Car Seats Linked to Autism, Other Medical Problems

Car Seats Linked to Autism, Other Medical Problems

A recent article published at Persephone Magazine exposed the ugly truths behind car seats. The article, entitled “I Will Not Follow the Herd” breaks down the dangers of car seats and the conspiracy behind Big Carma.

The article begins by describing just how toxic car seats are:

Seat belts are “made of synthetic fibers such as nylon, polypropylene or polyester.” Synthetic fibers. Why would I expose my daughters to synthetic material when I’m trying to keep them as natural as possible?

A great question. Why would you expose your child unnecessarily to toxic chemicals? And what about money? “With 4 million babies born in the U.S. annually, and each requiring three child restraint seats before age eight, Americans buy as many as 12 million seats a year.” explains the author. Then comes the biggest shocker of all, the link between car seats and Autism.

“Every single child I know who has autism spent time in car seats, most of them for many hours EVERY WEEK. Think about how many hours of toxic chemicals that adds up to by the time the child is 18 months old, when signs of autism first tend to show up.”

But don’t just take the authors word for it, she backs it up with solid research, explaining how as seat belt and car seat usage has gone up, so has autism.

http://persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Screen-Shot-2014-04-26-at-10.43.30-AM.png

Prevalence of Autism

This a great expose of the evils behind the car seat industry. As always, don’t trust what you read in the mainstream media, or those pesky scientific papers…do your own research.

Read the full article HERE

 

  • EpiGuy

    I read this original article, it was great. I am hoping someone somewhere takes it seriously, that would be too funny.

  • JeffH

    I thought it was organic food that was causing Autism? 🙂

  • Jack

    I told the stupid wife that the kids would be much safer sat on her knee in the front seat but no, she thinks she knows best because she read it in Woman’s own magazine!

  • Herbert West

    Wow. Making fun of vaccine damaged children. A new low.

    • Chris

      Reading comprehension fail. It is satire aimed at that kind of evidence free assumptions. Though you are quite welcome to show us the errors of our ways by providing us the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule causes more harm than the diseases. To make it easy for you, absolutely none in the following list are “reputable qualified researchers”:
      http://www.vaccinesafetyconference.com/speakers.html

      • Herbert West

        Logic comprehension fail. You’re using he Bigfoot exists argument, you say he exists, so it up to people who disagree to provide evidence you wrong. The vaccine safety studies you are asking for have never been done. That is a fact.

        • Chris

          I recognize the words as being English, but they make absolutely no sense. You see, deery, if you are going to claim that there are more children harmed by vaccines than by the diseases you need to provide the evidence. But you will not because you simply do not understand science, nor satire.

          But thanks for the laugh.

          • Chris

            Mr. West graced us with this evidence free statement: “The vaccine safety studies you are asking for have never been done. That is a fact.”

            For those lurkers who are not in a reality distortion field I present these search results:
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=vaccine+safety

          • Kevin

            oopp

          • Herbert West

            “deery”? No thanks to the troll bait. There are no studies comparing the long term health outcomes of vaccinated people vs vaccinated people. That’s the fact. You can ape words like “science” and “evidence” all you want, but the truth is you have no proof whatsoever that vaccines are safe, or that they improve the health outcomes of the population.

          • Chris

            Oh, silly deer, the respect you get here is directly proportional to the actual evidence you have posted.

            Your “long term studies” is a classic moving of the goal posts. And the funny thing is that you would gladly ignore the large epidemiological studies comprising hundreds of thousands of children, but are quite happy with the results of a forged case series of a dozen kids even after it was retracted.

            If you with to be taken seriously you need to provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that shows any vaccine on the present American pediatric vaccine causes more harm than the disease. You do realize there are long term consequences when a kid suffers encephalitis, meningitis, pneumonia and other effects from diseases, like death:
            http://web.texaschildrens.org/multimedia/flipbook/vaccine-book/files/vc033%20tch%20text_webbook_singpg_lr.pdf

            Just prove vaccines cause more harm.

          • Herbert West

            The old troll dodge and deflect statement..’moving the goalposts’ when asked for evidence…you’re an amateur at this sparky, aren’t you?

          • Chris

            Do you not understand how to click on the link I posted?

            Here is a long term study:
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823017/

            So far, you have posted exactly 0.0000 citations of actual factual science. Therefore you are still acting like a silly child stomping their tiny little feet demanding stuff.

          • Herbert West

            That’s not even a reference to a safety paper. Cite a clinical safety test, using legitimate true placebos. You think you’re a clever shill, but no matter what papers you post or cite, you cannot post what really matters, because it doesn’t exist.

          • Chris

            So what? It shows the actual effect of the measles vaccine.j

            So why should we care about what you think? You have no credentials other than being an HP Lovecraft fictional character. You probably think that the safety of smoking should have been done with placebos.

            Perhaps you a shill for Big Hospital Supply or kid sized coffins. Prove that I am wrong. Provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule causes more harm than the diseases.

          • Herbert West

            “So what?” Perfect answer. Sums up your (in)ability to qualify information.

          • Chris

            You have failed to provide any evidence for your claims, but make demands that are against humane treatment of children. I will take your lack of comprehension of science and reality to the fact that you are a fictional character who robs graves to reanimate the recently dead.

        • Mike Stevens

          “You’re using he Bigfoot exists argument, you say he exists, so it up to people who disagree to provide evidence you wrong”

          Huh?
          The antivax argument conforms to this MO very closely.
          You know, the one which goes like this:
          “Vaccines cause autism, I say it does, it’s up to you to provide evidence I am wrong”
          Sad thing is, even when people provide the evidence that vaccines don’t cause autism, you guys just double down on the stupid and throw in even more argumental fallacies.

          • Herbert West

            Says the guy who cheer-leads for more brain damaged children. How does your conscious let you sleep at night? You’re either a paid sociopath, or a mega dupe.

          • Mike Stevens

            20 million lives saved by measles vaccine since 2000, and the guy who is antivaccine is asking me how I sleep at night?

            Thank god I didn’t have my irony meter switched on for that one… I don’t want to call in the fire brigade yet again.

          • Herbert West

            Says the pro-autism paid sociopath.

          • Mike Stevens

            Says the pro-disease and pro-death psychopath.

          • Herbert West

            Ha, you’re not even smart enough to form your own comments. For real, how does it feel knowing that getting paid to push these products on-line is contributing to the death, neurological destruction and exponential increase in chronic illness in our children? Our future?

          • Chris

            Yawn, the old boring Pharma Shill Gambit.

            Do tell us exactly why what happened to this little boy is a good thing:
            http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-measles-sspe-20150624-story.html

          • Herbert West

            Wow, what about the not so rare fatal adverse reactions of the MMR, flu shot, HPV or any other vaccine? I guess they don’t count? not when you’re selling pharmaceuticals they don’t….

          • Mike Stevens

            Please provide evidence of the confirmed incidence rates of fatal adverse reactions to these vaccines, so readers can get an idea of how frequent they are.
            That’s something no reasonable person would refuse to do.

          • Herbert West

            Mike, would love to post them, except they have never been done. So we really cant say we know vaccines save more lives than they kill. Until you present the study comparing vaccinated groups to non-vaccinated groups, you really can’t say anything. I can’t wait to hear about moving goalposts, or the typical shill answers.

          • Chris

            “Wow, what about the not so rare fatal adverse reactions of the MMR, flu shot, HPV…”

            What are they? Just post the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that the MMR vaccine has been used in the USA since 1978 caused more deaths than measles, mumps and rubella. Some things that you might use for references:

            J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S69-77.
            Acute measles mortality in the United States, 1987-2002.

            West J Med. 1996 Jul-Aug;165(1-2):20-5.
            Pediatric hospital admissions for measles. Lessons from the 1990 epidemic.

            Last year about 87 children in the USA died from influenza, and that was significantly less than previous years:
            http://gis.cdc.gov/GRASP/Fluview/PedFluDeath.html

            Please post the verifiable statistics by reputable sources that the vaccine caused similar number of deaths. Do not mention VAERS nor post random news reports. They need to good public health sources.

          • Kevin

            I asked a reasonable question before and I will ask it again.Why do all anti vaxxers think that pro vaxxers are paid?

          • Herbert West

            Not all. Some are blatantly transparent. Others are just dupes.

          • Chris

            If you keep playing the old boring fact free “pharma shill” card, then you need to answer another question with verifiable documentation:

            Please provide evidence that it costs less to treat vaccine preventable diseases in the hospital instead of preventing them with vaccines. Prove that the following economic studies are wrong:

            Pediatrics. 2014 Apr;133(4):577-85.
            Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009.

            J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S131-45.
            An economic analysis of the current universal 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccination program in the United States.

            West J Med. 1996 Jul-Aug;165(1-2):20-5.
            Pediatric hospital admissions for measles. Lessons from the 1990 epidemic.

          • And afterwards Mr West, please provide evidence that anyone here is getting paid to shill for pharma.

          • Chris

            I am not Mr. West. Though I will tell you that dude will not provide any evidence. Mostly because he does not know how… nor does he care. He is a fictional character who preys on the recently deceased. He especially loves those kids who have died from vaccine preventable diseases.

          • I am aware. I was responding to you because I couldn’t be bothered with him.

            Re: Not providing evidence, yep, pointing it for the lurkers.

          • Chris

            I understand. He has got to be one of the most clueless anti-vaccine fools around.

          • Herbert West

            You continue to ask loaded questions that are an obvious attempt to sway the conversation to a place where you can control it. Not taking the troll bait. And won’t until you can cite the true placebo vaccine safety tests. Until then have fun shilling your brain damaging pharmaceutical products.

          • Chris

            They are not “loaded” questions. They are questions that have been asked and answered by real researchers. The answers are in the PubMed indexed papers that I actually cite. The real reason you think they are “troll bait” is because you know the answers are totally counter to your fictional world view.

            Have you finished reading the Belmont Report? Have you designed a study to suit your fictional criteria that conforms that that very real legal document?

          • Herbert West

            Sales 101, use designed questions that can only be answered in ways that benefit the sell. You are a very transparent shill.

          • Chris

            Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
            Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
            Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
            Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
            Rawhide!
            Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
            Though the threads are swollen
            Keep them comments trollin’,
            Rawhide!

            Move ’em on
            (Head em’ up!)
            Head em’ up
            (Move ’em on!)
            Move ’em on
            (Head em’ up!)
            Rawhide!
            Cut ’em out
            (Paste ’em in!)
            Paste’em in
            (Cut em’ out!)
            Cut ’em out
            Paste ’em in,
            Rawhide!
            Keep trollin’, trollin’, trollin’
            Though they’re disaprovin’
            Keep them comments trollin”,
            Rawhide
            Don’t try to understand ’em
            Just rope, laugh, and ignore ’em
            Soon we’ll be discussin’ bright without ’em

          • Herbert West

            So transparent. Good luck pushing product.

          • I would like to add another reasonable question: Why not call them shills after rebutting the argument.

            Case #1:

            Just supposing we really are all paid shills for the pharma companies. We’re writing our pieces because we’re paid to express those views, not because we have arrived at them by honestly examining facts and evidence. That means we’re writing the pieces irrespective of the facts, and so they may well be factually inaccurate. If that’s true, it should be easy for our opponent s to point out these inaccuracies shouldn’t it? So why don’t they? Why do they insist instead on just saying we’re a pharma industry shill? Surely what matters is if the arguments we have presented are correct or not?

            Case #2:

            Alternatively, suppose we’re still pharma industry shills, and we’re still writing because we’re paid to do so, but suppose that the pieces just happen to coincide with the facts. The pieces we’ve written are factually correct, purely by accident. So what is the relevance that we’re a pharma industry shill? The piece is correct regardless. Surely what matters is that the argument I have presented is correct?

            Case #3:

            We’re not paid shills for the pharma companies, and we have written our pieces based on what we think is a good honest evaluation of the facts and evidence. Of course, our arguments could still be wrong – we’re only human after all. So how does anyone tell if the arguments we’ve presented are correct? Surely they would still have to examine my arguments to see if they are correct or not?

            In all three cases above, the status vis-à-vis being paid by the pharma industry or not is irrelevant: what is important is the data – if the piece is correct or not. It’s always the data that’s important, not our political affiliations, not who pays us, not our qualifications (or alleged lack thereof), not any other agenda we might have. Nothing about us is important. Only the data is important.

            http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/07/ad_hominem.html

            Now, of course, per Orac, it is entirely appropriate to out a shill if some exist but that needs evidence.

            “The ad hominem is not always improper; in the case of a “shill” who is pretending to be “objective” and to have no connection with pharma it is quite appropriate to “out” that person. Even in appropriate cases, however, the ad hominem is not a refutation of that person’s arguments; it merely serves to increase (appropriately) the level of skepticism about what that person is saying. That still leaves the task of actually using evidence, logic, and sound arguments to refute what that person is saying.

            Of course, that’s not what the cranks do. They just fling the accusation that you’re a “pharma shill” without any evidence to support their accusation. It’s transparent; and it’s usually preaching to the choir. The only people likely to believe such accusations are usually the ones inclined to disagree with your point of view anyway.”

            Orac’s comment on the above.

          • Kevin

            I think perhaps personal pride comes into it,some people do not like losing so they will defend their position no matter what.The internet is a wonderful place to get information but one must be able to sort out the fiction from fact and this is where a lot of anti vaxxers come to grief.

          • Chris

            I don’t know. This guy just seems clueless.

          • Kevin

            One of the first things that anti vaxxers throws at pro vaxxers is “you are paid”What is with you people,is that the best you can come up with? We are not paid,we are putting evidence up to show that vaccination is a wonderful medical tool.

          • Herbert West

            What evidence is that, exactly…?

          • Chris
          • Herbert West

            Literally laughing out loud!! SBM is a pharmaceutical shill blog, you’re a joke.

          • Chris

            Prove it. You still have not posted anything other argument by blatant assertion.

          • Kevin

            I suppose you think Whale To is a better site

          • Herbert West

            Never been there.

          • Kevin

            There are people like you that will always deny evidence,no matter what the source is,there are plenty of links provided on this page and I bet you never read one of them.

          • Herbert West

            I’ve read most. None of the links provide answers to the questions repeatedly asked…where are the safety tests that are not funded by pharmaceutical interests and do not compare vaccinated groups with other vaccinated groups?

          • Kevin
          • Herbert West

            The Lewin sponsored retroactive paper….that does not qualify. Not even close.

          • Chris

            How would you know? What are your credentials other than being a fictional character?

          • Herbert West

            Oh, and the appeal to authority propaganda technique….what else do you have in your shill bag of propaganda tricks?

          • Chris

            “… shill bag of propaganda tricks?”

            So where is that economic study comparing letting children get sick with some serious diseases versus prevention those diseases? Or are you too busy waiting for them to die.

          • Herbert West

            Where is the study showing the small percentage of non vaccinated kids actually getting sick vs the percentage of vaccinated kids fighting neurological deficits and disabilities and chronic disease?

          • Kevin

            As I said,no matter how many links are provided there are people like yourself that will never accept the overwhelming evidence for

            vaccination,i could supply another dozen links but you would still claim that they are not good enough.

          • Herbert West

            If this is your “overwhelming evidence” you’re either an idiot or a shill. For real. You asked if I would involve my kids in a true placebo study with vaccines, let me answer this way, there is currently more than enough kids who have never been vaccinated living in the US to perform a comparison of health outcomes between the fully vaccinated and never been vaccinated. This will never be done, the results would destroy the vaccine industry.

          • Kevin

            You are obviously mixed up ( not surprised ) No I am not an idiot as I did NOT ask you to involve your kids in a true placebo study with vaccines,SHEESH.

          • Herbert West

            You are correct, it was Ken, my bad.

          • Chris

            The fool said: “… there is currently more than enough kids who have never been vaccinated
            living in the US to perform a comparison of health outcomes between the
            fully vaccinated and never been vaccinated.”

            Who are in several of the large epidemiological studies he has rejected. And, of course, they are not double blind. Stop feeding the fool.

          • Kevin

            You are right Chris,I am done with this fool.

          • Kevin
          • Herbert West

            This story was exposed as a fake. You’re getting boring.

          • Chris

            Love his answer to that one! “It was fake”… wow, he is really grasping at straws.

          • Kevin

            Hi,I think you are right,perhaps we should stop feeding the idiot.Some people are beyond belief.

    • What part of the article, exactly, is making fun of “vaccine damaged children?” The article I read is making fun of scammers and conspiracy theorists who don’t understand logic or statistics.

      • Herbert West

        Do you understand what satire is?

        • Yes, and I know that this satire lampoons anti-vaxxers, not children.

          • Herbert West

            Exploiting neurologically damaged children is the heart of this satire.

          • If you say so. It’s pretty clear to me that anti-vaxxers’ poor arguments are being satirized, not “neurologically damaged children.”

          • Herbert West

            By poor arguments, are you referring to their requests for independent, non pharmaceutical funded, true placebo safety tests?

          • As an example of dynamic goalposts and faulty understanding of existing data and experimental ethics, yes. Other arguments include using misleading graphs confusing mortality and morbidity, settlement cash amounts (rather than actual numbers of cases), studies designed to guarantee misleading results about heavy metals, heavy reliance on anecdotes, nonsense about “natural immunity,” arguments against 100.00% effective straw vaccines, and so on.

          • Chris

            And the classic Pharma Shill Gambit, because if you don’t have evidence just claim everyone else is paid.

          • Herbert West

            You’re either getting paid or you’re a moron. Third option is mentally ill.

          • Chris

            Hilarious! I am literally laughing at you floundering about screaming “pharma shill, pharma shill… you don’t believe me therefore you are paid!”

            Still waiting for those PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule cause more harm than the diseases:
            http://autismoevaccini.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/vaccines-are-not-associated-with-autism.pdf

          • Herbert West

            Wow. You’re desperate to cite that. Where’s your citation for the double blind, true placebo safety test? That’s right, it doesn’t exist, it’s “unethical”, I’ve heard the troll/shill speak countless times already.

          • Chris

            Perhaps you should try to read it.

            If you are unhappy with the several dozen studies that show no link between autism and vaccines, then go do it yourself. Design that study, make sure it complies with the Belmont Report, get it past an Independent Review Board and then write a grant to fund it. Submit that grant to places like SafeMinds, Generation Rescue, the Dwoskin Family Foundation and elsewhere. Then go do it, and come back when you have it published in a PubMed indexed journal.

          • Herbert West

            You can verbally dance around your inability to produce independent(not paid for by the vaccine manufacturers) true placebo vaccine safety tests all day. More and more people are seeing through this charade, and the cracks are getting bigger around the vaccine myths. Good luck pushing these products deery.

          • Chris

            When you are lurking around the hospital morgues looking for kids who died from vaccine preventable diseases to test your reanimation reagent you might trying reading this:
            http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/

          • Herbert West

            Now you’ve crossed the line into being 100% full of shit. Exploiting dead children and using fear mongering to sell product is despicable.

          • Chris

            “Exploiting dead children and using fear mongering to sell product is despicable.”

            You should have put a little more thought in choosing that username, a fictional character who robs graves to reanimate dead people.

            Again, if you are going to claim vaccines kill more than the diseases you need to provide actual factual evidence. But the fact remains that measles, influenza, Hib, pertussis, etc kill kids. Stop denying that reality.

            Political anti-vaccine forces in Japan have killed kids. In the 1970s this happened:
            Expert Rev Vaccines. 2005 Apr;4(2):173-84.
            Acellular pertussis vaccines in Japan: past, present and future.

            Which says:

            An antivaccine movement developed in Japan as a consequence of increasing numbers of adverse reactions to whole-cell pertussis vaccines in the mid-1970s. After two infants died within 24 h of the vaccination from 1974 to 1975, the Japanese government temporarily suspended vaccinations. Subsequently, the public and the government witnessed the re-emergence of whooping cough, with 41 deaths in 1979. This series of unfortunate events revealed to the public that the vaccine had, in fact, been beneficial.

            Then more recently a similar political decision caused more harm:
            BMC Public Health. 2005 Jun 4;5:59.
            Measles vaccine coverage and factors related to uncompleted vaccination among 18-month-old and 36-month-old children in Kyoto, Japan.

            Which says:

            Until January 2004, adminisiration of measles vaccine was recommended between 12 and 24 months of age, instead of between 12 and 15 months when children have the greatest risk of contracting measles [10]. In Japan, measles vaccine coverage has remained low, and either small or moderate outbreaks have occurred repeatedly in communities. According to an infectious disease surveillance (2000), total measles cases were estimated to be from 180,000 to 210,000, and total deaths were estimated to be 88 [11,12]. Measles cases are most frequently observed among non-immunized children, particularly between 12 to 24 months.

            So where is that evidence that any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule causes more harm than the diseases?

          • Herbert West

            Where is the evidence showing vaccinated kids are healthier, have longer health expectancy and impose less of a an economic cost to society than non vaccinated kids?

          • Kevin

            The fact that I am here,Had all my vaccinations, had the flu shot for years,Just had my yearly check-up and my doctor commented,”you are doing well for your age”Living proof that I am as healthy as non vaccinated people if not healthier.

          • Herbert West

            Your anecdote s cute, but its not scientific evidence of anything.

          • Kevin

            It’s still more evidence than you have provided.

          • Herbert West

            It’s no evidence at all.

          • Double blind…you mean a study where neither the participant nor the researcher knows whether the participant received a vaccine? Would you want yourself or your child in such a study?

          • Herbert West

            So now you admit the science has not been done. Thank you.

          • Do you have an answer to the question?

          • Herbert West

            You’ve answered it by omission. Keep dancing Ken.

          • The trouble is that you will just continue to manufacture more and more requirements for what a TRUE safety study MUST have. If it’s double-blind, you’ll demand triple-blind. If it’s vaccine against placebo, you’ll demand a different kind of placebo. If there are 1,000 participants, you’ll demand 10,000 in each group, duplicated a dozen times for various combinations, each with a specific placebo control. Your demands are just red herrings so that you can ignore existing safety studies as though they don’t exist.

            Would you participate in a study where nobody knows if you’ve received a vaccine or not, including you and the researcher?

          • Herbert West

            Right, moving the goalposts is the answer always given by people pushing vaccines when they are asked for hard evidence. You’re right on par Ken.

          • Would you participate in a study where nobody knows if you’ve received a vaccine or not, including you and the researcher?

          • Herbert West

            So you’re saying that studies comparing one set of vaccinated subjects to another set of vaccinated subjects qualifies?

          • I think I see where this is going. If I give you every single thing you ask for, you’ll just come up with more demands. If I answer those, you’ll have more and more. I’m guessing that as soon as you come up with one thing I don’t have an answer for, you’ll smugly declare victory. I’ve already made my point perfectly clearly — this article is making fun of anti-vaccine arguments, not “damaged” children.

          • FallsAngel

            That’s how the AVs do things.

          • Herbert West

            Lol, yeah you see where its going and you’re going to avoid talking about any specifics because you are bluffing and don’t have any. Thanks for playing.

          • https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jt/2009/532640/

            I’ll humor you with a study that was presented to me as the best of the best. Have a look at the funding, the researchers, the lab that did the analysis, the methodology, and the results.

            The funding is largely from the Autism Research Institute, which makes money maintaining a directory of chelation vendors and advocating for them. The vast majority of the researchers are from ARI or are naturopaths with a financial interest in blaming heavy metals and “toxins” that they can charge to remove. The analyses were performed by Doctor’s Data, which has repeatedly been sued for providing misleading test results that convinced customers to purchase unnecessary chelation services. The experiment included no neurotypical control group and specifically excluded participants whose heavy metal levels weren’t high enough. The results show weak and inconsistent correlations where they do exist, with the only significant exception being lead, which is already a known neurotoxin.

          • Chris

            “Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine”

            Seriously?

          • Herbert West

            No control group….now where have we seen that before…hmmm, oh yes, in every pharmaceutical funded vaccine safety study. The only humor here is your unsuccessful attempt to straw man this.

          • Vaccine safety studies do have control groups, but experimental trials generally can’t deny participants the existing standard of care, and a self-selected control group is no control group at all. You’re not allowed to assign participants to an unvaccinated control group (where an approved vaccine already constitutes the normal standard of care) any more than you’re allowed to assign cancer patients to an untreated control group while testing a new therapy. Depending on the experiment, the control group may be another vaccine, a saline solution, or simply no injection at all.

          • Herbert West

            You’re dancing around the truth…vaccines are not tested to the same safety standard as all other pharmaceutical products. Fact.

          • What are those standards? Do you know?

          • Herbert West

            Are you playing dumb?

          • I don’t know what you think the standards for drug safety testing are, so I’m asking. What are they, and in what way(s) are they different for vaccines?

          • Am I to conclude from your silence that you do not know what you think the standards for drug safety testing are?

          • Herbert West

            You can conclude anything you want, but based from your other posts I can assume any conclusion you draw will be incorrect.

          • That’s a yes, then. I guess it’s easier to pitch false theories when you can just change your rules depending on who you’re talking about.

          • Chris

            Yes. The grave robber’s rules include never backing up any statement he makes with actual factual evidence, but demanding everyone else provide him what he wants as he keeps dragging the goal posts around in a flurry of nonsense.

          • Herbert West

            Ken, when you say something worth taking seriously, I’ll let you know.

          • Please let me know if you’re ever able to back up your positions, too.

          • Herbert West

            Ken, you’ve admitted vaccine trials do not use a true placebo. You’ve admitted my position is accurate. And like the pigeon playing chess, you’ve knocked the pieces over, shit on the board, and behave like you’ve won the game.

          • Your position is that pharmaceutical companies should conduct unethical human experimentation?

          • Herbert West

            No pigeon, that is exactly your position. Nice try.

          • No, my position is that experimenters should not withhold the existing standard of care without the knowledge and explicit consent of the participant. I oppose double-blind studies where any group is unaware of such basic information as their vaccination history.

          • Herbert West

            You’ve stated that is unethical to test vaccines against a true placebo, but it is ethical to give these untested vaccines to newborns and children. You’re either a sociopath, or an idiot. Pigeon gives you too much credit.

          • The interesting thing is that you can test a replacement vaccine against its safety-tested predecessor instead of a “true placebo!” It’s sort of like how you can test a cancer treatment without instructing the control group to just let their cancer spread unchecked!

          • Herbert West

            You can’t talk your way around this one sparky. You agreed no placebo testing is done.

          • Sure it is, just not for replacement vaccines. Gardasil, for instance, was safety tested against saline. A new measles vaccine would not be tested against saline, since previously tested and licensed measles vaccines already constitute the standard of care.

          • Herbert West

            How many of those received a true placebo? Not the aluminum adjuvant containing “placebo”.

          • How many previous measles vaccines were tested against saline? I don’t know! Do you?

          • Herbert West

            You refuse to answer. no surprise.

          • My answer is that I don’t know. Where would I even find the answer? Do you know?

          • Herbert West

            You made the reference to Gardasil using a true placebo, so now you’re saying you have no idea?

          • Oh! I didn’t realize you were talking about Gardasil specifically. Most of the pre-licensure safety trials were against an adjuvant-containing placebo, but Merck also conducted a trial against a saline placebo:

            http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM111287.pdf

            Another study after licensure tested it against a saline placebo:

            http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2014/08/12/peds.2013-4144.full.pdf

          • Herbert West

            So how many subjects out of the total received the true(saline only) placebo? That was the question. Your 2nd link is not even a safety study, and both groups were vaccinated. Not appropriate for this conversation.

          • I can’t open the first link on my phone, but I believe it was about 600 participants who received saline.

          • FallsAngel

            The answer to your question is 594 saline placebo recipients. (Table 7)

          • Herbert West

            Thanks for response. Can you clear something for me? From what I see in table 7, the saline group is 594 people, and total placebo group(aluminum adjuvant containing) is 11004. In the safety data, is the true placebo group, saline only, separated out from the aluminum placebo group, or grouped in with the aluminum adjuvant group?

          • FallsAngel

            Quit playing games. I don’t really think you want the answer. You want to play “gotcha”.

          • Chris

            Because that is Travis, the window washer from Wisconsin. He just likes to play troll on his off days. Ignore him.

          • Herbert West

            Says the poster who fled after being asked direct questions he/she couldn’t answer.

          • Herbert West

            Much more likely you don’t want to answer, and understandably so. The saline only group was 5%, and the saline only group was mixed in with the remaining 95% “placebo” group containing aluminum adjuvants. Junk science.

          • Chris

            See: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/08/31/in-which-a-professor-who-isnt-talks-science-about-vaccines-that-isnt/

            It also includes full name… and a search on that reveals someone who has issues with insurance, licensing and traffic cops. Funny, how he could never answer any of my questions yet insisted we come up with papers that violated the Belmont Report. That search shoes he has very little regard for actual public safety regulations.

          • Herbert West

            Looks like chris is a little upset his cousin, or husband is getting called out on posting BS….having to resort to the blatant pharma shill opinion blog makes this all the more satisfying.

          • Chris

            Not this one, but it is interesting to read the effects of a controlled trial:
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2134550/pdf/jhyg00119-0147.pdf

            First that they went to Africa, and second that kids who did not get the vaccine died from measles. The grave robber troll simply does not understand the ethics, and why the Belmont Report was created.

            Also it is pointless to try to engage in someone who went to the Pee Wee Herman School of How To Argue Like a Five Year Old.

          • FallsAngel

            That is also the position of the Helsinki Accords. The purpose is to avoid another Tuskegee incident.

          • Chris

            Exactly. He has no clue that the epidemiological done in several countries actually do compare vaccinated versus unvaccinated. It is just that he has been brain washed by the “alt med” (if “alt right” is a thing, so is that!).

            I checked the googles on his chosen username: Herbert West. The first name is not common for someone who was not born when some of those diseases were real threats. It turns out to be character name for a series of HP Lovecraft short stories. Herbert West is the “reanimator”:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_West%E2%80%93Reanimator

            So I figured there are three scenarios to explain this most recent idiot:

            1: It is a Poe. Someone who is just pulling our chain because it is “fun.” Because it is a satire site, doncha know? (happened recently on the rabies post… the poor guy had no idea that on that same thread there were posts by true believers that were even more silly than his attempted Poe)

            2: It is really an idiot contrarian who believes the bovine excrement posted on websites just because he wants them to be true. Probably some teenager or millennial huddled in their parents’ basement or studio apartment reading anti-semitic racist fantasy stories, posting stuff that he thinks is just “brilliant.”

            3: He actually thinks he is a reanimator with the super special reagent that can bring the dead to “life.” He probably thinks he can create some special zombies by hanging around the morgues of children’s hospitals to bring kids who died from vaccine preventable diseases back to life. Which means he should be seen by a real psychiatric professional.

            Whatever he is, he is really quite boring. The same old stale boring stuff… “double blind studies, who cares about ethics!” and “pharma shill, pharma shill!”… seriously? I really wish these idiots would post some actual factual scientific evidence, but unfortunately they have no clue what that even means.

  • Laura J

    I seriously doubt that about car seats.

    • Chris

      What are the three smaller words under “The Science Post” main title? Pay close attention to the third word.

    • Then you’re smarter than the average anti-vaxxer

      • Laura J

        Not anti; we get ours 🙂