Liar Liar

24 Apr

Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy are very critical of vaccines. They assert that vaccines cause autism.

Criticising vaccines is a dangerous business. Vaccines are arguably one of the greatest, if not the greatest, medical advances in history. Anyone whose causes people to stop vaccinating their children runs the risk of being blamed for illness, permanent injury and death if/when the diseases return.

Mr. Carrey seems aware of this. In his recent blog piece he made a point of noting:

We have never argued that people shouldn’t be immunized for the most serious threats including measles and polio

This statement bothered me enough that I discussed it in two pieces (here and here) about measles outbreaks in Wales and the US.

I wanted to highlight the fact that the website for Mr. Carrey’s organization (Generation Rescue) includes language specifically telling people to avoid the measles vaccine.

Even after blogging that, somehow Mr. Carrey’s statement statement still bothered me. Then I remembered why.

A year ago, Mr. Carrey’s movie, “Horton Hears a Who”, was in theaters. One group in New Mexico decided to offer a screening of Horton with an added benefit: free vaccinations for children who came.

This didn’t sit well with Mr. Carrey, who decided to put a stop to the free vaccination program. According to Lisa Akerman of TACA (Talk About Curing Autism, another group that has had Jenny McCarthy as a spokes-person):

Once word from the autism community (Who-ville in this case) got to the Carrey & McCarthy super team about this story of a New Mexico vaccination plot things got a brewing. After his morning coffee, Jim made a few calls this morning on behalf of the autism community.

Following a long discussion with his representatives at Fox Entertainment – Who-ville – once again through Horton – was heard. The New Mexico test market of drive thru vaccines while at the movies with your children was stopped. Halted by Horton himself…

So, Mr. Carrey doesn’t “argue” that people shouldn’t be immunized. He just stops them from being immunized.

58 Responses to “Liar Liar”

  1. greydelislefan April 24, 2009 at 07:47 #

    Great post as usual.

    It still baffles me as to how people trust the word of celebrities and not actual experts.

    And then after doing my own independent research, I go and find out that Jenny’s son has symptoms in line with Landau-Kleffner syndrome, which is often mistaken for autism.

    I used to like Jim Carrey. Sad what he’s turned into these days.

  2. kathomar April 24, 2009 at 17:28 #

    O.K., at the chance of sounding totally ignorant-I have to ask this question. Why-after it has been proven over and over again that there is no link between autism and vaccines, do these groups, like genrescue and the like persist in pushing this myth. What is in it for them? I feel as though I am missing something..I just think if they put even just half their resources into valid research and towards programs..What a difference they could make. Why are they stuck on this. What is the point. What am I missing?

  3. Sullivan April 24, 2009 at 18:21 #

    It is always hard to describe the thought processes of others. But, there are a few things that could be driving the tenacious cling to the vaccine idea:

    1) They honestly believe that vaccines did cause autism in their kids. You can’t prove a negative–you can’t prove that vaccines don’t cause autism in 100.000000%. So, each parent can feel that even if vaccines don’t cause autism in general, they still did for their kid.

    2) groups like generation rescue have tied “recovery” to autism as vaccine injury. They say (without any explanation, by the way) that the methods they promote to “recover” kids are “healing vaccine injury”. They claim (falsely!) that other types of autism (such as genetically based) are untreatable. So, if you want your kid to recover, you want to accept vaccine injury as the cause.

    3) lawsuits. There is the (ever more remote) possibility of gaining money from the government or the pharmaceutical companies as compensation for injury. There is no compensation for genetics.

    4) Professional pride. Many of the leaders have a LOT of personal pride invested in the idea of autism as vaccine injury. Note that even when they have moved away from “Autism is just a misdiagnosis for mercury poisoning” to “autism is caused by too many vaccines too soon”, they haven’t admitted that they were wrong and that many people probably chelated their kids needlessly.

    5) Unfortunatly, there are bad people out there. While my suspicion is that most of the alternative practitioners are sincere, there are people who prey on the vulnerable.

    There are more reasons, but these come to mind readily.

  4. Joseph April 24, 2009 at 18:33 #

    Why-after it has been proven over and over again that there is no link between autism and vaccines, do these groups, like genrescue and the like persist in pushing this myth. What is in it for them? I feel as though I am missing something

    Why is Peter Duesberg still pushing HIV/AIDS denialism after all these years and all the medical advances concerning HIV and AIDS? Stopping is not an option for him.

    Even a seemingly intelligent person like Mark Blaxill can’t admit he was wrong in relation to the graphs he presented to the IOM, for example.

    Back then, in the days of the thimerosal hypothesis, they used to present data and charts. Today, the “too many too soon” hypothesis seems to be driven purely by emotion, and they probably won’t ever let it go. It appears they currently have no concern for factual truth or intellectual integrity. What matters is getting heard in the media.

  5. Squillo April 24, 2009 at 20:59 #

    2) groups like generation rescue have tied “recovery” to autism as vaccine injury. They say (without any explanation, by the way) that the methods they promote to “recover” kids are “healing vaccine injury”. They claim (falsely!) that other types of autism (such as genetically based) are untreatable. So, if you want your kid to recover, you want to accept vaccine injury as the cause.

    Yes. Moreover, any fair-sized organization that’s been around long enough begins to acquire a new mission in addition to (or in place of) the one upon which it was founded: continued existence. GR has put many, if not all, of its eggs in the anti-vaccination basket. It would be quite difficult for it to re-invent itself just because of some pesky science. “Green Our Vaccines” and “Talk About Recovering Autism” are a far easier sell than slow and steady scientific progress and difficult and sometimes ineffective behavioral interventions, not to mention advocacy for people with existing ASDs.

  6. kathomar April 24, 2009 at 23:15 #

    Thank you all for the insightful answers. When my boys were diagnosed-I never thought I would run into the lunacy that I have. Thanks for putting it into perspective for me…even though it scares the hell out of me!

  7. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 24, 2009 at 23:44 #

    .
    .
    “Why-after it has been proven over and over again that there is no link between autism and vaccines, do these groups, like genrescue and the like persist in pushing this myth. What is in it for them? I feel as though I am missing something”

    The probable reason is that as with most diseases autism can be associated with
    1. Genetic abnormalities
    2. Immunological abnormalities within the brain suggesting an immunogenic response against an immunogen
    3. Structural changes in nerve cells particularly dendritic spines
    4. Known immunogens which are associated with autism e.g. rubella, alcohol, hyperphenylalaniemia in PKU, thalidomide, organochlorines.

    Some mums and dads swear blind that the change in their child`s behaviour started after an immunisation. Immunisations are well-known to cause brain inflammation in recognised adverse reactions. Brain inflammation but not in the sense of meningitis or encephalitis is the essence of autism.

    It is because of the above plus reports of the temporal relationship between an immunisation and commencement of change in behaviour that the theory that immunogenic reactions to immunisations within the brain causes autism in genetically predisposed individuals persists.

    Everyone knows that research into the relationship beween immunisations and autism continues and that drug companies remain anxious if new childhood immunisations result in autism.

    So you probably are missing something.

  8. cafe-grendel April 25, 2009 at 00:48 #

    “The probable reason is that as with most diseases autism can be associated with”

    Errrr I hardly know where to begin with that open drizzle of nonsense.

    However, shall we just say that the “as with most diseases” phrase is the most egregious as it then lumps autism with ‘most diseases’ AND then states that ‘most diseases’ are associated with:

    “1. Genetic abnormalities
    2. Immunological abnormalities within the brain suggesting an immunogenic response against an immunogen
    3. Structural changes in nerve cells particularly dendritic spines
    4. Known immunogens which are associated with autism e.g. rubella, alcohol, hyperphenylalaniemia in PKU, thalidomide, organochlorines.”

    Utter nonsense.

    If you want to accuse the measles vaccine of anything – accuse it of causing meningitis or encephalitis, which on rare occasions it does (about 1 or 2 per million doses). The problem is that measles ALSO causes meningitis and encephalitis – but at a rate of 1 or 2 every 1000 cases, which kinda makes vaccination look like a hero rather than a villain.

    On the the Jim Carrey intervention – if a child in New Mexico dies or is injured as a result of his actions in intervening and canceling the vaccination program, is it possible that there would be legal implications? Courts have been fairly consistent in ranking evidence over supposition in vaccine cases.

  9. Sullivan April 25, 2009 at 01:08 #

    “Some mums and dads swear blind that the change in their child`s behaviour started after an immunisation.”

    Unfortunately for your story, the best documented version of this story is Miss Cedillo. Her parents literally swore into testimony that their daughter showed no signs of autism before immunization. It wasn’t the case.

    Dr. Wakefield published a paper stating that his patients were all typically developing prior to MMR. It wasn’t the case.

    Dr. Wakefield claimed that a random sampling of autistic kids on intake into a clinic for GI issues showed regression following MMR. It wasn’t the case.

    We need science, not anecdotes.

  10. Sullivan April 25, 2009 at 01:11 #

    “Known immunogens which are associated with autism e.g. rubella, alcohol, hyperphenylalaniemia in PKU, thalidomide, organochlorines.”

    Cafe-grendal–this part is not nonsense. Rubella infections–of the mother at a specific time during pregancy is linked to autism. Alcohol intake–by the mother at specific times during the pregnancy is linked to autism.

    I don’t think there is any study, for example, stating that Rubella infections of an infant or toddler leads to autism. If it did, we would have seen a big drop in autism in the late 1960’s in the US–the time when the rubella vaccine was introduced.

  11. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 01:28 #

    .
    .
    You are incorrect in describing the above as “egregious” (Definition: conspicuously bad or offensive)

    Most diseases are now associated with

    1.Genetic predisposition. New identifiable genetic abnormalities are almost reported every year
    2.Abnormal immunological measurements particularly TNF and imbalances in the Th1/Th2/Th3/Th17 balance.
    3. Recognised immunogens which provoke the immunogenic response
    4. Organ damage characterised by inflammatory changes.

    Autism is no excepton. Are you saying that rubella, alcohol, PKU etc are not causes of autism, that autism is not associated with several immunological abnormalities and that genetic abnormalities have not been identified in autism? Now that would be “egregious”.

    There is no accusation. It is a fact that research continues regarding a connection between immunisations and autism. Keep it real. Immunisation manufacturers are looking over their shoulders all of the time.

    You will have to talk to your lawyer or Carrey`s lawyer regarding the final point. Good luck.

  12. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 01:45 #

    .
    .
    And on an ethical note: what other treatment causing death in otherwise healthy children would be acceptable by an Ethics Committee if introduced for the first time in 2009? None?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1091288/Baby-died-days-given-MMR-jab-failure-warn-possible-complications.html

    I dont disagree with immunisations but they have always been at a bit iffy since the whooping cough immunisation brain damage in the 1960`s lest we forget. Still the needs of the many are greater than the needs of the few.

  13. Joseph April 25, 2009 at 01:48 #

    Brain inflammation but not in the sense of meningitis or encephalitis is the essence of autism.

    That’s not actually true, is it? Pro-inflammatory cytokines are associated with autism. There’s no reason to believe brain inflammation is the “essence” of autism, and there are a lot of reasons to believe this is *not* the “essence” of autism.

    Based on this logic, brain inflammation is the “essence” of PTSD, and it might make sense to study vaccines as risk factors for PTSD.

  14. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 02:10 #

    .
    .
    Johns Hopkins Neuroimmunopathology Laboratory begs to differ
    http://www.neuro.jhmi.edu/neuroimmunopath/autism.htm
    http://www.neuro.jhmi.edu/neuroimmunopath/autism_findings.htm

  15. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 02:17 #

    .
    .
    And
    http://www.neuro.jhmi.edu/neuroimmunopath/autism_faqs.htm

  16. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 02:27 #

    .
    .
    Furthermore why is it impossible that PTSD is another inflammatory brain disease? It certainly is associated with abnormal immune function measurements in initial studies from 2008
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19107725

  17. Roger April 25, 2009 at 03:42 #

    Furthermore why is it impossible that PTSD is another inflammatory brain disease? It certainly is associated with abnormal immune function measurements in initial studies from 2008

    The same might also be said of schizophrenia.
    http://www.ionchannels.org/showabstract.php?pmid=17062375 http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN2037349720070320
    http://tinyurl.com/dfploh

  18. Joseph April 25, 2009 at 04:19 #

    Johns Hopkins Neuroimmunopathology Laboratory begs to differ

    About which part exactly? You mean when they say: “Abnormal neuroglial activation may be present in autistic patients due to genetic susceptibility to inflammation, a change that can lead to abnormalities in neuronal-neuroglial interactions.” That’s clearly a hypothesis – a far cry from saying that brain inflammation is the essence of autism.

    Also, argument from authority? Really? I avoid that type of argument myself. But I thought anti-vaxers completely mistrusted authority.

  19. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 10:46 #

    .
    .
    “There’s no reason to believe brain inflammation is the “essence” of autism, and there are a lot of reasons to believe this is not the “essence” of autism.”
    What are these reasons?

  20. tara April 25, 2009 at 13:48 #

    If vaccines are sooooooooo safe and wonderful, why do parents have to sign away their child’s life, releasing the gov/vaccine makers of any responsibility of damages before each one?

    There’s a reason they make parents sign those papers.

    One more question – why have the vaccines increase from 10 when I was a kid to 36 mandated today? All those are for our kids’ health?!? Where’s the “science” showing that our kids are so much healthier? The studies I read show the opposite – food allergies increasing, ear infections increasing, allergies increasing, ADD/ADHD increasing, asthma increasing, the list goes on and on.

    Let’s show more faith and respect for the the expert who designed the human body, than for “experts” who have a huge financial investment. No one is saying all vaccines are BAD, let’s just stop going crazy with them, given what is happening to the health of our kids. The human body needs better nutrition not more chemical assistance. It’s already designed to heal, and we’re screwing it up by trying to “help” it. Read some of Leo Galland books, read books where people tell their personal stories of how they healed themselves, see how they did it….

  21. Joseph April 25, 2009 at 14:41 #

    What are these reasons?

    The brain inflammation as cause hypothesis would have to explain prior replicated findings, not only about the neurobiology of autism, but also cognitive findings. There are probably hundreds of these. How does the hypothesis explain the block design peak, for example?

    It’s like with PTSD. What causes it is traumatic stress. PTSD is associated with a pro-inflammatory response. That A is associated with B doesn’t mean that A causes B.

  22. Sullivan April 25, 2009 at 15:30 #

    Tara,

    as it turns out, I just discussed the “new” vaccines in this post:
    https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=2184

    Doctors are already protected, by law, from liability for adminstering vaccines. You don’t sign that right away.

    The government is not free from responsibility. The entire purpose of the Vaccine Act was to allow people to sue the US government for compensation for vaccine injury. One can not sue the government without such an act in place.

    Are children healthier? Where’s the science? Why the new vaccines?

    How about the drop in illness/injury/death with the introduction of the Hib vaccine? I consider the thousands of people protected from meningitis to be a considerable health benefit. The second MMR shot was introduced after the measles outbreak of the early 1990’s. That seems to have protected many more thousands–right up to the outbreaks amongst the unvaccinated in 2008.

  23. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 16:09 #

    .
    .
    I dont know what the block design peak is. The clinical features of bad feelings e.g. fear, resentment and self-pity i.e. cognition, combined with OCD is common in most psychiatric diseases.
    They are all associated with
    1.Genetic predisposition and increasing discoveries of genetic abnormalities
    2.Abnormal immunogenic responses and imbalances of Th1/Th2/Th3/Th17.
    3. Identifiable immunogens e.g. infection, dietary constituents and stress.
    4. Structural abnormalities of dendrite spines.
    It seems when the dendrite spines are more sparse in the frontal lobes bad feelings and obsessive-compulsive behavior develop.
    Any theory of autism will have to encompass all of these findings and not ignore any of them. These findings are all over the Internet should you look. It`s not about cause it`s about developing a model of what has happened and the treating it. That`s why antibiotics e.g. minocycline (schiophrenia/fragile X) and cycloserine (OCD) are now being used as adjunctive therapy in psychiatric disease clinical trials

  24. Joseph April 25, 2009 at 18:53 #

    I dont know what the block design peak is.

    That’s a pretty basic thing to know when it comes to autism.

    The clinical features of bad feelings e.g. fear, resentment and self-pity i.e. cognition, combined with OCD is common in most psychiatric diseases.

    That may be so, and I’m certainly aware of autistics who exhibit self-pity (won’t name names), but (1) I’m not finding this in the literature, and (2) it would be simplistic to assume that any diminished self-concept in autistics has to be biologically caused.

  25. Kev April 25, 2009 at 19:01 #

    If vaccines are sooooooooo safe and wonderful, why do parents have to sign away their child’s life, releasing the gov/vaccine makers of any responsibility of damages before each one?

    Because its a medical procedure maybe? What medical procedures do you know of that you don’t have to sign for?

    One more question – why have the vaccines increase from 10 when I was a kid to 36 mandated today?

    Can you name me 1 vaccine in the US schedule which is mandated? And show me where it states it is mandated?

    Also, the ’36 vaccines’ is twaddle. Read more here

    All those are for our kids’ health?!? Where’s the “science” showing that our kids are so much healthier?

    Here’s just one. I’ll quote from it for you:

    In 1900, the U.S. infant mortality rate was approximately 100 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, while in 2000, the rate was 6.89 infant deaths per 1,000 live births…

  26. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 20:16 #

    .
    .
    It is best to be honest with statistics. The infant mortality rate was 20 and not 100 per 1000 live births when immunisation was started and falling as this graph shows.

    The further reduction in infant mortality rate is not just due to immunisations but also ante-natal care, termination of fetuses with severe congenital abnormalities on ultrasound, improved post-natal care etc. Parents will become suspicious when these statistics are presented in a biased manner. The medical intelligence of parents continues to increase and they know that new immunisations are not that important to the health of their children e.g. rubella, mumps, hepatitis B chickenpox and there will be more as drug companies are now seeking profits after their earlier altruistic work.

  27. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 25, 2009 at 22:24 #

    .
    .

    Perhaps the infant mortality rate isnt that much use as a representation of the efficacy of the immunisation programme as it is also related to pre-term deliveries and the racial characteristics of the population which are changing in the US
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/health/07stat.html

  28. Kev April 25, 2009 at 23:48 #

    Maybe, maybe not. But I was answering the question put: ‘Where’s the “science” showing that our kids are so much healthier?’

  29. kellianndavis April 26, 2009 at 04:30 #

    “Still the needs of the many are greater than the needs of the few.”

    You want to “sacrifice” your child — go right ahead. But MY child will NEVER be “sacrificed for the greater good”….As a mother, my FIRST obligation is to MY CHILD.

    Seems folks are willing to make a statement like that AS LONG AS it’s someone else’s child that is being sacraficed!

    What happened to “First, Do No Harm”? Remember that one?

  30. Kev April 26, 2009 at 07:13 #

    You’re having at dig at someone who by and large agrees with you Kelli Ann. You do know that, right?

  31. anothervoice1 April 26, 2009 at 18:39 #

    @ kellianndavis – You want to “sacrifice” your child—go right ahead. But MY child will NEVER be “sacrificed for the greater good”….As a mother, my FIRST obligation is to MY CHILD.

    Boldly stated and I support you right to make decisions regarding your child’s welfare.

    I also have a right to protect my child’s welfare. I have been contacting my school board to let them know that I expect them to observe our state heath department’s immunization policy. If non-immunized children are being allowed in my child’s classroom I view that as reckless endangerment; unless a doctor has supplied a sworn statement that there is a medical condition preventing it and that the levels required for herd immunity are not compromised.

  32. nt4i April 26, 2009 at 20:32 #

    @ kellianndavis – “You want to “sacrifice” your child—go right ahead. But MY child will NEVER be “sacrificed for the greater good”….As a mother, my FIRST obligation is to MY CHILD.”

    As a MOTHER, MY PRIORITY is MY CHILD, MY FUTURE children and my future grandchildren.

    Not only is vaccinating the chid safer for that child than not vaccinating, particularly in light of current levels, a decent level of population immunity also protects me and my unborn child from the effects of contracting those diseases during pregnancy and beyond, and the same goes for my childrens children.

    If you can’t recognise that the needs of the many are greater than the needs of the few – at least think about the needs of the rest of you family.

  33. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 26, 2009 at 23:12 #

    .
    .
    There is no doubt that the immunisation programme has saved many, many lives. Also unfortunately a few lives have been lost. On the whole it is one of the reasons why children survive childhood.

    However, now it seems that drug companies are creating a sense of unjustifiable fear. How likely is it that chickenpox will kill your child? How likely is it that your child will get hepatitis B if not from an at-risk group of the population? What has been the reduction in congenital rubella since children and teenagers were immunised against rubella instead of just simply immunizing teenage girls before child-bearing age? Has the HPV immunisation in teenage girls led to an increased trend in promiscuity and chlamydia infections because of false reassurance?

    I dont know the answers to these questions but as the medical intelligence of the public increases they realise that drug companies are increasingly after profit which sometimes blunts the latters ethics and social responsibilty.

    It was interesting how Tony Blair the UK Prime Minister didnt admit if his son Leo had MMR in one go or had seperate injections until pressurised – this sort of behaviour does not inspire confidence amongst the populace i.e. one rule for us and one rule for you.

    Watch the comedy “Brain Candy” for the interaction between the scientist and the owner of the drug company as the latter seeks profit.
    This is an excerpt showing the interaction between the chief of the company and the scientist who knows long-term studies havnt been completed on the drug.

    It is good to keep the drug companies on their toes otherwise they will become complacent and treat the general population like sheep people (sheeple) for profit!

  34. Sullivan April 27, 2009 at 03:50 #

    “What happened to “First, Do No Harm”? Remember that one?”

    As Kev has noted, you seem to be questioning (harshly in my opinion) someone who seems to be thinking along the same lines as you.

    I’ll add, since your comment is likely focused on vaccines:

    Seems to me that many people claim to be “pro vaccine”. Bernadine Healy, David Kirby, Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey, to name a few.

    Mr. Carrey’s recent comments suggest to me that he is OK with vaccinating against some diseases (measles and polio were mentioned).

    And, yet, any medical procedure, including vaccines, run the risk of adverse events.

    Have they given up on “do no harm”?

    I will add–there are reports of kids harmed by chelation. Some of this is sworn testimony for the Omnibus Proceeding. Given that, have DAN! doctors given up on “do no harm”?

    While I have your ear–are you aware of any long term studies comparing chelated vs. non chelated kids? Especially for the various very nonstandard chekation methods used by the alternative medical community on autistic kids? I’m fairly certain they don’t exist.

    So, if you want to claim “do no harm”, perhaps your organization could stop promoting therapies which are unproven to “do no harm”, eh?

  35. nt4i April 27, 2009 at 09:52 #

    “How likely is it that chickenpox will kill your child?”

    Why is it that anti-vaxxers can’t see past death when it comes to effects of disease, but quite happily list anything and everything as side-effects of vaccines with no evidence whatsoever?

    Chickenpox is highly unlikely to have a long term impact on my toddler for example. But as a carrier she will expose me and any much younger siblings to the virus.
    From wikipedia
    “If infection occurs during the first 28 weeks of gestation, this can lead to fetal varicella syndrome. Effects on the fetus can range in severity from underdeveloped toes and fingers to severe anal and bladder malformation. Possible problems include:
    encephalitis, microcephaly, hydrocephaly, aplasia of brain
    Damage to the eye, Other neurological disorder: Damage to body:
    Skin disorders: (cicatricial) skin lesions, hypopigmentation

    Infection late in gestation or immediately following birth is referred to as neonatal varicella.”

    So actually I’m not concerned about my child catching chicken pox – but if the vaccination was on the UK schedule I would happily have her vaccinated to reduce the chances of her carrying it to higher risk individuals.

    Before you ask – I’ve had chicken pox, There’s a good chance I am immune, but I might not be and any newborn child deserves some degree of protection.

  36. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 27, 2009 at 12:37 #

    .
    .
    Congenital Varicella Syndrome is an extremely rare disorder. It would probably be a better idea to invest the money for the varicella immunisation programme in public health measures for cost-effectiveness.

  37. Roger April 28, 2009 at 03:43 #

    You forgot shingles.Many people with either mitochondrial disease,or who have immune problems, who have had varicella,as children.start to get shingles in their twenties,and have it every few years for the rest of their lives.Another good reason for vaccination.

  38. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 28, 2009 at 16:54 #

    .
    ,
    It is interesting to watch the immunisation industry in full swing for profits in collusion with the media in order to off-load their stocks of the anti-flu drug Tamiflu. Check out the newspaper headlines inducing fear in the general population re. swine fever. This is one of the reasons why the general population are wary of immunisations, the drug industry and the media.No wonder there is an anti-immunisation movement with such irresponsibility. It is their own fault.

  39. dedj April 28, 2009 at 17:13 #

    No man is responsible for another mans’ delusions.

    As a side note, I’ve yet to meet a case of shingles in any person who either wasn’t:

    born before vaccines were introduced
    born with an immunological problem
    younger but unvaccinated

    working with older persons has allowed me to encounter chronic and lifelong conditions (that they have had since mid or late adult hood, or even childhood) that are simply unheard of in people of the equivilant age today.

    P.S. CVS is only rare becuase exposure to varicella is rarer today, much less so during pregnancy. When it does affect pregnancy, it is non-rare at around 2% incidence.

  40. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 28, 2009 at 19:46 #

    .
    .
    Delusional means false belief. Why not read the papers or watch the TV inducing fear in the general population before writing your abuse.

    Why do you think healthy people are now buying Tamiflu privately and inappropriately?

    Has the incidence of CVS changed since chickenpox immunisations were introduced? Unlikely since most mothers had chickenpox as children in the past. CVS is still as rare as hen`s teeth and you are catastrophising for the sake of an argument.

    Excluding the consequences of measles,polio,whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and the different types of meningitis what are these “chronic and lifelong conditions”?

    Is national immunisation against mumps, rubella in the very young, chickenpox, hepatitis B (except in at-risk groups), rotavirus and more to come really cost-effective or more about profit for drug companies?

    I dont know the financial figures but perhaps the money could be better spent on other public health measures more effectively.

  41. dedj April 28, 2009 at 20:18 #

    Actually delusional mean a false, irrational, non-culturally acquired and unshakable belief.

    Again, if the media is promoting shite, that is the responsibility of the media.

    “Excluding the consequences of measles,polio,whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and the different types of meningitis what are these “chronic and lifelong conditions”

    Nice trick, but you don’t get to pre-exclude the answers to your question and then ask the question. You cannot fail to be aware that previously non-rare conditions can and do have lifelong effects, including repeat infections, chronic pain, growth disturbance, loss of sensation, and other complications.

    “Has the incidence of CVS changed since chickenpox immunisations were introduced?”

    Yes, chickenpox infections have reduced drastically overall, by as much as 90%. This still allows for 1 in 300 pregnant women to develop complications due to infection, not just CVS. The Royal College of Gynaecologists has easily available and fully referenced documents on this for further reading.

  42. dedj April 28, 2009 at 20:32 #

    “Is national immunisation……really cost-effective or more about profit for drug companies?

    From what I can tell, it can be held up as the very definition of cost effectiveness for most clinical settings that they can be applied in. The most expensive vaccines are still less than a few $100’s per course. This compares favourably with the cost of medical and health care, lost work days, surplus deaths, and effect on pre-exisitng conditions.

  43. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 28, 2009 at 21:18 #

    .
    .
    Incorrect correction of your abuse.
    Definition of delusion: something that is falsely or delusively believed. (Merriam-Webter Online)
    Get it right.

    Q:“Excluding the consequences of measles,polio,whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and the different types of meningitis what are these “chronic and lifelong conditions”

    A?”Nice trick, but you don’t get to pre-exclude the answers to your question and then ask the question. You cannot fail to be aware that previously non-rare conditions can and do have lifelong effects, including repeat infections, chronic pain, growth disturbance, loss of sensation, and other complications.”

    Not exactly answering the question about your “chronic and lifelong conditions” from rubella, mumps etc is it. So dramatic.

    Q:“Has the incidence of CVS changed since chickenpox immunisations were introduced?”

    A:”Yes, chickenpox infections have reduced drastically overall, by as much as 90%. This still allows for 1 in 300 pregnant women to develop complications due to infection, not just CVS. The Royal College of Gynaecologists has easily available and fully referenced documents on this for further reading.”

    Not exactly answering the question re the changing incidence of CVS after the introduction of the varicella immunsation programme is it?

    “Is national immunisation……really cost-effective or more about profit for drug companies?

    “From what I can tell, it can be held up as the very definition of cost effectiveness for most clinical settings that they can be applied in. The most expensive vaccines are still less than a few $100’s per course. This compares favourably with the cost of medical and health care, lost work days, surplus deaths, and effect on pre-exisitng conditions.”

    i.e. both of us dont know the answer.

    Your comments/answers does lead one to sympathise with the anti-vaccine groups who are as equally emotional.

  44. dedj April 28, 2009 at 22:13 #

    *sigh* Try reading the DSM definition of delusion and then get back to me. False beliefs are not automatically delusions, con victims – for example – can rationally hold false beliefs as can people who have misread or misunderstood their sources.

    Sorry, but if you exclude all of the answers by setting unreasonable parameters to your question (re: lifelong conditions) , it’s not exactly fair to ask me the question.

    “Not exactly answering the question re the changing incidence of CVS after the introduction of the varicella immunsation programme is it?

    Unless we’re using two different definitions of ‘incidence’, then the information to answer your question is freely available in the most relevant places where a reasonably competant person would think to look for it.

    “i.e. both of us dont know the answer”

    Uh no. YOU don’t know the answer (have you even looked?). With very few exceptions, all articles I found through metalib, Athens and google scholar indicated the cost effectiveness of vaccine programmes for most clinical settings. Again, these articles are available through the services that would have been the first port of call for a competant and informed researcher.

    Sorry to say this, but all of your questions so far can be answered by looking in the places that a informed and competant person would reasonably expect the answers to be.

    Consider me out of this conversation.

  45. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 29, 2009 at 11:58 #

    .
    .
    “sigh Try reading the DSM definition of delusion and then get back to me. False beliefs are not automatically delusions, con victims – for example – can rationally hold false beliefs as can people who have misread or misunderstood their sources.”

    You seem to be entering libellous territory if you are now diagnosing people with DSM diagnosis on an Internet site. From DSM definition of delusional it seems that it is non-culturally acquired. Of course the concept that the possibilty that autism is associated with autism is culturally-acquired even though it is not proven to be associated with autism.

    You used the rather dramatic term “chronic and lifelong conditions” in order to dramatise your argument.

    Incidence means “the number of newly diagnosed cases during a specific time period.”You dont quote the changing incidence of CVS with varicella immunisation because it was exteremly rare before and after the programme.

    You cant quote Internet sites confirming the cost-effectiveness of the most recently introduced immunisations mumps rubella in young children, hepatitis B (except for at-risk groups), varicella and rotavirus to defend your claims.

    Abusive, dramatic and ignorant it is good that you are out of the conversation. People like you give autism discussions a bad name.

  46. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 29, 2009 at 12:21 #

    .
    .
    Is this one of your examples?

    CONCLUSIONS: A US rotavirus immunization program would be cost-effective from the perspectives of society and the health care system, although the cost of the immunization program would not be fully offset by the reduction in health care cost of rotavirus diarrhea unless the price fell to $9 per dose.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9582045

    The cost of Rotarix is aboout $60.

    You do the math.
    Thats probably with you didnt give the Internet referneces.
    Liar,liar?

  47. unclesamscabin April 29, 2009 at 15:58 #

    Fascinating new research into the genetic origins of autism. Changes in genes involved in regulation of brain function have been identified as commonly occurring in autistic individuals. Really interesting reading.

  48. dedj April 29, 2009 at 18:49 #

    “You seem to be entering libellous territory if you are now diagnosing people with DSM diagnosis on an Internet site.”

    Lucky for me, that’s not what I’m doing, nor did I imply or state as such. You were the one that entered into the arguement over what constitutes a delusion. I corrected you. You responded with a colliquially correct, but not professionally correct definition. I told you to chase up the one that is held by many, if not most, of the relevant experts in your likely country of origin.

    You falsely extrapolated from that, that I am attempting to diagnose people with sets of characteristics that have a shared pathology or aetiology.

    It is a rather sad indictment of the poor quality of autism discussion, that a literal interpretation of my initial statement – obviously a rhetorical statement which has unintentionally yet astronomically succesfully provoked a rather bizarre response – which should otherwise indicate high levels of irrationality and gross over-generalisation, should have been the interpretation that gets chosen as the correct one.

    “You used the rather dramatic term “chronic and lifelong conditions” in order to dramatise your argument”

    Uh, no. In my profession, ‘chronic’ and ‘lifelong’ have a specific and legitimate meaning.

    “You dont quote the changing incidence of CVS with varicella immunisation because it was exteremly rare before and after the programme.”

    Sorry, but the initial statement you were responding to did not just talk about CVS. You don’t get to pick and choose here, billy.

    “You cant quote Internet sites confirming the cost-effectiveness of the most recently introduced immunisations”

    Nor would I want to, when I have access to the professional literature. I am well aware that such cost effectiveness analysis has been done for many vaccines, and for various vaccine programmes. So far the evidence freely available is overwhelmingly in favour of vaccines being cost effective, regardless of country.

    “You do the math.”

    No thanks, they already did it in the easily and publically available paper. If one only accounts for the reduction in health care costs from only rotavirus diahorrea, then you need a per-dose cost of $9. Once one factors in ALL costs and savings, then one reaches the conclusion that…….well, scroll back up to your last post and read the bit you qouted again.

    Or read the original study, specifically page 1375.

    “Abusive, dramatic and ignorant”

    Sorry, but you’ve called me this and worse. If anyone here is giving autism discussion a bad name, it is most certainly more likely to be you than me.

  49. me.yahoo.com/a/TuRz.joYnfzpKUWMPSYwTtN6HTLFunmLzPblUMkn April 29, 2009 at 21:15 #

    .
    ,
    You make errors re definitions, you cannot provide actual figures on the incidence of CVS or cost-benefit of recent immunisations and then return to the forum after you said you were leaving.
    Liar. liar?

  50. dedj April 29, 2009 at 22:50 #

    “You make errors re definitions”

    Incorrect. You have been told which definition I am using and why (it’s the one used in the relvant academic and clinical settings, or very similar to the definitions that are used in it’s place). Provide the basis for your challenge.

    “you cannot provide actual figures on the incidence of CVS”

    Irrelevant and misdirection. The inital arguement you were responding to was not exclusively about CVS. Provide the basis for your focusing on CVS, when other effects were explicitly mentioned.

    “cost-benefit of recent immunisations”

    Sorry, but you have already proven that you have access to several references that indicate exactly that. Provide the basis for you declaring that your sources concluded the exact opposite to what was explicitly stated in their conclusions.

    “and then return to the forum after you said you were leaving”

    Of course. Don’t smear people and expect them to just suck it up.

    “Liar. liar?”

    Fine, another attempt at misdirection and smearing. Quote me and prove it to be a lie.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: