Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Vaccine Autism Connection, Scientific Studies

Rate this topic


Message added by Haji 2003

The academic credibility of one of the authors of a number of studies in the OP has been questioned.

Recommended Posts

  • Unregistered
Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002

Abstract

Universal hepatitis B vaccination was recommended for U.S. newborns in 1991; however, safety findings are mixed. The association between hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and parental report of autism diagnosis was determined. This cross-sectional study used weighted probability samples obtained from National Health Interview Survey 1997-2002 data sets. Vaccination status was determined from the vaccination record. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds for autism diagnosis associated with neonatal hepatitis B vaccination among boys age 3-17 years, born before 1999, adjusted for race, maternal education, and two-parent household. Boys vaccinated as neonates had threefold greater odds for autism diagnosis compared to boys never vaccinated or vaccinated after the first month of life. Non-Hispanic white boys were 64% less likely to have autism diagnosis relative to nonwhite boys. Findings suggest that U.S. male neonates vaccinated with the hepatitis B vaccine prior to 1999 (from vaccination record) had a threefold higher risk for parental report of autism diagnosis compared to boys not vaccinated as neonates during that same time period. Nonwhite boys bore a greater risk.

A two-phase study evaluating the relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccine administration and the risk for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in the United States

Results: In phase I, it was observed that there was a significantly increased risk ratio for the incidence of ASD reported following the Thimerosal-containing DTaP vaccine in comparison to the Thimerosal-free DTaP vaccine. In phase II, it was observed that cases diagnosed with an ASD were significantly more likely than controls to receive increased organic-Hg from Thimerosal-containing hepatitis B vaccine administered within the first, second, and sixth month of life.

Conclusions: Routine childhood vaccination is an important public health tool to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with infectious diseases, but the present study provides new epidemiological evidence supporting an association between increasing organic-Hg exposure from Thimerosal-containing childhood vaccines and the subsequent risk of an ASD diagnosis.

Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study
Abstract

This longitudinal, case-control pilot study examined amygdala growth in rhesus macaque infants receiving the complete US childhood vaccine schedule (1994-1999). Longitudinal structural and functional neuroimaging was undertaken to examine central effects of the vaccine regimen on the developing brain. Vaccine-exposed and saline-injected control infants underwent MRI and PET imaging at approximately 4 and 6 months of age, representing two specific timeframes within the vaccination schedule. Volumetric analyses showed that exposed animals did not undergo the maturational changes over time in amygdala volume that was observed in unexposed animals. After controlling for left amygdala volume, the binding of the opioid antagonist [(11)C]diprenorphine (DPN) in exposed animals remained relatively constant over time, compared with unexposed animals, in which a significant decrease in [(11)C]DPN binding occurred. These results suggest that maturational changes in amygdala volume and the binding capacity of [(11)C]DPN in the amygdala was significantly altered in infant macaques receiving the vaccine schedule. The macaque infant is a relevant animal model in which to investigate specific environmental exposures and structural/functional neuroimaging during neurodevelopment.

Neurodevelopmental disorders after thimerosal-containing vaccines: a brief communication
Abstract

We were initially highly skeptical that differences in the concentrations of thimerosal in vaccines would have any effect on the incidence rate of neurodevelopmental disorders after childhood immunization. This study presents the first epidemiologic evidence, based upon tens of millions of doses of vaccine administered in the United States, that associates increasing thimerosal from vaccines with neurodevelopmental disorders. Specifically, an analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database showed statistical increases in the incidence rate of autism (relative risk [RR] = 6.0), mental retardation (RR = 6.1), and speech disorders (RR = 2.2) after thimerosal-containing diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccines in comparison with thimerosal-free DTaP vaccines. The male/female ratio indicated that autism (17) and speech disorders (2.3) were reported more in males than females after thimerosal-containing DTaP vaccines, whereas mental retardation (1.2) was more evenly reported among male and female vaccine recipients. Controls were employed to determine if biases were present in the data, but none were found. It was determined that overall adverse reactions were reported in similar-aged populations after thimerosal-containing DTaP (2.4 +/- 3.2 years old) and thimerosal-free DTaP (2.1 +/- 2.8 years old) vaccinations. Acute control adverse reactions such as deaths (RR = 1.0), vasculitis (RR = 1.2), seizures (RR = 1.6), ED visits (RR = 1.4), total adverse reactions (RR = 1.4), and gastroenteritis (RR = 1.1) were reported similarly after thimerosal-containing and thimerosal-free DTaP vaccines. An association between neurodevelopmental disorders and thimerosal-containing DTaP vaccines was found, but additional studies should be conducted to confirm and extend this study.

A two-phased population epidemiological study of the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a follow-up analysis

Results: Phase one showed significantly increased risks for autism, speech disorders, mental retardation, personality disorders, and thinking abnormalities reported to VAERS following thimerosal-containing DTaP vaccines in comparison to thimerosal-free DTaP vaccines. Phase two showed significant associations between cumulative exposures to thimerosal and the following types of NDs: unspecified developmental delay, tics, attention deficit disorder (ADD), language delay, speech delay, and neurodevelopmental delays in general.

Conclusions: This study showed that exposure to mercury from TCVs administered in the US was a consistent significant risk factor for the development of NDs. It is clear from these data and other recent publications linking TCVs with NDs that additional ND research should be undertaken in the context of evaluating mercury-associated exposures and thimerosal-free vaccines should be made available.

Transcriptomic analyses of neurotoxic effects in mouse brain after intermittent neonatal administration of thimerosal Abstract

Thimerosal is a vaccine antimicrobial preservative which has long been suspected an iatrogenic factor possibly contributing to neurodevelopmental disorders including autism. The association between infant vaccine thimerosal exposure and autism remains an open question. Although thimerosal has been removed from mandatory childhood vaccines in the United States, thimerosal-preserved vaccines are still widely used outside of the United States especially in developing countries. Notably, thimerosal-containing vaccines are being given to the newborns within the first 12-24 h after birth in some countries. To examine the possible neurotoxic effects of early neonatal exposure to a higher level of thimerosal, FVB mice were subcutaneously injected with thimerosal-mercury at a dose which is 20× higher than that used for regular Chinese infant immunization during the first 4 months of life. Thimerosal-treated mice exhibited neural development delay, social interaction deficiency, and inclination of depression. Apparent neuropathological changes were also observed in adult mice neonatally treated with thimerosal. High-throughput RNA sequencing of autistic-behaved mice brains revealed the alternation of a number of canonical pathways involving neuronal development, neuronal synaptic function, and the dysregulation of endocrine system. Intriguingly, the elevation of anterior pituitary secreting hormones occurred exclusively in male but not in female thimerosal-treated mice, demonstrating for the first time the gender bias of thimerosal-mercury toxicity with regard to endocrine system. Our results indicate that higher dose of neonatal thimerosal-mercury (20× higher than that used in human) is capable of inducing long-lasting substantial dysregulation of neurodevelopment, synaptic function, and endocrine system, which could be the causal involvements of autistic-like behavior in mice.

Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?
Abstract

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are serious multisystem developmental disorders and an urgent global public health concern. Dysfunctional immunity and impaired brain function are core deficits in ASD. Aluminum (Al), the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant, is a demonstrated neurotoxin and a strong immune stimulator. Hence, adjuvant Al has the potential to induce neuroimmune disorders. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, two key points ought to be considered: (i) children should not be viewed as "small adults" as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults; and (ii) 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? By applying Hill's criteria for establishing causality between exposure and outcome we investigated whether exposure to Al from vaccines could be contributing to the rise in ASD prevalence in the Western world. Our results show that: (i) children from countries with the highest ASD prevalence appear to have the highest exposure to Al from vaccines; (ii) the increase in exposure to Al adjuvants significantly correlates with the increase in ASD prevalence in the United States observed over the last two decades (Pearson r=0.92, p<0.0001); and (iii) a significant correlation exists between the amounts of Al administered to preschool children and the current prevalence of ASD in seven Western countries, particularly at 3-4 months of age (Pearson r=0.89-0.94, p=0.0018-0.0248). The application of the Hill's criteria to these data indicates that the correlation between Al in vaccines and ASD may be causal. Because children represent a fraction of the population most at risk for complications following exposure to Al, a more rigorous evaluation of Al adjuvant safety seems warranted.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24354891/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20628439/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12773696/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15795695/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24675092/

https://academicjournals.org/journal/JPHE/article-full-text-pdf/C98151247042

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22099159/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21058170/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

CDC claims “Vaccines do not cause autism”

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html

 

One opposing view is:

https://www.icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/VaccineSafety-Version-1.0-October-2-2017-1.pdf

 

This white paper provides an introduction to vaccine safety science and policy in the United States.

While most drugs, like the ones above, are given to sick adults, pediatric vaccines are typically given universally to babies and toddlers. And while pharmaceutical companies remain liable for injuries caused by their non-vaccine drugs, as discussed above, they have no liability for injuries caused by their vaccines. One would therefore expect that pre-licensure safety testing for vaccines would be more rigorous than that conducted for drugs. Unfortunately, unlike all non-vaccine drugs licensed by the FDA, vaccines are not required to undergo long-term double-blind inert-placebo controlled trials to assess safety. In fact, not a single one of the clinical trials for vaccines given to babies and toddlers had a control group receiving an inert placebo. Further, most pediatric vaccines currently on the market have been approved based on studies with inadequate follow-up periods of only a few days or weeks.

.

Even more amazingis that unlike every drug licensed by the FDA, the control groups in these vaccine trials did not receive an inert placebo. Rather, the control group was given one or more previously licensed vaccines as the “placebo.” This means each new vaccine need only be roughly as safe as one (or in some cases numerous) previously licensed vaccines. Such flawed and un-scientific study designs cannot establish the actual safety profile of any vaccine. The real adverse event rate for a vaccine can only be determined by comparing subjects receiving the vaccine with those receiving an inert placebo. Yet,this study design, required for every drug, is never required before or after licensing a vaccine.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
7 hours ago, justAnothermuslim said:

Even more amazingis that unlike every drug licensed by the FDA, the control groups in these vaccine trials did not receive an inert placebo. Rather, the control group was given one or more previously licensed vaccines as the “placebo.” This means each new vaccine need only be roughly as safe as one (or in some cases numerous) previously licensed vaccines. Such flawed and un-scientific study designs cannot establish the actual safety profile of any vaccine. The real adverse event rate for a vaccine can only be determined by comparing subjects receiving the vaccine with those receiving an inert placebo. Yet,this study design, required for every drug, is never required before or after licensing a vaccine.

 

I don't know how authentic the source is, however if it's true, then it's horrendous

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, AkhiraisReal said:

I don't know how authentic the source is, however if it's true, then it's horrendous

Here's an explanation why placebo was not used.

Del Bigtree, a prominent anti-vaccine activist and an illuminating example of how the movement uses misinformation to spread fear and create mistrust of health professionals.

“The reason vaccines are not typically tested against a placebo is that it is unethical to knowingly expose a control group to the risks of a vaccine-preventable illness. No such trial would be ethically approved. This is just one example of an artificial, manufactured controversy employed by anti-vaccination advocates to manipulate, influence, and persuade.”

https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/immunizations/chapter/case-study-del-bigtree/

 

Maybe rightly so a misinformant, IDK. However, according to this

https://www.icandecide.org/introduction-to-vaccine-safety/

the paper was presented to heads of National Institutes Of Health in May of 2017.

 

What i know and sure of is that, i’ve no snake oil to sell :-)

Here’s another take about “Vaccines do not cause autism”. Do read this one but don't have to believe anything it says.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccines-and-autism-is-the-science-really-settled/

“When it comes to any discussion of vaccine-autism science, Drs. Offit and Hotez both take the tone in public interviews that it’s silly to even ask the question, because the science has been done so many times, you must be sort of stupid if you still feel the need to talk about it.

Well, it's not done according the link above. What’s my interest in all this? A coin has 2 sides. If I want to know the truth, it’s logical to listen to both sides. Correct me if i'm wrong.

Edited by justAnothermuslim
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 8/8/2020 at 7:36 AM, AkhiraisReal said:
Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002

A two-phase study evaluating the relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccine administration and the risk for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in the United States

Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study

Neurodevelopmental disorders after thimerosal-containing vaccines: a brief communication
 
A two-phased population epidemiological study of the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a follow-up analysis

Transcriptomic analyses of neurotoxic effects in mouse brain after intermittent neonatal administration of thimerosal   

Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?

I recognized the name Geier (name of two of the authors) as I had a job when I was at university where I had to search for bogus authors of journal articles writers and determine how many times their fraudulent work had been citied. The name Geier came up a lot…  

 
Please read a brief background of the two major authors of these papers - Mark Geier and David Geier:
 

Mark R. Geier  is an American former physician and controversial sometime "professional witness” who testified in more than 90 cases regarding allegations of injury or illness caused by vaccines. Since 2011, Geier's medical license has been suspended or revoked in every state in which he was licensed over concerns about his autism treatments and his misrepresentation of his credentials to the Maryland Board of Health, where he falsely claimed to be a board-certified geneticist and epidemiologist.

Mark and his son, David Geier, are frequently cited by proponents of the now-discredited claim  that vaccines cause autism. In 2011, his son David Geier was charged by the Maryland State Board of Physicians with practicing as a licensed physician when he only has a B.A. degree in biology.

Mark Geier's credibility as an expert witness has been questioned in 10 court cases.  In 2003, a judge ruled that Geier presented himself as an expert witness in "areas for which he has no training, expertise and experience." In other cases in which Geier has testified, judges have labeled his testimony "intellectually dishonest," "not reliable" and "wholly unqualified.

For more background and details and links go to:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_and_autism

The publishers of journals state very clearly that they are not supporting the work they have published - they are just publishing it.  Just because someone writes a paper does not mean that it is accurate, honest or credible. That is why work needs to be replicated to be viewed as sound.  There are many scientists (or in the cases above, bogus scientists) who make up the results of their research for a variety of reasons - perhaps… they want fame, or they need to produce papers to retain their position, or they have gone a little loopy and really believe the results they are posting are (or would be) valid - even though they made them up… 

You need to be very cautious and make sure you are familiar with the background of the people you cite.  Also look for who is funding the research and what possible stake they may have in the results and conclusions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
6 hours ago, Maryaam said:

Just because someone writes a paper does not mean that it is accurate, honest or credible. That is why work needs to be replicated to be viewed as sound.  There are many scientists (or in the cases above, bogus scientists) who make up the results of their research for a variety of reasons - perhaps… they want fame, or they need to produce papers to retain their position, or they have gone a little loopy and really believe the results they are posting are (or would be) valid - even though they made them up… 

You need to be very cautious and make sure you are familiar with the background of the people you cite.  Also look for who is funding the research and what possible stake they may have in the results and conclusions. 

 

The same thing could be said about those research that says vaccine don't cause autism.

The key point is that there are research that shows connection between brain changes/ autism and vaccines.

There are also research that shows no connection between the two.

Which one do we believe?

Are you willing to use your kids/family members as guinea pig despite the dubious position of vaccines?

I would say the one with billions of dollars on stake has more incentive to be fraudulent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
1 hour ago, AkhiraisReal said:

The same thing could be said about those research that says vaccine don't cause autism.

Well it could if you brought up the same evidence as @Maryaam has done. But if you can't bring up the evidence then the same thing can't be said.

 

1 hour ago, AkhiraisReal said:

Which one do we believe?

The stuff that hasn't been written by the dude whose medical licence got suspended.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered
On 8/12/2020 at 7:28 AM, Haji 2003 said:

The stuff that hasn't been written by the dude whose medical licence got suspended.

 someone getting their medical license suspended doesn't necessary mean they were wrong. There could be many reasons for it.

On 8/12/2020 at 7:28 AM, Haji 2003 said:

Well it could if you brought up the same evidence as @Maryaam has done. But if you can't bring up the evidence then the same thing can't be said.

Are you implying that all my sources above are fraudulent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@Maryaam @Haji 2003

Is it true that none of the first 20 vaccines given to Americans babies have been studied for their relationship to autism?

Even if the claim is not true, how difficult is it to conduct a study, using a group of babies following the full schedule of vaccination program and a control group of totally unvaccinated babies and analyze the outcome at the end of say 3-5 years period? I believe, this could give a clearer picture "vaccines do not cause autism".

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccines-and-autism-is-the-science-really-settled/

The most shocking thing about all these studies that make Drs. Offit and Hotez so exasperated is that for all the griping that vaccines have been studied, in fact only one vaccine and one vaccine ingredient have actually ever been scientifically explored.

Let me explain.

Remember that in 1962 the maximum number of vaccines a child would receive by age five was three. In 1983 the maximum number of vaccines a child would receive by age five was ten. Today that number is thirty-eight, which is nearly quadruple what it was in 1983 and more than twelve times what it was in 1962.

Today by the time a child is five years old, if his parents follow the CDC’s recommended schedule, he will have received the following vaccines, with most being given three to four separate times: (1) hepatitis B, (2) rotavirus, (3) DTP, (4) Hib, (5) pneumococcal, (6) polio, (7) flu, (8) MMR, (9) varicella, (10) hepatitis A, (11) meningococcal (only for certain groups), and (12) HPV (teenagers)

Today at his two-month-old “well baby” visit, the average American infant will receive six separate vaccines in about fifteen minutes: hepatitis B, rotavirus, DTaP, Hib, pneumococcal, and polio. Two months later, at four months of age, most American children will again receive the same six vaccines, all administered at the same time: hepatitis B, rotavirus, DTaP, Hib, pneumococcal, and polio. Two months later, at six months of age, most American children then receive seven vaccines, all administered at the same time: hepatitis B, rotavirus, DTaP, Hib, pneumococcal, polio, and flu. By six months of age most American children receive nineteen vaccines in three visits to the doctor. Many kids also receive a birth dose of hepatitis B, boosting this number to twenty vaccines.

So of the first twenty vaccines given to American babies, how many have been studied for their relationship to autism? None.

That’s right, because only one vaccine, the MMR, has ever been studied for its relationship to autism. The MMR is a vaccine first administered to American children at thirteen months of age. But what about the two-month, four-month, and six-month “well baby” visits during which children receive so many vaccines? The truth is none of those vaccines have ever been studied or considered for their relationship to autism, so no one has any idea. This would be like trying to identify the source of a plane crash, suspecting mechanical failure, solely analyzing one of the wings, and then declaring the entire airplane free of culpability.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, justAnothermuslim said:

@Maryaam @Haji 2003

Is it true that none of the first 20 vaccines given to Americans babies have been studied for their relationship to autism?

Even if the claim is not true, how difficult is it to conduct a study, using a group of babies following the full schedule of vaccination program and a control group of totally unvaccinated babies and analyze the outcome at the end of say 3-5 years period? I believe, this could give a clearer picture "vaccines do not cause autism".

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccines-and-autism-is-the-science-really-settled/

 

 

This was authored by a manager of a private financial investment firm who blogs on autism and lockdown conspiracy theories...(?)….. 

A lot of research has been completed and replicated to pretty much debunk the autism by vaccine theory.  Several publications focused on this, were listed by posters already.

What is being done, currently, is trying to identify autism at an early age so that interventions and therapies can be started earlier for children who are considered prodromal (whose symptoms have not yet fully evolved).. Early therapeutic intervention in autism makes a huge difference.

The research is focused on siblings of young children who have been diagnosed with autism.  The idea is to try and find indicators - however subtle, so that in the future, a child will be diagnosed when an infant.  Here is a recent study for an example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32061926/  with children identified as young as 6 months old, who were later determined to have autism.

If it can be determined that children, who have a specific set of behavioural markers in infancy, later meet criteria to be diagnosed with autism, that would be proof that vaccines do not cause autism as the autism would be identified before any vaccines were given.  

Edited by Maryaam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, Maryaam said:

This was authored by a manager of a private financial investment firm who blogs on autism and lockdown conspiracy theories...(?)….. 

A lot of research has been completed and replicated to pretty much debunk the autism by vaccine theory.  Several publications focused on this, were listed by posters already.

What is being done, currently, is trying to identify autism at an early age so that interventions and therapies can be started earlier for children who are considered prodromal (whose symptoms have not yet fully evolved).. Early therapeutic intervention in autism makes a huge difference.

The research is focused on siblings of young children who have been diagnosed with autism.  The idea is to try and find indicators - however subtle, so that in the future, a child will be diagnosed when an infant.  Here is a recent study for an example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32061926/  with children identified as young as 6 months old, who were later determined to have autism.

If it can be determined that children, who have a specific set of behavioural markers in infancy, later meet criteria to be diagnosed with autism, that would be proof that vaccines do not cause autism as the autism would be identified before any vaccines were given.  

Dear Sis, you didn’t answer my questions.

Anyway, it will help me understand the issue better if you can respond point-by-point to the assertions made by the articles. It specifically cited 3 studies mostly used to prove "vaccines do not cause autism".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, AkhiraisReal said:

@justAnothermuslim isn't that madness brother?

Vaccine manufacturers' madness? Not sure about that :-)

But are we unwittingly support a system doing injustice to a subgroup of children who’re susceptible to vaccine injuries?

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccines-and-autism-is-the-science-really-settled/

What’s the Right Question?

The three questions and three studies I shared with you above come from three of the most commonly listed studies cited as “proof ” that “vaccines do not cause autism.” Yet not one of them comes close to answering the question parents of children with autism really care about, which goes something like this:

My child received thirty-eight vaccines by the time he was five, including twenty vaccines by his first birthday. Is the administration of so many vaccines causing autism in certain children?

That question, so important to the health of our children and our nation, has never been asked, so how could it be answered? Well, I should probably clarify that question, especially the part where I say “never been asked,” because the question has been asked, several times, in fact, but the answers don’t suit the Dr. Offits and Dr. Hotezes of the world, so you never hear about them, but you will in a moment, after a quick digression. I want to walk you through three simple but important concepts that will help put vaccine-autism science in proper perspective:

Biological plausibility “refers to the proposal of a causal association—a relationship between a putative cause and an outcome—that is consis- tent with existing biological and medical knowledge.”

Encephalopathy “means disorder or disease of the brain. In modern usage, encephalopathy does not refer to a single disease, but rather to a syndrome of overall brain dysfunction; this syndrome can have many different organic and inorganic causes.”

Wisdom of crowds is the notion that “large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant—better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future.”

No one wants to blame the childhood vaccine schedule for the autism epidemic. Vaccines were invented to save the lives of children, not harm them, and I believe most people on both sides of this debate believe they are helping children by either fighting for more vaccines or fighting for the recognition that vaccines are causing autism in a subset of children.

But blaming vaccines for the autism epidemic is the most “biologically plausible” hypothesis. Sorry, vaccines, but it’s just true. You provide some benefits to society in reducing a portion of certain acute illnesses, but you also have a very nasty underbelly: You cause brain damage in some of the kids who receive you.

image.png.1bcc7a60ef75e7b8526283b65f697c10.png

Don’t take my word for it—our federal government could not be clearer that vaccines cause brain damage in some children. Time and again on their own website, the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program makes it clear that “encephalopathy” is a vaccine injury, and they define “chronic encephalopathy” in the following way:

“Chronic Encephalopathy occurs when a change in mental or neurologic status, first manifested during the applicable time period, persists for a period of at least 6 months from the date of vaccination.”

Like many children with autism, my son is suffering from a chronic encephalopathy that occurred after his vaccine appointments.

I don’t really have to use that many of my IQ points to think that there may be a correlation between a product that causes brain damage (vaccines) and my son’s brain damage. It would be enough, frankly, that brain damage is known to be a side effect of vaccines in some children to assert how biologically plausible the vaccine-autism connection is, but the argument is bolstered by two additional points: (1) As you now know, the number of vaccines given to children has nearly quadrupled since the early 1980s, and the autism rate is up more than 30,000 percent during the same time period. (2) There are tens of thousands (or more) of parental reports of regression into autism after vaccination. These reports are worldwide, in every socioeconomic level and every race. The stories are remarkably consistent. The “wisdom of crowds” is taken to an extreme when it comes to the vaccine-autism connection, according to the parents, and many of their doctors, who witnessed the regression of their children firsthand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, justAnothermuslim said:

Dear Sis, you didn’t answer my questions.

Anyway, it will help me understand the issue better if you can respond point-by-point to the assertions made by the articles. It specifically cited 3 studies mostly used to prove "vaccines do not cause autism".

He is not an expert in anything related to autism and so it is not helpful.  The author seems to be a financial manager with a side hobby of some kind.  

There are many many research articles that debunk the vaccine autism connection that were written by proven experts that work full time in the field and do not have an agenda - they genuinely care about their work. These articles aren't hard to find.  Some have been listed on this site.  

The reason there was so much attention to vaccine-autism connection research is not due to any indications that there was a connection, but because of celebrities, who garner lots of media attention, convinced many parents not to vaccinate their kids. These kids went on to either get measles (for one example)  and/or act as carriers to unvaccinated infants who were not yet old enough to be vaccinated and became infected.  Many died when they would not have, when all parents vaccinated their children. I know of a two month old that died of pertussis - she should not have even been exposed to pertussis.  Also, measles was thought to have been eradicated in many countries, through vaccine, and now it is back - due to ignorance.  So hence the funding for the research.  To save lives.

Non vaxxers do not care how much research debunks their theories - they dont respect it and will not examine it.  They will not be discouraged as their opposition to vaccination is emotional; it is not logical.  If you do any research at all you will see this.

What I was saying is that there is, currently, a lot of time and effort put into determining if a child has autism very early in their life so treatment can be started.  Most children are not formally diagnosed till late preschool age.  However, a positive bi-product of this is that if infants can be diagnosed before they are vaccinated - that would be clear proof that there is no connection and maybe non vaxxers would accept this.

Most individuals with autism are genetically loaded for autism - it is in their family history.  

Edited by Maryaam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Unregistered

@Maryaam You are just reading your biased sources to prove your points.

You claim non vaxxers use emotion rather than logic. The first post of this thread is full of logical and scientific studies, and you just throw them in the garbage. Who's emotional?

Those who seek for truth are the succesful ones no matter how harsh the reality is. Even if it costs your family, license, money or whatever.

You have no critical thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
 On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

He is not an expert in anything related to autism and so it is not helpful.  The author seems to be a financial manager with a side hobby of some kind.  

If you think it's not helpful to refute his evidence-based argument, then it's a lost opportunity for me to listen to all arguments and follow the best of them.

On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

There are many many research articles that debunk the vaccine autism connection that were written by proven experts that work full time in the field and do not have an agenda - they genuinely care about their work. These articles aren't hard to find.  Some have been listed on this site.  

He claim to have made an effort to read every available studies that are being used to prove "vaccines do not cause autism". He did specifically point out the deficiency of 3 of

those studies among which:-

1. questions asked were wrong.

2. the study were made between heavily vaccinated children vs heavily vaccinated children with 1 less vaccine (MMR)

On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

The reason there was so much attention to vaccine-autism connection research is not due to any indications that there was a connection, but because of celebrities, who garner lots of media attention, convinced many parents not to vaccinate their kids. These kids went on to either get measles (for one example)  and/or act as carriers to unvaccinated infants who were not yet old enough to be vaccinated and became infected.  Many died when they would not have, when all parents vaccinated their children. I know of a two month old that died of pertussis - she should not have even been exposed to pertussis.  Also, measles was thought to have been eradicated in many countries, through vaccine, and now it is back - due to ignorance.  So hence the funding for the research.  To save lives.

Not in his case. His son contracted ASD after having vaccine appointment. 

On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

Non vaxxers do not care how much research debunks their theories - they dont respect it and will not examine it.  They will not be discouraged as their opposition to vaccination is emotional; it is not logical.  If you do any research at all you will see this.

"Sorry, vaccines, but it’s just true. You provide some benefits to society in reducing a portion of certain acute illnesses, but you also have a very nasty underbelly:
You cause brain damage in some of the kids who receive you.vaccines are good to eradicate some preventable diseases but "sorry vaccines, you have a nasty underbelly: you cause some children  who receive you brain damage".

Reading what he has gone through, that seems like a rational/logical statement to me; not one made by an anti-vaxxer.

i tried  to but i'm having a problem reading a medical research/study reports. besides the technical jargons used, i find it hard to determine which one is really a randomized, double-blind placebo clinical study etc, etc. Hence, reading pro/cons argument is the much easier path to me.

On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

What I was saying is that there is, currently, a lot of time and effort put into determining if a child has autism very early in their life so treatment can be started.  Most children are not formally diagnosed till late preschool age.  However, a positive bi-product of this is that if infants can be diagnosed before they are vaccinated - that would be clear proof that there is no connection and maybe non vaxxers would accept this.

All this early diagnosis is well and good.

But the only thing that can arrest the rate of ASD prevalence is to stamp out what causes it in the first place.

So, imo the first priority should be to study and identify what causes ASD.

On 8/14/2020 at 1:03 AM, Maryaam said:

Most individuals with autism are genetically loaded for autism - it is in their family history.  

well, can't totally ignore the environmental factor.

from www.autismspeaks.org, We know that there’s no one cause of autism. Research suggests that autism develops from a combination of genetic and nongenetic, or environmental, influences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
On 8/16/2020 at 8:56 PM, hasanhh said:

Another porigin of increasing rates of autism:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/10/health/weed-marijuana-pregnancy-autism-link-wellness/index.html

old fumble fingers me can't spel anymore.

I'm tired of hearing about this theory already! 

It was self reported and the experiment was conducted in Canada while marijuana was illegal there. While I certainly wouldn't advocate the use of marijuana, especially while pregnant, I have doubts about the validity of the study.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...