$75,000 Offered For MD to Publicly Drink Vaccine Additives

**Lunar4** · July 21, 2007, 06:32 PM

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...additives.aspx

Jock Doubleday, director of the California non-profit corporation Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc., has offered $75,000 to the first medical doctor or pharmaceutical company CEO who publicly drinks a mixture of standard vaccine additives.

The additives would be the same as those contained in the vaccines recommended for a 6-year-old according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, and the dose would be body-weight calibrated. It would include, but not be limited to:

* Thimerosal (a mercury derivative)
* Ethylene glycol (antifreeze)
* Phenol (a disinfectant dye)
* Aluminum
* Benzethonium chloride (a disinfectant)
* Formaldehyde (a preservative and disinfectant)

On August 1, 2007, if no one has taken the challenge, the offer will be increased to $90,000 and will increase at a rate of $5,000 per month until someone accepts.

hahaha drink up docs!!!

I doubt anyone would do this because they know how dangerous it is but then they gladly inject the **** into our children. Gotta love it.

**Gary88** · July 21, 2007, 06:34 PM

how about they just inject them? its not like kids drink the stuff after all

**Chaigidel** · July 21, 2007, 07:09 PM

well it is a current theory that these chemicals could contribute to the large amount of autism cases:O, I saw some things on it seems reasonable enough a claim.

**imb39** · July 22, 2007, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Chaigidel

well it is a current theory that these chemicals could contribute to the large amount of autism cases:O, I saw some things on it seems reasonable enough a claim.

Autism was only identified about 60 years ago and even now it has, to a large extent been redefined to 'Autistic Sptectrum Disorder'. Because it is is so new and being redefined (Ausberger's now falls within this spectrum, I believe), I doubt it is really increasing, but that we are getting better at recognising these difficulties and trying to help those who are 'autistic'. Where as a few decades ago, many would be left to fend for themselves or simply left to rot in asylums, now the attitude is totally different. Another example of why I hate it when people hark back to the old days. It's a complete myth. Things are so much better in so many ways. Many just refuse to accept that (sorry, rant over) - don't talk to me about care in the community, though... (a British issue).

**Gary88** · July 21, 2007, 07:12 PM

well it is a current theory that these chemicals could contribute to the large amount of autism cases:O, I saw some things on it seems reasonable enough a claim.

there was a big fuss in the UK when a Doctor claimed that MMR (measels mumps rhubella) triple vaccine could lead to autism and it resulted in a lot of parents refusing to let their children have the vaccine. after a lot of research by the UK medical establishment his claims were unfounded and he is now being done for unethical work practices (he performed unecessary and painfull treatments on kids in his study and he paid some kids at a birthday party to give blood samples)

**Chaigidel** · July 21, 2007, 07:17 PM

blah sucks, was hoping we had some solid info on where this wave of autism came from

**Cataclysm** · July 21, 2007, 11:09 PM

Why drink it? That makes no sense. You're being injected with it, to prove its harmless they should INJECT it too!

**Rhinosaur** · July 21, 2007, 11:15 PM

What I heard about the increase in Autism is that the definition of it has been broadened substantially, which now includes some kids that would just have been weird before. The Anti vaccination people claim it is the additives though, but I haven't read about any real indications of that being true.

**Simetrical** · July 22, 2007, 02:16 AM

Dang, too bad I don't have an MD. Easy 75 grand there. Unless it's a publicity stunt and they'll retract it, which seems not unlikely.

**The Fish** · July 22, 2007, 08:20 AM

The mercury-autism connection has been consistently debunked repeated times. Here's the abstract from one paper from the New England Journal:

Originally Posted by NEJM 347:1477-1482

Background It has been suggested that vaccination against measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) is a cause of autism.

Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all children born in Denmark from January 1991 through December 1998. The cohort was selected on the basis of data from the Danish Civil Registration System, which assigns a unique identification number to every live-born infant and new resident in Denmark. MMR-vaccination status was obtained from the Danish National Board of Health. Information on the children's autism status was obtained from the Danish Psychiatric Central Register, which contains information on all diagnoses received by patients in psychiatric hospitals and outpatient clinics in Denmark. We obtained information on potential confounders from the Danish Medical Birth Registry, the National Hospital Registry, and Statistics Denmark.

Results Of the 537,303 children in the cohort (representing 2,129,864 person-years), 440,655 (82.0 percent) had received the MMR vaccine. We identified 316 children with a diagnosis of autistic disorder and 422 with a diagnosis of other autistic-spectrum disorders. After adjustment for potential confounders, the relative risk of autistic disorder in the group of vaccinated children, as compared with the unvaccinated group, was 0.92 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.24), and the relative risk of another autistic-spectrum disorder was 0.83 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 1.07). There was no association between the age at the time of vaccination, the time since vaccination, or the date of vaccination and the development of autistic disorder.

Conclusions This study provides strong evidence against the hypothesis that MMR vaccination causes autism.

Decades of vaccination experience and research have clearly shown that any risks posed by the procedures are greatly outweighed by the benefits of reduced death and debilitation of the population.

Too bad there's no vaccination against idiocy.

**Chaigidel** · July 22, 2007, 08:45 AM

uh if we had a vaccination against idiocy---- there would be no forums anywhere :O

**Da Skinna** · July 22, 2007, 07:58 PM

Anyone know who Mercola is?

Well, my mom is addicted to what he writes. Not literally, but she follows some of the things he says and forwards emails all the time to me. Seriously though, he's a bright guy, not whored out by the pharmaceutical companies and a the town-crier for better things to eat, drink and what not to ingest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercola

**Gerin** · July 22, 2007, 08:21 PM

Mercola has a point about the vaccinations because to many to soon may make the child more likely to catch the virus or disease because the virus, bacteria, become resistent to the antibiotics.

**The Fish** · July 22, 2007, 09:13 PM

Vaccines are totally different from antibiotics. Vaccinations provide the immune system with a weakened or inactivated form of the virus or bacteria, allowing the immune system to build up the right antibodies to it. When the real thing comes along, then, the immune system easily clears it without any real symptoms. It's a sort of teaching tool for the immune system; no resistance can occur. Some pathogens just aren't well suited for vaccines, however; they change their biochemical "appearance" too quickly, or their outer coats don't elicit a strong immune response. This is why we only have vaccines for a small subset of infectious diseases.

Antibiotics directly attack and destroy pathogens. Rather than "teaching" the immune system, the work alongside it. Pathogens can therefore become resistant to the antibiotic. Thus, while antibiotic overuse can pose a long-term risk, vaccinations do not.