I wonder if you’ll ever realize how deep your hypocrisy is; you take advantage of the openness of this blog to spew your lies, trusting that the blog-owners will allow it to remain visible to all, while anti-health blogs like AOA boast that they censor all opposing views, to protect their readers from hearing any facts that might unsettle their preconceptions. I hope that when you realize how vile your behavior has been, that you can forgive yourself. Meanwhile, stay away from our children with your lies.

It wasn’t the Court, the LSC, FRC or the Defendants who said the case couldn’t be brought to trial, but the Claimants own legal team when they admitted that as things stood, there was no prospects of success and with O’leary’s findings, it wasn’t hard to see why.

Faced with that unsavoury set of circumstances who would argue that it was unjust for the LSC to remove the funding or for the FRC to uphold their reasons for doing so? The FRC said by Michael to have “refused to continue to support investigation into MMR as a cause of autism” could hardly find the LSC wrong in their decision to remove funding when they had been advised by the claimants own legal team that their case had no prospects of success.
Lord Taverne hit the nail on the head when in 2004 he said of the MMR litigation “After 10 years and the expenditure of more than £15 million, not surprisingly, no evidence has emerged to provide a prima facie case. Earlier this year, the Legal Services Commission withdrew support and declared that the failure to find evidence meant that the case was very likely to fail. It also observed that aid should never have been granted , because the courts are not the place to prove new medical truths”.

Lord Taverne further stated that” From the start it was a disgrace that legal aid was ever granted. The so-called research was, and always was likely to be, a farce”. (Hansard 16 June 2004 Column 789)

The Legal Services Commission, according to Brian Deer (Big Pharma shill), has given over all of the investigative materials to the Medical Research Council. The MRC, in the latest report before the LSC decision to withdraw funding, is of the opinion the causes of autism “remain, to a large extent, unidentified” This decision to terminate funding was made by the LSC less than 6 months before the trials against Glaxo were to begin.

The solicitors appealed, remaining firmly convinced that MMR causes autism. First, the Funding Review Committee refused to continue to support investigation into MMR as a cause of autism, then Judge Nigel Davis dismisses the appeal to force the LSC to continue MMR research funding. Judge Davis is the brother of Glaxo director Crispin Davis, who was also CEO of Elsevier which owns The Lancet.

So with the solicitors ready to go to trial and the Medical Review Committee unable to offer any clue as to what causes autism, the LSC decided that vaccines are not the cause and cannot ever be proved to be the cause.

This kind of heinous illogical reasoning and behavior is what people like you on this blog support as the correct path to take. While millions more kids become victims of our efforts to protect them, the LSC denies the only obvious correlation to autism, which is vaccines.

Dedj once posted – “Some of the people here are primary care givers for autistic or otherwise disabled children and adults.
Some of the people here are autistic adults, some with additional disabilities.
Some of the people here are professionals or paraprofessionals involved in autism care.
Some of the people here are academics or researchers in autism studies.
Some of us are, or have been some or all or the above”

Little of that is believable, as most of the people on this blog blindly support Big Pharma’s position on the vaccine autism issue and care little for the kids with regressive autism or those who will be rendered autistic in the future.

Toxin free vaccines should be used in independent clinical trials to resolve the autism issue. Anything less is unacceptable, unethical and unscientific. The mass of manipulated epidemiology used to hide the truth is well known by the people on this blog. In spite of their dishonest calls for the production of evidence, they know the evidence. They are practiced at denying it, disseminating mis-information, deflecting or merely lying. This defines their sociopathic behavior… The deliberate actions of avoidance and obfuscation that result in hurting and killing children while tens of millions are burdened to a degree I believe that most on this blog could not face.

I’m not going to change the minds of sociopaths. I was aware of that since the day I read the callous illogical rants and taunts from many persons here. I will stand and remind everyone of the pain and hopelessness to which you help condemn innocent children and their families. This will reach some of you, but not the majority, who will lash out with a vicious venom disregarding the lives lost to the shadow-world of regressive autism.

What “ended the UK MMR litigation” was an acknowledgement by the claimants QC’s that as things stood, they couldn’t bring a case to show a causal link between the MMR and ASD and the Legal Services Commission removed funding. Why do you and many others like you find it difficult to accept that ‘no case’ means ‘no cash’? How could any appeal judge irrespective of his family connections, order the LSC to reinstate funding for the child litigants when their own lawyers were standing there saying that they couldn’t make a case for them?. That’s just crazy.

What really ended the MMR litigation was the fact that despite the millions invested in the case by the LSC,the experts chosen by the childrens own lawyers could not provide the goods to support a claim that the MMR caused ASD, on their behalf.

The claims were dependant on individual experts, including Dr Wakefield, being able to provide research, evidence and sound argument to prove a causal link between the MMR vaccine and the childrens conditions. Clearly they could not do that since the legal team were forced to admit they had no case to bring and that’s what ended the MMR litigation.

With Dr Wakefield and many of his followers now trumpeting the fact that he never said there was a link between the MMR and autism,it’s questionable what possible merit there was in him being an expert witness for these children in the first place.He was clearly never going to implicate the MMR vaccine as causing autism in his expert reports. The claims were entirely dependant on experts being able to do just that, so it’s little wonder the litigation collapsed and the children lost out big time.

You still don’t get it. You have demanded a level and quality of debate that has been entirely absent from all of your posts. You have yet again provided us with a mish-mash post with zero substantiation and zero references, yet plenty of insults.

You have been asked – repeatedly, by several people – to put your money where you mouth is and meet your own imposed standards of debate. You have failed yourself at every turn, yet still demand we answer your issues, even though you have failed to substantiate them at all.

You have failed to address any of the concerns with the opening post being on a month old thread and woefully off topic, you have failed to addresss any concerns regarding your habit of freely casting about insults and accusations, and you have failed to address any of the concerns regarding your inability to meet your own standards of debate.

Just because you think you have a point, that doesn’t make it our responsibility to prove you wrong. Substantiating your claims is your responsiblity.

You have failed in that. You have no right to demand of others what you have failed – despite direct repeated requests that are derived from your own demands – to provide.

You will provide at least ‘2 pieces of evidence’ from peer reviewed sources for each and every one of your claims in your next few posts. No other response will be acknowledged. Failure will be pointed out.

Only one of you attempted to test the waters with a blatantly manipulated study from Thompson.

Told you so. All hat, no cattle. He thinks using the adjective “manipulated” is an argument worth considering.

Michael, I don’t recall giving you permission to speak for my autistic child.

That said, I will state that from my point of view, it is the vaccine-autism groups that have wasted HUGE amounts of time and HUGE amounts of money and HUGE quantities of well being for autism families.

If you want to go places and question the diagnoses of adult autistics, find other blogs. There are plenty that will welcome you.

There is no “regressive type” of autism. Regression appears to be a continuum—with some children undergoing much larger amounts of regression than others. And, yet, when they watch baby sibs closely, they find much less regression than when they rely on parent reports. Why is that, do you suppose?

If you want to make statements like “Asperger’s is not autism” be advised that it only demonstrates your own ignorance.

If you have a good argument for how vaccines cause autism, please contact the Petitioner’s Steering Committee. They spent millions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money and put together the best cases they could—and failed.