Fighting the Autism-Vaccine War

Vaccines

Vaccines are not fit for anyone to take. My grandson was developing normal until 18 mos. when he received his MMR and his DPT in the same day. I believe that due to vaccines being given to babies from day of birth that by the time they are 18 - 24 mos. they have such as toxic level of mercury (thimerosal) that most of them will develop neurological disorders. Look at the Amish community - autism is unheard in their community - they don't believe in giving their children vaccines. hummmm - see the connection. The pharmiceutical companies who make the vaccines are also the same ones who keep studying their affects and reporting back to CDC. If the research were to be made by an outside research team I believe we would see a much different outcome in the studies. Why would the pharmaceutical companies shoot themselves in the foot by showing the harmful effects of vaccines.

Our President needs to commission an outside research organization with no ties to pharmaseutical companies or any other group who stand to gain from the selling of vaccines or injecting vaccines.

i am so glad

I am a young mother of a two year old boy named Joseph. I don't know if there are words to explain how strong I felt about not getting my sons vaccinations. I actually argued with two of my sons pediatricians not to mention family members about them. My heart told me no. And I am glad I listened. Hearing other mothers tell their stories was enough for me. Nobody knows their child better than a mother. It's a God given gift.People think that they are protecting their children and because they are misinformed/uninformed these children and their families are suffering. Thank you for impowering parents with knowledge and a better understanding about autism.

Causes of Autism

Dr. Mark Hyman just wrote a great article about the underlying causes of autism -- here's the link, http://www.healthiertalk.com/why-current-thinking-about-autism-completely-wrong-0916

hope it helps!

BXJJUhjaBbTgAhnL

OdgTAA my best site http://horror.com

thirmerosal

i was wondering if you had any trouble when you were at the nih over your view of thirmerosal. i am scrutinized by colleauges when ever i mention the word. do you know if the nih has any funding ties to large pharma corperations or why they won't publish any papers that discredit its use. the only paper i could find that supported the ill effects of it was a 2004 study called

"Neurotoxic effects of postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain dependent". this paper was later discredited by another study published in 2008 called "Low-level neonatal thimerosal exposure: further evaluation of altered neurotoxic potential in SJL mice". im not sure if papers are rigged to fit agendas but how can you distinguish which of these papers is actually credible. if the 2008 paper fallowed all the apropriate guidelines how could the study show such gross differences from the 2004 study. they said they did a double blind on the sections they used as evidence but could they have distorted the facts. the only answer i can find is that there is no mention in the 2008 article about the sex of mice used. i cant prove it but the work still seams like a botch to me. even though it fallows proper protocals is there a possibility that it could have been doctored?

it's about science

I was very distressed to hear Dr. Healey's comments on last night's Larry King show. Her comments about "respecting" the other side of the issue seemed to miss the point; in spite of various well-designed studies, scientists have not found a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. Now let's focus our labs and research dollars on the paths that the scientists believe might lead to understanding this condition and a cure for it. That seems the ultimate in respect for the patients and their families, much more so than continuing to study a theory that the scientists say does not look promising. That's how science is done.

Polio epidemics?

I challenge the notion that the author makes that vaccinations are "extraordinarily safe". Vaccinations are the sole cause of the sky rocketing rates of asthma, juvenile diabetes, neurological disorders and auto immune diseases among children in the United States as a result of our bloated vaccination schedule. Even the product inserts admit to causing these adverse reactions among the various vaccines...

Additionally Poliomyelitis was NOT "eradicated" by vaccinations, Mrs. Healy. Reporting standards were changed in 1955, the year of the introduction of the first Polio vaccination that eliminated it from the vital statistics annuals by changing the it's name to viral or aseptic meningitis or coxsackie virus, also paralytic polio reporting standards became so severely different (from less than 24 hours of symptoms to "qualify" to more than 60 days of symptoms with 2 confirmed laboratory diagnoses...) that paralytic polio itself was also virtually eliminated by what the government had dubbed at the time to be "elegant administrative moves". These changes in medical reporting standards are well documented.

I have no idea why you would support the lie of the "success" of vaccinations, which do not confer immunity to disease, in the name of moderation. Half truth is simply not sufficient at this time in history, we need the whole damn thing. ;) Thank you.

Brain injury and vaccines

My son is 8 and has autism. We adopted him from russia at age 11 months.The Doctors here gave him many vaccines almost back to back to get him caught up on what he was missing. At the time I didn't think much about it. His speech was delayed but we thought it was due to him being from Russia. As his speech failed to develop and we noticed some abnormal behaviors and it was suggested that he may be autistic, which tured out to be true. Last year a Dr suggested we get a MRI done on his brain which showed an abnormality which was due to a brain injury early in life. At first I thought something may had happened to him prior to the adoption, but now I think the brain injury was due to the vaccines.

Larry King Appearance

I heard Bernadine Healy talking about vaccinations & autism on Larry King. She claimed that there have been no studies comparing autism in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. I invite everyone to do a quick Google Scholar search to prove this wrong. Add "review" to your search terms and you'll find meta-analyzes that consider multiple studies at once.

Let's get past the temporal associations and look for real causal links. Let's talk about how vaccines work, what happens once they're in the body, why we have the schedule we have. Or what about other genetic, environmental, social differences between autistic and non-autistic children? Or even looking at the recovered children - I'm very curious about the possibility of misdiagnosis (but very willing to accept recovery, just for the record). We just need an investigation into these topics.

I understand that autism and vaccines are a very sensitive subject. But we've spent years and years on the topic and there is no real evidence of a link - just parents saying they 'feel" there is an association. At this point vaccines are a red herring, we're wasting valuable time and research dollars.

Leaving out a MAJOR Fact

Why no mention of the FACT that the "researcher" who started this fudged his research...

"Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the British physician who jump-started the scare about a link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism, manipulated and changed data to make his case in the 1998 Lancet paper, according to an investigation by the Sunday Times of London. The purported link has subsequently been refuted by a large number of epidemiological studies.

...In 2004, 10 of the 13 original authors on the Lancet paper requested that the paper be withdrawn, concluding that "no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism because the data was insufficient." Wakefield has continued to stand by the paper's conclusions.

Wakefield and two other co-authors, Dr. John Walker-Smith and Dr. Simon Murch, are now defending themselves against allegations of professional misconduct brought by England's General Medical Council, which oversees physicians. Those charges are not related to the data in the newspaper, but to the researchers' ethics in using the children"

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2009/02/british-doctor.html