Autism Speaks: Don't Rule Out Vaccines
Is the vaccine-autism debate over? Not according to the co-founder of the largest, most mainstream, most influential autism organization in the world.
In an article published in the Daily Telegraph of the UK, Autism Speaks co-founder Bob Wright, former head of NBC and grandfather to an autistic child, is quoted rather extensively on the vaccine controversy.
Mr. Wright is essentially saying the same thing as I have been saying for quite some time: This debate is not over, and it is incumbent upon our government to study the long-term effects of our national vaccine schedule on (genetically) susceptible individuals.
Here is what he said:
There is no question but that autism is partly genetic and partly environmental, but we don't know whether environmental factors account for 30, 50 or 60 per cent of cases ... we ought to be able to zero in on some of the environmental factors in early childhood. Vaccines are one of the variables.
The last vaccine (my grandson) Christian had before he regressed was MMR - that's why my daughter concentrates on that. I don't know whether his autism is linked: it was certainly coincidental, what we don't know is if it was causal. Nor do we know whether the thimerosal (the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines) is a factor, although mercury is clearly poisonous.Governments want to run from that issue but they should become more aggressively involved. They have to follow children through to see if there are any effects. When we spend so much money on vaccines, we should be spending money tracking each year group.
Mr. Wright's comments are very much in line with other prominent Americans, including Barack Obama, John McCain and former NIH Director Dr. Bernadine Healy.
Since 2002, I have been researching the potential connection between mercury, vaccines and other possible environmental "triggers" and autism. I believe that the majority of autism cases are caused by a combination of genetic susceptibilities and environmental factors.
In my recent lectures, I lay out evidence to suggest a scientific link between autism and heavy metals and multiple simultaneous vaccinations in at least some subsets of genetically vulnerable children. My main sources are leading studies done at major universities and published in top-flight peer-reviewed and indexed journals, as well as officials, agencies and panels of the United States government.
Research into mercury, vaccines and autism continues today at universities and within the federal system, as well as at large mainstream private organizations such as Autism Speaks.
Autism Speaks recently authorized three studies on thimerosal and autism, and I know for a fact that the foundation is considering funding some more groundbreaking, unprecedented research into the possible links between vaccines and autism.
Some of the most vocal opponents of the autism-vaccine theory have received grants from Autism Speaks for their own research projects - mostly genetic in nature. One might legitimately wonder now if their criticism will remain as harsh and shrill towards Mr. Wright's beliefs as they plan their return to Autism Speaks for more research grants.
They will be in good company. In 2008, the following groups and individuals have all advocated or considered exploring possible links between vaccines and autism:
The Director of the CDC
Chairman of the U.S. House Science Subcommittee on Investigations
HHS Vaccine Safety Working Group
CDC Vaccine Safety Research Agenda Authors
Medical personnel at HHS Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
Strategic Planning Workgroup of the IAC Committee
Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Network - CISA
Autism researchers at Johns Hopkins University Medical School
The United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation
America's health insurance companies
Autism Speaks
The former head of the NIH and American Red Cross
Both Presidential Candidates
This post was based on a blog originally posted at www.ageofautism.com.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Hey Joesephius, have you heard of Bonnie Dunbar or Dr. Boyd Haley? Do you think Dr. Haley (a PhD chemist) is lame? He has an opposing view to yours and he is a scientist. How is he wrong?
Also, what does that say when a coroner cannot distinguish between a SIDS death and a "vaccine injury death?
Boyd Haley is a ____. He's a chemist....not an immunologist or neurobiologist. Do you know what Boyd Haley is doing these days? Peddling chelation formulas on his own internet site. Read: http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/168/
Yeah, sounds like someone I'd listen to.
"Also, what does that say when a coroner cannot distinguish between a SIDS death and a "vaccine injury death?"
Sounds like that coroner isn't running the tests to tell. When they do, the differences oare obvious.
That's great that Dr. Haley is helping kids to recover. It's the same thing, I guess, as Dr. Pr Offit having a patent on the useless rotateq vaccine he developed.
The coroners cannot DISTINGUISH between a SIDS death and a vaccine injury. I guess you could infer from that that they do not have tests that can determine this. God forbid they would have to rely on anecdotal evidence!
See; http://www.whale.to/m/sids.html or http:www.whale.to/m/sids.html
My 2 sons were injured and I want independent research and answers that can help prevent this from happening to another child. That is all.
My eldest son (8) is nearly recovered mainly through chelation (if this is quack medicine I will take it over the Risperdal that his pediatrician prescribed any day). My youngest son (3) was just diagnosed and is being tested now.
I am not a scientist, I'm just a mom. My sons were injured. Whether it be my amalgam fillings, vaccines, chemical sensitivities, pollution in my area (one born and lived in Seattle for 5 years, the younger born in Seattle but moved to Virginia at 6 weeks of age with the rest of us) I have no proof but I strongly suspect vaccines and have ever since I saw their fever, illness, changed personality immediately after they received their shots.
I really don't care what these studies that supposedly prove no correlation are saying, I know what I saw and I was STUPID enough to ignore my instincts and tell myself these were normal reactions, I thought that the threat of disease was worse than these side effects that passed (well the fevers passed, the change in personality and behavior etc did not). All 3 of my children are fully vaccinated. They won't receive another shot.
This is the best I can do as their mother. I have no trust for or faith in the medical community in charge of making sure they are safe
What no one seems to be able to answer, and what saddens me the most about the situation, is that if vaccines are so safe and effective, then why won't this debate go away? Why are so many parents screaming at the top of their lungs, "Just listen to me! This is what happened to my child!" and being completely ignored? Why are we mocked, ridiculed, bullied, and harrassed by the very doctors and scientists who we put our trust in? They call us stupid. They call us idiots. They call us public health menaces. How are my children such a danger to other children if mine have been vaccinated (all 3 were vaccinated. That's what got me into this mess)?
Oh, I know the vaccine mafia and the Church of the Immaculate Vaccination will say that it is dumb blonde celebrities that are stoking the fires. They will say that opportunistic journalists are feeding the flames. Well, guess what? This debate came along well before Jenny McCarthy. This debate was around long before Mr. Kirby added his welcome voice to ours.
Vaccine thugs, it isn't going away, no matter how badly you want to silence us. It will continue as long as we are ignored. It will continue as long as the doctors and scientists that we are supposed to trust and look up to continue to ignore our children.
"then why won't this debate go away? "
Who is "debating it" Craig? The scientific community? No. People posting on the internet, that's who. People who justify their positions with 'facts' like "I saw my child transform before my eyes". Funny, but when many (and perhaps not you Craig) are examined later, the signs were already there.
Craig, how do you interpret the fact that researchers at UC Davis have developed an observational method of predicting autism in children....before the parents "observe" the changes? What about when these specialists look at old video recordings of the "normal" baby before the onset and can clearly see the disposition? How do you explain that Craig? Are the parents...all parents, because they are parents more of an expert than these people who have done this as their calling in life?
okay, I lied. I have one last, one last thing to say to you. You should check out a Dr. Martha Herbert (pediatric neurologist from Harvard Medical School) You can check out a video of her giving a really interesting talk on the Autism Canada web-site. She notes that kids with autism have bigger head circumference and bigger brains and that this is something that happens in the first 2 years of life. Check it out.
This made me laugh in a sick way. My ASD sons both have huge heads. Last appt with regular pediatrician - she jokingly told me my sons were going to Harvard but my "neurotypical" daughter probably wouldn't - her head was so normal.
I know of her. A good researcher doing good work.
The bigger heads has been described for some time now (well over 20 years).
I only have one more thing to say to you, Josephius. Have you been into a school lately? Sure there might be some decently smart kids but there are A LOT (even in high SES areas-just to help rule out some factors like nutrition, less-educated parents) of children who really just aren't "right." They have variants of ADHD, aspergers, learning disabilities etc. It's getting crazy out there and I do believe one of the factors is over-vaccination. Do you honestly think hep b for babies is necessary? Do you think chicken pox is "deadly?" By the way, I was working with special needs kids today so it took me a while to get back to you on the monkey study, which, no doubt you will pan- and it doesn't bother me about Hewitson receiving money from vacc comp fund any more than it does the pharma-studies saying their stuff is all safe.
Chicken pox can kill, so yes, it can be reliably said the chicken pox is deadly.
Has Hewitson published her work in a respectable journal yet?
I think vaccines have probably killed more children than chicken pox. Both my kids had them (COVERED WITH SPOTS) and were swimming in Ontario lakes (kinda polluted) and yet they were fine. I honestly think a trade off where, yes, some children will die from certain diseases is better than having all these "debilitated" children. To some point I think we have strayed too far from "survival of the fittest" and common sense. I don't know if Hewitson has got her work published in a journal. You could maybe email her and find out.
Josephius,
Let's agree to keep our conversations a bit more respectful. There is no need to insult anyone's intelligence here as it's not warranted. We have some very bright individuals debating this issue so please don't berate or verbally assault anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Here are a couple facts about vaccines and the vaccination program:
98% of parents say that vaccinations should be a choice.
Mercury is the second most dangerous neuro-toxin known to man behind uranium.
When mercury and aluminum combine the resulting synergistic effect increases toxicity exponentially. Aluminum is in vaccines.
The diseases that vaccines are attributed to have prevented were already on their way out in industrialized nations.
Nearly no adult on the planet has received as many vaccinations as our children, so why are we not coercing every adult to get vaccinated? Could you imagine the outrage when it would effect us?
If you have a child harmed by vaccines here is one source you might consider.
http://www.adrugrecall.com/thimerosal/autism.html
In short, most of what you've said is incorrect.
As far as the 98%, we need to see the survey. What question was specifically asked, and who was asked. Saying 98% said this tells us nothing. Was it 100 people....was it more or less? Were they all at an AoA convention? It makes a difference.
Mercury is NOT the second most dangerous neurotoxin known. Absolutely not! You can compare any number of LD50 values for organic and inorganic compounds and mercury does not even come close. Cyanide, for example, is far more potent, as are a number of spider and snake venoms. Polonium is too. There are many, many more "dangerous" neurotoxins.
When mercury and aluminum are combined what what what? Were did you get this information? That's nonsense. Please reference the data (not a report, not a website...the data. It's not true, you are buying into product advertising from ambulance-chasing trial lawyers!).
The diseases were on their way down...some decreased, but that could just be that it coincided temporally. 3rd world nations that have not benefited from sanitation/water still show decreases in incidences comparable to developed nations.
"Nearly no adult on the planet has received as many vaccinations as our children"
It's not the number of shots!!!!!!! It's the number of antigens in the vaccines. There are FEWER now than we had.
Stop using the internet! Go to a library and read primary sources! Use PubMed! Stop believing everything posted on the web!
ThinkForYourself2: "Nearly no adult on the planet has received as many vaccinations as our children"
Josephius: "It's not the number of shots!!!!!!! It's the number of antigens in the vaccines. There are FEWER now than we had. Stop using the internet! Go to a library and read primary sources! Use PubMed! Stop believing everything posted on the web!"
OK Josephius, then "Nearly no adult on the planet has received as many vaccine antigens as our children". How many 50 year olds do you know that have had the HepB series, MMR, Chickenpox, HIB Series, Hepatitis A, Rotovirus or Gardasil? Ummm... none.
And guess what? Since many are retired, this is the population of folks that travel overseas the most - bringing back all of those deadly diseases you're so worried about. Better dive into your bunker!
lol!! You should change your name to Sybil. You bereate people for rudeness however you do the very same thing on other articles. Practice what you preach.
Fitting.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/166335
Can we please stop with the reflexive confirmation bias and go back to actually working the problem for a real solution? I'm no fan of getting jacked with needles, either, but this isn't helping anyone.
wow, Josephius, poking fun at the "gapping" holes in the vaccines/mercury/autism issues is really noble work!! Kids everywhere will benefit from your cynicism! You can say what you want but MANY doctors are even saying that kids are getting harmed from vaccinations. All the parents who have noticed the problems following shots aren't making it up, either. Why so angry? Do you work for the CDC? Don't worry, evidence is gathering. Did you hear about the recent study where they gave all the childhood vaccinations to the monkey and it developed autism? Oh, let me guess, that study was flawed but all the ones saying there's no link to vaccines and autism are "good science." Go bug someone else about a less important issue.
"Did you hear about the recent study where they gave all the childhood vaccinations to the monkey and it developed autism? "
No. Can you cite the study please? What journal was it published in?
I'll wait......
The study was undertaken at the University of Pittsburgh -not sure if it has been through the process of peer review and in a journal.
I will repeat one more time: You seem very irate/threatened about the suggestion of a problem/problems with the vaccinations (or the vaccination schedule simply being over-crowded). DO YOU WORK FOR THE CDC or A PHARMA CO? Do you think hep b needs to be given to babies? Do you think chicken pox is deadly?
I honestly can't be bothered talking with you anymore.
What? No reply? Wow, surprising.
That's because scientist "don't hear about the study"...from internet blog sites. We read them in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and they will only make it there (and be deemed a study) if it passes peer-review. It hasn't happened. It won't happen. All you are doing is buying into and spreading propaganda.
What you are refering to is L.Hewiston's poster where she made some claims at an anti-vaccine conference (not a science conference) last year. All that exists is a BS story. There is no published data. No one, besides the journalsit reporting about the confrence has seen it.
Did you know that the Hewiston's are litigants seeking damages (from the tax payer-funded vaccine comp fund) in the ongoing omnibus special courts trials? Ooops! A little conflict of interest there, don't you think?
David,
Why don't you end this once and for all? All you need to do is attend the next major immunology conference or one on pediatrics, psychiatry, or even public health policy and cite all this 'evidence' that you have? Bring some of your fellow supporters here (who know little to nothing about the scientific method, the masses of data available and studies performed more than what editorial and agenda web-sites provide via talking points), take them with you to tell those practicing in the medical and scientific fields that they are all wrong and you guys have compelling, case-shut information to prove it. Why don't you do it David? This would earn you the Nobel for sure, not to mention change global health policies on-the-spot.
Or better yet, why don't you be honest with your readers here and tell them exactly why you will never or have ever done it.
Josephius:
"the masses of data available and studies performed..." Yes. For both sides of this debate. But your side keeps relying only on population studies. You seem a reasonable person. You must know that those kinds of studies are notoriously unreliable, can be manipulated. Why aren't you willing to pay attention to case histories, and clinical studies, and so forth? And why the abject sneering at 'anecdotal evidence'? One of the first things a good GP would do would be to listen to his patient, or in the case of a pediatrician, to the parents. This is important stuff, goes to an appropriate medical method.
Can we cut to the chase here? My conclusion: You want all this noise about a possible link between vaccines and autism to stop because it's jeopardizing the vaccine schedule's uptake. That's what matters to you above all else. But to the parents of children diagnosed with ASD, their children matter above all else. And that's not being selfish so much as being reasonable. That's what they have an investment in. And if it is finally proven to the likes of you that vaccines have had a role to play in their damage, you will benefit from the knowledge as well, because we will all benefit from the safer vaccines that will have been forced into being, by the likes of David Kirby, and the Mercury Moms, and all the others who have been willing to investigate this matter.
well said - and I welcome and want conversations with other viewpoints. I am an expert on my own children - I'm willing to listen to other views tho. Thus far - biomed wins and all the studies go against what has actually helped my sons.
part 2
And I'm thinking here as well of the likes of Dr Richard Deth, and Dr Jill James, and Dr Russell Blaylock, and Prof Haley, and Burbacher, and Singh, and all the other investigators who have helped advance our knowledge of these matters.
Do I think that vaccines are responsible for ASD in a subset of children? It certainly appears so. Do I think that they are the only cause of ASD? No. I'd like to see more research into the likes of the fetal damage caused by prenatal ultrasound (the heating effect), for the 'classical' form of ASD, eg (as opposed to the regressive form); and so forth. But we are not going to get the full human shot at the causation of this terrible affliction by attitudes like yours, where invested interests seem to be at play.
How you can think that you are holding the proper scientific attitude towards this matter is beyond me. Or will you join me in agreeing that all potential causes should be explored - and let the chips fall where they may??
Or will you join me in agreeing that all potential causes should be explored - and let the chips fall where they may??"
I have no problem with that statement or the approach (so long as the irrational endevor to "prove" ones position isn't the motivating factor, at the expense of good science and progress).
"But your side keeps relying only on population studies."
I would disagree with you. It isn't just epidemiology...that is one part. Many of the cell-based and animal studies are important as well. But nothing compares to the developing genetic theories, such as copy number variants (not only in this disorder, but schizophrenia too). You cite researchers like Deth, James, Haley, and Burbacher. I'm sorry, but I will not agree with you that 1) the quality of the work they have produced is not on par with the majority of studies that seem to suggest their works are the outliers 2) is always, always, always, misquoted and misinterpreted by editorial and autism blog cites, often using their research to make claims the authors' never made or used them to support 'theories' that the research never addressed. The fact that these authors have only published on this subject once, or maybe a couple times, then move on to other research fields suggests to me (along with the fact that they are all published in low-impact journals and not Nature or Science) that they are moving on from a dead end.
Josephius,
What effect can mercury have in an infant's/child's body that their body cannot eliminate?
What effect can baseless accusations regarding the nation's vaccine program have on public heatlh?
Great question! Let's see what the medical literature has to say about it. Mercury exposure in infants, as well as people of all ages, has been documented for more than 2 centuries. Do any of the early accounts (or later accounts for that matter) appear to be autism? Do today's doctors and child (autsim) specialist get confused between acrodynia and autism?
Short answer....no! Long answer....dumb question, of course no!
They are not the same . Get a hold of a medial textbook that describes the symptoms of acrodynia. Get one with the descriptions of autism. Compare. Easy (although, it's not as easy as going to the Generation Rescue wesite and reading their descriptions...being that they are medically accepted and soooo reliable. I'm sure they do not have an agenda or vested intrest in deception...naaah!).
How is autism defined and described?
How is acrodynia diagnosed?
There's your answer.
"Congregation, let's open our Vaccination Bibles to Chapter 6, verses 82 through 106.
And (the false Pr)Offit did spake, 'When they blame the vaccines, make sure you change the subject and not discuss all of the parents who claim vaccine injury. Make sure that you protect the Holy Vaccine schedule at all costs. When they bring up Thimerosal, make sure that you inform them that it hasn't been in vaccines since 2001 (or 2002 or 03 or 04 or 05 or 06....we can't decide on a year for that. And don't even mention that it's still in many vaccines). If they continue, call them crazy conspiracy nuts and make sure you use Ad-Hominem attacks to discredit them. Act like thugs and antagonize, belittle, mock, ridicule and condescend. Only then will the Holy Vaccine be safe."
Remember, congregation, that Correlation does not equal Causation."
And the congregation responds, "But vaccines SAVE LIVES!"
HA HA HA HA! Craig this is brilliant. Thanks.
Craig,
Very cute! A nice way to divert from addressing the issues discussed.
If you decided, at some point, you'd like to discuss the topics, fell free. Reality is still here.
I wonder why you are so hostile J. Do you have an autistic child? I have two.
You can put any study or conference transcripts in front of me that you'd like. I don't need science to tell me that my kids were fine before being vaccinated and that after they recd their shots - they were
Thanks to the author, as always, for the updates. This is encouraging. It's a bit in the too-little-too-late category, not surprising considering some of the pharma-embedded members of Autism Speaks' science board (over whom Bob Wright does not have much control, according to his daughter), but it's something. I hope that this AS-funded research is not in the same realm as Pinchichero's infant thimerosal study and others merely bent on disproving the link, no matter how grossly and obviously numbers, methods and data have to be mangled to do it.
As far as Bob Wright's idea that 30 to 60% of autism cases have environmental factors-- I think this is too cagey and bet-hedging. I'd doubt more than a fraction of cases are even "mostly genetic" and suspect many more cases may not be genetic at all. In today's toxically bombed atmosphere, it seems to make more sense that the many-thousand percent rise in autism is mostly a result of compounded toxic insults softening up the system for the big blows from the main causal factors.
As for genetic susceptibilities, I've been hearing about many potential culprits but it seems few of these are confirmed to be actually genetic. The rest are all hypotheses which tend to fall apart when held up to the many-thousand percent rise in ASD in the past thirty or so years. I'll be interested to hear more on it, like everyone else.
Hey Gatogorra,
Since you say "it seems to make more sense that the many-thousand percent rise in autism is mostly a result of compounded toxic insults softening up the system for the big blows from the main causal factors", perhaps you could elaborate and tell us why 60's to present conditions in former eastern block countries did not produce the "environmental toxicological-driven' autism epidemic. They spewed far, far greater amounts of nasty pollutants into their air, water, and food supplies, as well as use a number of banned materials and substances, and did not experience the 'autism epidemic' you talk about. Why do you think that might be?
Also "As for genetic susceptibilities, I've been hearing about many potential culprits but it seems few of these are confirmed to be actually genetic". I would suggest some more reading from reliable sources. Try PubMed and examine the actual studies.
"I'd doubt more than a fraction of cases are even "mostly genetic" and suspect many more cases may not be genetic at all."
If only .001 percent of autism was caused by vaccines, that would have been discovered by epidemiologists years ago. Where is the evidence that vaccines have anything to do with autism? Temporal associations via anecdotes are not reliable.
The other day it was mercury, possibly industrial mercury brought down out of the atmosphere by the rain that was causing autism. Now, it's vaccines, either individual or combined that is causing it.
Just keep on moving those goal posts David! keep on movin' them. But, by all means, stick to your underlying theme (as pointed out in Evidence of Harm, available on line, just hit the link to your right!)
How come no one thinks it might be the metal used in the needle? Or the plastic in the syringe? Why not? What about the dissinfectants used in the doctor's office? Should we examine more possibilities?
you seem to disparage what I see as David's open mindedness. The picture isn't 100% clear as to the cause of autism but anecdotally, it's pretty obvious that vaccination is somehow involved. Perhaps you aren't aware that the autism explosion occurred around the time they ramped the schedule up? Complicating the picture are the flu shots (now, sadly being given to pregnant women and which sometimes contain mercury) and immigrant kids, which are pummeled with mercury in their vaccines because even though they took it out in North America they didn't abroad in many instances. If it walks like a duck...
What are you doing these days to advocate for children that's so great? Yeah, that's what I thought.
"picture isn't 100% clear as to the cause of autism but anecdotally, it's pretty obvious that vaccination is somehow involved. "
Really?! Anecdotally! Wow, what more 'evidence' does one need then? I wonder why the positions of ALL global health authorities and ALL of the relevant global medical and scientific authorities disagrees with that claim. Uh, maybe because the data says otherwise? Have you ever used PubMed? Ever work in the scientific research field?
Autism "exploded" when 1) the infrastructure came on-line to identify individuals 2) clarified the diagnostic criteria and disseminated that information to relevant professionals and educators 3) when the internet became available and more and more Google Ph.D.s visited cult-webistes such as AoA, GenRescue and Safeminds 4) with the NVICP agreed to pay legal fees to all parties in vaccine court, regardless of outcome and regardless of merit.
"What are you doing these days to advocate for children that's so great?"
Many things, including perpetuating good science and poking fun at the gapping holes from the vaccine/mercury-causes-autism conspiracy cults.
"The picture isn't 100% clear as to the cause of autism but anecdotally, it's pretty obvious that vaccination is somehow involved."
Actually, it's pretty obvious from science and epidemiological studies that vaccination is *not* "somehow involved."
Well, which is it, Josephius? Is it cold, unemotional "Refridgerator" moms (my wife stays at home with the kids. She is very caring and gave up a carreer in nursing to help my son)? Is it alcoholic moms (my wife hasn't had a drink since before I met her 15 years ago)? Is it old sperm (I was 28 when my son was born)? Is it genetics (no one in my family has autism or could be classified as autistic)? And the hypocrites say that the pro-safe vaccine side keeps moving the goalposts?
Here's a clue. The mercury, the dangerous chemicals, the live viruses, the alluminum; they all have one thing in common; they are in vaccines.
Autism SPECTRUM Disorders is a RANGE of disorders that relates to (in short) impaired social behaviors. There are varying characteristics among sub-types.
Higher organisms go through development throughout their lives (if you haven't noticed). Genes are turned on and off at specific stages of development. Loss or gain of gene function leads to development. Impairment of expression or overexpression leads to gains/loss of function, which in turn, produces a phenotype; in this case individuals fall along the spectrum. They may keep those impairments. They may lose them and regain function depending on the specifics inherent in the individual.
A+B doesn't always lead to C, Craig. Just because you were 28...rather old in traditional terms, doesn't mean you WILL have problems with your sperm, just as a 45 year old woman isn't guaranteed to have a Down's baby. There is a statistical TENDENCY.
Get it?
Tell us what you know about the studies dealing with copy number variants? What do you think about neurexin? Shank3 and its ligand? What do you know about CNV on chromosomes 5 and 22? Please....enlighten us.
Mercury, in the form of an organomercurial, is in microgram quantities and has 1) been used safely in literally billions of doses (human and animal) as well as a number of household and medical products 2) is metabolized and excreted with a 1/2 life of less than a week 3) been phased out of use in this country and others (I know. You're going to reference the bulk flu vaccines given at flu clinics or alternative formulations that are still available commercial, but not purchased/used any more. But, really, it's used at a fraction of the quantities in only some, rare circumstances. You need to accept this and move on, please!). Live viruses...uh, Craig....they are everywhere. When was the last time you stepped in ocean water or a pond/lake? How about rain? Just how many live viruses do you think are in 1 microliter? Millions! How many are in the aerosols generated from coughing, sneezing, and flushing the toilet? Millions! And these can cause disease! They are not attenuated). Aluminum...one of the most inert substances in the universe....is used in salt form, routinely in medicine and science. There is more aluminum ingested from cans and cookware than in a vaccine. Radio labeling experiments show that the aluminum is excreted within HOURS of a vaccination. And did I mention it was inert? Just a little detail there.
when Mr. Wright said, "we should be tracking each year group"- boy is that an understatement! Why do they even think that injecting children with so many vaccinations would have no consequence? It seems that their (CDC and pharmaceutical companies) follow-up studies only track kids for maybe 2 weeks, post-vaccination. That's obviously not enough and they KNOW IT!!!!! It's appalling that this problem has been allowed to go on for so long.
"Why do they even think that injecting children with so many vaccinations would have no consequence?"
Because children's immune system can handle tens of thousands of antigens at once. If you disagree, then you need to explain why, and submit your calculations and reasoning to a peer reviewed journal for publication.
The immune system of an infant or child is actually still developing and is not as strong as an adults. Also, realize that the child is not only being injected with antigens their bodies also have to deal with a whole range of toxic ingredients. Here is a partial list:
Formaldehyde
Chicken Embryonic Fluid
Thimerosal - yes it's still in many vaccines regardless of how much you've been told it's not
Monkey Kidney
Aborted Fetal Tissue
Aluminum Hydroxide
Guinea Pig Embryo
Ammonium Sulfate
Live Viruses
Polysorbate 80 & 20
MSG
Aspartame
http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.htm
I hope you're kidding.
Most people read the comment "children's immune system can handle tens of thousands of antigens at once" and wonder at the lack of common sense in such a statement. One might assume that when you say antigen you're talking about tens of thousands of distinct antigens -- which I think is what Dr. (pr)Offit said when he originally made this statement.
Most people would be correct in their assumption that this statement lacks basic common sense. Most things in dramatic excess kill people. You can drown in your own tissues from drinking too much water. Some things are very toxic to some people in very small amounts. I'm not talking about antigens, toxins, whatever bad things you might think... Peanuts in small quantities can kill some people. That's a FOOD. What makes you think that EVERY child can tolerate even the small number of antigens that they're exposed to???
This is the most brain dead stupid thing that any Doctor has every said: "a baby's immune system could handle as many as 10,000 vaccines" Then he upped the ante, saying it was probably "closer to 100,000." Dr. Paul Offit.
The possible link between autism and chemicals used in vaccinations should make us all wonder about the effects of the many thousands of chemicals that have been introduced into our bodies for decades.
The EU has already ruled that rather than wait for a demonstration of harmfulness, companies must prove that new chemicals are NOT harmful. In other words, the burden of proof and expense is on them.
It's a useful first step, but what we really need is a wide-ranging, comprehensive testing program on the chemicals currently in use. Every so often we get a "whoops!" when some substance is identified as harmful. But then much harm is already done.
Really comprehensive research can start with widely-used substances that experts think likely to be harmful. The work would then be expanded to a wider set of substances.
Another necessary area of research: what happens when these chemicals interact in the environment and in human bodies? Again, we can build on current knowledge to identify likely areas of interest, and move on from there. New information will light the way, as it usually does.
Industry is asking us, on a daily basis, to take vials of unknown chemicals. "Drink this" they say, "and don't worry about what it is. Be happy."
We can't know what testing will discover, but it's for sure that we need information so we can understand the consequences of what we and the children of America are imbibing and breathing every day.
I would like to say that I am so glad that we finally have a President-Elect that has autism in mind. That he has a plan for autism that is far more than I could ever say for prior elected Presidents. As for Autism Speaks, I am not sure how fond I am for that organization. My facts could be fuzzy, please somebody correct me if I am wrong, but didn't that group have some discrepancies regarding their taxes and fund raising? Like, I was under the impression that they were hiding money raised to go to somebody else? Please somebody let me know, because the very thought of that makes me upset.
I just hope that I will see in my lifetime, for my son's sake that there will be research done that will find the cause that will in turn help my son. I do believe that the vaccinations have a major role in my son's autism. I know what I witnessed first hand.
President Obama is blessed with highly educated, evidence-based advisors on the autism issue. I for one am very optimistic.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
