In the latest "Planet of the Apes" movie released in 2017, a major plot device in the film is a disease which makes (mostly white race) humans unable to speak and become fully mute, just like full on autism (not just asperger) does in boys today.

(((They))) know and shove it in our faces too in their Hollywood bullshit propaganda.

Does anyone know how much autism is affecting non white races ?

What is the prevelance of autism among Blacks, Muslims, Indians and east Asians ?

Can a case be made that autism is affecting mostly white people or am i imagining things ?

Merc, Black boys have been hit the hardest, IIRC it's up to 1 in 25 boys now in the American Black community -incredibly appalling state of things-. This is covered in this short excerpt:

Quote: (01-29-2018 09:12 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

No. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either a crank or can't understand basic science.

Wakefield made his data up.

TT, do you also believe in Catastrophic Anthopogenic Global Warming, the prevailing theory that man-made CO2 is drastically changing climate and will heat up the planet by 3C to 6C by the end of the century?

Because we all know that those who tell you otherwise (like yours truly) must either be cranks or can't understand basic science.

There is a holistic health explanation that explains all this ill health in our modern society (vaccines, ADD, autoimmune, Lyme Disease, etc.). Vaccines, ADD, autoimmune, and Lyme Disease are all connected. My siblings have various autoimmune diseases -- and about five years ago my health was a five on a scale of 1-10. After seeing the living hell that they experienced and also seeing that that prescription medication did nothing to address the symptoms, much less the root cause of the disease, for half a decade I became an autodidact on health and I slowly cured myself.

We do not eat like our ancestors. We are exposed to daily stress and man-made toxins (something like 80,000) that our ancestors never experienced. Modern lighting throws off our circadian rhythm. Some of us eat more sugar in a day than our ancestors ate in a year. Addressing these various factors (and many others) returned my health to me.

Why is it that some people can get a vaccine that contains some form of mercury or get bit by a tick with the bacterium Borrelia burgdorferi and be perfectly fine -- while others have a complete health meltdown. Whether or not you get sick depends on a combination of your genes, your mother's health when she was pregnant, and especially the total cumulative assault that you have placed upon your body over the course of your lifetime.

Your body wants to be in a state of homeostasis. It wants to get well, if you allow it. During the years -- and usually over many decades -- our body receives daily assaults by a poor diet, pesticides in our produce, antibiotics and hormones in our meat, mercury in our fish, and toxins in our water, air, cleaning products, and body care products. After a slow transformation from the robust health that God gave us to a fragile health of our own making, suddenly a tick bite, a vaccine, or a virus pushes our body to the breaking point. It is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

This is why it is so difficult for the medical establishment to find a cure, much less the cause, for any of this stuff. They look for a single cause of disease and address the symptoms rather than examining and then addressing the cumulative underlying causes of disease. Regaining your health is like peeling back the layers of an onion until you eliminate all the underlying causes, which allows your body to recuperate and to achieve homeostasis.

I have seen this play out with myself and others. Early on, I hired a board certified nutritionist who literally cured herself after being bedridden with MS. Because of the way in which modern medicine is structured, it will take decades for the mainstream medical establishment to accept any of these common sense notions. Fortunately, there are a growing number of holistic health practitioners who understand these principles.

So, is there any merit to the anti-vaccine movement? Of course. Most of them contain poisonous substances. Those of us in good health can successfully deal with such poisons when they enter our bodies. Those in poor health, from years of poor diet and exposure to toxins (or mothers with years of poor diet and exposure to toxins), will develop health problems. Our modern lifestyle is responsible for most sickness and disease. Vaccines are simply one layer of the onion; one further cumulative insult to the health of our body.

The good news is that you can proactively reduce this toxic burden on your body. Your health truly is in your own hands. Do not foolishly wait until it is in your doctor's hands.

BTW: I was a non-believer regarding holistic health, until my own bad health and the dereliction of the medical establishment, forced me to perform the research that proved myself wrong. So, I understand perfectly the sentiments of those who reject this stuff. When your own health implodes, however, you will discover the meaning of "there are no atheists in a foxhole."

"There is a holistic health..." **Stopped reading**

Surprised no one has said anything yet about the current flu outbreak in the US and how the MSM is pushing emotionally-driven scare tactics (ie pictures of kids that died and interviews with their sobbing parents) and telling everyone to get the vaccine amidst admitted ineffectiveness. This is the hardest and most blatant push for the vaccine that I have seen in recent memory.

Quote: (01-30-2018 01:20 PM)kamoz Wrote:  

Surprised no one has said anything yet about the current flu outbreak in the US and how the MSM is pushing emotionally-driven scare tactics (ie pictures of kids that died and interviews with their sobbing parents) and telling everyone to get the vaccine amidst admitted ineffectiveness. This is the hardest and most blatant push for the vaccine that I have seen in recent memory.

Today's main story from the Washington ComPost is a piece of flu fear porn:

"The flu can kill tens of millions of people. In 1918, that’s exactly what it did."

Note that ground zero for the "Spanish Flu" was a Kansas army barrack close to where bioweapons were being developed, a known fact that the WP article above tries to muddle. At that time soldiers were being used as guinea pigs, a practice that carried through much of the 20th century.

Same with Lyme disease, the first victims identified occurred in the vicinity of the Plum Island Animal Disease research center, a known bioweapons research lab focusing on diseases spread by animals and insects. Plum Island is located directly across Lyme, CT, where the first cases of lyme disease were identified.

Here in the Philippines, there is a current unfolding scandal where tens of thousands of schoolchildren were given a vaccine for dengue fever (which is a bit like chicken pox in tropical countries as in most children get it at some point, but it can be fatal). The vaccine has since been proven ineffective if the subject had never been infected before and if the subject had been infected before, it can trigger very serious cases of dengue fever. They are currently arguing over how many children died as a direct result of this vaccine. Worth reading up on if you're interested in this kind of thing.

Autism is a catch-all. There is no physiological basis for an autism diagnoses, it is a diagnoses based on symptoms that also manifest from other diagnoses.

I guarantee that in 100 years we won't be using the word autism and if you call someone autistic it will probably as offensive as calling them a retard.

Quote: (01-29-2018 07:45 PM)911 Wrote:  

Do you really think that the medical establishment in countries like Germany, Holland, Norway, Finland etc are 8 times as bad as their American counterparts in diagnosing a condition as drastic as autism?

No, they are probably 8 times better at it.

Quote: (01-29-2018 08:14 PM)Kona Wrote:  

Match up some of the autism rate increase charts with the charts that show the rate increase of motherhood obesity.

Just don't show the results to any autism mother's because they hate responsibility.

Aloha!

autistics were once called "refrigerator kids" because it was believed that there mother's coldness towards them was a factor

(disclaimer: I wouldn't say that neglect is a primary cause of autism... but in some cases)

Why French Kids Don't Have ADHD

I'm not discounting environmental causes for "autism" but you have to treat the statistics with some skepticism, and at least question the premise/basis for the diagnoses

Quote: (01-30-2018 06:04 PM)Grodin Wrote:  

Why French Kids Don't Have ADHD

I'm not discounting environmental causes for "autism" but you have to treat the statistics with some skepticism, and at least question the premise/basis for the diagnoses.

How hard really is it to diagnose a child that cannot speak, a feature of nearly half autistic kids? As well most autistic toddlers display other symptom patterns like digestive tracts inflammation.

As to the French kids and ADHD, yes culture is part of it, with tighter discipline there, but diet is a part of this as well, French kids don't eat frozen pizza, chips, soda and pudding cups at school lunches. Chemicals might be a bigger part yet though:

Quote:Quote:

In a study out today in The Lancet Neurology, researchers outline new chemicals that may be contributing to what they dub the “global, silent pandemic of neurodevelopmental toxicity.” In 2006, the team had released a list of five neurotoxins that may contribute to everything from cognitive deficits to attention problems. Now that list is expanded, based on new research that has since accumulated on chemicals linked to developmental disorders in children. Today, they outline six more.

"The greatest concern is the large numbers of children who are affected by toxic damage to brain development in the absence of a formal diagnosis," said study author Philippe Grandjean, of the Harvard School of Public Health. “They suffer reduced attention span, delayed development, and poor school performance. Industrial chemicals are now emerging as likely causes.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalto...44944742a8

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...131902.htm

You also have higher public health standards in other countries. France is about to ban glyphosates, something that would never happen in the US where Monsanto runs the show. In the US, drug companies, big agrobusiness and the chemical industry set the standards through the revolving-door policy and greater media control (though that gap has been narrowing with the EU and globalists making inroads across Europe).

Americans as well tend to be less skeptical about their media and corporate culture, and more gullible about things like fluoride (a known powerful neurotoxin) being harmless, that's why your water is fluoridated and the water in most European countries isn't. If you're a real skeptic in N. America and go against the grain of the official narrative, you will be labeled a "conspiracy theorist". There is more social stigma in crossing that double yellow cultural line that keeps people in line, more trust in media outlets and the scientific establishment, as opposed to the science proper.

where are you getting these numbers like half of autistic children can't talk, 1 in 125 children can't talk

you also don't seem to read well. I'm not ruling out environmental causes (like diet), but I have looked into vaccines and I don't think they are the cause.

I guess you haven't read my post above

thread-34230...pid1727451

Quote:Quote:

Verbal and nonverbal communication. Symptoms may include:

Delay in, or lack of, learning to talk. As many as 40% of people with autism never speak.

https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/autism-symptoms#1

reference used:
Volkmar FR, et al. (2009). Pervasive developmental disorders. In BJ Sadock, VA Sadock, eds., Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, 9th ed., vol. 2, pp. 3540-3559. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Williams.


Current autism rates are 1 in 50 boys. so 40% of 1 in 50 translates to 1 in 125.

Quote: (01-28-2018 10:32 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Those rates of autism are meaningless unless broken down in to the grades presented.

It's feasible that many cases of mild autism slipped under the radar for a long time but when you're looking at a kid in a special chair that has to be fed with a pig-line, then no, there is obviously no "mistaking" that for anything other than a severe disability.

Women getting preganant much later in life will also increase the rates, but I still have trouble believing that diagnosis and late-life pregnancy account for such a dramatic rise. I've talked to old timers about this and they are adamant that retardation, autism, immune disorders and allergies were virtually non-existent when they were growing up. And this is in a place where everybody knew everybody, so it wasn't like the odd kids were just being hidden in a basement somewhere.

Whatever the case, given the mountain evidence of an overall conspiracy to keep the general population stupid via the enormous amount of blatant lies peddled by the media, why would anyone for a second believe that the considerably more shadowy medical sector would be any less compromised?

It's inescapable that we are not only being deliberately dumbed down by the education sector and the media but that we are also being kept sick by the medical and agricultural sectors which have been run entirely by corporate interests for more than half a century now. Why would we believe that the same corporations that try to warp our psychology would not also try to warp our biology?

Keep in mind that those older women also have older husbands and the combinations of old eggs, old sperm, and cumulative environmental damage might play a part in this.

Everytime I mention older guys having kids might be a problem, no one in the manosphere agrees with me. But I contend that TWO older people are a recipe for disaster, especially when it comes to having first-time kids. Since husbands are usually older, this is what is happening now.

When I was born my grandparents on my dad's side were around 47 years old. These days, first-time parents are just a few years shy of that. This is a major change, but it's been so gradual that I don't think people notice.

In the 1970s or 1980s, if a couple ages 47 (man) and 44 (woman) said they were planning on "starting a family," they'd have been laughed at or recommended for psychiatric treatment.

You can't fool Mother Nature with frozen eggs, Viagra, or IVF. There's going to be fallout somewhere and I see this happening more and more with kids of old parents. If it's not autism, it's things partial deafness, digestive tract problems, learning issues, etc.

I'm not sure if there's any evidence to suggest that the age of the father plays a part in the health of the child.

Women are born with all the eggs they will ever have. They start out using the best and slowly work their way through grade A to F before the shop closes up.

Men on the other hand continually produce fresh sperm.

I'm trying to draw on 10th grade biology here. Am I wrong on this?

Quote: (01-31-2018 04:55 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

I'm not sure if there's any evidence to suggest that the age of the father plays a part in the health of the child.

Women are born with all the eggs they will ever have. They start out using the best and slowly work their way through grade A to F before the shop closes up.

Men on the other hand continually produce fresh sperm.

I'm trying to draw on 10th grade biology here. Am I wrong on this?

This is something called "The Paternal Age Effect."

The older the sperm, the more genetic mutations that can occur. I have a cousin who is a doctor who studied this in college. This is why older fathers have long been associated with children who have certain mental illnesses, like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Again, people in the manosphere dismiss this as political and say feminists and the media are making it up. Age matters, to some degree, in virtually everything we do. It matters less for men than it does for women -- much less. But it does factor into the equation when you have kids.

I was also hearing about how the age of fathers affected kids back in college from older biology professors who were definitely not liberal or feminist. There's literature on it, and below are some links.

Personally speaking, I would rather be aware of risks before having kids than getting hit with surprises later on. Even if a risk is small, it's good to know about it.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...ness-risk/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566050/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22325359

It's well known that womens eggs go stale, but sperm quality degrades in the same way audio quality degraded on the old cassettes after they'd been copied from cassette to cassette a hundred times.

Quote: (01-31-2018 05:47 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

This is something called "The Paternal Age Effect."

The older the sperm, the more genetic mutations that can occur. I have a cousin who is a doctor who studied this in college. This is why older fathers have long been associated with children who have certain mental illnesses, like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Personally speaking, I would rather be aware of risks before having kids than getting hit with surprises later on. Even if a risk is small, it's good to know about it.

IVF uses ICSI (a process where the strongest sperm is chosen and injected into the egg). This is done in part, to reduce (but not eliminate) the chance of defective genes. Well formed sperm that are good swimmers = likely genetically good.

I went through this process with the wife in order to have a kid. With men, you can improve sperm quality with nutrition, supplements, weight loss, and weight lifting (building muscle = higher T levels). However, it only slows down the deterioration. In the end, age gets us all.

Part of the resistance to vaccines IMHO, is due in part that people have forgotten how horrific and common these diseases were. I am old enough to have met (including one in-law) people were were ravaged by polio. Its physically a living death... you spend your life crippled and deformed.

If your decision to not get vaccinated only affected you, I wouldn't care if you got it or not. However, not getting vaccinated has ill effects on others. Case in point: My area over the past couple of years have had breakouts of German measles. Non-vaccinated illegals, anti-vaxxers, and people who lost their immunity* are to blame. The thing with measles is someone who is infected can infect others hours after they have left the area... Malls, subways, etc. The disease is that virulent.

I had a personal scare when an alert went out that a man infected with measles was in the same areas that I commute to work during the week, around the time I would have been there. A few days before I had blood work done and found out my immunity to Whooping Cough was minimal and my immunity to measles was none. The vaccines I had as a kid had worn off. My doctor didn't have measles on hand. I ran out to the local pharmacy and got a new MMR shot (gave me the dry heaves the next morning):.

My concern was more than my own health. My kid can't get an MMR shot until he is 1 year old. So for a year or more, he is 100% vulnerable to measles, mumps, and rubella. Measles kills.. Until a baby is old enough to get the vaccine, that kid is 100% dependent on 'herd immunity'. So if you choose to not get vaccinated, you are putting others at risk.

*The guy who was infected in this last round was like me... lost his immunity. He got measles during a trip to Europe.

There is a middleground between "don't question vaccines" and "all vaccines are evil".

These is no good reason to believe that these megacorporations suddenly have our best interests at heart when it comes to medicine. They might not want us all dying of polio but if they saved a buck per vaccine using fundamentally dangerous components while selling a billion vaccines, then yes, we are right to question whether they are putting profits over the health and wellbeing of humankind.

They obviously also have a lot to gain by making more people sick in the long run, don't they. A billion bucks would be the tip of the iceberg. So to suggest they don't have a huge motive to hide any culpability for vaccines being harmful is misguided.

This is the problem at hand. None of us want to die of a preventable disease but we'd have to be borderline retarded to think that the likes of Zuckerberg and Gates are putting the same shit in their kids that they tell us to put in ours.

Quote: (01-31-2018 08:31 AM)Hell_Is_Like_Newark Wrote:  

If your decision to not get vaccinated only affected you, I wouldn't care if you got it or not. However, not getting vaccinated has ill effects on others. Case in point: My area over the past couple of years have had breakouts of German measles. Non-vaccinated illegals, anti-vaxxers, and people who lost their immunity* are to blame. The thing with measles is someone who is infected can infect others hours after they have left the area... Malls, subways, etc. The disease is that virulent.

I had a personal scare when an alert went out that a man infected with measles was in the same areas that I commute to work during the week, around the time I would have been there. A few days before I had blood work done and found out my immunity to Whooping Cough was minimal and my immunity to measles was none. The vaccines I had as a kid had worn off. My doctor didn't have measles on hand. I ran out to the local pharmacy and got a new MMR shot (gave me the dry heaves the next morning).

People who exercise, eat a healthy diet, address their stress levels, and minimize their exposure to toxins will have a very low likelihood of ever getting one of these diseases, because they have naturally maximized their immune system. If they also take certain natural supplements during an outbreak (echinacea, zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D, etc.) then the odds grow even smaller. (Modern sanitation methods have reduced any systemic risk arising from poor sanitation.)

On the other end of the spectrum are people who could care less about proper diet, exercise, stress, or toxins. Instead, they are lazy and want modern medicine to use the "magic pill" to cure (or prevent) all their ills, even if the magic pill contains mercury or formaldehyde.

So far, so good. I am all about free choice. The problem occurs when the lazy and the ill-informed wish to force their choices upon the rest of us. The same people who are so lackadaisical and negligent about their own health want their own do-nothing health philosophy foisted upon the innocent (i.e., those who have taken great pains over many years, or even decades, to safeguard their health and maximize their immune systems).

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” Benjamin Franklin.

BTW: When Americans are asked what type of government they have, more than 99% of will respond by saying "a democracy." Not true. They live in a Constitutional Republic, where certain inalienable rights are protected on behalf of the minority against the tyranny of the majority. I often use this quote by Benjamin Franklin to highlight that fact. The Constitution protects the minority -- and the Second Amendment protects the Constitution.

Quote: (01-31-2018 11:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

Quote: (01-31-2018 08:31 AM)Hell_Is_Like_Newark Wrote:  

If your decision to not get vaccinated only affected you, I wouldn't care if you got it or not. However, not getting vaccinated has ill effects on others. Case in point: My area over the past couple of years have had breakouts of German measles. Non-vaccinated illegals, anti-vaxxers, and people who lost their immunity* are to blame. The thing with measles is someone who is infected can infect others hours after they have left the area... Malls, subways, etc. The disease is that virulent.

I had a personal scare when an alert went out that a man infected with measles was in the same areas that I commute to work during the week, around the time I would have been there. A few days before I had blood work done and found out my immunity to Whooping Cough was minimal and my immunity to measles was none. The vaccines I had as a kid had worn off. My doctor didn't have measles on hand. I ran out to the local pharmacy and got a new MMR shot (gave me the dry heaves the next morning).

People who exercise, eat a healthy diet, address their stress levels, and minimize their exposure to toxins will have a very low likelihood of ever getting one of these diseases, because they have naturally maximized their immune system. If they also take certain natural supplements during an outbreak (echinacea, zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D, etc.) then the odds grow even smaller. (Modern sanitation methods have reduced any systemic risk arising from poor sanitation.)

On the other end of the spectrum are people who could care less about proper diet, exercise, stress, or toxins. Instead, they are lazy and want modern medicine to use the "magic pill" to cure (or prevent) all their ills, even if the magic pill contains mercury or formaldehyde.

So far, so good. I am all about free choice. The problem occurs when the lazy and the ill-informed wish to force their choices upon the rest of us. The same people who are so lackadaisical and negligent about their own health want their own do-nothing health philosophy foisted upon the innocent (i.e., those who have taken great pains over many years, or even decades, to safeguard their health and maximize their immune systems).

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” Benjamin Franklin.

BTW: When Americans are asked what type of government they have, more than 99% of will respond by saying "a democracy." Not true. They live in a Constitutional Republic, where certain inalienable rights are protected on behalf of the minority against the tyranny of the majority. I often use this quote by Benjamin Franklin to highlight that fact. The Constitution protects the minority -- and the Second Amendment protects the Constitution.

This is rich how you can be so demeaning to people who don't agree with you in such a passive aggressive way full of strawmen. Instead of trying to have a rational conversation you put yourself up on a pedestool and basically just threw personal insults to everyone else.

Also I've yet to meet an anti vaccer who has never been sick with less contagious diseases than the ones people vaccinate for. The idea that vitamin and low stress will fend off Polio or Measles is interesting. Where is your data/research for this fact?

Given that polio has been eradicated in 80% of the world for decades, there's no call for the body to "fight it off".

People on both sides need to step back from the vaccination "debate" and get some perspective. You're not going to turn autistic by having a shot, nor are we all going to die if the guy down the road exercises their right not to put something into their/their childrens body.

Quote: (01-31-2018 11:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

Quote: (01-31-2018 08:31 AM)Hell_Is_Like_Newark Wrote:  

If your decision to not get vaccinated only affected you, I wouldn't care if you got it or not. However, not getting vaccinated has ill effects on others. Case in point: My area over the past couple of years have had breakouts of German measles. Non-vaccinated illegals, anti-vaxxers, and people who lost their immunity* are to blame. The thing with measles is someone who is infected can infect others hours after they have left the area... Malls, subways, etc. The disease is that virulent.

I had a personal scare when an alert went out that a man infected with measles was in the same areas that I commute to work during the week, around the time I would have been there. A few days before I had blood work done and found out my immunity to Whooping Cough was minimal and my immunity to measles was none. The vaccines I had as a kid had worn off. My doctor didn't have measles on hand. I ran out to the local pharmacy and got a new MMR shot (gave me the dry heaves the next morning).

People who exercise, eat a healthy diet, address their stress levels, and minimize their exposure to toxins will have a very low likelihood of ever getting one of these diseases, because they have naturally maximized their immune system. If they also take certain natural supplements during an outbreak (echinacea, zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D, etc.) then the odds grow even smaller. (Modern sanitation methods have reduced any systemic risk arising from poor sanitation.)

On the other end of the spectrum are people who could care less about proper diet, exercise, stress, or toxins. Instead, they are lazy and want modern medicine to use the "magic pill" to cure (or prevent) all their ills, even if the magic pill contains mercury or formaldehyde.

So far, so good. I am all about free choice. The problem occurs when the lazy and the ill-informed wish to force their choices upon the rest of us. The same people who are so lackadaisical and negligent about their own health want their own do-nothing health philosophy foisted upon the innocent (i.e., those who have taken great pains over many years, or even decades, to safeguard their health and maximize their immune systems).

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” Benjamin Franklin.

BTW: When Americans are asked what type of government they have, more than 99% of will respond by saying "a democracy." Not true. They live in a Constitutional Republic, where certain inalienable rights are protected on behalf of the minority against the tyranny of the majority. I often use this quote by Benjamin Franklin to highlight that fact. The Constitution protects the minority -- and the Second Amendment protects the Constitution.

Sorry, Brutha. Apart from the things you said about the government, which are all true, your medical "theory" is completely baseless. Diseases don't care what you had for breakfast.