Merged: Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[Clayton Moore]

Split from the "what do you guys believe?" thread here.

Posted By:LashL

The proof of the pudding that there are conspiracies at high levels of society is media's insistence that there are NONE.

Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group. They have convinced much of the American public that questioning the safety of vaccines is criminal.

Yet commercial after commercial airs up front and personal that if you've taken DRUG X, Y, or Z contact my law firm. Now you know those drugs, I think ZOLOFT is the star of the newer ripe for litigation drugs, were supposed to be tested with a control group! What happened.

And the media pretty much crucifies anyone who dares suggest a link between autism and vaccines. Why would the media trust and speak out for an industry/community with such a poor drug testing track record?

[Sceptic-PK]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe

Nobody says that. There are inherent risks to anything you decide to put in your body. The risks however, are very low. Much lower than people like you would have other idiots believe.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

I have no idea about this specifically, but since you said it, I suspected it was nonsense. A 5 min Google suggests it is.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Yet commercial after commercial airs up front and personal that if you've taken DRUG X, Y, or Z contact my law firm. Now you know those drugs, I think ZOLOFT is the star of the newer ripe for litigation drugs, were supposed to be tested with a control group! What happened.

I do like the fact that ambulance-chasing lawyers are a good metric for you when determining the truth of a matter. Also, what does Zoloft et al have to do with vaccines?

I also like the fact that apparently

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe

but here they are providing advertising for said ambulance chasers. Seems like the Main Stream Media is having it two-ways, those cunning buggers.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

And the media pretty much crucifies anyone who dares suggest a link between autism and vaccines.

That's because there isn't any evidence to support it. You're basically complaining that the media is "crucifying" people for telling lies. Poor information convinces the easily led and gullible into making equally poor lifestyle choices (re vaccination), which can impact the lives of third parties.

And then the really gullible waste other people's time on the internet by posting petulant nonsense.

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

... close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

I am not a medical researcher, but you would need to clarify this.

Prevention of Meningococcal Disease by Group C Polysaccharide Vaccine

Quote:

The 87 per cent reduction in Group C disease was statistically significant. Group B meningococci caused illness in four immunized and three control recruits, indicating the group specificity of the vaccine. Group C carrier acquisitions among vaccinated persons were markedly reduced.

Efficacy and safety of seven-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine in American Indian children: group randomised trial

Quote:

Methods In a group-randomised study, we gave this vaccine to children younger than 2 years from the Navajo and White Mountain Apache Indian reservations; meningococcal type C conjugate vaccine (MnCC) served as the control vaccine

Vaccine Therapy In Recurrent Herpes Simplex

Quote:

Prevention of recurrent herpes simplex, despite numerous recommended procedures, has remained a problem. In one of our previous studies, inoculation with a nonspecific vaccine gave results no better than those with the same vaccine which had been heatinactivated. It appeared possible that a specific vaccine might produce greater benefit. A double-blind study has recently been conducted in which one group of patients with recurrent herpes simplex received a series of injections of a specific herpes virus vaccine while the control group was given a placebo solution. No significant difference between the results in the two groups was obtained. It is concluded that the benefit observed is attributable to psychotherapeutic effects.

Induction of Immunologic Memory in Gambi an Children by Vaccination in
Infancy with a Group A plus Group C Meningococcal Polys a c cha r ide -Prot e in Conjugate Vaccine

Quote:

Two hundred twenty-one Gambian children vaccinated previously with one, two, or three doses of a meningococcal conjugate vaccine or two doses of polysaccharide vaccine before the age of 6 months were revaccinated a t the age of 18-24 months with either meningococcal polysaccharide, conjugate, or inactivated polio vaccines. Children who had previously received one, two, or three doses of conjugate vaccine had significantly (P < .001) higher ant i -group C meningococcal antibody levels following revaccination than did children vaccinated with a polysaccharide vaccine for the first time. Children vaccinated previously with two doses of polysaccharide vaccine had a lower group C antibody response than did control children. Group A antibody responses following revaccination of children who had previously received polysaccharide or conjugate vaccine were not significantly higher than those in control children. Thus, immunologic memory was probably induced by the group C but not by the group A component of the conjugate vaccine.

Yawn...I got bored doing this. Perhaps you can tell us what you mean by no controls. I'm going to guess it's something you read somewhere, but don't understand, and go around posting places where you think no one will know better. Show me how wrong I am.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

I am not a medical researcher, but you would need to clarify this.

Prevention of Meningococcal Disease by Group C Polysaccharide Vaccine


Efficacy and safety of seven-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine in American Indian children: group randomised trial



Vaccine Therapy In Recurrent Herpes Simplex


Induction of Immunologic Memory in Gambi an Children by Vaccination in
Infancy with a Group A plus Group C Meningococcal Polys a c cha r ide -Prot e in Conjugate Vaccine


Yawn...I got bored doing this. Perhaps you can tell us what you mean by no controls. I'm going to guess it's something you read somewhere, but don't understand, and go around posting places where you think no one will know better. Show me how wrong I am.

Being in a control group and not receiving a new vaccine is considered a danger to children because they do not receive protection.
FYI


http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-a...autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/c...wsuit-why.html

Chicago Tribune Trumpets Another Anti-Treatment Autism Lawsuit. Why?

Quote:

While googling to find the Tribune article, I instead found Orac's site. Who is Orac? Well, suffice to say that he has some mysterious desire to want autism to be only a genetic disorder. He gets upset if you discuss vaccines or the environment as causative factors. The usual suspects of the neurodiverse world and the assorted anonymous Wackosphere characters were hanging out at his site with their typical sarcasm and "blood-thirsty" DAN! comments. Orac though was beyond his usual histrionic self as his comments were pointed at the exact wording of the lawsuit. He actually had the lawsuit in a pdf file for the taking on his site! Now how, within hours of the Trib posting and to be exact, the Trib article by Patricia Callahan was posted online at 5:19 p.m. CST, March 4, 2010 and Orac had his pdf and blog up at March 5, 2010 3:00 AM. Appears to be quite bizarre and a bit suspicious?

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-a...autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

Can you please link that article on a legitimate news site?

Can you please link to the court documents of the case?

[Mongrel]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group.

But they are;

Safety is (mostly) tested in the Phase I - III trials.

Efficacy is tested against the current standard vaccine(s).
Simplisticly, the combination of these determines the risk\benefit ratio and whether the new vaccine is a suitable replacement

Everything is then checked with epidemiology when it's in use (handy for those 1 in 100,00 side effects)

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Mongrel

But they are;

Safety is (mostly) tested in the Phase I - III trials.

Efficacy is tested against the current standard vaccine(s).
Simplisticly, the combination of these determines the risk\benefit ratio and whether the new vaccine is a suitable replacement

Everything is then checked with epidemiology when it's in use (handy for those 1 in 100,00 side effects)

Ouch I wish I had not made that search.

vaccines are tested with a control group.

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/...ed-for-safety/

Quote:

How are vaccines evaluated for safety?

A review of some Prevnar studies on InsideVaccines

*All data herein is from the manufacturer’s package inserts.

**All studies listed excluded children who weren’t healthy–roughly 60% of the general population of infants and children would not be accepted into a vaccine study.

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Being in a control group and not receiving a new vaccine is considered a danger to children because they do not receive protection.
FYI


http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-a...autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/c...wsuit-why.html

Chicago Tribune Trumpets Another Anti-Treatment Autism Lawsuit. Why?

So you don't really mean "there's no control group". You just mean you have trouble understanding studies that don't use no vaccination as a control. Although it does appear that this isn't true either.
Influenza

Quote:

Vaccination of Health Care Workers in Long-Term-Care Hospitals
Reduces the Mortality of Elderly Patients

Quote:

We studied 1059 patients (302 were men) resident on 31 October 1994 in 12 geriatric medical long-term-care hospitals in Glasgow. The number of patients per site ranged between 55 and 119. Hospital policies of vaccinating or not vaccinating patients were maintained as per usual practice. Six hospitals had an "opt -out " policy, in which patients were routinely given influenza vaccine unless they refused or had a major contraindication. Six hospitals had an "opt - in" policy, in which patients were given vaccine only i f they or their relatives requested it following ward advertisement of the availability of influenza vaccine. Hospital sites were stratified by unit policy for vaccination, then randomized for their HCWs to be routinely offered either influenza vaccination or no vaccination. This resulted in 4 hospital groups: staff Downloaded from jid.oxfordjournals.org by guest on April 25, 20112 Potter et al. JID 1997; 175 (January) and patients unvaccinated (SOPO), staff vaccinated and patients unvaccinated (SVPO), staff unvaccinated and patients vaccinated (SOPV), and both staff and patients vaccinated (SVPV).

Efficacy of Intranasal Virosomal Influenza Vaccine in the Prevention of Recurrent Acute Otitis Media in Children

Quote:

To evaluate the efficacy of an intranasal, inactivated, virosomal subunit influenza vaccine for prevention of new episodes of acute otitis media (AOM) in children with recurrent AOM, 133 children aged 1–5 years were randomized to receive the vaccine (n = 67) or no vaccination (n = 66). During a 6-month period, 24 (35.8%) vaccine recipients had 32 episodes of AOM; 42 (63.6%) control subjects had 64 episodes. The overall efficacy of vaccination in preventing AOM was 43.7% (95% confidence interval, 18.6–61.1; P = .002). Children vaccinated before influenza season had a significantly better outcome than did those vaccinated after the onset of influenza season. The cumulative duration of middle ear effusion was significantly less in vaccinated children than in control subjects. Data suggest that the intranasal virosomal influenza vaccine might be considered among the options for the prevention of AOM in children <5 years old with recurrent AOM.

Yawn...You might want to cite actual research papers, rather than newspaper articles. It leaves the impression you can do more than search Google.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Ouch I wish I had not made that search.

vaccines are tested with a control group.

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/...ed-for-safety/

1) http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biologi.../UCM054459.pdf

Quote:

*Author’s note: Many people raise the issue of the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments in answer to these issues regarding placebo and safety studies. The Declaration prohibits the use of placebo control groups if there is already a “proven” treatment. (It is considered withholding treatment to use a placebo instead of the “approved” treatment.) Thus, you must only compare the “new” treatment to the “old” or existing treatment, when there is an “approved” treatment in place. However, others interpret this to mean that placebos can be used in safety studies, but cannot in efficacy studies.

So, we are not seeing proof that x vaccine is safe. What these studies prove is that x vaccine is safer than the ”other” vaccine.

**All studies listed excluded children who weren’t healthy–roughly 60% of the general population of infants and children would not be accepted into a vaccine study.

You ignored the above. It means the above unhealthy children will likely be required to get vaccinated with no "unhealthy" children involved in the study. 60 freaking percent. That is criminal.

[Scott Sommers]

Ohhhhhh...you mean placebo control groups. So you mean that even though there are probably hundreds of studies that compare vaccinated and unvaccinated groups under similar conditions, that's not a control group? Why do you think that?

You should understand that no one here believes things just because they were posted on an anti-vaccine website. Nor do most here feel the need to check these so-called facts. It is widely believed that such websites misquote people, use facts incorrectly or even make things up and pretend they are true. In short, I don't care what the Inside Vaccine website has to say because I believe neither you nor the people who made that website understand anything about clinical trials or medical research.

You would have more credibility if you stopped pasting excerpts from anti-vaccine websites and referred to actual studies.

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

http://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-a...autism-lawsuit
$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuit

OK, I just poked my head into this thread, and clicked on one link to check it out. That case (the Hannah Poling case) had nothing to do with autism. The site that you cited lied.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by CurtC

OK, I just poked my head into this thread, and clicked on one link to check it out. That case (the Hannah Poling case) had nothing to do with autism. The site that you cited lied.

Yeah sure.


http://articles.cnn.com/2008-03-06/h...2?_s=PM:HEALTH

Vaccine case draws new attention to autism debate
PRIVATE PRACTICE


*

Quote:

The parents of Hannah Poling, 9, sought damages after their daughter developed autism.

The parents of a 9-year-old girl with autism said Thursday that their assertion that her illness was caused by childhood vaccines has been vindicated by the federal government's decision to compensate them.

Quote:

A federal program intended to compensate victims of injuries caused by vaccines concluded last November that Hannah Poling's underlying illness that had predisposed her to symptoms of autism was "significantly aggravated" by the vaccinations she received as a toddler and that her family should therefore be compensated.
Advertisement

Quote:

But within 48 hours after receiving nine routinely administered childhood vaccines in July 2000, the girl's health rapidly declined, she said.

[Sceptic-PK]

The decision to award compensation in that case had nothing to do with a vaccine causing autism.

Quote:

In this case, "CHILD [Hannah Poling] v. Secretary of Health and Human Services," the court "concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder. Therefore, respondent recommends that compensation be awarded to petitioners."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/13/poling

The vaccine aggravated a pre-existing condition and compensation was awarded accordingly. Saying otherwise is nothing short of dishonest.

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

The proof of the pudding that there are conspiracies at high levels of society is media's insistence that there are NONE.

There's a conspiracy to keep pudding away from the lower levels of society? IT'S TIME FOR REVOLUTION!!!!

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

There's a conspiracy to keep pudding away from the lower levels of society? IT'S TIME FOR REVOLUTION!!!!

Harrumph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0k4s_cckBo

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

The decision to award compensation in that case had nothing to do with a vaccine causing autism.



http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/13/poling

The vaccine aggravated a pre-existing condition and compensation was awarded accordingly. Saying otherwise is nothing short of dishonest.

That's legalese crap. Your view is also crap.

Quote:

But within 48 hours after receiving nine routinely administered childhood vaccines in July 2000, the girl's health rapidly declined, she said.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

That does not contradict what Sceptic-PK said.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth

That does not contradict what Sceptic-PK said.

It wasn't intended to. If the case is gonna give the parents a fair settlement the language of the settlement is of little importance to them but super important for the "record" that the vaccine company admits no guilt. Much more important.

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism. Certainly the girl was part of the 60% of all the children that were unhealthy and not allowed to take part in the survey mentioned in a previous post.

[Sceptic-PK]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism.

Wrong (again). That's not what the court found. Either you're a liar or you're incapable of understanding the court's decision.

Quote:

Does that mean vaccines caused Hannah to become autistic?

No. Look again at the court statement: Hannah has "an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autistic spectrum disorder." Throughout the document, both Hannah's doctors and lab results support the diagnosis of mitochondrial disorder.

Not a diagnosis of autism?

Right. Mitochondrial disorder does not equal autism. Generally speaking, mitochondria are the parts of our cells that help generate energy. When they fail, the body's cells go awry, which can lead to failures in any number of normal body functions. There are at least 40 known mitochondrial disorders, and probably many more we haven't yet found. But it's clear from the transcript of the court's decision that this was not a case of vaccines causing autism. Rather, this is a case where the court deemed it plausible that vaccines aggravated an underlying disease caused by bad mitochondria, and that some of the symptoms Hannah showed were similar to autism. As you'll see below, there are even questions about that conclusion.

Ibid.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Your view is also crap.

Coming from a supporter of junk science, I take that as a compliment.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

Wrong (again). That's not what the court found. Either you're a liar or you're incapable of understanding the court's decision.

Coming from a supporter of junk science, I take that as a compliment.

It wasn't intended to. If the case is gonna give the parents a fair settlement the language of the settlement is of little importance to them but super important for the "record" that the vaccine company admits no guilt. Much more important.

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism. Certainly the girl was part of the 60% of all the children that were unhealthy and not allowed to take part in the survey mentioned in a previous post.


The toddler had a condition but did not have autism.
48hrs after she got 9 vaccines, I'm guessing by inoculation, she got autism, she became autistic.

I don't give a crap what the decision says because the language of the decision was agreed to by opposing councils.

And neither should you.

[Sceptic-PK]

I figured you'd be into crayons.

[Clayton Moore]

I see you are 32. If you have young children or intend to have them I hope you ignore your faith in vaccines and space them, one at a time, as far apart as possible.
That's what my son and his wife have done for their little girl who will be 3 this summer. Both are special ed teachers.

[Sceptic-PK]

I see you are a 911 truther and a holocaust denier. Won't be wasting any more time with you.

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

The toddler had a condition but did not have autism.
48hrs after she got 9 vaccines, I'm guessing by inoculation, she got autism, she became autistic.

I don't give a crap what the decision says because the language of the decision was agreed to by opposing councils.

And neither should you.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc reasoning.

I get up every morning before the sun comes up. Does that mean my getting up in the morning makes the sun come up? Or could it be that sunrise and my scheduled wake-up time just happen to occur at close to the same time?

[kookbreaker]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

I see you are 32. If you have young children or intend to have them I hope you ignore your faith in vaccines and space them, one at a time, as far apart as possible.
That's what my son and his wife have done for their little girl who will be 3 this summer. Both are special ed teachers.

Yeah, thanks a heap for the outbreaks, BTW.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism.

No, the mitochondiral disorder did.

Can't you frakking read?

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

Yeah, thanks a heap for the outbreaks, BTW.

Nice going, Clayton!

Dead children RARELY develop autism.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by aggle-rithm

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc reasoning.

I get up every morning before the sun comes up. Does that mean my getting up in the morning makes the sun come up? Or could it be that sunrise and my scheduled wake-up time just happen to occur at close to the same time?

Since u are the center of the universe, yes.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Sceptic-PK

I see you are a 911 truther and a holocaust denier. Won't be wasting any more time with you.

Good answer. I'm sure you'll space them.

[Elizabeth I]

pssst...Clayton? This stuff is everywhere. I think you should look into it. It needs someone with your talent for delving into an issue in depth.

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

Since u are the center of the universe, yes.

Well, apparently you and the point I am trying to make do not share the same galaxy.

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

The 9 vaccines did cause the autism.

Have you any actual evidence for this assertion? Or are you just claiming your inexpert opinion makes it true?
I'm sure you'll provide you credentials in microbiology, biochemistry, virology, epidemiology and neurology then.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

48hrs after she got 9 vaccines, I'm guessing by inoculation, she got autism, she became autistic.

So you admit you know nothing about this case, not even the nature of the vaccines or their method of deployment. Further ignorance on display.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

I don't give a crap what the decision says because the language of the decision was agreed to by opposing councils.

And the parents.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

And neither should you.

So you're advocating we ignore this case then?

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

pssst...Clayton? This stuff is everywhere. I think you should look into it. It needs someone with your talent for delving into an issue in depth.

I just took on Pepsi/Coca Cola bubble count brouhaha. Can you you take the ball and run with the DHMO. GL and run deep.

[Sledge]

Clayton, your statement appears to be syntactically valid, and I am sure it has some sort of intuitive connotations for you, but I can't extract any actual meaning from it at all.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by Sledge

Clayton, your statement appears to be syntactically valid, and I am sure it has some sort of intuitive connotations for you, but I can't extract any actual meaning from it at all.

Elizabeth I decided to through some water at me and it landed on my brain. I've got my trusty hair dryer relieving it.


Go deep. = 1/2 still water RUNS deep

and 1/2 go long, keep going, keep going, keep going. (old football trick)

[Elizabeth I]

"to through some water"?

Hmm...

[Clayton Moore]

Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts
http://www.naturalnews.com/031116_Dr...l_Journal.html

Quote:

(NaturalNews) New documents have emerged that clear Dr Andrew Wakefield of the allegations of fraud recently made by the British Medical Journal and its reporter Brian Deer. This new evidence "completely negates the allegations that I committed scientific
fraud. Brian Deer and Dr. Godlee of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) knew or should
have known about the facts set out below before publishing their false allegations," says Dr Andrew Wakefield (see sources, below).

...

Over a decade of crime against babies.

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Do not copy and paste lengthy tracts from elsewhere. Instead, just post a short passage and a link to the source.

Posted By:LashL

[Clayton Moore]

How many hundreds of thousands of these gruesome attacks on babies could have been prevented?



http://www.naturalnews.com/031116_Dr...l_Journal.html

Edited by LashL:

See mod-box in the post above. This post was just a continuation of the copying and pasting from the same article.

[Clayton Moore]

CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud scheme

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Th...#ixzz1LvF20OTt

Quote:

How much vaccine research is based on outright fraud?
It also raises the question: How many other scientific researchers and grant money administrators are on the take, pocketing taxpayer dollars that were intended for research purposes? How many of these people falsify their research data in order to keep getting grant money injections into their private bank accounts? Just how deep does the collusion between the corrupt scientific community and the fraudulent vaccine industry really go?

And, of course, what is the CDC's role in all this? It has been one of the top cheerleaders for the vaccine industry for at least the past decade. Now, we are learning that a CDC section chief knowingly or unknowingly colluded with a physician and researcher who has now been indicted for fraud and money laundering. How high up the CDC does this alleged fraud really go?

I don't know the answer to that. But it's not that complicated to figure out, especially when CDC employees become Big Pharma vaccine employees, and vice-versa. It's all a giant government-corporate-medicine orgy where the scientific trust was abandoned long ago in favor of Big Pharma profits.

We'll do our best here at NaturalNews to find out the rest of this story and bring it to you. That's what we do. That's why we're the 4th largest alternative news website in the world (and growing every day). We bring you the news about the fraud and corruption in the pharmaceutical industry that most mainstream media sources won't dare touch. Subscribe to my free daily email newsletter to receive a daily email that I send out, containing links to the top stories you need to know about. It's free, so sign up now at: http://www.naturalnews.com/readerre...

By the way, I strongly recommend that you become a regular readers of www.AgeOfAutism.com which provides outstanding reporting on these issues. Make that site one of your regular sources of information. You'll be amazed by what they are able to report.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Th...#ixzz1LvGpeU00

[Scott Sommers]

I'm sorry, but how is any of this relevant?