The Timing is Wrong
Children get vaccines at a young age—a time when they most need to be protected against diseases that can be serious and even deadly. Coincidentally, this is around the same time children are developing quickly (learning to sit, crawl, walk and talk), leading people to wonder if the vaccines are related to problems with development such as autism. However, children can show signs of autism in early infancy before receiving vaccines—and even have differences in their brains as early as birth.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Worst of all -- plaintiffs have no right to discovery either against the pharmaceutical industry or the government. Since autism is a behavioral affliction rather than a precisely defined biological injury -- epidemiological studies are critical to establishing its causation. But the greatest source of epidemiological data is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) -- the government maintained medical records of hundreds of thousands of vaccinated children -- which HHS has gone to great lengths to keep out of the hands of plaintiffs' attorneys and independent scientists. Unfortunately the vaccine court has judicially anointed this corrupt concealment by consistently denying every motion by petitioners to view the VSD. The raw data collected in the VSD would undoubtedly provide the epidemiological evidence needed to understand the relationship between vaccines and autism. The absence of such studies makes it easy for judges to say to plaintiffs they have not met their burden of proving causation.
-Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Vaccine court: Autism debate continues, Feb 24, 2009 8:37 pm
Dr. Shu,
Are you of the correct numbers of healthy 'children that succumb to measles, mumps, rotavirus, diptheria ect? How about some REAL honest numbers.
The CDC needs to understand that the American public is NOT stupid and 23 cases of Measles out of a population of over 300 Millions i not an outbreak nor is it an epidemic. The Epidemic is the soaring rate of Autism while we continually add to the Vaccine Schedule.
Are you advocating that mercury and aluminum is safe in any amount?
How do you argue that parents that have pulled their children back from Regressive Autism have done so by clenaing the mercury out of their bodies?
You also mention regressive autism and that parents have 'pulled their children' back from it after cleaning the mercury out of their bodies. I would like peer reviewed, journal published evidence that:
a) regressive autism is a valid medical diagnosis
b) any child has been cured of autism using chelation
Thanks.
What are you looking for? Is everything reported by parents anecdotal and therefore not worthy of note? When the affected children were video taped before and after regression, is that still anecdotal? Is there a peer reviewed, journal published study that proves that regressive autism does not exist?
Personally, I do not know if chelation is a valid treatment for autistic children. But since the med journals are decidedly pro-vax (and not without good reason), is it in their interest to study whether chelation does any good?
You ask if mercury and aluminium are safe in any amount. I would say 'yes, in some amounts'.
As I showed here ( http://www.opposingviews.com/arguments/mercury-is-naturally-in-humans-in-amounts-greater-than-all-vaccines ) mercury exists naturally in all humans in amounts greater than in the totality of every mercury containing paediatric vaccine in existence today.
Aluminium (as discussed here: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=873 ) is interesting. If you do not vaccinate your child and yet do breast feed then you will have matched the entire amount of Aluminium in the current paediatric vaccine schedule after between 51 and 346 days.
... it's exactly the same as if you inject it into your blood stream, right?
"If you do not vaccinate your child and yet do breast feed then you will have matched the entire amount of Aluminium in the current paediatric vaccine schedule after between 51 and 346 days."
You seem to think so. Sadly, doctors do not agree with you. Neither do I.
But to those with a peanut allergy tiny amounts are not a good thing. There is no reason that with the genetic component, some will be more sensitive than others.
You're comparing two very different things. Nut allergies are an established medical fact with a known pattern of causation. The idea that vaccines cause autism on the other hand is, by comparison, not medically accurate.
Why would a large amount of mercury existing naturally in the body not do any damage and yet mercury via a vaccine would?
My point was that it is possible that with the differences in genetics some may be more sensitive to mercury than others. The peanuts were just a reminder that such things happen.
The latest measles epidemic numbers into the hundreds. In the first six months of this year, 131 people in the US have contracted measles. Fifteen people were hospitalised. Thankfully, none have died. Of those 131 people, 63 chose (or their parents chose for them) not to vaccinate.( http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/health/research/22measles.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin )
Over here in the UK, two children have died from measles in the past two years.
Conversely, as I pointed out to the NAA here ( http://www.opposingviews.com/counters/stunning-increase-in-what #dialogState=counter_state_2214) there is no evidence to support the idea of an autism epidemic.
Not if you don't look for it.
The claim that autism can only be caused AFTER birth is not supported by the evidence.
The brain can be damaged at any time, by a wide array of toxins, including the mercury and aluminum present in flu vaccines Bush FDA approved for babies and pregnant women.
“The claim that autism can only be caused AFTER birth is not supported by the evidence.”
There has been no verified cause of autism… so this is technically true.
“The brain can be damaged at any time, by a wide array of toxins, including the mercury and aluminum present in flu vaccines Bush FDA approved for babies and pregnant women.”
Yes the brain can be damaged… but a number of toxins and toxicant. However you have yet to show a causative link between the mercury / aluminum present in vaccines and the increase in autism.
Since thimerosal has been removed from the majority of vaccines the public exposure has been dropping… if thimerosal was one of the causative agents then we should be seeing a decrease in autism, or a decrease in the severity of autism cases.
If anyone could explain to me why my baby was given so many Hep-B vaccines between birth and age 1, I'd like to know! What's his risk to contract Hep-B at that young age (with a perfectly healthy mother)? 0 - that's ZERO!!! What's his risk for Autism? His older brother was delayed developmentally at the time and was diagnosed with autism two months later. It turned out that my baby carried 100% risk for autism when given all these SCHEDULED vaccines - he was diagnosed for autism at 16 months :(.
The TIMING for these early childhood vaccines, in particular Hep-B, is COMPLETELY WRONG!
The drug companies count on the public being apathetic and ignorant ablout how disease is actually spread. Dr's are fed misinformation by their drug reps. Dr's recieve incentives to dose the children. Hygiene, sanitation and healthy diet are the cornerstone of being healthy, not the junk science of vaccinating.
Do you have any factual evidence to back up those beliefs? Of course hygiene, sanitation and healthy diet are important, but so is a good program of public health - including vaccinations.
Melody Petersen's "Our Daily Meds" would be a good place to start.
Then read up on psychology, about how a parent who has accidentally injured their child (say, with a toxic vaccine) might want to deny their role in the tragedy .
You might find it autobiographical.
“Then read up on psychology, about how a parent who has accidentally injured their child (say, with a toxic vaccine) might want to deny their role in the tragedy .”
You mean like blaming an injection that their child was given during the same time period that autism first starts emerging?
Worst of all -- plaintiffs have no right to discovery either against the pharmaceutical industry or the government. Since autism is a behavioral affliction rather than a precisely defined biological injury -- epidemiological studies are critical to establishing its causation. But the greatest source of epidemiological data is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) -- the government maintained medical records of hundreds of thousands of vaccinated children -- which HHS has gone to great lengths to keep out of the hands of plaintiffs' attorneys and independent scientists. Unfortunately the vaccine court has judicially anointed this corrupt concealment by consistently denying every motion by petitioners to view the VSD. The raw data collected in the VSD would undoubtedly provide the epidemiological evidence needed to understand the relationship between vaccines and autism. The absence of such studies makes it easy for judges to say to plaintiffs they have not met their burden of proving causation.
I find myself wondering how cowardice qualifies as a defense.
Dr. Leitch, I respectfully disagree with your notion that you have to be vaccinated to be healthy. I was born in 1967 in LB, CA, USA. I was not vaccinated, I played in the mud, licked the grease off of my father's tools, exposed to chicken pox, was a normal kid etc... I never got a flu shot, yet I survived! I rarely get sick, yet my wife who was vaccinated as a child and receives flu shots gets the flu ALL THE TIME. Funny how she gets the flu, we live together and I rarely ( once every three or four years ) get the flu. It is extremely hard for me to believe that vaccination is necessary for healthy living. I work on cars for a living and I believe that asbestos and mesothelioma are connected, too. That is why I wear a mask when dealing with an auto in a shop. I definitely wouldn't inject that stuff into my body so why should I inject it into my child's body?
As for prenatal exposure, in addition to flu shots which are now being advised for pregnant women, the Rhogam shots, given to pregnant women who are Rh negative, have mercury in them.
Children get mercury-laced vaccines BEFORE they are born, thanks to Bush's FDA pushing flu shots on pregnant women.
Coincidentally, this is the time when the brain is most vulnerable to toxics because it is growing rapidly.
However, infants can be exposed to mercury in other ways, such as the annual 48 tons of mercury pollution from coal-fired power-plants. Bush's EPA stopped enforcing Clean Air Act Violations against them shortly after the "voluntary partial ban" on thimerosal.
This poison ends up in the babies brain BEFORE birth from the mother eating mercury-tainted fish. So autism could easily show up in the womb.
Unless you have some statistics to back that up then your claim is only supposition. Mercury is toxic, but the only link between autism and vaccines has been shown to be a fraud.
Has there ever been an identified case of a newborn with autism?
Show me the fraud, Mr. B.
I'll show you the Simpsonwood transcripts.
You mean the paper where Scientists listened to the reports and then rated the possibility of a link between autism and themrisal at 1.8 out of 6... with the highest ranking being a 4?
The same paper that includes:
" Part one, is there a causal association between ethylmercury and neurological effects noted in the Vaccine Study Datalink project? The answer is no. Why not? From a toxicologists (sic) viewpoint there is no dose response relationship (Page 191)
To me the increasing mercury levels in your population at one month… is so small that it would suggest to me that you have a confounder here. That this is not due to mercury. (page 213)
I gave it a value as 1. I think the strength of the associations are mostly weak and the weaker the associations, the more likely bias might explain some of this. (Page 217)
This is not designed as a study to look at the effects of these vaccines on the different outcomes, but it is using data collected for other reasons, so it is not a carefully controlled prospective cohort study to study. We are using data that was collected for other purposes. (Page 218)"
As to the fraud I give you Mr. Andrew Wakefield.
" http://briandeer.com/wakefield-deer.htm "
Can you cite recent studies that show a link between autism and vaccines ?
I have a problem with the statement concerning children showing signs of autism in early infancy before they have even had vaccinations. I do not think this is a fair statement to say. The truth is that babies get their first vaccination in the hospital when they are born. They again get shots at two months old.
The HepB vaccine is given on the day of birth. If signs of autism appear in infancy, how can you know that the HepB
shot doesn't play a role? So much for the claim that autism appears BEFORE any vaccines are given.
Infant are not in a risk group for Hep B. Hep B is spread the same way AIDS is. A side effect of th Hep B shot is Diabetes. Diabetes rates in infants is unbelieveable.. 1 in 450.
I personally know a Mother whose infant was given the Hep B, even though her Hep B status was Negative, and there was a signed exemption form. The nurse told the mother, that she thought it was best.
Infants are very much in a risk group for Hep B. Transmission occurs via:
1) unprotected sexual contact,
2) blood transfusions,
3) re-use of contaminated needles & syringes,
4) and vertical transmission from mother to child during childbirth.
Transmission between family members can also occur via nonintact skin.
Do infants have lots of unprotected sex, dirty needles and blood transfusions at your house? Because I try and find more age appropriate activities for them.
Dr.: First, with all do respect, I think you are oversimplifying the argument and leaving out the issue of genetic susceptibility followed by enviromental (including vaccine) insult. Moreover,you claim many babies show signs of autism before vaccines. Really? Since, in many states, babies receive their first vaccines in the hospital at birth I am not sure how widely that argument applies. Moreover, many mothers receive vaccines while pregannt that may have in utero impact -- we just don't know!