End of the Innocence: McCain, Obama and Vaccines. Oh My!

Last week, I purchased a bag of Brach's Autumn Mix for my son Liam. Even thought it was mid-October, I gave in to his sweet tooth's request with the caveat that he would have to make the whole bag of delicious candy corns and pumpkins last until Halloween day.

From time to time, I could hear the kitchen drawer open and the bag rustle. Being the clever boy he is, he found a way to get into the bag and touch the candy but not eat it all himself.

Years of Applied Behavioral Analysis therapy for his autism transformed him into a child constantly seeking positive reinforcement. He craves it almost as much as he craves sweet treats.

Lucky for me he also doles it out.

Over the last week, every time I do something he deems praise worthy, I get a candy corn.

"Mom, you got me to school on time today. You get a candy corn." Or "Mom, you made my pot roast for dinner. You get a candy corn." Or "Mom, you brought us to see Beverly Hills Chihuahua again. You get a candy corn."

I haven't eaten this many candy corns in a long time.

As we were sitting on the couch Friday afternoon, Liam turned to me and said, "Mom, what does innocent mean?"

"It means that you didn't do something bad. It means that you are not guilty. Do you know what guilty means?"

"Yes, that means you did something bad like eat all the candy corns when your mom said don't do it."

"Right. It means you knew something was bad and you did it anyway."

Hmmm.

I went to investigate the bag. Sure enough, there were nine candy corns left.

Someone felt guilty.

"Liam, are you the one who is guilty of eating the candy corns?"

"No mom. I am innocent. You have been eating the candy corns because you did a good job. Remember? You are the guilty one."

My child with autism has learned the art of spin -- twisting situations where he is clearly guilty around to blame someone else for his actions while simultaneously declaring his innocence, maybe he is destined to run for office.

Last week, I tuned in to the Presidential Debates with all the enthusiasm I usually reserve for the Superbowl. I even popped a bowl of popcorn. For political junkies like me, historical elections like this make for great entertainment.

Lo and behold, both candidates not only mentioned the word autism but actually debated the health issue. McCain indicated autism issues would be an integral part of his Administration's efforts. Obama almost dismissed McCain's comments as pandering since McCain would be calling for a governmental spending freeze stating the amount of money required to effectively address autism issues would be astronomical. Watching genuine banter for votes on the most important health topic in my personal life on national television was almost too much to bear.

That said, taking on autism is a significant task. Any candidate effectively addressing the issues is tantamount to Kennedy's youthful exuberance declaring that we would have man on the moon in 10 years or Reagan's life experience and wisdom that challenged Communism head on.

Presidential leadership is required to cut through bureaucracy, set goals and direct governmental agencies to accomplish difficult tasks. To plant our flag on the moon. To tear down that wall. With effective leadership, we clearly have the ability to Accomplish The Impossible as American citizens.

One percent of our nation's children -- one child in every 68 families, one in every 94 boys -- are being diagnosed with this lifelong disorder. Will our next Commander in Chief require his administration to turn over every stone, from environmental to genetic, to find both causes and effective treatments to restore our children's health? Will the next Administration set serious goals of reversing the rate of autism diagnosis by the end of their term or just declare autism a national health emergency and let it go at that?

Both candidates are on record acknowledging the autism epidemic. Both are on record stating that something significant must be done to address it. Both recognize that autism was woefully swept under the rug by the last three administrations. Both are aware that there is a huge community out there in America that needs their dedication and direction addressing these issues through the very agencies that they will have the power to control once they inhabit the West Wing -- the CDC, the NIH, the HHS, the EPA and FDA.

Both candidates have gone on record stating that we must do the necessary research to determine what is causing the increase in autism. Out on the campaign trail, Obama has indicated that he believes there should be more environmental research but when pressed with regard to vaccines specifically, he stated that he didn't believe in selective vaccination and would do nothing to alter the existing vaccine program. Conversely, McCain commented earlier this year that he believes that the rise in autism diagnosis might have something to do with vaccines, specifically those that contain Thimerosal, and that it should be addressed. In fact, this is an issue McCain has repeatedly addressed in his role as Senator. Senator Obama has not.

Senator Obama is a man that offers youthful exuberance to set aggressive goals to address the issues of autism.

Senator McCain is a man that offers life experience that would aggressively address the issues of autism.

So, what kind of man does it take to direct governmental agencies and pharmaceutical companies to stop purposefully injecting American children with a neurotoxin?

Four years ago, President George Bush and Senator John Kerry stated that if elected they would support the removal of Thimerosal from vaccines for children and pregnant women. Once re-elected, despite a very vocal request from the American Public that he make good on campaign rhetoric by issuing an Executive Order banning the use of the neurotoxin, President Bush flip-flopped by stating his Administration would continue to knowingly and purposefully inject mercury into children until at least 2009.

Thimerosal is an antiseptic solution whose main ingredient is mercury that must be disposed of as hazardous waste. According to its own Material Safety Data Sheet exposure to the substance by children can lead to neurological damage and mental retardation. The packaging on the label of this ingredient bears a skull and crossbones graphic and yet, it is still routinely used in vaccines that make their way into the bodies of children nationwide on a daily basis -- especially during flu season.

Regardless of whether or not Thimerosal causes autism directly, or contributes to the development of autism in some way, what baffles me is why intelligent human beings inject a known neurotoxin in any amount into a child with a developing brain and body for any reason when there are alternative vaccines on the market without it.

Is our government that desperate to preserve a 50 cent per dose profit margin for the Pharmaceutical companies that they will not order its removal?

Why does the removal of Thimerosal from vaccines demand Presidential leadership?

Because even though the agencies that fall under the Executive Branch recommended that Thimerosal be removed from all vaccines for children and pregnant women nearly a decade ago in 1999, they didn't require it.

President Bush is guilty of allowing this practice to continue with every child or fetus that received a Thimerosal-containing vaccine during his second administration. He had a chance to improve vaccines safety and vehemently refused to do so.

Moving forward -- both candidates are fully aware of the controversy. To date, neither 2008 candidate has been brave enough to specifically committ to err on the side of caution and remove Thimerosal from vaccines for children and pregnant women. Not that people haven't asked, but it has been a while since we heard either candidate address this issue in public.

Jenny McCarthy's article on the front cover of US Weekly this week expresses her disappointment that McCain wouldn't meet with her back in May and has lamented publicly that the Obama Campaign won't call her back on this issue either in the past few weeks. Rebecca Estepp, a mom from San Diego, sent in her vaccine safety requests to both candidates as well. While Obama didn't address her concerns regarding Thimerosal or individualized health choices when it comes to vaccines, McCain did.

Despite repeated requests, calls and emails through every avenue, I, too, have had no response from the Obama campaign on this issue. However, I did have the opportunity to meet personally, face to face, with Senator McCain in my hometown of Baton Rouge last April. I asked him my questions and he answered that he understood these issues well and if elected he promised to clean house, making changes from the top down in those agencies that have ignored this issue for so long.

So who cares?

When it comes down to it whether we pull Thimerosal from vaccines or alter the schedule, if we lose our civil liberties along the way, it doesn't really matter. While Senator McCain didn't directly answer Rebecca Estepp's specific question, he zeroed in on what it comes down to: choice. That focus on informed choice should resonates with members within the vaccine injured community, for the parents of young children and for those living in communities, like New Jersey, where vaccine mandates are taking hold.

Why? Because as humans, as clarified by the United Nations, we have a right to informed consent when it comes to medical procedures.

If a woman has a sovereign right to her body to the point that she can choose abortion, how can our Government remotely believe they have the right to force her to get a flu shot when she is pregnant?

It is the End of the Innocence, gentlemen, and for the last ten years America's children have been unnecessarily poisoned by these fairy tales of safe vaccines.

As you enter the next administration with your eyes wide open, this armchair warrior hopes that my son Liam will have an opportunity to personally reward one of you for a job well done and hand you a candy corn for being brave enough, man enough, to issue the Executive Order requiring pharmaceutical companies to once and for all end the practice of injecting neurotoxic, hazardous materials into America's children and for preserving our choice to exercise our rights for informed consent.

Comments

[Promotor-Fidei]

While I sympathize with families that have children with autism, I don't understand why vaccine safety should be the litmus test for the candidate with the best autism plan.

I've been following the issue since my grandson was diagnosed with autism, and I've shared in my son's and daughter-in-law's daily struggles. After comparing the candidates' official stances on autism I found the Obama plan is far superior to anything McCain has published. Obama's plan appears more likely to help people with autism now than McCain's, due mainly to Obama's plan to appoint a federal Autism Coordinator to assist with developing sound autism policy. As I understand McCain, he is proposing full funding of IDEA and "portability of federal special education dollars" (a wordy way of saying "vouchers"). The former is in Obama's plan and the latter has almost no chance of succeeding in a Democrat-controlled Congress.

Ms. Reynolds, I appreciate your passion, and I mean no disrespect. If I was a single-issue voter, I would probably lean toward the candidate with the best plan to serve families now, especially when positions like "cantbehav­ingwiththi­s'" are so clearly stated. It seems the better measures are to weigh what we do know about autism more heavily than what we don't know or what we "feel" about vaccines and to consider the candidate with the clearer handle on the issue over the one who does not.

Wishing you and your family well,

Promotor-Fidei

[Keys2UA]

I am not a single issue voter but some issues in my life have greater importance than others. I am very concerned about an evolution where government can force you to submit to a medical procedure.

The issue outlined in my post is the issue of choice when it comes to vaccination. It has nothing to do with the candidate's positions on autism. In 2008 both candidates have presented comprehensive plans for addressing autism issues in the next administration whoever wins....an­d an autism advocate for over a decade it is a wonderful thing to see both parties really paying attention!

But informed choice for vaccination and autism are not the same subject. The ramifications of forced vaccination will reach far and wide and impact all of us. Vaccination is a medical procedure. People have a right to both informed consent and refusal. If you believe that vaccines are safe and effective for your kid, vaccinate them. But if you have serious concerns that due to your family's health history vaccines might trigger autism in your child or paralysis in your 12 year old daughter if she receives Gardasil, or any other reason, you should be able to exercise informed consent. It is a difficult choice for a parent to make. I am glad that more parents are starting to realize vaccination is medical procedure with lasting results that should be taken just as seriously as something like surgery and not just a little rite of passage for toddlers.

[Capitalist13]

This has been your best blog thus far.

Vaccines are safer now, because of parents like Shelley. The world is more aware of autism. I saw one of your blue puzzle piece bumper stickers (Autism Speaks) on an American Made Cadillac, yesterday. Keep up the good work.

[chrissyks]

I have spent a lot of time thinking and writing about Sarah Palin as the new "advocate for special needs families." Please read my blog about it. I think all parents of kids with autism should consider these points before voting.
http://hubpages.com/hub/5-Reasons-Why-Sarah-Palin-does-NOT-Represent-This-Special-Needs-Family

[ak1999]

Please do not vote on a single issue but on ALL the issues. I am the parent of 2 boys with Autism. Do I think vaccines should be up to the parent? YES! And guess what -- THEY ALREADY ARE! No one held a gun to my head and forced me to vaccinate my kids. In America if you don't want to vaccinate, you sign a form that says you have declined it. That is what parents who choose to can do. As for changing the schedule..­. Yes that would be ideal.

Perhaps Obama has not seen all the info on this, I am not convinced his lack of response means he would not support changing vaccines. John McCain would cut the budget for every school program they have, and probably force us to find our own insurance -- which would Bankrupt our family. We cannot simply look at this one incident and decide that McCain is the best choice. In the debate McCain dropped the Autism issue like a catch phrase, and Obama came back with the answer that we would need to FUND the research!! Not just talk about solving the problem and then send more $$ to fight a war in Iraq. Obama is the right choice for the BIG picture. I cannot bear to think of what another 4 years of Republican policies will do to our childrens' schools and insurance coverage. Please visit www.barackobama.com to be informed of his proposed plans for our country.

[Keys2UA]

No one held a gun to your head and forced you to vaccinate your kid. That's great.

But maybe you don't live in MS where they don't have the same choices you do. Maybe you don't live in NJ either where they just mandated flu vaccines for all kids and also have a proposal in place where they will begin tracking children through their social security numbers after the born on date of 1/1/98. Those who aren't caught up, will be.

So parents who are concerned that their older children had vaccine reactions will be forced to submit their siblings to the same medical procedure.

Right now you have that choice, and that opportunity, but unless we are careful and protect our civil liberties to informed consent, those days may be waning. NJ is the test case state.

Obama's campaign has seen all this information. Over and over and over again. And he has been very clear. He doesn't support selective vaccination. He doesn't hide it.

Not picking one over the other. Just sayin'. It might seem like a little thing...bu­t vaccines aren't a rite of passage. They are a medical procedure. We need to preserve our informed consent.

Slow them down and spread them out all you want. When you lose the right to informed consent, all of that is moot.

[typicalpol]

either one will probably end up selling out to Autism Speaks

[Midnightrain]

Bravo! I have tears. Keep up the good work!

[wiedb]

Our world is filled with neurotoxins - whether it's thimerasol, aluminum, MSG, formaldahyde,(all found in vaccines) mycotoxins from moldy homes/schools, additives in our food, chemicals in our homes - our KIDS ARE NOT SAFE! Getting rid of thimerasol is a great first step - aluminum in vaccines needs to go, also. Testing vaccine's ingredients for safety and for their reaction together would be useful. This hasn't been done!

For those that think the science isn't there supporting a connection between vaccines/autism check out www.safeminds.org - read the research for yourself, check the link between the government's claims that vaccines are safe & the conflict of interest of their researchers - most of whom are paid by drug companies. Check out the Simpsonwood transcripts.

FYI - as a member of the IL State Senate - Sen Obama voted FOR a bill giving parents philosophical choice in March of 1999 - it was unanimous. Unfortunately, the bill died in the House.

[suzannemaria]

It is no surprise that politicians have figured out that autism families are a huge voting block, especially when the grandparents are factored too. So, we can expect a certain amount of pandering just like any voting block can. Just because John McCain says he is going to do something does not guarentee that he will. For instance, McCain says one of his top priorities is an across the board spending freeze. Therefore, if he is going to do that how can he produce the billions he promises in special needs spending? That question was posed to him by Obama in the debate and went unanswered.

I will not be a single issue voter based on what either candidate SAYS he will do for autism. I have to consider all of my other concerns and values as well. For instance, I regulary vote for my state rep., a republican. Everything we have for our autistic kids in this state can be directly or indirectly linked to his efforts. This man is a suburban moderate republican, which is why I am able to vote for him. Were he a far right, blur the lines between church and state, morality police type conservative I would not vote for him, no matter how good he may be on autism. Why? Because I believe such policies are bad for the state and the whole country. I have to consider not only my own interests, but what I think is best for my country.

[lisab-MS]

The fact is that vaccines strengthen, not weaken, the immune system. This is true even for newborn infants. On the other hand, a natural infection clearly can weaken a child’s immune system. For example, a previously healthy child with chickenpox (varicella) may become infected with dangerous bacteria, resulting in an infection severe enough to require hospitalization or even cause death. Similarly, a child with measles infection is more likely to develop middle ear infections.

I got this quote from the article I linked to. I actually question that natural infection is...less effective than artificial stimulation of antibodies by a vaccines. Am I reading it right? That to have a vaccine induced response is..better­..than to have a natural response.

So..we seem no closer to an answer from parents across this country.
1 in 150 diagnosed with autism. If you factor out increased diagnostic criteria- that is still an EPIDEMIC.
1 in 6 diagnosed with a learning disability.
asthma on the rise, juvenile diabetes- is our choice disease or life long chronic disability??

Yes!! the environment has gotten more toxic: food additives, PCBs etc etc.
Yes!! Many believe there are families that genetically have risk factors.

But what else has changed in the last 35 years to explain these numbers?
I ask as a mother. Concerned for disease and vaccine risk factors. Oh yeah- and then the law that says I do not have a choice for my daughter.

[cantbehavingwiththis]

to continue..­.

Moreover, when an immune system is in the process of reacting to one specific pathogen, the entire organism is weakened, especially the immune system's ability to respond to different pathogens. Therefore opportunistic pathogens can multiply, avoid detection by the overworked immune system, and produce a productive infection of their own. 3% of chicken pox cases are fatal not because of varicella virus, but because the immune system's response to VV allows bacterial pathogens, particularly in the inner ear, to colonize, infect, spread (especially to the spine), and kill.

Conversely, vaccines produce a very specific immune reaction. They "inform" cytolitic T-cells as to what a pathogen "looks like", so that these cells, in the future, will be able to recognize that pathogen and destroy it before a full-scale immune system reaction needs to be launched. Thus the fatal "over-reaction" of the immune system is avoided, both by the vaccination and by any further exposure to the disease. The benefits are gained and the risks are avoided.

[lisab-MS]

I appreciate that very clear explanation. I plan to copy your response. Thank you for taking the time.

Is there an explanation (I am not being sarcastic- a sincere question) why there are times when a vaccinated person will develop a disease? Other than it being a long period of time since their last booster? I understand there is a concept of herd immunity. But still, shouldn't a vaccinated person not develop a disease they have been vaccinated for?

[cantbehavingwiththis]

*and then the law that says I do not have a choice for my daughter.*

This is because infectious diseases are _infectious_. They are not a health hazard to one specific person, such as cancer or heart disease, but are a risk to the community at large. You may consider the risk of your daughter acquiring measles is sufficiently low to desire to not vaccinate her, but if you do not vaccinate her, she acquires measles, and she passes it on to someone else who is unvaccinated because they have not had the choice -- and there are many, many people in the world who do not have the choice -- and that person dies, they have died because of your refusal to vaccinate your child when you had the opportunity. The law is responsible for all people under it, not a few. You have every right to risk your life by doing any number of unhealthy things, but you have no right to risk _other_ people's lives by doing unhealthy things. That is why getting vaccinations is mandatory, while, say, eating a low-fat diet is not.

[lisab-MS]

And I suppose that is where we come to a point where we are stumped until the true cause or number of causes is discovered.

See- those who believe- truly and deeply that vaccination is at least one of the causes of autism, that there are vaccine side effects and reactions, brain-swelling and death associated with vaccines- even if it is a very small "statistically insignificant number" then they see that argument totally opposite. Why should my child be the collateral damage?? If I can alternate the schedule, delay some vaccines, choose to not vaccinated for some (not all are mandatory- some are recommended only) look at my family history and see a contraindication for some then I do not see myself as a threat to society.

One day perhaps we will find the answer.

Children have been injured. What the majority of the selective, delayed, non-vax community would like is not to have this one size fits all schedule.

Totally take out the autism component of the argument for the moment. That in and of itself is not a unreasonable request.

[ThinkForYourself2]

Autism is only one of many potential horrific side effects of vaccines. Imagine seeing your baby becoming paralyzed, losing their vision, having violent seizures or even dying. These are all known and admitted side effects of vaccines. Walk through a grade school and see how many children have been harmed by these vaccines. These days will go down in history as mankinds darkest days I assure you. It's a time where people turned a blind eye to children harmed because it was too inconvenient for them to care or it might effect that stock price of that drug company they've invested in.

Only a sick and disturbed person would try telling a mother of a harmed child that the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks. You have sold your soul and I really pity you and people like you.

Read some of the thousands of medical research papers right now debunking the myths that vaccines are safe.

http://www.909shot.com/

http://www.novaccine.com/

[nowGo4ward]

Are vaccinated individuals less likely to pass along a disease they are exposed to?

I would think they would be just as capable of spreading "germs" even if they are less likely to develop a "natural" case of the disease.

Couldn't they be even more likely to transmit a disease because the symptoms will be masked as something milder?

I'm not comfortable with the assumption that "mandating" chronic suffering is more acceptable than risking the "infectious" type, especially since that seems to target genically or environmentally vulnerable individuals for suffering, and there also seems to be a closed-eye approach to evaluating the adverse side of an intervention and a simultaneous overrating of the efficacy.

Shouldn't the dialog be about finding a better way to boost the health all of individuals in the population (even if some interventions don't directly generate profit for any specific industry), not mandating one approach, and shouldn't vaccinations be available for those who want them with full disclosure of risks and degree of efficacy?

[ThinkForYourself2]

Since most of us wacky health-conscious folks like to know the ingredients of the foods we eat wouldn't it be great if we knew the ingredients of the vaccines injected directly into the bloodstream of our tiny infants who have yet to evolve their immune systems?

Aborted Fetal Tissue
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
Aluminum Hydroxide
Guinea Pig Embryo
Ammonium Sulfate
Live Viruses
Polysorbate 80 & 20
MSG
Aspartame
etc.......­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­.......


You wouldn't dump this stuff down your toilet because you'd be arrested but the medical industry and government wants to dump it directly into the bloodstream of our babies and want parents to just shut up and take it without objections? If harm does come about as a result of the vaccines they also want parents of these little injured souls to just shut up because it's all done for the public good and there will always be collateral damage? No sir, we will fight this battle until the battle is won, believe me. This fight will not end until we have full informed consent and choice. Let the people decide what’s right for themselves and their children. The government does not own our children and we will not allow them to be used as someone’s medical experiment.

http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.htm

[Leedox]

I'm sorry Shelley that your son is Austistic. It is a disorder that has wreaks havoc on all involved.

Australia banned thimerosal in 1999. My son was born in 2001 and received his MMR at age one. In Sept 2003 he was diagnosed Autistic. Parents of Autistic children are divided on this issue in the US and some other countries but every parent that I have met here that has a child 9 or younger knows for a fact that no vaccine in Australia caused their child's Autism.

Sometimes the hardest thing about Autism is the loss of hope. Believing that Autism is caused by a vaccine is misguided hope and when confronted with all the scientific evidence that vaccines do not cause Autism, one is forced to give up some of that hope and it is very painful.

I hope that whoever wins this election will provide families of Autistic children the necessary help and hope that they need.

Good luck with Liam, it sounds like he is doing well. I would give anything to hear my sons voice.

[Keys2UA]

I can't necessarily prove my son's autism was caused by vaccines..­but I personally believe it to be so. I have not seen convincing evidence that it hasn't happened or couldn't happen. Additionally, I don't believe that Thimerosal is the only culprit within the vaccine program. It's a nasty substance and one would think you could stop sticking it in kids but thedebate has waxed on now for nearly a decade.

My children will not be getting any more vaccines unless they choose to do so as an adult. I have researched them extensively and researched the diseases extensively. I do believe in the theory of vaccination but don't approve of the products that are currently on the market and as such, have decided not to put them into my kids. It is a scary position for a parent to be in and it makes me nervous. That said, I have made, and exercised, my choice.

With regard to the debate, there are areas where autism and vaccines safety can overlap but they are two distinct circles in the Venn diagram of life. I became interested in vaccine safety because I believe unsafe vaccines contributed to my kids autism. But they are two separate issues.

I maintain that regardless of whether or not vaccines are in fact one day proven to contribute to autism, it is just ridiculous to put neurotoxic, hazardous waste material whose product label contains a skull and crossbones sign for poison on it into our babies.

[lisab-MS]

continuation of previous
I am aware of the phasing out of thimerosal and I was disappointed that it did not directly result in reduced rates of autism.
Disappointed because I believed very strongly in the connection but also because it meant that 1 in 150 children is still being diagnosed and we don't seem to have a strong answer as to why. It seems the prevalence of autism should be causing public outrage.

While I am completely open to hearing a credible alternative argument: the environment or genetics I would like a reasonable explanation as to why it is so unreasonable to be uncomfortable with a vaccine schedule that 35 years ago contained more like 10-13 doses of 4-5 vaccines and there was an incidence of autism more in the range of 1-10,000 and today is closer to 48 doses of 14 by age six. Why are those who believe a link may be there so...stupi­d and clinging to false hope?
Why can't there be some price to pay for being that manipulative of our infants immature immune systems?
Where are the double blind studies that compare a non vaccination group and a vaccinated group over a period of time?
I am a bit insulted by the insinuation that those who believe vaccines or the schedule or the ingredients are somehow linked need to just "let go". Find another tree to bark up..etc.

[cantbehavingwiththis]

*Where are the double blind studies that compare a non vaccination group and a vaccinated group over a period of time?*

As a virologist myself, I can tell you that the reason for this is that clinicians and researchers who design such studies are not willing to subject the unvaccinated group to the risks associated with not receiving vaccinations. Although we are privileged to live in a country and a time where deaths by most infectious disease are rare, they do still occur, as the two unvaccinated children who died of measles last month in the hospital where I work would tell you, if they could. The reason why they are not widespread is because almost everyone is vaccinated. To subject a large group of children -- and it would have to be large, to have any statistical relevance -- to the risks of acquiring potentially fatal infectious diseases in order to test if vaccines have an effect on a disease which has not been firmly linked with vaccinations is not something anyone who has taken a Hippocratic Oath would be willing to undergo.

I am not saying that the potential connection of autism and other disease to vaccinations should not be studied. It should be. But removing vaccinations from any segment of the population is not the way to go about it -- not unless you want to start seeing children dying of measles and diphtheria, rubella and pertussis, polio and mumps like they used to.

[lisab-MS]

Hi cantbehavi­ngwiththis­,
I am just learning the ropes of posting here. I thank you for you comment to that specific question.
I would counter by saying that there are many in the selective,­delayed,an­d non vax community that would be willing to volunteer if scientists were open to that kind of study.
There are many caring, educated parents who feel as they look at each vaccine in the schedule that the risks associated with the disease are lower than the risks associated with the vaccine.
I would say chicken pox is an example. I had chicken pox as a child and now I have a life-long immunity. Why is there a MANDATORY is many states vaccine for this??? I (as another poster said) believe in the theory of vaccination but in practice today there seem some flaws. We do not know the potential effects of mandating an entire generation of children to have a vaccine for a disease that was rarely fatal. (I do not actually have numbers- that I would have to look up)
Many in the selective, delayed community are not trying to throw the baby out with the bathwater but make safe decisions based on their knowledge of their child and family medical history.

[suzannemaria]

My child, who happens to have an autism diagnosis, makes astonishingly low levels glutathione. A person with glutathione levels this low is unable to remove toxins from his body in the way the average person can. This is basic biochemistry. A very mainstream test also shows that he has myelin basic protein anti-bodies, which means that his white blood cells constantly attack his brain. This means he has autoimmune disorder. Now, who wants to tell me that it is safe to continually inject this child with known neurotoxins and viruses?

As for the scientific studies, see Rep. Dr. David Welton's (R-FL) comments on the quality of the studies the government relies on. He sat on the congressional committee that looked into the CDC's handling of autism. To say the least, he was not impressed. Dr. Welton has no personal connection to autism. He's a doctor and congressman that reviewed the "proof" of safety and all he found was poorly done research.

[lisab-MS]

I have been a part of this debate for about 8 years. It was fall 2000 when my very dear friend called me to let me know that her 2 year old son, who showed signs of regressing and losing language, had been diagnosed with autism. She asked if I would be interested in being trained to become one of his Applied Behavioral Analysis therapists. I was and I became one. I also became entrenched in learning whatever I could about autism, what could have led to it, why it was on the rise, etc.
One thing I would like to say immediately is that our tone needs to be one of respect. I have many times been given an attitude that to believe as I do I must be stupid or uninformed, hanging on to hopeless threads. I do my best to convey my opinion with the upmost respect for others. I know they have their facts and opinions and have made their decision based on those things. We are moms and friends and aunts and dads and grandparents and neighbors. It is not likely that we are coming from anywhere but that of extreme concern and care.

[ThinkForYourself2]

Mercury and aluminum in vaccines are good for a growing brain and nervous system. Healthy is the word that comes to mind.

http://www.vaclib.org/

[cantbehavingwiththis]

As a virologist myself, and as the daughter of a neuropsychologist who studies autism, I can assure you that there are no credible studies that show the thimerosal in vaccines is even correlated to autism, or any other health problem, in a statistically significant way, let alone that it is a causative agent.

I fully agree with you that more work needs to be done on this issue. I am more tied into autism research than most because my mother is one of the many scientists who are working on this issue, and the number of children who are born with autism is increasing at a terrifying rate. But I question your choice of candidates based on this issue alone -- McCain has declared he will enact a spending freeze, should he become president. Government grants for basic or clinical science are already lower than they've been in a decade, so a spending freeze would, at best, fail to improve them. Funding would likely decrease, as it always does under a Republican president. How, then, would we come closer to understanding the causes of autism, or be able to improve the lives of autistic children and adults?

[hankm]

I don't understand this point of view.

You seem to believe that a lack of studies proving that mercury-filled vaccines are harmful overrides common sense.

Mercury, as I'm sure you know, is one of the most toxic elements there is. Why would anyone in their right mind inject it into a little kid?

And why would anyone wait for a study, when it is patently obvious that vaccines with Thimerosal are bad for your health?

[cantbehavingwiththis]

Mercury interferes with biological functions because it binds to proteins, primarily to sulfur atoms of thiol ligands. A biological organism, however, has a great many ways of counteracting the effect of damaged proteins, so, like all toxins, a certain amount of mercury must be present in the organism before detrimental effects on a physiological level are seen. The levels of mercury produced by amount of thimerosal present in vaccines are way below the levels necessary to produce a physiological effect. Given that common sense would therefore lead us to conclude that the mercury injected into children with thimerosal­-containin­g vaccines is negligible on a physiological level, yes, studies would be needed to prove otherwise. No studies have. All studies done with a sufficiently high sample size as to be statistically relevant have shown no correlation between thimerosal and any physiological effects whatsoever.

As several other posters have pointed out, all childhood vaccines available in the United States are available without thimerosal. As someone who works closely with the clinicians who deliver vaccines, I can assure you that the majority of vaccines offered automatically in the United States are ones which do not contain thimerosal. Thimerosal­-containin­g vaccines have been phased out in the United States since 1999, and the incidence of those diseases which thimerosal has been linked to has increased, rather than decreased. Similarly, in many European countries thimerosal has been outlawed from vaccines, and again the incidence of diseases such as autism and ADHD has continued to increase.

[cantbehavingwiththis]

to continue..­.

I do not support putting thimerosal in vaccines, and hope that the United States continues to phase it out until it is outlawed like it is in many parts of Europe. But to say that it is "patently obvious" that vaccines with thimerosal are bad for your health is patently untrue, as it is anything but.

Worrying about a product in a vaccine which has no proven ill effects AND is in the process of being phased out anyway distracts from the main issue, which is that autism is a horrible disease which is not being given the attention it deserves. Misinformation does not help, it only hinders.