Over the last decade, autism has gone from a rare and misunderstood condition to a disorder that may affect as many as 1.5 million Americans. Without a clear explanation in sight, parents and doctors have worked tirelessly to pinpoint the cause of autism, but the answer remains elusive. Are vaccines the missing link?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
the parents of yet another child with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were awarded a lump sum of more than $810,000 (plus an estimated $30-40,000 per year for autism services and care) in compensation by the Court, which ruled that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine had caused acute brain damage that led to his autism spectrum disorder.
In his conclusion, Special Master Abell ruled that Petitioners had proven that the MMR had directly caused a brain inflammation illness called acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) which, in turn, had caused the autism spectrum disorder PDD-NOS in the child.
And then there is this, the U.S. government awarded compensation to a Georgia family, the Polings, who had sued the government (along with 5,000 other families whose children have autism), claiming vaccines had caused autism in their now 9-year-old daughter, Hannah. As the decision made headlines, antivaccine groups claimed victory and vindication, and parents fretted over whether to vaccinate their children.
Check out the governmental vaccine injury reporting site to learn exactly what harm vaccines are causing children.
http://vaers.hhs.gov/info.htm
No vaccine offers a guaranteed immunity against any viral infection. In fact the only guaranteed immunity is that of the big pharmcoes making the vaccines. A victim may not sue a vaccine manufacturer directly, the suit goes through "vaccine court" and the judgments come from a seventy-five cents tax on every vaccine sold, none of the money comes from the manufacturer or taxpayers.
As of January, 2009, 12,850 cases have been filed with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) , 5,535 representing autism cases. Of the total, 6,979 have been adjudicated, with 2,260 being compensated. Claims arising from vaccinations given prior to October 1, 1988, were paid from general appropriations. Over 939 million dollars has been paid in compensation from the trust fund for the post- 1988 cases, including attorneys’ fees and costs. There is currently nearly 3 billion dollars in the trust fund. There is a wide range of awards depending on the severity of injury, with the highest award currently being $9.1 million in present dollars.
2008 there were 144 awards totaling $83,743,524.93 (avg. over a half million dollars per award)
I'm not a doctor, I just know what happened to my son Ben.
http://bensmyson.wordpress.com
- bensmyson
March 5, 2009 8:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
To suggest that Hannah Poling did not have autism is an outright falsehood. She was duly diagnosed by professionals in the field and it was only later when her father, a well-respected neurologists pushed for more intensive testing that her encephelopathy and mitochondrial dysfunction came to light. To suggest that professionals like Dr. and Mrs. Poling, who had ready access to centers like John Hopkins would somehow go to some hack who could not correctly diagnose their daughter is laughable.
The list of symptoms you mention are not necessarily the symptoms she displayed when she got her autism diagnosis. They are the symptoms that Poling's team presented during the course of their initial hearing which supported their claim for compensation under NVICP. Since the rules of engagemtn there are relatively strict compared to other arenas for tort, it is important to present the case using previously accepted terms. Otherwise you risk an outright dismissal.
What is probably the most significant aspect of the Poling case is not that Hannah regressed after her vaccinations, or even that her autistic characteristics were determined to be the result of her vaccine injury. The most significant thing is that Hannah's case was to be the first test case for this new area of claim (autism caused by vaccination) and DHHS recognized that as such it would set a very unpleasant precedent for them. This is why the quietly conceded so quickly, and why so many people whose careers are vested in continuing and expaning the vaccination program were so incensed when Dr. Poling chose to go public with the deatils.
- Dad Fourkids March 26, 2009 1:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Government Conceded That Vaccines Triggered Regression Into Autism
- From Dr Hirani
By Dr. Karima Hirani - MD MPH
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Government Isn't Always Right...
Just because the government says that, it doesn't mean that it is true. I just think that the government cracked under the pressure of society for an answer regarding the Hanna Poling case. And as far as I'm concerned, mitochondrial dysfunction is a condition all its own, that has similar symptoms of autism. The big difference is, mitochondrial dysfunction can be cured, real autism can not.
- wallace12603
July 31, 2008 1:05PM
Reply to this Recommend (2)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No, they didn't.
The US Gvmt have not said that vaccines triggered a regression into autism. If you believe this to be true, please could you provide a link to this statement.
What I believe you will find is that HHS stated:
"In sum, DVIC has concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder."
1) encephalopathy is not autism
2) 'features of autism spectrum disorder' does not equate to 'diagnosis of autism'.
It is clear that Ms Poling was vaccine injured. It is also clear that she is autistic. What is also clear from both this document and the Case Study is that her vaccines did not cause her autism.
Please see: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=1084
- Kev Leitch
August 8, 2008 2:18AM
Reply to this Recommend (2)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
That 1950s book about "lying with statistics"
Ultimately, where the snake- oil industry lies with statistics, a new world order of mind control and market profiteering steal the day. Just make the statistics so complexly-evasive and so covered-up, that a normal person might even assume all is well. Well, until their child is utterly ruined and their family plans are ruined. Is this the world you want? Is it a new covert form of eugenics? A means to remove particular breeder-genes from humans?
- TruthBeautyGoodness
September 5, 2009 3:16AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
statistics
“Just make the statistics so complexly-evasive and so covered-up, that a normal person might even assume all is well.”
In what way are the statistics ‘complexly-evasive and so covered up’? They seem quite readable to me.
“Is this the world you want? Is it a new covert form of eugenics? A means to remove particular breeder-genes from humans? “
Do you have any evidence to support this? Or is this more ‘second gunman’ style conspiracy theorizing?
- MrBook
October 3, 2009 11:56PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
To Mr Brook
Mr Brook:
Granted, it is easy to dismiss persons who are outside the ivory towers. Perhaps that is final in it's self.
"In what way are the statistics ‘complexly-evasive and so covered up’? They seem quite readable to me."
The "Tower Of Babel" likewise is readable and yet it is indeed logical that readers are found on all sides of those issues. In this manner, i could agree with you sir.
“Is this the world you want? Is it a new covert form of eugenics? A means to remove particular breeder-genes from humans? “
Do you have any evidence to support this? Or is this more ‘second gunman’ style conspiracy theorizing?
Evidence?-- I certainly have many remarkable leads available to study, with regard to that statement. Thanks to the internet ! Many of these leads have scholarly works supporting further, more comprehensive investigation. Do you collate and review all comprehensive evidence, sir? Do you sir, propose to dismiss similar-sounding, public interests?
With thanks for your comment.
- TruthBeautyGoodness
October 4, 2009 7:14AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
evidence
"Granted, it is easy to dismiss persons who are outside the ivory towers."
Actually it is easy to dismiss persons who make claims but do not provide evidence to support their claims.
"Evidence?-- I certainly have many remarkable leads available to study, with regard to that statement. Thanks to the internet ! Many of these leads have scholarly works supporting further, more comprehensive investigation. Do you collate and review all comprehensive evidence, sir? Do you sir, propose to dismiss similar-sounding, public interests?"
Then cite so I can review and we can discuss.
- MrBook
October 4, 2009 10:42AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Dr. Hirani is a DAN! Advocate
I am dismayed that Dr. Hirani is listed as an expert. side from her MD and MPH, her only expertise is a seeming concurrence with the reams of false studies and bogus biomedical interventions proposed by DAN and the Autism Anarchists. Her website is a clear departure from evidence based medicine and her misstatement of the evidence is a strong indicator of someone whose emotional attachment has overcome her rational thinking.
- Citizen Deux
November 9, 2009 8:51AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.