MMR vaccine cause Austism


Please read the following articles for more information counter to the above statement :-

Wikipedia - MMR controversy
WebMD - Autism/MMR Vaccine Study Faked
The Telegraph - 'MMR vaccine causes autism' claim banned
CNN - Retracted autism study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

There have been a number of purported studies and articles from single-sourced research (which are not peer-reviewed) and then which have been amplified by the various "Healthy Living" websites that are just plainly sending out very misleading and wrong claims - stick to ESTABLISHED websites with good track records to find out about these claims or counter-claims.

As with all information sourced from the web and published by unknown sites - beware!
 

http://www.trueactivist.com/courts-quietly-confirm-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism/

Some suggested solution to the decade long debate includes staggered stages of vaccinations.. still, the question lies on whether the pros outweigh the cons..

Thanks for the link. Very enlightening.

multiple sites
https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=damages+courts+autism+mmr&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari
 

Last edited:
LOL you actually believe any rubbish True Activist publishes?

Ah well the world needs gullible people I guess. No other way Sim Lim would survive.
 

lol
cnn reported
because some parents in the UK really believe this, they opted out from MMR vaccine
now cases of measles/mumps/rubella in UK has gone up
 

in italy, they jailed scientists for wrongly predicting the severity of earthquakes.

Ha ha, their science must be very precise.
 

So courts can now decide on the validity of medical research?

If the reports r true n based on the extracts.. the magistrate has ruled that for a particular case of a child's autism condition was "determined " to have a slightly more than 50% chance caused by the mmr vaccinations received. This case has set the first occurrence of an incident that has been legally ruled to be true.. so it's sort of like a milestone in the the debate that mmr vaccine causes autism.
Medical research has not yet linked the vaccinations directly to autism purely because there there is no way any parents would volunteer a normal healthy child to be tasted n cause him to be autistic.. yet many case studies has indicated population with higher occurrence of vaccinations also has a higher occurrence of autism.. that's why parents with autistic child r upset n trying to predetermined the cause and effects..
 

Hi mods... is the thread title too controversial?? If it is.. maybe can edit it by adding a question mark at the end and in brackets (open discussion ); Cox the intention was just purely to discuss.
 

If the reports r true n based on the extracts.. the magistrate has ruled that for a particular case of a child's autism condition was "determined " to have a slightly more than 50% chance caused by the mmr vaccinations received. This case has set the first occurrence of an incident that has been legally ruled to be true.. so it's sort of like a milestone in the the debate that mmr vaccine causes autism.
Medical research has not yet linked the vaccinations directly to autism purely because there there is no way any parents would volunteer a normal healthy child to be tasted n cause him to be autistic.. yet many case studies has indicated population with higher occurrence of vaccinations also has a higher occurrence of autism.. that's why parents with autistic child r upset n trying to predetermined the cause and effects..

Correlation does not imply causation.
Population with higher occurrence of vaccinations could simply be a subset of populations living in developed countries, which other subsets could be related, ie. populations with greater exposure to pollution, GMO food, violence on television, alien encounters etc etc. So any of those can be cause for autism if simply based on correlation. I am no medical researcher, but autism is mostly a neural developmental disorder, which could be strongly related to genetics. My questions is, why is only MMR vaccines implication? Adolescents and adults take multiple other vaccines throughout their lives too (Hep A/B/C, tetanus, BCG, viral fever etc etc), but you don't see them having developmental disorder ( I reserve my judgement on people who cut queue or throw sanitary pads out their windows).
 

Correlation does not imply causation.
Population with higher occurrence of vaccinations could simply be a subset of populations living in developed countries, which other subsets could be related, ie. populations with greater exposure to pollution, GMO food, violence on television, alien encounters etc etc. So any of those can be cause for autism if simply based on correlation. I am no medical researcher, but autism is mostly a neural developmental disorder, which could be strongly related to genetics. My questions is, why is only MMR vaccines implication? Adolescents and adults take multiple other vaccines throughout their lives too (Hep A/B/C, tetanus, BCG, viral fever etc etc), but you don't see them having developmental disorder ( I reserve my judgement on people who cut queue or throw sanitary pads out their windows).

U r right..
It was suggested that the original "report" was a fraud by this Dr Wakefield to sue the vaccinations manufacturers
Mmr was highlighted as the strain contained in one of the injection; included something that causes infection to the brain..

the key concern is since we
know vaccinations of any sort is ultimately injection of a weaken virus into the body so the body can build it's own resistance to it, autism was a condition which was only discovered many years and recognized after vaccinations were introduced in children health follow ups. IF vaccinations r strongly linked to causing a condition that is to b found out many years after, would the pros outweigh the cons to subjecting young children to vaccinations?

My personal opinion is that the advantage of knowing the kid is immune to life threatening diseases like measles or small pox in comparsion to whether anot a unforeseen condition developed many down the roads outweighs the uncertainty.

Many others still believe that if there is a possibility in the future, in this context autism happening, then the kid should not be vaccinated.. there is no wrong in saying the parents want the kids to grow up healthy, so why subject the children to this potential harm they argued. Especially since medical technology is so advanced now that given adequate treatment was adminstrated most diseases that we r vaccinated for r treatable compare to in the olden days when vaccinations were introduced to improve mortality rates in young children..
Discuss. :)
 

Pls note the above is only if it's is proven that vaccinations may potentially lead to a medical condition unforeseen in the developmental stages only to occur years after vacc.

Would you still subject young children to vaccinations??
 

w/ regards to the italian decision...

The centerpiece of the “courts confirm” article is the 2012 finding of a local Italian court that a child was diagnosed with autism a year after receiving an MMR. The court, in linking the two things, relied very heavily on the retracted and fraudulent 1998 Wakefield MMR Lancet paper and the testimony of a single physician, hired by the plaintiff’s attorney (widely known for advising parents on how to avoid compulsory vaccinations). The physician, Massimo Montinari, it seems, has written a book on how vaccines cause autism and peddles an autism “cure” that he’s devised.

Italian courts, provincial or otherwise, are not known for basing their rulings in science. They are, after all, part of the system that led to a manslaughter conviction of six scientists for not predicting the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, disregarding completely the obvious fact that such predictions are not, in fact, scientifically possible. In a similar way, the Italian court that made the MMR-autism ruling–the centerpiece of this latest “courts confirm” tripe–ignored completely the science made available to it and focused almost solely on the retracted Wakefield paper and a physician with a COI in making its decision. A decision that is, by the way, under appeal.