# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Health & Well-Being >  Tennessee Medical Office Stops Vaccines Because They Cause Autism

## donnay

> *Tennessee Medical Office Stops Vaccines Because They Cause Autism*
> 
>  July 13, 2016 · by Albert Hunter 
> 
> Franklin, TN  The Cool Springs Family Medical Center just informed its patients that it will no longer be administering vaccines. The amazing letter, posted on the medical facilitys website, gives 8 reasons for the move, including the links to autism, dangerous ingredients, and their agreement with Wakefield.
> 
>     We will no longer be administering Vaccines at Cool Springs Family Medicine (CSFM).
> 
>     How come?
> ...


http://www.curediseases.info/breakin...-cause-autism/

----------


## puppetmaster

Cool.....I would take my kids there.

----------


## TheCount



----------


## William Tell

Awesome.

----------


## donnay

> 


Does that make this story any less awesome?

----------


## Zippyjuan

He has since pulled that list of claims from his website. 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...x-brigade.html




> *Physician Hates Vaccines, Loves Colon Cleanses*
> 
> Dr. Daniel Kalb says his practice wont administer vaccines anymore because they arent safe.
> 
> A Tennessee doctor is refusing to administer vaccines to patients becausewait for itthey can cause autism.
> 
> Dr. Daniel Kalb is a physician at Cool Springs Family Medicine (CSFM) in Franklin, TN, a practice that *provides preventative care through natural measures like detoxes, colon cleanses, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and ultraviolet light treatment. They also offer Botox.*
> 
> On May 31, Dr. Kalb *wrote an eight-point list (that has since been removed from the CSFM website* but can be found here) about why CSFM will not offer vaccines to patients, noting his 15 years of experience with upset mothers whove shared their vaccine injury stories.


Yelp score says only half of those who rated him said they would recommend him to somebody else. 2.5 out of 5 stars. http://www.yelp.com/biz/cool-springs...icine-franklin

----------


## puppetmaster

> He has since pulled that list of claims from his website. 
> 
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...x-brigade.html
> 
> 
> 
> Yelp score says only half of those who rated him said they would recommend him to somebody else. 2.5 out of 5 stars. http://www.yelp.com/biz/cool-springs...icine-franklin


  forced to by the licensing  thugs in the government.  Yelp is a great source. Lol.....wait no it is not it is easy to manipulate

----------


## dannno

> Yelp score says only half of those who rated him said they would recommend him to somebody else. 2.5 out of 5 stars. http://www.yelp.com/biz/cool-springs...icine-franklin


Once again, you fail to read the $#@! you post about, sorta like the 28 pages.

If you look at the reviews with comments, almost all are 5 stars - the ones that are one or two star almost all have the same complaint, and it is about the staff - the wait times - the paperwork, etc.. Only one person complained about the treatment they received, which they claimed was a misdiagnosis. Last time I went to a doctor, I got a misdiagnosis, and that was after I told him exactly what the issue was, he tried to say it was something else.. but at least I got some free muscle relaxers. But anyways, it's not uncommon.

----------


## TheCount

> Does that make this story any less awesome?


I think the title is written to make readers think of something a little bit more credible / official than a strip mall doctor's office.

----------


## donnay

> I think the title is written to make readers think of something a little bit more credible / official than a strip mall doctor's office.


Regardless.  Having the courage to stand up against the establishment thinking makes them as big as the Empire State Building.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> I think the title is written to make readers think of something a little bit more credible / official than a strip mall doctor's office.


Also does not present any evidence to support the claim.

----------


## Danke

> I think the title is written to make readers think of something a little bit more credible / official than a strip mall doctor's office.


 There are a lot of doctors and dentists etc. that Co-locate next to a strip Mall.

----------


## Working Poor

All right one more good doctor who does not want to sacrifice children to the Nazi eugenics agenda!

I found a decent article on doctors against vaccine they are out there keep looking.

http://vaccineimpact.com/2015/medica...s-be-silenced/

----------


## donnay

> Also does not present any evidence to support the claim.


Forty-nice doses to 69 doses given to a child whose brain and immune system is not full developed should be all the evidence one needs.

----------


## CPUd

> Forty-nice doses to 69 doses given to a child whose brain and immune system is not full developed should be all the evidence one needs.


That's not evidence.

----------


## donnay

> That's not evidence.


Yes-- it is called common sense based evidence.  I know that is lacking in the conventional medical practices these days.

----------


## CPUd

> Yes-- it is called common sense based evidence.  I know that is lacking in the conventional medical practices these days.


It's more an expression than anything else.  You could possibly reformulate it into a claim or something of the form "X says Y = Z".  That might be evidence.

----------


## Zippyjuan

What percent of his patients did he give autism to by vaccinating them?  What is his "common sense based" evidence?

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> I think the title is written to make readers think of something a little bit more credible / official than a strip mall doctor's office.



That makes him less credible?  Offices of doctors, dentists, lawyers, and other professionals are located in industrial parks, malls, and similar set-ups all across the country.  

One very common office is the older residential house that is converted to an office for a doctor, dentist, lawyer, etc.  You see this in large and small towns alike.

Oh yeah, you get a neg rep for this just because you are constantly trolling like this.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Also does not present any evidence to support the claim.



What difference would it make to you?  I have posted evidence time and time again, but you always ignore it.  Instead of trolling and being a liberal contrarian on this site, maybe you should actually try to learn something.  Neg rep.


**********************************



Recent peer reviewed research connects vaccines to autism. This is not the almost 20 year old research of Wakefield that people harp on. Here are just two of the studies:

"...children from the countries with the highest ASD prevalence appear to have the highest exposure to Al from vaccines; (ii) "the increase in exposure to Al adjuvants significantly correlates with the increase in ASD prevalence in the United States."

"...a significant correlation exists between the amounts of Al administered to preschool children and the current prevalence of ASD in seven western countries..."

http://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf





"...the relationship between the proportion of children who received the recommended vaccines by age 2 years and the prevalence of autism (AUT) or speech or language impairment (SLI) in each U.S. state from 2001 and 2007 was determined."

"A positive and statistically significant relationship was found: The higher the proportion of children receiving recommended vaccinations, the higher was the prevalence of AUT or SLI. A 1% increase in vaccination was associated with an additional 680 children having AUT or SLI."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535

----------


## Leaning Libertarian

Zippy is more than welcome to my childrens' left over unused vaccines. I sure as hell am not putting any more vaccines into them, until they make them safe and green.  These liberal protagonists repeatedly go after Wakefield's Lancet article and McCarthy's soft core porn, but these are the low hanging fruit.  They won't touch the Hannah Polling or Bailey Banks court finding vaccines directly caused these two children (each diagnosed with autism) to have "autistic like behavior" (as if there is a damn difference).  They won't touch the overwhelming medical consensus declaring vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe," is the whole reason the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act was passed in the first place.  They don't discuss the Thomas Verstraeten Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information in June 2000. Related to your cited medical studies you will get crickets.  Most work in the medical profession somewhere, and have a cognitive bias.  They wouldn't want to face themselves knowing the "social good" they believe themselves doing is causing the pandemic levels of developmental disabilities globally, so they fight it tooth and nail.  They can put up all the fight they want online.  Just as long as they don't show up at my doorstep with a syringe of their crap, I don't care if they agree or not.

----------


## Cleaner44

Besides the Doctor of Medicine degree, he also has a Master of Public Health... but his office location means he isn't credible? People are strange.

----------


## Zippyjuan

What did Thomas Verstraeten say?  http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywil.../#5b219e1b4f12




> In his presentation at the Simpsonwood conference, Verstraeten noted,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				This is the result for autism, in *which we don’t see much of a trend except for a slight, but not significant, increase for the highest exposure*. The overall test for trend is *statistically not significant*.
> 			
> ...





> He then notes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				Because the findings of the first phase were not replicated in the second phase, the perception of the study changed from a positive to a neutral study. Surprisingly, however, the study is being interpreted now as negative by many, including the antivaccine lobbyists. The article does not state that we found evidence against an association, as a negative study would. It does state, on the contrary, that additional study is recommended, which is the conclusion to which a neutral study must come
> 			
> ...


In other words, he did not find any significant link between thimerisol and autism.  Further proof can be seen by what happened when thimerisol was removed from vaccines.  If it was a cause of autism, autism rates should have gone down when it was taken out of them.   It did not.




> "autistic like behavior" (as if there is a damn difference).


Autism Spectrum Disorder does not have a single definition.  It covers an ever- growing list of symptoms (one reason more cases are reported- more fit the expanded definition).  They look at a person's behavior and try to decide if the person fits enough of the definition. There isn't a test for autism which says "yes, this person has autism, no- this person doesn't".

----------


## angelatc

> What difference would it make to you?  I have posted evidence time and time again, but you always ignore it.  Instead of trolling and being a liberal contrarian on this site, maybe you should actually try to learn something.  Neg rep.
> 
> 
> **********************************
> 
> 
> 
> Recent peer reviewed research connects vaccines to autism. 5


\

Bull$#@!.  Bull$#@!. Bull$#@!. Your first hint should be that the paper is in a Chemistry journal, not a medical journal.  Peer review - LOL.

If you want to see an actual, you know, medical professional review the paper : http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...d-by-the-decr/






> The evidence in the paper consists mainly of Tomlijenovic and Shaw comparing increasing ASD prevalence to the increasing number of vaccines in vaccine schedules in various countries, their argument being that increasing doses of aluminum through vaccines correlates with increasing prevalence of ASD. Basically, they collected data on ASD diagnoses for children from ages 6-21, from 1991-2008 from the US Department of Education Annual Reports for ASD prevalence. Next, they tried to correlate the autism prevalence in this group with the cumulative aluminum dosage they received before age 6 through the pediatric vaccination schedule. They then basically did the most simplistic analysis imaginable, plotting the minimum, mean, and maximum aluminum exposures against ASD prevalence. Can you say ecological fallacy? Sure, I knew you could.

----------


## angelatc

> Zippy is more than welcome to my childrens' left over unused vaccines. I sure as hell am not putting any more vaccines into them, until they make them safe and green.  These liberal protagonists repeatedly go after Wakefield's Lancet article and McCarthy's soft core porn, but these are the low hanging fruit.  They won't touch the Hannah Polling or Bailey Banks court finding vaccines directly caused these two children (each diagnosed with autism) to have "autistic like behavior" (as if there is a damn difference).  They won't touch the overwhelming medical consensus declaring vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe," is the whole reason the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act was passed in the first place.  They don't discuss the Thomas Verstraeten Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information in June 2000. Related to your cited medical studies you will get crickets.  Most work in the medical profession somewhere, and have a cognitive bias.  They wouldn't want to face themselves knowing the "social good" they believe themselves doing is causing the pandemic levels of developmental disabilities globally, so they fight it tooth and nail.  They can put up all the fight they want online.  Just as long as they don't show up at my doorstep with a syringe of their crap, I don't care if they agree or not.


How can you tell when an anti-vaxxer is lying?  His lips are moving.  There is literally no evidence that vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent.  Your kids are protected by the fact that most parents are smarter than you are, not vice-versa.

----------


## Intoxiklown

Yes, there was a CDC cover up regarding vaccines. That there was a higher rate than normal of possible links to autism in black children under the age of 36 months (?). Wrong to hide it, yes. Proof that vaccines are immediate autism for all children? No. Also, define autism. Realize that autism diagnoses are about 1.5% of people nationwide, and this is under the new diagnostic parameters. Over 1/3 of those would never have been considered autistic under older diagnostic definitions. Also, where you have autism diagnostic centers, you see autism diagnosis spike. Move away from these specialized centers, and the rates of people diagnosed with autism drops significantly. 

To be fair, location and new criteria only accounts for roughly 60% of cases. Strangely, there is a more of a link to autism with older parents, leaning more towards older fathers. 

The problem with blaming aluminum for anything is (alzheimers runs strongly in my family, and as aluminum is possibly related, I'm well read) that aluminum is literally one of the most common elements in the universe. It's in everything. And I mean everything.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> \
> 
> Your first hint should be that the paper is in a Chemistry journal, not a medical journal.  Peer review - LOL.


First hint of what?  Chemistry is part of medicine.  It's a peer reviewed chemistry journal.





> Can you say “ecological fallacy”? Sure, I knew you could.



Sure, I can say it, Mister Rogers, but I won't because it doesn't apply.






> Bull$#@!.  Bull$#@!. Bull$#@!.



Jumping up & down and screaming profanities doesn't negate the evidence.





> If you want to see an actual, you know, medical professional review the paper : http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...d-by-the-decr/


[/QUOTE]


It was not only reviewed, but it was peer reviewed.  I will take that over your "blogger."

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> How can you tell when an anti-vaxxer is lying?  His lips are moving.  *There is literally no evidence* that vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent.  Your kids are protected by the fact that most parents are smarter than you are, not vice-versa.



What is literal evidence?  Something opposed to figurative evidence?

Maybe you should consult your "Sure, I knew you could" Mister Rogers blogger to understand the definition of evidence.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Yes, there was a CDC cover up regarding vaccines. *That there was a higher rate than normal of possible links to autism in black children under the age of 36 months (?).* Wrong to hide it, yes. Proof that vaccines are immediate autism for all children? No. Also, define autism. Realize that autism diagnoses are about 1.5% of people nationwide, and this is under the new diagnostic parameters. Over 1/3 of those would never have been considered autistic under older diagnostic definitions. Also, where you have autism diagnostic centers, you see autism diagnosis spike. Move away from these specialized centers, and the rates of people diagnosed with autism drops significantly. 
> 
> To be fair, location and new criteria only accounts for roughly 60% of cases. Strangely, there is a more of a link to autism with older parents, leaning more towards older fathers. 
> 
> The problem with blaming aluminum for anything is (alzheimers runs strongly in my family, and as aluminum is possibly related, I'm well read) that aluminum is literally one of the most common elements in the universe. It's in everything. And I mean everything.


The study which found higher autism rates was flawed and they corrected it. The problem was that they included a group of black children in a special school for autistic kids where they had to be vaccinated before they could attend.  They had autism* BEFORE* they got their vaccines so the vaccines could not have *caused* the autism.  Once that group was removed, they found no other correlations.

----------


## Intoxiklown

> The study which found higher autism rates was flawed and they corrected it. The problem was that they included a group of black children in a special school for autistic kids where they had to be vaccinated before they could attend.  They had autism* BEFORE* they got their vaccines so the vaccines could not have *caused* the autism.  Once that group was removed, they found no other correlations.


Sadly, that info is a day late and a dollar short. I can't fault anyone being leery of the subject going forward since they hid data. Still, it's good to know.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> The study which found higher autism rates was flawed and they corrected it. The problem was that they included a group of black children in a special school for autistic kids where they had to be vaccinated before they could attend.  They had autism* BEFORE* they got their vaccines so the vaccines could not have *caused* the autism.  Once that group was removed, they found no other correlations.



How do you know that?  Did you read the study?  If so, please show the study.  The CDC statement I see seems to confirm the correlation between vaccines and autism:




> The findings revealed that vaccination between 24 and 36 months was slightly more common among children with autism, and that association was strongest among children 3-5 years of age. The authors reported this finding was most likely a result of immunization requirements for preschool special education program attendance in children with autism.
> http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/con...ediatrics.html




Is this the study to which you refer?  If you have something, then I will like to see it.  If looks as if a person wanting to see this data/study must make some kind of special request.  They are calling it "restricted access."  I have never heard of such a thing.  Here is that information:





> The Developmental Disabilities Branch (DDB) will only make this data set available under *restricted conditions.*
> 
> To request access to the data, interested researchers must complete a scientific proposal and send it to CDC at NCBDDDdata@cdc.gov. The proposal should clearly state which data sets are being requested, how the researcher plans to analyze them, and which hypothesis(es) are being tested. The proposal should be no longer than eight typed, single-spaced pages, including appendices and cover page, in Times New Roman 12 pt font. The proposal should include the following:
> 
> Background - This section should describe the background and reasons for requesting the data set(s) of interest.
> Introduction - This section should describe the proposed research, in detail, including a clear statement of the hypothesis(es) being tested and an explanation of its significance to the overall analysis. In addition, this section should also describe how the researchers intend to maintain confidentiality of the data.
> Methods - This section should clearly list, with relevant citations, the analytical methods proposed for data analysis.
> Data Sets Requested - This section should clearly list the data set(s) requested and the length of time each data set is needed.
> Appendices
> ...


 

So, is this the study to which you refer?  If so, did you specially request the information and do your own analysis?  I doubt it because you are not a doctor.  Didn't you say you have an economics degree for U of Colorado, Boulder?

And why all the secrecy about a study?  I have never heard of such a thing.  You have to compose a complicated proposal to access a study?  Really?

----------


## euphemia

If people still want vaccines for their children, they can go right down to the Williamson County Health Department and have them done.  Probably for free.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> How do you know that?  Did you read the study?  If so, please show the study.  The CDC statement I see seems to confirm the correlation between vaccines and autism:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this the study to which you refer?  If you have something, then I will like to see it.  If looks as if a person wanting to see this data/study must make some kind of special request.  They are calling it "restricted access."  I have never heard of such a thing.  Here is that information:
> 
> 
> ...


Don't have a link at this moment but the information comes from one of the study's authors.  The study was retracted and the information corrected.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4128611/

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/now-ret...ry?id=25248179




> On Aug. 27, Translational Neurodegeneration –- a peer-reviewed journal -– pulled Hooker’s study from its online publication and left the following note in its place:
> 
> “This article has been removed from the public domain because of serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions. The journal and publisher believe that its continued availability may not be in the public interest. Definitive editorial action will be pending further investigation.”
> 
> The journal declined to comment further pending its own investigation. Hooker said he was told the journal removed his study “temporarily” because his ties to Focus Autism presented a conflict of interest.
> 
> More than a month later, on Oct. 3, the journal issued an official retraction:
> 
> “The Editor and Publisher regretfully retract the article as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings. We apologise to all affected parties for the inconvenience caused.”
> ...

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> [From the article you quoted]: "Furthermore,* post-publication peer review* raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis,..."


Post publication peer review?  Really?  What exactly is that?  The people who did the original peer review were found to be sleeping on the job?  Incompetent?  Teenagers were impersonating the original peer review members?  Grizzly Bears broke into the lab? 






> "Hooker said he was told the journal removed his study “temporarily” because his ties to Focus Autism presented a conflict of interest."


Why is it a conflict of interest for Hooker to fund his own study, but it's not a conflict when the vaccine companies fund their own studies?

----------


## Zippyjuan

Conflict of interest is probably his testimony in many anti- vaccine lawsuits.




> Competing interests
> Dr. Hooker has been involved in vaccine/biologic litigation


But the biggest problem was that inaccurate data was used to try to support his conclusion.

The only group he could find any correlation between a group of people who were vaccinated and had autism was with a group of black boys who were vaccinated AFTER they already were diagnosed as autistic. If you are trying to show cause and effect, this group should not be included in any data.  Unless you were trying to show that autism caused vaccination.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Conflict of interest is probably his testimony in many anti- vaccine lawsuits.



Wouldn't that also apply to the testimony of vaccine makers, distributors, etc. involved in those lawsuits?






> But the biggest problem was that inaccurate data was used to try to support his conclusion.



Your article said that the data came from the CDC.






> ...a group of black boys who were vaccinated AFTER they already were diagnosed as autistic.


I didn't see that in the study.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Wouldn't that also apply to the testimony of vaccine makers, distributors, etc. involved in those lawsuits?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your article said that the data came from the CDC.
> 
> ...



They didn't indicate that in the study.  That is  why it was retracted.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> They didn't indicate that in the study.  That is  why it was retracted.



So how do you know that?

----------


## dannno

> The only group he could find any correlation between a group of people who were vaccinated and had autism was with a group of black boys who were vaccinated AFTER they already were diagnosed as autistic.


Does that seem suspicious at all to you?

----------


## Zippyjuan

Suspicious how?

----------

