|
Forums33
Topics44,197
Posts519,915
Members14,168
| |
Most Online3,221
Oct 6th, 2025
|
|
Administrator/owner:
John (Dragonslayer)
Administrator:
Melinda (mig)
WebAdmin:
Timo (Timo)
Administrator:
Brad (wolverinefan)
Moderators:
· Tim (Dotyisle)
· Chelsea (Kiwi)
· Megan (Megan)
· Wendy (WendyR)
· John (Cheerful)
· Chris (fyrfytr187)
|
|
If you want to use this QR code (Quick Response code) just save the image and paste it where you want. You can even print it and use it that way. Coffee cups, T-Shirts etc would all be good for the QR code.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
|
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345 |
Back to Wakefield, him suing for restitution, and the fact that there now are doctors finding that measles vaccination causes autism?
What's up, we have to stick to the subject, one subject at a time.
PS: Jones may be looney, but Murdoch is downright evil.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,334
|
|
OP
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,334 |
Ok, back on track but Jones is one crazy nutter: Dr. Wakefield may have figured that, in Texas, there would be little “downside” to filing
frivolous libel claims and using the suit to raise money and chill the free speech of his critics. Not so anymore. To avoid dismissal under our State’s new anti-SLAPP statute, Dr. Wakefield must submit evidence to support each essential element of his libel claims. He cannot do this for several reasons. First, the statements he challenges are true. The GMC findings against him— numerous proven charges of dishonesty and research misconduct—are binding in this case, and they leave no room for Wakefield to argue that he was defamed by Defendants’ reporting and editorial comment. During the GMC proceeding, Dr. Wakefield’s own counsel admitted that the charges against him amounted to an allegation of “fraud.” And Defendants have overwhelming additional evidence to establish the truth of the challenged statements.
Timo 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
|
|
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345 |
Timo, it seems like you know a lot about drug companies and what's going on in that arena, do you have any idea why Rupert Murdoch's journalists would be out to use their "freedom of speech", so to speak, on a doctor who was trying to protect children from autism? I know Murdoch owns hundreds of news agencies, but I can't figure out the tie in to drug companies. Does he personally own any drug companies? Or is he related to any of the drug company owners? I can't figure this part out.
PS: What do you think of the articles in the autism paper?
And what do you think of other doctors now find proof that measles vaccine is linked to autism?
Most important of all, what do you think of the thousands of parents out there who see their children deteriorate before their eyes after vaccines?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,334
|
|
OP
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,334 |
It looks like the Murdochs have ties to drug companies and they sit on some boards so there is a connection. As to your other questions I just have to go back to these studies: 1. Read the Results and conclusions on the first page of this study from the New England Journal of Medicine (strong evidence against link to autism). 537,303 children study: http://www.safeminds.org/research/library/20021107.pdf 2. US National Library of Medicine: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC65532/
Timo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
|
|
Fourth_Degree_AS_Kicker
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 345 |
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
1,058
guests, and
105
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
