Autism rates even higher
Vaccine-man
Well, maybe john, peterB and the rest of the anti-vac crew can explain
to us why the rates are continuing to increase, even after thimerosal
was removed from childhood vaccines six years ago.
JOHN
"Vaccine-man" <zigg...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1170981138.4...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MMR etc
Jeff
"JOHN" <jo...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:AsednSgRB6m...@bt.com...
Actually, if you read carefully, you would see the study was done in 2002 on
8-year olds. So these are kids who were vaccinated around 1996-1998.
I also wonder if some kids with autism were effectively eliminated from the
study because they were in private school or home schooled, increasing the
apparent rate. I might read the actual report.
Jeff
Mark Probert
Well David Kirby is claiming that one of the reasons is the cremations
of Chinese in China.
The CDDC numbers for the critical birth cohort of 3-5 year olds have
steadily increased. Years ago Kirby even acknowledged that if the rates
do not go down by the fourth quarter of 2005(?)--moved goal post to
2006--then the thimerosal issue is in deep doo-doo. Of course, the
Mercury Militia now substitutes Rhogam, flu shots, etc. as the cause. As
if the uptake on those is equal to that of the uptake on vaccines.
These MM-anti-vac liars really do insult intelligent people with their
wild yarns.
Mark Probert
It is available on the CDC website. Or I can email you the PDF.
Jeff
"Mark Probert" <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:7V_yh.2469$Yl3.1515@trndny09...
No, I will get it later. The CNN article was also inaccurate in that the
study was done in 2000 and 2002, not just 2002, according to the New York
Times article.
Jeff
nogggin
damage trials to the press and the public?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/the-other-secret-bush-cou_b_34232.html
Mark Probert
> Why would the department of justice want to close upcoming vaccine
> damage trials to the press and the public?
You, and goal post moving Kirby have it wrong. The DoJ does not want to
close it. The proceedings are private, and they are opposing opening it
because the Mercury Militia want to make it a side show and show off
their broken and defective children. At least, they think their kids are
broken and defective, since they do not accept them for who they are.
That is sad.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/the-other-secret-bush-cou_b_34232.html
>
David Wright
Won't fly, John-boy. MMR uptake rates haven't changed much for many
years, yet according to you, autism continues to increase. In any
event, the measles component is what the anti-vaxers blame, yet
measles vaccination goes back to the 1960s in the US, so autism rates
should have shot up by 1970. They didn't.
Similarly, you assure us that thimerosal is also really, really bad,
but now the thimerosal is out of the vaccines, yet autism hasn't gone
away.
Your "explanations" don't hold water.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If George Bush were my dad, I'd be drunk in public so often that
James Baker would have me killed." -- Bill Maher on the Bush twins
PeterB
> In article <AsednSgRB6mN-1HYRVn...@bt.com>, JOHN <j...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >"Vaccine-man" <ziggit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:1170981138.4...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> >http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/02/08/autism.prevalence.ap/...
>
> >> Well, maybe john, peterB and the rest of the anti-vac crew can explain
> >> to us why the rates are continuing to increase, even after thimerosal
> >> was removed from childhood vaccines six years ago.
>
> >MMR etc
>
> Won't fly, John-boy. MMR uptake rates haven't changed much for many
> years, yet according to you, autism continues to increase.
Perhaps if you spent time away from the newsgroups, you would have
heard the news by now. I know, after twenty years doing your
sponsors' bidding, what's news?
> In any
> event, the measles component is what the anti-vaxers blame, yet
> measles vaccination goes back to the 1960s in the US, so autism rates
> should have shot up by 1970. They didn't.
More children are receiving more vaccinations, however. There is
really nothing else happening on such a wide scale that might explain
it.
> Similarly, you assure us that thimerosal is also really, really bad,
> but now the thimerosal is out of the vaccines, yet autism hasn't gone
> away.
>
> Your "explanations" don't hold water.
Your failure to contribute anything meaningful to any discussion here
never stops you. Say hello to your sponsors for me, Ok?
David Wright
PeterB <p...@mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 11, 12:39 pm, wri...@l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote:
>> In article <AsednSgRB6mN-1HYRVn...@bt.com>, JOHN <j...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Vaccine-man" <ziggit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1170981138.4...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/02/08/autism.prevalence.ap/...
>>
>> >> Well, maybe john, peterB and the rest of the anti-vac crew can explain
>> >> to us why the rates are continuing to increase, even after thimerosal
>> >> was removed from childhood vaccines six years ago.
>>
>> >MMR etc
>>
>> Won't fly, John-boy. MMR uptake rates haven't changed much for many
>> years, yet according to you, autism continues to increase.
>
>Perhaps if you spent time away from the newsgroups, you would have
>heard the news by now. I know, after twenty years doing your
>sponsors' bidding, what's news?
"Heard the new?" What news is that? I did see the item about ASD is
now seeming to be about 6% of the population, according to the CDC,
but the CDC didn't relate it to vaccination. I'm also aware of
Wakefield's bogus claims about MMR vaccination. So what news is it
you're claiming I'm unaware of?
By the way, I see your supplement-making sponsors finally figured out
that it was suspicious that a supposed concerned citizen like yourself
only posted during business hours, and they're now springing for
overtime so you can post on weekends. Congratulations; I'm sure you
need the extra income.
>> In any
>> event, the measles component is what the anti-vaxers blame, yet
>> measles vaccination goes back to the 1960s in the US, so autism rates
>> should have shot up by 1970. They didn't.
>
>More children are receiving more vaccinations, however. There is
>really nothing else happening on such a wide scale that might explain
>it.
"Nothing else" you're aware of. My, how omniscient of you, PeterB.
"Nothing else?" Sure.
Only if there's anything to explain. First, you have to establish
that ASD actually *has* increased sharply. There is, of course,
evidence that it hasn't really increased, simply that it's being
recognized more often.
>> Similarly, you assure us that thimerosal is also really, really bad,
>> but now the thimerosal is out of the vaccines, yet autism hasn't gone
>> away.
>>
>> Your "explanations" don't hold water.
>
>Your failure to contribute anything meaningful to any discussion here
>never stops you.
I've seen nothing of value from you, PeterB, other than YOUR intention
to follow the party line on, say CODEX. And that's not of value to
the discussion -- but it *is* of value to demonstrate where you're
coming from. It's a classic political trick: group A is hip-deep in
some dubious practice, so they try to distract the public by accusing
group B of committing the same practice.
By the way, despite your screaming about how CODEX has somehow
affected the availability of supplements in Australia, the
Complementary Healthcare Council of Australia disagrees with you; see
ttp://www.chc.org.au/scripts/cgiip.exe/WService=ASP0012/ccms.r?Roxy=0x00066e64&PageId=10093
> Say hello to your sponsors for me, Ok?
Trivially easy -- since I have no sponsors, I can say hello to all of
them in zero time. But do say "hi" to yours.
Mark Probert
> On Feb 11, 12:39 pm, wri...@l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote:
>> In article <AsednSgRB6mN-1HYRVn...@bt.com>, JOHN <j...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Vaccine-man" <ziggit...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1170981138.4...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/02/08/autism.prevalence.ap/...
>>>> Well, maybe john, peterB and the rest of the anti-vac crew can explain
>>>> to us why the rates are continuing to increase, even after thimerosal
>>>> was removed from childhood vaccines six years ago.
>>> MMR etc
>> Won't fly, John-boy. MMR uptake rates haven't changed much for many
>> years, yet according to you, autism continues to increase.
>
> Perhaps if you spent time away from the newsgroups, you would have
> heard the news by now. I know, after twenty years doing your
> sponsors' bidding, what's news?
What "news" is that? The the California number for the 4Q of 2006 did
not reflect the drop that the mercury militia of the anti-vac liar
brigade predicted? If so, then it is news.
>> In any
>> event, the measles component is what the anti-vaxers blame, yet
>> measles vaccination goes back to the 1960s in the US, so autism rates
>> should have shot up by 1970. They didn't.
>
> More children are receiving more vaccinations, however. There is
> really nothing else happening on such a wide scale that might explain
> it.
Incorrect, Petey. What is happening on a wide scale, beginning in the
late 1980's and early 1990's, was that school districts were actually
beginning to do their job and trying to figure out why Johnny cannot
read. Further, there was a substantial broadening of the diagnosis of
Autism during that same period, with a significant amount of diagnosis
re-assignment.
>> Similarly, you assure us that thimerosal is also really, really bad,
>> but now the thimerosal is out of the vaccines, yet autism hasn't gone
>> away.
>>
>> Your "explanations" don't hold water.
>
> Your failure to contribute anything meaningful to any discussion here
> never stops you. Say hello to your sponsors for me, Ok?
Actually, you failed to provide anything meaningful to the discussion.
BTW, for anyone who thinks you are paid, I can assure them that there is
no one in any business that would be so stupid as to pay you for what
you post here.
Mark Probert
Even supplement manufacturers are not so stupid as to hire Petey for that.
JohnDoe
Oh, come on. Kelly Eidem isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shop
either, yet he got paid to write a book about Revici. If that is
possible, I can believe someone pays PeterB for his posts.
Mark Probert
OK. I sit corrected.
Richard Schultz
: Incorrect, Petey. What is happening on a wide scale, beginning in the
: late 1980's and early 1990's, was that school districts were actually
: beginning to do their job and trying to figure out why Johnny cannot
: read. Further, there was a substantial broadening of the diagnosis of
: Autism during that same period, with a significant amount of diagnosis
: re-assignment.
I was under the impression (I would appreciate being corrected if I am
mistaken) that the likelihood of a child's being autistic correlates with
the age of his parents (or is it just with the age of his father?). If
so, the increase in autism diagnoses may be due in part to the rising average
age of people having children.
I'd also be curious to see the numbers for how many children were diagnosed
as retarded but *not* autistic during that same period. If your assessment
is correct, that number should have gone down as children who were formerly
written off as being significantly mentally retarded are now diagnosed as
being autistic. (Actually, I should be more specific and ask for the numbers
of children diagnosed as retarded but neither autistic nor suffering from
Down's Syndrome or any other condition correlated with the parents' ages.)
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell bad."
Richard Schultz
: Oh, come on. Kelly Eidem isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shop
: either, yet he got paid to write a book about Revici. If that is
: possible, I can believe someone pays PeterB for his posts.
Especially since PeterB can *appear* to be reasonable and to have a large
amount of data at his command. That the "data" consist of articles that he
hasn't read and usually don't say what he claims that he does, and books
by people who are either incompetent or insane or both, is not something that
the average reader might be expected to know.
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"
Jeff
"PeterB" <p...@mytrashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171218532.7...@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
<....>
> More children are receiving more vaccinations, however. There is
> really nothing else happening on such a wide scale that might explain
> it.
It has not been established that there is a real increase in autism. It may
very well be that as people are more aware of autism, there are more
diagnoses.
If there is a real increase in autism, you should be aware that kids are
exposed to far more enviornment toxins, like pesticides, paint fumes,
metals, and organic compounds that people weren't exposed to before.
Considering that there is nothing to link vaccines to autism, there is no
reason to think vaccines cause autism.
If you compare a timeline of autism diganosis rates to vaccination, you will
see that there is no increase in autism after any introduction of vaccines.
>> Similarly, you assure us that thimerosal is also really, really bad,
>> but now the thimerosal is out of the vaccines, yet autism hasn't gone
>> away.
>>
>> Your "explanations" don't hold water.
>
> Your failure to contribute anything meaningful to any discussion here
> never stops you. Say hello to your sponsors for me, Ok?
Actually, how do you explain that after mercury was withdrawn from most
vaccines, there was no decrease in autism rates? The only logical
explanation is that mercury does not cause autism.
Jeff
Jeff
"David Wright" <wri...@l1000.prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:y9Kzh.53240$QU1....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
> In article <1171218532.7...@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>,
<...>
> "Heard the new?" What news is that? I did see the item about ASD is
> now seeming to be about 6% of the population, according to the CDC,
> but the CDC didn't relate it to vaccination. I'm also aware of
> Wakefield's bogus claims about MMR vaccination. So what news is it
> you're claiming I'm unaware of?
Actually, that was 6.7 per thousand, not 6%.
The latest survey was for autism spectrum disease, not just autism.
So the apparent increase from one in 160 to about about one in 150 may be
that different (but related) things are being measured autism and
autism-spectrum disease.
Jeff
Mark Probert
> In misc.health.alternative JohnDoe <do...@spam.me> wrote:
>
> : Oh, come on. Kelly Eidem isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shop
> : either, yet he got paid to write a book about Revici. If that is
> : possible, I can believe someone pays PeterB for his posts.
>
> Especially since PeterB can *appear* to be reasonable and to have a large
> amount of data at his command. That the "data" consist of articles that he
> hasn't read and usually don't say what he claims that he does, and books
> by people who are either incompetent or insane or both, is not something that
> the average reader might be expected to know.
Smoke and mirrors Petey.
Mark Probert
> In misc.health.alternative Mark Probert <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote:
>
> : Incorrect, Petey. What is happening on a wide scale, beginning in the
> : late 1980's and early 1990's, was that school districts were actually
> : beginning to do their job and trying to figure out why Johnny cannot
> : read. Further, there was a substantial broadening of the diagnosis of
> : Autism during that same period, with a significant amount of diagnosis
> : re-assignment.
>
> I was under the impression (I would appreciate being corrected if I am
> mistaken) that the likelihood of a child's being autistic correlates with
> the age of his parents (or is it just with the age of his father?). If
> so, the increase in autism diagnoses may be due in part to the rising average
> age of people having children.
IIRC it is father based, not mother based.
> I'd also be curious to see the numbers for how many children were diagnosed
> as retarded but *not* autistic during that same period. If your assessment
> is correct, that number should have gone down as children who were formerly
> written off as being significantly mentally retarded are now diagnosed as
> being autistic. (Actually, I should be more specific and ask for the numbers
> of children diagnosed as retarded but neither autistic nor suffering from
> Down's Syndrome or any other condition correlated with the parents' ages.)
I do not know if those numbers exist as you describe.
David Wright
>
>"David Wright" <wri...@l1000.prodigy.net> wrote in message
>news:y9Kzh.53240$QU1....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>> In article <1171218532.7...@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>,
><...>
>
>> "Heard the new?" What news is that? I did see the item about ASD is
>> now seeming to be about 6% of the population, according to the CDC,
>> but the CDC didn't relate it to vaccination. I'm also aware of
>> Wakefield's bogus claims about MMR vaccination. So what news is it
>> you're claiming I'm unaware of?
>
>Actually, that was 6.7 per thousand, not 6%.
Yes; the CDC report mentioned "150 per thousand." I wrote 6% and
should have written 0.6% (or maybe 0.7%). My bad.
>The latest survey was for autism spectrum disease, not just autism.
Absolutely. Unsurprisingly, some of the popular press articles just
said "autism" not "autism spectrum disorder." The usual precision
we've come to expect from the mass media.
>So the apparent increase from one in 160 to about about one in 150 may be
>that different (but related) things are being measured autism and
>autism-spectrum disease.
The CDC report didn't claim to be absolutely accurate; they only
surveyed a few states and those states may not be representative of
the nation as a whole. Indeed, the state-to-state variation was
fairly large, suggesting some errors in the numbers. So we shouldn't
take 1 in 150 as holy writ. The true value may be larger or smaller.
David Wright
Richard Schultz <sch...@mail.biu.ack.il> wrote:
>In misc.health.alternative Mark Probert <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote:
>
>: Incorrect, Petey. What is happening on a wide scale, beginning in the
>: late 1980's and early 1990's, was that school districts were actually
>: beginning to do their job and trying to figure out why Johnny cannot
>: read. Further, there was a substantial broadening of the diagnosis of
>: Autism during that same period, with a significant amount of diagnosis
>: re-assignment.
>
>I was under the impression (I would appreciate being corrected if I am
>mistaken) that the likelihood of a child's being autistic correlates with
>the age of his parents (or is it just with the age of his father?). If
>so, the increase in autism diagnoses may be due in part to the rising average
>age of people having children.
There was a recent report that found a correlation between the age of
the father and the likelihood of autism in the child.
However, there's also the study that found that autism really hasn't
increased much, if at all -- instead, it's being diagnosed properly,
whereas autistic children used to be classified as retarded or having
some sort of mental illness.