“I believe that Vaccines played a role in reducing diseases”

What role, and where are you taking this from?

What is the source to your claim that there is a ‘limited’ role vaccines play, why is it just limited and not fully?

What are the other components that completed the role in eliminating the diseases and are they measurable?

The moment this entire discussion shifted away from science and facts I no longer am able to respond.

How is one to respond to made up facts and made up assumptions?

We can discuss a study or piece of science, such as Keej123 attempted to do, However, once he realized that his assertions are statistically insignificant and actually show that statistically the study is very strong and proves that the MMR vaccine plays no role in autism he went silent.

It was funny to see how Dooms jumped along with the study as if this proves that MMR increases autism rates. Dooms will take anything that proves the agenda of anti-medicine, regardless what the actual studies show.

Make no mistake, Dooms and Bais hillel are not interested in a respectful discussion, despite prior attempts to a portray themselves as moderates and educated, they are just copying and pasting stuff from blogs like age of autism. In no way are they are interested in having a meaningful discussion.

I feel bad for these people that the only way they can make their point is by unloading a whole bunch of nonsense, at first I went through what was posted with complete sincerity, I (and others) were surprised to see that the actual studies posted concluded other than what Dooms claimed, instead of acknowledging and responding to these, Dooms just kept on unloading more and more stuff.

At this point, what is the point of this discussion?

Bais hillel,

The article you posted has a very strong author bias, in fact the same authors have authored an article that was published and later withdrawn as it was shown to be flawed.

Their conclusions are not evidence based and are not at the level of what the scientific community expects it to be.

this is the redaction:
“This article has been withdrawn at the request of the Editor-in-Chief due to serious concerns regarding the scientific soundness of the article. Review by the Editor-in-Chief and evaluation by outside experts, confirmed that the methodology is seriously flawed, and the claims that the article makes are unjustified. As an international peer-reviewed journal we believe it is our duty to withdraw the article from further circulation, and to notify the community of this issue.”

If these are the people that are at the forefront of your position, they further your agenda you have a very low criteria for accepting legitimate science.

Below is from the Chops website.

“Aluminum is used in vaccines as an adjuvant. An adjuvant is vaccine component that boosts the immune response to the vaccine. Adjuvants allow for lesser quantities of the vaccine and fewer doses. The adjuvant effects of aluminum were discovered in 1926. Aluminum adjuvants are used in vaccines such as hepatitis A, hepatitis B, diphtheria-tetanus-containing vaccines, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and pneumococcal vaccines, but they are not used in the live, viral vaccines, such as measles, mumps, rubella, varicella and rotavirus.

Vaccines containing adjuvants are tested extensively in clinical trials before being licensed. Aluminum salts, monophosphoryl A (a detoxified bacterial component), and squalene (a compound of the body’s normal cholesterol synthesis pathway) are the only materials that can be used as adjuvants in the United States. The quantities of aluminum present in vaccines are low and are regulated by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER).

The aluminum contained in vaccines is similar to that found in a liter (about 1 quart or 32 fluid ounces) of infant formula. While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet. Breast-fed infants ingest about 7 milligrams, formula-fed infants ingest about 38 milligrams, and infants who are fed soy formula ingest almost 117 milligrams of aluminum during the first six months of life.”

Dooms,

But it is very likely that those that did not receive the MMR shot also have received any shots, yet the rate of autism was the same among all groups besides for those with a genetic predisposition.

“I would need to know exactly how many children in the full 95k, would get autism from genetics even without MMR”

No you dont, you will never know as the 95k are not all in the same group.
Why would you ask for something thats not possible tonmnow if your honestly looking at this from a statistical standpoint?

“why do you think one more study would be different?”

It will only be different if it concludes the same as the radical anti-medicine people. Otherwise, it is worthless.

It can also be worthwhile, if they can cherry-pick a paragraph or cherry pick what data and just post half of the data to make it seem as if it proves their position.

Cherry Picking:
“suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.”

“Group B – No Sibling ASD, No MMR (5 yrs)

7,735 children

68 Autistic (860 × .08)”

You mean 0.8 which is fractional to 0.9

you cannot cherry pick data, since you are looking at age 5, it would be interesting to note that children with just one dose had higher rates of ASD than those that had two vaccines.
Also, since we are still at age 5,
Fully vaccinated children had a rate of 0.5%
Unvaccinated at all: 0.7%

Quoted from the study.
“We also found no evidence that receipt of either 1 or 2 doses of MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD among children who had older siblings with ASD. As the prevalence of diagnosed ASD increases, so does the number of children who have siblings diagnosed with ASD, a group of children who are particularly important as they were undervaccinated in our observations as well as in previous reports.”

“The prevalence of ASD among all index children in the study sample was 1.04%, comparable with the current estimate of ASD prevalence of 1.5% in the general US population.28 In addition, the younger siblings of children with ASD had a 6.9% risk of ASD, also consistent with published estimates ranging from 6.4% to 24.7%.”

“Conclusions
In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.”

Dooms,

“MMR does Not Cause Autism. Which is like saying if Non-Smokers get Cancer, that is PROOF that Smoking
does NOT cause Cancer!”

– Incorrect, it is as if the smoking group and the non smoking group both would have had the same rate of cancer, since both groups have the same rate of autism this shows that MMR does not play a factor.

Dooms,

which study are you referring to?

There are a number of studies showing that children with siblings that have autism are more likely to be diagnosed with autism, this shows that there is a genetic factor at play.

Besides, you need to understand some vocabulary, if the study concludes other than your preference, that is not the meaning of fraud or more fraud.

you wrote:
“The Study found some Children who did not get MMR who have Autism. This is used to PROCLAIM:”

– Incorrect, the study finds no difference between those that received the MMR vaccine and those that have not. This is not the same as “the study found some Children who did not get the MMR who have autism”.

I guess twisting words and making up your own facts is not associated with fraud in your mind. Only using evidence to make sound and evidence-based decisions is.

“BUT I DID NOT CITE the anti-vax website 2Cents is attacking. I Cited: FocusForHealth.Org

Once again, 2Cents is caught Lying! 2Cents has ZERO Credibility!”

a. you did write health.org.
b. I should have realized the spaces should have been part of the website, sorry for not knowing that.
c. this is a discussion about facts, I am glad that you finally are willing to look beyond the poster and focus on the facts.

”
Bad genes.

NO! Vaccines are causing Autism.”

– Once again, you do not get to make up your own facts.

as of now, we have the following:

a. No change between children that have received vaccines and autism.
b. We do have children with older siblings that were diagnosed with autism that have a much higher rate of autism.

Now explain the above with the facts that you made up.

Dooms,

You dont get to decide what is right and what is wrong, also you dont get to make up facts.

I feel sorry that you have an anti medicine and anti scientific view to sell, the rest of us will continue to focus on the evidence at hand and make evidence based decisions.

keej123

“Because you can’t claim that their Autism is operating at the same rate, unless you take their cause into consideration. If their cause is genetics, so at what rate is genetics operating in comparison to what MMR would be operating. ”

Once again, the argument or concern you raise is only after you establish that the MMR actually operates, the study proves that the MMR has zero effect on autism rates, which is why there is no difference between the group that got the MMR shot and the ones that have not.

To simplify it, lets say the cause of autism is genetics (which the data clearly points in that direction, as noted in my previous post), that would explain why the rate of autism is not dependant on any other factors.

I think that you have a misconception and believe that the MMR vaccine plays a factor and the only question is how much of a factor, that would be the only explanation for your questions. Yet the study proves that the MMR vaccine plays no factor and is in line with the many other studies that all show the same.

Bais Hillel

“If I missed anything, you are more than welcome to add to the collection.”

yup, you missed the entire point of the study.

If you check out the Bandim Health project, which Dr Peter Aaby undertook in 1978 you would actually understand that he and the project actually observed that vaccines actually played a significant role in reducing mortality.

It was the groups opinion that the DTP vaccine actually had negative effects and increased mortality vs those that got the OPV vaccine.

However, the study has some issues, first off this was the groups bias, second the very small group that it studied.

It had 18 deaths. with some that were documented as sudden or no information, with a small cohort every single death in a group pushes the results in one direction.

The WHO addresses this and many other studies on the DTP vaccine, it categorizes the studies by high risk of bias vs very high risk of bias.

“Total kids at risk is the entire group, not just the No-MMR kids.”

Explain please, what risk are you referring to, and why is the entire group exposed to this risk.

Keej123,

Sorry for being late in the discussion.

Not sure what you are trying to uncover.

The actual study actually splices the data in all directions, showing no change with MMR vaccine.

If there are a group of people that have a different variable (such a genetics) which would result in the MMR vaccine together with variable have some sort of synergistic effect and cause the child to develop autism, if that were the case, the group receiving the MMR vaccine would have a higher percentage of cases of autism.

Since the variable is evenly spread across both groups, if it was the case like you suggested that the variable would cause the MMR shot to cause autism, the group receiving the MMR vaccine would have had a higher percentage of autism cases, as this is the only group that has the variable together with the MMR vaccine.

Now, this is all assuming that such a variable exists, however, this is just made up hypothetical stuff to satisfy an unsubstantiated agenda that the MMR vaccine plays a roll and is a cause of autism.

As of now, the data suggests that genetics are what is causing autism.
PubMed 24794370
PubMed 21844053

Parents with children that were diagnosed with Autism are less likely to vaccinate their other children vs other parents, yet the risk of their other children developing autism is significant.

There are multiple billing agencies that specialize in ambulance billing, they probably charge a percentage of what is billed or a flat fee per claim.

They have a team that requests the billing information from the hospital and have the necessary software required.

While I have no clue if Hatzoloh would hire such a service, almost every ambulance agency does, I believe Hatzolah would do so as well.

With regards to EMTALA, that is not the case, the law states that care cannot be delayed by asking for insurance and billing information, this is to assess and stabilize a patient.

Yet most patients that arrive at the hospital are stable and do not require immediate treatment. These patients are registered prior to being treated.

Regardless, the billing agency is tasked with getting the patients billing information.

I will once again stress, I am sure there are reasons against billing, however, misinformation should not be thrown around.

keej123

Re the JAMA study, not following your concern.

This is what you write.

” The normal children received that amount of MMR exposure, showing that the exposure itself isn’t the determining cause of autism”

This is where you err, it shows no association at all, your implying that there is an association yet just ‘not in itself” when in fact the study proves that there is no association at all.

Furthermore, if you actually read the study as you claim you did, you would notice there are in fact correlations of lower autism associated with those that were vaccinated. But in reality this has nothing to do with vaccines, only that children that have siblings that were diagnosed with autism are rather to be unvaccinated, yet they have a greater chance of being diagnosed with autism.

Another point the study makes, which the anti vaccine people disagree with is that genetics play a roll, that would diminish the argument they make against vaccines.

“As the prevalence of diagnosed ASD increases, so does the number of children who have siblings diagnosed with ASD,”

I do feel bad for the mods having to read through all these posts, I guess I will slow down.

“Did I mention they sent us a fruit basket? It was very nice.”

– They are poisoning you with Formaldehyde.

Besides, all people that ate fruit at one point eventually died.

apy,

It seems that this is for all their transports, this will significantly reduce their need to rely on fundraising, it also seems that other areas including Catskills Hatzolah have been doing this for a longer period of time, for all their transports.

Not sure if this played a factor, but from what I heard Hatolahs communication system is very outdated and an upgrade would be more than 20 million dollars, this is just one item on the list that is a direct result of being limited to fundraising for their expenses.

Other saying these studies exist, you have not provided them. So how can they be reviewed?

All the other nonsense stuff you mention, are just your (or probably from anti medicine websites) own made up facts. You have been told a number of times, the facts and data should be the deciding factor about this, not your beliefs (or your own facts).

“My advice to dooms is to discontinue posting, as these clowns who promote vaccines are the real cultist and rotfim that should ousted from the community.”

Nice, you begin your post as if your a moderate and level headed person, yet your last paragraph exposes your radical beliefs.

If you call people that form their decisions based on facts and evidence clowns, i guess people that hang onto lies and garbage science are those that you respect.

Unlike you, i would encourage anyone with real data and science to present it, regardless on which side if the argument they stand.

Until that happens, we have overwhelming evidence as well almost the entire scientific, medical and rabinical community that stand by the evidence that vaccines are safe and should be given.

“Dr. Joseph Biederman was a researcher who made Fraudulent Studies for Pharmaceutical Companies.
In addition to being paid the standard fee as a researcher, the Pharmaceutical Companies also paid
Biederman $1.6 MILLION in “consulting” and “speaking” fees. In other words Biederman got a $1.6 Million BRIBE from Pharmaceutical Companies as a reward for making Fraudulent Studies for them!”

What in the world does this have to do with Vaccines?

By the way, this actually proves the integrity of the evidence-based medicine system, should someone be caught with a conflict of interest and not disclose it, they will be disciplined as Dr Biederman was.

I would like to see the ‘alternative’ people have this regard for science as the medical world does.

If Wakefield is good for you and you hold him in such high regard, why is Dr Biederman suddenly a bad person? why is the scientific community now to blame only because one person had a nondisclosed conflict of interest and was exposed and disciplined?

This nicely proves its integrity.

From Dooms.

“Folks, PROOF 2Cents is a Liar:”

Hey, you dont need any proof, I am OK with you calling people names, But can we act like grownups and look at the data for a moment?

Why would my integrity matter here unless you do not care about the facts?

Or you assume that we all makeup facts like you do.