« Dachel Media Update: Thailand, Prayer, ADHD |
| Best of AoA: Sir Liam’s Skeleton: the UK Department of Health Fabricates Flu Deaths to Boost Vaccinations »
Posted by Age of Autism at June 06, 2013 at 5:43 AM
in Dr. Andrew Wakefield
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Thank you, Dr. Wakefield. Having a lesser grief I believe, I still need due diligence in place aiming to understand and prevent adverse vaccine reactions, or at the very least to provide understanding, better information to parents after.
I cannot believe that it is possible to improve vaccine outcomes only by not vaccinating, especially as the U.S. vaccine practices go. I also think the "unavoidably unsafe" vaccine paradigm, as long as it's quietly or even if loudly held to be true, ethically demands diligent seeking of healthier alternatives to prevent some disease mortality and morbidity and when possible using such instead.
Jeannette Bishop |
June 08, 2013 at 02:26 AM
I recall trying to pull Fitzpatrick's leg when this was published, contrasting his praise of Macdonald's with his high-living Living Marxism pal (and cult leader) Frank Furedi, and his relish of expensive restaurants.
Indeed, Furedi is quoted in the Daily Mail condemning the Priory drug addiction clinics for being run like Macdonalds:
"Prof Frank Furedi, of Kent University, said the group ran its businesses 'like a McDonald's restaurant'.
"He added: 'They've moved away from focusing on the very rich to a mass market. The more we hear that addiction is a penalty for life, the more it creates a massive public health problem'"
Needless, to say my comment wasn't published.
John Stone |
June 07, 2013 at 01:41 PM
I don't know how anyone could take Fitzpatrick seriously after this article singing the praises of McDonalds for children with autism:
June 07, 2013 at 12:19 PM
Dr Salisbury has no intention of debating in public with Andrew. He never did have. He is not listening either. He is in complete denial.
But as long as Andy keeps him in his sights I and many others feel relieved.
June 07, 2013 at 06:13 AM
This is the (obviously edited on the 'orders' of the UK governments' medical establishments), Scottish Herald's report on the death of Glasgow baby Ryan Mason.
This news report was written shortly after the buried-for- 20-years Urabe mumps MMR scandal was finally released into the public domain. The original article mentioned the unsafe Urabe MMR vaccine, in UK use 1988-1992, when it was banned. Then UK Minister for Health, Michael Forsyth was concerned about MMR vaccine, but was 'assured' the baby's death was 'unlikely' to have been caused by the vaccine.
Jenny Allan |
June 07, 2013 at 03:15 AM
Perhaps after the "50th Challenge" Dr. Salisbury "MAY" listen.
June 06, 2013 at 08:08 PM
In my view, 'shameless', 'shameful' and 'despicable', are epithets that perfectly describe both Salisbury and Fitzpatrick. Shame on them.
Mark Struthers |
June 06, 2013 at 03:00 PM
Aah Now I understand why this particular Dr Fitzpatrick has not actually made any sincere and direct attempt to approach Andrew Wakefield as a serious challenger to an open debate.
Dr Fitzpatrick is plainly only hoping to obtain some form of misplaced publicity for his own book. Well it takes all sorts doesn't it. There are a few unpleasant epithets I could apply to this particular phony contender but I shall not waste any more time on his sad need for publicity.
June 06, 2013 at 07:31 AM
For more on this scandalous story:
Andy deals purely with Salisbury's extraodinary contribution, but there is much else besides.
John Stone |
June 06, 2013 at 07:03 AM
Yet again in his latest video Andrew Wakefield has shown himself to be his own finest advocate. He speaks with absolute conviction and a confidence which stems from complete authority in his field. He also has the grace to speak without malice. How unlike his opponents who are inevitably reduced to sneering contemptuousness and attempts at defamation in order to appear to speak with conviction and authority.
As for Salisbury, he patently does not possess either the moral courage or the necessary conviction to stand up and publicly debate such issues with Andrew. Nobody here ever seriously believed he did have those attributes, did we? Whoever the doctor is who has taken up Andy's challenge to speak on a public platform I applaud the man and want to know more please!
Keep on producing these films Andy. They are having a very powerful effect on the public platform. Whatever happens in the Appeal Court, keep this man in your sights because some one has to. He is a danger to the Public Health Service.
June 06, 2013 at 06:32 AM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please
You are currently signed in as
(You can use HTML tags like <b> <i> and <ul> to style your text.URLs automatically linked.)
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address