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.'
with all the doubt exisiting about vaccines I maintain that parents should question vigorously whether they should have their child(ren) vaccinated...
but I am sure you agree on this - parents should have the final say on this very questionable issue...
I say null hypothesis to all who claim that vaccines are safe and that parents should not question the safety of them...
yeah and if you believe that vaccines are safe, without question, I have a nice ocean front property for you in Arizona...
I don't see them, please point out the answers.
Better yet, why don't you just cut-and-paste them to another post?
Do you REALLY believe that smallpox would have disappeared around 1870?
Your definition of "...legitimate medical and scientific organizations" is?
if vaccinations against were given around 1867 - why then - did they see a peak of 42,000 deaths in 1872?
The kind that don't wear tin foil hats.
Anyway, I went back to your document dumps and nowhere do they even mention autism. Now maybe I missed it, but you didn't even come close to anwering those questions.
Try again.
anyway - here are some early historical facts on vaccines...
TESTIMONIES
OF
MEDICAL AUTHORITIES
ON
VACCINATION
LONDON SOCIETY FOR THE ABOLITION OF
COMPULSORY VACCINATION
DR. SQUIRRELL, of the London Small-Pox Hospital, a Contemporary of JENNER,
Opposed vaccination on the ground that we have already too many maladies; that it affords no security against small pox; and that it was frequently followed by injurious consequences, in support of which conclusions he instanced thirty-nine cases.
DR. PEARSON, 1799.
This intimate friend and coadjutor of JENNER, in a letter to him, describes the eruptions in the vaccinated patients in London. "You will be astonished at my talking of eruptions, but it now appears in DR. Woodville’s cases, that as many have eruptions on the body as have them only in the parts inoculated. I inoculated an infant yesterday in Dr. WOODVILLE’S presence, from a patient ill of the cow-pox with eruptions on his body to the amount of two or three hundred . . . . On telling DR. WOODVILLE that I had been anxious about your publishing the use of the caustic, he replied, ‘That would have damned the whole business.’ Be assured that, if the practice [of vaccination] cannot be introduced without the caustic, it will never succeed with the public."—Life of Jenner by Baron,, i. 313, 315.
JOHN BIRCH, Surgeon Extraordinary to the Prince of Wales, and Surgeon to St. Thomas’s Hospital, 1804-7.
I have thought it a duty to publish my answer to the questions of the College of Surgeons, and my letter to the College of Physicians. In the last of these I have adduced no less than seven cases of death caused by vaccination. I could add more, but the cases adduced are enough to refute the assertions made to the House of Commons, that vaccination might be safely adopted because it was never fatal.
I have known several bad effects occur in consequence of vaccination. The case of REBECCA LATCHFORD is published: spring and fall she is usually visited with some eruption or suppuration about the face or arm. I have also seen more than two cases similar to that of JOWLES, in which the face has been principally attacked. By some vaccinators these eruptions are called scrofula: but how can this be reconciled with the positive assurance of a justly celebrated surgeon, on which parliament relied; that neither scrofula, nor any other disease, was excited by vaccination.
Besides the singular eruptions above mentioned, I have seen many others of a very itching nature, and some shrivelled scaly skins consequent on cow-pox.
CAPTAIN BUTTS, of the Navy, lost an infant from an eruption which took place immediately from the affection of the arm.
I have information from Hertford of five cases of small-pox occurring after vaccination, in four of which the patients died.
In Lambeth Workhouse several died of small-pox subsequent to vaccination.
In respect of the consequences of vaccination I am compelled to declare, that I see new and anomalous eruptions following this disease; eruptions, which in the whole course of my former practice I never met with, and which I must conscientiously refer to this novel practice.
MR. BIRCH concludes as the result of observation and experience:
1. That cow-pox has in more than one instance proved fatal.
2. That cow-pox is productive of new appearances of disease, unknown before in the catalogue of human impurities.
3. That cow-pox is not by any means to be depended on as a security against the natural small-pox.
EXTRACT FROM THE REPORT OF THE FIRST VACCINE INSTITUTION:
"It is our duty to acknowledge that four or five cases have proved fatal from the affection of the part vaccinated."
Dr. LETTSOM, 1805,
Was one of JENNER’S coadjutors in introducing the cow-pox. A friend of DR. LETTSOM, writing in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1802, says :—" It has been disputed of the old inoculation whether any other disease could be transmitted with the small-pox: DR. LETTSOM grants there may, which is a serious hazard."
WILLIAM ROWLEY, a Member of the University of Oxford, and of the Royal College of Physicians in London; Physician Extraordinary to Her Majesty’s Lying-in-Hospital, 1805; Public Lecturer on the Theory and Practice of Medicine, &c.
In 1805, wrote :—It results from the general resume of all these authentic facts, that out of 504 persons vaccinated in England, 75 died from the consequences, and almost all have had the small-pox, some sooner, some later, after their vaccination. There is no question here of supposition or calculation of probability, it is truth! It is evidence which seems to speak and leaves no doubt. Now, if in the space of 7 or 8 years, (from 1798 to 1805,) vaccination has shown itself so grievous to society, what may we not fear for the future? It will scarcely be imagined that the facts mentioned are all that might be cited to prove the inefficiency and dangers of the practice. Alas! it is too certain that on all sides we meet with new instances of maladies such as those already detailed. Consider England, France, Germany, Italy, and other countries, where vaccination has been received; penetrate into the interior of houses, into the bosom of families; interrogate fathers and mothers, and you will be surprised, shocked, and even enraged to see, not only tolerated but maintained, a murderous practice, which carries desolation into families, and compromises the reputation of those who protect or practise it.
LONDON COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 1806
Eleven hundred circulars were dispatched on 15th December, 1806, to all the members of the College whose addresses were known in the United Kingdom, submitting the following questions—
1st. How many persons have you vaccinated?
2nd. Have any of your patients had small-pox after vaccination;
3rd. Have any bad effects occurred in your experience in consequence of vaccination? and if so, what were they ?
4th. Is the practice of vaccination increasing or decreasing in your neighbourhood? if decreasing, to what cause do you impute it?
To the 1100 circulars only 426 replies were received. Why nearly two-thirds of the members kept silent, when at the outset they were converted in multitudes to Vaccination, is left unexplained. The replies were thus summarised by the Board on 17th March, 1807—
The- number of persons stated in such letters to have been vaccinated, is 164,381.
The number of cases in which small-pox had followed vaccination is 56.
The Board think it proper to remark under this head, that, in the enumeration of cases in which small-pox has succeeded vaccination, they have included none but those in which the subject was vaccinated by the surgeon reporting the facts.
The bad consequences which have arisen from vaccination are—
66 cases of eruption of the skin, and
24 of inflammation of the arm, whereof
3 proved fatal.
Vaccination, in the greater number of counties from which reports have been received, appears to be increasing: in the metropolis it is on the decrease.
The principal reasons assigned for the decrease are—
Imperfect vaccination,
Instances of small-pox after vaccination,
Supposed bad consequences,
Publications against the practice,
Popular prejudices.
DR. GREENE, BOSTON, U.S., 1806,
Reported to the Boston Society of Medical Improvement a fatal case of erysipelas following re-vaccination.
DR. JENNER,
Writing to JAMES MOORE:, in 1810, said, "When I found DR. WOODVILLE about to publish his pamphlet relative to the eruptive cases at the Small-pox Hospital, I intreated him in the strongest terms, both by letter and conversation, not to do a thing that would so much disturb the progress of vaccination."—Life of Jenner, ii., 374.
Dg. CAPADOSE, The Hague, Holland, 1823.
We may expect a similar effect of vaccination as if we tried to protect the body against those terrible ulcers by inoculating their virus; and if inoculation of small-pox be dangerous, vaccination must be so too. The deleterious virus in the lymph being a poisonous germ, the application of it will be tantamount to poisoning the blood, whether the lymph be taken from cows or from children. As every remedy ought to be applied according to the particular constitution, the state of health, and the disposition of the patient, the uniform and universal use of the same means or virus promiscuously to every person, whether infant, adult, or aged person, will cause the prophylactic remedy, like all specifics, to be condemned as quackery. No one can tell what will be the effect of the nostrum upon the health of every one to whom it is administered. Science is plunged into an ocean of uncertainty, and the more you re-vaccinate the more you will complicate your course; and as it ought to be left to every one to take care of his own health and that of his children, or to take the advice of the physician in whom he has confidence, and to follow the way his constitution requires, compulsory vaccination ought not to be entertained.—Bestryding der Vaccine. 2nd Edition.
GEORGE GREGORY, M.D., 1840.
I have heard the particulars of a case where erysipelas and cow-pox co-existed, and the lymph being unfortunately taken, both diseases were communicated to the child. I have no experience bearing on the question whether measles can be communicated along with cow-pox, but it would be going too far to say that such a thing is impossible. As little have I to say practically on the question of communicating syphilis by means of the vaccine virus, but I am not prepared to deny the possibility of such an occurrence. DR. JENNER, as we all know, laid great stress on the danger of vaccinating while the system was pre-occupied by herpes, lepra, or psoriasis. I have frequently seen the vaccine vesicle assume the leprous character; nor can I doubt that the combination of the Leprous and true vaccine disease would be propagated, if anyone were so unwise as to employ such degenerated lymph.—London Medical Gazette P. 658. Vol. xxvi.
DR. HENRY COLES, Cheltenham, 1840.
A medical friend in this place, (much my senior, and whose authority, consequently, is much weightier than mine,) lately pronounced on an eruptive case, that it arose from the child having been vaccinated from an unhealthy subject. I have been astonished at the number of persons from whom I have heard of this child "turned into a most horrid spectacle;" and I find that the caution of parents (always in the extreme on this point), has of late been aggravated to a very annoying extent. It is not enough to be able to answer for the parents of the child, but I have had enquiries put to me respecting the preceding generation, and if the fancies and fears of the idle and wealthy are to be sanctioned and encouraged, it will be soon expedient that practitioners in this place should furnish themselves with the genealogy of all the clodpoles in Gloucestershire, together with a record of the integrity of their constitutions, and a voucher for the purity of their morals.—London Medical Gazette. p. 626. Vol. xxvi.
THE LANCET, March 30th, 1840.
It appears that there still exists in Italy, not only among the people, but many medical men, a great prejudice against vaccination diseases which occur after vaccination being often attributed to the inoculation of the virus.
DUBLIN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 1844,
Publishes’ a series of cases of erysipelas following vaccination.
PROFESSOR JOSEPH JONES, M.D.
It is said that in 1849-50 Erysipelas so frequently followed vaccination in Boston, and the result was so often fatal, that many physicians refused to vaccinate, except when it was absolutely necessary, and almost entirely abandoned re-vaccination.— Researches upon Spurious Vaccination, Nashville, Tennessee, U.S.
PROFESSOR BARTLETT, of New York, 1850.
Lecturing at the University of New York, in 1850, on the causes of pulmonary consumption, quoted on the authority of two eminent French physicians, DR. BARTHEZ and DR. RILLIEZ, the following important facts connected with vaccination: "Of 208 children that had been vaccinated, 138 died of tubercular consumption, and 70 of other maladies. In 95 who were not vaccinated, only 30 died of tubercular Consumption, and 65 of other diseases." The circumstances, adds DR. BARTLETT, "connected with the two classes, the vaccinated and un-vaccinated, were, as nearly as could be, the same."
DR. VERDE DE LISLE, 1850.
How is it that in an enlightened century, the Academy of Medicine, which is the centre and stimulus of this great question, tries to support a pitiable prejudice, not by solid and irrefutable reasons, but by pomposity, prizes, medals, and admonitions? It is high time, in the interest of science and humanity, to stop, and show how this vile, beastly corruption of the blood has injured our race. It is high time for the Academy to take up again this question among its labours, if it would not burden itself with a heavy responsibility for all the misery with which vaccination has already afflicted from three to four generations. It is time to examine whether JENNER and his coadjutors, in order to have their so called protective remedy against small-pox adopted, had the dishonest view to deceive the Government and public about the real nature of their specific.
In case of an affirmative answer, we will ask the Academy:—
1. Whether by the transplantation of a skin disease from an animal to the human creature, other affections beside a skin disease are not transferred?
2. Whether, in consequence of the transfer of these skin diseases, the absorbing and resorbing ability of the skin vessels is not also partly destroyed?
3. Whether, in consequence of this effect, the loathsome eruptive matters destined by nature to be thrown out of our economy, do not find an insurmountable barrier in the skin, and are therefore compelled to develop themselves in the interior in various forms; and whether these vaccinal disorganisations are not infinitely more serious, and a hundred times more fatal, than the natural small-pox, which the vaccine poisoning offers to prevent?
4. Whether the number of these diseases, which have so luxuriantly grown since the introduction of the cow-pox, are not the effects of vaccination ?
DR. NITTINGER, of STUTTGART, 1850.
How rapidly does the scourge progress! The terrible, ominous commotion begins already the first, fourth, seventh, and ninth day after the vaccination; many, many children fall its victims ; and again others are more fortunate, but mostly some misery remains.
The mucous membranes, particularly those of the organs of the senses and generation, (in adults,) attest the sufferings and dangers originating in the inoculated kine pox poison—ophthalmia, otorrhoea, fluor albus, prurigo, &c.—Evils of Vaccination.
Dr. COPELAND, 1850.
Just half a century has elapsed since the discovery and introduction of vaccination, and after a quarter of a century of the most transcendant laudation of the measure, and after another quarter of a century of reverberated encomiums from well-paid Vaccination Boards, raised with a view of overbearing the increased murmurings of disbelief (now rapidly increasing) among those who observe and think for themselves; the middle of the nineteenth century finds the majority of the profession in all latitudes and hemispheres, doubtful as to the preponderance of advantages present and prospective, to be obtained either from inoculation or vaccination. DR. COPELAND also says,—that vaccination favours the prevalence of several forms of scrofula..—Dictionary of Practical Medicine. P. 823.
THE MEDICAL TIMES & GAZETTE for Jan. 1st, 1854,
Also informs us that consumption "has widely spread since the introduction of vaccination, and within ten years (ending 1853) had slain its 68,204 victims in the metropolis alone."
THE LANCET, July 15th, 1854.
There is a belief, it may he .denounced as a prejudice, but it is not the less a deeply rooted conviction, and one not confined to the poor or the ignorant, that, if the vaccine disease maybe transmitted by inoculation, other diseases, less beneficial, may be propagated in the same manner, and by the same operation. Many a parent of high and low degree, dates constitutional disease in her offspring to vaccination with bad matter. Who should say that this etiological conclusion is always false?
THE LANCET, Nov. 11th, 1854.
So widely extended is the dread that along with the prophylactic remedy something else may be inoculated—lest the germ of future disease may be planted, that few medical practitioners would care to vaccinate their own children from a source of the purity of which they were not well assured.
DR. R. T. TRALL, New York, 1855.
Physicians are not at all agreed as to the propriety of resorting to vaccination as a protection from small-pox. There is no question that it is, to a great extent, a protection from the virulence and danger of the natural smallpox; at the same time, there is danger of inoculating the patient with some loathsome, and even worse disease, as syphilis or scrofula, from the impossibility of always getting a supply of matter from healthy constitutions. In either way there is a risk to incur, and it is a delicate matter for a physician to advise on a subject when both sides are hazardous. I am fully convinced, that if people could bring up their children in strict physiological habits, the non-vaccinating plan would be altogether the best; but in a city this seems next to impossible, and in the country it is pretty generally neglected. Children reared healthily in relation to food, exercise, and ventilation, have little to fear from any disease, however contagious; they may have this (small-pox), but it will not endanger life, nor produce much deformity, nor serious injury. I have seen within the last year a most horridly loathsome case of scrofulous disease, in which the patient literally rotted alive at the age of 15, from unhealthy virus received when he was but three years of age. Parents often find some of their children tainted with morbid humours, unlike any other member of the family, and which they are wholly unable to account for, except on the supposition of foul matter taken into the system by vaccination. My own practice would be to keep children as healthy as possible; and if the small-pox happen, let it have its natural course.—Hydropathic Encyclopedia p96
DR. T.S. McALL of Greenock
I have every reason to believe that lymph taken from a party with hereditary disease, conveys that disease with it.—Reply to circular of Medical Officer of Privy Council, as to Vaccination, 1856.
DR. HAMERNIK, Prague.
The operation of vaccination is not in itself so insignificant as has been supposed, and very frequently is followed by results more or less injurious. At one period it was declared that from 1 to 2 per cent of vaccinated cases ended fatally. Cases have frequently been observed in which vaccination has been followed by St. Vitus’ dance, swelling of the glands of the shoulder and arm, abscesses, withering up of the punctured and the surrounding parts, accompanied by shivering attacks; increased heat of the body, heightened pulse, &c. The deaths that have ensued from vaccination seem to have been caused by pyaemia, so-called, following upon it.—Reply to Circular, Medical Officer of Privy Council, 1856.
DR. LEVER, Physician to Guy’s Hospital, London.
I have known syphilis communicated to a child by the hand of a legally educated medical practitioner.—Reply to Circular of Medical Officer Of Privy Council 1856.
DR. JOEL SHEW, Cincinnati, U.S.
Commenting on a case of death from vaccination which was reported in the "New York Journal, Medical arid Surgical," gives a case of a lady whose health had been injured by vaccination, and adds,— In two other cases large swellings took place; one in the arm-pit, the other in the neck, lasting for some days, and finally breaking out in running sores. By questioning closely, we not unfrequently find that children never enjoy good health after vaccination, however firm it might have been before.
In another place the same author says,— After all the recommendation that this practice has had for the
last 50 years, there are yet those who entertain honest doubts as to whether it is, after all, on the whole, a benefit to the race. At any rate, the question, like all others, has two sides ; both of which demand our most honest consideration. It is certainly true that vaccination does not merit the encomiums which its more early advocates put upon it; nor is it anything like capable of exterminating small-pox from the world, as was formerly maintained; but
page 18 missing
to have given occasion to the distinction between a genuine and modified small-pox (varicella)—a distinction evidently made with the view of maintaining at all hazards the dogma to which vaccinators have committed themselves, as to the influence of vaccination in modifying the outbreaks of the epidemic. These clinical subtleties, belonging to the category of chimeras, have long since proved to be illusory; in reality, there is no such distinaion; for, even in a mild epidemic of varicella, a careful observer will be able to discover amongst the sufferers fully developed pustules of smallpox, possessing every attribute of the true and genuine pustule.— From the Natutrarzt.
DR. JOHN EPPS, 25 years Director of the Jennerian Institute, had vaccinated about 120,000 people, but finally declared, 1861—
The vaccine virus is a poison. As such it penetrates all organic systems, and infects them in such a way as to act repressively on the pox. It is neither antidote nor corrigent, nor does it neutralise the small-pox, but only paralyses the expansive power of a good constitution, so that the disease has to fall back upon the mucous membrane. Nobody has the right to transplant such a mischievous poison compulsorily into the life of a child. If the vaccine virus be not eliminated in the form of a genuine vaccine vesicle, the system is unquestionably poisoned. And again :—If the vaccine lymph does not produce the vaccine disease, it produces something else—i.e., a noxious agent is introduced to poison the system against the poison of small-pox ; but if it does not produce this effect, it still poisons, without the benefit superadded of protection from small-pox.—London Vaccine Institute Report, 1863.
PROFESSOR RICORD, M.D., Paris.
If the transmission of disease is clearly demonstrated, vaccination must be altogether discontinued. For in the present state of science, we are in possession of no criteria,, that may permit the conscientious practitioner to assert that the lymph with which he inoculates is perfectly free from admixture with tainted blood.
—Lecture at the hotel Dieu, Paris, 1862.
At first I repelled the idea that syphilis could be transmitted by vaccination. The recurrence of facts appearing more and more confirmatory, I accepted the possibility, but still with reserve and even with repugnance; but to-day I hesitate no longer to proclaim their reality!—Address at the Academy of Medicine, Paris; May 19th, 1863.
PROFESSOR RICORD, M.D., Paris.
My position is simply this—I suspect that isolated examples of syphilitic infection through vaccination are much more common in this country than is generally admitted. For the chance of the occurrence of such isolated cases is infinitely greater than that of a wholesale outbreak of vaccinal syphilis, and when such wholesale outbreaks have been noted, I cannot help feeling certain that many isolated cases of infection have occurred without their nature being detected or admitted.—Letter to MR. W. HUME-ROTHERY, December 24th, 1879.
MEDICAL TIMES & GAZETTE of May 30th, 1863.
On the 14th May, 1863, Mr. WELLs vaccinated a lady, the mother of a family, taking good matter from the vesicle of a healthy child; immediately upon making the punctures the patient swooned. A visit on the following morning disclosed the fact of very singular symptoms having set in; the arm was much swollen, and had a dark purplish hue, much resembling the colour of a bullock’s liver, the punctures nearly invisible, and the whole region of the operation presenting the appearance of having been bitten by some venomous reptile. The symptoms grew rapidly worse, entirely baffling medical skill, and the patient died on the 18th, of phlegmonous erysipelas.
DR. O. KRATZ, Surgeon, Confederate Army, U.S.A.
After reporting cases of vaccine syphilis, says, "I have seen one case, where the product of vaccination was Surpetigo rodent, a frightful disease of, I believe, a cancerous character. Some cases had herpes exedens, as the result of vaccination on their arms.— Confiderate States Medical and Surgical journal, pp 104, Vol. i. 1864.
DR. COLLINS, M.D., Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh, M.R.C.S., Eng., &c., 1866.
I have no faith in vaccination; nay, I look upon it with the greatest possible disgust, and firmly believe that it is often the medium of conveying many filthy and loathsome diseases from one child to another, and no protection whatever against small pox. Indeed, I consider we arc now living in the JENNERIAN epoch for the slaughter of innocents, and the unthinking portion of the adult population.—(Twenty years experience of a Public Vaccinater.)
Dr FRANK HASTINGS HAMILTON, late Lieutenant Colonel, Medical Inspector, United States Army.
Vaccination almost constantly produces the same results (i.e., ugly and untractable sores), and is in many cases followed by abscesses in the axillary, cervical, and other glands.— Treatise on Military Surgery, quoted by PROFESSOR JONES, in Researches upon Spurious Vaccination P. 26. 1867.
JOSEPH JONES, M.D.. Professor of Physiology and Pathology, University, Nashville, U.S. 1868.
The Federal prisoners confined in Camp Sumpter, Andersonville, Georgia, were vaccinated, and in a number of cases large gangrenous ulcers appeared at the points where the vaccine lymph had been inserted, causing extensive destruction of tissues, exposing arteries, nerves and bones, and necessitating amputation in more than one instance. From the establishment of the prison, on Feb. 24, 1864, to Oct. i, over 10,000 Federal prisoners died—i.e., near one-third of the entire number perished in less than seven months. These accidents led to the belief among some of the prisoners that the surgeons had intentionally introdumced poisonous matter into their arms during vaccination. No wonder they had such a persuasion, seeing that about 100 of them lost the use of their arms, and about 200 were so injured that they soon afterwards died. Though some medical officers were tried before a special military commission, convened in accordance with orders from the War office at Washington, on the charge of having willfully poisoned the Federal prisoners with vaccine lymph, it was shown that the unhappy consequences of vaccination at Andersonville were paralleled in the Northern prisons. "Alter careful inquiries," says DR. JONES, "among returned Confederate prisoners, I am convinced that the accidents attending vaccination were quite as numerous and severe in Northern prisons as in Southcrn."—Researches upon spurious Vaccination
T. MASSEY HARDING MRCS, LSA House Surgeon to Middx Hospital, Public Vaccinator for 12 years in Worcestershire.
When a child is vaccinated about that time (dentition), and some eruption succeeds, it is difficult to say whether the vaccination or the dentition is the cause. It is not right, however, to view this popular prejudice as a silly, groundless feeling, deserving only of ridicule. Deep-rooted popular opinions have generally a substratum of truth, and certainly some eruptive diseases have come on so immediately after vaccination as to render it extremely probable that the operation was the real cause of the eruption. These eruptions are generally of an eczematous nature—the skin is red, a serous fluid exudes freely. Most writers consider dentition the starting-point, and regard its occurrence after vaccination as a coincidence. This may be so, but the explanation certainly does not satisfy the parents of children in whom the eruption takes place immediately after vaccination, and would not satisfy me if it occurred in my own child in a few days after the punctures were made, and at the same time as the vesicle commenced. I bear in mind at this moment that a gentleman, aged fifty-six, not subject to any eruption, was re-vaccinated. The arm was violently inflamed, the matter, as he expressed it, took well. I have previously explained how mistaken such an expression is. This gentleman now, some two or three years after vaccination, is a martyr to an eczematous eruption over the body, and is himself much inclined to blame the vaccination. Some gentlemen, on the other hand, are such enthusiasts as to think that vaccination is capable of curing skin diseases of every variety, and gravely propose to employ it as a curative agent in skin diseases, including the syphilitic eruptions.
—From Small-pox and Vaccination, published by the Ladies Sanitary Association, London, 1868.
DR. BALLARD, now one of Her Majesty’s Vaccine Inspectors,
Summed up the evidence as follows:—
1. There are numerous cases on record to prove that the vaccine virus and the syphilitic virus may be introduced at the same spot by the same puncture of the vaccinating lancet.
2.—From several instances on record, there can remain no reasonable doubt that the vaccine virus and the syphilitic virus may both be drawn at the same time, upon the same instrument, from one and the same vesicle.
3.—The vesicle which is thus capable of furnishing both vaccine and syphilitic virus may present, prior to being opened, all the normal and fully developed characters of a true Jennerian vesicle, as ordinarily met with.—Essay on Vaccination. Pimblished 1868.
DR. B. F. CORNELL, M.D., President of the Homeopathic Medical Society, of New York.
It is my firm conviction that vaccination has been a curse instead of a blessing to the race; every physician knows that cutaneous diseases nave increased in frequency, severity, and variety, to an alarming extent. Not only the ancient forms of eruptive disease, scrofula, psora, erysipelas, tetter, &c., but new varieties are making their appearance, for ‘which no satisfactory cause can be given, unless they are a compound of all the others, with a sprinkling of venereal to give them respectability; and, as contemporaries, a corresponding increase of chronic disease of all the internal organs. To what is this increase owing? contagion may account for some of the varieties ; in a large majority, however, to no medium of transmission is the wide-spread dissemination of this class of disease so largely indebted as to Vaccination. Feb. 11th, 1868.
DR. McCONNELL REED, M.D., L.R.C.P. Edin., 1869.
While some members of the medical profession declare it to be the result of their experience and general observation, that the practice of vaccination has increased the susceptibility to pulmonary consumption in adults, and the general mortality of infants and children—can you be surprised at the fact that there is a growing disinclination on the part of conscientious parents to submit to have their children vaccinated by comupulsion ? I confess that with my own experience as a medical practitioner, and with the knowledge of the experience and opinions of others capable of forming a correct judgment on this subject, I cannot advise my patients to have their children vaccinated : but I would strongly advise the Government to adopt measures to bring about a speedy repeal of the compulsory clauses of the vaccination acts.—Anglesca Place, Commercial Road, London, E.
DR. SPENCER T. HALL, MA.
He said his attention had long been drawn to this question, and the more he had looked into it, the more he had found evidence abounding in various parts of the kingdom—and this in every rank of life—of instances of persons being more unhealthy after vaccination than they were before. People of rank did not like to confess to the world that their blood was contaminated, though many of them had to mourn the fact in private life. Almost without exception—and he said this without unkindly feeling towards his medical brethren—it would be found that if a person well oft wanted a child vaccinated, the doctor would seldom go to the parish pauper for his lymph; but while this was going on, the poor pauper children were being vaccinated from one another by hundreds. Let us look this question fairly in the face.—Southport Visitor, Aug. 24th, 1869.
MR. J. D. BROWN, F.R.C.S.E., L.S.A., of Haverford-West.
I have been 30 years in the profession, and have never vaccinated a child without trembling for the results; never sent to London for vaccine without a qualm of conscience, supplied (as it is well known to be) from the lowest grade of infected children, born of parents steeped in the most loathsome, diseases, highly communicative by blood, lymph, and matter, and from that den of collected human ruin our pure lymph (save the mark!) is obtained.
This discovery that immortalised JENNER rescued the human race from the cruel tyranny and the hideous stamp of small-pox. Since that day the pure stream has passed through millions of human beings, taking some evil out of each—certainly all that can pass from blood to lymph, and therefore all that can be conveyed from man to man. What a tide of corruption it is by this time, I leave your readers to imagine, and how far it has lost its pristine power: how much polluted it must be with many nameless diseases, had better remain untold. Can we blame a mother, or punish a father, for refusing to convey this poison into their offspring’s blood—a poison perhaps reeking with the stamp of a curse that never dies out till the awful sentence is fulfilled, and the fourth generation has suffered, in whose tomb it lies buried ?—Milford Haven Telegraph, Sept. 22nd, 1869.
DR. CHARLES KIDD
It is satisfactory to find that the poor woman imprisoned for neglect of vaccination has been set at liberty. Hudibras tells us of certain Puritans who are ever so exacting, perverse, and in the right, that they seem to worship God for spite. So it is to be feared of the animal vaccinators from the heifer, gushing sensationalists, and others who would wish to keep this woman in gaol, to point the moral of their new fangles. It is clear that we want some relaxation of these penal clauses as to vaccination. We want vaccination to be left in its natural channel, amongst proper medical men—not enforced by handcuffs and goals, and the tender mercies of the police and mechanical-minded public vaccinators. I have seen a terrible disease in an infant that I could not, after the utmost inquiry, find out to be due to anything but this compulsory vaccination of children in shoals, without discrimination. Such a thing could not happen in France or Ireland, where dispensary men are careful, conscientious, and well educated; men who vaccinate half-a-dozen infants, perhaps, in a week,—not a hundred higgledy-piggledy by Act of Parliament. The mere crowding together of the children is a source of disease in itself. We have inspectors, who inspect after the harm is done; but what we want is less inspecting, and better preparation of the children for the operation, and an accurate and good vaccine lymph.—CHARLES K1DD, M.D., Sackville Street. Anti Vaccinator, Oct. 2nd, 1869.
DR. M. G. EVANS, M.D., Pubic Vaccinator for 16 years. Narberth, 1869.
Animal vaccination has been extensively tried on the Continent and may have many good points about it; but competent judges affirm that the lymph obtained direct from the heifer acts too violently; and where could parties be found willing to supply heifers to keep up a stock of lymph? It is well known that in this country much more attention in general is devoted to the health of those animals, than is bestowed upon the health of the children of their proprietors, and who would not, for a small consideration, permit their stock to be operated on. Again; would it be justifiable to introduce into the system of animals a virus said to reek with the stamp of a curse, which animals (at some future date) are inevitably destined to become the food of man? Assuredly not. The idea is as loathsome as it is impracticable.—Anti-Vaccinator, October 23rd, 1869.
DR. STOWELL.
[Twenty-five years a vaccine practitioner.] The nearly general declaration of my patients enables me to proclaim that vaccination is not only an illusion, but a curse for humanity. More than ridiculous—it is irrational to say that any corrupt matter taken from boils and blisters of an organic creature, could affect the human body otherwise than to injure it. First, it was asserted that vaccination protected for life. When this proved a failure, re-vaccination in every seventh year was proposed; but this also failed. Then there was a want of sufficient cow-pox. Well, cows were inoculated with human pox, and the suppurated matter produced by this operation was called pox-lymph, fresh from the cow. This bastard poison is now transferred into human bodies, no matter what disease man or brute may have had; but it is called now-a-days "genuine vaccine." This pure lymph is carried from child to child, and spreads a diseased condition, so that hospitals and drug shops have increased 80 per cent., and continue to do so from day to day. What are 450 physicians of the Bluebook, while there are in London alone 3,000 physicians? I myself know the names of a hundred physicians who think like me.—Lancet, 1870.
Dr. BAYARD.
For my part when I used to vaccinate, I observed many cases of ulcers sufficiently dangerous to necessitate particular care; and mothers, also, have said to me "My child has never been well since it was vaccinated." Consumption seized upon them and many succumbed. With this cow (or horse) virus I had introduced a germ of disintegration, and my preservative did not preserve them from small-pox.—Essay on Vaccination, after 35 years experience. London, 1870. Translated by GEORGE S. GIBBS
Mr. JOHN PRATT, M.R.C.S., Durham, 1870.
Was recently summoned, and he said to the magistrates: My child has not been vaccinated. I have reasons for not obeying the vaccination laws. I obeyed the law with respect to my first child, and the consequence is, that it has been seriously injured by the operation. Being a professional man, I used all the precaution 1 could in selecting good matter ; but in spite of all that, my child has been considerably injured. Under these circumstances, I came to the determination that I would never vaccinate another child of my own or anybody’s. I have considered tile vaccination question for a number of years, and have gone minutely into it, both for and against; and the only conclusion I can arrive at is—that vaccination has no beneficial effect whatever, but that it inflicts very serious injuries. This being my opinion, I cannot conscientiously do an injury to any man’s child, which I would do if I obeyed the vaccination laws—Co-Operator, July 30th, 1870.
MR. R. CEELY, M.R.C.S., L.S.A of Aylesbury.
Dr SEATON says (Hand-book of Vaccination P. 337) :—There is no one in England whose opinion on the subject of animal vaccination will be received with so much respect as MR. CEELY’S, because there is no one who has nearly the knowledge that he possesses of the disease in the cow, and its transmission to the human species. He looks upon this proceeding as not only open to the objection of impractibility as applied to the general population, and of unsuccess ; but he says also, that so far from being likely to produce fewer ailments, and cutaneous eruptions in time predisposed, he knows from his experience that it would, as being more irritating, produce more.
Dr. SKELTON, MD., Licentiate in Medicine and surgery. London, Edinburgh. Author of the ‘Family Medical Adviser." ‘ Science and Practice of Medicine," Midwifery: its Complications, Diseases, &c., 1870."
The blood of the people is saturated with scrofulous and tuberculous diseases ; and the prevailing opinion among thousands of the most thoughtful, non-professional and professional, is, that vaccination has much to do with it.
DR. CHAPMAN,
In recording a case of eczema, resulting from vaccination, says: It may be here observed that chronic diseases may often be traced back to the period of vaccination in such a manner as to show that the virus was commnunicated in that way. British Journal of Homeopathy. No. 29.
DR. TURNBULL, Cheltenham, 1870.
He was sure that there was not a single medical man who would not alter his views respecting vaccination, if he studied the subject for thirty-six hours. He had often stated that vaccination was physiologically wrong, and there was not a doctor living who could prove the reverse. He had seen healthy children die rotten, from the effects of vaccination ; and although the doctors as a body, were opposed to him, yet he was glad to say that several medical men in Cheltenham had avowed their belief that several children in that town had been destroyed by vaccination.
ENOCH ROBINSON, M.R.C.S., late Medical Officer of Health for Dukinfield.
Before the child is three months old, it meets with another influence that is calculated to strengthen any infective process which may be already at work in the system, and originate such a process in a child otherwise healthy and vigorous. The most powerful infective substances are the various forms of purulent matter (a low condition of living animal matter, and essentially a phase of disease). One of these purulent forms of matter is the fluid of the vaccine vesicle. When inserted and absorbed into ‘the living blood by an unnatural method, it exerts an influence of an infective character, opposed to the healthy vital power, and weakening to the extent of its influence the natural vigour of the body. That the natural vital powers are too strong for it in many cases, is recognised in the supposed necessity for re-vaccination. But in ascertaining the causes of the high rate of infant mortality, the degrading influence of vaccine matter must be considered.—From Letter to the Local Board of health on the Causes of High Infant Mortality in Dukinfield.
Dr. HEIM, Public Vaccinator, Wurtemburg,
Says :—That the most expert diagnostician will not always be able to detect dyscrasy in children of the vaccination age, and that he himself has transplanted syphilis from a child which seemed to him perfectly healthy.—From Horrors of Vaccination. P. 26.
Dr. BAKEWELL, M.D., M.R.C.S., Vaccinator-General of Trinidad, 1871
During the 21 years in which I have been in the habit of vaccinating, I have seen very few cases in which any skin disease followed the operation so soon after as to be fairly attributable to it. Nevertheless, I feel bound to say that the amount of testimony I have heard against it from mothers—and the number of cases of skin eruptions, especially, which they have declared to have followed vaccination in children previously free from anything of the kind, led me to infer either that some vaccinators have been very careless as to the sources of their lymph, or that certain constitutional diseases may be conveyed by vaccination.
Since I have been in Trinidad—and particularly since I have been Vaccinator-General—my attention has been much directed to the subject of leprosy, and its possible propagation by vaccination. It is a strange but undoubted fact, that leprosy is greatly increasing in this island ; that it is attacking the children of most respectable parents, who want nothing in the way of diet, &c. And, moreover, it is attacking the children of Europeans, where there can be no possibility of hereditary taint. Now, it is worthy of remark, that in this island vaccination has of late years been compulsory; and that a large portion of the younger people were actually vaccinated during an epidemic of small-pox a few years ago. The general opinion among medical men is, that it is quite possible that leprosy may be propagated in this manner. It is curious, too, that in those islands where vaccination is not much used, there is very much less leprosy in proportion than here.
SIR WILLIAM GULL, BART., M.D..
In the Commons Committee of 1871, was asked (Q. 4,869), "Have you known erysipelas to occur after re-vaccination? Have you seen death resulting from it ?" Dr. GULL replied: "I have not seen death resulting from it, but I know that it has occurred." P. 277.
PENNSYLVANIA MEDICAL JOURNAL, Sep. 1871.
American mothers at last are no more free from the plague of "vaccination" than are British parents. What a prospect for humanity is this propagation of loathsome, contagious diseases! National virusation by a staff of State officers to "preserve" the public health. All the vaccine virus now sold in Alaska-street, Philadelphia, is obtained from children suffering under the influence of scrofula, syphilis, or some kindred pestilence. The vaccine station is neither more nor less than a cesspool of germinal horrors.
DR. COLLINS, M.D., L.R.C.P. Ed., M.R.C.S.
There is no certainty in the action of the vaccine virus upon tile Constitution, it often imparts, or calls into activity, diseases that otherwise would have remained dormant, by debilitating the system and weakening the powers of vitality. 1871.
THOMAS SKINNER, M.D., L.R.C.S., Liverpool, 1872.
That there are many who die of vaccination I have no doubt whatever ; that they are maimed for life I have no doubt ; and that scrofulous and other forms of disease are rendered active by it every physician in family practice knows to be an almost every day occurrence. I saw a case the other day where the little patient has never slept for three weeks, or very little, and it cannot be touched without screaming. It is much emaciated, and otherwise very ill. All this has arisen and dates from the day of its vaccination.
JOSEF HAMERNIK, M.D, Professor of the University of Prague, Bohemia.
Some years since, some terrible cases came to light, which were falsely registered as an epidemic, and which were caused by one vaccinator infecting a whole district with syphilis by vaccination.
In the begining of this year a similar misfortune occurred in the neighbourhood of Melnik, when a number of children in several districts got syphilis by vaccination, and several died of it.
Such epidemics probably occur more frequently than they are described as doing. In the earlier times of the practice of vaccination, no one dared to write anything against it, and thus no means existed of obtaining a correct knowledge of conditions like these.
One would naturally suppose that a single case of the transmission of syphilis by vaccination, incontestably proved, would result in the immediate abandonment of the practice of vaccination, in the instant withdrawal of the Government grant for its support, and in advising the people as to the dangers of vaccination, and showing the impossibility of any but misguided or self-interested physicians advocating its continuance. — The History of Small-pox and Vaccination. Prague, 1872.
DR. J. EMERY CODERRE, Professor of Materia Medica, University, Montreal, Canada.
Vaccination has made victims among us; some have contracted small-pox in consequence of the inoculation of the vaccine; others have been attacked with gangrenous ulcers, syphilitic sores, &c., resulting from the introduction of this virus into the constitution.— From a paper read before the Medical Society, .Montreal, January 31st, 1872.
MR. F. T. PORTER, M.R.C.S.
With reference to revaccination, I have no faith in it. Not one of the 36 attendants at the South Dublin Union sheds has taken small-pox. Only 7 of the number were revaccinatcd, and as the remaining 29 enjoyed the same immunity, wherein is the necessity of the operation? I have known gouty inflammation, abscess of the breast, (angio-leucitis), &c., to result from the operation. I cannot in the face of such facts approve of it. Moreover, the sense of the profession is against it.—Medical Press and Circular, March 27th, 1872.
DR. STARTIN.
Believed in 30 years he had seen about thirty cases of syphilis communicated by vaccination. He had seen hundreds of cases of spurious vaccination, where contagious porrigo had been inoculated. He had seen scabies vaccinated on more than one occasion. When DR. SIMON sent out his circular, in 18566, he (Dr STARTIN) collected several cases, giving the names and addresses of the patients, but no notice had been taken of them. They were undoubtedly cases where the children had been perfectly healthy, as well as their parents and nurses.—Discussion at the Royal Medico-Chirurgical Society, June, 1872.
WILLIAM HITCHMAN, M.D., D.C.L.
I have been acquainted with the morbid effects of vaccination for nearly 40 years, and have witnessed crowds of cases, both in hospitals and private practice, analogous to the Guy’s Hospital model; but lest my testimony may not be deemed sufficiently impartial or unbiassed, I shall quote fronm the records of the Smallpox Hospital, to prove that pure lymph, even in the hands of MR. MARSON himself, is occasionally attended with very impure consequences. M. A. W., aged 4, a fine child, was vaccinated by MR. MARSON in five places on the left arm, the poor child at the time being in perfect health, on the 19th May. The arms soon became severely inflamed, and spots of purpura appeared on the face. The vesicles on the eighth day appeared dark and filled with blood, and numerous effusions were dispmersed over the entire body. The areola assumed a mahogany appearance. In fact, the vaccine vesicles were jet black with fearful blotchcs—worrse, I think-, than the eruption of small-pox itself— dispersed (as I have said) over the whole body of this unhappy child thus "protected" by a paternal Government from disease; more especially involving the face, neck, and arms, and over the skin, together with bleeding from the left ear and nostril. Enough, and to spare, of these morbid phenomena now propagated by Acts of Parliament.—The Anti-Vaccinator, Oct. 7th, 1871.
As for time children recently vaccinated in Liverpool, I may say, from my own private observation, without reference to the many thousands I have seen at the hospital for skin diseases, that the health of hundreds has been thereby permanently affected with intractable forms of cutaneous eruption: emphatically have I seen strumous ulcers rapidly developed, acute ophthalmia, chronic enlargements of the cervical glands, diseases of the scalp, purulent discharges, foetid abscesses, and gangrenous inflammation of parts, followed by sloughing, while the throat, especially, of many such miserable sufferers according to Act of Parliament, together with the palate, uvula, and tonsils, are periodically covered with dark livid incrustations, more difficult to heal than those of small-pox itself, inasmuch as they owe their disgusting origin to the foul exudations of that indefinite, nameless, hideous thing now in course of active propagation throughout the land, yclept vaccino-syphilis.
—From the Anti- Vaccinator, Dec. 16th, 1872.
DR. HENRY A. MARTIN, Boston, U.S.A.
The reason why, in February, 1873, I abruptly ceased to propagate and collect humanized virus was, because in one week of that month I had five cases of erysipelas. They were all in children vaccinated on one arm with the institution "stock" and on the other with cow-pox; and in every instance the disease appeared on the humanized side, I had previously had four precisely similar cases scattered over the preceding two and a half years, and contemplated an eventual abandonment of the old stock; but this epidemic determined me at once to discontinue vaccination with humanized virus.—Unfortunate Results of Vaccination.
MEDICAL TIMES & GAZETTE, February 1st, 1873.
The important subject of vaccinal syphilis came again before the Medico-Chirurgical Society on Tuesday evening, when a paper was read by Mr. HUTCHINSON, detailing two new cases. He also drew some general deductions from the facts as already ascertained, which, together with others elicited in the course of the discussion that followed, constitute the most important practical suggestions yet made with regard to this most unsatisfactory subject. That syphilis could be communicated by vaccination was, though admitted abroad, long disputed in this country. Since the publication of MR. HUTCHINSON’S paper, and a communication by MR. THOMAS SMITH to the Clinical Society, where the patient was exhibited, it can no longer be so. We have now emerged from the region of doubt, to one of belief in the possibility of such an untoward occurrence; and, in accordance with the practical turn which most professional discussions sooner or later take in this country, we have promptly begun to seek a remedy for the possible evil.
Heretofore, as we have said, it has not been admitted that, if due care be taken, syphilitic infection by vaccination is possible. Especially has this been urged by the Crown officers when asked to encourage heifer vaccination. The facts flow before the public will tend to rouse them, if they have not been roused already, from the false security into which they have been lulled. And, as was stated at the meeting, it is plain that Our compulsory vaccination laws cannot be maintained unmodified.
If you would have bothered to do any research on this you would have seen there was a worldwide smallpox outbreak in 1872, and since innoculation was only begun a few years earlier, not much of the population had yet been vaccinated.
Here is a news story from Provincetown, MA and it mentions a large outbreak of smallpox in 1872. Now how was Jenner to blame for that?
Here is some current research:
* In 1997, the National Childhood Encephalopathy Study (NCES) was examined to see if there was any link between measles vaccine and neurological events. The researchers found no indication that measles vaccine contributes to the development of long-term neurological damage, including educational and behavioral deficits (Miller et al., 1997).
* A study by Gillberg and Heijbel (1998) examined the prevalence of autism in children born in Sweden from 1975-1984. There was no difference in the prevalence of autism among children born before the introduction of the MMR vaccine in Sweden and those born after the vaccine was introduced.
* In 1999, the British Committee on Safety of Medicines convened a "Working Party on MMR Vaccine" to conduct a systematic review of reports of autism, gastrointestinal disease, and similar disorders after receipt of MMR or measles/rubella vaccine. It was concluded that the available information did not support the posited associations between MMR and autism and other disorders.
* Taylor and colleagues (1999) studied 498 children with autism in the UK and found the age at which they were diagnosed was the same regardless of whether they received the MMR vaccine before or after 18 months of age or whether they were never vaccinated. Importantly, the first signs or diagnoses of autism were not more likely to occur within time periods following MMR vaccination than during other time periods. Also, there was no sudden increase in cases of autism after the introduction of MMR vaccine in the UK. Such a jump would have been expected if MMR vaccine was causing a substantial increase in autism.
* Kaye and colleagues (2001) assessed the relationship between the risk of autism among children in the UK and MMR vaccine. Among a subgroup of boys aged 2-5 years, the risk of autism increased almost 4 fold from 1988 to 1993, while MMR vaccination coverage remained constant at approximately 95% over these same years.
* Researchers in the U.S. found that among children born between 1980 and 1994 and enrolled in California kindergartens, there was a 373% relative increase in autism cases, though the relative increase in MMR vaccine coverage by the age of 24 months was only 14% (Dales et al., 2001). For more on this study, see California Data on Theory of Autism and MMR Immunization.
* Researchers in the UK (Frombonne & Chakrabarti, 2001) conducted a study to test the idea that a new form, or "new variant," of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) exists. This new variant IBD has been described as a combination of developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms occurring shortly after MMR immunization. Information on 96 children (95 immunized with MMR) who were born between 1992 and 1995 and were diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder were compared with data from 2 groups of autistic patients (one group of 98 born before MMR was ever used and one group of 68 who were likely to have received MMR vaccine). No evidence was found to support a new syndrome of MMR-induced IBD/autism. For instance, the researchers found that there were no differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups with regard to when their parents first became concerned about their child?s development. Similarly, the rate of developmental regression reported in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups was not different; therefore, there was no suggestion that developmental regression had increased in frequency since MMR was introduced. Of the 96 children in the first group, no inflammatory bowel disorder was reported. Furthermore, there was no association found between developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms.
* Another group of researchers in the UK (Taylor et al., 2002) also examined whether MMR vaccination is associated with bowel problems and developmental regression in children with autism, looking for evidence of a "new variant" form of IBD/autism. The study included 278 cases of children with autism and 195 with atypical autism (cases with many of the features of childhood autism but not quite meeting the required criteria for that diagnosis, or with atypical features such as onset of symptoms after the age of 3 years). The cases included in this study were born between 1979 and 1998. The proportion of children with developmental regression or bowel symptoms did not change significantly from 1979 to 1988, a period which included the introduction of MMR vaccination in the UK in 1988. No significant difference was found in rates of bowel problems or regression in children who received the MMR vaccine before their parents became concerned about their development, compared with those who received it only after such concern and those who had not received the MMR vaccine. The findings provide no support for an MMR associated "new variant" form of autism and further evidence against involvement of MMR vaccine in autism.
* A 2001 study (Dales et al.) used the autism case numbers provided by the California Department of Developmental Services and compared them with early childhood MMR immunization level estimates for California children. Results showed that for children born from 1980 through 1987, there was no major change in MMR immunization levels with the exception of a small increase in children born in 1988. This small increase was followed again by steady levels in children born through 1994. On the other hand, the cases of autism increased markedly, from 44 cases per 100,000 live births in 1980 to 208 cases per 100,000 live births in 1994. Even if one allows that a true increase in autism has occurred and the increase is not due to changes in diagnostic methods, diagnostic categorization, and improved identification of individuals with autism because of the level of services offered (Fombonne, 2001), this analysis shows that receipt of the MMR vaccine is not a factor. If it were a factor, one would expect the shape of the MMR level of immunization curve to be very similar to the autism case numbers. This is not the case, thus the analysis in this study argues against a link between MMR vaccination and autism."
Answers, please, answers......
"The early triple vaccine against diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus had also been shown beyond doubt to cause paralytic polio in some children to whom it was administered. The incidence of polio in children recently vaccinated against diphtheria was statistically greater than in unvaccinated children, symptoms showing in the vaccinated limb within 28 days of the initial injection. This scandal broke in Britain during 1949, an epidemic year for polio, other reports soon following from Australia. Papers dealing with this topic are plentiful. One, British, gives details of 17 cases of polio which followed 28 days or less after various injections. (129) Another, Australian, gives details of 340 cases of polio, 211 of which had been previously vaccinated against whooping cough and/or diphtheria. Of these, 35 had been vaccinated within the preceeding 3 months and a further 30 within the previous year. (130) Dr. Geffen reported similar findings from the London Borough of St. Pancras, where 30 children under the age of 5 developed polio within four weeks of being immunized against diphtheria or whooping cough or both, 'the paralysis affecting, in particular, the limb of injection. In 7 other recently vaccinated cases, paralysis occured but not in the limb that had received the injection'. (131) Two medical statisticians at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine examined these reports and concluded that: Paralytic Polio Linked To Vaccinations
"'In the 1949 epidemic of poliomyelitis in this country cases of paralysis were occuring which were associated with inoculation procedures carried out within the month preceding the recorded date of onset of the illness'. (132)
"Dr. Arthur Gale of the Ministry of Health reported 65 cases from the Midlands, where paralysis followed about two weeks after an injection; in 49 of these, paralysis occurred in the injected limb. (133) Then it was reported that of 112 cases of paralysis admitted to the Park Hospital, London, during 1947-1949, 14 were paralyzed in the limb which had received one or more of a course of immunizing injections within the previous two months. In the majority of cases, the interval between the last injection and the onset of paralysis was between 9 and 14 days. Again, combined whooping cough, diphtheria and tetanus injections were involved. This outbreak of polio followed an intensive immunization campaign during that time, 1947-49. (134) Following these findings, the Ministry of Health recommended that diphtheria and triple vaccines should not be used in areas where polio was naturally present. From that time onwards, the incidence of paralytic polio decreased rapidly in Britain, even prior to the advent of Salk vaccination..."
(Bill Bingham, Diphtheria - Part Two, The Campaigners' Handbook: The Infectious Diseases series, National Anti-Vivisection Society, 261 Goldhawk Rd, London W12 9PE, England, May 1988.)
"The medical profession has been aware of the damaging effects of vaccines on the immune system since their introduction. For example, the ability of pertussis and DTP vaccines to stimulate the onset of paralytic polio was first noted in 1909. In every polio epidemic since then DTP injections have caused the onset of polio disease.
"In 1950, two careful studies were conducted in the state of New York to evaluate the reports of an association between the onset of paralytic polio and recent injections. Investigators contacted the families of all children who contracted polio during that year, a total of 1,300 cases in New York City and 2,137 cases in the remainder of New York State. A history of vaccinations received in the previous two months was obtained on each child and from a group of matched controls in the same population. Those studies discovered that children with polio were twice as likely to have received a DTP vaccination in the two months preceding the onset of polio than were the control children (Korns et al., 1952; Greenberg et al., 1952).
"The association of vaccines with the onset of polio continues in the modern age. During a recent polio epidemic in Oman, DTP vaccination again caused the onset of paralytic polio. In that epidemic, 70 children 5 to 24 months old contracted paralytic polio during the period 1988-1989. When compared to a control group of children without polio, it was found that a significantly higher percentage of these children had received a DTP shot within 30 days of the onset of polio, 43 percent of polio victims compared to 28 percent of controls (Sutter et al., 1992). The DTP vaccine suppresses the body's ability to fight off the polio virus."
(Dr Randall Neustaedter, The Vaccine Guide: Making an Informed Choice, North Atlantic Books, 2800 Woolsey Street, Berkeley, California 94705, United States, 1996. Neustaedter's web site at www.healthy.net/vaccine, which contains a forum for vaccine questions.)
References to NAVS article:
129. Martin, J.K. 1950. "Local paralysis in children after injections" Arch. Dis. Childhood, March 1950, pp 1-5.
130. McCloskey, B.P. 1950. "The relation of prophylactic inoculations to the onset of poliomyelitis". Lancet, April 8th, pp 659-663.
131. Geffan, D.H. 1950. "The Incidence of Paralysis Ocurring in London Children Within Four Weeks After Immunisation". Medical Officer, April 8th, pp 137-140.
132. Bradford Hill, A., Knoweldon, J. 1950. "Inoculation and Poliomyelitis". BMJ, July 1st, pp 1-6.
133. Gale, A.H. 1950. Daily Express, April 10th.
134. BMJ., July 29th, 1950.
the debate on vaccinations is not a new one...
for years this has gone on...
you'd think with all the touting given to the efficacy of vaccines that all dis-ease would have been eradicated by now...
but NO - we are seeing increasing rates of dis-ease...
and all we hear is that we need more medicine and vaccines for addiction, for vomitting, for aids, etc etc...
New research demolishes link between MMR vaccine and autism
The studiesone published in the Lancet by a team from the Royal Free Hospital Medical School, London, the second in Current Problems in Pharmacovigilance from a specially convened working party of the Committee on Safety of Medicinesboth found no evidence that the vaccine causes either autism or inflammatory bowel disease, which has been suggested as the link mechanism.
In the Royal Free's study, Brent Taylor, professor of community child health, and colleagues investigated 498 children with autism born since 1979 in the North Thames region. They found that the age at which autism was diagnosed was the same regardless of whether they had received the MMR vaccine before or after 18 months old or had never been vaccinated.
There was no clustering of developmental regression after vaccination, and no more children in the group with autism had been immunised than in the general population of the region. The team said that, although the number of cases of autism had increased steadily since 1979, there was no sign of any steep rise coinciding with the introduction of the MMR vaccine in 1988.
The Committee on the Safety of Medicines' study examined medical records of 92 children with autism and 15 with Crohn's disease; the records had been passed to the committee by a firm of solicitors. Evidence of autism before vaccination was found in 36 cases, and another 28 showed family history of the condition. Eight autistic children and four with Crohn's disease seemed to have developed symptoms after MMR vaccination, but, the authors said, the small numbers and the fact that onset of autism frequently occurs around age 18 months meant that this is not enough to prove causation.
Add these findings to those of last year's Medical Research Council's team of 37 experts who examined the issue and also concluded that no link existed, and, said Norman Begg, head of the Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre's immunisation division, it is clear this issue must now be laid to rest. "These are important papers. They are further evidence that this vaccine causes neither autism nor inflammatory bowel disease," he stated.
Dr Marie McCormick, chairwoman of the committee that drafted the report, said that on the basis of the evidence "no change in MMR immunisation procedures is warranted at present." Dr McCormick, professor of maternal and child health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, spoke at a press conference held by the institute as the report was released.
In one of the more strongly worded statements on the issue to have appeared since the association between MMR vaccine and autism was first suggested, the report cites the lack of epidemiological evidence showing an association and insufficient data from case reports, including the initial 1998 report in the Lancet (1998;35l:637-41), to either prove or disprove causality. It also describes the biological models linking MMR vaccine to autism as fragmentary.
The committee weighed evidence from at least nine studies since the initial 1998 report reviewing the association between MMR vaccine and autism.
At the same time, the institute's report said that it did not exclude the possibility that MMR vaccine could, in rare cases, contribute to what it terms "autistic spectrum disorders." It goes on to note the high level of concern about the safety of MMR vaccine and that this must be addressed. "There is need for continued attention to this," said Dr McCormick.
The report made it clear that the benefits of immunisation far outweighed any risk associated with MMR vaccination. "No vaccine is 100% safe," said Dr McCormick, but she noted that, if left unchecked, diseases such as measles, mumps, and rubella could cause considerable sickness and death.
The report noted that before the vaccine was introduced in 1963 there were four million cases of measles reported annually in the United States; in 1999 there were only 100 reported cases. Before 1963, complications from measles were common: annually there were 150000 cases of respiratory complications, 100000 cases of otitis media, 48000 admissions to hospital, 7000 cases of seizures, and 4000 cases of encephalitis; overall, an estimated 4000 to 8000 deaths from measles complications occurred annually.
Current concerns are idiosyncratic: most reviews have confirmed the vaccine's safety.
The most recent study reported was conducted in Finland, where a two dose MMR schedule has been used since 1982.8 Using enhanced passive reporting, the authors monitored serious adverse events in 1.8 million children who received 3 million doses of the vaccine over 14 years. Adverse events, including febrile convulsions, anaphylaxis, urticaria, and encephalitis, were reported, although all were rare and encephalitis occurred at a rate similar to that expected in an unimmunised population. In particular, no cases of autism or inflammatory bowel disease associated with MMR vaccine were reported [---] as suggested in an earlier paper by Wakefield and colleagues in the Lancet. If there were an onset of autism and bowel problems within days of MMR vaccination, as Wakefield et al suggested, this study should have shown cases. Specific hypothesis driven studies have also found no association of MMR vaccine with bowel disease or autism.
So tell me, are you completely unable to argue a point without pasting someone else's words?
And we are discussing MMR and autism, at least try to keep things on topic.
Why won't you answer my questions?
Sir - the original article we are discussing indicates a strong causative link to MMR...J Biomed Sci 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4):359-64
Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism.
Singh VK, Lin SX, Newell E, Nelson C.
Department of Biology and Biotechnology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA.
Autoimmunity to the central nervous system (CNS), especially to myelin basic protein (MBP), may play a causal role in autism, a neurodevelopmental disorder. Because many autistic children harbor elevated levels of measles antibodies, we conducted a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and MBP autoantibodies. Using serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 control children, antibodies were assayed by ELISA or immunoblotting methods. ELISA analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children.
Immunoblotting analysis revealed the presence of an unusual MMR antibody in 75 of 125 (60%) autistic sera but not in control sera. This antibody specifically detected a protein of 73-75 kD of MMR. This protein band, as analyzed with monoclonal antibodies, was immunopositive for measles hemagglutinin (HA) protein but not for measles nucleoprotein and rubella or mumps viral proteins.
Thus the MMR antibody in autistic sera detected measles HA protein, which is unique to the measles subunit of the vaccine.
Furthermore, over 90% of MMR antibody-positive autistic sera were also positive for MBP autoantibodies, suggesting a strong association between MMR and CNS autoimmunity in autism. 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. Copyright 2002 National Science Council, ROC and S. Karger AG, Basel PMID: 12145534 [PubMed - in process]
You have an incredibly short attention span, don't you? I addressed that in post 16 "Experts reject latest MMR research".
But, if that isn't enough for you:
More evidence:
* American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 1994.
* Bailey, A., Hervas, A., Matthews, N., et al. International Molecular Genetic Study of Autism Consortium. A full genome screen for autism with evidence for linkage to a region on chromosome 7q. Human Molecular Genetics, 1998;7:571-578.
* Bristol MM, Cohen DJ, Costello EJ, et al. State of the science in autism: Report to the National Institutes of Health. J Autism Developmental Disorders 1996;26:121-54.
* Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles prevention: recommendations of the immunization practices advisory committee, MMWR 1989;Vol.38 / No.S-9.
* Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles, mumps, and rubella-vaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella and congenital rubella syndrome and control mumps: recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR. 1998. Vol. 47. No. RR-8.
* Chadwick N, Bruce IJ, Schepelmann S, Pounder RE, Wakefields AJ. Measles virus DNA is not detected in inflammatory bowel disease using hybrid capture and reverse transcriptase followed by polymerase chain reaction. J Med Virol 1998;55:305-311.
* Chen RT, DeStefano F. Vaccine adverse events: causal or coincidental? Lancet 1998; 351:611 - 612.
* Dales L, Hammer SJ, Smith, NJ. Time Trends in Autism and in MMR Immunization Coverage in California, JAMA 2001; 285:1183-1185.
* DeStefano F, Chen RT. Negative association between MMR and autism. Lancet 1999;353:1987-8.
* Department of Developmental Services. Changes in the Population of Persons with Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders in California?s Developmental Services System: 1987 through 1998. Report to the Legislature, March 1, 1999. Available at http://www.dds.ca.gov.
* Duclos P, Ward BJ. Measles vaccines: a review of adverse events. Drug Safety 1998;19:435-454.
* Fombonne E. Epidemiological Findings on Autism and Related Developmental Disorders. Workshop on Educational interventions for Children with Autism. The National Academies (NAS), Washington, DC, Dec. 13-14, 1999.
* Fombonne E, FRCPsych, Chakrabarti S, FRCPCH, MRCP. No evidence for a new variant of measles-mumps-rubella-induced autism. Pediatrics 2001; 108:e58.
* Fombonne E. Is there an epidemic of autism? Pediatrics 2001; 107:411-13.
* Fombonne E, du Mazaubrun C, Cans C, Grandjean H. Autism and associated medical disorders in a large French epidemiological sample. J Am Acad Adolesc Psychiatry 1997, 36:1561-69.
* Gillberg C, Coleman M. Autism and medical disorders: A review of the literature. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 1996;38:191-202.
* Gillberg C, Heijbel H. MMR and autism. Autism 1998;2:423-4.
* Horvath K, Papadimitriou JC, Rabsztyn A, Drachenberg C, Tildon JT. Gastrointestinal abnormalities in children with autistic disorders. Journal of Pediatrics 1999;135(5):559-63.
* Iizuka M, Itou h, Chiba M, Shirasaka T, Watanabe S. The MMR question. Lancet 2000;356:160.
* IOM, Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines, Institute of Medicine, 1991.
* IOM, Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines, Evidence Bearing on Causality, 1994.
* Kastner JL & Gellin BG. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism: The rise (and fall?) of a hypothesis. Ped Annals 2001;30:408-415.
* Kaye J, del Mar Melero-Montes M, Jick H. Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: a time trend analysis. BMJ 2001; 322:460-463.
* Medical Research Council. (2000, April 3). Media Release: No New Evidence of A Link Between MMR and Autism. Retrieved April 3, 2000 from the World Wide Web:
* Medicines Commission Agency/Committee on Safety of Medicines. The safety of MMR vaccine. Curr Probl Curr Pharmacovigilance 1999;25:9-10.
* Metcalf J. Is measles infection associated with Crohn's disease? British Medical Journal 1998;316:561.
* Miller D, Wadsworth J, Diamond J, Ross E. Measles vaccination and neurological events. Lancet 1997;349:730-31.
* Morris A & Aldulaimi D. New evidence for a viral pathogenic mechanism for new variant inflammatory bowel disease and development disorder? J Clin Pathol: Mol Pathol 2002;55:0.
* Patja A, Davidkin I, Kurki T, Kallio MJT, Valle M, Peltola H. Serious adverse events after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination during a fourteen-year prospective follow-up. Pediatr Infect Dis J, 2000;19:1127-34.
* Piven J. The Biological Basis of Autism. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 1997;7:708-12.
* Rapin, I. Autism. New England Journal of Medicine, 1997;337:97-104.
* Rodier PM, Hyman SL. Early environmental factors in autism. MRDD Research Reviews 1998;4:121-128.
* Taylor B, Miller E, Farrington CP, et al. Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association. Lancet, 1999;353:2026-9.
* Taylor B, Miller E, Lingam R, Andrews N, Simmons A, Stove J. Measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and bowel problems or developmental regression in children with autism: Population study. BMJ 2002; 324(7334):393-396.
* Uhlmann V, Martin CM, Sheils O, Pilkington L, Silva I, Killalea A, Murch SB, Wakefield AJ, O?Leary JJ. Potential viral pathogenic mechanisms for new variant inflammatory bowel disease. J Clin Pathol:Mol Pathol 2002;55:0-6.
Either make vaccines safe or don't administer them!
Lawyers Seek To Prove Vaccinations Caused Autism Hearing Tuesday To Determine Future Of Case
Posted: 11:04 a.m. EDT July 31, 2002
Updated: 12:14 p.m. EDT July 31, 2002
MIAMI -- What happens today in a Miami courtroom could have a huge impact on thousands of children with autism. A group of Miami attorneys is fighting for the right to prove in court that many autistic children were poisoned by Mercury. Many parents and a growing number of researchers believe that Mercury came from vaccines.
Some local parents are waiting anxiously for the outcome of the hearing.
From the day Aaron Blackburn was born, his proud parents recorded his milestones, and everything seemed perfect. It was that way for David Bennett's family, too.
As a toddler, David was full of personality. His mother Hilda says, "David was a very playful baby. He would seek out others to make eyes at them and to flirt. He loved blondes!"
But by the age of two something changed dramatically. Both boys stopped communicating. Their diagnosis: Autism.
Hilda says, "It was like he became deaf and unresponsive in many ways."
Both families say their boys crashed after getting their routine vaccinations.
Ellen, Aaron's mother says, "He just got this high fever. He just looked like somebody just stole him right out of his body.
Before the 1990's, one in 10,000 children was diagnosed with autism. Recent studies show it's at least 1 in 500 kids now.
Attorneys across the country want to prove that kids like David were poisoned by Thimerosal, a compound that contains the toxic heavy metal Mercury that is found in vaccines.
Attorney Elwood Lippincott says, "As the cumulative mercury exposure increased with the addition of additional vaccines to the required schedule, more kids became autistic.
Autism and mercury poisoning have many of the same symptoms: loss of speech and obsessive compulsive behavior that has many researchers theorizing there is a link between vaccines and the mercury in them and the increase in autism.
Hilda Bennett says, "Mercury is dangerous to pregnant women. The CDC is telling women not to eat too much tuna, but my son had 25 shots with Thimerosal before he was 15 months old."
Because of these concerns, vaccines made after 2000 no longer contain Thimerosal. Still, many pediatricians say there is no scientific proof of a link.
Dr. Lee Sanders, a University of Miami Pediatrician, said, "The institute of Medicine and American Academy of Pediatrics can find no conclusive link between vaccines and serious neurological or developmental problems."
But parents want a jury to hear both sides and decide whether drug companies should be held accountable for using mercury in vaccines.
Mercury has been removed from latex paint by the federal government, from eye drops, over-the-counter medications, batteries and even dog vaccines, but to this day, the FDA has never banned Mercury from childhood vaccines.
This report is not anti-vaccine, every one agrees how important vaccines are to public health. The focus of the lawsuit is on the possible link between Thimerosal and autism.
The bottom line for parents: drug companies have voluntarily taken the mercury compound out of the vaccines, but nothing was recalled. You can talk to your pediatrician and make sure that your child's inoculation does not contain Mercury.
THAT ought to be the quote of the day!
This was real fun, but I've got things to do. Maybe I'll look in tomorrow and see if you've found some important research from the ancient Romans or Greeks to post.
No - I have a good attention span...
so you believe that there is no justification to question the safety of thimerosol in vaccines and that parents should not hesitate to give a vaccine to their child(ren) because all this research you present says there is nothing to worry about - is that what you are suggesting?
perhaps you are incredibly naive?
I see perfectly well...
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.