:RE: Re: Not understanding

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve, First of all, you say you haven't established a position and that is why you have joined the group. But I feel you have established a position and that is that you feel not vaccinating is probably as dangerous as vaccinating. That's fine, that is you choice, but that is still a psoition you have taken. Secondly, there are aobut 1400members of this group and i doubt very much that we all agree on everything regarding this. My positionis that I wouldn't vaccinate ever again-I wouldn't vaccinate my grandson(who lives with me), nor would I vaccinate myself or my cats. I have come to this conslusion after 5 years of working on it, studying, reading, etc etc. But that is my position. I am sure it does not represent everyone's position in this group. Take care, Maurinescd7131 <steve.dionne@...> wrote: Suzanne - I absolutely agree with your stance that evidence of harm being done to our children - or anybody at all - would provide sufficient reason to make changes. In this case to the process of vaccinations.I clearly am not as prepared to discuss specifics as you are. Until now, I have been independently working on this and have had no need to view the situation as one of having to support my position. As a matter of fact, I have not yet established my position, which is why I have joined this group - I want to line up all the facts to make sure whatever I do is in

the best interest of my son.While I cannot specify any studies off the top of my head, let me answer that question another way. By "circumstantial", I guess what I mean is that group of studies that would seem to indicate a link between mercury (or other toxins, or the administration of vaccines in general) and autism, but is unable to explain anything beyond a simple indication. What I would find much more convincing would be a study that went something like this:"Our study shows that specific substance X acts in specific way Y and results in specific neurodevelopmental problem Z, and here is a precise, thoroughly researched and well-proven explanation of exactly how this happens." I have never seen such a study. The lack of such a study certainly does not mean that process "Y" does not occur, but I would feel a lot better about hinging treatment choices on this assumption if I could know that it were

valid.I understand your statement about the law, but am not sure the logic flows in this case. Still, the message is well received and again I appreciate your time in responding to my questions.Please do not feel you have to defend your position on this topic, I am not here to judge anybody and I have no right to do so. We are all just caring parents who want the best for our children (and everyone else's).One concern I have about this topic in a broad sense is that some parents may be encouraged to not vaccinate their kids against serious diseases at all becuase of this debate. So I guess my 2 questions from that concern would be - a)does this group feel that the debate is closed, and that the issue has been settled? and does this group agree that not vaccinating children can have equally damaging results as vaccinating? Question B is not worded very well, but I hope you catch my

meaning.Thanks,Steve > >> > Dear scd > > > > > > > > I would say most of us arrived at our

convictions by doing > extensive> > research. This takes time and commitment. > > > > It is what each parent must do on his own or her own. That would > be the> > best path for you, rather than some of us defending ourselves,> > > > which clearly may spill over into personal, subjective and > emotional> > accounts. > > > > > > > > We certainly can assist you in your research .> > > > Here are some excellent resources:> > > > > > > > www.safeminds.org <http://www.safemind <http://www.safeminds.org/> s.org/>> ,> > www.generationrescue.org <http://www.generati> <http://www.generationrescue.org/> onrescue.org/> ,> > www.nationalautismassociation.org> > <http://www.national <http://www.nationalautismassociation.org/>> autismassociation.org/> www.autismone.org> > <http://www.autismon <http://www.autismone.org/> e.org/> > > > > www.achamp.org <http://www.achamp. <http://www.achamp.org/> org/>> www.nomercury.org> > <http://www.nomercur <http://www.nomercury.org/> y.org/>>

www.unlockingautism.org> > <http://www.unlockin <http://www.unlockingautism.org/> gautism.org/> ,> some studies funded by CAN,> > www.cureautismnow.org <http://www.cureauti <http://www.cureautismnow.org/>> smnow.org/> > > > > > > > > google the Autism Research Institute, headed by Dr. Bernie > Rimland, and> > google his brainchild, DAN, Defeat Autism Now and their > conferences,> > > > > > > > google USAAA .The Asperger and Autism Association of America;> > > > > > > > google the work of Dr. Boyd Haley, Dr. M. Horning, Dr. Burbacher, > Dr. > > O'Hara,> >

> > Dr. Mumper, Dr. Usman, Dr. > > > Ayoub, Dr. Geier,> > > > Dr. Wakefield, Dr. Buttar, Mark > Blaxill,> > Sally Bernard, Binstock and countless others> > > > whose names you can find on the above websites as well as the > conference> > lists of DAN , USAAA,> > > > and Autism One . You should also review the articles and research > by > > Pringle, Dan Olmsted, Rep. Weldon, F.Kennedy, Jr, > among others > > > > > > > > Research the Merk Memo Simpsonwood...but > these> > things are on the above website; you must search and research> > > > > > > > You should also research conflict of > interest> > within CDC, FDA, NIH and other government agencies, involving >

> > > among other entities, pharmaceuticals, > > > > > > > > You have your work cur out for you, but as you > are> > serious about uncovering the truth, > > > > you will welcome the work,> > > > > > > > > > The evidence will speak > for itself> > Suzanne Messina REAACH> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: EOHarmgroups (DOT) <mailto:EOHarm%40> com> [mailto:EOHarmgroups (DOT) <mailto:EOHarm%40> com] On > Behalf Of> > scd7131> > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 10:49 AM> > EOHarmgroups (DOT) <mailto:EOHarm%40> com> >

Subject: Not understanding> > > > > > > > Hi all - > > I am a new member of this discussion group. My son is 5 and is > > autistic. My purpose when joining the group was to expand my > > knowledge base so I can determine the best course of treatments for > > my son's disability.> > I am hoping someone can help me to understand what I am perceiving > to > > be a foundational belief of this group - that Autism is caused by > > environmental toxicity. Most specifically, by thimerosal in > > vaccines. I know that Kirby's book presented compelling > > evidence that this is the case. I also know that numerous studies > > have been published that have failed to show the link between > > vaccinations and the onset of Autism. So I am trying to understand > > why a large group of clearly

intelligent people have arrived at the > > decision that this is a fact, and that their choice of treatment > > options stems from this fact.> > Please understand that I am not trying to cause an argument or to > > question the validity of anyone's beliefs on this issue - I > certainly > > do not know what causes autism and have no special information > which > > would lead me to believe that anyone's opinion is right or wrong. > It > > seems to me that there is some conflicting science. So what, then, > > is causing this group to fall on one side of the debate instead of > > the other?> >>

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

You are right, Maurine, I guess I have established a position. To qualify my statement, I should add that it is a temporary position that is subject to change based on new information. And I appreciate your forthright response in taking your position.

I am still trying to get my arms around this issue. What would make you consider supporting the vaccination of your loved ones? Or, to put it another way, what change, if any, in the manufacturing and administration of vaccines would make you feel the risk/benefit equation moved to the side of avoiding the possibility of serious diseases (mumps, measles, rubella, diptheria, pertussis, tetanus, chicken pox, flu) vs. incurring the risk of negative effects (autism, asthma, diabetes, etc.)? I think this is a central issue in helping me to understand the point of view of many (though not all) members of this group.

Thanks,

Steve

Not understanding> > > > > > > > Hi all - > > I am a new member of this discussion group. My son is 5 and is > > autistic. My purpose when joining the group was to expand my > > knowledge base so I can determine the best course of treatments for > > my son's disability.> > I am hoping someone can help me to understand what I am perceiving > to > > be a foundational belief of this group - that Autism is caused by > > environmental toxicity. Most specifically, by thimerosal in > > vaccines. I know that Kirby's book presented compelling > > evidence that this is the case. I also know that numerous studies > > have been published that have failed to show the link between > > vaccinations and the onset of Autism. So I am trying to understand > > why a large group of clearly intelligent people have arrived at the > > decision that this is a fact, and that their choice of treatment > > options stems from this fact.> > Please understand that I am not trying to cause an argument or to > > question the validity of anyone's beliefs on this issue - I > certainly > > do not know what causes autism and have no special information > which > > would lead me to believe that anyone's opinion is right or wrong. > It > > seems to me that there is some conflicting science. So what, then, > > is causing this group to fall on one side of the debate instead of > > the other?> >>

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/user_friendly.pdf

Best article I have read on vaccinating your kids.

JB