You get accused of changing subjects to distract from the total hypocrisy and gross ineptitude of your enlargements so what do you do........
Try and create a further distraction and attempt to change the subject twice in a single post.
YET
Then we have.........
YET
So when i was a 1 of 1c statement that says he might have found something in one child that might mean something that the court considered not worthy to consider even though its made by a jewish doctor its gospel yet if its a court ruling made with overwhelming supporting evidence you don't like its a jewish Conspiracy seems rather hypocritical.
Nope, IF his study is true - and the experimental data from the large scale study shows a correlation of only 7.3% between the 2 conditions (so that's a pretty big IF) - you still have to contend with the fact that ANY pathogen could trigger it - therefore may aswell vaccinate.
So you're tangentially referencing something 100 pages ago - and you wonder why I'm saying you are changing the point....
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Dude, you're welcome to continue to maintain that people "may as well vaccinate".
It doesn't change the fact that it is becoming increasingly apparent that vaccines may well contribute to the prevalence of autism.
Polysorbate 80, aluminium, mitochondria, autism, vaccines, big pharma etc. have all been part of that discussion.
It's not my problem that you're struggling to keep up.
The correlation between autism and brown eyes would be far higher about 5 times
Having blue eyes would also be higher
As is the correlation between being male.
The rate of Autism and being called Brian is about the same.
Speaking of which how are you going to take into account that women receive far more vaccinations yet are only 25% as likely to be diagnosed with Autism.
If you were a parent you might know the answer to that. but we already established you don't know much and also you are not a parent so the correlation of this study using you as the only example is 100%.
Males are 4 x more less likely if not higher to be diagnosed with autism so why is not even or even close to even if its caused by Vaccination then?
Maybe if you were to look at environmental factors you might find some studies indicate a high correlation with maternal smoking and Autism.
In mice, developmental nicotine exposure in utero and up to postnatal day 21 significantly affected neuronal dendritic morphology and behavior in a passive avoidance paradigm. Human studies have shown that socioeconomic status (SES) is significantly associated with ASD13, and that women with lower SES have a higher tendency to smoke during pregnancy. Additionally, smoking is associated with adverse birth outcomes, such as fetal growth restriction and low birth weight15, which are in turn associated with increased risk of ASD
In NZ and the rest of the developed world yes you see they are also vaccinated for Diseases men dont get. they also live longer and are 2-3 times more likely to visit a doctor.
They also generally get a vaccination during pregnancy.
So why is it Male children are 4 times more likely to be diagnosed as having Autism if as you keep trying to spread that its Vaccinations.
It seems like you might be not quite understanding the disorder at all.
Plus you are ignoring all the stuff like the mother smoking exposure to drugs etc etc
Family history of Autism etc etc
There are currently 10 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 10 guests)
Bookmarks