Rhesus negative

[Guest guest]

Rhesus negativehttp://www.14studies.org/pdf/HG_11.pdf Dr Miles from University of Missouri showed that the rhesus factor and injections resulted in no difference to the outcome of neurological consequences for children.The problem is that every other piece of work in this area showed huge worsening of child health outcomes for parents not rhesus compatible.While people take joy in denigrating the work of Dr Wakefield looking at 12 children, it seems open house for people to produce research which makes the Royal Free study look impeccable.For the first part of my life as a chemist the Inert Gases were rightly so called. Today and for 50 years nearly, we know that the Inert Gases are no more inert than any other element for the most part. To come up with negatives is therefore very dangerous, especially in the area of rhesus compatability where all previous work has shown differences in health outcomes.This work was paid for in full from and , the inventors of treatments for rhesus incompatibility and to use in claims of harm from their products in court actions.Reading the small print, Dr Miles is happy to deny harm found from her meticulous work, meticulous in places and in others remarkably worrying as there are claims that the people enrolled were excluded after early results came in. Was this because they proved the opposite of what and wanted to know?It seems to me that this work needs more examination and explanations why changes are made in the middle of research programmes which have a contradictory effect on your findings.In fact in much work I look at there seems grounds for calling fraud, cheat and lies. How many research papers in fact resist close scrutiny?At present any negative results should be taken as of zero value as it turned out for the arguments that xenon would not form any compounds stable or otherwise. Xenon oxide is a stable white solid and must have come as a huge shock to a chemical world who immediately did their recalculations and said it must be so. Obvious in hindsight!Facts are one thing but denials are just worthless and when going against proven changes to health they may be more sinister than just saving companies from paying out for harm their products produce.In the middle of all the denials, Dr Miles covers herself by admitting the harm from rhesus incompatibility is sky high but then forgets to mention this harm in the abstract.Rhesus compatibility may in fact be a major factor in neurological harm to offspring and if this work has stopped any further research in this area for five years it is a very serious factor in the general wellbeing of todays unborn infants.While such research says there are no grounds to worry, there are societies that try to limit the possible damage to families and their children. Interestingly even the diagnosis of rhesus factor may be down to diet more than genetics as we discover that while in the Miles study there were 15 per cent that in some countries the numbers do not go over half of one per cent. Why is this? And is it really possible for people to get rid of the rhesus negative factor by change of diet?In the field of autism and neurological harm, the effects of rhesus compatibility has been more than ignored in the past few years but may well have been damaged by inferior or work or worse.Rhesus negativehttp://www.14studies.org/studies.html

Note this study is in fact one of the 14 studies used to show vaccines are not harmful. The study shows no such thing. No vaccines are part of this research.Rhesus negative