And every mother is screened for it during pregnancy. Don’t blow smoke up my rear.
RFK measles cure
- Thread starter WhyisIUBBcursed
- Start date
First, the CDC has always maintained that vitamins are necessary. But they don't imply, hint or otherwise suggest that they should be used to combat measles.
Second, I was pretty clear that the manner and sequencing and what the statement left out absolutely was someone who didn't give two shits about taking measles vaccine. And he doesn't
We aren't talking about the HPV vax--we are talking about measles.
You miss the point here, and you are still wrong--and likely wouldn't know anyway.
During 2016-2020, 88% of commercially insured women and 84% of Medicaid-enrolled women were tested for Hep B surface antigen. However, few than half of expected births to Hep B positive patients were identified.
You don't stop the pregnancy for Hep B-part 2 of why the vaccine is important. But again, you wouldn't know. At this point, it appears you are just playing the contrarian card without really knowing what you talking about.
And of course if a mother is tested, then they should not give their child the Hep B vaccine immediately (or at all) if they don’t wish to.
I can't believe I'm defending what that nut job has said, but I don't understand why everyone is off their rocker because of what he said. Plenty of other BS he's spewed to be upset about.
If you want to get into semantics and the order of phrases, go for it. I just think it's ridiculous to get hung up on that statement when he's said other things that are actually so far out there that only a fringe group of people agree with him.
Rubeola / Measles | CDC Yellow Book 2024
Information about how to order the U.S. government publication about traveling titled "Health Information for International Travel" (also called the "Yellow Book"). Provided by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
wwwnc.cdc.gov
Treatment is supportive. The WHO recommends vitamin A for all children with acute measles, regardless of their country of residence, to reduce the risk for complications. Administer vitamin A as follows:
Clinical Overview of Measles
Learn about clinical diagnosing and treating measles cases.
www.cdc.gov
Under the supervision of a healthcare provider, vitamin A may be administered to infants and children in the United States with measles as part of supportive management. Under a physician's supervision, children with severe measles, such as those who are hospitalized, should be managed with vitamin A.
Last edited:
This is false.
Otherwise you would see a roughly equal diagnosis of autism across all age groups now that we’re screening for it. But that’s not the case, heavily skewed towards younger people.
Who is screening a 50 year old for ASD? Aren't kids the only ones widely screened?
What kind of PCP can’t identify a patient displaying autistic behaviors? Especially older patients that visit more frequently?
The whole “we screen for it better?” is some of the worst malarkey that’s ever been purveyed. Agreed?
Last edited:
No I don't agree. Basically every child gets ASD screening today at like 18-24 months. Since it's a developmental issue... Not sure there is a hell of a lot to be done for a 50 year old.
There's a long long list of things we treat people for (and see TV commercials for) that were unheard of 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean that the maladies didn't exist. Restless leg syndrome. Thyroid Eye disease. Carrot dick syndrome.
Sometimes your stupidity actually impresses me. It's incredible how confident you are in it.
This is chiefly the reason for the over-diagnosis. A lot of $ to be made in manufactured maladies. To the extent it actually has risen, that’s environmental of course. Over-vaccination being one of the chief suspects.
Give me facts. Not babble speak and your ill informed hunch. I gave you facts. You should do the same
If it is vaccine related, shouldn't vaccinated and non-vaccinated have wildly different rates?
In the link below, #1 under Ecological studies contains this line:
These authors also found no differences in autism rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated children when they extended their analysis to include a longer time after MMR exposure or a second dose of MMR [6].
A different study, #4 in that same section has this, "Autism rates increased coincident with a decrease in MMR vaccination rates."
Vaccines and Autism: A Tale of Shifting Hypotheses - PMC
Although child vaccination rates remain high, some parental concern persists that vaccines might cause autism. Three specific hypotheses have been proposed: (1) the combination measles-mumps-rubella vaccine causes autism by damaging the intestinal ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
And then under Observational Studies was this:
- In Denmark, again using a national registry, researchers determined vaccination status and autism diagnosis in 537,303 children born during 1991–1998 [14]. The authors observed no differences in the relative risk of autism between those who did and those who did not receive MMR vaccine. Among autistic children, no relationship between date of vaccination and development of autism was observed.
Geesh. The insanity of your response is mind boggling. You are doing more than suggesting that autism is a manufactured illness--you are flat out suggesting there is a sinister reason for its classification.
We don't have to think that God is punishing us and that is why we are getting sick. We clean up the water we drink.
We don't have to think that demons have possessed us anymore. We can treat mental and physical illness.
Sad.
The fact that somehow this has become a political battle because some stupid bastard (Andrew Wakefield), who fraudulently created the facts behind his absurdity, is insane. Wakefield's own co-authors retracted their work because it was 100% bullshit "We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between (the) vaccine and autism, as the data were insufficient."If it is vaccine related, shouldn't vaccinated and non-vaccinated have wildly different rates?
In the link below, #1 under Ecological studies contains this line:
These authors also found no differences in autism rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated children when they extended their analysis to include a longer time after MMR exposure or a second dose of MMR [6].
A different study, #4 in that same section has this, "Autism rates increased coincident with a decrease in MMR vaccination rates."
Vaccines and Autism: A Tale of Shifting Hypotheses - PMC
Although child vaccination rates remain high, some parental concern persists that vaccines might cause autism. Three specific hypotheses have been proposed: (1) the combination measles-mumps-rubella vaccine causes autism by damaging the intestinal ...
And then under Observational Studies was this:
- In Denmark, again using a national registry, researchers determined vaccination status and autism diagnosis in 537,303 children born during 1991–1998 [14]. The authors observed no differences in the relative risk of autism between those who did and those who did not receive MMR vaccine. Among autistic children, no relationship between date of vaccination and development of autism was observed.
There have been several studies done. For example, the National Library of Medicine found that in 2018 the average life expectancy of someone with autism was 39 years. Up to 45 and 54 in other studies. You aren't seeing 50 year old's because they are generally passing away due to respiratory, cardiac, and epileptic events. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1664-z
What point are you even trying to make? That ASD is over diagnosed? Or that ASD has increased because of vaccines?
No, vaccination being studied and eliminated as even a contributing factor to autism over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over...
The absence of proof for an autism-vaccination link is as striking as the absence of proof for a flat Earth.
The fact that so many people don't know this is amazing.
When research is sloppy / faked / fudged, it gets retracted.
But Wakefield's papers were not just sloppy, he made up studies that never happened out of whole cloth. The fraud was so severe that mere retraction wasn't enough. He had to be barred from ever practicing medicine again. In a bit of irony, he then went on the speaking circuit to spread his bullshit even wider. More people heard his bogus rants at speaking engagements than would ever have read his made-up horseshit papers.
They don’t want to be tracked…while using their cellphones, credit/debit cards, using the internet and with security cameras being EVERYWHERE. Oh, don’t forget their car’s GPS. Yeah, “they” don’t need microchips to track their fat asses. Hell, their extra layer of “insulation” would probably block any signal from a microchip anyway.
If you are not seeing the link, it is because you don’t want to see the link.
Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid - Science, Public Health Policy and the Law
Background: Vaccinations required for school attendance have increased nearly threefold since the 1950s, now targeting 17 infectious diseases. However, the
publichealthpolicyjournal.com
HHS sounds like they’re commissioning a more comprehensive study, let us all be thankful.
ooh, from the prestigious Chalfont Research Institute in Jackson MS. With a HOME (residential) ADDRESS for a fake institute, "published" not in any recognized journal and without peer review.
The specific paper you (and Kennedy) cited — which claims to have found that “[v]accinated children were significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed” with autism and a variety of other neurodevelopmental disorders — is not rigorous.
“I have read this paper carefully, and it has so many severe methodological issues, it clearly would never have passed any legitimate peer review,” Jeffrey S. Morris, director of the division of biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, told us.
The paper was published on Jan. 23 in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, an outlet that claims to be a peer-reviewed journal, but as we have noted before, is not available on PubMed Central, the National Institutes of Health’s database of biomedical research, nor indexed on MEDLINE, which requires some evaluation of journal quality. The editor-in-chief and other board members, including the section editor for the paper, are well-known spreaders of vaccine misinformation.
The two authors, including lead author Anthony Mawson, are affiliated with Chalfont Research Institute in Mississippi, which does not have a website and appears to use a residential home as a mailing address, based on IRS records. Both authors have previously published work on vaccines that has been retracted. The paper was funded by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group.
RFK Jr. Cites Flawed Paper Claiming Link Between Vaccines and Autism in HHS Confirmation Hearing - FactCheck.org
In his second day of confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, refused to say that vaccines do not cause autism -- despite a large body of evidence showing there is no link. He also pointed to a flawed paper...
www.factcheck.org
It's like linking the Flat Earther newsletter
I see a lot of character assassinating the people and organizations that conducted and published the study.ooh, from the prestigious Chalfont Research Institute in Jackson MS. With a HOME ADDRESS for a fake institute, "published" not in any recognized journal and without peer review
The specific paper you (and Kennedy) cited — which claims to have found that “[v]accinated children were significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed” with autism and a variety of other neurodevelopmental disorders — is not rigorous.
“I have read this paper carefully, and it has so many severe methodological issues, it clearly would never have passed any legitimate peer review,” Jeffrey S. Morris, director of the division of biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, told us.
The paper was published on Jan. 23 in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, an outlet that claims to be a peer-reviewed journal, but as we have noted before, is not available on PubMed Central, the National Institutes of Health’s database of biomedical research, nor indexed on MEDLINE, which requires some evaluation of journal quality. The editor-in-chief and other board members, including the section editor for the paper, are well-known spreaders of vaccine misinformation.
The two authors, including lead author Anthony Mawson, are affiliated with Chalfont Research Institute in Mississippi, which does not have a website and appears to use a residential home as a mailing address, based on IRS records. Both authors have previously published work on vaccines that has been retracted. The paper was funded by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group.
RFK Jr. Cites Flawed Paper Claiming Link Between Vaccines and Autism in HHS Confirmation Hearing - FactCheck.org
In his second day of confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, refused to say that vaccines do not cause autism -- despite a large body of evidence showing there is no link. He also pointed to a flawed paper...
It's like linking the Flat Earther newsletter
Given that all the studies you rely on are conducted by organizations largely funded by pharma, I’ll take mine thank you very much.
They didn't conduct any study.
It is a work of fiction, pure and simple. Fabricated "research" by authors who have tried to publish before and were turned down or (worse) got their papers accepted, before they were RETRACTED.
They even made up a fake name for a "research institute" located in somebody's garage.
Say what you want about pharma sponsored research, but Eli Lilly (as an example) is really a company and really does research. Unlike that drivel you linked and that RFK Jr. swallowed.
You can create a fake sciencey-sounding website and publish your own fabricated "study" from the fabricated "GooglyMooglyWooglyBoogly Research Institute" in a fabricated journal and it would be just as valid.
Last edited:
There was no link previously provided. Nevertheless, this paper you site has been thoroughly thrashed and rightfully so:If you are not seeing the link, it is because you don’t want to see the link.
Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid - Science, Public Health Policy and the Law
Background: Vaccinations required for school attendance have increased nearly threefold since the 1950s, now targeting 17 infectious diseases. However, the
HHS sounds like they’re commissioning a more comprehensive study, let us all be thankful.
"The two authors, including lead author Anthony Mawson, are affiliated with Chalfont Research Institute in Mississippi, which does not have a website and appears to use a residential home as a mailing address, based on IRS records. Both authors have previously published work on vaccines that has been retracted. The paper was funded by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group.
Using Florida Medicaid claims data, the paper compared how common certain neurodevelopmental disorders, or NDDs, including autism, were in 9-year-old children born between 1999 and 2002 who were considered vaccinated with those who were not.
Children were counted as vaccinated if they ever had a health care visit with a billing code for a vaccine in their Medicaid claim records. The authors did not have information on which vaccines were administered or whether children might have been vaccinated outside of the Medicaid system.
The authors reported finding that about 28% of vaccinated kids had been diagnosed with at least one NDD, compared with 11% for unvaccinated children. For autism specifically, the authors said vaccinated kids were about 2.7 times more likely to have a diagnosis than those who never had a vaccine billing code in their Medicaid records.
Morris, however, said several features made the paper’s primary analysis “severely flawed from a biostatistical standpoint.”
One of the biggest issues, he said in an email, is that the analysis “ignores all confounding factors that might influence both propensity to [be] vaccinated and propensity to be identified with a NDD, and treats the 90% of the population who were vaccinated by age 9 as equivalent in every way except vaccination to the 10% who remained unvaccinated at age 9 (according to Medicaid records).”
Of these confounding factors, Morris said, “by far the most important one” is a person’s health care utilization status, which he said should have been available in the data. People who use more health care are more likely to get vaccinated and to have a condition diagnosed and treated.
Other factors, he said, include: race, since there are known disparities in autism diagnoses; and genetics and family, because parents are likely to vaccinate their children similarly and autism can run in families.
In addition, Morris said the authors didn’t “even check whether the NDD diagnosis occurred before or after the first vaccination record.”
“The authors’ ignoring of all current literature going against their hypothesis is another severe flaw,” he said, “as is their citation of their own previous paper that was retracted.”
Other scientists have also noted many of these problems and others with the Mawson paper."
Great minds and all--I just posted the same thing.ooh, from the prestigious Chalfont Research Institute in Jackson MS. With a HOME (residential) ADDRESS for a fake institute, "published" not in any recognized journal and without peer review.
The specific paper you (and Kennedy) cited — which claims to have found that “[v]accinated children were significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed” with autism and a variety of other neurodevelopmental disorders — is not rigorous.
“I have read this paper carefully, and it has so many severe methodological issues, it clearly would never have passed any legitimate peer review,” Jeffrey S. Morris, director of the division of biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, told us.
The paper was published on Jan. 23 in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law, an outlet that claims to be a peer-reviewed journal, but as we have noted before, is not available on PubMed Central, the National Institutes of Health’s database of biomedical research, nor indexed on MEDLINE, which requires some evaluation of journal quality. The editor-in-chief and other board members, including the section editor for the paper, are well-known spreaders of vaccine misinformation.
The two authors, including lead author Anthony Mawson, are affiliated with Chalfont Research Institute in Mississippi, which does not have a website and appears to use a residential home as a mailing address, based on IRS records. Both authors have previously published work on vaccines that has been retracted. The paper was funded by the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine group.
RFK Jr. Cites Flawed Paper Claiming Link Between Vaccines and Autism in HHS Confirmation Hearing - FactCheck.org
In his second day of confirmation hearings, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, refused to say that vaccines do not cause autism -- despite a large body of evidence showing there is no link. He also pointed to a flawed paper...
It's like linking the Flat Earther newsletter
It really is. It is now a conspiratorial or contrarian slant when you don't trust what the most respected doctors have to say because you think they've all been captured by big Pharma, so you found a guy in Tijuana, or who works out of his garage who says he can cure your cancer. You don't trust what the Mayo Clinic says about vaccines, and now you're afraid to get your kids vaccinated because you've listened to 14 hours of RFK Jr on podcasts, so you've started trusting him as what a new authority on vaccines.
If you no longer trust the experts, you've likely started trusting someone's uncle most of the time
Last edited:
He’s totally ignorant about many subjects, but has strong opinions about those subjects anyway. It’s fascinating, but also exceptionally annoying.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
If I’m Illinois fan, Underwood is my worst nightmare…
- Latest: hickorytree1
-