Both Age of Autism and David Kirby have recently reported on a new review paper with Age of Autism describing it as ‘pretty interesting’ and David repeating a part of the abstract:
Documented causes of autism include genetic mutations and/or deletions, viral infections, and encephalitis following vaccination.
So, should we all in the skeptic camp be reaching for our humble pie and our knife and fork? Not exactly. Lets take a look at the contents of this paper. Lets start here:
The vaccine organism itself could be a culprit. For example, one hypothesis of the cause of autism is that the pertussis toxin in the DPT vaccine causes a separation of the G-alpha protein from retinoid receptors in genetically at-risk children (Farfel et al., 1999; Megson, 2000). The pertussis toxin creates a chronic autoimmune monocytic infiltration of the gut mucosa lamina propia and may disconnect the G-alpha protein pathways, leaving some G-alphamodulated pathways unopposed. In turn, the non-specific branch of the immune system is turned on and, without retinoid switching, cannot be down regulated.
Wow, blinded with the cool science yet? No, me neither. Go back to line one where it says ‘one hypothesis’. All that follows from that point is mere opinion. There’s no science to back it up.
Another organism of suspect is the live measles virus…
Yeah except its really not. The issues with the Wakefield hypothesis are so many and so thoroughly debunked, it really isn;t worth my time or yours going through them again and again.
There is evidence that Thimerosal (which is 49% ethyl mercury) is indeed harmful. Since the 1930s, Thimerosal has been extensively used as an antibacterial agent in vaccines (Geier et al., 2007). Thimerosal has been implicated as a cause of autism. Not only is every major symptom of autism documented in cases of mercury poisoning but also biological
abnormalities in autism are very similar to the side effects of mercury poisoning itself (Bernard et al., 2001)
Oh dear. Reliance on more thoroughly debunked rubbish in the form of well, anything by the Geier’s and the ridiculous Bernard ‘paper’. I’m happy to go through why these are rubbish but I think I’d be preaching to the converted.
The rest of the paper is a rogues gallery of debunked and fringe science. Helen Ratajczak cites the Geier’s numerous times, DeSoto and Hitlan, Nataf and Rossignol to name but a few. This isn’t a paper so much as an advert for the sort of poor science that was examined in the Autism Omnibus proceedings and roundly rejected by the Special Masters. For goodness sake, she even cites David Ayoub of the Black Helicopter infamy.
When it comes to this paper – handle with extreme caution. Its toxic rubbish.
Left Brain Right Brain 
@ken, surely you see how the assertion of yourself living in the ‘real’ world and others with whom you disagree not, despite the fact we all inhabit the same planet, and none on this thread exhibit any clear signs of psychosis (though David N Andrews may challnege me on that point) is poorly considered at best?
Sniffer:
Was that true in the 1960s? Think very hard, and do tell us about Dr. Kelsey and thalidomide.
sniffer, Thalidomide does cause autism, but it doesn’t need to cause any genetic damage to do so. Thalidomide is a nitric oxide synthase inhibitor. It disrupts neurodevelopment and other developmental pathways.
Nitric oxide pathways are highly involved in neurodevelopment. The other things that cause autism, valproate, phenyltoin, and other antiepileptics also have effects on nitric oxide pathways. Those drugs also affect neural tube closure (which requires NO and NOS signaling). Probably anything that adversely affects neural tube closure could lead to autism if the exposure happens at a certain stage of neurodevelopment in utero.
Maternal stress causes autism. Autism is a property of a phenotype, not a genotype. I think that essentially every human genotype can support an autism phenotype. It simply depends on the trajectory of neurodevelopment. Most (99.999+) of that happens in utero when the brain goes from zero cells to ~10^11.
No, you got p’wnd because you are unable to support how Ratajczak’s claims could be biologically plausible. It doesn’t need to be specifically studied because the answers to that are known. Pick up a genetics textbook and do some reading by real experts how DNA recombination works and under what conditions this can be manipulated. Before you start caterwauling how “science doesn’t have all the answers”, yes, however, there are some assertions, like Ratajczak’s that are so stupid out of the gate, they don’t deserve any further examination.
Operative word Ken is “story”; an opinion piece. If PubMed is such a ruse, then why do you and your ilk toil so hard to legitimise your crusade with the very science you sneer at? That is comical. Do you really think that you are so enlightened that none of us could possibly know the problems with the industry? With public health policies? Really Ken? You can’t even recognise a really shitty review and you really think you are going to edumacate us on what is really wrong with the pharmaceutical industry? You give yourself way too much credit.
“It was Deer’s opinion that this was the case”
Later proven to be almost 100% correct in front of the highest relevant authourity after an extensive hearing with full scope for input from Wakefield.
It was found that several of the children had no reason for the clinical tests within their refferals, that the barrage of tests was similar to the point of being operationally the same as the research protocol and not any etablished clinical protocol, that Wakefield personally ordered tests with the stated exclusive intent of generatng research findings only, amongst many other things.
Wakefield had full opportunity to present his case effectively and he appears to have deliberatly refrained from doing so in order to include his defence in his book. Wakefield willingly put his supporters through needless expense and wasted effort just to have enough material to put in his book. This is so unspeakably callous and unethical that it would be worthy or reporting him to the GMC for this behaviour alone had he not already been struck off.
What was weak about his debunking of her claims? He actually put it into fairly easy-to-understand language. What exactly do you have a problem with?
Umm, no; that’s basic genetics fact.
Science Mom:
could I get a judgment call? The DNA hypothesis in the “review” appears to me to be not part of a “review” but her own analysis (such as it is) inserted into a review. As such, isn’t this rather inappropriate? She’s basically taking the opportunity of a pseudo-review to promote her own ideas, using incredibly weak support from the data she does cite.
@Sullivan You said,
“First the minor points: the rotavirus vaccine is an oral vaccine. It is not injected. One might think that a person linking to a “vaccinerisk” blog might now that. Second, Dr. Offit has sold his rights to his invention. He no longer makes any money of Rotateq. More importantly, Dr. Offit has been upfront about his involvement with vaccine production. Mr. Wakefield lied about his involvement with MMR litigants. Also, Dr. Offit’s science has proven sound. Mr. Wakefield’s research was wrong. Lastly, I check what Dr. Offit says, I do not take him as a “Messiah”.”
Touche’! I honestly never realized it was an oral vaccine. My kids have never recieved it and I never could get past the Intestinal twisting, contamination with Pig Virus, and the fact that this vaccine ‘sheds’ and perpetuates the disease. Is that better? My ‘risk’ site points out things like I just commented on, not so much the delivery mechanism. I leave that to pubmed head’s! 🙂
Ok, so because Offit got an amount that Offit said “it’s like winning the lottery.”, makes it ok for him to comment? I don’t want to hear it from someone who profitted greatly from a vaccine that maimed and injured 10’s of thousands of infants and perhaps did more yet untold damage from its contamination with Pig Virus. I just don’t have much use for him nor can I compare him to someone who ethically did nothing wrong.
“Once again, you are showing ignorance. Have you read what Dr. Offit wrote? He stated that a person has the ability to mount an immunological defense against the challenges posed by the antigens in 100,000 vaccines. He did not say that one could be injected with 100,000 vaccines. Do you understand the difference? It doesn’t seem as though you do.”
I do realize the difference. I don’t have much confidence in 100,000 antigens either as we add the varricela virus to MMR and it doubles the number of seizures but this is where I got the 100,000 ‘vaccines’ from: http://www.newsweek.com/2008/10/24/stomping-through-a-medical-minefield.html
I love the insults though. I’m not perfect…I make mistakes, often I am posting from memory….but I do have a basis for what I am saying.
“The interesting thing about the “review” article that is being discussed is the way she inserted her own opinions into it. The “DNA causes autism” hypothesis is not cited as being from another paper. It is something she put into the paper. It is not a review, but poorly formed opinion.”
I don’t disagree that it is a review of previous hypothesis’ and she added her opinion. I think where we differ is the holier than thou attitude that she has no idea what she is talking about. Most here, including me, don’t know anything about her. I personally am intrigued and want to know why she thinks what she thinks before I cast her into the nutball category. I am of the belief that she probably has access to information, having worked on vaccines, that is not available to the public.
“I do apologize for the rather harsh response you got on this site. I do not apologize for people pointing out, repeatedly, that you don’t even understand the basics of the arguments you create. Time and again you have shown that you don’t really understand the subject.”
No, i understand the subject, its just that people here LOVE to latch on anything remotely wrong with a statement and then ignore everything else. It is quite the tactic. Again, I threw the Mitochondrial DNA out there as an EXAMPLE as to why it is intigueing to hear Helen’s theory on Human DNA. It then gets twisted into show me how this is possible and I have have no idea what I’m talking about. It is silly. Shoot me becuase I didn’t realize Rotavirus vaccine was oral…doesn’t change the argument…
Ken,
It isn’t that your statements are “remotely” wrong. The are frequently very wrong. You repeatedly show a distinct lack of scientific knowledge and understanding.
@Sullivan You wrote,
“Science Mom:
could I get a judgment call? The DNA hypothesis in the “review” appears to me to be not part of a “review” but her own analysis (such as it is) inserted into a review. As such, isn’t this rather inappropriate? She’s basically taking the opportunity of a pseudo-review to promote her own ideas, using incredibly weak support from the data she does cite.”
I agree, this is exactly what she is doing and it is what I stated in one of my first posts on the subject. She *may* know something that everyone else doesn’t. She says in the CBS article that she was muzzled while working for the drug company. Maybe it is a conspiracy theory but to me it is an easter egg put into a rather boring review. She put it there for a reason and I want to hear more about why she thinks this.
Ken,
I don’t know if this comes as news to you, but she has an email address. If you want to know if she has some special knowledge, ask her.
All you are doing here is demonstrating once again that vaccine skeptics often work from ignorance.
If I was in to the debate for debate sake, you’d still be dull as your arguments are so poorly formed.
@Ken, I’ll quickly add that I do not “LOVE to latch on anything remotely wrong with a statement”. Therefore I will withold my thoughts about the inappropriate use of the word love in the above context. My point in bringing to attention your ‘real’ world comment was to serve as a warning that hyperbolic or thoughtless statements will not serve you in this forum. Tired cliche’s dent your credibility as much as misinformed opinions.
“She may know something that everyone else doesn’t.”
Something that even the people who work on gene theory in autism don’t know? How likely is that?
Something that even the people who work on viral theory in autism don’t know? How likely is that?
Something that would be front and centre for mutliple teams of multiple experts in multiple countries (and it’s not even a novel or new theory) and somehow it’s been overlooked by all bar a singular retired person who was apparently never an expert in any of the relevant fields? How likely is that?
Not very, one would have thought.
Dedj,
Of course she knows things others don’t. She knows what she had for breakfast, for example.
Similar to what you point out: it’s a big stretch from “she may know things others don’t” to “she knows things which are counter to well established science”
The proposition that her DNA hypothesis comes from work she was “muzzled” from disclosing doesn’t hold water.
“hi, I’m Helen. I have this revolutionary idea of biology. I know a way that you can inject fragments of human DNA into a muscle and they will travel to the brain and incorporate themselves into the DNA of brain cells. I thought about patenting this and making a huge amount of money. Of course I would have written it up for Science or Nature. And there’s that whole shaking hands with the king of Sweden and accepting the Nobel Prize.
But I thought, why not just disclose this in a paragraph of an obscure review article?”
@Science Mom and Sharon
Ah…now I see why the venom is coming out. After seeing your respective blogs, i see that I am a 180 from your views on vaccination. I mean, with a post like ‘There is no mercury in Vaccines’ on one, and ‘Pertusis outbreaks are being caused by pockets of unvaccinated’ on the other, i can see how we differ.
I’ll just bow out as this is going to be incredibly fruitless for both sides because neither of us are going to change our minds.
“Ah…now I see why the venom is coming out.”
Do not complain of having your views distorted whilst disorting and trying to invalidate others.
Otherwise, yes, it is clear that no one will benefit from you being here.
@Ken, thanks for the visit to my blog. Maybe you learnt something?
Ken:
Why would stating a fact be an indictment? The required pediatric vaccines have been available without thimerosal for a decade. Almost half the influenza vaccines have no thimerosal.
If you have an issue with this data, then go and ask why this message went out asking for “old vaccines”:
http://onibasu.com/archives/am/27456.html
Please do tell us how 2001 is less than a decade ago.
Then come back with actual documentation of the amount of thimerosal in vaccines, which is freely available on several websites. Just make sure you don’t cherry pick the information claiming Company A’s DTaP has a trace of thimerosal, while neglecting that it is available from both Company B and Company C without thimerosal.
(I noticed that both Sniffer and Ken are upset about the posts here, but I don’t see “venom” or “hostility.” What I see are questions being asked, and corrections to opinions posed by those who complain. If you don’t like the attitude here, then in the future post with actual data and evidence, from reliable sources.)
@Chris said “I don’t see “venom” or “hostility”. Quite, I was going more for smarmy than hostile. I get so fed up listening to the same silly arguments. Directly under the post about Mercury on my blog is another about love. A far more complex and interesting concept to explore. Why can’t these anti vaxers just move on, or just keep to themselves? Drives me bonkers.
“I got owned because she said I am wrong and Helen is wrong but her hero is correct? Great. I’m sorry I can’t answer a question to something that has never been studied.
Carry on your cheerleader role…”
No.
You got owned because you opened your pathetic wee gob on a topic that you evidently were clueless about.
You said: “I have to ask, why is a Medical Doctor qualified to comment on what a Senior Scientist who obviously has worked on the very vaccines he blindly administers? He is a medical doctor who knows what the vaccine inserts tell him, if he even reads them.”
She said: “Dr. Gorski is also a PhD scientist, in addition to an MD who has his own research laboratory. He doesn’t administer vaccines and knows considerably more about them than what is in the package inserts.”
This is where she owned your scrawny little arse. Stop being pathetic: learn something properly, or piss off and leave the discussion to people who know what’s going on.
DES vomited and this came out: “@ David Andrews: it is worthy of note that NOWHERE on this site did I mention my book, and I challenge you to find the title mentioned anywhere here. Therfore David you have come from oracs site, what? did Chris have to bring in the ” heavy weight” to squash the opposition? See, having googled you I notice that you never seem to have much in the way of thought as a response, rather you make idiotic statements, usually peppered with foul langugae which you seem to think gives substance(?) to your statement (?!). Fail.”
1- I did not say that you had mentioned your book on this site, so your challenge is pointless. minus 150 for irrelevance.
2- no, I haven’t ‘come across from Orac’s site’ … I’m a regular reader and commenter here (as, obviously, you must know if you can make a statement like “I notice that you never seem to have much in the way of thought as a response, rather you make idiotic statements, usually peppered with foul langugae which you seem to think gives substance(?) to your statement (?!)”; ergo – minus 2,000 for total lack of observance.
3- “usually peppered with foul langugae which you seem to think gives substance(?) to your statement (?!)” … OMFG, where to start here … well, no I don’t think that foul language ‘gives substance’. I use it to show extreme irritation at the presence of people who are obviously too stupid to have any business discussing anything here (like, for example, you!). minus 300,000 for misattribution, with further penalty of 50,000 for stupidity-showing punctuation and an additional penalty of 90,000 for not even being bothered to check your spelling!
4- more inobservancy shit: you didn’t do such a good google ‘research’ thing if all you got was me swearing at fuckwits; I dare say there’s many places on this blog and others where I have shown my ability to contribute very significantly to the discussion under way at the time… minus 900,000 for being too stupid to have picked up on those comments!
Reason why I swear a lot: the people I do it to are basically too stupid to hold a rational discussion with, because they cannot be bothered to learn anything from the discussion. So there’s no point in discussing anything with them. You are one such person. Plus, of late I’ve been working with my ex-wife on some important educational materials regarding Facilitated Communication, which is – despite its popularity – a ‘method’ that is riddled with problems and piss-poor research being used to support it (even when the good quality research has demonstrated it to be total bollocks!). So, I’ve not had the time – and nor have I had the inclination – to be teacher to people like you and Ken and OneQueerFuckwit/AWankerOnLeave (and many others just like you).
Totalling up your points:
-1,342,150 … that’s a lot of points to owe an assessment, DES … demonstrates a clear rationality FAIL!
Get a life and stop bugging the shit out of us!
She is absolutely opining. Even if there was some “secret data”, she would be obligated to cite that, e.g. “unpublished data” with a citation in the literature cited section for the source. It is inappropriate and I can just about guarantee that this is a vanity piece and not a proper solicited, expert review. In other words, she wrote it, submitted it, paid the fee and got it published.
And once again, you demonstrate your stunning ignorance of vaccines and vaccine issues. There was no “pig virus” found in the vaccines and furthermore, no infectious virus in the cell lines. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21093497 PCV does not cause disease in humans and ~70% of us have antibody to PCVs just from eating pork products. Rotavirus vaccine shedding does not perpetuate the disease. Getting facts straight should be an objective of yours if you are going to comment on them, apparently it isn’t.
As others have stated, there is no venom, just intolerance for ignorantly arrogant fools who can’t even get basic facts straight.
@Science Mom You Said,
“And once again, you demonstrate your stunning ignorance of vaccines and vaccine issues. There was no “pig virus” found in the vaccines and furthermore, no infectious virus in the cell lines. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21093497 PCV does not cause disease in humans and ~70% of us have antibody to PCVs just from eating pork products. Rotavirus vaccine shedding does not perpetuate the disease. Getting facts straight should be an objective of yours if you are going to comment on them, apparently it isn’t.
As others have stated, there is no venom, just intolerance for ignorantly arrogant fools who can’t even get basic facts straight.”
I know I wasn’t going to comment anymore, but I can’t let this comment go unchecked.
Are you serious? A Porcine CircoVIRUS is not a VIRUS? Seriously? Maybe this is a test to see if I will actually comment…i hope it was.
I also understand that when the Rotateq vaccine was RECALLED they said there was no harm or evidence of harm to humans. They always say that but their actions speak louder than their words. Your ignorance is amazing to think that the billions and billions of dollars made by this toxic concoction would be allowed to be affected negatively. It was a big step to just recall the vaccine.
Are you sure about the live rotavirus shedding not perpetuating the disease? I mean, aside from the numerous evil anecdotal stories i have heard, here is a blurb from medscape:
*”Viral shedding has been demonstrated in the stool samples of 0.3-8.9% of patients receiving rotavirus vaccine. Shedding has been documented as early as 1 day after immunization and as late as 15 days after a dose. As a result, families should be aware of the potential risk to close contacts who are immunocompromised.”*
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/549275
If it doesn’t “perpetuate the disease” then what is the potential risk to the immunocompromised? Can’t wait to hear this one…
@Chris You said,
“Why would stating a fact be an indictment? The required pediatric vaccines have been available without thimerosal for a decade. Almost half the influenza vaccines have no thimerosal.
If you have an issue with this data, then go and ask why this message went out asking for “old vaccines”:
http://onibasu.com/archives/am/27456.html”
Chris, I never said they weren’t greatly reduced. I am saying that there is still mercury in vaccines ‘trace’ amounts that are less than/equal to .3 ug mercury per dose. This is an irrefutable fact and the Tripedia insert for DTaP says this.
“Then come back with actual documentation of the amount of thimerosal in vaccines, which is freely available on several websites. Just make sure you don’t cherry pick the information claiming Company A’s DTaP has a trace of thimerosal, while neglecting that it is available from both Company B and Company C without thimerosal.”
Yes it is and I didn’t say that it wasn’t greatly reduced or had ‘free’ versions. I simply mentioned an article title that sounded idiotic. A blanket statement that “There is no mercury in vaccines” is just flat out wrong. IF it would have said “There is no Mercury in SOME vaccines” I would have not said a word.
Ken:
What about the other two DTaP vaccines?
Did you miss where I said “Just make sure you don’t cherry pick the information claiming Company A’s DTaP has a trace of thimerosal, while neglecting that it is available from both Company B and Company C without thimerosal.”
Because you just did that. Even though you copied and pasted the words, it looks like you did not really read them
Again, all required pediatric vaccines are available in thimerosal-free formations. Pointing out that one of the three DTaP versions has a trace amount does not change that statement. Also, please point out where I said “There is no mercury in vaccines”, because I don’t remember saying that.
You are working on a slippery slope if you are playing semantics. Especially using a phrase different than the one I used.
You seem to have a great deal of difficulty with anything related to DNA so let me help you out. There were fragments of PCV 1 and 2 found at very low copy numbers in the vaccines. NOT VIRUS.
Wrong again. A rotavirus vaccine was recalled, specifically Rotashield, for its association with increased risk of intussusception in recipients. Note that it was recalled as a result of VAERS reporting. Also note, that “tens of thousands” of maimed children have not occurred.
Do you know the definition of “perpetuate”? Particularly as it pertains to how you are implicating? No, it’s obvious you don’t. Perpetuating the disease means that it becomes established in a susceptible population and is continually transmitted. The rotavirus vaccine strains are very self-limiting even if transmission to an immunocompromised recipient occurs.
Ken:
That post is not on Sharon’s blog but is There Is No Mercury in Vaccines. I suggest you read it. You may have noticed I never refer to the “mercury in vaccines”, but very specifically refer to the “thimerosal in vaccines.” Do you get the difference?
Again, you are arguing semantics. Try now to argue with some actual facts.
Considering what an ass of yourself you make by trying to rebut my evidence, you really should think about sitting on your hands. Or not and I get to reveal yet another arrogantly ignorant anti-vaxxer “education”.
@Chris
“That post is not on Sharon’s blog but is There Is No Mercury in Vaccines. I suggest you read it. You may have noticed I never refer to the “mercury in vaccines”, but very specifically refer to the “thimerosal in vaccines.” Do you get the difference?
Again, you are arguing semantics. Try now to argue with some actual facts.”
Ok, so now I understand why you are so sensative to my comments on that particular article. You wrote it, that explains the repeated calling out of me based on a passing comment. I totally get that Thimerosal is ROUGHLY 50% ethyl-mercury(FACT). I totally get that…do you? You seem to try and hide behind that fact that this mercury basee preservative is called Thimerosal. It doesn’t matter what it is called, it has mercury in it(FACT).
I’m not the one arguing semantics, you are. By trying to cherry pick that there are certain formulations that do not contain Thimerosol is completely ignoring the fact that there are vaccines that do have varrying amounts of Thirmerosol(FACT). Please understand that I cannot understand my simple statement that to say “There is No Mercury in Vaccines” is plain WRONG(FACT)! I can’t make it any simpilar than that.
Science Mom:
Exactly. I am waiting for Sniffer to come back and tell how Dr. Kelsey actually approved thalidomide in the USA. That would be amusing.
(by the way, the FDA did finally approve thalidomide for some very specific conditions like multiple myeloma and Hanson’s Disease (leprosy), but only in the last two decades and never for pregnant women)
@Science Mom
“You seem to have a great deal of difficulty with anything related to DNA so let me help you out. There were fragments of PCV 1 and 2 found at very low copy numbers in the vaccines. NOT VIRUS.”
And you seem to get hung up on trivial matters. Here is a link to the FDA that says they found PCV 1 (VIRUS, me correct) in Rotarix and PCV 1 and 2 (DNA, you correct, but I could care less if it is a virus or DNA, I don’t want either) in Rotateq: http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm205547.htm
Excerpt from FDA: “Within the last two months, FDA became aware of the presence PCV1 in Rotarix and DNA from PCV1 and PCV2 in RotaTeq.”
“Wrong again. A rotavirus vaccine was recalled, specifically Rotashield, for its association with increased risk of intussusception in recipients. Note that it was recalled as a result of VAERS reporting. Also note, that “tens of thousands” of maimed children have not occurred.”
Let’s not pretend that I am not keenly aware of the Rotashield recall and the FACT that they could not hide behind that one, it was maiming infants and there was no denying it. This “Harmless” Pig VIRUS surely was/or will cause something. You can bet money on it! My point was they don’t recall vaccines for willy nilly things, thanks for making my point!
My “tens of thousands” quote is an opinion based on the fact that 1 million Americans alone were vaccinated with the Rotashield Vaccine and even in the clinical trials of this vaccine, it demonstrated an intussusception rate 30 times higher than expected. Now, if it is able to damage intestines to the point where they can twist or telescope inwardly into another, it probably caused quite a few cases of other Gastro issues, no?
@Science Mom
“Considering what an ass of yourself you make by trying to rebut my evidence, you really should think about sitting on your hands. Or not and I get to reveal yet another arrogantly ignorant anti-vaxxer “education”.”
I think you better go back and review the discussion between us.
I have been arguing areas that are very low on my level of importance to this point. (Vaccines/Autism, Wakefield, DNA). When we start getting into all of the areas that Vaccines harm or are ineffective, I can be here all day.
Ken:
That should be interesting. I have been asking for the actual evidence that the MMR vaccine is more dangerous than measles, mumps and rubella, and how the DTaP is riskier than diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis for ages. It would be nice if someone finally answered with actual science, and not merely repeating the falsehoods perpetuated on sites like AgeofAutism, NaturalNews package inserts or even CBS news. And it would be nice to see studies that are not cherry picked and/or misrepresented.
Chris
How do I answer you, one who seems to correct bloggers with scorn and venom. So hopefully, without receiving further scorn from you and obviously your fellow supporters (no offence meant to anyone else) my view for debate only pleasssse.
My sincere apologies, Dr Kelsey was such an insignificant name ,I couldn’t be bothered in answering you about someone who had so little to do with Thalidomide injury .America also had near to zero involvement ,because America at the time was better regulated and wasn’t so slipshod, lackadaisical and had a better regulatory system.
“In the future you get your medical information from places other than John Scudamore’s whale.to site and any site that starts with the word “political”.
Again I am confused as to your reference to John Scudamore and Whale ,I only mentioned that site once for a story that I could have got from several sites. You and your supporters seem pathological when anyone mentions Whale ,and parallels’ Blackadders Sense and Senility “Don’t mention Mac Beth”.
The word political ,search me I can`t find why anyone would have a problem with that.
Paramount you miss the discussion in your blinding outrage and offer no comment on the Thalidomide 2nd generation victims’, do you have a view point on this please.
Your copy and paste of Dangerous Pregnancies Mothers, one book I have never perused. I read lots of reviews in my line of work and concerning the writer Leslie Regan I find her work technically correct but lacks depth.
Daedelus
I agree with you that the synopsis on neural tube closure. Until science can detect which mothers ,children will not be able to tolerate thalidomide and may I add drugs and vaccines, should we be mandating their widespread use for all children?I say nay.
If you are a parent with a vaccine-injured child, your answer may differ from that of a parent who does not have a vaccine-injured child. I cannot stop thinking about what caused the immune reaction in Pardo’s 2004 study.
Then I read that Deer’s and other “studies” have shown that vaccines do not cause autism. After taking many logic courses, I know that this is faulty reasoning. We supposedly do not know what causes autism. If this is the case, how do we know that vaccines do not cause autism? This does not make logical sense. More relevantly, there are plenty of well-established science theories that as you have done explain the systems in our bodies that are affected by say,vaccines. There are plenty of well-educated people with letters after their names who can explain the systems that are affected by the toxins in our environment. People are still studying the effect of the combination of vaccines and the toxins in our environment on the systems in our bodies.. the book is far from closure again I will no doubt be piled with scorn for my above view.
Again I have yet to discuss with anyone 2nd generation Thalidomide,Thalidomide in ADHD..and the sense and science of this any takers ,please refrain from argumentum ad hominem
Sniffer:
So you never even bothered to look her up? She was the reason that thalidomide was never approved by the FDA, even though she was under tremendous pressure by the American distributor of that drug (and they still gave free samples to doctors, a practice that is now illegal — can you guess why?).
So you think she won the highest civilian award in this country for nothing?
Also, as far as the book: how am I supposed to cut and paste from an actual copy of the book? I held it and gave a synopsis of the data. Your comment about depth is laughable, she is a legal historian.
What you are trying to do is dig out from the hole you created by parroting the old and tired “thalidomide and Vioxx” portion of the “science was wrong before” that you read on a news article. Like the on being discussed here:
As far as John Scudamore: look up Scopie’s Law.
You just pasted one story about one person affected by a drug that was sold with lax regulatory oversight. It never occurred to you that thalidomide was never approved for use in the USA, and because of what it did in Europe caused regulatory laws to be changed. The only thing it has to do with vaccines is that they are tested extensively before being approved. The opposite of what you what to mean.
Considering your lack of knowledge about its history, the next time you bring up thalidomide, provide evidence that can be found in a medical school library. Not a news story about someone born about fifty years ago.
I don’t have to, that is why I quote, so there are no mistakes as to what I am responding to.
Oh this is bloody rich, in other words, you are making demonstrably false statements but it doesn’t matter because you don’t care much for the topics, even though you are the one who raised the spectre of plausibility and accuracy. And, watch out when you get into a topic that you know even less about, why you could go on endlessly I’m sure.
One of the problems I have with people like you Ken is how intellectually bankrupt you are. Not only do you repeatedly make ignorantly, patently false statements, but you don’t have the integrity to take a step back and evaluate your actual level of knowledge on the subject and maybe realise how out of your depth you are. Nope, you just keep blazing cluelessly ahead, shifting goalposts, making lame excuses and trying to dredge up anything that you think will support your position, rather than the other way around, which is to formulate a solid position based upon the evidence.
Chris,
I have more to do with the damage that is around us today. I take nothing away from Dr Kelsey she is held up by many and has been awarded an award for something that hasn’t happened great. I am more concerned with the thousand `s around the world today and more appearing all the time ,” Don’t mention Whale moment” so I found this for you elsewhere http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/thalid2.html
Real people below Chris ,alive just now born within the past 6 years with the same horrendous injuries.
http://www.thalidomideuk.com/worldofthalidomide.htm
Please don`t get annoyed Chris, just sad stories of real people horrendously damaged ,100% avoidable.
Lets pray for them.
sniffer, you seem to not understand the timing of neural tube closure. It happens very early in the first trimester. If the neural tube closes properly, the fetus can develop a normal neurvous system. If the neural tube does not close properly, it cannot. Neural tube closure only has do do with exposures at the time of closure. Vaccines given years later can have no effect.
A viral illness during pregnancy can have adverse fetal effects, which is why it is important for women to be sure of their vaccination status, and catching up on their vaccines before they become pregnant so that exposure to viral infection in utero can’t happen.
Sniffer, the dependence on animal testing was exactly why Dr. Kelsey refused to license thalidomide in the USA. Your absolute refusal to understand that the FDA actually did its job goes beyond bias confirmation and is bordering on willful ignorance.
The first site seems to be using cherry picking, and diversionary tactics. They did not mention that it was not approved in the USA, only saying:
Which implies it is drugs, but it depends more on news reports, and not even giving the March of Dimes cite for us to check on what it really says. The reason for birth defects could be that premature babies, including some very tiny babies, tend to live instead of die. As it turns out, prematurity is now a major focus of the March of Dimes. The first website is lying through omission.
Do tell the people who run the second link to get a better web designer. It is horrible (and I thought the March of Dimes website was annoying!). And again, I cannot find evidence that children have been born recently due to the use of thalidomide for leprosy or cancer. I did find on this page a statement that:
Did you even read that website? Granted it is very difficult to do (white text on a blue background covered in white dots!). But I did see this page on the brands. Looking at the USA it says “1958 – December 1961 as samples only and clinical trials.” The free samples were not approved, it was down under the counter. Which is what I have been telling you all along.
I never found the link to the teratogenic births in the last decade. Could you be more specific?
In the future stick to PubMed citations. I used the terms “thalidomide teratogenicity case report” in PubMed and came up with eight papers. The only one that seemed to involve real children was this:
Pediatrics. 1999 Apr;103(4):e44.
Thalidomide in children undergoing bone marrow transplantation: series at a single institution and review of the literature.
Mehta P, Kedar A, Graham-Pole J, Skoda-Smith S, Wingard JR.
Also, do tell us how many thalidomide babies were born in the last decade compared to those with Congenital Rubella Syndrome (according to the CDC Pink Book Appendix G there were at least ten cases of CRS in the USA since 2001). Provide a real reference (like a case report).
Now please explain to us again how much more dangerous vaccines are versus the diseases. Remembering that thalidomide was never approved for use in the USA, it was used in Europe for pregnant women fifty years ago, it is only now approved for certain conditions and all pediatric vaccines have been available without thimerosal for a decade.
I should add, Sniffer, are you also fighting the use of the acne medication, Accutane? It is also teratogenic, and is probably prescribed more often than thalidomide.
Dear daedalus2u
The cause of NTDs is not known. Scientists believe that there are genetic, environmental, and nutritional components. However, according to the March of Dimes, the parents of about 95% of babies born with NTDs do not have a family history of these disorders. Some seizure medications, such as Valproic acid, have been associated with an increased risk, as have certain diseases in the mother, such as diabetes. Risk can be reduced but not eliminated by ensuring that the mother has adequate folate/folic acid at the time of conception the book remains open very much like the problem in the neural tube fusing process .
Dear Chris
I have no wish prevaricate, antagonise your tortured mind and, I hearby unreservedly state that The American system in place at that time, stopped Thalidomide thorough the actions of Dr Kelsey.
“The first site seems to be using cherry picking, and diversionary tactics. They did not mention that it was not approved in the USA, only saying:”
A bit tiresome and banner waving Chris ,no diversionary tactics.Try and get out of the everybody is against us mentality I am not, just here to have a civil debate.
“Which implies it is drugs, but it depends more on news reports, and not even giving the March of Dimes cite for us to check on what it really says. The reason for birth defects could be that premature babies, including some very tiny babies, tend to live instead of die. As it turns out, prematurity is now a major focus of the March of Dimes. The first website is lying through omission.”
Chris , if you think the site lies complain .The owners of the site are very open to opinion based on past experience when contacting them. I certainly don’t read it as a lying organisation.If you look at any of the pictures do the pictures lie ,tricks of the camera flipper`s etc, Chris?
“Do tell the people who run the second link to get a better web designer. It is horrible (and I thought the March of Dimes website was annoying!). “
Well I mean,it is under construction it states that when you browse. I fail to see why anyone would need to tell them to change the site ,unless of course you are just being bloody minded.
“And again, I cannot find evidence that children have been born recently due to the use of thalidomide for leprosy or cancer”
On the site I gave you Chris,left hand side you must have over looked it Freddie Musena Fund.
http://www.thalidomideuk.com/freddiemusena.htm
Plenty more below from, WHO ,
http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js4945e/4.html
“Today, a large number of thalidomide babies continue to be born each year16-18 possibly reflecting regulatory insufficiency and widespread use under inadequate supervision. In Brazil, which has more than 1000 registered thalidomide victims, the last officially known case was born in 199519,20. There is evidence that second generation babies with similar deformities are being born to thalidomide victims21,22”
Your remaining posting is outlandish, I say, or has been answered above.
I also note that you did not share a prayer for the victims, or feel any compassion
Comment has gone into the ether. Short version:
Sniffer, please explain what thalidomide has to do with vaccines? How are regulations in Kenya and the USA equivalent?
Please show us that the MMR is more dangerous than measles, mumps and rubella.
I would also like to post some quotes from you:
And later:
and
Pot, meet kettle.
Dear Chris
You are extremely belligerent, who is debating vaccines, thalidomide autism, mmr ,measles, mumps ,rubella Kenya and god almighty the USA (sorry God) all in one breath/post? I have only included replies as requested .
My observations of your writing and my replies are written after exasperation and provocation on here. Your totally un quantified to try and turn the situation round when you are a perpetrator.
If you are so stuck as you obviously showed, you couldn’t read the web site I directed to you before . I feel from your English ,you were in a loud-mouthed ,blind rage when I was merely only looking for civilised debate.
Autism and Thalidomide link ..?is this the dark alley your trying to lead me up ?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8157157
Chris, a coherent rational reply without the cheap ridicule please.
Yours Sincerely
Sniffer
I wrote: “Sniffer, please explain what thalidomide has to do with vaccines?”
Answering with “look it causes autism!” does not answer that question.
Okay, so thalidomide, like rubella can cause autism. It happened fifty years ago affecting 10000 kids, 40 or less in the USA. At that same time Congenital Rubella Syndrome, which is also a known cause of autism, affected 20000 children just in the USA. From the Rubella Chapter of the CDC Pink Book:
The UK deafblind group, Sense, was originally called “The Rubella Group” for a reason. It would be interesting to see their reaction if you tried to tell them to concentrate on thalidomide instead of one of the things they do: encourage uptake of the MMR vaccine.
The title of this article is: “Sloppy science – a perfect example of how the anti-vaccine crowd will listen to anything.” Do not get upset that I have been trying to keep you on topic.
Thalidomide is not a vaccine. The MMR is a vaccine. Thalidomide is off topic, the MMR is on topic. Thalidomide is not in common use, and a person knows when they are taking it. The sloppy science around vaccines means that rubella can still stealthily affect babies (a child with rubella is infectious before symptoms, and can infect a fetus before the mother even knows she is pregnant).
If you wish to continue a discussion, I suggest you make it relevant to vaccines, and only use actual verifiable documents (similar to the WHO link). Thank you.
Dear Chris
“I wrote: “Sniffer, please explain what thalidomide has to do with vaccines?”
Answering with “look it causes autism!” does not answer that question.”
Your arguing with yourself Chris ,I have not said Thalidomide causes autism .
“Okay, so thalidomide, like rubella can cause autism. It happened fifty years ago affecting 10000 kids, 40 or less in the USA. At that same time Congenital Rubella Syndrome, which is also a known cause of autism, affected 20000 children just in the USA. From the Rubella Chapter of the CDC Pink Book:
A rubella epidemic in the United States in 1964–1965 resulted in 12.5 million cases of rubella infection and about 20,000 newborns with CRS. The estimated cost of the epidemic was $840 million. This does not include the emotional toll on the families involved.”
That is your take Chris,not mine and a copy and paste from the CDC .
“The UK deafblind group, Sense, was originally called “The Rubella Group” for a reason. It would be interesting to see their reaction if you tried to tell them to concentrate on thalidomide instead of one of the things they do: encourage uptake of the MMR vaccine.”
Again your debate is off at a tangent from what I have debated.
“The title of this article is: “Sloppy science – a perfect example of how the anti-vaccine crowd will listen to anything.
Do not get upset that I have been trying to keep you on topic.”
Oh!right ,so its becoming clear I am, an anti-vaccine-ator-exterminator alien type form?
“Thalidomide is not a vaccine. The MMR is a vaccine.”
Well no ,argument from me on that one !!
“Thalidomide is off topic, the MMR is on topic. “
Not to me ,I`m interested in Thalidomide.
“Thalidomide is not in common use,”
It is Chris very wrong again..look up Brazil .
“and a person knows when they are taking it.”
Is that so, what is Swahili, for Thalidomide?Thalidomide is only sold in English lettering.
” The sloppy science around vaccines means that rubella can still stealthily affect babies (a child with rubella is infectious before symptoms, and can infect a fetus before the mother even knows she is pregnant).”
Sorry I have not debated Rubella , this is inflammatory.
If you wish to continue a discussion, I suggest you make it relevant to vaccines, and only use actual verifiable documents (similar to the WHO link)
Chris ,why would anyone believe one organisation .As humans we compare ,that is what has made us the species of dominance (the healthy ones anyway) Do you shop only in Walmart?
. Thank you.
My pleasure
Sincerely
Sniffer
Sniffer: “I have not said Thalidomide causes autism .”
Sniffer: “Autism and Thalidomide link ..?is this the dark alley your trying to lead me up ?” Followed by a link to a paper linking thalidomide to autism (a second time).
Please stay on topic. It does not matter if thalidomide is interesting to you, it is off topic to this article. Thalidomide has nothing to do with vaccines other than strengthening the pharmaceutical safety laws in the USA and Europe.
Thalidomide is off topic for this article. Please stop derailing the discussion and stay on topic. Thank you.
Chris, it is kind of on topic 😉 sniffer’s blind acceptance is an example of the very low level of sloppy pseudoscience that anti-vax advocates are drawn to and then accept without question. There is no increase in the incidence of birth defects in the children of thalidomide victims. There is no credible mechanism for thalidomide to cause second generation effects. It is pseudoscience and/or fraud generated and disseminated to scam people. Just like all the other anti-vax “research” and “information”.
http://www.thalidomide.ca/cause-second-generation-birth-defects/
An authoritative link that was trivial to find.
The anti-vax advocates don’t have any data, they don’t have any science, all they have are their feelings that somehow, someway vaccines are bad. They are trying to compel reality to conform to their feelings, rather than the other way around.
They are left with trying to randomly find stuff that they think supports their position, a position that they don’t have the capacity to understand even the basics of. If they had the capacity to understand science, they would have abandoned their anti-vax position a long time ago. They can either stay on topic with nonsense, or go off topic with slightly less nonsense. Since they can’t tell what is nonsense and what is not, nonsense is all you are going to get from them.
Thanks, daedalu2u!
Reading the link, and this sentence made me giggle: “The first mechanism can be excluded, since Lamarckism has long since been abandoned by scientists. “
“Chris, it is kind of on topic 😉 sniffer’s blind acceptance is an example of the very low level of sloppy pseudoscience that anti-vax advocates are drawn to and then accept without question. There is no increase in the incidence of birth defects in the children of thalidomide victims. There is no credible mechanism for thalidomide to cause second generation effects. It is pseudoscience and/or fraud generated and disseminated to scam people. Just like all the other anti-vax “research” and “information”.”
Dear daedalus2u,
Thank you for pointing that relationship Autism/Thalidomide to Chris.
Many moons ago, the general public would have had a problem disproving your un –proven claims above ,but at a click of said, mouse they are easily shown up to be banner waving,unfounded denialist lies.
As written to Chris, the photo’s don’t lie of the 2nd generation babies showing flipper’s instead of hands and arms .Maybe your of the same ilk as Chris, and believe that the photos are trickery and the web sites of flidder`s are lies?written by liars,posted by liars thats what you and Chris believe seemingly ?
The rest of your blog is farcical,but not funny in any way,1 in 12 babies born here, in the US have a disability right,(March Of Dimes) .
If you and Chris are to believed lies ,all lies you would like to believe the damage isn’t that bad easies your troubled and tortured conscience ,obviously.Then why , what, about the photos of the thalidomide 2nd generation ? the camera is lying as well ,silly us? and to think the camera is telling the truth your anti-vaccine-ator–exterm-inatory-alien-life-form to be verbally abused and shot down on site .
I came on lbrb for civil debate on a site that allegedly supports Autism and disabilities( I have yet to see this) .When one starts to post you then find that the main posters are so twisted with denial,and vehemently deny that these dis-abled people exist in the first place?
The thinkers know diffrent..
Yours
Sincerely
Sniffer
Sniffer, thalidomide is off topic. Please stop derailing the discussion to your own pet interest. If you wish to have a discussion on thalidomide do on your own blog.
“a site that allegedly supports Autism and disabilites…(I have yet to see this.) None are so blind as those that will not see.
@sniffer, may I ask what your interest in Autism is?
Crickey dick!
After wading through the posts above, I suggest that maybe RBLB should invest in one of those screening programs that ensure the poster is, in fact, human, and not some sort of chatbot. Generally I don’t like them, because they do confuse me a wee bit, and I suspect they may be more confusing for people further along the spectrum than I. But, I seriously suspect sniffer is a chatbot, and maybe those ‘find the number’ tests are useful after all.
What do you make of this – on “Brian Deer: Stomping at the Savoy” sniffer made this post:
https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/04/brian-deer-stomping-at-the-savoy/#comment-156502
Then on this thread sniffer makes this comment:
“Then I read that Deer’s and other “studies” have shown that vaccines do not cause autism. After taking many logic courses, …[blah blah blah]….
Sniffer hasn’t a blind clue who Brian Deer is. And probably hasn’t a blind clue about thalidomide, vaccines or autism. Sniffer is just wasting bandwidth recycling stuff from other sites, and chopping up material from posters here with material from other sites (particularly large, sea-going mammal-type sites – lets see if the sniffer-bot picks up that reference out of context). Verbiage on ‘logic’ and ‘reason’ is pretty standard output from basic chatbots.
Hey sniffer,
1)What is the base rate of limb deformities in the population?
2)What is the rate of limb deformities among the children of thalidomide victims?
(Hint: the photos in either case look pretty similar! Photos, like anecdotes, have nothing to do with causation)
I stop posting concerning thalidomide and then the goading starts moderator you see this ? Mc D your so clever, (others tell the truth), You extrapolate to everybody without using the terms or words, Thalidomide,Whale, using only WHO web sites as all other sites are banned even the official thalidomide UK is to be banned and branded as liars (Chris criteria). Pro-disabled bloggers my granny would turn in her grave.