Posted on 08/12/2002 9:52:47 AM PDT by USA21
NEW STRONG EVIDENCE LINKS AUTISM TO VACCINE
Scientists have uncovered the strongest evidence yet that the three-in-one Measels-Mumps-Rubella(MMR) vaccine plays a clear role in the development of autism.
Earlier this year British expert Dr Andrew Wakefield and molecular pathologist Professor John O'Leary established a possible link between the measles virus, autism and a related bowel disorder. They found fragments of the measles virus from the MMR jab in the guts of autistic children who also suffer a rare form of bowel disease.
Now scientists at Utah State University, have reported finding a strong association between the MMR vaccine and an autoimmune reaction which is thought to play a role in autism.
The team led by Dr Vijendra Singh analysed blood samples from 125 autistic children and 92 children who did not have autism. Dr Singh, is an acknowledged expert with more than 20 years experience of immunology research.
In 75 of the 92 autistic children they found antibodies showing there had been an abnormal reaction to the measles component of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine. Nine out of ten of those children were also positive for antibodies thought to be involved in autism.
These are incredible statistics. The antibodies attack the brain by targeting the basic building blocks of myelin, the insulating sheath that covers nerve fibres. This stops the nerves developing properly and may affect brain functions. Dr Singh has suggested that an abnormal immune response may be the root cause of many cases of autism.
None of the non-autistic children showed the unusual anti-measles response.
Not one. Not any. Zero. Nil. What a damming statistic. Read that sentence again and consider it well.
But incredibly, the UK Government's Chief Medical Officer and the British Medical Association, both still insist there is a wealth of scientific evidence that the triple jab is the safest way to protect children.
And Peter Lachmann, Emeritus Professor of Immunology at Cambridge, said that the conclusions drawn by Vijendra Singh and his team did not make for a direct link between MMR and autism.
In my view the associations that Dr Singh makes do not follow. His hypothesis does not show causality; he is drawing unjustifiable conclusions from the antibody data he has collected. I do not think such conclusions can be drawn.
As these comments reveal, the new evidence has the Government and the BMJ fighting a rearguard action to keep the lid on the vaccine/autism disaster.
Dr Singh's team report their findings in the latest issue of the Journal of Biomedical Science. The news of their findings is unreported as of this date in the US media.
They sensibly conclude: 'Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.'
And your last posts isn't a study, it is an editorial, deviod of almost anything useful.
Many parents told me that their children were normal until getting a triple vaccine-the DPT shot.
Remember: The plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data".
More outrageously, smart kids who simply take longer to develop speech are being diagnosed as "slow" and sidetracked, more often than not, the false diagnoses of neurologic problems becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. I wonder how many parents of these poor kids are wasting their time chasing kooky vaccine lore.
I could have written many things. The truth is....your comment was deserving of more than just an insult. Why are you even interested in this topic? It is obvious to all here that you know absolutely nothing about autism.
Especially considering the second paragraph is a complete and uttler falsehood. The person writing this "article", (there was no name or contact information on the website - suprise) had to be either purposely deceptive or very stupid to miss the O'Leary information.
But that is par for the course for the antivaccinationists.
Bones, did you read the information on Yurko, the child murderer? Opponents of vaccinations are using his case to push their agenda. You should look at the case, I'd be interested in hearing your take.
world-wide people are asking questions...
Vaccine Organizations and Websites
|
I'm trying hard to make sure my 6 year old daughter gets to be kid while we spend a lot of time with my 4 year old son in Autism therapy.
Unfortunately my wife and I are someday going to have to pass the reigns of responsibility for his well being to her. I'm heartened when I read about siblings of Autistic children and how you still care after all the years of hardship.
My son's communication has been getting progressively better since the link below occurred a year ago but he still has a long way to go. I hope he can be self sufficient when he gets older.
When Even the Churches Abandon the Helpless [FreeRepublic activism works]
Here is more on vaccines...BAD BLOOD: Pre-1963 Polio Vaccines May Be Killing Hundreds Through Cancer
Electronic Telegraph (UK)14 February 1999 By Robert Matthews
THE mass vaccination campaigns of the Fifties and Sixties may be causing hundreds of deaths a year because of a cancer-causing virus which contaminated the first polio vaccine, according to scientists.
Known as SV40, the virus came from dead monkeys whose kidney cells were used to culture the first Salk vaccines. Doctors estimate that the virus was injected into tens of millions during mass vaccination campaigns before being detected and screened out in 1963. Those born between 1941 and 1961 are thought to be most at risk of having been infected.
Now a new study of the effects of SV40 points to disturbing evidence that the monkey virus causes a number of human cancers. It concludes that there is "compelling" evidence linking SV40 to mesothelioma, a once-rare type of lung cancer whose prevalence is rapidly increasing.
Dr Janet Butel of the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas, and the lead author of the study, told The Telegraph: "I feel strongly that research is warranted to determine how common human infections by SV40 may be, and what factors might predispose individuals to SV40-related tumours." Her study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, also suggested that the monkey virus may be passing from those given the contaminated vaccine to their children, spreading the cancer risk still further.
Blood samples analysed by Dr Butel and her colleagues point to the steady spread of the cancer-causing virus in the human population, with 10 per cent of those never exposed directly to the contaminated vaccine testing positive for SV40. Dr Butel said: "I believe SV40 is present in the human population today and is being spread among individuals by an unknown route."
The Telegraph has learnt that scientists in Britain have joined an international effort to confirm the findings. According to Prof Gordon McVie, the director general of the Cancer Research Campaign, researchers have so far uncovered evidence linking SV40 to a number of cancers, including brain tumours and bone cancer. He said: "Ive a feeling that the virus might be implicated in more, such as non-Hodgkins lymphoma and prostate cancer."
The study is also likely to prompt a radical rethink by doctors of what happened 40 years ago, during the early days of polio vaccination. Until now, SV40 was regarded as harmless, with no evidence of long-term health effects emerging in follow-up studies of those vaccinated.
Now it appears that these studies may not have been conducted over a long enough period. New highly sensitive laboratory tests have disclosed the presence of SV40 in many different types of human tumour.
The most startling results centre on mesothelioma, until recently linked primarily to exposure to asbestos. Studies have found that around 70 per cent of mesothelioma cases test positive for the SV40 virus. Over the past 30 years, the number of mesothelioma cases has risen 10-fold, to about 1,000 a year, and is predicted to reach 4,000 early next century.
Until now, the increase was blamed on the asbestos industry. But the new findings are leading scientists to suspect that SV40 may account for a substantial number of mesotheliomas. Dr Butel said: "The consistent association of SV40 with that tumour is compelling."
Some scientists remain sceptical of the link, however. Robin Weiss, a professor of viral oncology at University College, London, said that SV40 is widely used in laboratories and could easily contaminate tumour samples, fooling the ultra-sensitive tests used to detect the virus. Prof Weiss said:
"Many of the positive results are probably false positives. Weve looked at mesothelioma and did find it in some cases, but then we got bogged down in whether they were due to contamination or not."
However, Dr Bharat Jasani, a leading expert on SV40 and mesotheliomas at the University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, said that new reliability tests rule out contamination as a possible explanation. He said:
"There is absolutely no question of laboratory contamination being to blame. That part of the story is now over. The time has come where we have to take things more seriously."
Dr Jasani said he had little doubt that the mass polio vaccination campaigns were to blame for SV40 entering the human population. He said, however, that this could bring new hope to hundreds of cancer patients, as it suggested that many might be treated by a vaccine that attacked SV40. He said:
"We could think about saving more than 2,000 lives a year from mesothelioma - and that is good news."
A spokesman for the Department of Health said last night that it was aware that SV40 had contaminated early polio vaccines but insisted that there is no evidence that the virus caused tumours. She said: "It is also important to stress that the vaccine currently used is rigorously checked for safety and efficacy and is free of SV40."
Feat.Org |
||
Autism Society of America |
(Yes I know he supports Hillary, Ugh) |
Autism National Commitee |
A pox on vaccines
Parents who refuse to have children immunised are regarded as dangerous cranks - in defiance of the facts
Anne Karpf
Wednesday January 16, 2002
The Guardian
We call it propaganda when governments peddle "facts" which are demonstrably untrue. And yet the claim that without vaccination measles is a stalking killer is disseminated by both the Department of Health and most medical journalists, despite strong counter-evidence. In 1976, Professor Thomas McKeown, investigating trends in mortality, compared declining death-rates from infectious diseases with medical interventions since the cause of death was first registered in 1838. He found that immunisation had no significant effect on the trend of the death-rate from measles, which had fallen to a low level before mass vaccination was introduced, because of major improvements in sanitation and nutrition. So too had morbidity, the incidence of the disease.
Those of us who haven't had our children vaccinated aren't cranky obsessives or zealous Jehovah's Witnesses. On the contrary, we're mostly pretty well-informed, as you have to be if you refuse the orthodoxy of vaccination. We do so for two main reasons, neither of them specifically to do with autism, which most people would agree is dreadful but only affects a small number of children.
The first, and most shocking one, is that vaccination simply can't sustain the claims made for it. In the US immunisation rates are as high as 98% is some areas, and yet there are still regular measles epidemics. The Centres for Disease Control in Atlanta found that 80% of measles cases in 1985 occurred in children who had been vaccinated, while a 1987 outbreak affected a secondary school more than 99% of whose pupils had had live measles vaccine. In Italy there were just 10 deaths from measles between 1989-91, even though they had only 40% coverage from the vaccine. In the following two years coverage from the vaccine grew, as did deaths from measles (to 28). So much for "herd immunity".
Second, we believe that in the case of infectious diseases, Pasteur's germ theory has been oversold. Pasteur, Robert Koch and others focused on the bacteria that caused infections, which medicine then tried to zap. Most anti-vaccinators argue that the host, ie the body, is as important as the infecting germ. Starting from a quite different paradigm, they prefer to nourish the body's own immune system, which vaccination (they maintain) impairs.
Opponents of immunisation feel vindicated by epidemiology, for measles isn't a disease that strikes randomly unless routed by vaccination. On the contrary, it turns out to be depressingly class-conscious and poverty-aware. Those most debilitated by it are the least well fed - there's a tragic synergy between malnutrition and infectious diseases. According to a 1973 World Health Organisation report, "ordinary measles or diarrhoea - harmless and short-lived diseases among well fed children - are usually serious and often fatal to the chronically malnourished.
"Before vaccines existed, practically every child in all countries caught measles, but 300 times more deaths occurred in the poorer countries than in the richer ones. The reason was not that the virus was more virulent, nor that there were fewer medical services; but that in poorly nourished communities the microbes attack a host which, because of chronic malnutrition, is less able to resist". Given that there's no vaccination against poverty, governments prefer the quicker fix of vaccination. Vaccine producers like it too: there's gold in them thar jabs.
This isn't a sphere where conscientious objections are tolerated, either among doctors or patients. Each GP gets a "target payment" (did someone say "bribe"?) of £2,730 for vaccinating 90% of two-year-olds on their list. Some practices are now considering dropping unvaccinated families from their lists. When my first child was newborn, my GP asked why I was risking her life by refusing to have her vaccinated. I changed practices soon after. Journalists, too, are expected to toe the public health line and are labelled irresponsible (as I will be) if they don't, even though accusations of "inaccuracy" often mask genuine disagreements.
Alternative health practitioners argue that measles and other infectious illnesses, far from damaging children, actually improve their overall health. But a child suffering from the disease needs proper, labour-intensive care. Nursing used to be an essential part of the job-description of motherhood: our mothers (for it was mostly them) knew how to nurse an infected child - drawn curtains, cold drinks, and wet flannels. We now think of nursing almost entirely in professionalised terms, as something we pay others to do.
Above all nursing is slow, but life is fast. What child, today, can afford to miss a week of the national curriculum, and what mother can take a week off work? I don't usually admit it in public lest a passing doctor burst a blood-vessel, but I want my children to contract measles. Yet whenever I hear of someone from whom they could catch it, it's never the right time - an exam or deadline is always looming.
One consequence of the mass vaccination of children is to turn measles into an adult (or adolescent) disease, when it's far more dangerous. And now the government is considering the introduction of a chickenpox vaccine - thus does the vaccination cocktail grow. We're familiar with the concept of informed consent. On vaccination, increasing numbers of people are turning towards the concept of informed refusal.
akarpf9@hotmail.com
And come on, there're only a few questions. I'm sure with all those websites at your disposal, you can easily find the answers:
-Why would many countries (the UK, Finland, Sweden), no friend to big business, go along with this conspiracy?
-Why would EVERY researcher looking into this lie?
-Why would other drug companies, who could make money off a replacement vaccine, support the conspiracy?
-How could MMR be the cause of autiam when rates in the UK started going up in 1979 and MMR wasn't introduced until 1988?
-How can rates of autism in the US have shown a steady growth since the 80s and MMR vaccine rates remained steady?
Wow, now you've taken to posting fantasy. Smallpox would have disappeared around 1870? Do you really believe that?
I can cut-and-paste absolute proof that man never walked on the moon. Want me to? It will be just as reliable as the garbage you've been posting.
And are you EVER going to answer my questions?
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.