Doesn't Make Sense to Me

I have a list of sites on my blog on the left-hand side of the screen. I wanted to explain their significance and invite you all to visit the sites and read the information if you haven't already done so.

I will start with the CDC Website. When you click on the link it will take you to the official CDC wesite. I had the wrong link up until now... I finally fixed it. I basically did the "legwork" for you and found the exact spot where they have all the vaccine ingredient information. Let me direct your attention to the first thing that stands out to me: "All routinely recommended pediatric vaccines manufactured for the U.S. market contain no thimerosal or only trace amounts." Doctors claim that ALL routine recommended pediatric vaccines have NO thimerosal (a.k.a. mercury), but yet they clearly state in the website that some contain "trace" amounts. They recall products containing trace amounts of lead or mercury all the time.... yet, vaccines don't have the same criteria? If you take "trace" amounts and multiply it by the number of vaccines that children get before school age... the amounts are staggering!! Doesn't make sense to me.

The next thing I would like to point out is the list of ingredients in vaccines. They are listed under the heading: "Additional Facts". These are the ingredients: Aluminum, Antibiotics, Egg Protein, Formaldehyde, Monosodium Glutamate (MSG), and Thimerosal. Out of all these ingredients the most disconcerting to me are: formaldehyde, MSG, and Thimerosal. I go OUT of my way to avoid these things for my children and yet the government mandates I introduce these things into their bloodstream. Doesn't make sense to me.

When you click on the VAERS link on the CDC website, you might be surprised to find out that the CDC is currently investigating all kinds of things concerning vaccines. However, you might be more surprised to find out how they do it. For example, they did a study to find out if thimerosal exposure had any neuropsychological outcomes. They evaluated 1,047 children aged 7 to 10 years (all basically randomly selected from a computer) who received vaccines in the 1990's before the removal of thimerosal. "Each child's level of exposure to ethyl mercury was determined through a review of electronic immunization registries, medical records, personal immunization records, and parent interviews. Each child was then administered a series of standardized neuropsychological tests in a clinical setting at ages 7 to 10 years. The study found only a few statistically significant associations between exposure from thimerosal and neuropsychological functioning. The weight of the evidence from this study does not support an association between early ethyl mercury exposure from thimerosal-containing vaccines and/or immunoglobulins and neuropsychological functioning at ages 7 to 10 years." OKAY..... I have to interject my thoughts here.... First of all, is 1,047 children a good sample? NOT!!! Another question, why didn't they evaluate kids who HAD autism or other neurological disorders??? If I want to find out why a group of individuals have a disorder or disease I would like to find out what the common factor is. Do they all live in the same area of the states? Do they all eat similar diets? Were they all exposed to same things? Do they all have a genetic defect? I don't just randomly select a thousand kids and test them for problems. When I read further I also found that only a "total of 378 statistical tests were conducted" and that is NOT a significant number. I don't see how they can get sufficient data. Besides, they DID find some "statistically significant associations between exposure to thimerosal and neuropsychological functioning..." Why don't they explore that further? What if there is a small portion of the population that is affected? I would compare this to an allergy. Not all kids are going to be allergic to eggs, for example, but those that are can't have certain vaccines. That doesn't mean that all parents are going to "freak out" and not vaccinate! They have to come up with a screening tool for parents. We have the technology and we have the evidence... what gives??? It all just doesn't make sense to me!

The Huffington Post link has information that made me question if autism is truly "autism" in some of the cases? Are they misdiagnosing vaccine injury with autism? At this point in time, my theory is that if a child is vaccinated and has "autism-like" symptoms and then either slowly recovers or the symptoms go away, then it might have been vaccine injury. In some cases, the kids don't recover and that's also a reality. However, if a child is born with "autism" and/or if the symptoms of autism become apparent early on before the age of 18 months to 2 years, then perhaps it is more of a genetic thing combined with environmental factors. I think that is why there is so much confusion. Also, to add to the confusion... I have a theory that perhaps vaccine injury presents itself in different ways with individuals. For example, perhaps one child might have "autism-like" symptoms, while another might have "ADHD-like" symptoms, while yet another might have chronic ailments such as asthma, severe allergies, or gastric/intestinal problems. All I know is that according to the evidence there seems to be more evidence showing that vaccines can cause problems versus that they are completely safe. All I can say is...it doesn't make sense to me!

The Last thing I want to highlight is Russel Blaylock's paper that I have a link to on the same listing as the CDC website. It was published in 2004 and discusses the meeting called: "Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information." This conference, held on June 7-8, 2000 at Simpsonwood Retreat Center, Norcross, Georgia, assembled 51 scientists and physicians of which five represented vaccine manufacturers. These included Smith Kline Beecham, Merck, Wyeth, North American Vaccine and Aventis Pasteur. This one got me thinking about the cummulative affect that vaccines might have. No one has done a study on that and I believe it's long overdue! Also, why do they have to make the vaccines one sized doses? Medicines are not given that way and it makes sense that vaccines should not be given that way either. I urge you to read the paper.... it will definitely get you thinking. I just don't understand how there could be so many "uncertainties" and yet they are "certain" that vaccines don't cause harm. It just doesn't make sense to me!
************************************
Take the time to check out the links.
You won't be disappointed.
************************************