https://nz.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20131226004840AAimG56

When I hold my cursor overt the first avatar box I get "Sheogorath". That persons says their child died.

Sheogorath, yesterday, you said that children are born with autism and that anyway their vaccines don't start till months after they are born.

Don't know if you read my previous comment where I suggested you check the current CDC schedule which starts on the day of birth.

By the way, I had german measles/rubella ( also had mumps and regular measles)as a child.

With rubella, I got some itchy bumps, felt miserable for a day or two ( rather like the flu) and stayed home from school in bed til the lumps went away.

I remember the worst part was that it was very itchy.
The main feeling in the parents around us was to get as many exposed as possible so we would all have "done " the measles.

I now have lifelong immunity, unlike the breakthrough cases who are apparently now getting measles despite the vaccine.

By the way; my understanding is that Dr Wakefields advice was to get the single measles shot?

So your story today is that you vaccinated your kid with a single measles shot and she got an incredibly bad reaction to measles anyway, that resulted in her being blind and deaf?

I'd have a lot more sympathy if I thought you were telling the truth.

I'm always intrigued with the correlation is not causation argument. Kids will "randomly" just develop seizures and brain damage after a shot, and we are told "correlation is not causation" but any type of issue after an illness means "correlation is always causation."

My cynical part suggest they have put themselves in a bit of a bind. The biggest thing about rubella that parents feared when I was growing up was that a pregnant woman would catch it.

That's why parents were keen for their children to get it when they were young, so they would be immune by the time they were having babies.

A pregnant woman who gets the rubella virus can have a child with congenital rubella syndrome, the consequences of which can include a child being born with autism.

But hard to scare parents with that after they are being told by everyone that autism is fine.. What's a little brain damage between friends?
So , I think I have got it now.

Rubella virus in pregnancy=autism in baby

Vaccine reaction to live virus given to a year old baby resulting in autism = coincidence.

Always good to have that correlation/causation thing really explained.....

You are so right! In fact, I refused to allow my daughter to have the MMR because of Dr. Wakefield's work, and thus avoided her getting autism. Yes, Caitlin is blind and deaf now as a result of the measles she caught and she very nearly died of the disease, but at least she's not autistic. Thank you, Dr. Wakefield!

On pg. 49 of _Callous Disregard_ Wakefield writes:

"During the first half of 1996, I was asked for help by Richard Barr of Dawbarn's law firm and lead attorney on the UK MMR cases. Specifically, I was asked to review the safety of measles-containing vaccines (MCV) and, separately, to design a study that would help determine whether there was or was not a likely case in law against the manufacturers of MCV....I prepared a research proposal for Barr's submission to the Legal Aid Board (LAB), a means-tested, government-funded legal assistance program to which Barr was contracted for the vaccine work. The proposal focused upon laboratory-based detection of measles virus in the diseased intestinal tissues of children with Crohn's disease and those with developmental disorder and intestinal symptoms, should they come to colonoscopy."

So who initiated the report isn't the closely-held secret Brian Deer hints at in a recent post on an anti-Wakefield website.

Dear Dr Wakefield,

Well done you for standing your ground in such a controversial, important study. Most persons in your position would have been bought off by now. To have any future, your findings needs to go viral, dodge those media clowns.

"When I demanded to know why, if the government’s principal concern was to protect children from measles, it would prevent parents with genuine safety concerns over MMR from protecting their children, Elizabeth Miller of the Health Protection Agency responded, “…if we allowed parents the choice of single measles vaccines it would destroy our MMR program.” The government’s concern appeared to be to protect the MMR program over and above the protection of children."

This single paragraph tells us much about the state of the state "vaccination" Program.

What is to be protected IMO above all else is the states right to punch as many "vaccines" as it desires into the small bodies it thinks it OWNS.

A real obstacle to the "vaccination" with dozens of "vaccines" often given at multiple times is the shear number of "vaccine injections" CURRENTLY involved. A child being "vaccinated" to the schedule receives about one "vaccine" per month.

Suppose mothers could be pulled into the ped's office once a month for a "wellness" visit, could the office take the PHYSICAL TRAFFIC, could parking be found ect.? I doubt it. Thus multiple "vaccinations" given on a single day are a NECESSITY. With about 300 NEW "vaccines" under development, in testing or awaiting approval (simple these days where almost NO testing is required compared to the DECADE the FDA once demanded) you can see why the gang rape by NINE "vaccines" a day is set to INCREASE. Will we see 20 a day or will all our children be OBVIOUSLY damaged (every single "vaccine" damages, most of this damage is not visible) by then?

But folks this may be our strongest card in our battle.

Please disseminate this.

"Upon analysis, the team found that the more vaccines a child receives during a single doctor visit, the more likely he or she is to suffer a severe reaction or even die. According to Heidi Stevenson from Gaia Health, for each additional vaccine a child receives, his or her chance of death increases by an astounding 50 percent — and with each additional vaccine dose, chances of having to be hospitalized for severe complications increase two-fold. To sum it all up, the overall size of the vaccine load was found to be directly associated with hospitalization and death risk, illustrating the incredible dangers of administering multiple vaccines at once." Relative trends in hospitalizations and mortality among infants by the number of vaccine doses and age, based on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 1990–2010

From a health of the CHILD viewpoint SINGLE "vaccination" days are REQUIRED.

From the STATE viewpoint GANG RAPE "vaccination days" are REQUIRED.

What will it be folks?

I still standby what I always believed: that a man does not dedicate his life to something unless he truely believes there is something in it. My children were lucky to get the single vaccines from a private doctor who imported them - he wanted them for his own family and believed parents should have a choice. He was suspicious of the withdrawal of choice above and beyond any vague doubts he had about MMR - but over time came to believe that the behaviour of government pointed to people with something to hide. As for my decision: there were too many indicators in the family of my children's father for me to take a risk that the Wakefield paper was wrong. Could I live with choosing to give a vaccine that may inflict a lifetime of difficulty on my child when a perfectly good alternative was out there at a lower cost than my car insurance? No I could not. I have never regretted this. I believe it should be available on the NHS. I believe robbing parents of choice is dictatorial. Andy Wakefield is not to blame for a measles outbreak in Wales - how utterly ridiculous! It is about time someone published stats on how many of those kids actually were vaccinated and how in any case: I wouldn't be surprised if some had had the MMR. If I remember correctly the 'take up' is much lower than for the singles vaccine hence the need for the second dose. Has there been tests to see if the take-up is good after the second dose? Or is MMR not only potentially dangerous but also ineffective?

To John Stone.

You wrote : "And in fact what happened to Andrew Wakefield might actually be grounds for further distrust, particularly when you consider that his senior co-author and the clinician in the controversial Lancet paper of 1998, Prof Walker-Smith, who was funded to appeal the GMC - unlike Wakefield - was completely exonerated last year."

Something is puzzling me : has Pr Walker-Smith had a single word in favour of Dr A. Wakefield after having been relieved of all the charges bearing on him last year ? I fear he hasn't ( but I did not keep informed continuously ). He could have said something like : despite what has opposed us (?), this decision of the Court should lead people to change their mind on the charges affecting A. Wakefield "

Why is Pr Walker-Smith silent ?

THE LIFE OF BRIAN?

Off subject slightly but the comment about PEPYS interested me immensely.

Son of the late truly great Jack Pepys who did much work on immunology.

Mark was knighted in 2012.

He has strong links to GSK and Roche et al!

Involved as said in Alzheimer work.

If he was responsible for the removal of Andrew then this is new to me and I want to know MORE.

It would behove everyone to find out all about this great person and his close and warm relation to government and industry. (especially GSK who might be thought to employ SAD tactics as do MERCK?)

After just a couple of minutes looking, he is responsible for much AD and other work so although he is high profile there is sadly not much promise as AD like ASD is the 21st century catastrophes alongside other illness not concerned with the Royal Free.

My first groan is that this person and others INSIST on removing what is being produced after someone gets an illness. (amyloid, C Reactive Proteins etc etc)

I believe only progress can be made by stopping at source the cause of the problems. Wiping up the mess as it is produced does NOTHING. Except make money for all who are not ill.

I was struck by the notion of BACTERIAL et al infectious causes for AD back in 1998 to 2002 etc!

Getting back on target would, over and repeat vaccines using materials designed to OPEN UP the blood brain barrier (basically SOAP!) be causing the increase in AD and maybe (long shots) ASD as well! Not to mention Charles Richet type problems!

Working with GSK so closely is hardly likely to do much for sick people with autism or AD but might be good for Big pHARMa and for those Doll like people who follow and collect the offerings that fall by the wayside for all their companions of the garter?

Great stuff Andy. Keep working and fighting for the forgotten millions of the 20th and 21st century, the vaccine-injured ones.
You deserve the Nobel prize, and will hopefully get it one day before long.

Jennifer and Keith Horne-Roberts, parents of our most beloved Harry RIP, a victim of Urabe strain MMR who was killed aged 20 by anti-psychotic medication given without our knowledge or consent, aged just 20. A brilliant, multi-talented boy. In endless grief, Mummy and Daddy.

To ENDEKER

Look at the recent published revamp of research done from 1994 to 1999 when the CDC have admitted a rate of autism spectrum disorder both rising and still not counted properly if at all for the mercury reduced vaccine schedules. Presently ASD is at around 11 cases per 100 meaning with a four to seven fold male predominance that rather too many males get this problem so many more in theory may have some problems?

The research indicates that MMR provides at least TWICE as many antigens for the child to react to and overcome.

With other vaccines in this period the over exposure to antigens even approaches or EXCEEDS the lower estimates put that babies can withstand.

Nobody not even Andrew Wakefield is telling people to give vaccines a miss but he is looking at children damaged rightly or wrongly in his eyes from MMR vaccines used in the UK in the 1990's.

Using the knowledge from his work my grand children got vaccinated with separate vaccines and suffered no ill effects until the last child was forced to use MMR or even quadrivalent or pentavalent vaccines as the supply of single measles fell to ZERO.

Consider the South Wales case today with epidemic and rising measles.

Would it be better and safer to use MEASLES vaccines to protect those queuing up?

Or to use vaccines with more than double the antigens and containing amongst other things live RUBELLA linked by all to autism CAUSATION!

If I was in south Wales my defence would be having the illness as a child and developing IMMUNITY by natural means.

With a child as explained they would be protected by SINGLE vaccines and so hopefully trusting in the safety of vaccines again no problem.

Finally with MMR vaccines, it seems you need 4 lots of shots to get protected and I hope you know about the work of Charles Richet and the natural reaction to a repeat vaccine?

Finally if you check that CDC research what do you make of the risk of autism after more antigen exposure going up MORe than 4 fold?

I WONDER?

Eindeker (again);-
"If only AW had acted with due care, reported what was a limited case series looking at a possible link between GI issues and autism then the world would be a very different place, after all how many reports of a limited case series of a dozen or so patients warrent a full blown press conference where he made his (so far) unjustified comments about single versus multiple vaccine formulations."

Hang on a minute! Dr Wakefield expressed what he made clear was a 'personal' opinion at the press conference. In his book 'Callous Disregard' he states his 'conscience' would not allow him to recommend the MMR vaccine, which he sincerely believed was damaging children. The UK was and is supposed to be a democratic country where persons should be able to express an opinion. It seems that in Orwellian fashion, Eindeker believes some opinions are better than others. In particular, vaccines are somehow 'sacrosanct' and any concerns about the safety of vaccines must NEVER be expressed -'Hush your mouths children"!!

The idea that Dr Wakefield's sensible suggestion of going back to single measles vaccines, pending more MMR vaccine safety research, (he never suggested this as a PERMANENT arrangement), has somehow 'changed the world' is quite ridiculous. Parental concerns about the safety of MMR vaccine were being publicly expressed long before the Wakefield et al Lancet paper was published in 1998. The UK Government deliberately 'covered up' their Urabe blunders.

As for MMR2 , my grandson got this vaccine and we believe fell foul of it. He was part of a later group of around 50 children being treated at the Royal Free Hospital for exactly the same syndrome as described in the 1998 Lancet paper. Any further research or treatment was 'pulled' by incoming UCL Medical Director Professor Mark Pepys, who also admitted getting rid of Dr Wakefield. Prof Pepys later linked up with MMR vaccine manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline to research senile dementia/ Alzheimers(groan). The £millions going into this 'black hole' would be far better spent on researching the-now admitted to be environmental-causes of autism in children, and vaccine causation should most definintely NOT be 'sacrosanct'.

I remember the kids parties for measles we all went for them .. Mum knew best and we trusted her .. most mothers today appear to be a little bit dense and rely upon science without the slightest idea about science and its ever changing certainties .. try we came from the monkeys Darwin .. another failed theory .. just like vaccination.

Science and their pronouncements change on a daily basis .. what was fact today is nonsense tomorrow .. just look at the history of medical science. A flickering mirage!.

Good posts everyone agree with all from our side...shame on the other side..

Eindeker says "there are valid reasons why 3 separate vaccines are not preferable from a pure logistics and cost basis"

Perhaps I can help. prior to 1998, when the Lancet Wakefield et al paper was published, single vaccines for measles and rubella had been part of the UK child vaccination schedule for many years. The measles vaccination was introduced in 1968, the year it was administered to my elder daughter, then 18 months old. I was warned she would be fretful and may develop a rash -she was and did!! Two years later, this vaccine was withdrawn for causing exactly the same problems as the wild measles, brain damage, deafness etc. Our family doctor refused to give this vaccine to my younger daughter. He said it had caused him far more problems than the measles. My younger daughter received a modified vaccine version in 1970 at a 'baby clinic'. This time, no rash, no fretfulness. My daughter caught wild measles two years later. In those days only one measles vaccine dose was administered. Boosters were considered unnecessary. Parents were not pressurised to give this vaccine to their children; it was offered as an optional extra. Some doctors disliked it and refused to administer it.

A few years later rubella was added to the UK child vaccination schedule. Only girls were vaccinated at around 11-12 years. Of course both my daughters had already had wild rubella in infancy, but no matter. This vaccine proved to be both cost effective and successful in preventing rubella damage to unborn children. I have never heard of any problems with it.

In those days Mumps vaccine was considered unnecessary. Little boys, it was assumed, were better to contract this disease in infancy and most mothers made sure their sons were infected. It was the Urabe mumps MMR component 1988-1992, which caused the initial meningitis/encephalitis havoc which first raised parental MMR vaccine concerns during the early 1990s, when Jackie Fletcher started the JABS support group after her son Robert became profoundly disabled after his MMR vaccination. This was years before the Wakefield et al Lancet paper. The UK Government, acting in character, put a 20 year press and media 'block' on the Urabe scandal. To this day only a couple of Scottish press outlets carried the story, which surfaced in 2010, shortly before the GMC guilty verdicts on Dr Wakefield and Profs Walker-Smith and Murch were announced. Even then, the popular press refused to publish this aspect of the MMR vaccine history.

Dr Wakefield wanted the UK Government to continue using the two single vaccines for measles and rubella, whilst more research was carried out on the MMR vaccine. The single vaccines were cost effective and had prevented child measles outbreaks in the UK. In view of the Cochrane assertion that not enough proper safety checks had been carried out on MMR vaccine, prior to its introduction, then Dr Wakefield's suggestion looks eminently sensible. I have no wish to discuss mumps vaccine here, but I am aware that manufacturers Merck are being sued in two US courts for misrepresenting this vaccine's efficacy.

Eindeker's fixation with vaccine 'logistics' and 'cost basis' seems to depressingly echo the collective attitudes of the 'men in suits' who sit in government offices and decide these things. It seems, as Dr Wakefield forcefully points out, that these people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!! We are talking here about our precious childrens' safety and wellbeing. No vaccine is 100% safe or effective, but parents are entitled to expect them to be as safe and effective as possible.

I have often wondered what would have happened to that kindly wise old family doctor,(long dead), in today's climate if he had refused to deliver a measles vaccine to a chid?

I can say something about the single shot rubella vaccine. When I was pregnant with Erik, the doctor recommended for me to get vaccinated to prevent mental retardation. The single vaccine was brand-new at the time in 1969. I wished I had refused because later they warned not to give any rubella vaccines to pregnant women. I used to trust my doctor. I was naive. Today I look at all recommendations very carefully.

Eindeker

I believe AW had researched the safety studies. This was, of course, 1998. Certainly, in relation to MMR safety studies Cochrane stated both in 2005 and 2012 that they were "largely inadequate" which I am sure you will agree is an appalling conclusion 40 years after the product was first marketed.

I also believe it was the case that the original marketing of MMR was based largely on safety studies of the component vaccines, and not its trivalent assembly, but I don't have the sources immediately to hand. That would suggest there may be more convincing studies for the measles component.

@ Jen

".. Bring on the debate! If the MMR is so good as to efficacy and safety they would welcome debate, wouldn't they?

You are absolutely correct .. common sense dictates THEY SHOULD be the ones DEMANDING a public debate .. as well as DEMANDING an independent study of vaccinated v unvaccinated populations .. but .. their absolute refusal to do EITHER is clear and convincing evidence THEY ALREADY KNOW WHAT "THAT DEBATE" AND "THAT STUDY" .. WOULD REVEAL.

SHAME ON THEM!!!!

We know we can rely on Dr Wakefield pity we can't say that about the rest of the medical establishment. Wakefield should have been on newsnight instead of Offit. Regarding the mandating of vaccines in the UK they(David Salsbury and Fiona Godlee) do not want to mandate because then we would not have to sign for the vaccine and they would be culpable for damage but if you sign for a vaccine you take on the responsibility and decision for doing so.

Excellent comments, Barry!

And, Andy, you are a true hero! Thank you for remaining steadfast regarding what you know to be true, especially in light of all that it has cost you and your family. My hat goes off to you.

Keep up the good fight! The truth will prevail.

I am 71 years old, and I remember the way it was when people still got diphtheria and measles. I was one of them, and certainly people would not want to go back to the days of small pox. However, there is such a thing as prudence.

My point is that governmental agencies need to own up to doing what's right for the children and all humankind. They need to make vaccines as safe as they can be. I grew up in Germany, and the inoculations I received were all mono-valent. They did not contain Thimerosal. MMR is a live vaccine (no Thimerosal). The MMR combination is a really bad idea. Who would want three different diseases simultaneously (that's right, thatt's what you get) no matter how attenuated (whatever that means) they are.

The CDC and all the other agencies need to test their vaccines and preservatives and other adjuvants for safety. They need to list the side-effects, and they need to make sure that pregnant mothers don't get them.

Dr. Wakefield keep it up!

How about a "pay to view" event?

I would love the opportunity to pay the equivalent of a ticket to a "hit" Broadway show or the Superbowl .. to see a publicly televised debate between Dr. Wakefield .. and .. a "serious challenger" .. regarding the "safety and role of the MMR in autism".

I would be willing to double the price of my ticket if the "serious challenger" was one of the main-stream media favorite "sock puppets" .. such as .. Dr. Offit or Bill Gates.

In the 1950's they used to have measels and mumps parties in the summer so their children would not get sick during the school year.

Something like 120 cases of measels in the USA last year. In the 50's a mother could handle 3 or 4 cases at one time... nearly 3% of the entire 2012 US case load.

Does the CDC ever provide a list of those children who have the mumps as teenagers from a "MMR failure" and become sterile ? I would guess not...

Bravo and huzzah, Dr. W! Every time there is a disease outbreak, the pharma companies and their cronies in government and the media cook up a fresh batch of "Wakefield Blame" as a means of distracting the public from the rather OBVIOUS fact that the vaccines don't actually work all that well, either because they never did, or they wear off sooner than advertised maybe due to viral interference, or because of antigenic drift. One can't fix the problem if one is only focused on covering it up by blaming parents and a doctor whose work was published a decade ago. If Dr. W were the problem, there wouldn't still be a problem. Until they fix the real problem and provide safer, common-sense alternatives like single unadjuvanted preservative-free vaccines, parents will continue to abandon ship.

I wish we could have a South Africa-style "truth and reconciliation" council for vaccines, whereby governments and pharma could freely admit that the current vaccines DO cause preventable harm and that newer, safer vaccines and a saner vaccination schedule are necessary. Think how much better off we would all be if the energy and money expended on the coverup were instead expended on improving child health.

Nobody has ever been willing face off with Dr. Wakefield in debate. They are only willing to snipe in girly fashion.

Which reminds me, Orac opines that while Emily Moller Lowrie suffered encephalopathy within two weeks of vaccination, that doesn't mean vaccination caused her autism. She was going to get autism anyway, I guess, because we all know it's genetic.

Coincidence the Guardian article and the measles outbreak in Swansea making Wakefield the villain again. How many are actually unvaccinated there and how many of these cases have actually received a vaccine.

In Dr Wakefield book Callous Disregard he mentions a trial of MMR in babies at 3 months and the trial stopped ,why was it stopped . Christina Engalnd found some interesting files from 30 years ago in the Kew archives which have been published on the vacc truth web-site about concern by the UK's DOH about the safety of single measles vaccine interesting read.

Oh how I would love to see such an interview - along with thousands of others! Dr Wakefield has been ignored by the media for so long - worse than that - unfairly reviled and criticised and denied the opportunity to publicly tell his side of the story. After the first GMC session - which didn't really address the science of the work done at the Royal Free Hospital - it was sound after all - the medical authorities had to think up a way to challenge the science. Then a year later appreared the three articles by Brian Deer - not a scientist, not a doctor [they were clever to keep themselves out of the limelight!] but by publishing these letters in the Lancet, gave the impression that the medical establishment was in agreement with the contents.
Yes I'd love to see a QUALIFIED person take up the debate with dr Wakefield. Bring it on!

In October 2010, shortly after he had made an address on autism and vaccine safety at the European Parliament in Brussels, Andrew Wakefield gave a talk in Boulder, Colorado.

http://www.vaccinesafetycoalition.com/event-video.html

At question time (1.27.30), a questioner claimed that Dr Wakefield might have been unwilling to debate someone ... namely Dr Paul ... Offit, a long term advocate for forced vaccination amongst other things. Andrew Wakefield went on to say,

"No, it's not true: I have actually written to Dr Paul Offit and sent as a registered letter an invitation to him to debate me, in public, at any time of his choosing ... and he's not even troubled to respond ... and I've done that at several public meetings such as this ... and I will do it again: Dr Offit; I will debate debate you at any time of your choosing on this subject" ...

Andrew Wakefield has again set out his challenge to the likes of Offit:

"The more light that shone on this subject by way of informed, balanced debate, the better. I am offering to debate any serious challenger on MMR vaccine safety and the role of MMR in autism, live, in public, and televised."

Come on Salisbury, come on Offit, let us see what you're made of.

* Salisbury is Professor David Salisbury CBE, 'The Director' for vaccine operations at the Department of Health in London.

So if Dr Wakefield told you to put your head in an oven WOULD YOU OH PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE IT IS AN INSULT TO PARENTS TO BLAME ANDREW WAKEFIELD CANT PARENTS MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS

Oh, the government is subsidizing the Vaccines and to get three all rolled up into one -- the drug companies are giving them a better deal than if they had to buy three different vaccines.

Oh, now I remember -- the government was given a really - really good deal on the kinds that had a tendency to cause meningitis.

Ohhhh yeah I forgot-- the drug companies were worried about selling it to the government, but the government said that with that great deal they would change the laws so those that were harmed could not sue.

Got it.

As a fan of AOA I am totally anti vaccines on all levels. I don't believe I am alone.

Given that the BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, HuffPo and all UK news outlets are writing such scathing, factually incorrect and hateful articles someone needs to hit back. An offer of a live TV debate says this man aint backing down.

This debate is not about Dr Wakefield. In such a polarised debate the media have a focal point and a single man to demonise but it is us the parents who need to wade in.

I have just taken a call from a colleague this morning asking what they should do, to give the MMR to a 12 month old or not- I was so pleased to be able to stop just one more person from making the wrong choice. You all gotta speak out in whatever way you can.

We all have a role to play here. I am grateful to Dr Wakefield of course for his unwavering stance. Yet another person of great courage.

Thank you Dr. Andrew Wakefield for speaking truth of power.

So Elizabeth Miller of the UK Health Protection Agency responded, “…if we allowed parents the choice of single measles vaccines it would destroy our MMR program.”

This is just another example of disregard for the rights of parents to protect their children.

Along those same lines of disregard, here is the text of my letter to the editor of the Sioux Falls, South Dakota “Argus Leader” newspaper on February 10, 2009:

“Currently the South Dakota Department of Health notification for the flu vaccine says it may contain thimerosal but that thimerosal free is ‘available.’ What it does not say is that thimerosal is ½ mercury by weight and that mercury is a known neurotoxin.

South Dakota bill (SB198) recently failed in a Senate committee [2009]. It would have required notification to parents when a vaccine contains mercury at one part per million or higher.

The South Dakota Department of Health testified against the bill and said ‘This bill could lead parents to falsely believe that there is a reason for concern regarding the mercury based preservatives.’

But a report in 2001 concluded ‘Mercury in all of its forms is toxic to the fetus and children and efforts should be made to reduce exposure to the extent possible to pregnant women and children as well as the general population.’

The report is called Technical Report: Mercury in the Environment: Implications for Pediatricians, Pediatrics. It can be found at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/108/1/197 .

So for now, flu shots with thimerosal have 50 parts per million mercury. It is available without mercury and there may be extra fees. Unless parents and pregnant women ask--they won’t know.”

And so today, in 2013, South Dakota parents are still uniformed when their children receive flu shots with the same weight of mercury as a half cup of D009 hazardous waste. http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/12/q-a---how-about-a-half-cup-of-mercury-hazardous-waste.html

I mean no disrespect to Dr Wakefield, who truly is one of the only heroes in this nightmare they call autism

But there is no such thing as a safe , or an effective vaccine. There never has been , and there never will be.

Everything we've been told about vaccines is a lie. They are nothing more than carefully designed poisons, which intentionally corrupt our immune system. Because there is a LOT of money to be made from doing that.

My guess is that Dr Any Wakefield's legal battle is going a little too well, and it literally threatened to bring down the entire house of cards. I believe that this so calked "measles outbreak" isn't even real, and has been completely fabricated by a corrupted media, that's been tasked once again with smearing the good Dr Wakefield.

John O'Neill

AoA has never been an anti-vaccine site. We are just asking that any programme be conducted with due care.