Poll of the Day > Rob Schneider Attacks LIBERALS for SILENCING the ANTI-VAXX MOVEMENT!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

Anti vax is actually one of those things where it isnt left or right wing. There are plenty of people from different areas of the political spectrum that are in it.
---

That there is no substantiated link between vaccines and autism. I've never suggested anything more than that, aside from saying that the risks of vaccines are far outweighed by the benefits (which we agree on).

Except as I stated the testimonies of thousands of parents, the video evidence which many have of notable changes in behavior, and even a whistleblower complaint from the CDC reporting that data has been manipulated to hide findings of a link.

The whistleblower being a doctor with nothing to gain by making the complaint... but an industry with lots to lose if he isnt shut up or discredited.

Yes. It is significantly more plausible that a couple thousand people (if that) made a retrospective subjective assessment inaccurately than that they actually observed a definite correlation that empirical studies have failed to find. Especially considering the emotional distress of the diagnosis and the fact that they had been primed to suspect the vaccine by the ongoing controversy. Especially also considering that parents will tend to be extra vigilant about any oddities in their child's health after the vaccine because of the flu-like symptoms that tend to follow any vaccine, meaning there's a good chance they'll notice something wrong that they hadn't noticed before.

None of that means anything when everyone has a sophisticated video recording device known as a smart phone. Even if Im willing to concede that these are the most emotional, untrustworthy, noobie parents ever in existence... it doesnt stop professional behavior therapists and doctors from examining video footage of these children before and after their vaccination.

Yes, seizures are included in the list of potential adverse vaccine reactions, which makes a lot of sense to anyone that knows that febrile seizures are a thing. Not sure what seizures are supposed to have to do with autism, though.

A lot of kids with autism also suffer with seizures. And even those that dont have full blown seizures, many of them suffer from petit mal seizures. They are less dramatic and often missed but can be seen with specific medical equipment. Petit mal seizures look as if the child is spacing out but in reality theyre seizing. These seizures are very different than the febrile that you mentioned, as those are only around when a fever spikes and a child usually outgrows them. Febrile are NOT the ones associated with autism.

But seizures do have an effect on development, especially the more they happen.

You starting to make the connection now?

"The virus" being the inactivated virus in the vaccine? Were that the case, the actual disease would also cause autism, making it a pretty moot point. That would also likely have been picked up in one or more of the studies that have searched for a link. I don't think there's much to that theory.

I typed virus but that was suppose to say autism.

My stance is that it seems certain families have a genetic disposition for the virus...

^That was my fuck up.
---

magemaximus posted...

Anti vax is actually one of those things where it isnt left or right wing. There are plenty of people from different areas of the political spectrum that are in it.

Politically it is right wing. It's a normal Republican position. It is very out of the ordinary for a Democrat to be anti vax.

---

According to the internet, about 3.79 million (a low number as amounts have dropped) babies are born a year in the us. And about 1 in 59 children are born with autism. Having thousands of parents who start noticing their child acting different is a pretty low number considering about 64,000+ children are possibly born on the spectrum. Like adjl said, its probably people who are looking at their children closer after the vaccine who start noticing things that they just didnt notice before, rather than changing drastically. Which you can also do unconsciously. Not to mention, certain changes are normal as its a baby...

And no offense, but I have a tendency to believe trained professionals more than random people. Same reason I go to the doctor for health problems instead of random people on the street for advice because its sounds just like what [insert name here] had.

Theres also the fact that many children just may not have been diagnosed (or were misdiagnosed) before being vaccinated. Especially since it can be harder to diagnose really young children...
---

HornedLion posted...

Except as I stated the testimonies of thousands of parents,

Which are less than reliable, as I've outlined.

HornedLion posted...

the video evidence which many have of notable changes in behavior,

Which is also unreliable due to not being a remotely comprehensive picture of the "before" state. It's useful for doctors to identify the emergence of symptoms, but it doesn't capture everything that might have happened prior to the parents becoming concerned. For something as subtle as a developmental disorder, signs and symptoms are usually around for a while before somebody notices something, unless they're looking really closely the whole time.

HornedLion posted...

and even a whistleblower complaint from the CDC reporting that data has been manipulated to hide findings of a link.

Which I'll need to see a citation on. Preferably with details on the alleged data manipulations.

HornedLion posted...

but an industry with lots to lose if he isnt shut up or discredited.

The thing I don't get about the conspiracy angle is that Big Pharma really wouldn't be hurt by a conclusive link between vaccines and autism. The overwhelming medical consensus would continue to be that the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks, so the only people that would choose not to vaccinate are the ones who currently think that autism is worse than polio (who aren't vaccinating anyway). Meanwhile, they've got another potential revenue stream to tap into by offering pharmaceutical treatments for autism or coming up with a premium vaccine with a lower risk that they offer at a higher cost. It would be a minor setback at worst. Certainly not anything worth the massive cover-up that would be required to silence every single doctor in the world that's found a credible link (and many, many scientists have gone looking for that link since Wakefield's paper).

HornedLion posted...

None of that means anything when everyone has a sophisticated video recording device known as a smart phone.

Which they turn on when their baby does something cute. They don't have that camera running all the time, so they aren't going to capture every odd behaviour or developmental delay that might be possible to pick up. Again, you need a comprehensive record of the "before" state if you want to definitively state that there was nothing unusual going on then.

I should also make the point of looking at basic probabilities: If we presume that autism symptoms are going to show up between the ages of 1 and 2, then "within a week of their MMR vaccine" actually refers to a solid 2% of that time frame. That number only grows if we start to include other vaccines around that time. That means you are going to get a few hundred people per year noticing autism symptoms within a few days of their kid's vaccine through sheer random chance, without needing to infer any sort of causal relationship for that.
---

Which is also unreliable due to not being a remotely comprehensive picture of the "before" state. It's useful for doctors to identify the emergence of symptoms, but it doesn't capture everything that might have happened prior to the parents becoming concerned. For something as subtle as a developmental disorder, signs and symptoms are usually around for a while before somebody notices something, unless they're looking really closely the whole time.

Except parents dont start recording kids only when they notice something is wrong. They have videos showing a kid exhibiting no ASD behaviors, and then videos post vaccination showing the loss of speech, eye contact, name response, etc.

Weve been here already, and are just going around in circles.

Which I'll need to see a citation on. Preferably with details on the alleged data manipulations

Dr. William Thompson is the CDC whistleblower with nothing to gain and all to lose by doing so. Like most whistleblowers. Thats not some random guy on the internet. Not some news caster whose sponsors include pharmaceuticals. A senior scientist at the CDC.

should also make the point of looking at basic probabilities: If we presume that autism symptoms are going to show up between the ages of 1 and 2, then "within a week of their MMR vaccine" actually refers to a solid 2% of that time frame. That number only grows if we start to include other vaccines around that time. That means you are going to get a few hundred people per year noticing autism symptoms within a few days of their kid's vaccine through sheer random chance, without needing to infer any sort of causal relationship for that.

Are you saying that Im the only one finding numerous people at my 3 most recent jobs, and in everyday life, with this same story? Oh wait. I guess this is anecdotal and it shouldnt be trusted.

And even if I discount the ones that have made the connection between the beginning of their childs symptoms and vaccination date... theres still a shit ton more people with an ASD child than there was 20 years ago.

1/5,000 in 1975 compared to 1/59 today. Ignoring the increase in number of vaccines today versus back then... it still should be a cause for concern. But all big pharma wants you to know is that vaccines didnt do it. We dont know what causes autism... but all we can say is that its definitely not our vaccines.

And lets not forget, that The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program continues to pay out. Remember, they dont just GIVE money out because you just say what you do. You have to have medical records, video recording; evidence.
---

HornedLion posted...

Except parents dont start recording kids only when they notice something is wrong. They have videos showing a kid exhibiting no ASD behaviors, and then videos post vaccination showing the loss of speech, eye contact, name response, etc.

Weve been here already, and are just going around in circles.

No offense, but I think youre going in circles. But not adjl... He said how there isnt a comprehensive picture of before. Most people dont record their whole lives (some do). But the amount they record before the vaccines is only a small portion of their life. So, only having a small amount that they seem to have wouldnt be enough to get a full picture of how they were before. Not to mention that some parents wouldnt notice some things that would be ASD behavior at first. But after they notice something after getting the vaccine, they may start noticing something else. But its possible that the signs wont be caught on camera before. Especially since at that point, you dont think anything is wrong. And arent always recording...

HornedLion posted...

theres still a shit ton more people with an ASD child than there was 20 years ago.

Actually, while there has been a rise, that can be for many reasons. One is actually knowing and understanding it more than on the past. Also, there have been more false positives because of what some of the symptoms are. I found results that say about 1 in 59 children are born with it. But at one point, they were thinking it was 1 in 6. Which was because of the false positives. Either way, 1 in 59 is probably more than then past because before they knew about autism, they probably just said the kid was weird...
---

HornedLion posted...

Except parents dont start recording kids only when they notice something is wrong. They have videos showing a kid exhibiting no ASD behaviors, and then videos post vaccination showing the loss of speech, eye contact, name response, etc.

The key point is that the absence of evidence is not conclusive proof of absence. All their video evidence indicates is that they have no pre-vaccination video evidence of ASD behaviours, not that those behaviours weren't there.

HornedLion posted...

Dr. William Thompson is the CDC whistleblower with nothing to gain and all to lose by doing so.

That's a name. A citation would include the data he released. Talking about how he has nothing to gain contributes nothing to your position and is another example of that pathos I criticized you for earlier.

HornedLion posted...

Are you saying that Im the only one finding numerous people at my 3 most recent jobs, and in everyday life, with this same story?

No, I'm saying that approximately 2% of parents with an autistic child can be expected to see that timing purely through random chance. That means it's not the mere existence of people seeing that timing you should be fixating on, but rather making a statistical comparison (the people you've met at work are not an adequate sample size to draw a credible conclusion) between the actual number and that 2% (the null hypothesis, in this study).

HornedLion posted...

But all big pharma wants you to know is that vaccines didnt do it. We dont know what causes autism... but all we can say is that its definitely not our vaccines.

And if somebody had published a fraudulent study saying that chicken caused autism instead, Big Chicken wouldn't be able to tell you what actually caused it but would say that it wasn't their chicken. It's not the responsibility of whatever entity you're baselessly blaming for a problem to offer a solution to that problem if they aren't actually causing it. That's just a silly thing to suggest.

HornedLion posted...

theres still a s*** ton more people with an ASD child than there was 20 years ago.

1/5,000 in 1975 compared to 1/59 today. Ignoring the increase in number of vaccines today versus back then... it still should be a cause for concern.

It is indeed. A sizable chunk of that increase is likely due to refining the diagnostic criteria such that you're simply getting more diagnoses, plus merging the whole spectrum under one disorder name is going to skew comparisons (I don't know if that 1/5000 figure you're giving is specifically for autism or if it's been adjusted to count everything that would be called ASD today), but there does definitely seem to be an uptick in autism diagnoses. It's concerning, but epidemiologists are studying it. It's best to just relax and let them figure it out. They'll get there eventually.
---

The key point is that the absence of evidence is not conclusive proof of absence. All their video evidence indicates is that they have no pre-vaccination video evidence of ASD behaviours, not that those behaviours weren't there.

This one, Im calling it now we will never see eye to eye.

ASD is a spectrum but it does have some hallmarks.

If a family has videos showing a child engaging with others, showing excellent eye contact, speaking, playing with others, and responding to their name... then they get their vaccination, and they notice their children lose interest in others, in playing with others, lose eye contact, lose speech, and name response... well thats just a coincidence to me.

But then you have another family with the same. And another. And another. Well... now you need to pay attention. Because what were being fed isnt adding up. And keep in mind that your argument isnt even what the scientific community is making... theyre saying that the child was born autistic but they just so happened to regress after their vaccination COINCIDENTALLY.

In what you wrote... are you suggesting that when they turn the cameras off the child all of a sudden displays a bunch of ASD behaviors but coincidentally loses them(which doesnt happen in a ASD person) when the cameras are on?

A recurring coincident is pattern to me, and many others. But again, this isnt something we are going to agree on.

Talking about how he has nothing to gain contributes nothing to your position and is another example of that pathos I criticized you for earlier.

You gave a lot of importance to the emotions of the parents but I cant say that there arent any conflicts of interests with this doctor? At least not without being accused of trying to incite some sort of emotion. What I was doing was highlighting the fact that he has nothing to gain. Maybe that Wakefield guy you mentioned earlier did, allegedly... but not this doctor.

I dont think I have to argue that conflicts of interests are more important than emotions. Emotions that Im giving the benefit of the doubt are overriding what parents are witnessing but we dont really have proof of that.

It is indeed. A sizable chunk of that increase is likely due to refining the diagnostic criteria such that you're simply getting more diagnoses, plus merging the whole spectrum under one disorder name is going to skew comparisons

ASD has always been ASD. The only thing that has recently merged was the diagnosis of PDD. It is now a part of ASD.

The theory that it is better diagnostic advances that has caused rates to skyrocket has been brought up and discussed BUT... it is hardly an agreed up and definitive answer to the rise. Not even close.

@LinkPizza

Lol. I really thought it was just me and adjl at this point. Nice to see someone else is following.
---

Imagine thinking you need to take note if 0.001% of parents notice autism after a vaccine. Even if it did cause it, it would be at such a low rate you couldn't reasonably test it.
---

Mike Xtreme posted...

Lets not pretend that anyone gives a shit what Rob Schneider has to say

---

Question everything.
---

If youre saying that its not a coincidence because theres a lot of people, I dont think thats correct. Especially since its actually quite a low amount. Thousands out of the 64,000+ children born with it is pretty low. Not to mention thousands out of the 3.79 babies born in the US or 130 million born worldwide...

Also, I dont think hes saying they display all these symptoms magically when the camera turns off. But many people arent recording 24/7. Meaning they will miss a lot of stuff, good or bad. And people wont always notice ASD symptoms. Even if there are some, people may not have paid attention to it much before the vaccine because they didnt really have a reason to think anything was different.

There are even children who dont get diagnosed with it until they get much older. And some even go undiagnosed. Of course, depends on where you are on the spectrum. And its much easier to miss the signs with single children homes, or first children. Not to say you cant miss it with a children born after multiple children or anything.

As for the doctor, he did have something to gain. If he was right, which evidence proves he wasnt, he would have been one of the first to discover what vaccines were actually doing. That could get him fame, and stuff like that. Since he was wrong, he gets nothing. Which makes it seem like he had nothing to gain...

Also, the rise in better diagnosis would raise the amount of people. Solely because more people are being diagnosed. Which would automatically raise the amount. If vaccines really were causing it, the amount would actually skyrocket compared to the amount that have it today. And while ASD may have always been ASD, it doesnt means thats what they always diagnose them with...
---

You have to be insanely ignorant, uneducated, or straight up trolling to support the anti-vaxx (read pro-disease) movement.

Vaccines do not cause autism.

HornedLion posted...

theyre saying that the child was born autistic but they just so happened to regress after their vaccination COINCIDENTALLY.

And if we assume that said regression happens on a random day between the ages of 1 and 2, ~2% of autistic children will have seen that happen within a week of their MMR vaccine. Going by Link's numbers of 64,000 new diagnoses per year, that's 1280 people that would observe that every year purely because of random coincidence.

This is the null hypothesis, where we assume that whatever phenomenon you're observing can be attributed to random chance and not to anything significant that's going on. Every scientific study looking to draw any sort of meaningful conclusion has to reject the null hypothesis before attempting that, and that means having results that differ from what can be explained by random chance by a statistically significant margin (usually 5%). You're saying thousands of parents are observing this supposed coincidence? That's within the predictions of the null hypothesis, meaning that is not in fact reason to suspect that anything more than coincidence is going on. You get more than 1350 (1280*1.05) a year? Then maybe you've got something worth looking at.

HornedLion posted...

What I was doing was highlighting the fact that he has nothing to gain

And that is irrelevant to the claim that he's blown the whistle on some sort of major conspiracy. His motivations are entirely tangential to the facts he presented (which you have yet to share, incidentally). You should be outlining the details of said conspiracy, not trying to make him sound more credible.

HornedLion posted...

ASD has always been ASD. The only thing that has recently merged was the diagnosis of PDD. It is now a part of ASD.

Depending on how the statistics are being counted, past Autism diagnoses may not have included things like Asperger Syndrome that were treated as being distinct diagnoses from autism but are now included under the umbrella of ASD. As I said, though, I don't know how those are being counted for the purposes of comparing to historical data.

HornedLion posted...

n what you wrote... are you suggesting that when they turn the cameras off the child all of a sudden displays a bunch of ASD behaviors but coincidentally loses them(which doesnt happen in a ASD person) when the cameras are on?

No, I'm suggesting that even with smartphones, 99% of a child's daily life doesn't get recorded for the vast majority of people (and 99% is a generous estimate that presumes parents take an average of 15 minutes of video footage every day, which is pretty high). Odds are, unless the parent is specifically looking to record odd behaviours, they aren't going to capture them.
---