I believe in Eslick's study the same way I believe in MSNBC. It's not a double-blind controlled study -- no one in the medical establishment has done one of those or is willing to do so "for some reason or other" -- it's just a meta-analysis of other people's work, none of was a double-blind controlled study. Eslick, by the way, is on record as saying that the mercury in some vaccines is perfectly safe, because it's "below toxic levels." That really fills me with confidence (not).
Did Eslick's "meta-analysis" include any of the CDC-published studies on which Dr. William Thompson worked? Thompson became a whistleblower and described how these studies were essentially frauds, cherry-picking the data to come up with the results they wanted. He came clean and, filled with remorse, explained how fraud was built into all the studies on the connection between vaccines and autism that he co-authored between 2004 and 2010. Also, I am suspicious of studies which, like Eslick's, are filled with dense verbiage that make comprehension difficult even for an educated reader. As with "postmodernist" academic writing, a lack of substance, or truthfulness, is likely being obscured by the semi-comprehensible mush. Dr. Thomas's study, though published in a scientific journal, is not like that at all.
The Denmark study Eslick cites is familiar to me, and it's a pathetic joke.
A famous 2002 Danish study, trumpeted by the CDC as well as the New York Times and the New England Journal of Medicine, conclusively disproved, they said, that thimerosal caused autism — the clincher being that autism rates spiked in Denmark after the preservative was removed from vaccines. Closer inspection revealed several irregularities, however. At various junctures of the study period, the guidelines were changed. For the first eleven years, for example, the authors had counted only children admitted to hospitals, where autism is rarely diagnosed, but from 1995 they included outpatients as well. In 1992, the year thimerosal was removed in Denmark, they began including cases diagnosed in a busy Copenhagen clinic which accounted for 20% of the country’s cases; prior to this, the clinic’s records had been ignored. The following year, new diagnostic codes for autistic spectrum disorders were introduced in Denmark which “may have stimulated reporting of autism cases.” Question: If vaccines really do what their proponents say they do, why do they so often resort to tricks like this?
After researching a book I will be publishing for a friend on the topic, I now question the whole underlying theory of vaccines
(read the preceding eight words several times if they're not clear to you) and no longer believe that the already-falling rates of the diseases that vaccine advocates claim as "successes" had much to do with vaccination at all.
I do believe that assaulting a child's body and immune system with some 70 shots these days (probably nearly twenty times what my generation was subjected to), each shot being an horrific compound of unnatural chemicals that we most certainly did not
evolve to deal with inside our bodies is bound
to have bad consequences, many of which we may not know about yet. (One very prominent pro-vaccine author, the Jew Paul Offit, states that even 100,000 injections per child would be just fine! Insane. He's recently quietly reduced that claim to 10,000. Still insane. Offit, by the way, has made at least $29 million off of vaccines.)
At the very least, no one is exploring the idea that the immune system has limits and purposely triggering it unnaturally so many times, close to 100 times during childhood alone, might damage it or make it less responsive to natural threats -- and that is an area of research, like the double-blind vaxxed/unvaxxed studies I mentioned before, that "just can't get funding" for reasons that mystify no one. Here's the clincher: Virtually all such studies are funded by the vaccine industry or by those who somehow make money off vaccines. I trust Dr. Thomas's study because he has nothing to gain
and a lot to lose by publishing the results he came up with.
The whole vaccine field stinks to high heaven with lies and corruption, just like American politics does.