----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 7:23 PM Subject: Re: Cover-up or protection?
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 12:26 AM > Subject: Cover-up or protection? > > > >More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, > >and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The > >disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed > >among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added > >to baby vaccines in 1931. > > I looked at when autism is diagnosed and found at > > http://www.neurologychannel.com/autism/diagnosis.shtml > > "Diagnosis of autism is usually made by the age of 3." > > In Gary's post, (and basically confirmed elsewhere, the only shot given to > kids under 3 that still has thimerosal are the flu shots, which are very > rarely given. If thimerosal is the culpet, shouldn't diagnosis of autism > be reduced to false positives? I guess only false positives overstates it. From what I've read, a relatively small fraction of children under 3 have received flu shots. This would indicate that the numbers should drop to the same percentage of children who got those shots. And....the true rate among those who have not had the flu shot should be near zero. So, does anyone know if the diagnosis of autism has fallen off by, say, 80% over the last few years? I'd guess that, if that happened, someone would have noticed. Dan M> _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
