Check my links and you will find historical facts: yes FACTS! not the ravings of a lunatic, not a demented conspiracy theorist; Facts which you can check for yourself, if only you make the effort!

Let me try again to post a relevant link:

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.or.....n/77/3/417

...Dr.Megan Taylor on March 11th, 2008 18:22:29
Autism is clearly on the rise in the world…

Actually, no, it isn’t; you can find a description of what the word autism actually means here:
A THEORY OF PERSONALITY BASED MAINLY ON PSYCHIATRIC EXPERIENCE —ROSANOFF 77 (3): 417—American Journal of Insanity

This is the personality type, which many borrowed to label various disorders, both childhood and adult, since at least as far back as Eugene Bleuler’s schizophrenia paper of 1912 (published in both Austria and the USA) a long time before Kanner or Asperger is supposed to have invented the word. Worth noting, too, that worthies such as Carl Jung described disorders which match some within ASD (which has no established link to autism, nor does it resemble a spectrum; trying to do any kind of research while believing this taxonological waste-basket has some scientific relevance, is a waste of time, as I’ve pointed out in previous posts, above). If anything, real autism is in decline, since the end of arranged marriages in the western world (autistic males don’t get on too well with normal women, though autistic women seem to be much sought after).

...and the global initiative to immunize children early as to not miss the chance may be at fault…

Autism was around a long time before immunisation programs, as were many disorders now mislabelled as such. I’m not saying that immunisation doesn’t perhaps cause some disorders, but to determine this, one must first tighten up on definitions. The historical evidence shows overwhelmingly that autism is a genotypical variant, and a useful one, being apparent in just about all the great inventors, scientists and philosophers of the past (a personality type which dominated science circles up until about 60 years ago, until mass education began to displace them in favour of seekers of academic success, who measure their self-esteem more by how much they know, not what they understand)

...I am a physican parent of an autistic child reaching out to have pure Scientists not funded by Vaccine companies to review the data on Immunization…

Please find my analogue about “Dytch Olm disease” in a previous post, to see how this will serve no purpose, if it’s done by PhDs who got their qualifications by NOT questioning the orthodox view. I could fairly claim to be a “pure scientist” (or even a natural philosopher) but I suspect a mere degree in Mechanical Engineering wouldn’t do? On the other hand, I am autistic (and not the least bit defective) but that in turn means I’m not funded by anyone, nor even considered employable any more.

...Looking at the Immunologic data, there seem to be 2 major categories of autistic children. These are those that are born with the disease and those that have late onset of problem with regressive symptoms. Scientists have recently found a difference in the NK cells(immune response cells) in the late onset group in that they are highly expressed. Other researchists have found clear immunologic destruction in the postmortem brains of autistic individuals who donated there bodies to science…

This is all very interesting, but what’s it got to do with autism? A clinical diagnosis is totally unreliable, given no two clinicians can hardly agree on what they mean by “autism”, and all seem to be peculiarly resistant to discussing the historical precedence, or even admitting the existence of able adult autistics like myself. Ask them about the time-proven psychometrics which can so clearly and precisely identify real autistics, and watch how quickly they change the subject: you are right to suspect the establishment take on all things described as autistic, but the way to tackle this is to get back to basics, firm up on definitions, verify assumptions, and whatever it takes to ensure that, when you label any of these disorders, that the labels are both well defined and relevant!

There can only be ONE category of “autistic child”, and that is a child who’s personality is dominated by the autistic segment, such as Rosanoff described it. Are such children perhaps more sensitive to certain malign vectors, as you and others suggest? It could well be, but the way to determine this is to, firstly, properly identify those who are actually autistic, referenced to others of the general population who are equally autistic, but not clinically diagnosable as such. This would be easily done, but nobody in the research community wants to even talk about this possibility. One thing I can state with very high degree of probability: many of those so diagnosed today are not autistic at all; even the DSM IV Asperger’s Syndrome diagnosis includes groups which are not (and very few who are, though Asperger himself clearly understood what autism really meant). To pursue any kind of research on the basis that all those disparate issues now collectively labeled ASD, are actually related to each other, is a complete and utter waste of time!

...I have more information and feel it is the time to speak up and figure out what is happening. The incidence of the problem is increasing at an alarming rate. Perhaps the children who are immunologically over responsive to vaccines causes this outcome and destruction. In the current world, it wouldn’t be surprising to find an increased incidence of autism in children born to families who are forced to get immunizations like Hep B as an infant. Are we missing the boat and ruining families and impairing our society as we are led blindly by dictums to add vaccines rather than reveiwing our steps. I recently got an answer that it is too late to evaluate vaccines as a source in this case as they are already instituted as a requirement. Who is monitering this and what involvement have they had with vaccine company reimbursement in the past. Why isn’t this being addressed at the level of the Immunologic journals rather than the Neurologic, genome and Psychiatric journlas if this is perhaps a different immune respone. The death rate from many of these diseases is far far lower than the incidence of autism which for some families is a death sentence to their dreams for their children…

Dr. Megan Taylor
Allergist and Immunologist-Board Certified practicing clinician
I am not looking for funding,fame or anything other than someone to engage and help figure this out. Please direct people/MDs with similar thoughts to me. I have the medical literature…

I’d be more than happy to help, and have been speaking out about the perversion of “autism, presented as science”, for some four years, and in all that time I’ve not found a single autism expert who will engage with me, so expect to be disappointed. This isn’t the first time the establishment have used media propaganda, and their control of funds, to promote profit making; witness how tryptophan, after a century of successful treatment of depression, was deemed to be “unsafe”, just weeks before Prozac became available. Similarly, safe, time-proven, and useful (but not profitable) drugs here in Europe (ginko biloba, nootropics, melatonin etc.) are increasingly becoming prescription only, on the excuse they’ve not been “officially” proven safe (but who’d pay for such testing? It’s a catch 22!) which means they are effectively banned (because no quack in his right mind will prescribe an “unsafe” drug; but Zoloft and co get handed out like candy) and there’s even a restriction on Vit B6, and we get bombarded with “warnings” about the dangers(?) of vitamin and herbal supplements in general.

This isn’t even the first time (recall Mengele and his predecessors?) they’ve tried to pervert science to “justify” the removal of a defenseless minority, but having learned from history, expect them to be much more circumspect and evasive this time (but just as determined); what you are up against here is a program of eugenics in disguise, which had its beginnings at least half a century ago, no doubt having learned lessons from how Hitler and co. used media campaigns to turn otherwise decent Germans, against Jews, gypsies, and other “defectives”. This time it’s the turn of autistics. No, not kids with disorders; the establishment love kids with disorders, because apart from immunisation, there’s also stuff like Ritalin, which are increasingly being prescribed for any kid who doesn’t conform to today’s ever more homogenous notion of “normality”, and just look at what parents have to pay to have their kids bullied by clueless therapists, who’s efforts make huge contributions to the plan to move money up-hill, from your average tax payer, and into the pockets of those who already have too much.

The real target is real autistics, who, through no fault of their own, just happen to “unwittingly” get up the noses of the control freaks who run everything, and this, in their eyes, is reason enough to get rid of them. Sure, they’ll have to terminate potentially profitable defectives, once gene technology is advanced enough to identify foetuses who carry “autistic” genes, but they can afford it; to them it’s a price worth paying. You probably don’t want to hear all this Doc, but before you disregard this view completely, think again about how the researchers employed today keep repeating the same statistically erroneous arguments. Note how none will now even discuss the personality aspect, or any pre-Kanner usage of the word autism, which used to be a “given” as recently as the early 90s. Back then, there were plenty of researchers challenging the direction in which autism research was been driven, but you don’t find those guys among today’s “leading autism experts”! While the industry is being steadily expanded by ever more clueless non-scientist, who go round in the same old circles, making zero progress, all those who used to find out useful stuff, and expose how things were steadily getting worse, have now all been weeded out. This is an industry that is being managed to fail: the only “result” the establishment wants from autism research is; “well we can’t cure these disorders, but we have reached the stage where they can be identified during early stages of gestation, so let’s just get rid of them?”. People like you are paying for this.

The main issues:

1) Thimerosal has not been adequately tested for safety—I don’t think it’s ever been tested for safety
2) Many vaccine safety tests are not done against a real placebo—they use experimental vaccines, or adjuvants and then compare adverse reactions.
3) Vaccine reaction followup periods are very short, often less than 30 days, sometime far less than that
4) Vaccine adverse reaction reporting is not mandatory
5) Vaccine schedule changes aren’t tested for safety—concurrent application of vaccines are not tested for safety

They should be performing long term tracking studies similar to the ones they performed with HRT.

There are at least two major Cochrane reviews of specific vaccines (MMR, and Flu) that both conclude that inadequate safety testing was done. This is after reviewing hundreds of studies.

If you read the Simpsonwood transcripts (and I don’t mean anything about any conspiracy) you’ll realize how ignorant the “vaccinologists” are about anything outside of their field. They were pretty much clueless on a number of important topics.

No assumptions here.

Why do you assume they haven’t?

I am not convinced either. There are no enough information on the impact in immature children/biologically- or inmunologically or biochemically-genetically in terms of collaboration to create even further susceptibilities. The scientific controversy is going to be solved in a lab with a scientific approach in the future, not in a court with the current status of knowledge.

What you and Maria and others like you leave people with a is a mishmash of plausible LOOKING gobbledeegook that even an expert can’t cobble into helpful advice. You leave them thinking, “well obviously there’s a reason to suspect what my doctor and vaccine experts say, and this guy is surely smart since he can spell most words correct and all… so I think I’ll just skip the vaccines for my kid.”

I see several groups related to this controversy
Pro vaccines as they are Vaccination is safe for practically all as it is recommended today,including multiple injections at once and thimerosal is safe for all. Adverse reactions are minimal.
-Anti vaccines –Vaccinations are bad for all – whatever the combination or the dose or the disease. This is what I consider antivaccine.
beyond these extremisms- that are not helpful – there is a big group of people looking for improvements in the safety aspect. I will include my opinion about what I consider appropiate. I always think that a serious and concerned doctor should be involved in the discussion of all these options with parents: – rational approach of vaccination to minimize the risk of potential adverse reactions to vaccines-especially those given in combination
the promotion of more care in the evaluation of the prevaccination analysis -consider GI , behaviour, immunology issues to avoid the adverse reactions to vaccinationsincluding spreading them if time if necessary —reevaluate each time
a more adequate look and scientific evaluation to the impact of antibiotics treatments to common childhood problems like otitis media – nonvaccine preventible and in the reactions to vaccines the first year because of the impact on the gastrointestinal health especially if the antibiotics treatments have been many. – better research and consideration of preventive methods to adverse reactions to vaccinations ( nutritional support, testing?)- to optimize answer – proper detection of asymptomatic/atypical reasons of adverse reactions to vaccines and more research and training of the proper detection and treatment of them , immediately after they take place.
Of course one should consider the potential genetic component in the adverse reactions to vaccines. And this is why I consider Dr Poling´s points of view balanced.
I have a profound respect by other parents/- even if they like me or not, even if they have a or scientific background or not, or they have further knowledge. I disagree with many of the views of autism BUT I am very aware of the difference between the disagreement with the idea and the consideration/respect of the person. I disagree strongly with any views that consider my autistic son less by being autistic or is not respectful of him in any way. I have been/am/will be the best advocate I can be for his health, his emotional psycological and sociological needs and for the proper consideration of all his human rights.I refuse to be engaged in wars of personal attacks.

I take what I say very seriously as I do have a responsibility when conveying information that might help or hinder others.
I am a student of autism in general and of autism in my son. Autistic adults have been teachers in many aspects. Parents of autistic children also. I have always recommended having a meaningful discussion about the information that I have provided with a serious doctor that is focused in the well-being of the patient, and has the behavior of a scientific and ethical doctor-mainstreamed or not- and with knowledge that there are many subtilities of testing procedures in terms of usefullness and meaning . I invite all the readers to look around the web how I have always stressed the importance of considering my writing as an opinion and to excercise parental responsability , and talking with doctors.Serious , scientific, committed Researchers/Doctors are the ones who should lead changes that I consider necessary in the areas of testing, detection , prevention and or treatment of CMPs in ASD for the full spectrum of ages and also for other aspects of autism.The main problem is that many aspects presented by parents/autistics of all ages have not been properly taken into account given the accepted paradigm about autism as only genetics- and other preconcepts. And observation is the first step of any discover. I consider that only in a fruitful discussion and interaction parents/researchers/doctors- and autistic teen/ adults- more knowledge on all aspects of ASD is going to arise- on CMPs but not only. Cognitive, educational and sociological aspects are also of paramount importance.

Your citation has a lot of dismissal of the intelligence of many parents. Nobody should consider what is read in the web as medical advice, yours, mine or someone else. We have opinions Information from peer review sources is helpful in terms of having the tools to make informed decisions-in a team with doctors who have a balanced approach. It is also useful to better understand some of the issues.
Please look here under my name for my approach, for an example of the particular topic of this blog entry
http://www.autismweb.com/forum.....38;start=0

And Schwartz, if that happens and a child is severely harmed, then you won’t know about it most likely, even if you are really one who had an influence on that particular parent reading your posts. You will sleep at well at night and not know which child is buried where because of your and your little friends’ antivax motivated speculations, that are just oh so satisfying for you to promulgate. And I think that’s a shame.

All life is precious. As there are children dying or being harmed by vaccine- preventible diseases there are also children dying or being harmed from adverse reactions to vaccines. Both situations should be approached with the needed balance and equilibrium and scientific tools to have proper answers to minimize both problems .Human lives are involved and this deserves calm, respect and balance in the discussion..

Yes, I consider-that my son had adverse reactions to vaccines- being a severely IgA defficient atypical- that was not checked before vaccination to prevent the harm. I refute your accusations as untrue and I stand up with my scientific- based evidence and objective analysis of the situation-as much as I can in an issue so important to me
AD whether you realise it or not , you are being utterly unfair. I refuse to be engaged in the kind of counter-productive style you have. I have tried to explain to you publicly and privately many times and have always received the same answer. I will let your words speak for themselves. I have learned from you as I have learned from other autistic adults. I have appreciated your insight on many aspects that were not available as information to me. I am saddened to read your opinion of me . I strongly protest because you are wrong as demonstrated by my behavior and my style of participation here and around in the web , before and now.
I am not antivaccine-I want all the topics considered above properly analyzed without absolutisms, with scientific approach and care to improve the vaccine program. And the most extremists views of the issue are not helping one iota.
Now,going back to the topic-this is Kev´s blog and the proposed topic was mitochondrial conditions in ASD-, there is an interesting manuscript published in Dec 2004
J Autism Dev Disord. 2004 Dec;34(6):615-23.
Relative carnitine deficiency in autism.Filipek PA, Juranek J, Nguyen MT, Cummings C, Gargus JJ.
Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu.....d_RVDocSum
If some of the readers is interested in the further discussion of, please let me know.

I guess you’ve forgotten to notice the overall lack of credible evidence of safety. As bones correctly pointed out to me earlier “no evidence of harm” is not the same of “evidence of no harm”. But like I said, you go living your life in faith of the system.

“I think you can’t see what’s wrong with their collected reasoning because you have made up your mind that you have some kind of special insight into the motivations of vaccine manufacturers.”

Obviously you think you have special insight into my mind? You certainly won’t make a living as a mind reader. I am observing both history and evidence. They both point to weaknesses in scientific publication and government oversight. Using these observations, I temper the weight of the evidence I read. To do otherwise would be illogical and would be ignoring the evidence of the process. I do the same for non-governmental/industry publications for as we all know, science is littered with junk from all sides. What I do not do is place FAITH in the system, in the absense of credible evidence. I prefer to make note of credible anecdotal evidence in the absense of anything better, something that you seem to completely disregard—which in itself is illogical.

“And Schwartz, if that happens and a child is severely harmed, then you won’t know about it most likely, even if you are really one who had an influence on that particular parent reading your posts. ”

You see, you’ve misread my mind again. For some reason you think I’m all anti-vaccine. Let’s review a couple of scenarios:

1) The government continues to deny ANY problems with Thimerosal and the possibility it could possibly be dangerous, refuses to remove it, refuses to study it, and continues to force people to use it.

The lack of safety testing is still glaringly obvious. The chorus of credible neurologists recommending it’s removal still exists, and the people become scared—because no real data is forthcoming due to the refusal to do a safety study. So people stop vaccinating because they don’t trust the government, they get mixed messages, and then the vaccination rate of the important illnesses actually drops.

2) The CDC removes Thimerosal from all childhood vaccines, then perform long term safety trials on vaccines. They also perform real safety trials when they alter vaccine schedules. People may not vaccinate right away (but they wouldn’t be vaccinating under scenario 1 either) but they will feel much more confortable with the direction because there is little to object to under this scenario. Vaccine rates of the rarer diseases MAY drop, but the confidence in the oversight will slowly return. With the publication of data, either changes will be made, or people will feel much more confident in the process. Undoubtedly more will be learned about children who are damaged.

So let’s look at a few hypothesis:

A) Thimerosal actually causes minimal harm in all children, and great harm in a minority of children

B) Thimerosal doesn’t cause harm in any children

C) Thimerosal causes no harm in most children, but harm in a minority.

Since you are in Camp #1, let’s review the number of children damaged:

A) All children damaged from Thimerosal, some severely, some children damaged from vaccine preventable vaccines because they’re scared of Thimerosal and don’t vaccinate

B) Children damaged from vaccine preventable diseases due to fear of Thimerosal

C) Some children damaged from Thimerosal, some children damaged from vaccine preventable illness due to fear of Thimerosal

Now in camp #2, let’s review the outcomes:

A) On a temporary basis, some harm to children for a temporary period of time due to those who refuse to vaccinate due to fear of damage until safety is tested (a smaller number than under scenario 1). Small group of study subjects are harmed by Thimerosal.

However, ongoing, the rate of vaccination will rise, and if studies are done, we might even identify at-risk children pre-vaccination reducing overall harm.
B) Virtually the same as A
C) Virtually the same as A

It will cost more.

NOTE: Those who won’t vaccinate, would also not vaccinate under scenario #1.

Who do you think will be responsible for less harm and sleep better at night, someone promoting #1 or #2.

“When you want to keep millions of people as healthy as possible it’s not practical to say, we will give them all a customized vaccine schedule.”

That’s funny. Are all children supposed to start eating food at exactly the same age? Do they all speak at the same age? How about Potty training? All at the same age?

Do all children get exactly the same medical treatment when they catch a cold? Do all children get the exact same illnesses as at the same time as other children? Do all children fight off the flu at the same rate?

I noticed that all children were different. You must have missed that somehow. Clearly there are children that are damaged by vaccines—we don’t know the number. Why would we just write them off as casualties without even trying better?

“The constant fear mongering that you do makes me feel sick, because I know that your ivory tower intellectually “satisfying” conversations are destructive to innoncent lives.”

I’m sorry that’s your opinion. I could apply exactly the same words to you. Except I might have to add the adjectives vitriolic and nasty to describe the conversation part.

“The other reality is that poor countries are populated with people whose lives count as much as yours. They deserve a life without polio and diphtheria! You want to pretend like they don’t exist? ”

I didn’t realize we were talking about Africa. Oh yeah, we’re not. Thimersol is still being used in all of those juridictions, just as you would prefer.

“Seriously, how can you do this with no qualms of conscience?”

Pretty easily… and a lot easier than if I advocated what you do. Convenience above safety. You keep your faith in the system. I’ll rely on the credible evidence, thank you.