Fear and Its Consequences: Why States Should Get Tough with Vaccinations

[cleanhippie]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fear-and-consequences

Fear and Its Consequences: Why States Should Get Tough with Vaccinations

With preventable diseases on the rise, the states should get strict on vaccines

By The Editors | February 10, 2011


This winter in the San Francisco Bay Area, many children will sit in classrooms and play on the jungle gyms at recess and then go home to attentive parents who work hard to give them every advantage in life. Parents in this part of the country are better educated and wealthier than the average American and can give their children more opportunity. But the Bay Area is also a hotbed of the growing movement to abstain from vaccinations for fear that the shots cause autism and other disorders. Although these parents may have the best of intentions—to protect their kids—they are dangerously misguided.

California is now in the middle of the worst outbreak of pertussis in half a century. This highly contagious disease—known as whooping cough for the distinctive sound its victims make when gasping for air after a fit of paroxysmal coughing—was a scourge of childhood until the advent of an effective vaccine against it in the 1940s, which drastically reduced incidence of the disease. The number of annual cases has been climbing in recent years. Last year, though, the rate of infection rose, once again, to epidemic proportions—7,297 known and suspected cases, a fourfold increase from 2009. Whether those refusing the vaccine have helped fuel the current pertussis epidemic is uncertain, but their decisions have created a public health tinderbox: in some Bay Area schools, 40 percent or more of the kids are not vaccinated, leaving them unprotected against pertussis and other preventable diseases, such as measles.

--snip--

In February 2010 the Lancet retracted Wakefield’s infamous paper. That leaves no scientific evidence to support the assertion that vaccines cause autism or other chronic diseases. Unfortunately, fear is far easier to ignite than to extinguish. Some parents caught in the crossfire between scientists and charlatans have decided, against all reason, that the vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they protect against.

They are wrong. Vaccines may provoke a low fever and other unpleasant symptoms. Very rarely, side effects are serious, such as an allergic reaction. The risk of unprotected exposure to vaccine-preventable diseases is far higher: for example, more than 90 percent of unvaccinated people exposed to measles will become infected.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fear-and-consequences

---------------------------------------------

Bold emphasis mine. Hopefully, this will finally sink in.

[xchrom]

1. indeed. nt

[Kalun D]

2. Because Greedpig Pharma Needs More Money

take your dose of nuerotoxin thimerosal, it also acts as a sedative so you bunch of sheeple wont rise up like they did in Egypt

What about the supposed Swine Flu Pandemic that supposedly was going to happen last year? It was all over the corporate greed pig news but it never happened. It's all bullship fear mongering propagated by the greedpig pharmaceutical corporations.

[cleanhippie]

3. Can you support your assertion with factual evidence?

And why do you disagree that the risk of NOT vaccinating greatly outweighs the risk of vaccinating?

[Kalun D]

12. You Don't Follow The News?

you have to look closer than the TV

the much touted "swine flu pandemic" never happened, it's was all a propaganda effort put out by big pharma hand in hand with big media. We heard night and day how bad it was going to be, when it didn't happen?? ... crickets.

so then you believe the same people when they tell you thimerosal is not a problem?

[cleanhippie]

19. Considering thermerisol was taken out of vaccines in 1999...

and telling me to "look at my TV" is not providing factual evidence. That requires research and study, can you link me to any wiseacre and/or studies that support your assertions?

[Kalun D]

24. Thimerosal was taken out of "some" vaccines

I was at the hospital last year with an injury and they asked me if I was current on my Tetanus shot, I asked them can you guarantee there's no Thimerosol? Uhh, no it has Thimerosal. Sorry, no thanks.


seriously, if you really care to read some facts, here's the foremost authority on the subject

http://www.mercola.com/

[Maru Kitteh]

33. FORMOST AUTHORITY? That is pretty freakin' hilarious, BUT...

You forgot the sarcasm tag. Some people are going to think you're actually that foolish.

[WatsonT]

38. Written by a doctor

He's one of THEM!

[cleanhippie]

42. Seriously, a homeopathic website is your source?

No wonder you are so misguided.

[LeftishBrit]

45. Mercola the foremost authority?

Are you serious?

He is not just anti-vaccine; he is anti-modern-medicine in general; advocates 'alternative' treatments for serious diseases like cancer; has published articles by someone who thinks that cancer is a fungus; and himself says that it is '85%' caused by emotions!

And if you think he's not JUST as keen to sell his products as anybody from 'Big Pharma', just look at all the adverts on his site!

[Odin2005]

98. MERCOLA IS A FUCKING CON MAN.

[trotsky]

109. Mercola?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[uppityperson]

130. mercola is your "foremost authority on the subject"? oh my. eom

[charlie]

203. You know what the Foremost Authority says is a safe remedy for flu symptoms?

Mercury

Of course, the joke is it's homeopathic mercury, otherwise known as water.

However, what he's suggesting is that you trust a quack fooling around with mercury with no oversight to deliver that water untainted. Dumb idea.

When he's not banging on about the dangers of thimerosal, he's prescribing mercury. The dissonance is delicious.

[WatsonT]

31. Let's see if I'm following your logic here:

the fact that one media hyped plague didn't materialize proves that vaccines don't work and pharmacists are trying to brain wash us with neurotoxins?

[Odin2005]

97. Bullshit. It's better to be safe than sorry when it comes to empidemics.

Would you rather have a false alarm or having a horrible pandemic unprepared?

[mhatrw]

93. some interesting recent businesss news stories

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-27/novartis-q4-profit-down-as-vaccine-demand-drops.html

Swiss drug maker Novartis AG saw fourth quarter net profit slip 2 percent on the year to $2.32 billion amid one-off charges and a sharp drop in demand for its pandemic flu vaccine, the company said Thursday. ...

Revenue in the fourth quarter grew from $12.92 billion to $14.19 billion. However, the vaccine division suffered a 74 percent decline in sales to $361 million following the end of the pandemic flu in 2010, after sales for the flu vaccine totaled $1 billion a year earlier. ...

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/01/31/mckesson-q-profits-slides-weaker-hn-season-raises-forecast/

McKesson 3Q Profit Slides on Weaker H1N1 Season, But Forecast Raised

By Jennifer Booton

McKesson (MCK) reported late Monday a 52% decrease in third-quarter profit, hurt primarily by a $189 million litigation cost and a weaker H1N1 flu season.

The San Francisco-based company posted net income of $155 million, or 60 cents a share, compared with $326 million, or $1.21 a share, in the same quarter last year.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/02/us-sanofiaventis-idINTRE7113OB20110202

French drugmaker Sanofi-Aventis is seen posting a drop in fourth-quarter earnings next week due to more generic competition, a trend it hopes to counter by buying U.S. biotech group Genzyme Corp. ...

Vaccine sales are seen down 18 percent from the same quarter in 2009, when the H1N1 flu pandemic boosted growth.

http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/108060/20110202/glaxosmithkline-share-price-down-on-ftse-100-ahead-of-fy-results.htm

Shares in GlaxoSmithKline were down on the FTSE 100 in afternoon trading ahead of the pharmaceutical giant's fourth quarter and full year results, expected tomorrow. ...

Keith Bowman, analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said ahead of the results, "Lower sales of diabetes drug Avandia, and herpes drug Valtrex in the developed world, combined with legal charges and the absence of last year's windfall from the H1N1 pandemic vaccine may act on the downside.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2011/01/11/2003493221

The government’s purchases of A(H1N1) vaccines from Adimmune in 2009 accounted for about 80 percent of the company’s total revenue that year. The company is the sole A(H1N1) vaccine provider in Taiwan.

http://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/11636/meridian-biosciences-q1-profit-drops-32-on-lower-demand-for-swine-flu-tests--11636.html

Meridian Bioscience's Q1 Profit Drops 32% on Lower Demand for Swine Flu Tests

Meridian Bioscience's (NASDAQ: VIVO) first quarter profits for fiscal 2011 dropped 32% year-over-year as demand for swine flu tests fell after fears of the virus subsided.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9L0IS380.htm

AstraZeneca Q4 net profit down 5 pct

Drug maker AstraZeneca says competition from generic drugs in the United States contributed to a 5 percent drop in net profit for the fourth quarter.

The pharmaceutical firm reported Thursday a net profit of $1.63 billion in the fourth quarter from revenue of $8.6 billion, down 4 percent from a year earlier when sales were boosted by sales of H1N1 vaccine.

[uppityperson]

133. Do businesses make money off food? They do? OMG, food is Teh Evil!!!1111

[WatsonT]

5. That's true, the fact that people are making money off it

completely negates the centuries of evidence and mountains of scientific studies backing vaccine use.

[Kalun D]

7. Flu Vaccine is Bullship

big Parma is running a scam

thimersol is a poisonous neurotoxin, autism is up to 1 per 150 why?

the WHO is compromised by big Pharma insiders, the supposed "swine flu pandemic" was absolute bullship

sure some vaccines are viable, but it's mostly historic now, especially with modern standards of sanitation

[cleanhippie]

10. Other than your personal assertion, can you provide ANY evidence that supports your claims?

You seem to like to post flowery slogans, but are very short on facts of any kind. Why is that?

[Kalun D]

18. Waste of Time

here, I'll give you a link to some facts

www.google.com

show us then the news reports of all the fatalities from last years "swine flu pandemic". It should be more deaths than a normal year's normal flu deaths. It may be hard to find since there was actually less deaths than normal that year.

LOLZ!!!! the jokes on you and big pharma is laughing all the way to the bank and dancing on your neurotoxin'd grave.

[cleanhippie]

21. So your answer is "no, I cannot provide any factual evidence" then?

[Kalun D]

25. www.mercola.com

[cleanhippie]

39. Hahahahaha! A homeopathic website is your "evidence"? Hahahahaha!

Wow, just wow.

[WatsonT]

48. But Dr. Cola is willing to sell you his products!

http://products.mercola.com/

That means it can't be a scam.

[Kalun D]

53. I've Studied Nutrition for 20 Years

Mercola hits all the high points very well. Just because he's commercial doesn't mean he's scamming.

[WatsonT]

56. Odd because at the begininning

of this thread you seem to take the stance that big pharma must be lying because they're out to make money with their products.

Whereas Dr. Cola is . . . .also trying to make money with his product.

[cleanhippie]

64. And unlike the claim that big pharma "might" be lying, we "KNOW" homeopaths are lying.

Dr. Mercola is a BIGGER fraud than big pharma EVER will be. AT least big pharma DOES make products with actual medicine that actually works.

[WatsonT]

70. No kidding

these folks will latch on to any problem they can find with vaccines no matter how minor and use that to ignore all the glaring problems with their own preferred method.

Modern medicine fails sometimes, clearly witchcraft is the way to go!

[Kalun D]

79. the Ad Hom continues

when they have nothing else

equating witchcraft with nutrition

[WatsonT]

83. Equating witchcraft with homeopathy

nutrition does not equal homeopathy. And neither will it prevent polio.

A main concept of homeopathy is water memory. That is, water retains the 'essence' of any material dissolved in it even after dilutions have left you with essentially pure water.


Which raises an interesting question: we defecate in water, and most of the human body is made up of water. So do homeopaths believe themselves to be mostly full of shit, or is it just everyone else who thinks that?

[Kalun D]

85. Okay Back UP

I confused Homeopathy with Naturopathy

[Kalun D]

87. Nutrition is Naturopathy

Mercola is a Naturopath

Polio is also prevented by sanitation, hygene, nutrition

[WatsonT]

91. Actually there's a lot of evidence that polio was made worse by sanitation

Clean water meant more people were contracting it as adults or older children when it was worse to catch it, rather than at younger ages. Which explains why it got so much worse in the US and europe around the turn of the century. (although that's probably propaganda put out by well diggers. The big-well industry practically runs this country)

Although it's always a problem.

BTW: you believe proper nutrition will save you: would you be willing to have the smallpox virus administered to you? You can have a full year beforehand to eat whatever you want and get plenty of exercise, sleep, etc so you're plenty healthy.

[SheilaT]

200. Bingo!

Thanks for bringing this up.

[HuckleB]

112. Nutrition is health care. It is not the sole possession of Naturapathic QUACKS!

[WatsonT]

128. Then work at reclaiming it from them

BTW: I can't think of a single doctor on earth who tells you to eat LESS healthy.

Being generally healthy will protect you from many ailments, but not all of them, not forever.

[HuckleB]

131. And MDs should and public health officials should spend less time on what?

:shrug: You want them to spend resources on PR?

It's time to regulate the quacks, so they can't push their BS propaganda in a vacuum?

[WatsonT]

135. Drs?

No. But if the only people advocating 'nutritionism' are also pushing homeopathy what view do you suppose the average listener will have of it?

It's like if string theory was only pushed by folks who swore the earth was hollow. People would tend to ignore it.

You seem to like the idea, so push back against the nuts on this subject.

It really isn't much of a theory though. Eating healthy leads to healthier people. This is axiomatic.

Claiming it will cure all diseases though will be a harder sell what with the empirical evidence stacked against it.

[HuckleB]

142. Newsflash: Homeopaths and Naturapaths pretend they're the only ones doing it.

But that's not reality.

[WatsonT]

162. Because to everyone else it isn't something to be advocated

it's common knowledge.

An apple a day . . .

[cleanhippie]

102. Oh, thats fucking BRILLIANT!!!!

Which raises an interesting question: we defecate in water, and most of the human body is made up of water. So do homeopaths believe themselves to be mostly full of shit, or is it just everyone else who thinks that?


Fucking BRILLIANT, I say!

[cleanhippie]

101. Hahaha! Fail again. YOU make assertions that no one else does, then claim they do.

no one equated witchcraft with nutrition, YOU did.

[Kalun D]

73. he said she said

is not an argument, be specific

what has Dr Mercola said specifically that's fraudulent?

tell us what is not fraudulent about WHO claiming a pandemic when there is none?

"AT least big pharma DOES make products with actual medicine that actually works."

depends how you define "works" like there's always side effects and many times it fixes what's advertised in the short term but makes it worse in the long term.

[Kalun D]

66. So what are you saying?

that you know big pharma is not scamming and lying?

that you know Mercola is scamming and lying?

I'm saying that big pharma is scamming and lying and Dr. Mercola is telling the truth.

Is that clear enough for you? Or are you still confused?

[WatsonT]

71. I know what you're saying

it's just wrong.

[Kalun D]

74. But you can't counter

with a factual arguement

you have no answer to my points other than ad-hom

[WatsonT]

77. Waste of Time

here, I'll give you a link to some facts

www.google.com

[uppityperson]

136. um, google is a search and other website. Not "some facts".

I am sure you can do a search for many things and find "some facts", but simply giving google as a link isn't "some facts"

[WatsonT]

163. I was responding snidely to kalun in the same way he responded

in post 18. Actually the exact same way: I copy and pasted it.

[uppityperson]

167. ah, thank you. I saw that also but have difficulty keeping people without avatars straight

I hate it when people change their avatars also, am visually oriented vs names. Thanks for the clarification. I called him on it also, thought it rather odd and in way sarcastically funny. Not sure if it was meant to be so elsewhere.

[WatsonT]

86. It's impossible to counter you argument with facts

because when presented with them you merely scoff and say those are lies put out by big companies regardless of the source, regardless of the evidence, regardless of the quality of the study.

No matter what the proof is you won't accept it unless it backs your line of reasoning.

This is the exact same logic used by creationists. They demand you prove evolution is true. Then you show them evidence of evolution and they say 'bah, satan put that there to trick us' and claim you have no proof.

All you have proven here is that you are a true-believer in the religion of homeopathy.

[Kalun D]

88. naturopathy

nutrition

as opposed to taking a pill after you've been screwing your body for the majority of your life with garbage food and chemicals, pile more chemicals on top to mask the symptoms.

[WatsonT]

90. Sure you try that

Use a proper diet to cure polio.

Poor nutrition weakens the immune system, and proper nutrition leads to a stronger one. This is true and no doctor, not even those employed by big pharma, denies this.


HOWEVER, a strong immune system is not a perfect defense.

There were plenty of well fed people who were struck down by polio, and smallpox, and measels, and every other disease we're trying to wipe out.

And children are always among those hardest hit by contagious diseases. Meaning that refusing to vaccinate children (even if you make them eat their broccoli) is a really bad idea.

[Kalun D]

89. Exactly

""It's impossible to counter you argument with facts""

because the fact that WHO is scamming us for big pharma can't be countered with facts

[WatsonT]

92. I take it you didn't read the rest of that post

take the time to do so now, please.

[cleanhippie]

57. Because he is selling homeopathic "remedies" DOES mean its a scam.

[WatsonT]

59. Homeopathic anything is a guaranteed scam

May as well sell overpriced sugar pills for all the good it does.

[cleanhippie]

63. That exactly what they are: sugar pills.

[WatsonT]

69. Slander!

Traditional homeopathy is tap water. They think water has a memory so it can retain the same characteristics as whatever you put in it, no matter how dilute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory

Religion is fun.

[Kalun D]

72. Tell Us

What was the WHO doing telling us there was going to be a swine flu pandemic?

and then it didn't happen?

nobody bought their crap, the government wasted 1000's of doses and yet there was no pandemic

who's scamming who?

So nutrition is a scam? Because that's a large part of what homeopathy is.

Nutrition is a guaranteed scam, that's what you're saying.

I've asked it numerous times on the thread and none of you have answered it, how did WHO get the call on a major pandemic so wrong? Nothing to do with the big pharma insiders working there right?

[Kalun D]

68. According To

the big pharma position

no evidence presented to back up the claim

[cleanhippie]

121. Only by willfully ignoring the COPIOUS amount of studies on homeopathy can you state that.

And by stating that, you admit you are willfully ignorant.

[Kalun D]

51. and

material from big pharma is your evidence

one of the biggest killers just after cancer and heart disease

pharmaceuticals

still waiting for you to tell us what happened to the swine flu epidemic

still waiting for you to explain why the WHO is beholden to big pharma

still waiting for you to explain why you believe known liars

these companies are run by people like Donald Rumsfeld who pushed the Searle aspartame through the FDA

that's who you believe, that's where your "evidence" comes from

[cleanhippie]

55. Hey, YOU made all those baseless assertions, not me, so why are you waiting on me to explain them?

And your Dr. Mercola is a quack. Homeopathic remedies are a scam of epic proportions.

[Kalun D]

76. Cleanhippie's ad hom attack

"Hey, YOU made all those baseless assertions, not me, so why are you waiting on me to explain them?"

So Rumsfeld is an okay guy? and aspartame is good for you? There was no flu pandemic as claimed by the WHO? Those are baseless assertions?

how specifically is Mercola a quack?

since nutrition is a large part of Homeopathy, how is nutrition a scam of epic proportions?

if you can't answer or ask anything specific then what is your "argument" worth?

[cleanhippie]

100. You are putting up a strawman, again.

Deal your own strawmen and red herrings. Homeopathy has been shown to be a scam, as evidenced by the 10 year study conducted by the British NIH, where they determined it to be no more effective than placebo and have taken it off the list of approved medical treatment. Nutrition is one thing, homeopathy is another, and its bunk. Proven to be bunk. Repeatedly.

[blondeatlast]

40. That's mrcola.com; the formost authority on mecidal science. nt

[Kalun D]

52. Ad Hominem

is not an argument

[cleanhippie]

65. But the fact that Mercola and homeopathic remedies are a scam IS an argument

backed by scientific data.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WatsonT]

30. Both sides of the aisle

have an aggressively anti-science population, it seems.

[Kalun D]

54. What Kind Of Science?

big business pharma "science" that wants to inject you with synthetic chemicals? You know the ones that are funded by large greed pig corporations with no morals or ethics?

(haven't "scientists" told us that the Gulf of Mexico has largely recovered from the recent oil spill?)

or well established homeopathic science that wants you to be healthy through natural means?

[WatsonT]

58. You do realize homeopathy is a thoroughly discredit belief system, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathic

Sorry but I don't share your faith in this religion. And since it can be scientifically shown to be false I feel quite comfortable in saying that.

[Kalun D]

80. Wikipedia

has seriously gone off the deep end and is being co-opted by the establishment to the point where it can no longer be trusted

this article is written with a very clear bias towards conventional medicine.

""And since it can be scientifically shown to be false I feel quite comfortable in saying that.""

and how much were those "scientists" paid and who's paying them?

[WatsonT]

84. I suppose you're right

we can't trust them ther scientists on account of they're getting paid. So we should just place our faith in Dr. Cola, who is working for free. Except of course the 'purchase' tab is prominently displayed on his website.

[cleanhippie]

67. Wow, thats some serious denial you have going on there.

[Kalun D]

81. Only Problem Is

you can't say specifically why

[cleanhippie]

103. You are right, I cannot say why you are in denial.

I can only assume it is because you have invested so much into homeopathy over the years only to have it proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is quackery. It takes time to get over that, you obviously need more.

[Occulus]

180. Homeopathy IS NOT FUCKING SCIENCE

Jesus.

Jesus Christ.

[uppityperson]

134. google is your "link to some facts" showing "flu vaccine is bullship"?

oh my again. Neither is mercola.

[WatsonT]

13. So don't get a flu shot

we're talking about pertussis and measles in children.

I'm sure someone made money off the polio vaccine. And you know what? I'm ok with that.

[drmeow]

28. Salk refused to patent

his polio vaccine. He didn't think it was appropriate. Unlike too many scientists today he was a truly ethical public servant.

[WatsonT]

32. Indeed

but someone had to make and sell the stuff.

[Orrex]

201. Ladies and gentlemen, I present another sad case of

[WatsonT]

4. If vaccines were 100% effective

I'd say great, let these folks refuse to vaccinate their kids. The rest of the population will be safe and we might get to witness some evolution in action.

Unfortunately vaccines, while very effective, aren't perfect. Leaving a reservoir for the disease means it will occasionally infect even vaccinated folks. So these people are not only being ignorant and hysterical they're also being quite selfish.

[cleanhippie]

6. Where do you get that from?

Unfortunately vaccines, while very effective, aren't perfect. Leaving a reservoir for the disease means it will occasionally infect even vaccinated folks. So these people are not only being ignorant and hysterical they're also being quite selfish.


Can you expand and clarify this, please? Support your first assertion regarding the limited effectiveness with factual data, please.

[WatsonT]

11. Sure

I don't know if you can get the papers, I get them free through the university. Others may have to pay. But wikipedia sums them up: Vaccines do not guarantee complete protection from a disease.<13> Sometimes, this is because the host's immune system simply does not respond adequately or at all. This may be due to a lowered immunity in general (diabetes, steroid use, HIV infection, age) or because the host's immune system does not have a B cell capable of generating antibodies to that antigen.

Even if the host develops antibodies, the human immune system is not perfect and in any case the immune system might still not be able to defeat the infection.

---------------------------

Vaccines work . . . .most of the time. And it's certainly better to be vaccinated than not when exposed to an infectious agent. However it's even better to be vaccinated and reduce your exposure.

[cleanhippie]

15. Ok, thanks.

I was unsure of what you were trying to say. Thanks for the clarification.

[WatsonT]

60. No prob

not an anti-vaccer.

[trotsky]

16. He's right - he means that vaccines don't always provide immunity.

Sometimes they don't generate enough of an immune response. They're pretty good, but still in the 95%+ range. Enough to cover for herd immunity, which is why it's so important we vaccinate.

[Pathwalker]

8. The pertussis outbreak worries me for my youngest son.

He had seizures as an infant, and as such, was advised against receiving this vaccination. The local Health Dept. was very helpful and special ordered a vaccine without the pertussis vaccine, and gave it to him free of charge.

He is 29 now, but engages in activities that might raise his risk of getting this, mostly in the form of having friends who do not follow health safety rules. He gets every cold, flu, etc. that is going around, so I worry.

My cousin had polio, so I know full well how dangerous this disease can be.

[cleanhippie]

9. It is likely that you can thank the anti-vax scare mongerers for this elevated risk.

[Pathwalker]

17. Why would I thank them - I blame them! The doctors said the danger

of him having a bad reaction to this particular vaccine was too great to risk, so I wouldn't allow that risk. All three of my sons were vaccinated, and given their boosters as needed. I get the flu vaccine every fall, I'm the first one called by my doctor when they arrive, as I am at great risk if I get it.

But my worry is for my son. :-(

[cleanhippie]

22. Of course, I was using some sarcasm there.

[Pathwalker]

23. My sarcasm radar's on the fritz, sorry. I worry what it will take

before this trend runs its course. How many will die, be blinded, or be maimed, and from what disease before we acknowledge that some are playing chicken with the public's health safety?

[EvolveOrConvolve]

107. My fear is that it will take something truly terrible to happen before these people wake up

It's easy for anti-vaxers to live in their anti-vax bubble and not have to experience firsthand the horrors of these diseases since they're rare now because of vaccines. It's scary as hell to think that many, many children may have to die before they pull their heads out of their asses.

[barbiegeek]

14. Thimersol was removed from MMR in 1999

Yes, it's still in the flu shot, but you don't have to get that one-Measles, Rubella, & Mumps are dangerous.

I have a child with Autism, they have 6 genetic markers outlined now. It's not the vaccines, it's the chemicals, insecticide & herbicides, and microwaving plastics for food which releases neurotoxins--plastic baby bottles.

http://www.parenting.com/article/toxic-baby-bottles

[Kalun D]

27. Vaccines are Chemicals

injected straight into the bloodstream

[Pathwalker]

29. Weird. I always get mine in a muscle, not through an IV.

[Kalun D]

82. Do You Understand General Terms

or do you "argue" by splitting hairs?

[trotsky]

184. Clearly you don't understand general terms. That's the problem.

You confused homeopathy with "naturopathy" above.

You are confusing intravenous with intramuscular here.

You really shouldn't be accusing others of not understanding general terms.

[WatsonT]

34. Nachos are chemicals

absorbed directly in to the bloodstream via the intestine.


Nachos cause autism!

[cleanhippie]

41. Now THATS funny! +1

[blondeatlast]

43. True, but jalapenos neutralize the effect. I read it at mrcola.com. nt

[Confusious]

169. OK, i laughed a little

But then I thought, I have to use that for everything!

Then I laughed a lot!

[HuckleB]

124. Oooogaaaaaa! BOOOOOOOGGGGGAAAA!!

ARE YOU REALLY PLAYING THAT NONSENSE?

:rofl:

[barbiegeek]

194. I believe they are RNA fractions

[LeftishBrit]

202. Everything is a chemical or combination of chemicals

and vaccines are usually injected intramuscularly, not straight into the bloodstream.

[xchrom]

20. kick

[supernova]

26. Sadly, I think these anti vaccers

don't fully appreciate that while, in a small number of cases there are vaccine side effects (low grade fevers, sometimes a rash --- none of this is very common at all) a great many more of their precious children, including their own WILL DIE of these diseases now preventable, especially pertussis and measles and polio.

I'm sorry to say, there is probably a sizable contingent of antivaccers who will have to start going to children's funerals in order to fully understand the harm that they are causing.

[KittyWampus]

35. Doesn't CA have a large population of children of immigrants who aren't vaccinate?

Seems that would be problem.

[blondeatlast]

36. +1. nt

[RedCloud]

37. Just take human food grade Diatomaceous earth. And fuck all diseases!

[laundry_queen]

44. Vaccines should never be mandated

unless you want a police state.
Many places here in Canada have far, far higher vaccine rates than in the States, but there is no mandate in most provinces. Why is that? Free health care, easy access, better education. You are barking up the wrong tree, concentrating your energy (and fear) in the wrong place.

As for vaccine effectiveness - 95% seems high to me - I just received a sheet that I'll have to dig up, from the local public health unit that says certain vaccines, such as Chicken Pox are more like 75%-80% effective. What pro-vaccine people should be doing is lobbying big pharma to produce far more highly effective vaccines. This way you wouldn't have to worry about those who don't vaccinate.

And figuring out the percentage of who catches a disease and who has been exposed is an inexact science at best. I'd like to know where that 90% comes from. Anecdotally - my kids don't have the MMR (will get it at puberty). They were exposed to the mumps, by playing with a kid who was fully vaccinated, sharing sippy cups, who came down with it the next day. My 2 unvaccinated kids who were exposed never got it. My kids were exposed directly to chicken pox numerous times before they caught it. One time, before the vax was widely available, I was babysitting 1 kid who was covered in pox and her brother who broke out on the last day I was watching them, again, all kids were little and playing with the same toys, putting them in their mouths etc. My kids, for some reason, didn't catch it. They were exposed that whole week.

What a lot of pro-vaccine people don't get is there are some anti-vax people who are on the side of science. I am one of them. I have read so many studies, (and yes I'm pretty good at deciphering them, went through some of them with my doctor and he was impressed) and there is still a large vacuum when it comes to hardcore double-blind studies with regards to vaccines. If the pro-vaccine people want to shut the anti-vaxxers up, there needs to be a huge study with kids who have NEVER had a vaccine, and kids who have been fully vaccinated on schedule, and everything in between. Follow them from birth. Make the science irrefutable. Importantly, make the funding completely independent of either group, anti or pro. When that study comes out, then I will be able to say with certainty, one way or the other, what I believe. Until then, the best I can do is risks vs benefits for my own kids. And until then, there will still be those who will be vulnerable to 'woo'.

[cleanhippie]

46. If you want your kids to attend public school, then yes, it should be required.

Not doing so only threatens ALL of the kids at a school.

I agree that a blanket mandate is a bad thing, but requiring it to enroll in a public school is a different matter.

[HuckleB]

113. +1

[WatsonT]

47. We put a lot of restrictions on what people can do

for public health reasons. I wouldn't say we live in a police state.

For instance: you may not defecate in public, or dump your dead relatives in the public drinking water, or serve rotten food, etc.

[trotsky]

49. Police state! Police state!

I wanna dump grandma in the reservoir, goddammit!

[WatsonT]

61. Well ok

but you have to fill out a bunch of forms first. And pay a hefty disposal fee.

[trotsky]

50. The "study" you propose is ethically and logistically impossible.

Ethically: Vaccines are *known* to provide protection from disease. This is a proven fact. It would NOT be ethical to the control group to remove their protection from polio just to "see what happens."

Logistically: Herd immunity. Read about it. Decipher it. Your proposed study has no way to account for it and its benefits - sure, you could leave a group unvaccinated but how do you properly assess the negative risk of that if they live among vaccinated people who are protecting them from disease?

[WatsonT]

62. About that

"It would NOT be ethical to the control group to remove their protection from polio just to "see what happens.""

We've done that. Well not intentionally. But many nations in Africa have resisted the use of polio vaccinations and the end result: lots and lots of polio.

I find it very depressing that this debate is still ongoing. It's so clear: countries with comprehensive polio vaccinations have no polio. Countries without them do have polio.

[mhatrw]

96. Why not just follow the religiously exempt?

Why not at least do some primate studies in lieu of that?

[trotsky]

106. The unvaccinated Amish have autism too.

Scary, isn't it? BOO!

[cleanhippie]

122. At the same rates as vaccinated kids do.

Even MORE scary!

[WatsonT]

129. Impossible

Dr. Jenny McCarthy said she just knew it was vaccines that caused it. She knew!

And she has really large fake breasts. Does that count for nothing?

[mhatrw]

95. .

Now prepare for the inevitable attack from all sides.

[mhatrw]

75. I love how anecdotal (and not even truly demonstrated) correlation MUST imply causation

when it comes to pertussis outbreaks and local rates of deviation from the recommended vaccine schedule, but correlation cannot possibly suggest causation when it comes to the steep rise in mandatory vaccinations coinciding with the steep rise in childhood developmental disorders.

[WatsonT]

94. We know what causes pertussis

we know how vaccines work. There are plenty of direct correlations done under controlled conditions pointing out the link between not vaccinating and getting a disease.

We do not know how autism works. There have been plenty of studies show no link between it and vaccines. That's just something a women who made herself famous by looking good naked hit on and got other people to follow.

[mhatrw]

99. LOL. Where is the evidence that shows that total rates of vaccination

are even CORRELATED to the recent cyclical upsurge in whooping cough cases in California?

It's hilarious. Where is the evidence showing that the counties with the lowest DPaT vaccination rates are those most affected by this recent upsurge in whooping cough cases? Where is the evidence showing that the people coming down with the whooping cough got it because they were not vaccinated with the DPaT vaccine on schedule? When it comes to questioning vaccine safety, clear correlation is dismissed. Who cares that the tripling of the vaccine schedule has coincided with a steep rise in childhood developmental diseases? Vaccines save lives! Now take your shots, and stop asking questions!

On the other hand, when it comes to blaming communities with slightly higher rates of questioning the necessity of current 50+ vaccination schedule for recent disease outbreaks, you don't have to even demonstrate correlation. If there you can show any increase in any incidence of any disease for which vaccinations exist in any one season, then the culprit for this increase necessarily has to be the small percentage of individuals who did not give their children all 50+ vaccines on the CDC's recommended schedule. We don't need any evidence to demonstrate causation! We don't even need any evidence to demonstrate correlation! We know who must be at fault! It's those damn educated San Francisco liberals and their questioning ways! There ought to be a law!

[cleanhippie]

105. From the article:

"Whether those refusing the vaccine have helped fuel the current pertussis epidemic is uncertain, but their decisions have created a public health tinderbox: in some Bay Area schools, 40 percent or more of the kids are not vaccinated, leaving them unprotected against pertussis and other preventable diseases, such as measles."


Uh, yeah, no one STATED that this IS the reason.....

[mhatrw]

111. LOL. No implcation was made whatsoever!

No, the liberals of San Francisco were not at all targeted as the enemies of good health whose horrible (and hopefully soon unlawful) behavior is causing a nearly unprecedented wave of pertussis to spread through the state. That was not the point of the article at all!*







































*see disclaimer

[cleanhippie]

117. Uh, no one EVER claimed it was the "liberals" of SF, but it IS the IGNORANT of SF

that may share the blame. Yes, the IGNORANT. Are you equivocating the ignorant ones in SF with "liberals" in SF, because they are NOT one and the same.

But nice try at obfuscation.

[mhatrw]

149. LOL. Who do you think lives in San Francisco? Kombucha drinkers or tea baggers? LOL n/t

[cleanhippie]

170. Dude, you are pricless. I am so saving this thread for when I need a laugh.

[trotsky]

108. Please present your source that children get FIFTY PLUS vaccines.

I call bullshit. PROVE IT. Show how rational you are.

[mhatrw]

114. NJ requires 33 vaccine doses by 12th grade to be eligible to attend public school.

http://nj.gov/health/forms/imm.pdf

Add in 3 Gardasil shots and annual flu vaccination from ages 6-18 (which do not seem to be mandatory) and that's 49.

[laconicsax]

123. My what large error bars you have!

"all 50+ vaccines on the CDC's recommended schedule."

"NJ requires 33 vaccine doses by 12th grade to be eligible to attend public school."

"Add in 3 Gardasil shots and annual flu vaccination...and that's 49."

In which branch of mathematics is 33>50 and 49>50? Is it the same division of probability where you're guaranteed to win the lottery if you just play enough?

[mhatrw]

140. Cute. If you live until age 70, well over 100 vaccinations are currently recommended.

And the number just keeps going up, up, and up, just about every year.

It all depends on where you set the cut off date.

[laconicsax]

165. zOMG! 20-40 vaccinations in 50+ years? Will the horrors never cease?

:rofl:

[cleanhippie]

125. Thats 2 per year average. Ohhh, scary!

[mhatrw]

143. Thanks, Count.

[WatsonT]

146. I've heard that many of them contain CHEMICALS!!!!!!

[trotsky]

182. Thank you for proving that your own claim was FALSE.

Not only is it NOT "fifty plus" (YOUR OWN BOGUS CLAIM), you didn't even look at the chart carefully and you certainly didn't count accurately.

Did you realize, for instance, that measles, mumps, and rubella are NOT 3 separate vaccines? You also clearly double-counted because you didn't look at the descriptions properly. Using your chart, I count just 24 required vaccines for children from birth to age 18. That's less than HALF your wild claim.

No wonder no one takes you seriously.

[WatsonT]

126. Here's some fun graphs for you

OMG, ze vaccines, they do nothing!

[mhatrw]

144. When have I ever argued against the effectiveness of any of thes vaccines?

Who the fuck are you confusing me with?

[WatsonT]

187. "Who the fuck are you confusing me with?"

The person who argued with my statement in post 94 about pertussis.

I apologize if that was someone else with an identical user name.

[WatsonT]

132. You are free to ignore reality

we live in a free country.

Although I do wish we could establish quarantine zones where folks who choose to forgo modern medicine will be free to live their lives as they see fit without putting the rest of the population in danger.

After watching half their kids die before the age of one (yep that's about what it was in dark ages europe) they might wise up. Or not, either way we win as a nation.

[mhatrw]

145. LOL. Nice non sequitur strawman. n/t

[HuckleB]

158. Is someone moving in on your territory?

:rofl:

[mhatrw]

185. This is a trend for this particular individual. It's never ending.

[HuckleB]

197. .

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:rofl:

[Confusious]

171. WoW! this is interesting

You posted an article showing increased rates of whooping cough in those areas that had lower vaccination rates.

Spooky!

[cleanhippie]

104. But there has not been a "steep risein mandatory vaccinations coinciding.."

Steep rise in mandatory vaccinations coinciding with the steep rise in childhood developmental disorders


care to cite that? What study concluded that? What info concluded that?

[LeftishBrit]

110. Actually...

there isn't a 'steep rise in childhood developmental disorders'. There is a steep rise in the *particular diagnostic label* of autism for such disorders. In the past, children who would now be diagnosed as autistic were labelled as psychotic, schizophrenic, maladjusted, or generally mentally handicapped.

A recent study in the UK involved the assessment of a large number of people of all ages, using current criteria for diagnosing autism. About 1 per cent of all people in the study were diagnosed as autistic under these criteria. There was *no* age difference, so that older adults were just as likely as younger adults to get this diagnosis, and adults were just as likely as children. Most of the adults hand not previously been diagnosed as autistic, though they might have received other diagnoses. So the diagnostic criteria have changed; not the actual incidence of autism.

[mhatrw]

116. I was not discussing the putative CAUSE of the rise. I was discussing that fact

that there is OBVIOUSLY a strong CORRELATION between reported incidence of autism and the number of recommend (and mandated) vaccines.

How the fuck can anyone deny this?

[cleanhippie]

119. Only if you disregard the widening of the diagnosis' of autism.

Autism has been expanded to include many. many new things. Unless you adjust the data to account for that expansion, there can be no correlation.

[mhatrw]

139. That's a putative CAUSE for the steep recent rise in incidence of autism.

All I said was that the steep recent rise in this incidence of autism is correlated with the the steep recent rise in the number of recommended vaccinations.

How can anyone deny this? It's unbelievable!

[WatsonT]

157. These correlate pretty nice

So the only question is: does the stock market control autism rates or do autism rates control the stock market?

[WatsonT]

161. Oh my god, so does this one

Hold on I think I'm on to something here.

If I stop posting suddenly it's because the CIA took me out for stumbling on to this conspiracy.

[mhatrw]

172. Wow! Did you just discover that correlation does not always equal causation?

Thanks for proving my point!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=100948&mesg_id=101036

[WatsonT]

193. Correlation doesn't prove causation

unless it's correlation with vaccinations.

[mhatrw]

115. LOL. You folks will deny ANYTHING!

[cleanhippie]

118. What is the source for this chart?

Would like to see the source data, please.

[HuckleB]

120. Why does it matter?

:shrug:

As usual, the content of that post lacks context, and thus lacks viability within an honest discussion.

Recent autism prevalence studies point to variability in methodology and bias
http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/02/7740/

More evidence against autism epidemic
http://autism-news-beat.com/archives/1443

[mhatrw]

138. HuckleB, you are merely suggesting an alternate CAUSE for the steep rise in the reported

incidence of autism.

You can't actually be so ignorant that you would actually deny that there has been a steep rise in the reported incidences of autism over the last 20 years. Can you?

[HuckleB]

141. Yeah, I choose to ignore reality.

:sarcasm:

Keep pushing those conspiracy theories. And, no, I don't care what BS distraction you use as a response. Your routine is well known.

PS: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/10/sibling-recurrence-and-the-genetic-epidemiology-of-autism/

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0011551

[mhatrw]

147. LOL. You're priceless.

It's like discussing the Bible with a Jehovah's Witness.

[HuckleB]

148. And, as usual, you have no response when the real world invades your fantasy world.

[mhatrw]

151. You live in a fantasy world in which you cannot even admit an UNDENIABLE correlation. n/t

[HuckleB]

152. Correlation?

You're actually claiming to have evidence of a cause that can be correlated to a purported rise in autism rates?

If not, what are you going on about?

PS: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/09/1-in-100-adults-are-autistic/

and...

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/04/social-influences-on-the-rise-in-autism-prevalence/

[mhatrw]

154. smh n/t

[HuckleB]

155. Try using it for once.

:eyes:

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/09/1-in-100-adults-are-autistic/

[mhatrw]

186. This is a trend for this particular individual. It's never ending.

[HuckleB]

196. .

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:rofl:

[WatsonT]

150. You know the cause

we all do.

The steep rise was caused by professionals nailing down a definition and looking for the symptoms.

If we had no way to diagnose cancer the rates would drop to zero. If we were to later figure one out the rates would skyrocket and continue to increase as more doctors were trained in how to look for it.

You would get a statistically significant rise in incidence without anything actually changing other than the reporting of it.

[mhatrw]

156. Yeah, we ALL know the cause. Because you say so.

LOL

[WatsonT]

159. Because it's obvious

Question: how often to doctors report a disorder that as far as they know doesn't exist?

[mhatrw]

173. Yeah, that's why the causes of the recent rise in autism cases are so controversial among

medical researchers and practitioners. But I'm glad to see that Dr. Obvious is on the job with a hand waving narrative explanation that simply must account for the entire increase because he says so!

[WatsonT]

188. The cause of autism

is a source of heated debate.

The sudden rise is a matter of reporting.

Are you really unable to understand why switching from not reporting to reporting some ailment will necessarily lead to an increase in reported incidents?

Ok we'll try something else: your walls are filled with cockroaches. However you don't ever bother pulling back the panels and checking, so you are blissfully unaware. Then one day you do. You are shocked by what you see so you keep checking. All of a sudden you go from 'knowing' there were zero cockroaches in your wall to knowing there are thousands.

What caused this sudden outbreak of cockroaches in your house?

That's right: vaccines.

[WatsonT]

192. BTW: you didn't answer my question

How often do doctors report, by name, a disease they don't know exists?

[mhatrw]

137. Come on. Are you denying that the incidences of reported autism have gone up over the last 20 years?

Are you denying that the number of recommended vaccinations has gone up over the last 20 years?

You're unbelievable.

[Odin2005]

166. The decline of piracy also causes global warming!

[mhatrw]

174. Yet another person who just discovered that correlation does not necessarily imply causation!

Good for you!

[WatsonT]

189. But do pirates cause autism?

Or does autism lead to more piracy?

No one is asking these hard questions that big pharma doesn't want you to think about.

[cleanhippie]

168. I haven't denied shit. I asked for the source of your chart.

Now stop obfuscating and provide the source for that chart, or else its worthless.

[mhatrw]

175. You are clearly an AUTISM DENIER.

You have the explanation all sewn up.

1 out of every 88 US military children has ALWAYS been autistic. Right? We just didn't know what to call it 10 years ago! Right?

[cleanhippie]

178. Classic. Keep making shit up and changing the subject.

Saving this thread for later humorous reference. You take the cake.

[Odin2005]

199. Before then they were called "Retarded" or "Psychotic".

[WatsonT]

127. OMG! That is a damning chart

what are you pro-vaccine folks going to say now huh?

Clearly vaccines which have been in use for centuries caused the spike in autism cases in the 1960s.

It couldn't possibly be that the modern definition of autism wasn't arrived at until the 60s, before which time it was classified in a variety of different ways but never autism.

Oh wait, that's exactly the case: http://ww1.cpa-apc.org:8080/Publications/Archives/CJP/2003/september/guesteditorial.asp

Point is you are going to find more incidences of any disease once you start looking for it. In the dark ages they remarkably had not a single recorded* incidence of epilepsy! They cured it. So what changed? The industrial revolution clearly is what causes epilepsy.

*the rates of satan induced tremors were much higher though

[mhatrw]

153. What is with all the non sequitur strawmen?

Who do you think you are arguing with?

I never ruled out any cause for the recent steep rise in the incidence of autism, including your autism rise denialism.

I merely said the recent steep rise in the incidence of autism is correlated with the recent steep increase in recommended vaccinations. How the fuck can anyone deny this?

[WatsonT]

160. Sigh

here's the problem with your argument. We haven't seen a steep rise in autism cases. We've seen a steep rise in REPORTED autism cases. That may seem like a minor detail but it's actually pretty huge.

There have always been stories of kids who display autistic traits. They were never labeled as such because A) it wasn't common to take your kid to a shrink till recently and B) even if you did the professionals hadn't decided it was a disorder yet.

So there is no actual rise in cases correlating to anything. There is merely a rise in reports which can be correlated to whatever you like.

[mhatrw]

176. Yet another AUTISM DENIER!

You too have the explanation all sewn up.

1 out of every 88 US military children has ALWAYS been autistic. Right? We just didn't know what to call it 10 years ago! Right?

[Dorian Gray]

183. How the heck

was the above post a denial?

[WatsonT]

190. There you go

we scratched a skeptic and found a fanatic.

Yes because all scientific theories are settled with screaming "DENIER!!!!!!!!!!!!!" at people who question them.

I remember Stephen Hawkins speech on particle phsyics where he just typed "SHUT UP YOU FUCKING IDIOTS I'M RIGHT, LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!!!!" for 5 hours. He clearly proved his theory that day.

[LeftishBrit]

195. Of course, we're *denying* the existence of a disorder if we point out that it was frequently

underdiagnosed in the past.

As someone who suffered 10 years of undiagnosed and misdiagnosed illness due to lack of awareness of the extent of Crohns disease, and in particular the fact that it can affect children, I am tempted to start using the phrase 'underdiagnosis deniers'!

[Odin2005]

164. What a bunch of BULLSHIT. Autism was barely understood and know before the 80s.

I was not diagnosed until 2000.

This BS is disgusting and dishonest.

[mhatrw]

177. What's disgusting and dishonest is denying that US autism rates are truly rising.

You can't just look at that and say, "Trust me. It's all explained by more accurate diagnoses."

The rate more than tripled from 2000 to 2007.

[cleanhippie]

179. Hahahahahahaha!!!!

You got me. Kudos for keeping up the act for so long.



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Occulus]

181. That's not what that graph says at all.

In fact, it shows exactly nothing, period.

[Odin2005]

198. The high-functioning part of the spectrum was almost unknown before 1994.

Yes, and it is all from more accurate diagnosing.

[WatsonT]

191. Actually they started diagnosing it in the 60

Which oddly enough was when we saw the first cases.

Then it gradually caught on and only recently gained widespread acceptance as a singular disorder among psychiatric professionals. Which correlates perfectly with the sudden rise in reported cases.

It's simple enough: you don't see a problem till you look for it.