So the Centers for Disease Control finds no link between vaccines and autism. This is the same government that told the Vietnam vets that Agent Orange was safe; that told people in southern Utah that the open air nuclear testing was safe; that told 9/11 first responders the air at ground zero was safe; that told us that mercury fillings were perfectly safe.
I know three couples whose children received vaccines and the next day the child had significant, serious behavior changes. What should I believe, the obvious or the CDC, especially considering children with autism have been found to have higher levels of mercury and other toxic metals in their blood?
Maybe the question needs to be reworded. Why are there poisonous metals in the vaccines in the first place? If they act only as preservatives, which is more important: keeping poison out of a child's bloodstream or increasing the shelf life of a replaceable product?
Bruce A. Nieveen
- Join the discussion: Is feminism misunderstood?
- Dan Liljenquist: The economic impact of...
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the...
- In our opinion: Federal contracting executive...
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'?
- Capitalism and the common good: Fairness,...
- My view: Utah's Constitution requires state...
- Doug Robinson: Violence against women is...
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 114
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 79
- My view: Balancing personal conviction... 54
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 51
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'? 46
- Letter: Policy disagreement 45
- Join the discussion: Is feminism... 37
- My view: A global warming solution to... 36