Tag Archives: autism and vaccines

Could the government EVER admit that vaccines cause autism?

I’m copying a comment on another blog, Age of Autism. Ann Dachel has articulated the underlying problem in the autism-vaccine controversy:

There is one topic that is NEVER talked about in news stories on autism–and I mean NEVER. You’ll never hear any reporter speculate on the possibility that many people have lots of reasons to cover up what vaccine are doing to kids. It would sound something like, “The U.S. government mandates the vaccine program so of course they would be held responsible if a link is clearly recognized.” To many people this is the unthinkable.

To any thinking person this is obvious but we never seem to bring up the topic. Instead we pretend that this is just about the science and that officials have left no stone unturned in their pursuit of the cause.

This came from a posting where Dan E. Burns describes sitting in a coverup conference for industries that made Agent Orange. Substitute vaccines for Agent Orange, and you may have a picture of what’s happening in industry and government trying to cover up their tail ends.

Source: http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/the-situation-room-autism-vaccines-and-agent-orange.html

Finally, a study comparing autism rates and vaccine use…

Some Canadians have done the study I’ve been hoping for, comparing autism rates and vaccine use. They’re from the University of British Columbia, and they published it in November in the  Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry.

These scientists, led by L. Tomljenovic and C.A. Shaw, focus on the aluminum used in the vaccines. Aluminum is a neurotoxin, and there’s a significant amount of it in a vaccine, enough to harm an adult who gets several vaccines, they said. “If exposure to Al from only few vaccines can lead to cognitive impairment and autoimmunity in adults, is it unreasonable to question whether the current pediatric schedules, often containing 18 Al adjuvanted vaccines, are safe for children?” reads their abstract.

The scientists correlated number and age of aluminum-containing vaccines against autism rates. They found a consistent statistically significant correlation across several populations, enough to think that the aluminum-containing vaccines could be causing autism. Further studies are warranted, said the abstract.

Why has it taken so long for someone to ask this question and then create a study to find the answer? Our research system in the U.S. is controlled by those with the money, the drug companies who are merrily churning out more and more vaccines. This has meant no significant study until now of the too-many, too-soon theory. That theory supposes that too many vaccines at too young an age could be to blame for the autism epidemic, which seems to coincide with the rise in the number of required vaccines.

So it’s taken some Canadians, funded by parent groups, to do this study. The groups funding the study are:

* The Katlyn Fox Foundation, “a parent-founded charitable foundation focused on raising funds for independent scientific research into the safety and efficacy of children’s vaccines. The funds will go directly to independent medical researchers as well as vaccine awareness groups.” Katlyn Fox was a 22-month-old child whose parents believe died as the result of taking vaccines.

* The Albert and Claire Dwoskin Family Foundation, an nonprofit that has supported the National Vaccine Information Center in the past.

I am guessing that vaccine proponents and unthinking people in the media will dismiss this study because of its funding, and continue to trumpet the line that people who criticize the vaccine schedules are foolish. But they don’t dismiss all the other studies funded by vaccine makers, who obviously have a stake in the outcome. (Note: those limited previous studies answer only two questions, whether the measles virus in the MMR shot causes autism, and whether the mercury ingredient that used to be in most vaccines causes autism. The answer to those questions seems to be no. But what about all the other things that could be adverse about too many vaccines, too soon? Such as aluminum and other ingredients?) I wish people would get fully educated on the issue.

See the study: “Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?

Scandal exposed in mercury-autism research

Our doctors told us that studies showed mercury in vaccines doesn’t cause autism, and studies showed the measles virus in the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism. Therefore, they concluded, vaccines don’t cause autism. (What about the 98 zillion other possible things in all vaccines that could be wrong?) Aside from this faulty logic, now it looks like the mercury in vaccines DID possibly cause autism, a fact known to some at the CDC at the time. And the mercury still in the flu shots.

What’s happened? Through the Freedom of Information Act, a citizen advocacy group has obtained copies of CDC emails to vaccine researchers that seem to show a coverup of research results. The actual research results showed that autism rates in the controversial Danish study dropped after the mercury was removed, although the resulting article claimed the rates increased.  The advocacy group, The Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs, is demanding that the journal Pediatrics retract the resulting article, and that the CDC launch an investigation.

So what else is being covered up for the benefit of those who profit from vaccines?

This is my kids we’re talking about, two out of four on the autism spectrum, all vaccinated on schedule to the hilt with thimerosal and everything else in the vaccine proponents’ arsenal at the time. Say, isn’t the government supposed to be protecting us? Grr.


Medical professor finds widespread bias in medical research

Beatrice Golomb, MD, PhD, is adding herself to the ranks of those who question the conclusions being drawn by modern medical research.  The issue she underscores: multiple conflicts of interest tend to distort results.

In a recent interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola of Mercola.com, she described some of the situations she has identified which trouble her. Golomb is an associate professor of medicine and family medicine at University of California-San Diego.

Golomb is a researcher on statin drugs who wanted to set up a trial independent of the drug companies. The only way to do that is to ask NIH for money for the trial. But NIH insisted that the application involve asking the drug company to provide the drug for free. NIH didn’t want to pay for the drug. So the research could not be independent, said Golomb.

Not only do the drug companies fund part or all of every drug study, but they put pressure on the journals to publish articles favorable to them. It’s financial pressure: the drug companies pull their advertising if an unfavorable article might be published, and the advertising is what funds the magazine. Favorable articles, on the other hand, produce plenty of revenue to the magazine in the form of copyrighted copies of the articles to be distributed by drug sales people to doctors, charges Golomb.

Golomb was looking at a particular issue involving statin drugs. Favorable studies were published, but unfavorable ones were not, skewing the apparent usefulness of the drug. In fact, the effect was so pronounced that when the unfavorable results were factored in, the effectiveness of the drug went from the reported 90 percent down to just 50 percent. “That’s the difference between unanimity and a coin toss,” said Golomb.

Mercola, writing up the interview, mentions Paul Offitt, the vaccine inventor and researcher who has been critical of those who suspect vaccines may play a part in autism.  Offitt advocates accepting all the medical journals have to say, accepting some illogic in the process as I have detailed in previous posts.

Mercola also said,

It’s virtually impossible to expect a publicly traded pharmaceutical company, which has a major obligation to its stockholders, to simultaneously have the patient’s best interest at heart. As Golomb says, the two are fundamentally incompatible. And yet this is THE source of the vast majority of the funding for all our science-based evidence.

Source: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/06/12/beatrice-golomb-interview.aspx

Autism and vaccines: “The Vaccine War” on PBS tonight!

A PBS documentary on “The Vaccine War,” featuring Jenny McCarthy and others, will be shown tonight. Times will vary depending on where you are, of course. Here in St. Louis, it’s at 9 p.m.  Check your local PBS station website for the time where you are, and let’s tune in to see what PBS thinks the scoop is!

A study of autism outcome in vaccinated vs unvaccinated: found?

A frequent commenter on this blog, Mike, is a skeptic on Yasko and the possible autism-vaccine connection.

On a recent post of mine, “News media accepting illogic on autism and vaccines again,” I said, “Research has NOT INVESTIGATED these further possibilities (of a link between autism and multiple vaccines). Here are the ones that come to mind:

“1. The immature immune system (first day of life and following) cannot deal with the vaccines, at least in some cases.

“2. Taking multiple vaccines at the same time may overwhelm the young immune system.

“3. A vaccine ingredient, currently unidentified, is toxic to some children.

“These have NOT been tested. … As I have said before, a simple study could settle this question: comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.  Are the medical people AFRAID to do it?”

Mike in response posted links to reports on a study that did compare autism outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, done by the Danish Epidemiological Center, published in 2003. It found no correlation between vaccination and autism. Here are the links:


And the follow up


Thank you, Mike! I am interested to see this.

Unfortunately, at closer inspection, it isn’t the comparison that I am calling for. I would like to see a comparison of the full set of vaccinations that are currently required for kids in the US, against no vaccinations at all. There are enough conscientious objectors now that this is possible.

The kids in Denmark aren’t in the same situation as the kids in the U.S. Here’s why: the kids in the U.S. get three times as many vaccine shots as the ones in Denmark, according to a study by Generation Rescue in April, 2009.  That shows 36 required shots in the U.S., compared to 12 in Denmark.

This study Mike linked to simply asked the question whether and when the child received the MMR vaccine, and symptoms related only to that vaccine.  It is one of the studies that apparently proves that the MMR vaccine, as used in Denmark at the time, by itself does not cause autism. This was a large study, looking at more than 500,000 children, the kind of study that should uncover correlations if there are any.

So, now I am asking again for a study investigating the effect of multiple vaccines on American children. This study doesn’t answer that question.

By the way, the Generation Rescue study looked at published statistics from 34 developed countries. The US has the most required shots, or doses, of any of them, and also the worst mortality rate for children under 5 of any of them. The average number of doses is 13, for these 34 countries, compared to our 36.

News media accepting illogic on autism and vaccines again

There was an article in the Los Angeles Times March 13 (and widely distributed by the Associated Press) in which yet another reporter reported an unbalanced story–failing to report the “other side of the question” –perpetuating the autism-vaccine logical fallacy yet again.

Thomas H. Maugh reported that the government vaccine court has declared that thimerosal, a mercury additive largely discontinued from vaccines, does not cause autism.  This is not surprising and is in fact a logical conclusion. The reason is that while thimerosal is not an ingredient in most vaccines since 2001, autism rates continue to climb.

Maugh’s fallacy is faulty generalizing.  He takes the thimerosal assertion and combines it with another: that the measles vaccine in the MMR shot does not cause autism, at least in most cases. I’ll grant that to be apparently true as well–research supports it.

Therefore, says Maugh, parents should accept that vaccines do not cause autism. There is the fallacy, generalizing from insufficient evidence.  Vaccines could be causing autism by any number of other ways.

Meanwhile, it’s obvious that autism rates have gone up at the same rate and time that the number of childhood vaccines has gone up. There could well be a correlation. The medical establishment should look into it, disregarding their vested interest in the vaccine system.

Research has NOT INVESTIGATED these further possibilities. Here are the ones that come to mind:

1. The immature immune system (first day of life and following) cannot deal with the vaccines, at least in some cases.

2. Taking multiple vaccines at the same time may overwhelm the young immune system.

3. A vaccine ingredient, currently unidentified, is toxic to some children.

These have NOT been tested. Mr. Maugh and colleagues, quit swallowing the line of the vaccine proponents and get on the ball!! You are not doing a service to your country. Please investigate and report the other side.

As I have said before, a simple study could settle this question: comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.  Are the medical people AFRAID to do it?

Autism and vaccines: Associated Press, Time Mag. got it wrong


There was an article in today’s paper by the Associated Press that declared that the autism-vaccine question has been settled. Funny, that’s news to me.

The reporter, Carla K. Johnson in Chicago, wrote, “…much has been written about research that has failed to find a link between vaccines and autism.”  Just a single study raised the question, she said, and it has been retracted. Case closed:  “Fear of a vaccine-autism connection stems from a flawed and speculative 1998 study that recently was retracted by a British medical journal. The retraction came after a council that regulates Britain’s doctors ruled the study’s author acted dishonestly and unethically.”

Whether that particular study was retracted because of politics is a matter of debate. This was the study that suggested that the measles vaccine in the MMR shot causes autism.  The sample size was tiny, and results were debatable.

Time Magazine on Feb. 25 made a similar claim: “And yet research conclusively shows that vaccines are safe for children; just last month, the U.K. scientist who had published a study linking the MMR shot to autism was found by a British medical panel to have acted unethically.”

I would like to tell these under-informed and surely well-meaning news reporters that there are manifold reasons why and how vaccines could cause autism, and this retracted study addressed only one possibility, that of the measles virus in the MMR somehow running amok.

Another possible vaccine-autism link that seems discredited is the theory that thimerosal, a mercury additive in pre-2001 shots, causes autism. Here’s why it’s discredited–despite the fact that there’s no thimerosal in the shots, autism rates continue to rise.

Therefore, if there is an autism-vaccine link, it probably has to do with something besides those two possible causes. For example, the “too many, too soon” theory which says that the many many sticks that kids get these days, at a very young age, could be a cause. There are other possibilities that we don’t know about yet.

What we do know is:

* that the autism epidemic has risen alongside the number of required shots

* that the anecdotal evidence, including before-and-after videos on Youtube, is overwhelming from families reporting regression soon after taking shots

* that the autism epidemic surely has at least partly an environmental cause, because an epidemic cannot have a solely genetic cause

* that vaccines under development are tested alone, not in combination with others, and

* that the medical establishment has a huge vested interest in creating and marketing vaccines.

What we need is a definitive study that compares vaccinated populations and unvaccinated.  THAT study would prove it one way or another, not the tiny measles vaccine study that appeared to be flawed.  The Associated Press article I am discussing reports on a University of Michigan phone survey a year ago of 1,552 parents inquiring about whether they were vaccinating their children.  It’s a shame surveyors didn’t also inquire about whether their children are autistic, permitting correlation of the two pieces of data.

Photo by M. Bartosch at freedigitalphotos.net

NAET treatment for autism: promising

Shannon is continuing her NAET treatments for her Asperger’s.  It’s some sort of acupressure aimed at specific allergens or substances that the body reacts to.  She had a big reaction to the treatment for the MMR vaccine, and then a week later another big reaction to a treatment for the DPT vaccine.  Interesting! She recovered in 25 hours, meaning that her system should now no longer be affected by those.

Although we have autism in our family (my brother is autistic), I always wondered whether she also falls into the category of kids who regressed at a young age possibly because of vaccines.  She started showing symptoms of what I called “a little bit of autism” at age 4 (in 1991 when the epidemic hadn’t started yet). She stopped looking people in the eye. Before that, she was a totally normal child.