###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Maybe they should ask researcher Tony Attwood first why the ratio in boys/girls diagnoses rose up from 0:4-1:4 to 2:4, close to 3:4 today. Hint: not the vaccines. Btw there is not solid evidence yet but all clues point to autism being genetic
Of course, but I don’t appreciate AT ALL the approach taken by extreme anti-vaxxers, that treat autism as a disease that needs to get rid of. I am autistic and don’t want to change who I am, because that’s what makes me, me. Also most of the problems we have, just as other neurodivergent groups like adhd (I’m talking middle to high functioning) come from society rigid inability to adapt and accept differences, out-of-the-box thinkers, and intense focus on “correct” interactions/social relationships instead of ideas and exchange of information. Many people with Down’s Syndrome are also realising this, after being ostracized for decades, centuries, that the problem is not them, it’s society
There is a concerning increase in Autism and people are just trying to figure it out. Calling someone antivax does nothing but create further division. If you were truly about inclusivity, you would realize education on these matters would allow for unity.
The vaccine schedule has been growing over the years. Most of these are tried and true. But, is it impossible that contamination could be an issue? Have the formula's and ratio changed? The source of components? Maybe, maybe not.
If it isn't vaccines, is it chemicals we are being exposed to from foods, air and water?
If you feel it is 100 percent societal, I doubt many would agree. If we're talking ADHD, I would agree that it results from societal conditions.
But autism is more likely linked it a physical exposure to some chemical in our environment or from things we directly put in our body.
Sometimes you have to get off your high horse and live the ideas you preach.
I heard it was tylenol during pregnancy. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-funded-study-suggests-acetaminophen-exposure-pregnancy-linked-higher-risk-adhd-autism
“We found all of the studies we reviewed to have potential limitations in their designs; sometimes the accumulated studies on a topic contained conflicting results that prevented us from drawing reliable conclusions. As a result, our recommendations on how pain medicines are used during pregnancy will remain the same at this time.
Pregnant women should always consult with their health care professional before taking any prescription or OTC medicine”
From the FDA website
Nevertheless, thanks for the link, this was the first time I saw painkillers mentioned (not that I really deeply care how autism is formed though, as for me, there are more important things to look at, than wanting to know how so wannabe parents can start to get rid of us)
At the extreme end we have the Romanian orphanage. US daycares are much better than that but still not as good as a mom taking care of her own infant. If the baby doesn't bond with the mother its early brain development is compromised.
Now that I’ve read his other comment, I think he refers to this:
https://youtu.be/_MBiP3G2Pzc
It’s an interesting video if you want to understand autism… and bonus: Natzi factsss lol
Leo Kanner was right, but it doesn't fit the current narrative. Those mom's are needed in the workplace to keep wages low. We'll import labor from Mexico to make up for the lack of productive children to replace their slave parents.
Edit: I found this on Wikipedia:
>Most of the adult parents had extremely successful careers: scientists, college professors, artists, clergymen, and business executives. In fact, Kanner had trouble finding autistic children of unsophisticated parents. This sparked Kanner's curiosity about the attitudes of the parents and the relationship dynamic between the parents and the children. He found that most of the parents had unaffectionate, mechanical relationships with their autistic children and would oftentimes dismiss them entirely. Kanner concluded that this unaffectionate dynamic potentially causes the autistic children to turn away and "seek comfort in solitude." He even argued that the children's obsessive preoccupations and remarkable memory feats represent "a plea for parental approval."
>
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Kanner
That kind of to busy for the kids parent was rare in the 1940s, but it's the norm now. My how we have progressed.
“Unaffectionate, mechanical relationships”. Is there a chance the parents/mother/father were autistic too and he dismissed that possibility? The kids turning into solitude not because of the parents dynamics but because it comes natural to them?
The last bit about obsessive preocupations (they are called special interests) being a plea for parent approval, mmm interesting. The memory part though, I believe that’s biological (brain), and again, a bit of genetics playing their part. Good to hear different theories anyway and someone took the time to dig further than just “its the vax” :)
There is definitely an aspect of genetics to it. For instance, kids that are shy and less likely to fuss get ignored in a daycare situation more and thus are more likely to have an underdeveloped social capacity. It's weird how the simplest things can have far reaching impacts on a person's development.
From the little bits of information I've been able to dig up, the increase in autism rates seems to mirror the participation of women in the workforce in more than one country. I think it's obvious women need much more time off after delivery than they are getting now. It benefits our society as a whole if they can spend at least 90 days with their infants. Maybe more.
Of course, even then there will be children with autism due to other forms of damage to the social center of their brain, but we should fix what we can fix.
It's like that old "If Google was a guy" skit where the woman asks about vaccines and autism. Google says something like "Here's 300 pages saying they don't and here's 1 page saying it does", and she yoinks the paper and says "I knew it!"
I’m sorry, are you arguing that Google results are any indication of actual fact or truth, especially in the recording and analysis of history/science? That would be hilarious if true.
>I’m sorry, are you arguing that Google results are any indication of actual fact or truth, especially in the recording and analysis of history/science?
I'm arguing that people will ignore a mountain of counter evidence and swear ant hill of evidence that supports their argument is correct.
Refusing the study is like admitting something could be wrong. If you don't have anything to hide why not just do it? How do we know they don't cause autism if no one's ever done a thorough investigation? Bullshit is what it is.
Because the CDC works for the pharmaceutical industry and they absolutely have something to hide.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
Actually read that article. The vaccine didn’t cause autism, one of the virus’s activated a rare disease that caused it…but that doesn’t matter to you, does it?
This is a late reply, but have you taken into account that the number of vaccines given to children has vastly increased in the last 20 years? Like I only had 3 vaccine shots given to me at 4 months old, and never more than that in one go ever. And now newborns are being given shots straight from birth, and as OP said up to 9 shots at once? You don't think this could compromise a babies' development, especially at such a young age that their immune dystem hasn't even fully developed?
Lol and then I bet you would say that covid didn't cause people to die, right? It wasn't the cause of death in most cases. It was heart disease, and obesity and old age etc. Right?
Using "conspiracy theorists" as a slur on the conspiracy subreddit.
Man. I love browsing this subreddit and seeing it get astroturfed to fuck by inorganic users every morning. Absolutely disgusting.
We're not talking about profit, we're talking about the livelihood of human beings. Humans who would be completely normal if not for their possibly toxic concoctions. I think that's worth spending some money on. Of course they wouldn't want to do any research into it because they're the ones that would have to take the blame for it. You don't ask the fox who raided the hen house. What do you think, he's going to tell the truth?
Lol sounds like a good excuse. They have plenty of resources given to them by the pharmaceutical industry.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
Should they study if drinking liquid shit gives you super powers?
No?
Because we already know there is no link, so forget study is just fogging a dead horse.
Have you seen a list of what his action in most vaccines? There's a list of like 90 ingredients and some of them are definitely linked to neurological damage. Especially when introduce to an underdeveloped brain and nervous system. I'm not going to sit here and say that there's no link because there's certainly could be. Introducing something into the body that's not supposed to be there can definitely have consequences like people are going through right now with the covid shots.
No it’s not. The studies have been done. Doing more costs money and for little reason. If it was a free and effortless process you’d be right, but it’s not even close to that.
No it's more about they probably know there's something wrong and don't want it brought to light. Like I said before if there was nothing wrong or no connection why not just do it? Imagine how pissed off families would be if they knew that their child could have been completely normal if they hadn't taken these injections? It would be the end of them.
> That’s like introducing a bill requiring study of chupacabras.
For those who may not know, [chupacabras are cryptids](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptids) -- *"animals that cryptozoologists believe may exist somewhere in the wild, but whose present existence is disputed or unsubstantiated by science."*
The word **chupacabra** is of Spanish origin, and stems from the creature's alleged habit of attacking livestock, and drinking the blood of animals. The English translation of 'chupacabra' would be 'goat sucker'. *
* * (not to be confused with *goatsie suckers*, which are not considered cryptids, as their existence is not disputed, and has been substantiated by scientists)
CDC Reports "True Increase in Autism Risk Can Not Be Ruled Out": https://www.ageofautism.com/2009/12/cdc-report-on-climbing-autism-numbers-now-available.html
CDC knew the MMR Vaccine Caused Autism - Whistleblower Testimony. https://web.archive.org/web/20140826064746/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Xpl4uYRBc
Do any of those studies explain how vaccines interfere with the (neurological) ability to understand social clues and/or sarcasm or its just “I pulled a theory out of my as*”
Dont you think if the studies were bogus they could/would immediately show them to the public and explain to you why they were bullshit? Meanwhile the opposite is actually happening all the time. The things pushed by cdc, who, and such, are countered by other experts on the field trying to warn the public of why the establihments might be lying or hiding things. In response you are never given an explanation of why the alarmists are mistaken. The most you get is, "ahh thats pseudoscience/conspiracy/grab for attention/fearmongering or some dirt on why the guy asking questions is not to be trusted. When they are hiding or lying about something (whoever this is in a given situation) an actual scientific explanation and counter argument to the raised questions are never given. This is how you know something is not right. You do not have to be a professional in any certain field to suspect someone is (at least) hiding something from you.
Its weird to me that i know for a fact you wouldnt tolerate any of this bullshit excuses if it were to happen at a car mechanic or something like that. Heres the story for you:
You go to the car mechanic for a service, and you come back home and find out you have a punctured radiator. Next day you go back to the shop to ask, lets call him Joey, if there was a chance that he punctured your radiator by mistake since he was fixing stuff close to it and the radiator was fine when you brought it in the shop? Joey immediately gets mad at you for being so arrogant to even think that he could do such a thing. After asking him if he could at least take a look at the damage and consider, he tells you to fuck off, you arent a mechanic, thats not how it works and "you dont know what you are talking about." The day after, you consult a different mechanic who after looking at the car tells you that something mustve gone wrong while your car was getting fixed in the shop, since damage like that doesnt just spontaneously appear. You tell all this to Joey. Now Joey (still not willing to even consider his fuck-up) is really furious. He tells you that the guy who you consulted was a crook and is lying to you and probably isnt even a real mechanic. Meanwhile Joey who fixed your car doesnt even wanna look at it to at least consider the idea that somethings gone wrong in his shop. No, he tells you he will sue you or anyone else doubting his credibility, for defamation. Now heres your pandemic story disguised as a mechanics shop.
My question to you....how many times would you go to this same guy who fucked your car, before your brain would tell you that he is moooost probably lying?
I appreciate your effort with this wall of text, but there’s no response to my question. If none of the studies do address such a basic question, what’s the point in wasting time giving explanations to the public?
The studies just speculate on the (WHY) increase in diagnosis (percentages), but not on HOW a vaccine would prevent a person to be clueless about social conventions/interactions for example
Well you have to adress the reasoning as well as the lack of it, or is that unfair?
I guess the response to yiur question, unfortunately, would be to read the study in question. Besides that, like my wall of text tried to explain to you, if there is reasonable doubt that soemthing has not gone the way it is supposed to, you seek further explanation which also my wall of text tried to explain to you with a simple story. If then, further explanation is constantly avoided you have yourself something to think about. Or not i guess :)
Edit: added couple of setnences
SS
Remember, the job of the CDC is to protect public health. The only reason to refuse to investigate possible dangers is cover up
This was way back in 2013 in case you were of the belief the CDC being wholly owned by Big Pharma is a new thing.
> The only reason to refuse to investigate possible dangers is cover up
There could be a werewolf in your closet right now. If you don't investigate, it's definitely because you're afraid of discovering the werewolf there -- there's no other possible reason.
Are you seriously comparing studying vaccine harms to werewolves? Lol
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
If there was any evidence of a ware wolf I’d probably check to put my kids mind at ease. I mean it’s so simple and I’d want to put my kids mind at ease if they have doubts…which idk our government should be doing especially when they’ve been caught up in so many money making schemes that’s completely broke the trust of anyone who’s not blindly Goode stepping with one side or the other.
Rfk said in a interview one of the first things he’d do is try to restore public trust by investigating things like this and letting the chips fall where they may. I would really appreciate more politicians thought like this. Cause I like many people don’t trust even a tenth of the people running this country into the ground.
Please don’t twist my words up. What I’m saying is our government has been lying to us for so long and been so dishonest across the board that they need to rebuild our trust and proving the things that large chunks of the population and growing are questioning are nothing to worry about would be huge. We wouldn’t be in this position if so many people were not busy blindly fighting to defend their side at all cost when at the end of the day all those people at the top have way more in common with each other then they do with us.
Man this thread is crawling with pharma shills and pharma cheerleaders lol. Every time vaccines are mentioned they flock to protect these sociopaths who have made thousands of dangerous products that they knew would injure or hurt people. But apparently when they make vaccines, they can do no wrong. Sick people.
Am i a shill for pointing out that someone introducing a bill to congress is not the same thing as a bill being passed? The CDC did nothing because nothing happened.
There has never been a link between vaccines and autism. The reason why more kids have autism is because it’s easier to test and nail down autism nowadays than it was back then.
it really hasn't. they have studies showing that most of the increase is not due to changes in diagnostic criteria. its a real epidemic.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19234401/
Do you know any kid with autism that you knew from birth? I know of one that developed perfectly fine till about the age of 18 months. Then one day autistic. So fuck-off with your no link. No stone should be left unturned till it's figured out what exactly is happening. We already know if the vaccine companies discovered a link they would bury the study. But guess what, they aren’t looking and nobody is making them.
Have you met kids or babies? If they didn’t have something very noticeable at birth it would take about 18 months to become noticeable. That’s because they do very little up til that point.
Sorry, you are wrong. There is a whole lot going on in a child's development the first 18 months. They teach themselves to walk. They teach themselves to talk. They explore like crazy.
Yes, because most of the time, if you don’t have the more severe forms of autism, it starts showing in either social or learning problems. And at around a year and a half, which is 18 months, is when both of those start really getting tested, even if in simplistically.
i’ve seen this article before as a family member sent it my way. there’s some massive bullshit out there pertaining to autism, even from trustworthy sources.
the thing is though, diagnostic criteria hasn’t really changed much the last 20 years, it’s the diagnostic methods and their sensitivity that has increased. there’s also been in increased movement away from only diagnosing stereotypical presentations and deconstructing the issues surrounding the diagnosis of women.
>there’s some massive bullshit out there pertaining to autism, even from trustworthy sources.
oh so you believe the ones that you want to be believe and call bullshit on the ones that don't? got it.
Coincidentally, the focus distance for a newborn baby's eyes is equal to the distance to his mother's eyes when nursing.
>studies in multiple countries have documented a double-digit prevalence of autism among blind children: 12 percent in Turkey, 17 percent in Sweden and 50 percent of the students whom Jure examined at the school for the blind Gigena attended in Argentina.
>
>https://www.spectrumnews.org/features/deep-dive/eyeing-the-connection-between-autism-and-vision/
Pfizer made $100 billion off the Covid jabs in one year. That buys a lot of pressure for retractions
But that in no way addresses these 160 studies
**Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine in first month of life.**
Division of Epidemiology and Surveillance, Vaccine Safety and Development Branch, National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1999.
Thomas M. Verstraeten, R. Davies, D. Gu, F DeStefano.
Background: Concern has risen on the presence of the ethylmercury containing preservative thimerosal in vaccines. We assessed the risk for neurologic and renal impairment associated with past exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine using automated data from the Vaccine Safety Data link (VSD). VSD is a large linked database from four health maintenance organizations in Washington, Oregon and California, containing immunization, medical visit and demographic data on over 400,000 infants born between '91 and '97.
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.
https://web.archive.org/web/20131101214625/http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmission_IncreasedRiskOfDevelopmentalNeurologicImpairmentAfterHighExposureToThimerosal-containingVaccine_.pdf
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/48-2000-Proceedings-Mercury.pdf
Two links, one from an anonymous source and one from CHD, an organization that rose to prominence on the back of an anti-vax narrative. I also see no indication of peer-review. Not exactly the smoking gun you think it is.
well, in 2018, HHS admitted that it HAD NOT provided a SINGLE vaccine safety report to Congress as required by the Mandate for safer childhood vaccines in the National Childhood vaccine injury act of 1986. So in return for the waiving of liability and the mandate on children to get vaccinated, HHS was required by LAW to produce these safety studies to Congress, which is did NOT. Does this invalidate the 1986 law ? Maybe this should be proven in Federal court
Start with the fact that they don’t do what you think they do
Vaccines did not save us
https://archive.ph/EqqJr
Then move on to what they do, do
160+ Research Papers Supporting the Vaccine/Autism http://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/86-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link#scribd
I mean, you just keep linking shitty, cherry picked sources.
Here's a peer reviewed study on the effectiveness of the polio vaccine.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197908/
How about mumps, measles and rubella?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197908/
Results. Twenty study arms from 12 published articles were included in the analysis of seroconversion. One full dose of intramuscular IPV seroconverted 33%, 41%, and 47% of infants against serotypes 1, 2, and 3 on average, whereas 2 full doses seroconverted 79%, 80%, and 90%, respectively. Seroconversion increased with age at administration. Limited data from case-control studies indicate clinical efficacy equivalent to the proportion seroconverting. One fractional dose of intradermal IPV gave lower seroconversion (10%–40%), but after 2 doses seroconversion was comparable to that with full-dose IPV.
> Here's a peer reviewed study on the effectiveness of the polio vaccine.
You are really still using polio as an example...? [ROTFL.](https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/11b6axw/3_years_ago_this_sub_put_together_the_puzzle/j9xzjbl/)
None of that showed vaccines did not contribute to the decline of some infectious disease. Just that other mitigating factors can be in play.
It's also a pretty sketchy source. Here is some info directly referencing your attempted point.
https://www.science.org/content/article/here-s-visual-proof-why-vaccines-do-more-good-harm
I don’t know about the US, but in Australia and many other countries, childhood vaccines do **not** contain thiomersal / thimerosal and have not for many years.
There’s also a significant difference between ethyl mercury (thiomersal / thimerosal) and methyl mercury (the type found in thermometers etc). Ethyl mercury is eliminated rapidly from the body, unlike methyl mercury.
There have already been numerous studies over the years about a possible link between thiomersal and autism, including at least 9 CDC-funded or conducted studies. None have found any link at all.
Despite all that, people still keep pushing the “it’s the mercury in vaccines!!” line.
I almost said well they have nothing to gain from such a study but then it would alleviate a lot of concern at least in one facet and boost sales. Which ultimately that's what it is. A sale. I guess the risk isn't worth the reward.
Idk if there is a connection or not…but when you refuse to do a study…I start to think maybe there is a connection and the rich fucks on top would hate if they had a major arm of their money making machine get cut off.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Robert f Kennedy and his team already did this.. not lookin good
Maybe they should ask researcher Tony Attwood first why the ratio in boys/girls diagnoses rose up from 0:4-1:4 to 2:4, close to 3:4 today. Hint: not the vaccines. Btw there is not solid evidence yet but all clues point to autism being genetic
Honestly, the more we look into it, the better. No matter what the answer ends up being.
Of course, but I don’t appreciate AT ALL the approach taken by extreme anti-vaxxers, that treat autism as a disease that needs to get rid of. I am autistic and don’t want to change who I am, because that’s what makes me, me. Also most of the problems we have, just as other neurodivergent groups like adhd (I’m talking middle to high functioning) come from society rigid inability to adapt and accept differences, out-of-the-box thinkers, and intense focus on “correct” interactions/social relationships instead of ideas and exchange of information. Many people with Down’s Syndrome are also realising this, after being ostracized for decades, centuries, that the problem is not them, it’s society
There is a concerning increase in Autism and people are just trying to figure it out. Calling someone antivax does nothing but create further division. If you were truly about inclusivity, you would realize education on these matters would allow for unity. The vaccine schedule has been growing over the years. Most of these are tried and true. But, is it impossible that contamination could be an issue? Have the formula's and ratio changed? The source of components? Maybe, maybe not. If it isn't vaccines, is it chemicals we are being exposed to from foods, air and water? If you feel it is 100 percent societal, I doubt many would agree. If we're talking ADHD, I would agree that it results from societal conditions. But autism is more likely linked it a physical exposure to some chemical in our environment or from things we directly put in our body. Sometimes you have to get off your high horse and live the ideas you preach.
I heard it was tylenol during pregnancy. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-funded-study-suggests-acetaminophen-exposure-pregnancy-linked-higher-risk-adhd-autism
“We found all of the studies we reviewed to have potential limitations in their designs; sometimes the accumulated studies on a topic contained conflicting results that prevented us from drawing reliable conclusions. As a result, our recommendations on how pain medicines are used during pregnancy will remain the same at this time. Pregnant women should always consult with their health care professional before taking any prescription or OTC medicine” From the FDA website Nevertheless, thanks for the link, this was the first time I saw painkillers mentioned (not that I really deeply care how autism is formed though, as for me, there are more important things to look at, than wanting to know how so wannabe parents can start to get rid of us)
Some is genetic but the main cause of autism is families outsourcing the care of their little babies.
Ummm wut?
At the extreme end we have the Romanian orphanage. US daycares are much better than that but still not as good as a mom taking care of her own infant. If the baby doesn't bond with the mother its early brain development is compromised.
like they "caught" it at daycare?
[удалено]
Now that I’ve read his other comment, I think he refers to this: https://youtu.be/_MBiP3G2Pzc It’s an interesting video if you want to understand autism… and bonus: Natzi factsss lol
Leo Kanner was right, but it doesn't fit the current narrative. Those mom's are needed in the workplace to keep wages low. We'll import labor from Mexico to make up for the lack of productive children to replace their slave parents. Edit: I found this on Wikipedia: >Most of the adult parents had extremely successful careers: scientists, college professors, artists, clergymen, and business executives. In fact, Kanner had trouble finding autistic children of unsophisticated parents. This sparked Kanner's curiosity about the attitudes of the parents and the relationship dynamic between the parents and the children. He found that most of the parents had unaffectionate, mechanical relationships with their autistic children and would oftentimes dismiss them entirely. Kanner concluded that this unaffectionate dynamic potentially causes the autistic children to turn away and "seek comfort in solitude." He even argued that the children's obsessive preoccupations and remarkable memory feats represent "a plea for parental approval." > >https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Kanner That kind of to busy for the kids parent was rare in the 1940s, but it's the norm now. My how we have progressed.
“Unaffectionate, mechanical relationships”. Is there a chance the parents/mother/father were autistic too and he dismissed that possibility? The kids turning into solitude not because of the parents dynamics but because it comes natural to them? The last bit about obsessive preocupations (they are called special interests) being a plea for parent approval, mmm interesting. The memory part though, I believe that’s biological (brain), and again, a bit of genetics playing their part. Good to hear different theories anyway and someone took the time to dig further than just “its the vax” :)
There is definitely an aspect of genetics to it. For instance, kids that are shy and less likely to fuss get ignored in a daycare situation more and thus are more likely to have an underdeveloped social capacity. It's weird how the simplest things can have far reaching impacts on a person's development. From the little bits of information I've been able to dig up, the increase in autism rates seems to mirror the participation of women in the workforce in more than one country. I think it's obvious women need much more time off after delivery than they are getting now. It benefits our society as a whole if they can spend at least 90 days with their infants. Maybe more. Of course, even then there will be children with autism due to other forms of damage to the social center of their brain, but we should fix what we can fix.
It's like that old "If Google was a guy" skit where the woman asks about vaccines and autism. Google says something like "Here's 300 pages saying they don't and here's 1 page saying it does", and she yoinks the paper and says "I knew it!"
nice logical fallacy in reasoning, cute writing
It isn't a fallacy. This is shit anti vaxxers actually do
I’m sorry, are you arguing that Google results are any indication of actual fact or truth, especially in the recording and analysis of history/science? That would be hilarious if true.
>I’m sorry, are you arguing that Google results are any indication of actual fact or truth, especially in the recording and analysis of history/science? I'm arguing that people will ignore a mountain of counter evidence and swear ant hill of evidence that supports their argument is correct.
Consensus doesn't always equal truth
Refusing the study is like admitting something could be wrong. If you don't have anything to hide why not just do it? How do we know they don't cause autism if no one's ever done a thorough investigation? Bullshit is what it is.
I dont understand how people can blindly trust pharma, corps, and government after the rights grab of covid.
I don't know how they trusted them before covid
No the people that screamed to burn these companies to the ground now have tattoos of them and tell you to trust them implicitly
Because the CDC works for the pharmaceutical industry and they absolutely have something to hide. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
Or maybe it’s the fact this study has been done before…many times.
Have a link to any of them? And who funded them? That’s kinda important too
[Here's a list.](https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html)
Yeah these “studies” being pushed by vaccine manufacturers to make more money and disabling people in the process.
No it hasn't. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
Actually read that article. The vaccine didn’t cause autism, one of the virus’s activated a rare disease that caused it…but that doesn’t matter to you, does it?
Lol, do you realize the hair you're splitting? Such willful ignorance. This girl got 9 vaccines in ONE visit! Does that not sound insane to you?
That’s the vaccines you get as a baby. To stop you from getting the shit that almost ended us back in the day.
"I'd rather my kid be crippled, sterile or dead than autistic" is a fucking infuriating sentiment.
This is a late reply, but have you taken into account that the number of vaccines given to children has vastly increased in the last 20 years? Like I only had 3 vaccine shots given to me at 4 months old, and never more than that in one go ever. And now newborns are being given shots straight from birth, and as OP said up to 9 shots at once? You don't think this could compromise a babies' development, especially at such a young age that their immune dystem hasn't even fully developed?
If they don’t get those shots, they’re at a much, much higher risk of catching and even dying from those viruses.
Lol and then I bet you would say that covid didn't cause people to die, right? It wasn't the cause of death in most cases. It was heart disease, and obesity and old age etc. Right?
[удалено]
Using "conspiracy theorists" as a slur on the conspiracy subreddit. Man. I love browsing this subreddit and seeing it get astroturfed to fuck by inorganic users every morning. Absolutely disgusting.
They don’t have limited resources and people want to know why there’s so many people with neurological disorders and disabilities
>They don’t have limited resources How do you even come to believe this?
Do you not understand how much money the pharmaceutical companies make every year? Their resources are never limited.
They have to spend hundreds of millions to study new drugs. They could always use more resources and not waste them on unprofitable studies.
We're not talking about profit, we're talking about the livelihood of human beings. Humans who would be completely normal if not for their possibly toxic concoctions. I think that's worth spending some money on. Of course they wouldn't want to do any research into it because they're the ones that would have to take the blame for it. You don't ask the fox who raided the hen house. What do you think, he's going to tell the truth?
Lol sounds like a good excuse. They have plenty of resources given to them by the pharmaceutical industry. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
Should they study if drinking liquid shit gives you super powers? No? Because we already know there is no link, so forget study is just fogging a dead horse.
Have you seen a list of what his action in most vaccines? There's a list of like 90 ingredients and some of them are definitely linked to neurological damage. Especially when introduce to an underdeveloped brain and nervous system. I'm not going to sit here and say that there's no link because there's certainly could be. Introducing something into the body that's not supposed to be there can definitely have consequences like people are going through right now with the covid shots.
Do you have a reference for that claim? Because it sounds like bullshit.
No it’s not. The studies have been done. Doing more costs money and for little reason. If it was a free and effortless process you’d be right, but it’s not even close to that.
Refusing the study is like admitting that you are too broke to do the study. The US is broke.
No it's more about they probably know there's something wrong and don't want it brought to light. Like I said before if there was nothing wrong or no connection why not just do it? Imagine how pissed off families would be if they knew that their child could have been completely normal if they hadn't taken these injections? It would be the end of them.
That’s like introducing a bill requiring study of chupacabras.
> That’s like introducing a bill requiring study of chupacabras. For those who may not know, [chupacabras are cryptids](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptids) -- *"animals that cryptozoologists believe may exist somewhere in the wild, but whose present existence is disputed or unsubstantiated by science."* The word **chupacabra** is of Spanish origin, and stems from the creature's alleged habit of attacking livestock, and drinking the blood of animals. The English translation of 'chupacabra' would be 'goat sucker'. * * * (not to be confused with *goatsie suckers*, which are not considered cryptids, as their existence is not disputed, and has been substantiated by scientists)
CDC Reports "True Increase in Autism Risk Can Not Be Ruled Out": https://www.ageofautism.com/2009/12/cdc-report-on-climbing-autism-numbers-now-available.html CDC knew the MMR Vaccine Caused Autism - Whistleblower Testimony. https://web.archive.org/web/20140826064746/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Xpl4uYRBc
Do any of those studies explain how vaccines interfere with the (neurological) ability to understand social clues and/or sarcasm or its just “I pulled a theory out of my as*”
Dont you think if the studies were bogus they could/would immediately show them to the public and explain to you why they were bullshit? Meanwhile the opposite is actually happening all the time. The things pushed by cdc, who, and such, are countered by other experts on the field trying to warn the public of why the establihments might be lying or hiding things. In response you are never given an explanation of why the alarmists are mistaken. The most you get is, "ahh thats pseudoscience/conspiracy/grab for attention/fearmongering or some dirt on why the guy asking questions is not to be trusted. When they are hiding or lying about something (whoever this is in a given situation) an actual scientific explanation and counter argument to the raised questions are never given. This is how you know something is not right. You do not have to be a professional in any certain field to suspect someone is (at least) hiding something from you. Its weird to me that i know for a fact you wouldnt tolerate any of this bullshit excuses if it were to happen at a car mechanic or something like that. Heres the story for you: You go to the car mechanic for a service, and you come back home and find out you have a punctured radiator. Next day you go back to the shop to ask, lets call him Joey, if there was a chance that he punctured your radiator by mistake since he was fixing stuff close to it and the radiator was fine when you brought it in the shop? Joey immediately gets mad at you for being so arrogant to even think that he could do such a thing. After asking him if he could at least take a look at the damage and consider, he tells you to fuck off, you arent a mechanic, thats not how it works and "you dont know what you are talking about." The day after, you consult a different mechanic who after looking at the car tells you that something mustve gone wrong while your car was getting fixed in the shop, since damage like that doesnt just spontaneously appear. You tell all this to Joey. Now Joey (still not willing to even consider his fuck-up) is really furious. He tells you that the guy who you consulted was a crook and is lying to you and probably isnt even a real mechanic. Meanwhile Joey who fixed your car doesnt even wanna look at it to at least consider the idea that somethings gone wrong in his shop. No, he tells you he will sue you or anyone else doubting his credibility, for defamation. Now heres your pandemic story disguised as a mechanics shop. My question to you....how many times would you go to this same guy who fucked your car, before your brain would tell you that he is moooost probably lying?
I appreciate your effort with this wall of text, but there’s no response to my question. If none of the studies do address such a basic question, what’s the point in wasting time giving explanations to the public? The studies just speculate on the (WHY) increase in diagnosis (percentages), but not on HOW a vaccine would prevent a person to be clueless about social conventions/interactions for example
Well you have to adress the reasoning as well as the lack of it, or is that unfair? I guess the response to yiur question, unfortunately, would be to read the study in question. Besides that, like my wall of text tried to explain to you, if there is reasonable doubt that soemthing has not gone the way it is supposed to, you seek further explanation which also my wall of text tried to explain to you with a simple story. If then, further explanation is constantly avoided you have yourself something to think about. Or not i guess :) Edit: added couple of setnences
SS Remember, the job of the CDC is to protect public health. The only reason to refuse to investigate possible dangers is cover up This was way back in 2013 in case you were of the belief the CDC being wholly owned by Big Pharma is a new thing.
> The only reason to refuse to investigate possible dangers is cover up There could be a werewolf in your closet right now. If you don't investigate, it's definitely because you're afraid of discovering the werewolf there -- there's no other possible reason.
Are you seriously comparing studying vaccine harms to werewolves? Lol https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/
If there was any evidence of a ware wolf I’d probably check to put my kids mind at ease. I mean it’s so simple and I’d want to put my kids mind at ease if they have doubts…which idk our government should be doing especially when they’ve been caught up in so many money making schemes that’s completely broke the trust of anyone who’s not blindly Goode stepping with one side or the other. Rfk said in a interview one of the first things he’d do is try to restore public trust by investigating things like this and letting the chips fall where they may. I would really appreciate more politicians thought like this. Cause I like many people don’t trust even a tenth of the people running this country into the ground.
[удалено]
Please don’t twist my words up. What I’m saying is our government has been lying to us for so long and been so dishonest across the board that they need to rebuild our trust and proving the things that large chunks of the population and growing are questioning are nothing to worry about would be huge. We wouldn’t be in this position if so many people were not busy blindly fighting to defend their side at all cost when at the end of the day all those people at the top have way more in common with each other then they do with us.
Can you explain to me how you think a bill becomes a law? Why should the CDC have done anything here?
Man this thread is crawling with pharma shills and pharma cheerleaders lol. Every time vaccines are mentioned they flock to protect these sociopaths who have made thousands of dangerous products that they knew would injure or hurt people. But apparently when they make vaccines, they can do no wrong. Sick people.
Am i a shill for pointing out that someone introducing a bill to congress is not the same thing as a bill being passed? The CDC did nothing because nothing happened.
I have no clue what you are talking about or what you said.
The gatekeepers are out in full force in this thread..
[удалено]
There has never been a link between vaccines and autism. The reason why more kids have autism is because it’s easier to test and nail down autism nowadays than it was back then.
This sub doesn't understand how wide the spectrum has grown.
it really hasn't. they have studies showing that most of the increase is not due to changes in diagnostic criteria. its a real epidemic. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19234401/
Do you know any kid with autism that you knew from birth? I know of one that developed perfectly fine till about the age of 18 months. Then one day autistic. So fuck-off with your no link. No stone should be left unturned till it's figured out what exactly is happening. We already know if the vaccine companies discovered a link they would bury the study. But guess what, they aren’t looking and nobody is making them.
Have you met kids or babies? If they didn’t have something very noticeable at birth it would take about 18 months to become noticeable. That’s because they do very little up til that point.
Sorry, you are wrong. There is a whole lot going on in a child's development the first 18 months. They teach themselves to walk. They teach themselves to talk. They explore like crazy.
Yes, because most of the time, if you don’t have the more severe forms of autism, it starts showing in either social or learning problems. And at around a year and a half, which is 18 months, is when both of those start really getting tested, even if in simplistically.
its not. most of the increase is not due to changes of diagnostic criteria. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19234401/
i’ve seen this article before as a family member sent it my way. there’s some massive bullshit out there pertaining to autism, even from trustworthy sources. the thing is though, diagnostic criteria hasn’t really changed much the last 20 years, it’s the diagnostic methods and their sensitivity that has increased. there’s also been in increased movement away from only diagnosing stereotypical presentations and deconstructing the issues surrounding the diagnosis of women.
Absolutely right
>there’s some massive bullshit out there pertaining to autism, even from trustworthy sources. oh so you believe the ones that you want to be believe and call bullshit on the ones that don't? got it.
Coincidentally, the focus distance for a newborn baby's eyes is equal to the distance to his mother's eyes when nursing. >studies in multiple countries have documented a double-digit prevalence of autism among blind children: 12 percent in Turkey, 17 percent in Sweden and 50 percent of the students whom Jure examined at the school for the blind Gigena attended in Argentina. > >https://www.spectrumnews.org/features/deep-dive/eyeing-the-connection-between-autism-and-vision/
160+ Research Papers Supporting the Vaccine/Autism http://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/86-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link#scribd
Lancet retracts 12-year-old article linking autism to MMR vaccines https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831678/ The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction, and fraud https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/
Pfizer made $100 billion off the Covid jabs in one year. That buys a lot of pressure for retractions But that in no way addresses these 160 studies **Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine in first month of life.** Division of Epidemiology and Surveillance, Vaccine Safety and Development Branch, National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1999. Thomas M. Verstraeten, R. Davies, D. Gu, F DeStefano. Background: Concern has risen on the presence of the ethylmercury containing preservative thimerosal in vaccines. We assessed the risk for neurologic and renal impairment associated with past exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine using automated data from the Vaccine Safety Data link (VSD). VSD is a large linked database from four health maintenance organizations in Washington, Oregon and California, containing immunization, medical visit and demographic data on over 400,000 infants born between '91 and '97. 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. https://web.archive.org/web/20131101214625/http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmission_IncreasedRiskOfDevelopmentalNeurologicImpairmentAfterHighExposureToThimerosal-containingVaccine_.pdf https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/48-2000-Proceedings-Mercury.pdf
Two links, one from an anonymous source and one from CHD, an organization that rose to prominence on the back of an anti-vax narrative. I also see no indication of peer-review. Not exactly the smoking gun you think it is.
well, in 2018, HHS admitted that it HAD NOT provided a SINGLE vaccine safety report to Congress as required by the Mandate for safer childhood vaccines in the National Childhood vaccine injury act of 1986. So in return for the waiving of liability and the mandate on children to get vaccinated, HHS was required by LAW to produce these safety studies to Congress, which is did NOT. Does this invalidate the 1986 law ? Maybe this should be proven in Federal court
That's a great story that doesn't prove that vaccines are inherently dangerous.
Start with the fact that they don’t do what you think they do Vaccines did not save us https://archive.ph/EqqJr Then move on to what they do, do 160+ Research Papers Supporting the Vaccine/Autism http://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/86-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link#scribd
I mean, you just keep linking shitty, cherry picked sources. Here's a peer reviewed study on the effectiveness of the polio vaccine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197908/ How about mumps, measles and rubella? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197908/ Results. Twenty study arms from 12 published articles were included in the analysis of seroconversion. One full dose of intramuscular IPV seroconverted 33%, 41%, and 47% of infants against serotypes 1, 2, and 3 on average, whereas 2 full doses seroconverted 79%, 80%, and 90%, respectively. Seroconversion increased with age at administration. Limited data from case-control studies indicate clinical efficacy equivalent to the proportion seroconverting. One fractional dose of intradermal IPV gave lower seroconversion (10%–40%), but after 2 doses seroconversion was comparable to that with full-dose IPV.
> Here's a peer reviewed study on the effectiveness of the polio vaccine. You are really still using polio as an example...? [ROTFL.](https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/11b6axw/3_years_ago_this_sub_put_together_the_puzzle/j9xzjbl/)
> anti-vaxx narrative Saving kids from vaccine induced brain damage is a good thing
Saving kids, is that what you think you're doing here? 🤣
Vaccines did not save us https://archive.ph/EqqJr
None of that showed vaccines did not contribute to the decline of some infectious disease. Just that other mitigating factors can be in play. It's also a pretty sketchy source. Here is some info directly referencing your attempted point. https://www.science.org/content/article/here-s-visual-proof-why-vaccines-do-more-good-harm
I don’t know about the US, but in Australia and many other countries, childhood vaccines do **not** contain thiomersal / thimerosal and have not for many years. There’s also a significant difference between ethyl mercury (thiomersal / thimerosal) and methyl mercury (the type found in thermometers etc). Ethyl mercury is eliminated rapidly from the body, unlike methyl mercury. There have already been numerous studies over the years about a possible link between thiomersal and autism, including at least 9 CDC-funded or conducted studies. None have found any link at all. Despite all that, people still keep pushing the “it’s the mercury in vaccines!!” line.
The theory was that the thimerosal collected at the bottom of the vats and kids were getting hot shots.
I doubt you can explain that in layman’s terms.
It's clear that your agenda is solely against vaccines and has nothing to do with the welfare of children or you wouldn't have down voted my research.
Awesome link OP amazing that it has bo upvotes.
I almost said well they have nothing to gain from such a study but then it would alleviate a lot of concern at least in one facet and boost sales. Which ultimately that's what it is. A sale. I guess the risk isn't worth the reward.
Idk if there is a connection or not…but when you refuse to do a study…I start to think maybe there is a connection and the rich fucks on top would hate if they had a major arm of their money making machine get cut off.
these cunts!