Please Sign & Share Folks

[BREWSTERS]

What upside is there to the government spending money prescribing vaccines that caused autism.
The point of this thread is highlighting a petition that is trying to shame the government in to spending money they don't want to spend.
If you look at it extremely coldly it would be much cheaper for them to let 100's of kids die of measles every year than to provide the support to kids diagnosed with autism.

And then look at the evil pharmaceutical companies there in competition with each other. Do you not think if Company A could prove that company B's Jab gave kids autism they would do so and then sell the government their new improved more expensive vaccine they had a patent on

Without wanting to take this off into a political thread...the government (and by that I mean any party) are more interested in the benefits for big business than they are in the welfare of the population. In America, the vaccine industry is the only one that is protected by the government...you cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer no matter what the outcome (I only use this example because what happens there, we usually follow) and some vaccines are mandatory.

And don't start me on banks....

 

[bonusmedia]

Just want to point out, that there are 11 contributors to this thread, and 3 have a child with autism...

Growing up and until my mid 20's, no-one I knew, knew of anyone with autism or anything that might be attributed to it now.

I'm more inclined to believe what I see going on around me, than reports produced by organisations with a vested interest.

This is exactly the issue, you're extrapolating from a very limited set of data which does not represent the wider population. There are people who'll tell you that homeopathy cured their cancer, because they had cancer and took sugar pills and now they don't. It doesn't mean that one thing caused the other.

Autism may well be on the increase but there are a huge number of factors that might be involved - increasing age of parents is certainly one. Vaccines are probably one of the most carefully studied factors and no-one has found any real evidence to support a link.

You're entitled to believe whatever you want but I have to respectfully disagree - when it comes to medical science, misinformation is deadly.

Cognitive bias is everywhere and tough to avoid. Human beings are wired to look for cause and effect and someone/something to blame, but it's very rarely that simple.

Sorry to hear about your situation - best wishes and I hope you're able to access good support

 

[AssetDomains]

Without wanting to take this off into a political thread...the government (and by that I mean any party) are more interested in the benefits for big business than they are in the welfare of the population. In America, the vaccine industry is the only one that is protected by the government...you cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer no matter what the outcome (I only use this example because what happens there, we usually follow) and some vaccines are mandatory.

And don't start me on banks....

I guess I'm never going to get you to see the scientific point of view on this on so a few more point's and then I'm out.

There is no love lost between the government and big pharma just look at the battles they have over cancer drugs.

Whilst governments might let google out of paying full tax.
There not going eat the cost of caring for thousands of autism cases where's the upside.

Finally even if the government was so evil it still doesn't answer the question
If Company A could prove that company B's Jab gave kids autism why haven't they done so damaging there competitor reputation and reopened up a lucrative market.
The new vaccine sells for £100's per dose MMR sells for pennies if there was credible science that let them introduce a new vaccine believe me it would be published and they would be cashing in

 

[BREWSTERS]

Timely article published a couple of days ago.

I guess I'm never going to get you to see the scientific point of view on this on so a few more point's and then I'm out.

No, we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

There is no love lost between the government and big pharma just look at the battles they have over cancer drugs.

Whilst governments might let google out of paying full tax.
There not going eat the cost of caring for thousands of autism cases where's the upside.

Smoke and mirrors...the government wants to be seen as driving a hard bargain every now and then.
As for eating the cost of caring etc - well they don't, do they? It isn't their money, it's our money, our taxes. When do they (whatever party is in power) actually care about that?
Our governments do not work for the people. They have other paymasters. Tony Blair walked out of No.10 and into a £3m a year consultancy with Bank of America. That's a clue.

Finally even if the government was so evil it still doesn't answer the question
If Company A could prove that company B's Jab gave kids autism why haven't they done so damaging there competitor reputation and reopened up a lucrative market.
The new vaccine sells for £100's per dose MMR sells for pennies if there was credible science that let them introduce a new vaccine believe me it would be published and they would be cashing in

The answer to this is that they are all linked by ultimate ownership but can't be seen as such...not yet. Just like the political system, they have to give the illusion of choice so we think we have some say in the matter. We don't.

 

[martin-s]

This article is an interesting read:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35706020

Headline stats:

Infected children can be dead within 24 hours
700,000 infants under one year old vaccinated each year
This age group has just over 100 cases and six deaths each year
Cost-effectiveness in this high-risk age group was classed as "borderline"
Men B gets rarer as children get older
Men B is becoming rarer anyway, falling from 1,600 cases in England in the early 2000s, to about 400 cases in 2014