Go ahead, align yourself with that genius Jenny McCarthy...
Posted on 07/07/2009 1:25:36 PM PDT by wagglebee
July 6, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Increased rates of regressive autism in children in the US and UK can be historically associated with the switch by pharmaceutical companies from the use of animal cells to produce vaccines to the use of aborted human fetal cells, a campaign group is claiming.
"Now when we vaccinate our children, some vaccines also deliver contaminating aborted human fetal DNA. The safety of this has never been tested," says Dr. Theresa Deisher, President of the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI).
SCPI, a group that educates the public on the use of aborted human fetal material for drug production, warns that the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccines introduced to the US and UK in 1979 and 1988 respectively, were produced using aborted fetal cells, while previous versions were made using only animal cells. This switch coincides with what SCPI says are "dramatic" increases in the rates of regressive autism in children, in which the child's social and verbal development halts.
The warning comes in response to the recommendation in June by the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) of the US Department of Health and Human Services for further study into vaccine safety with relation to autism. Some concerned parents of children with autism maintain that there is a link between childhood vaccinations and autism.
Despite assurances from health agencies and the scientific community disputing this, a growing number of parents have opted out of national vaccination programs. This has prompted the Centers for Disease Control to convene a Vaccine Safety Working Subgroup. A report by the NVAC recommended further study of the potential for vaccines to contribute to regressive autism in children.
SCPI points to studies showing an environmental factor, "a trigger," that brings on the disorder. But while scientists pointed to the presence of mercury in the MMR vaccines, SCPI says that autism continued to rise after mercury was removed.
"The early vaccines produced using aborted fetal cells, such as MMRII, don't even inform consumers that residual aborted fetal DNA is injected with each vaccine," SCPI said in a media release. More recently introduced vaccines, the group says, do inform consumers that they contain contaminating residual DNA from the "human diploid cell" but do not say that this cell is from an aborted human fetus.
"The safety of injecting our children with aborted human fetal DNA has been debated for over 40 years, but has never been studied," SCPI said.
From my own observations, there seem to be A LOT more autistic children today than there were in the past.
Pro-Life Ping
Ping
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
ping a ling
Autism correlation among identical twins is ~90%, so it seems certain that it is primarily a genetically determined disorder; 90% rather than 100% suggests that there may be some way to avoid or treat the disorder. We need to find out how!
I'm sure you're right.
The reality is that forty years ago ALL gasoline was leaded, and that meant there was a lot of lead in the air. Additionally, nearly all paint was lead based. And the fact is that things like autism weren't anywhere near as prevalent as they are today.
I object to the fetal cell vaccines on ethical and religious grounds and my daughter’s haven’t had them. You can find lists of which vaccines use fetal cell lines (and which lines) online. Sadly, Merck has decided to stop manufacturing the separate MMR components again to force parents ot use the MMR. Given that all or nothing choice, I’m choosing nothing. Thanks for nothing, Merck, for giving me no choice but to not vaccinate my daughter with the two components of the MMR that don’t use fetal cell lines because Merck isn’t making them and supplies have run out.
I’ve heard more than a few claims that autism and autism-like symptoms are triggered by things like diet and vaccines. While it’s quite likely that autism is largely genetic (it seems to be passed on to children, too), that doesn’t mean that things like mercury, fetal DNA, other toxins, wheat proteins, and so on couldn’t be a triggering agent that determines whether a person develops it or, if they do, how severely. There are plenty of other cases with a predisposition toward a problem requires a trigger for the problem to develop. The only way to get a good sense of that is separated twin studies and they are very hard to do and often rely on very small samples. Another option would be to treat two twins differently, for example, not vaccinating one of them and feeding them different diets, to see if that makes a difference, but that sort of experimentation is ethically questionable.
Go ahead, align yourself with that genius Jenny McCarthy...
omg
What are you talking about?
I am not talking about making vaccines “green”, I’m talking about not using MURDERED BABIES. Are you able to discern the difference?
“And the fact is that things like autism weren’t anywhere near as prevalent as they are today.”
The definition of autism has been broadened over time, so that is in doubt.
True, but my unscientific observation is that I see a lot more kids that seem autistic now than I did twenty years ago.
Jenny McCarthy has been on a rampage the past couple years about vaccines causing autism in her son and has been the spokesperson for it for several groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_mccarthy
What?!!!
It’s plausbile. I’m sure that using aborted children’s cells for vaccines, or anything, is stupid beyond belief.
I do think the growing austim rate has to do with the broadening of the definition of autism, and the fact that these children are no longer institutionalized, but live with their families.
Good point, I hadn't really considered that.
Before the 80's, autism wasn't in the mainstream language, but there always were "retarded" children. Even allowing for the pollitical correctness that has become commonplace, I do wonder if the incidence has grown (by percentage) or if the description is what has changed?
I went to school during the 50's. "Disabled children" were not mainstreamed. Even polio victims (not affected mentally), were segregated from the general school population. As far as I know, the "mentally retarded" were not sent to school, but were either kept at home or institutionalized.
It makes me wonder if "autism" is not just a new designation for the same disorder.
That is true, I hadn’t really considered that in the fact many disabled children were simply “hidden away”.
The following vaccines are grown on aborted fetal tissue - rabies, some mumps, rubella, chickenpox, hepatitis a, smallpox (some), ipv. One of the single measles vaccines is further attenuated in diploid cells
This can be seen in the package inserts - referred to as diploid cells
So? Are you suggesting that because she may be correct, we should ignore a possible link?
How do you feel about the info in post 22?
Socialism is why there are more children DIAGNOSED as being autistic. Before the Government started giving free money if your child got diagnosed as autistic, autism rates were much lower as many that might NOW get diagnosed with autism were instead diagnosed as borderline autistic at most.
My D-i-L works with autistic children. They could not be classed as anything else. And the class is growing. These are kids under 5.
See post 25
I agree. I am willing to accept that in the past many such children were "hidden away" by their families, but I know that I see a lot more kids today that clearly have something wrong with them, there is nothing "borderline" about it.
No such implication follows. For example, it could also mean that only children with certain genetic profile will be sensitive to a given environmental trigger (e.g. to some neurotoxic component of vaccines). This would be analogous to any other genetic trait, say height or strength, of a child affecting its well being via interaction with environment e.g. imagine some toy or custom causing damage to kids who are not tall or strong enough (like ancient Spartans throwing weaklings boys off the cliff). Hence in a family of shorties, the kids would be hurt by the toy and the damage would cluster genetically. Yet the toy manufacturer would still be responsible for making unsafe toys.
The additional fact that genetic profile of the entire population did not suddenly change in late 1980s when the rates of autism started their rapid rise, removes the genetic conjecture as actual cause for autism (which the one pharma is peddling through media) altogether.
The only remaining possibility is that some not properly tested environmental factor which changed at the same time (such as the large increase in number of mandatory vaccines and change in their manufacturing) is interacting differentially with different genetic profiles, leaving some kids unaffected (or more likely affected at subclinical levels) while significantly damaging other kids.
One of such genetic variations (relevant to vaccine/autism corelation) is ApoE genetic polymorphism, with 3 alleles ApoE2, ApoE3 and ApoE4 which affect differentially the excretion rates of the mercury from brain - ApoE2+ApoE2 (1 ApoE2 from father one from mother) combination has the strongest excretion rates, while ApoE4+ApoE4 the weakest (among other damages, the people with ApoE4 have much higher rates of early onset Alzheimer's disease).
Since we are all exposed to environmental mercury (from dental amalgams, some fish, coal power plants, vaccines) the damage to the nervous system will cluster in families even though the mercury is the neurotoxin causing the damage. For example the frequency of ApoE4 allele increases among Europeans from south to north, resulting in much larger damage to Nordic nations than to Mediterranean nations. Consequently, the Nordic nations were the first to ban use of dental amalgams and to clean up their vaccines. On the other hand, dental industry conducts their tests to "prove" safety of amalgams on Mediterranean or Latin American children (e.g. see such fake 2003 study, highly publicized in USA by ADA & CDC, which was done in Portugal, in addition to being rigged in several other ways to favor the "amalgams are safe" conclusion that the study sponsors wanted to get).
Is the class growing because the local community is growing?
Does your s-i-l only work with the difficult children with autism?
The fact that the diagnosis of autism is up is not an ironclad indication that actual rates of autism are up; and certainly isn't any evidence that vaccinations of one sort or the other are to blame.
These children are very different from what would be classed as “retarded”. There are quite a few that fixate on objects and they just cannot be reached. If the object is removed, they can become violent. D-i-L said they had new children today and it sent the room “off”. The new child also became aggressive. They do not like change.
I'm not really sure what you mean.
The fact that the diagnosis of autism is up is not an ironclad indication that actual rates of autism are up; and certainly isn't any evidence that vaccinations of one sort or the other are to blame.
So, you OPPOSE studies to determine if vaccines may be causing problems? (And before the near-certain, "who will pay for the study" response, drug and vaccine manufacturers generally pay for the studies of their product.)
I am FOR studies to establish the causes of autism and to study the safety and efficacy of vaccination; I just don't think the matter can or should be settled by anecdote.
I see autistic children (at least they appear to be) quite often, twenty years ago I never did. But I am prepared to agree that I might not have been paying attention as much then.
I don’t think it can be settled by anecdote either, but it should be studied and I oppose ANY use of fetal tissue.
While I don't discount the article (I firmly believe that such use of aborted babies is an abomination and very likely IS dangerous), one possible reason for the increase in autism cases is diagnosis - doctors are better at seeing the signs, and diagnosing children that in years past would have been chalked up to behavior problems or general learning disabilities.
That being said - Autism has become practically "in vogue" like ADHD was a decade back. Brings in all sorts of federal cash to public schools, and many benefits to parents.
Unfortunately, states are one-after-the-other moving to make it illegal to NOT vaccinate your children.
Of course not. Anecdote is a good cause for suspicion though. Autism rates are low to nonexistent among the Amish. There needs to be a study that is not funded by special interests such as drug companies.
The idea that the Amish do not vaccinate their children is untrue,” says Dr. Kevin Strauss, MD, a pediatrician at the CSC. “We run a weekly vaccination clinic and it’s very busy.” He says Amish vaccinations rates are lower than the general population’s, but younger Amish are more likely to be vaccinated than older generations.
Strauss also sees plenty of Amish children showing symptoms of autism. “Autism isn’t a diagnosis - it’s a description of behavior. We see autistic behaviors along with seizure disorders or mental retardation or a genetic disorder, where the autism is part of a more complicated clinical spectrum.”
“The additional fact that genetic profile of the entire population did not suddenly change in late 1980s when the rates of autism started their rapid rise, removes the genetic conjecture as actual cause for autism (which the one pharma is peddling through media) altogether.”
That’s not clear to me at all. Nor is the “fact” that actual incidence of autism has risen. That issue has been well-discussed elsewhere in this thread.
If there’s an environmental trigger for autism, it has yet to be identified. Best of luck in your search.
Wouldn't that pose the same autoimmune problems as transplants and spread throughout the rest of the body, even the brain?
The author of your piece of “I can’t seem to find any autistic Amish” is a leading advocate of the vaccine/autism connection. He is not a doctor vaccinating the Amish or treating autism among them; and all he offers is anecdote. He seems most likely the SOURCE of such idiotic hogwash as ...
a) the Amish don’t vaccinate
and
b) the Amish don’t suffer from autism.
The Amish do vaccinate their children. The Amish do suffer from autism.
All of our back and forth goes back to what I said before, there should be a study that is not funded by special interests such as drug companies.
In the mean time, maybe it isn’t unreasonable to put the burden of proof on those who think that vaccines are a good thing, because they really haven’t proven that there is no connection between vaccines and autism.
“From my own observations, there seem to be A LOT more autistic children today than there were in the past.”
Autism was rarely diangosed in the past. Really, it’s only been in the last two decades or so that child & adolescent psychiatry has begun to be been given near the attention it deserves.
As of present, I’ve yet to see any real research that links vaccinations to autism, despite several trials attempting to find just such a link.
I was wondering the same thing as your statement. When did the autism start to increase? Does it correlate to the date they started putting these additives in vaccines?
I should add that I’m NOT a fan of using embryonic vaccines, but again, I have yet to see any verifiable ands sound connection made between vaccines and autism.
a) the Amish do vaccinate
b) the Amish do suffer from autism (but at a lower rate)
As far as proving a negative, the author is an idiot who has no idea how science works. One must first establish a statistical correlation, this has not been done; then one must establish cause, this also has not been done. One CANNOT “prove” a negative.
If someone wants to establish this link, there is a lot of SCIENTIFIC work to be done; not writing silliness about how ‘I as one of the main advocates of the vaccine/autism connection, just can't seem to find any autistic Amish children’ while claiming incorrectly that the Amish do not vaccinate their children.
So.............do you agree that:there should be a study that is not funded by special interests such as drug companies?
An academic lab would be perfectly suited to such an endeavor and if there were any academic scientists who believed in this connection (despite not finding any statistical correlation) they would probably be looking at it intently as it would absolutely MAKE a scientists career to discover this connection.
But the lack of statistical correlation between vaccination and autism is probably a death blow to anyone wanted to risk their time and money looking into this.
Now keep in mind that correlation isn't causation; but if there isn't even correlation, you are looking to find a Wonderland hidden down a rabbit hole.
After making our moral point on this issue, regarding the use of aborted human fetal tissue, if we are honest we have to acknowledge that regardless of whether or not the "safety of this has never been tested", the idea that "human fetal tissue" is the cause has not been tested or proven either.
I think, like mercury in vaccines, this is another example of grasping at straws by looking to prove cause by simple statistical correlation. Its not science.
From an article that I posted: All of the medical journals sell ads to drug companies. Is there a better way to corrupt your findings than money?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.