Here we go again with the autism and vaccinations controversy. I know a lot of my friends go back and forth on this issue. It is so hard being a parent!The latest Associated Press article says there's proof there is no link between autism and a preservative that used to be found in most childhood immunizations (thimerasol.) The A.P. says autism cases in California continue to climb. This, even after a vaccine preservative containing mercury --blamed by some for the neurological disorder-- was removed from routine childhood shots.
State health department researchers found the autism rate in children rose continuously from 1995 to 2007. The preservative hasn't been used in childhood vaccines since 2001, though it is used in some flu shots.
Doctors say the study adds to existing evidence against a link between exposure to the preservative (thimerosal) and the risk of autism. And they say the study should reassure parents that autism
isn't caused by vaccinations.
Results were published in January's issue of the journal Archives of General Psychiatry. The study did not explore why
there's been an increase in autism cases.
People who believe there is a link between vaccinations and autism point to those flu shots. They say there has been a big push for pregnant women to get flu shots in the last few years and babies as young as six months are now recommended to get it.
Personally, I don't want to be biased and say what I have decided to do with my family concerning the flu shot, but I will tell you about my experiences. My obstetrician recommended I get the flu shot when I was pregnant. My pediatrician's office recommended my baby get the shot at nine months old. However, my pediatrician pays extra to get the flu shot that does not contain thimerasol. When I asked her why, she said "to give the parents piece of mind."
I will email some people on both sides of this issue and encourage them to post their thoughts so you, as a parent, feel more informed. I know I can never hear enough opinions on this.
Yes, there is a link to autism
No, there is no link to autism
-NewsAnchorMom Jen
I fall into the "pro vaccination" front. I guess I've just read too much about the past spread of disease and the mortality rate of children.
ReplyDeleteI think families of children with autism are, naturally, looking for an explanation, looking for someone/something to blame and 'big pharma' is an easy target. Plus, like with most myths, there is a bit of common sense involved in the thinking "vaccines contain mercury + mercury is bad = vaccines are to blame." But, it's rudimentary thinking that negates the actual facts.
Most children under three receive a preservative-free version of the influenza vaccination, so blaming everything on the flu shot is completely ridiculous. Besides, the coverage for influenza vaccination is (unfortunately) very poor. Based on 2005 CDC data, vaccine coverage for children 6-23 months was only 33.4%.
ReplyDeleteVaccine opponents are really grasping for straws here. The data just keeps piling up against a vaccine-autism link, but many continue to cling to this theory out of a desperate need to blame something for their child's condition ... or profit from it (those who push chelation, Secretin treatment and megavitamins).
Believing in a link between vaccines and autism is approaching the same level of ridiculousness as believing in a flat earth.
I have not read the full California study yet, but like similar epidemiological studies have limitations. First, no epidemiological study can dismiss a link between Thimerosal exposure and autism unless it specifically looks at exposure data in each child. This study as all others did not do this, but just to a large group of children. There is no data that quantitates flu vaccine-Thimerosal exposures, only coverage rates, so one cannot assume all children only get Thimerosal free shots. I know one family whose son was given a flu got last year with Thimerosal and became autistic shortly after. The California study did not take into account immigrant vaccine schedule. Based upon my work in Quebec, over 50% of the children are immigrants or parents of immigrants and got much more Thimerosal than native families. SInce there is a huge immigrant population in California and parents move there for services, one will never know how many of those got Thimerosal before immigrating, I suspect a large portion. Ultimately we need a study that looks at autism rates in unvaccinated children-until that is done and done by independents (of drug company $$), vaccines cannot be excluded as a cause of autism.
ReplyDeleteDon't ignore aluminum as another potent neurotoxin. The exposures have increased since Thimerosal was reduced are are at outrageous levels in shots. Aluminum exposures are as high as 250 micrograms/kg on days of vaccination and the FDA suggests 4-5 micrograms as a limit (above 60 micrograms are overtly toxic). I found 85 case reports of aluminum toxicity in childhood and almost 100% of those kids exhibited striking similarities to autism including loss of speech, regression of motor development, etc.
As for the readers comments about desperate parents, it is despicable to widely characterize any group of individuals, I think this is also known as stereotyping, or perhaps just colorful, ignorance. Those that believe nutritional/biomedical therapies are useless perhaps need to read the peer reviewed literature that consistently states otherwise. In general the opponents of the vaccine hypothesis are far more ignorant and biased than parents who are even more discriminating at seeking medical help after most of them witnessed the horror of regressive autism following vaccinations. History teaches us one thing---most giant lies take years to come to justice. I have no doubt this one will eventually be fully exposed.
Here is a comment on this story that was sent to me via email:
ReplyDeleteDear Jennifer,
I enjoyed reading your blog. Here is an article regarding the study from California that you talked about. Good luck in your search for the truth. Maybe the truth for each on of us is a little different, but is worth exploring.
Anju Usman, MD
Statement by Rick Rollens, parent of a 17 year old son with autism, co-founder U. C. Davis M.I.N.D. Institute and member California Legislative Blue Ribbon Commission on Autism.
"Although this study by California's vaccine establishment clearly sustains the fact that California is in the midst of a growing autism epidemic and that California's system of reporting professionally diagnosed cases of full syndrome autism is the gold standard in the country, the conclusions in the study are flawed and premature, and does nothing to exonerate vaccines, particularly mercury containing vaccines, as a cause of California's autism epidemic.
Although the mercury burden in vaccines has been reduced over the years, we know that even very small amounts of mercury can cause serious, life altering neurological damage. California's ban on mercury containing vaccines for pregnant women and children under three did not take effect until December 2006.
Today, those children born after the ban took effect are between 4 months old and one year of age. California's developmental services reporting system DOES NOT include children under the age of three years old.
It will not be clear what impact California's law banning mercury in vaccines has had on the rate of new cases of autism until at least 2009-2010 and later. Historically, the majority of children with autism enter California's developmental services system between the ages of 3+ and 9 years old.
If by 2009-2010 there has not been ANY change in the rate of increase of new cases of autism entering California's developmental services system, then we can scratch mercury in vaccines off our list of agents contained in vaccines as a cause, and; then begin concentrating on the numerous other poisons and toxic agents in vaccines such as aluminum, formaldehyde, MSG, live viruses, etc., and most importantly, the interaction of these and other toxic agents contained in the 34 doses of vaccines children receive from birth to two years old today."
To Dayoub and countering the statement by Rick Rollens,
ReplyDeleteOne can never prove a negative, so of course for those who fanatically cling to this theory will always and forever-more be able to claim that the studies didn't go far enough. It's ludicrous! The preponderance of evidence clearly denies any link between vaccination and autism.
What concerns me the most is that when people so rabidly cling to this one theory, they turn money and effort away from studies that could truly help us learn more about autism and its causes and possible treatments.
If there is a major environmental toxin linked to autism (and I have serious doubts that this is a major contributor), wouldn't the toxin be something that children are exposed to over a long period of time ... not just once every 2-3 months in minuscule amounts???
Another thing I never hear from vaccine opponents ... what's their goal ... to stop vaccination completely? Do they really want to see a re-emergence of polio, measles, congenital rubella syndrome, Hib meningitis, pertussis, and diptheria in this country? Do they realize what an enormous burden this would be on our already over-stretched healthcare system? Do they really want to leave us helpless in the face of the next influenza pandemic? I, as a physician, am the one who is going to have to triage patients and decide who gets put on one of the limited number of ventilators and who gets to sit on a gurney and die.
Unfortunately it will probably have to come to that before vaccine opponents realize the enormity of their irresponsibility.
To Knight in Dragonland
ReplyDeleteFirst, as I post comments, unlike yourself, I am not anonymous. I am Dr David Ayoub in Springfield Illinois. I am conducting research on autism causation. I have attended congressional hearings. I have witnessed representatives from the CDC, NIH and FDA get up in a congressional sub-committee hearing and leave the room refusing to even listen to new research proving a link between autism and vaccines. (See a list of papers at http://generationrescue.com/studies.html)
I have faced off with representatives at the CDC, AAP and Illinois Public Health and have exposed their ignorance and arrogance in front of legislators.
I have seen FOIA memos and internal transcripts showing that the CDC and AAP leaders know that vaccines cause autism. I have original datasets from Quebec and am about to publish a reanalysis that will demonstrate that one of the leading antithimerosal researchers Eric Fombonne's Canadian study was fraudulent. I have 3 letters from the editor of the AAP's journal refusing to publish our letters and proof of research fraud.
Your comments converting my views about wanting safer vaccines into alleged views of not wanting any vaccines is obviously pure propaganda and this is an old strategy of those who obviously defend the drug companies and/or the agencies who are responsible. What I want is to remove a useless, ineffective preservative from flu shots given to pregnant women and children. This is not asking for much since it has already been removed from HiB, HepB and DTaP and done so very quickly, unlike the 7 years we have been waiting for the flu vaccine. I can cite a dozen papers showing how ineffective Thimerosal is as a preservative and in 2004 the USA lost over 50% of its flu shot supply because, IN SPITE of Thimerosal, Chiron's vaccines got contaminated.
Removing Thimerosal would have no impact on these other childhood illnesses and you statements about resurgence of childhood illness are ridiculous and alarmist. The threat to the vaccine program is the continued refusal to correct a horrific wrong, admit to the mistake, stop publishing bogus research showing injecting mercury is safe.
I would be more than happy to debate you in public, but I already know your answer...anonymous commenters like yourself are rather common, cowardly and predictable.
Dr. Ayoub,
ReplyDeleteIf you would care to take the time click on the link to my blog, you'll see that I am NOT anonymous. My name is Dr. Matthew Weidman, and I'm a pediatrician in practice in Pekin, IL.
If your entire goal is to see to the removal of thiomersal from all vaccines, then I'm not entirely opposed. If that would end this controversy without risking contamination of the vaccine supply, so much the better. The evidence linking thiomersal to harm is extremely weak, but if that's all it would take to calm those of a paranoid bent, fine.
The problem is that simply seeking the removal of thiomersal is NOT the goal of many vaccine opponents. Many campaign for the refusal of ALL vaccinations, not simply those containing thiomersal. Those who take this campaign to that extreme endanger us all.
For those who want some clarity here ... Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist in Springfield who has no special training in autism, pharmacology, toxicology or vaccinology and has only one entry in PubMed related to autism. It's a letter, not a research article. For some entertaining reading, here is a lengthy description of Dr. Ayoub's campaign to bring himself public notoriety without a shred of evidence to back up any of his claims.
to Dr Dragonland in Pekin
ReplyDelete"The evidence linking thiomersal to harm is extremely weak:"
i believe you are being lied to by the AAP. You are just a loyal to the AAP and believe what you are told... and I can't blame you or anyone else who believes a very clever lie. Let's not forget how vicious the denials were about mercury in teething powder and Pink's Disease in the 1900-50s which was widely endorsed and defended by physicians such as yourself until, after 50 years of fruitless hypothesis and "expert" opinions led to no gain iin the disease process until one doctor figured it out much to the contempt of the masses that clung to that lie for many more years.
The studies that refute this link are at best inconclusive, flawed and in some instances fraudulent. I have read and evaluated every single one. I will repeat myself, you are a victim of a propaganda campaign, and i would be more than happy to go over every single paper and outline their flaws. I would be happy to stand in a room and debate you. I would offer money for that. So far, no one has taken me up on this offer. I will sit down with you one on one and go over the data. I am not intimidated by liars or people that believe a lie.
"Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist in Springfield who has no special training in autism, pharmacology, toxicology or vaccinology"
It is presumptuous of you to know just how much I know. I believe the man who started the entire vaccine industry was neither a scientist nor a physician. Again, I will gladly let you "embarrass" me by your expertise in public at a debate. Frankly, you don't stand a chance against me. How much of a vaccine or autism expert do you have to be to expose a sampling error in an epidemiology study, a statistical error, or a design flaw?
"has only one entry in PubMed related to autism."
I am sorry, how many do you have? I am submitting 3 papers this year. I have already presented 2 abstracts at annual meetings. And your CV??
"For some entertaining reading, here is a lengthy description of Dr. Ayoub's campaign to bring himself public notoriety without a shred of evidence to back up any of his claims. "
It is no surprise that physicians that speak out against this would get attacked. Are you using this to attack me? Go right ahead. I think most reasonable observers can tell the difference between an attack of the message and the messenger, it just lowers your credibility. Good luck trying to prove that I in anyway benefit from this work, financial or otherwise. The last thing I ever saw myself doing at this stage in my career is arguing with people like you. I will restate, I am not afraid of liars or people who believe lies. I suspect you are the later. I will face off with you anytime, anywhere with anyone else you want to bring.
"without a shred of evidence to back up any of his claims. "
I can easily make you eat your words on this. You missed or ignored my reference list of several papers that support my views. If you think you can search www.FDA/CDC/AAP and you call this "research", you are a fool. I have read well over 2,000 papers in the last 3 years on this topic. Your comment is erroneous, false. you just echo organizations that in fact, are also the same responsible for causing harm, why would they admit to their own malfeasance and incompetence? Believing the CDC or AAP on evidence of vaccine harm is like having OJ jury his own trial.
"If you think you can search www.FDA/CDC/AAP and you call this "research", you are a fool."
ReplyDeleteWhile the FDA can often bow to political pressure, the CDC and the AAP base their recommendations on peer-reviewed research done by scientists and clinicians who have dedicated themselves to the scientific method and a search for truth in this matter. As far as you've shown here, your beliefs are based on paranoia, and your claims of expertise and overwhelming evidence are smoke and mirrors.
"I can easily make you eat your words on this"
Then do it, Dr. Ayoub. This is a public forum. Where's your supposedly overwhelming evidence? So far all I see is blather and bluster.
"I am submitting 3 papers this year. I have already presented 2 abstracts at annual meetings. And your CV??"
I could submit papers until the cows come home, but that's simply braggadocio. Those papers could be complete drivel. Only accepted papers are meaningful.
As for abstracts presented at meetings, many end up being research dead ends. Abstract presentations have their purpose, but it is not a peer-reviewed process.
I'm not claiming to be an expert, Dr. Ayoub. You are ... and you don't have the credentials for it. I am a pediatrician in a primary care practice, so I'm quite sure that I have more personal experience with vaccine administration than a radiologist. That, however, is the only expertise that I claim other than a personal interest in this topic.
You may be able to bluster your way past people who don't know any better, Dr. Ayoub ... but you can't con me.
"Where's your supposedly overwhelming evidence? So far all I see is blather and bluster"
ReplyDeletewell, i do believe i sent a link that listed several references. I am not sure if i am supposed to read them aloud to you or whether you are capable of reading any peer-reviewed science critically without the AAP telling you what to think.
"Only accepted papers are meaningful."
and i certainly agree with you that PEDIATRICS will not be publishing my studies, lest their corporate sponsors (Merck, Sanofi, etc) become upset. With 20 pages of drug ads at $10k per pop each month and several hundred of thousands more from reprint sales to drug reps, I doubt the editor could afford to print it.
" I am a pediatrician in a primary care practice, so I'm quite sure that I have more personal experience with vaccine administration than a radiologist."
I am certain your nurse is actually doing most of the injections. I see nurses in airpots and shopping malls giving flu shots, so administering a shot can't be rocket science. What does shot administration have to do with understanding the biological pathophysiology of vaccine induced autism? Furthermore, how do you address the growing number of pediatricians who now accept that vaccines cause autism and are successfully treating this children with nonconventional therapies. How would you discredit these clinicians?
'Im not claiming to be an expert, Dr. Ayoub. You are ..."
Hmmm, well, please point out where i said I was an expert anywhere, anytime. I am well read, I admit to that. I never ever called myself an expert.
"but you can't con me."
Those fed a steady diet of indoctrination don't often see the truth no matter how obvious.
Since we are practically the only 2 having this dialog on this blog, it is not worth my time to continue exchanging salvos with you. My offers still stand. When I lecture in Peoria next you will be invited to participate, attend, critique, rave, whatever. It is too bad there is no open discussion of the possible causes and treatments of this horrible affliction. In reality exchanges like this alienate both sides even further to the detriment of the victims. But pediatricians are still not able to offer a cause, prevention or cure for autism, the attitude of "I'll be damned if anyone else has an answer" only serves to weaken the fragile relationship between parents and their pediatrician.
I think it is worth mentioning, strictly from the standpoint of understanding potential bias, that Dr. Anju Usman is a DAN! doctor (Defeat Autism Now!)
ReplyDeleteDAN! practitioners (they are not all doctors) are a group of health practitioners who provide such therapies as chelation (chemical removal of heavy metals)that are promised to cure a child of their autism. As a matter of fact, Dr. Usman referred a young autistic boy to one Dr. Roy Kerry a few years back who administered a chelation agent that caused the death of the child. Dr. Kerry has recently been sentenced for his crimes.
To anyone who is considering the validity of the vaccine/autism hypothesis, buyer beware!
I'm a mom of a child with autism from a vaccine and a nursing student. I do not want to see all vaccines done away with. What I want to see is this:
ReplyDeleteWe first stop this assinine idea that all vaccines are always good for all the people all the time.
Second, we use some commonsense in the vaccine schedule. For example, a newborn does not always have to have a hep B just because it's convenient. Test the mom at birth, if negative, baby can wait, especially if mom is in a monogamous relationship and it's fairly obvious she isn't doing IV drugs. Hep B could wait until child enters daycare or school.
Another example of commonsense approach. Stop giving an 8 wk old vaccines for 8 or more pathogens. Give the few most serious, spread out the rest. Wait until baby is a little older, a little stronger, and only, only, only give when baby is fully healthy with no signs of illness or within 30 days of a recovering illness of any kind. This will ensure baby is in best shape to fight off the immune assault of a vaccine.
Third, take out all the crap. Injected aluminum is not good of an infant. Heck, it's not good for an adult. Mercury is not good for an infant. Formaldehyde is never good injected into an infant, I don't care how small the amount.
Fourth, accept that we don't know everything there is to know about immunizations. Let's rid the scientific community of fear for answering real scientific questions. The way the scientific community is scorned today for questioning vaccine safety, which is a reasonable question, is reminiscent of Christopher Columbus daring to assert the world may be round. We've come full circle now in that such religious groups at Methodist Women dare to ask for science and science treat their products as religious gods to be worshipped and adorned.
Sixth, stop punishing families who are making informed consent that their kids will be okay if they get the pox the old-fashioned way. Someone phrased it well recently. Why is it that a parent has to get a religious exemption *not* to get their child an immunization? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Why, do I need a religious exemption if I don't take my high bp med? Do I need a religious exemption if I skip feeding my kid broccoli one night? It's none of the government's business.
Finally, stop injecting my child mandated medical procedures just because. Each child is different. My children are my cherished angels sent to me straight from God Himself. They mean more to me than all the world's treasures. Don't tell me to mess with their health just because it's convenient or because Uncle Sam doesn't want me to miss a few days of work. My child's health is far more than convenience or a sick day. Heck, I don't even work!
It's convenient for me to smoke a cigarette when I'm stressed, but it's not good for me.
Most children under three receive a preservative-free version of the influenza vaccination, so blaming everything on the flu shot is completely ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteWell, I don't blame the flu shot for my daughter's autism, except for the only one I ever got in my life was the one I got the week after my daughter with autism was conceived. But really, I blame the hepB vaccine she was given while still scabbed over with chicken pox at 9 months of age; within 2 wks she had stopped nursing, stopped babbling, stopped eating her fruits and babyfood, stopped pulling up, and began to stare off into space all the time. Her titer to hepb is almost zero, despite all her other titers to her other shots being just fine.
But yeah, I'm just grasping at straws, no way a shot given to a sick baby would cause her to lose all typical developmental skills within days. No way all her abnormal immune panels, abnormal CBCs, abnormal organic acids tests, or abnormal stool tests mean anything, especially when a genetics laboratory found no signs of any anomalies, and especially when her cord blood stored at birth tested clean for 100's of metabolic disorders.
But yeah, that vaccine had nothing to do with it, stupid me.
Dr Dragonland,
ReplyDeleteSince my autistic son keeps getting better by chelating to remove the mercury, could you explain why that improvement is possible if mercury did not cause the autism? Would chelation ever help a genetic condition?
You're not "the only two" on this blog.
ReplyDeleteDoctors, heal thy selves! Take some of your own medicine.
When we start eating cloned animal meat and genetically altered food, we'll have a fine artificial time of it.
Foresam,
ReplyDeleteI would be happy to post your last comment if you could take the name calling out of it. I like the differing opinions, but I don't think the name calling helps parents.
Thanks!
People want to swallow a pill or take a shot in the arm, to make everything better.
ReplyDeleteThey don't want to change their own behavior or exercise self-restraint in diet.
"Give me a vaccine against that dread disease," they chant, so they can continue to do the same things they've always done.
America has the worst health and the most medicine of any other nation on earth.
What's that Big Pharma? You have a new drug for us? Better get it now, before the FDA yanks it from the shelves.
Dr Usman is a DAN doc and so well respected that she is not taking any new patients because her practice is full. She does not have to post here to recruit patients, she has enough. And how can you blame her for the error of another clinician? If I send a relative to a surgeon for an appendectomy and they die, does that make me an accessory? Not hardly.
ReplyDeleteTo mamma debi
ReplyDeleteI agree with alot of your comments. You are correct in stating it is not all the mercury. No one knows for sure what triggers each and every case, but aluminum is one very scary substance. I just gave a review on the subject and have finished a pilot study showing over 95% of autistic kids have elevated levels of aluminum. See my full report at http://homepage.mac.com/raypoke/FileSharing10.html
I found 85 published case reports of aluminum toxicity in early childhood, all but 1 child had neurological problems and most regressed (lost speech, muscle tone, motor skill, seizures, myoclonus). Like Thimerosal, there are no safety studies. Last year researchers at the U of Brit Colum. showed aluminum salts from vaccines killed neurons in the brain and spinal cord of mice at doses LOWER than given children (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez)
Children are getting aluminum up to 250 mcg/kg/day in shots and the FDA advises limits of 4-5 mcg/kg/day. Levels of above 60 mcg/kg/day are known to be overtly toxic. A full term baby gets 75 mcg/kg with the HepB vaccine to protect him form a rare and most often benign viral infection.
regarding flu shots, i survey the clinics in springfield, and the majority for private practices still offer mercury containing shots for kids and pregnant women. I realize that most pediatric doses are mercury-free, no one seems to find them. Children can be given the adult formula in half the dose, and still get mercury. I know of several cases of regression in children only getting a flu shot, 2 work in my department. So in some cases a flu shot is all it takes. Influenza is rarely serious in children and pregnant women. I published a review you can find here:
www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf
I have a great idea for knight in dragonland. Jock Doubleday has offered a reward of $115,000 to drink the vaccine additives my child received in the standard schedule, adjusted to body weight. So if you are 100% convinced of their safety, it's time to put up or shut up. I look forward to seeing you in the news as you make a lot of money...
ReplyDeleteHere's the offer:
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/$75,000VaccineOffer.htm
I am getting some comments that are pretty negative. Please try to keep in mind this blog is to keep parents informed. I welcome differing opinions, but lets try not to attack each other, instead attack the arguments.
ReplyDeleteThanks!
News Anchor Mom, Dr. Haley has given permission to forward his rebuttal of the study in question:
ReplyDeleteRESPONSE TO 2008 R. SCHECHTER AND J. GRETHER PUBLCIATION "CONTINUING
INCREASES IN AUTISM REPORTED TO CALIFORNIA'S DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
SYSTEM"
WHICH ADDRESSES CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DATA ON
EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIMEROSAL AND AUTISM
8 January 2008 by Boyd Haley, Professor of Chemistry,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
We should all consider that there are two top priorities in the
vaccine/autism issue every American should be concerned with. We
need to
develop a safe vaccination program, and we need to find the cause of
autism
and eliminate it if possible. I have been a strong proponent of
investigating thimerosal as the casual agent for autism spectrum
disorders
based on the biological science that shows thimerosal to be incredibly
toxic, especially to infants. I know of nothing remotely as toxic as
thimerosal that numerous infants would be exposed to before 3 to 4
years of
age. Below I present several comments regarding this issue and the
2008
Schechter-Grether study that I think are relevant. Mainly, while the
Schechter-Grether study appears to be a well done study it suffers
from the
fatal flaw of assuming that thimerosal was removed to safe levels in
vaccines by 2002. They also cut a fine edge as to time when a
significant
drop in autism rates would be expected. Further, no study exists that
proves our vaccine schedule alone is safe, let alone the current one
that
still exposes infants to thimerosal, a concern they do not address.
The
alarming concern is that these authors seem more involved at providing
material saying thimerosal is safe than they are concerned with the
obvious
fact, openly presented in their own data on autism rates, which
strongly
indicated that increased rates of autism started with the CDC mandated
vaccine program. References to support the comments are readily
available in
many recent publications.
1. Autism was not a known, described illness until about 1941-
3, 8 to
10 years after the introduction of thimerosal and similar organic
thiol-mercury compounds in biological mixtures used in medicine and
other
areas. This argues against autism being a genetic illness.
2. In 1977, 10 of 13 infants treated in a single hospital by
topical
application of thimerosal for umbilical cord infections died of
mercury
toxicity. This same topical was used on adolescents without obvious
ill
effects which strongly supports the concept that infants are very
susceptible to thimerosal toxicity.
3. The recent increase (starting about 1990) of autism spectrum
disorders correlated well with the advent of the CDC mandated vaccine
program which increased thimerosal exposures with increased
vaccinations.
Due to its toxicity, thimerosal would have to be suspect for causing
autism.
4. As expected by science, extensive searching for a genetic
cause of
autism has not turned up a significant find that would explain the
recent
increased rate in autism. The latest genetic find, at best, might
explain
0.5% of autism causation. Most agree that a genetic predisposition is
likely (like those that lead to low glutathione levels), but that a
toxic
exposure is absolutely needed. Consider also, that this increased
toxic
exposure would have had to occur in all 50 states at about the same
time as
all states have reported similar increases in autism rates. Only
something
like the government recommended vaccine program fits this need for a
time
dependent, uniform exposure of a toxin throughout all the states.
5. In the Schechter-Grether study it is implied or assumed that
all
thimerosal containing vaccines were gone by the end of 2002 due to
their
expiration dates. I don't think this is a valid assumption. I have
talked
to mothers who asked to see the vaccine inserts as late as 2004 and
found
thimerosal present as a preservative in infant vaccines being used in
certain clinics. Also, in 2004 the influenza vaccine was recommended
by the
CDC for infants 6 months of age and older. It would appear as if a
thimerosal free vaccine time-frame would be very hard to identify, if
one
ever existed. I have read that the average age of autism diagnosis
is near
44 months of age. Therefore, while it does seem reasonable to expect
a
decrease in autism after 4 to 5 years of complete thimerosal removal,
assuming a consistent diagnostic protocol was used, it appears this
has not
been accomplished. This means the Schechter-Grether study is likely
somewhat
premature in reaching the conclusions reported in that enough time
has not
passed for the expected decrease to occur and that they were quite
optimistic in identifying the dates of thimerosal reduction and
underestimate exposures occurring between 2002-4.
6. If, indeed, the complete removal of thimerosal from vaccines
was
not followed in an appropriate time by a decrease in autism then this
would
be solid proof that thimerosal was not causal for autism. However,
thimerosal has not been completely removed from vaccines and
thimerosal used
at the original levels in the manufacturing of these vaccines
with "trace"
amounts left in the vaccines when bottled. I don't know what
level "trace"
is since it is not a term used in science to describe an actual
amount.
Some called the 12.5 micrograms mercury in the older vaccines
a "trace"
amount. Bottom line, the infants are still getting some level of
thimerosal, a "trace" amount that is free and an amount of
ethylmercury that
is bound to the proteins that induce the immune response. If
vaccines are
causing autism and it appears this is a strong possibility based on
the
California data and, if removing thimerosal added as a preservative
really
does not reduce the autism rate then the causation is much more
complex.
Consider the possibilities that:
A. Autism may be caused by a thimerosal modified protein that sets
off an
immune response or causes some other biological reaction that can
cascade
with injurious effects. Since the vaccines are manufactured with
thimerosal
present in abundance it is quite likely that any cysteine containing
proteins would be modified with ethylmercury. Removal of most of the
free
thimerosal (or just not adding it) would not decrease the level of
any toxic
modified protein produced during the vaccines production that might be
causal. Removing the thimerosal added as a preservative would not
decrease
the amount of this ethylmercury modified protein in those vaccines
with
"trace" thimerosal levels.
B. That autism could be caused in susceptible individuals by very low
thimerosal or ethylmercury modified protein exposures due to their
genetic
susceptibility or other factors (general health, gender). In this
scenario
the higher thimerosal exposures are not required and the induction of
autism
is not thimerosal concentration dependent at the old and new
thimerosal
vaccine levels, but just requires a significant exposure level that
is met
by the vaccines containing the lower "trace" amounts of thimerosal
and past
thimerosal levels in vaccine production processes. Bottom line, if
genetic
susceptibility is involved then causation of autism may not increase
linearly with increased thimerosal exposure. Causation may only
require low
thimerosal exposure or exposure to modified proteins. It is possible
that
the reduction of thimerosal as in the "trace" was just not enough to
produce
a safe vaccine.
Not all toxins work like alcohol and the old "dose makes the toxin"
is not
always correct. As long as they are used, the mere use of "trace"
thimerosal in vaccines along with higher levels in the flu vaccine
will
always prevent a conclusive answer to thimerosal's involvement in
autism
causation. What should be studied is the "no exposure" versus
the "exposed"
populations with regard to autism rates.
7. If indeed autism is rare among the non-vaccinated Amish
populations, as reported by Dan Olmstead, I find it an amazingly
oversight
that the CDC and others responsible for infant health do not fund a
study in
this area. This study could go both ways, if the Amish have autism
rates
identical with the rest of the population the argument would be
over---neither vaccines nor thimerosal would be causal for autism,
and I
personally would argue in this direction. If, however, the autism
rates in
the Amish are exceptionally low then vaccines would have to be
considered as
a prime suspect in causation with the presence of the highly toxic
thimerosal the main suspect.
If the results in the 2008 Schechter-Grether study hold up with time,
and
complete removal of thimerosal does not cause a drop in autism rates
and the
autism rates in non-vaccinated populations are low then something
else in
the vaccines would have to be considered the major causation factor
for
autism. However, without doing the non-vaccinated population studies
there
cannot be a conclusive statement either way about either vaccines or
thimerosal as being causal for autism. The steadfast refusal of the
CDC and
others to support such studies being done is part of the reason that
many
parents, scientists and physicians have severe doubts about the
sincerity of
their efforts to resolve this issue. This is how I think, when I
review a
paper submitted for publication I always ask why an obvious experiment
wasn't done. The study of non-vaccinated populations is a very
obvious
experiment that the CDC and its supporters appear to refuse to
consider.
This makes me suspicious that this knowledge exists and is being
suppressed
because knowledge of the rate among the non-vaccinated population
would
answer many questions.
Finally, the Schechter-Grether study may be good news to the vaccine
manufacturers and those who recommended and use the mandated vaccine
program
as it serves as manufactured uncertainty about the thimerosal
involvement in
autism causation. However, it presents a major concern to the
parents and
families of infants since it implies that our vaccines, even with
most of
the free thimerosal removed, may not be safe and that our CDC does
not have
a clue about what to do make them safe. Common sense would lead most
to
attack finding the cause of autism instead of trying to prove
something
besides thimerosal is causal. The major question is "are our vaccines
causing autism"---only comparing the non-vaccinated to the vaccinated
will
answer this question. Common sense would have lead to this
comparison being
done first and being done 10-15 years ago. In the recent past I have
recommended that parents vaccinate their children with thimerosal free
vaccines as I considered them safe. If Schechter-Grether are
correct, and
vaccines, but not thimerosal, correlate with increased autism rates,
then I
am in error assuming vaccines are now safer with regards to autism
risk than
they were 2000.
There is NO rational reason to inject the MOST potent neuro-toxin known to man into human beings, especially the youngest and most vulnerable, PERIOD!
ReplyDeleteThimerosal should NEVER have been added to ANY vaccines - the only "safety testing" was done on less than 2 dozen adults who were already dying, I believe of meningitis. All were dead in less than a month, and NO legitimate conclusions about thimerosal's safety could possibly be drawn from this "study", but the FDA bowed to Eli Lilly and gave approval.
Ever since it was added it has caused such a high number of adverse reactions that the medical profession called for it to be removed, but the FDA took no action. Even after mercury-containing products such as merthiolite, teething powders with mercury, contact lens solutions and even veterinary meds containing mercury were all removed form the market because of their high reactivity profile, the CDC proceeded to continue to INJECT mercury into people.
Injection is the MOST invasive of methods of administering a vaccine, allowing the contents to enter the bloodstream and bypass blood/brain barriers, especially in the young and the susceptible. Mercury ACCUMULATES in the brain and the organs, so each time an additional vaccine is given that contains thimerosal, more mercury is added to the amount that remains behind in the body.
People are not 'one size, fits all", and there is NO safe dose of mercury for human beings- NONE. THAT'S the facts.
beth
To all interested parties.
ReplyDeleteDr. Ayoub gave out the address to this blog in a mocking comment made to a Yahoo! group called "Evidence of Harm", which is an anti-vaccinationist group who adhere to the faulty science originally offered in David Kirby's book "Evidence of Harm".
This is his announcement on that site:
"I have had an exchange with a pediatrician (just out from his indoctrination,
err, i mean
training); it is on a Peoria television station web blog run by a good
journalist, Jen
Christensen. See how much fun I am having..."
I thought that was worth pointing out so that people understand that the message from Ayoub and John Best (Foresam) represents the furthesy fringes of the anti-vaccine agenda.
And so no one questions the ethics of me pointing this out, this is a statement from the guidelines to members of this Yahoo! group:
"While the EOHarm list is membership moderated, it is a political and public forum. All postings to this list should be considered public, and not private or confidential statements."
David Ayoub's message is well-rehearsed, has been debinked by scientists and doctors far more respected than he (a radiologist), and runs counter to both common sense and accepted medical knowledge.
To anonymous
ReplyDeleteI will save you some time...here is my next post to EoH yahoo group:
I posted a comment yesterday about an interaction i was having with a pediatrician (allegedly) on a blog from a Peoria Illinois site. The posts against me and the truth were pretty vicious and actually predictable. I have recently suspected that the"neurodiversity" crowd had been given the assignment of lurking on all mothering, prenatal, childcare blogs because of some of the same, nearly identical comments are showing up on multiple blogs/yahoo groups. They always start out sounding like "concerned" parents however, as my wife lets me answer their comments, you soon get them bent out of shape and expose the nature of their actions.
So yesterday I posted a "copy and paste" on EoH as a test to see if my comments would be used against me on the little known, low traffic blog of newsanchormom.blogspot.com/
Well, guess what, in less than 24 hours my post on EoH was copied onto newsanchormom blog and used against me. They are devious, but in the end rather obvious. I think this shows beyond a doubt that there is a deeply organized blog-lurking program against sites like this and many many others. Probably were Kevin Leitch slithered to when he closed his website.
Another clue, this blogger is also a brave anonymous coward. Here it is: (oh, and i am sad to say my work has been "debinked"!)
Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Autism and Vaccinations":
To all interested parties.
Dr. Ayoub gave out the address to this blog in a mocking comment made to a Yahoo! group called "Evidence of Harm", which is an anti-vaccinationist group who adhere to the faulty science originally offered in David Kirby's book "Evidence of Harm".
This is his announcement on that site:
"I have had an exchange with a pediatrician (just out from his indoctrination,
err, i mean
training); it is on a Peoria television station web blog run by a good
journalist, Jen
Christensen. See how much fun I am having..."
I thought that was worth pointing out so that people understand that the message from Ayoub and John Best (Foresam) represents the furthesy fringes of the anti-vaccine agenda.
And so no one questions the ethics of me pointing this out, this is a statement from the guidelines to members of this Yahoo! group:
"While the EOHarm list is membership moderated, it is a political and public forum. All postings to this list should be considered public, and not private or confidential statements."
David Ayoub's message is well-rehearsed, has been debinked by scientists and doctors far more respected than he (a radiologist), and runs counter to both common sense and accepted medical knowledge.
I just wanted to state that the boy who died from chelation died from being given the wrong drug. Even the FDA (or is it CDC?) official stated EDTA, the chelating drug, is "harmless." Let's at least be factual.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I have had the privilege of hearing Dr. Usman speak at the NAA conference. She is a very intelligent, caring, scientific clinician.
Funny, no one seems to want to call out Dr. Rick Glover for giving my daughter a hep B shot while she was still scabbed over with chicken pox.
Vaccines, pills, surgery, shots, America is fooled by and flooded with all this medicine and the medical model...
ReplyDeleteso why are we the sickest and fattest nation on earth?
Why do hospitals continue to make errors so frequently, even the doctors dread going to them, according to Time Magazine poll.
Duract was prescribed as a good pain reliever, until it killed too many people.
Medicine is the #1 killer. We'd be a lot healthier without most of it.
Dr. Ayoub, do you still believe the World Health Organization secretly uses vaccines to sterilize poor women in third world countries, as part of a conspiracy to depopulate the earth, and that Bill Gates and the Rockefeller Foundation are in on the plot? Here's a link to your video:
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/2jl6xj
Dr. Usman diagnosed Tariq with elevated aluminum levels, then sent the boy to a quack ENT for chelation. It doesn't matter how many patients fall for Dr. Usman's snake oil - that's not how scientific credibility is not decided. But you already knew that, right?
First of all I do not feel obliged to respond to anyone who remains anonymous, so please state your name.
ReplyDeleteMy beliefs have not changed since I did the video and I would be happy to answer questions for anyone how is legit to these postings. By that, I mean name, job, contact info.
I suggest anyone curious enough watch the 1 hr video and judge the content of the lecture, not the tone of critics who are anonymous
I did get a link today for a web site that shows recovered kids from autism I would like to share
www.recoveryvideos.com
I would like to also finally share the outcomes of a scam called Steven Barrett and "QuackWatch", who turned out to be a shill for Big Pharma. The courts were not too kind to him, but this man was given air time and print coverage in media outlets all over the country. So beware of bloggers and websites claiming to be "truth seekers", many are actually truth suppressers and they like to operate by discrediting the messenger while ignoring the message....a warning sign.
links:
http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/editorial/quack.htm
http://www.curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=929500
http://www.bolenreport.net/
signed, nonanonymous David Ayoub, MD
"I would like to also finally share the outcomes of a scam called Steven Barrett and "QuackWatch", who turned out to be a shill for Big Pharma. The courts were not too kind to him, but this man was given air time and print coverage in media outlets all over the country. So beware of bloggers and websites claiming to be "truth seekers", many are actually truth suppressers and they like to operate by discrediting the messenger while ignoring the message....a warning sign."
ReplyDeleteIt was after I discussed this fact on my blog that the neurodiverse stopped commenting there. The ND's always hide from the truth.
I just wanna say thanks to News Anchor Mom, you've been pretty cool to let this conversation be heard. Thanks for being one of the apparent non-biased journalists left in your career. I think you should add "Professional" to your title.
ReplyDelete