Cracking The Autism Riddle: Common Sense About Vaccines And Autism
All sorts of arguments are thrown around to persuade parents that shots threaten their children with autism. I'd like to discuss 4 of the commonly repeated concerns, 3 flawed...and 1 that I think has merit.
1) Too many shots can overwhelm a child and cause autism. No!
Babies get more vaccines today than 30 years ago, but if you think that means more things are injected into their young bodies...you'd be wrong! That's because immunizations today are much more purified than those of the past.
For example, in 1980, the DPT shot (Diphtheria/Pertussis/Tetanus) was made from a soup of blendarized bacteria (over 1000 different illness particles - antigens - all mixed together). And, the polio vaccine had live virus that actually protected children by triggering a minute case of...polio! Today, our modern DPT vaccine is highly purified, containing only 3-5 bacterial antigens and the polio shot has absolutely no live virus.
Actually, the current trend to give kids more shots is a win-win for them. They win because they're protected from many more illnesses and because they have fewer antigens put into their bodies.
But, some still worry, "Can too many shots overwhelm a baby's immature immune system?" That idea is pretty close to a baby urban legend.
The immune system is a superb multitasking, fighting machine. Every day, babies are bombarded by thousands of threats: irritating pollen; colonic microbes; bacterial invaders from the skin, eyes, nose, mouth; viral swarms; offending dietary proteins; damaged cells; even tiny, little cancers. The immune system's magnificent ability to protect against many, mild attacks at one time is exactly why most babies tolerate several shots at once with no reaction whatsoever. (In fact, a new theory suggests that allergies and asthma may be on the rise in part because we have made the world so clean it doesn't exercise a baby's immune system enough!)
2) Shots hurt the brains of extra-sensitive children. No!
Each of us has special sensitivities. Some have peanut allergies...some get lots of strep throat....and a very, very few get serious reactions to vaccines. I wish we had a test to detect which infants are susceptible to severe measles or big vaccine reactions, but no such test exists.
The good news, however, is that shot risks are tiny compared to the risks of full-blown illness. For example, influenza and chicken pox hammer the immune system 100-1000 times harder than the impact of the flu or pox vaccines. While most kids breeze through the chicken pox shot, even a mild case of real pox can weaken a child's immunity for weeks to months and lead to ear infections, pneumonia and, rarely, toxic shock syndrome. (And, it can often land an adult in the hospital!)
There is one special case of possible vaccine susceptibility that made headlines last year and became a major new focus for those who claim vaccines cause autism. A 19-month-old child developed autism after getting 5 shots. But - and this is a huge "but" - unlike most autistic kids, this one child also has a rare medical problem - Mitochondrial Disease (MD).
Recently, vaccine avoiders have floated the theory that perhaps many healthy looking kids have hidden MD. They suggest that it may be the combination of vaccines plus hidden MD that is triggering autism in so many seemingly normal children.
But, the research suggests that this is unlikely to affect more than a handful of kids. Here's why:
MD is rare (1 in 5-10,000 children). A Portuguese study found ~93% of autistic children had no evidence of MD (and even that 7% figure has yet to be confirmed). In a recent study, scientists from Harvard and Johns Hopkins could find only 25 children with both MD and autism. And, these kids had serious problems rarely seen in most cases of autism (like, delayed walking, acid reflux, liver disorder, severe fatigue, etc).
Fourteen of these kids seemed to be developing normally then suddenly deteriorated into autism during toddlerhood. But only 1/14 (7%) got worse right after shots. (Had 2 or 3 or 5 kids gotten worse after the shots, one could make the argument that children with MD are at increased risk for getting autism after vaccinations. However, as I mentioned in part 1 of this blog, 7% is very close to the number of cases one would expect to be diagnosed right after shots...just by chance.)
Another dramatic finding of this study argues against a link between MD and the national rise in autism incidence: classic autism spectrum disorder affects many more boys than girls (3-9 times more boys!)...but children with Mitochondrial Disease + autism are evenly split between the genders.
While it remains to be proven that children with MD are more vulnerable to shots, there is no doubt that they are super-vulnerable to illness. In other words, MD kids who skip shots can get very sick, very fast it they catch a vaccine preventable disease like influenza or pneumonia.
3) Doctors push risky shots on children to make more money. Please!
This accusation is as appalling as it is ridiculous. Pediatricians labor through 23 years of education; wake at all hours to help worried parents; and desert our own families on weekends and holidays to rush to the hospital to care for sick babies.
In fact, a greedy doctor wanting more money would actually discourage parents from giving their children shots...not encourage it! Why? Because doctors make more money caring for sick kids - needing repeat office visits - than caring for the well.
In truth, the only reason doctors cajole, beg and pressure parents to immunize their children is because we want to protect them - and other children - from the pain and suffering of preventable infections.
I agree that there are too many ties between doctors and big pharmaceutical companies. This must be stopped because it creates the appearance of conflict of interest and the real potential of collusion. However, the record of organized medicine is reassuring. Over the past 30 years, doctors have rejected many vaccines when concerns arose that they were not effective enough or caused unacceptable side effects.
4) Shots can be delayed. MAYBE...but only those risking your child's health.
This is one of the most critical issues facing parents: Are shots a personal choice or a civic duty?
As a pediatrician, I recommend all vaccines, but I suggest parents think of shots as falling into 2 different groups: 1) those given primarily to protect your child, 2) those protecting your child and your neighbors' children.
The first group of shots stops infections like, influenza, rotavirus, hepatitis A, chicken pox and hepatitis B. They help your child but don't give great protection to the community. That is either because the illnesses are very common (spread quickly through your neighborhood even if your child gets the shot) or hard to spread (difficult for your child to give it to others). (Note: Older kids, teens and adults are at risk for hepatitis B. It has caused thousands of cases of liver failure and cancer and so all citizens should eventually get this vaccine.)
The second group of shots stops infections that threaten your child and your community (your neighbor's baby, the elderly, chronic disease sufferers, etc.). These shots include, whooping cough, meningitis (Hib), pneumococcus (Prevnar) and measles. They miraculously halt diseases that are so contagious just one cough, one airplane flight or one germy doorknob can spread them like wildfire through your town.
I believe giving the first group of shots is a parent's personal choice because the suffering you risk is mostly limited to your child and family. Skipping the flu shot, for example, may cause your child to be one of the 36,000 Americans who die from influenza this year, but it probably won't stop a flu outbreak (although it may help to reduce it).
However, giving the second group of shots is an important civic responsibility., because delaying them creates a serious public health risk. By immunizing at least 95% of children with these shots we create "herd immunity" that can totally halt the spread of deadly epidemics in our communities. Herd immunity stymies the spread of disease the way that frequent rain keeps lightening strikes from starting raging forest fires.
Some doctors may fairly argue which vaccines should go into which groups, but the important point is that the shot schedule has some flexibility...it is not written in stone. In fact doctors have repeatedly tweaked this schedule to make it safer and more effective (for example, over the past 30 years, the measles vaccine was pushed from 9 months to 12 months...and now is recommended to be given as late as 15 months of age). However, the second group of vaccines is crucial if we are to protect children in our communities who are too young to get their own shots. Parents who skip these shots may not mean to harm others, but their action significantly increases the risk of avoidable suffering and death to innocent children.
For over 10 years, a huge amount of passion and debate about the cause of autism has focused on vaccines. But recently a totally new suspect has surfaced that warrants investigation as a potential autism trigger. In the last installment of this 3-part blog, I'll discuss the worrisome compounds known as...endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs).
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
"AutismNewsBeat
'If you're focusing on the numbers, you're just looking to disagree.'
I love found humor. Somebody needs to translate this into Latin, and include it on every University of Google diploma."
Wow. I see. If browbeating doesn't work, try marginalizing.
Now everyone knows you.
If empiricism doesn't work, just try making stuff up.
blindj, I'm not attacking you, just your ideas. If you can't see the difference, you should try AgeOfAutis
My ideas have been: 1) More research until we have positive results (more than simply disproving connections), and 2) Stop blaming the parents for being dissatisfied with the answers they're getting.
I am not advocating stopping vaccinations. I am not claiming that I know what the link is, if any, between shots and autism.
I'm not sure which ideas you're attacking. I don't know which ideas you think I'm echoing.
When ardent pro-vaccine folks smother the conversation, it's hard to know what anybody is actually saying.
Ouch!
As the father of two autistic boys, I APPLAUD your efforts to dispel the myths and nonsense going around about autism and Vaccines.
Anyone who is interested in more of the story, and in getting a good lesson in how proper research should be conducted, I strongly encorage you to pick up a copy of Dr. Paul Offit's book: Autism's false prophets.
Much in line with the infomration presetned above, Dr. Offit thoroughly and scientifically debunks all of the anti-vaccine, anti-glutten/casin, pro-chelation (very dangerous! DEADLY!), nonsense that parents have been duped into accepting over the years by medical frauds like Andrew Wakefield, outright charlatans and, in the latest, most absurd episode, dim-witted celebrities like Jenny McCarthy, and into spending their hard-earned and much-needed money on.
One on one, intessive speech, social and behavioral therapy is ALL that will help. PERIOD. And it's not (YET) covered by insurance in most states, so you can't afford to waste your money on nonsense.
Mister Karp? I salute you. Keep up the good work.
I agree with you that "One on one, intensive speech, social and behavioral therapy is" critical. I also agree that there is much junk science and snake oil out there. My son however, while pre-verbal, was almost unreachable in any meaningful way. His behavior was that of someone drugged and paranoid. We were recommended to the GF-CF diet by a leading DAN doctor and we tried it. While the diet by no means cured my son, he did not begin to speak until much later, it did make him "available" for treatment. Almost immediately, within days, began allowing eye contact and focusing on tasks. Being skeptics we not once but twice over a one year period stopped the diet only to lose our baby to the old lost child. Debunk what you will, and the diet does not help for all ASD children, but it does help with many and it was, quite nearly, miraculous for my son.
I'm glad your son is developing.
NiceguyEddie-
Quite a mouthful of emotion -- and a sales pitch for Dr. Offit's horrendously poor, propaganda book. Your post is familiar, misspellings and all. The anonymous pro-vaccine zealots- blindly following emotion rather than science, seem to replicate here with different names hourly.
"Mister Karp" with a question mark-- ok, whatever. I guess you wonder if he is truly a doctor....
As far as Dr Offit's knowledge on anything regarding autism- here is what he, himself said about his understanding of autism:
http://sci
"Regarding my characterization of children with autism: I think one of my limitations in writing this book is that I'm not a neurologist, psychologist, or developmentalist. I'm an infectious diseases specialist with an expertise in vaccines. So I don't come in contact with many children with autism. As a consequence, my characterization of children with autism in AUTISM'S FALSE PROPHETS came exclusively from what I read in newspapers, which no doubt slants descriptions to more extreme symptoms, or to descriptions from a handful of people, like Richard Grinker, Peter Hotez, Kathleen Seidel, and Camille Clark."
Hardly science or medicine based evidence which is why the book did poorly and exposed Dr. Offit's inaccuracies and conflict of interest. The world of the neurodiverse and/or vaccine profit makers is not a world of reality when it comes to autism.
regardless of what you think of Dr Offitt, his opinions are based on science not gut sense. bottom line is that there is no scientific evidence to support the hypothesis that vaccines = autism. move on.
niceguyeddie was advocating therapy for autism and not vaccines. your accusations that everyone is attacking you, but your posts are full of ad hominen attacks. you cant have it both ways
See Harvey Karp's Profile
Hi NiceguyEddie,
Thanks for sharing your personal experience.
I have not commented on this previously, but I am helping to develop a research study at UCLA using my Happiest Toddler DVD work with children 2-8 years of age with autism. There has been some good results reported by individual parents and therapists, and now we will look at this special approach to outburst behaviors in the setting of the autism diagnostic clinic.
Best of luck! (And belated happy Father's Day!)
Dr Karp-
You said "Thanks for sharing your personal experience" to NiceguyEddie but his post is a commercial for Offit's book. Why are you thanking him?
You then describe a DVD (are you about to put it on the market?) in what appears to be your own commercial.
How about sticking to true facts about vaccines, not pulling the old "In the 1930"s, whooping cough"s painful strangulation was epidemic" --fear mongering, and discussing research pertinent to why we have so many children being diagnosed with autism.
Again, your "thanking" regarding Paul Offit's book is very inappropriate for this discussion.
Dr. Offit is evidently a patent holder on many vaccines, and is making tens of millions of dollars off their use. With this serious conflict of interest, he served on the national CDC committee that determined what vaccines children must take.
Maybe that's not greed working, but when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Dr. Karp's unqualified stamp of approval for Dr. Offit's clearly self-enriching viewpoint compromises his own.
Here's one report on Dr. Offit. http://art
Which vaccines is Offit a patent holder on? Be specific. The be specific as to how Offit has a self-enriching viewpoint.
Mercola is not a valid source.
Do you have anything other than ad hominem attacks based on false informtion? I am aware of only one single vaccine that Dr. Offit worked on. He is not "making 10's of millions of dollars" from that. What you have read is bald faced ad hominem lies intended to make people distrust him.
If you want to talk about conflicts based on making money, then you have to ackknowledge that virtually every single "authority" on the vaccine=autism side makes money from their efforts. Even McCarthy has for profit operations and makes serious money from her effor (in addition to jumpstarting her failed career). This does not make McCarthy a Iiar (her provably false statements do that). Neither does it make Offit (or Dr. Karp) compromised.
Yeah, I really trusts the AMA. They forced highly toxic fluoride into our drinking water. They also pulled the licenses of dentists who warned their patients about the mercury in amalgam fillings. They blatantly lie about mercury being able to escape those fillings (anyone who took basic metallurgy at a major university knows that the components of a metal amalgam evolve from the solid amalgam state over time in both gas and liquid form). Having one of the most toxic substances known to man put in my mouth is not my idea of responsible medicine.
Someday I hope someone sues the AMA into oblivion and takes their corporate masters with them. There is plenty of evidence for criminal prosecution, including reckless homicide and conspiracy. I also hope some of the criminals behind this are still alive to be sent to prison before too many of our children become victims.
You are committing an (understandable) fallacy of over generalization. The fact that the AMA and individual doctors lie at times to promote their self interest does not mean everything they say is a lie. You need to evaluate each case based on evidence and from what I've seen the evidence here does not support the premise that vacines cause autism.
Yes, and conversely the fact they they are often correct does not make them always correct. For example, while my mother was pregnant with her children doctors were telling their pregnant patients to smoke to calm their nerves (whick those of you who dissagree with me may see as "what happened":-)
No one is always right and, as parents of an ASD son, we have been told by EVERY doctor we have seen that we no one knows our child like we do and that we should trust ourselves first.
I think we have a new face for America's anti-vaccine movement!
Please stop insulting people coming here & instead discuss what it is they're saying. He believes what he does for reason so how about using reason if you choose to reply?
iplaw: Why are you parroting nonsensical conspiracy theories?
If you think there's no truth in what he says, then you've lived a sheltered life. Truth to many matters may seem ridiculous but usually there's always some fire where there's smoke.
"They blatantly lie about mercury being able to escape those fillings (anyone who took basic metallurgy at a major university knows that the components of a metal amalgam evolve from the solid amalgam state over time in both gas and liquid form). Having one of the most toxic substances known to man put in my mouth is not my idea of responsible medicine."
Amalgam fillings are safe. I suggest you read this which explains not only the evidence, but the fraudsters who profit from claiming the dangers of amalgam:
http://www
Thank you Dr. Karp. Hopefully this will enlighten some people here who continue to buy into the nonsense.
Has anyone ever heard of the dihydrogen monoxide hoax? This has been an experiment replicated many times by various students and researchers, mostly at Universities, though I first heard about it from Penn and Teller.
Dihydrogen monoxide is a real thing. What the hoax involves is people starting petitions, student groups, etc regarding the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide in an attempt to get them to support banning dihydrogen monoxide. They will list instance in which this substance has caused death and injury (which is true, actually). The hoaxer will often set up multiple web sites that they then give to people as reference, which list all the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide. They will distribute pamphlets and post signs around their towns and campuses. They will go on and on about government and corporate conspiracies to push this dangerous substance on the rest of us for profit. These hoaxers have gotten petitions signed by many people, have gotten student groups up in arms about it. They have gotten people to gather together in protest, have gotten message boards with people demanding action.
Dihydrogen monoxide is the scientific name for water.
In other words: tell people something scary sounding, put up a website with a few scientific terms on it, throw in the words "government" and "corporation" and "profit", and that's all you need to start a movement. Scientific integrity not required.
Excellent point.
I unfortunately knew someone in college who recruited an all-female rights group to circulate a petition to "end women suffrage."
It took three days for someone to realize that women suffrage is not women suffering. It's women voting.
Say something loud and with enough authority and indignance and you'll have an army of idiots at your back.
Still and yet studies of the evidence surrounding injury and death caused by inappropriate Dihydrogen monoxide protocols has given rise to countless rules surrounding the possession and use of Dihydrogen monoxide. I personally had to spend significant money to protect the neighborhood children from the large Dihydrogen monoxide container I keep in the back yard. My neighbor has a Dihydrogen monoxide vehicle and is require to wear protective equipment while operating it. The examples are manifold so feel free to do your own research but here is a link from the American Academy of Pediatrics: http://www
Cute...and insulting.
What is insulting and why? Does it not illustrate how easily people can be swayed? And why we should work hard as parents, teachers, etc. to educate our children, students, etc., so that they don't fall victim to the same sorts of things? If we first made it clear that it is a sign of courage to admit when we don't know something, and then armed them with the tools to discriminate valid research from wild speculation or outright woo, would we not be better off? Isn't that part of what is at play here? As for the rest, availability heuristic, affect heuristic and confirmation bias play even larger roles in the fight to make people believe that vaccines are to blame for autism.
I have done that with some members of my chemistry class many years ago but not on such an elaborate scale. It works every time.
Please check this out. There is NO link between vaccines and autism.
http://www
Countless scientific evidence has proven that vaccines do not cause autism. Check it out.
http://www
youtube???
I'm a parent of 2 now-adult children. I did not vaccinate them until they were in their teens. I made the decision not to vaccinate them because I am also an attorney. I recieved weekly trial lawyer updates from several organizations I belonged to. Every single newsletter contained numerous accounts of children becoming very sick with high fevers, suffering lasting, debilitating injuries and even dying after being vaccinated. The evidence was overwhelming.
The drug companies COULD have made the vaccines safer for just about 4 cents a dose. They chose not to.
Finally, my husband was in pharmaceutical research for many years. I know all too well how the drug companies manipulate studies and data.
Parents have to make the choice and live with the consequences. I kept my children home and away from crowds during the first 6 months of their lives. I never put them in daycare. Both are healthy adults. I have no regrets.
What would you expect a lawyer newsletter from trial lawyers to include except reports of injuries? Anecdote is not evidence. When you are immunizing millions of children there are going to be several sad stories, although not nearly as many sad stories as there would be if you did not immunize them. Nobody is claiming that there aren't rare serious adverse effects.
I would absolutely love to hear proof of your claims that drug companies could have made vaccines "safer" for about 4 cents a dose. Considering doses only cost a few dollars and the entire cost is transferred to the patient I would also like to hear why they would not do so.
I would also like to know how drug companies could manipulate studies and data for decades, including those studies and data from other countries and outside sources. Merck couldn't keep the lid on the Vioxx problems for even 2 years and that data was all internal. We are supposed to believe that they can manipulate outside studies funded by the NIH over several decades (and thousands of researchers will just go along with it)?
You can believe what you want. And, do your own research. I did and I made my choice and I have 2 very healthy, brilliant kids today.
BTW, if you believe the pharmaceutical companies don't lie to you, you are dead wrong.
Do you have any proof to back up your claim, or is it all unverified, suspect, anecdotal evidence?
Do your own research, college boy.
Unfortunately Americans are born victims. We have been conditioned to do as we are told, perhaps more so than any other society on earth. This combined with a profit driven corruption of our government leads to us not only being lied to but for health professionals being sanctioned for trying to dissent with the party line. Corporations use organizations like the AMA instead of the government in order to avoid 1st Amendment issues which would limit a government entity action but not the AMA. Many good doctors have had their licenses pulled for trying to protect their patients, and many more intimidated into keeping quiet.
"We have been conditioned to do as we are told, perhaps more so than any other society on earth"
Have you actually been outside of the US? The constitution of the US and the freedoms of the people far outweigh the majority of countries around the world.
Thanks for sharing the truth here, Iplaw.
It's going to be hard for some to buy into what you're saying.
The good thing is, once seeds of truth are planted they usually take root in most thinking & common sensed people.
Once that happens, there's no going back.
I started as a skeptic myself & you are up against many here.
They'll be learning, though.
I hope for their sakes, it's not too late, especially on this most important issue.
I've become, for good reason, quite an extremest on this issue & I'm sorry if that angers some people.
Where I personally, & recently, crossed over to extremism is after reviewing the gold mine of information here at these discussions & had to come to question if vaccinations actually work to prevent disease or save lives?
Look at reports through time, when one study concerning what's good for us, is later contradicted.
Then it changes again, back & forth.
I won't give examples because we know it happens all the time. It's clear. There's been a lot of guess work or plain deception that's created bogus reports since day one.
How are we to know who & what to trust?
We must question past studies on this most urgent issue due to dubious nature of those with vested & conflicted interests.
Maybe vaccines do work, I don't know?
If so, do the benefits "really" outweigh the bad?
We, parents & grandparents, do know vaccinations are a trigger to autism even though not completely to blame.
Dr. Karp talks of the "soup of toxins" in his prior article & they certainly are real & part of this equation, too.
They're also probably the catalyst in other disease we see rapidly on the increase.
It's time to right many wrongs that have been going on, unchecked, for far too long.
I would apreciate it if you would address me directly. To repost:
Part 1.
I think mofmars and dugmaze are doing an excellent job of showing exaclty why this movement is becoming dangerous.
It is one thing for people to question the safety of vaccines.
But these two, and I have seen this before on similar threads, are actually claiming that people do not die of infectious disease.
When people post them statistics saying the death toll from these diseases, they say those statistics are a lie. Mofmars states that because he doesn't know anyone who has ever died of infectious disease, than he doubts that it actually happens.
For this to be true, it is necessary for every governement, every health organization, in existance, in the world, to have colluded with pharmaceutical companies in order to claim that people died of diseases when they actually did not. Especially impressive considering that many of these statistics are from a time before pharmaceutical companies EVEN EXISTED.
This is the equivilant of Holocaust denial. They are simply trying to rewrite history and claim that millions upon millions of people who have died of infectious disease...
I repeat my invitation to these posters to come with me the next time I go on a volunteer mission to a third world hospital or orphanage. There you can see children dying of such diseases first hand.
By the way I do apreciate your well wishes, I appreciate that you are engaging in civil debate, I really do.
But I feel that to actually suggest, as you have, that infectious diseases do not kill people...i
So again, I apreciate that you are passionate, that you believe in your cause, and that you are kind in how you present your argument..
part 2:
My next mission will be in either the month of August or October through the Universidad de Yucatan for the orphanage Amor Y Vida in Merida, Mexico. We will be working with kids both at the orphanage and in the Hospital Regional del ISSSTE and the Hospital Regional de Alta Especialidad.
It is a 6-8 week program. You would have to pay for your own food and accomodations, though some people do live at the orphanage. You don't have to be a medical professional. There are volunteers, usually college students (which is how I started on the program) who do nothing but spend time with the kids and help take care of them.
http://www
Also, for those who believe vaccines are evil, I sure hope you aren't typing on a Microsoft computer! The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation is currently running one of, if not THE largest vaccination program in the world. They are paying for our trip- though we will be providing other health services, vaccines are a major part of it. This is a non profit organization, so I guess we're just evil and vaccinating kids to make them sick for fun, since there's no profit motive in this case!
My guess is that people are far less likely to be willing to give up their computer and computer software than they are to make their children forgo vacciantions
Marsha,
Have you considered that from where and from whom you get your information matters a great deal? Gilbert hypothesized and studied the idea that people accept automatically as true any new information (and found that this was in fact accurate) they take in. It is only with reflection and active cogntive effort that this new information can be judged and then either accepted or rejected.
By only reading people's moving stories and restricting yourself to sites that are not scientifically sound, you have not given yourself a fair shake to even assess the information. You came into these forums with your mind made up and all conversations with you have only served to further polarize your belief sets.
If you are genuinely interested in what is really known about vaccines and their efficacy and relative safety, then you have a personal obligation to read reputable sites that will counter what you've previously read. Then you owe it to yourself to really think about and weigh the evidence.
Please, as an easy start to reading information that counters the woo sites, read Do Vaccines Cause That? A Guide to Evaluating Vaccine Safety Concerns. You can get it online. If you are really interested in furthering your knowledge and not just in pushing a predetermined agenda, you'll do some homework.
Hi Kim,
Years ago, before I joined these debates at HuffPo, I had already been active in groups & forums concerning this issue.
I assure you I have done all home work, possible.
I was affiliated with many groups representing all important issues to our people but this one was close to my heart because it hit home.
I have many experiences from when I was a child to my own & now my granddaughters. I've met hundreds of others & heard countless tragic stories, while on this journey.
I've always been suspicious of vaccinations, even as a child & as I told you, have done extensive research that entailed both sides of the issue.
My reactivation back into this matter, since last April beginning with Jim Carrey's article, has brought with it a bank of new information. I added all that to what research I had already done, so now without a doubt, I know vaccinations are the culprit, many of us suspected.
The scientific & medical fields, along with many others, have to begin from scratch on this matter.
They have to!
Especially now that the sleeping giant on this one is waking up.
As for this you commented on below;
http://bra
I believe it's reputable & not a woo thing as you put it.
I have seen all sides of this matter, Kim, please believe that.
See Harvey Karp's Profile
You may not know if vaccines protect, but the evidence is clear and powerful..
Of course nutrition and sanitation have been very important, but as I said in my first blog, within a decade of introduction of each vaccine listed below, that specific terrible disease was almost eliminated from parent's fears:
"So many parents have become paralyzed with indecision that they’ve lost track of the fact that shots have saved millions of children (and adults) from disease, deformity and death:
*In the 1930’s, whooping cough’s painful strangulation was epidemic - in the 1940’s the vaccine became widely used - by the 1950’s whooping cough was uncommon.
*In the 1940’s, paralytic polio terrorized every family - in the 1950’s the vaccine became widely used - by the 1960’s polio was almost eradicated.
* In the 1950’s, measles caused thousands to suffer pneumonia, encephalitis and death - in the 1960’s the vaccine became widely used - by the 1970’s measles was rare.
* In the 1960’s, rubella was a common cause of stillbirth, deafness and mental retardation - in the 1970’s the vaccine became widely used - by the 1980’s birth defects from rubella had vanished.
* In the 1970’s, H flu meningitis and epiglottitis were seen every day across America - in the 1980’s the vaccine became widely used – by the1990’s deadly H flu was close to eliminated.
And similar stories can be told for
Maybe they have saved lives as you say, Dr. Karp.
We've seen those statistics many times before but it proves nothing.
We'll still be needing new & improved studies with strict oversite, from those we know have no vested interests, this time around.
After all that's transpired to date on this matter, we'll be needing a lot of proof in the whole matter.
Harvey,
Just posting numbers are not facts. How do the deniers put it, "correlation doesn't equal causation". How about some studies proving vaccines reduced deaths.
Remeber, just because you see deaths being prevented with your own eyes does not mean deaths were prevented. I believe they call that "availability heuristic ". I know, I've been schooled by the best.
1930's: Thimerosal started widespread use
1940's: first cases of autism documented
1950's: nothing
1960's: nothing
1970's: increase in vaccine schedules
1980's: autism starts abnormal increase
1980's.5: more vaccines added to schedule
1990's: autism rising faster than 1980's
2000: vaccines increase 260%
2003: autism ~1 in 150
I agree with you completely. We only get data sanctioned by big pharmacutical interests. Statistical analysis has shown that big pharma funds studies that increase profits and reduce liability for big pharma.
You have absolutely no idea how scientific research is done.
So again... you are honestly HONESTLY suggesting that every nation and every health organization in the history of the world is being paid off by big pharma to fudge numbers?
If that's the case, then you know what, we might as well give up on life. If what you are claiming is actually true...the
If you honestly believe that such a conspiracy is possible and is true...the
It's interesting to me, an autism outsider (I don't have any kids with autism) how many people attack even the moderate middle on this issue.
I say we need research that answers questions instead of just telling people they're wrong. I get attacked on side issues by people who seem bent on distracting and distorting, rather than illuminating.
All that proves to me is that a lot of people have something vested in the status quo. And that makes me more of a skeptic, not less.
More research is great. No problem with that. Plenty of research has already been done. Why not read some of that. The Handbook of Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders 3rd edition. It's only about 1500 pages and summarizes the vast literature that exists on autism. And when you've finished that you could read the slim by comparison The Neurology of Autism.
You don't get to suggest that there are hundreds of thousands of parents who blame vaccines for autism and not get called on it. Sorry. This is not one of your first experiences with this kind of comment section, so you should know that you weren't attacked. Your arguments were challenged. Did you expect that you'd post and everyone would just willy nilly agree you were right?
"You don't get to suggest that there are hundreds of thousands of parents who blame vaccines..
Dishonest. I suggested "thousands" with the same emphasis as "hundreds of thousands.
In any case, the exact number was _not my point_, and still is _not my point_! I was simply establishing that the number is large and indeterminate.
The fact that several people attacked that trivial non-point (while ignoring my actual point) shows me that a lot of folks are on a hair-trigger with this issue, and I wonder why that should be.
In The Tipping Point, the author talks about people who stopped smoking when they started taking certain anti-depressants. First it was considered a coincidence by their doctors. Then it was recognized as a correlation, but not a cause. Finally, they found out how the two were connected.
So, again here is my actual point, my argument, the part worth berating me for: Maybe it's not mercury. Maybe it's not a particular shot regimen. But we have too much evidence for it to be simply a coincidence, and yet too little to resolve the correlation.
Until we do, we can't expect parents to accept the word of anyone who simply says "There's nothing there."
Harvey.... how does something listed as a mental disorder cause a biological condition?
Wouldn't it be helpful, at this point, to stop calling this condition what it isn't and start calling it what it is?
see: http://ped
We served together on the Environmental Hazard Committee of the AAP Chapter II
One of us swallowed the Kool-Aid and one of us didn't.
Welcome, doctor.
Just what we needed here.
Another voice of reason & a doctor to boot. We're counting on many of you in the medical field coming forward & helping bring truth to our table.
Thanks for coming as this most urgent matter needs all the help we can get.
Your last comment is offensive. Find a more eloquent and less derisive way to demonstrate you think someone has sold out their integrity. And then be specific about it, because when you're impugning someone's character you ought to be able to say exactly what it is and why you have cause to do so.
http://www
Do you feel the same way about Dr. Karp telling us on one hand that adjusting the vaccination schedule has merit but then telling us "Skipping the flu shot, for example, may cause your child to be one of the 36,000 Americans who die from influenza this year, but it probably won't stop a flu outbreak (although it may help to reduce it)."?
A more snide response would have been to point out that based on the link, Stoller's statement, "One of us swallowed the Koo-Aid and one of us didn't", is absolutely correct. Of course I would say that without explaining exactly why.
The link is a "letter to the editor" written by Stoller himself. It is a response to an article in Pediatrics. In it Stoller buys into the concept that autism is an "epidemic" and not a shift in diagnostics (not even a mention of it). He also fully buys into the idea that mercury is an environmental trigger for autism (along with other heavy metals), going as far as to claim that "all available evidence" supports this. In the letter he appears to reject the genetic components of autism completely.
Kool-Aid indeed.
"..how does something listed as a mental disorder cause a biological condition?"
If you accept that anorexia is a mental disorders, then it is no great leap to see how it can lead to starvation and death.
Anxiety disorders, which are common in some PDDs, are known to lead to GI and other problems.
Cute but not relevant. anorexia IS the fear of gaining weight so not eating...A
See Harvey Karp's Profile
Hi Ken,
Sure, I well remember you being there for a while. But, I am not exactly sure what you are talking about. I said in an earlier blog ASD may affect other body systems, too.
What I am sure about is that many people are making a lot of money promoting hyperbaric oxygen therapy.
Nice picture of Dr Stoller and his chamber. Wont be drinking the kool aid on that one
Which we tried to no effect.
What exactly is meant by kool-aid? I heard this on another post and thought it was something racist.
Jonestown reference.
http://www
Cult members drank cyanide-laced Kool Aid.
No one can tell me what caused my son's autism. Until its cause has been determined, I have to look at everything in our environment skeptically. We have worked too hard to help him advance to risk regression because of a shot, preservative in a food, or a chemical in our environment. This debate can and will continue on until the cause for autism is determined. Until that time, as a parent, it is my job to protect and help my child.
Hear hear! Is your child on the GF-CF diet? It's one of the few treatments from which we have received immediate and measurable results.
THIMEROSOL CAUSES AUTISM
http://bra
WOW!
That was explosive, thank you. I love Robert Kennedy & thank him for helping truth out on this matter.
Now watch for all the deniers saying , "But the thimerosol was removed"
When we know it's still there in traces as well as it was never removed at the 95% rate when they said years ago, either.
The small traces are still there in some, now & they make no secret of it.
As for the flu vaccine, we're told we can go green & get them without the thimerosol but what about those unsuspecting souls that don't know it's in theirs?
Yes, because Robert Kennedy is reputable on this, because this link is reputable. No. Not. In the least.
Marsha,
Again, as long as you only frequent sites that are unbelievably wrong for so many reasons, you aren't giving this a fair shake. You're saying you are more interested in being emotionally swayed than in reading actual science.
Last time I checked Rolling Stones magazine was not a peer-reviewed scientific journal and robert kennedy is not a trained MD or scientist
common sense. Healthy, happy 2yr old fine the day before and the day of immunization shots. Evening after shots, child fever spikes, convulses and child is never the same again. Autistic. coincidence? common sense=shots had something to do with it.
This is your own experience?
No, not common sense. Correlation does not equal causation. Just because two things happen at around the same time does not mean they are related.
With tens of thousands of children experiencing autistic regression, there are guaranteed to be thousands of regression episodes that occur shortly after a vaccination, even without a causal link. Dr. Karp showed that in his previous blog.
There are plenty of parents who have seen the exact same regression at other times. Of course, they have nothing to be "warriors" about so we don't hear from them as much. Several of them have commented on this site though.
The fact that ASD manifest outside of one or other external insult does not negate the possibility of one or other compounds or circumstances to exacerbate ASD. I get that that's one of the CDC's favorite arguments but even they know it is false and only being used because it sounds logical. As an argument it bears striking resemblance to "car accidents don't happen because of speeding, peopel speed all the time and don't have an accident. Car accidents are caused by people running their cars into other peoples cars.
That's the real difficulty with this subject, isn't it? Establishing most vaccine adverse effects is similar to establishing vaccine efficacy- both are demonstrated with statistics. If I ask you to show me an individual case report of a person who did not develop a given disease because a vaccine averted it, you won't be able to produce one, because efficacy isn't provable for individual cases (well, technically it depends on what you accept as "proof" but let's say >95% confidence) but it does declare itself in large populations.
Likewise, dismissing individual cases of potential adverse reactions as "merely anecdotal" is unscientific. By that reasonng, a person could go through the records of every smoker who ever died of lung cancer, find some confounding factor in each case history which obscures the link between smoking and cancer, and at the end of the very long list, declare with a satisfied smile "See? You couldn't show me a single case which prooves the link."
The truth is that cases like the one kobio posted above may or may not be part of a useful body of evidence with something to say about vaccine adverse effects.
My opinion: people with stories like this should be accessioned into a study (if they are willing) to see whether any trends declare themselves, and if so- whether any mechanisms can be posited.
It is very possible your child has Mitochondrial Disorder. There is a large percentage of people with MD that have autism. This is because any fever can, cause autism in this population. Therefore, it's possible your child would have developed autism anyway after the first time he got really sick, but the immunizations sped up the process. MD is rarely tested for because it requires a small surgical procedure be performed.
That being said, your story sounds compelling and shouldn't be completely disregarded. The question remains, was the vaccine the cause or the catalyst?
-Patrick
See Harvey Karp's Profile
Dear kobio,
I know it can seem logical that two things are related when one happens right after the other...it certainly can be coincidence. In case you did not read the first part of my blog:
"Approximately 24,000 children are diagnosed with autism every year and in about 1/3 of those cases (8000/year…150/w) normally developing kids show abrupt deterioration (so called “regressive” autism). Regression usually appears between a child’s 1st and 3rd birthdays, a period during which they get shots 4 separate times. Do the calculations and you quickly realize that, every year, over 600 children will spiral into autism during the four 1-week periods that follow these 4 shot visits… just by pure, utter, random chance.
Such a high chance of coincidence means that a parent who hears about 4-5 toddlers (or even 4-500 toddlers) who worsen after shots may easily be fooled into assuming that the cause of the autism was the shots...bu
But not without reason for concern. the fact that it is certainly not the only trigger or exacerbation (It is clearly NOT the "cause") and that it may be coincidental does not eliminate the possibility that it is not coincidental and that it may be one of many contributing factors.
Dr. Karp - Your reasoning is impeccable. Your logic sound. Your message clear and compelling. The problem is there is a group of people who have so much personally wrapped up in the "immunizations cause autism" meme that they simply will not listen to a reasoned argument. These people would much rather listen to a Jenny McCarthy or other entertainer who has just enough information to be dangerous than a physician who has spent years developing a reasoned and logical position. This is the America of the 21st century. Thank you anyway. It was refreshing to hear a rational argument presented on this subject.
couldn't have said it better myself.
It's sad - some people will believe the most sensationalist garbage solely because it is so earth-shattering and then search for facts to support their belief system. Any attempt to suggest otherwise is considered anathema.
Sounds like a certain political party since the turn of the millenium, doesn't it?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
