at what point did Brian start to seem "off"?

[filledeplage]

There are now, I'm told ways of requesting vaccines prepared without mercury.  I would imagine you'd have to be an knowledgeable and aggressive parent.  They are in the best position to advocate for their kids.  
But you do bring a lot of expertise to the table working with these kids, while the discussion rages, and can perhaps provide insight into.  They are indeed lucky to have you.  
And we are wandering off the music track...

That's the thing though. Pharmacy companies can now prepare vaccinations without mercury. At this point they don't stand to lose anything if they remove mercury from their vaccines.
(quote)
Then, why don't they, if what we know about mercury poison, and we do an environmental cleanup when there is a mercury spill in a high school laboratory.  

They could discover that autism is mercury poisoning, remove all mercury from their vaccines, and not miss a beat or be harmed in the least bit. Were this 20 years ago, this may not be the case, but it's a small part of the reason I don't find the big pharmacy companies running things to be a great argument.
(quote)  
There could be a gene responsible for this, and the vaccine "triggers the event." The Pharma companies are settling lawsuits "privately" with many of these suspicious cases.  

The Center for Disease Control did a big study into this. See http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/topics.html. Their findings are similar to a lot of other studies deemed credible by the scientific community. You can argue that maybe big pharmacy companies are involved and have an agenda to push, but I personally don't buy it.
(quote)
I am unimpressed by this.  It looks as if it was prepared as a public service awareness bulletin. The CDC is an administrative agency under the Executive Branch of the government.  The largest donations to the candidates are coming from the medical/Pharma community.  They have the most powerful lobbies.  

The CDC has been forced to look at this as a direct result of Jenny McCarthy's Autism Organzation and the force of parents demanding answers.  Great pressure has fallen on industry to respond, not unlike the movement Michael J. Fox has spearheaded work on Parkinson's. And, the Beach Boys have worked on ocean pollution/environmental causes, with Surfrider. (now, we are BB relevant!)

And, I have no involvement with this particular issue,  except in the capacity of teaching children with Aspergers in regular ed, and mainstreaming, but have worked on some environmental exposure issues and have been "schooled" in how these agencies work, in an activist/professional capacity, and how science is influenced by industry.

CDC policies are often, sadly, politically driven, are responding to a "squeaky wheel."

 But at least, now, the issues are open for debate, and that could not be a bad thing.  
(quote)
But yes, lets get back on topic.

Yes, indeed!

[myonlysunshine]

There are now, I'm told ways of requesting vaccines prepared without mercury.  I would imagine you'd have to be an knowledgeable and aggressive parent.  They are in the best position to advocate for their kids.   
But you do bring a lot of expertise to the table working with these kids, while the discussion rages, and can perhaps provide insight into.  They are indeed lucky to have you. 
And we are wandering off the music track...

That's the thing though. Pharmacy companies can now prepare vaccinations without mercury. At this point they don't stand to lose anything if they remove mercury from their vaccines.

Then, why don't they, if what we know about mercury poison, and we do an environmental cleanup when there is a mercury spill in a high school laboratory.

They actually are doing it slowly. Despite the fact that most studies by the CDC don't support the vaccine autism hypothesis, there is nevertheless a strong movement to eliminate or reduce the use of mercury as a preservative in vaccines going on today, so it is happening and the Pharmacy companies are not being harmed.

Currently, all routinely recommended vaccines for U.S. infants are available only as mercury-free formulations or contain only trace amounts of mercury, with the exception of the inactivated influenza vaccine, the latter of which comes in a variety that contains either no mercury or only a trace of mercury if one wishes to use those varieties.

Yet despite the fact that Pharmacy companies have been doing this since the early 2000s, the rates of autism diagnoses continue to climb at an unprecedented rate. This would seem to suggest there are other factors.

They could discover that autism is mercury poisoning, remove all mercury from their vaccines, and not miss a beat or be harmed in the least bit. Were this 20 years ago, this may not be the case, but it's a small part of the reason I don't find the big pharmacy companies running things to be a great argument.

There could be a gene responsible for this, and the vaccine "triggers the event."

See my earlier comment about genes and vaccinations as the trigger. Identical twins, both getting the same vaccines, but only one develops an ASD. The study I referred to was sponsored by a university that has no claim to this issue, nor any contacts with the pharmacy companies. It's possible that vaccines could be the trigger, but not necessarily.

The Pharma companies are settling lawsuits "privately" with many of these suspicious cases.

Never heard of this. Do you have a source to back this claim up?

The Center for Disease Control did a big study into this. See http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/topics.html. Their findings are similar to a lot of other studies deemed credible by the scientific community. You can argue that maybe big pharmacy companies are involved and have an agenda to push, but I personally don't buy it.

I am unimpressed by this.  It looks as if it was prepared as a public service awareness bulletin. The CDC is an administrative agency under the Executive Branch of the government.  The largest donations to the candidates are coming from the medical/Pharma community.  They have the most powerful lobbies. 

The CDC has been forced to look at this as a direct result of Jenny McCarthy's Autism Organzation and the force of parents demanding answers.  Great pressure has fallen on industry to respond, not unlike the movement Michael J. Fox has spearheaded work on Parkinson's. And, the Beach Boys have worked on ocean pollution/environmental causes, with Surfrider. (now, we are BB relevant!)

And, I have no involvement with this particular issue,  except in the capacity of teaching children with Aspergers in regular ed, and mainstreaming, but have worked on some environmental exposure issues and have been "schooled" in how these agencies work, in an activist/professional capacity, and how science is influenced by industry.

CDC policies are often, sadly, politically driven, are responding to a "squeaky wheel."

 But at least, now, the issues are open for debate, and that could not be a bad thing. 

It's your call if you're unimpressed by this, but again, mercury or no mercury in the vaccines, the Pharmacy companies aren't affected either way. There are a lot of myths out there about autism and I just feel as someone who happens to A) be affected by this and B) have an education in Special Education and disabilities like this, that it's my duty to step in and respond.

But yes, lets get back on topic.

Yes, indeed!

 

[Fun Is In]

Anyone have any idea when he began to hear and then be disturbed by voices in his head?


Often, people w/ auditory hallucinations self medicate w/ street drugs leading to uncertainty about which came first, the hallucinations or the drugs.

[filledeplage]

All Alone - you have a real passion for this and that is critical to be an effective advocate. Bravo!

There have been a couple of Vaccine Acts, one in 1986 and 1992 to provide for recovery for affected individuals.  The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.  And the 1992 version.

I'm going to direct you to an ABA - American Bar Association article from the ABA Journal of October 1, 2010, which summarizes some events, facts and decisions relative to vaccine litigation.  It is called "The Immune Response." I found it among a myriad of decisions about vaccine litigation.  Beyond this, if you like reading court cases, there are a lot online.

What I liked about this article is that it cited other countries dealing with this problem and this forum is a global one, so it gave a multinational approach that includes more than US issues.  And it raised issues with regard adults developing symptoms post vaccination.  So, it enlarged the claims arena.

There are so many factors involved, including pre-emption, (which means, the feds intend to "occupy the field" and be the ultimate authority) administrative or non trial court remedies, but, there has been a fund set up to compensate victims under a "Vaccine Court" and court decisions which affect the ability to take a challenge outside the fund set up by a tax on each dose, which I think was about 75 cents.  There are issues of product liability and risk/benefit theories, and whether the product could have been made safer for a reasonable cost substitute. ( this is not legal advice.)

www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag_article/the_immune_response/   This link might work on tablets, etc.  

But you can probably find some version for a regular computer.  

With regard the twins issue, by extension, I've seen cases where one identical twin develops leukemia and the other identical healthy twin is the bone marrow donor.  Why one identical twin develops or is predisposed to an illness or malady, I cannot answer.  I'm not a doctor.  

But, I hope the article is helpful and will give you precedent setting case names, challenging appeal case names, and laws enacted by the government in response to Vaccine Injuries since 1986, and where the trends are going, now.

Back to the Beach Boys!  

[myonlysunshine]

This is an interesting article that answers my previous question to you. However, notice the underlying theme of the article is "while we suspect vaccines play a role in developing autism, we really just don't know yet." And that's pretty much what I mentioned in the beginning. The article calls for more research and I agree.

With hot button issues such as this, in many cases I find that what people accept as the truth is relative compared to the actual truth. Our conception of what the reality is, or what we accept as the truth, is relative. The other truth is the actual truth, independent of whether anybody accepts it as such. I think it's important to search for the second truth with all issues, but as of now on the subject of what causes autism, the answer sadly eludes us in light of better evidence. Time will tell what causes it, and until then we have to be understanding and patient.

[KittyKat]

It wasn't until Brian was in his early 20s that he had problems and that's common with adult onset mental disorders like depression and bipolar disorder. He sounded pretty normal until then.

I don't know. I had the full range of vaccines when they were still using mercury, and so did my siblings and most of my relatives, friends, and classmates, and none of us developed any autistic spectrum disorders.  Several studies have seen no link between vaccines and autism, but there could be other things/environmental factors causing it.  It's bad to have many parents wholesale refusing the vaccinate their kids when getting those diseases is a lot worse than any small health risks overall. There has to be herd immunity to keep diseases at bay.

[Wirestone]

This is the simple fact -- the parents who are refusing to vaccinate their children pose a greater and more imminent public health threat than any mercury-based preservative.

[NHC]

Maybe Brian was vaccinated with a phonograph needle. . . . and the music just started pouring out.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

This is the simple fact -- the parents who are refusing to vaccinate their children pose a greater and more imminent public health threat than any mercury-based preservative.

Absolutely.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Anyone have any idea when he began to hear and then be disturbed by voices in his head?


Often, people w/ auditory hallucinations self medicate w/ street drugs leading to uncertainty about which came first, the hallucinations or the drugs.

Good question...there's that story about Brian constantly talking to himself when he would play baseball, and in a Landy-era interview he did say that he would to it to get the 'voice' of Murry out of his head. I don't think he meant that literally, just as a self pep talk, but who knows?

[MBE]

Marilyn once put it to me like this. Brian always had good days and bad days but the bad gradually became more frequent. 
Here are the changes over the years I perceived or have been told about.
1963-He already wants off the road and is putting on weight. Brian said in a 1964 interview that he had a health food diet in high school but found it harder to maintain on the road. His bad eatting habits stuck with him from then on.
1964-We have panic attacks on the Europe tour, and the big breakdown at the end of the year.
1965-Brian was still pretty active, and would still make the effort to go on TV or hometown gigs. It was reported later that he had a few panic attacks, but not quite breakdowns.
1966-The Pet Sounds sessions seem very tight, but by the end of the year he seems to not be as certain. He was becoming a perfectionist to the point where he would tinker too much on things. Not going on the road much at all, but still concerned enough with the live act to rehearse them hard on Good Vibrations
1967-This wasn't the big meltdown it has been made out to be. Yes his actions were odd at times, yes he seems to have lost some of his drive but he seems to have made a conscious decision to not be as competitive. He also seems to have rediscovered the joy of working with the guys. Consider this, in the 12 months after Smile (June 1967-68)  he headed three unconventional but great albums., He also played Hawaii, worked at saving it for a faux-live  studio project, and recorded roughly another LP worth of outtakes.
1968-The year began well, but by the middle of the year he seemed to be burning out for real. He went to an institution briefly, and some feel he was different when he came out. Others told me they didn't see a real difference yet. He did seem to be excited about being a dad initially, but Marilyn told Stephen Gaines that it was after they had the children that she began to get concerned. One thing should be made clear, he may not have been taking the helm like before, but he was still active in the studio the last six months of 1968 with and without The Beach Boys. He also was still making public appearances if not doing any shows. Yellow Submarine premiere, a concert where he signed autographs with the others in the entrances etc. First time he missed sessions though.
1969-Brian seems to have bounced back to a certain point. He was working a lot during this time and his focus was on the group again. He was concerned about their record sales and with Break Away tried to make a difference. A real damaging thing happened at the end of the year when Murry sold Sea Of Tunes. I feel it made him lose a little confidence, but not completely yet. He seemed to enjoy owning the Radiant Radish the first year or so.
1970-While Brian sometimes seemed unsure of himself, and was prone to panic attacks once in a while, this was one of his most active years. He lost weight, played some shows, and actually seemed to want to participate when he did. Then again he did seem torn about signing the Warner's contract and acted somewhat passive aggressive about it.
1971-Brian said this was the point he felt the Beach Boys could really record extensively without him. Through the Surf's Up sessions he was there most of the time, but he wasn't writing as much. I feel the use of Surf's Up ended his desire to be a Beach Boy for a long time. He still worked with the group but again started missing a lot of sessions. Spring seemed to perk him up briefly, but even his work there was in fits and starts.
1972-Carl once said it was here he saw Brian being self destructive with drug's cocaine. Others have told me he changed when he came back from Holland. Less willing to go out, putting on a little weight. In 1976 he said his second major breakdown happened then. In Holland I think was when Brian really started showing signs of decline.
1973 His Iowa session seemed to find him in a good frame of mind. David Sandler has told me that Brian was a pretty normal guy around him when they knew each other well from 1970-73. He did note that he wasn't into drugs so Brian didn't do them around him. Early in the year he was still well groomed, and willing to even sing a little at a local Beach Boys show. When Murry died the bottom fell out. I think this was a huge moment for him sinking further into addiction and depression. Up till then he could still appear conduct himself with some poise, not so after.
1974-He was gaining massive weight, being thrown out of clubs, stopped cutting his hair, didn't seem to shave. While word got out that Brian was eccentric as early as 1966, this was when mental illness and drug abuse really started getting talked about. He had really changed
1975-He just got worse, blanking out on old friends etc. Now he didn't even look washed, and he set about to destroy his voice on purpose.
1976-Landy seemed to help the first time, but the nervous tremors started hands shaking, leg jiggling. His issues were made fully public that year (Nick Kent's 1975 article had done the same thing but not in a media blitz) and he became an erratic performer in the studio and on stage. He still seemed aware of everything around him though, and could converse with some ease in the right mood.
1977-He seemed in good shape as a whole, but drifted slowly back into self destruction. Also the odd public behavior hadn't stopped.
1978-Now he was worse than ever as far as drugs, or depression. A lot of time was spent in the hospital, plus his presence at Beach Boys sessions crawled to a halt as LA Light began to take shape.
1979-A brief weight loss helped, but by the end of the year he was heavy again. He also seemed a but flustered at times, zoned out in interviews during the LA Light promotion. Funny enough as he began to gain weight, he briefly rallied. No incidents seemed to happen on the road, he was touring regularly, and participating in KTSA sessions. Stephen Desper was working with the group again for about a year on and off, and he noticed Brian was less confident, less of a leader than he had been from 1967-72 (Stephen left in late 1971 but helped finish the Spring album in 1972).
1980-Brian still seems on for the most part. He continued to gain weight, but he did some very lucid interviews around this time. On stage he wasn't doing much at the shows, but there was still hope he was getting better.
1981-All of a sudden Brian takes a sharp decline. Heavier than ever, his stage singing was awful. The drugs went into very high gear again, plus he seemed to stop combing his hair, wearing clean clothes etc.
1982 Well it was an all time low. He was huge, putting himself in bad situations and acting very strange on stage.
1983-92. Robot Landy Brian. Never seemed quite as aware as before. Looked good, occasionally came up with a good song, but his work declined quite a bit with Eugene in general. Most of their work (discounting a good deal of Brian Wilson the LP) was in fact terrible. Didn't make his own decisions, was no longer as lucid. Seemed damaged, not always aware.
1993-now. He's had ups and downs, but his life no longer seemed in danger. Obviously he has done some great work in the last ten years, he hadn't acted so much a vital part of the group since the early seventies during the reunion. IJWMFTT found him a little more talkative than later, but by the time he hit his late fifties you could tell that some part of him was lost forever in the cocktails Landy gave him. Part of that is age, but he never totally lost the slur in his voice. He often is stiff in public.  It's not all sad though, he still can be pretty bright, and "with it" when he is in a quiet situation. Certainly he proved he can still write, sing, and perform when he is feeling good.

[filledeplage]

This is the simple fact -- the parents who are refusing to vaccinate their children pose a greater and more imminent public health threat than any mercury-based preservative.

Wirestone - in 1980 the children received 10 vaccines spaced over a couple of years.  I had my kids in the 1980's. None was administered until the baby was about 2-3 months old.  Now, there are 38 shots, more in the pipeline, and the first ones are given right at birth.  There are vaccine schedules on many websites which chart the increase x4 in vaccines, coupled with new adolescent vaccine schedules.  Do kids really need 38 shots, now, when they got 10 in the 1980's?

I'm not anti vaccine as much as skeptical of toxins used, for whatever reason, as preservative agents or whatever.  And, years back before two parents worked, children stayed home when they got chicken pox or measles (which can be a tough sickness) and acquired their own immunities.  Now, the human immune system isn't permitted to become strong and resistant on its own, and it is artificially subject to a laboratory created virus version, live, or killed and parents have little or no say in the matter, even though being a parent is a constitutional right. 

There are now, some alternative vaccine schedules, only as a result of activist parents who have become knowledgable and who refuse to be ruled by the medical-pharma lobbies, which are so strong and have paid so much money into Congress, that you can recover for a defective tire, if you get injured or your car crashes because of defective brakes, but are able to recover only in what is known as Vaccine Court.  It is an unchecked industry. Congress did recognize vaccine injuries and promulgated the Vaccine Act of 1986.

The fungal meningitis outbreak should have everyone suspicious of what happens when self-policing doesn't happen, and no oversight comes from the government agencies, who get paid the big bucks to protect us in the States.

[hypehat]

That's rubbish.

Refusing a vaccine on the grounds that big pharma is nasty isn't good parenting, it's the exact opposite. But I guess you can make your paranoid point whilst your child dies of measles, whooping cough, meningitis A, B or C or polio or something. Stick it to the man, man.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

That's rubbish.

Refusing a vaccine on the grounds that big pharma is nasty isn't good parenting, it's the exact opposite. But I guess you can make your paranoid point whilst your child dies of measles, whooping cough, meningitis A, B or C or polio or something. Stick it to the man, man.

Yep. Washington state has had the highest numbers of parents refusing vaccinations and has seen a 1300% increase in the whooping cough. These parents should be put in jail for neglect and those who spearhead the anti-vaccs movement should likewise be thrown in jail for brainwashing people with their conspiracy theories into neglecting their children. These beliefs are a dangerous, menace to society and are part of a large over-arching movement to keep the public largely irrational and ignorant. Despicable on almost every level.

I am no fan of Big Pharma. Check the Off Topics threads and you'll see me make very pointed critiques of the system. The anti-vaccs crowd is not making these sorts of critiques. If anything they are fostering the sort of critical thinking (or lack of it) that keeps these power mechanisms going.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Marilyn once put it to me like this. Brian always had good days and bad days but the bad gradually became more frequent. 
Here are the changes over the years I perceived or have been told about.
1963-He already wants off the road and is putting on weight. Brian said in a 1964 interview that he had a health food diet in high school but found it harder to maintain on the road. His bad eatting habits stuck with him from then on.
1964-We have panic attacks on the Europe tour, and the big breakdown at the end of the year.
1965-Brian was still pretty active, and would still make the effort to go on TV or hometown gigs. It was reported later that he had a few panic attacks, but not quite breakdowns.
1966-The Pet Sounds sessions seem very tight, but by the end of the year he seems to not be as certain. He was becoming a perfectionist to the point where he would tinker too much on things. Not going on the road much at all, but still concerned enough with the live act to rehearse them hard on Good Vibrations
1967-This wasn't the big meltdown it has been made out to be. Yes his actions were odd at times, yes he seems to have lost some of his drive but he seems to have made a conscious decision to not be as competitive. He also seems to have rediscovered the joy of working with the guys. Consider this, in the 12 months after Smile (June 1967-68)  he headed three unconventional but great albums., He also played Hawaii, worked at saving it for a faux-live  studio project, and recorded roughly another LP worth of outtakes.
1968-The year began well, but by the middle of the year he seemed to be burning out for real. He went to an institution briefly, and some feel he was different when he came out. Others told me they didn't see a real difference yet. He did seem to be excited about being a dad initially, but Marilyn told Stephen Gaines that it was after they had the children that she began to get concerned. One thing should be made clear, he may not have been taking the helm like before, but he was still active in the studio the last six months of 1968 with and without The Beach Boys. He also was still making public appearances if not doing any shows. Yellow Submarine premiere, a concert where he signed autographs with the others in the entrances etc. First time he missed sessions though.
1969-Brian seems to have bounced back to a certain point. He was working a lot during this time and his focus was on the group again. He was concerned about their record sales and with Break Away tried to make a difference. A real damaging thing happened at the end of the year when Murry sold Sea Of Tunes. I feel it made him lose a little confidence, but not completely yet. He seemed to enjoy owning the Radiant Radish the first year or so.
1970-While Brian sometimes seemed unsure of himself, and was prone to panic attacks once in a while, this was one of his most active years. He lost weight, played some shows, and actually seemed to want to participate when he did. Then again he did seem torn about signing the Warner's contract and acted somewhat passive aggressive about it.
1971-Brian said this was the point he felt the Beach Boys could really record extensively without him. Through the Surf's Up sessions he was there most of the time, but he wasn't writing as much. I feel the use of Surf's Up ended his desire to be a Beach Boy for a long time. He still worked with the group but again started missing a lot of sessions. Spring seemed to perk him up briefly, but even his work there was in fits and starts.
1972-Carl once said it was here he saw Brian being self destructive with drug's cocaine. Others have told me he changed when he came back from Holland. Less willing to go out, putting on a little weight. In 1976 he said his second major breakdown happened then. In Holland I think was when Brian really started showing signs of decline.
1973 His Iowa session seemed to find him in a good frame of mind. David Sandler has told me that Brian was a pretty normal guy around him when they knew each other well from 1970-73. He did note that he wasn't into drugs so Brian didn't do them around him. Early in the year he was still well groomed, and willing to even sing a little at a local Beach Boys show. When Murry died the bottom fell out. I think this was a huge moment for him sinking further into addiction and depression. Up till then he could still appear conduct himself with some poise, not so after.
1974-He was gaining massive weight, being thrown out of clubs, stopped cutting his hair, didn't seem to shave. While word got out that Brian was eccentric as early as 1966, this was when mental illness and drug abuse really started getting talked about. He had really changed
1975-He just got worse, blanking out on old friends etc. Now he didn't even look washed, and he set about to destroy his voice on purpose.
1976-Landy seemed to help the first time, but the nervous tremors started hands shaking, leg jiggling. His issues were made fully public that year (Nick Kent's 1975 article had done the same thing but not in a media blitz) and he became an erratic performer in the studio and on stage. He still seemed aware of everything around him though, and could converse with some ease in the right mood.
1977-He seemed in good shape as a whole, but drifted slowly back into self destruction. Also the odd public behavior hadn't stopped.
1978-Now he was worse than ever as far as drugs, or depression. A lot of time was spent in the hospital, plus his presence at Beach Boys sessions crawled to a halt as LA Light began to take shape.
1979-A brief weight loss helped, but by the end of the year he was heavy again. He also seemed a but flustered at times, zoned out in interviews during the LA Light promotion. Funny enough as he began to gain weight, he briefly rallied. No incidents seemed to happen on the road, he was touring regularly, and participating in KTSA sessions. Stephen Desper was working with the group again for about a year on and off, and he noticed Brian was less confident, less of a leader than he had been from 1967-72 (Stephen left in late 1971 but helped finish the Spring album in 1972).
1980-Brian still seems on for the most part. He continued to gain weight, but he did some very lucid interviews around this time. On stage he wasn't doing much at the shows, but there was still hope he was getting better.
1981-All of a sudden Brian takes a sharp decline. Heavier than ever, his stage singing was awful. The drugs went into very high gear again, plus he seemed to stop combing his hair, wearing clean clothes etc.
1982 Well it was an all time low. He was huge, putting himself in bad situations and acting very strange on stage.
1983-92. Robot Landy Brian. Never seemed quite as aware as before. Looked good, occasionally came up with a good song, but his work declined quite a bit with Eugene in general. Most of their work (discounting a good deal of Brian Wilson the LP) was in fact terrible. Didn't make his own decisions, was no longer as lucid. Seemed damaged, not always aware.
1993-now. He's had ups and downs, but his life no longer seemed in danger. Obviously he has done some great work in the last ten years, he hadn't acted so much a vital part of the group since the early seventies during the reunion. IJWMFTT found him a little more talkative than later, but by the time he hit his late fifties you could tell that some part of him was lost forever in the cocktails Landy gave him. Part of that is age, but he never totally lost the slur in his voice. He often is stiff in public.  It's not all sad though, he still can be pretty bright, and "with it" when he is in a quiet situation. Certainly he proved he can still write, sing, and perform when he is feeling good.

Mike - thank you so much for this in depth discussion. Very very interesting stuff though I might make more of his post-Friends "breakdown".

[filledeplage]

That's rubbish.

Refusing a vaccine on the grounds that big pharma is nasty isn't good parenting, it's the exact opposite. But I guess you can make your paranoid point whilst your child dies of measles, whooping cough, meningitis A, B or C or polio or something. Stick it to the man, man.

Just for clarity, hypehat - I never refused a vaccine for my kids, as the diseases for which the vaccines were given, were "reasonable under the circumstances." Interestingly, the smallpox vaccine had just been discontinued which I would have had administered, because it it catastrophic. Smallpox was considered eradicated, at the time.

They were for catastrophic diseases like polio, tetanus, diphtheria, rubella, and not what was known as "common childhood diseases" which virtually all children got when they were exposed playing outside, or in school, and which kids hardly do these days, (they have "play dates") and the vaccine schedule was reasonable.  

The vaccine schedule is unreasonable in my view, and I am not alone in that opinion, as apparently Congress agrees that there have been Vaccine Injuries. And, as a result of congressional hearings, etc., in order to get a law passed that compensates, in some way for seizures, brain swelling, learning disabilities, language deficits, etc., many parents and medical experts went to Congress because they have or treated injured kids, not because they are paranoid, but could not get relief to care or support their kids.  

Parent have better things to do with their time, until there is no recourse but to expose a danger to their kids with a congressperson's  support. They passed a law in 1986. That is not paranoia, but helpful information at work. And about 30 years of recognition that there is a problem. The Congress created a court, just for vaccine cases. Is that paranoia?  

That is my right, but my opinion is "informed" from reading many cases of injured children and adults who suffered adverse effects from Swine flu vaccine injuries, from 1976, Guillain-Barre syndrome, H1N1 miscarriages, DPT injuries, MMR injuries, ad infinitum.

dangerousprescriptiondrugs.weebly.com/pharma---payouts.html

childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/japvaxautism/

Hope these links open.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

The vaccine schedule is unreasonable in my view, and I am not alone in that opinion, as apparently Congress agrees that there have been Vaccine Injuries. And, as a result of congressional hearings, etc., in order to get a law passed that compensates, in some way for seizures, brain swelling, learning disabilities, language deficits, etc., many parents and medical experts went to Congress because they have or treated injured kids, not because they are paranoid, but could not get relief to care or support their kids.  

Here's a good article about US Congress's relationship to the anti-vaccine conspiracy theory:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/04/congress_hearing_on_vaccines_is_a_farce_of_dangerous_antivax_nonsense.html

[myonlysunshine]

Here's a good article about US Congress's relationship to the anti-vaccine conspiracy theory:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/04/congress_hearing_on_vaccines_is_a_farce_of_dangerous_antivax_nonsense.html

Thank you for posting this rockandroll. That article confirms a lot of what I already mentioned in my previous posts.

[filledeplage]

The vaccine schedule is unreasonable in my view, and I am not alone in that opinion, as apparently Congress agrees that there have been Vaccine Injuries. And, as a result of congressional hearings, etc., in order to get a law passed that compensates, in some way for seizures, brain swelling, learning disabilities, language deficits, etc., many parents and medical experts went to Congress because they have or treated injured kids, not because they are paranoid, but could not get relief to care or support their kids.  

Here's a good article about US Congress's relationship to the anti-vaccine conspiracy theory:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/04/congress_hearing_on_vaccines_is_a_farce_of_dangerous_antivax_nonsense.html

Thanks for that link. Pertussis is dangerous, and I should have included it in my catastrophic list. And my kids were vaccinated against it.  I qualified the vaccine issue. I'm not anti-vax, and I was pretty clear.  That is extreme.  I'd like to see more oversight, that is legit, by neutral experts who are not on a drug company payola machine payroll, and compensation with educational support and home care funding for injured parties. Just fairness.  If you hurt someone; you pay. Plain and simple.

At the bottom of the link, is a comment on "vaccine timing, and vaccine dosage." It was from a Dutch study.  There is room for more flexibility in vaccine scheduling.   And more oversight, that is free from lobbying influence.  They get millions.  Some states have passed laws to prevent doctors from getting "gifts." It is a big business, no less than the oil and energy companies.  And, much of it is public information.

Don't think that industry money is not painting "anti-vaxers" as "nut jobs" because they have a big bottom line to protect, government contracts to vaccinate the military, etc.  There are billions at stake, much of which is tax payer subsidized , and experimentation of vaccines done in third world countries, where most people have no legal access, and who have been injured as well, being used as guinea pigs.  Just saying...

There are two sides to the coin.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Thanks for that link. Pertussis is dangerous, and I should have included it in my catastrophic list. And my kids were vaccinated against it.  I qualified the vaccine issue. I'm not anti-vax, and I was pretty clear.  

As the article noted, the Congressman who spouted a ton of anti-vax rhetoric also prefaced the rhetoric by saying that he wasn't "anti-vax."

There is room for more flexibility in vaccine scheduling.

For absolutely no reason. A child could theoretically get 100,000 vaccines at once and it wouldn't cause any harm.

And more oversight, that is free from lobbying influence.  They get millions.  Some states have passed laws to prevent doctors from getting "gifts." It is a big business, no less than the oil and energy companies.  And, much of it is public information.

This doesn't explain that the scientific consensus that vaccines are harmless is not just a United States phenomenon. It is agreed by the overwhelming consensus of scentific communities that exist far outside the sphere of Big Pharma lobby influence.

Is Big Phara a big business? Yes. Is that problematic? Yes. You know what is also problematic? Hysteria "sky-is-falling" arguments like yours that undermine the real activist movement that are trying to raise awareness of the real problems associated with the health care industry. As long as people believe that the problem with Big Pharma is simply that they are over-vaccinating people to the extent that whooping cough numbers don't spike by 1300% then you can feel comforted by the fact that the system will continue forever. This is why big business adores conspiracy theories - nothing keeps big business going better than conspiracy theories.

Don't think that industry money is not painting "anti-vaxers" as "nut jobs" because they have a big bottom line to protect, government contracts to vaccinate the military, etc.

 

I've researched conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists for years and this is such a familiar, virtually Xeroxed response from what must be a Conspiracy Theorist FAQ Handbook that I haven't come across yet. Holocaust deniers are painted as "nut jobs" because it's in the best interests of the Jews that are in control. 9/11 was an inside jobbers are painted as "nut jobs" because it's in the best interest of the government who stands to gain from 9/11.

In fact, the truth is much more plausible. People (not just "industry money") consider these conspiracy theorists to be "nut jobs" because they are, in fact, nut jobs. But, of course, what nut job who is already a paranoid conspiracy theorist would believe that they are actually a nut job rather than a victim of a conspiracy to make everyone think they are a nut job...right?

There are two sides to the coin.

Yes. One is true and one is false and driven by an industry to deviate people from real political activism and, as a result, cause enormous harm.

[filledeplage]

Rockandroll - I disagree with your position, but respect your right to have it.  America was built on activism.  And, a three pronged system of checks and balances for a reason.  

Transparency is lacking as a result of influence peddling.  I won't apologize for my position, because it is a result of reading many legal cases, many of which, had what I consider to be an unfair and harsh result.  I am glad you concede that the business aspect of medicine could be problematic.  What ever happened to "first, do no harm?"

Just as an example, to analogize, we have a huge drug epidemic in this country. And when OxyContin was manufactured, the company knew the potential for abuse.  They knew (because they are supposed to test for misuse,) that it would produce a heroin high if chewed or snorted and was very dangerous if it fell into the wrong hands.  And it did.

The state of Kentucky was one of the first to sue, and recover monies for drug treatment for the victims.  That was the tip of the iceberg.  And the misrepresentations were huge. The president and chief medical officer pled guilty to charges of fraudulent marketing and making claims not supported by research.

If this industry behaves this way towards pain killers, do they behave differently with vaccine promotion?  I think not.  I've gone to too many funerals of former students who overdosed and started off with a very innocent looking pill.  If you hurt someone; you should pay.  And always good to know who funded a scientist's research.  Not to know is just looking through "rose colored glasses."

Parents whose precious kids got sick after a shot, deserve answers, and should have them.  JMHO

They don't get a pass from me.  

www.erinmariedaly/com/clips/ky_attorney_general_oxycontin.pdf

(For educational purposes)

Are all vaccines bad? Absolutely not.  Can they be made safer? Probably. Is there a moderate position? Parents in my era rarely heard of autism connected to vaccines, and we did not challenge a vaccine schedule. This is something that happened more frequently since that time and required some attention.  Do we need to artificially eliminate everything including colds, with vaccines?  

Does this industry need oversight when some of those in charge have been found guilty of falsehood?  You decide.

Mods - please move this thread.

Brian's health status concerns his doctors, his family and is none of our business.  JMHO
  

[I. Spaceman]

There is an incredible amount of truth in that post, Rocknroll. Thanks for that.
How do people think such a wide range of conspiracy theory gets on the big business/government controlled airwaves and web? If it is such outlaw, underground, suppressed information?

[Don Malcolm]

Mike, thanks for the yearly log. I agree with r'n'r that the incident after Friends (possibly in some way related to the first "plundering" of the SMILE material in that time frame) is an important interim step in what was a gradually escalating set of emotional difficulties. As I think virtually all of us agree, given all that happened to him, it's a freakin' miracle that he's still with us and still making music.

[Mike's Beard]

Brian's health status concerns his doctors, his family and is none of our business.  JMHO
  

Brian's management has used his mental health concerns as a marketing slant ever since 1976's "Brian's Back" campaign.

[filledeplage]

Brian's health status concerns his doctors, his family and is none of our business.  JMHO
  

Brian's management has used his mental health concerns as a marketing slant ever since 1976's "Brian's Back" campaign.

The discredited "medical" manager, who faced ethics violations? 

And, "Brian is Back" I think is a great song! Complete with the "You Still Believe in Me" measure, woven in, a sublime reference to Pet Sounds, and the Mike/Carl split lead.