Jump to content

Arbeit macht frei, or the Tories and the terminally ill


NormanH
 Share

Recommended Posts

I forgot to mention that I also would take anything that Gary Null says with a pinch of salt. One of his best claims way that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS. Rather than add more I would suggest you simply Google his name. You will find that he has his own, rather strange, agenda on medicine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Incapacity Benefit is quite a strange benefit in that not only do claimants have to prove that they are incapable long term of working, but also need to have paid sufficient NI contributions within a specified time. As Sara says

[quote user="Sara"]My husband worked for 25 years whilst struggling with a progressive and degenerative neurological illness. He worked hard enough to be able to retire very early on his own funds. He has never drawn a social benefit in his entire life. [/quote]

and he's not alone in not being entitled to IB. There must be huge numbers of people who are permanently disabled and yet because they haven't got the correct number of NI credits in the necessary years, can't claim. I suppose really that the best thing to do would be to reform the whole benefits system making it more responsive to need.

Onto the latest new subject to be introduced (!), I thought that MMR had been found to save vast numbers of lives, and the doctor who said that it was dangerous (Dr Wakefield?) had been utterly discredited.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"][quote user="Sara"]

Quillan, there is an excellent U.S. radio piece on Dr David Wakefield & the MMR controversy by investigative journalist Gary Null. It is over 4 hours long. It includes interviews with Dr Wakefield himself and the notorious Brian Deer. As well as other prominent figures within the medical, legal and vaccine research fields. It also includes evidence from mothers of the Lancet children who were at the centre of the controversy.    

It is the most incisive and impartial piece I have come accross on this highly controversial story. Preferential certainly to the politicised commentaries posted in the U.K. media on this matter I would suggest. A good starting point for those interested in the subject.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/progressive-commentary-hour/

You can download the 3 individual parts under the heading "Progressive Commentary Hour  - 01/23/12..A special three part Progressive Commentary Hour on the vaccine controversy"

Having listened to this in detail & examined other evidence out there, in my personal opinion, things do seem to point in one direction. It is quite damning I feel on the part of the BMJ and Brian Deer. There is other evidence out there but this one does encapsulate the facts quite well re. the GMC inquiry. 

[/quote]

Strange how these people could interview the 'mothers' of the 'Lancet Children' because firstly it assumes that only mothers were involved which is wrong and secondly the names of the parents involved have never been released. In the article which you are intitially talked about which is entitled "Secrets of the MMR scare: how the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed" mothers and fathers who were interviewed were given numbers. So how anyone can claim they got the names from that article is beyond belief. You may want to read the report yourself so you can see I am right and they are wrong, a link is given below.

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347

[/quote]

Quote from my earlier message: "It also includes evidence from mothers of the Lancet children who were at the centre of the controversy" 

This does not state or suggest they were interviewed on air. I am therefore somewhat at a loss on the point you are making here in relation to my earlier message. Although what you say concerning anonymity of study participants is accurate and indeed common knowledge to anyone who has looked into this matter. I am rather lost by your comment "..it assumes that only mothers were involved.." I do not understand the point you are trying to make here.

More accurately I perhaps could have commented that statements from mothers of the Lancet children were read out in full on air. They were interviewed privately I believe. I would imagine the mothers themselves came forward on a discrete basis to facilitate this. A mother of another autistic child treated at the Royal Free, who was separate from the Lancet study, was interviewed live on air. Are you aware that Brian Deer himself is alleged to have published the names of the children on his website? Before, allegedly he took them down. I am aware of the BMJ report. But thanks. This is not a matter of right or wrong on this particular point but a suggestion on my part to examine some rather more impartial evidence than one might obtain from reading anything emanating from Fiona Godlee and the BMJ. Or for that matter from the British media.   

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]I forgot to mention that I also would take anything that Gary Null says with a pinch of salt. One of his best claims way that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS. Rather than add more I would suggest you simply Google his name. You will find that he has his own, rather strange, agenda on medicine.[/quote]

Why not listen to the evidence before passing judgement Quillan? Or is that too much to ask for?

The BMJ also, arguably, has a rather strange agenda when it comes to medicine and medical issues.

Personally I tend to rely upon evidence rather than google results, wikipedia or U.K. tabloid headlines. It pays one to keep an open mind in life I feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"]

[quote user="Quillan"]I forgot to mention that I also would take anything that Gary Null says with a pinch of salt. One of his best claims way that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS. Rather than add more I would suggest you simply Google his name. You will find that he has his own, rather strange, agenda on medicine.[/quote]

Why not listen to the evidence before passing judgement Quillan? Or is that too much to ask for?

The BMJ also, arguably, has a rather strange agenda when it comes to medicine and medical issues.

Personally I tend to rely upon evidence rather than google results, wikipedia or U.K. tabloid headlines. It pays one to keep an open mind in life I feel.

[/quote]

But is not that the point, there is no evidence.

Gary Null is a very strange person who in the past has been sacked for making outrageous comments and who has his own agenda and interests that conflicts with mainstream medical practices from which he makes his living. In the old days people would have called him a 'quack'. Likewise American media is as bad if not worse than UK media and should be at best tarred with the same brush. Don't forget it was their media that pumped up WMD's and that their government that lied to the world about Iraq. That would not have been quite so bad however if it was not for the fact that it ended up directly causing the loss of thousands of lives including women and children by pushing us all in to an illegal war and occupation of another country. The American government and it's media have done the same with Afghanistan where far more civilians have lost their lives than any of the troops that have been sent there. One only has to read and see American press and the comments bordering almost on hysteria about Iran and North Korea.  No they don't have 'nice' regimes but if America and it's press had their way we would be invading those countries next.

So my conclusion is that yes there are big problems with the UK press and media but they are not alone. Even the French media has it's moments. As for Murdoc, well the underside of a snake could not be more slipery. His latest thing about just deciding to launch The Sun on Sunday has been a thing in planning since before he closed the News of The World. It is a matter of common knowledge and record that he bought the website names for this paper two weeks before he closed the NOTW. It will be interesting to see how many ex NOTW journalists (if you can call them that) turn up on the SOS. As I said before if you read something of interest in the news go and do your won research amongst non media websites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is precisely the point Quillan. There is in my judgement, & many, many others, irrefutable evidence to support the contention that Wakefield is completely innocent of his charges and furthermore that the Lancet study was wholly valid.

Rather rash surely for someone in your position, I would politely suggest, to jump to such a self-convinced & unwavering verdict on the matter without even bothering to listen to the evidence. Surely? Or have the laws of logic & rationality been inverted since I last checked?

I agree with your thinking re. the U.K. and U.S. media. The manipulation of the truth leading up to the Iraq war was indeed an utter disgrace. I also agree with your sentiments re. Murdoch and the glorious rise of the Sunday Sun. However, knowing how warped & skewed the media is very much explains why such controversial stories as MMR, Wakefield and the astonishing antics of the establishment's popular complainant Brian Deer have to go underground. As it were.

Apologies to NormanH for hurtling off topic with this!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only listened to about 90 minutes of the program and consider that up to that time it to be just as biased but to the opposite degree as the others that you claim have found Wakefield 'guilty'.

Since 2004 scientists and doctors in the UK and America from both camps (i.e. guilty and innocent if you like) have tried to duplicate his findings but have as yet been able to do so. That to me says that his claim that the MMR vaccine can cause autism and bowel disease is not founded. Further WHO have reported an increase in measles and deaths from measles particularly in the UK to be on the rise. In nearly all cases they say the child did not receive it's MMR vaccination. One conclusion you could come to is that his report frightened parents in to stopping their children being vaccinated and in doing so have left their children unprotected resulting in them catching the measles and dying. I wonder how many of those parents now wish their children had their MMR vaccination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]

I have only listened to about 90 minutes of the program and consider that up to that time it to be just as biased but to the opposite degree as the others that you claim have found Wakefield 'guilty'.

Since 2004 scientists and doctors in the UK and America from both camps (i.e. guilty and innocent if you like) have tried to duplicate his findings but have as yet been able to do so. That to me says that his claim that the MMR vaccine can cause autism and bowel disease is not founded. Further WHO have reported an increase in measles and deaths from measles particularly in the UK to be on the rise. In nearly all cases they say the child did not receive it's MMR vaccination. One conclusion you could come to is that his report frightened parents in to stopping their children being vaccinated and in doing so have left their children unprotected resulting in them catching the measles and dying. I wonder how many of those parents now wish their children had their MMR vaccination.

[/quote]

Dr Wakefield did not claim his research had proven a link between the vaccine, autism and bowel disorders. The conclusion drawn from his research was that "further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to the vaccine.” Wakefield also recommended that until further research was done, it might be a good idea to separate the three viral components in the MMR shot into 3 single vaccines.

A list of replication studies supporting his research, including a recent U.S. study, may be accessed via the following link: http://www.vaccinesafetyfirst.com/pdf/replication%20and%20support%20doc.pdf

Returning to the question of the GMC inquiry. The evidence that this represented a miscarriage of justice is quite convincing in my opinion. Also specific evidence implicating Brian Deer in withholding information vital to the inquiry is also becomming clearer.

I wonder how many parents of autistic children now wish they had been more cautious & obtained an alternative means of vaccination to the MMR jab?    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"][quote user="Quillan"]

I have only listened to about 90 minutes of the program and consider that up to that time it to be just as biased but to the opposite degree as the others that you claim have found Wakefield 'guilty'.

Since 2004 scientists and doctors in the UK and America from both camps (i.e. guilty and innocent if you like) have tried to duplicate his findings but have as yet been able to do so. That to me says that his claim that the MMR vaccine can cause autism and bowel disease is not founded. Further WHO have reported an increase in measles and deaths from measles particularly in the UK to be on the rise. In nearly all cases they say the child did not receive it's MMR vaccination. One conclusion you could come to is that his report frightened parents in to stopping their children being vaccinated and in doing so have left their children unprotected resulting in them catching the measles and dying. I wonder how many of those parents now wish their children had their MMR vaccination.

[/quote]

I wonder how many parents of autistic children now wish they had been more cautious & obtained an alternative means of vaccination to the MMR jab?    

[/quote]I am sure that those parents would rather have an autistic child than a dead one.

The problem with giving split vaccinations is that this requires more visits to the doctor/clinic and so increases the risk that the child is not fully vaccinated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillan previously wrote:

"I forgot to mention that I also would take anything that Gary Null says with a pinch of salt. One of his best claims way that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS. Rather than add more I would suggest you simply Google his name. You will find that he has his own, rather strange, agenda on medicine."

"Gary Null is a very strange person who in the past has been sacked for making outrageous comments and who has his own agenda and interests that conflicts with mainstream medical practices from which he makes his living. In the old days people would have called him a 'quack'."

I meant to respond in defence of Gary Null yesterday but overlooked doing so. In a belated response I set out below some interesting quotes from a prominent figure within the medical research community:


“There are too many shortcomings in the theory that HIV causes all signs of AIDS. We are seeing people HIV-infected for 9, 10, 12 years or more, and they are still in good shape, their immune system is still good. It is unlikely that these people will come down with AIDS later.”

“HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS.”

VI Int’l AIDS Conference, Jun 24 1990

“AIDS does not inevitably lead to death, especially if you suppress the co-factors that support the disease. It is very important to tell this to people who are infected.... I think we should put the same weight now on the co-factors as we have on HIV.”

“Psychological factors are critical in supporting immune function. If you suppress this psychological support by telling someone he’s condemned to die, your words alone will have condemned him.”

“We did not purify [isolate] ... We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology [shape] typical of retroviruses ... They were very different ... What we did not have, as I have always recognized it, is that it was truly the cause of AIDS.”

Interview with Djamel Tahi-1997

— Dr. Luc Montagnier, Virologist, co-discoverer of HIV, Pasteur Institute, Paris - Winner of the Noble Prize in Physiology or Medecine 2008 for the co-discovery of human immunodeficiency virus.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...