Vaccines & Thimerasol - Cover up?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    I came across an interesting study from 1999.

    Thomas Verstraeten brought this report to the CDC. The original research paper read as follows:

    Methods: We categorized the cumulative ethylmercury exposure from thimerosal containing vaccines after one month of
    life and assessed the subsequent risk of degenerative and developmental neurologic disorders and renal disorders before the
    age of six. We applied proportional hazard models adjusting for HMO, year of birth, and gender, excluding premature babies.

    Results: We identified 286 children with degenerative and 3702 with developmental neurologic disorders, and 310 with renal
    disorders. The relative risk (RR) of developing a neurologic development disorder was 1.8 ( 95% confidence intervals [CI] :::
    1.1-2.8) when comparing the highest exposure group at 1 month of age (cumulative dose> 25 ug) to the unexposed group.
    Within this group we also found an elevated risk for the following disorders: autism (RR 7.6, 95% Cl = 1.8-31.5), non organic
    sleep disorders (RR 5.0, 95% Cl = 1.6-15.9}, and speech disorders (RR 2.1, 95% (1=1.1-4.0).
    For the neurologic degenerative
    and renal disorders group we found no significantly increased risk or a decreased risk.

    Conclusion: This analysis suggests that high exposure to ethyl mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines in the first month
    of life increases the risk of subsequent development of neurologic development impairment
    , but not of neurologic degenerative
    or renal impairment. Further confirmatory studies are needed.

    I later found out that this study was not published in this form. It was published several years later, in 2003. The 2003 revised version was substantially different:

    METHODS: A 2-phased retrospective cohort study was conducted using computerized health maintenance organization (HMO) databases. Phase I screened for associations between neurodevelopmental disorders and thimerosal exposure among 124 170 infants who were born during 1992 to 1999 at 2 HMOs (A and B). In phase II, the most common disorders associated with exposure in phase I were reevaluated among 16 717 children who were born during 1991 to 1997 in another HMO (C). Relative risks for neurodevelopmental disorders were calculated per increase of 12.5 micro g of estimated cumulative mercury exposure from TCVs in the first, third, and seventh months of life.

    RESULTS: In phase I at HMO A, cumulative exposure at 3 months resulted in a significant positive association with tics (relative risk [RR]: 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-3.38). At HMO B, increased risks of language delay were found for cumulative exposure at 3 months (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01-1.27) and 7 months (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.13). In phase II at HMO C, no significant associations were found. In no analyses were significant increased risks found for autism or attention-deficit disorder.

    CONCLUSIONS: No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.

    This piqued my curiosity. What happened between 1999 and 2003 that caused a complete reversal in the results of this study? This is what I found:



    1. A clandestine meeting took place in 2000. It involved members of the CDC, WHO Vaccine division, FDA, and representatives from the various vaccine manufacturing companies. There is a complete transcript available, thanks to the Freedom of Information Act. A few pertinent quotes:



    • Dr. Verstraeten - "Now it turns out that other people also thought that this study was not the right thing to do, so what I will present to you is the study that nobody thought we should do.



    • Dr. Bernier (NIP - National Immunization Program of the CDC) - "We have asked you to keep this information confidential. We do have a plan for discussing these data at the upcoming meeting of the Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices on June 21 and June 22. At that time CDC plans to make a public release of this information, so I think it would serve all of our interests best if we could continue to consider these data. The ACIP work group will be considering also. If we could consider these data in a certain protected environment. So we are asking people who have a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So to basically consider this embargoed information. That would help all of us to use the machinery that we have in place for considering these data and for arriving at policy recommendations."



    • Dr. Clements (WHO Official Representing the Expansion of their Vaccine Program) - "And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, because the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted, and we have all reached this point now where we are left hanging, even though I hear the majority of consultants say to the Board that they are not convinced there is a causality direct link between Thimerosal and various neurological outcomes."



    • Dr. Clements - "So I leave you with the challenge that I am very concerned that this has gotten this far, and that having got this far, how you present in a concerted voice the information to the ACIP in a way they will be able to handle it and not get exposed to the traps which are out there in public relations. My message would be that any other study, and I like the study that has just been described here very much. I think it makes a lot of sense, but it has to be thought through. What are the potential outcomes and how will you handle it? How will it be presented to a public and media that is hungry for selecting the information they want to use for whatever means they in store for them?"



    • Dr. Bernier - "I don’t think we can set a rule here because some people have gotten these documents. For example, some of the manufacturers were privileged to receive this information. It has been important for them to share it within the company with the experts there, so they can review it. Some of you may have questions. You may have given a copy, but I think if we will all just consider this embargoed information, if I can use that term, and very highly protected information, I think that was the best I can offer."




    2. Dr. David Weldon, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, wrote a letter describing some of what took place. Some interesting quotes:​



    • [*=1]
      The actions of the CDC regarding their November 3, 2003, article in
      Pediatrics raise serious concerns about the objectivity of the CDC’s top
      vaccine safety officials and the value of their input on this issue.




      [*=1]
      On the day the Pediatrics study was released, a top CDC researcher and a
      coauthor of the study was quick to declare in news articles that appeared
      across this nation, "The final results of the study show no statistical
      association between thimerosal vaccines and harmful health outcomes in
      children, in particular autism and attention-deficit disorder."
      Unfortunately, the study does nothing of the sort, and when called to account
      eight weeks later, this CDC official was forced to recant. When asked if the
      children in the study were too young to have received an autism diagnosis,
      this coauthor stated that yes they were too young. He went on to admit that
      the study also likely mislabeled young autistic children as having other
      disabilities thus masking the number of children with autism.
      There are a
      host of other flaws in the study that are raised in the attached articles and
      letters to Pediatrics, which I urge you to personally review.




      [*=1]
      It appears to me not only as a Member of Congress but also as a physician
      that some officials within the CDC’s NIP may be more interested in a public
      relations campaign than getting to the truth about thimerosal. At present, I
      have lost confidence in the ability of officials at the CDC to give an honest
      evaluation of the matters at hand.
      It is not just me raising these concerns
      about public confidence, but also Dr. Neal Halsey who in his letter conveys
      his concerns about loss of confidence in the NIP.




    3. Some interesting emails took place between several of the researchers discussing how changes in the research criteria yield different results.

    4. Safe Minds did an analysis of the data discrepancies, the changes that took place in the statistical analysis and how it affected the outcome.

    5. Dr. Verstraeten, the lead researcher had an interesting career change. In between the time of his first analysis of the data and his final published data, he went to work for one of the main vaccine manufacturers: GlaxoSmithKline.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    LOL. The website you used to tell us about your conspiracy theory actually debunks your conspiracy theory.

    No, it attempts to debunk Robert F. Kennedy's article from a long time ago. My research is independent of his.

    You make this mistake in logic quite often.

    If you disagree with something that I wrote, feel free to debate it on its merits. Not on the merits of an entirely separate article.
     

    level.eleven

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    4,673
    48
    Come on steve, none of the anti-vaxxers are still trotting out the Simpsonwood/Verstraeten conspiracy theory. It completely blew up in their face. Get some fresh material.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    Come on steve, none of the anti-vaxxers are still trotting out the Simpsonwood/Verstraeten conspiracy theory. It completely blew up in their face. Get some fresh material.

    Source?

    Do you have any actual arguments to make? Perhaps one that includes logic, reason, or evidence of some sort?

    I'll take your hollow condescension as a "no".
     

    BigBoxaJunk

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 9, 2013
    7,314
    113
    East-ish
    I remember when I started wearing soft contacts in 1980 the contact solution contained Thimerasol. After a few weeks, my eyes were blood red all the time. Teachers thought I was a stoner. I had to switch to the preservative free solutions which were very expensive then.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    I remember when I started wearing soft contacts in 1980 the contact solution contained Thimerasol. After a few weeks, my eyes were blood red all the time. Teachers thought I was a stoner. I had to switch to the preservative free solutions which were very expensive then.

    Anecdotal evidence! Preserving living tissue is safe and effective.:lala:
     

    level.eleven

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    4,673
    48
    Source?

    Do you have any actual arguments to make? Perhaps one that includes logic, reason, or evidence of some sort?

    I'll take your hollow condescension as a "no".

    I'll have a discussion. First you have to bring up something other the Geire clan. CoMed was founded and is ran by them. Remember Reverend Sykes from you last conspiracy theory? She is the current president of CoMed.

    Some Notes on the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (CoMeD
     

    octalman

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 30, 2010
    273
    18
    Oh Yeah! Such a better plan to eliminate vaccinations. The resulting Smallpox, Polio, Whooping Cough, etc. is an acceptable outcome.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    I'll have a discussion. First you have to bring up something other the Geire clan. CoMed was founded and is ran by them. Remember Reverend Sykes from you last conspiracy theory? She is the current president of CoMed.

    Some Notes on the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (CoMeD

    This study has nothing to do with the Geier family. None of my sources referenced statements from CoMeD, Sykes or the Geiers. Their website happened to be the first I found that hosted a PDF of the original study that was performed by Dr. Verstraeten, at the behest of the NIP branch of the CDC. Neither Dr. Verstraeten nor any of his colleagues in this study have any affiliation with the Geier family that I am aware of.

    I can see no relevance in bringing them up unless you are implying that their hosted copy of the original study is a fake. If that is your implication then I can find a copy elsewhere and link to it, if you want.

    Next?
     

    level.eleven

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 12, 2009
    4,673
    48
    This study has nothing to do with the Geier family. None of my sources referenced statements from CoMeD, Sykes or the Geiers. Their website happened to be the first I found that hosted a PDF of the original study that was performed by Dr. Verstraeten, at the behest of the NIP branch of the CDC. Neither Dr. Verstraeten nor any of his colleagues in this study have any affiliation with the Geier family that I am aware of.

    I can see no relevance in bringing them up unless you are implying that their hosted copy of the original study is a fake. If that is your implication then I can find a copy elsewhere and link to it, if you want.

    Next?

    The Geire clan "broke" the story according to all of the conspiracy blogs. Hey man, maybe they can win all of their lawsuits now. It is rather important where you get your information. And, that is a photocopy of a page from the intenerary of the 2000 EIS conference. It was preliminary, never published. Do you know why? Why didn't they link the other 300 pages? What congresional office was reviewing the ESI conference from 2000 in August of 2013?

    Have you decided whether to go public with your smoking gun? Do you think the authors support your conclusion? Man, this Simpsonwood conspiracy runs DEEP.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    The Geire clan "broke" the story according to all of the conspiracy blogs.

    I have not referenced any statements from any conspiracy blogs or from the Geiers, and I still fail to see any relevance to this discussion.

    Let's break this down to keep the debate focused.

    Fact: In 1999 this team of researchers concluded that thimerasol, in the amounts commonly used in childhood vaccines, correlated to increased incidences of neurological damage.

    Fact: In 2000 a group of CDC, WHO, FDA and pharmaceutical company representatives (many with a vested interest in avoiding thimerasol lawsuits) met and discussed the need to hide this information from the public.

    Fact: In 2003 the study was re-titled and published with a very different conclusion than that of the original.

    Fact: Sometime between the prior two events, the lead researcher became employed by a pharmaceutical company with a vested interest in the perceived safety of the vaccines they produced.

    Fact: A CDC official admitted that the new report's data had been manipulated in a way that would favor the conclusion of thimerasol safety.

    Theory: Government and corporate interests converged to form an opposition to this report in its original form. The researchers were encouraged to investigate ways to manipulate the data to alter the final conclusion. The lead researcher's future career with one of the pharmaceutical companies may have played a part.

    Which of these seemingly documented facts do you disagree with, if any?

    Can you point out any holes in my theory? Do you have an alternate theory that explains this progression of events?
     

    tetsujin79

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    Apr 23, 2013
    387
    18
    NWI
    In the beginning of the study, they talk about "high exposure" which seems to be indicated at > 25 micorgrams. What was the amount that went into vaccines?
     

    5.56'aholic

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 5, 2009
    981
    28
    <- tragic boating accident
    Nothing is more convincing than profanity laden diatribes with balls and bowling pins.


    Then you truly missed the point of the video. 1:110 chance of autism, or 1:5 chance of death or paralysis. Thats assuming one buys into the 1:110 for vaccinations causing autism.

    Also, you do realize that the form of mercury in thimerasol is unable to be absorbed by the human body? You will ingest and absorb more mercury from eating fish than being vaccinated. Think of square peg in a round hole vs. round hole and round peg.
     
    Top Bottom