Data on Unvaccinated Children

[Juliet]

https://youtu.be/

At 10:57 (study begins at 8:10) you can see the data for the rate of autism in unvaccinated children is 1 out of 715. For partially vaccinated children rate of autism is 1 out of 440. For fully vaccinated children it is 1 out of 45.

To put this in perspective, the medical community will often induce a pregnant woman who is 42 weeks pregnant because studies show the rate of death for infants increases from 2-3 in 1,000 to 4-7 in 1,000. Therefore, much smaller increases of death lead the medical community to take great measures of action in regards to other medical complications.

"While the risk of stillbirth is increased in pregnancies that go beyond 42 weeks, it is still relatively small, at 4 to 7 deaths per 1000 deliveries, as opposed to 2 to 3 deaths per 1000 deliveries in women who deliver between 37 and 42 weeks."

https://www.verywellfamily.com/stillbir ... es-2371543

[setyourselffree]

https://youtu.be/

At 10:57 (study begins at 8:10) you can see the data for the rate of autism in unvaccinated children is 1 out of 715. For partially vaccinated children rate of autism is 1 out of 440. For fully vaccinated children it is 1 out of 45.

To put this in perspective, the medical community will often induce a pregnant woman who is 42 weeks pregnant because studies show the rate of death for infants increases from 2-3 in 1,000 to 4-7 in 1,000. Therefore, much smaller increases of death lead the medical community to take great measures of action in regards to other medical complications.

"While the risk of stillbirth is increased in pregnancies that go beyond 42 weeks, it is still relatively small, at 4 to 7 deaths per 1000 deliveries, as opposed to 2 to 3 deaths per 1000 deliveries in women who deliver between 37 and 42 weeks."

https://www.verywellfamily.com/stillbir ... es-2371543

Was the same person who researched this also the Author of the Apostle confession.

[Juliet]

https://youtu.be/

At 10:57 (study begins at 8:10) you can see the data for the rate of autism in unvaccinated children is 1 out of 715. For partially vaccinated children rate of autism is 1 out of 440. For fully vaccinated children it is 1 out of 45.

To put this in perspective, the medical community will often induce a pregnant woman who is 42 weeks pregnant because studies show the rate of death for infants increases from 2-3 in 1,000 to 4-7 in 1,000. Therefore, much smaller increases of death lead the medical community to take great measures of action in regards to other medical complications.

"While the risk of stillbirth is increased in pregnancies that go beyond 42 weeks, it is still relatively small, at 4 to 7 deaths per 1000 deliveries, as opposed to 2 to 3 deaths per 1000 deliveries in women who deliver between 37 and 42 weeks."

https://www.verywellfamily.com/stillbir ... es-2371543

Was the same person who researched this also the Author of the Apostle confession.

I would have better luck finding the Author of the Apostle Confession (AAC) at the CDC: Center for Disease Creation

[justme]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

[The Airbender]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

[setyourselffree]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

1

[The Airbender]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

You must be a big fan of Alex Jones. He just admitted today he has pyhcosis. People love conspiracy theories. Until things get real and they lose everything because of lawsuits. Juliet has admitted several times on here she suffers from psychosis. Not that Juliet is a bad person. I just trust actual real research rather than some youtube videos.

I've heard the name, but don't know much else about him.

[Juliet]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

It's a great study. But it only takes into account one or two doses of the MMR vaccine. Their data also reflects the data I posted, even those who did half the recommended vaccines had a far less rate of autism. If you only study one vaccine, then sure, the risk could be barely above or even below 1, the same as the general population.

How does this apply in reality when you are giving your infant sometimes 6 or 7 vaccines all at once? Have any studies shown that this is safe?

This combined effect of vaccines according to what I posted is what skyrockets the rate of autism, which is why this particular pediatrician wrote a book on how to schedule the vaccines so as not to over do it.

I can eat a doughnut and not have diabetes. This doesn't prove there is no link between doughnuts and diabetes.

[David13]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

You must be a big fan of Alex Jones. He just admitted today he has pyhcosis. People love conspiracy theories. Until things get real and they lose everything because of lawsuits. Juliet has admitted several times on here she suffers from psychosis. Not that Juliet is a bad person. I just trust actual real research rather than some youtube videos.

A financial interest is not a conspiracy theory. It's a contaminating factor, or as they like to label it, a 'conflict of interest'.
dc

[justme]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

So do we only accept science done pro bono and at the scientists personal expense?

[Davka]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

So do we only accept science done pro bono and at the scientists personal expense?

I would say we should be more critical of studies funded by an individual/organization with an obvious financial (or other) interest in particular results. This should go without saying.

[justme]

According to a large study reported in JAMA https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2275444

There is no difference in autism rates for unvaccinated vs vaccinated. This agrees with a dozen previous studies.

So the question becomes do we go with a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association or a Youtube video. You can make your choice. I have made mine.

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

So do we only accept science done pro bono and at the scientists personal expense?

I would say we should be more critical of studies funded by an individual/organization with an obvious financial (or other) interest in particular results. This should go without saying.

Yes. So I would include AMA as a valid source. I also would tend to listen to the American Heart Association over say a study issued by a big tobacco firm etc.

[setyourselffree]

By the way I am sorry for what I said about Juliet. I had her mixed up with someone else. Q

[Davka]

As have I. Sounds like we gathered quite opposite ideas from the same information.

Question is, who pays for the research done at the JAMA?

So do we only accept science done pro bono and at the scientists personal expense?

I would say we should be more critical of studies funded by an individual/organization with an obvious financial (or other) interest in particular results. This should go without saying.

Yes. So I would include AMA as a valid source. I also would tend to listen to the American Heart Association over say a study issued by a big tobacco firm etc.

Actually, it doesn't take too much digging to find conflicts of interest with organizations like the AMA, CDC, Anerican Academy of Pediatrics, etc. A lot of revolving door type jobs, big bonuses, and the like.

And it doesn't change the fact that the studies cited by these organizations are inherently flawed. The whole thing is a big mess of corruption.

Look, not a year or two ago I could have been you, making the same arguments you're making. I have 3 fully vaccinated kids. But once I took the time to actually read the material I used to brush off as "anti-vaccine," a few things were crystal clear.

1. The benefits of vaccines are inflated
2. The risks of vaccines are underplayed
3. Many illnesses we vaccinate against aren't quite as scary as the establishment would have you believe
4. There is a significant amount of cover up and corruption surrounding vaccines.

So I stopped vaccinating myself and my children. It could be a coincidence, but we have all been healthier this cold and flu season than any year in memory. It is the first year my 3.5 year old son with asthma hasn't gotten a flu shot and the first year he hasn't been hospitalized at least once.

And speaking of big tabacco...for your viewing pleasure, a walk down memory lane.

[justme]

This winter while walking on my driveway I slipped on the ice and fell. It was painful. Darn gravity. Then I got thinking: The theory of universal gravitation is just a theory. I don't have to believe in it. It is taught by professors at universities and we all know how corrupt the university system is. Those professors are paid thus there must be conflict of interest and corruption. Can't trust them. The physicist who professionally research gravity are paid for by grants from the National Science Foundation. So obviously we cant trust them. Big money, big corruption. Also those physicists belong to associations like the American Physical Society . Thus cant trust them. The best of these scientists belong to the National Academy of Sciences which must be a corrupt organization since they teach about things like gravity, vaccines, climate change, and other things I don't believe in. The articles in scientific journals discussing gravity are anonymously peer reviewed, but they are all in on the conspiracy so cant trust them. But if I look hard enough on youtube I am sure I can find one video or podcast that agrees that the theory of gravity is wrong. Life is so much easier now that I don't have to worry about pesky science and its theories. Leave me much more time to go out to the orchard and pick cherries.

(I hope I don't have to say it explicitly, but all of the above is sarcasm yet matches so much of what can be found in todays society)

[justme]

The scores of reports on russian troll farms and bots fueling the vaccince debate in American social media to sow discord must automatically be false since they are in the mainstream media. And nothing ever reported in the mainstream media is true right?

[justme]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1lCPNkqB0I

I found a video on youtube proving that gravity is fake.

His summary is; In this video I will prove that gravity here on earth is fake and just one big myth that the government wants us to believe. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is 100% fact! I know I will get in trouble for posting this but I feel that it is my duty to expose the liars and get the truth out. And what is the truth? The truth is the gravity is fake and that it does not exist! -Mr. Reverse

So now I don't have to worry about that Newton guy, or even Einstein. The wonders of youtube science.

(Disclaimer, I did not watch the video myself )

[David13]

This winter while walking on my driveway I slipped on the ice and fell. It was painful. Darn gravity. Then I got thinking: The theory of universal gravitation is just a theory. I don't have to believe in it. It is taught by professors at universities and we all know how corrupt the university system is. Those professors are paid thus there must be conflict of interest and corruption. Can't trust them. The physicist who professionally research gravity are paid for by grants from the National Science Foundation. So obviously we cant trust them. Big money, big corruption. Also those physicists belong to associations like the American Physical Society . Thus cant trust them. The best of these scientists belong to the National Academy of Sciences which must be a corrupt organization since they teach about things like gravity, vaccines, climate change, and other things I don't believe in. The articles in scientific journals discussing gravity are anonymously peer reviewed, but they are all in on the conspiracy so cant trust them. But if I look hard enough on youtube I am sure I can find one video or podcast that agrees that the theory of gravity is wrong. Life is so much easier now that I don't have to worry about pesky science and its theories. Leave me much more time to go out to the orchard and pick cherries.

(I hope I don't have to say it explicitly, but all of the above is sarcasm yet matches so much of what can be found in todays society)

You only have got some tremendous differences there.

The univs don't make any money off the theory of gravity. Big PHarma only makes billions, notice that is b not m, billions off vaccines. So does the CDC.

You personally proved the theory of gravity observable by your self.
dc

[Davka]

This winter while walking on my driveway I slipped on the ice and fell. It was painful. Darn gravity. Then I got thinking: The theory of universal gravitation is just a theory. I don't have to believe in it. It is taught by professors at universities and we all know how corrupt the university system is. Those professors are paid thus there must be conflict of interest and corruption. Can't trust them. The physicist who professionally research gravity are paid for by grants from the National Science Foundation. So obviously we cant trust them. Big money, big corruption. Also those physicists belong to associations like the American Physical Society . Thus cant trust them. The best of these scientists belong to the National Academy of Sciences which must be a corrupt organization since they teach about things like gravity, vaccines, climate change, and other things I don't believe in. The articles in scientific journals discussing gravity are anonymously peer reviewed, but they are all in on the conspiracy so cant trust them. But if I look hard enough on youtube I am sure I can find one video or podcast that agrees that the theory of gravity is wrong. Life is so much easier now that I don't have to worry about pesky science and its theories. Leave me much more time to go out to the orchard and pick cherries.

(I hope I don't have to say it explicitly, but all of the above is sarcasm yet matches so much of what can be found in todays society)

Um..last time I checked no one is making literally billions of dollars of research proving that gravity exists. Because the "studies" are all the pro-vaxxers have to go on. If those are disproven, the amount of money the pharmaceutical industry would stand to lose is staggering. And not just the corporations but the individuals running the corporations. So you had better believe they will go to great and very unethical lengths to ensure they are not discredited.

Your slip and fall example was an *experience* that informed your understanding of the principle of gravity. Well, thousands and thousands of parents have seen -- experienced firsthand their perfectly healthy babies disappear into an inner world of autism. Or witnessed other health problems shortly after vaccination. Are you questioning their experience? That's like me telling you you didn't really get hurt when you slipped and fell!

Case and point: My pregnant sister in law gets the flu shot and 10 days later ends up in the hospital for 3 days with...you guessed it...the flu! And guess what she couldn't stop telling people? "Everyone get your flu shot! I can't imagine how sick I would have been had I not gotten the flu shot!" SMH.

Your analogy is more like someone trying to convince you that gravity wasn't the culprit when you fell, but instead it was just a random bad luck event. The science is totally there to prove the damage vaccines do. It's just expertly kept out of the public eye. You have to know where to look.

Have you even read and so-called anti-vaccine material? Or better yet, have you read the vaccine inserts provided by vaccine manufacturers? I'd start there...many of the "theories" you're debating against are written in their own words in those pamphlets.

Because right now, you are the one who is uninformed.

But, hey, if you want to vaccinate yourself and your family, do that. You won't have to worry about catching measles from my troupe of unvaccinated children, right? Or do you not trust that they really work? I mean, 40 percent of the people who caught measles in the 2015 Disneyland outbreak weren't fully vaccinated or anything....

[David13]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1lCPNkqB0I

I found a video on youtube proving that gravity is fake.

His summary is; In this video I will prove that gravity here on earth is fake and just one big myth that the government wants us to believe. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is 100% fact! I know I will get in trouble for posting this but I feel that it is my duty to expose the liars and get the truth out. And what is the truth? The truth is the gravity is fake and that it does not exist! -Mr. Reverse

So now I don't have to worry about that Newton guy, or even Einstein. The wonders of youtube science.

(Disclaimer, I did not watch the video myself )

If you haven't watched it, what did you post if for? Troll purposes?

At least find some comical youtube video to hint at your animadversions here.
dc

[justme]

I know this forum is a very small highly non representative sample of mormonism. So I shouldn't read to much into what I read here. It just boggles me though that there is a strain, regardless of how small, of science deniers in this church. The glory of God is intelligence. Outside of temples and meeting houses the single greatest expenditure of the church budget is universities. We are an academic people. I am a professor and thus my life calling and career is teaching science. So maybe I take it too personally. But I cannot believe the anti science bias on this forum. I just read above that it is hard to find the truth about vaccines and autism because it is hidden so well. On the contrary go to google, type "national academy sciences vaccine safety" for the definitive word on current science. If you do not understand what the national academy is then you have some learning to do before you should pretend to teach others about science.

[David13]

I know this forum is a very small highly non representative sample of mormonism. So I shouldn't read to much into what I read here. It just boggles me though that there is a strain, regardless of how small, of science deniers in this church. The glory of God is intelligence. Outside of temples and meeting houses the single greatest expenditure of the church budget is universities. We are an academic people. I am a professor and thus my life calling and career is teaching science. So maybe I take it too personally. But I cannot believe the anti science bias on this forum. I just read above that it is hard to find the truth about vaccines and autism because it is hidden so well. On the contrary go to google, type "national academy sciences vaccine safety" for the definitive word on current science. If you do not understand what the national academy is then you have some learning to do before you should pretend to teach others about science.

Science, per se, is a fine thing.

It's when it's perverted into the service of making money that it gets twisted, to the point where it's no loner science. It's financial interest.

It was Ezra Taft Benson who said we don't believe in conspiracy theories. We believe in conspiracy facts. Yes, they are facts. They do conspire to make money. At all costs. And that ain't science. It's greed.
dc

[kittycat51]

I am a professor and thus my life calling and career is teaching science.

Well then you above everybody else should know that science is never set in stone. Science is not a body of knowledge – it’s a dynamic, ongoing reconfiguration of knowledge and must be free to change. The accepted views of science knowledge can change over time, because the world constantly changes. Changes can result from new science observations, but can also be affected by social, political or religious convictions. The fact that science changes is a good thing. It's a sign of progress. Science changes in the light of new evidence.

There are plenty of studies that do show the dangers of vaccines.

[justme]

I am a professor and thus my life calling and career is teaching science.

Well then you above everybody else should know that science is never set in stone. Science is not a body of knowledge – it’s a dynamic, ongoing reconfiguration of knowledge and must be free to change. The accepted views of science knowledge can change over time, because the world constantly changes. Changes can result from new science observations, but can also be affected by social, political or religious convictions. The fact that science changes is a good thing. It's a sign of progress. Science changes in the light of new evidence.

There are plenty of studies that do show the dangers of vaccines.

I agree with your initial statements but partway through the paragraph things go south. I do not know what you mean by "accepted views". Do scientists ever alter, change or disgard hypothesis? Of course, that is science. I don't know what you mean by "world constantly changes" from a scientific perspective. Can you give me an example. Like say before 1800 gravity worked one way but then because of "social political or religious convictions" it now works another way? I think we are confused about what science means.

For sake of argument lets say there are "plenty" of studies that shows the dangers of vaccines. There are also plenty more studies that dispute those dangers. Which do you believe? Wouldn't it be good if there was some very high level organization of the worlds best scientists that were not directly involved in the studies, and had no financial considerations, and would take a look at the whole conglomerate of such studies, carefully evaluating the methods, throwing out the questionable study and looking for what the preponderance of evidence of all available studies reveal. Luckily there is such a body, cause that is how science works. And guess what there conclusion is?

http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/Report ... utism.aspx

[Davka]

I know this forum is a very small highly non representative sample of mormonism. So I shouldn't read to much into what I read here. It just boggles me though that there is a strain, regardless of how small, of science deniers in this church. The glory of God is intelligence. Outside of temples and meeting houses the single greatest expenditure of the church budget is universities. We are an academic people. I am a professor and thus my life calling and career is teaching science. So maybe I take it too personally. But I cannot believe the anti science bias on this forum. I just read above that it is hard to find the truth about vaccines and autism because it is hidden so well. On the contrary go to google, type "national academy sciences vaccine safety" for the definitive word on current science. If you do not understand what the national academy is then you have some learning to do before you should pretend to teach others about science.

Science is great. As a scientist, I am sure you can appreciate the value of a double-blind, placebo controlled study.
Well guess what. A study such as this has never been conducted on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. Ever. Okay, actual husband is îu. studied the flu shot in China. But you probably don't want to hear the results. It would burst your bubble.

As a scientist, you know it is possible to make a study show whatever you want it to show by manipulating controls, eliminating/including specific data, or just flat out fabrication of results. This is how "science" is bought. Have you ever heard how the sugar industry was behind the studies showing how bad sugar was for you back in the 80s? Totally false, totally bought...but, but, but it is in a science journal so it must be true!

I'm all for science when it is actual science. What I am not for is lies masquerading as science...lousy or manipulative experiment design that claims to prove something it doesn't really prove that makes people think they are informed because they read the headline in the newspaper but didn't actually read or analyze the study.

I ask you again, have you actually read any studies cited by the anti-vaxx advocates? Because, as an open-minded scientist, you should be willing to gather all pertinent data before making a judgement call.