Joanna,
the authorities are cracking down on Dr Geier because of his untested and damaging Lupron Protocol - not because of his court activities as an expert witness. There are high profile doctors in the USA who question vaccines and are not investigated: Bob Sears, Jay Gordon, Jerry Kartzinel, Bryan Jepson etc.
His role as an expert witness was only questioned when he stepped beyond his areas of expertise to dabble in the field of autism.
Regarding slamming the door on victims of vaccine injury, I must disagree. Your vaccine injury compensation scheme is one of the most generous in the world. The claimants costs are paid whether they win or lose and the standard of proof, "50 per cent plus a feather" is far more lenient than the "beyond reasonable doubt" of the UK system.
Your claims about science do not stand up to scrutiny. It was pro vaccine scientists who raised the alarm over thimerosal. Pro vaccine scientists banned Rotashield because of the real but minuscule risk of intussusception.
Regarding immunity, civil courts were handing out punitive damages to vaccine manufacturers that threatened to close down the vaccine indutry. Governments took on the burden of compensation because they wanted to preserve the vaccine programme. The irony is that the original DTP cases that threatened to bring down the system and forced the government to act were not caused by DPT at all. The real reason was a genetic disorder, Dravet's Syndrome that causes epilepsy and mental retardation in children and emerges around the time of the DPT vaccination. Hence the mantra of pro vaccine scientists, "Correlation is not Causation."
Neurodiversity is not a theory. It is a fact. There is not a single standard model for neurological development. There is diversity. And without diversity there can be no evolution. Some examples of diversity will turn out to be evolutionary cul-de-sacs. But we cannot know in advance. High functioning autism may be the next step in evolution. It may not. Evolution favours those best placed to exploit their environment. If the environment rewards smarts then smarts will prevail. But not necessarily.
I am glad you support evolutionary theory. But I suggest you look elsewhere for your information. The site you linked to is actually a Creationist website.
Comment Reply
Joanna,
the authorities are cracking down on Dr Geier because of his untested and damaging Lupron Protocol - not because of his court activities as an expert witness. There are high profile doctors in the USA who question vaccines and are not investigated: Bob Sears, Jay Gordon, Jerry Kartzinel, Bryan Jepson etc.
His role as an expert witness was only questioned when he stepped beyond his areas of expertise to dabble in the field of autism.
Regarding slamming the door on victims of vaccine injury, I must disagree. Your vaccine injury compensation scheme is one of the most generous in the world. The claimants costs are paid whether they win or lose and the standard of proof, "50 per cent plus a feather" is far more lenient than the "beyond reasonable doubt" of the UK system.
Your claims about science do not stand up to scrutiny. It was pro vaccine scientists who raised the alarm over thimerosal. Pro vaccine scientists banned Rotashield because of the real but minuscule risk of intussusception.
Regarding immunity, civil courts were handing out punitive damages to vaccine manufacturers that threatened to close down the vaccine indutry. Governments took on the burden of compensation because they wanted to preserve the vaccine programme. The irony is that the original DTP cases that threatened to bring down the system and forced the government to act were not caused by DPT at all. The real reason was a genetic disorder, Dravet's Syndrome that causes epilepsy and mental retardation in children and emerges around the time of the DPT vaccination. Hence the mantra of pro vaccine scientists, "Correlation is not Causation."
Neurodiversity is not a theory. It is a fact. There is not a single standard model for neurological development. There is diversity. And without diversity there can be no evolution. Some examples of diversity will turn out to be evolutionary cul-de-sacs. But we cannot know in advance. High functioning autism may be the next step in evolution. It may not. Evolution favours those best placed to exploit their environment. If the environment rewards smarts then smarts will prevail. But not necessarily.
I am glad you support evolutionary theory. But I suggest you look elsewhere for your information. The site you linked to is actually a Creationist website.
September 26, 2011 - 4:31pmThis Comment
Reply