David Kirby Asks for Difficult Questions

"I sincerely encourage any and all vaccine-autism skeptics, critics, agnostics and cynics living in the northeastern US to please consider attending one of these talks, armed with all of your most pointed, difficult and critical questions."
said David Kirby as he advertised his Northeast tour.

I suppose Kirby will make his usual claim that, maybe thimerosal caused some autism. This guy wrote a book and makes his living off of publicizing the horror of thimerosal induced autism but he just doesn't have the guts to state definitively what every parent knows who has watched their autistic kid get better by removing the damn mercury.

With his "maybe" statement as a fallback, the only tough question one could ask Kirby would be similar to asking him if it might rain tonight. Kirby would be sure to check with a meteorologist, ask for more testing of computer weather models and maybe be confident enough in his answer to tell you there's a 10% chance of rain.

Your lack of confidence in yourself is pathetic, David. Whether you like it or not, you are representing my son. You do not represent my son properly by giving any weight to any of the lies bandied about by the industry that poisoned him.

When questioned by any MD about the fact that thimerosal caused the autism epidemic, the proper reply is to first, ask how many babies they poisoned personally. Then you ask 200 pound MD's if they will accept an injection of 500 micrograms of mercury, directly into their brain to approximate the same effect thimerosal had on our 5 pound infants. Follow this up by asking how much money the damage to their reputations will cost them when parents don't bother with the stupid well baby visits. Then ask them about "standard of care" which protects them from lawsuits as long as it is standard medical practice to lie to parents anout thimerosal. Remind them that we know that if the majority of them tell the truth and advise parents to use chelation to remove the poison that they put into our kids, that that majority will alter the "standard of care" and they will all be open to lawsuits themselves rather than just the drug companies. Advise them that we already know the truth by virtue of some of us curing our autistic kids and let them know that the sooner they stop lying to us, the sooner they can begin to regain some respect.

You can't use these arguments, David if you're going to keep acting like a pansy and pretending you don't know the truth. You don't win debates by saying "maybe". You win debates by stating your position in no uncertain terms and using every available fact to refute the opposition.

When confronted by neuroinsane nitwits who tell you autism has always existed, your response is simple. You ask them to present 1 out of 150, 78 year olds who are feces smearing, non-verbal, illiterate, head bangers. If we don't obtain the funding and the publicity to have all of our kids treated biomedically, that's what the world will have to deal with about 50 years from now. Don't worry, the nitwits won't even be able to find one old person with Asperger's.

When the inevitable stupid question surfaces about thimerosal being removed in 2001, the correct response is not to claim that there are too many vaccines. The correct response is that the drug companies learned what we learned, that the largest increase in autism happened in 1994, exactly three years after they started using the HepB shot on the day of birth, before infants have developed a blood brain barrier. First, you correct them by telling them that thimerosal was not removed until 2003 from most vaccines. Then, you point out that giving pregnant women the flu shot with thimerosal has a much greater effect on a one pound fetus with a barely developing brain than the HepB shot did on full term infants. You also can insert the fact that having all those babies born with scrambled brains instead of regressing makes the naive parents believe that autism is genetic so they don't learn that their kids can be cured and they don't learn that they can sue the vaccine manufacturers. Are you getting this, David?

But, of course, the questions I would like to ask of you and Olmsted still remain. Why did you publicly support Kathleen Seidel who consistently lies about autism, thereby influencing public opinion against us obtaining the help we need to cure our kids and stop the poisoning of babies worldwide? When will it dawn on you that you have kicked every decent parent in the groin by publicly supporting this nefarious bitch? Why won't you or Olmsted answer that question, David? Will you answer that question for my son who you represent and who can't afford the treatment he needs? Do you think it is ethical to make your living off the back of my son while you misrepresent him in this cowardly fashion?