Home > General Info > Autism Expert Agrees: It’s Time to Shift the Focus Off of Vaccines

Autism Expert Agrees: It’s Time to Shift the Focus Off of Vaccines

ASFAs the Chief Science Officer at the Autism Science Foundation, and an assistant adjunct professor in the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology at Rutgers University, Alycia Halladay, PhD, is concerned about the distraction that vaccines have become in the world of autism research.

Almost a decade ago, a small and now discredited study on vaccines and autism helped Andrew Wakefield gain worldwide notoriety and opened the flood gates of worry for parents around the world.  Parents had long since relied on vaccines to protect their children from dangerous preventable diseases, but as these diseases became less apparent, vaccine safety was thrown into question along with a concern over the rising rates of autism.

Today, most people recognize that there is no credible evidence of any link between vaccines and autism.  And yet, the vaccine-autism myth continues to be a topic of concern among parents and the focus of much of mainstream media.

Could it be that the vaccine-autism myth is so intrinsically woven into today’s social narrative that we just can’t let it go? 

In an article written for STAT news, Dr. Hallady eloquently refutes the vaccine-autism myth and goes a crucial step further by offering readers a glimpse of the promising research on the true causes of autism. She also expresses deep concern that because the media continues to keep the vaccine-autism conversation alive, the public is missing out on important scientific discoveries that are being made in the world of autism research.

She explains:

During the last year or so, there has been a steady drumbeat of media coverage about autism and vaccines. Politicians, celebrities, the presidential election, film festivals, and mythical conspiracies all contributed to mainstream news and media story lines on the false link between vaccines and autism. Many of them had nothing to do with real science, nor were they the result of research findings that helped families.

But during the same period, a dozen new scientific findings were published on legitimate environmental factors, including toxic chemicals, maternal infection during pregnancy, and chronic stress. These rarely made headlines, with the media spotlight remaining on the myth. Yet knowledge and understanding of these real environmental factors could lead to actual therapies or ways to prevent the debilitating symptoms of autism.

Dr. Halladay’s article clarifies the often misunderstood concern about autism and “environmental factors”.  She explains the difference between a “risk” and a “cause” and states that as of today, no single environmental factor has met the criteria for being a cause of autism.  However, the latest scientific discoveries do suggest that “environmental factors appear to work together, or interact with genes, to lead to autism”.  Below are few examples of the environmental factors she notes as having been linked to autism:

Exposure to these factors elevates a child’s risk of developing autism anywhere between two and four times. An exhaustive review of these factors was just published in the Annual Review of Public Health.

vaxnoautism1Of course, no discussion of vaccines and autism would be complete without exploring the issue of mercury.  Dr. Halladay laments the ongoing claims that mercury in vaccines may be the culprit for the increase in autism, particularly since ethyl mercury (also known as thimerosal) has not only been removed from nearly all childhood vaccines, but has also been exonerated as a potential cause based on an abundance of scientific evidence.

Dr. Halladay concludes her piece with a passionate plea.  As someone who has dedicated her life to studying autism, she wants the media and the public to move on from the vaccine-autism conversation so that we can focus on real autism research:

Researchers and advocacy organizations have moved on from the vaccine-autism story line to focus on issues that truly affect families, such as understanding the real causes of autism, finding ways to diagnose it earlier, developing more effective treatments, and offering better access to those treatments. With every minute wasted talking about the autism-vaccine myth and every dollar spent on researching this dead end, we are losing ground and failing families who deserve real answers on the causes of autism and more help for their loved ones.

It is our hope that her message will be echoed by researchers, advocacy organizations and the general public, and that our readers will recognize the value of sharing this article with legislators and the media in order to educate them on their role in helping to change the narrative.

We are at a pivotal moment in time.  It would be foolish and wasteful to spend precious resources rehashing a myth that we can confidently put behind us.  Now is the time to focus on the real scientific discoveries that will lead to determinants of environmental risk factors for autism and beneficial treatments for families impacted by autism.  As advocates for children, it is incumbent upon all of us to support the science that will lead to better health for all children.  

 

  1. kurt titze, D.C.
    March 16, 2017 at 5:52 pm

    I left a comment last night with regard to Thimerosol in 48 million doses of various vaccines and now I see that it was deleted,… Why is that?

    Like

  2. Christine Vara
    March 16, 2017 at 6:02 pm

    @kurt The comment was not deleted. It was never received. Perhaps you can repost. Sorry for the inconvenience.

    Like

  3. Lawrence
    March 16, 2017 at 6:53 pm

    A Chiropractor posting about vaccines?

    This should be interesting.

    Like

  4. Peter
    March 17, 2017 at 12:27 pm

    Probably will be much better info than the average Joe.

    Like

  5. Lawrence
    March 17, 2017 at 4:20 pm

    Unlikely.

    Like

  6. March 18, 2017 at 6:53 pm

    Please refute ALL of these Medical studies,…

    Like

  7. March 18, 2017 at 6:56 pm

    130 Research papers supporting Vaccine/Autism CausationGinger Taylor, MS
    Mainstream research has found that vaccines and their ingredients can cause the underlying medical conditions that committed physicians and researchers are commonly finding in children who have been given an autism diagnosis. These conditions include gastrointestinal damage, immune system impairment, chronic infections, mitochondrial disorders, autoimmune conditions, neurological regression, glial cell activation, brain inflammation, damage to the blood–brain barrier, seizures, synaptic dysfunction, dendritic cell dysfunction, mercury poisoning, aluminum toxicity, gene activation and alteration, glutathione depletion, impaired methylation, oxidative stress, impaired thioredoxin regulation, mineral deficiencies, impairment of the opioid system, endocrine dysfunction, cellular apoptosis, and other disorders.
    1.
    Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosalcontaining vaccine in first month of life. !ivision of “pidemiology and #urveillance, $accine #afety and !evelopment %ranch, &ational Immunization ‘rogram, (enters for !isease (ontrol and ‘revention. )***. Thomas M. $erstraeten, +. !avies, !. u, – !e#tefano %ackground (oncern has risen on the presence of the ethylmercury containing preservative thimerosal in vaccines. /e assessed the risk for neurologic and renal impairment associated with past exposure to thimerosalcontaining vaccine using automated data from the $accine #afety !ata link 0$#!1. $#! is a large linked database from four health maintenance organizations in /ashington, 2regon and (alifornia, containing immunization, medical visit and demographic data on over 344,444 infants born between 5*) and 5*6. Methods /e categorized the cumulative ethylmercury exposure from Thimerosalcontaining vaccines after one month of life and assessed the subse7uent risk of degenerative and developmental neurologic disorders and renal disorders beforethe age of six. /e applied proportional hazard models ad8usting for 9M2, year of birth, and gender, excluding premature babies.+esults /e identified :;? confidence intervals @(IA B).):.;1 when comparing the highest exposure group at ) month of age 0cumulative doseC :> ug1 to the unexposed group.
    Within thisgroup e also !oun” an ele#ate” ris$ !or the !olloing “isor”ers% autism &RR ‘(), *+ Cl – 1(.31(+
    , non organic sleep disorders 0++ >.4, *>? (l B )..*D, and speech disorders 0++ :.), *>? 0)B).)3.41. -or the neurologic degenerative and renal disorders group we found no significantly increased risk or a decreased risk. (onclusion
    This analysis suggests that high eposure to ethyl mercury !rom thimerosalcontaining #accines in the !irst month o! li!e increases the ris$ o! su2seuent “e#elopment o! neurologic “e#elopment impairment

    Like

  8. March 18, 2017 at 6:57 pm

    Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002.
    Gallagher CM, et al. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2010.
    Show full citation
    Abstract
    Universal hepatitis B vaccination was recommended for U.S. newborns in 1991; however, safety findings are mixed. The association between hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and parental report of autism diagnosis was determined. This cross-sectional study used weighted probability samples obtained from National Health Interview Survey 1997-2002 data sets. Vaccination status was determined from the vaccination record. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds for autism diagnosis associated with neonatal hepatitis B vaccination among boys age 3-17 years, born before 1999, adjusted for race, maternal education, and two-parent household. Boys vaccinated as neonates had threefold greater odds for autism diagnosis compared to boys never vaccinated or vaccinated after the first month of life. Non-Hispanic white boys were 64% less likely to have autism diagnosis relative to nonwhite boys. Findings suggest that U.S. male neonates vaccinated with the hepatitis B vaccine prior to 1999 (from vaccination record) had a threefold higher risk for parental report of autism diagnosis compared to boys not vaccinated as neonates during that same time period. Nonwhite boys bore a greater risk.

    PMID 21058170 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

    Like

  9. March 18, 2017 at 6:58 pm

    Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2009 Mar;61(2):133-6. doi: 10.1016/j.etp.2008.07.002. Epub 2008 Sep 3.
    Gender-selective toxicity of thimerosal.

    Branch DR1.
    Author information
    Abstract
    A recent report shows a correlation of the historical use of thimerosal in therapeutic immunizations with the subsequent development of autism; however, this association remains controversial. Autism occurs approximately four times more frequently in males compared to females; thus, studies of thimerosal toxicity should take into consideration gender-selective effects. The present study was originally undertaken to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of thimersosal in male and female CD1 mice. However, during the limited MTD studies, it became apparent that thimerosal has a differential MTD that depends on whether the mouse is male or female. At doses of 38.4-76.8mg/kg using 10% DMSO as diluent, seven of seven male mice compared to zero of seven female mice tested succumbed to thimerosal. Although the thimerosal levels used were very high, as we were originally only trying to determine MTD, it was completely unexpected to observe a difference of the MTD between male and female mice. Thus, our studies, although not directly addressing the controversy surrounding thimerosal and autism, and still preliminary due to small numbers of mice examined, provide, nevertheless, the first report of gender-selective toxicity of thimerosal and indicate that any future studies of thimerosal toxicity should take into consideration gender-specific differences.
    PMID: 18771903 DOI: 10.1016/j.etp.2008.07.002
    [Indexed for MEDLINE]

    Like

  10. March 18, 2017 at 7:02 pm

    4.
    Mercury toxicokineticsdependency on strain and gender.

    Toxicol Fppl ‘harmacol. :4)4 Mar )>G:3=0=1:;=*). doi )4.)4)<H8.taap.:44*.4;.4: weeks, when the organ 9g content was assessed. !espite similar 9g intake,
    A(SW males attaine” a 9030 signi!icantly higher W4R an” 9 to +!ol” higher total renal :g retention/concentration than A(SW !emales an” 410(S mice( A selecti#e renal :g accumulation 2ut o! loer magnitu”e as seen also in 410(S males compare” ith !emales(
    !ifferences in /%+ and organ 9g accumulationare therefore regulated by non9: genes and gender. Jymph nodes lacked the strain and genderdependent 9g accumulation profile of kidney, liver and spleen. Ffter )> days without 9g F.#/ mice showed a 3fold higher /%+ and liver 9g concentration, but ))fold higher renal 9g concentration, showing the key role for the kidneys in explaining the slower 9g elimination in F.#/ mice. The trait causing higher mercury accumulation was not dominantly inherited in the -) hybrids. -: mice showed a large interindividual variation in 9g accumulation, showing that multiple genetic factors influence the 9g toxicokinetics in the mouse. The genetically heterogeneous human population may therefore show a large variation in mercury toxicokinetics

    Like

  11. March 18, 2017 at 7:19 pm

    Autism: A form of lead and mercury toxicity

    Heba A. Yassa

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2014.10.005


    Autism is a developmental disability characterized by severe, pervasive deficits in social interaction and communications.

    Lead and mercury two of the most common heavy metals in the environment.

    Lead and mercury can lead to autistic disorders.

    Many risk factors contribute to the high level of heavy metals in autistic children.

    Defect in the metabolism of the heavy metals in autistic children also contribute to the high level of these heavy metals in their body.

    Chelating agents can be used in the treatment of the autistic disorders.
    Abstract
    Aim

    Autism is a developmental disability characterized by severe deficits in social interaction and communication. The definite cause of autism is still unknown. The aim of this study is to find out the relation between exposure to Lead and/or mercury as heavy metals and autistic symptoms, dealing with the heavy metals with chelating agents can improve the autististic symptoms.

    Method

    Blood and hair samples were obtained from 45 children from Upper Egypt with autism between the ages of 2 and 10 years and 45 children served as controls in the same age range, after taken an informed consent and fill a questionnaire to assess the risk factors. The samples were analyzed blindly for lead and mercury by using atomic absorption and ICP-MS. Data from the two groups were compared, then follow up of the autistic children after treatment with chelating agents were done.

    Results

    The results obtained showed significant difference among the two groups, there was high level of mercury and lead among those kids with autism. Significant decline in the blood level of lead and mercury with the use of DMSA as a chelating agent. In addition, there was decline in the autistic symptoms with the decrease in the lead and mercury level in blood.

    Conclusion

    Lead and mercury considered as one of the main causes of autism. Environmental exposure as well as defect in heavy metal metabolism is responsible for the high level of heavy metals.

    Like

  12. March 18, 2017 at 7:25 pm

    Administration of aluminium to neonatal mice in vaccine-relevant amounts is associated with adverse long term neurological outcomes

    Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry
    Volume 128, November 2013, Pages 237–244

    Like

  13. March 18, 2017 at 7:27 pm

    J Biomed Sci. 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4):359-64.
    Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism.

    Singh VK1, Lin SX, Newell E, Nelson C.

    Abstract
    Autoimmunity to the central nervous system (CNS), especially to myelin basic protein (MBP), may play a causal role in autism, a neurodevelopmental disorder. Because many autistic children harbor elevated levels of measles antibodies, we conducted a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and MBP autoantibodies. Using serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 control children, antibodies were assayed by ELISA or immunoblotting methods. ELISA analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children. Immunoblotting analysis revealed the presence of an unusual MMR antibody in 75 of 125 (60%) autistic sera but not in control sera. This antibody specifically detected a protein of 73-75 kD of MMR. This protein band, as analyzed with monoclonal antibodies, was immunopositive for measles hemagglutinin (HA) protein but not for measles nucleoprotein and rubella or mumps viral proteins. Thus the MMR antibody in autistic sera detected measles HA protein, which is unique to the measles subunit of the vaccine. Furthermore, over 90% of MMR antibody-positive autistic sera were also positive for MBP autoantibodies, suggesting a strong association between MMR and CNS autoimmunity in autism. Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.

    Like

  14. March 18, 2017 at 7:30 pm

    I have over 100 other Medical Peer Reviewed studies! Let me know when you are really ready to explore! I have studied the ill-effects of vaccinations for 34 years! I have a plethora of information that you can Not refute! Vaccines should be further investigated and will be soon with President Trump’s Vaccine Safety Committee.

    Like

  15. March 18, 2017 at 7:34 pm

    An FDA Report,… and an Insert Statement inside a vial of Vaccine.

    Here’s an excerpt from approved vaccines by the FDA and their adverse events.

    ” – ADVERSE EVENTS REPORTED DURING POST-APPROVAL USE OF TRIPEDIA VACCINE INCLUDE IDIOPATHIC THROMBOCYTOPENIC PURPURA, SIDS, ANAPHYLACTIC REACTION, CELLULITIS, AUTISM, CONVULSION/GRAND MAL CONVULSION, ENCEPHALOPATHY, HYPOTONIA, NEUROPATHY, SOMNOLENCE AND APNEA. “

    vakcini-autizam-top-analiza-fda-01

    You can find this on page 11 of 13 from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts

    Like

  16. March 18, 2017 at 7:54 pm

    I know, I know the Insert NO LONGER exists,… I wonder why?

    Tripedia Insert Disappears! Does That Mean all the Children Harmed by this DTap Vaccine Also Disappeared?

    A few minutes ago I was checking out an article from the Orange County Weekly, which seems to want to blame Dr. Bob Sears for outbreaks of pertussis and measles. For the record, more than 50% of measles outbreaks in the last few decades have been vaccine-strain measles and somewhere between 80%-90% of pertussis cases have occurred among those who are fully and “appropriately” vaccinated. That’s because (1) the MMR is a “live-virus” vaccine and those who receive it are contagious for 3-4 weeks after vaccination; and (2) the DTap is causing outbreaks of pertussis because it’s a partial coverage vaccine, which has attempted to wipe out one strain of pertussis bacteria. In that attempt, the DTap is CAUSING increased incidence of illness that is the result of parapertussis – for which the vaccine DOES NOTHING to prevent.

    But that’s not what this is about.

    This is about deception.

    As I was reading the comments following the article referenced above, one commenter made the claim that there is no “credible” evidence that the DTap causes brain damage.

    WHAT???

    So, I did what I always do when people claim the DTap is safe and effective. I hopped on over to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s list of vaccine manufacturer’s inserts. My intention was to respond to Mr. Uniformed (or more likely, Mr. vaccine manufacturer employee) with the link to the Tripedia insert and a very pointed comment about the fact that on page 11 of said insert, Sanofi Pasteur themselves listed encephalopathy, seizures, SIDS and autism among the adverse reactions that were temporally associated with the administration of the vaccine. The Tripedia insert states that these adverse reactions were included “because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting.”

    Well… Guess what?

    When I got to the webpage, the Tripedia insert was gone. POOF!

    Like it never existed.

    Thankfully, I have some pretty awesome friends who are old hats at researching the truth about vaccines. One of them (I love you, Dawn H.) had the foresight to take a screenshot of page 11 of the Tripedia insert.

    In this instance, it actually would have been okay if Dawn didn’t have the screenshot, because I have the insert printed out; as I’m sure many of my vaccine-saavy friends have also done.

    Page 11 of the Tripedia Vaccine Insert from Sanofi-Pasteur.
    The point of this post is this: When you are conducting your research regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, you need to be sure you have that information archived somewhere.

    You never know when it will disappear. Like it never existed in the first place.

    My question: So, Sanofi Pasteur… now that you’ve made the insert go away, does that mean all those children who died from SIDS or who have lifelong brain damage as a result of your vaccine also disappeared?

    Of course they didn’t. The proof is in their grieving parents.

    Shame on you. And shame on all of those who work so hard to make the evidence disappear so parents won’t have the information they need to make informed decisions about whether or not to use your products.

    Parents: Do your research. Save the evidence. Trust No One.

    NOTE: Within minutes of posting this article, I was directed to this link, which still lists SIDS, Encephalopathy, and autism among the reported adverse reactions to Tripedia. Please SAVE this informaion – screenshot it – or print it out. You don’t know when it will be gone.

    NOTE: This is another site where the Tripedia insert is still available.

    EDIT: (8/13/2012) – Since I wrote this post on Saturday (2 days ago), several people have notified me that Tripedia was discontinued in 2011. Some of those people have postulated that the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health may have removed the Tripedia Manufacturer’s Insert for this reason. If that’s the case, I would like to know why they still have TriHIBit and ActHIB inserts on their site. Both of these (actually they are the same insert, listed separately in two places) give instructions for combining the ActHIB vaccine for Haemophilus Influenzae type B with the Tripedia vaccine, for one injection containing FOUR vaccines: Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis and HIB. Is it really the case that Tripedia was discontinued? Or is it just no longer being made available UNLESS it is combined with the HIB vaccine? Is this another case like what happened when it was suggested that the MMR vaccine may be causing autism, and may be safer if separated? That suggestion was followed by the manufacturer’s decision to STOP making the separate vaccines available at all. They removed the choice so there could be no comparisons between children who received the vaccines separately vs. those who got the MMR. Is history repeating itself now, with Tripedia?

    ActHIB and TriHIBit inserts BOTH say to refer to the Tripedia insert for information about adverse reactions. The insert for ActHIB and TriHIBit tells the reader NO LESS THAN SIX TIMES – “refer to the Tripedia insert” – yet when you go looking for it on the Bloomberg site, it’s not there. Why? If they are not going to list the information where you can find it, they need to include the Tripedia adverse reactions in the ActHIB and TriHIBit inserts. If they fail to do that, it does indeed look like they are trying to hide the facts that their vaccine is responsible for the deaths and lifelong severe injuries of children. For ease of reading, here is the information from the Tripedia insert:

    • As with other aluminum-containing vaccines, a nodule may be palpable at the injection sites for several weeks. Sterile abscess formation at the site of injection has been reported.3,36

    • Rarely, an anaphylactic reaction (ie, hives, swelling of the mouth, difficulty breathing, hypotension, or shock) has been reported after receiving preparations containing diphtheria, tetanus, and/or pertussis antigens.3 …

    • Arthus-type hypersensitivity reactions, characterized by severe local reactions (generally starting 2-8 hours after an injection), may follow receipt of tetanus toxoid.
    • A few cases of peripheral mononeuropathy and of cranial mononeuropathy have been reported following tetanus toxoid administration, although available evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation.37
    • A review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) found evidence for a causal relationship between tetanus toxoid and both brachial neuritis and Guillain-Barré syndrome.37
    • A few cases of demyelinating diseases of the CNS have been reported following some tetanus toxoid-containing vaccines or tetanus and diphtheria toxoid-containing vaccines, although the IOM concluded that the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship.37
    *** Adverse events reported during *post-approval* use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, AUTISM, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine.2

    Like

  17. Milwauken
    March 18, 2017 at 11:26 pm

    Kurt, they’ve been refuted over and over. This is 2017. Try to keep up.

    Like

  18. Milwauken
    March 18, 2017 at 11:32 pm

    Ginger Taylor’s list of “studies” are a running joke in the reality based community. It is not hard to find a thorough debunking of her poorly understood interpretations of research papers, poster presentations, and prepared speeches. Here is one critique to get you started.

    http://www.docbastard.net/2016/05/124-papers-that-do-not-prove-vaccines.html

    And what is the deal with chiropractors and pseudoscience, anyway?

    Like

  19. Chris
    March 19, 2017 at 1:50 am

    Kurt: “Tripedia Insert Disappears!”

    Mostly because that vaccine no longer exists. It has not been available for over six years. It has been gone so long the notice it was removed from the market is only available on Archive!:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20160820141845/http://ashp.org/menu/DrugShortages/DrugsNoLongerAvailable/Bulletin.aspx?id=764

    Seriously, do try to keep up.

    Like

  20. Lawrence
    March 19, 2017 at 9:06 am

    Sorry, but someone who believes in Subluxations obviously knows nothing about actual sciences – like Immunology, for instance.

    Like

  21. Lawrence
    March 19, 2017 at 9:08 am

    And Kurt’s copying and pasting from an anti-vax article from 5 years ago? Seriously?

    Like

  22. Lawrence
    March 19, 2017 at 9:11 am

    And if environmental exposure to mercury and lead caused autism, we would have seen an explosion of autism in the 17th – 20th Centuries, where both mercury and lead were prevalent in the environment in much greater amounts than what we see today (heck, think about all of the leaded gasoline which was used in the early to mid 20th Centuries).

    Like

  23. Lawrence
    March 19, 2017 at 9:18 am

    So yes, Kurt, those studies either have all been refuted already or have absolutely nothing to do with a link between vaccines & autism.

    Like

  24. Sharyl
    March 20, 2017 at 11:30 am
  25. Chris
    March 20, 2017 at 12:14 pm

    Sharyl, it is a bunch of pseudo scientific nonsense by a doctor with no expertise in autism, epidemiology and biochemistry. Perhaps it is due to his own self-medicating.

    Like

  26. March 20, 2017 at 1:05 pm

    Does your dear Dr. Bogner has expertise in autism? He knows nothing about autism prevalence. The “autism rate” (and it’s not a rate) was not 1:10,000 in 1983. No population study has ever found a 1:10,000 prevalence. And comparing 1983 numbers to 2017 shows just how ignorant Bogner is. He’s comparing apples to oranges. There was no autism spectrum in 1983.

    1983: A healthy-born child according to the CDC vaccination schedule [2] receives 6 vaccines in the first 15 months of life. The autism rate is 1:10,000.

    2017: A healthy-born child according to the CDC vaccination schedule [3] receives 23 vaccines in the first 15 months of life. The autism rate is 1:68.

    Like

  27. Sharyl
    March 20, 2017 at 4:31 pm

    milwauken, maybe in 1983 it was 10 in 10,000 (1 in a 1000), so what is your point? Here is the CDC showing in a 12 year period it went from 1 in 150 to 1 in 68.
    https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html

    Like

  28. Lawrence
    March 20, 2017 at 5:11 pm

    And you do know that the DSM criteria changed significantly during the same time period.

    Like

  29. Milwauken
    March 20, 2017 at 5:47 pm

    Sharyl, why did you sabotage you argument by making the baseless claim that the “autism rate” (sic) in 1983 was 1:10,000? It doesn’t exactly help your credibility. Not only are you conflating rate with prevalence, but you are seemingly unaware of the evolution of DSM criteria over the decades.

    This is a serious discussion where science and data matter. If you can’t hang with the adults, then you need to go back to the kids’s table.

    The CDC ADDM data are important, since it tries to apply the same criteria over the years. But it also has its limitations. In the 2008 and 2010 studies, about 20% of the eight year olds that the researchers identified as autistic had no autism diagnosis. Think about that. In the 2012 census, that unidentified population nearly disappeared.

    Autism is like dust – the harder you look, the more you find. A study that merely counts medical diagnoses will find far fewer cases than a study such as the ADDM, which looks as school administrative diagnoses and even infers an ASD from language used in teachers’ notes (fails to make eye contact, does not play with other children, etc.)

    There is no good evidence for an epidemic in actual cases of autism. What we have seen since 1966, when Lotter made the first epidemiological study (4.5:10,000) is an increase in diagnoses. The fact that more children are being diagnosed with autism means that more children will get the services they need. How is that a bad thing?

    Like

  30. March 20, 2017 at 10:34 pm

    Ok, perhaps I did not do my homework! Here is a Challenge!!! ANYONE here interested?

    IF YOU ARE ALL SO CORRECT in your thoughts that Thimerosal is safe then PROVE IT and collect $100,000.

    On Feb. 17, 2017, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Robert De Niro held a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Among those joining them was Del Bigtree, producer of the movie Vaxxed.1 The conference was moderated by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, host of the Sunday TV news program Full Measure.2

    The conference focused on the issue of vaccine safety, specifically as it relates to controversial ingredients in vaccines such as the ethylmercury preservative known as thimerosal and, more broadly, to the alleged link between thimerosal containing vaccines and autism. Although the amount of mercury in vaccines has been reduced since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) jointly asked vaccine manufacturers in 1999 to remove mercury from all vaccines given to children, ethylmercury in varying amounts remains in some influenza, meningococcal, DT/Td and adult Tetanus vaccines.3

    On Jan. 10, Mr. Kennedy was reportedly asked by then President-elect Trump if he would be willing to head up a special commission to investigate the safety of vaccines.4

    According to Mr. Kennedy, who said he agreed to lead the initiative, the purpose of the commission would have a broad mandate: “to make sure we have scientific integrity in the vaccine process for efficacy and safety effects.”5 While the commission has not been formally approved or announced by the new Administration, Mr. Kennedy has said he remains in communication with White House staffers on the matter and is “trading documents about what the commission would look like.”5

    I have been contacted three times by the administration since [10 January] and they tell me that they are still going forward with a commission.6
    During the press conference, Mr. Kennedy, who is chairman of a new organization he founded, the World Mercury Project (WMP), announced on behalf of the WMP a $100,000 challenge with a “goal of stopping use of highly toxic mercury in vaccines.” A press release issued by the WMP stated:

    Thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative, is still in 48 million U.S. flu vaccines each year, tetanus toxoid, meningococcal vaccines and, in massive doses, in the pediatric vaccines given to 100 million children across the developing world. A Centers for Disease Control (CDC) review published last month found that the ethylmercury in thimerosal is as profoundly neurotoxic as the heavily regulated methylmercury in fish.6
    Under the terms of the challenge, the WMP will…

    pay $100,000 to the first journalist, or other individual, who can find a peer-reviewed scientific study demonstrating that thimerosal is safe in the amounts contained in vaccines currently being administered to American children and pregnant women.7
    Now, it is important to read the wording of the challenge carefully. The money would be awarded in exchange for the production of evidence in a “peer-reviewed scientific study demonstrating that thimerosal is safe in the amounts contained in vaccines” that are currently being given to “American children and pregnant women.”7

    The challenge is very specific. Mr. Kennedy is voicing concern about children and fetuses continuing to be exposed to dangerous levels of mercury when they or their gestating mothers are given thimerosal containing vaccines, even though the CDC stated in 2001 that thimerosal was “removed from or reduced in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and under, manufactured for the U.S. market.”8

    Like

  31. March 20, 2017 at 10:46 pm

    By the way, the smart alecs; Lawrence and Milwauken,… who down plays the significance of Chiropractic and those who practice as Chiropractors,… perhaps you should read the newest Guidelines for the Treatment of low back pain released by the American College of Physicians on 2/14/2017. Spinal Manipulation got rave reviews due to outstanding Evidence Based Outcomes. Since RAND CORPORATION research determined that 94% of spinal manipulation is performed by Chiropractors that equates to the many hundreds of thousands of member MD’s of the ACoP a full support of our Chiropractic theories!!!! call it pseudo science if you wish to denigrate yourselves but they finally see Chiropractic for the value that it has. Way back in 1994 the same decision was reached but the AMA trumped this proven way of treating back pain only to once again be proven wrong by the recent Guidelines!!! Chiropractic Works! Chiropractic care SAVES MONEY!! Use it,… OR continue to stick your head in the sand and avoid reality. By the way Lawrence and Milwauken why do you hide behind a made up name? why not tell us all your full names?

    Like

  32. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 5:57 am

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/02/27/bogus-challenges-to-prove-the-scientific-consensus-the-m-o-of-a-crank/

    Already addressed here.

    And this is my real name. I stopped using my full name when anti-vaxers threatened my kids.

    Like

  33. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 11:16 am

    milwauken, I have no idea what you are talking about? Sabotage? I was conceding to you that if you didn’t want to go with my 1 in 10,000 claim then I would give you 10 in 10,000 because the number is irrelevant. The link I provided is the CDC stating that autism rates have gone from 1 in 150 to 1 in 68 from the years 2000 to 2012.

    Lawrence, the autism DSM criteria changed significantly in 1994 to include other behaviors doctors were seeing in children. At that point the numbers exploded. In 1995 the number was 1 in 500. So to be clear, the numbers immediately following the DSM criteria change were 1 in 500 (1994) and today they are 1 in 50. Te rate did not level off after the 1994 change.

    Here’s a study from 2009 from my home state of California.
    California’s Autism Increase Not Due To Better Counting, Diagnosis
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090108095429.htm

    Like

  34. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 11:31 am

    “Almost a decade ago, a small and now discredited study on vaccines and autism helped Andrew Wakefield gain worldwide notoriety and opened the flood gates of worry for parents around the world.”

    WRONG – I have read it. Dr. Wakefield never made any claim the MMR vaccine caused autism. His “study” was about the connection between the MMR vaccine and IBS/gut issues. It was the parents of the study that came forward and told Dr. Wakefield that they thought there was a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism and Dr. Wakefield merely stated that it should be studied. In fact. Dr. Wakefield went out of his way on more than one occasion to state specifically that he wasn’t claiming any connection between the vaccine and autism. I have seen the video of the testimony.

    Like

  35. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 11:39 am

    “Today, most people recognize that there is no credible evidence of any link between vaccines and autism.”

    No credible evidence? Wrong again. There is plenty of evidence. There are thousands of stories from parents who have witnessed it and there are plenty of study’s that support a vaccine autism connection.

    Ever heard of the movie Vaxxed?

    I also provided many study’s showing the vaccine/autism connection, but the comment is under moderation.

    Like

  36. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 21, 2017 at 12:13 pm

    @ Sharyl

    First, Wakefield’s study was not about looking at MMR vaccine and autism; but looking at relationship between autism and GI tract disorders. Second, thus, there was absolutely no legitimate reason for Wakefield including what the parents thought in his 1998 study. Do you really think he would have included if parents thought because they lived on a farm and used pesticides that it was pesticides? Or, what about parents who believed their child had been possessed? Wakefield recruited almost all the children from either those being represented by the Dawburn Law Firm or whose parents were members of JABS, an antivaccinationists organization that was working with Dawburn Law Firm. That is, he knew in advance that the parents believed it was the MMR vaccine that caused the problem. Wakefield had also applied with the Dawburn law firm for research monies to do a study to “prove” that MMR vaccine contributed to/caused autism and he had already received approximately $750,000 for consulting with the Dawburn law firm. Though his 1998 study did not use the monies he applied for, it is absurd to think that he was unbiased. In addition, at the press conference Wakefield stated he thought it safer to use a monovalent measles vaccine. And the Royal Free, the hospital he worked at as a researcher, had submitted a patent application for a monovalent measles vaccine with Wakefield listed as the researcher. Note that in US and UK researchers involved in patent applications are given generous shares of whatever revenues come to the organization. And later on in various interviews Wakefield clearly implicated the MMR vaccine in cases of autism.

    I don’t know what video you saw; but I could give references to several articles; but have better things to do since you clearly haven’t read his 1998 article or would have known it wasn’t to show relationship between MMR and autism. From his article:

    “We investigate a consecutive series of children with chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorder.” [Wakefield et al (1998 Feb 28). Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet; 351(9103): 637-641. Available at: http://thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0.pdf

    Like

  37. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 12:29 pm

    Joel, your reading skills are horrible. Here is what I stated above….
    “Dr. Wakefield never made any claim the MMR vaccine caused autism. His “study” was about the connection between the MMR vaccine and IBS/gut issues.”

    So you clearly are not the credible one.

    Like

  38. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 12:31 pm

    Joel, I am happy that you discredited this statement from the article above.

    “Almost a decade ago, a small and now discredited study on vaccines and autism helped Andrew Wakefield gain worldwide notoriety and opened the flood gates of worry for parents around the world.”

    Like

  39. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    Joel,

    “Second, thus, there was absolutely no legitimate reason for Wakefield including what the parents thought in his 1998 study. Do you really think he would have included if parents thought because they lived on a farm and used pesticides that it was pesticides? ”

    Yes, I do believe that if the parents told him they thought that there was a pesticide connection, he would have mentioned it. Everything should be included, whether you think there is a connection or not. The information should be included. In his case, the parents thought there was a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism, so he included (that they mentioned that) in his study. It would be the right and proper thing to do.

    Like

  40. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    Joel,

    Please provide a source for these statements.

    “That is, he knew in advance that the parents believed it was the MMR vaccine that caused the problem.”

    and this

    “Wakefield had also applied with the Dawburn law firm for research monies to do a study to “prove” that MMR vaccine contributed to/caused autism and he had already received approximately $750,000 for consulting with the Dawburn law firm.”

    Like

  41. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 12:47 pm

    Joel,

    “In addition, at the press conference Wakefield stated he thought it safer to use a monovalent measles vaccine.”

    God forbid that Dr. Wakefield was suggesting to break up the 3 in 1 vaccine for safety concerns. Who cares about safety right?
    And the fact that only one Company makes the MMR vaccine (Merck) so they have a monopoly. And as you admitted, if they split it up, other manufacturer’s could get in on it as well. Hmmmmmmmm

    Like

  42. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 1:15 pm

    Sharyl, I’ve been tracking anti-vax folks for over ten years. You need some new talking points. Your arguments and revelations have been shouted to the mountaintops, and subsequently shot down, over and over again. All of Joel’s points about Mr. Wakefield’s perfidy are public record. It was obvious to me that you are only parroting tired old AV talking points when you said the autism “rate” (sic) was 1:10,000 in 1983. Yes, I know you took it back, but the fact you even went there gave you away. The only people you are fooling are the folks who have already fooled themselves.

    Like

  43. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 21, 2017 at 1:45 pm

    @ Sharyl

    No, there is NO legitimate reason to ask parents what they think as part of research. Of course, a doctor treating a child would ask parents what they think; but not necessarily then agree with them. And, given that Wakefield had been a consultant on the Dawburn lawsuit and the kids were either from the lawsuit or JABS, how could he NOT know that the parents believed MMR caused their kids condition? They were suing based on this belief. And given that Wakefield was involved in recruiting most of the kids, duh!

    Since his paper was NOT about MMR and autism and the parents beliefs were irrelevant to the paper, given that Wakefield and the Royal Free stood to make a lot of money if there monovalent vaccine received a patent and they convinced people better to use a monovalent vaccine, his statement at the press conference was self-serving. And, I am not going to bother giving references to later statements where Wakefield clearly blamed the MMR given that you didn’t understand the 1998 paper was not about the MMR and autism, so his statement was outside the scope of his study. In addition, there are numerous studies that found that the MMR is just as safe as an individual measles vaccine.

    If you want info on Wakefield and Dawburn or Wakefield’s grant application to British Legal Aid Society, try googling. Since you claim to have investigated/studied this area, should be easy for you.

    As with all antivaccinationists, you seem to think that money is the only criteria. First, the entire sale of vaccines in the world amounts to only about 2% of the revenues of the pharmaceutical industry. Second, I have NEVER worked for a pharmaceutical company, nor own stock in them, nor have I worked for the FDA or CDC. However, I have almost 50 years of education, experience, etc. And I wouldn’t hesitate to get or give the MMR to anyone, except those with clear immune problems, e.g autoimmune disease.

    As for safety, since you probably wouldn’t want three separate shots given at same doctor visit just for measles, mumps, and rubella, added to any other shots given at that time, the risk is that parents will miss some shots, either altogether or delayed. And then if the kid gets the natural disease, real risks. Since most families have two working parents, it would mean one would have to take time off from work several times. Given that the overwhelming evidence is that the MMR vaccine is safe, actually it is the measles component, either in the trivalent vaccine or by itself, that has the highest albeit still rare risk of side-effects, it would be foolish to go back to monovalent vaccines.

    One last thing. In 1994, Asperger’s was added to Autism Spectrum Disorders, which increased the rate. There are actually cases of men in their 70s who have been diagnosed with Aspergers. Do you really think they developed it all of a sudden in their 70s. Of course not; but as another researcher once said, if it isn’t defined, it doesn’t exist. Just one example.

    If you really want to understand vaccines, I suggest you learn about the immune system. An excellent easy to read short book, about 150 pages is: Lauren Sompayrac. “How the Immune System Works.” Probably less than $25 used from Amazon marketplace.

    Like

  44. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 1:49 pm

    milwauken, please enlighten me. What specific statement do you not agree with?

    Like

  45. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 1:53 pm

    Joel,

    “No, there is NO legitimate reason to ask parents what they think as part of research. Of course, a doctor treating a child would ask parents what they think; but not necessarily then agree with them.”

    One – he didn’t ask them what they think. They told him.
    Two – He didn’t agree with them. He actually stated otherwise. He stated at his hearing that he was making no claim of an MMR/vaccine connection and that his study did not support it either.

    Like

  46. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 1:57 pm

    Joel,

    Are you listening to yourself?

    “As for safety, since you probably wouldn’t want three separate shots given at same doctor visit just for measles, mumps, and rubella, added to any other shots given at that time, the risk is that parents will miss some shots, either altogether or delayed.”

    One – who said to give all 3 at the same visit? And why would you care anyway? They do more then that all the time. Common practice.

    Two – Oh, they are saving the kids by combining all 3 together because parents can’t be trusted to get all 3 of them individually? Why not just give a 10 in one vaccine???

    Ridiculous logic. Nice try.

    Like

  47. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 1:59 pm

    Joel,

    I figured you wouldn’t support your statements with sources. Wonder why?

    “That is, he knew in advance that the parents believed it was the MMR vaccine that caused the problem.”

    and this

    “Wakefield had also applied with the Dawburn law firm for research monies to do a study to “prove” that MMR vaccine contributed to/caused autism and he had already received approximately $750,000 for consulting with the Dawburn law firm.”

    Like

  48. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 2:02 pm

    Joel,

    “In 1994, Asperger’s was added to Autism Spectrum Disorders, which increased the rate. There are actually cases of men in their 70s who have been diagnosed with Aspergers. Do you really think they developed it all of a sudden in their 70s. Of course not; but as another researcher once said, if it isn’t defined, it doesn’t exist. Just one example.”

    As I already mentioned above, but you missed it again. The autism DSM criteria changed significantly in 1994 to include other behaviors doctors were seeing in children. At that point the numbers exploded. In 1995 the number was 1 in 500. So to be clear, the numbers immediately following the DSM criteria change were 1 in 500 (1994) and today they are 1 in 50. The rate did not level off after the 1994 change.

    So please explain what has happened since 1995 to 2017?

    Like

  49. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 2:46 pm

    You want the real story on Wakefield – here it is:

    http://briandeer.com/solved/solved.htm

    Like

  50. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 2:47 pm

    What happened?

    A lot more people were trained to recognize and diagnose the symptoms of autism.

    That’s what happened.

    Like

  51. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 2:48 pm

    And autism is a condition of developmental delay, not stasis…kids with autism don’t look the same at 3, 10, 16 or 30.

    Look at any engineering department & you’ll find adults who would qualify as autistic today.

    Like

  52. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 2:48 pm

    Oh, and you mean Wakefield pimping a single measles vaccine, which he was applying for a patent?

    Like

  53. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 3:00 pm

    Here are some more questions for you – if vaccines were related to autism, then why do we see such wildly different rates of diagnoses across different states…..and why don’t states like Mississippi and West Virginia, which require vaccinations for school (with only medical exemptions) have the highest rates of autism?

    Just simple questions like this show the ridiculousness of trying to link vaccines to the onset of autism.

    Like

  54. Chris
    March 21, 2017 at 3:03 pm

    Yeah, it was some magical stuff that I was told by a neurologist in 1991 that my non-verbal son was definitely not autistic because he smiled. Apparently no one bothered to update us a few years later, and it was only brought up again by the school psychologist when he was a senior in high school.

    Though the caveat was that they had created an autism program in the high school, but my son was getting services based on his needs. The autism class pretty much catered to the whole spectrum, but they were treated the same and so not to their individual needs.

    Also, the state’s Dept. of Developmental Disorders did not recognize autism. So that same year they rejected him. Apparently the “disability” had to occur in childhood… funny, I don’t remember my son being able to speak before he had ten years of speech therapy. That was in 2007.

    Well, now things have changed. My son finally got a diagnosis of Autism Level 2 under DSM V (and he also qualifies under DSM IV). Plus he now qualifies for Dept. of Developmental Disorders under updated criteria.

    Don’t tell me that things did not change. There is no magic wand that makes every neurologist, school psychologist, and education policy wonks change the moment the new DSM is published. These things take time.

    By the way, if you are going to drag up the number in 1983 and compare it to those in 2017, make sure you only count the kids that would be diagnosed under DSM III that came out in 1980.

    Like

  55. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 3:25 pm

    And it isn’t like suddenly every child in America is evaluated at the same time…..many poorly served areas of the country lack the personnel and experience to properly diagnosis kids with autism, and at the same time, in other areas, parents are “demanding” a diagnosis of autism by professionals, because it grants their children additional resources and help.

    If you start looking for something, you sure as heck will start finding a lot more of whatever it is that you are looking for…..children have always been on the spectrum, we’re just a lot better today at identifying who they are.

    Like

  56. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 3:49 pm

    Lawrence, Brian Deer as your source for the real story??

    13 things you may not know about Brian Deer.
    1. He’s not a Sunday Times reporter, and never has been, so who the heck is paying his bills?

    2. When Brian Deer began his investigation of Andy Wakefield, he was supported by a pharmaceutical front group.

    3. His most recent hit piece was funded by the British Medical Association, who has many reasons to shut Wakefield up.

    4. Deer is the person who filed the complaint against Andy Wakefield with the GMC in the first place – he wagged the dog.

    5. Deer appears to be the journalist stooge in this whole thing, and the real instigator of the Wakefield investigation may be far more powerful.

    6. The CEO of the Lancet joined Glaxo’s board, soon before Deer’s first article in 2004 in the Sunday Times.

    7. The Sunday Times editor who originally hired Deer also had a serious conflict of interest.

    8. Deer had access to the medical records of the Lancet 12 children long before the GMC hearing, which is apparently illegal.

    9. Deer actively assisted the US Department of Justice in their defense of vaccines in the recent omnibus proceedings.

    10. The Lancet 12 parents are terrified of Brian Deer and deem him to be unhinged, dangerous, and able to cause harm to their families.

    11. Deer’s most recent report in the BMJ, the one making all the news, is based on an impossibility that the press should be able to understand.

    12. Despite Anderson Cooper’s assurances to the American people, Brian Deer has not interviewed the Lancet 12 parents.

    13. Anderson Cooper called Brian Deer “an independent journalist who’s won many awards” and he’s neither.

    Like

  57. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 3:51 pm

    Lawrence,

    “What happened?
    A lot more people were trained to recognize and diagnose the symptoms of autism.
    That’s what happened.”

    Since 1994 Lawrence? The number hasn’t leveled off since 1994 Lawrence.

    Like

  58. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 3:53 pm

    Lawrence,

    “Oh, and you mean Wakefield pimping a single measles vaccine, which he was applying for a patent?”

    Or you mean Merck having a monopoly on the MMR vaccine?

    Please provide your source. I asked Joelll, but he declined to provide anything.

    Like

  59. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 3:56 pm

    Lawrence,

    “if vaccines were related to autism, then why do we see such wildly different rates of diagnoses across different states…..and why don’t states like Mississippi and West Virginia, which require vaccinations for school (with only medical exemptions) have the highest rates of autism?”

    Lawrence, because states don’t all use the same processes to calculate the numbers. There is a very wide range of ways to determine the number, state to state.

    Oh that was so hard to answer.

    Like

  60. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 4:11 pm

    Wakefield applied for a vaccine patent in July, 1997. It took me three minutes to find the application online.

    There are entire books filled with things you don’t understand about vaccines, autism, epidemiology, immunology, and many other words ending in -ology.

    Like

  61. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 4:17 pm

    You really have all of the anti-vax talking points down, don’t you?

    Seriously, I’m not seeing any real citations to back up your assertions….at least Brian Deer published his sources for review. The anti-vax folks just didn’t like the fact that he pointed out that Emperor Wakefield had no clothes.

    You really don’t seem to know a lot about Wakefield – like the fact that he received hundreds of thousands of dollars from a law firm which was suing the British Government over vaccines.

    Like the fact that he did indeed file for a patent for a single measles vaccine.

    Like the fact that he refused to provide a defense against the charges leveled against him, even though he had every opportunity.

    All of this is easily found in the public record, but anti-vaxers just never bother to look…

    http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452

    Like

  62. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 4:20 pm

    https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html

    Perhaps because now, the numbers are leveling off…..

    Like

  63. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 4:21 pm

    I also notice that it your attempting smearing of Brian Deer, you can’t actually contradict any of the facts in his reporting.

    If you could do so, you wouldn’t have to resort to conspiracy theories in an attempt to criticize him.

    Like

  64. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 4:23 pm

    Sharyl, you are right about something!

    “Lawrence, because states don’t all use the same processes to calculate the numbers. There is a very wide range of ways to determine the number, state to state.”

    This is why it is useless to compare 1983 prevalence to 2017, as you did. The first autism epi study in the US was by Treffert in 1970. He used computer records to count children with autism who were institutionalized in Wisconsin. I have met Dr. Treffert and he says the study was flawed. Yet anti-vaxers love to quote it as proof that the autism “rate” (sic) was 1:10,000 in 1970!

    The ADDM census takes place every two years, and looks at 8 year olds. As I pointed out in a previous comment that you either ignored or failed to grasp, the 2008 and 2010 studies found that one in five children showing signs of autism had no diagnosis. Not from a doctor or a school. What does this tell you, Sharyl? That Big Pharma® bribed the ADDM scientists? Or that the harder you look for something, the more of it you will find?

    Like

  65. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 4:24 pm

    It also doesn’t help Wakefield’s case that his study co-authors all retracted their names from the paper, citing concerns about the conclusions in light of uncovered evidence of fraud.

    And, of course, Walker-Smith, throwing Wakefield under the bus during his appeal, also not good for Wakefield.

    Like

  66. Lawrence
    March 21, 2017 at 4:25 pm

    Sharyl is obviously invested in the anti-vax narrative – even in the face of reality and overwhelming evidence to the contrary….

    Like

  67. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:26 pm

    milwauken, there is a whole world out there full of information you don’t know. It will take you longer than 3 minutes to understand.

    Like

  68. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:30 pm

    Oh lawrence, you logic is utterly laughable. You want some sources showing a possible vaccine/autism connection?

    Like

  69. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:33 pm

    Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170

    Like

  70. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:33 pm

    Porphyrinuria in childhood autistic disorder: implications for environmental toxicity.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16782144

    Like

  71. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:34 pm

    Theoretical aspects of autism: causes–a review.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355

    Like

  72. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:34 pm

    Uncoupling of ATP-Mediated Calcium Signaling and Dysregulated Interleukin-6 Secretion in Dendritic Cells by Nanomolar Thimerosal

    “Genetic susceptibility of the immune system to mercury.”
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1513334/

    Like

  73. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:35 pm

    Gender-selective toxicity of thimerosal.

    “A recent report shows a correlation of the historical use of thimerosal in therapeutic immunizations with the subsequent development of autism; ”
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18771903

    Like

  74. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:35 pm

    Comparison of Blood and Brain Mercury Levels in Infant Monkeys Exposed to Methylmercury or Vaccines Containing Thimerosal

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280342/

    Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7992310

    Like

  75. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:36 pm

    Neuroglial activation and neuroinflammation in the brain of patients with autism.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15546155

    Activation of methionine synthase by insulin-like growth factor-1 and dopamine: a target for neurodevelopmental toxins and thimerosal.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14745455

    Like

  76. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:36 pm

    Validation of the phenomenon of autistic regression using home videotapes.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16061766

    Blood levels of mercury are related to diagnosis of autism: a reanalysis of an important data set.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18006963

    Like

  77. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:36 pm

    Developmental Regression and Mitochondrial Dysfunction in a Child With Autism

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2536523/

    Evidence of toxicity, oxidative stress, and neuronal insult in autism.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17090484

    Like

  78. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    Oxidative stress in autism.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16766163

    Thimerosal neurotoxicity is associated with glutathione depletion: protection with glutathione precursors.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15527868

    Like

  79. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826

    Environmental mercury release, special education rates, and autism disorder: an ecological study of Texas.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16338635

    Like

  80. Sharyl
    March 21, 2017 at 4:38 pm

    Shall I go on milwauken?

    Like

  81. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 21, 2017 at 4:38 pm

    @ Sharyl

    You write: “Lawrence, Brian Deer as your source for the real story??” and then give a number of points.

    I suggest you read my article: “Ad Hominem Attacks Against Investigative Journalist Brian Deer: A Clear Example of Antivaccinationists’ Inability to Address the Issues, Poor Scholarship, and Just Plain Unethical Behavior” at: http://www.ecbt.org/images/articles/Ad_Hominem_Attacks_Against_Investigative_Journalist_Brian_Deer.pdf

    I completely refute the points you list.

    And, for instance, you can find in Justice Mitting’s decision in the John-Walker Smith case that Wakefield was actively involved in recruiting the kids. See my article: Andrew Wakefield Has Never Been “Exonerated”: Why Justice Mitting’s Decision in the Professor John Walker-Smith Case Does Not Apply to Wakefield at: http://www.ecbt.org/images/articles/Andrew_Wakefield_Has_Never_Been_Exonerated_Final.pdf

    you can find the link to Justice Mitting’s decision in the reference list.

    As for the movie Vaxxed. If you have been following this exchange of comments, links were provided to refutations of the articles claimed by Kurt Titze. Since Vaxxed was based mainly on these articles, so what? Imagine someone is convicted of a rape/murder. On appeal the defense asks for samples found on the victim to be tested for DNA (perhaps not available at time of original conviction). The DA agrees to split the samples, sending half to his labs and allowing the defense to send their half to a lab of their choice. Both labs find the DNA doesn’t match and also matches another man currently serving time for rape, so the innocent man is released. What would you think of a movie made later that tries to prove his guilt?

    It is interesting that you don’t really address my comments that show the flaws in yours, just post more nonsense.

    Entering into a dialogue with you or any other antivaccinationists is like dealing with the World Flat Earth Society. I do believe that there is absolutely NOTHING that would change your mind. Must be nice to have god-like perfect knowledge? ? ?

    Like

  82. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 5:00 pm

    Sharyl, if you’re going to cite PubMed, then you need to read beyond the abstract. Ghallager’s neonate paper is laughably weak. He looked at 1997-2002 data from the National Health Interview Studies, and correlated autism with hepatitis B vaccination. Children were ages 3-17.

    The autism group had (wait for it) 33 kids total. Of these, 9 of 31 (29%) had the HepB vaccine. There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups (HBV/no HBV) in their autism prevalence (p = 0.07).

    And here’s something else: Of the 7,488 children in the study, 33 had autism. That’s a prevalence of 1:227. According to your CDC link, the prevalence should have been closer to 1:150.

    Now explain again why we should be taking you seriously.

    Like

  83. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 5:03 pm

    Yes, Sharyl. by all means keep posting links. The whole world needs to know how scientific illiteracy impacts public health.

    Like

  84. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 21, 2017 at 6:08 pm

    @ Sharyl:

    You write: “His “study” was about the connection between the MMR vaccine and IBS/gut issues. So you clearly are not the credible one.”

    So, where in the 1998 paper does Wakefield state his study was about the “connection between the MMR vaccine and IBS/gut issues”?

    I repeat, Wakefield’s paper states: “We investigate a consecutive series of children with chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorder.” [Wakefield et al (1998 Feb 28). Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet; 351(9103): 637-641. Available at: http://thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0.pdf ]

    In case the simple English escapes you, he was investigating the relationship between chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorders. Try actually reading and putting your thinking cap on, that is, if you have one.

    Like

  85. Milwauken
    March 21, 2017 at 6:32 pm

    Make that “Critical Thinking Cap.” 😉

    Like

  86. March 21, 2017 at 11:21 pm

    I’m reading a fascinating book called, “Polio: An American Story,” by David Oshisky. This is an excerpt from the introduction:
    “In 1949, San Angelo, Texas outbreak of polio in kids….Since poliovirus was often found in human feces and on the legs of houseflies, Dr R.E. Elvins, the city health officer, called for a heavy spraying of DDT, singling out the open pit toilets on the “Latin American” and “Negro” side of town….. Blaming the epidemic on the “wetbacks” who migrated north each year, monitoring the health of migrant workers become the target…
    San Angelo bought two fogging machines to bathe the city in DDT. Twice each day, flatbed trucks would rumble through the streets, spraying the chemical from large hoses while children danced innocently in the mist that trailed behind. As a goodwill gesture, the local Sherwin-Williams store provided DDT at no cost, urging customers to drench the walls and furniture in their homes…..
    By mind-June more than half of San Angelo’s 160 hospital beds were filled by polio patients, almost all of them children under 15.
    In truth, polio was never the raging epidemic portrayed in the media, not even at its height in the 1940s and 1950s. Ten times as many children would died in accidents in those years, and three times as many would die of cancer. Polio’s special status was due, in large part, to the efforts of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, better known as the March of Dimes, which employed the latest techniques in advertising, fund raising and motivational research to turn a horrific but relatively uncommon disease in to the most feared affliction of its time.
    The genius of the National Polio Foundation lay in its ability to single out polio for special attention, making it seem more ominous than other diseases. This strategy would revolutionize the way charities raised money, recruited volunteers organized local chapters and penetrated medical research. The new model created philanthropy as consumerism and in turn, funded a furious competition for a vaccine…The Salk trials would have a profound impact on the federal government’s role in testing and licensing future drugs and vaccines. “
    No infection has ever drawn as much attention or struck as much terror in the hearts of parents as polio. Yes, some people died and some people were left with lame limbs. But the marketing behind the drive for the first nationwide vaccine campaign has left memories that have lingered for two generations, and long after the Western Hemisphere was declared polio-free by the WHO in 1994. When I ask people, “What pops into your mind when I say the word ‘polio’”? The answers are always the same: Wheelchairs. Crutches. Kids with leg braces. Paralyzed limbs. Iron lung machines.
    And was a virus really the cause of paralysis? Or did the DDT cause the neurological disturbances, which were then conveniently blamed on a usually mild viral infection, seen mostly in summer, and primarily in children?

    The Truth about a Polio Infection
    Polio is an enterovirus. More than 90% of people who were exposed to the virus experience something that looked like a mild case of food poisoning: cramping, diarrhea, mild fever, perhaps vomiting. The infection passed through, leaving a lifetime of true immunity behind. About 3% of people experienced what was called non-paralytic polio, which was often diagnosed as viral meningitis. Symptoms included high fever, a severe headache, a stiff neck and often asymmetrical limb weakness. The illness lasted about 10 days, followed by complete recovery and true, lifetime immunity. Less than 2% of those who contracted the infection experienced severe paralysis, and only 2% of that 2% – or 0.04% of all cases of diagnosed polio – contracted bulbar polio, the type of infection that affected the ability to breathe. And of those who had numbness, weakness or mild paralysis of a limb, 50% fully recovered within two years.
    Rotary International and the Gates Foundation have partnered with the CDC, UNICEF and WHO to develop the Polio Eradication and Endgame Strategic Plan for 2013 to 2018. The estimated cost for this initiative is $5.5 billion, on top of the billions spent since 1979, when Rotary International first got involved in the business of polio. This 134-page document details the plan to eliminate a virus from the planet that is associated with more hype than harm. In 1988, there were 350,000 cases of paralysis attributed to polio, still not that many in relation to total global population. Most recently (2015), the WHO reported only 74 reported cases of confirmed paralytic polio in the entire world.
    Let that number sink in.

    74 cases of polio.
    In the whole world.

    There are more than 7.5 billion people on this planet. All this hysteria, all this surveillance, all this money…over 74 people. And we don’t know if the paralysis was permanent – or if the child fully recovered.
    What’s worse about all of this ambition is that polio is NOT a synonym for paralysis. Some day, after spending billions and billions and billions of dollars to remove three strains of Enteroviruses from the planet, the globalists will puff up their chests and declare that the world is now “polio free,” thanks to the wonders of polio vaccines.
    But the kicker? Eradicating the polioviruses will not make the world “paralysis-free.”
    The international polio surveillance system is based on actively looking for cases of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP), defined as an onset of limb weakness that progresses to paralysis in less than four days. The affected limb or limbs are flaccid, meaning, floppy or limp. When AFP occurs in a foreign country, stool and saliva samples are whisked off to regional centers to be tested. If a single poliovirus is found, the alarms go off and there is a mad dash to vaccinate the entire country with another round of oral polio vaccine. If a polio virus is not found, nothing is done.

    Why? Because other viruses can cause AFP including Coxsackie A, Coxsackie B, Japanese encephalitis, Echoviruses 19 and 33, and other Enteroviruses, including Enterovirus 71 and Enterovirus D68.
    The number of cases of paralysis caused by the oral polio vaccine. Approximately 2 cases of VAPP occur for every million doses of OPV administered. That’s a dirty little secret rarely talked about. VAPP is the reason that the US stopped using the oral polio vaccine in 2000 and transitioned to the injectable polio vaccine (IPV). Note that the Americas had 1,455 cases of paralysis even though the Americas were certified to be polio-free since 1994.

    Again: Polio is not a synonym for paralysis.
    Polio eradication will not eradicate paralysis – but isn’t that the point of the exercise?

    What if those many billions of dollars had been spent on potable water, adequate food, electricity for refrigeration, adequate food, literacy campaigns, and safe housing?

    More money, time and lives wasted on vaccines.

    Like

  87. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 22, 2017 at 12:00 am

    @ Kurt Titze:

    You continue to display your incredible ignorance. One book and only a selected quote. Doesn’t the book also discuss the 1907 and 1916 epidemics in New York? Or how about outbreaks around the country in the 1920s and 30s. I’ve got over 10 books on polio , including one in Swedish, the first country to experience epidemics of polio, and probably 200 articles and documents. Yes, only 1/100 to 1/200 develop permanent paralysis of those exposed; but, unfortunately, most children were exposed so, for instance, during the early 1950s an average of 15,000 cases of polio paralysis occurred yearly in the US. How do we know it was polio? Two reasons: 1. differential diagnosis, quite simply polio develops differently than several of the other causes of paralysis and 2. lab tests for the actual virus. The WHO program to eradicate polio tries to confirm every case with lab analysis, so it isn’t just a couple of cases that raise alarms, it was thousands.

    One simple question? If the cases of acute paralysis in the US during the 1950s were not caused by polio; but by the other viruses you named, how come the latest stats on acute paralysis in the US find less than 200 cases per year? Besides the polio vaccine, what other changes do you hypothesized eliminated the other viruses. How do you explain going from 15,000 or more to less than 200 if it wasn’t the polio vaccine?

    The WHO statistics are even more impressive. From 100s of thousands to currently in most countries, none.

    And, yes, the oral vaccine caused a few cases of polio; but no intervention is perfect. If I were currently a parent and the risk was 15,000 cases without the vaccine vs a half dozen with it, it would be an easy decision to make. However, we now have a killed vaccine that protects against the 3 strains of polio (the original Salk vaccine was only 70% effective against the worst of the three strains) and does not cause paralysis, not a single case.

    I lived through the pre vaccine era. I have personally known a man who spent over 30 years in an iron lung, several paraplegics, one post-polio syndrome, and swim with a man who limps, missing one calf. I would suggest several books and websites; but, given chiropractors believe in a theory with no valid evidence, your mind is made up. You live in a fantasy world. Do you understand any microbiology or immunology? Do you understand how one can differentiate viruses in the lab? Have you ever been to a hospital and seen rows of kids in iron lungs.

    Again, simple question, how did the US go from rows of kids in irons lungs and paraplegics to a handful of cases of acute flaccid paralysis if it wasn’t the polio vaccine? I realize that simple logic and common sense don’t register when one has a fixed ideology.

    You listed 100s of studies that have been either shown to be deficient or not even relevant, so rather than standing back and thinking maybe you are wrong, you now quote from one book and discuss WHO without a reference. And if I were to give lots of quotes and references totally refuting your latest, you will simply come up with something else. You are really pathetic.

    Like

  88. dingo199
    March 22, 2017 at 8:58 am

    Sharyl and Kurt are clearly trolls – posting huge tracts of antivax tropes, posing “questions” but never listening to the replies, and demanding answers but quickly moving the goalposts every time someone gives the answers they want or rejecting the evidence via a multitude of logical fallacies.
    Obviously nobody will convince them, so perhaps we could feed them a bit more selectively?

    Like

  89. dingo199
    March 22, 2017 at 9:06 am

    Oh, and as regards the “increse” in autism, perhaps Sharyl might want to read this paper by Baxter et al.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25108395

    METHOD: A systematic review was conducted for epidemiological data (prevalence, incidence, remission and mortality risk) of autistic disorder and other ASDs. Data were pooled using a Bayesian meta-regression approach while adjusting for between-study variance to derive prevalence models. Burden was calculated in terms of years lived with disability (YLDs) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), which are reported here by world region for 1990 and 2010.

    RESULTS: In 2010 there were an estimated 52 million cases of ASDs, equating to a prevalence of 7.6 per 1000 or one in 132 persons. After accounting for methodological variations, there was no clear evidence of a change in prevalence for autistic disorder or other ASDs between 1990 and 2010. Worldwide, there was little regional variation in the prevalence of ASDs.

    Like

  90. March 22, 2017 at 2:34 pm

    About the same time that the Salk Vaccine was put into market the nomenclature of what was Polio before was changed. I believe it was Aseptic Meningitis. If you check the CDC reports of Aseptic Meningitis and Polio the Totals FLIP FLOPPED. After Salt was started all or most previous diagnoses that were Called Polio were now miraculously Aseptic Meningitis! How Clever! NOT! Read between the lines! Also, IF YOUR VACCINES WORK SO WELL, then why are vaccinated people so afraid to be around unvaccinated children?? I kept all of my children AWAY from the true carriers of disease (the Vaccinated Kids) as they were shedding the diseases (Not the wild type) for up to 60 days following vaccination! Vaccinated children and adults are the true reason for continued spread of these childhood diseases! My children are amongst the healthiest kids alive! Never sick,…To each their own, thank God for freedom of choice!

    Like

  91. Lawrence
    March 22, 2017 at 2:45 pm

    @Kurt – please stop it with the anti-vax stupidity.

    DDT is still used in many places in the world, yet those places don’t have Polio.

    Also, if vaccines “shed” then where are all the cases of disease? As a chiropractor, I’m not surprised that you don’t understand the basics of biology…attenuated viruses can’t replicate, which means they can’t infect.

    We’re not afraid of being around unvaccinated children, we are concerned for those children who, for valid medical reasons, can’t be vaccinated or are too young. Like the child who is dying of SSPE in San Francisco – he caught the measles from an unvaccinated child & now he’s going to die.

    Where was his “freedom of choice?”

    Like

  92. Lawrence
    March 22, 2017 at 2:48 pm

    And yet the incidence of childhood diseases that we vaccinated against has been reduced by, in many cases, more than 99% – care to explain?

    Like

  93. Lawrence
    March 22, 2017 at 2:53 pm

    And please feel free to post reputable information to back up your assertions….

    Like

  94. Chris
    March 22, 2017 at 3:29 pm

    Kurt: “Also, IF YOUR VACCINES WORK SO WELL, then why are vaccinated people so afraid to be around unvaccinated children??”

    Please tell us your proven way to protect babies from measles, mumps and chicken pox before their first birthday. Provide the PubMed indexed study to show that it actually works. Many infected in the Disneyland outbreak were under age one. Your method could have prevented that!

    “After Salt was started all or most previous diagnoses that were Called Polio were now miraculously Aseptic Meningitis!”

    Aseptic meningitis is a symptom, not a disease. It is caused by other diseases like mumps, measles, etc. Just like a fever is a symptom not a disease.

    Also the “renaming of polio” is one of the most inane foolish anti-vax arguments around. Even in the 1950s they could distinguish the difference between the three different polio serotypes (though it took a wee bit of work). Now with more modern methods, which include finding out that the Disneyland measles strain came from the Philippines, that is even a more idiotic argument.

    The following is US Census data on reported polio cases during the 20th Century. Do provide the PubMed indexed papers from the 1950s to show what policies were enacted to “rename” polio.

    From http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
    1912 . . . . 5.5
    1920 . . . . 2.2
    1925 . . . . 5.3
    1930 . . . . 7.5
    1935 . . . . 8.5
    1940 . . . . 7.4
    1945 . . . 10.3
    1950 . . . 22.1
    1955 . . . 17.6
    1960 . . . . 1.8
    1965 . . Less than .05
    1970 . . Less than .05
    1975 . . Less than .05
    1980 . . Less than .05

    Like

  95. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 22, 2017 at 4:23 pm

    @ Lawrence:

    Sorry; but attenuated vaccines can, though rarely, infect others; but only when in continuous close proximity and only the first day or two, e.g. for instance, unvaccinated parent changing diapers. The original Salk vaccine reduced the number of cases from an average of 15,000 per year to less than 2,000; however, as I mentioned in a previous comment, it was only about 70% effective against the most virulent strain. The Sabin oral vaccine was effective against all three. However, it did cause a very few cases and that is sad; but seatbelts don’t always save lives or injury and there are a few cases of people being injured by seat belts in minor traffic mishaps; but I wouldn’t stop using my seat belt. However, Titze keeping his kids away from those vaccinated with the killed vaccine is just ridiculous and keeping them away from those with the attenuated would only reduce risk slightly as polio infects mainly through food and water, not direct contact. So, unless Titze kept his kids away from the world, they would still be at risk.

    However, as usual Titze really doesn’t know what he is talking about. The polio vaccine trials required a lab confirmation of each case, that is, the lab had to find the polio virus. And, prior to 1950 the stats just listed polio, then they began a separate category of paralysis, which remained throughout the Salk trials and afterwards.

    As for DDT, though used a few times directly after WWII, such as in San Antonio (at the time one theory of polio transmission was flies), it didn’t come into wide spread use until 1947-8, so the epidemics of 1907 and 1916, 1920s, 1930, and 1940s were prior to usage of DDT. And despite what antivaccinationists claim, DDT usage in millions of pounds per year, continued until 1972, 10 years after Rachel Carlson’s book, Silent Spring. And, it was not banned in US totally, just mass spraying. It could and was used for outbreaks of specific mosquito-born diseases and it wasn’t banned in rest of the world. Though mass spraying stopped and, for instance, walls of huts were sprayed and mosquito netting.

    Titze, obviously just copies from others with no indication he actually studied/investigated the subject or even thinks about what he is writing.

    I have a ton of article on chiropractic; but just today another good one was posted on Science-Based Medicine by Steven Novella, “Cracking Down on Chiropractic Pseudoscience” at: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/cracking-down-on-chiropractic-pseudoscience/

    It is tiresome even reading what Titze and others write. The writings of the International Flat Earth Society at least are amusing.

    It would also be nice if Titze would give the links or references to quotes. I would; but it would be a waste of time. If anyone following this discussion has read any of my ECBT papers, I use extensive quote, complete accurate references, and hyperlinks when available.

    From WHO:

    Case definition for notification of poliomyelitis due to wild-type poliovirus under the IHR (2005)
    Under the IHR (2005), a notifiable case of poliomyelitis due to wild-type poliovirus is defined as a suspected case* with isolation of wild poliovirus in stool specimens1 collected from the suspected case or from a close contact of the suspected case.
    *A suspected case is defined as a child under 15 years of age presenting with acute flaccid paralysis (AFP2), or as any person at any age with paralytic illness if poliomyelitis is suspected.

    Note concerning notification of wild or vaccine-derived poliovirus from sources other than AFP cases
    In addition to notification of laboratory confirmed cases of poliomyelitis due to wild-type poliovirus (a disease which is designated in Annex 2 of the IHR (2005) as “unusual or unexpected and may have serious public health impact”), the isolation of wild or vaccine-derived poliovirus from other human or non-human sources (from persons without paralysis, or from environmental samples) must generally also be notified to WHO under the separate notification requirement for “events which may constitute a public health emergency of international concern” as they fulfil at least two of the four criteria for notification.

    1 As a standard procedure, two stool specimens are collected from an AFP case within 14 days of paralysis onset. Since virus excretion in the stool decreases beyond two weeks after paralysis onset, and to increase the sensitivity of virus detection, additional stool specimens from up to five close contacts are taken from AFP cases for whom 2 specimens collected within 14 days of paralysis onset are not available.
    2 Poliomyelitis cannot be diagnosed reliably on clinical grounds because other conditions presenting with acute paralysis can mimic poliomyelitis. Surveillance for polio eradication therefore requires the reporting of all children < 15 yrs with acute onset flaccid paralysis, with subsequent laboratory testing of stool specimens.

    WHO. Case definitions for the four diseases requiring notification in all circumstances under the International Health Regulations (2005). Available at:

    http://www.who.int/ihr/Case_Definitions.pdf?ua=1

    Like

  96. March 22, 2017 at 9:46 pm

    Picking on the chiropractor will get you no where,…

    The whisleblower “Scientist” told the world that his Vaccine Maker company told him to destroy VALID Data that stated the danger to african american children was SIGNIFICANT and greatly outside the standard of Deviation of difference..

    True or False?

    This truth puts to rest any reliance on Scientific studies!! They are often fraudulent and can not be believed!

    Like

  97. Chris
    March 22, 2017 at 10:15 pm

    Why should we care about what you think? You don’t even know that aseptic meningitis can be caused by all sorts of reasons. By definition it is meningitis that is not caused by a bacterial infection, which is why they are aseptic… not septic (bacterial):
    http://www.healthline.com/health/aseptic-meningitis

    Plus you forgot it was only African American boys (not girls) who have been vaccinated late. Plus the numbers were too small to be significant. The most likely reason why there was a tiny anomaly in the numbers was because they were children from low income families who decided to get them vaccinated after they had become a cause of concern due to developmental issues, and it was a requirement to access special ed. services at a public school.

    The data was not destroyed, but archived in electronic form. Otherwise Hooker could not have used that same data, to squeeze out through lots of hoops his own strange conclusions. They have also been put online for all to see here:
    https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/01/04/the-william-thompson-documents-theres-no-whistle-to-blow/

    Again, why should we care about what you think?

    Like

  98. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 7:03 am

    @Joel – thank you for the correction. It is my understanding that the OPV does run the risk of secondary infection, but at a very reduced rate compared to wild measles, hence why the changeover to IPV & even the newer vaccine for final eradication.

    To my knowledge, there has never been a reported case of the MMR vaccine causing an infection of the diseases they protect against, which is why I find the anti-vax stance even more ridiculous.

    As to Kurt above, he seems to be mixing up stories, since his claim about “destroying” data is completely wrong. I’ll also point out that the increased rate or risk identified in the DeStefano data, which wasn’t included in the final draft, was explained and certainly that increased risk has not been seen in real life.

    Since anti-vaxers can’t even get the most basic facts of the story correct or even show any recognition of basic scientific understanding, it’s funny to see them flailing about.

    Like

  99. March 23, 2017 at 9:24 am

    OK TIME FOR YOU HACKS TO ATTACK ONE OF YOUR OWN,…I can’t wait to read what you say about an MD who thinks like most Chiropractors and other highly intelligent anti-vaccine people.

    Following Your Inner Compass: Rejecting Flu Vaccine in Pregnancy
    by Kelly Brogan, MD | Guest Writer
    Published February 22, 2017 | Vaccination, Risk & Failure Reports

    I dare say that the modern woman has handed over her inner compass. It’s as if we came from generations of master chefs—natural giants in the kitchen, using our senses and instincts to guide us toward nourishing preparations—but we have been recently convinced through the promise of technology and corporate prowess that processed food is more reliable, nutritious, and beneficial. We’ve been convinced that Hamburger Helper is better for our families than a homemade Bolognese.

    The Medicalization of Pregnancy and Birth is no Exception
    In this way, women have permitted doctors and pharmaceutical companies privileged access to their fierce and primitive drive toward protecting a pregnancy. They have been made to feel fear, convinced that they need the support of the apparatus of allopathic medicine to get them through this perilous trial.

    I’d like to take a moment to pause. Take a deep breath. And ask the women reading this to look inside and to check if that compass is there. Ask if they can hold it gently in their hand and trust that their bodies and minds know how to guide them, when properly supported and cared for.

    If you must relinquish your power to doctors, I recommend finding one who acknowledges the awesome dangers of blindly following medical doctrine. Outsourcing our health to pharmaceutical companies is an extremely myopic approach to securing lasting wellness. I’d like to show you that the guiding authorities you have been led to believe are acting in your best interest are guilty of some pretty heinous crimes of abuse and neglect, and never more so than in the pregnant population.

    Enter the ACIP, or the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
    This group of “thought leaders” is charged with the task of determining what vaccines will be pushed upon you during your doctor’s check-ups and wellness visits. It consists of heads of pharmaceutical companies such as Novartis and Sanofi Pasteur, and is a prime example of the enmeshment between the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and industry.

    There are several reasons why a committee that behaves in the way this one does should not be one that you trust with your body or your baby.

    Since 1997, the ACIP has recommended the trivalent inactivated flu vaccine to pregnant women after the first trimester. Then, in 2004, this recommendation, inexplicably changed and grew, as is the way with vaccine recommendations, to encompass all pregnant women (and every human over 6 months of age), regardless of personal risk factors, immune determinants, diet, regional exposures, and timing of injection.

    But they Must Have Determined that it was Safe? How Could They Recommend it?
    Determining that something is “safe” in pregnancy is like saying that because individuals don’t have car accidents on passage from point A to B, that riding in a vehicle is safer than walking. For ethical reasons, pharmaceutical products cannot be studied in a randomized manner in pregnancy, severely limiting our ability to look at short or long-term outcomes. The surprising news is that vaccines, the pharmaceutical product in question, have never been studied in a truly placebo controlled manner, in single, or multiple deliveries, and not for long-term outcomes, even in a general population.

    I have discussed, in previous articles, the concerns surrounding the recommendation of a pharmaceutical product to healthy pregnant women despite the lack of any general population studies. Here are some of my major gripes and reasons why you might want to reject the flu vaccine in pregnancy:

    Safety
    Closer review of the vaccine “safety studies” including this recent claim that the flu vaccine was not associated with low birth weight, reveals outcomes that are compromised by insufficient statistical power (small studies), short-term assessment periods, exclusion of fetal losses in analyses, incomplete control of confounding variables (that can raise incidence rates of bad outcomes in both groups), lack of laboratory confirmation of influenza, and focus on gross outcomes such as preterm birth rather than longer term neurodevelopmental.
    Multiexposure
    The flu vaccine is prepared with egg proteins and associated unidentified viral DNA from this animal tissue, the allergen gelatin, polysorbate 80 which crosses the blood brain barrier, the carcinogen formaldehyde, the detergent triton x100, sucrose, resin, the antibiotic gentamycin, and thimerosol/mercury. Double talk of mercury exposure in pregnancy (don’t eat sushi, get your vaccine!) is only one glaringly egregious example of the CDC’s selective neglect of peer-reviewed published literature demonstrating profound harm associated with this neurotoxic metal.Mercury-containing vaccines are offered to pregnant women despite evidence as recent as last month which linked vaccine-related exposure to autism spectrum disorders. The unstudied role of these ingredients is compounded by the genome-altering effects of unquantified viral DNA from the cross-species preparation of this product. Multiple exposures through different vaccine preparations have never been studied, despite accumulating evidence of synergistic toxicity, mortality, and risk associated with other pregnancy-related vaccines such as DTaP.
    Inflammation
    Perhaps the most concerning study I have come across implicated the influenza vaccination in a strong inflammatory response in pregnant woman. Here, the investigators identified significantly elevated CRP two days after vaccination and a similar (but non-significant) pattern for TNF-alpha. They address the notion of vulnerable subgroups as being more important than generalizable findings. For example, the most depressed women at the time of vaccination exhibited an increased inflammatory response to vaccination—suggestive of inflammatory priming by the depressed state or an impairment of the inflammatory attenuation that is typical of a pregnant state. Stating that this inflammation is preferable to that of a flu virus infection is hand waving assumption, and is guaranteeing an inflammatory response in a woman who may very well have been otherwise unaffected.
    Fear-mongering
    Inflated risks of the flu in the pregnant population are the basis for aggressive propaganda. As Ayoub and Yazbak state:
    In general, most symptoms of the “flu” are not caused by influenza virus but by a variety of noninfluenza viruses, bacteria, other infectious organisms, or even noninfectious conditions. According to the CDC, only about 20% of the cases of ILI are actually caused by the influenza virus. If this is true, then theoretically only 20% of all cases of ILI are preventable by influenza vaccination, and only when there is a perfect antigenic match between the vaccine strain and the circulating virus. Furthermore, even a perfect antigenic match does not guarantee an adequate antibody titer, nor does measurable antibody assure protection.
    Efficacy
    A Cochrane analysis of 50 studies (15 of which were industry funded) demonstrated that in the likely event that the included strains did not match circulating virus, there was a 2% incidence of presumed influenza in the unvaccinated population as opposed to a 1% incidence in the vaccinated. There was no effect of vaccination on hospitalizations for complications. This review also acknowledges an increased incidence of Guillain-Barre Syndrome (autoimmune paralysis) associated with vaccination. A Canadian study found that subjects who had received the regular trivalent influenza vaccine the previous season were more susceptible to subsequently contracting the pandemic H1N1 in 2009/2010.
    This Committee Not Only Feels Comfortable Discarding These Concerns but Also Ignores the Following:
    It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to pregnant women or can affect reproduction capacity.
    Goldman, the researcher and author of the aforementioned study, determined the following:

    Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) and still birth rates determined to be proximally associated to vaccine delivery were analyzed by Moro et al for the flu seasons of 1990-2009 finding 1.9/million or an average incidence of 1.2 per year.
    From this average to the first 5 months of the 2009/10 season in which women were recommended to receive both the typical flu vaccine and the H1N1, there were 57/million fetal losses reported.
    Using a capture-recapture statistical tool that allows for researchers to control for the inherent limitations of a reporting system, 174 cases from VAERS and 67 cases from NCOW were pooled to identify an ascertainment-corrected rate of 1/1695 (590/million). This adjustment reflects the fact that VAERS is a gross underestimation of the actual incidence of adverse events—in this case representing only 13% of the vaccine-related fetal losses.
    Goldman then discusses how initial underreporting can influence further underreporting:

    Because both patient and health care professionals relied on a historical profile that was incomplete with respect to assessing fetal-demise reporting, a possible link to fetal demise following administration of influenza vaccine/vaccines during 2009/2010 was rarely contemplated or was considered highly unlikely and thus, more often than not, not reported.
    This 4250% increase in fetal deaths was known to the CDC and did not trigger any reparative action.
    We have a committee comprised of pharmaceutically-invested “experts” telling doctors what to do with their patients. The transparency of the no-citizen-left-behind agenda is never more apparent than in the fact that you can engage this potentially lethal medical intervention (yes, death is a known and documented potential side effect) at your local CVS. Long gone are the days of informed consent.

    Find Your Inner Compass
    This information certainly calls at minimum for “further study” if not a complete and total halt to the current perinatal recommendations. It’s time to take a step back, as citizens, and take a long, hard look at what is happening to our health as a population. It’s time to appreciate that our doctor’s recommendations are influenced by companies who engage repeatedly in criminal behavior, and who refuse to acknowledge any role for lifestyle, diet, and individual genetics in infectious disease.

    Don’t wait for the too little too late DES and thalidomide style recalls, decades after the fact. You have the power to reclaim your pregnancy, understand natural support of immunity, and handily dismiss obstetrical bullying by seeking out a like-minded provider. Take back your maternal compass. It’s telling you to steer clear of this needle.

    Kelly Brogan, MD.

    Like

  100. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 10:00 am

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/04/02/i-do-not-think-that-study-shows-what-you-think-it-shows/

    Dr. Brogan is not an expert…..I’m not surprised that you would use this person as a source.

    Also, the “4250%” increase in fetal deaths? If that was the case, it would mean no child would have been born alive in 2009 – 2010.

    Like

  101. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 10:21 am

    Not only not an expert, by her website, she isn’t even a real doctor….advocating against the real treatment of depression? She’s probably killing people.

    Like

  102. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 10:36 am

    And besides being off-topic, your assertions have already been thoroughly debunked.

    Back to the topic at hand, it is past time for us to be dedicating resources for both child and adults with autism, to help them with effective means of communicating and living productive lives.

    All of the money wasted on studies to attempt to find some link between vaccines and autism should be put to much better use.

    Like

  103. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 11:00 am

    @lawrence

    Dr. William Thompson

    Like

  104. Milwauken
    March 23, 2017 at 11:03 am

    Kurt, why are you still here? Just about every point you have made has been clearly refuted, but instead of changing your belief to accommodate new evidence, you ignore the evidence and move on to yet another anti-vax talking point, and when that point is debunked, you move on to the next. Lather, rinse, repeat. Clearly you are not easily embarrassed.

    Like

  105. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 11:11 am

    @milwauken

    I have just read all of the comments above and I must say, clearly you think a lot of yourself.

    Hint: Being humble, kind, and calm will make your life easier.

    Like

  106. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 11:22 am

    @ Kurt Titze:

    One additional point about William Thompson, the “whistleblower.” He made it quite clear in his testimony before Congress that the analyses that were included in the paper were valid. So, the paper found NO association between MMR and autism in any of the included analyses. So, even if one were to believe that there is a risk is only Afro-American boys if given the vaccine prior to 36 months, then shouldn’t antivaccinationists be telling everyone that the MMR is safe for all other children and for Afro-American boys should be given after 36 months? Of is Thompson only credible when he agrees with you; but not otherwise?

    DeStefano et al (2004). Age at First Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccination in Children With Autism and School-Matched Control Subjects: A Population-Based Study in Metropolitan Atlanta. Pediatrics; 113: 258-266.

    As for Kelly Brogan MD, there are also chiropractors that support vaccinations. Finding one MD or even a handful out of probably one million MDs in US (not all practicing), means nothing. I can probably find MDs who believe in just about anything.

    The fact that the best you can do is cut and paste what others say and base your comments on cherry-picking one or two articles just proves your incapability of a scholarly logical scientific approach. Such an approach involves looking at all the research. But, just for your enlightenment, there have been numerous studies on flu vaccine and pregnancy and they have found not only NO significant risks; but even more so, that the newborn is protected as well. I have around 25 articles in my electronic database, e.g.:

    Moro et al (2017 Feb). Surveillance of Adverse Events After Seasonal Influenza Vaccination in
    Pregnant Women and Their Infants in the Vaccine Adverse Event
    Reporting System, July 2010-May 2016. Drug Safety; 40(2): 145-152

    Nunes et al (2016). The Effects of Influenza Vaccination during Pregnancy on Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Perinatology; 33: 1104-1114.

    Tapia et al (2016 Sep). Maternal immunisation with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine for prevention of influenza in infants in Mali: a prospective, active-controlled, observer-blind, randomised phase 4 trial. Lancet Infectious Disease; 16(9): 1026-35.

    Just a few to whet your whistle. I have actually over 10,000 articles on my electronic database on vaccines and infectious diseases, indexed of course.

    What is fascinating is how each claim you post is refuted and, instead of reevaluating your position, you just post something else. You just keep making a fool of yourself.

    Why don’t you go to PubMed, type in “flu vaccine AND pregnancy”, get ALL the studies and, instead of cutting and pasting what someone else writes, do your own summary of ALL the studies. Of course, that would assume that you had a basic understanding of scientific methodology, especially epidemiology, and statistics. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to know which studies should count.

    Like

  107. Chris
    March 23, 2017 at 11:57 am

    Mr. Titze, you just dumped a cut and paste load of nonsense, without ever thinking about the issues for yourself. Again, why should we care about what you think?

    Dr. Harrison: “So, even if one were to believe that there is a risk is only Afro-American boys if given the vaccine prior to 36 months, then shouldn’t antivaccinationists be telling everyone that the MMR is safe for all other children and for Afro-American boys should be given after 36 months?”

    And the most likely reason those boys received the vaccine late was because they were found to have some kind of developmental delay and through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s “Child Find” program were admitted to a public school special ed. preschool. But in order to attend, they needed to catch up on their vaccines.

    That paper was written in 2004, several years before the Affordable Care Act was passed. It makes one wonder if that study had been done just in the last five years what the numbers would have been, assuming their families got health insurance coverage (Georgia never got around to expanding Medicaid).

    Also what would the numbers have been if the study had been done in a state that had expanded Medicaid?

    Like

  108. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    @Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

    Dr. William Thompson’s study found a higher risk with the MMR and autism in two categories, African American boys, and children who had been developing normally for the first twelve months of life.

    Like

  109. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 12:22 pm

    It wasn’t Thompson’s study…he was merely a research participant.

    Like

  110. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 12:26 pm
  111. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 12:39 pm

    @Lawrence

    I know it wasn’t “his” study, it was a study that he was involved in.

    I quickly looked over your source, and it is missing badly in many areas, and also has a lot of opinion, so I can’t trust it.

    Here are the facts:
    There was fraud committed at the CDC.
    The study found a higher risk of autism when the MMR vaccine was given before 36 months of age to two groups, African American boys, and children who had been developing normally for the first twelve months of life.

    Spin it however you would like.

    Like

  112. Milwauken
    March 23, 2017 at 12:46 pm

    Michael, you use an alternative meaning of “facts”, and a weak grasp of how statistics work.

    Like

  113. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    Those “facts” are just not true, Michael.

    I’ve read the study documents – all of them & they don’t say what anti-vaxers say they do….more importantly, Thompson hasn’t said what anti-vaxers think he said either.

    Like

  114. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 1:13 pm

    @Lawrence

    Which one of those two facts to you disagree with? Please explain why and then feel free to give your sources.

    Like

  115. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 1:16 pm

    @Milwauken

    Being humble, kind, and calm will make your life easier.

    And btw, I aced all of my statistics classes. If you have an issue with my statistics, then you are free to correct me on them. What statistic do you have an issue with specifically?

    Like

  116. Milwauken
    March 23, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    Then you must be familiar with statistical significance. What makes you think the DeStefano study had generated usable data with regard to autism and AA boys? Why don’t we see a higher prevalence of ASDs in black children than in white children, and what biological mechanism could possible account for such an outcome?

    Like

  117. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 2:27 pm

    @ Michael:

    You write: “I know it wasn’t “his” study, it was a study that he was involved in.”

    The author list is: Frank DeStefano, Tanya Karapurkar Bhasin, William W. Thompson, Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp and Coleen Boyle

    So, the principle investigator was DeStefano, it was his study, he led it, Thompson contributed; but again, if you believe the claim of autism in African-American boys, so then MMR vaccine safe for everyone else. Right? Or is Thompson only credible when what he says fits your ideology?

    From the article:

    Results for Subgroups of Case Children
    When we performed analyses within the nonmutually exclusive clinical subgroups of case children, we found no associations with vaccination before 18 months or 24 months of age among cases without preexisting conditions before 1 year of age. . .”

    Results According to Race, Birth Weight, and Maternal Characteristics
    We further examined associations according to selected maternal and birth characteristics that were available from the birth certificate files. For vaccination before 18 months or 24 months of age, all of the ORs according to different categories of race, birth weight, maternal age, and maternal education were 1.0 (Table 5). For the 36-month cutoff, there were
    suggestions of possible associations within the subgroups of children whose mothers were older or had more years of education, but the CIs were very wide and included 1.0.”

    CI means that that results include both protective and risk, in other words, indeterminate. As I wrote earlier, the number of Afro-American boys below 36 months was too small to do a legitimate meaningful analysis on. When you have a very small sample, one kid going in either direction (due to chance) could influence the results. And Hooker couldn’t even get the minimum for his article so he increased the months covered and used the wrong statistic. So, you aced your statistics classes, then should should understand that you don’t use a Chi-square for matched data in a case-control study. Besides my PhD, I have a M.S. in biostatistics.

    If you really understand research you should understand that one develops main hypotheses. Afterwards, one can do post-hoc analyses to see if there is anything that may lead to new hypotheses and future research. Because of multiple comparisons, that is, the more tests you do, the higher the risk of false positives, especially when done on subgroups with small sizes, post hoc analyses should not be included in a paper. The Afro-American boys fit this. Left Brain Right Brain actually posts the link to the entire study protocol and Congressional hearing. You can find it on his webpage at: https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/01/06/if-you-want-to-read-the-william-thompson-documents-heres-the-link/

    As for “children who had been developing normally for the first twelve months of life.” The MMR was given after 12 months to all children, not just Afro-American boys, so any study looking at effects of MMR would have to be on children after 12 months of age. You can’t expect the vaccine to have an effect before it is given. Duh!

    @ Chris:

    You write: “And the most likely reason those boys received the vaccine late was because they were found to have some kind of developmental delay and through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s “Child Find” program were admitted to a public school special ed. preschool. But in order to attend, they needed to catch up on their vaccines”

    Definite possibility! Good point! ! !

    As I and others have mentioned in previous comments, no matter how many points submitted in comments by antivaccinationists that are refuted, they just come up with additional ones. Years ago J Edgar Hoover was intent on proving Albert Einstein an active member of the Communist Party because Einstein promoted pacifism. Hoover discovered a German woman being treated for Schizophrenia in an American Mental hospital who claimed Einstein had attended a party meeting at such and such a date and such and such an address. Despite definite evidence that it was the wrong address and at the given date there was absolute proof that Einstein was out of the country, her testimony was included in Hoover’s Einstein File (see the book by the same name. The Einstein File). Though devoting years and massive manpower, the thick file came to nought. I guess Hoover would have made an excellent antivaccinationist?

    Like

  118. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 2:34 pm

    I wonder why all of the cover-up and fraud?

    Like

  119. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 2:48 pm

    @ Michael:

    Are you really so dense? As I wrote, they shredded the printouts; but the electronic data is available, which Hooker obtained directly from the CDC, so what cover-up if one can apply to the CDC for the data and carry out ones own analysis? As I wrote previously, I photocopy articles at the library, then go to friend’s office and scan in, takes up a heck of a lot less space. I then put in electronic files on my computer and make backups on DVDs.

    I wonder why all the paranoid conspiracy delusions you seem to be suffering from?

    Like

  120. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:01 pm

    @Joel A. Harrison PHD, MPH

    You are so long-winded with anything you say, that much tends to get lost.

    So you claim no fraud took place and there was no cover-up? So you think that Dr. William Thompson is just “off of his rocker” huh??

    And as for “children who have been developing normally” the term is called isolated autism. So your point actually supports my point that it proves that the MMR vaccine given before 36 months of age also increases the risk of autism to all typical “healthy” children.

    To use your own vocabulary… “DUH!”

    I wonder what paranoid conspiracy delusions you are suffering from???

    Like

  121. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:08 pm

    2014 statement from Dr. William Thompson

    My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and

    Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.

    I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.

    I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.

    My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub­ group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.

    I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his beliefthat CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent. I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.

    I am grateful for the many supportive e-mails that I have received over the last several days.

    I will not be answering further questions at this time. I am providing information to Congressman William Posey, and of course will continue to cooperate with Congress. I have also offered to assist with reanalysis of the study data or development of further studies. For the time being, however, I am focused on my job and my family.

    Reasonable scientists can and do differ in their interpretation of information. I will do everything I can to assist any unbiased and objective scientists inside or outside the CDC to analyze data collected by the CDC or other public organizations for the purpose of understanding whether vaccines are associated with an increased risk of autism. There are still more questions than answers, and I appreciate that so many families are looking for answers from the scientific community.

    My colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been entirely professional since this matter became public. In fact, I received a performance-based award after this story came out. I have experienced no pressure or retaliation and certainly was not escorted from the building, as some have stated.

    Like

  122. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 4:24 pm

    I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.

    Please reconcile this statement with your beliefs, Michael.

    Because unless you are reading a different cut and paste than what you see above, it really doesn’t support any of your contentions. Certainly even Thompson doesn’t mention the word “fraud.”

    Like

  123. Lawrence
    March 23, 2017 at 4:27 pm

    And the results of the study showed no increase of risk outside of that one subgroup, unless you can show otherwise.

    And notice how this “risk” hasn’t been borne out by actual real world numbers either – or any other research.

    Like

  124. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:36 pm

    @Lawrence

    If you want to just cherry pick that section of his statement, then it does tell a different story. But there is much more to his statement. I suggest you try and read all of it.

    I would call 1:68 real world numbers .

    Like

  125. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:38 pm

    @Lawrence

    Here it is… “I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

    Like

  126. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:38 pm

    Please reconcile this statement with your beliefs, Lawrence.

    Like

  127. Chris
    March 23, 2017 at 4:50 pm

    Michael, what is the significance of the age of three years and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s Child Find program?

    Like

  128. Michael
    March 23, 2017 at 4:55 pm

    @Chris

    I don’t respond to riddles that are off topic. If you have something to say, you should just state it. I don’t play games.

    Like

  129. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 5:03 pm

    @ Michael:

    You continue to ignore that the actual protocol for the study did not include the subgroup analysis of Afro-American boys at 24 and 36 months and that the data WAS NOT DESTROYED. In addition, Thompson stated:

    “I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.”

    Antivaccinationists have stated the recording was NOT illegal. Depends on the State. In most States, a recording can only be made if both sides are aware of it. So, whether illegal or not, it was certainly highly unethical and Hooker shared it with Wakefield who released Thompson’s name. So, some of your sources of information are highly unethical people, certainly not the best of sources.

    Again, if you believe that the subgroup study of Afro-American boys, based on an extremely small group, is valid, then according to Thompson the published data was accurate, so you should be accepting vaccinations between 12 and 36 months for ALL children except Afro-American boys and then vaccinating them after 36 months.

    I won’t bother to refer to additional articles that deal with Thompson and his reasons for contacting Hooker and the validity of his statements because the facts, including availability of the data for analysis (legitimate analysis, not Hooker’s), and the complete Congressional hearing and study Protocol, refute his claims.

    As for the 1:68. There are several reasons:

    1. It is NOT classically defined autism; but Autism Spectrum Disorder, so additional disorders have been added. At one time, leukemia was thought an infectious disease, then a form of cancer, so when added to cases of cancer it increased the number of cases of cancer and decreased cases of infectious diseases.
    2. Even Kanner, who wrote the first article in 1943 giving a collection of symptoms the name Autism, admitted in early 1970s that he had excluded a number of kids who he should have included, so when they became included this increased the cases.
    3. Asperger’s was added in 1994, increasing number under ASD. Some men in 70s received diagnosis; but they certainly didn’t suddenly develop the symptoms.
    4. Federal programs developed to fund ASD, so if school district wanted more funds, kids who may have been diagnosed as retarded/developmentally challenged, were diagnosed with ASD. ASD is a collection of behaviors, not objective physical attributes so there is room for subjectivity. There are several research papers that showed rates of diagnosis of retardation had negative correlation with ASD diagnoses.
    5. Standardized evaluation tests were developed that allowed school personnel to administer rather than psychiatrists and licensed psychologist. The standardized test allow for some subjectivity.
    6. Public awareness, e.g. Asperger’s. I have a friend that fits Aspergers, almost genius level in understanding of cosmology and similar disciplines; but socially awkward. Until I learned about Aspergers, I just considered him eccentric and socially awkward.

    A Finnish study actually looked at classical autism diagnosis and ASD and found ASD increased; but classical rates remained fairly constant.

    If one changes the definition, changes availability of funding, changes awareness, etc. rates appear to be increasing; but they aren’t.

    If tomorrow we were to redefine common cold as falling under FLU-LIKE conditions, FLU-LIKE conditions would increase. Yes, there are differences; but some similarities, just as the different disorders under ASD have some similarities and also differences. In fact, leukemia, though listed under cancer, differs quite a bit from solid type cancers. One can create categories that include quite divergent characteristics as there are always some characteristics one can find in common.

    Melodie Peterson’s book “Our Daily Meds” describes how kids who were just energetic, were reclassified as either “hyperactive” or with “attention-deficit disorder” leading to massive use of psychpharmaca. As Lorna Wing once wrote: “it doesn’t exist until you define it.”

    Like

  130. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 5:08 pm

    @ Michael

    Chris wrote: “Michael, what is the significance of the age of three years and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s Child Find program?” and you replied: “I don’t respond to riddles that are off topic. If you have something to say, you should just state it. I don’t play games”

    The significance is that ASD was included which meant school districts could get added funding for every child diagnosed with ASD. Certainly not off topic since it is one of the key reasons for an increase in diagnoses of ASD. If you are going to post comments, show that you have actually studied what is going on, instead of displaying your continued ignorance.

    Like

  131. Marsha
    March 23, 2017 at 5:32 pm

    I am a speech-language pathologist and have worked in the same elementary school for 25 years. I work with a highly experienced team of professionals who have dedicated their lives to serving to children in public schools. We are not concerned with reimbursement from medical insurance. We do not receive any profit from the marketing and sales of quick-fix, cure all programs. Our work is not dependent on grants or the results of our research. Our work will not make headlines or sell magazines. It will not go viral and be used as a link for web advertising.

    After reading the comments above I had the feeling that I was a child at a cocktail party, l listening to a room full of adults argue about the statistics of neglected children. What is the point? Why argue about headlines and inconclusive studies? Does anyone really think that statistics will give us an answer? Or is this just a way to avoid fear.

    Here is the simple truth. No jargon. No numbers: The children that are enrolled in my classroom today, have very different needs as compared to the children who were enrolled 15 years ago. This is not because, back in the day, there were more children in institutions. It is not because my former students really had the same needs and I just don’t remember them very well, or that I just used different terms to categorize children. I don’t even use those terms unless I have to communicate with someone who needs big words to feel important. It is not because our busting- at- the- seams, school launched an advertising campaign so we could stretch our budget just a little bit more. It is most certainly not because the hard working families of these beautiful children are just following a popular new trend in in parenting.

    I will agree that , over the years, the language that has been used to describe behaviors or skills has changed. More contemporary, politically correct labels have been created. However, those of us who have actually been working with children in a public classroom did not participate in that project. We don’t have time to publish, do research, attend committee luncheons, or even go the bathroom. We teach. We observe. We take data. We spend more time with the children in our classrooms than their parents do. We don’t need to debate statistics. We know. We are not concerned about what the popular public trend is. We live it.

    So here is a fact: We have seen a dramatic increase in children being referred to us who demonstrate significant challenges in sensory processing, motor planning and communication. These children have striking and dramatic differences in the way that they play and interact with people in their environment. Their neurological and biological systems are so overwhelmed that many resort to engaging in repetitive behaviors and routines in order to protect themselves from the constant bombardment of language and sensations that they can not interpret. If they had been here 20 years ago I would remember.

    On the other hand, many of these children demonstrate academic skills that are far more advanced than their classmates who do not flap their hands, and are able to look adults in the eye. So statistically these children could help to create a new “norm curve” for academics. The possible result could be that my “typically developing” child could then be statistically, delayed or even worse…..atypical.

    Each child is an individual. Knowing how many children exist in the population, that exhibit similar behavior patterns to the individual, is as useful to me as knowing how many children used a binky or picked their nose. It is not about seeing children as a percentage of the group. It is not about identifying everything that is different or lacking and changing it. It is about finding a way to see the world through a child’s eyes. It is about understanding that the “norm” is not necessarily better, and different is not a disease. Maybe we need to just understand.

    I do not work with statistics.
    I do not work with diagnoses.
    I do not call my students Asperger’s
    or ASD, Classic or rock n roll Autism.

    They are children
    They have names

    Like

  132. Eva
    March 23, 2017 at 5:43 pm

    I too work with children on the autism spectrum, and know that recognizing their humanity is the most important way to begin to help them navigate through the complicated “real world.”

    The incidence of autism rose 7- to 8-fold in California from the early 1990s through the present. Quantitative analysis of the changes in diagnostic criteria, the inclusion of milder cases, and an earlier age at diagnosis during this period suggests that these factors probably contribute 2.2-, 1.56-, and 1.24-fold increases in autism, respectively, and hence cannot fully explain the magnitude of the rise in autism.”www.precaution.org/lib/autism_increases_real.090101.pdf In other words, while autism diagnosis in California increased 700% in less than 20 years, only 56% is due to inclusion of milder cases, and 12% is explainable by changing age at diagnosis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19234401

    Like

  133. Eva
    March 23, 2017 at 5:45 pm

    The rising numbers of children diagnosed with autism cannot be mostly attributed to changing diagnostic categories or better diagnostic techniques. We know that environment is a large component, and the many co-morbidities (such as seizure disorders and severe gastrointestinal distress) suggest that we should be looking at some systemic disrupters in the environment (so rain in August, and television since the 1950s, can probably be ruled out, and therefore do not merit study).

    I think we should put to rest this question of how ASD should best be diagnosed by pushing the medical community to agree upon a quite reliable diagnostic test, a brain scan. While it isn’t 100%, many cases could be easily identified, and the brain scan less expensive than currently used methods.http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.philosophy.humanism/2010-08/msg00039.html

    Like

  134. Chris
    March 23, 2017 at 5:54 pm

    Michael: “I don’t respond to riddles that are off topic.”

    You obviously have no clue what it is like to have a child with developing disorders. My son went through Child Find to get special ed. preschool services because he could not talk. He was the same age as those special African American boys you seem so concerned about.

    Eva, that was back before autism was even mentioned in Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, so he did not have that label during his entire school experience. But he does not. The psychologist who diagnosed him a couple of years ago told me that there has been a great deal of research into autism, including figuring out what de novo mutations account for certain clusters of behaviors (which include seizures and GI issues).

    This presentation explains some of that, including that there are now parent groups based on some of the known genetic mutations:

    Like

  135. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 6:18 pm

    @ Marsha:

    Did you even read the article at the top? You write: “So here is a fact: We have seen a dramatic increase in children being referred to us who demonstrate significant challenges in sensory processing, motor planning and communication.” So, is it possible that in the past many of these children would NOT have been referred to you? There could be numerous reasons why you are getting more referrals. You make the same mistake that most non-scientist make, you rely on personal experience. Prior to advent of scientific methodology, that is how people thought and often they thought wrong. Of course, someone working with a child should recognize their individuality and do their best to help them; but programs, funding, and everything else we do in society has to be based on something more objective. I wonder why you are even commenting since you seem to be missing the main point, that is, its a discussion on the role of vaccines in society. You work with children; but someone refers them to you!

    @ Eva:

    Just based on the study you refer to, 12% increase based on changing diagnosis and 56% by inclusion of milder cases, so this alone, if categories mutually exclusive, is 68%. The author writes: “Younger ages at diagnosis, differential migration, changes in diagnostic criteria and inclusion of milder cases do not fully explain the observed increases. Other artifacts have yet to be quantified, and as a result, the extent to which the continued rise represents a true increase in the occurrence of autism remains unclear.”

    In other words, she hasn’t excluded other possible artifacts that may explain the increase and questions whether it “represents a true increase in the occurrence of autism remains.”

    You write: “We know that environment is a large component”. No, we don’t. We have studies that indicate some environmental factors; but many studies have found genetics and changes in first trimester. Did you know that there is a correlation between increases in ASD and cell phone usage and someone else has found a correlation between organic food consumption and ASD?

    So, maybe people who use cell phones a lot and eat organic foods are the culprits? ? ?

    Brain scans, at this stage of the science, would not be wise, too many false positives and false negatives.

    And, as I said to Marsha, this conversation began with vaccines and ASD. I always wonder why people who apparently haven’t followed the discussion, jump in? ? ?

    Though the number of vaccines has increased, the number of antigens, the substances that the immune system reacts to, has decreased. During the same time, over 80,000 chemicals have been added to our environment, only a handfull tested beforehand for safety. Parents are having kids later in life. Our foods have changed, high sugar, high fat, high salt, low fiber. And modern medicine keeps adults and kids alive who would have died, e.g. premies, who also have higher rates of ASD. And by keeping those alive who would have died, if they have some genetic predisposition, it gets passed on. There is an incredible amount of research going on, both genetic, and environmental, and I sincerely hope to see in my remaining lifetime, hopefully at least 5 – 10 years, credible evidence and better treatments/prevention for at least some of the disorders of ASD.

    Like

  136. Linda May
    March 23, 2017 at 6:34 pm

    Joel,

    1 in 10 children have ADHD, 1 in 6 asthma, 1 in 68 autism, 1 in 400 type 1 diabetes…why in the past two decades the rate of asthma has gone up 300%, ADHD 400%, allergies 400%, autism 1500%, why the Philadelphia Pediatric Diabetes Registry says the biggest jump in new cases of type 1 diabetes is in newborns to age 4 years, why type 1 diabetes is rising at the rate of 3% per year, an incidence which doubles every 20 years?

    People like you have made a mess of public health. When we were children we were not on drugs, we were not on inhalers, we were not allergic to peanuts, we were not injecting insulin to stay alive, we had 1 or 2 special ed students in each school instead of bursting classrooms full that we find today, we did not need special testing accommodations for hundreds of thousands of students. Give me measles, mumps, rubella and chicken pox for youth as we had them, at ages when we were most able to fight them and when these viruses are most mild providing life long and true herd immunity as nature designed, over the modern chronic horrific scourges that have replaced them via vaccination, ANY DAY.

    Like

  137. Milwauken
    March 23, 2017 at 6:40 pm

    The “rate” of autism has not gone up 1500% in two decades. At most you can say the diagnostic prevalence has increased four-fold, but that is not a “rate.”

    Like

  138. Milwauken
    March 23, 2017 at 6:51 pm

    Most self-important people don’t.

    Like

  139. Marsha
    March 23, 2017 at 7:35 pm

    joel – numbers don’t equal “my experience”, numbers are numbers, pure and simple.

    Like

  140. Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
    March 23, 2017 at 8:24 pm

    @ Linda May:

    You write: “People like you have made a mess of public health. When we were children we were not on drugs, we were not on inhalers, we were not allergic to peanuts.”

    Well, recent research found that children, who doctors thought might have problems and told the parents to avoid giving them anything with peanuts, when given peanuts (that is, perhaps peanut butter so they don’t choke) at an earlier age actually don’t develop peanut allergies, the research found an 80% reduction. They were still given all therir shots. Explain that one!

    And I explained part of the reason, more premies are being kept alive. There are also several infectious diseases that, if a kid has a genetic predisposition, cause diabetes. Asthma, well, 80,000 new chemicals since World War II, smog, etc. As I mentioned diet. Did you know studies have found since lead removed from gasoline that rates of violent outbursts in kids has decreased as lead levels in blood decreased?

    If we did not have vaccines, good chance neither you nor I would be alive. Smallpox killed about 50% of children, add in other vaccine-preventable diseases, and the population of the world would be much smaller. Ask people in the Third World if they would like to have our level of public health.

    You write: “as nature designed.” So, we shouldn’t use antibiotics or chemotherapy or . . . After all, some people do survive infectious diseases and there are cases of “spontaneous remission” of cancer. Let’s leave it to nature. Did you know that during the early 1900s as many as 15,000 people died every year from measles? And even in the 1950s prior to the vaccine, 50,000 hospitalizations, 400-500 deaths, up to 2,000 disabilities (deafness, blindness, seizure disorders, mental retardation) and given most parents work nowadays, one million kids per year would miss a week of school and a parent would have to stay home from work to take care of them. And that is just from measles. The only way to make statements such as yours is to not understand how the immune system works which is why vaccines work and not understand the numerous studies that refute your claims. The only way to think as you do is to reject science and base your life on superstition.

    @ Marsha:

    You write: “Joel – numbers don’t equal “my experience”, numbers are numbers, pure and simple.”

    There is literally a ton of research on perception and judgment. People have selective perception and selective memories. Doctors, when asked how many of their patients get, for instance, a mammogram, give widely divergent statistics and are usually wrong when researchers do chart audits. What doctors remember is the most recent patients that got mammograms. Unless you have objective measures of the problems your kids had 10 or 15 years ago, your experience means very little. In addition, you claim you have had an increase in referrals; but don’t explain why. Could it be that other clinics closed? Or, perhaps, due to funding cuts, classes became larger and teachers couldn’t devote as much time to kids with special needs. Perhaps, the demographics of your district changed and different people moved into the area? And I could think of many other reasons. Your personal experience is not one of them. Back to lead, it was lab studies, field studies of lead levels in environment, blood tests, and comparisons of those with lower and higher blood levels, all done with objective measures, not personal experience.

    So, Marsha, if you wish to reject numbers, then reject almost 100% of our modern world.

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: