Grrrr, vaccine ARE connected with autism. >.< That's a

Post Reply New Topic

....which is why I only eat organic foods, drink purified water, and watch exactly what goes into my body. If it isn't organic I ain't eating it. And it isn't just fire retardant you need to worry about, it's everything else that has that stuff in it - how many people use Teflon-coated cookware? How many realise that when heated it releases noxious fumes that have been known to kill birds in the same room? How many realise than when scratched or heated it leeches into the food, and that over 95% of people test positive for Perflurooctanoic Acid (PFOA). It's not just fire-retardent, it's cookware, stain-resistant coatings on clothes and carpets, non-stick cooking paper, etc etc...

And what about the fumes from cars and factories that litters our atmosphere? Ever been to London (or probably other cities) where you end up with 'London nose'... after just a day there you'll be blowing soot out your nose. Lovely but a fact of life - imagine what it's like for people who live there! What of chemtrails and the junk polluting our skies from planes?

How about we include all the poisons they coat our food with? No use buying non-organic and washing it; most use more sophisticated wax coatings so that the poisons don't wash off in the rain. Peeling would help, except that they've all drank the stuff up through the soil. And how bout those pesky GMOs that have caused tumours and stunted growth in all animals they've tested them on so far? Once they're out they're out - cross-contamination is a fact of life these days, it's hard to get around. Monsanto must be having a field day (scuse the pun!).

Oooh, what else have we got. Well, there's all the toxins in air fresheners, in carpets, that 'new car' smell you find, fabric coatings, laundry detergent, soap, skincare, cosmetics (don't forget, these things are MADE to be absorbed!), personal care products...


Don't worry, it isn't just vaccines that I avoid. They're just one of the easiest ones you can avoid in amongst the toxic soup we live in daily - it's harder to avoid the constant air and water pollution than to not get jabbed in the arm. It's all about minimalising the risks and dealing with what we can deal with. I also avoid all teflon or fire/stain/water retardants, use only natural skincare and cosmetics, use soap nuts to wash my clothes with, clean my house with baking soda and vinegar, use non-aluminium deodorant, only eat organic foods, etc etc... Which, when written like that, makes me sound paranoid, I admit. But if it doesn't take any more time or effort than using toxic alternatives, I don't see what the big deal is. It's all about informed consumerism and buying or making things that won't pollute this place worse than it already is. If you don't do it for yourself, then do it for the environment.

Organic is a scam invented by radical environmentalists.



I do, I have a bird in the same room, and he's in perfect health.

Obviously not all birds. I don't plan on buying one either to test it!! But there are more than a few anecdotal reports around of it happening... make of it what you will.

How is organic a scam? Organic is natural. Mother nature didn't create plants coated in toxic gunk dangerous to both the plant, the insects, and the animals (including us), and plants survived hundreds of millions of years without them, so why would it be a scam? And how is it radical either?

I personally take all anecdotal reports with a fine grain of salt.


If it was all so dangerous, we'd all be dead.

Look, I'm not going to pay extra money I don't have just to buy products with a stupid label attached to them.

You want to spend your cash on that, go ahead.

Ok, so you'd rather eat kilograms of poisonous chemicals each year. Good for you.

And actually, we are all dying... cancer rates are now at 1 in 3 people. Again, this fixation with the here and now that we have in modern society means we ignore the problems things cause later in life - damage accumulates, and then when the body is sufficiently depleted of nutrients or in a state of trauma or trouble or down from a virus etc the real problems start kicking in.

The label can't be put there without extremely strict control measures - you can't get an organic certification particularly easily. Also, it isn't any more expensive if you cut all the crap junk food out too. Lose the crap from your grocery shop and buy all organic natural things you need and you'll find the price should stay roughly the same as it normally is. I certainly don't spend any more than any of my friends who load up on junk food.

You know, by your posts you seem really articulate. Did you actually read the article or just the inflammatory headline? The judge stated quite unequivocally that this girl's so-called autism WASN'T caused by the vaccine. Yes she had a reaction to the vaccine but it wasn't autism! It said so in the news release. Yet you choose to ignore the judge and run with what the agenda-sporting Father had to say... Why?

Science has connected no less than 46 GENES to autism... It is a fact that vaccines cannot cause changes at the genetic level, for heaven's sake. You don't have to understand genes to know this.

The fact of the matter is that if anyone having once been vaccinated is autistic, it is SOLELY because they were autistic BEFORE the vaccine; whether or not they manifested symptoms may be in question, but it was inherently there... Why do you insist on ignoring the facts?

The only person that even remotely suggested that this girl's autism was vaccine-induced was her Father and he out and out lied. PERIOD. Why? I don't know... maybe because he doesn't like the idea of thinking that his genes had something to do with causing his daughter's autism, maybe because if it's genetic, it's not really a disability and therefore he won't get Government support... who knows. H E double hockey sticks, maybe it's just a case of his wanting to believe that he didn't see his daughter's autism prior to the vaccine reaction because that would make him a bad Father.

Whatever the Father's reasoning... This isn't a huge victory, it's a debacle and you are helping antagonize the situation by not reading the FACTS of the case; or even reading the entirety of the news article.

The fact is that there is not now (and this still isn't one) nor has there ever been any direct link between Autism and Vaccines... NONE.

Um LeKiwi,

Having once read all of your "arguments" for how you protect yourself from the toxicity of our environment... I am left with one question...

Do you breathe the same air the rest of us do or do you mix your own air?

The girl's mom is the one with the agenda, not her dad.

Her dad, in an interview with WebMD, stated that he believes vaccines are the most important medical invention of the past century. He also admitted that the media is not telling the complete truth regarding the case.

I'm paraphrasing, but he did say something very close to that.

I stand corrected. I didn't see the WebMD interview.

Have you got any links to the interviews? Haven't seen either parent's comments on this yet so would be interested to see what they're saying.


No, vaccines can't change genes and I never said they could. They can, however, cause damage to or inflame pre-existing conditions that may not have become apparent (or as apparent) without the toxic vaccine adjuvants. It isn't just thimerosal I'm talking about either, before you go on about the mercury thing - aluminium, formeldehyde, benzoate, glutamates etc have just as much potential to do so as anything else.

Again, I question the 'autism like symptoms' terminology. You either have autism or you don't - 'autism-like' is very misleading, considering this is a syndrome we're talking about - a cluster of symptoms present in a group of people, without a known cause or causes (yes, there can be more than one). When there is no definitive known cause of autism, there can't be 'autism-like'. It either is or it isn't - the terminology is very misleading; a way of getting around admitting this girl's autism was caused by the vaccine ingredients.

Now, again, I'm not saying all autism is caused by vaccines, or that all vaccines cause autism. I'm just saying that I firmly believe SOME cases with certain circumstances - pre-existing conditions, such as her mitochondrial disorder; viral infection at time of jab; sensitivity to ingredients; etc etc - are caused by these vaccines, and that it's about time scientists shrugged off the pressure and funding from certain vested interests and admitted it to these children and their families. It's insulting not to.

Thing is, the AAP recommends that children with mitochondrial disorders should not be vaccinated, lest complications arise.

Her parents, who are doctors, should have known better.

The problem is, as far as I'm aware, there's a huge range of different mitochondrial disorders and many of them don't get diagnosed until the person is well into their teens or 20s. So, given that kids are vaccinated mostly before the age of two, it doesn't give time for those to become apparent. The number isn't as high in lots of countries, but in the US you get 28 vaccines by age two last I looked - that's a huge number and a huge risk for some children.

My family history of ASD's and related disorders gives me even more reason to not vaccinate my children - if there's something there already predisposing them to autism there's no way I'm going to risk aggravating it further with vaccines, regardless of my beliefs on them anyway and misgivings about what's in them.

I see what you're saying. But you have to realize that helping feed the "vaccines cause autism" machine is even more insulting. There is no doubt in my mind that thimerosal aggravates mitochondrial disorder. BUT that's not autism, although, YES, lots of autistics have mitochondrial disorder. Yes, mercury poisoning is going to aggravate other disorders, BUT not all autistics have THAT disorder.

Make the specific connection between the specific disorder and the vaccine, ok, fine, BUT to even suggest that vaccines CAUSE autism is conducive to the ridiculous notion that a genetic situation can be "cured".

With the understanding that the only way to "cure" a genetic situation is through genetic manipulation (now considered a sin by the Pope, thank you very much) or through eradication... (Can you say third trimester abortion?) Then you can see why it's a dangerous and slippery slope to allow to just slide through the cracks.

See, to me it's insulting to those whose children DID change right after the vaccine to say it's in their head and scientifically unfeasible - and insulting to the children themselves. We aren't all the same - again, autism is a syndrome; there could be any number of ways in which it comes about. Yes, the majority is genetic, but whose to say vaccines aren't triggering that gene lying dormant till that point in a child? Despite what you say, there IS a lot of evidence from the scientific community pointing towards it - you just need to follow the money trail. The majority of studies won't get published or peer-reviewed due to the influence of pharmaceutical companies; they make billions, if not trillions a year from vaccines, so why would they want them linked to something like autism? Something like 70-80% of studies never see the light of day if they don't prove something beneficial to the big pharma interests, and so many that do are flawed. Again, follow the money trail - who are these scientists? Who are they linked to? Who provided funding for this study? etc. There was an article in the New York Times about this recently too. The only real way to stop the bias, or to get the missing 70% out into the open, is to have some kind of law or policy that makes researchers state at the outset of their study what they're doing, when it'll be completed, and what they're hoping to find out. That way they can't pretend it never happened, and perhaps we'll see some less biased journals being printed.

Le Kiwi, what's insulting is you insistence that vaccines are dangerous. Full stop. You can put whatever twist on it you want - your position is crystal clear to everyone speaking to you. You want nothing to do with vaccines. I've said this before and I'll repeat it. That makes you a health hazard. By all means - keep checks going on reactions from things like mitocondrial disorder. But that's a rare condition - and just because it stands along side Autism in some cases doesn't mean it's a part of it! The same applies to your other examples.

I agree that 28 vaccinations in 24 months is not smart. It should be spread wider than that. I'd be looking at 28 in something like 5 years (no more than that). To be strictly accurate - one every two months. That way if there is a reaction to one it can be dealt with either by reversing it if possible, or if it can't delve into why.

Why am I health hazard? You're vaccinated so you'll be fine. Right? If not, then why do you vaccinate in the first place?