Angladrion is a liar

Angladrion, better known as New Zealand Anti-Vaccination loon Hilary Butler has been desperately trying to show off how important she is, and how clever she is to be able to misinterpret statistics by banging on about how smallpox vaccination didn't help eradicate smallpox.

She starts off by asking a load of irrelevant questions, most of which imply that because vaccination science in the 19th and early 20th century was somewhat crude, vaccination science today is equally crude.

Most of the questions are comprehensively dealt with on a Bad Science thread about them.

When a couple of posters (including the marvellous Occam) point out that most of her questions are pointless, or ask her with a sigh "Go on then - show us how clever you are Hilary, do tell us…", she proceeds to flatly refuse, explaining that:

I will not be giving you any answers to those questions, now or in the future. In your role, you should know all those answers, and it's not my job to educate you. I have better things to do.

OK - so, unusually for an anti-vaxxer, in this instance she doesn't want to "educate" people… I suggest the reason she won't explain is that she either knows her hypotheses and "research" findings could be ripped to shreds my anyone with a smattering of critical thinking or knowledge of the subject, or she doesn't actually have any evidence for her mad theories about smallpox vaccination.

However, to "prove" that she does know what she's talking about, and how important she is, she goes on to bang on at great length about some conference she claims to have given a paper at, around twenty years ago. When questioned about this, she gets very defensive:

Auckland Medical school. The invitation was organised by one of the professor's staff. The professor at that time, was Professor Jim Watson, who was out of the country at that time, and the immunologist who organised the presentation was Dr Roger Booth.

As to the exact year, I'd have to rummage around in boxes to find out. Sometime in the early late 1980's to early 1990's... But I'm sure Dr Booth could fill in the answer to such a senseless question.

She also makes one particular outlandish claim, which will she feels will back up her claim to have given this presentation, and how important it was, and she is:

Oh yeah, and.. i can give you the name of a VERY famous man who was at that presentation. You might have heard of him. He's very famous in the cancer world. Goes by the name of Dr Bruce Baguley.

very interesting man. He researches quite unique and fancy cancer drugs.

But the very interesting thing was that after the meeting, he told me how, when he got cancer, he cured his own cancer with vitamin C and Iscadore. Apart from being a very famous cancer researcher, who did some fantastic (unpublished) research on vitamin C in cancer, he is also an amazing musician.

You might like to email him too

Wow - he sounds like a really famous bloke. I looked him up: he is. He's very well respected in the world of cancer research.

It appears Rich Scopie, from the Bad Science forums also looked him up. He however went one step further, and emailed him about Ms Butler's claim. Here's Dr Baguley's response:

Not true I'm afraid - worrying how stories change. I have never had a
malignant tumour. I took vitamin C one for a condition that was
diagnosed as a possible lymphoma, but was in fact much more likely to
have been a virus infection. It's an interesting area but I don't have
any data.

So there we have it. Hilary Butler is a liar. If she's prepared to tell such preposterous lies to back up her claim to be so well respected and important in the world of smallpox vaccine research, posts an exam full of idiotic and irrelevant questions then isn't prepared to divulge any of her findings (or "the answers" as she would no doubt have it) and throws temper tantrums when anyone questions the veracity of what she says, why does she think anyone (apart from that halfwit Gus The Fuss) is ever going to take her seriously?

Agenda over public health

One of the saddest things about JABS is the way they are prepared to extend their fears over existing vaccines into totally imaginary health scares.

Rosemary (who seems to have calmed down recently - she either posts the text of lunatic monkey virus sites (which most of JABS seem to have the good sense to ignore) or she simply reposts general medical stories from assorted news outlets) has posted a story from the Independent about Scarlet Fever.

As I see it, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to post on a health terror site.

However… As JABS is full of fucking nutters, they can't all let it lie, can they? Oh No.

Seonaid tries (rather half heartedly, if you ask me) to link this to vaccines:

Just as well they didn't vaccinate for this - or they would be blaming fall in vaccine uptake for it's return!

Now, from what I see, the original story was a simple news piece. "This has happened". No agenda, nothing. Certainly no mention of vaccines.

However, as we know (JABSLoonies passim.), Seonaid is a fucking cretin, so we'll perhaps pass this off as another conspiracy theory.

OH NOES!!! Minority View - the "reasonable face of JABS" - decides to have a go too:

How much you want to be[t] that a vaccine is coming? Generally, if there is a news story about an infectious disease, it doesn't really mean the cases are rising. What it means is that a vaccine is on the way and doctors have been nudged to start diagnosing whatever it is.

See the series of events on whooping cough in adults in the U.S.

First there is publicity, directed at doctors, telling them that this illness is either undiagnosed or increasing in teens and adults.

Second the doctors start spotting it, since they have been told to pay attention

Third the vaccine gets released to general acclaim and good sales

They're never fucking happy are they, unless people are getting ill, or actually dying? A simple story about the resurgence of a disease, and they start spreading F.U.D. I reckon MV or John Stone could spin a vaccine story out of the fact that Aston Villa are in the top four of the Premier League.

Cybertiger - unintentional irony

I've probably done this joke before, but it's a good one, so worth repeating…

To Cybertiger, irony is like goldy, or silvery - just a different metal.

Denis Thatcher once said,

"Better keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt."

Couldn't have put it better myself, you fucking moron.

Unsurprising lack of tact

Angladrion (who's apparently some kind of idiot "campaigning journalist") is based in New Zealand. Now, I know that the Kiwis and the Aussies don't always see eye to eye, but you'd think she'd have the tact to change her JABS signature, given the dreadful events in Australia recently.

…it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires…

Mind you - she's got a point. Brush fires kill. As does her relentless anti-vax bleating.

MMR in the media - Part 2 - Wakefield is a liar

The other big story this week was the Sunday Times piece about Andrew Wakefield, and his quite phenomenal talent for lying. Not just getting things wrong, but out and out lying.

For those of you who don't know (there must be someone who doesn't), Dr Andrew Wakefield is the man who took a load of money to prove an association between MMR and bowel problems and autism, unsurprisingly enough did so, with what turned out to be a very dodgy piece of work. This was then published in The Lancet, and kicked off the whole MMR-Autism hoax.

It turns out that the biopsies from the bowels of the children he was dealing with weren't actually diseased, and medical records show that nearly all of them (there were only 12) had shown signs of autism before their MMR vaccine, or were showing signs of Aspergers Syndrome, and not regressive autism as Wakefield claimed.

That, at least, was what the Sunday Times claimed this week.

It's worth noting that this article was written by a freelance journalist called Brian Deer - who was the first to dig into the murky world of Wakefield's finances and research, and was at least in part responsible for him being crucified by the General Medical Council.

The reason it's worth noting, is that the JABS crowd (in particular that cock John Stone) have picked up on this fact, and tried to use it as a reason why the information should be discarded. Here's Stone:

…yesterday's story, which is based on Deer's uncorroborated claims based on documents he shouldn't have, can't publish and doesn't it should be said have the competence to understand.

Now, another poster, NikkiC picked up on this refutation of the story, and pointed out that none of that guff means that any of the story is untrue.

Various other loons then chime in in support of Stone. Each time, NikkiC politely points out that they aren't actually denying the points made in the article. They plead that Deer has been using documents he shouldn't have (although it seems that the information has been revealed in the GMC hearing), they claim that he doesn't understand the information (how difficult is it to understand that medical records stated one thing, Wakefield claimed something else in his study, and hence was lying? Hardly fucking rocket science, is it?), they bleat "troll!" (as though that's any kind of defence - doesn't make the Sunday Times wrong, does it?), and they try and change the subject.

Each time, NikkiC, Sandford, and Occam come back and ask why the Sunday Times article is wrong.

John Stone even goes as far as to point everyone to the rather hasty rebuttal of all the points by Andrew Wakefield. Except, hang on… he doesn't actually say any of them are incorrect - he does the same as Stone; he argues… well - I'll leave it to Nikki to describe what he actually argues:

There's a lot of hand waving, and "oh, you don't understand" in that reply - and precious little in the way of "that is factually untrue". There's lots of "oh, it wasn't me", or "I did the best I could", but, as I say, little that says "you're lying" or "you're wrong".

Dr Wakefield appears to be trying to explain the accusations away, rather than outright denying them.

The allegation that several children had already been diagnosed with autistic "signposts" (for want of a better term) is a very serious one, but is surely one that can be simply refuted.

Dr Wakefield replies with a series of "it wasn't me", "it was the others" and "you don't understand". Not an outright "that is not true".

When it comes down to it, Wakefield's been shown to be lying, his staunchest supporters know it, and are shitting themselves.

That fucktard Melanie Phillips has taken this up by the way, publishing pretty well all of Wakefield's bleatings in The Spectator, and making herself look fucking silly. Still, at least she has a voice.

I got an email from NikkiC earlier today. She's been banned from JABS.

MMR in the media - Part 1 - Jeni "Arsehole" Barnett

There have been a couple of MMR related stories in the media - one mainly online, one in print - over the last week or so. Now, I don't generally cover vaccination issues in general, as there are plenty of people who do it so much better than I do. However, naturally, they've both brought out the dribbling fucktards at JABS.

The first was Ben Goldacre's excellent piece on possibly the world's most ignorant radio presenter, one Jeni Barnett. She works for LBC, and is a completely mindless cretin.

She ran an episode (edition? whatever) of her show, which she used as a platform for her half baked, pig shit ignorant ideas about the evils of the MMR jab. She even had a homeopath on to back her case up. How fucking stupid can you be?

Anyway - Dr Goldacre put the audio from the show on his site, and was promptly threatened by LBC's legal team. He's taken it down, but since then the audio and a full transcript of the hateful programme has gone all over the web. I personally recommend The Lay Scientist as a good starting point.

Obviously though, the JABS wingnuts have a different take on it - particularly Jeni's vile shouting over and hectoring of a nurse who rang in to politely, efficiently and sensibly point out where Jeni was wrong, and why what she was doing was a serious danger to public health. If you listen to the audio or read the transcript, you can see how polite she was, and how rude Jeni was. Predictably, that cockend Cybertiger sees it differently:

You've got things a bit ar*e over t*t on this one, Vince. Yasmin [the nurse] is the dolt ... and I cannot see where Jeni Barnett has been rude ... enough. Listen again, Vince.

I'm quite confident that you can make your own mind up on this.

The thread on JABS is called "Support Jeni against Bad Science" - after you've listened to the audio you might want to go there and add your 2p-worth.

Echinacea - as likely to be a cause of autism as MMR

Apologies for being away for so long - I've had a load of half baked ideas for blog posts, and then thought "no – no-one would believe them". I've also had a life to live. Still… there have been so many hand grenades tossed into the foaming mass of vipers that is JABS lately that I can't ignore it any longer.

First of all, a kind of follow on from comments on my last post - Thanks to John H and DT:

There's been a discussion on JABS about echinacea, a herbal supplement which is supposed to boost the immune system and help prevent colds and minor ailments. I tried it once - I told my boss I was feeling a bit under the weather and she recommended it. I didn't feel any better, and once it made me throw up. Still - I suspect it works among those who go for the woo approach (and, while I liked my then boss a lot, she did have "woo" tendencies). Nothing really to worry about though.

However, this particular discussion started when a new poster pointed out a study showing that echinacea, in some people, could cause bowel problems. Could this, given that the Wakefield crew believe that MMR causes bowel problems and those bowel problems cause autism, also cause autism?

Now, I suspect this to be a wind up, but the JABS lot went mental. I'll repost DT's comment on my earlier post, as it says it all really…

But instead of countering the hypothesis with a bit of science based critical analysis and common sense, the jabbers have taken the line of:

1. Echinacea is natural! So it is obviously harmless! (Suba)


2. North American Indians use echinacea and I haven't heard they have rates of autism of 1:150 (Suba again, Lola and Aasa)
   
3. No-one would give kids echinacea (John Stone, ignoring the fact that plenty would, and the OP specifically talked of the transmissability in breast milk)


4. I never gave my son echinacea, so it cannot have caused his autism (John Stone again)


5. Remember that it is only vaccines that cause autism, nothing else could possibly do it! (actually that's not in this particular thread, but that's what they think)


6. But herbs harm people less than conventional treatments which kill millions of people (Truthseeker)


The fallacious and mind-numbingly stupid and predictable arguments they are trotting out has quite put me off my lunch. All we need now is for Cyberpussy to tell us how Roy Meadows is embroiled in all of this.

Another new(ish) poster - "NikkiC" then chimed in, I suspect simply playing "Devil's Advocate", pointing out that if the JABS regulars were prepared to take the leap of faith that Wakefield suggested, from bowel problems caused by measles vaccine to autism, why was it such a problem to make the leap of faith from gut problems caused by echinacea to autism?

Again, the JABS nutters weren't prepared to argue this with science, or with reference to papers showing the safety of their favourite herb. Oh no. John H sums up their responses to that in a comment here:

You could argue that:

1. so is hemlock but it will kill you. To paraphrase a lady contributor "Suba is a twat"


2. so there is a causal relationship between taking echinacea and alcoholism is there because there is certainly a correlation in the US Indian population


3. maybe the kids got homeopathic doses of echinacea - the less they got the more it would affect them (err maybe)


4. ditto. As that lady constantly says "John Stone is a twat" as well.


5. words fail me - but you are perfectly right.


6. ask Truthseeker to name the millions who died from conventional medicine (OK a tough task, just name what they died from then). As a certain lady says "TruthSeeker is a twat"

Lucky for me I could just paste "twat" in otherwise I would have been typing for hours.

Hey - I may not have many readers of this blog, but I like the ones I do have!

What I love about this particular JABS exchange is that if you take the word "echinacea" out, and substitute "MMR", it's exactly the argument that the JABS nuts are trying to push as their whole agenda. There's no real evidence for either being a cause of autistic spectrum disorders, yet they're passionately arguing for one, and getting really nasty arguing against the other.

There's no negotiating with fucking nutters.

Cybertiger is a loser

Cybertiger - Dr Mark Struthers - is an evil bastard. He doesn't really believe that MMR causes autism. He doesn't really believe that preservatives in vaccines cause harm. He doesn't even really believe that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. However, he wants to have the loonies at JABS on his side for his personal mission, which is to attack anyone in the medical establishment who's been more successful than him.

You see, Dr Struthers is a salaried GP (not even a partner) in a local practice in Flitwick. For those of you who aren't aware of Flitwick, it's a small town on the outskirts of Luton.

He hates Roy Meadow, not because of his cock-ups, but because he's more successful than him. He can't stand Simon Baron-Cohen, because he's more successful than he's ever been.

You see, Dr Mark isn't even as successful as his Mum, Joyce. Joyce at least made it onto some sort of enquiry board - although its findings were rapidly dismissed - but she at least got that far. No-one's ever asked Dr Mark to be on any kind of panel, board or even pub quiz team. Possibly because he's mental, or, more likely, because he's not that bright, and doesn't have an original, or interesting thought in his head.

However, on the JABS forum, he likes to think that he's some kind of intellectual, and, given that the level of intelligence there hardly challenges that of most shellfish, he's probably right.

Here's his latest rant:

Spreading fear in a gullible populace drove the American taxpayer to fund the ugly wars on Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza. The American military-industrial-complex were thrilled.

Spreading fear of measles, mumps, rubella and the HPV has driven the British taxpayer to spend collosal sums of money on the 'wars on innocuous contagion'

What the FUCK does this have to do with vaccines? Um - nothing whatsoever. However, Dr Struthers knows full well that the critical thinking ability of the average JABS subscriber is roughly equivalent to that of a pipe cleaner, and so likening five wholly unconnected military conflicts with perfectly reasonable fears of disease is likely to gain him some more support from cretins.

However, because Dr Mark has never done anything in his life worth mentioning, and is still little more than a fill in doctor - not being deemed bright enough to be offered a partnership, that support does little for him. The man is an idiot - as judged by those who read his internet rantings, and seemingly by those who he's worked with. There are no papers with Dr Struthers' name on, there's nothing he's ever done that will advance the cause of medicine - he's a nobody, a nothing. Zilch. Zip. Fuck all.

If, in order to make himself feel more popular he has to argue that measles, mumps and rubella are diseases that shouldn't be fought, borders on criminal. Dr Mark Struthers should be struck off.

JABS bleating over well argued points. Funny that.

"The Vaccine Book" by Dr Robert Sears has become a big hit among the worried well and University Of Google-educated American middle classes. It's written to sound like a reasonable discussion, but in fact repeats all the anti-vax lies that the JABS crowd spew out - it just suggests that they might be a problem, rather than stating them outright. Planting a seed of doubt - the most effective way of getting the anti-vax ideas propogated. At the end of the book, it suggests an alternative schedule of vaccination for children - one that sounds reasonable to those worried parents who don't have the critical faculties, or the time to actually read any primary sources.

Dr Paul Offit has written an excellent critique of the book, which has been published in Paediatrics.

It's well written, calm and collected, and extremely well referenced - and it acts as an excellent reference for debunking a lot of common anti-vax lies and misinformation that you might come across being spread by the likes of JABS, or parents at your child's school or pre-school.

For this reason (probably more than the takedown of the "alternative schedule" - which obviously isn't as anti-vaccine as the foaming JABS nutters would like), they're doing the usual trick of rubbishing it without producing any reasons why it's wrong.

Cybertiger is, unsurprisingly, banging on about trust:

Why not look again at 'trust' and the controversy Paul Offit has stirred up over 'trust' in the scientists who work for the great medico-pharma-vaccinology-industrial-complex.

Dr Paul Offit MD etc, reviewed 'The Vaccine Book' by Dr Robert Sears with its suggestions for boosting flagging trust in what the vaccinologists say about vaccines and their safety.

Um - because this isn't about your paranoia regarding the whole medical community; this is about keeping children and adults safe and healthy, not spreading lies about vaccination programmes. You twat.

Minority View throws a non-sequiteur in:

Ah! So it doesn't count if children end up dead, paralyzed or brain-damaged from vaccines. Glad to have that cleared up.

But, as I never tire of pointing out, there's no evidence that this happens, is there, MV? You'd like there to be - but there isn't. And you're worried that sensible writing like this points out the huge holes in your flimsy anti-vax arguments and lies.

Have a read of the pdf linked above - it's quite long, but well worth it.

Lalala, we're not listening

Just quickly…
Gus the Fuss has linked to a piece on Age Of Autism which is "covering" a new study which again suggests that there isn't any evidence that thimerosal causes autism. The AoA piece is here: www.ageofautism.com/2009/01/feeding-the-hungry-lie-italian-style.html, but you can read a quick précis here if you like:

"A new study has shown that thimerosal doesn't cause autism. *insert fingers in ears* LA LA LA LA!!! WE'RE NOT LISTENING!! WE KNOW WE'RE RIGHT!! LA LA LA!!!"

The original piece, in "Pediatrics", is here.

Edit: I've just come across Orac's excellent explanation of this research and the stupidity of the anti-vax crowd.

Autism may or may not be a medical condition

Gus the Fuss has posted a snippet of a quote from Simon Baron-Cohen (who seems to have turned into some kind of bogeyman for the JABS crowd recently) which includes the line:

Because autism is a medical diagnosis, it shouldn't be given out lightly

Gus has picked up on this line, but I have no idea what he's arguing when he says this:

If autism is a medical diagnosis why is there no protocol of medical testing in place---blood/urine/stool/hair?

He appears to be saying autism isn't a medical condition - which, coming from the father of an autistic son is rather odd. He also appears to be saying that every condition should be testable by looking at something physical. So is he denying the existance of (for example) Alzheimer's? Clinical depression? I really haven't the foggiest idea what point he thinks he's making.

(I suppose it's possible he just can't stand Professor Baron-Cohen, and so feels he has to disagree with every statement he makes…)

Just how stupid is Gus the Fuss?*

Rosemary has, for once, done a sensible thing. She's reposted a letter to the Guardian from Prof Simon Baron-Cohen (I can't find it on the Guardian website, so I'm taking it on trust that she's copied it properly - it's here: http://jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3474) in which he bemoans the poor and misleading reporting of his recent study which "found a correlation between levels of foetal testosterone (FT) and the number of autistic traits a child shows at the age of 8."

He's gone through the errors point by point, and explained, in simple terms exactly what was wrong with the reporting, and how his work was misrepresented.

This isn't enough for Gus the Fuss, a man who is apparently psychic and psychotic in equal measures, believing that a) He knows more than Professor Baron-Cohen does about his own work, and b) That the reporters from the Daily Mail, and the lunatics who inhabit the insane world of JABS have a better insight into his work, despite most probably having not actually read the research.

Looks like Cohen and Fitzy re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic!

While the band plays on ..we believe you Cohen along with your other crack-pot theories..DUH we all got it wrong,BBC,Mail, and your right ?NOT!

The Big Lie has nothing on you,you now have surpassed all your peers in producing the most irrelevant, inaccurate and stale study on autism yet.

I don't understand the mindset of someone who rabidly rants at an article, but when the author of the original source material says "Let's clear this up - actually, that's not what I meant…"; then rants at them for lying, maintaining the first version was true.

As ever, let's not let facts or research get in the way of irrational belief.

* a rhetorical question.

Obviously this is only anecdote…

A new poster by the name of Maxybrown has asked if anyone on the JABS site has an unvaccinated child with autism.

Amethyst, a fairly regular poster and anti-vaxer has politely replied:

Yes I have a 5 year old who has autism and he is free from vaccination, apart from VIT K which was administered without our knowledge or consent.

He was born 10 weeks prem so at the moment, we put his condition down to that.

I have a 17 year old damaged by the MMR who is on the AS and a 14 year old who was vaccine damaged by the DTP, causing him massive brain damage, also on the AS.

This, to me, and probably to you too, suggests that Amethyst's family is a prime example of autism being primarily a genetic condition; three children on the autistic spectrum, blamed on three different environmental factors? You've got to be pretty pigheaded to just deny out of hand that this could in any way be genetic.

Another new poster, by the name of Forbalance has pointed this out:

Several studies have demonstrated that autism has a strong genetic component. If one child in a family is autistic, there's about a 10 percent chance that a sibling also will have autism.

Hurrah for Forbalance. But then Cybertiger - who let's not forget IS A DOCTOR, a real, medical doctor - not a naturopath or anything else made-up; a proper doctor - sticks his oar in:

And your point is, Mr. Balance?

Now, Dr Struthers, you know perfectly well what Forbalance's point is. He's suggesting that in this case it would not be unreasonable to suggest that the cause to Amethyst's three childrens' atuistic spectrum disorders is genetic. However, because you need the loons and the nut-jobs, the religious nutters and the out and out liars on your side to bolster your own agenda, you're using your status as a doctor to imply that you believe this to be absolutely not the case. You've been quite clever - you've not actually written anything that could get you into trouble - just implied it. I'm prepared to bet that this thread will be full of the usual suspects by teatime, claiming that there's no genetic component to autism, and that it's all environmental.

I feel so sorry for Amethyst - I can't begin to imagine what she must go through every day - but Cybertiger is quite happily propping up her paranoia and fears by suggesting that no, it's not genetic, yes, it's something she did to her children, she's to blame, and she has to live with that for the rest of her life. Dr Mark Struthers should be stuck off.

ABORT! ABORT!

Over the last few days, several newspapers (The Guardian, The Telegraph and others) have carried a story about research done over eight years to test for a correlation between high levels of testosterone in fluid surrounding foetuses, and higher levels of “autistic traits”, such as poor verbal and social skills later in life. None of the children in the study were autistic, the study did not seek to develop a test for autism. The conclusion of the research was that their findings fit with the theory that exposure to testosterone in the womb is related to higher levels of autistic traits. That's it. There's an extremely good write-up on NHS Choices. The research team was led by Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, director of the Autism Research Centre at Cambridge University.

So far, so good.

You'd've thought that this kind of research into autistic traits would be welcomed at JABS, as while it doesn't actually look at autism, it's sensible, thorough scientific research in that direction, which may, just may help us understand some of the real causes of autism.

Oooohh no. That's not how it works over at JABS. Sensible research is there to be rubbished, built up as conspiracy and completely misunderstood and lied about (whereas anything "alternative" is to be praised and lauded - clay baths for detox, weird tests for monkey viruses, drinking bleach etc). JABS is fundamentally anti-science. This is how Gus the Fuss hysterically reports the story:

Baron-Cohen wants to abort autistic foetuses

All these a*** lickers are trying to do is test a babies suitability to take the massive ammount of vaccines they pump into them just now.

Does the test include Aspergers, ,ADHD, both on the Autism spectrum.If it did on current goverment Autism figuresare 1 in 100 babies would be terminated take ADHD and aspergers in with the autism and every 2nd and 5th child born in a family of 5 babies would be terminated.

and hes meant to be looking out for the good of autistic children
Sounds like the return of holocaust

Hmm. The study isn't aimed at creating a "test for autism", vaccines aren't mentioned, none of the children involved were actually autistic, and I'm buggered if I know where licking arses comes in.

Gus's post was quickly followed by another which likened Baron-Cohen and his team to Nazi eugenics enthusiasts, but this was (surprisingly) removed fairly quickly. However, Aasa has chimed in with some words of "wisdom":

I think the idea of developing a screening test for autism "in the womb" is ridiculous. The testosterone in the womb could be interacting with heavy metals that the mother and fetus are exposed to. Whether the children will develop "autism" later also depends on their exposures to heavy metals and other toxins which can affect their development, even after birth. If they haven't even figured out how autism is caused, how can they expect to screen for it in the womb? Aside from that, the idea of screening for something which is likely environmentally caused, and then terminating pregnancies on the basis of that, certainly does not seem ethical.

So, what Aasa is doing here, as well as completely misunderstanding / not reading the research, is dismissing it out of hand, in favour of her (I just assume Aasa is a "she" - don't know why) own pet theories of environmental factors for autism, especially heavy metals - a theory for which there is no evidence, and which is primarily pushed by private "clinics" offering dangerous, expensive and useless chelation / biomedical therapy.

As I said earlier - you'd think that research along these lines would be welcomed by parents of autistic children; after all, it may eventually provide them with some reasons for their children's condition. But no - because it doesn't support their own theories, for which there is no evidence, it's lied about, blown up out of all proportion, and misrepresented. It's a prime example of the anti-science agenda at JABS.

-- later that day --

A bit more on this - Suba has confirmed what I pointed out about Aasa's post:

The plethora of possible causes of Autism especially genetic ones are but a smoke screen to divert one's attention from the real environmental causes. Vaccines being the major insult to the immune system are consistently swept under the carpet. The carpet has a luxurious deep pile of excuses but the threads will soon wear thin under the weight of a big white elephant.

Doing research into topics the JABS crowd are interested in is no good if you don't come up with results that match their preconceptions.

That cock Mark Struthers has also weighed in with a smattering of abuse for Professor Baron-Cohen - although what he's actually done to annoy Struthers is mysteriously not mentioned. (I get the feeling that Struthers is a very bitter man, ending his career as a salaried GP in Flitwick, instead of with the titles and knighthood he feels he deserves. This may explain his hatred for anyone who's had some degree of success in medicine.)

Sacha (Borat) and Simon make splendid pantomime dames. Any thoughts on a stage name for Sir Simon Baron-Cohen?

What a cock.

Truth Seeker has posted a load more nonsense all over the JABS forum, including this spectacular piece of misdirection about vaccines in general - as a response to Reality Check's very reasonable post (see previous post).

You should reassure us that vaccine cell lines are not contaminated, with bovine,chicken or monkey contaminants.
see http://www.jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3469
You should be able to prove beyond all doubt that vaccines are not capable of suppressing TH1 immunity, foreign DNA does incorporate into our own dna and is not linked to auto immune disease.
You should have some ethical arguments as to use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines and why we should not have moral issues regarding this.
You should say why you think its safe to inject aluminium into babies and why this can not cause nerve damage.
You should say why babies who have not deveopled full Myelin sheath protection are not more at risk from vaccinations.

You see, Truth Seeker, the problem is that there is no evidence, nor suggestion that any of these are true. You know (actually, you may not, as you appear to have the intelligence level of an out of date packet of Weetabix) that it's not possible to disprove a negative - however, the fact is that, when applied to vaccines, none of your assertions have any evidence to back them up. You may as well demand; "You should say why vaccines do not increase the likelyhood of being struck by a meteorite, cause gang war, or cause the sacking of football managers". There's no evidence to suggest that any of these are likely outcomes of vaccinating - just as there's no evidence to suggest that any of your hypothetical problems are anything more than ramblings that you've just picked up from you latest favourite fundamental Christian or alt-med website. Yours sound a bit more "sciency", and scary, but have no more basis in fact. Why don't you change your forum name from "Truth Seeker" to "Credulous Prick"?

Sensible post drives JABS regulars into frothing frenzy

A new poster on JABS, who has one post to his name (and is unlikely to be allowed to post again) has written a splendid rant, which, before it's deleted, I'll post in full here. Let's hear it for "Reality Check"!

Suba
Dont be silly. This article, like all those before it state quite clearly that vaccines save lives. Stop getting your evidence from daft websites and face up to facts. Vaccines are the best tool we have in medicine and that is why we are working to develop more. Obviously websites like this one (and its adherents) are doing lots of harm as highlighted by the BBC today http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7819874.stm
..or do you think the Beeb is in the grasp of your "big pharma".

Vaccines are developed in laboratories, universities, research institutes, hospitals - do you think we are all corrupted to tell lies so that kids get sick?

At what point in the last few years did Wakefield become a hero figure to you lot? He is one of the biggest crooks going who made a fortune out of the worried well (as we call them) who were gullible enough to buy his single shot vaccines and made him very rich as a result. Can't you see when you are being taken for a ride?

Actually, a lot of this anti-vaccine stuff is generated and stirred by the alt med sector, like it has been doing for the AIDS story, because it seeks to profit from those who cannot tell the difference between manipulated anecdotes and facts. Remember, many of the contributors to this website (and other similar ones) are trying to sell you rubbish medicine – don’t fall for it - look at the REAL evidence, the sort of analyses looking at thousand of patients over many decades. If you must get your evidence from the internet, at least bother to check out the author – are they qualified? Are they selling something? Where is the article published?

The bottom line is - if you want to be a good parent, get your kids vaccinated. And always remember - wanting to believe something, does not make it true.

Get real folks, before its too late and more kids die from our collective stupidity.

scarter

This has, predictably, driven the regulars into a hysterical rage. Let's take that grade-A moron Truth Seeker first, as he goes down the "informed choice" / big pharma route, before reeling off a load of made-up "ingredients" of vaccines:

What nonsense if you want to be a good parent you will not blindly vaccinate like a robotic sheep but make a fully informed choice based on the truth, not coporate bad $cience.

If you are happy to inject your child with such filth as animal pus, fetal bovine soup, DNA from aborted babies, monkey glands, aluminium rat killer,and other toxins go ahead but dont tell me anyone else what to do with our children based on silly emotional arguments about being "good parent"

"Emotional arguments" Truth Seeker? You're the one who posted a picture of bottles of brown liquid with the words "Fetal Bovine serum" photoshopped onto the labels so badly that it could only have been worse if whoever did it had used Comic Sans.

Following hard on Truth Seeker's heels in the moron stakes comes that venal bastard Cybertiger. He replies to the comment about Andrew Wakefield's dishonesty with this gem:

Don't be silly! I think you'd better take a reality check before you shoot yourself up your backside.

Dr Struthers - everyone knows by now that you have no actual arguments other than innuendo and insult, but "don't be silly" is pathetic, even for you.

Minority View then sticks her oar in, with a big old juicy lie, accusing the poster of being heartless:

I think you win the tactless of the year award. The majority of the posters on this site have a vaccine damaged child.

Hmm. For starters, MV, you're not one of them. You don't have a sick kid. You're just pushing your bullshit anti-vax agenda, using those parents who do have sick kids as a crutch to support your vile propaganda. Secondly, parents on the forum do not have vaccine damaged children. They have ill children, certainly; desparately ill in some cases, I'm sure, but vaccine damage is a self-diagnosis. That diagnosis hasn't been provided by real medical professionals, has it? It's a belief, not a medical fact. And you're just trying to exploit that belief to push that murderous agenda of yours. Now who's the heartless bastard?

Oh, and Gus spouts some shit a bit later on. Nothing to worry about - just some abuse.

So, hurrah for Reality Check!

Sugar pills to replace MMR vaccine?

Another new poster as coincidentally popped up on JABS to ask about single vaccines - what a coincidence, as Merck have announced in the last few days that they'll no longer be producing single vaccines. I claim "sock puppet" again - still, no matter. Single vaccines and "choice" is at least in line with the claimed JABS agenda. However, Truth Seeker then chimes in with a claim for "twat of the week":

Have you considered homeopathic nosodes of mumps, measles and Rubella?

Now, this is a bit sneaky. What Truth Seeker would like to see is the whole population rejecting all vaccinations, and as a result having a fair proportion of children ending up in a hospital or a mortuary. However, he seems to have realised that this is an unpopular point of view among new posters, and is making out that he's suggesting a valid alternative, when actually he's advocating treating children with, well, nothing at all - a treatment that if followed nationwide would end up with thousands of children in hospitals and morgues. Evil bastard.

John Stone posts the same old crap. Again.

John "Cock" Stone has again shown his skill in the use of CTRL-C and CTRL-V by copying a post from AgeOfAutism, regarding a groundless and timewasting complaint made about "eleven British health officials" by Bill Welsh, an anti-vax "activist" from Edinburgh. These are his primary complaints:

1. The inexplicable, and unforgivable, failure to react appropriately when it was established in 1998 that autistic children had a novel form of bowel disease/ inflammation.


2. An insistence on an “MMR or nothing” policy in face of the initial, and accumulative, scientific and anecdotal evidence re MMR’s lack of safety for a sub-set of children.


3. A refusal to press for proper investigation, using the most appropriate scientific means of research, of the claims of thousands of parents that the MMR vaccine had damaged children.


4. The promulgation, in conjunction with the Health Protection Agency, of information relating to MMR vaccine safety that is likely unreliable and potentially misleading in that context.


5. The recommendation that unethical treatments be given to children when there is no clinical need and irrespective of whether the child might be prone to adverse reactions.

Let's just take these one by one, shall we?

1. In 1998 it wasn't "established" that there was any such link. It was suggested in one paper, a paper that ten out of its twelve co-authors have since disowned. There was no good evidence.


2. There was no initial scientific evidence, and is no accumulative evidence for a lack of safety. Anecdote and conclusions drawn from coincidence are not evidence.


3. Now, I don't know how many parents Andrew Wakefield and friends, the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph frightened into complaining about MMR, but any claim that there hasn't been follow-up research is ludicrous. It's just that there's been no good quality, peer reviewed, published follow-up research that agrees with the conclusion Welsh and Stone would like.


4. The information put out by the Department of Health that MMR is safe seems, in the face of a total lack of evidence showing it to be anything other than safe seems to me to be perfectly reasonable.


5. Unethical treatments? Like what? As head of the Autism Treatment Trust, Bill Welsh is no stranger to dangerous and unethical treatments, such as "maximised heavy metal detoxification" - when there's no good evidence that autism is caused by heavy metal poisoning. I assume he's implying that MMR is an unethical treatment. Sadly for Welsh and Stone - all the evidence says otherwise.

All this stuff, John Stone is completely aware of - but as I've pointed out before, to admit it would mean a massive loss of face, so he continues on his ever more ridiculous quest, grasping at thinner and thinner straws. The man's an immoral cock - he's campaigning for something dangerous, when he knows his position is a lie.

So - that's Welsh dealt with. Can we have him locked up for malicious time wasting?

Anti-vaccination is a religion

Now tell me that these people aren't nutters. Truth Seeker has posted a quote from immunizationinfo.org, which explains the science behind the myth that vaccines contain foetal tissue.

"Some vaccine components have been derived from human fetuses. The abortions were not conducted for the purpose of vaccine discovery or vaccine production"

Perfectly reasonable.

However, as Truth Seeker has shit for brains, he then goes on to claim that this is an absolute lie, by copy-and-pasting a great long diatribe from a website by the name of www.jesus-is-savior.com. The specific page is: http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils in America/Abortion is Murder/aborted_fetus_vaccines.htm. You can imagine the kind of reasoned discussion you'll get on that site, can't you…? To save you the bother of your own copy and paste job (as I refuse to link to this kind of crap), it starts with a big gory header that reads "The Abortion Industry Contributes To Vaccine Manufacturing", and carries on in much the same vein for pages of shite.

When the JABS crowd resort to backing their arguments with quotes from fundamental religious whack-jobs, any last remnants of their supposed sheen of respectability drains merrily away down the toilet.

Amusingly, the next post, from that halfwit aobbard reads:

Brings it home doesn't it?

Err, no. It makes you all look like twats.

Happy New Year…

Hi all - it's New Year's Eve, and I'm in at home, watching TV while the tiny person is sleeping. Happy New Year to all who've read this stuff over the last few months.

I've been meaning to do an "Admin" post for a while, so this seems to be the ideal opportunity.

I've noticed that, since I started writing this blog, JABS posters have become a little less keen on posting the utterly mental alt-med and anti-vax stuff that they were writing about when I was still a member there. There's less of the "AIDS is caused by Polio vaccine / It's all teh munki virii" kind of mentalism that was there a while ago. This can only be a good thing. I suspect that Jackie may have had a word with some of those on the lunatic fringe (Gus The Fuss springs immediately to mind), as she'd desperately like to have JABS seen as an "alternative view" group. Rather than the bunch of fucking nutters that they actually are.

What they do seem to be doing now is simply posting links to loon alt-med sites (naturalnews etc) or anti-science sites (mercola, whatdoctorsdonttellyou etc) - or quoting the shit that those people write. That makes life a bit tricky at JABSLoonies HQ - do I lose focus, and start having a go at all the anti-vax sites out there? Or do I stick with pointing out how evil JABS is?

Well, over the last few months, the regulars on the JABS forum have acquired a new target. Children who have been beaten or shaken to death. Now, this is currently a very hot topic - as Cybertiger never stops pointing out, there have been several high profile convictions overturned due to dodgy evidence given by the likes of Roy Meadow. He's quite right - poor quality evidence, poor quality statistical claims etc should be shot down in flames. Maybe Cybertiger should read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book, rather than simply calling him names. They actually agree (broadly) on this point. Where Cybertiger goes wrong is when he starts defending every child killer. He's defending Alan Yurko - whose baby son was found to have massive injuries, and several fractured ribs. Not even Andrew Wakefield has ever claimed that MMR causes broken ribs… Remember that this man (Cybertiger) is a GP. If you live in Flitwick, he may be your GP. He denies that HIV causes AIDS and spends his time arguing on the internet that MMR causes autism, and that vaccines in general are evil. While advertising on his website for pensioners to come and have their 'flu jabs. What a cunt. An utter, utter cunt.

Another study showing conclusively that MMR and autism / bowel disease are NOT linked came out this year. That cock John Stone tried to spin it as though it actually supported his view - that MMR causes autism. His feeble bleatings on every discussion board, trying to argue this point were shot down in flames, every time. John Stone is a cock. He has an autistic child, but spends no time caring for him - he spends all his time looking for someone to blame, and trying to big up the MMR Vaccine / Autism "controversy" - when there is no controversy. No-one, apart from John Stone, Jackie Fletcher and Gus the Fucking Fuss believe in any kind of connection - and even they don't actually believe it any more. The trouble is (for them) that if they turn around, and say "actually, there's no connection", they'll lose face. That's what this is all about. They keep on banging on about MMR/Autism when they know it's not true - they just can't stand to lose face.

Cybertiger of course, just says anything the Jabbophobes will like to hear, in order to promote his anti-Roy-Meadow cause. Cunt.

I'm hoping that the lack of original thought on JABS over the last few months is a good sign. The number of posts has gone down, and those that are there are simply links or reposts to mental sites. I'll keep watching JABS, and watching for utter stupidity, but I'll probably not be posting daily - as I've not been doing over the last month and a half or so.

I may start posting some stuff from other nutter sites - if anyone wants to alert me to this sort of shite, please feel free to do so on becky.fisseux[at]gmail.com

Happy New Year all,

Kind regards,

Becky.

Cybertiger supporting the beating to death of little children

Cybertiger's at it again - as a response to a fairly reasonable question about vaccinating premature babies, he kicks off in a completely different direction, blaming the death of baby Yurko on vaccines.

Alan Yurko vaxxed his premature son at 2 months and look what happened to him

Yes Dr Struthers. He was beaten to death by his father. You can hardly blame that on MMR. But you'd love to, wouldn't you? You're evil.

Vegetarian vaccines

Minority View has upgraded herself to "utter arsehole" status - advising a new sock puppet poster on JABS that:

Melanie its certainly not a vegeterian or vegan vaccine.

So, you'd rather abandon your child's health on the basis that a vaccine isn't vegetarian??? (Or rather, you'd use the fact that Melanie's husband is vegetarian as a way of pushing your own twisted, murderous agenda) On the grounds that you/she/he have/has some misguided notion that vegetarianism makes you a better person? You, with your middle-class whimsy; "oh, I don't consume anything made from dead animals"? You're prepared to put your child in danger because of that? You ought to be force-fed with lard. I hope you get trampled to death while protesting at an abattoir.

Gus gets more mental by the minute

Regarding the Robert Napper conviction for the brutal murder of Rachel Nickell in 1982, given that Napper has been diagnosed with Aspergers, Gus The Fuss comes out with this gem:

Aspergers case not properly cared for AGAIN!

He's not actually come out and said that Napper's Asperger's was caused by vaccines (although I'm sure he will), but spinning a murder as being down to poor care of an Asperger's Syndrome sufferer is just appalling. Let's not forget that Napper is a paranoid schizophrenic, already confined to Broadmoor for the rest of his life for crimes of violence - or can that be caused by vaccines now too? You're a vile, vile man, Gus.

I predicted this to myself

As soon as I heard that Suzanne Holdsworth has been cleared of murdering Kyle Fisher, I though to myself "The JABS bunch will be all over this like vultures over a corpse". Sure enough, with no evidence whatsoever, Gus The Fuss (possibly the most unhinged of the lot of 'em) comes up with this:

No sign of what caused the epilepsy??not vaccines of course?

There's no evidence to suggest this. None at all, yet this stupid, evil bastard wants, like the rest of the JABS forum regulars, to put the blame for this child's tragic death on vaccines.

I'm sure that in their own minds they've absolved Theoneste Bagosora of mass murder in Rwanda - after all, 800,000 dead in 100 days can only be put down to vaccines. They'll be campaigning in the street for his release soon, I'm sure.

Like buses…

…idiot comments on JABS seem to come in threes. "Squib" has posted this:

When to suspect child maltreatment: guideline consultation

Nice is holding a consultation about this guideline (16 December 2008 – 10 February 2009).

Although it mentions bruises and subdural hematomas, I notice also that there appears no mention of vaccine induced problems.

This is simply another JABS member promoting their current favourite group hypothesis that child abuse simply doesn't exist - it's the vaccines. My loathing for these people knows no bounds.

John Stone - a man with no concept of irony

That cockend John Stone has just posted this gem on JABS:

The political and medical authorities demonstrated their lack of objectivity by subjecting anyone who disagreed to harassment and abuse, while the children themselves were condemned to medical neglect. Every time they stuff their ears they just prove the point.

Does he not realise that this is what he spends his entire miserable life doing - subjecting those who thoughtfully point out that actually, there's no evidence for a vaccine / autism link to harrassment and abuse, while he neglects the most important thing he should be doing - caring for his autistic child? John - no-one blames you for your child's autism, so there's no need for you to be desperately trying to find someone to shift that blame onto. There is no blame. We're not blaming you. Please, I realise that admitting "actually, I was wrong" will involve a massive loss of face, but at the moment, you're just digging yourself deeper.

Just idiocy

Fortunately, people don't generally end up at JABS if they're looking for cancer treatment - although those who've bought into the MMR lie may well end up taking everything they read there seriously.

Suba has posted one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen - it's a repost from "Natural News", a hotbed of quackery and alt-med crap. Here are some highlights:

A Proven Cure and Prevention for Cancer the Medical Establishment Doesn't Want You to Know (Part I)

This article is about how you can prevent and cure cancer with a bottle of flax oil and a carton of cottage cheese. As incredible as this may seem, it is a truth that has been well proven and documented.

[if you're diagnosed with cancer] you really can afford to take the time to relax and regain your composure, and then decide on a rational approach based on alternatives that do offer you the potential for complete cure. Whether you have a lot of money or not, and even if you have no health insurance, you really can make a complete recovery from cancer.

There are thousands of documented cases of recovery from cancer using the Budwig protocol. For her research and practice, Johanna [Budwig] was nominated for seven Nobel Prizes, but was kept from receiving any of them by the German pharmaceutical and medical industries that subjected her to endless vilification and harassment and blocked the publication of her writings and clinical studies.

Let's see - conspiracy? Yep. References? Nope. Evidence? Nope. Outright lies? Yes (well proven and documented? No - it's not.) Dangerous medical advice? The Nobel Prize nomination claim is extremely suspect too - The official Nobel Prize website has no record of her nomination for medicine or physiology before 1955 - and more recent nominations are not made public. (Nominations are not made public for 50 years.)

This is the kind of crap that leads to the deaths listed here.

Just as you think it's all calming down…

JABS has been fairly quiet recently. Well - I say quiet; I mean that its posters have limited themselves to reposting rubbish from ridiculous alternative medicine sites such as Dr Mercola, Cybertiger posting abusive and meaningless digs at Anthony Cox, and republishing crap from the Daily Mail's anti-vaccine crusade. The kind of stuff that, were I still allowed to post there, I'd be politely pointing out the holes in the arguments in, but not actual crass stupidity from the JABS posters themselves - the kind of thing that I try and point out here. That's why I've been quiet for the last few days.

However, today, a story has been reposted from a site called "Pharmalot.com", which concerns the tragic death of an infant in India.

Let me tell you what the story says:

An infant in Bangalore, who had a pre-existing cardiac disorder, died during a clinical trial for an advanced pneumonia vaccine. And India’s rules prohibit testing on human subjects with such conditions without prior approval of the Drugs Controller General of India

Let me make one thing clear: The death of a child is a tragic occurance, in any situation. However, JABS (and the journalist behind Pharmalot) are obviously trying to spin this as a "BIG PHARMA KILLED MY BABY WITH VACCINES!!!" story, so let's look at the first line.

An infant, with a pre-existing cardiac condition has died during a trial. Shall we remove the hysteria and spin? "Child with heart condition dies". The story, as posted, provides no evidence that the vaccine trial and the death are linked. Neither is there any evidence that the cardiac abnormality was known about before the trial started. It's the evil bastards at JABS who want to scare you, me and every worried new mum.

It turns out that this trial was trialling a vaccine against the current standard, a vaccine called Prevnar. The child who died had been given Prevnar. Minority View has a bit of a thing about Prevnar, so has decided to spin this fact thus:

so, let us get this straight.

in the regular world, Prevnar can be injected into any baby, heart condition or no heart condition.

once Prevnar is being used in a drug trial as the "placebo" against the new version of Prevnar it can only be injected into healthy babies.

does this make sense to anyone?

Yes, MV. It makes perfect sense. If a drug is to be trialled on healthy individuals, obviously your control group has to be healthy too. But you know that - you mendacious bastard. You try and put the fear of God into people with spin like this, just to satisfy your own twisted agenda.

Evidence free sock puppets

There seems to be a rash (sorry!) of new posters on JABS, all of whom come on asking questions that ara tailor-made for a standard JABS answer. "Pro single-vaccine choice", "Yes - MMR is dangerous" etc. I strongly suspect several of these of being "sock puppets" - designed to give the forum perhaps a little more credibility. However, one or two of them come on initially as "I don't know much about MMR…" but fairly quickly seem to develop some quite detailed "knowledge" about specific vaccine related topics…

They're also fairly easily recognisible as sock puppets due to moronic statements like this from "CathyB":

My son had the single measles vac at 10 months. Three weeks later his temp shot up and he went into convulsions. Of course the doctors all say it's not the vac's fault, but I beg to differ.

Have you considered the number of factors that could have affected your son's health in three weeks? No - of course not, you just blindly decide it's the vaccine. Is there any evidence that it was the vaccine? No. Do you have any kind of second opinion from someone with a medical background? No. You just decide, unilaterally, that it must've been the vaccine. Idiot.

More Vile Posturings

The JABS crew have been bleating over the George Fisher verdict. For those of you not immediately aware of the case, George Fisher was an 18 month old child, who tragically died - for no immediately apparent reason. Dreadful though this is, it happens. Toddlers drop dead - adults drop dead. They just die. It's dreadful, but it happens.

In George Fisher's case though, Jackie Fletcher, of JABS, and that evil bastard John Stone, have persuaded Mr and Mrs Fisher that the MMR vaccine that George had, ten days before his death, was to blame.

Lets think about that for a moment. Mr and Mrs Fisher have just lost a child - the worst thing that could happen to any parents. Then Fletcher and Stone turn up, and say "Your child was killed by SOMETHING YOU DID!!! YOU KILLED YOUR CHILD BY VACCINATING HIM!!!"

However, if you then take anyone in sight to court, claiming it was THEIR (Big Pharma, Ben Goldacre) FAULT, you can assuage that guilt.

The trouble is, the inquest that Fletcher and Stone have pushed the parents into has turned round and said "Er, no. Vaccines had nothing to do with this child's death."

John Stone is still bleating on, as are several other posters on the JABS forum, making out that there's some kind of cover up. Let's see what kind of shit they're coming out with, shall we?

Gus the Fuss: The pharma cartel lies about the vaccines given when the baby is born and then lies yet again when the baby dies evil filthy liars

Allison: Another point I'd like to make that has since bowled me over;

The Coroner, Alan Crickmore with the sole decision into the findings of the death of Georgie Fisher is "a divorce lawyer".

He cited death by natural causes.

Was he really a suitable choice to be allocated such an important medical based decision? I think not.

Aasa: I don't know about the UK, but here in Ontario, coroners need to be practising physicians. One would think that that should be at least a minimum requirement to be a coroner.

Now, it's interesting that the choice of coroner wasn't cited as a problem before the verdict was announced.

It's impossible to please these evil bastards who are, when it comes down to it, dead set on trying to kill your (of if not your, someone else's) children.

They want to ban vaccines, and they want to do this by having a scientist tell the world that they're likely to kill children, or cause autism. To this end, they find any dead child they can, badger their grieving parents by lying to them about vaccines (as we've seen), and then wait for the outcome of a pointless enquiry. They know full well that the enquiry will say "No, vaccines weren't involved", but they put the parents through the horrible experience anyway.

They just hope that one day they'll get a judge / coroner / whoever who's suffering from early onset Alzheimers who'll give them the result that they want. However, they keep getting reasonable human beings, who keep following the evidence and saying "No, nothing to do with vaccines."

In the meantime, they'll push as many parents through this whole (as John Stone puts it) "sorry farago", destroying their already shredded lives even further.

John Stone, Jackie Fletcher et al, I hope you rot in hell.

Yup - I was right about Stone

Yes - John Stone has broken cover and is now trying to spin the George Fisher inquest as a partial victory, implying that it's the final nail in the coffin for the government. Not quite sure how he works that one out.

The most disgusting part of his weaselly-worded post though is the first sentence.

I feel terribly sorry for Chris and Sarah being dragged through this disreputable farago, but I do not think the way they have been treated - or the way the BBC popped up when it was all over - will lead to greater trust in the authorities. By now the public have sense of weariness and disillusionment with everything government does, and this is going to look scarcely more credible than the jury at the Menezes inquest being instructed not bring back a verdict of unlawful killing. I believe they overplayed their hand.

Who dragged them through this "disreputable farago" John? JABS did, with your encouragement. When two grieving parents should have been receiving support after a terrible loss, what happens? JABS dives in to grab their grief for its own cause, telling them that yes, there *is* a reason, and it's VACCINES!!! When, after pushing them through the legal hoops required to get this inquest, not allowing them to come to terms with their loss, the JABS story is shown to be a pack of lies, their world collapses once more. I hope you're all proud of yourselves for the extra suffering you've heaped on these two distraught people.

This isn't a final nail in the coffin of government, but with any luck it'll be the final nail in the coffin of JABS.

John Stone's paranoia

The JABbers have been whining on recently that the NHS is pushing MMR in the wake of news that the number of measles infections is the highest it's been in a decade. Seems logical to me - if measles is spreading, let's push a pre-emptive procedure that will stop it.

John Stone, predictably, sees it a little differently:

Surely this just being timed to coincide to block out the Georgie Fisher inquest along with the stupid programme with David Elliman.

His bleating gets more feeble by the day - which can only be a good thing.

Stone might be interested to see this - the George Fisher inquest verdict. Natural causes. No doubt the JABS crowd will hail this as some kind of victory and proof of conspiracy, when the facts are that a sickly child (whose parents had cancelled MMR appointments previously because he was ill) tragically died ten days after having his MMR jab - with no evidence to suggest one fact is related to the other. His parents, no doubt egged on by the likes of Stone, "believe the vaccine was "implicated" in their son's death."

Well - there you go. It wasn't. My thoughts go out to the family, obviously, but the sight of the likes of Stone and Jackie Fletcher grabbing this case for publicity for their discredited cause has been utterly vile.

When is a charity not a charity?

Gus the Fuss is a twat. He posts gibberish at pub kicking out time, and when he might be sober, he just posts rubbish. Now, he's having a go at the National Autistic Society because they pay their staff.

Hidden agenda maybe to put it in a mild as possible way ..and lets not kid ourselves on theNAS aren’t a real charity not in the terms and sense of a real charity, the organisers draw big salaries

Someone should really tell Gus that all charities pay their staff. How do they expect to get competent, experienced and talented staff unless they pay salaries on a par with local government or the private sector? Pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

Pay nothing, you might get a moron like Gus.

MinorityView displays her inner arsehole

Not biologically speaking, you understand.

I generally have a little more time for MinorityView than most of the dickheads on JABS - she sticks to simply misrepresenting facts and twisting studies, rather than actually spouting obviously ludicrous pseudo-science and quack remedies.

Or at least she did.

Now that you have mentioned homeopathy the pro-vaxers will probably give up on you. They regard homeopathy the way vampires look on garlic

No MV - anyone with even a vague understanding of science regards homeopathy as most people regard a constipated mime artist. Utterly pointless, ineffective, and full of shit.

Suba provides advice that will kill you

This is the kind of advice that can kill.

It is also important to note that even once a person contracts meningitis their fate is not sealed, because bacterial meningitis has been treated effectively, bringing people back from death's door, using such support to the immune system as significant doses of intravenous Vitamin C. Please be aware, though, that a hospital will only administer alternative treatments when specifically instructed to by you - otherwise regimens that weaken the immune system are employed, particularly antibiotics, and the consequences can be fatal. You also need to be aware that legally the hospital must administer the Vitamin C if you request it. You are the boss, not them, but most hospital staff seem to need reminding of this! Seek the assistance of a doctor that is learned in nutritional therapies who can give the detailed instructions to the hospital.

For crying out loud - bacterial meningitis can, ond often will kill, without prompt treatment with antibiotics. If you follow this advice, YOU MAY WELL DIE.

Remember that if you even consider taking medical advice from any of the nutters of JABS. Suba wants prosecuting.

Vaccines made from DEAD BABIES!!!

Lola really is a moron. She's now equating vaccines with cannibalism.

I read that some vax's have material from aborted babies Im very very unhappy about that.. whatever the reasons ethically, it cannot be right in this society to push & push these childhood vax's onto an unsuspecting population of new parents who have no idea about this & like me would be truly disgusted (regardless of medical benefits they believe it provides)if they knew

& what does this fetal tissue provide in the vax's anyway???

to my mind its akin to cannabalism but much worse

For what it's worth, rubella vaccine is cultured on human cells, which are a line derived from a legal abortion in the 1960s. There are no aborted foetus cells in MMR. But the JABS crew will do anything to frighten or disgust worried mothers into avoiding vaccines.

Perhaps Lola was making a genuine enquiry, but then Truth Seeker chimes in with an explanation that does nothing to reassure. Evil bastard.

The dose is the poison

Having failed to find any real connection between anti-cervical cancer vaccinations and ill-health of any kind, Seonaid is using the "Green Our Vaccines" argument and claiming Gardasil is actually rat poison. Apparently there's sodium borate listed as an ingredient.

What do rat poison and the HPV vaccine have in common? The answer is a hazardous chemical known as sodium borate. Savvy readers may wonder what a toxin that is commonly used to kill rats is doing in the ingredient list for the HPV vaccine that is currently being pushed on girls as young as nine and is even being considered for men and boys.

Hmm. While it's used as an insecticide, Wikipedia doesn't list it being used as a rodenticide. According to Wikipedia (I know - not exactly the world's most accurate of sources, but good enough to counter this kind of shit), the median lethal dose in rats (which is probably where the "Rat Poison" line comes from) is 2.66g/kg. So, if, for the sake of argument, we assume a similar figure for humans… Let's take a ten stone human being. That's about 63.5kg. The lethal dose would therefore be (63.5 * 2.66g) - about 169 grams. Getting on for half a pound.

How much is there in a Gardasil injection? Well, a Gardasil dose is 0.5ml. If we consider the vaccine to have the same density as water, that's a total mass of 0.5 grams. The Gardasil leaflet doesn't list the actual mass of sodium borate, but it does list the mass of other ingredients up to 20 micrograms, so we can assume that the amount of sodium borate is less than 20 micrograms. (In fact it's likely to be trace, but I'm giving the nutters the benefit of the doubt here). 20 micrograms. 0.00002 grams. Or, at maximum, about one eight-and-a-half-millionth of a lethal dose - probably far less.

Why not check how much is in your favourite cosmetics?

Sodium Borate in Wikipedia

More on abuse

They've really picked up on this new topic - and it's getting worse. Jabba is now claiming (without citing a shred of evidence - because there isn't any) that:

If you look at the number of deaths from SIDS, abuse, etc, and realize that most of them are due to vaccinations plus the chance of getting autism or encepalitis, no sensible parent would opt for the vaccination.

So most child abuse is actually caused by vaccines is it? Why doesn't JABS adopt a new strapline? "JABS - Defending Child Abuse"

It's just appalling.

Suba's being a twat again

Proof that anti-vaxxers really are slowly slipping off the fringes of reality, Suba is now trying to tell parents who've been scared by the MMR hoax that everything wrong with the body is down to it being too acidic. Does it need saying that this is just utter, utter bollocks?

We were all taught in human biology that immunity comes from white blood cells protecting us from some invading germ or virus. White blood cells provide NO immunity. White blood cells do not destroy germs. White blood cells are glorified janitors that swim around in our blood and lymphatic plasma picking up the garbage we create from an acidic lifestyle and diet. White blood cells are NOT soldiers, destroying some invading germ coming in from the outside world that would make us sick. True immunity comes to each of us by maintaining the alkaline fluids of the body. That is where true immunity is found. The first line of defense against sickness and disease is an alkaline internal environment. As soon as you put something acidic into your mind, into your mouth, into your lungs, your alkaline buffering system is engaged to neutralizing or buffer any acidic food, drink, or thought that might be present. That's true immunity. It is found in the alkaline reserves for your body. When you have an alkaline lifestyle and diet you are able to defend off environmental, dietary or metabolic acids that would make you sick, tired and/or fat. Germs DO NOT cause disease. Acids cause pain, sickness and disease.

So, all modern medicine is wrong, and this fucking wingnut is the saviour of humankind? I think not. Mind you, that's par for the course at JABS.

Cybertiger's support of child killers

Cybertiger makes no secret of his loathing of Prof Sir Roy Meadow and other "expert witnesses" in "shaken baby" cases - preferring to blame those child deaths on vaccines. As we've seen, that appears to be down to defending the family honour. However, he seems to be taking this support for child killers to the extreme:

Imagine your baby dying and the struggle to save him. Imagine being arrested for shaking him to death. Imagine going to prison for life without possibility of parole for a murder you did not commit, for a crime that hadn't happened. Remember Alan Yurko? That nightmare happened to him.

Alan Yurko's name perhaps isn't as well known (certainly in the UK) as Sally Clark, but Wikipedia summarises his case as:

"Alan Yurko, born December 11, 1969 (1969-12-11) (age 38), was sentenced to life in prison + 10 years (in 1998) without parole for the murder of his son, due to shaken baby syndrome".

Cybertiger is a staunch supporter of the "Alan Yurko is innocent" campaign, despite the fact that the autopsy report stated:

"Post-Mortem Findings included minor contusions of both temporal areas of the head, small ecchymosis of the right lower eyelid, fresh subdural hemorrhages of the right and left cerebral hemispheres and at base of brain and some areas of spinal cord, and retinal bleeding. The brain was grossly edematous. In addition there were several old, healing fractures of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 10th ribs, all posterior and on the left."

So, Dr Struthers - are you going to explain how all those injuries can be caused by vaccination?

There's a far more in-depth discussion of this case at the most excellent Millenium Project. I just find it interesting the disgusting lengths a GP is prepared to go to to suck up to the anti-vaccination lobby.

UPDATE
Coincidentally, Rosemary has posted more on this today (and Cybertiger's chimed in too) - a great long rambling essay by that vile anti-vaxer F. Edward Yazbak, full of feeble assertions, all attempting to show that vaccines were to blame for a baby who was beaten to death.

It is interesting to note that when Yurko's verdict was changed to one of manslaughter, the judge specifically announced that there was no indication that vaccines were in any way to blame for baby Alan's death.

They get viler and viler at JABS. By the day.

How normal ill-effects are caused by vaccines - the HORROR!

One common tactic of the JABS crowd is to ascribe ill-effects to vaccines, when there is no evidence to show the connection. Here's a prime example from that egregious bastard Truth Seeker:

And yet it seems if your pre disposed to warts Gardasil may make the problem worse. In the links in my post above some comlained about this, following the vaccine.

"One of the most startling findings is 78 cases of outbreaks of warts
following the vaccine in women already infected without knowing it. Besides
genital warts, some patients experienced massive outbreaks on the face,
hands, or feet, sometimes caused by strains not included in the vaccine"

Sounds nasty, eh? Until you actually read what he's posted: 78 cases of outbreaks of warts among women already infected. So you're infected with the virus that causes warts, and then - horror of horrors - you get some actual, y'know, warts on your skin. Who'd've thought it, eh? But Truth Seeker wants you to believe that the vaccine was in some way responsible - no doubt if he actually reads this, he'd come back crying "but you can't prove that it wasn't the vaccine, can you? Eh? Eh?" - without realising that there's not a shred of evidence to lead anyone but the most strongly agenda-driven moron to suppose that there might be.

With friends like these…

Aobbard is pushing the Budwig Flax Oil Diet as a cure for cancer. Frankly, if she wanted to take it herself, I'd not want to stop her. However, this is what she posts…

I do know of someone with young children who's wife is in late stage cancer who is having chemo. I mentioned this on the Yahoo Iodine Forum I belong to and someone very kindly emailed me to suggest I passed this information on. It is rather a dilemma for me and as yet I have not done so but it is really playing on my mind.
I know its unlikely but could it be that this could possibly save her life?
I can see that in UK since we are not offered any alternatives how easy it is to be sucked into mainstream medicine especially when you are so scared.

So you're taking potentially lethal medical advice from the "Yahoo Iodine Forum", and are considering passing it on to a terminally ill friend?? What kind of heartless bitch are you???

And let me just point out that mainstream medicine is mainstream because it's evidence based, and currently offers the most effective known treatments. Would it not be more accurate to say how easy it is for simple minded fools to be sucked into ludicrous quackery pushed by charlatans and believed by cretins?

Inflated sense of self importance

Suba seems to be convinced of the importance of JABS in the grand scheme of things, and flings out one of those regular accusations of "Big Pharma" trolling. But this time (s)he goes a bit further:

Thomas P, the very fact you hog these boards more diligently than any parent with vaccine damaged kid's is proof enough that MMR is damaging our kids. And you get paid to do it that is for sure. You are part of a massive PR campaign of misinformation, lies and deceit of which you think you are some sort of master. Pharmaceuticals spend 60% of their budget on marketing products, you are part of a corporate cancer that is trying to plough a global furrow in a field made infertile by big farma.

No Suba, JABS isn't important enough for Big Pharma to waste money on it. Individuals make a point of looking at JABS, pointing out the real stupidity there, and hopefully discouraging maybe one worried parent to discard it as the dangerous nonsense it is.

I really don't know why…

…but Cybertiger is still posting the exchange from OnMedica.com. I have no idea why - it just makes him look like a complete twat. Judge for yourself…
http://jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1379&whichpage=4 (not a clickable link, as ever)

Burden of proof

Truth Seeker uses the "burden of proof" argument fairly frequently. His (her?) argument goes like this:

The onus to prove vaccinations do not suppress immunity and do not make one more suscetable to chronic diseases such as autoimmune diseases lies with the makers, the DOH and people who licence them which they have not done.

Actually, Truth Seeker, all the available evidence does suggest that vaccinations do not suppress immunity, and don't make one more susceptible to chronic diseases. The problem lies with cretins like you who have an agenda to pursue, and are well aware that it's logically impossible to prove a negative. For example, it's impossible to prove that vaccinations don't leave you more likely to be attacked by tigers. There's no evidence that suggests you are more likely to be - just as there's no evidence to suggest that vaccinations make you more susceptible to autoimmune diseases. When all the evidence (and there's a hell of a lot of it) points to there being no connection, and there's no evidence to suggest that there is a connection - if you come up with a theory, the onus is on you. But you're trying to convince worried mothers that there might be a connection. You evil, evil bastard. I hope you get attacked by tigers.

New favourite phrase

Cybertiger has a new favourite phrase, which he's using to insult any medical professional who doesn't agree with his potty views of the world, or who he doesn't like. (So - pretty much everyone). It's "scientifically incurious".

Dr Michael Fitzpatrick has rubbished that idiot John Briffa's (who Cybertiger worships) support of a hypothesis that rain causes autism.

Dr Fitzpatrick doesn't know the cause of autism or why its prevalence has increased: he seems not to care. He doesn't understand how genetic vulnerability might interact with a variety of possible environmental triggers, including vaccines. Fitzpatrick is scientifically incurious. And he absurdly dismisses a higher rainfall association without giving it another thought. Fitzpatrick and his ilk are a manifest disappointment.

Anthony Cox has also pointed out the flaws in the study; he too is "scienfically incurious".

Dr Anthony Cox PhD has hilariously covered the rainfall story with his own brand of scientific incuriosity,

Cybertiger thinks that using long words makes him look clever and important, when actually, he just looks like a twat. You see, all he's doing is using the "open minded", "can think for myself" argument that morons like Truth Seeker use, when people don't agree with him. Just with fancier words. He's trying to imply that his fellow medical professionals are so jaded that they no longer care about cutting edge investigation into new science - when actually, he's just trying to pick petty fights with people who know where to draw the line between clever and stupid. Cybertiger clearly doesn't.

It's a conspiracy, stupid

According to laura_c_a, the only reason doctors and nurses are so keen on giving children the MMR jab is because they get paid for doing so:

In my opinion, and don't take this as medical advice - I am not a qualified doctor - and if I were you, I would not take your daughter back.

When the nurse said, "the individual injections she had as a baby didn't 'count'", I think the nurse meant in terms of staff bonuses.

The GP surgery and its staff get ££,£££ of bonuses if they meet their immunisation targets, so of course, the nurse wants your daughter to return!

That's obviously it. Nothing to do with actually wanting children to stay healthy, is it? Oh no. And doctors are either stupid becuase they don't know that *insert quack remedy of choice* cures *insert ailment of choice*, despite it being all over the internet - especially here, on *insert quack-website-du-jour*, or, if they're not stupid, they must be actively suppressing it, because they don't get paid for *ludicrous quack remedy*. That's it! Conspiracy! Obviously. Sigh.

John Stone and Cybertiger in "No-one likes us and we're going to cry" shock

John Stone likes to present himself as the reasonable face of anti-vax lunacy, but whenever anyone points out compelling evidence why he's wrong, he tends to turn into a shouty ranter, flinging ad-hom attacks left, right and centre.

Cybertiger has been whinging that the majority of posters on OnMedica (other doctors - intelligent, thoughtful people mainly) think he's an arse. He even posts their comments to illustrate this. (I think he's hoping to convince people that he's outsmarting them all with his wit, but he just proves what a cock he is).

It's a long post, so here's the address (I'm not linking to it - you'll need to copy and paste): http://www.jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1379&whichpage=3

John Stone then chimes in with his usual debating tactic:

It is pitiful. The only response to parents who complain about damage is to claim they are lying - even before inspecting the evidence. What a bunch of nauseating toads. The innuendo over the botched colonscopy says it all. The newspaper repeats allegations which have been withdrawn. Innuendo rules.

What a twat.

Since I started this post, the "debate" - or rather, Dr Struthers trying to wriggle out of awkward questions - has raged on, and Anthony Cox has turned up to add a little more sanity. This should be good; CyberStruthers loathes Anthony Cox. :-) So, what happens?

1. He shoots Cybertiger down in flames:
   

   So Mark Struthers who routinely makes accusations about other peoples conflicts of interest, usually without any supporting evidence, accepts money from the government to administer vaccines to patients when he believes that those vaccines are both dangerous and unnecessary. What a surprise. No doubt he also prescribes statins despite his view that they are a scam, and anti-retrovirals to HIV patients despite his views on the "mythology of HIV causing AIDS".



2. He finds the perfect description for Jackie Fletcher and JABS:
   

   Jackie Fletcher describes her group as a group representing parents of vaccine-damaged children. Certainly vaccines can cause adverse effects, and this is accepted by both the medical profession and government, but the sad fact is, that in the case of the autism-MMR vaccine hypothesis, many of the parents are not parents of vaccine-damaged children, but victims of a terrible hoax that has led them down a desperately sad false trail of anger and despair. Now that every aspect of the Wakefield hypothesis has been undermined or disproved, it is time that we moved on from this debate and that efforts were put into research of treatments and support for autism that work. It is clear that for parents of autistic children, JABS is actually a counterproductive organisation that is undermining research in autism by continually associating autism with pseudoscience and conspiracy theories.

Hurrah for Anthony Cox, laughs all round at Cybertiger who appears to have slunk away with his tail between his legs, and "YOU'RE A COCK, STONE!" for John Stone.

Cybertiger continues to be a hypocritical cock

He's reposted something he posted on OnMedica:

Few operations or investigative procedures are without risk and risks always have to be balanced with potential therapeutic and diagnostic benefit.

Very true Dr Struthers. Why do you take a completely different view when it comes to vaccination?

I'm all right Jack

This is a prime example of the "me me me" attitude of the JABS posters. Aquamarine smugly posts:

Think I'll stick to the good old-fashioned things that have got humanity through the last hundred thousand years or so... good wholesome organic food, sunlight, clean water, exercise, hygiene. Somehow we survived that long without vaccines and without the toxic potions we smear all over ourselves every day, so I think I'll just fall back on our collective experience and take my chances.

While wholesome food, clean water, hygiene etc are all extremely good ideas, and presumably things that Aquamarine has easy access to, there are plenty people in the world who don't have these advantages, for whom measles is far more likely to be fatal. In addition, if everyone healthy with these advantages eschews vaccination, we're going to see more outbreaks of potentially fatal diseases - and for those of the population who for whatever reason can't be vaccinated, with suppressed immune systems - that could be disastrous.

Perhaps there's no malice here, unlike some JABS posters, but there's just a serious lack of rational thought.

As an afterthought, is Aquamarine thinking of relying on wholesome food for protection if he/she ever travels to a country where malaria is endemic?