Autism in India

A comment from Cherry Sperlin Misra: Circa year 2000 I was running my nursery school in New Delhi and seeing an occasional case of autism (after about 1995) I then got a copy of the new vaccine schedule that was...

How Mercury Triggered The Age of Autism

Conversation with the Authors of Plague

Autism Public Service Announcement

Canary Party Vaccine Court Video

A Glimpse into Autism

Meet Our Advertisers


Olmsted's Original UPI Series

  • The Age of Autism Tag

« NJ Obama Corzine Autism Vaccine Rally | Main | Is Obama Pro-Choice? And What if Autism Were Contagious? »

Obama: "I am not for selective vaccination."

Choice_2By Claudine Liss

Last Friday evening, September 5, 2008, I had the opportunity to ask Senator Barack Obama about childhood vaccine safety/choice.  His response, “I am not for selective vaccination, I believe that it will bring back deadly diseases, like polio.” 

He went onto say in so many words that he is for more science and the funding of more science if it’s needed.  (His science response is fuzzy, as his first response stunned me for a second). I previously gave his staffer a folder of information on vaccines. The Senator promised me that he would take a look at it. 

I thank you Senator Obama for stating your opinion on vaccines.  Feel free to elaborate or clarify in the future.

Senator McCain, Do you have an opinion on vaccine safety/choice?  Will you accept and review the same packet of information Senator Obama promised me that he would review?

Senators, here’s some common sense information to ponder: (I am purposely keeping things simple.)

1.  Every barbeque I went to this past summer had at least one (1) autistic child in attendance; several parties had children with severe food allergies and/or food processing issues.  One infant I met can’t process sugar. (Approx. 10 parties in different US locations, as far away as CA.)  Maybe I am wrong, but this does not seem right to me. What are the odds?

2.  I make it a point to talk to longtime educators.  Longtime educators can compare children of today with children of 25 plus years ago.  Many educators that I have talked to are concerned, which makes me concerned, see, their students are suffering from chronic asthma, food allergies, arthritis, diabetes, ADD, ADHD, other learning disabilities, speech problems, sensory perception issues, autism, and on and on.  The children they taught 25 years ago did not have these problems/illnesses in such great numbers.

3.  The need for special education teachers and facilities keeps growing. Why?

4.  1 in 6 US children have some form of a learning disability, a year 2004 CDC number.

5.  The US government admits to a vaccine-autism connection (Poling decision), and States continue to mandate new vaccines for school entrance (i.e.: flu shot in NJ). Caution thrown to the wind, in my opinion.

6.  What about other nations?  To the best of my knowledge, Canada. England, Japan and other foreign nations allow their parents to opt into their respective vaccine protocols.  To the best of my knowledge, children are not kept out of school if they are not vaccinated or selectively vaccinated.  Are diseases killing children in these countries?  Are the rates of chronic illness in their children equal to the US figures?  Are we being guided by fear in the US instead of logic?  Are we eradicating certain diseases and replacing them with chronic autoimmune and/or neurological illnesses?

7.  The US government, to the best of my knowledge, has never studied the health of the fully vaccinated, under-vaccinated, and un-vaccinated populations to compare and contrast chronic illness rates. Why?

Senators McCain and Senator Obama, if you decide to speak out publicly on the vaccine issue, please do me a favor and first read information from some of the people mentioned below.  Some really bright people have been talking/writing about vaccine choice/safety for years and years; Philip Incao, M.D., Mayer Eisenstein M.D. (Chicago), Sherri Tenpanny D.O., Harris L. Coulter, Ph.D., Tedd Koren D.C., Barbara Loe Fisher, Amy L. Lansky Ph.D., Tim O’Shea, D.C., Neil Miller, Kenneth Boch, M.D., Bryan Jepson M.D., Jane Johnson, Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., Randall Neustaedter, O.M.D., Stephanie Cave, M.D., Bernard Rimland Ph.D.  There are many more from all over the world not mentioned here. (The latest addition is Jon Poling, M.D.)

Both of you have daughters.  Start with Charlotte Haug, M.D., Ph.D’s recent article on Gardasil posted in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Claudine Liss, Esq. (NJ)

Claudine Liss (accountant/lawyer) is a practicing real estate lawyer in NJ, indie filmmaker and writer.  She is the mother of 2 children, Chloe 12, Max 7.  She has followed the autism explosion for 12 years.  Her interest in the vaccine/asthma-allergy connection was sparked after reading the Coulter/Fisher book “A Shot In the Dark.”  Her son Max was hospitalized at 3 months old.  He was lifeless, turning blue and filled with mucous. He was later diagnosed with chronic sinusitis and asthma.  Claudine credits acupuncture for getting Max to almost perfect health.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8357f3f2969e200e5550b0d178834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama: "I am not for selective vaccination.":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Allergies to substances exist in nearly all things therefore, substances contained in immunizations are not likely an exception to allergic reactions. Forcing children to ingest or inject substances of which some have an allergic reaction to sounds like the concern of individual circumstances are shunned. If other medication are exempt then why isn't immunizations? Many children have allergies to medications and treatment is evaluated case by case. One size fits all; medication, immunization and diet? Give diabetics sugar along with everyone else in a school lunch? One size fits all does not seem rational. Most often if a child has a reaction and the parents would like to omit that particular immunization he or she must discontinue the entire immunzation schedule as many are combined immunizations. To simply say one size fits all is not seem like the best solution.

Sam, that's a good point. The difference is you don't have to prove you eat Fruit Loops and Oscar Meyer Lunchables to go to school.

KIM

As a parent I am much more concerned with the food I am feeding my child multiple times a day than with vaccines at this point. Do vaccines concern me, yes, to a degree. Does the fact that nearly every food item I pick up in the grocery store contains ingredients which are genetically altered, artificially produced and or contaminated with pesticides and chemicals concern me...greatly.

Perhaps it is vaccines that are causing the above listed issues but I honestly wonder why the fight against toxic substances isn't being undertaken with the same vehemence. My kids don't need to ingest dyes, preservatives, gmos, rbgh, pesticides and the countless other allowable additives every day. Not to mention thepthalates leaching out of their dishes and the lead on their toys.

The world in general is contaminated to the point of unacceptable (at leat in my opinion) with the blessing of our government regulatory agencies. How can we expect our kids growing bodies not to suffer from that exposure. Vaccines are just a very small, infrequent component of it all.

While Obama talks a good game and gives us empty promises (as usual) John McCain cosponsored the Combating Autism Act of 2006, and worked to ensure its enactment. This law is helping to increase public awareness and screening of autism spectrum disorder, promote the use of evidence-based interventions, and create autism Centers of Excellence for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research and Epidemiology. John McCain understands that despite the federal and scientific research efforts to date, the exact causes of autism are not yet known and greater research is needed to understand this disorder. That is why in November 2007, he joined with Senator Lieberman in requesting the leadership of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which has jurisdiction over federal research into autism, to hold a hearing on federal research efforts regarding factors affecting incidence and treatment in order to help determine where research efforts can best be directed. As President, John McCain will work to advance federal research into autism, promote early screening, and identify better treatment options, while providing support for children with autism so that they may reach their full potential.

Many think there is a connection between thimerosol and autism. But what about the other metals in the vaccinations, such as aluminum; what about DPT? what about adjuvants, which create an inflammatory response so that the immune system can 'recognize' the weakened 'dead' virus. Using energy-based testing, which some see as unscientific and controversial (just like the discovery of electricity and other advances in society were at one time considered), I have found that there is indeed more to the autism/vaccine issue than just thimerosol. Also, 'genetics' is passing along our genes. Have we considered that we might as well be passing along our toxic accumulations to our children, which could be misconstrued as 'genetics?' Is that why children with autism and other neurodevelopmental disabilities are being diagnosed earlier? Have bigger craniums at birth because of 'inflammed' tissues? Did you know that the flu shot supposedly still has thimerisol in it, so if you and your mate have been getting the 'savior' flu shot every season, you can potentially pass down these accumulations to your developing fetus?

Why is society in general so fixed on doing the same things and looking for different results? Staying inside the box and never daring to look out of it? Why does society not ask "Why" enough? Why do professionals feel so proud to be able to diagnose things like autism earlier and earlier than before but after all of the parent questionnaires, observations, checklists, and behavior profiles, there are not many on the other side boasting of true solutions?

Question everything that offends your soul. Don't just accept an answer or traditional solution just because everyone else around you does or because you'd rather not bother in changing/challenging your current thoughts and beliefs:

It is not 'divine purpose' that anyone should be lost and be in poor health.

There are always answers - FIND THEM!

Ask for God's guidance and find the answers. .

I believe both Senators should be asked the question in terms of parental and personal choice, rather than 'selective vaccination'. Senator McCain consistently stands against personal choice in the area of a woman's right to chose to terminate a pregnancey, even when her health is in jepoardy. Whatever you may believe about abortion, his stand is a clear determination that he has the right to invade a woman's privacy, so I don't see him standing for a parent's right to choose whether or not to vaccinate their children -another privacy issue. Senator Obama seems much more likely to me to support a parent's right to chose to not vaccinate, even if he disagrees with their decision. He does have 2 young daughters and has probably chosen to vaccinate them, as many of us have done, before we had negative experiences. This is an issue that needs to be clarified much more but Senator Obama has always supported parents' rights, so I don't see him changing his position.

"I hate to say it but I am in favor of forced vaccinations."

Hey, Chris, maybe you hate to say it because it's morally insupportable.

Imagine this scenario: you have three children. Your 10-year-old daughter becomes permanently paralyzed and unable to speak within days after her forced Gardisil shot; you also have a four-month-old baby who dies within 48 hours of a set of routine "immunizations."

Now how do you feel about forced vaccination for your third child?

Oh, wait. I see what you meant: forced vaccination for *other people's* children.

Whew, ignorance can be educated, but the belief that people should be *forced* to take these kind of medical risks with their children is just evil.

There are risks to vaccination in addition to autism, and they are substantial, including death. They are also less rare than the average person wants to believe.

Terri Lewis

I really don't get it. I just read through all these comments and you don't even KNOW McCain's stance on the issue. I don't understand how you can have this argument. I don't understand why I wasted all this time reading your comments.

Did anyone here ever consider that may be at falt for their child condition, even if indirectly? We live in a disposable society, look at what we throw away that ends up in our water supplies. Did people 25 year ago have traces of anti-psychotics, anti-biotics and other drugs in their water supplies, odds point to NO. Also did anyone ever do a study on birth controls effects on later born children? 25 years ago people weren't serially downing pregnancy hormones to avoid having a period as some women have been doing now. Which mean ovulation doesn't occur when another ova has matured, what are the effects of retaining ova after they've matured? Do I believe thimerosal is the ONLY culprit in the increasing ASD rates, no. Do I believe thimerosal is the main culprit, maybe. Do I think we should stop using thimerosal yes, if only to point out that rates won't drop when it's dropped. We are collectively polluting the land, air and water and are shocked that we are polluting ourselves. Look at the increased rates of auto-immune disorders as well. The capitalist, disposable, consumer society we live in is the problem, but we can't solve that as long as we keep attacking symptoms instead of root causes. ASD, ADHD, MS, MD, RA are all symptoms, modern society is the disease.

There is no evidence that autism is linked to vaccinations. the truth is that diagnoses have increased merely as an artifact of changing diagnostic criteria. the truth is that every credible piece of research has shown that there is no link. In areas where vaccinations have decreased autism rates have not decreased and there is many examples. Also they are now starting to be able to show signs of autism in children before the age of 1 year which is when the applicable vaccine is administered. the latest research is showing that there is most likely a genetic link. I hate to say it but I am in support of forced vaccinations. If the parents aren't responsible enough to put seat belts on the children they should be punished as they should if they refuse to protect their children from potentialy fatal illnesses.

Fox news now...
Obama has pledged to dedicate $10 billion annually to electronic health information systems in general, which he says will help track the spread and origins of disease. “I will invest in new vaccines and technology to detect attacks and to trace them to their origin, so that we can react in a timely fashion,” he said.

You have forever lost any chance at my swing vote Obama. That is a campaign promise scarier than any gun totin' right wing Alaskan VP.
No thanks, still healing the damage from the old vaccines.

Why is it that so many people here have blindly jumped onto the pro-Opharma bandwagon? Is it simply because they can't bring themselves to admit an extreme left-liberal like Barack would be anti-vaccine choice? Get over it and open your eyes. What you are doing is no different than what Big Pharma has done for years. Big Pharma would rather not investigate legitimate questions from us because they don't fit with their big profits agenda. Obamaborgs would rather blidly follow Barack into the abyss than admit he is a Big Pharma chill. Read on: http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/companies/pharma_votes/index.htm?postversion=2008030714

Bush actually banned another bill just because it would have banned thimerasol.

McCain = Bush

Please don't trust him, so many of us stupidly trusted Bush when he pretended to care about Thimerasol in 2000.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-19-2007/0004628856&EDATE

"Btw, many of you failed to mention Obama's response to vaccinations in which he states: "I believe that every American has the right to access these screenings, and I believe that every American has the right also to refuse these screenings voluntarily if they so choose. I also support a thorough and independent review of our nation’s vaccination policies.""

A health SCREENING is not the same as a vaccination. A screening is like having your hearing checked or getting tested for diabetes. It is NOT getting injected with things. You didn't notice how Obama refused to take on the issue and instead tried to change the subject by talking about screenings in the hopes that people like you (whom it obviously worked very well on) wouldn't notice?

I know that I’m often more negative than I probably should be, and might do better by sometimes focusing on the positive. But I keep looking at this issue with Obama and wondering why everyone is so anxious to bring Obama around to our way of thinking.

I guess I don’t believe for a minute that he doesn’t already know the truth about this. And I don’t doubt that he finds it distasteful or worse to have to say the things he’s said about mandatory vaccination. That being said, however distasteful he might find it I don’t believe he is going to change what he’s saying publicly on this issue any time soon. There’s too much money coming in from pharma. That’s going to be more important that the truth. If he wanted to speak about the truth he would be doing so by now, in my opinion.

Ok now maybe this is going to sound nuts, but why not focus on McCain, instead of on Obama? I know that the vast majority of people have been reluctant to speak out about this issue at all, let alone in support of those who believe there is a connection between vaccines and autism. But I keep on hearing about how the tide is turning, and about how things come around.

Perhaps some effort toward getting McCain to see this as an issue he could benefit from taking on, from publicly getting on the right side of—that being our side—would be more effective. More effective than trying to change what Obama’s been saying publicly.

Regardless of the beliefs of most Americans about whether or not vaccines have contributed to chronic childhood illnesses, I think that most of those who lean to the right are able to see the basic principle at stake here is more than just protecting children from harmful toxins. It’s got to do with freedom. The freedom of choice and freedom from government intervention that republicans have always been on about.

I understand that the issue is complicated and very controversial, and I would expect McCain to take a stand on whether or not vaccines have damaged children, a truly public stand on the issue, when hell freezes over.

But I think that a lot could be accomplished simply by shifting the attention from vaccine damage to vaccine choice. If McCain were to take a public position in direct opposition to Obama’s on this, I think it could do a lot to help strengthen his standing with his base and even with many swing voters. And it would do a lot to bring the attention of vaccine choice, if not vaccine damage, to the voters, which I think could only help our cause.

Rather than focusing on trying to influence what Obama’s saying publicly about forced vaccination, I think efforts should be made to influence what McCain says publicly about forced vaccination.

To that end I suppose I should write to someone with his campaign.

Dadvocate: Oh yes, the lastest Palin's smear is that she cut her state's Special needs education budget by 62%. Look at any on-line budget. The 2008 budget moved a large line item out from under "Special Schools" to its very own category. Look at the individual items contained under "Special Schools." In FY2007 the Alaska Challenge Youth Academy (ACYA) was a line item under "Special Schools." In FY2008 it was it own Budget Item. The above difference of 5,109,300 is just under the 5,449,300 that was designated in FY2008 for the ACYA. So the truth is Palin increased spending and moved items on the budget around. ACYA was given its own budget line because that school is for troubled teens rather than kids on special education and/or disability.

Other sources will tell you that "a second part of the measure raised spending for students with special needs to $73,840 in fiscal 2011, from the current $26,900 per student in fiscal 2008, according to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development (emphasis added)."

Source: http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/09/newest_palin_smear_she_cut_spe.asp

Ms. Silencedogood, this:

Jennifer, in case you are truly interested...

Palin's Position:
http://gov.state.ak.us/archive-59920.html

is not a position. It is simply a statement proclaiming April as Autism Awareness Month. It is the same one that many, many Governors enter into the record every year. It's boiler plate. I say this because I looked and looked and cannot find any reference to Palin having any position whatsoever on autism or other developmental disabilities (other than her self appointment as "friend and advocate" at the RNC convention). This fact was highlighted in last Saturday's New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/us/politics/07needs.html

There is simply little to go on with her.
She may grow into an advocacy role at some point but like may things about her, there are a lot of unknowns and she is all of 4 months into being a special needs parent.
I know at that point in my life I didn't know much of anything either.

To name but a few, the deal breakers for me are this ticket's stated choices: cutting social security, opposition to universal health care, support of insurance company opposition to coverage of ABA, and opposing the Community Choice Act (which will de-populate congregate care facilities like nursing homes in favor of community based, inclusive solutions)...to name but a few. These are policy positions that as a long time advocate I strongly oppose. Obama ain't perfect but he "gets" the issue of lifetime supports for people on the spectrum who need them, and I believe from my experience that he and his advisors will listen to opposing viewpoints with an open mind and are capable of changing theirs.

I think Age of Autism does a terrific job questioning power and raising truly important safety issues (even though I disagree with some of the direction taken at times). It troubles me though when a candidate is said to have a position when, apparently, one does not exist.

If I'm wrong and one does exist, I am eager to learn the policy details.


Welcome to the new world order.

The only good candidate was Ron Paul.
Of course many are not aware because of CFR owned media.

This will only continue and more of our freedoms will be taken away. Of course after we attack Iran which obama is for too.

Youtube. Cfr nwo IMF or. Ron Paul

Tell me exactly how we know that Palin is going to be an "advocate" for my daughter and my family in the white house? I still have not heard one solitary plan, point or example of what she and McCain are going to do to help families with Autism, or this country for that matter...unless of course you consider "drill baby drill" a policy (and if you think that is help, then perhaps there is no help for our society). Just because Palin has a son with special needs, doesn't mean she speaks for me.

Btw, many of you failed to mention Obama's response to vaccinations in which he states: "I believe that every American has the right to access these screenings, and I believe that every American has the right also to refuse these screenings voluntarily if they so choose. I also support a thorough and independent review of our nation’s vaccination policies."

All McCain has publicly stated was that there is "strong evidence" about a thimerosal link...most everyone agrees with that. He has said nothing about being against giving vaccines, being for selective vaccines, or even doing away with them, so please tell we what is McCain for that is so appealing and different? And, even more so, what are his PROPOSALS???

1ASDMOM you asked: "Would you rather have someone in power who cares less if you have insurance to cover children with autism or any special needs..."

Now I asked, would you rather have someone in power who presumably wants universal health care for everyone except the aborted who SURVIVE 'the procedure?'

For crying out loud even NARAL doesn't have a problem with the Born Alive Infant Protection Act because it doesn't target Roe vs. Wade. Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200612/ai_n17190692

IMHO, there is a fundamental character flaw with a person who can't differentiate between being pro-choice and infanticide.

What would make you think such a person would care for the needs of our ASD kids any more than the needs of the most vunerable members of our society?

Claudine,
Your conversation with Senator Obama is what prompted my call in plea. What it told me is that we have not had the chance to show him our Science. McCain has had meetings with parents from our community and wrote a letter to the HELP committe to have them do Senate hearings on thimerosal. Obama says he is also against mercury in vaccines and will remove it. However the fact that someone has not been able to show Obama our science is concerning. Presidents are put in a bubble with little outside influence and if we do not cry out to him now there is less of a chance we may be able to hold his attention for the science on our side. This plea was not to tell someone who to vote for, it's a plea requesting an opportunity to pass on our information and science to Obama himself.

TSk...Tsk...Tsk...

What is this? Is this some type of political forum or is it a place where people can come to share information that will actually help families and individuals with ASD?

I have heard much debate about whether autism is caused or aggravated by vaccines (murcury etc.)

I don't think that Obama's comment was meant to discard research on autism or to minimize the importance of finding a cure.

It puzzles me when people take a statement and run with. You know how it goes. a person tells one person something, then they tell another and it blows up, and as this thread is proving...and misses the point.

The topic of autism should not be triffled with this way. One of the major issues in educating others on autism is being able to provide healthcare for those who have already been diagnosed (unconditionally), and support research on what the actual causes (affirmatively) of autism are, and to fund preventive measures.

To take one man's statement and condemn him on that is irresponsible on your part. Make sure that you come full circle with you inuendos. That will make you a strong accountable source of true reporting...tell it all not just bits and pieces, and tell it acurately without tryin to sway people into a political debate that has nothing to do with the issues involving cures for autism. Shame on you...hmmm

Would you rather have someone in power who cares less if you have insurance to cover children with autism or any special needs or would you prefer to educate the "powers that be" with actual scientific information on the cause of autism? To politicalize this issue is typical, but try not to fall into the abyss of the actual point.

What says you?

K you said McCain's staff is loaded with Big Pharma lobbyists. Did you ever read CNN's Aaron Smith's article entitled, "Big Pharma opens wallet to Dems: Liberals have lost their reputation as the long-standing foes to drugmakers as party lines become blurred with McCain?" (March 08). If not, read it and weep.

"Obama maintains a slight edge over his Democratic rival, with $181,000 in Big Pharma donations through Jan. 31, compared with Clinton's $174,000, according to the center. McCain is far behind with $44,000."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-helen_31_bdaug31,0,6582382.story?track=rss

About two weeks ago, CNN Headline News had a crawl that said something like...

CDC: highest number of measles cases since 1997 ... CDC: nearly half of measles cases in unvaccinated kids

I could not find an article on their website that made the same statements, but it would be helpful to find this data. Consider: if "nearly half" were in unvaccinated kids, then "more than half" of the measles cases must have been in vaccinated kids.

CRAWL THAT CNN!

Maybe we need to get Kennedy to talk to Obama.

"Stark contrast between McCain's remarks and dear old Opharma's (credit AL over at AL for new nickname). "

Buyer BEWARE!

Remember, John McCain's staff is loaded with pharma lobbyists.

McCain's stance on MANY issues have changed since 2006. It seems to be a case of "say whatever it takes to get elected" with him too.

starting at 3:22

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/32579/1/TDS-Reformed-Maverick-090508.wmv

or

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/32579/2/TDS-Reformed-Maverick-090508.mov

I was impressed when Senator Obama responded to A-Champ’s questionnaire to presidential candidates nine months ago. He responded, "I support the removal of thimerosal from all vaccines and work to ensure that Americans have access to vaccines that are mercury free.”

But now I wonder, is he calling for non-selective vaccination before or after the thimerosal is removed from all vaccines?

He also stated in that same questionnaire, “I believe Americans should know must know (sic) the health effects that [are] caused by the presence of mercury in vaccines.”

Does that mean forced vaccination is acceptable as long as Americans “know the health effects” caused by the mercury they and their children are receiving?

And in answer to the question, “Should vaccines be investigated as a possible source of autism?” Obama did not say "no.” He instead said, “I believe that the next president must restore confidence and open communication with the American people. This includes environmental policies and government funded research. An Obama administration will go where the science and the facts lead us, whether it’s about climate change or toxic heavy metals in our environment.”

His answer clearly implied that vaccines should be investigated as a cause of autism – or at the very least, not ruled out. Yet we now hear that he stands for a one-size-fits-all, mandatory vaccine policy.

Unless we learn that Claudine Liss was experiencing the auditory hallucinations of sudden onset psychopathy, I cannot possibly cast a vote for Senator Obama. Even if Senator McCain states nothing further on the subject of vaccines, that’s preferable to Obama’s comment last Friday at a private fundraiser.

A total of four members of my family have now switched their votes to McCain as a result of this revelation. No issue trumps the government-sanctioned poisoning of our children.

“How disappointing. Sounds like Obama may have stopped by Dr. PrOffit's house on his way to the party.”

Good one. And most likely Offit really has been trying to get to him. Looking at your articulate and informed responses on this blog and the associated web sites, one question is - what more can be done to all work in concert over the next two months (and after) to override the corporate special interests?

Hey Claudine, scroll down to read McCain's statements regarding Autism. He has publicly declared that "there’s strong evidence" that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that was once in many childhood vaccines, is responsible for the increased diagnoses of autism in the U.S.

Source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/john-mccain-ent.html

And in case you missed this, Orac (the Big Pharma shill over at Respectful Insolence), disapproved of McCain's stance. Here's what dear old Orac said:

"No, no, no, no, no!” wrote Orac, the anonymous scientist at Respectful Insolence. “McCain needs to replace his medical and scientific advisors forthwith and find some who understand science and clinical trials.""

Source: http://chronicle.com/blogs/election/1794/john-mccains-autism-comment-prompts-outrage-in-the-science-blogosphere

Stark contrast between McCain's remarks and dear old Opharma's (credit AL over at AL for new nickname).

Further, in case you don't know this, during Palin's speech at the convention she stated that if elected families of children with special needs would find her a friend and ADVOCATE in the White House. Not only does she have a Down Syndrome baby, but her nephew is Autistic.

Source: http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah-palins-message-to-special-needs.html

Barack Obama's church in Illinois has a Rev. Wright who said that the US was responsible for the AIDS epidemic citing Leonard Horowitz (regards to vaccines being responsible for AIDS).

Apparently Obama is no different than all the Presidents (up to the present)who have been pro-vaccine. I'm really not surprised. Unless you are a parent who has a kid with autism who was damaged by vaccines, you will be pro-vaccine.

Ray Gallup

Tim,
They gotta give me something. Either attack the thimerosal issue OR the boatload of shots our kids are getting before the age of two. Why the $@#$ is Obama worried about Polio when 1 out of 94 boys has autism, a potentially life-long and seriously debilitating condition. Is he prey to the post 9-11 fears of plain old flu viruses and hoax bird-flu pandemics (the two are currently being lumped together in a flyer sent home with my kindergartener last week!)? Is he immune to our plight because his daughters were unaffected? I'm just surprised he hasn't done more research on this topic and I sure hope he or his staffers are reading our post.
According to an Inside Autism poll, 54% of parents of autistic children believe there is a connection to the vaccines. I think that is a signficant demographic.
By the way, I'm not rushing to vote for McCain either...I may just stay home this year.

Wow I see how everybody quickly wavers.

I really do not care because right now there are bigger issues on the agenda.

Like if we don't stop global warming, all the singled vaccination go out the door because we won't have a earth worth living on.

Secondly, if we don't stabilize the economy then it is a matter of pockets that you have because I have priced out the single doses and they cost about 150 bucks for one of them.

I would never in a million years waver my vote on something as such as this. We still have a long road to go but as a parent I still have a choice of weather to vaccinate and I still have choice of how and when to vaccinate my child. Why because I live in America.

I don't think I would trade that option for an guarantee you don't know exist. Data that hasn't be quite proven considering the election isn't over. Let alone the extreme ideals of those in place. Now if we go to war with Iran and invade other countries are you going to be bitching about that as well knowing you swayed your vote due to this?

If you have a grievance in the matter, did you try to contact their campaign at all as a concerned parent. At least he excepted the packet. Truthfully, if you wanted this to have more effect you should have contacted him a long time ago when the primaries where first happening. You probably would have had more time to put up a front and find backing. I would not expect you to get an answer right away due to the fact that he will end up doing his own research on the information that you have given him.

Or course its easy to say whatever you want but I am not going to stop voting Obama because of this than I would have to say this a glorious day for the Republicans because they just got a whole bunch of people that are swing voters because of this. I just hope you can live with that decision and when all hell breaks loose because of it that you don't sit here and whine about it.

"Nobody in power is willing to do a study comparing rates of these conditions among vaccinated and unvaccinated kids."

Anybody can do this kind of study. The CDC does not control research. In fact, I am doing scientific research right now and the CDC, FDA, and FBI have ignored me.

"Individual people badgering their reps in DC is the only way we are ever going to get the study that we need done."

So, you want the government, who you all claim in cahoots with Big Pharma, to conduct a study?

Anyway, at least vaccines got rid of smallpox.

Mr. Obama - are you the man for autism? Really?

Sorry its controversial but it comes with this territory. Nothing about autism is easy and the numbers are growing.

This election is beyond interesting to watch. It just got more interesting.

Thank you to the Liss family and the other families who participated in this inpromptu rally on behalf of our kids. That effort was greatly appreciated.

Senator Barack Obama’s vaccine response should not influence your vote! Why? We have not yet heard from Senator McCain! Would John McCain have answered me any differently? If he did, would he truly mean it? I am thankful for Obama’s honest response. Another reminder of how important our grassroots education campaign is to our nation. Right now, grassroots is the only way. It is what it is. It appears to me that BOTH of these candidates have avoided the controversial “vaccine” topic. Avoid it all you want, it is not going away. Who is going to get a response directly from Senator McCain?

So I know there are many of us with differing political party affiliations/opinions/leanings but I am hoping maybe some might join me in an a plea to have Obama meet with ANYONE with our prospective and from our side.

I called the campaign office after reading today's AOA piece. I told them they are about to lose a very big voting block and from Senator Obama's comments I could tell he has not sat down and/or seen the science with anyone from our community. His stance on science is strong because he disagrees so strongly with Bush's "non science" stance. I begged that time is short and the information we have is too important and too complex for a question answer session at a town hall meeting. I was clear that Senator McCain has already done this and that Hillary Clinton has also seen much of the science. He personally needs some exposure to the science, personal nature of our situations and directly from someone from our community. I gave several names, including Dr. Poling and others to have him reach out to or to myself or any other A-CHAMP representative. I left my name, number and e-mail. Is this a "Hail Mary" plea? Yes, it is but nothing is impossible and if we are going to educate him the best time is now before one or the other is elected into office. I was clear that Bush has given us 8 years of brick walls and no one in this community will give a chance to anyone who might possibly shut the door on our largest concerns. So, Anyone want to join me in calling campaign headquarters to second what I requested?? -Allison Chapman chapnalli@comcast.net

PS I also said Autism Speaks does not speak for a large number of the autism community and that is not who I am requesting he meet with.

Obama's campaign number (she thought maybe I should call the legislative office but I told her this was also a campaign issue with a large voting block, I think we should do both)
(866) 675-2008
PLEASE BE CURTIOUS WHEN CALLING….This is a plea to show our science not a lynching.
There is an option to speak to a staffer/volunteer. She tried to type everything I was saying so we should probably coordinate talking points.
Talking points
-Let us show you the science, biological science, mercury toxicity science, etc
-Not antivaccine for safe vaccines
-We meet with legislators often and name them ( I told them I sat with Kennedy's staff for 2 hours in June this is what might have hooked her)
-Autism Speaks is run like a corporation not a charity by "the parents", so they don't speak for us
-Bush is not our friend (important to mention since he wants to totally change the status quo)
-McCain has met with us and has seen the science and understands the toxicity of thimerosal and he has promised to take on the drug companies
-We are a huge voting block and have grassroots organization full of passion to fight for our kids and his (he loves grass root orgs)
End with Please meet with one of us personally for longer than a question answer session. It's too complex and way too important not to.

Rachel - you said you "would vote for the candidate who will promise to BAN mercury from vaccines IMMEDIATELY upon taking office" - Well it's settled then:

George Bush is your man!!! - since that is pretty much what he said 4 years ago. Important lesson, no?

All kidding aside, it is important to remember the candidates are going to do whatever they believe is the best approach to get elected. I doubt John McCain's advisors will even LET him stick to his guns on being vocal about his doubts on the safety of thimerosal for the rest of the campaign - The biggest test will be when and if he responds to future direct questioning on it.

The reason that both parties mentioned autism in their speeches is that they now understand the number of voters involved - simple math. Not so simple math is the fact that biomedically informed voters like us are far and few between - sorry, but I believe Autism Speaks wins that count by a landslide - I dare say most parents of children with autism probably believe whatever A.S. tells them.

I love to hear and encourage the passionnate and strong voices here, but let us not let politics divide us and keep us from achieving our ultimate outcome - to be able to unite to educate the winning administration beginning on November 5th.

;oD

McCain's statements of vaccine-autism link:

At a town hall meeting Friday in Texas, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., declared that "there’s strong evidence" that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that was once in many childhood vaccines, is responsible for the increased diagnoses of autism in the U.S. -- a position in stark contrast with the view of the medical establishment.

Source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/john-mccain-ent.html

If indeed Obama isn't for 'selective vaccinations,' then in an Obamanation the CDC's schedule will be further shoved down our throats. I do know McCain publicly stated that Autism is caused by thimerosal.

I made a group, it's called "Obama is against vaccination choice! UNVOTE HERE". By joining, you can show that your vote for him, which seemed like a sure thing, just disappeared when he showed himself to be a business-as-usual politician.

If you believe in sending a message, join up, and invite others. They are all watching facebook closely. Give them something useful to look at.

The Dept of Education is doing a fabulous job on covering up the actual number of learning disabled children as well as the real number of Autistic children. Not only has the curriculum been "dumbed down" repeatedly over the years, but so have the Special Education Assessment Tests, SATs and so forth. There is something really WRONG with this picture when a 13 yr old cannot add, subtract, multiply, divide, or comprehend more than a paragraph of reading material and the parents are told that there is nothing wrong with his test scores! In fact, the scores are AVERAGE when compared nationally to others his age. I am urging everyone to investigate the Special Education/IEP process and how difficult it is for your child to qualify. The numbers are far greater than 1 in 6 learning disabled. I am estimating that as much as 80% of the children in this country are learning disabled. This is a national crises!

Glenn Beck is also investigating Obama's secret "Public Allies" group too. Yes, another secret of Obama's. So far, it appears that he feels everyone is obligated to contribute to society for the "greater good". Kind of sounds like forced vaccination, huh? For the sake of the phony herd?

Also, take a close look at Obama's answers in this scientific debate, particularly Pandemics and Biosecurity.

http://www.sciencedebate2008.com/www/index.php?id=40

I would vote for the candidate who will promise to BAN mercury from vaccines IMMEDIATELY upon taking office. It is unconscionable that mercury is still being injected into pregnant women and small babies (25 mcgs. and 12.5 mcgs. respectively) in the flu shot and in the tetanus shot (not to mention the .3 mcgs in Tripedia DTaP whose package insert states autism as a possible adverse reaction!). Obama and McCain, are you listening? This is a huge demographic. I in 68 families has a child with autism! And we're smart and we're getting the word out.

Before deciding over the next two months on voting, and yes corporate special interests are both candidates’ path to failure for stopping mandated vaccine injuries, look at their overall approach to health care. Here are two viewpoints posted as blogs on Adventures in Autism September 3, 2008 at http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/

From Barack’s web site;

“Barack Obama believes we need to research treatments and search for the causes of ASD. He has been a strong supporter of more than $1 billion in federal funding for ASD research on the root causes and treatments.” http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/DisabilityPlanFactSheet.pdf

From a McCain voting record site:

“McCain Has Voted To Cut, Restrict, And Underfund Medicare At Least Twenty-Eight Times” from 1995 to 2005.

“McCain Voted To Cut, Eliminate, Restrict Health Insurance Coverage for Low Income Children and Pregnant Mothers At Least SIX Times” from 1997 to 2007.

“McCain Voted Against Allowing Uninsured Parents To Enroll In The Same Plans As Their Children” in 2000.

“McCain Opposed Reauthorizing SCHIP And Providing Insurance For Millions Of Uninsured Children.” in 2007.
http://mccainsource.com/mccain_fact_check?id=0006

A loud pointed boo!, right at Obama.

The only thing that a politician sees is numbers/voters, and how very unfortunate that Obama has deflated hope within the autism community! He is really showing voters, including Democrats and independents, that he is full of hot air on being different, or not a regular politician.

Please, someone with facebook knowledge create a group for previous Obama believers to join to show that Obama will lose large numbers of votes if he refuses to shape up on his stance, and fight for responsible vaccination programming!

It's the numbers that will change him. What a phoney.

I agree with Tim K (well except about the whole "Packers" thing).

This election is about far more than just this issue. War, health care, debt, spying on citizens...


But if you consider just the Supreme Court change, that alone should scare the hell out of everyone.

And IF that change to the court becomes overly conservative, when (and probably not "if") the vaccine-autism thing reaches that court (vaccine court ruling -> state courts [if the supreme court doesnt change this possibility and move all such litigation away from state courts to federal courts and a ruling on that is coming up!]-> appealed to Federal Courts-> moved to Supreme Court) are you going to want a probusiness oriented Supreme Court of judges?

With lobbyists and big money controlling candidates and legislation, the vaccine issue is always gonna be us against whomever is receiving that $ - be they democrat or republican. Pharma has enough money and lobbyists to hedge their bets on both (because that's still cheaper than facing the lawsuits and losing those markets).

Bummer. But confirms my belief that the only thing that is causing change is the parents who are speaking out. That isn't going to change no matter who is in the White House -- there is not going to be a magic moment when our work is through and someone in charge acts with common sense to stop this madness, much as I wish it were so. There are too many powerful interests at work on the other side for that to happen, and too many weak politicians in both parties willing to trade our children's futures for a few campaign dollars or a nice steak dinner.

I'd love to know what both of the candidates stands are on Codex Alimentarius and what they are going to do about it.

Obama has lost my vote.

I wrote to Obama at http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/mypolicy

"Please see the article today at /www.ageofautism.com/2008/09/obama-i-am-not.html.

"Is it true that Senator Obama said that he is against 'selective vaccination'? Does this really mean that he believes that parents should have no choice on whether or not to give their children all the vaccinations on the CDC schedule -- which is about 2 dozen during infancy and another dozen before school starts?

"If so, this is terrible for two reasons:

- Parents should have the right to make this very important decision. Vaccines have risks as well as benefits. The state should not force vaccines.

- Currently the risks of vaccines are beining denied. Adverse events are not being studied. Children have escalating rates of immune system and neurological disorders including asthma, diabetes, severe allergies, autism, and ADD. Nobody in power is willing to do a study comparing rates of these conditions among vaccinated and unvaccinated kids. As more and more babies get more and more vaccines -- often up to 9 at the same time -- more adverse reactions are occurring. The pharmacy companies are exerting too much financial and polictical influence. These are the same companies who have recently gotten in trouble for suppressing research on adverse reactions to drugs. Gov't agencies such as the CDC & FDA are terrified of admitting to mistakes.

"More and more voters are aware of and affected by these issues. If Senator Obama is not aware, he needs to be!!!!"

******

I encourage everyone to go to his web site. Maybe our messages will die unread, but it's worth trying.

As far as who to vote for, I see no evidence whatsoever that McCain and Palin will be any better on this issue.

Come on people....

If you are seriously making your decision on who is going to lead this nation the next 4 years based on Obama's and McCains public comments about the National Immunization Program, you need to step back and look at the bigger picture.

I have my man, but that is not the point here - regardless of who you support and plan to vote for, there is far more at stake here than the our concerns about vaccines and autism. There is the Supreme Court for one.

Important, yes of course, but really, how do you expect them to say anything else? They hear every firggin day, just like most americans, that vaccines save lives and anything they say that puts that into question is going to push away voters.

McCain said something earlier this year about his suspicions about thimerosal thanks in no small part to Lin Wessels, but has quieted down and is more careful with his words since that time. Obama has never really been up to speed on it so of course it was easy for others to put the fear of God into him. As for Pharma campaign contributions, they were going to go to someone for sure, and I think they saw there best investment in Obama. Do you really think McCain would have turned it down? Get real.....

I understand the importance of getting the candidates opinion. I understand your passion. But do you really think that the position of President has more chance of changing things in the FDA, CDC and the medical community than WE do? That is a big HELL NO. I have always believed the president does what he is told to do and that is that. The strings are pulled and he (or she) will always salute.

WE are the change. Whoever becomes president will be left with the mess of not only the war in Iraq, the slow economy, housing and environmental nightmare, but by 2012 it will be quite evident that the 90's generation has become adults. I predict the generation of kids born after reduced thimerosal levels, though affected by increased vaccine schedules, will finally show a "decline" in the RATE of autism (Kids under 8 in 2011) as evidenced by special ed counts. Can't say the same about all the other health issues vaccines result in though.

That president, whoever it is, will see the fit hit the shan and we will be there to remind them of what we asked them in 2008.

Please vote on ALL issues, not just one.

BTW, Go Packers!!!

The real problem here is that autism still isn't recognized as an epidemic with the potential to bankrupt our country.

As long as the CDC has a strangle hold on research and continues to pretend that all this autism is acceptable, no one is going to demand we honestly look at vaccines as the cause.

Anne Dachel
Media editor

This is really sad across the board.

I don't like to hear anyone with any kind of political clout quote Pharma talking points.
All party affiliations aside.

The reality is... Polio exists today because oral vaccine is given to poor under developed countries, despite it's known risks to pass fecally.
It's cheap and can be mass produced.
Then it gets imported by immigrants flying here due to the globalized society in which we live.
So if you are immune suppressed or don't hold a titer this mass practice of giving a risky oral vaccine is more dangerous than a few thousand people skipping Polio.
The whole reason we switched to an injection was because of the oral diaper risk.
The last case that hit the Amish population in Minnesota was passed in a hospital setting from a foreigner who was recently vaccinated with the oral vaccine.

This Obama statement is disappointing, but it is also a typical Pharma line of thought.
I'm not voting for Obama, but I don't think we should suffer to let that error go unaddressed.

I hope if elected, he will bring true CHANGE as promised. Not the same old politics in bed with Pharmaceuticals.

Obama = loss of rights. He has been bought and paid for by pharma.

I am honored to be listed with all of the outstanding scientist, who have concluded that vaccines both for adults and children carry with them risk with questionable benefits.

I think that Senator Obama just does not get it. He, like so many other politicians, has only one agenda, to get elected. Therefore, he has taken the politcal safe message on vaccines, just give them all.

Sincerely,

Mayer

Avoid "Lesser Evil" voting ... http://brushfires2008.com/2008/08/27/lesser-evil-revisited/

I personally, have given up on the two parties and will vote for Bob Barr. Call it a protest vote if you will, but the gist of what most of you on here are talking about are "individual liberties" and the Libertarian party is the only one really devoted to this issue. Will someone with a D or R behind their name be the next president? Yes. Is this a self self-fulfilling prophesy on the part of the voters? Yes.

FJH
http://autismparents.net

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
–John Quincy Adams

Well that just ****ing sucks. It would be nice to have a choice this election. Talk about the Scylla and Caribdes-- perpetual war for hegemony or vaccine mandates. Or both.

In my once astonishingly rugged family line, m father is dying from flu shots, my children are struggling from that and more, my second cousin almost died from the MMR, my nephew has asthma. But how's anyone going to pay for the epidemic if we're at war for "100 years"?
http://tinyurl.com/5rd3gy

This is hell.

I am not happy about this-
Don't want to vote for Bill Frist's party- But don't see that Obama has given me a choice.

Here is a link re. Obama's contributions from Big Pharma vs. McCain's. I think it is relevant to this discussion.

Big Pharma opens wallet to Dems
Liberals have lost their reputation as the long-standing foes to drugmakers as party lines become blurred with McCain.

By Aaron Smith, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: March 7, 2008: 2:40 PM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Democrats have long served as the traditional enemy of Big Pharma, but in this presidential campaign, the left is taking the lion's share of drugmaker money.

Democratic senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the top recipients of donations from the pharmaceutical industry, according to The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit, non-partisan research group in Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, donations to Sen. John McCain, who was recently endorsed by President Bush as the official Republican candidate, pale in comparison.

Obama maintains a slight edge over his Democratic rival, with $181,000 in Big Pharma donations through Jan. 31, compared with Clinton's $174,000, according to the center. McCain is far behind with $44,000.

This is in spite of the fact that all three candidates have consistently bashed the pharma industry and vowed to lower drug prices, which would take a bite out of corporate profits.

But it wasn't always this way. Big Pharma, voting with its wallet, used to be more of an enthusiastic supporter for the Grand Old Party.

In the 2004 presidential election, drugmakers donated $516,000 to the Bush campaign, a huge increase over the $280,000 provided to Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic candidate from Massachusetts, according to the center.

A changing climate
There are two reasons for the recent shift in funding. The Bush administration may still control the White House, but Republicans no longer control Congress. Democrats hold the majority in the House, and the parties are evenly split in the Senate. Drugmakers could be trying to secure access to the ruling party by courting their traditional enemies.

"Since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, money has shifted away from Republicans, to the Democrats who hold the keys to the kingdom," said Massie Ritsch, a spokesman for The Center for Responsive Politics. "The pharmaceutical industry is one that would lean Republican if it didn't have to make friends with the party that's in power right now."

Merck spokesman Ron Rogers said his company has never announced support for a specific candidate and "has always sought to work with both Republicans and Democrats on the issues that affect pharmaceutical innovations whether one party or the other has controlled the Congress of White House."

Schering-Plough spokesman Steve Galpin said his company has not donated to any presidential candidates. Other drugmakers contacted on this issue - Pfizer and Eli Lilly & Co. - did not comment by press time.

Secondly, the distinctions have blurred between the two parties' relationship with big business. Democrats have traditionally been seen as enemies to the pharmaceutical industry, while Republicans are supposed to be their allies.

"I think what you can say about the philosophical divide is that the Republicans as a party believe in free markets and the Democrats want to socialize our healthcare system," said Barbara Ryan, pharma analyst for Deutsche Bank North America.

But with McCain as the conservative contender for the White House, the issues are no longer black and white. Ryan noted that the current campaign lacks hard and fast party differences in healthcare. In fact, the policies from of Clinton, Obama and McCain are uniformly unfriendly toward Big Pharma.

The high cost of prescriptions
Much of their political ire is focused on drug prices. All the candidates co-sponsored a bill early last year to allow the re-importation of U.S.-made drugs back from Canada, where they're cheaper. But the bill failed to pass the Senate.

McCain, who has described himself as "the biggest enemy of the pharmaceutical industry in Washington," has been particularly vocal on re-importation.

"Why shouldn't we be able to re-import drugs from Canada?" he asked during the New Hampshire republican debates in January. "It's because of the power of the pharmaceutical companies."

"Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys," countered Mitt Romney, the former presidential candidate who has since dropped out of the race.

"Well, they are," said McCain.

Campaign crosshairs are also focused on the Bush administration's ban on drug-price negotiations between the government and drug companies. This ban was included in the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act. Removing it could result in lower drug prices, which would put the squeeze on pharma sales.

Obama and Clinton have clearly stated that they oppose the ban on price negotiations.

"[Clinton] has been very much against the non-negotiation ban, said Gene Sperling, her economic advisor, as well as former director of the National Economic Council for former President Bill Clinton. "She feels that that puts the government in a worse position than a big company."

Obama, on his campaign Web site, has vowed to repeal the ban that prevents the government from negotiating with drug companies, estimating it could result in savings of up to $30 billion for patients.

McCain's stance on this issue isn't clear. When Democrats failed to pass a bill last year that would have eliminated the ban, he wasn't present for the vote. McCain's office did not return calls and emails asking about his position on this issue.

Business as usual
But even with all the political rhetoric, Wall Street doesn't seem to be paying attention.

Paul Alan Davis, manager of Charles Schwab's $800 million healthcare portfolio, which includes holdings in Pfizer (PFE, Fortune 500), Merck (MRK, Fortune 500), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ, Fortune 500), Schering-Plough (SGP, Fortune 500) and other major pharma companies, said he wasn't sure which of the candidates posed the biggest shake-up for the industry - if at all. He also said that the campaign is not a factor in his investment decisions.

"I think it's probably easier to talk about change to get votes than it is to actually change the system," he said.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/companies/pharma_votes/index.htm

It seems a little conflicted to be pro-choice on abortion and anti-choice on vaccines.

Before my life included vaccine damage, I had only a vague notion of the benefits and risks of vaccines. I vaccinated my children, but remember a friend of mine telling me that her pediatrician threw them out of the practice for choosing not to vaccinate.

I said, "Wow, that's terrible." And I meant it.

Without even thinking about it, it was clear to me that she'd made a decision that she believed was in the best interest of her child, and she had every right to make that decision.

To be against selective vaccination is to be in favor of forced vaccination.

To be in favor of forcing any medical procedure on someone who is unwilling to accept the risks of that procedure is morally wrong.

You do not have the right to force me to risk my child's life so that your child can be safer.

You do not have the right to make me risk my life so that your life can be safer, because you are not of greater value than me, nor is your child of greater value than my child.

You can encourage me, you can persuade me, you can appeal to the best interests of my child, you can even appeal to my interest in the greater good, but you cannot force me to endanger my child so that your child is safer.

You can remove my sick child from your school if he has a communicable illness.

You can choose not to socialize with me, or with my child.

You can call me names, and you can protect yourself from me, but your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose, and your right to wield a toxin-filled needle--even in the name of the greater good--ends at my child's arm.

This is a basic human rights issue.

Anyone who is in favor of forced vaccination is unfit to lead a free country.

And I was for the guy.

Terri Lewis

How disappointing. Sounds like Obama may have stopped by Dr. PrOffit's house on his way to the party.

I believe its fairly clear why Senator Obama is against selective vaccination.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/companies/pharma_votes/index.htm

Left is Right. Right is Left.

At this point, I have zero faith that either of these individuals and/or political parties will do anything... They are puppets. The question is... who is really pulling all the strings?

This has been a real hard choice the whole time. Let's see, who should I choose, the war hero proud to be an American guy who has a history of trying to curb big corporation influence over political decision-making (Campaign Finance Reform) I have been reading about and rooting for since 2003 or the guy that came out of nowhere, doesn't salute the flag, and wants to take people's rights away? Sorry if I offended anyone, I have this horrible habit of speaking my mind.

Thank you for your hard work, time, expense, and traveling to talk to Obama.

And please also ask this. Comparing the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) rates between the years 1967 and 1983 of 3.4 per 10,000 and the CDC rate of 1 per 150 children in 2002 and then using an annual birth rate of 4 million children per year in this country - calculates out to an increase of 25,307 more children each year with ASD. Why do babies born today have a 19.6 times greater risk for autism than the babies born 25 years ago?

Elucidatus is not for Obama and Obama is not for me. He talks about change but the more he talks about it the more things seem to stay the same. The only change that will come from him becoming president is that mandatory vaccination will become a reality. All for the sake of science.....

Sad thing is even if McCain said the opposite, I wouldn't believe it. I would believe an institutionalized pathological liar before I ever trusted McCain to stick to his words.

As shown by previous platforms contrasted to his voting record, the man has flip flopped more than John Kerry, John Edwards, and Hilz combined. His choice for VP shows he has absolutely no integrity or core beliefs -- he'll do anything to seize power, including allowing the scumbags who trashed him, his wife, and adopted daughter (makes me sick how they made that little girl disappear) in South Carolina to engineer his campaign tactics.

Can I add to your list? Ask him to read Kirby and Jepson and then talk to them. "Selective vaccination" sounds like propaganda. Why not use "selective brain injury" or "selective epilepsy” or “selective human guinea pigs?” Is this what our public servants at the CDC told him - the bogey man sales approach by the corporate special interests?

I see another lost opportunity shaping up with Obama. Too bad. Individual people badgering their reps in DC is the only way we are ever going to get the study that we need done.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

@AgeofAutism Tweets

follow me on Twitter

SPONSORS

  • HC Logo 2014
  • Canary final logo
  • VOR logo sidebar
  • Safeminds 2014 Logo
Age of Autism's Facebook Page