Quote:
|
Quote by: RickSp Before putting preservative in vaccines, there were cases where the vaccine went bad due to bacterial contamination and dozens of children died. Vaccine was prepared in batches and could be dangerous without preservatives like thimerosol. These days vaccines are prepared in single unit dosages without thimerosal. This is more expensive but obviously preferable as long as you can afford it.
From everything I have read, most of the claims about thimerosal are irresponsible. Every reputable study has shown no relationship between thimerosal and autism. The most telling indication, at least to me, is that Denmark, which banned thimerosal before the United States, has not seen a decrease in autism in the years following the ban. In fact autism in Denmark has continued to rise long after thimerosal should no longer be a factor.
This hasn't stopped the alarmists and the conspiratorialists from making all sorts of outlandish claims, but that is what they do. |
Quote:
"The Danish results were riddled with even more problems than the Swedish ones, however. Even the authors admitted that they 'may have spuriously increased the apparent number of autism cases,' As in Sweden, they had only counted inpatient cases, at least from 1983 to 1994. Then in 1995, for reasons that went unexplained, the researchers began including outpatient cases as well. In that same year, the total number of children reported with autism more than doubled over the year before. from about 40 cases in 1994 to 100 cases in 1993."
"' Changes over time in the rates of diagnosis of autism-like dosorders in inpatient versus outpatient settings may have affected the ascertainment of cases,' the authors said, in what Mercury Moms thought was the under-statement of the year."
"A second flaw was that prior to 1992, the data did not include cases diagnosed in a busy cinic in Copenhagen, where 20 percent of all Danish cases were diagnosed. By adding in these previously excluded cases, the authors found a spike in rates in 1992, the same year mercury was removed from vaccines."
|
- From David Kirby's
Evidence of Harm
Pg. 271 to 272... and it doesn't stop there. The text previous to that is interesting too.
Now, do I consider that "gospel?"
No.
But does it sound like some rabid conspiracy theorist trying to debunk a study?
Hardly.
The simple claim that all the anti-Thimerosal studies are flawed in comparison is easy to make without specifics. It doesn't mean a hell of a lot except that is the side those who make such claims have taken. Of course the same would be true in reverse.
So do you feel my sister-in-law, brother-in-law and other parents concerned with this issue are merely... "alarmists and... conspiratorialists?" Perhaps you think they care more for conspiracies than they do their children? Painting such horns and tails on those you disagree with would easy, but also meaningless... I would hope you agree.
So far I have seen a lot of those posting retorts using such phraseology. It's easy while debating a topic make claims that everyone who doesn't back up your view on any one subject is an alarmist or a conspiracy theorist. I hope that wasn't your intent.