To dare speak about Vaxxed on MN?

[thegoodfight]

NC for this but a regular.

So I've just watched the documentary Vaxxed. I know how vaccine threads unfold on MN, so I'm ready to be told IABU however I feel like everyone should see this whatever your views - it's about the cover up around studies into autism and MMR

There is an admission from a CDC insider that he worked on the study and hid data which proved a link (a strong an quite frankly astounding one) and the data was sent to an external biologist who saw it for himself. There are first hand accounts from parents, scientists, doctors and politicians. The CDC haven't denied anything or called their lawyers despite it being an allegation of the biggest medical fraud ever (not exact words but something along those lines)

I just can't believe it's not been in the news! AIBU to ask if anyone else is planning to watch it??

I cross posted too Y0uCann0t .. that was to Mimi about DHs scarlet fever

Bruffin, from here

"Coverage of single measles vaccine was initially poor, and had only reached around 80% in 1988 when MMR vaccine was introduced. Coverage rapidly increased and by 1992 MMR coverage at 24 months had reached 92% which was sustained for the next 4-5 years. After the 1994 MR school campaign, which achieved a coverage of 92%, endemic transmission of measles was interrupted."

You wouldn't have been getting the measles vaccine in school in the 60s as it didn't become available until 1968 Odd as I too had it, in the 60s... mainly as 1968 is actually in the 60s

Thanks for the admission of your mistake OurBlanche. It does seem that you consider it pedantry when people question you but just 'establishing the facts' when you question others.

We must bave been imagining it Ourblanche
Except that measles rapidly declined from 70 onwards, surprise that

Have you not noticed I am only questioning you, your quibbling?

Everyone else I was just exchanging information and opinions with.

And, as I am not a pedant I did make an error and am quite happy to admit it.

Your turn, I think!

Well who can argue with anecdotes?

Yes, quite! Again, nicely done. Sinuous, even!

But it still stand that 1968 was definitely in the 60s, whether bruffin and I are lying mistaken or not!

I haven't waded through the thread in full yet but:
If society was more accepting and supportive of people with asd then perhaps we wouldn't end up depressed, isolated and unable to work or function well
^This. So much fucking this. This with bells, neon lights and people doing the can can on top of.

I haven't read anything about a mass school campaign in the 60s. The first school vaccine program mentioned is MR in 1994. As the above link says, uptake of the measles vaccine in 1968 was initially poor but if 2 people say there was a vaccination program for measles in their school in the U.K. in 1968 then it must be true. (You do seem to be going back on what you said earlier about it not being measles you were talking about but DPT)

OurBlanche- remember what I said.........

It was most definitely measles. DTP was in secondary school as was rubella (Didnt have that because i had rubella a few weeks before, caught from my mum) and TB.

We are talking ancient history before the internet

Jumping back several pages to "winter's" assertion of my so-called arrogance.

If my arrogance is that I'm a professional in a similar field and am both open minded to be questioned myself on my fields of expertise and able to questions others, them I'm proud of such arrogance.

Such arrogance has proved life saving and in the case of the birth of my own children invaluble as the "expert" scientist agreed I knew as much as he did.

Interestingly, in one of pregnancies I queried with my (smart, switched on) GP the merits of the flu vaccine in pregnancy and he agreed with me and privately admitted his own wife, also pregnant, had not had it.

So I will keep my arrogance but I certainly do not think that so called experts should not be queried. Most of the time they don't agree with each other either!

I admit to that too, Bertrand. But I don't remember having payed with it before

mumbles yes, I had quite a few vaccinations when I was a kid. As did almost every other kid I knew! Having 1 doesn't mean I didn't have another. My error was, as I have stated, twice categorically, was to type MMR - the main topic of the thread - when meaning another triple jab, that was widely available at the time.

I can think of many things it is possible you haven't read about.... do none of them exist either? Solipsism at its very best!

I assume that posters who do not allow any questioning of vaccines at all recognise that vaccine damage does exist? That we have a programme (imperfect, admittedly) that allows compensation for vaccine damage?

If it is agreed as a concept, therefore, that vaccines have the potential for harm, what about more benign harm? Harm that takes a longer time to develop? That perhaps caused more subtle immune problems such as diabetes?

Even the studies looking at increasing rates of leukaemia acknowledged the problems of a lack of sample size for unvaccinated children or those who had not received the MMR

Yes Charlieismydarlin; the risk of the vaccine outweighs the risk of the disease.
No one pretends there is no risk at all. Life isnt that simple.

Yes Charlie. That has been discussed a few times, no one has said otherwise!

You miss my point.

Vaccine damage of that sort is catastrophic. But shows the potential for harm is there. Thus we must remain open to the possibility of less catastrophic but very real damage. I'm talking subtle changes to the developing immune system which may cause allergies or autoimmune disorders later in life or childhood leukaemia.

ALL increasing and no real explanation.

I don't think I missed your point, I certainly don't ignore it!

ALL increasing and no real explanation Or all being reported, recognised, diagnosed more as medicine becomes ever more sophisticated. And yes, no real explanation because nobody knows!

What would you like to see happen/change?

The number of people who work in similar fields that equip them to make complex medical decisions on these threads is very surprising!

Well I would love more research but I don't think it is possible due to the lack of control groups.

I would however like more studies done into the combination of vaccines and when given. At present, there is a blanket assertion that it doesn't matter if we are vaccinating against a hundred viruses or just one, the effect is the same.

I don't believe it.

I would like to see research specifically on food allergies and autoimmunity and the extent of vaccines.

Finally, we need to stop rubbishing and shutting down debate on the issue. And that includes in relation to autism.

(I have just watched a summary of the Vaxxed film. In essence, it says a CDC study showing a link between autism and the MMR, specifically in younger males, was not published. Apparently the link was not shown after 3 years of age).

I have no idea what to make of that to be honest but if we are at the stage of being unable to trust published research then we are in trouble.

The number of people who work in similar fields that equip them to make complex medical decisions on these threads is very surprising!

Is it? Wouldn't you expect to see people drawn to threads that they're interested in/know about?

apple that's where you and I differ.

I welcome people questioning my expertise. It happens daily. It is called robust debate.

It's not difficult to read the results of research studies. What is much harder is thinking about what has not been looked at. What has been missed? How long term was the study? What was the control? Who funded it?!