it doesn't make anything up, it certainly embellishes Dr. Kilmer's plight:

    His work was not met with applause in the scientific community, which coalesced in a herd mentality around the concept of cholesterol.

    McCully was denied tenure, and soon left Harvard. In 1995, Meir Stampfer of Harvard recalled for NBC's Tom Brokaw what McCully went through for daring a different idea.

Here is an interview which paints quite a different picture:

    "McCully: The immediate reaction when I first started was supportive. I had a number of colleagues who were interested, and the chairman of my department was interested for a period of about five or six years. I was able to publish the basic elements of the theory until about 1975, when the chairman of my department retired. The new chairman informed me that I would have to support my work in some way but no he made no effort to help obtain this support. My laboratory was removed from the department to another part of the hospital. It was made clear to me that I should look elsewhere for support. The Director of the hospital told me that Harvard Medical School believed that I hadn't proven my theory. I left Harvard at the end of December of 1978 and came to Providence VA Medical Center in 1981 where I have worked ever since.

Sounds like he wasn't getting anywhere with his research and was let go (perhaps he didn't get along well with the new chairman?).

Anyway, the real story is much less "sexy" than what you posted.

You really need to quite taking these articles at face value.

49 posted on 08/15/2002 12:31:48 PM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: discostu
To blame that epidemic on medicine that didn't even start getting used until after the epidemic has begun is fool hardy.

You've got me confused with someone else. I'm not blaming the huge increase in autism diagnoses on anything. As a parent who has vaccinated his kids with MMR, I AM, however, interested in getting to the truth of the matter, not just play some silly game of abstract posting.

And I know all about the objectivity of medical journals, peer-reviewed and otherwise. Getting to the truth in medical research these days isn't all that easy.

50 posted on 08/15/2002 12:48:46 PM PDT by Al B.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-274 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson