- This topic has 52 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’ve not read so much about it as it doesn’t effect me too much so I only really tell those who need to know and some can guess – those who have done psychology at Uni etc as my old flatmate had.
There’s an awful variance between the kind of autism I have and the mild form of it and those which others suffer from – many find it far more difficult to communicate than I do, including those who find difficulty associating with adults, talking in public etc.
I started talking at 18 months (possibly earlier or later I’m not certain exactly) though to put the level of autism I have into perspective it wasn’t diagnosed until I was 14 or 15.
I’ve not read that book as yet though my parents have and a few friends.
Martin
You should read it Martin. I’m not having a go at you but a lot of people affected by this are well and truely fcuked up. Anyone reading this thread might think that ‘it’s not so bad after all .. ‘ which isn’t true.
The crowning glory of his research being the development of this vaccine
.. you didn’t have any side effects then roland, or haven’t you had the jag yet?
I probably should read it and will when I get the time but at the moment I have other things going on. By "****** up" I presume you mean socially or is there other stuff it mentions?
I think it was originally aimed at the teenage market, but was then picked up by adults..it just tries to show, throught the eyes of the narrator what life is like if you don’t understand things like facial expressions and lying…people that are not in the autistic spectrum take it for granted that people can smile at people they hate, lie as a matter of course and hide emotions of sadness or happiness to fit in with what society requires of them..
Ah right – I have trouble with some of those (emotions things) which can be awkward and sarcasm i’m not always that great with. Those who know me know this stuff so it’s kind of slipped my mind talking about it on a racing forum.
I understand your concern but sometimes conspiracies just don’t exist.
You obviously have a high regard and interest in autism. You know your stats on measle fatalities but have you researched Autism rates.
Recent studies in California and Gothenburg gives a prevalence for all IQ levels for all autistic spectrum disorders of 56 per 10,000, or even, if all those with social impairment of the autistic spectrum type are added, a total prevalence of 91 per 10,000.
Taking just the figure for autistic spectrum disorders, which includes asperger syndrome, this is 5.6 times the amount of fatalies expected in those who contract measles, a substantial amount of which are very capable of living independant and fruitful lives.
This leaves a much smaller amount, who in your words aretruely fcuked up
It is thought that genetics and problems during pregnancy or delivery as well as environmental factors, such as viral infections, metabolic imbalances, and exposure to environmental chemicals contribute to some causes of autism. Throw in your MMR theories and surely the numbers fail to stack up when weighed up against the risks of not vaccinating.
And that just when contemplating the risk of measles, not mumps or german measles.Letting your logic to influence your decision on the cervical jab is a mistake in my opinion. My son is 15 and i know were he a girl i would be recommending he/she
get it, i also know that were i to give him all relevant information on the HPV virus and cervical cancer he’s at an age where he can be trusted to make up his own mind before (i’m hoping) he becomes sexually active.Does anyone know of a link to read more about this? I am interested to know if there will be, or is, any potential to give this to women of all ages? Thanks in advance.
Dohhhhhhh! Last time!
There is no link proven between autism this cervikal cancer jab or the MMR vaccine. It all in your head!
Doh .. last time Kevin, not what the thread is about. If you could be bothered reading other people’s posts you would know that.
the vaccine is for 14 year olds but at some point be given to girls up to 18; once girls become sexually active they may be carrying the virus anyway..there is a possibility that it could be given to boys at some point as they can carry it without [obviously] developing cancer.[don’t quote me on this, it’s only my interpretation of what I was told].
thats not actually known yet, but it is possible boosters may be needed. High levels of protection have been shown for at least six years in follow-up studies (and these studies will be continued for many years). Longer lasting protection is expected as antibody levels in vaccinated women have remained very high, well above the levels seen from natural infection in fact.
The UK vaccination program starts with Year 8 girls but continues at other age groups to cover all girls under 18 by 2010.
This leaves a large group of women with little protection until cervical smears begin at 25, and it must only be for money reasons as older non sexually active women can still gain full benefit from the vaccine.WTF! Your having a laugh now Dave. Maybe you should re read your first three posts.
You bring up the MMR issue in the first post as a reason for not giving your daughter the cervical cancer vaccine.
“My daughter is 14 and see isn’t getting it. I don’t know anything about this and unless someone can convince me that it’s completely safe, then she isn’t having it. I feel quite strongly about this since the MMR thing and Leo Blair not having it while his Daddy was telling everyone else it was safe.”
I have simply tried to give you advice that you asked for.
the vaccine is for 14 year olds but at some point be given to girls up to 18; once girls become sexually active they may be carrying the virus anyway..there is a possibility that it could be given to boys at some point as they can carry it without [obviously] developing cancer.[don’t quote me on this, it’s only my interpretation of what I was told].
thanks Moehat – anything in the literature about it controlling the virus at all? For older women that is who potentially may have it?
Kevin, if Tony Blair didn’t get his own kid done because he thought it could have been dodgy, why was he telling everyone else it was safe? At the time he didn’t know if it was safe or not, did he? Meaning, why should I allow my daughter to have a vaccine just on someone else’s say so. Why not wait and see if there are any side effects, like Tony Blair did?
The thread is about trust (or the lack of it), the sincerity of politicians who tell you that something is good for you when they don’t know if it is or not and taking responsiblity for your own kids welfare, instead of letting the state bully you around and swallowing all of the guff they poke at you everyday. Not the link between MMR and autism because they have proved that something that is not the the MMR jab is causing the exponential rise in this condition.
It always amazes me that people believe what they are told when all of the evidence from history and events past and present, tells us we are probably being decieved, in one way or another.
Dave, I am sorry but all of your last post is nonsence to me and flawed logic. If I had a daughter I would not be making any of her future health decisions on what Tony did. Rather I would be looking at the facts. The facts are that there is no Autism link with the MMR or this vaccine etc. There is no evidence that the vaccine is dangerous.
Just on "someone else’s say so" does not make sence. It was not Politicians that developed, trailed and tested the vaccine.
This thread is about you letting your lack of trust in politicians, probably Tony Blair in particular, cloud your objectivity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.