Parents Continue to Kill Children

Unfounded fears about vaccination which are fueled by media networks who want to show “both sides” of a story without having an opinion themselves are causing the resurgence of measles and other childhood diseases. Parents fear that vaccination will give their children autism (untrue) or that they may develop serious side effects (rare1). At least, with the fear of side effects, parents are dreading well-documented issues, even if they are vastly over-reacting to the possibility of a complication. (there is also the subset of parents who object to vaccination on religious grounds. I won’t talk about them, here)

Parents who fear childhood vaccinations because of the speculative and discarded hypothesis that they cause autism are prey to an emotional response which is the basis for the statement “Correlation does not imply causality”. In other words just because an effect occurs after you do something, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the something caused the effect. Just because some children are diagnosed with autism after they receive vaccinations does not necessarily mean that vaccinations cause autism.

Some anti-vaccination persons claim that the main culprit, so the theory goes, is a preservative called thimerosal, a mercury containing compound. On the face of it, you might suppose they’re right, after all, mercury is a neurotoxin and autism is a neurologic disorder. Let’s assume for the moment that mercury might cause autism. The obvious response would be to remove the mercury-containing substance, thimerosal, from the vaccines that children are receiving. That would make sense, right?

Well, that’s what Sweden and Denmark did. They removed thimerosal from their vaccines and yet the incidence of autism went up. This website has a breakdown of numerous studies that confirm no link between thimerosal and autism rates. There is no link between thimerosal and autism2. None. Zero.

“Ok, then”, you say, “what about vaccines without thimerosal? Those might be causing autism.” True, they might, but how about this Danish study where they looked at a large population of children (nearly all Danish children born between ’91 and ’98) who were vaccinated with non-thimerosal doses and compared them to all the unvaccinated children born during the same years. They found no statistical difference between the two categories when looking at autism rates. A child receiving a vaccination (or not) made no difference in whether she would be diagnosed with autism.

This brings us back to my initial point that parents are killing their children. They are denying them modern (proven!) immunity to life-threatening diseases because of unsubstantiated fears. Furthermore, they are actively fighting the (proven!) vaccination movement while discounting the knowledge of professional scientists and epidemiologists because they know there’s a link between autism in their children and the vaccines that were administered.3

These parents are killing their children and by association are endangering the lives of the children around them. There are kids out there who for various reasons cannot be vaccinated and they are being put in harms way, especially because some of the medical reasons which prevent their vaccination are likely to make them more susceptible to measles or other childhood diseases.

We’ve stamped out small pox. We’ve eliminated polio in America, Europe and China. We’ve reduced measles, mumps and rubella to tiny shadows of their former selves. But measles is popping back up and kids are being infected. We, the population of the world, have a right to live in a disease free environment because we can. It makes no sense to throw away a life saving treatment and have children die because some people don’t believe in science.

The anti-vaccine movement gets my blood up in a way that anti-evolutionists don’t. They’re both wrong, but the anti-vaxxers are presented with flesh-and-blood reminders of what it is they’re fighting against. The anti-evolutionists merely have to ignore complicated (often dry) scientific studies and research.

Don’t be an anti-vaxxer! Your kids might die.

1It’s important to read the list of vaccination side effects from the CDC while keeping in mind that something might be possible, but it’s not likely. Several of the “severe” side effects are listed as so rare that they haven’t determined whether or not the vaccine caused them

2Quoting from the FDA website, and remember that this was issued during the tenure of the most science-fearing administration of recent decades, “In 2004, the IOM’s Immunization Safety Review Committee issued its final report, examining the hypothesis that vaccines, specifically the MMR vaccines and thimerosal containing vaccines, are causally associated with autism. In this report, the committee incorporated new epidemiological evidence from the U.S., Denmark, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, and studies of biologic mechanisms related to vaccines and autism since its report in 2001. The committee concluded that this body of evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, and that hypotheses generated to date concerning a biological mechanism for such causality are theoretical only [editor's emphasis]. Further, the committee stated that the benefits of vaccination are proven and the hypothesis of susceptible populations is presently speculative, and that widespread rejection of vaccines would lead to increases in incidences of serious infectious diseases like measles, whooping cough and Hib bacterial meningitis.”

3A side note (not one which I’ll argue) is whether it’s a public good to prevent the infection of hundreds of thousands and the death of hundreds by inflicting [something] on a few. ‘The good of the many’ argument. Note that I don’t think we are inflicting anything on those few, aside from the fortunately rare serious side effects.

This entry was posted in Random. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Parents Continue to Kill Children

  1. I have many disagreements with you on this piece and your assumptions about the research that has been done. But setting those aside for the moment, I would just like to point out that the title of your piece is just… well it is wrong.

    There has been 131 cases of measles this year, and no one has died. Only 15 were even hospitalized. Everyone is making a full recovery.

    And only 63 of those 131 were unvaccinated.

    There has not been a measles death in this country in five years. Two people died from it in 2003. One was a child who had an organ transplant and was on immunosuppressive therapy and the other was an elderly man.

    Measles deaths had dropped to almost nil even before the introduction of the vaccine in 1968 because improved sanitation, nutrition and health care had turned it into a typical childhood illness.

    There was even a Brady Bunch episode where all the kids got measles and had a ‘battle of the sexes’ over the bathroom.

    This is not polio we are talking about.

    Alarmists articles with headlines like this one are not going to improve vaccination rates.

    A KNOWN side effect of the MMR is “Vaccine Induced Encephalopathy”. The department of Health and Human Services lists the symptoms as:

    1. loss of eye contact
    2. lack of response to stimuli (except for loud shouts)
    3. disconnection from the world around them
    4. often accompanied by seizures

    THAT is simply an alternate description of a child with autism.

    But most doctors who administer vaccines have never even heard of vaccine induced encepalopathy. But they have been taught about “Autism”. So when a child fitting this description sows up in their office, and mom says, ‘He has been like this ever since his vaccines’, doc believes it is ‘autism’, does no medical investigation, does not look for encepalopathy, because he has been taught that it is only a result of viruses, not the vaccines for those viruses, and refers to a psychologist or speech therapist. But not before telling mom her child has “autism” and “autism” has no relationship to vaccines.

    So CDC can continue to report that serious vaccine injury is rare. As long as doctors continue to NOT examine children with “autism”.

    Which they don’t.

    If you want vaccination rates to improve, encourage the medical establishment to start taking vaccine injury seriously, start examining the bodies of children diagnosed with “autism” and start treating vaccine induced encepalopathy.

    Until mainstream medicine, AAP and CDC start rebuilding faith with parents, who know that what they are saying does not even remotely add up, things are only going to get worse.

    … and there are only going to be more and more parents like me who make you super duper angry.

  2. So I am assuming that since you have posted several other pieces since I submitted my comment, that you will not be approving it.

    Don’t you think that is pretty cowardly as you have thrown down the gauntlet and stated that non-vaccinating parents are baby killers?

    And we don’t get to defend ourselves?

    Now I am going to get a bit judgemental and just say:

    Shame on you.

    Easy to win the arguement when you wont let anyone else speak, isn’t it.

  3. Bill Ruhsam says:


    Before I reply substantively:

    Congratulations on counting! You’ve equated “one” to “several”.

    Also, I hope I needn’t inform you that there is a convenient feature on most blog software that allows you to post-date your submissions. Such is the case with my posts yesterday. Your comment ended up in my moderation queue because you’ve never commented here before. From now on, I assure you, your comments will post immediately, so long as you use the same email address and name.

    Your comment wasn’t approved until 10 minutes ago because I only just now arrived back home and turned on my computer. I make no apologies for the length of time that comments can sit in my moderation queue. I have a life away from my computer.

    To reply to your comment:

    Why, if vaccine induce autism-like vaccine induced encepholopathy (VIE for my convenience), did the epidemiological study in Denmark show no statistical differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated children? You stated above that VIE is being misdiagnosed as autism. If that were the case, then there should be a difference in autism rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated population.

    I’m all for continued studies on unanswered questions, but let’s start from a standpoint that doesn’t say “all those peer-reviewed scientific studies are WRONG.” I can accept a statement like “the study was misinterpreted in a way that slipped through the cracks of the review process because of [reason]” but I don’t believe that you or I are capable of formulating said reason.

    Your comment saying “[measles] is not polio…” is spot on. I agree. Measles is not nearly so debilitating as polio and isn’t the deadly disease that it used to be. I’m sure you’re familiar with the slippery slope philosophy, yes? Stop vaccinating for measles because of faulty science and soon we’ll stop vaccinating for other things. I’m not jumping on that bandwagon.

    What I will say, is that I’ll look into your claims about VIE (although you need to look at what I said about vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations).

    Don’t forget that any scientist worth her Ph.D. would slaver for an opportunity to overturn existing scientific opinion in a meaningful way. That way lies trips to Stockholm to claim the big prize. To say that researchers are ignoring this is to think that they don’t have their own best interests in mind!

  4. Pingback: The Evil Eyebrow » I’ve Been Taken To Task

  5. Excuse me… I thought I saw more than one post.

    “Your comment wasn’t approved until 10 minutes ago because I only just now arrived back home and turned on my computer.”

    Then I hereby unshame on your and apologize for thinking you were a big fat cheater.

    I will get back to you on the rest after I put my kids to bed.

  6. Hi again Bill,

    “Why, if vaccine induce autism-like vaccine induced encepholopathy (VIE for my convenience), did the epidemiological study in Denmark show no statistical differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated children?”

    First, before I address that, one problem is applying any of the Danish studies to the US is that they have a dramatically lower autism rate. US children have a 7 to 10 times greater incidence of autism. (I have compared it to doing a study of sickle cell anemia in Denmark and applying it to the population of Baltimore, the populations risk are quite different)

    It may be that Danish children do not have as high a genetic predisposition for vaccine injury, or that they have a significantly lower burden from environmental pollution.

    Most significantly, they have a less aggressive vaccine schedule. So children are given fewer vaccines, fewer combinations and they start later.

    But back to your question..

    Here are five good reasons from one critique… (sorry for the long cut and paste, I am not sure the chart will format correctly, but here goes):

    From MMR-Danish Study – a critical analysis —Ulf Brånell

    Approximate reconstruction of the data for the study, assuming that all cohorts are the same size: 537,304 children divided into 8 cohorts

    1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
    67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 67163 67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 67163
    67163 67163 2,4 milj person years
    67163 537304 children

    This reconstruction illustrates how the oldest cohort born in 1991, contributes 67,163 person-years during each and every one of the 8 calendar years. The youngest cohort, born in 1998, only contributes 67,163 person-years during one single year, however. The reconstruction gives a total of 2.4 million person-years, compared with the 2.1 million person-years stated in the study. The difference can be explained by minor variations of little significance in the cohorts from year to year.

    The underlined figures indicate when vaccination normally takes place as part of the vaccination programme. The figures in italics indicate the point in time when autism is usually diagnosed in that age group: i.e. the fifth year of life – 1996 for children born in 1991 etc. This point is only reached by the three oldest cohorts. Children born in 1994 and later did not reach the age when autism is usually diagnosed before the study was concluded.

    SOURCE OF ERROR # 1: Children did not have time to become autistic as a result of MMR vaccination before being excluded from the study.

    537,303 children multiplied by 12 years equals a total of 6.5 million person-years for children born between 1991 and 1998. Only 2.1 person-years have been taken into account, however. Younger children were only studied from the time of birth until the study was concluded. As a result, the oldest children contribute considerably more person-years to the study than the youngest children.

    The average age for the entire population studied is 2.1/6.5 * 12 = approximately 4 person-years. As a result, observation of the subjects was discontinued long before the age when autism is normally diagnosed (4.25 – 5.25 years according to the study itself). Moreover, a second MMR vaccination is normally given during the fourth year of life.

    The youngest cohorts have only just managed to get the MMR vaccine before they are discarded from the study. As a result, they contribute to the numbers of vaccinated children, but have little or no chance of being diagnosed with autism as a result of the vaccines they were given.

    Children diagnosed with autism before they were old enough to be given the MMR vaccine may then have been included in the study as “unvaccinated autistic children”.

    This is a systematic and uncontrolled source of error. As a result, the possible role of the MMR vaccine as a cause of autism is consistently underestimated.

    SOURCE OF ERROR #2: Cases of congenital autism and cases of autism as a result of previous vaccinations with other vaccines also obscure the issue and reduce the effect of those few cases of autism caused by the MMR vaccine that are nonetheless detected.

    Many experts on autism believe that some cases of autism are not caused by vaccination, but are congenital. These cases are usually diagnosed in the first year of life and often before the first MMR vaccine is administered. Moreover, the Danish study also seems to presume that only the MMR vaccine may cause autism, whereas numerous studies have shown that any vaccine is in fact capable of doing so. Books such as Dr Viera Scheibner’s “Behavioural Problems in Childhood – The Link to Vaccination”, Greg Wilson’s “Vaccination and Behavioural Disorders – A Review of the Controversy”, Harris Coulter’s “Vaccination: Social Violence and Criminality, The Assault on the American Brain” and Karen Seroussi’s “Unravelling the Mystery of Autism” examine the subject in great detail. The first two of these books alone cite over 500 relevant medical papers between them. However, it does not seem to have occurred to the authors of the Danish study that cases of autism caused by the MMR vaccine can hardly be diagnosed before the vaccine has been administered. Not only that: any cases of autism caused by the second MMR vaccine, which is normally administered in the fourth year of life, are unlikely to be detected by this study, since most of the older children are no longer included in the study by this time. Indeed, children in the later age cohorts no longer form part of the study before the effects of even the first MMR vaccine can be detected.

    Most cases of congenital autism and many cases of autism caused by other vaccines will be detected by this study, but very few cases of autism caused by the MMR vaccine will show up. As a result, the significance of any such cases that are in fact found will be obscured by the cases of congenital autism and autism caused by other vaccines. The statistical effect of this is that groups that have received the MMR vaccine and those that have not will tend to exhibit a similar incidence of autism

    This is a systematic source of error that makes it practically impossible to detect any cases of autism caused by the MMR vaccine.

    SOURCE. OF ERROR #3: Autistic children may have systematically been classified as unvaccinated.

    According to the study, 18% of the children were unvaccinated, while 82% were vaccinated. Only by the age of three were children deemed, with certainty, to have been vaccinated. The average age when the MMR vaccine was given can be estimated as 1.5 years.

    It is not clear how the study categorized children who were diagnosed with autism before the age of three, but who were given the MMR vaccine after they were diagnosed. Similarly, it is unclear how children who were given the MMR vaccine for the first time after the age of three were classified.

    As for the reason why 18% of the children did not receive the MMR vaccine, this is neither studied nor commented upon. Contraindications to vaccination include poor health, lowered immunity, immunological processes, neurological diseases and neurological disturbances: in other words the very conditions indicative of the gastro-intestinal autism syndrome.

    It is obvious that such cases must have existed. The fact that they are not commented upon can only indicate that the authors of the report have either not realised what the statistical effect would be or are deliberately seeking to conceal the effects of the MMR vaccine.
    If doctors or parents have refrained from vaccinating for health reasons, whether real or suspected, these children will have been classified as “unvaccinated” and the conclusions of the report will be completely misleading.

    SOURCE OF ERROR #4: The effect of relevant data has been diluted by irrelevant data.

    If the intention is to compare the effects of vaccines on children, it is appropriate to compare vaccinated with unvaccinated children only AFTER vaccination. Mixing such data with data concerning children prior to vaccination only serves to obscure the issue and make any effects much harder to detect. At the same time the impression is given that the study is based on far more observations than is in fact the case.

    Of the 2.1 million person-years studied, 537,303 * 1.5 = 0.8 million years represent unvaccinated children below 1.5 years of age (whether or not they were subsequently vaccinated). Of the remaining years (2.1 – 0.8 = 1.3 million person-years), 82%, or approximately 1.1 million person-years represent children older than 1.5 years who received the MMR vaccine. Only approximately 0.2 million person-years represent children over the age of 1.5 years who did not receive the MMR vaccine. Only in this group would it be possible to find a relevant control group to compare with those who did receive the MMR vaccine. It is this limited group that must form the basis for statistical evaluations of safety and level of incidence.

    According to the study, 738 cases of autism were found that could be assigned to the population studied. All cases of autism diagnosed before the age at which the MMR vaccine was administered must naturally be discarded in order for any comparison to be meaningful. Generally speaking this would be 0.8/2.1 = 38% of the 738 cases reported (i.e. 280 cases). Of the remaining 458 cases, assuming the risk is the same for both vaccinated and unvaccinated children, 18% (82 cases) will be unvaccinated children older than 1.5 years. This represents 10 cases per year for the whole of Denmark.

    SOURCE OF ERROR #5: The design of the study makes it extremely sensitive to any changes that take place over time.

    It is well known that vaccines are not stable: both their quality and their contents are continually changing. An analysis of the studies conducted by Kayes and Taylor in England, for example, show that the introduction of the Urabe vaccine in 1992 was followed by a sudden and rapid increase in the incidence of autism. It is reasonable to assume that in Denmark as well there were changes in the characteristics of the vaccines used. Such changes are neither mentioned nor accounted for.

    The design of the study means that the older cohorts (1992-1995) contribute far more person-years to the study. This means that just as in the English studies, any increase in the risk of autism over time is practically impossible to detect.

    In addition, no information is given about how the unvaccinated group is distributed over the years 1991-1998. This in itself can seriously affect or distort the study.

    TO SUM UP: The data presented in the study provides no basis whatsoever for the conclusions drawn by the authors.

    The study tries to give the appearance of an exhaustive investigation of all children born in Denmark from 1991 to 1998. In reality only one third of the person-years attributable to these groups of children have been studied. Many of the person-years that have been studied are of no relevance whatsoever. Most of the person-years that would have provided the most valuable information have been excluded from the study, perhaps due to lack of time or other reasons. However, a more detailed examination of the oldest cohorts, which might have compensated for this shortcoming, has not been provided.

    Important questions remain unanswered, such as whether children diagnosed with autism at an early age were classified as vaccinated or not, and whether or not the original decision to vaccinate or not vaccinate children is in itself a source of systematic error.

    In the final analysis, the conclusions drawn by the authors of the study are based on a mere 10 cases per year. Given the numerous sources of error and the unclear definitions of the concepts used, this is totally inadequate.

  7. As far as looking at vaccinated v. unvaccinated populations of US children, the first thing you think would have been done in this debate, autism parents like me have been lobbying for years for these studies to be done, but health authorities just won’t do them.

    There is currently a bill in congress, sponsored by Carolyn Maloney of New York, that would force NIH to finally do it, the “Comprehensive Comparative Study of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Populations Act of 2007” (H.R. 2832). (Write your congressmen and ask them to sign on).

    One of the problems with the studies that you cited (beyond the bad methodology and conflicts of interest) are that they don’t really answer all the questions. Even if they were all good studies, there are still holes big enough to drive truck loads of autistic kids through because there are so many pieces of the puzzle that just are not studied or discussed.

    These studies do not take into account the explanations of the biological mechanisms that are being put forward by those who are claim (and successfully treating) vaccine induced autism.

    Off the top of my head, The Fombonne study that PROVES that mercury from vaccines leaves the body quickly. Except that it doesn’t.

    Fombonne knows full well that the working theory is that in children diagnosed with autism, that they have impaired detoxification systems because they do not make sufficient glutathione (the primary detox amino acid) and that instead of being eliminated from the body, mercury (and whatever other metals go in) gets bound in the tissues and the brain.

    Standard practice is to test for mercury toxicity via urine test following DMSA challenge, as DMSA binds to metals in the tissue and allows them to be excreted in the urine.

    But Fombonne didn’t use the standard, he used blood mercury levels. So he tests children for blood mercury a few weeks after vaccination, finds little to none, and declares that mercury is excreted easily! However his methods tell us NOTHING about how much mercury was stuck in the brain, because is pretending that if it ain’t in the blood, it ain’t anywhere.

    In addition, no children with autism were included in his study, so this tells us nothing about how THEY may excrete mercury differently from the general population.

    So while Fombonne spent lots of time and money on his study, it does not tell us anything about what mercury is doing in the brains of our babies. Yet those who are not familiar with the ins and outs of autism treatment look at this and go ‘yep… proof that mercury has nothing to do with autism’.

  8. “Stop vaccinating for measles because of faulty science and soon we’ll stop vaccinating for other things. I’m not jumping on that bandwagon.”

    Bill, you haven’t heard me say stop vaccinating for measles.

    There is a middle ground between universally giving infants 36 shots in their first 18 months of life with almost no regard for their medical history starting on the day they are born, and abandoning vaccination all together.

    This is the part of the ‘vaccine story’ where we need to stop and re-evaluate the vaccine program. We are not threatened by any epidemic and we have breathing room to see what is important, what is not, and which children should not be given which shots and when.

    It is time to tailor vaccination to the individual child according to their risks and their specific health picture. It is time for us to end the ‘vaccinate everyone the same and to hell with those who are the genetically weak minority’ policy we have now.

    My son got had his first vaccine reaction at three weeks (a week before his due date as he was born early) after getting the Hep B shot. I don’t have Hep B. My baby was not at risk for Hep B.

    Polio is bad. My father, uncle and their father all got it. While my dad and uncle recovered, their father did not, and they lost him when they were only 5 and 7. That is awful.

    But there has not been a case of polio in this country since 1979 and the western hemisphere was declared eradicated in the early 1990′s. But we are still giving children THREE doses of the vaccine before 18 months of age. At the same time as 4 or 5 other vaccines. That can’t be pushed back and spread out a bit?

    My grandfather was one in 60,000 for dying at the height of the polio epidemic, my dad was one in 3,000 for getting the illness and making a full recovery, but my son is 1 in 150 for being vaccinated against such diseases. My son was vaccinated according to the threat my father faced 60 years ago, not the current health threat to American children, neurological and autoimmune disorders that are the current epidemic.

    It is time for wiser reasoning to be used in the vaccine program.

    Cramming a vaccine program that parents can clearly see does not make sense for their child is leading to huge (and justified) distrust of health authorities and doctors, and the vaccine program will be abandoned by more and more people until they start dealing straight.

    “Don’t forget that any scientist worth her Ph.D. would slaver for an opportunity to overturn existing scientific opinion in a meaningful way. That way lies trips to Stockholm to claim the big prize.”

    You would think so, especially since Hannah Poling got paid for her vaccine induced encepalopathy by the VICP and Julie Gerberding went on CNN and explained how vaccines can cause “autistic symptoms” in children with asymptomatic mitochondrial dysfunction… but historically researchers who find new problems with vaccinating have not had such good careers afterward.

    The Semmelweis Reflex is in full effect with criticism of vaccination.

  9. zerj says:

    “There has been 131 cases of measles this year, and no one has died. Only 15 were even hospitalized. Everyone is making a full recovery.

    And only 63 of those 131 were unvaccinated.”

    I thought the story was that only 63 patients were known to have rejected vaccination. 11 cases were from known vaccinated children, leaving 50 some children with unknown medical history.

    “Measles deaths had dropped to almost nil even before the introduction of the vaccine in 1968 because improved sanitation, nutrition and health care had turned it into a typical childhood illness.”

    I believe the current mortality estimate for a developed country is 1 in a thousand who catches the disease will die. To me this isn’t particularly low, How does this 1 in 1000 number compare to the estimated chance of an contracting Autism via the MMR vaccine? On an individual level this isn’t a particularly fair comparison as the chance of an unvaccinated child contracting Measles isn’t nearly 100%. After all vaccinated children are an effective means of stopping the spread of Measles to unvaccinated children. However if everybody decided to do away with the MMR vaccine for autism fears it seems like it could approach this.

    The big question then is what does the measles vaccine do to stop the spread of measles.

  10. zerj says:

    “SOURCE OF ERROR # 1: Children did not have time to become autistic as a result of MMR vaccination before being excluded from the study.

    537,303 children multiplied by 12 years equals a total of 6.5 million person-years for children born between 1991 and 1998. Only 2.1 person-years have been taken into account, however. Younger children were only studied from the time of birth until the study was concluded. As a result, the oldest children contribute considerably more person-years to the study than the youngest children.”

    You have obviously done more research into this than I but the only study I could find that suggested any causality between MMR and Autism was Wakefield’s study. In that study the parents of the children claimed that the Autism symtoms appeared “within days” So in this case wouldn’t 2.1 years be plenty of time?

  11. “How does this 1 in 1000 number compare to the estimated chance of an contracting Autism via the MMR vaccine?”

    We don’t actually know because the research that would answer that question just has not been done.

    When parents report vaccine injury to their pediatricians, most deny it. When I did to my pediatrician, his choice was not to examine and document the case, it was to call his lawyer and up his malpractice insurance.

    The autism rate in this country reported by CDC is 1 in 150 (three year old number), reported by the Department of Defense 1 in 88 for military dependents. So it is around 1% of the population. Some portion of that is purely genetic (in my estimation a small number), some portion of that is another toxic injury, some portion is in injury from another vaccine, and some is MMR injury. (For example my son didn’t get the MMR but was injured after several other shots).

    The best you could probably do right now would be to survey parents to see how many cases were believed to be MMR related. You could also do a VARES search, but only 1 in 100 or so vaccine reactions are actually reported to the database.

    Parents have been asking for laws mandating that doctors report vaccine injury, but now there is not one.

    In comparing death stats, we also need to factor in the death toll of autism. Our kids do not have a natural, healthy fear of danger. They don’t see it coming. They often escape from their homes or parents super vision (even school) and become accident victims, usually of drowning, but also of exposure when lost in the woods. They also are targets of abuse because they are difficult and cannot report it because of their communication disorder. Unfortunately no one is keeping track of those deaths either, so we don’t have a guestimate of how likely someone with autism is to die early from accident or assault compared to other children their age.

    You also have to factor in SIDS, because many of those cases are suspected to be vaccine injuries. And the vaccine manufacturers know that their products cause SIDS. Two weeks ago one reporter turned up a memo on it. In 1979 Wyeth changed their distribution methods so that one state or area would not receive too many doses of the same lot of any vaccine. After a rash of SIDS deaths in TN that were linked to one of their vaccines. This was so any “hot lots” that were causing children to die could not be detected as the cases would be spread out over the whole country.

    “However if everybody decided to do away with the MMR vaccine for autism fears it seems like it could approach this.”

    Sure it would. Doing away with the measles vaccine would bring back measles.

    But we are not proposing that. When I was a tot in the early 1970′s we were given less than 10 shots in the first 18 months. Now kids get 36. Would you want to get 36 shots in the next 18 months?

    We are vastly overvaccinating our children. Consider that almost 90% of children create the requisite antibodies the first time they are given a vaccine. But it cheaper to give to more shots than it is to give a titers test to see if they even need the shot.

    So by definition, almost all children get three times the vaccines they actually need. This is malpractice.

    By the time a child is given the MMR they have already gotten at least 25 shots, and many kids are already displaying early symptoms that all our kids displayed before their autistic regressions, bowel problems, crying, fevers, seizures, food sensitivities, developmental delay.

    When people are concerned about vaccinating, and still want to give their child all their shots, I encourage them to talk to their pediatrician about waiting to begin their shots until after they are two years old, when their immune system is considered more fully developed and can manage the vaccines better, and then give one shot at a time, breaking up the MMR into three separate shots for measles, mumps and rubella, and then following each, give check for titers before moving on to the next vaccine. Also consider skipping the ones for non threatening diseases like chicken pox and rotavirus. If the child doesn’t get chicken pox then he can get the shot in early puberty. All the time checking for these early signs that this might not be a child that can handle vaccination.

    This process will take longer, but a little more expensive and require more visits, but how few cases of autism would it take to make up for that (as raising one of our kids costs between 3 and 10 million dollars). And doing it this way will get a child vaccinated before starting school.

    Right now, because pediatricians are pushing a one size fits all schedule, and not screening for children who can’t handle shots, and children on the Nightly News are get paid from the government for vaccine related autism, many parents know that the whole thing vaccine program has a HUGE BS factor to put it mildly, so they are quitting vaccination. And right now children who WILL get sick and die from their shots, continue to be fully vaccinated.

    So we have a situation where kids who could handle vaccines just fine go with out, and children who are vulnerable to them become injured needlessly.

    “Too many, Too soon.”

  12. “In that study the parents of the children claimed that the Autism symptoms appeared “within days” So in this case wouldn’t 2.1 years be plenty of time?”

    Again… you would think so.

    But most kids are not diagnosed with autism for months and years after a vaccine regression.

    My son had his regression at 18 months, was diagnosed with “speech delay” 7 months later, and got his “autism” diagnosis at three. In California, where we were living, the state offers early start, but does not give formal autism diagnosis before the age of three. While to everyone involved in his care starting at two, he had autism, but his records didn’t reflect it until age three.

    Often kids get shots, parents see a regression, the pediatrician blows it off, parent reports to pediatrician that they are worried that son is not talking yet or is behind in his speech, and the doc says, “boys develop more slowly than girls, lets just wait and see” and not until a child starts kindergarten do professionals see him and flag him for screening does it get diagnosed. This happens more often in oldest and only children as parents don’t have a previous child with typical development to compare to. This IS getting better though. Diagnosis is starting to come earlier.

  13. zerj says:

    On the surface that Vaccine Memo seems like it could by attempting to hide a correlation between SIDS an a vaccine. However lets suppose there is another unrelated cause of those SIDS cases. By not spreading those lot numbers out you are making it more likely that the vaccine will be reported as the cause. Children who live in the same location are also more likely to have other common factors. Perhaps they all drank milk from the same dairy farm. Or their pediatricians all purchased thier hypodermic needles from the same vendor. If I were working for Wyeth at the time I would have pushed for the same decision. I certainly also would have pushed for reporting of Vaccine related injuries. Any SIDS death should be investigated for common factors, If the same lot number shows up as a common factor for geographically separated children it is much more conclusive evidence. Spreading out the lots just remove extranious variables from your equation and are a good idea.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>