The judges in today's ruling said that years of scientific research have conclusively found no connection between autism and childhood vaccines. Thousands of families who believe in a link have sought compensation from the government's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.The Huffington Post put it less gently:"The decision is very consistent with current science and evidence related to vaccines," said Georgia Winson, head of The Autism Program of Illinois. "This has been a concern expressed by many families, and we really commend families for bringing their concerns to the scientific community. We hope that this decision is going to bring greater unity in the autism community."
Given the divisive nature of this debate, and the entrenched views of many parents often desperate to find a explanation for their child's disorder, that's not likely to happen.
The special masters who decided the case expressed sympathy for the families, some of whom have made emotional pleas describing their children's conditions, but the rulings were blunt: There's little if any evidence to support claims of a vaccine-autism link.Meanwhile, as cited on the Age of Autism site, several autism organizations which believe strongly in an autism/vaccine link responded to the finding. Among those groups, somewhat, surprisingly, was the huge non-profit Autism Speaks:The evidence "is weak, contradictory and unpersuasive," concluded Special Master Denise Vowell. "Sadly, the petitioners in this litigation have been the victims of bad science conducted to support litigation rather than to advance medical and scientific understanding" of autism.
Today the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ruled that the combination MMR vaccine -- with and without the preservative thimerosal -- did not contribute to three particular children's autism. These latest rulings are limited, and do not mitigate the need for further scientific investigation.The Chicago Tribune concludes that findings by the Special Masters of the Vaccine Court are unlikely to change much in the controversial autism world. My guess: they're 100% correct.
I am sure you’ll get many replies to this entry, so I will make mine short. This is what the courts decided, regardless of this or that, this is what we all must deal with for the better or worse. There is no sense arguing their ruling since I do not believe they will change it.
Bottom line? More science needs to be there, for all of us.
Bottom line? More science needs to be there, for all of us.
I think that is a statement that everyone can agree with.
I hope the findings are going to shift the balance in the autism world. Hopefully we can move beyond a strictly genetic vs vaccine debate and move on to the something new, like the upcoming genetic vs environment wars…
Is it time we question if mercury really is toxic? Come on! The EPA says mercury in liquids exceeding 200 ppb is hazardous waste. Today the “special masters” say its alright to inject infants with a solution that contains 50,000 ppb mercury 10 times or more. We need to re-think the mercury toxicity question.
Dr. Tim~ toxicity should effect all equally, more so when it comes to children than adults and that really isn’t the case here then with vaccines. Vaccines didn’t effect all equally. The special masters did not say anything was ok, they simply said there wasn’t enough evidence.
“The special masters did not say anything was ok, they simply said there wasn’t enough evidence.”
That is the TACA spin. It is also false.
Rather than reading the press releases, try reading the decisions themselves.
From the Cedillo decision:
“This case, however, is not a close case. The overall weight of the evidence is overwhelmingly contrary to the petitioners’ causation theories.”
“…the evidence that I have reviewed makes it appear extremely unlikely that the MMR vaccine can contribute to the causation of autism. It is clear that the causation theories themselves are weak, not just the case in specific for Miss Cedillo.”
“…I have found no merit in the petitioners’ theory that thimerosal-containing vaccines in general can damage infant immune systems.”
From the Snyder case:
“Having carefully and fully considered the evidence, the undersigned concludes that the combination of the thimerosal-containing vaccines and the MMR vaccine are not causal factors in the development of autism and therefore, could not have contributed to the development of Yates’ autism.”
How about
“The MMR hypothesis may have appeared biologically plausible at its inception, but the accumulating body of scientific evidence has tipped the scales decisively against it.”
“The weight of the scientific evidence is that the measles vaccine virus plays no role in the pathogenesis or triggering of autism.”
These are only some of the comments. They are very clear.
That is the TACA spin. It is also false.
No, that is true. If you read the opinions they are talking about the evidence that was presented at the hearings. They only consider what evidence is presented and they found the evidence presented by the government to be more convincing.
The set of possible evidence is not the same as the set of evidence presented at the trial.
So that does not mean that as a question of science that this question has been answered and that no other information exists. Science does not work like that.
Nor this this mean that the MMR and thimerosal has been blessed as perfectly safe in all cases. Remember Hannah Polling? Wanna make a bet that she isn’t the only person in the world to have the same problem?
So much for moving on.
wow,
so the lawyers for the petitioners were totally incompetent? That’s the new spin?
Please, what evidence did they leave out? Oh, yeah, the Hornig study that even Rick Rollens accepted as clearing MMR.
It’s time for some intellectual honesty–there was no epidemic of vaccine induced autism. Didn’t happen. The evidence–even as put forth by the petitioner’s expert in the thimerosal hearings– is very clear on that.
Nice dodge, by the way. On the intellectual honesty front–would you like to admit that the Special Masters were very clear on the decision that MMR doesn’t cause autism?
There are real questions about autism that need to be answered. Questions that can actually help people with autism. “Did MMR cause autism” is not one of them.
I am NOT the “Sullivan” who has posted above. He is, I hope, no relation to me.
I am an attorney in Nevada (former Air Force JAG), and I have a 3 y.o. boy with autism.
PLEASE – NOBODY CONFUSE THIS (OR ANY) COURT RULING WITH REALITY! This ruling is just a court ruling — and a bad one, as I will explain below.
REMEMBER! The three decisions handed down are not “science.” They are not a study comparing un-vaccinated kids to vaccinated kids. They are just court rulings.
THE SPECIAL MASTER’S DECISION IN THESE THREE CASES DOES NOT INCREASE MANKIND’S KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WHAT CAUSES AUTISM. It is just some guy in a black robe who rendered a decision in a lawsuit.
Any lawyer will tell you that judges (and Special Masters) get things wrong ALL THE TIME. I don’t mean that they get things “wrong” merely because they don’t rule in your favor — I mean they get things WRONG. WRONG-WRONG. They get things WRONG A LOT! Almost 50% of the time.
I am not too bad in a courtroom. I’d say I “win” more often than I am actually “right.” But I always know the difference.
As I have gotten older and wiser, I realize more and more how often seemingly smart / educated people (including judges) are just WRONG.
People are ESPECIALLY LIKELY TO GET THINGS WRONG WHEN THEY ARE OPERATING FROM A BIASED VIEWPOINT. I believe this Special Master had a BIAS.
I’ll let you in on a secret: YOU CAN ALWAYS TELL WHEN A JUDGE (OR SPECIAL MASTER) IS BIASED – AND WHEN THEIR BIAS HAS AFFECTED THEIR DECISIONMAKING. WANNA KNOW ***HOW*** YOU CAN TELL? Shhhhhh!… You gotta keep this secret…
You can tell when he/she issues strongly-worded conclusions which are NOT NECESSARY in deciding the outcome. In this case, the Special Master said this:
“Sadly, the petitioners in this litigation have been the victims of bad science conducted to support litigation rather than to advance medical and scientific understanding” of autism.
That was a gratuitous shot at the Plaintiffs’ experts. In order to render a decision, the Special Master need only have found that the Plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of proof to demonstrate by a preponderance (51%) that the MMR vaccine caused their childrens’ autism. That’s what an UNBIASED jurist would have concluded.
Instead, the Special Master took a shot at the Plaintiffs’ belief that vaccines played a role in their childrens’ autism.
Let’s see that again:
“[...] bad science conducted to support litigation rather than to advance medical and scientific understanding [...].”
The Special Master’s tone here, as well as the “substance” of his findings, betray a strong bias.
He has what you call “AN INELASTIC PREDISPOSITION” in favor of the government and the vaccine manufacturers.
Just because you “lose” doesn’t mean the Judge was wrong; and just because you “win” doesn’t mean the judge is right.
These decisions do not add anything to our understanding. The families should appeal, because the Special Master’s bias has self-evidently led him to decide the cases based upon his viewpoint, rather than on the real evidence.
-Bob
Remember the Dredd Scott case???
The United States Supreme Court ruled seven to two against Scott, finding that neither he, nor any person of African ancestry, could claim citizenship in the United States, and that therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules. Moreover, Scott’s temporary residence outside Missouri did not effect his emancipation under the Missouri Compromise, since reaching that result would deprive Scott’s owner of his property.
The LESSON:
Judges (and Special Masters) are human beings. They are subject to the same biases and human failings as any of us. Even the supposed-geniuses on the U.S. Supreme Court are wrong A LOT!
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the inane positions espoused by MJ and Bob above but I did expect a bit more substance than ‘they’re just plain wrong’.
Why were you surprised by Autism Speaks position Lisa Jo? As soon as Tepper-Singer left they could finally abandon all pretence at caring about decent science. They’re just one more autism/antivax group.
I really doubt if we ever get “proof” about this that are acceptable to everyone – the moment there is proof, too many litigations might happen that will probably cause the next recession!
In my mind though I am convinced. My little girl had no delays and was actually speaking and participating in fun till the MMR shot at 15 months. Got fever the next day, and it lasted for almost 3 weeks. It has been 3 years since then and 3 years since she last spoke and even had proper eye contact or eaten solid food. Forget scientific proof, this is too much of a coincidence! Not only that, most doctors I see these days seem to be really interested only in treating symptoms and not patient as a whole; just prescribing one medicine each for each symptom – even for normal cold and cough, one gets 2-3 different medicines.
I only wish other parents who have infants understand that the diseases MMR can supposedly prevent are actually much more easier to handle than autism.
Since 1 year we’ve been trying traditional Indian herbal medicines and things are slowly picking up.
Mercury is exceptionally toxic and for any special master to deny this is CORRUPTION and miscarriage of justice.
Special master says that mercury is only in one vaccine and in one formulation of that vaccine.
WRONG. It’s in 17 current USA vaccines.
Now that’s just one factual error by the special masters.
George Hastings, Denise K Vowell and the third special master are guilty of all the new autism cases that arrive from today.
They at least should have demanded the exclusion of mercury and organic mercury injections for one day babies or the foetus in the womb.
The USA cannot afford to recompense these people but that is no reason to allow millions of new autism children to be “made” by the jab of a toxic organic mercury injection.
John Fryer MSc BSc Chemist
Childhood vaccines do not contain Thimerosal. The more and more vaccines ran through production over the years, the less and less trace amounts are there. The MMR never contained it and the use of Thimerosal has been going on for decades.
People cant and shouldn’t base decisions on coincidence. Without the science, there then will never be prevention or known cause(s).
It wouldn’t had matter which way this ruling went. The fact is all that would had resulted was money exchange but there still would be no answers. All this court had to decide is if it was plausible and they decided not to go by coincidence since that coincidence could be combined with other factors. Either way, this court ruling wouldn’t be saying by proof that vaccines were or were not the cause since that was not thier jobs. The question of science really wasn’t ever part of this court hearing nor was this hearing a normal type court.
Since Thimerosal was used for so many years, some one like me would want to know why that first vaccine given to any child didn’t result in injury right from the start. I want to know why so many on the same schedule had no ill side effects while then some did.
We all would like answers but this court was never about real answers. It was about money exchange.
The rise in autism seems to correspond with the rise in the numbers of single moms. And, it seems most of the “victims” are male. But, the medical establishment never seems to turn down a new disorder, no matter how bogus it is.
I have zero problem not being confused with Bob Sullivan. He is spinning worse than the vaccine-oriented autism organizations.
Mr. Sullivan is correct: this was not a scientific decision. It was a legal decision based on a much lower standard of evidence. The court is designed to give the petitioners (plaintiffs) every consideration.
If people want to start attacking the Special Masters, please make it clear that you are acting as individuals. The rest of the autism community doesn’t need to be damaged by your actions.
“Is it time we question if mercury really is toxic? Come on!”
@tim: The special maters said mercury is not toxic anymore? I must have missed that part.
“The EPA says mercury in liquids exceeding 200 ppb is hazardous waste.”
And it should be considered hazardous waste. If, say, a lake contains 200 ppb mercury, that’s a lot of mercury, and I doubt fish could live there.
However, if you ingest 1 cc of water that has 200 ppb mercury, you’d be fine. You’d be worse off if you eat a tuna sandwich. Do the math.
That’s the part those who posit this talking point don’t get. The dose is what matters. The concentration matters depending on the volume.
2 children,with severe immune dysfunction on both sides ( diabetes, thyroid problems etc carrying a risk of autism of at least 1 in 12, probably higher as they are both boys),a family member possibly with mild aspergers, but no vaccines, and no autism.
Its time to realize that when the vaccine inserts say vaccines with live viruses should not be given to children with immune system dysfunction, we should listen.
And I believe it is likely there are multiple causes of autism.Some genetic studies seem to indicate people with dysfunction in glutathione transport,which is used to remove aluminium and thimerosal,amongst other metals are particularly at risk.A texas study correlates mercury in the air with autism. And testosterone ( the boy hormone) makes toxic metal removal harder. We know thimerosal can kill, as it did in the cases of young babies several years ago when their umbilical cord was cleansed mistakenly with a solution containing thimerosal.Why would it be perfectly safe once you put it into an injection?
As the hepatitis B vaccine is given at birth routinely , I always wonder whether damage that was caused at this time would ever show up as anything other than something the child was apparently “born with”?
“Kev” and “Sullivan”,
Kev – you said you want something more substantive than “they’re just plain wrong.”
I’m not sure what could be more “substantive” than being wrong. Nevertheless, I did not say the Special Master’s decision was wrong – I said it was biased.
Existentially, there either IS or IS NOT a connection between vaccines and autism. No human being yet knows whether there is a connection. Until a study is done that compares vaccinated and un-vaccinated children, we will not be able to establish, disprove, or quantify the linkage.
You missed the point I was making. So let me phrase it a different way: the Special Master’s decision has nothing to do with that existential question — whether there is or is not a connection between vaccines and autism. It is simply a judicial ruling, which may or may not correspond with reality.
“Sullivan” states that the “standard of evidence” in court is “much lower” than in science. That is an incorrect understanding.
The “preponderance” burden (sometimes said to be 51%), but the experts’ opinions, which form the basis for a finding of causation must be made “to a reasonable degree of medical [or scientific] certainty.” In other words, the court incorporates the scientific standard into its decision-making.
For the Plaintiffs to win, the Court must find, to a reasonable degree of medical and scientific certainty, that the vaccines were the proximate cause of the neurodevelopmental injury.
“Kev” and “Sullivan” seem to imbue the SM’s decision with the mystique of authoritativeness and objectivity. It deserves no such imputation.
@Bob Sullivan: What evidence do you have that it was biased?
I’m sure that if the decision had been in favor of the petitioners, you would not think it was biased.
I actually haven’t yet seen much in the way of refutations of the lengthy analyses by the special masters, although I’m sure various orgs are working on this as we speak.
I could say the same about any number of things other than vaccines. Clearly, the decision applies to the various hypotheses put forth by the petitioners. Do you dispute the finding that *these hypotheses* completely failed to support the contentions of the petitioners?
Still nothing substantive, counselor. Calling someone “wrong” or “biased” is just labeling. What are the three special masters biased against, other than existentialism? We might want to drag the Harvard divinity master into this.
Joseph-
You asked: >>
See Post (8).
You said: >>
Yep, I do agree with you there.
I would respond by saying that there are a lot of things we don’t know. We don’t know whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. We don’t know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried. And we don’t know whether vaccines play a role in autism. Those answers are likely to become known in the fullness of time.
But just because a judge determines that there ARE little green men, or that Hoffa is buried at Giants Stadium, that doesn’t make it so. Likewise the vaccine/autism issue. A judge’s decision is simply that; a judge’s decision.
For now, the decision resolves the legal question, but it does not resolve the existential question.
Dear Joseph,
Sorry, my offset marks must have caused the quotes to be omitted.
I meant to say this:
Joseph-
You asked: …@Bob Sullivan: What evidence do you have that it was biased? …
A: See Post (8).
You said: …I could say the same about any number of things other than vaccines…
Yep, I do agree with you
————–
ANB- calling cyanide “poison” is also labeling. (I don’t know how to do the winking-smiley face; but I would insert it here if I could).
I know from your many posts and reading your website that you are very smart. I’m sure you would acknowledge that some innocent people are sitting in jail, some guilty people go free (O.J. 1998-2008), and some people are in jail for the wrong thing (O.J. 2008-present).
So the fact that the Special Masters in 3 cases see no vaccine-autism connection may turn out to be right, or it may turn out to be wrong; but I would rather have the issue decided by a study comparing vaccinated and un-vaccinated populations, not based on some court decision.
I’m sure you and I would disagree about whether the “verdict” of science is in or not. But we probably do agree that science, not judges, should decide the issue.
I’ve never suggested the verdict was dispositive of the larger question, which is whether vaccines cause autism. And no single study, including the much-hyped vaxed v. unvaxed study, could settle the question existentially. That’s because science cannot prove a negative. The best we can do is look at the best available evidence, which in this case is rather large. I can list 25 studies conducted since 1998 that show no support for an association between MMR and autism, and ten more that do the same thing for thimerosal.
The smiley face is semi-colon, hyphen, right parenthesis.
You were correct Lisa, this ruling isn’t going to change anything..
Sullivan, you said :
so the lawyers for the petitioners were totally incompetent? That’s the new spin?
Where did I say that? I said that special masters found the evidence presented by the government to be more convincing. If you are familiar with the legal process, this is a normal occurrence during a trial or hearing. This idea is very distinct form “totally incompetent”.
Please, what evidence did they leave out?
Do a search of autism on pubmed. Note that there are many studies that are not included in the list of evidence in the case. Repeat as needed.
It’s time for some intellectual honesty–there was no epidemic of vaccine induced autism. Didn’t happen. The evidence–even as put forth by the petitioner’s expert in the thimerosal hearings– is very clear on that.
Please point to the exact location in any of three rulings that states this. Because from what I understand that was not the question being asked here nor was that was the question of an epidemic addressed except in passing and then only to say that the answer is unknown. The court only had three issues before it, whether thimerosal alone or together with the MMR, or the MMR alone could cause autism. If we are going for “intellectual honesty” then we should “honestly” admit that those three questions do not equate with the idea that the ruling addressed all possible vaccines.
Nice dodge, by the way. On the intellectual honesty front–would you like to admit that the Special Masters were very clear on the decision that MMR doesn’t cause autism?
The special mastered ruled that when they considered the evidence that was presented the evidence against a relationship was stronger than the evidence against it.
So in a limited sense, yes, the special masters found that there was not enough evidence to support the claim that the MMR causes autism. But that means that the petitioners failed to prove there case – that does not mean that the opposite was “proven” – there was no attempt to “prove” that the MMR does not cause autism.
There are real questions about autism that need to be answered. Questions that can actually help people with autism. “Did MMR cause autism” is not one of them.
We can partially agree there – there are real unanswered questions that can help. I think the question of what causes autism is very important – and the evidence is pointing to some combination of genetics and environment.
Kev, you said:
Congratulations, you get the ironic use of the word “inane” award. Inane means “one that lacks sense or substance” – your reply didn’t address a single thing that I said and even made up something that I didn’t say (ie ‘they’re just plain wrong’). I think that would be the definition of “lack of substance”. So that’s an extra 10 irony points for an inane use of the word inane.
But that means that the petitioners failed to prove there (sic) case – that does not mean that the opposite was “proven” – there was no attempt to “prove” that the MMR does not cause autism.
How does one prove a negative in a court of law?
The last part of my comment was supposed to be:
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the inane positions espoused by MJ and Bob above but I did expect a bit more substance than ‘they’re just plain wrong’.
Congratulations, you get the ironic use of the word “inane” award. Inane means “one that lacks sense or substance” – your reply didn’t address a single thing that I said and even made up something that I didn’t say (ie ‘they’re just plain wrong’). I think that would be the definition of “lack of substance”. So that’s an extra 10 irony points for an inane use of the word inane.
How does one prove a negative in a court of law?
What does a court of law have to do with proving a negative? You have an issue before the court, it is decided based on the evidence presented – the “direction” of the question has nothing really to do with it.
The question before the court was not prove that the MMR does not cause autism, it was prove that the MMR does cause autism. That theory was (strongly) rejected by the court based on the evidence presented. But that is far different from saying it was “proven” that the MMR does not cause autism.
This isn’t a hard concept.
MMR NOT ONLY SAFE– IT ALSO ALLEVIATES AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE
from – Randy Crawford 3701 Second St. #10 Coralville, Iowa 52241 (319)400-2837
randycrawford52241@hotmail.com rancrawfo@hotmail.com
The federal vaccine court is to be congratulated for ruling Feb. 12, 2009 MMR does NOT cause autism and other diseases. I have been using dozens and dozens of repeated doses of MMR for years, because it is the only thing that will alleviate my autoimmune disease processes. I know from direct experience that MMR is completely safe and free from side effects. It is effective to alleviate autoimmune disease, and works best when injected every day for weeks at a time. MMR works even better when given with other live virus vaccines like varicella and yellow fever. The stories that mercury combines with MMR in some weird way is also demonstrably false, because when I took a dozen tetanus-diptheria shots with thimerosal the same days I got MMR, there were no side effects either. When kids get sick about the time of getting a vaccine, it’s only an event that would have happened anyway and had nothing to do with the shot– like with a million people watching TV today some will have heart attacks next week, but the heart attacks would have happened anyway and had nothing to do with watching TV the week beforehand. Now that the courts have ruled intelligently, doctors don’t have to be paranoid about using MMR and they can help more people with multiple MMR injections. And that’s good for people who need relief from autoimmune disease. MMR works against autoimmune disease by acting as an immunodistractant to down-modulate eosinophils, neutrophils, lymphocytes, and other leukocytes.
MMR NOT ONLY SAFE– IT ALSO IS USEFUL IN AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE REMEDIATION
from – Randy Crawford 3701 Second St. #10 Coralville, Iowa 52241 (319)400-2837
randycrawford52241@hotmail.com rancrawfo@hotmail.com
The federal vaccine court is to be congratulated for ruling Feb. 12, 2009 MMR does NOT cause autism and other diseases. I have been using dozens and dozens of repeated doses of MMR for years, because it is the only thing that will alleviate my autoimmune disease processes. I know from direct experience that MMR is completely safe and free from side effects. It is effective to alleviate autoimmune disease, and works best when injected every day for weeks at a time. MMR works even better when given with other live virus vaccines like varicella and yellow fever. The stories that mercury combines with MMR in some weird way is also demonstrably false, because when I took a dozen tetanus-diptheria shots with thimerosal the same days I got MMR, there were no side effects either. When kids get sick about the time of getting a vaccine, it’s only an event that would have happened anyway and had nothing to do with the shot– like with a million people watching TV today some will have heart attacks next week, but the heart attacks would have happened anyway and had nothing to do with watching TV the week beforehand. Now that the courts have ruled intelligently, doctors don’t have to be paranoid about using MMR and they can help more people with multiple MMR injections. And that’s good for people who need relief from autoimmune disease. MMR works against autoimmune disease by acting as an immunodistractant to down-modulate eosinophils, neutrophils, lymphocytes, and other leukocytes.
That is about the strangest thing I have ever read on the internet.
What about the Hannah Poling case? I am dumbfounded that the majority of the press has written the vaccine-autism connection off becasue of these recent rulings. Just because these plaintiffs were unable to prove their cases it doesn’t mean that vaccines don’t cause autism in some children. There are 5,000 more cases to go, and we already have a precedent setting case where it was decided that vaccines did cause autism.
HHS did not concede that vaccines caused Poling’s autism. That is a common misperception.
The petitioners failed to put forth a believable theory of how vaccines could contribute to autism. Lots of speculation, but no real science.
The Hannah Poling was quite different. She had a bunch of vaccines in one day for catch-up vaccines that she missed while being sick. She had more than the normal amount of vaccines in one day. The ruling in that case said “officials have conceded that childhood vaccines worsened a rare, underlying disorder that ultimately led to autism-like symptoms” That is the very large difference between that case and the other recent 3 cases. Mitochondrial disorder is rare but also inheritary plus the fact she had more vaccines in a day than the average child would.
Unless the rest of the cases can duplicate Hannah Poling, there is no precedent setting at all.
If you look at the 100 million people or so who have gotten MMR, you’ll find a few examples of most anything among them. If you look at another 100 million people or so who like vanilla wafers, you’ll find about as many examples of the same anything among them too. Does MMR cause whatever “result” you see? About as much as vanilla wafers do.
Randy, for the love of everything good and holy, step away from the syringe.
Your posts here (and everywhere) of “look at me, multiple injections are safe” are not convincing.
Samaxtics, nothing is convincing if you refuse to look at it. The monkeys who refused to consider coming down from the trees have descendants who are still there. Anyone who is comfortable with the paranoia of vaccinophobia will likely stay comfortable there. However, their children will continue to suffer because the parents are refusing to look for the real source of the problem.
Rabbi Fishbein: It isn’t so strange if you consider the history of our species. For hundreds of millions of years, our ancestors have had to daily face up to multiple challenges from thousands of simultaneous exposures to numerous species of bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoans, and worms. That’s why we have an immune system– to fend them off. And the next day, and the next day, when we see them again. So, if your immune system is mistakenly attacking you, and if you then give it another target which is more legitimate, it tends to leave you alone like a bull distracted by a red cape. This therapeutic strategy is also harmless, because our evolutionary history pre-enables us to face up to the repeated challenges of revisited viruses, worms, and all the rest. The only hard part to understand is that for the past few generations we haven’t been living in daily filth and so we’ve forgotten cerebrally about our dirty past. But, the white blood cells of the immune system haven’t had time to evolve new habits in the time/space of only a few generations, and so they continued doggedly along with their version of habits of immune memory.
Folks, I deleted the prior comment because this thread is really deteriorating into personal jabs. I think it’s time to end this particular conversation.
Thanks very much,
Lisa Rudy (autism guide)
What happened to the comments?
Maybe if they would use the total amount of vaccine injected into our kids all at once the results would be different. I understand these kids build up the amounts given in their bodies until their immune system just can’t handle it anymore and goes on overload much the same as it does with some diseases such as meningitis.
If the experts would spend as much time and money trying to find a cure as they have trying to prove vaccines were not at fault, we may be closer to a real solution. Come on. There are all kinds of preservatives in these shots-aluminum, formaldahyde, thimerasol are just the tip of the iceberg. My son went over the edge at 4 years with the last dpt booster, but he went just the same. The fever, seizures, etc. and then the oops; we can’t prove that did it; it could be coincidence. I was there. I know what happened.
I agree, as a parent I think the most frustrating thing about all of this, is the strong disregard for what our experiences have been. Most of us are educated professionals just trying to open some eyes, so other children will not suffer the same way our children and families have. Let’s stop the fighting and listen to those most affected. There is NO WAY we are all crazy, when we all experienced the same decline in our child’s development following a visit to the doctor for vaccines. My son never had the MMR, as we saw developmental and GI issues following each series of vaccines and my older son had a psoriosis breakout after his MMR. Immune issues? yes most likely! Predisposition? yes most likely. Would it be soooooo awful to admit that some children may need a different vaccine schedule and MAYBE some children should be watched more cautiously than others when it comes to the amount of vaccines given at a time.
This needs to become a discussion of SAFE VACCINES and SCHEDULING, as opposed to vaccines vs. no vaccines. Vaccines are one of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time. No one should downplay that or argue it, but there are sooooo many now, maybe it is just time to rethink how we go about giving them to our babies.
When eye-witness evidence of vaccine damage to our children is disregarded it proves our justice system is flawed.
I feel our children are being used as pharmaceutical guinea pigs, and the result of this arrogance is autism.
A thought to remember: French vaccine makers have been sued for manslaughter.
[i]“when eye-witness evidence of vaccine damage to our children is disregarded it proves our justice system is flawed.”[/i]
It’s important to remember that “seeing” vaccines cause autism is not the same as “seeing” a robber steal a handbag. The court was not convinced that parents actually saw cause and effect, because the experts were not able to show a convincing biological link between vaccines and autism.
It is quite possible to see one thing happen, followed by another thing – and assume cause and effect. Sometimes there really is a causal link. Sometimes there isn’t.
Lisa (autism guide)
I have never commented before but I feel the need today. I would just like say that the human body is amazing. And every body is amazingly different. One body when exposed to an injection of venom responds with mild itching, swelling and redness. Another body when injected with the same venom responds with an all out immune reaction requiring the use on an epi pen (description of a bee sting).
Some children who were exposed to radiation at Chernobyl died, some got cancer, some were given antioxidants and were ok. Wide range of outcomes for SERIOUS exposure to toxins.
We don’t all have high cholesterol, we’re not all anorexic, we don’t all have bunions, and we do not respond to things in the same way.
I just don’t understand why so many people say everybody would have autism if vaccines trigger autism. No matter what causes autism (and it is most likely several different things) not every body will get it even if they are exposed in the same way.
I will contend till the day I pass that my daughter went to the doctor healthy and speaking, but after that was not the case hours after her 2 year old shots.
Maybe someone other than the federal governement should be policing themselves on this topic.
“There are all kinds of preservatives in these shots-aluminum, formaldahyde, thimerasol are just the tip of the iceberg.”
Aluminum is not a preservative, and the amount contained in a year’s worth of vaccines aren’t close to what a child ingests naturally in the food he eats. Most aluminum is quickly excreted.
Formaldehyde is a naturally occurring substance, found in most living things. A banana has far more formaldehyde than any five infant shots combined.
Thimerosal has been absent from scheduled childhood vaccines since 2002. Today, it is found in some flu shots. The “trace” amount found in other vaccines means a quantity too small to measure. Mercury is everywhere, and has been for over a billion years. Breast milk contains more Hg than a varicella or polio vaccine, for example.
AutismNewsBeat:
“Aluminum is not a preservative, and the amount contained in a year’s worth of vaccines aren’t close to what a child ingests naturally in the food he eats. Most aluminum is quickly excreted.”
Are you really seriously suggesting that aluminum ingested, and thus subject to the GI tract process, is the same as aluminum injected, and in an inflammatory context to boot? And in such a context where there can be factors making it more difficult for it to be excreted; eg, the glutamate in the MMR shot, which depletes glutathione? Or in a susceptible child who has a genetic polymorphism causing lower glutathione levels?
Just because you feel that vaccines didn’t have anything to do with your child’s ASD really shouldn’t blind you to the stories of parents after parents after parents who are not dummies, who do know that correlation is not causation, and still know what they have seen and experienced: that their child had a clear reaction to a shot or series of shots, including obvious symptoms of brain damage like high-pitched screaming etc etc, and – boom – that was it. Lost him or her. No eye contact; etc etc.
A good doctor takes a case history, makes detailed notes, including info from the parents – and does not try to pretend that “the vaccine didn’t do that”, because he or she is defending an agenda. It’s time and past for the truth, and the whole truth, in this matter, folks. And that is extremely likely to uncover the truth that a subset of children have a genetic predisposition to be damaged by vaccines, for various reasons. That doesn’t mean the end of vaccines. It means the introduction of safer vaccines, because of understanding more aspects of their effects, which can include too many at a time. It can also include more concern about environmental pollutants, because OF the genetic predispositions of a subset of children – discovered because of this vaccine factor in their damage. So good for such parents, in not letting this knowledge and awareness get buried, by naysayers with a vested interest in the status quo.
Aluminum is already found in the human body, mainly from the foods people eat and what they cook with. What is in vaccines is Aluminum salts which is far less toxic than plain Aluminum exposure. It also doesn’t react as other heavy metals do, it’s really a mineral, and as of today they don’t even really have a known toxic level.
Formaldahyde is also found in the human body and every one has it, it’s part of normal human metabolism.
I do not feel our children are being used as pharmaceutical guinea pigs. Most parents have a choice to vaccinate or not and can follow any schedule they want providing their child isn’t in day care and public school. For no good reason other than having no insurance, my sister didn’t start her child’s vaccines until he was 4 years old and was caught up before entering grade school. This doesn’t solely rest on pharmaceutical’s. As much as we want good doctors to inform us, most parents don’t even need to listen to the doctors beliefs or disbeliefs- just choose not to vaccinate.
Of course no one will react the same way to all things, genetics plays a large role in that. Some people have a family history of high cholesterol where as other’s do not. The idea and theories of vaccines mainly is the chemical’s once used, then removed, added vaccines and over all size of the infant/ child. If we go by no one reacts the same to all exposures, then there would be no conspiracy factor of the Pharms. We would still need to know why more who received vaccines didn’t have autism, and why more boys than girls are effected.
In France, investigations of GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi Pasteur for anti-hepatitis B drug used in a vaccination campaign between 1994 and 1998. They have not been sued, these investigations just recently started and this really has no bearing one way or another and not related to autism at all.
The Vaccine Court’s release of its opinion on Darwin’s 200th birthday was fortuitous, seeing as the vaccine-autism faithful have a good deal in common with religious fundamentalists. They are so invested in their ideas that they ignore or attack any evidence to the contrary, and treat gaps in the opposing evidence as further proof in their favor.
The obscenity of the “anti-vax” movement is stupefying– a campaign to reinstitute open sewers or ban refrigeration could scarcely threaten greater violence to the public health.
I have much more to say on this topic here.
It’s all about MONEY! Look around and see the world as it is.These drug companies have choices wether to spend millions in settling law suits due to mercury or a babies [we're all different] ability to tolerate the shock of a vaccine cocktail that causes Autism or sig their lawyers who are on company payroll to defend them. Why don’t these vaccine companies set up a fund to do the research necessary that still hasn’t been done. I Don’t Think So.
Whether aluminum is a preservative or not, it has been debated for the last 30 years that there is a link there with Alzheimers(another epidemic). Also the first thing I think of with formaldahyde is embalming fluid. Several years ago, we were warned that furniture treated with formaldahyde should be sealed as it could cause lung cancer if we breathed it. Can that be good for a little person to have any form of it injected directly into their bodies? For someone who has the ability to immediately detox these chemicals from the body, it may not be an issue. What if we can’t? What if the pathways have been damaged due to numerous chemical assaults, whether by vaccines, virus, environment chemicals, etc. and the current vaccination is the straw that broke the camel’s back. If these are not preservatives, then why use them? We assimilate enough chemicals in our everyday toxic environment for overload. What if every vaccine and every chemical stays in the body and the damage to the immune system multiplies? Why is autism in epidemic proportions? What’s the difference in one epidemic and another? The reason people don’t get it is because they do not live with a child or adult that they lost mentally and emotionally hours or days after a vaccine. They don’t live with a person who goes insane when it rains or the wind blows. They don’t live with a person who stays awake all night giggling or beats holes in the wall with their head. They didn’t see their normal, sweet child turn into this in a matter of days or weeks and know that the only injury had to come from that “state-mandated” vaccine. Now, instead of the government putting money to find something to help these children recover, they are spending billions of taxpayer money trying to prove it must be genetic. Do they not realize that at some point society will be financially liable for these people? Is it going to continue until the largest population of the world has autism? Then what will we do?
People have to understand that aluminum, formaldahyde and mercury in other forms are very harmful but what’s used in vaccines is not that same substance. Aluminum salts have been in vaccines longer than Thimerosal ever was. Alzheimers is not related to aluminum salts, either. Alzheimers was first used by Alois Alzheimer, in 1910. Just like autism, the term was there but never often used for a diagnosis until many years later.
A 12-pound infant makes more formaldehyde each day than you can find in any five scheduled childhood vaccines combined. It doesn’t matter if it makes you think of embalming fluid. The fact is, just about any substance is toxic at some concentration and dose. Oxygen can blind babies – yet kids breathe the stuff every day!
Formaldehyde is a natural bi-product of single carbon metabolism. It’s there for a reason.
Thank you for clearing that up for me. It still doesn’t make a lot of difference to those 1 out of 87 children with autism who’s parents are sure it is a direct result of a vaccination. Something is causing the damage. When my son was diagnosed in 1998 it was 1/2000; now it’s 1/87.
That 1:88 is only in one state, MN and there is great controversy over how the school system can give that without a medical diagnosis, which is about the only state that allows this. The national rates are still 1:150 something.
Autism rates are not completely accurate to begin with- many are mis diagnosed and many don’t have an autism IEP to be counted to begin with. There is no way of those rates that anyone can come up with a rate of who feels vaccines are the cause.
The “rate” of autism is rising because the child-handlers who are paid to (a) diagnose autism , and (b) treat autism don’t get much money if there isn’t autism “found” at a high enough rate. As Daniel Boone observed: let lawyers come settle on the frontier, and the rate of lawsuits rises noticeably.
Work in a child psychology unit sometime and you will rapidly find out the parents are visibly crazier than the institutionalized kids about 90% of the time. As I pointed out previously in #29, 34, 36, and 37 above, MMR and other vaccines even when repeatedly used are demonstrably harmless. But this will not calm down parents who want someone to blame and someone to send the bill to.
Blaming vaccines, and avoiding seeking the real cause and the real cure, only leaves the kids who do have something wrong with them twisting in the wind. To reiterate: give a million kids vaccines, and give another million kids no vaccines. Let a million kids watch TV, and let another million kids watch no TV. A few in each group will have something peculiarly good or peculiarly bad happen to them a week later, but whatever it was had nothing to do with the vaccines or lack of them and nothing to do with the TV or lack of TV. Vainly wishing otherwise merely conveniently avoids looking for the true cause or causes, and delays alleviation.
I follow your posts for a long time and should tell you that your posts always prove to be of a high value and quality for readers.
Greetings. I was a victim of the polio vaccine in 1960 and my daughter was rushed to hospital following DTP-induced seizures. The court finding is only protecting the interests of the pharma industry and health bodies. The truth is found elsewhere, particularly with the work of Robert F Kennedy Jr and others. Parents, and vaccine victims, do not give up. I know vaccine is the sacred cow of the medical establishment and that the public is tragically brainwashed – but one day this will change. Russia banned thimerosal in vaccines 20 years ago. Why could the USA not have done the same? Egos were involved. Pure and simple. They’ve condemned the population of the US and other western countries to brain damage because of egos.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1419999256011826335&hl=en
P.S. US researchers knew that mercury in MINUTE quantities was toxic to cells and caused them to die, for decades.
In 1971 Eli Lilly research found that small doses of thimerosal were highly toxic, but continued to promote it as non-toxic. In 1991 the FDA considered banning it from animal vaccines but the same year the US CDC – Centre for Disease Control – RECOMMENDED that newborn infants be INJECTED with a series of thimerosal-laced vaccines.
If that isn’t just bald-faced pure in-your-face evil and greed-profit motivated, then I sure as hell dont know what is!