FACT: Since 2001, thimerosal (mercury preservative) has NOT been used in childhood vaccines...and...

"Since 2001, thimerosal (mercury preservative) has NOT been used in childhood vaccines"

In addition, this is a blatant lie.

Defensive much?

If you are a person of science why are getting so emotional, suggesting that you are the "common variable"? I assume that is some sort of insult, admittedly I am a moron and an idiot but not even I could or would make that leap.

As people age and mature they tend to limit not increase the number of person, people, friends or families they "know". They tend to be focused on a very small group of immediate family.

The average person doesn't even know the name, or relative age of their coworkers family members.

That being said, not sure how you "strongly believe" I am "completely wrong".

Furthermore, as you can see with any CDC budget and the growth of special interest groups focused on it, their would not be a great, and I mean great, need for education on the aforementioned diseases if everyone knew families, as in more than one, who were touched by said diseases.

Wouldn't this suggest that "motives" of some groups interest you?

Those who attempt to use science alone to understand the conspiracy against the common people will typically die at least several decades before the truth about it surfaces.

[link to www.google.com]

[link to www.google.com]

Furthermore, as you can see with any CDC budget and the growth of special interest groups focused on it, their would not be a great, and I mean great, need for education on the aforementioned diseases if everyone knew families, as in more than one, who were touched by said diseases.


What?! I'm not following your logic. You think that if people knew four or more people with diabetes that the CDC would be compelled by special interest groups to study these diseases in more detail?

That's a very unusual stretch to use as evidence that people don't know four or more people with the most common US diseases/disease processes.

One point I will make, though: The CDC...the one also in the pockets of big pharma and big med? The CDC, the NIH and the FDA along with big pharma-med do NOT want to cure. Curative is NOT our medical model, and when curative is not the foundation, why would pure research to understand the causes and the processes be aggressively employed?

I could go on for days on this subject alone but will leave it there.

.

Wouldn't this suggest that "motives" of some groups interest you?


Yes, they do but not on a level of examining the scientific protocol.

Autism rates have STILL INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY!

All of you SHILLS, LIARS, AND DISINFO AGENTS need to STFU about mercury causing autism...there is NO PROOF of that.

If thimerosal-containing vaccines were a major cause of Autism, a sharp decline in cases would now be expected to be evident.

Autism rates have STILL INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY!

All of you SHILLS, LIARS, AND DISINFO AGENTS need to STFU about mercury causing autism...there is NO PROOF of that.

If thimerosal-containing vaccines were a major cause of Autism, a sharp decline in cases would now be expected to be evident.

wheres your proof? i have TONS of accredited sites that show ingredients for vaccines that are CURRENT.

theyre using aluminum in vax too.

prove it or

I was suggesting that the CDC and groups like the ACS would not have to spend as much funding on education if more people knew someone, certainly with regularity, who have been or are "touched" with a disease. They would be likely to make the lifestyle needed to reduce the damage already done, increase healing and prevent further damage and death.

I disagree with you 100% about "Big Pharma" noting wanting a cure. The profit margin on finding a cure, having a patent on it for at least 10 years, would and could be astronomical. If they are all about profit, which they are, then a cure would be a gold mine. How a person of science can not see that, is hard for me to fathom. Certainly in this day and age where the average business model does not extend past 10 years, and sadly a number don't extend past 5. Where "windfall" profits for "Big Pharma" are based on margins less than 15%.

I don't deny that potential for the CDC, WHO, the UN, FDA, etc being marketed to as doctors are by "Big Pharma". I do however suggest that their influence is their, but does not control. If so companies like Merck would not have been aloud to be literally pummeled for Vioxx. Furthermore look at Pfizers involvement in the Vioxx fallout (coughs "Celebrex").

Finally, the CDC and WHO have made it clear time and time again how lifestyle can drastically increase your wellness and help to prevent the diseases "BigPharma" doesn't want to cure.

It is clear, at least to me, that "BigPharma" makes money for the sheer lack of desire and force of will of the average person to take their health into their own hands. The information is available to anyone, at anytime.

The truth is "BigPharma" is not different than fast food, it is quick, easy, cheap and convenient.

I was suggesting that the CDC and groups like the ACS would not have to spend as much funding on education if more people knew someone, certainly with regularity, who have been or are "touched" with a disease. They would be likely to make the lifestyle needed to reduce the damage already done, increase healing and prevent further damage and death.

I disagree with you 100% about "Big Pharma" noting wanting a cure. The profit margin on finding a cure, having a patent on it for at least 10 years, would and could be astronomical. If they are all about profit, which they are, then a cure would be a gold mine. How a person of science can not see that, is hard for me to fathom. Certainly in this day and age where the average business model does not extend past 10 years, and sadly a number don't extend past 5. Where "windfall" profits for "Big Pharma" are based on margins less than 15%.

I don't deny that potential for the CDC, WHO, the UN, FDA, etc being marketed to as doctors are by "Big Pharma". I do however suggest that their influence is their, but does not control. If so companies like Merck would not have been aloud to be literally pummeled for Vioxx. Furthermore look at Pfizers involvement in the Vioxx fallout (coughs "Celebrex").

Finally, the CDC and WHO have made it clear time and time again how lifestyle can drastically increase your wellness and help to prevent the diseases "BigPharma" doesn't want to cure.

It is clear, at least to me, that "BigPharma" makes money for the sheer lack of desire and force of will of the average person to take their health into their own hands. The information is available to anyone, at anytime.

The truth is "BigPharma" is not different than fast food, it is quick, easy, cheap and convenient.


I appreciate the points in your lengthy response; however, it is 4:30 AM where I am located, and, unfortunately, I cannot spend the time that your post warrants.

I will, though, leave you with this thought:

Big Pharma is interested in profits not cures; disease MANAGEMENT is the most profitable model, not disease cures.

Thanks for the discussion tonight, Neo.

Cheers!

.

How does their profits affect the methodology behind coming up with a new medicine?

Unless you are suggesting that if they don't make enough profits, they can't do more research and development. That makes sense.

If that were the case wouldn't you have a problem with chemistry in general?

Sleep well

"Many vaccines still contain thimerosal (49.6% ethylmercury by weight.) While mercury is a highly toxic element second only to radioactive plutonium, when combined with other ingredients, specifically aluminum and formaldehyde, the synergistic effects increase 10,000-fold. Individuals who suffer from chronic mercury exposure will have a unique expression of symptoms."

Autism rates have STILL INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY!

All of you SHILLS, LIARS, AND DISINFO AGENTS need to STFU about mercury causing autism...there is NO PROOF of that.

If thimerosal-containing vaccines were a major cause of Autism, a sharp decline in cases would now be expected to be evident.

There are a lot of theories, of course. Obviously, the huge increase in the incidence of the Autism spectrum could only come from some lifestyle event. But what event? Many of the cases come about shortly after immunizations -- too many to feel comfortable thinking it is just a random event. I think it probably is related to immunizations, but not necessarily thimerosal-related. Here is a site which will give you ingredients of immuzations.

[link to www.novaccine.com]

Why can't it simple be a broadening of the definition of said disease thus increasing it's diagnosis.

I have made this point countless times, with evidence to support it and was cast out countless times for it. It is nothing against people with Autism.

Most people perceive Autism in the "severe" condition. I think that most people who read about the potential link between Thiomersal and Autism envision "severe" cases.

The reality, as I have attempt to say and used links in the past to suggest is that the diagnosis has broadened. Cases of "mild" Autism can also be related to behavior issues and environmental.

Most child psychologist, and pediatricians would agree that behavior issues, environment, abuse, diet, etc. can also slow or hamper a child's development.

Furthermore, as you can see with any CDC budget and the growth of special interest groups focused on it, their would not be a great, and I mean great, need for education on the aforementioned diseases if everyone knew families, as in more than one, who were touched by said diseases.


What?! I'm not following your logic. You think that if people knew four or more people with diabetes that the CDC would be compelled by special interest groups to study these diseases in more detail?

That's a very unusual stretch to use as evidence that people don't know four or more people with the most common US diseases/disease processes.

One point I will make, though: The CDC...the one also in the pockets of big pharma and big med? The CDC, the NIH and the FDA along with big pharma-med do NOT want to cure. Curative is NOT our medical model, and when curative is not the foundation, why would pure research to understand the causes and the processes be aggressively employed?

I could go on for days on this subject alone but will leave it there.

.

I was suggesting that the CDC and groups like the ACS would not have to spend as much funding on education if more people knew someone, certainly with regularity, who have been or are "touched" with a disease. They would be likely to make the lifestyle needed to reduce the damage already done, increase healing and prevent further damage and death.

I disagree with you 100% about "Big Pharma" noting wanting a cure. The profit margin on finding a cure, having a patent on it for at least 10 years, would and could be astronomical. If they are all about profit, which they are, then a cure would be a gold mine. How a person of science can not see that, is hard for me to fathom. Certainly in this day and age where the average business model does not extend past 10 years, and sadly a number don't extend past 5. Where "windfall" profits for "Big Pharma" are based on margins less than 15%.

I don't deny that potential for the CDC, WHO, the UN, FDA, etc being marketed to as doctors are by "Big Pharma". I do however suggest that their influence is their, but does not control. If so companies like Merck would not have been aloud to be literally pummeled for Vioxx. Furthermore look at Pfizers involvement in the Vioxx fallout (coughs "Celebrex").

Finally, the CDC and WHO have made it clear time and time again how lifestyle can drastically increase your wellness and help to prevent the diseases "BigPharma" doesn't want to cure.

It is clear, at least to me, that "BigPharma" makes money for the sheer lack of desire and force of will of the average person to take their health into their own hands. The information is available to anyone, at anytime.

The truth is "BigPharma" is not different than fast food, it is quick, easy, cheap and convenient.

Furthermore, as you can see with any CDC budget and the growth of special interest groups focused on it, their would not be a great, and I mean great, need for education on the aforementioned diseases if everyone knew families, as in more than one, who were touched by said diseases.


What?! I'm not following your logic. You think that if people knew four or more people with diabetes that the CDC would be compelled by special interest groups to study these diseases in more detail?

That's a very unusual stretch to use as evidence that people don't know four or more people with the most common US diseases/disease processes.

One point I will make, though: The CDC...the one also in the pockets of big pharma and big med? The CDC, the NIH and the FDA along with big pharma-med do NOT want to cure. Curative is NOT our medical model, and when curative is not the foundation, why would pure research to understand the causes and the processes be aggressively employed?

I could go on for days on this subject alone but will leave it there.

.

I was suggesting that the CDC and groups like the ACS would not have to spend as much funding on education if more people knew someone, certainly with regularity, who have been or are "touched" with a disease. They would be likely to make the lifestyle needed to reduce the damage already done, increase healing and prevent further damage and death.

I disagree with you 100% about "Big Pharma" noting wanting a cure. The profit margin on finding a cure, having a patent on it for at least 10 years, would and could be astronomical. If they are all about profit, which they are, then a cure would be a gold mine. How a person of science can not see that, is hard for me to fathom. Certainly in this day and age where the average business model does not extend past 10 years, and sadly a number don't extend past 5. Where "windfall" profits for "Big Pharma" are based on margins less than 15%.

I don't deny that potential for the CDC, WHO, the UN, FDA, etc being marketed to as doctors are by "Big Pharma". I do however suggest that their influence is their, but does not control. If so companies like Merck would not have been aloud to be literally pummeled for Vioxx. Furthermore look at Pfizers involvement in the Vioxx fallout (coughs "Celebrex").

Finally, the CDC and WHO have made it clear time and time again how lifestyle can drastically increase your wellness and help to prevent the diseases "BigPharma" doesn't want to cure.

It is clear, at least to me, that "BigPharma" makes money for the sheer lack of desire and force of will of the average person to take their health into their own hands. The information is available to anyone, at anytime.

The truth is "BigPharma" is not different than fast food, it is quick, easy, cheap and convenient.


The state of Penn. has tracked 50,000 Amish kids for 40 years, not one case of Autism, not one case of Asthma.
Same with Jehova Witness's. No vaccine, no autism, no auto immune problems.

Autism rates have STILL INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY!

All of you SHILLS, LIARS, AND DISINFO AGENTS need to STFU about mercury causing autism...there is NO PROOF of that.

If thimerosal-containing vaccines were a major cause of Autism, a sharp decline in cases would now be expected to be evident.

Autism rates have STILL INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY!

All of you SHILLS, LIARS, AND DISINFO AGENTS need to STFU about mercury causing autism...there is NO PROOF of that.

If thimerosal-containing vaccines were a major cause of Autism, a sharp decline in cases would now be expected to be evident.