One of the big problems with the media has been their willingness to give the vaccine-induced-autism-epidemic idea far more wight than it deserved. While the science has been very one sided against the theories presented, the media usually puts out “he said/she said” type stories. You know the type. A new study will come out. A news story will be produced. They will open with people talking about the increasing numbers of people diagnosed with autism and the belief in the vaccine link in some groups. The scientists for the new study will be interviewed. And then the story will end with parents saying, “but I know the link is real”. It was a world of false balance.
That world has changed, at least for now. Sure not everywhere, but the media and the public’s perception of vaccines and autism has changed.
Case in point: the comic strip “Doonesbury”. For about 40 years Gary Trudeau has had his finger on the pulse of American society. He has been a harsh critic of political figures and popular culture figures (many papers have placed his comic on the opinion or editorial pages).
Here are a couple of panels from today’s strip (click to enlarge). Boopsie, former cheerleader and Playboy playmate, is discussing Jenny McCarthy:
The full strip can be found at Doonesbury.com.
The vaccine-causation idea has only survived through the media and public relations. The science never really supported the hypotheses. Jenny McCarthy rode the vaccine story back into the public’s eye, and appears to be trying to jump ship before it drags her back down. If today’s Doonesbury is any indication, she may have waited too long. She could do a lot of good by making a public statement distancing herself from the junk science and PR campaigns that created the image of a vaccine-induced-epidemic. It wouldn’t make up for all the damage she caused, but it would be better than having her publicity people beg the Colbert show to not be harsh on her, while she was at the same time writing pieces supporting the junk scientists for the Huffington Post.
When Doonesbury is calling you out for promoting a “bogus vaccine-autism link” and for causing real harm to preventive health care, you’ve lost public support. You can either try to stay low and ride it out, or do the right thing and repair some of the damage you’ve caused. The choice is yours, Ms. McCarthy.
Left Brain Right Brain 
You sure its the same Jenny..
“And, referring to the BMJ story, she added, “Last week, this hoopla made us a little stronger, and even more determined to fight for the truth about what’s happening to our kids.”
Wednesday, January 12th 2011, 1:35 PM
Jenny McCarthy stands firm on autism and childhood vaccine link; reacts discredited medical study
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2011/01/12/2011-01-12_jenny_mccarthy_reacts_to_article_claiming_theres_no_link_between_autism_and_chil.html
That’s the person Trudeau is criticizing.
Funny how she wanted Colbert to not criticize her because she supposedly has backed off.
shout the lie loud enough ?more like..
@AWOL, what other Jenny could it be?
people are attacking her because she is a playmate
not because her beliefs are unsound.
a rather large contingent (and the scientific data) are starting to look at a combination of genetics and environmental factors for causing autism with at least some of the environmental factors appearing to be in some cases vaccines.
tho i will personally say this tho.
When doonesbury starts belittling my beliefs then i tend to believe i am on to something good.
one of the last places i would consider getting my medical advices is a political cartoon.
Carl, her beliefs *are* unsound, because they are not based on science and have no support in the science.
Your repetition of the now-discredited assertion that vaccines cause autism is sad and uninformed. You need to revise your beliefs in the light of the facts and stop repeating stuff that is just plain wrong.
Vince
I suppose you work on the lbrb autistic economic repair “not a clue department”
Just thought i would chuck that in with the rest of the jokes on here..
@Carl Bainbridge, she is a former playmate. That fact is of no consequence to me. If she left the porn industry for university and obtained an actual degree, say in science, rather than her ‘Google degree’, then I might listen to her. If she was open to discussion around the multiple studies showing no vaccine/autism link, rather than being dismissive, while simultaneously giving false hope to parents about recovery from Autism then I might have some respect for her opinion. The fact she appeared in Playboy does not concern me in the slightest. Good luck to her if she wants to cash in on some genetic gifts, but why should I listen to her opinion about the etiology of a complex neurological quirk?
My take on Jenny McCarthy:
I honestly don’t care what her background is — I would listen to her whether she was actively filming porn, or a Christian homeschooler — if she was able to discuss vaccines intelligently.
Instead she keeps changing her story about what effects she thinks vaccines had on her son, uses her professional performing skills to milk testimonials while attacking scientists and doctors on camera, argues against toxins in vaccines while rhapsodizing about Botox, and has poured her considerable passion and power into compromising public health.
I don’t think she’s an evil person, but I do think she’s a credulous person, a passionately misguided person, and given her influence on other credulous and passionately misguided people, a dangerous person. I think she is a skilled performer rather than a skilled thinker.
Our society needs to value children’s health over celebrity hubris.
From:
http://www.squidalicious.com/2010/07/vaccine-songs-take-on-jenny-mccarthy.html
Carl Bainbridge:
Let me echo Shannon, I also dislike her because she changes her story. I think it is dishonest to blame the MMR vaccine that her child got sometime between 15 to 18 months old for a seizure he had when he was over two year old. A span between six months to a year.
Mr. Bainbridge, you are welcome to have your own beliefs. But you are not welcome to your own facts. There is a difference. If you wish to convince us that vaccines are associated with autism, then you need to prove that claim with real evidence. Not beliefs.
“Our society needs to value children’s health over celebrity hubris”.
Wish I had said that.
Vaccines don’t cause autism and smoking doesn’t cause cancer.
The vaccine-autism story has finally landed in the place where it deserves to die: the Sunday comics.
Now if we could all just stop digging up the bones . . .
@carl bainbridge
Well, I suppose the ironies are flying about rather thickly if you do think the Doonesbury comic was giving medical advice, instead of skewering McCarthy’s persistent expression of the belief complex that gave rise to the conclusion that vaccine causes autism.
If Doonesbury is one of the last, one wonders where the last place is that you would look for medical advices.
It’s hard to believe you could do worse than moving Jenny McCarthy to the bottom of that list, not because she wore no clothes, but because her expressed beliefs, stripped bare and exposed to daylight, are not supported by the science (which can be found in places like BMJ).
(hmm, and thinking about McCarthy and science in the days of digital clocks, does the expression “even a stopped clock is right twice a day” still have relevance?…)
Nine out of ten parents rank vaccine safety as their number one childhood health concern. Is it a little premature to declare “mission accomplished”?
Joe, that is a lovely little statistic. Did you think it was pertinent to the comic or Jenny McCarthy? Perhaps it is because of the clueless blathering of Ms. McCarthy that there is a statistic like that. By the way, we will assume you made up those numbers unless you provide a valid reference.
“You sure its the same Jenny..”
Frame three of the strip says: “Jenny McCarthy”
Brian Morgan
What I say is, it cant be the same Jenny Mc Carthy the autism community know ,love and thank ,she is being grossly mis-represented.
I quoted Jenny in the very first post on this blog dated
Wednesday, January 12th 2011, 1:35 PM
“And, referring to the BMJ story, she added, “Last week, this hoopla made us a little stronger, and even more determined to fight for the truth about what’s happening to our kids.”
For clarity I printed that .Despite this clarity and the very recent date you all,on here still mantra the words “Jenny is jumping ship” no doubt,no doubt: as much chance of that as you had Nelson jumping ship…
Jenny McCarthy stands firm on autism and childhood vaccine link;
the writer should have left it at that…
I hope Kev approves of this as half my posts dont get through these days..
@Chris: I think that Joe is referring to the Univ of Michigan survey that asked parents about their concerns. Vaccine safety was high on the list. NOT a statement that vaccines were unsafe, or that they caused autism or ADHD or any other nonsense, only a statement that vaccine safety was high on parents’ list of concerns.
Actually – just googled it. From the U of M site: “Vaccine and medication safety are parents’ top research priorities
Parents rate research on environmental effects, childhood diseases, and causes of childhood injuries less important”
So….parents have RESEARCH on vaccine and medication safety as top priorities. AOA and other sites have misquoted it, but this is from the official information.
“A poll released by the C.S. Mott Children’s National Poll on Children’s Health shows that nearly 9 in 10 parents rank vaccine safety, and the effectiveness and safety of medicines, as the most important topics in children’s health research today.
The poll, which asked 1,621 parents age 18 and older in August 2010 to rate the importance of different types of medical research for children’s health, found that parents rated the topics as follows:
1. Vaccine safety (89 percent)
2. Medication safety and effectiveness (88 percent)
3. Things in the environment that could lead to health issues (72 percent)
4. Foods that might protect against cancer (67 percent )
5. New treatment for rare childhood diseases (66 percent)
6. Cancer-causing foods (64 percent )
7. New treatments for common childhood illnesses (64 percent)
8. Leading causes of injuries (46 percent)”
Totally different picture than what Joe and AOA are painting, isn’t it?
Dawn, thank you, it is completely different. Which is why I like to see persons making claims to show the source of their information. It makes it easier to judge the data.
Nothing so bad as,those that can see just dont want to Chris,springs to mind This is why Chris, I ask for un -biased studies from all bloggers..which Chris has yet to supply..even one..have you Chris?
http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc/media/newsroom/details.cfm?ID=1760
“”In this poll, parents overwhelmingly see the need for research on the safety of vaccines and medications given to children,” says Matthew Davis, M.D., director of the poll and associate professor of pediatrics and internal medicine in the Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit at the U-M Medical School. “Parental concerns about the safety of vaccines have increased markedly over the last decade, due to alleged but later disproven links between vaccines and autism and related concerns about mercury and other preservatives used in vaccines.
“Assurances from health care providers and government officials that vaccines are safe have been insufficient. Rather, it’s clear from this poll that parents want more research about the safety of vaccines for their young children and adolescents.””
I`m waiting
Thanks for providing the reference for me Dawn. I appreciate it.
It is ironic when people cry “foul” when McCarthy gets trashed. She is not known for her argumentation, she is known for her “celebrity endorsement”. She has been carefully used as a photo op advocate. Fair game for a poltical cartoon? Absolutely….
@Jonathan Semetko, “She is not known for her argumentation..” Sure you could have worked in a gag about augmentation there?
Sullivan and Kev – check your spelling of Trudeau’s first name (I don’t want to appear to be nitpicking, but it’s in title of the post).
Chemmomo,
thanks for that. I put off the correction for a while because I didn’t want to mess up the url for the post. So, the title is hopefully correct, the URL is forever wrong.
Strange how all were holding forth and the diversion is now in place..no takers as below???
Nothing so bad as,those that can see just dont want to Chris,springs to mind This is why Chris, I ask for un -biased studies from all bloggers..which Chris has yet to supply..even one..have you Chris?
http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc…..fm?ID=1760
“”In this poll, parents overwhelmingly see the need for research on the safety of vaccines and medications given to children,” says Matthew Davis, M.D., director of the poll and associate professor of pediatrics and internal medicine in the Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit at the U-M Medical School. “Parental concerns about the safety of vaccines have increased markedly over the last decade, due to alleged but later disproven links between vaccines and autism and related concerns about mercury and other preservatives used in vaccines.
“Assurances from health care providers and government officials that vaccines are safe have been insufficient. Rather, it’s clear from this poll that parents want more research about the safety of vaccines for their young children and adolescents.””
I`m waiting
Until there is a study that compares VACCINATED CHILDREN AGAINST UNVACCINATED CHILDREN – how can anyone know for sure? …and of course- the higher-ups REFUSE to do this study… Why do you think this is so?
t dennison, please tell us how you would design that study to protect the unvaccinated arm from measles, Hib, pertussis and other vaccine preventable diseases. Remember that many of these diseases have caused a great deal of harm lately, especially pertussis and Hib (with real deaths).
Here are some guidelines:
1- Do not use institutions for the severely disabled like the Hepatitis B and polio tests done at Willowbrook.
2- Do not use children in developing countries, like this study.
3- Look at the study I linked to, check out Table 1. You must make sure that that the second column (“Clinical measles”) is zero for both rows. With that, the third column should also be full of zeros.
4- Don’t claim that you can use the number of kids whose parents have voluntarily refused to vaccinate them. That would not be blinded, and have already been done… several times in many countries. The large epidemiological studies that were conducted in the UK, USA, Canada, Finland, Denmark and Japan all showed that vaccines have no casual link to autism.
Do you understand? Can you design that study and have it comply with these rules?
To the troll that is “Absent WithOut Leave”, you are being ignored because you consider Gary Null, an incompetent supplement salesman, to be “unbiased.” Plus the link you provided gives this as its first line: “Your request could not be processed.” What a tool.
Dear Chris(others tell the truth)
“Remember that many of these diseases have caused a great deal of harm lately, especially pertussis and Hib (with real deaths).”
Can you provide your un biased ,non pharma studies please ?
I noticed on AOA ,a superb study just received as below..if you could lower yorself to look at it we would all appreciate your advice on the study ,not that we will take your advice but it gives us an idea into the pharma logic..(giving credit you have one)
http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/02/vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children-some-data-are-in-and-they-are-disturbing-.html
And so were not going away from the topic which your great at reminding people about Chris and ,you wont answer how you got my previous post soo wrong…heres JMC on Huf..
Posted: January 10, 2011 03:14 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-mccarthy/vaccine-autism-debate_b_806857.html
AWOL, I’ll tell you what I thought when I went and read that story you link to. I thought ‘whats that got to do with autism?’ Have I missed where it discusses autism? Could you quote from the part that touches on autism? I’d hate to think you were quoting meaningless studies that have nothing to do with the reason this blog exists.
Kev,
I would suggest you follow the link to the free test of the full paper. Amongst other interesting details is the author affiliation:
” Health Project, Apartado 861, Bissau, Guinea-Bissau; and Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark”
Funny how affiliations with the Statens Serum Institute (which makes vaccines for Denmark) is considered a fatal conflict of interest for vaccine-autism studies but people from this same institute are not a part of “big pharma” now. (more precisely, 7 years ago when the paper was written)
Kev
sorry t dennisson wrote
“Until there is a study that compares VACCINATED CHILDREN AGAINST UNVACCINATED CHILDREN – ”
AOA study is exacctly vac non vac,study
Chris commented on “pertussis and Hib (with real deaths).”
Fairly logical post i posted (for me), what`s the problem?
“AOA study is exacctly vac non vac,study”
is it, now? That’s good to hear.
From the paper:
So, children who have received the BCG vaccine are considered “unvaccinated”, because the authors controlled for it. In other words, “unvaccinated” means no DPT vaccination, not completely unvaccinated.
Funny how the definition of “unvaccinated” changes. When considering children unvaccinated by MMR, it wasn’t considered valid because they received other vaccines. Yes, there is major goalpost moving going on here.
And even more:
The author, Peter Aaby, is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Ironic that, considering how much hatred has been heaped on Bill Gates in the past couple of weeks. Prof. Aaby’s work has “lead to the discovery that intensity of exposure to infection and not malnutrition was the main cause of high measles mortality in low-income countries “, completely counter to the ideas thrown around by people who bash the efficacy of the measles vaccine.
Prof. Aaby’s work indicated that a high-titer measles vaccine might result in higher childhood mortality amongst females. WHO pulled the vaccine. According to the “logic” I’ve heard so often by supporters of Andrew Wakefield, Prof. Aaby would have faced personal and career attacks for daring to challenge vaccines. Quite the contrary.
There is a guy working on vaccine safety. Not only that, but he is working with people in what most would consider a disadvantaged situation. Good for him. Let him do his work. The last thing he needs is to have a bunch of people cherry pick his conclusions and misapply them. Not only does that put other people at risk, say in “advantaged” countries like the US and the UK, it makes it harder for him to do his own work. He may be right, he may be wrong. Let him find out and apply the results appropriately.
Sullivan..
“Funny how the definition of “unvaccinated” changes. When considering children unvaccinated by MMR, it wasn’t considered valid because they received other vaccines. Yes, there is major goalpost moving going on here.”
Surely this would only de a dis-advantage to the study as the vaccines would make the childrens health worse .The detriment would be to the better figures of the un-vaccinated.
“weeks. Prof. Aaby’s work has “lead to the discovery that intensity of exposure to infection ”
You know on here your asked for un-biased studies is this man not that?
No pleasing..some people
“No pleasing..some people”
You are projecting. I have zero problem with the man. In fact, I admire him for what he is trying to do. Whether he’s right or wrong, I can’t say. But he is actually working on vaccine safety. He is a far cry from pseudo vaccine safety people like Andrew Wakefield.
I wanted an answer from Mr. or Ms. Dennison, not he/she who is Absent WithOut Leave. I also specifically said “Do not use children in developing countries.” Therefore the Aaby study does not qualify in that is was done in Guinea-Bissau. As noted, there are other issues at play.
Try again, and this time from Mr. or Ms. Dennison and following all of the criteria that I laid out.
Sullivan,
” He is a far cry from pseudo vaccine safety people like Andrew Wakefield.”
And light years from Brian Deer`s tales in the B.M.J (Big Merck Joker`s)
Funny? ha ha..
I can’t remember who said it, but it was an American journalist that visited Germany in 1938, writing about seeing a Hitler Youth rally and said.
“This would be hilarious to watch if it wasn’t so damn scary”.
lbrb reminds me of this sentiment.
Dear Chris,
“I Want” Doesn’t Get.
The Absent WithOut Lunch:
Exactly. The folks screaming they want a (to quote t dennison above) “study that compares VACCINATED CHILDREN AGAINST UNVACCINATED CHILDREN” are not going to get what they want. That is because present research ethics prohibit endangering children, and there is no way a study like that would get past a review board.
Now they could do the type proposed by Prometheus a couple of years ago in the article “Let’s put on a Study!” (which is a modified epidemiological study, like the several that have been done before, and like the one Prometheus described in They DID a study!).
i am going to comment on that particular issue of vaccinated/unvaccinated studies being unethical.
main point is how can it be “ethical” to use a vaccine whose safety and efficiency is not tested against an unvaccinated cohort.
it is a point that i find particularily puzzling whenever i hear this particular arguement.
another issue i have slightly unrelated is the potential removing of those with “identified immune deficiencies” as the present thought process actually does not involve simply vaccines but a combined genetic/vaccine combination which some people believe may actually be undiagnosed immune deficiencies that could be reacting to the vaccine.
perhaps a most telling study would be testing all children for immune deficiencies BEFORE vaccinating them and then not vaccinating all immune deficient children. It would be of some interest to see if perhaps the incidents of autism decreased under those conditions.
the problem i am finding with most arguments involving vaccines at the moment is that many people on the anti vaccine side are starting to accept a genetic/vaccine combination as the likely cause however many of those who are pro vaccine are arguing based solely on the DR. WAKEFIELD MMR vaccine concept and simply are arguing against vaccines alone. Most anti vaccine people have moved past this arguement and so many of these arguements are disjointed simply because the two sides are arguing different points altogether.
Mr. Bainbridge, please explain how that study would be done without causing harm to the children who are not vaccinated. I would like you to specifically answer that question using the criteria I set out here (it is earlier in these comments, which I assume you have not read).
I would especially be interested how you would comply with these rules. Also, did you read the links I posted just before your comment? Because it is quite tiresome for you to post the almost exact same thing as “t dennison”, and I see no reason why I should repeat myself. So please stop the “vaccinated/unvaccinated studies” requests until you come up with a viable and safe study.
what i am saying is that saying that it is unethical to do a vaccinated/unvaccinated study is no different then it being unethical to start giving these vaccinations to children before they do this study.
basically before ANY vaccine into the vaccine schedule this should be a basic requirement to prove safety
i actually dont see how this is even a question.
to me it is basic ethics in medicine. Above all do no harm.
make sure the “vaccine” is safe.
Then explain clearly how it can be done, and that the study follows the rules (you never did click on it, right) at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/populations/children.html . Show that you know what you are asking about before commenting on its ethics. Stop continually behaving like a small child asking why he has to brush his teeth before going to bed, or can’t have candy before dinner.
and in truth following your rules there is an exception that would allow this study.
A fourth category of research requires a special level of HHS review beyond that provided by the IRB.
45 CFR 46.407 – Research that the IRB believes does not meet the conditions of 45 CFR 46.404, 46.405, or 46.406, but finds that the research presents a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding, prevention, or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children.
If the IRB believes that the research does not meet the requirements of 45 CFR 46.404, 46.405, or 46.406, but finds that it presents a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding, prevention, or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children, it may refer the protocol to HHS for review. The research may proceed only if the Secretary, HHS, or his or her designee, after consulting with a panel of experts in pertinent disciplines (e.g., science, medicine, education, ethics, law) and following an opportunity for public review and comment, determines either: (1) that the research in fact satisfies the conditions of 45 CFR 46.404, 46.405, or 46.406, or (2) the following:
•the research presents a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding, prevention, or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children;
•the research will be conducted in accordance with sound ethical principles; and
•adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of children and the permission of their parents or guardians, as set forth in HHS regulations at 45 CFR 46.408.
base point being that this research would provide a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding of prevention or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children. specifically two different issues 1/ autism 2/ vaccination rates.
the major issue is that no specific effort can be made to eliminate subjects due to outside factors.
specifically no specific tests can be made or required of the children before they are placed in the test. basically no prescreening.
the purpose of this is to make sure that the makeup of the test is typical to the standard makeup of a normally vaccinated children.
Okay, we now know you can cut and paste. Good, now show how you would design the study to protect the unvaccinated children from acquiring vaccine preventable diseases. Especially diseases like measles (which now has three cities on alert), pertussis (which has killed almost a dozen children in California), Hib (which killed a few last year), and tetanus (for which there is no herd immunity). This is part of the •the research will be conducted in accordance with sound ethical principles; bit.
It might help if you wander around PubMed and look at several of these 50000 plus papers.
basic herd immunity would protect for most instances.
designing the study so that basic herd immunity could be maintained could be achieved simply by selecting a small number of children from several large communities.
tetanus would be more difficult and while my first instinct would be that tetanus would generally exempt from this however it would actually ruin the basis of the test and throw the results into disrepute.
that particular issue would require a different thought process and i am not sure how it could be surpassed. however it is one of very few actual problems when you get right down to it and it could be worked around i am just not sure how yet.
Mr. Bainbridge:
Really? Then why did those kids die in Pennsylvania from Hib? Why did those babies die in California from pertussis? How come San Diego had to spend so much on measles control in 2008? Why did a Grant County, WA family have three of their eight children hospitalized that same year? What about kids like these two boys in the UK? What about the people in Boston with measles now! How about today’s measles news?
You cannot exempt tetanus because of first sentence of the link with the rules (which I have linked to more to once!), emphasis added by me:
Since you say (finally):
… well come back when you figure it out. Remember that there have been several large epidemiological studies done in several countries spanning three continents that show no casual link between vaccines and autism. Not only do you have to show that no children will be harmed, but also that it is really necessary to carry out the study you want.
@Carl, I just can’t get your logic.
If a child is so immune deficient that they are vulnerable to the antigens in a vaccine, the vaccine is going to be the least of their problems.
And then it will only be the live-virus vaccines that will be an issue for an immune deficient child, and these days, those attenuated virus vaccines are not given until after one-year old.
A genuinely immune deficient child will have been identified by that stage, and their condition is already a factor taken into consideration for vaccination. So what you are suggesting as a study is actually current medical practice.
For the quite rare instance of immunodeficiency not being diagnosed in infancy, the risk for the immunodeficient child is of actually contracting the disease from an attenuated virus. And that risk is way way lower than it would be if these diseases were circulating in the population the way they were 50 years ago.
Dr. Maurice Hilleman made astounding revelations in an interview that was cut from The Health Century — the admission that Merck drug company vaccines had been injecting dangerous viruses into people worldwide.
Speak of the Devil…
Hilleman Mercola today
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/18/leading-vaccine-doctor-states-cancer-linked-to-polio-vaccine.aspx
Bear in mind that Dr. Hilleman was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program. He developed over three dozen vaccines, more than any other scientist in history. He was a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society. He received a special lifetime achievement award from the World Health Organization. Hilleman was one of the early vaccine pioneers to warn about the possibility that simian viruses might contaminate vaccines.
Great comment from Mercola just hit the link above ..
A person I know had a home video put up on Mercola where before the video had been on You Tube for 2 years and had 300 hits ,in one day Mercola got her 53 thousand hits..amazing the internet ..Egypt springs to mind…
actually mcd there is some researchers who are actually looking at the possibility of some immune deficiencies being part of the issue when related to autism.
however chris i am going to give you some hard facts
the issues that those children’s parents go through with their child’s measles
any parent of an autistic child has the exact same issues
however the high and mighty pharmaceutical garbage men who slam and slander anyone who questions the safety of vaccines only look at the high profile diseases because to them it is better that our children suffer to make some diseases go away then to make sure that the drugs they produce are actually safe.
the tests need to be done THAT is the ethical imperative to do otherwise is to continue the same problem we have now.
vaccines with uncertain safety records (and questionable efficiencies) being passed over because the risks are getting to be too high.
1% of all children born is to high an incidence rate to not have serious funding and research
more children will be diagnosed this year with autism then with pediatric cancers, HIV and diabetes COMBINED
and yet we get minimal research funding and any advances and attemtpts to get questions answered are slammed constantly by people wanting to save the sanctity of pharmaceutical company profits
Mr. Bainbridge:
Excuse me? Did you miss the facts? I don’t don’t see anything but unsupported opinion. Next time, try it again with some actual references.
Also, I think it is disgusting that you compared autism with “pediatric cancers, HIV and diabetes.” I dare you to tell the parents of Ben Towne that it was okay he only had cancer and not autism.
And don’t tell me about funding. I have a disabled adult son (from an actual disease! Go figure!) and I know all too well the lack of services.
Funny that AWOL holds Hilleman in such high regard. He developed vaccines for measles, mumps, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, chickenpox, meningitis, pneumonia and Haemophilus influenzae bacteria.
The Mercola link is typical of his mischaracterization and outright lies. First off, that tape is obviously doctored with a laugh track and can’t be trusted. Secondly, there is no association between SV40 and cancer. Mercola kind of forgets to mention that studies that found an association could not be replicated and also seems to have completely missed the definitive NCI studies that have put this issue to rest:
http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/2004/sv40
Yes, Hilleman and others deserve credit for making the discovery in a time when modern PCR did not exist to amplify DNA. Their real concerns for vaccine safety led to the removal of the vaccine and to improved purification techniques. It was an unfortunate incident and was corrected. Merck wasn’t the boogie man here. Had you been alive during polio outbreaks, you would understood the urgency in developing a vaccine for this scourge.
And, btw, what does any of this have to do with autism?
AWOL needs an anti-vax spam filter.
The comic by Garry Trudeau was very enjoyable.
And awol’s comments are good for a laugh, nothing more.
here is the fucking problem with jack asses like you
autism is a fucking actual disease and it is losers like you who refuse to realize the crap we have to deal with on a daily basis which create 90% of our hassles
on any daily basis due to our childrens disability we will get physically attacked
on any daily basis we will have to repeatedly change diapers because our children are years behind getting toilet trained because they just dont understand
these children will be with us long after a parent with a cancer patient child or an HIV child will have to deal with it.
and yes while they will likely deal with the loss we will still be dealing with a 40 year old child who is still unable to communicate, highly likely to still attack us at any given time for any reason, still be in diapers. etc.
so when we die of old age our child who will likely be 60+ and still unable to carefor himself if he is unlucky enough to not have another family member with the ability to care for them is highly likely to be placed in a jail simply because there is no other facility that is capable of dealing with him
and this is all because wacko losers like you dont get that
AUTISM IS A SERIOUS FUCKING DISABILITY WITH LIFE CHANGING AND LIFE LONG REPRECUSSIONS