once again, you dodged the entirety of my posts behind the excuse of “time” (yet, you’ll spend precious seconds spouting unsupported “safety” drivel, especially in the face of previously linked lab studies where alum adjuvant has been turning animals autistic. in addition, multiple cdc researchers already debunked your bogus safety claims.
CDC Whistleblower: CDC covered up MMR autism link, Immunization Director admits plausibility of autism link (audio)
this isn’t “correlation”, but in fact causation.
Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 40: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays which are two separate ICD9 codes.
Exposures at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders
Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 44: “Now for speech delays, which is the largest single disorder in this category of neurologic delays. The results are a suggestion of a trend with a small dip. The overall test for trend is highly statistically significant above one.”
Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 76: “What I have done here, I am putting into the model instead of mercury, a number of antigens that the children received, and what do we get? Not surprisingly, we get very similar estimates as what we got for Thimerosal because every vaccine put in the equation has Thimerosal. So for speech and the other ones maybe it’s not so significant, but for the overall group it is also significant….Here we have the same thing, but instead of number of antigens, number of shots. Just the number of vaccinations given to a child, which is also for nearly all of them significantly related.”
Dr. Guess, pg. 77: “So this essentially is a 7% risk per antigen, an antigen is like in DPT you’ve got three antigens.”
Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 77: “Correct.”
Dr. Egan, pg. 77: "Could you do this calculation for aluminum?"
Dr. Verstraeten [CDC], pg. 77: "I did it for aluminum…Actually the results were almost identical to ethylmercury because the amount of aluminum goes along almost exactly with the mercury one."