Respectful Insolence

Before I move on to other topics, I can’t resist one last comment about the corrupt and sleazy Andrew Wakefield, the man who, with the help of heaping piles of cash from lawyers, almost singlehandedly produced a scare over the possibility that the MMR vaccine causes autism so large that vaccination rates in the U.K. fell precipitously, leading to massive misery due to a resurgence of the diseases prevented by the MMR vaccine and at least one death. Brian Deer, as you may know, is the journalist who exposed the disgusting underbelly of Wakefield’s activities and who also broke the story of just how much money Wakefield and his cronies had accepted from lawyers beginning before his 1998 journal article that caused the MMR scare was ever published.

Now, Brian Deer asks the question about Jackie Fletcher, the woman who runs JABS, the anti-MMR group from the northwest of England: Did she know about the dough?

A very good question, don’t you think? Anyone want to guess what the answer probably is?

The most amusing part of Deer’s article is his takedown of anti-mercury crusader Erik Nanstiel. Remind me never to get on Brian Deer’s bad side. Deer could teach Orac a thing or two about insolence.

Comments

  1. #1 Pro-Liar
    January 6, 2007

    Orac, all you have to do to steer clear of Brian’s wrath is not to lie, don’t get paid with taxpayer dollars for being a liar, and don’t publish a lie that has the potential to harm citizens. Pretty easy to keep Deer-free that way.

    Brian is doing a jig on Waker’s grave right now. It’s all over but the shouting. Wakers has bought himself a one-way ticket and unfortunately the saps that went along with him are left to either defend him or slink away soothing their damaged wallets and egos.

    And it’s not that Erik is anti-mercury. He’s just Pro-Geier in a very twisted and bizarre way. One has to wonder if quantummoron’s beliefs in psychics and his “the government is spying on me with black helicopters” psychosis is a genetic flaw that the Vultures have taken advantage of.

    “Sir, please turn around, drop your drawers, and bend over slightly. I’ve got a BA in History and this won’t hurt a bit.”

  2. #2 Bennett
    January 6, 2007

    One of our ID docs at my hospital gave a Grand Rounds talk about the “surge” in mumps in the US recently. In the last few years cases have gone from 600-700 a year to over 6000 last year.

    He then went on to show that several of the outbreaks, including the one major one we had in New York State, were directly tracable to individuals who had come over from the UK incubating mumps.

    He then gave the UK figures.

    Over 70,000 cases in the year 2004-2005. Holy crap. More than ten times the number of cases in a country one fifth the size of the US.

    Wakefield has an awful, awful lot to answer for.

    What amuses me the most about the autism/MMR non-link, is that in the UK the public thinks it’s all due to the measles portion of the vaccine, whereas in the US the public thinks it’s all about the thimerosal perservative (which the US no longer uses anyway). The misinformation isn’t even consistent…

  3. #3 Orac
    January 6, 2007

    What amuses me the most about the autism/MMR non-link, is that in the UK the public thinks it’s all due to the measles portion of the vaccine, whereas in the US the public thinks it’s all about the thimerosal perservative (which the US no longer uses anyway). The misinformation isn’t even consistent..

    It’s even a worse misconception than that in the U.S., given that MMR has never had thimerosal in it. It’s a live attenuated virus vaccine, and the thimerosal would kill the viruses.

  4. #4 Common Sense
    January 7, 2007

    It’s a live attenuated virus vaccine, and the thimerosal would kill the viruses.

    Emphasis on KILL the viruses. So, thimerosal kills. Cool. How do we know what else it kills? Surely, thimerosal isn’t able to tell the difference between a virus and a brain cell? Or, can it?

  5. #5 Orac
    January 7, 2007

    Emphasis on KILL the viruses. So, thimerosal kills. Cool. How do we know what else it kills? Surely, thimerosal isn’t able to tell the difference between a virus and a brain cell? Or, can it?

    Are you that ignorant or do you have to work at it?

    There’s a big difference between a substance inactivating a virus (and I’m not even going to go into the debate over whether a virus can be considered truly “alive” or not) and being harmful to people in the amount that is in a vaccine. Thimerosal will do the former, but there is no good epidemiological evidence (the Geiers and Boyd Haley certainly don’t count) that it will do the latter. Even if the two situations were analogous (which they are not), to produce the same concentration of thimerosal in a child that a virus would “see” in a 5 or 10 cc vial of vaccine, the amount of thimerosal would have to be many, many times more than what is in a vaccine.

    The entire concept of dose-response curves is apparently lost on you.

  6. #6 Ruth
    January 7, 2007

    The sugar in your jam or the salt in your ham are there to prevent bacterial growth. Will they kill you if you eat them for breakfast?

    As noted before, thiomersal was added to vaccines after several children died from baterial contamination of vaccines. Based on the tox data available at the time (LD50 of 45 mg/kg) it was considered safe to add traces of thiomersal.

    Dose/response curves are important. Botulism toxin is far more deadly than thiomersal, but at the concentration in Botox, it has a very good safety record.

  7. #7 HCN
    January 7, 2007

    Water also kills… but I do not see an outcry to ban it.

    Oh, wait, I have: http://www.dhmo.org/

  8. #8 Andrew Dodds
    January 8, 2007

    Common Sense:

    Your body, right now, contains Cyanides, Aresnic, dozens if not hundreds of different types of viruses, hundreds of types of bacteria, Uranium, Radium, Plutonium, Mercury, Lead, assorted insecticides and herbicides, benzine, heterocylic amines, peroxides, superoxides, PCBs and lots, lots more.

    How come you are still alive?

  9. #9 anonimouse
    January 8, 2007

    Common Sense:

    Your body, right now, contains Cyanides, Aresnic, dozens if not hundreds of different types of viruses, hundreds of types of bacteria, Uranium, Radium, Plutonium, Mercury, Lead, assorted insecticides and herbicides, benzine, heterocylic amines, peroxides, superoxides, PCBs and lots, lots more.

    How come you are still alive?

    Good question. My sense is that Sue is not a real person, but a anti-vax canard spewing bot. Thus, she would not have mercury, uranium and lead circulating through her body, because she would not have one.

  10. #10 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Thimerosal will do the former, but there is no good epidemiological evidence (the Geiers and Boyd Haley certainly don’t count) that it will do the latter.

    No good evidence of harm does not equate with it being safe. Get me a petri dish with some living cells and inject thimerosal into the dish. Record what happens and then we can talk. Until then, you know nothing. I’m not sure why continue to pretend that you do.

  11. #11 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Water also kills… but I do not see an outcry to ban it.

    Oh, wait, I have: http://www.dhmo.org/

    Oh, yes, it can’t officially be an Orac thread (having to do with autism/vaccinations) without someone bringing up the insane water also kills argument. Guess what? A few months ago I was watching a news program and there was a discussion about how dangerous it is to allow babies to drink water before a certain age (don’t remember the age now). There you have it… water, dangerous… thimerosal, safe. I feel better all ready.

    Now, about the website that you linked to. Can you point out the part where they want to ban water. I see references to DHMO … help me here… is that the same thing as water?

  12. #12 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Your body, right now, contains Cyanides, Aresnic, dozens if not hundreds of different types of viruses, hundreds of types of bacteria, Uranium, Radium, Plutonium, Mercury, Lead, assorted insecticides and herbicides, benzine, heterocylic amines, peroxides, superoxides, PCBs and lots, lots more.

    Right. No doubt. So, would it be advisable to inject 187.5 micrograms, of say, cyanide into an average 6 month old baby? I mean they already must have some toxins in their system due to maternal factors, so it should be cool to add more, right?

    p.s. before someone points out the difference in molecular weight (or other such nonsense) between cyanide and mercury, don’t bother. You get the idea.

  13. #13 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Good question. My sense is that Sue is not a real person, but a anti-vax canard spewing bot. Thus, she would not have mercury, uranium and lead circulating through her body, because she would not have one.

    Riiiiiiight, Mouse. Good one.

  14. #14 Andrew Dodds
    January 8, 2007

    Common Sense –

    To borrow a quote(*), you appear to be so out of your depth that the fish have funny lights on their heads.

    The point is that a sufficently small amount of a substance will do no harm, no matter how toxic that substance may be at a large dose.

    And Di-Hydrogen MonOxide (DHMO) is water. As is hydrogen oxide, oxygen(II) hydride, hydrogen hydroxide..etc.

  15. #15 Andrew Dodds
    January 8, 2007

    Common Sense –

    To borrow a quote(*), you appear to be so out of your depth that the fish have funny lights on their heads.

    The point is that a sufficently small amount of a substance will do no harm, no matter how toxic that substance may be at a large dose.

    And Di-Hydrogen MonOxide (DHMO) is water. As is hydrogen oxide, oxygen(II) hydride, hydrogen hydroxide..etc.

  16. #16 Jud
    January 8, 2007

    Common Sense said:

    “Get me a petri dish with some living cells and inject thimerosal into the dish. Record what happens and then we can talk.”

    Far more rigorous testing than injecting thimerosal into “a petri dish with some living cells” has already been done – see http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimfaq.htm

    OK, what would you like to talk about?

  17. #17 Bronze Dog
    January 8, 2007

    Because putting cells in a petri dish and putting in what would likely be unrealistic doses without giving the subject cells access to the liver, kidneys and other stuff is the surest way of putting the whole thing in context of a whole, functioning human body.

    Reminds me of my school days when I got heavy exposure to radical environmentalism that resorted to propaganda over facts (Of course, there are lots of reasonable environmentalists out there, but that’s for another time and place): One bit I recall hearing back then was that there was a now-extinct rainforest tree whose sap could kill HIV in the test tube. Only later did I realize that just about anything could kill HIV in the test tube. The problem is killing the HIV in the human body without killing said human body.

  18. #18 Joseph
    January 8, 2007

    Sue avoided the question. Why haven’t you died, Sue, with all those different toxins and pathogens in your body?

  19. #19 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    To borrow a quote(*), you appear to be so out of your depth that the fish have funny lights on their heads.

    The point is that a sufficently small amount of a substance will do no harm, no matter how toxic that substance may be at a large dose.

    And Di-Hydrogen MonOxide (DHMO) is water. As is hydrogen oxide, oxygen(II) hydride, hydrogen hydroxide..etc.

    Odd website. Almost seems as if one of you put it together. Whatever. I will continue to think of water as H2O…

    To your other point. What I have asked and will continue to ask is … what is the “safe” dose of thimerosal (mercury) to be injected into people (including pregnant women and babies). We need to know that BEFORE we can state that a small amount can do no harm. Right? Where do I lose you on that? It seems so obvious.

  20. #20 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    “Get me a petri dish with some living cells and inject thimerosal into the dish. Record what happens and then we can talk.”

    Far more rigorous testing than injecting thimerosal into “a petri dish with some living cells” has already been done – see http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimfaq.htm

    iOK, what would you like to talk about?

    You had me for a second, Jud. I actually thought that you had something which would be of use to me here. Wrong. There have been no safety studies on thimerosal… The sooner you get that the better off you will be.

  21. #21 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Because putting cells in a petri dish and putting in what would likely be unrealistic doses without giving the subject cells access to the liver, kidneys and other stuff is the surest way of putting the whole thing in context of a whole, functioning human body.

    Mice studies are nice (can we grab anonimouse first). Primates are good. I’m game. We need more because as we know some have already been done and it doesn’t look to good for you guys :) Sure, it doesn’t necessarily translate to humans but I would never suggest that we go back to that nightmare… (injecting babies with large amounts of thimerosal). Mouse, are you in?

  22. #22 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Sue avoided the question. Why haven’t you died, Sue, with all those different toxins and pathogens in your body?

    Surely this is an educated guess (because I, like you, don’t KNOW anything for sure). Let’s go from there. Of course I have certain toxins and pathogens in my body as we all do. Daily amounts which come and go through the body. My body can handle it (although certainly it is NEVER good to have these things in your body) and truth be told I have no doubt that pollution is probably slowly killing us all… but I digress. For the most part, we live, we breathe, we expell the toxins, etc. etc. What happens when you get a large dose of a particular toxin? Not quite as nice of a scenario. Here’s the analogy. It should sound familiar.

    You have an ongoing headache. You decide one day to take one pain reliever. The next day you feel better. So you take another one pain reliever as a preventitive measure. This continues for 60 days. At the end of the 60 days, you most likely are no worse for the wear. Now, try taking those 60 pain relievers in one day. How are you feeling now, Joseph?

    So, sure infants are subjected to toxins (as we all are). However, during the 1990’s they were also slammed with a healthy dose of mercury as well. Not so good.

  23. #23 George Smiley
    January 8, 2007

    However, during the 1990’s they were also slammed with a healthy dose of mercury as well. Not so good.

    But, but, but… I thought you said mercury was not healthy. So now are you saying that the removal of thimerosal should mean that kids to day are less healthy? You are so confusing, CS.

  24. #24 clone3g
    January 8, 2007
  25. #25 Nomen Nescio
    January 8, 2007

    thimerosal (mercury)

    no, Sue, you do not get to blithely equate those two quite different molecules in that fashion. my memories of high school chemistry are still too sore from our host’s friday dose of woo to allow such a blatant misrepresentation to pass unchallenged. we do not speak of “table salt (metallic sodium)”, and so neither do sensible people speak of “thimerosal (mercury)”, either.

  26. #26 Ruth
    January 8, 2007

    According to Bakir (Science, 181:230-241, 1973) the total body burden of methylmercury when symptoms were noted during the Iraq poisoning incident was 20 mg (milligrams), which, Sue, is 20000 micrograms. So if the total exposure of infants from vaccines was 188 micrograms, that still leaves a bit of safety margin. Plus, as Burbacher and others have noted, the ethylmercury in thiomersal has a much shorter elimination time in the body. The 188 micrograms may approach the EPA limit for mercury ( 0.1 micrograms/kg/day), but is still well below the FDA or WHO limits (0.4 micrograms/kg/day). Those limits are calculated for daily exposure for years, with a safety factor thrown in for individuals who may be more sensitive.

  27. #27 Bronze Dog
    January 8, 2007

    If you can refer to it as “thimerosal (mercury)” can I say “water (explosive hydrogen)”?

  28. #28 George Smiley
    January 8, 2007

    If you can refer to it as “thimerosal (mercury)” can I say “water (explosive hydrogen)”?

    You can’t say either one if you are at all honest. Are you?

  29. #29 Joseph
    January 8, 2007

    However, during the 1990’s they were also slammed with a healthy dose of mercury as well. Not so good.

    They were “slammed” with about the amount of mercury contained in a tuna sandwich, in each shot. How many tuna sandwiches would you say you’ve had in your life?

    And of course, they are not “slammed” in that manner anymore. When should we expect to see any effects from that?

  30. #30 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    we do not speak of “table salt (metallic sodium)”, and so neither do sensible people speak of “thimerosal (mercury)”, either.

    Figures that this is the point that you want to focus on. Quite typical.

  31. #31 George Smiley
    January 8, 2007

    Bronze Dog, that link is hilarious. Thanks!

  32. #32 George Smiley
    January 8, 2007

    we do not speak of “table salt (metallic sodium)”, and so neither do sensible people speak of “thimerosal (mercury)”, either.

    Figures that this is the point that you want to focus on. Quite typical.

    Well the, um chemistry of the compound controls its, erm, you know, toxicity. So yeah, it might be a good idea to, well, focus on the chemistry.

    Does your dumbassery come naturally, or have you had to work at it?

  33. #33 Nomen Nescio
    January 8, 2007

    why should i not focus on it, Sue? seriously – if you can’t get such an obvious detail straight (but yet you just happen to get it wrong in the very way most likely to spin and slant the narrative in favour of your own, still unsubstantiated, opinions… fancy that!), then why should i believe you can get anything more complex or more nuanced right, either?

    seems to me a mistake like this could well be diagnostic of your whole approach to the debate. seems to me like a quick apology and correction would have been more likely to convince me of your honest intents, not that they would have been sufficient at this point. you seem to me like a virulent propagandist, and complaining about being called out on an error this grave yet this basic does nothing to improve that perception.

  34. #34 Bronze Dog
    January 8, 2007

    When you get down to it, medicine and biology are pretty much just special cases of chemistry.

  35. #35 clone3g
    January 8, 2007

    Gosh, I seem to remember Sue making a big deal of assorted (and accepted) ways to spell thimerosal.

    If I’m not mistaken, she also likes to point out the different biochemical properties of ethyl and methyl, organic and inorganic, forms of mercury. Now that sounds to me like good reason to ‘focus’ on chemistry.

    Actually, it would be nice if Sue could stay focused on just one thing.

  36. #36 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    They were “slammed” with about the amount of mercury contained in a tuna sandwich, in each shot. How many tuna sandwiches would you say you’ve had in your life?

    And of course, they are not “slammed” in that manner anymore. When should we expect to see any effects from that?

    Truthfully, I’ve probably had too many tuna sandwiches over the years. I don’t eat it anymore :) You still haven’t been able to tell me what the difference would be between injesting the mercury via a tuna sandwich and injecting it via a vaccination? Plus, still no information re: the effects of methylmercury vs. ethylmercury. Get back to me and we can talk.

  37. #37 Common Sense
    January 8, 2007

    Gosh, I seem to remember Sue making a big deal of assorted (and accepted) ways to spell thimerosal.

    Actually that came about when we saw that the organization of people who were supposed to be researching the whole thimerosal issue couldn’t even spell the word after a few years. A lot of research they did…. NOT! That WAS funny though. Leitch trying to convince me that they simply wanted to use the “alternate spellings”. Sure…

  38. #38 Robster
    January 8, 2007

    And of course, they are not “slammed” in that manner anymore. When should we expect to see any effects from that?

    Should have already. This is why Kirby has his back up. No decrease in autism numbers despite removal of thimerisol from childhood vaccines. Epi studies in nations where thimerisol have never been used, but have similar levels of autism in the population already demonstrated the lack of connection between the two.

  39. #39 anonimouse
    January 8, 2007

    Plus, still no information re: the effects of methylmercury vs. ethylmercury.

    We know that methylmercury sticks around in the body a whole lot longer than ethylmercury, causing all sorts of potential for systemic damage. You can thank your buddy Burbacher for that.

    Actually, Ruth already pointed that out above, but since you’re incapable of deciphering any reasonable statements which oppose your hardcore anti-vaccine opinion.

  40. #40 shot_info
    January 9, 2007

    I’m still laughing that the (lack of) Common Sense has avoided the meme that is DHMO and then had the gall to suggest that a poster put the site together.

    Anybody would think LoCS doesn’t know how to use google…except to find what the TROOOTH is :-)

  41. #41 Kev
    January 9, 2007

    Its amazing how ruinous a dose of Sue can be for a thread. What is an acceptable dose of Sue? I’d say, none :o)

    Anyway…

    Sue, as ever, you talk a good fight but in reality you don’t know what you’re talking about. I’ll make you a deal – when you can show me a level of thiomersal (spell that OK for you?) that is scientifically established to cause autism, then we can talk about anything you want to. Has it really not filtered through to you yet that even after nine years, no science whatsoever has established causative links between autism and MMR and/or autism and thiomersal.

    Nine years Sue. Nine years without either an epidemiological association to autism or an association to known comorbidities of autism or any clinical association to autism itself.

    In those nine years, anti-vaxers such as yourself have continued to scream about the non-existent link and vaccine uptake fell. Children have died and been hospitalised resulting from vaccine preventable diseases. Autistic people continue to be demonised as disease ridden ‘empty shells’ ravaged by mercury. You are partly responsible for that. Are you ashamed? I doubt it. Do you feel any kind of responsibility? I doubt it.

  42. #42 Bronze Dog
    January 9, 2007

    Odd website. Almost seems as if one of you put it together. Whatever. I will continue to think of water as H2O…

    Missed this bit. Where’s Sue been for the last 10 years? And why can’t he see that he’s using the same rhetorical techniques that website parodies?

  43. #43 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Should have already. This is why Kirby has his back up. No decrease in autism numbers despite removal of thimerisol from childhood vaccines. Epi studies in nations where thimerisol have never been used, but have similar levels of autism in the population already demonstrated the lack of connection between the two.

    Does anyone find it the least bit funny and/or ironic that right below my post regarding spelling issues with thimerosal, The Robster has misspelled it again (I’ve not commented previously). It sort of proves the point. Robster please do some more research. Oh, by the way, as I’ve noted… the spelling is not too big of a deal (unless your job depends on you knowing about the issue), however, the ironly here is classic. Thanks for the laugh Robster!

    p.s. blame Clone for bringing the issue up…

  44. #44 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    We know that methylmercury sticks around in the body a whole lot longer than ethylmercury, causing all sorts of potential for systemic damage. You can thank your buddy Burbacher for that.

    Mouse, is that really what the Burbacher study says? Could it be that you picked out one portion of the study out without giving the ENTIRE story. Do you think that Burbacher would agree with your analysis of his study? I tend to doubt it. For fun, can you answer this… do you think that ethylmercury floating around in your system or imbedded into your brain is completely safe?

  45. #45 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    I’m still laughing that the (lack of) Common Sense has avoided the meme that is DHMO and then had the gall to suggest that a poster put the site together.

    Anybody would think LoCS doesn’t know how to use google…except to find what the TROOOTH is :-)

    I find the DHMO site funny and I did not really think that one of you actually put it together… go back and re-read my comment. Please. The DHMO site is cute but doesn’t work in this scenario unless you can show studies which indicate that thimerosal poses no danger in small doses. I don’t think you can.

  46. #46 Dunc
    January 9, 2007

    He then gave the UK figures.

    Over 70,000 cases in the year 2004-2005. Holy crap. More than ten times the number of cases in a country one fifth the size of the US.

    Goddamn it! I’m in the UK, old enough to have missed the vaccine and I never got mumps as a kid. Guess I need to stay the hell away from anyone with children then…

  47. #47 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Nine years Sue. Nine years without either an epidemiological association to autism or an association to known comorbidities of autism or any clinical association to autism itself.

    It also took about 10 years for them to finally replace the DTP with the (safer) DTaP. I never suggested that these things move quickly. The co-morbidies of which you speak… are they simply genetic? Do they happen more often in children with autism?

    Children have died and been hospitalised resulting from vaccine preventable diseases. Autistic people continue to be demonised as disease ridden ‘empty shells’ ravaged by mercury.

    Clearly this is a logical fallacy. “Appeal to emotion” perhaps. Check with Jonathan on that.

    You are partly responsible for that. Are you ashamed? I doubt it. Do you feel any kind of responsibility? I doubt it.

    I feel zero responsibility for that, whatsoever. I imagine this is another logical fallacy. Of course, if we are right and you are wrong… you, Kev (by your standards) will need to be held responsible as well.

  48. #48 i_like_latin
    January 9, 2007

    The dumbass makes the poison.. or was it dose?

  49. #49 Kev
    January 9, 2007

    “Mouse, is that really what the Burbacher study says?”

    Its one of the things it says.

    “Could it be that you picked out one portion of the study out without giving the ENTIRE story. Do you think that Burbacher would agree with your analysis of his study? I tend to doubt it.”

    Mouse merely pointed out that Burbacher highlighted the length of time MM sticks around compared to EM. Mouse did not claim it was any more than one portion, or that it was the entire story. I’m also pretty sure Burbacher would indeed agree with what Mouse said. In fact he did:

    “The second slower phase of washout could also represent the gradual biotransformation of ethylmercury (the presumed principal organic form of Hg after thimerosal administration) to Hg-containing metabolites that have a different tissue distribution or are more slowly eliminated…”

    “For fun, can you answer this… do you think that ethylmercury floating around in your system or imbedded into your brain is completely safe?”

    No idea.

    For fun, can you answer me this…what part of the Burbacher study I quoted from shows that ehtylmercury floating around in your system or (imbedded? Is that an alternative spelling of ‘embed’? More research necessary Sue!) embedded into your brain causes autism?

  50. #50 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    For fun, can you answer me this…what part of the Burbacher study I quoted from shows that ehtylmercury floating around in your system or (imbedded? Is that an alternative spelling of ‘embed’? More research necessary Sue!) embedded into your brain causes autism?

    I’ll get back to some other points later as time permits but just so we are clear could you have meant “ethylmercury” or is “ehtylmercury” an alternative? Just wondering :) Forgive my typo. Typos are one thing. Ignorance something completely different. Remember? We’ve been over this before.

  51. #51 Kev
    January 9, 2007

    “I never suggested that these things move quickly.”

    Of course not, but ‘glacial’ might be a good way to describe the speed of progress in terms of causation. I hear the Geier’s need timing with a calendar now.

    “The co-morbidies of which you speak… are they simply genetic? Do they happen more often in children with autism?”

    I imagine some do. Down’s Syndrome for example. I have no idea. What’s your point? Actually scratch that. I’m not interested, its just more smoke and mirrors.

    “Clearly this is a logical fallacy. “Appeal to emotion” perhaps.”

    No Sue, its a fact. Children have died from vaccine preventable diseases. Autistic people continue to be described in highly stigmatising ways. What’s fallacious about that exactly?

    “I feel zero responsibility for that, whatsoever.”

    No surprise there Sue. You and your ilk are masters in the avoidance of personal responsibility. No matter. It exists.

    “Of course, if we are right and you are wrong… you, Kev (by your standards) will need to be held responsible as well.”

    You are absolutely right. I will post a public apology on my blog and on every public forum I’ve commented on.

    What will you do? Carry on dissembling and avoiding responsibility for your actions, both individually and collectively? I’m guessing you will. The absence of spine seems to be a prerequisite for the more extreme thiomersal/autism anti-vaxer these days.

  52. #52 clone3g
    January 9, 2007

    I think we are dealing with methyl-Sue here. Inorganic Sue would have been eliminated by now but this form is tenacious, persistent, inhibitory to logic, and resistant to reason.

    Is there some sort of trans-dermal Sueccimer cream I can rub on my screen to purge every last trace of her. I feel my neurons dying faster than an SH-SY5Y cell in Boyd Haley’s medicine cabinet.

  53. #53 Ruth
    January 9, 2007

    OK, here is straight from my Orange book, the United States Pharmacopeia.

    thimerosal-USP

    thiomersal is BAN (British approved name) and INN (international nonproprietary name)

    Merthiolate is Lilly’s brand name.

    And how many anti-vaxers can dance on the head of a pin?

  54. #54 Robster
    January 9, 2007

    Sue,

    Does anyone find it the least bit funny and/or ironic that right below my post regarding spelling issues with thimerosal, The Robster has misspelled it again (I’ve not commented previously).

    Thanks for noting it. :) I thought it would be funny if I did that one last time. Irony and sarcasm are three of my favorite forms of humor.

    Yes, I had mispelled the compound name, but that doesn’t change the science or lack of evidence on your side. I think I’ll use the BAN/INN spelling for a while. It makes certain points about the chemical structure clear that the other does not.
    ——–
    “Clearly this is a logical fallacy. “Appeal to emotion” perhaps.”

    If, and only if, Kev did not have evidence to back his statement up, would this be a logical fallacy (appeal to consequences, to be exact). In this case, Kev has evidence, and is correct.

  55. #55 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Of course not, but ‘glacial’ might be a good way to describe the speed of progress in terms of causation.

    As for moving slow. Yes. When it involves a topic so disturbing as we are discussing. I imagine it would go slow. Who wants the responsibility of dealing with that?

    What’s your point?

    I figured that you could see the point. But here, let’s spell it out. IF, in fact, chldren with autism do have more of these “comorbidities” (for lack of a better term) then it seems logical to search deeper into whether or not these “comorbidities” have more of a connection with autism than we acknowledge today. Seems logical.

    Children have died from vaccine preventable diseases.

    Prove to me that these deaths have anything to do with people who question certain vaccinations? If you can’t then I will have to stick with the “appeal to emotion” logical fallacy.

  56. #56 The Feelingsinator
    January 9, 2007

    No appeal to emotion, because, Sue, you apparently don’t give a rat’s ass about anyone dying from a vaccine-preventable disease. Your sole goal on this blog is to taint vaccines in any way you can in an effort to shore up your feeling that someone other than you is responsible for your child’s diabetes.

    Sue, prove that you aren’t an anti-vaccine uber-extremist with a whole lot of time on her hands to troll this blog and warn your EoH listmates not to make psychic fools of themselves.

  57. #57 HCN
    January 9, 2007

    Common Sue, these are not deaths, but you’ve already been given the TimesOnline article about the boys who had been blinded by measles… boys who could not be vaccinated and depended on herd immunity. You just choose to ignore it, or sweep it away with a brush of your logic (the same logic that makes you think that both diabetes and celiac disease are vaccine related).

    For those who need reminding:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1061838,00.html

    I would love to see what Brian Deer would write on the antics of Sue and her absolute disregard of all the information she has been given, yet chooses to totally ignore.

  58. #58 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Mouse merely pointed out that Burbacher highlighted the length of time MM sticks around compared to EM. Mouse did not claim it was any more than one portion, or that it was the entire story.

    Yes, but sometimes not telling the entire story may confuse the newbies. Let me give you an example.

    Here’s my analogy which I believe is analogous to what Mouse did here. Discussion between a child and his mother.

    “Mom, can I have some ice cream”?

    “No, you may not”.

    Child sulks away and goes upstairs to talk with Dad.

    “Dad, can I have some ice cream”?

    “Did you already have some after dinner”?

    “No. I haven’t had any all week”.

    “Ok. I’ll let you have some”.

    Did the child make anything up? No. Did he lie? No. Did he tell the entire story? Of course not. So, go ahead and pick and chose what you want from the Burbacher study… it doesn’t tell the whole story does it, Kev?

    Burbacher noted in his study that:

    There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%). Absolute inorganic Hg concentrations in the brains of the thimerosal-exposed infants were approximately twice that of the MeHg infants. Interestingly, the inorganic fraction in the kidneys of the same cohort of infants was also significantly higher following i.m. thimerosal than oral MeHg exposure (0.71+-0.04 vs. 0.40+-0.03). This suggest that the dealkylation of ethylmercury is much more extensive than that of MeHg.

    Minimally, all we can say is that we cannot compare methylmercury vs. ethylmercury exposures. I’m confused as to why you, Mouse, Ruth (and others) continue to try to compare them. Can you explain that?

  59. #59 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Sue, you apparently don’t give a rat’s ass about anyone dying from a vaccine-preventable disease.

    Logical fallacy :)

  60. #60 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Common Sue, these are not deaths, but you’ve already been given the TimesOnline article about the boys who had been blinded by measles… boys who could not be vaccinated and depended on herd immunity. You just choose to ignore it, or sweep it away with a brush of your logic (the same logic that makes you think that both diabetes and celiac disease are vaccine related).

    Again, you are missing the point. What does MY questioning the safety/timing of giving certain vaccinations have to do with the deaths or injuries which may/may not occur? Two separate issues. Of course, again, since you guys are so concerned about the burden of proof. It is up to YOU to prove to me that these deaths/injuries are due to low immunization rates or have anything to do with questioning certain vaccinations. Good luck with that!

  61. #61 Robster
    January 9, 2007

    Sue,

    Minimally, all we can say is that we cannot compare methylmercury vs. ethylmercury exposures. I’m confused as to why you, Mouse, Ruth (and others) continue to try to compare them. Can you explain that?

    Because, at root, people were saying that thiomersol was toxic at the levels that people were exposed to because oganic Hg toxicity estimates have typically been based on MeHg activity. Different forms of mercury have different levels of toxicity. EtHg is eliminated more quickly than MeHg. EtHg is deakylated more quickly than MeHg, for which there is evidence that it is part of the detoxification process. That is mentioned immediately after the paragraph you quoted above. Also mentioned were results that showed that inorganic Hg was not present where cerebellar damage was observed. Hence, inorganic mercury is not the offending species. Following that is another paragraph stating that there are other studies that do not back up the detoxification data, but does not state that this is a toxifying process.

    Trying to convince people that vaccines are dangerous can decrease their likelihood of having their children vaccinated. As vaccination levels decrease, as was observed in the UK, outbreaks occur. People are sickened and suffer serious consequences because of the changes that antivaxers work for. There is plenty of evidence, on the other hand, that vaccines don’t cause the problems that you claim they do, and even more that they protect people from disease.

    Now that autism levels have been determined to likely be stable and type 1 diabetes rates continue to increase in the US (as far as I can tell from a quick websearch), despite the removal of thiomersol, when will the antivaxers admit that they were wrong? My guess is that their quasi-religious fervor will continue unabated.

  62. #62 Joseph
    January 9, 2007

    Minimally, all we can say is that we cannot compare methylmercury vs. ethylmercury exposures. I’m confused as to why you, Mouse, Ruth (and others) continue to try to compare them. Can you explain that?

    Sue: Should I take this as a complete dismissal of Sallie Bernard’s paper on your part?

  63. #63 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Sue: Should I take this as a complete dismissal of Sallie Bernard’s paper on your part?

    A complete dismissal? No. Wasn’t that paper an overview of a lot of different topics in regards to mercury exposure, etc? Could it be updated to reflect more recent science? Sure.

  64. #64 Common Sense
    January 9, 2007

    Robster,

    I will let Burbacher speak for himself on his study. Here you go:

    The key findings of the current study are the differences in the disposition kinetics and demethylation rates of thimerosal and MeHg. Consequently, MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal derived Hg. Knowledge of the biotransformation of thimerosal, the chemical identity of the Hg containing species in the blood and brain, and the neurotoxic potential of intact thimerosal and its various biotransformation products, including ethylmercury are urgently needed to afford a meaningful interpretation of the potential developmental effects of immunization with thimerosal-containing vaccines in newborns and infants. This information is critical if we are to respond to public concerns regarding the safety of childhood immunizations.

    That’s a far cry from your shove it under the carpet stance…

    p.s. you may want to double check your spelling again (I know it’s a tough word)…

  65. #65 Robster
    January 9, 2007

    And yet, epi studies don’t offer any evidence for any of your claims regarding thiomersol (accepted BAN/INN spelling, has the dual value of being correct and irritating Sue) or vaccines. Since it’s use has been cut back severely in the US and there has been no change in autism or diabetes rates…

    Just because the evidence isn’t there to support your claims doesn’t mean that I don’t support more tox testing of mercury or mercury containing compounds. The tests will likely to show that a much higher level of exposure to EtHg would be required before any neurotoxic effects are observed.

  66. #66 Kev
    January 10, 2007

    “As for moving slow. Yes. When it involves a topic so disturbing as we are discussing. I imagine it would go slow. Who wants the responsibility of dealing with that?”

    Apparently all those people (Bernard et al) who have already ‘proved’ they are right.

    You don’t get it Sue. From the starting point nine years ago that vaccines began to be linked with autism, the science to prove any sort of link be it epidemiological, be it associative or be it clinical has not moved forward one iota. There’s slow and there’s non-existent. This is non-existent.

    “I figured that you could see the point. But here, let’s spell it out. IF, in fact, chldren with autism do have more of these “comorbidities” (for lack of a better term) then it seems logical to search deeper into whether or not these “comorbidities” have more of a connection with autism than we acknowledge today. Seems logical.”

    Joseph already did that with Epilepsy and MR (IIRC) – they don’t back you up. There’s also recently been a paper published regarding GI issues which I intend to blog on.

    “Prove to me that these deaths have anything to do with people who question certain vaccinations?”

    If vaccine uptake drops because of people like you baselessly scare-scaremongering then vaccine preventable diseases rise. Its inevitable. If the population are injured or die as a result of contracting vaccine preventable diseases then those who scaremongered are partly responsible. Develop a spine and own what you bought.

    “So, go ahead and pick and chose what you want from the Burbacher study… it doesn’t tell the whole story does it, Kev”

    And once more for the hard of comprehension.

    No-one.
    Claimed.
    It.
    Did.

  67. #67 Andrew Dodds
    January 10, 2007

    Kev –

    I was re-reading 1984 last night, and George Orwell has already come up with the perfect definition of what Sue (and many other anti-vaxers/alties/pseudoscientists) does when reading here; it’s called ‘crimestop’ in newspeak..

    http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-dict.html

    crimestop – Orwell’s definition: “The faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. In short….protective stupidity.”

  68. #68 notmercury
    January 10, 2007

    “Minimally, all we can say is that we cannot compare methylmercury vs. ethylmercury exposures.”

    That’s really about it though. Did you know that oral MeHg and IM MeHg can’t be compared? That’s the same compound delivered via two different routes and deposition in organs is completely different.

    Burbacher used oral MeHg and IM thimerosal.

    Yes he saw nearly double the concentration of inorganic mercury in brain tissue which indicates that it is being broken down and removed faster. It didn’t hang around as EtHg, unlike MeHg which is more stable and toxic.

    Pay attention to the word ‘proportion’ in the following sentence: There was a much higher proportion of inorganic Hg in the brain of thimerosal infants than MeHg infants (up to 71% vs. 10%).

    Now think about how the levels of mercury were assayed and expressed – as ng/g. That’s nanograms per gram. Out of the 25 micrograms of thimerosal or so in a vaccine with the highest levels of thimerosal, what percentage would you estimate to be deposited in the brain? 10%? 1.0%? 0.1%?

    The concentration of thimerosal in a vaccine was somewhere around 0.01% or 50 parts per million Hg.

    Burka found that “Thimerosal IM injection resulted in 0.22 +/- 0.04% in the brain” and an acute injection at 10 fold higher resulted in 0.1% Hg in the brain. which brings us down to roughly 50 parts per billion.

    Can you find anything to indicate that mercury is neurotoxic at that concentration?

    Double the inorganic mercury sounds like a lot until you consider the minute quantities involved. 16 ng/g. Of that, the vast majority will be compartmentalized in astroglia and microglia and unavailable for contact with other brain cells.

    In an earlier study by Burbacher, monkeys were given 50 micrograms Hg/kg body weight/day over periods ranging from 6-18 months. At that level, and I’ll quote, “Neurons, oligodendrocytes, endothelia, and pericytes did not show a significant change in cell number for any exposure group.” Keeping in mind that methylmercury is far more toxic than ethylmercury which is more toxic than thimerosal.

    One important observation at these levels of exposure: “Astrocyte cell number exhibited a significant decline for both the 6 month and clearance exposure groups. The microglia, in contrast, showed a significant increase in the 18 month and clearance exposure groups.”

    Are you aware of any literature to suggest a decline in astrocytes and increase in microglia associated with autism?

    Let’s also try to remember that Burbacher couldn’t find any thimerosal containing vaccines at the time of this study (how many years ago was that?) so he added thimerosal (dissolved in saline) to vaccines that weren’t prepared with thimerosal in the first place.

    I understand that he is now looking for changes in brain cells following thimerosal exposure. Do you think he’ll see the sort of structural differences found in autistic brains? I guess we’ll have to wait and see. Until then, let’s all promise not to compare different chemical forms of mercury while commenting on a thread about Brian Deer and MMR.

  69. #69 anonimouse
    January 10, 2007

    It is up to YOU to prove to me that these deaths/injuries are due to low immunization rates or have anything to do with questioning certain vaccinations.

    No, it’s not. It’s up to you to prove they’re not.

    You see, Sue, scientific consensus is that herd immunity does exist and when people like yourself claim otherwise, that shifts the burden of proof to you.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

  70. #70 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    And yet, epi studies don’t offer any evidence for any of your claims regarding thiomersol (accepted BAN/INN spelling, has the dual value of being correct and irritating Sue) or vaccines.

    I really didn’t want to have to go here but recheck yourself. Hint: I am fully aware of the accepted BAN spelling of the word and honey that ain’t it. Again, this is not about spelling it IS about ignorance of a topic. Let me guess… you’re a doctor?

  71. #71 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    No, it’s not. It’s up to you to prove they’re not.

    No, it would be up to you. Sorry. Prove away.

  72. #72 Joseph
    January 10, 2007

    Anonimouse is right, Sue. The burden of proof is on the person making the extraordinary claim; in this case, that decreased vaccination rates do not pose a health risk and that deaths from vaccine-preventable diseases cannot be attributed to said decrease.

    When you claim that vaccines cause autism or diabetes, again, the burden of proof is on you, as the claim seems preposterous based on what is known about the conditions. Some really extraordinary evidence would be required to shift the burden of proof. So far whatever evidence has been produced is of low quality and easily shown to be flawed.

  73. #73 notmercury
    January 10, 2007

    CS: I really didn’t want to have to go here but recheck yourself. Hint: I am fully aware of the accepted BAN spelling of the word and honey that ain’t it.

    Sue, I think you forgot to add “Nah-ah girlfriend” and “Talk to the hand”

    Mmm-Hmm, thaz right. We ain’t on the Jerry Springer show, honey.

  74. #74 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    Sue, I think you forgot to add “Nah-ah girlfriend” and “Talk to the hand”

    Mmm-Hmm, thaz right. We ain’t on the Jerry Springer show, honey.

    I was trying to be civil. I was actually a bit embarrassed for The Robster on that one. I’m cutting him some slack knowing that he’s probably a doctor. He will need to be deprogrammed.

  75. #75 Steve Watson
    January 10, 2007

    OK, anyone who misses the point of the DHMO spoof (which has been around for, what — 10 years or more?) is too stupid to discuss any issue involving chemistry, medicine, or public health (and probably lots of other topics).

  76. #76 anonimouse
    January 10, 2007

    OK, anyone who misses the point of the DHMO spoof (which has been around for, what — 10 years or more?) is too stupid to discuss any issue involving chemistry, medicine, or public health (and probably lots of other topics).

    That would disqualify anyone who likes John Best’s blog or thinks that J.B. Handley is a swell guy.

  77. #77 anonimouse
    January 10, 2007

    No, it would be up to you. Sorry. Prove away.

    Your standard retort for everything, Sue, is that “you have to prove that it’s safe”.

    Well, here’s a concept – we’ve been vaccinating people for, what, over a century now? In that time nobody has ever been able to prove a link between vaccines, thimerosal, MMR, what have you, to relatively common conditions like diabetes, or SIDS, or MS, or autism, or any of the other anti-vax favorites. Yet we’ve been able to pick up super-rare incidences of rare side effects, like the link between the swine flu vaccine and Guillian-Barre Syndrome or arthritis in a handful of adult recipients of the MMR vaccine.

    Explain to me, Sue, how we can find all of these rare side effects of vaccines but can’t determine that they cause something as common as type 2 diabetes. The only explanation can be that virtually every scientific, pharmaceutical or government entity in the free world is either profoundly stupid, ignorant or are all lying.

    That must be it.

  78. #78 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    Explain to me, Sue, how we can find all of these rare side effects of vaccines but can’t determine that they cause something as common as type 2 diabetes.

    The fact that you bring up type 2 diabetes shows me what I already know. You don’t have a clue and you don’t listen.

  79. #79 Bronze Dog
    January 10, 2007

    Type 1, type 2, whatever. The point still remains. Nice try at dodging it.

  80. #80 Bronze Dog
    January 10, 2007

    Kind of reminds me of what happened in a Bigfoot thread on the JREF forums: Someone showed a close-up, clear picture taken by an automatic camera: I think was a severely endangered species of cheetah or something: Only tens of members left on Earth.

    So why can’t anyone get a decent Bigfoot photo?

  81. #81 notmercury
    January 10, 2007

    Bigfoot is shy and Cheetahs never prosper

  82. #82 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    Type 1, type 2, whatever. The point still remains. Nice try at dodging it.

    No, it isn’t a “whatever”, BronzeDog. Does Mouse know the difference? I tend to doubt it.

  83. #83 Bronze Dog
    January 10, 2007

    Yeah, just keep knocking that moot point, as if it somehow invalidates the argument.

  84. #84 notmercury
    January 10, 2007

    CS: “For fun, can you answer this… do you think that ethylmercury floating around in your system or imbedded into your brain is completely safe?”

    I know of at least one study that showed thimerosal containing vaccines to be safe. Sue probably wouldn’t be interested though because it was funded by the US gov.

  85. #85 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    Yeah, just keep knocking that moot point, as if it somehow invalidates the argument.

    It isn’t a moot point. Mouse is showing her ignorance on a topic which she claims to know all about. How is that a moot point?

  86. #86 Bronze Dog
    January 10, 2007

    It isn’t a moot point. Mouse is showing her ignorance on a topic which she claims to know all about. How is that a moot point?

    Because whether it’s type 1, type 2, or typo has nothing to do with the argument. It’s a red herring, because that mistake doesn’t take away the point behind the argument. It’s a trivial objection.

    Here it is spelled out: We can find very rare effects. Why can’t we find ANY of the ones you claim?

    That’s it. If you bothered paying attention you would have caught it with my analogy: If someone could take a clear photo of a very rare wild cat, why can’t all the bigfoot fans get a single clear bigfoot photo?

  87. #87 Common Sense
    January 10, 2007

    It’s a trivial objection.

    It is trivial to you but to me it isn’t because Mouse is quick to spew out studies and information. He/She/It claims to know about which it squeaks. Clearly it doesn’t. This clears a lot up and for that, I am happy. Similarly like The Robster and his lack of regard for the spelling of thimerosal/thiomersal. It doesn’t mean much that he can’t spell it (it’s a tricky word). It is insight into their lack of knowledge on the issues. That’s all.

  88. #88 Thigh Mirasol
    January 10, 2007

    No Sue, Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipukakapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu is a tricky word.

  89. #89 Ruth
    January 10, 2007

    Spotting spelling errors still doesn’t explain why post-mortem brain pathology of alkylmercury victims looks nothing like autistic brains. Damage from alkylmercury is focused in the regions for vision and hearing, and very specific cell types within the cerebellum. And not one victim of alkylmercury poisoning has developed ‘savant’ skills.

  90. #90 Jess
    January 10, 2007

    Bigfoot is shy and Cheetahs never prosper

    Heh!

    Ok, you all can go back to having a discussion now, but that made me chuckle.

  91. #91 Kev
    January 11, 2007

    OK Sue, here’s the exact same question without the typo:

    Your standard retort for everything, Sue, is that “you have to prove that it’s safe”.

    Well, here’s a concept – we’ve been vaccinating people for, what, over a century now? In that time nobody has ever been able to prove a link between vaccines, thimerosal, MMR, what have you, to relatively common conditions like diabetes, or SIDS, or MS, or autism, or any of the other anti-vax favorites. Yet we’ve been able to pick up super-rare incidences of rare side effects, like the link between the swine flu vaccine and Guillian-Barre Syndrome or arthritis in a handful of adult recipients of the MMR vaccine.

    Explain to me, Sue, how we can find all of these rare side effects of vaccines but can’t determine that they cause something as common as type 1 diabetes. The only explanation can be that virtually every scientific, pharmaceutical or government entity in the free world is either profoundly stupid, ignorant or are all lying.

    That must be it.

    Hopefully that’ll pass your vitally important spell-checking test of science.

  92. #92 clone3g
    January 11, 2007

    And of course there is the Rotavirus vaccine. A handful of adverse events were picked up and the vaccine was pulled off the market. No cover up or conspiracy to hurt children, just a quick response and a less than perfect post licensure surveillance system doing what it was designed to do.

    Oh yeah, before Sue points it out, the evil arch enemy of the anti-vaccine movement, Paul Offit, has his name on a rotavirus vaccine patent.

  93. #93 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    Yet we’ve been able to pick up super-rare incidences of rare side effects, like the link between the swine flu vaccine and Guillian-Barre Syndrome or arthritis in a handful of adult recipients of the MMR vaccine.

    Ok. Let’s take a look at this. One reason could be the difference between adults and children. If I, as an adult, suffer an adverse reaction to a vaccine, I may be able to better understand that situation. Suddenly (or within a few weeks) after a vaccine I start to develop certain symptoms. Symptoms which I never had previously but *coincidentally* started soon after the vaccine. Perhaps both a doctor and myself would be able to put 2 and 2 together. Here we have an INFANT who can’t talk and tell us symptoms or perhaps the child develops ongoing diarrhea… I imagine we would be less able to put a finger on the cause. Or let’s say at a younger age your child develops some ailment. If your thought process does not make you think of vaccines (we are told that there is no correlation), then you would more easily consider the “ailment” to be a genetic defect or some random occurence as opposed to an adult who was fine for his/her first 40 years and suddenly is ill. Another point, let’s use your example of an adult who has an adverse reaction to the mmr and gets arthritis… what does that tell us about children. Geez, who knows what it could do to them. A young baby… immature immune system…. Look at what you do admit to and then try to see how that sounds to me. Yes, bad things can happen to an adult … but it’s all good when given to children along with other vaccines at the same time? Please.

  94. #94 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    Well, here’s a concept – we’ve been vaccinating people for, what, over a century now? In that time nobody has ever been able to prove a link between vaccines, thimerosal, MMR, what have you, to relatively common conditions like diabetes, or SIDS, or MS, or autism, or any of the other anti-vax favorites.

    This is the precise reason that we need a study on the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations. Just because this is the way we’ve been doing it for a century now (which as you know is skewed)… doesn’t mean it is safe. It may even cloud the issue. Everyone is vaccinated these days (for the most part). I see plenty of people with type 1 diabetes, with peanut allergies, with autism so they just blend in. It doesn’t seem “odd” at all to me. So, the majority of people aren’t looking for answers… it is just accepted as the way it is. What if it isn’t just the way it is… instead it is a doctor induced reality.

  95. #95 George Smiley
    January 11, 2007

    Common Cause,

    I have a question for you. Can you define – not from a dictionary or wikipedia, but in your own words – the word “correlation,” and when corrrelation may and may not be used to generate causal inferences? This is a serious question. Based on what you’ve written in this thread, I think that your understanding of this concept is really weak.

  96. #96 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    And of course there is the Rotavirus vaccine. A handful of adverse events were picked up and the vaccine was pulled off the market. No cover up or conspiracy to hurt children, just a quick response and a less than perfect post licensure surveillance system doing what it was designed to do.

    Let’s think really hard about this Clone. You have a child who gets a Rotavirus vaccine… within a few weeks said kids’ bowel folds in upon itself. This happens to a “handful” of other children. Well, that would be easier to pick up on then let’s say a kid who gets an mmr and develops ongoing diarrhea after that. The response can be oh, it’s just diarrhea. No big deal. Kids get diarrhea… it isn’t a medical emergency. What’s going on with the immune system of the kid with the diarrhea… we don’t know. Do we?

  97. #97 clone3g
    January 11, 2007

    This happens to a “handful” of other children. Well, that would be easier to pick up on then let’s say a kid who gets an mmr and develops ongoing diarrhea after that.

    I thought regression into autism following vaccination is supposed to be immediate and unmistakable. You’re saying it’s more subtle and the timeframe variable to the point where it’s difficult connect the two?

    Or let’s say at a younger age your child develops some ailment. If your thought process does not make you think of vaccines

    So if your thought process does include the idea that vaccines are to blame you are more likely to reach that conclusion?

  98. #98 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    I thought regression into autism following vaccination is supposed to be immediate and unmistakable. You’re saying it’s more subtle and the timeframe variable to the point where it’s difficult connect the two?

    Perhaps it depends, Clone. Certainly each child’s situation could be different. Oftentimes, as an example, parents do not necessarily tie the two events together (because of course vaccines don’t trigger autism, right). So, it may not be until later when they keep digging/reading that the connection is made. I know that this will provoke some giggles here because you will see this as the “crazy” parent looking for “something to blame”. Unfortunately for you, however, the parents are often also able to back up their claims via their child’s medical histories.

    So if your thought process does include the idea that vaccines are to blame you are more likely to reach that conclusion?

    This doesn’t make sense to me… Rephrase (or not)…

  99. #99 clone3g
    January 11, 2007

    CS: So, it may not be until later when they keep digging/reading that the connection is made.

    So recall bias can be influenced by reading materials such as one might find on the internet?

    Unfortunately for you, however, the parents are often also able to back up their claims via their child’s medical histories.

    How often? More often then the parents reporting intussusception after Rotavax?

  100. #100 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    How often? More often then the parents reporting intussusception after Rotavax?

    Intussusception is something that can’t be denied and/or ignored… can it?

  101. #101 Robster
    January 11, 2007

    Sue, damn, I still have you going on the spelling joke? If only you had evidence to back up your point, instead of arguementum ad spellcheck.

    I’m cutting him some slack knowing that he’s probably a doctor.

    PhD Toxicology. Working on an MPH (Masters of Public Health) to improve my background in epi and stats. Shall we whip out our dissertations and compare them? Diplomas, then?

    He will need to be deprogrammed.

    Heh. Pot to kettle. Again.

    What if it isn’t just the way it is… instead it is a doctor induced reality.

    It is an observed reality. You can run in circles over the details as much as you would like, but it doesn’t change the facts.

  102. #102 Common Sense
    January 11, 2007

    Sue, damn, I still have you going on the spelling joke?

    Nice try.

    PhD Toxicology. Working on an MPH (Masters of Public Health) to improve my background in epi and stats. Shall we whip out our dissertations and compare them? Diplomas, then?

    Your dissertations and diplomas don’t impress me. Experience is key here so unless you tell me that you’ve been treating children who have autism who also have ongoing GI problems, “allergies”, etc. than you can pretty much take your diplomas and shove ‘em :) There is no surprise here about your experiences… you do need deprogramming. Would you like me to write you a letter of recommendation to the Anti-Sheep School for PhD’s?

  103. #103 Are you experienced?
    January 11, 2007

    “Experience is key here”

    Yet, with all the internet experience you’ve garnered since your child has been diagnosed with diabetes, you still haven’t found the time, effort, or intellect to actually read papers. You regurgitate the headlines in true town crier form. What that makes you, Sue, is simply a mouth connected to other peoples’ ideas and computers. Many of us have seen your pleas on the EoH list asking for scientific links between heavy metals, a compromised immune system, and diabetes. You have a feeling that vaccines are the culprit and you act on it while you try to collect data to support your intuition like a rickety skeleton of a structure. I hate to break the news to you, but… JENGA!

    You really might take a page from Robster and check out a biology textbook. I’d suggest with a high school level book first so you don’t get dizzy.

    You’re nothing but an agitated anti-vax blowhard with an inflamed ego and some seriously hurt feelings.

  104. #104 Robster
    January 12, 2007

    Experience is key here

    Sue, experience with autistic kids has no correlation with being able to read and interpret articles about thighmersal. You don’t need a doctorate to read and comprehend, but you do have to leave your bias and preconcieved notions behind. We should move beyond the disproven claims that vaccines and thiomaresol cause autism or diabetes and make progress. Progess towards understanding the causes of these disorders and developing better means of coping with autism and preventative measures regarding diabetes.

  105. #105 Common sense
    January 12, 2007

    Sue, experience with autistic kids has no correlation with being able to read and interpret articles about thighmersal.

    Ok. Now it is a joke with the misspellings. Don’t try to pretend that you were purposely misspelling previously… that made you look stupid :)

  106. #106 Psychics R Sue
    January 12, 2007

    Sue, did Nanstiel tip you off to the black helicopters who gave your kid diabetes or did you rely on someone with “the gift”? You tried to shut down the psychic thread quickly on your little list. Was that because you were afraid the government would find out about your clairvoyant efforts to control the black helicopters or were you embarrassed to be associated with that? Has Nanstiel convinced you to hold your kid down and cure the diabetes with a Lupron shot series? I hear Little Geier’s BA in History really makes him a fine clinician so I’m sure he could whip up special concoction that’ll make you feel better (of course your child will be experimented upon, but that’s a different thread, eh?).

    Back to Wakers. Sue, did the MMR give your child diabetes or not? Prove to us that you are not an antivax zealot.

  107. #107 Common Sense
    January 12, 2007

    You tried to shut down the psychic thread quickly on your little list. Was that because you were afraid the government would find out about your clairvoyant efforts to control the black helicopters or were you embarrassed to be associated with that?

    Tried to shut it down? Hardly. I joined in :) Nice try though… Good to see you guys hang on every word we say. Thanks for staying on topic.

  108. #108 Common Sense
    January 12, 2007

    Yet, with all the internet experience you’ve garnered since your child has been diagnosed with diabetes, you still haven’t found the time, effort, or intellect to actually read papers.

    I read every paper that I can find or that is pointed out to me. Not sure how you can suggest that I haven’t? I suppose because I don’t fall for them hook, line and sinker?

    Many of us have seen your pleas on the EoH list asking for scientific links between heavy metals, a compromised immune system, and diabetes.

    I do ask people for information. Should’t I? What’s wrong with that? The thing to remember is that the vaccines don’t cause autism/type 1 diabtees studies are easy to find. Just go to the CDC website. You will find them all there. You have to dig more for truth. One page for the CDC always gives me a giggle:

    http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/archive/diabetes_and_vaccines.htm

    Check that out for a laugh or two. They claim:

    “Many factors, including genetic and a number of possible environmental factors unrelated to vaccines, may influence the development of diabetes”.

    — They have to add in that “unrelated to vaccines” comment as if they know. It makes perfect sense… there is an environmental factor … but it CAN’T be vaccines.

    “There is no proven evidence that vaccines cause or increase the risk of developing diabetes in people”.

    — There is no proven evidence, therefore, stop looking at vaccines, silly people. Move on.

    “Comparisons of diabetes rates with vaccination schedules in a few countries have been interpreted by some as suggestive of a possible increase in risk of diabetes associated with vaccination”.

    — Yes, they do. Where’s the follow-up?

    “Results of several scientific studies, however, have not shown a relationship between vaccines and an increased risk of diabetes in people”.

    — The Danish tell me that it’s not vaccines, so we’re good. Yup. Those Danes come through again. Boy, they are good.

  109. #109 Fact Checkinator
    January 12, 2007

    Nothing wrong with asking questions, AntivaxSue, it’s just that you are looking for evidence to support a feeling. The rest of the world collects data and then sees how it stacks up to support a hypothesis. I’m sure difference is lost on you.

    Again, Sue, you’re simply a mouth connected to other people’s quotes and computers. It’s laughable for you to claim that you read and understand scientific papers that involve vaccines, immunology, and diabetes. Back to the real issue in this thread: You’re a Wakefield apologist and a lame one at that. Your game is stale, Sue. Stick to your usual circlejerk hatingautism haunt. Bye.

  110. #110 Robster
    January 12, 2007

    Don’t try to pretend that you were purposely misspelling previously… that made you look stupid :)

    I did misspell it by accident, noticed it before posting, and thought it would be funny if I left it as is (and because I really could care less about your opinion). One letter off after all your protestation seemed fun. Admittedly, I have an odd sense of humor. My jokes are for my own benefit. If anyone else laughs, I call it a bonus. Spelling, in this case, not that important. Understanding stats and study design are key.

    “Many factors, including genetic and a number of possible environmental factors unrelated to vaccines, may influence the development of diabetes”.

    — They have to add in that “unrelated to vaccines” comment as if they know. It makes perfect sense… there is an environmental factor … but it CAN’T be vaccines.

    And the broken record keeps skipping. Studies have allowed us to rule out vaccines as the causal environmental factor. So, yes, it can’t be vaccines, so we keep looking for other possible risk factors.

    “There is no proven evidence that vaccines cause or increase the risk of developing diabetes in people”.

    — There is no proven evidence, therefore, stop looking at vaccines, silly people. Move on.

    Exactly. Examine the data, determine if it is worth pursuing, then either examine more closely or move on.

    “Comparisons of diabetes rates with vaccination schedules in a few countries have been interpreted by some as suggestive of a possible increase in risk of diabetes associated with vaccination”.

    — Yes, they do. Where’s the follow-up?

    No. There is evidence from one lab (with admitted financial interest in the issue) that is contradicted by the everybody else. The follow ups have geen done, found nothing (that paper we kept linking to above? Yeah, that was a follow up).

    “Results of several scientific studies, however, have not shown a relationship between vaccines and an increased risk of diabetes in people”.

    — The Danish tell me that it’s not vaccines, so we’re good. Yup. Those Danes come through again. Boy, they are good.

    So the data isn’t reliable because it comes from Denmark? That study was massive and well executed. Other studies, recently performed, also found a lack of a relationship.

    So we move on and look elsewhere.

  111. #111 Common Sense
    January 12, 2007

    I did misspell it by accident, noticed it before posting, and thought it would be funny if I left it as is (and because I really could care less about your opinion).

    Sure, Robster. I’m supposed to believe that you “noticed it before posting” but posted it anyway because it would be sooooo funny. Ah, you also must have noticed that you also wrote (accepted BAN/INN spelling, has the dual value of being correct and irritating Sue) which to anyone with a clue would make your really funny joke seem foolish. No reason to make up fairy tales, Robster.

    So the data isn’t reliable because it comes from Denmark? That study was massive and well executed. Other studies, recently performed, also found a lack of a relationship.

    So we move on and look elsewhere.

    Denmark is sketchy as far as I’m concerned. Beyond that, we are looking to Denmark with its different vaccinations, vaccination schedules, amounts of thimerosal, etc. to tell us something about our own over-crowded schedule. Doesn’t cut it…

  112. #112 shot_info
    January 12, 2007

    “Denmark is sketchy as far as I’m concerned. Beyond that, we are looking to Denmark with its different vaccinations, vaccination schedules, amounts of thimerosal, etc. to tell us something about our own over-crowded schedule. Doesn’t cut it… ”

    hahahahahahahaha
    Love it, “it doesn’t meet my preconceived notions, so I’m ignoring it”. Good on you LoCS, you again prove your lack of scientific thinking. Best to get back and finish grade school rather than this “experience thing” because your experience is woefully inadequate.

  113. #113 Common Sense
    January 13, 2007

    hahahahahahahaha
    Love it, “it doesn’t meet my preconceived notions,so I’m ignoring it”. Good on you LoCS, you again prove your lack of scientific thinking.

    No, I’m sorry but that’s not quite it. Let me ask you this. If you are trying to make a point about vaccinations perhaps triggering type 1 diabetes in children wouldn’t it be more sound science to pick a population of children who had similar vaccinations and similar vaccination schedules? Why would such a good “scientific thinker” such as yourself be ok with such differing groups of children? Denmark had a very different vaccination policy as compared to the US. Aren’t we comparing apples to bananas again. Why do you guys let that slide? It doesn’t seem very scientific to me. Denmark stopped using thimerosal in 1992. Denmark had a much less crowded vaccination schedule than the US did. Denmark didn’t inject babies with the Hep B vaccine on day 1 of life. I guess that you just sweep that under the carpet in the name of science… Huh? How does that work?

    I hope that you and your other scientific thinkers can figure out why the rates of children with type 1 diabetes in Denmark has increased significantly since 1970.

    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/25/12/2197

    “The increase in incidence is too steep to be caused by shifts in the population gene pool due to improved survival of people with insulin-dependent diabetes. THEREFORE, ENVIRONMENTAL RISK FACTORS MUST BE INVOLVED. Several known environmental risk factors have changed in Denmark over the last 30 years when related to birth cohorts, including birth weight (19) and maternal age (20-22), which might account for some of the cohort effects”.

    (Emphasis above was mine).
    Yes, of course it has to be birth weight, maternal age and breastfeeding changes… it can’t be vaccination. Nope. No way…. LOL! Good luck, scientific thinkers…

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.