General Discussion

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

15. No, you really don't.

Mon May 19, 2014, 11:35 PM

May 2014

I believe in Science big time

No, you really don't.

If you did, you'd understand why your observations of your own child weren't a valid experiment, and you'd also have noticed that "that change" arrives about that time whether or not the autistic child is vaccinated.

So I am not anti vaccine just vaccinating too much when a child's brain is developing is what I have problem with.

If you believed in Science big time, you'd have wondered just how those vaccines compare to the pathogens your child is exposed to in a normal day. 35 vaccines is nothing. Your child got exposed to thousands of pathogens every time they stuck something in their mouth.

You'd also have noticed that countries still using vaccines loaded with thimerosal and other Evil Chemicals™ have virtually no reported cases of autism (see: all of Africa).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Vaccines still don�t cause autism, study of 1.3 million kids finds [View all] LuckyTheDog May 2014 OP

WHARGARBLE anecdotal evidence WHARGARBLE!! KamaAina May 2014 #1

DU rec... SidDithers May 2014 #2

Post removed Post removed May 2014 #3

Please find another link than whale.to... SidDithers May 2014 #4

Here is the rolling stone link kimbutgar May 2014 #6

For the 2nd time a jury has shown this article is no longer tolerated on DU. alp227 May 2014 #20

Here are some other great links on that site! Codeine May 2014 #5

I didn't know whale was a wacko site kimbutgar May 2014 #7

That's an article so bad it's been pulled from a number of sites. nt Codeine May 2014 #8

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present another sad case of Orrex May 2014 #17

I really hope there will come a time when we can put this shit to bed NuclearDem May 2014 #9

But people want to believe it shenmue May 2014 #10

Post removed Post removed May 2014 #11

No, you really don't. jeff47 May 2014 #15

We never will. Archae May 2014 #13

but but that Playboy centerfold said the exact opposite NightWatcher May 2014 #12

No doubt they also pin-pointed the true cause with a sample that large. What did they GoneFishin May 2014 #14

So what's the real cause of cancer? jeff47 May 2014 #16

Cancer researchers don't repeatedly harp on a single NON-cause of cancer ad nauseam. GoneFishin May 2014 #19

Damned if they do, damned if they don't NuclearDem May 2014 #22

They would be looking for an actual cause NuclearDem May 2014 #18

Suprise! LostOne4Ever May 2014 #21