Autism Rate Now at One Percent of All US Children?

A pair of federally funded studies on autism rates is about to make news -- big news -- and it isn't good: It would appear that somewhere around one percent of all US children currently have an autism spectrum disorder. The rate is even higher among six to 11 year olds and among boys, according to data from at least one of the new studies.

If you are an expectant parent, or planning to have a child soon, you might want to sit down before absorbing these staggering statistics, recently released by the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH), which is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the US Department of Health and Human Services.

According to data from the 2007 telephone survey of parents of nearly 82,000 US children, the odds of a parent being told that their child has an ASD are one in 63. If it is a boy, the chances climb to a science fiction-like level of one in 38, or 2.6% of all male children in America.

But there was also some surprisingly good news. Enormous numbers of children who were told that they had autism went on to shed the ASD label as they got older, parents reported.

Among all children aged two to 17, according to respondents, one in 100 (100-per-10,000) currently have an ASD, which is considerably higher than the previously (CDC) estimated rate of 1-in-150, (or 66-per-10,000).

But researchers were also told by parents that 60-per-10,000 children "had autism, Asperger's Disorder etc. at some point, but not currently."

This suggests two rather remarkable things:

1. At some point in their lives, 1-in-63 US children (160-per-10,000) will be labled with an ASD and;

2. Out of every 160 children whose parents reported that they had an ASD, 60 of them (37.5%) no longer have an ASD.

Among boys, for every 260-per-10,000 male children originally identified as having an ASD, 90 of them (34.6%) reportedly do not have the diagnosis now. This still leaves a monumentally high parent-reported rate of one in 58 boys with ASD today, or 1.7 percent (170-per-10,000).

The percentage of girls who apparently lost their original label was 44.5%.

There was a big difference among age groups as well. Among those children who still have the diagnosis, the rate of ASD was 40% higher in 6-11 year olds (140-per-10,000, or 1-in-71) than the current rate of 12-17 year olds (100-per-10,000, or 1-in-100).

Interestingly, among the youngest children, two to five years old, the rate was only half that of their six- to 11-year-old siblings, (70-per-10,000 vs.140-per-10,000). Most or all of that may be due to the average age of diagnosis, which is below five years, though it does bear watching to see if these younger kids go on to double their rates and "catch up" with the older ones.

Overall, the 2007 NSCH survey revealed a 100% increase in parent-reported ASD rates compared to the 2003 NSCH survey (which showed a 50-per-10,000 reported rate).

The survey was conducted by the Data Resource Center of the Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative (CAHMI) at the Oregon Health & Science University. And though the survey used what is considered to be sound methodology for estimating ASD percentages, most observers are still anxiously awaiting the release of more and even more reliable statistics -- expected soon from the CDC.

This second autism study, culled from data in the CDC's Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring network (ADDM), has been eagerly anticipated for quite some time.

ADDM researchers examine the education and (when possible) medical records of all eight-year-old children in selected US cities and states. They look only at eight-year-old cohorts to allow time for all diagnoses to be made, reported and counted.

So far, ADDM has published data from just two birth cohorts: children born in 1992 (eight-year-olds in 2000) and those born in 1994 (eight-year-olds in 2002). The 1992 cohort revealed an estimated ASD rate of one in 166, or 60-per-10,000. (This has since been revised to 67-per-10,000, or one in 150).

For the 1994 cohort, the estimate was virtually unchanged, at 66-per-10,000.

CDC officials have been analyzing the 1996 birth cohort (2004 data on 8-year-olds) for years. I asked the agency a few months ago about the slow progress in releasing the numbers and was told that the data were currently "under review." No response was given to written questions about data collected from the 1998 or 2000 cohorts (in 2006 and 2008, respectively).

I also submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the CDC for the raw data it had collected to date. That request is still pending.

But just the other day, the Adventures in Autism blog reported that CDC was about to release its 1996 birth cohort data, and that those data would also show ASD prevalence rates along the lines of 100-per-10,000, or a whopping one percent of US children.

The blogger, Ginger Taylor, reported that the CDC's new one in 100 figure had been mentioned at a recent national meeting of the Autism Society of America. So I called ASA President and CEO Lee Grossman to ask him about it.

It was Grossman himself who brought up the new studies, while introducing the keynote panel at the ASA meeting in St Charles, IL the week of July 20.

"I told people we were about to get hit by two separate studies that will be published in the near future," he said. The National Survey of Children's Health data will be published in September and the CDC's 1996 birth cohort data will also appear in print -- in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report -- "probably before the end of summer, although that is not yet official," he told me.

Grossman said his sources were "good people" that he trusts, working within the CDC's ADDM network, which he termed the "gold standard" of US autism epidemiology.

According to his sources, the 1996 birth cohort will reveal ASD prevalence rates that are "consistent with other national large-scale study figures, and I assume that includes a study from the UK," Grossman said. That study put the UK rate at 1-in-83.

The CDC researchers also told Grossman that there were "some similarities" to what was found in the NSCH survey, even though NSCH and ADDM are "two extremely different instruments."

Assuming that the new CDC figures show a significant increase in diagnoses between the 1994 and 1996 cohorts, the overarching question, of course, will be, "why?"

"Did the numbers really go up, or is it better data collection? I don't know the answer," Grossman told me. "Are we monitoring it better and finding more kids? I suspect we are, though it is hard to say." He added that ASA was working with a few school districts that provide statistics on ASD rates, "and their numbers are closing in on one in 100 as well."

One possible explanation for at least some of the increase is that ADDM researchers became more proficient at obtaining the necessary records across their analyses of the 1992, 1994 and 1996 birth cohorts. For example, in the 1994 cohort, the ASD rate in New Jersey (where access to both medical and school records was possible) was 93-per-10,000, while in Alabama (where access to school records was not available) the rate was about one-third of that, at just 33-per-10,000.

Is it possible that CDC researchers somehow gained access to school records for, say, Alabama children born in 1996 that they did not have for kids born there in 1994, thus driving up the numbers? Of course it is, though we must wait for the published report to find out.

Another plausible explanation for some, if not all of the increase, is the expansion of the ASD classification within the public schools to include not only full-blown autism, but also milder forms of ASD such as Pervasive Developmental Disorder -- Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) and Asperger's Syndrome.

This has long been the argument of those who do not believe that the real number of ASD cases has increased -- they insist that the rise is simply an artifact of wider diagnostic criteria, greater awareness and/or more ASD services on offer.

I am certain that the expansion of ASD criteria in the early 1990's contributed to the increase in reported diagnoses during that time, though I am not personally convinced that this can account for the entire growth of cases.

And I do not believe that autism rates have always been one in 100, or one in 71, as currently reported by parents of six- to 11-year-olds in the NCHS study.

So, what else could help explain at least part of the ASD increase? I believe that environmental factors are at play. And rising levels of toxic exposures among pregnant women, unborn children and young infants must be fully examined.

Which leads us to vaccines: Could they be responsible, at least in part, for contributing to the rising ASD numbers?

"A person with an autism spectrum disorder has a number of underlying and seemingly unnoticed immunological, inflammatory or mitochondrial issues happening, and there could be any number of factors that trigger this," Lee Grossman told me, reflecting a growing consensus among autism groups and researchers. "And it is certainly plausible that vaccines are one of those triggers."

The whole debate over why the numbers are going up, Grossman added, "is sad." He lamented the fact that "people are trying to limit the debate and the science. But until we know what is going on, we should treat everything as a plausible factor, and study it to the point where we have a much better understanding. For example, why do some people have a severe reaction to vaccines and why do some not have that reaction? To me, it is appalling that those studies have not happened."

If there is an environmental component to autism, hopefully scientists will want to know which exposures might have increased between, say, 1992 and 1996.

One possible answer is the Hepatitis B vaccine, (which also contained 25 micrograms of mercury containing thimerosal).

Introduced in 1991, it was the first vaccine ever given on a population basis to newborn babies (within the first three hours after delivery) in human history.

But according to the CDC's National Immunization Survey (which also includes parental telephone interviews), only 8% of infant children received the Hep B vaccine in 1992, when that birth cohort showed an ASD rate of 67-per-10,000.

By 1994, the number of children receiving Hep B vaccine had reached just 27% -- and the cohort showed a similar ASD rate.

But the Hep B coverage rate had risen to 82% by 1996, when that cohort's ASD rate rose to around 100-per-10,000.

Correlation, obviously, does not equal causation. And there was no small uptick between the 92 and 04 cohorts, as might be expected. But no one is suggesting that Hepatitis B vaccine is the singular "cause" of autism (or any cause at all). But the uptake rate of that particular immunization is at least one environmental factor that did demonstrably change during the period in question.

In addition, some recent studies and Vaccine Court decisions have supported the contention that Hepatitis B vaccine can damage myelin -- the nervous system's main insulating component -- at least in certain genetically susceptible adults and infants.

A study published last October in the journal Neurology found that children who received the Hepatitis B vaccine series were 50% more likely to develop "central nervous system inflammatory demyelination" than children who did not receive the vaccine.

Most of this increase was due to the Engerix B brand of the vaccine, manufactured by the UK's GlaxoSmithKline. That brand increased the risk of demyelination by 74%, and patients with confirmed multiple sclerosis were nearly three times more likely to develop the disorder.

"Hepatitis B vaccination does not generally increase the risk of CNS inflammatory demyelination in childhood," the authors concluded. "However, the Engerix B vaccine appears to increase this risk, particularly for confirmed multiple sclerosis, in the longer term. Our results require confirmation in future studies."

In another Vaccine Court Case, Banks v HHS, the Special Master ruled that a young boy named Bailey Banks suffered from a similar demyelinating disease called "acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) following the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine, which "led inexorably" to his development of PDD-NOS, an autism spectrum disorder.

In Bailey's case, the myelin repaired itself, but the CNS damage was permanent. Most children with ASD do not show current signs of myelin damage, though many of them test positive for antibodies to myelin basic protein, suggesting that demyelination may have played a role at one point, as it did in the Bailey Banks case.

Another item that will surely spark fiery debate is the reason why so many children previously indentified with ASD are currently not holding that diagnosis.

There are three main possible explanations:

1) Many children never had an ASD to begin with, and were simply "mislabled."

2) Some children naturally "recovered" from ASD on their own without treatment, (though Lee Grossman and many others told me they have never seen this happen).

3) Interventions including behavioral therapy, dietary changes and biomedical treatments actually work, and it is possible to "recover" a child from the grips of ASD.

One thing is certain however: No matter what the explanations for the increase -- and for the extraordinary "recovery" rate of children diagnosed with ASD -- the current US ASD level is still somewhere around 1% -- and 1.4% (140-per-10,000) among kids aged six to 11, if the NCHS study is to be believed.

Let's assume that the 140-per-10,000 rate is the most accurate: This would make the "autism is genetic and has always been with us at these levels" crowd appear to be pathetic, if not downright laughable.

Why? Because reputable studies from the 1980s showed that the actual rate of autism was about two per 10,000 children, not 140 per 10,000. If those studies were wrong, and if the rate was the same then as it is now (as many scientists contend), that would mean that doctors, educators and statisticians are now 7,000 percent more proficient at diagnosing and counting autism than they were before.

According to this logic, out of every 140 children who had an ASD in the 1980s, 138 of them went (and continue to go) undiagnosed, uncounted and untreated by medical and educational professionals.

If I were a medical or public health professional, that is a fact that I would not be keen on broadcasting.

And if the actual rate of autism in America is truly 1%- or 1.4% - then as ASA's Grossman said: "People ain't seen nothing yet."

"Everyone is going to cover this story, and the reality is that nobody is doing anything about the increase in autism," Grossman commented. "But when you get to a figure of 1% of the population, hopefully you'll get attention, and have people begin to act to help those with autism today with funding of services and support, and to get a better handle on how to spend research money."

Grossman said it was "terrible" that research into the causes of autism has been so heavily weighted towards genetics, at the expense of studying environmental factors.

"But now, many people believe that autism is associated with environmental triggers," he told me. "And my message is: 'Wake up.' But if this doesn't wake people up, then I don't know what will."

I, for one, concur with Lee Grossman.

"I'm hopeful that this unfortunate statistic, and the terrible growth in autism, will finally get people to act to do something about autism," he said. "And by that, I mean the fine folks in government who are not responding in the ways that they should."

Comments

[just2curious]

This story is related due to the nature of the matter & sharing of the same culprit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/31/va-wont-pay-benefits-to-m_n_272762.html

[dugmaze]

That's terrible. Sometimes it seems like our government has no common sense when it comes to our veterans. We should take it as an honor to treat our veterans. Instead they view it as a burden.

From the article
" While the vaccine isn't mandatory, the military strongly encourages troops to take it. "

Trust me. You have no choice.

[just2curious]

Damn right it's mandatory.

[dugmaze]

Smallpox scare in Missouri:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/sciencemedicine/story/BABAD1D3708B3A4086257621001D87F8?OpenDocument

[AutismNewsBeat]

Chickenpox, no smallpox.

[dugmaze]

Sorry, chikenpox.

[dugmaze]

chickenpox

There, finally!

[dugmaze]

Yet another story of teachers assaulting autistic children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaAPjILGHCQ

The teachers can either learn how to deal with it, quit, or join us in educating the public to the dangers of this autism epidemic.

People think autism doesn't affect them. It affects everybody.

[AutismNewsBeat]

Why does it have to be an epidemic? Do you have any data to support that notion?

[dugmaze]

Why do you always try to steer the conversation away from the topic?

Tell me, what is your payoff? According to Dr. Phil everyone has a payoff . You know mine without even asking but I don't know yours.

The reason I'm asking is you seem to deny, deny, deny on every subject. That's awfully suspicous. If you have a personal belief and feel strongly about that belief then I have no problem with that. But if your paid by some front group to disrupt the parents then that is unacceptable. Or if your trying to make money promoting your website off the current autism epidemic then that too would be unacceptable.

To answer your question, "Why does it have to be an epidemic?":
That would depend on your belief. Epidemic's are normally attached to disease. I believe autism is a disease, some people will say it's a disorder.

Since the CDC and other deniers like to blame mitochondrial disease for autism, then they in fact label autism as a disease and it falls under the guidelines of epidemic.

Which states, "an epidemic occurs when new cases of a certain disease, in a given human population, and during a given period, substantially exceed what is "expected".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemic

[patricklane22]

yet another way for the a hole doctors to get rich. More patients is more money. What next? 1 in 50? 1 in 10? Then 100%? AHAHAHAHAH­AHAHAHAHAH­A! I'm Aspergers.­.I THINK a legitimate case (been bullied and hospitalized twice and am now in Vocational Rehab, etc.) and still don't appreciate these fing labels. and you know what? No one does. Maybe....j­ust maybe..it is (mostly) caused by bad parenting if these joke of cases are rising this fast. This is coming from someone who's been diagnosed on the spectrum before it became the new in thing in Hollywood to have.

[CaroKnows]

I must say that your post is utterly offensive. Claiming that it is mostly caused by bad parenting, that most children who are completely non-verbal are the result of not enough attention from mum or daddums? That is completely outrageous and borders on Bettleheim territory. Do yourself a favor and look him up and learn why he was discredited; you may learn something (I highly doubt, however).

[dugmaze]

More proof of doctors and researchers being paid off by big pharma to falsify studies:

Surgeon accused of lying quits WU
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/education/story/C307570B4DF7501986257618000A23DD?OpenDocument

[just2curious]

It's all coming out in the wash as light is being shed on truth.

Dangerous & sometimes deadly conspiracies are being exposed for what they really are, finally. Thank goodness & all the people speaking up & out on behalf of mankind's survival.

[dugmaze]

Doctors and researchers need to step up and reassure parents that the medical industry isn't being completely bought out by special interest.

I personally think the mistrust is growing on every scale and in every community. I talked to an older couple the other night about autism. Although they didn't have any children on the spectrum, they were aware of the growing epidemic. They seemed to have this underlying suspicion about the medical community and had several questions. Which I was more than happy to answer.

Big pharma won't be able to produce a vaccine against parents like me. I've been introverted my whole life but now I can't wait to talk to parents and express my voice.

[jened]

Joe, your first article totally reinforced my points!! The article stated that it was mostly the family physicians who were worried about not re-couping vaccine costs (and for them only a small minority). The article actually states that, only "5 % of Peds were contemplating getting out of the vacc business because, and I quote, "that's why kids come in." Right in black and white. Also, many of the docs made a nice healthy profit (40 per shot) off the actual vaccines when reimbursed by private health insurers. So much for the "poor doctors" theory. Maybe they would make some money off childhood illness complications but many of us survived measles, chicken pox just fine. You would really have to balance that against serious adverse events after vaccination and educational costs of children damaged mentally due to the shots. This area needs serious, reputable study (vacc VS unvacc studies) and true vaccine safety studies. Take Gardasi- more serious adverse events than reported cases of cervical cancer with no idea of protection beyond 5 or 10 years. A serious waste of public health monies! Sp when they vacc a 10 year old child whose protection may even run out by the time she is sexually active.

[jened]

Joe, I have responded below to your link. Thanks for sending.

[WhiteandNerdy]

Summary for Craig,
This would be a really good time for you to publicly admit that:
(1) There is autism rate data from 100% unvaccinated kids
(2) That the GR survey showed 100% unvaccinated kids had a higher rate of ASD
(3) That in the US it is possible to sue vaccine manufacturers in “regular” courts—and the courts have already ruled against all the vaccines cause autism arguments
(4) That it is silly to believe scientific analysis of complex problems from people that don't understand what they are talking about

[CraigWilloughby]

Summary for WhiteandNerdy,
1) If there is, then they need to release and publish it. The data from Simpsonwood has never been seen by the general public.
2) No, it did not. Taking the data at face value, if you compare according to sample size, at worst, the difference between the 2 is miniscule. What you don't take into account is the fact that unvaccinated boys in particular show less autism (4% as compared to 8% for partial and 5% for partial+full, with a larger sample size). Then, of course, you need to adjust for sample size, as I posted below, to adjust for the difference in the sizes of the samples.
3) I never claimed it wasn't possible. Straw man.
4) Yes, exactly, which is why I don't believe you.

Again, nice try.

[CaroKnows]

I think both of you are focusing to much on how they got the numbers. This is important, yes, but why they got the numbers is just as important. The first time I saw the data for this study, I was immediately curious as to why the partially vaccinated children were almost twice as high in ASD rates. In some cases, the rates of ASD were almost at twice the rate of unvaccinated children. Why?
Here's my theory. If a parent perceives their child to have a vaccine reaction, do you think they will continue to vaccinate? What if there is no reaction? Will they continue to vaccinate? I think this could be affecting the data. As I said, this is just a theory.
There is one thing to take into consideration. Even if you consider this study to be bad science, there is still a result that warrants more study. Same with the Monkey study; there were results that warranted more study.

[AutismNewsBeat]

The data from Simpsonwood has never been seen by the general public.

Have you seen the data from Simpsonwood?

[autism360]

Where was autism when I was growing up? I never even heard of anyone with autism symptoms!!
It must be vaccine related or the government would not be so quick to downplay this national crisis and epidemic. Full disclosure, my son developed autism after his vaccines.

[just2curious]

I agree, Autism360.

Top that off with widespread disease that's mounted continuously through the years & anyone paying attention gets the picture.

I see it daily at the disability complex I live at & I can tell you many have caught on as to why they were so unlucky to have such sickness & disability.

The evidence is out there when it come to autism, too. It's all the many voices of distressed parents, combined, that have been ignored until now.

I think the vaccinated have unknowingly passed dis-ease on to their children, too, along with all the direct injury & death.

My Mother was a procrastinator & when I got caught up with my shots all at once before school started, I developed Scarlet Fever & shortly thereafter I became asthmatic.

I have several personal vaccination true stories I tell, including what happened to my own two granddaughters.

They're okay for the most part, except one has digestive & bowel problems we're trying to deal with.

Ours didn't end up getting them all, thank goodness, after the pediatrician was confronted, except for the ones deemed necessary & important.

[just2curious]

Continued;

I have many conditions & deserve to be in Ripley's Believe it or not.

I have, until recently, been a high profile activist.

Due to my disabilities, I have always looked my condition as a blessing that gave me time in leaving the work world to try & help the state of our nation & in turn, our whole world for the sake of all our children everywhere.

When I think of the ignorance we have been guilty of by allowing ourselves & little ones to be the guinea pigs as we & they have been, I have to cringe.

I was a test subject in 1975 for a new hysterectomy procedure.

I almost died last May & am a case study. Special permission had to be given to the surgeon who operated because they thought it hopeless & that there was no way it could be done.

You should see that monster mass & two tumors they took out that kept me deathly ill for many years, unnecessarily, on top of all the many other medical conditions I live with.

I have incredible pictures they gave me of the mess in my belly they took out. People can't believe it. I swear, one shot looks like a live rat, a big one black one with it's eye reflecting light.

I've always been thin & my belly just kept growing for years. It's amazing, the whole ordeal & it gives me the shivers every time I look at the

[lunchlady]

I would just like to remind everyone of the risks vs. benefits of immunizations.
I know a family who has refused all immunizations and ending up also homeschooling their kids because no school in their area wanted to enroll the kids without immunizations. I suspect they could have challenged this in court and got the kids enrolled, but they were interested in homeschooling anyway.
They are very proud of their dedication about this, but if a lot more people did it we would be back to having epidemics and our child morbidity/morality would go up and up. This family did end up with all three children very ill with whooping cough at the same time. It was scary. They are still prone to catching smallpox, chickenpox, tetanus, and so on. This is the choice of this family but I have been happy to get any immunizations available for myself and my children and prefer to accept the risks of that than the contagions themselves. It wasn't all that long ago that we had polio epidemics and all these other things, but the relative safety these days has made people complacent.

[AutismNewsBeat]

Most of the US population is susceptible to smallpox. Fortunately, the virus was eradicated about 30 years ago, thanks to mass immunization programs.

[lunchlady]

Yes, you're right. How about a little diptheria then? Or rubella? And without that mass immunization program we would still be having smallpox epidemics. My grandfather had facial scars from a bout with smallpox, which he barely survived. He also lost two beloved cousins in the Great Flue Epidemic. I bet if you asked him about immunizations (he's dead now) he'd be pretty gungho.

[dugmaze]

"ending up also homeschooling their kids "

All these people have one thing in common, they're homeschooled:

Edward Jenner-inventor of smallpox vaccine
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
John Quincy Adams
Abraham Lincoln
William Henry Harrison
Theodore F. Roosevelt
Patrick Henry
Charles Pickney III
Richard D. Spaight
William Livingston
Richard Bassett
William S. Johnson
George Clymer
John Francis Mercer
William Blout
William Few
Blaise Pascal
Booker T. Washington
Thomas Edison
Benjamin Franklin
Andrew Carnegie
John Stuart Mill
Mark Twain
George Bernard Shaw
Irving Berlin
Charles Dickens
C.S. Lewis
Abigail Adams
Mercy Warren
Martha Washington
Florence Nightingale
Phyllis Wheatley
Agatha Christie
Pearl S. Buck
"Stonewall" Jackson
Robert E. Lee
Douglas MacArthur
George Patton
John Singleton Copley
Andrew Wyeth
Rembrandt Peale
Claude Money
Ansel Adams
Anton Bruckner
Felix Mendelssohn
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Francis Poulenc
George Washington Carver
Pierre Curie
Albert Einstein
Michael Faraday
Claude Monet

I have more.

[lunchlady]

I didn't think I was disparaging homeschooling. I wouldn't want to do it, but I'm not feeling superior to homeschoolers or their children.
My point was that avoiding immunizations seemed to be the final factor for them to commit to homeschooling.

[dugmaze]

Although I'm not totally against vaccination, I would still like someone to PROVE to me that vaccinations even work.

Look at these charts:
http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html
http://www.healingourchildren.net/Are_Vaccine_Safe/vaccine_side_effects_fall_in_death_rates.gif

Are they lying? Then PROVE it. I'm a confused parent that is willing to listen to facts.

I've been asking this question for months and can't get ONE honest answer:
Do vaccines work?

[just2curious]

I'm not against them all either but have to wonder if they even work with no proof but fabricated talking points advocates for their safety stand by.

I was sad to see the newspaper just list all shots children need to get to be allowed in school. They listed mandatory ones & recommended ones that included the Gradasil vaccination that we know is severely dangerous & untested.

The tetanus was listed as mandatory, too, when we know that's one that causes injury. It's ridiculous to keep up the fraud with all the evidence out there.

I hope no one asks for that evidence, so just in case, I'll say now, "the evidence is the many voices of distressed parents out there "greedy & ignorant people of fact" behind this atrocity try to ignore.

This is crazy to expect us to continue allowing our children to be guinea pigs.

As a few regular backers in these debates say verbatim, I will say too, "Thank you in advance" for answering this question.

"I thought we could opt out legally & our children could still go to school?"

My son's school asked several times to see his shot record but I kept putting them off until they stopped. He's in his middle thirties now & his girls did get the ones we felt might be needed, even though there's "no" concrete evidence they even work.

[AutismNewsBeat]

That's like asking if our immune systems work.

[WhiteandNerdy]

Hi Dugmaze,
I always try to assume the best of people, and as such choose to believe that the links you posted are not from liars. But I can understand why others see things differently when they see these false arguments still being made after so many decades of correction.
The error both links make is they give death rates--which is the wrong data to measure vaccine efficacy.
Efficacy is measured by comparing relative risk of disease between vaccinated and unvaccinated. Any author that can’t figure this out isn’t worth reading.
There are many ways to approach this issue. The simplest is with a challenge study where vaccinated and unvaccinated are deliberately exposed to the pathogen. Pubmed has countless examples you can read.
There is an example with flumist were volunteers were exposed to influenza. You can read the study on the FDA site.

[WhiteandNerdy]

Hi Dugmaze,
I totally disagree. In order to understand the outcomes, one needs to understand the process.
In order to win, the petitioner needs to do exactly three things:
*Offer a theory,
*That provides a logical cause/effect explanation,
*And have an approximate temporal relationship with vaccination.
That is all it takes to win a judgment.
This bar is so low that clearly families are awarded money when the vaccination had nothing to do with the child’s health issues.
So your conclusion that an award always=vaccine damage is simply not correct.

[WhiteandNerdy]

Sorry--above comments were posted at the wrong spot.

[jened]

Josephius, your response (if you are still looking at this site) to my query about mercury still being given to many pregnant mothers and babies (in the form of the flu shot) was just ridiculous! You have to think more outside the box. You can say "people can request the single dose vials", but how many mothers would actually know to do that?(do you have data on that?) There should be data on that. I bet there are a lot of pregnant women who don't. You also (weakly) say that you don.t feel that many babies are exposed to thimerosal because only one state mandates it. You are naive. Peds (whom most Americans with kids visit) push the shots like crazy because their whole business depends (indirectly) on the fact of the childhood vaccination schedule. Also, PLEASE, although most things could be neuro-toxic in large amounts, we aren't injecting them into our bloodstream like we do in the case of vaccination.

[Josephius]

1st of all, "pediatricians' business depends on the childhood vaccine schedule"? Are you serious?

http://www.med.umich.edu/mott/research/NEWS%20ARTICLES/Some%20Doctors%20May%20Give%20up%20Vaccines%20Because%20of%20Cost.pdf

http://www.infectiousdiseasenews.com/200203/vaccine.asp

If they wanted to make more money, they would make far more letting these kids catch preventable infectious diseases, then having them pay for treatment and services.

2nd. influenza and pregnant women:

"H1N1 is spreading more quickly than the seasonal flu, in part because most people haven't built up an immunity to this new strain of virus. The flu’s also targeting a much younger, healthier age group. Typically, the large majority of people killed by the flu are those 65 years and older. However, the swine flu has been more prevalent among pregnant women and young adults. Currently, 6 percent of swine-flu deaths worldwide have occurred in healthy, pregnant women, compared with less than 1 percent very rare occurrences with regular flu deaths. Even though mortality will stay low, “the social impacts of the deaths will be greater because it produces death among younger people,” says Dr. Jarbas Barbosa, the Pan American Health Organization’s regional adviser in immunization and vaccines. "

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/08/19/will-you-die-from-swine-flu-putting-h1n1-in-perspective.aspx

[jened]

Joe, thankyou for sending the links. I just read the first one you sent and honestly, did you even read it? It totally proves my point. THe article actually states that family physicians were most likely to give up giving vaccines because of their cost' much more so than pediatricians. It actually said, " pediatricians were not as likely (only 5%) to give up giving vaccines because, that's why kids come in." Spelled out, in black and white. THe vast majority of those polled actually were reimbursed by private insurance companies and had a healthy profit margin. The well-child visits absolutely are structured around the many "routine" childhood vaccines for the Peds. You have to start and question why so many parents are opting out of the vaccines. If you had young children you would know this from an anecdotal view (which we parents see as valid). Your point as to the cost of treating complications from measles, chicken pox etc. being more of a "money-maker" may not be true. Obviously, you would have to weight that against the cost of all the vaccine reactions and the cost educationally of supporting all these students with some type of minimal brain dysfunction, which admittedly needs to be more scientifically investigated with some real integrity, and not pharma-driven. THankyou for the links, though.

[Josephius]

And.....

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/122/6/1319?HITS=10&hits=10&volume=122&maxtoshow=&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT&fulltext=vaccine%2C+profit+margin%2C+pediatricians&issue=6&searchid=1&RESULTFORMAT=

[jened]

don't see my response up. Will repeat. Thanks for links. The first article you refer to however, completely proves my point. Did we read the same article??It was mostly family physicians, not Peds who were getting discouraged with profit on vaccines.I­n fact, many of the doctors with private insurance companies reimbursing made a nice profit (40- per shot). Article actually says, "only 5% of Peds would seriously consider giving up vaccines because that's why kids come in." There it was in black and white. Sure if kids got measles, chicken pox there would be some money in treating complications (not as much as might be presented -many of us grew up with these childhood illnesses and got through fine). You would have to weigh that against the costs of vaccines adverse events and even the costs of educating children with minimal brain dysfunction. There really does need to be more objective research (like a vacc/unvacc study on this). We parents and educators have experienced lots of anecdotal evidence on something not being right with our kids nowadays, admittedly, there are other environmental concerns besides vaccination but we do believe vaccines may be doing more harm than good. Look at Gardasil. MORE serious adverse effects (indluding death) than cases of cervical cancer. AND, protection is not known for more than 5 years. Why give it to 10 year old girls and have it only potentially be effective until BEFORE they are even sexually active? Makes no sense.

[dugmaze]

Autismnewsbeat said:
"If it was possible to do a vaxed v. unvaxed study that yields reliable data, I would be for it. Unfortunately, there aren't enough totally unvaxed children in the US and Canada to do that.

I don't know how you could possibly know how many kids are unvaxed but I agree that studies should be done with the proper amount of children. Look at these:


Children Vaccinated Against Flu--> 3X Risk of Hospitalization
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/598/9/
263 children

Time Trends in Reported Autistic Spectrum Disorders
in Israel, 1972–2004
http://www.ima.org.il/imaj/ar09jan-05.pdf
3509 children

Abnormal measles-mu­mps-rubell­a antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
125 autistic children and 92 control children

Novel plasma phospholipid biomarkers of autism: Mitochondrial dysfunction as a putative causative mechanism.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19608392?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
15 autistic and 12 non-autistic age-matched controls

U.S. Court Finds No Link Between Vaccines, Autism
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/12/AR2009021201391.html
3 children

[AutismNewsBeat]

How many unvaccinated children do you suppose it would take to conduct a reliable study that could find a 10 percent or greater difference in autism between the two groups?

[dugmaze]

Me personally, it would have to be no less than thousands and I would prefer 10's of thousands.

That's probably not reasonable for researchers. But autism isn't making history alone. Our collective inaction is making history too.

[dugmaze]

If vaccines cause vaccine damage

Then why can't a lot of vaccines cause a lot of vaccine damage?


Here's hundreds of cases where vaccines caused damage:
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/opinions_decisions_vaccine/Unpublished
Couple of examples:
Case No. 07-576V---­--varicell­a vaccine---­--$125,000­.00
Case No. 06-159V---­--hepatiti­s B, DTaP, IPV, HIB, and Prevnar vaccinatio­ns-----$23­0,000.00
Case Jane Doe-----hepatitis B-----$385­,000.00

The list goes on and on.

Millions of dollars in taxpayer money is being awarded to vaccine damaged citizens, mostly children.

Why is the HHS shielding vaccine makers with taxpayer money?

Where's all the healthcare demonstrators on this one?

[AutismNewsBeat]

The vaccine injury compensation program is funded with a 75-cent tax on each vaccine given. It was created about 25 years ago when few drug companies were willing to make vaccines, due to the high cost of defending against lawsuits. The standard of proof in the US Court of Claims is lower than what a plaintiff would face for a similar action in civil court. It is doubtful that either the Poling or Banks cases would have succeeded in civil court.

[just2curious]

That's really unfair to think when it'scommon knowledge the damage "was" done by vaccinations.

[dugmaze]

"due to the high cost of defending against lawsuits"

That applies to EVERY company in the U.S.

[WhiteandNerdy]

Dugmaze,
I think if would be helpful if you also posted the decision making standards used in coming to the court decisions.
Thanks!

[dugmaze]

Settling out of court doesn't involve much decision making standards. Just an enormous amount of money, I'm sure into the billions.

Have you looked at the cases?

I figure they settle for two reasons:
1) The HHS is certain vaccines can and will always cause vaccine damage and taking them to court will prove this point.
2) Well, I just can't think of any other reason.

[AutismNewsBeat]

The key issue here is prevalence. Mr. Kirby wrote: “And though the survey used what is considered to be sound methodology for estimating ASD prevalence, …”

It is not possible to determine prevalence from the data—a fact explicitly pointed out repeatedly in Mr. Kirby's link. Any good faith attempt to critically evaluate his post demonstrates that he has no idea what he is writing about and his article here is simply rubbish.

But here is the interesting part:

The same folks that are so insistent that vaccine cause autism,
And are so offended that the rest of the world rejects this belief,
Simply accept anything that criticizes vaccines.
All that is left now is to watch how the misinformation gets promulgated and the errors get ignored.

And now Red will address my points one by one.

[dugmaze]

I like the idea of phoning parents. Your getting straight to the information without it being "filtered" by the study editor.

The ADDM method is assuming autistic children are logged somewhere in the system. And that information was properly put in the system. How often do we complain about the medical and educational systems?

[CraigWilloughby]

LOL...appa­rently he is now a plagiarist as well. The last part of the comment is the most relevant:

"And now Red will address my points one by one"

He's claiming that they are his talking points....­.but wait, I thought he copied them from somewhere else.

I'm pretty certain about my original assessment. He is well known for having multiple sock-puppets to give himself an echo-chamber. How pathetic.

[WhiteandNerdy]

ANB,
I keep expecting some further explanation as to why you essentially reposted my words.
Thanks!

[AutismNewsBeat]

You posed some great questions, but Red refused to answer them because she doesn't like your handle. Since she's never complained about my handle, I figured that if I asked the same questions, then she would answer them. Unless of course there was another reason for not answering.

[Jamie McKibbin]

Check out http://drcarley.com/. She has had success in reversing autism among other things. Also this: Vaccines - The True Weapons of Mass Destruction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6dffXhewVE . Vaccines are so dangerous it has to be addressed immediately. This is nothing but eugenics. This film explains the big picture - Endgame http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM6US0Qk5_8. Peace love and light to you all.