possibly false data MMR/Autism link

Everyone's opinion is important. Please don't bash anyone else's ideas or opinions on what I know is a very controversial subject. However, what do you think about the possibility that the data was manipulated? Why would he want to manipulate the data to prove a theory that might not be valid? Does this change your opinion of vaccinations? England has had fatal cases of measles in 2008.

(moderators, feel free to delete this post if you feel it's too inflammatory or starts turning ugly, I understand)

http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-deer-1.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_...icle5683671.ece


Other studies suggest that autism may be linked to bowel disease?

 

I've never believed that the study was accurate. How can you prove something with such a small study group? On the other hand, my children are receiving separate MMR vaccinations. If they develop autism, I'll know I did all I could to prevent it. I don't expect others to do the same thing, it's just the only way I knew that I could live with myself if they did have autism. I've learned though my life how I handle guilt and it's not very well. I just couldn't imagine playing the "what if" game with myself for the rest of my life.

I think there should be an option. (or the option should be easier to obtain). By separating the vaccines, kids are still getting the prevention needed, but parents have more of a choice in it.

 

Even if this was true (and not saying that it isn't), but do you honestly think any gov't is going to say that any vaccine is unsafe? Of course they won't. No one will go against big pharma, they have their greedy little hands in everything and anyone who does is discredited. Who knows who is right or wrong. The gov't won't do any long term studies so that leaves indepentants to do it. And no this absolutely does not change my opinion about vaxs.

 

I don't know what to think about the research but I personally feel that the standard US vaccination schedule is a bit too intense. We started out on the standard schedule, then we decided to slow it down a bit. Our kids will still get all of their vaccines, just at a less intense pace. Never more than 2 vax's at a time, and we chose to split the MMR. You have to pay for the individual vaccines, but it is worth it for us, since we have a lot of immune system dysfunctions in our family-- allergies, etc. Also, my brother had some genetic testing done and he was told that he had a predisposition to developing autism if he had been raised in environmentally taxing circumstances (specifically, today's toxic environment versus the one he was raised in 25 years ago). Who knows? Not me, so I am erring on the side of caution and choosing to separate and somewhat delay on a schedule that feels comfortable to me. Thankfully, we have a ped on board with our plan.

FYI: You can get the vax's separated from Hopewell Pharmacy in New Jersey.

 

The doctor who performed the "study" (and I use that term very loosely), was paid directly by lawyers representing parents who were suing the vaccine companies claiming the MMR vaccine caused their children's autism. At least some of the children in the study were these very same children, hardly impartial or ethical. I also agree that the test group of 12 children is ridiculously small. The same researcher placed names of respected colleagues on the study to gain credibility even though the colleagues had nothing to do with the research and didn't even know their names were attached to it. This is not a conspiracy by the government, it's a conspiracy by the lawyers who get paid no matter who wins or loses. Andrew Wakefield falsified the data because he was paid to "prove" a link.

 

QUOTE(becasquared @ Feb 10 2009, 11:46 AM) [snapback]1184335[/snapback]
Everyone's opinion is important. Please don't bash anyone else's ideas or opinions on what I know is a very controversial subject. However, what do you think about the possibility that the data was manipulated? Why would he want to manipulate the data to prove a theory that might not be valid? Does this change your opinion of vaccinations? England has had fatal cases of measles in 2008.

(moderators, feel free to delete this post if you feel it's too inflammatory or starts turning ugly, I understand)

http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-deer-1.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_...icle5683671.ece
Other studies suggest that autism may be linked to bowel disease?


Although this may be the first indication of intentional manipulation of data, this study has been debunked for years. The other researchers involved have distanced themselves, and the study is facially flawed from a scientific perspective. I have never believed that there is any link between the MMR (or any vaccine) and autism, so this just furthers my belief. There have been numerous studies at this point disproving any link.

 

QUOTE(angie7 @ Feb 10 2009, 12:07 PM) [snapback]1184365[/snapback]
Even if this was true (and not saying that it isn't), but do you honestly think any gov't is going to say that any vaccine is unsafe? Of course they won't. No one will go against big pharma, they have their greedy little hands in everything and anyone who does is discredited. Who knows who is right or wrong. The gov't won't do any long term studies so that leaves indepentants to do it. And no this absolutely does not change my opinion about vaxs.


The government has done studies, and surprisingly the vaccination business isn't a big profit center - which is why the number of companies is down to I think 4 from dozens. In any case, what is to be gained by pushing harmful vaccines on the nation's children? The cost of treating the diseases would be more profitable to the pharmaceutical companies.

I just don't understand when vaccines, which have eradicated diseases worldwide and nationwide, because the enemy?

 

QUOTE(mommymeg @ Feb 10 2009, 11:57 AM) [snapback]1184352[/snapback]
I've never believed that the study was accurate. How can you prove something with such a small study group? On the other hand, my children are receiving separate MMR vaccinations. If they develop autism, I'll know I did all I could to prevent it. I don't expect others to do the same thing, it's just the only way I knew that I could live with myself if they did have autism. I've learned though my life how I handle guilt and it's not very well. I just couldn't imagine playing the "what if" game with myself for the rest of my life.

I think there should be an option. (or the option should be easier to obtain). By separating the vaccines, kids are still getting the prevention needed, but parents have more of a choice in it.


There are benefits to children being fully vaccinated by age 2, but medically there is no reason to get the MMR all at once instead of divided. As long as they are fully dosed by age 2. For the record, I don't think there is any reason to split it up, but there is no harm in doing so.

 

QUOTE(Mom to Jack and Anna @ Feb 10 2009, 07:45 PM) [snapback]1184599[/snapback]
The government has done studies, and surprisingly the vaccination business isn't a big profit center - which is why the number of companies is down to I think 4 from dozens.

I just don't understand when vaccines, which have eradicated diseases worldwide and nationwide, because the enemy?


I think you need to do some research as far as the gov't doing studies. Recently the CDC announced to the gov't that their studies were misleading and weak.

http://evidenceofharm.com/VaccineDataLinkR...ngressFinal.pdf (specifically page 5 & 6)

Also there is much proof that diseases were extremely declined before vaccines were even given to the public. For example, measles was down 90% before the first vaccine was created. The knowledge is out there if you chose to look for it. Knowledge is power.

QUOTE
In any case, what is to be gained by pushing harmful vaccines on the nation's children? The cost of treating the diseases would be more profitable to the pharmaceutical companies.


These same companies do make the drugs to treat medical diseases and conditions...and they do make a considerable amount of money by pumping today's people full of meds so why wouldn't they want them sick? Just asking of course....Everyone takes meds now a days. Rather then diet and exercise for a condition, they pop you a pill. Simple and easy right? Chronically ill people make more money then a disease that can be treated and recovered from.

ETA: Merck doubles profit in 2008 to 7.8 billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090203/bs_af...nyearningsmerck

Crucell's profit for 2008 14.6 million (they have license agreement with GlaxoSmithKline & Sanofi Pasteur)
http://www.direktbroker.de/news-kurse/deta...s+for+/20027066

Wyeth profit for 2008 is 1.02 billion
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1202089408...5.html?mod=MKTW

and these are just a very, very few that make vaccines and other pharmaceuticals....I don't think they are hurting for money. There are millions, billions to be made off of chronically ill people..

 

QUOTE(angie7 @ Feb 10 2009, 02:27 PM) [snapback]1184704[/snapback]
Everyone takes meds now a days. Rather then diet and exercise for a condition, they pop you a pill. Simple and easy right?


Boy, I honestly hope you never find yourself in the position to need something that simple diet and exercise doesn't cure. And, I certainly hope you or your children don't find yourself facing a serious illness that a simple vaccination from "Big Bad Pharm" could have prevented.

 

This is a hot topic!

I've done my own research and talked to our ped (who I trust a lot) at length about vax. To me there is much more risk in not vaccinating than vaccinating.
We've chosen to vax- on schedule- and I'm very happy with this decision. I would rather them be protected than to come down with a preventable disease.

 

QUOTE(angie7 @ Feb 10 2009, 03:27 PM) [snapback]1184704[/snapback]
I think you need to do some research as far as the gov't doing studies. Recently the CDC announced to the gov't that their studies were misleading and weak.

http://evidenceofharm.com/VaccineDataLinkR...ngressFinal.pdf (specifically page 5 & 6)

Also there is much proof that diseases were extremely declined before vaccines were even given to the public. For example, measles was down 90% before the first vaccine was created. The knowledge is out there if you chose to look for it. Knowledge is power.
These same companies do make the drugs to treat medical diseases and conditions...and they do make a considerable amount of money by pumping today's people full of meds so why wouldn't they want them sick? Just asking of course....Everyone takes meds now a days. Rather then diet and exercise for a condition, they pop you a pill. Simple and easy right?

ETA: Merck doubles profit in 2008 to 7.8 billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090203/bs_af...nyearningsmerck


Maybe it's just my interpretation, but I don't get the anger directed at me in your post. I wasn't rude to you - just stated my thoughts in a non-confrontational manner. I have done an enormous amount of research on vaccines and potential side effects. The bottom line is that no study (with the exception of Wakefield's, which is only loosely a study) has shown a connection between vaccines and autism. Numerous studies have tended to disprove a connection.

Without question, vaccines have eradicated smallpox worldwide, polio in the U.S., and dramatically lessened the rates of many diseases that killed children. Hib, tetanus - these diseases still have significant death rates even with modern science. All the diet and exercise in the world doesn't prevent polio - vaccines do. I simply stated that I do not understand when they became the enemy. Honestly, I think it started with Wakefield's "study", which we know to be a poor basis for any decisions.

And I go back to my previous point - what do the vaccine companies have to gain by knowingly giving children vaccines that will harm them? As you pointed out, they make the drugs that fight the diseases too - a bout of measles is a bigger profit center than an MMR shot.

For me, it comes down to a known risk (the diseases that vaccines prevent) vs. a theoretical at best risk (potential harm from vaccines).

 

QUOTE
ETA: Merck doubles profit in 2008 to 7.8 billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090203/bs_af...nyearningsmerck


Actually, that may be true, but the increase in profits are due to massive lay offs and increase in medications for diabetes, cholestorol and osteoperosis. Pharmacuticals are lucky to break even on vaccines, if not record a loss.

 

QUOTE(gina_leigh @ Feb 10 2009, 03:42 PM) [snapback]1184738[/snapback]
This is a hot topic!

I've done my own research and talked to our ped (who I trust a lot) at length about vax. To me there is much more risk in not vaccinating than vaccinating.
We've chosen to vax- on schedule- and I'm very happy with this decision. I would rather them be protected than to come down with a preventable disease.


We have done the same thing and feel comfortable in our decision.

 

QUOTE(Mom to Jack and Anna @ Feb 10 2009, 12:47 PM) [snapback]1184603[/snapback]
There are benefits to children being fully vaccinated by age 2, but medically there is no reason to get the MMR all at once instead of divided. As long as they are fully dosed by age 2. For the record, I don't think there is any reason to split it up, but there is no harm in doing so.


Can you write more about the benefits of being vaccinated by age 2? I hadn't heard this... but am interested in learning more. We're delaying and splitting a lot of vaccines for our girls, and had planned several after the age of 2.

 

QUOTE(becasquared @ Feb 10 2009, 08:46 AM) [snapback]1184335[/snapback]
Everyone's opinion is important. Please don't bash anyone else's ideas or opinions on what I know is a very controversial subject. However, what do you think about the possibility that the data was manipulated? Why would he want to manipulate the data to prove a theory that might not be valid? Does this change your opinion of vaccinations? England has had fatal cases of measles in 2008.

(moderators, feel free to delete this post if you feel it's too inflammatory or starts turning ugly, I understand)

http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-deer-1.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_...icle5683671.ece
Other studies suggest that autism may be linked to bowel disease?

Have you seen this sticky, in our Health Issues forum?
Everything you wanted to know about vaccines

 

QUOTE(angie7 @ Feb 10 2009, 12:27 PM) [snapback]1184704[/snapback]
Also there is much proof that diseases were extremely declined before vaccines were even given to the public. For example, measles was down 90% before the first vaccine was created. The knowledge is out there if you chose to look for it. Knowledge is power.

Knowledge is power. Correct knowledge is even better. I have seen your above claim before, here (post #62).
Please be sure to read all the way to the end of the thread (post #65), to get the real scoop. Even better, read the entire thread.

 

QUOTE(4lilmonkeys @ Feb 10 2009, 03:34 PM) [snapback]1184725[/snapback]
Boy, I honestly hope you never find yourself in the position to need something that simple diet and exercise doesn't cure.


Big big ditto.

 

QUOTE(gina_leigh @ Feb 10 2009, 04:42 PM) [snapback]1184738[/snapback]
This is a hot topic!

I've done my own research and talked to our ped (who I trust a lot) at length about vax. To me there is much more risk in not vaccinating than vaccinating.
We've chosen to vax- on schedule- and I'm very happy with this decision. I would rather them be protected than to come down with a preventable disease.



I have to agree....we talked in great length to our ped about vax's and especially the MMR. We came to the same decision that the risk would be greater to not vaccinate.

 

Again, this is just *my* take on the whole thing-but I'm very pro-vaccine, especially since family members of mine had polio, and I had German Measles. I can sort of see the opinion about Big Bad Pharm in the US, but here in the UK, with everything being national health care, there is really no profit margin at all, as we pay little or nothing for our medications unless we choose to do something privately.

 

I went to an autism convention and a resarcher form there gave a speech and said they are know thinking that there are different types of Autism such as genetic and environmental. Environmental being things like the vaccine or other things the child has been exposed to. My gut feeling is that the vaccine doesn't cause Autism, just how a particular vaccine reacts to a specific person might trigger Autism to develop. For instance I could take a perscription and be fine where as someone else might take the same medicine and have an upset stomach. For me we are going to vaccinate on a delayed schedule. My vet won't even give my yorkie more than one vaccine at a time and it has to be spaced appart because she said small dogs in her experience have had addverse affects to booster vaccines. So after hearing that I couldn't possibly give a baby more than one vaccine at a time. My ped is for vaccines, but he also believe in spacing them appart. Personally I think some vaccine are a little redicoulus. For instance I think there is no reason to give a one day old baby the hep vaccine. I have also worked with children with Autism I can't not help but think of all the stories I have heard form the moms. I feel like they have to count for something. I thought I heard that someone won a law suite in like NC proving that the vaccine was linked to her child's Autism.

 

QUOTE(4lilmonkeys @ Feb 10 2009, 08:34 PM) [snapback]1184725[/snapback]
Boy, I honestly hope you never find yourself in the position to need something that simple diet and exercise doesn't cure. And, I certainly hope you or your children don't find yourself facing a serious illness that a simple vaccination from "Big Bad Pharm" could have prevented.


Boy, that's a funny statement considering I am disabled and I have 2 very rare neurological diseases that are going to leave me dead or paralized from the neck down. There are no drugs to cure me, just ones to ease the symptoms of many neuro problems slowly killing my nerves from my spinal cord and brain to the rest of my body. I chose not to take any of these drugs as I don't want the side effects of the meds. I sure wish diet and exercise would help me. And one HUGE reason why I don't vax my kids is my conditions are being linked to genetics which they could potentially have. I don't want to subject neurotoxins to my kids that very well could have 1 or both of my neurological conditions. But I also believe that vaxs are dangerous and poisonious. We all have our own opinions and our reasons why. I will not debate this topic again on this site. It seems that many claim to do research but talking to your doctor, does not classify as research, it's a biased opinion...Goodbye

 

Angie if you don't enjoy defending your beliefs or debating a topic like an adult, why express your opinion in the first place? I admire that you have such strong beliefs even if I personally don't agree with them. There's no need for any of us to personally attack anyone for their choices. Personally, I do not distrust doctors and I don't believe there is a huge conspiracy by the gov't to poison us all for a profit. And personally having a chronic condition myself, I choose not to suffer needlessly when there are drugs that can make my life and the lives of those around me a little better. As for knowledge being power, you are so right. I personally never look to the interest groups on the internet for my healthcare options, but there are those that do. Being a scientific minded person, I want completely factual data before I make any health care decision. This can be obtained by going to any university library and looking in medical and research journals, reading the information, comparing studies over the years through literature reviews, etc. Real data is the only truth. A study is only accurate if it is valid scientifically and reproduceable over and over. Scientists live their lives doing such research. Some is gov't funded and some is not. Either way, the results are available to everyone. Never trust the opinions of internet people,especially special interest groups, for medical info.

Now, that said, no doctor is 100% right 100% of the time. We are blessed in this country to have the option to visit as many as we want until we get answers or help. Drugs are not always the answer either. Just look at antibiotics! People have created super bacteria by over using something that can and does save lives. If your kid has a cold, don't run to the dr for antibiotics! I blame parents and the dr's that give the ab's to them just to shut them up. That is bad medicine. Face it, we are all human and some humans are good people and they care about finding answers to help people. The rest may care but may not do the research to make sure they are doing the right thing. Then of course there are the greedy, non-human types. Most of them are not researchers/scientists though. Maybe the CEO of a big pharm company might fund research and not consider the actual results, but he has little control over what the medical and scientific community will do with the results. Heck, our gov't has prohibited the free things drug companies gave dr's to use thier drug over another companies drug. But even when they did it was only a severely unethical dr that would prescribe something that was not already indicated for treatment of a patient's condition. Why would they? It's dangerous and there is nothing to gain. If the gov't didn't care about us, why would it put this in place or fund research at all? Ok, I got carried away here.

I have strong feeling on this subject as well. I am fully aware that vaccines can have side effects and some of the very rare ones are pretty scary. However, the data proves that more children die from measles in one year, even now, than have severe side effects from the vaccine. You want to be frightened? Look at the side effects of any medications you take. I always read the inserts and yes, there can be deadly consequenses for some people. But lives saved can outweigh the bad in some cases. If I sacrifice my life to save ten others, it is my choice and I would be proud to do it. My twins have autism, for those that don't know that already. It had nothing at all to do with vaccines because they didn't have any before I knew they had autism.So you could say the fear had made me question what I knew was false, but oh well, atleast I know for a fact autism was not caused by vaccines! One case in the US has linked a vaccine- not even MMR- to autism-like symptoms (read that carefully, it does not say autism) due to the little girl having a very, very rare mitochondrial disorder. This type of neurological disorder is NOT autism. Anyway, if doctors and the gov't were so gung ho to kill us all, why did they and are they doing several research studies trying to find a way to identify any pre-existing biological disorders prior to giving infants vaccines?? I mean, severe side effects are very rare, more rare than death and disability from the diseases they prevent. Of course side effects sometimes terrify me because what if it is my kid that dies from the pertussus vaccine? Well, I would be devistated of course but I wouldn't sue the vaccine company or the gov't if it happened. It's not their fault, I made the decision to try and protect my children with vaccines, so I knowingly accept the responsibility. I would rather try and prevent than regret it later.

Anyway, autism-like symptoms exist in many forms caused by many different diseases,genetic disorders,epilepsy, and environmental toxins (super high concentrations of poisons). I do not believe autism-like symptoms means a person has autism. I do know/believe those children who are "recovered" from autism are NOT truly recovered either. I mean they still have it, they still need a special diet/drug/DAN doctor/supplimentation system to remain "recovered". That is bull crap. They are undergoing treatment and are responding well. If they were recovered, they would not need intervention any longer in any form. I am amazed by kids with autism that learn to deal with and compensate for their condition and difficulties. That is what they do, they learn to compensate and they learn to function in our world. Usually through many years of therapies and some people also use biomedical interventions as well. No biomed. practitioner will ever say stop all therapies, I can fix it naturally. It isn't possible. If someone comes out of autism, it may not have been (probably wasn't) autism to begin with. Misdiagnosis/overdiagnosis could be on the rise. Fear has struck the hearts of every parent. I for one will say I want my kids to function in the world to the best of their abilities, but I also accept and embrace their autism as who they are, part of them as though it were freckles or brown hair. I can't change it nor do I want to. I love them and they love me. They are vibrant, loving, fun and very bright. Autistic children do develop and thrive generally. They just do it slower or at their own pace and they need lots of help to learn. They have a world of their own and they have to learn to deal with ours. It must be hard for them but don't for once think they don't know what is going on around them. They so totally do. Okay, enough from me. Thanks for listening!

 

QUOTE(Chase&Parker @ Feb 10 2009, 06:06 PM) [snapback]1184893[/snapback]
We have done the same thing and feel comfortable in our decision.

Likewise - much safer to be vaccinated than to get the diseases. I do believe that you are born with autism. And I think that a child shows signs of autism around the same time they get their vaccinations. I think its just bad timing - I do not believe they are linked.

 

More information about the actual study subject is available to the public now due to the court case now in progress in London. Anyway, I will take an excerpt and quote it here. The actual link to the info is at www.change.org

Liz Ditz at I Speak of Dreams has noted, quite a few people have been commenting on the discovery that data in the 1998 study on the MMR and autism were altered. What stands out to me is what the medical records reveal about the "regression" that the children in the study are said to have experienced. As noted in Sunday's Times of London, developmental and other delays were noted in many of the children prior to them receiving the MMR vaccine:

(Emphases in this admittedly long quotation from the Times of London in italics are mind.)

The first [inconsistency], in the Lancet tables, concerned the first child in the paper: Child One, from Cottesmore, Leicestershire. He was 3½ years old and the son of an air force pilot. In November 1995, his parents had been devastated after receiving a diagnosis of autism.

“Mr and Mrs [One]’s most recent concern is that the MMR vaccination given to their son may be responsible,” their GP told the hospital in a letter.

In the paper this claim would be adopted, with Wakefield and his team reporting that Child One’s parents said “behavioural symptoms” started “one week” after he received the MMR.

The boy’s medical records reveal a subtly different story, one familiar to mothers and fathers of autistic children. At the age of 9½ months, 10 weeks before his jab, his mother had become worried that he did not hear properly: the classic first symptom presented by sufferers of autism.

Child One was among the eight reported with the apparent sudden onset of the condition. So was the next child to be admitted.

This was Child Two, an eight-year-old boy from Peter-borough, Cambridgeshire, diagnosed with regressive autism, which, according to the Lancet paper, started “two weeks” after his jab.

However, this child’s medical records, backed by numerous specialist assessments, said his problems began three to five months later.

The difference between 14 days and a few months is significant, according to experts. Autism usually reveals itself in the second year of life, when the vaccine is routinely given. If there was no sudden onset after the MMR injection, as claimed for the “syndrome”, the condition could be ascribed to a conventional pattern.

More apparent anomalies lurked among the following 10 children, as they arrived at the Royal Free hospital between September 1996 and February 1997.

Only one was a girl, Child Eight, aged 3, from Whitley Bay, Tyne & Wear. She was reported in the journal as having suffered a brain injury “two weeks” after MMR.

Her medical records did not support this. Before she was admitted, she had been seen by local specialists, and her GP told the Royal Free of “significant concerns about her development some months before she had her MMR”.

Child Six, aged 5, and Child Seven, aged 3, were said to have been diagnosed with regressive autism, with an onset of symptoms “one week” and “24 hours” after the jab respectively.

But medical records show that neither boy was “previously normal”, as the Lancet article described all the children, and that both had already been hospitalised with brain problems before their MMR.

Child Six received his vaccine at the age of 14 months, but had twice previously been admitted with fits.

Child Seven was given his at the age of 20 months but, again, problems already showed.

“He developed well, had social smiling and was responsive to his mother,” a psychiatrist wrote. “But he began to have pale episodes and ? [sic] petit mal [convulsions], and had an EEG [an electroencephalogram, a common test for epilepsy] done at 15 months, which was abnormal.”

Meanwhile, neither was diagnosed with regressive autism, or even nonregressive classical autism. Three of the children had been diagnosed with Asperger’s disorder, in which language is not lost, and which is not regressive: nothing like what afflicted One and Two. This was also the diagnosis for Child Twelve in the series, a six-year-old boy from Burgess Hill, West Sussex.

And Seven would be diagnosed with an odd behavioural condition called “pathological demand avoidance syndrome”. This usually manifests as social manipulativeness, and is nothing like the “syndrome” being claimed. It is sometimes marked by a child putting his hands on his ears, while singing “lah-lah-lah, can’t hear you”.

Accounts of a child changing "suddenly" and "overnight" are regularly given by people claiming that vaccines or something in vaccines "caused" a child to become autistic. Such claims are not surprising: Parents aren't saying that they think a vaccine or something in a vaccine "causes" their child to "become" autistic out of the blue. But looking closer at cases like those of the children in the 1998 Lancet study reveals a pattern, of a claim of "regressive autism" after a child received a vaccine when, in fact, the child had already presented with developmental delays, signs of epilepsy or seizures, or other concerns. For instance, in the Autism Omnibus "vaccine court" hearing in June 2007 for then 12-year-old Michelle Cedillo, videotapes showed that she had already been showing signs of delayed and/or unusual development prior to receiving her vaccines. (A transcript from the most recent Autism Omnibus trial can be read here.)

Promote Respectful Language---ask people to think at least twice about the language they use when talking about autism and when talking to individuals on the autism spectrum. One reason that the alleged "link" of vaccines to autism is turning out to be so detrimental is that this hypothesis of autism causation suggests that having autism means an individual is "damaged" or has been "injured," or even "poisoned"; that autism is something that an individual can "get." Autism, it's implied, is analogous to some sort of external agent, some thing "outside" a child, that somehow "gets into" him or her and "makes" him or her "become" autistic.

commentary by Kristina Chew from Change.org

 

QUOTE(KellyJ @ Feb 10 2009, 08:56 PM) [snapback]1185414[/snapback]
Anyway, autism-like symptoms exist in many forms caused by many different diseases,genetic disorders,epilepsy, and environmental toxins (super high concentrations of poisons). I do not believe autism-like symptoms means a person has autism. I do know/believe those children who are "recovered" from autism are NOT truly recovered either. I mean they still have it, they still need a special diet/drug/DAN doctor/supplimentation system to remain "recovered". That is bull crap. They are undergoing treatment and are responding well. If they were recovered, they would not need intervention any longer in any form. I am amazed by kids with autism that learn to deal with and compensate for their condition and difficulties. That is what they do, they learn to compensate and they learn to function in our world. Usually through many years of therapies and some people also use biomedical interventions as well. No biomed. practitioner will ever say stop all therapies, I can fix it naturally. It isn't possible. If someone comes out of autism, it may not have been (probably wasn't) autism to begin with. Misdiagnosis/overdiagnosis could be on the rise. Fear has struck the hearts of every parent. I for one will say I want my kids to function in the world to the best of their abilities, but I also accept and embrace their autism as who they are, part of them as though it were freckles or brown hair. I can't change it nor do I want to. I love them and they love me. They are vibrant, loving, fun and very bright. Autistic children do develop and thrive generally. They just do it slower or at their own pace and they need lots of help to learn. They have a world of their own and they have to learn to deal with ours. It must be hard for them but don't for once think they don't know what is going on around them. They so totally do. Okay, enough from me. Thanks for listening!


Wow, thank you for such a thoughtful and well written response. I didn't want to quote the whole thing for space reasons - but I really appreciated your point of view.

And what a beautiful way to describe your children.

Fear of the unknown is so scary - and from the moment we learn we are pregnant, we can't let that fear drive us - but it can sure be a powerful force.

 

As you all can see in another thread, another member's nephew has passed the day after getting his one year shots. Not that the shots are linked to his death, but his death could be one of the terrible and terribly rare side effects of vaccinations.

KellyJ and Angie7, thank you both for your passionate responses on both sides of this. I too feel that (generally speaking) autism is something that you are born with and that manifests itself around the same time as the MMR immunization would occur. I also feel that part of the increase in autism diagnoses is that it's a known condition now, prior to the 40's and 50's doctors probably just considered it schizophrenia or another mental illness and whisked them off to the institution where they would have been treated for the wrong diagnosis.

 

QUOTE(idril @ Feb 10 2009, 05:37 PM) [snapback]1184938[/snapback]
Can you write more about the benefits of being vaccinated by age 2? I hadn't heard this... but am interested in learning more. We're delaying and splitting a lot of vaccines for our girls, and had planned several after the age of 2.


There are a few reasons. There are issues with the timing of boosters - they need to be given within a specific window after the first shot, so you don't want to spread the boosters too far from the initial shot. The shots are also tested and indicated for a certain age group. For example, older children/adults can't get the pertussis vaccine given to younger children. Finally, the time when children are most vulnerable to serious complications from the diseases and the most likely to get them due to underdeveloped immune systems is in the first couple years of life, so it's important to get the vaccines as early as possible. I know some people break them up and just see their pedi like once a month to get all the shots in. There's more information on sites like www.ecbt.com - which is the site for the organization Every Child by Two, which promotes vaccine education and vaccinating children.

 

QUOTE(becasquared @ Feb 11 2009, 08:16 AM) [snapback]1185590[/snapback]
As you all can see in another thread, another member's nephew has passed the day after getting his one year shots. Not that the shots are linked to his death, but his death could be one of the terrible and terribly rare side effects of vaccinations.

KellyJ and Angie7, thank you both for your passionate responses on both sides of this. I too feel that (generally speaking) autism is something that you are born with and that manifests itself around the same time as the MMR immunization would occur. I also feel that part of the increase in autism diagnoses is that it's a known condition now, prior to the 40's and 50's doctors probably just considered it schizophrenia or another mental illness and whisked them off to the institution where they would have been treated for the wrong diagnosis.


It's so sad that there are very real, but very rare side effects from vaccines. Some children are allergic to one or more of the ingredients. I have a good friend whose brother has no vaccinations because he had very severe allergies to them. The fact that some people can't get vaccinated makes it more important that the rest of the population does - the herd immunity protects all our children.

I think it's great to have such a hot debate on the issue. Vaccines were something I never thought about before getting pregnant, and it surprises me how passionate I have become about them.