Re: twoweasleys; question from last year

[Guest guest]

,

two different European governments

> > > > >

> > > > > , my question is, what is the current level of

thimerosal in

> > > > > vaccines? I agree that it's not *as high*, but there is evidence

> > that

> > > > > thimerosal is still in vaccines, even those deemed " perservative

> > > > > free " . It's my understanding that it's still being used as a

> > > > > sanitizing agent and cannot be fully filtered out. It's also my

> > > > > understanding that autism did drop until the flu vaccine was

> ordered

> > > > > into the series, and when age is considered, the increase

> begins the

> > > > > same time those infants initially given the flu vax would have

> been

> > > > > old enough to enter " autism dx age " .

> > > > >

> > > > > What are your thoughts? I believe thimerosal is not the only

> > > > > component, I personally think it's the immune assault combined

> with

> > > > > thimerosal and aluminum, but that's my personal opinion from

> > personal

> > > > > experience and biochemistry understanding, which might not

be very

> > > > > understood, lol. I believe if all the thimerosal were

removed, the

> > > > > vaccines were delayed and spread out over a longer time

frame, and

> > > > > only given when absolutely necessary there would be very, very

> > little

> > > > > autism. If I were to advise of a vaccine schedule (which of

> course I

> > > > > can't, so I'm just brainstorming here), it would be:

> > > > >

> > > > > pertussis (*ONLY*, no d, no t) 3 mos

> > > > >

> > > > > hib 6 mos

> > > > >

> > > > > tetanus 1yr

> > > > >

> > > > > polio 5 yrs (we have a LOT of kids at our school from places

like

> > > > > Liberia who get the oral one day, hop a plain and start

school the

> > > > > next day.)

> > > > >

> > > > > mumps 12yr

> > > > >

> > > > > rubella 13yr

> > > > >

> > > > > hepB 14yr

> > > > >

> > > > > and if not contracted by adulthood, varicella and measles at

> least 6

> > > > > mos apart. forget the rest of them unless there was a real

reason

> > > > > specific to that person, location, etc to get one.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Debi

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

,

two different European governments

> > > > >

> > > > > , my question is, what is the current level of

thimerosal in

> > > > > vaccines? I agree that it's not *as high*, but there is evidence

> > that

> > > > > thimerosal is still in vaccines, even those deemed " perservative

> > > > > free " . It's my understanding that it's still being used as a

> > > > > sanitizing agent and cannot be fully filtered out. It's also my

> > > > > understanding that autism did drop until the flu vaccine was

> ordered

> > > > > into the series, and when age is considered, the increase

> begins the

> > > > > same time those infants initially given the flu vax would have

> been

> > > > > old enough to enter " autism dx age " .

> > > > >

> > > > > What are your thoughts? I believe thimerosal is not the only

> > > > > component, I personally think it's the immune assault combined

> with

> > > > > thimerosal and aluminum, but that's my personal opinion from

> > personal

> > > > > experience and biochemistry understanding, which might not

be very

> > > > > understood, lol. I believe if all the thimerosal were

removed, the

> > > > > vaccines were delayed and spread out over a longer time

frame, and

> > > > > only given when absolutely necessary there would be very, very

> > little

> > > > > autism. If I were to advise of a vaccine schedule (which of

> course I

> > > > > can't, so I'm just brainstorming here), it would be:

> > > > >

> > > > > pertussis (*ONLY*, no d, no t) 3 mos

> > > > >

> > > > > hib 6 mos

> > > > >

> > > > > tetanus 1yr

> > > > >

> > > > > polio 5 yrs (we have a LOT of kids at our school from places

like

> > > > > Liberia who get the oral one day, hop a plain and start

school the

> > > > > next day.)

> > > > >

> > > > > mumps 12yr

> > > > >

> > > > > rubella 13yr

> > > > >

> > > > > hepB 14yr

> > > > >

> > > > > and if not contracted by adulthood, varicella and measles at

> least 6

> > > > > mos apart. forget the rest of them unless there was a real

reason

> > > > > specific to that person, location, etc to get one.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Debi

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

let's see one by one:

> 1. Please provide the published reference(s)

> that support your:

> >

> >From my understanding, the trace amounts

> >of thimerosal are not " biologically active " ,

> >but I have not bothered to look up the

> >original JAMA paper on which that assessment

> >is based.

This is very very interesting. I could swear that this table:

http://www.fda.gov/CBER/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#t3

used to have a footnote that stated that the " trace amount " in the new

vaccines was " biologically inactive " and quoted a JAMA paper for that.

I should have checked it right away. This page:

http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimfaq.htm

still states that the trace amount is not " clinically significant "

without a quote. How irritating.

However, my statement to Debi remains: right now, even the children

who receive the flu vaccine with the whole thimerosal content will

receive less thimerosal in 2 years than the children who received the

old DTP vaccine. If thimerosal in vaccines caused autism, why have the

rates not dropped to the pre-1990 numbers?

Debi,

I think I have stated very clearly that I think thimerosal should not

be in vaccines. However, if a person needs protection from a certain

disease and the only vaccine available contains thimerosal (or traces

thereof), I am all for using that vaccine.

[Guest guest]

> apparently you believe experimenting

> on vulnerable humans is an acceptable

> practice.

I answered that in my last post - I was thinking more about adults who

work in high risk areas and need protection from certain diseases

against which an entirely thimerosal free vaccine is not available.

> In addition, your statement indicates

> that you have little or no understanding

> of toxicology.

How charming.

>

> All that is needed is to take some

> growing cells of any kind and treat them

> with a given level of Thimerosal in

> steriles isotonic saline and observe the

> effects, if any, on the any aspect of the

> biological activity within the cell system

> in comparison to a control set where only

> the same amount of sterile isotonic saline

> is introduced.

Cells in culture are a lot more vulnerable than cells in a human body.

In terms of concentrations of a given toxin, a cell in an organ or

body is much more protected, or why aren't LD 50 established in cell

culture?

> Again, recent studies have shown " biological

> activity " in such cell lines at levels below

> 0.03 ppm and, to my knowledge, no level of

> added Thimerosal (other than NONE) has been

> PROVEN to have no short-term (<48 hours)

> activity. [NOTE: The pertinent references

> can be found in the last two articles

> published in www.mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/.

which is probably why the term " clinically significant " was chosen in

that link in my last post.

[Guest guest]

> apparently you believe experimenting

> on vulnerable humans is an acceptable

> practice.

I answered that in my last post - I was thinking more about adults who

work in high risk areas and need protection from certain diseases

against which an entirely thimerosal free vaccine is not available.

> In addition, your statement indicates

> that you have little or no understanding

> of toxicology.

How charming.

>

> All that is needed is to take some

> growing cells of any kind and treat them

> with a given level of Thimerosal in

> steriles isotonic saline and observe the

> effects, if any, on the any aspect of the

> biological activity within the cell system

> in comparison to a control set where only

> the same amount of sterile isotonic saline

> is introduced.

Cells in culture are a lot more vulnerable than cells in a human body.

In terms of concentrations of a given toxin, a cell in an organ or

body is much more protected, or why aren't LD 50 established in cell

culture?

> Again, recent studies have shown " biological

> activity " in such cell lines at levels below

> 0.03 ppm and, to my knowledge, no level of

> added Thimerosal (other than NONE) has been

> PROVEN to have no short-term (<48 hours)

> activity. [NOTE: The pertinent references

> can be found in the last two articles

> published in www.mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/.

which is probably why the term " clinically significant " was chosen in

that link in my last post.

[Guest guest]

> you have obviously NOT read the recent

> papers that clearly establish that, in

> the United States of America (US) the

> incidence of diagnosed neurodevelopmental

> disorders, including autism, has dropped

> starting in " 2002 " (about 3 years after

> most of the Thimerosal was removed from

> the childhood vaccination schedule and

> before the " flu " shot was recommended for

> universal administration to PREGNANT

> WOMEN and children in the US vaccination

> schedule in December of 2003). [sEE: The

> 2 articles published in recognized peer-

> reviewed journals in 2006:

> a. Geier DA, Geier MR. An assessment of

> downward trends in neurodevelopmental

> disorders in the United States

> following removal of thimerosal from

> childhood vaccines. Med Sci Monit.

> 2006 May 29; 12(6): CR231-239.

> b. Geier DA, Geier MR. A meta-analysis

> epidemiological assessment of

> neurodevelopmental disorders following

> vaccines administered from 1994

> through 2000 in the United States.

> Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006 Jun 29;27(3)

> (Epub ahead of print).]

> [NOTE: Articles published on studies in

> countries other than the US have no

> bearing on US experience and, based on

> a review of the all the INITIAL

> epidemiological studies done on US

> children (including the unpublished

> unmanipulated study findings by the

> Verstraeten group {obtained under FOIA}),

> the causal link between Thimerosal level

> and autism incidence and the incidence of

> other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs)

> has been established. The non-US studies,

> including the recent small-scale Canadian

> study by Fombonne (which: a) mistakenly

> " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

> if they were recalled (when they were not)

> and overlooks the fact that a Thimeorsal-

> preserved hepatitis B vaccine was also being

> given at birth and in grade school in Quebec

> during that part of the study period where

> he erroneously claims " nil Thimerosal "

> exposure), have been shown to be knowingly

> flawed and their authors have not only

> failed to disclose the authors' conflicts

> of interest as well as, in some cases, their

> financial and other ties to the US CDC

> (Center for Disease Control and Prevention).]

,

don't be silly (sorry), but the original theme of this thread was that

some people think that the Geiers cannot be trusted further than their

names on the papers (again, sorry to be so blunt).

I am looking at the Californian numbers and I see no drop. I am

looking at world numbers and there is no drop (see the most recent

paper by Baird and others in The Lancet which is just a trifle more

recognized as the " Medical Science Monitor " ).

And it is a bit far fetched to claim that 2002 was " 3 years after

thimerosal was removed from the childhood vaccination schedule " . You

know very well that the recommendation to do so was issued at the end

of 1999 and that thimerosal containing vaccines were not immediately

removed from doctor's shelves. Do you really want to claim that in

2000 most US children did not receive any (or very little) thimerosal

in their vaccines? Doesn't the same criticism you apply to Fombonne

apply to your claim? (a) mistakenly

> " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

> if they were recalled (when they were not))

Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

[Guest guest]

That's great if you like the adult booster, but because you're

comfortable with it does not mean it should be mandated. No medical

procedure should ever be mandated on an entire group of people. Any

and all medical procedures should be based on the individual, not on

the religion.

Debi

> > >

> > > Neiter disease acquired nor vaccine acquired immunity lasts a life

> > > time. The acellular pertussis vaccine provides the shortest lasting

> > > immunity and 5 years is probably about right. That was the trade off

> > > (to lose some of the side effects of the whole cell pertussis

> > > vaccine). I just read that they are experimenting with a nasal whole

> > > cell pertussis (without toxin gene) vaccine that confers very strong

> > > immunity even to small babies. Until then, cocooning the baby by

> > > vaccinating mum, dad and older siblings is probably the best

strategy

> > > to protect the babies.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

That's great if you like the adult booster, but because you're

comfortable with it does not mean it should be mandated. No medical

procedure should ever be mandated on an entire group of people. Any

and all medical procedures should be based on the individual, not on

the religion.

Debi

> > >

> > > Neiter disease acquired nor vaccine acquired immunity lasts a life

> > > time. The acellular pertussis vaccine provides the shortest lasting

> > > immunity and 5 years is probably about right. That was the trade off

> > > (to lose some of the side effects of the whole cell pertussis

> > > vaccine). I just read that they are experimenting with a nasal whole

> > > cell pertussis (without toxin gene) vaccine that confers very strong

> > > immunity even to small babies. Until then, cocooning the baby by

> > > vaccinating mum, dad and older siblings is probably the best

strategy

> > > to protect the babies.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

If hepb has no bearing on autism incidence, why did my child stop

eating, stop babbling, stop pulling up, and stop making eye contact

within 1 wk after her hep B shot? It was the only vaccine she received

that day, she was 9 mos old.

Debi

>

> Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

> immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

> school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

(twoweasleys),

Your initial statement was:

>

>From my understanding, the trace amounts

>of thimerosal are not " biologically active " ,

>but I have not bothered to look up the

>original JAMA paper on which that assessment

>is based.

>

Apparently you were mistaken.

Moreover, your current non-responsive reply:

>This is very very interesting. I could swear

> that this table:

>

>http://www.fda.gov/CBER/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#t3

>

>used to have a footnote that stated that the

> " trace amount " in the new vaccines was

> " biologically inactive " and quoted a JAMA paper

>for that.

>I should have checked it right away. This page:

>

>http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimfaq.htm

>

>still states that the trace amount is not

> " clinically significant " without a quote. How

>irritating.

>

>However, my statement to Debi remains: right now,

>even the children who receive the flu vaccine

>with the whole thimerosal content will receive

>less thimerosal in 2 years than the children

>who received the old DTP vaccine. If thimerosal

>in vaccines caused autism, why have the rates not

>dropped to the pre-1990 numbers?

>

again attempts to:

a. Fabricate facts, which do not exist, to

support your position, and

b. Raise issues, which clearly indicate that

you do NOT understand, including, but not

limited to:

i. The nature of the systemic mercury

poisoning induced by Thimerosal,

and/or

ii. How much more insidiously mercury

toxic it is to the developing fetus

when a Thimerosal-preserved influenza

vaccine is administered to a pregnant

woman WITHOUT the PROOF OF SAFETY as

required for giving a TERATOGEN

(MUTAGEN) at any level to a pregnant

woman.

First, your statement, " still states

that the trace amount is not 'clinically

significant' " clearly establishes that

US FDA recognizes " trace amounts " of

Thimerosal are biologically active, the

ISSUE that you raised in your previous

post to this group!

Next, as you probably know, BUT refuse

to admit, if you want the level of

clinically observed mercury poisoning

to drop to pre-Thimerosal levels, you

would need to remove it from all

vaccines and other mercury-containing

drugs, recall and destroy all existing

doses of any mercury-containing drug,

and then wait at least 5 years.

Had the healthcare establishment

(including the government) kept their

1999 promise and removed all Thimerosal

from all of the drug-making processes

that produced Thimerosal-containing

drugs and recalled and destroyed ALL

the doses thereof, we would have seen

this dramatic drop.

However, knowing the reality of the

fallout, that would follow this drop

the healthcare has not only knowingly

broken that promise but knowingly

added Thimerosal to the childhood

vaccination schedule by adding an

ineffective Thimerosal-preserved flu

vaccine to that vaccination schedule

and, apparently to ensure that the

level of harm did not drop, made the

recommendation that ALL pregnant women

get a Thimerosal-preserved flu shot if

they will be pregnant during the " flu

season. "

Thus, your statements:

>

>However, my statement to Debi remains:

>right now, even the children who

>receive the flu vaccine with the whole

>thimerosal content will receive less

>thimerosal in 2 years than the

>children who received the old DTP

>vaccine. If thimerosal in vaccines

>caused autism, why have the rates not

>dropped to the pre-1990 numbers?

>

:

a. Forget that, including the dose of

Thimerosal-preserved flu vaccine

pregnant women get, the specific dose

(dose per weight of the child) will be

much greater than the overall pre-1990

dose where, in general, the flu shot

was NOT given to pregnant women at any

time in their pregnancy when the

fetuses (who have been shown to

preferentially absorb the Thimerosal

dose administered) may weigh as little

as a few grams and, regardless of the

fetuses' weights when their mother is

injected, have NO fully developed

mercury detoxification systems since

these usually do not mature UNTIL

after the children are born, and

b. All other factors being " equal, " it is

the SPECIFIC DOSE (dose/kg of body mass),

and NOT the dose, that MATTERS - see,

for example, the US EPA guideline for

the suggested no-effect level (which is

at least an order of magnitude higher

than, based on what we now know, it

should be for INJECTED mercury

[Thimerosal {49.55% mercury by weight}])

for INGESTED mercury [0.1 micrograms of

mercury per kilogram of body mass per day].

Hopefully, you will, as I suggested,

a. Cease from making unsupported and

knowingly misleading comments in

this area,

b. Support the US ban on all drugs

whose safety has NOT been proven

in all manners required by US

statute (21 U.S.C. Section

351(a)(2)() or US laws (21 CFR Parts

210 and 211 for all mercury-containing

drugs, and, for PRESERVED biological

drugs, 21 CFR Section 610.15(a) --

EVEN WHEN they have been:

i. Apparently illegally licensed

by the US government (US FDA)

since 1973 if NOT 1962 (see the

1988 unanimous US Supreme Court

decision in Berkovitz versus USA)

or

ii. Illegally recommended for a

dangerous off-label use (CDC's

recommendation for the off-label

use of the flu shot for ALL

women who are pregnant during

the " flu " season).

c. Do the research needed to understand

the complex realities and implications

of the INJECTION of Thimerosal-

containing drugs into pregnant women

(mercury poisoning the fetus --

sometimes to death -- resulting in an

abortion) and babies, and

d. JOIN in the remove to have Thimerosal

and all other mercury-containing drugs

from all of medicine and stop using

mercury-based amalgams in dentistry.

IF: You do not,

THEN: It will be crystal clear that,

no matter what you say, that you

are OPPOSED to stopping the

UNNECESSARY mercury poisoning of

human beings by medicine and

dentistry from the time of

conception until the day each

human dies.

The clear choices are yours -- CHOOSE!

Respectfully,

Dr. King

http://www.dr-king.com

PS: With respect to my last rapid

response to you, in my point " 3,

" the text reading:

>

>and their authors have not

>only failed to disclose the

>authors' conflicts of interest

>as well as, in some cases,

>their financial and other ties

>to the US CDC (Center for

>Disease Control & Prevention).]

>

was meant to read:

>

>and their authors have not

>only failed to FULLY disclose

>the authors' conflicts of

>interest as well as, in some

>cases, their financial and other

>ties to the US CDC (Center for

>Disease Control & Prevention).]

>

Please correct that post and also

correct any obvious typographical

errors that you find in it because

there are a few.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At 20:31 7/17/06 -0000, twoweasleys wrote:

>

>Dear ,

>

>let's see one by one:

>

>> 1. Please provide the published reference(s)

>> that support your:

>> >

>> >From my understanding, the trace amounts

>> >of thimerosal are not " biologically active " ,

>> >but I have not bothered to look up the

>> >original JAMA paper on which that assessment

>> >is based.

>

>This is very very interesting. I could swear that this table:

>

>http://www.fda.gov/CBER/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#t3

>

>used to have a footnote that stated that the " trace amount " in the new

>vaccines was " biologically inactive " and quoted a JAMA paper for that.

>I should have checked it right away. This page:

>

>http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimfaq.htm

>

>still states that the trace amount is not " clinically significant "

>without a quote. How irritating.

>

>However, my statement to Debi remains: right now, even the children

>who receive the flu vaccine with the whole thimerosal content will

>receive less thimerosal in 2 years than the children who received the

>old DTP vaccine. If thimerosal in vaccines caused autism, why have the

>rates not dropped to the pre-1990 numbers?

>

>Debi,

>

>I think I have stated very clearly that I think thimerosal should not

>be in vaccines. However, if a person needs protection from a certain

>disease and the only vaccine available contains thimerosal (or traces

>thereof), I am all for using that vaccine.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

wrote: Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhoodimmunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Gradeschool hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Infant hep B vaccines are not a part of "routine" childhood immunization schedules in Quebec or Ontario, but that does not mean that there are no children getting these vaccines. Most of the students that I have taught over the past 6 years here in Ontario, have received the infant hep B vaccines, the thimerosal-containing variety (since thimerosal-free hep B vaccines did not even become licenced in Canada until 2001). A good number of these children are having difficulty with reading and writing, with many of them not reaching expected levels for their age groups. I do believe

that "grade school hep B immunizations" can have a bearing on incidence of various neurological disorders, including problems with executive function. Some children do all right through Grade 6, and then begin to experience difficulty in Grades 7 and 8. I don't think it helps any, that Grade 7 children in Ontario are subjected to thimerosal-containing hep B shots at that time (especially boys, for whom testosterone intensifies the damaging effects of the thimerosal). I don't know what the situation is like in Quebec, but here in Ontario, we have a serious problem, with 30% of our secondary school students at risk of dropping out, and it is mostly boys who are having the greatest difficulty with academic subjects. Aasatwoweasleys <twoweasleys@...> wrote: > you have obviously NOT read the recent> papers that clearly establish that, in > the United States of America (US) the > incidence of diagnosed neurodevelopmental> disorders, including autism, has dropped> starting in "2002" (about 3 years after > most of the Thimerosal was removed from > the childhood vaccination schedule and > before the "flu" shot was recommended for > universal administration to PREGNANT> WOMEN and children in the US vaccination> schedule in December of 2003). [sEE: The > 2 articles published in recognized peer-> reviewed journals in 2006: > a. Geier DA, Geier MR. An

assessment of > downward trends in neurodevelopmental > disorders in the United States > following removal of thimerosal from> childhood vaccines. Med Sci Monit. > 2006 May 29; 12(6): CR231-239.> b. Geier DA, Geier MR. A meta-analysis > epidemiological assessment of > neurodevelopmental disorders following > vaccines administered from 1994 > through 2000 in the United States. > Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006 Jun 29;27(3) > (Epub ahead of print).] > [NOTE: Articles published on studies in > countries other than the US have no > bearing on US experience and, based on > a review of the all the INITIAL > epidemiological studies done on US > children (including the unpublished > unmanipulated study findings by the > Verstraeten group {obtained under FOIA}), > the causal link between Thimerosal level > and autism incidence and the

incidence of > other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) > has been established. The non-US studies, > including the recent small-scale Canadian> study by Fombonne (which: a) mistakenly > "interperts" vaccines being withdrawn as> if they were recalled (when they were not)> and overlooks the fact that a Thimeorsal-> preserved hepatitis B vaccine was also being> given at birth and in grade school in Quebec> during that part of the study period where> he erroneously claims "nil Thimerosal"> exposure), have been shown to be knowingly > flawed and their authors have not only > failed to disclose the authors' conflicts > of interest as well as, in some cases, their> financial and other ties to the US CDC > (Center for Disease Control and Prevention).],don't be silly (sorry), but the original theme of this thread was thatsome

people think that the Geiers cannot be trusted further than theirnames on the papers (again, sorry to be so blunt).I am looking at the Californian numbers and I see no drop. I amlooking at world numbers and there is no drop (see the most recentpaper by Baird and others in The Lancet which is just a trifle morerecognized as the "Medical Science Monitor"). And it is a bit far fetched to claim that 2002 was "3 years afterthimerosal was removed from the childhood vaccination schedule". Youknow very well that the recommendation to do so was issued at the endof 1999 and that thimerosal containing vaccines were not immediatelyremoved from doctor's shelves. Do you really want to claim that in2000 most US children did not receive any (or very little) thimerosalin their vaccines? Doesn't the same criticism you apply to Fombonneapply to your claim? (a) mistakenly > "interperts" vaccines being withdrawn as> if

they were recalled (when they were not))Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhoodimmunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Gradeschool hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

[Guest guest]

-You give only half the story..per usual. There was a birth dose.

overlooks the fact that a Thimeorsal-

> preserved hepatitis B vaccine was also being

> given at birth and in grade school in Quebec

> during that part of the study period where

> he erroneously claims " nil Thimerosal "

> exposure),

---- " some people think that the Geiers cannot be trusted further than

their

> names on the papers "

and your other statement is completely from your wishful imagination,

or these are " your people " because it was not on this list..as you

brought it here as your entrance back to eoh....from where again?

PS...it is Dr. King

>

>

> > you have obviously NOT read the recent

> > papers that clearly establish that, in

> > the United States of America (US) the

> > incidence of diagnosed neurodevelopmental

> > disorders, including autism, has dropped

> > starting in " 2002 " (about 3 years after

> > most of the Thimerosal was removed from

> > the childhood vaccination schedule and

> > before the " flu " shot was recommended for

> > universal administration to PREGNANT

> > WOMEN and children in the US vaccination

> > schedule in December of 2003). [sEE: The

> > 2 articles published in recognized peer-

> > reviewed journals in 2006:

> > a. Geier DA, Geier MR. An assessment of

> > downward trends in neurodevelopmental

> > disorders in the United States

> > following removal of thimerosal from

> > childhood vaccines. Med Sci Monit.

> > 2006 May 29; 12(6): CR231-239.

> > b. Geier DA, Geier MR. A meta-analysis

> > epidemiological assessment of

> > neurodevelopmental disorders following

> > vaccines administered from 1994

> > through 2000 in the United States.

> > Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006 Jun 29;27(3)

> > (Epub ahead of print).]

> > [NOTE: Articles published on studies in

> > countries other than the US have no

> > bearing on US experience and, based on

> > a review of the all the INITIAL

> > epidemiological studies done on US

> > children (including the unpublished

> > unmanipulated study findings by the

> > Verstraeten group {obtained under FOIA}),

> > the causal link between Thimerosal level

> > and autism incidence and the incidence of

> > other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs)

> > has been established. The non-US studies,

> > including the recent small-scale Canadian

> > study by Fombonne (which: a) mistakenly

> > " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

> > if they were recalled (when they were not)

> > and overlooks the fact that a Thimeorsal-

> > preserved hepatitis B vaccine was also being

> > given at birth and in grade school in Quebec

> > during that part of the study period where

> > he erroneously claims " nil Thimerosal "

> > exposure), have been shown to be knowingly

> > flawed and their authors have not only

> > failed to disclose the authors' conflicts

> > of interest as well as, in some cases, their

> > financial and other ties to the US CDC

> > (Center for Disease Control and Prevention).]

>

> ,

>

> don't be silly (sorry), but the original theme of this thread was that

> some people think that the Geiers cannot be trusted further than their

> names on the papers (again, sorry to be so blunt).

>

> I am looking at the Californian numbers and I see no drop. I am

> looking at world numbers and there is no drop (see the most recent

> paper by Baird and others in The Lancet which is just a trifle more

> recognized as the " Medical Science Monitor " ).

>

> And it is a bit far fetched to claim that 2002 was " 3 years after

> thimerosal was removed from the childhood vaccination schedule " . You

> know very well that the recommendation to do so was issued at the end

> of 1999 and that thimerosal containing vaccines were not immediately

> removed from doctor's shelves. Do you really want to claim that in

> 2000 most US children did not receive any (or very little) thimerosal

> in their vaccines? Doesn't the same criticism you apply to Fombonne

> apply to your claim? (a) mistakenly

> > " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

> > if they were recalled (when they were not))

>

> Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

> immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

> school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

(twoweasleys),

RE: YOUR SECOND POST on 17 July 2006:

1. Your first answer clearly indicates

that you do believe experimenting

on vulnerable humans is an acceptable

practice.

2. Your second set of responses confirm the

validity of my assertion vis-a-vis

your apparent understanding of toxicology

as well as your feeble attempt to change

the ISSUE: AGAIN -- biological activity

is biological activity and the simple

studies suggested have and will show

that trace levels of Thimerosal are

BIOLOGICALLY ACTIVE -- so you are again

wrong.

The other issues you raise ( " LD50 " and

" clinically significant " ) are:

a. Tangential to the issue of " trace "

Thimerosal's BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY

and

b. AGAIN NOT relevant to the issue

of YOU RAISED -- BIOLOGICAL

ACTIVITY!

RE: YOUR THIRD POST on 17 July 2006:

With respect to your self-serving and

prejudice-laden remarks:

>,

>

>don't be silly (sorry), but the original

>theme of this thread was that some people

>think that the Geiers cannot be trusted

>further than their names on the papers

>(again, sorry to be so blunt).

>

>I am looking at the Californian numbers

>and I see no drop. I am looking at world

>numbers and there is no drop (see the

>most recent paper by Baird and others in

>The Lancet which is just a trifle more

>recognized as the " Medical Science

>Monitor " ).

>

I would again suggest you read the papers

because, among other datasets, they analyze

the published California data on autism

cases and found and reported a decline in

the numbers of new cases being added each

quarter that far exceed the imputable " 1% "

drop caused by a change from a " diagnosed

and confirmed " basis to a " diagnosed,

confirmed, and included " basis that

apparently your stated prejudice and,

perhaps, your other unstated biases

prevented you from seeing.

As to your " trust " issues, again your

obvious prejudice and other unrevealed

conflicts have obviously prevented you

from independently assessing the data

and all of the published papers.

Your obvious prejudice clearly establishes

that your views cannot be trusted.

In addition, it is the validity of the

science published and not the stature of

the peer-reviewed journal in which it is

published that should matter.

Finally, as far as I can ascertain:

a. The ONLY " numbers " that are truly

relevant in the US are those that

reflect the US esposures and

US outcomes, and

b. Though the US does NOT do a good job

of tracking NDDs (neurodevelopmental

disorders) it does a better job than

the UK (with, perhaps, the exception

of the recent efforts in Scotland)

and the rest of the world.

WITH RESPECT TO YOUR:

>

>And it is a bit far fetched to claim

>that 2002 was " 3 years after thimerosal

>was removed from the childhood vaccination

>schedule " . You know very well that the

>recommendation to do so was issued at

>the end of 1999 and that thimerosal

>containing vaccines were not immediately

>removed from doctor's shelves. Do you

>really want to claim that in 2000 most US

>children did not receive any (or very little)

>thimerosal in their vaccines? Doesn't the

>same criticism you apply to Fombonne

>apply to your claim? (a) mistakenly

>> " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

>> if they were recalled (when they were not))

>

a. You begin by deliberately misquoting

what I stated, which was:

" (about 3 years after most of the Thimerosal

was removed from the childhood vaccination

schedule and before the " flu " shot was

recommended for universal administration to

PREGNANT WOMEN and children in the US

vaccination schedule in December of 2003).

b. Factually, since the drop was seen in 2002

(and NOT at the begining of) and the " removal

BEGAN, " as your reply admits, in late 1999,

then late 1999 - late 2000 is 1 year, late

2000 - late 2001 is 2 years and late 2001 -

late 2002 is 3 years ==> this " about 3 years "

is a valid statement.

c. Since " removed from the schedule " is NOT the

same as " removed from the market, " as you

again agree,

the statement I made is valid and your deliberate

misquoting of it obviously undermines your

credibility here.

Moreover, your repeated attempts to proverbially

" put words in my mouth " and to twist what was

said into statements that were NOT made combine

to render your statements ethically reprehensible

in my view.

WITH RESPECT TO YOUR:

>

>Apart from that, hepB was not part of

>the routine childhood immunization

>schedule in Quebec during the time

>of his study. Grade school hepB

>immunizations hardly have a bearing

>on autism incidence.

>

a. You have again intentionally take my

statements out of its context --

what I said in context was:

The non-US studies, including the

recent small-scale Canadian study by

Fombonne (which: a) mistakenly

'interprets' vaccines being withdrawn

as if they were recalled (when they

were not) and overlooks the fact

that a Thimeorsal-preserved hepatitis

B vaccine was also being given at birth

and in grade school in Quebec during

that part of the study period where he

erroneously claims " nil Thimerosal "

exposure) "

-- you deliberately left out the

" at birth and " wording to make it

seem as if there was no impact on

the Thimerosal level administered to

babies when there clearly was.

b. Please show me the studies that have

established that multiply dosing

Thimerosal-preserved hepatitis B

vaccine into grade-school children

CANNOT cause their mercury poisoning

to progess from some non-NDD diagnosis

to an NDD diagnosis (Fombone's PDD)!

[NOTE: In other words, some children

in the US are NOT diagnosed with a

PDD (or NDD) until they are in grade

school or beyond. In addition, in the

US, there are cases where, after getting

a Thimerosal-preserved dose of Memomune

as seniors in high school, some students

are subsequently unable to attend college

because of the clinical symptoms they

exhibit are include sof of the symptoms

of sub-acute mercury posioning seen in

2- and 3-year-old children.]

c. Based on my point " b, " your " Grade school

hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing

on autism incidence " statement is at odds

with reality, at least in the United

States.

Based on the duplicitious nature of your

statements and your repeated failure to

accurately quote my statements, please

do NOT trouble me further with any more

of your " pseudo " retorts to the science-

based responses I provided to you.

Regards,

Dr. King

http://www.dr-king.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At 21:33 7/17/06 -0000, twoweasleys wrote:

>

>

>> apparently you believe experimenting

>> on vulnerable humans is an acceptable

>> practice.

>

>I answered that in my last post - I was thinking more about adults who

>work in high risk areas and need protection from certain diseases

>against which an entirely thimerosal free vaccine is not available.

>

>> In addition, your statement indicates

>> that you have little or no understanding

>> of toxicology.

>

>How charming.

>>

>> All that is needed is to take some

>> growing cells of any kind and treat them

>> with a given level of Thimerosal in

>> steriles isotonic saline and observe the

>> effects, if any, on the any aspect of the

>> biological activity within the cell system

>> in comparison to a control set where only

>> the same amount of sterile isotonic saline

>> is introduced.

>

>Cells in culture are a lot more vulnerable than cells in a human body.

>In terms of concentrations of a given toxin, a cell in an organ or

>body is much more protected, or why aren't LD 50 established in cell

>culture?

>

>> Again, recent studies have shown " biological

>> activity " in such cell lines at levels below

>> 0.03 ppm and, to my knowledge, no level of

>> added Thimerosal (other than NONE) has been

>> PROVEN to have no short-term (<48 hours)

>> activity. [NOTE: The pertinent references

>> can be found in the last two articles

>> published in www.mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/.

>

>which is probably why the term " clinically significant " was chosen in

>that link in my last post.

>

>

>

>

>

At 21:49 7/17/06 -0000, twoweasleys wrote:

>

>> you have obviously NOT read the recent

>> papers that clearly establish that, in

>> the United States of America (US) the

>> incidence of diagnosed neurodevelopmental

>> disorders, including autism, has dropped

>> starting in " 2002 " (about 3 years after

>> most of the Thimerosal was removed from

>> the childhood vaccination schedule and

>> before the " flu " shot was recommended for

>> universal administration to PREGNANT

>> WOMEN and children in the US vaccination

>> schedule in December of 2003). [sEE: The

>> 2 articles published in recognized peer-

>> reviewed journals in 2006:

>> a. Geier DA, Geier MR. An assessment of

>> downward trends in neurodevelopmental

>> disorders in the United States

>> following removal of thimerosal from

>> childhood vaccines. Med Sci Monit.

>> 2006 May 29; 12(6): CR231-239.

>> b. Geier DA, Geier MR. A meta-analysis

>> epidemiological assessment of

>> neurodevelopmental disorders following

>> vaccines administered from 1994

>> through 2000 in the United States.

>> Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006 Jun 29;27(3)

>> (Epub ahead of print).]

>> [NOTE: Articles published on studies in

>> countries other than the US have no

>> bearing on US experience and, based on

>> a review of the all the INITIAL

>> epidemiological studies done on US

>> children (including the unpublished

>> unmanipulated study findings by the

>> Verstraeten group {obtained under FOIA}),

>> the causal link between Thimerosal level

>> and autism incidence and the incidence of

>> other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs)

>> has been established. The non-US studies,

>> including the recent small-scale Canadian

>> study by Fombonne (which: a) mistakenly

>> " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

>> if they were recalled (when they were not)

>> and overlooks the fact that a Thimeorsal-

>> preserved hepatitis B vaccine was also being

>> given at birth and in grade school in Quebec

>> during that part of the study period where

>> he erroneously claims " nil Thimerosal "

>> exposure), have been shown to be knowingly

>> flawed and their authors have not only

>> failed to disclose the authors' conflicts

>> of interest as well as, in some cases, their

>> financial and other ties to the US CDC

>> (Center for Disease Control and Prevention).]

>

>,

>

>don't be silly (sorry), but the original theme of this thread was that

>some people think that the Geiers cannot be trusted further than their

>names on the papers (again, sorry to be so blunt).

>

>I am looking at the Californian numbers and I see no drop. I am

>looking at world numbers and there is no drop (see the most recent

>paper by Baird and others in The Lancet which is just a trifle more

>recognized as the " Medical Science Monitor " ).

>

>And it is a bit far fetched to claim that 2002 was " 3 years after

>thimerosal was removed from the childhood vaccination schedule " . You

>know very well that the recommendation to do so was issued at the end

>of 1999 and that thimerosal containing vaccines were not immediately

>removed from doctor's shelves. Do you really want to claim that in

>2000 most US children did not receive any (or very little) thimerosal

>in their vaccines? Doesn't the same criticism you apply to Fombonne

>apply to your claim? (a) mistakenly

>> " interperts " vaccines being withdrawn as

>> if they were recalled (when they were not))

>

>Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

>immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

>school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Please TELL TWO WEASLEYS THAT IF THE MOTHER GETS VACCINES CONTAINING MERCURY IT WILL CROSS THE PLACENTA AND CAUSE AUTISM IN THE 10-15% OF KIDS THAT ARE GENETICALLY PREDISPOSED---- Original Message -----

From: twoweasleys

EOHarm

Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:37 PM

Subject: Re: twoweasleys; question from last year

urgh - I would not want to go through pertussis, I am actually quiteglad about the adult booster. Breastfeeding is irrelevant for specificimmunity against pertussis.> >> > Neiter disease acquired nor vaccine acquired immunity lasts a life> > time. The acellular pertussis vaccine provides the shortest lasting> > immunity and 5 years is probably about right. That was the trade off> > (to lose some of the side effects of the whole cell pertussis> > vaccine). I just read that they are experimenting with a nasal whole> > cell pertussis (without toxin gene) vaccine that confers very strong> > immunity even to small babies. Until then, cocooning the baby by> > vaccinating mum, dad and older siblings is probably the best strategy> > to protect the babies.> > > > > >>

[Guest guest]

- Goodness - so I am clueless and ignorant?

I must be, because I fail to see any drop in the admissions in the

Californian system from their data - just looked again and the

admissions in the 3 to 5 year old group are still going up.

So, how many women in California did get thimerosal containing flu

vaccine? Do you have the numbers?

I will just lean back until Thimerosal is no longer used as a

preservative at all (something I do indeed support) and I will watch

the intake of autistic children into the system. I am assuming you are

doing the same. And since the thread started out with the Geiers, I

could not help but notice that it would be a good idea to look at the

numbers as they are published, not once they have gone through

someone's interpretation.

[Guest guest]

Debi,

as you said - your daughter was 9 months old and not in grade school.

The Canadian schedule introduced the hepB vaccine for children in

grades 4 through 7. I doubt that this had an influence on the

incidence of autism.

>

> If hepb has no bearing on autism incidence, why did my child stop

> eating, stop babbling, stop pulling up, and stop making eye contact

> within 1 wk after her hep B shot? It was the only vaccine she received

> that day, she was 9 mos old.

>

> Debi

>

>

> >

> > Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

> > immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

> > school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

,

one is an MD herself, the other one has no connections to the medical

field (her family is full of engineers

>

> >Of course I have a family - a

> husband, children AND two boys with ASD among my the children of my

> best friends about whom I happen to care very much. <

>

> ,

>

> I remember when you joined us with your questions. Did we ask you

if your friends with children with autism have any connection to the

medical field, or drug companies? It is harder for those in the

medical field to admit culpability of that establishment in their

child's autism.

>

> C.

>

[Guest guest]

You're right. My child just suddenly stopped eating, pulling up,

babbling, etc the same time she was given this injection as a nine

month old infant, but it couldn't possibly have had anything to do

with it. Do you hear how stupid that sounds? You can't really use the

genetic card because that's the excuse given for the magic 18 mo mark.

You think my daughter was so ahead of the gene curve?

Debi

> >

> > If hepb has no bearing on autism incidence, why did my child stop

> > eating, stop babbling, stop pulling up, and stop making eye contact

> > within 1 wk after her hep B shot? It was the only vaccine she received

> > that day, she was 9 mos old.

> >

> > Debi

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

> > > immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade

> > > school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

It seems to me that (twoweasleys) thinks that Canadian infants have not been receiving the hep B vaccines as infants, because these shots are not on the immunization schedules of most provinces. Infant hep B shots are not on the "schedules" used in Ontario and Quebec, yet there are infants who are receiving these shots. If they received hep B vaccines prior to 2001/2002, they would have likely received the thimerosal-containing hep B vaccines because thimerosal-free hep B vaccines were not licensed in Canada until 2001, becoming available in early 2002. More than half of all the students I have taught over the last 6 years did receive hep B vaccines as infants, even though these infant shots are not on our "schedule", and they would have received the thimerosal-containing vaccines (because they received their vaccines in 1998 or earlier). Aasa http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ccdr-rmtc/02vol28/dr2809ea.htmlDebi <fightingautism@...> wrote: You're right. My child just suddenly stopped eating, pulling up,babbling, etc the same time she was given this injection as a ninemonth old infant, but it couldn't possibly have had anything to dowith it. Do you hear how stupid that sounds? You can't really use thegenetic card because that's the excuse given for the magic 18 mo mark.You

think my daughter was so ahead of the gene curve?Debi> >> > If hepb has no bearing on autism incidence, why did my child stop> > eating, stop babbling, stop pulling up, and stop making eye contact> > within 1 wk after her hep B shot? It was the only vaccine she received> > that day, she was 9 mos old. > > > > Debi>

> > > > > > > > > Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood> > > immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study. Grade> > > school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism incidence.> > > > > > > > >> >>

[Guest guest]

>

> It seems to me that (twoweasleys) thinks that Canadian infants

have not been receiving the hep B vaccines as infants, because these

shots are not on the immunization schedules of most provinces. Infant

hep B shots are not on the " schedules " used in Ontario and Quebec, yet

there are infants who are receiving these shots. If they received hep

B vaccines prior to 2001/2002, they would have likely received the

thimerosal-containing hep B vaccines because thimerosal-free hep B

vaccines were not licensed in Canada until 2001, becoming available in

early 2002. More than half of all the students I have taught over the

last 6 years did receive hep B vaccines as infants, even though these

infant shots are not on our " schedule " , and they would have received

the thimerosal-containing vaccines (because they received their

vaccines in 1998 or earlier). Aasa

Thank you - that is interesting. I was indeed under the impression

that very few of the Quebec children would have gotten the hepB as

infants due to the published schedule.

[Guest guest]

Debi,

you are not getting the distinction. I was talking about TIMING. A

hepB shot in grade 4 or 7 would not have a great impact on autism

incidence. I was NOT talking about infant hepB vaccination.

> > >

> > > If hepb has no bearing on autism incidence, why did my child stop

> > > eating, stop babbling, stop pulling up, and stop making eye contact

> > > within 1 wk after her hep B shot? It was the only vaccine she

received

> > > that day, she was 9 mos old.

> > >

> > > Debi

> > >

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Apart from that, hepB was not part of the routine childhood

> > > > immunization schedule in Quebec during the time of his study.

Grade

> > > > school hepB immunizations hardly have a bearing on autism

incidence.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>