From: john on

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:rv47p5pshqd6dgk0747f9bagk8a0e73ul2(a)4ax.com...
> Jan Drew <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Dr. James R. Shannon, former director of the National institute of
>>health declared, "the only safe vaccine is one that is never used."
>
> You're doing it again, Jan. Why do you keep telling this lie?
>

what, that he never said it

or that vaccines are safe, that is the biggest lie of all
http://whale.to/vaccines/safer.html

"THE ONLY WHOLLY SAFE VACCINE IS THE VACCINE THAT IS NEVER USED." (Dr J.
Shannon of the National Institute of Health, U.S.A., June 23 1955.)


From: mainframetech on
On Mar 6, 5:44 pm, Mark Probert-Drew <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 3:37 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 8:49 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 3, 8:33 am, mainframetech <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 2, 5:01 pm, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
>
> > > > > john wrote:
>
> > > > >  > Joan Cranmer's Fateful Decisions and the Suppression of Autism Science
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > By Mark Blaxill
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > March 02, 2010
> > > > >  >http://www.ageofautism.com
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > On February 12, 2010 the journalNeurotoxicology made a quiet change
> > > > > on its
> > > > >  > web-site to an "in-press" article that had previously been available
> > > > > as an
> > > > >  > "epub ahead of print."  There was no press release or public
> > > > > announcement,
> > > > >  > simply an entry change. The entry for the article, "Delayed
> > > > > acquisition of
> > > > >  > neonatal reflexes in newborn primates receiving a thimerosal-containing
> > > > >  > Hepatitis B vaccine: Influence of gestational age and birth weight", was
> > > > >  > first modified to read "Withdrawn" and has since been removed altogether
> > > > >  > from the Neurotoxicology web-site. The only remaining official trace
> > > > > of the
> > > > >  > paper is now the following listing on the National Library of Medicine's
> > > > >  > "PubMed" site.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  >   Neurotoxicology. 2009 Oct 2. [Epub ahead of print]
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  >   WITHDRAWN: Delayed acquisition of neonatal reflexes in newborn
> > > > > primates
> > > > >  > receiving a thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B vaccine: Influence of
> > > > >  > gestational age and birth weight.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  >   Hewitson L, Houser LA, Stott C, Sackett G, Tomko JL, Atwood D, Blue L,
> > > > >  > White ER, Wakefield AJ.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  >   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh
> > > > > School
> > > > >  > of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States; Thoughtful House
> > > > > Center
> > > > >  > for Children, Austin, TX 78746, United States.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  >   This article has been withdrawn at the request of the editor. The
> > > > >  > Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause.
> > > > >  >
> > > > >  > How can a scientific study simply vanish?
>
> > > > > Crappy science is crappy science.
>
> > > > > Just like Wakefield's crappy science.
>
> > > > > Jeff
>
> > > > > <...>
>
> > > >    The science of the original article can be judged by anyone that
> > > > wants to look at it.  The article in its original form is located at:
>
> > > >http://fourteenstudies.org/pdf/primates_hep_b.pdf
>
> > > Holy smoke! Pure bullshit. For clarification:
>
> > >http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/04/generation_rescue_and_fourt....
>
> > > >    The discussion and conclusions at the end point out the need to
> > > > look further into the problem of vaccines containing Thimerosal.  
>
> > > With a child being able to have all childhood vaccines without
> > > Thimerosal, why waste money on that?
>
> > > My
>
> > > > own addition is that they ought to look also at all of the adjuvants
> > > > that are used in these vaccines.
>
> > > Why? There is no evidence suggesting that the adjuvants are causing
> > > any problems.
>
> > > >     The key problem is that the drug industry found that vaccinations
> > > > are very profitable and so they will work hard to find reasons to
> > > > increase the number of vaccinations our babies must endure
>
> > > I see, so you are implicitly blaming the "drug industry" for creating
> > > more diseases?
>
> > > that
>
> > > > contain methyl mercury,
>
> > > OOPS! Now that is a either a typo, or a demonstration that you do not
> > > have a clue as to what you are bleating and braying about.
>
> > > > aluminum and other dangerous chemicals.  The
> > > > increase in vaccinations will multiply the effect of any dangerous
> > > > contents in them.
>
> > > Do you have any proof, other than your personal idle speculation, of
> > > that premise?
>
> > LOL!
>
> >    It's amazing how easy it is to draw out the usual suspects... :)
>
> Exactly. I ask for proof, and you pop up.
>
> > The surefire way to do it is to suggest that there is something bad
> > about the drug industry.  I can picture the lovefest now after each
> > defense of the dirty drug boyz.  Lovin' and huggin' each other near to
> > death... :)
>
> That is not proof.
>
> >   Does anyone wonder why they work so hard to disrupt this forum?  
>
> I am sorry, but question the anti-vaccination dogma is not disruption.
> I know that this is an idea that is foreign to the anti-
> vaccinationist, as they exclude legitimate journalists who ask
> questions from their love-ins.
>
> NOTE: I can prove that on at least two occasions.
>
> I
>
> > suggest it's because people coming here might find working
> > alternatives to the costly and deathdealing drugs that are out there.
>
> You can post your idle speculation to yours "hearts" content. I do
> this because I know that vaccines save lives. As for death dealing,
> anti-vacs are pro-death and disability.
>
>
>
> > Chris-- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

LOL! It's amazing to see how you can actually concoct a post without
using profanity when you choose. However, insults are more difficult
for you to avoid, it appears. You can ask for 'proof' until the cows
come home. You have to realize that you making a request (or demand)
doesn't immediately cause me to scurry around and provide links and
common sense and logic for your edification, as needed as it may be.
I don't believe that you much care about that anyway, it's just a
device of yours to harass folks. So if you want to see 'proof' of
this or that, run and fetch it fella. It's out there if you need it,
and I know you know how to find it.

Chris :)

From: Mark Probert on
On Mar 8, 1:34 am, "john" <nos...(a)bt.com> wrote:
> "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
>
> news:rv47p5pshqd6dgk0747f9bagk8a0e73ul2(a)4ax.com...
>
> > Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>Dr. James R. Shannon, former director of the National institute of
> >>health declared, "the only safe vaccine is one that is never used."
>
> > You're doing it again, Jan. Why do you keep telling this lie?
>
> what, that he never said it
>
> or that vaccines are safe, that is the biggest lie of allhttp://whale.to/vaccines/safer.html
>
> "THE ONLY WHOLLY SAFE VACCINE IS THE VACCINE THAT IS NEVER USED." (Dr J.
> Shannon of the National Institute of Health, U.S.A., June 23 1955.)

1955? Methinks you live in the past. What would he say today (assuming
he even said it)?

He would say nothing. He's dead. How convenient for you that it cannot
be verified.

From: Mark Probert on
On Mar 12, 9:45 am, mainframetech <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 5:44 pm, Mark Probert-Drew <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 6, 3:37 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 3, 8:49 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 3, 8:33 am, mainframetech <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 2, 5:01 pm, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
>
> > > > > > john wrote:
>
> > > > > >  > Joan Cranmer's Fateful Decisions and the Suppression of Autism Science
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  > By Mark Blaxill
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  > March 02, 2010
> > > > > >  >http://www.ageofautism.com
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  > On February 12, 2010 the journalNeurotoxicology made a quiet change
> > > > > > on its
> > > > > >  > web-site to an "in-press" article that had previously been available
> > > > > > as an
> > > > > >  > "epub ahead of print."  There was no press release or public
> > > > > > announcement,
> > > > > >  > simply an entry change. The entry for the article, "Delayed
> > > > > > acquisition of
> > > > > >  > neonatal reflexes in newborn primates receiving a thimerosal-containing
> > > > > >  > Hepatitis B vaccine: Influence of gestational age and birth weight", was
> > > > > >  > first modified to read "Withdrawn" and has since been removed altogether
> > > > > >  > from the Neurotoxicology web-site. The only remaining official trace
> > > > > > of the
> > > > > >  > paper is now the following listing on the National Library of Medicine's
> > > > > >  > "PubMed" site.
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  >   Neurotoxicology. 2009 Oct 2. [Epub ahead of print]
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  >   WITHDRAWN: Delayed acquisition of neonatal reflexes in newborn
> > > > > > primates
> > > > > >  > receiving a thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B vaccine: Influence of
> > > > > >  > gestational age and birth weight.
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  >   Hewitson L, Houser LA, Stott C, Sackett G, Tomko JL, Atwood D, Blue L,
> > > > > >  > White ER, Wakefield AJ.
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  >   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh
> > > > > > School
> > > > > >  > of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States; Thoughtful House
> > > > > > Center
> > > > > >  > for Children, Austin, TX 78746, United States.
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  >   This article has been withdrawn at the request of the editor. The
> > > > > >  > Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause.
> > > > > >  >
> > > > > >  > How can a scientific study simply vanish?
>
> > > > > > Crappy science is crappy science.
>
> > > > > > Just like Wakefield's crappy science.
>
> > > > > > Jeff
>
> > > > > > <...>
>
> > > > >    The science of the original article can be judged by anyone that
> > > > > wants to look at it.  The article in its original form is located at:
>
> > > > >http://fourteenstudies.org/pdf/primates_hep_b.pdf
>
> > > > Holy smoke! Pure bullshit. For clarification:
>
> > > >http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/04/generation_rescue_and_fourt...
>
> > > > >    The discussion and conclusions at the end point out the need to
> > > > > look further into the problem of vaccines containing Thimerosal.  
>
> > > > With a child being able to have all childhood vaccines without
> > > > Thimerosal, why waste money on that?
>
> > > > My
>
> > > > > own addition is that they ought to look also at all of the adjuvants
> > > > > that are used in these vaccines.
>
> > > > Why? There is no evidence suggesting that the adjuvants are causing
> > > > any problems.
>
> > > > >     The key problem is that the drug industry found that vaccinations
> > > > > are very profitable and so they will work hard to find reasons to
> > > > > increase the number of vaccinations our babies must endure
>
> > > > I see, so you are implicitly blaming the "drug industry" for creating
> > > > more diseases?
>
> > > > that
>
> > > > > contain methyl mercury,
>
> > > > OOPS! Now that is a either a typo, or a demonstration that you do not
> > > > have a clue as to what you are bleating and braying about.
>
> > > > > aluminum and other dangerous chemicals.  The
> > > > > increase in vaccinations will multiply the effect of any dangerous
> > > > > contents in them.
>
> > > > Do you have any proof, other than your personal idle speculation, of
> > > > that premise?
>
> > > LOL!
>
> > >    It's amazing how easy it is to draw out the usual suspects... :)
>
> > Exactly. I ask for proof, and you pop up.
>
> > > The surefire way to do it is to suggest that there is something bad
> > > about the drug industry.  I can picture the lovefest now after each
> > > defense of the dirty drug boyz.  Lovin' and huggin' each other near to
> > > death... :)
>
> > That is not proof.
>
> > >   Does anyone wonder why they work so hard to disrupt this forum?  
>
> > I am sorry, but question the anti-vaccination dogma is not disruption.
> > I know that this is an idea that is foreign to the anti-
> > vaccinationist, as they exclude legitimate journalists who ask
> > questions from their love-ins.
>
> > NOTE: I can prove that on at least two occasions.
>
> > I
>
> > > suggest it's because people coming here might find working
> > > alternatives to the costly and deathdealing drugs that are out there.
>
> > You can post your idle speculation to yours "hearts" content. I do
> > this because I know that vaccines save lives. As for death dealing,
> > anti-vacs are pro-death and disability.
>
> > > Chris-- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> LOL!  It's amazing to see how you can actually concoct a post without
> using profanity when you choose.  

I do acknowledge that, on occasion, I use profanity, when it is called
for. However, that is not my norm.

However, insults are more difficult
> for you to avoid, it appears.  

Calling a spade a spade is not an insult. It is a description of
reality.

You can ask for 'proof' until the cows
> come home.  You have to realize that you making a request (or demand)
> doesn't immediately cause me to scurry around and provide links and
> common sense and logic for your edification, as needed as it may be.
> I don't believe that you much care about that anyway, it's just a
> device of yours to harass folks.  So if you want to see 'proof' of
> this or that, run and fetch it fella.  It's out there if you need it,
> and I know you know how to find it.

I see, so you acknowledge that you post flatulence.

From: Jan Drew on
On Mar 8, 1:34�am, "john" <nos...(a)bt.com> wrote:
> "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
>
> news:rv47p5pshqd6dgk0747f9bagk8a0e73ul2(a)4ax.com...
>
> > Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>Dr. James R. Shannon, former director of the National institute of
> >>health declared, "the only safe vaccine is one that is never used."
>
> > You're doing it again, Jan. Why do you keep telling this lie?
>
> what, that he never said it
>
> or that vaccines are safe, that is the biggest lie of allhttp://whale.to/vaccines/safer.html
>
> "THE ONLY WHOLLY SAFE VACCINE IS THE VACCINE THAT IS NEVER USED." (Dr J.
> Shannon of the National Institute of Health, U.S.A., June 23 1955.)

Amen!!