Quote:
Originally Posted by MaDMaN_26
It’s amazing to see how emphatically people are for or against this. Obviously as it involves children I understand the emotion, But I’m surprised there are not more people (although I have seen a few here) posting about how this issues is confusing and frustrating as it does not seem there is a clear message.
To be quite honest I had heard about possible unsafe dosages of mercury being used in vaccines to extend their shelf life and how that was possibly causing autism in small children. I had concerns about vaccinations long before I heard Jenny and Jims take on it. I think that probably goes for most people. To think or say that any persons decision about vaccinating their child is based on Jenny or Jim ranting I think is an untrue assumption. People had these concerns before hand and they are just famous people with the same concerns. They are not making my mind up either way, but I will be watching to see who answers their questions and how.
For me I think the human body is made to deal with toxins, we have a system to filter them out and it can deal with many when the exposure is moderate or the dose is small enough… my worry would be that a new born’s system is not up to speed yet and I think personally I would simply wait a extra few months before vaccinating. I think the risk would them be minimized as the babies body would have the capacity to deal with toxins in that amount, at 1 month or 2 I’m not sure that still the case.
I wonder if a study has been done relating the amount of preservatives, McDonald cheeseburgers and steroids in the food breast feeding mothers consume relates to autism… seems to me many of our diseases are growing at rate about equal to our terrible diets getting worse.
|
It's certainly possible that our diet contributes to disease in some way--type 2 diabetes and heart disease are just two examples. But Autism is a poor example for any kind of historical argument because the one thing that has changed most dramatically is the method by which it is detected.
What this means is that comparing autism "rates" as a baseline to years ago is very, very dumb. It's maybe the dumbest thing about the "Jim and Jenny" argument. The reason there appears to be more autism now than in the past is probably in large part that we are now better at detecting it.