MMR & AUTISM: NO LINK! WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 9 SHOTS
A study that found no link between MMR and autism just happened to hit the press less than a week after the Eli Stone debacle for AAP. Read the abstract here. Read a FOX News report HERE.
The 2008 AAP vaccine schedule shows up to 12 vaccinations could be admininstered at a child's 15 month well visit. One of those is the MMR. The others include: Hib, Pneumococcal, Polio, Varicella, Diptheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Hep A, and an extra Influenza, depending on time of year and whether child got a flu shot at an earlier visit. Count the shots for yourself HERE on the schedule.
Tomorrow you're going to have a headache. Heck, you might have one right now. You'll take a Tylenol or a Motrin or a Bayer aspirin. Would you take all three at once? Or could that combination perhaps cause harm?
Whaddya think, Age of Autism readers? Is MMR off the hook?
MMR is definitely not off the hook. They didn't even look at vaccine strain measles RNA. That's what Wakefield et al were looking at. I understand only one child had GI symptoms. So, again, they were looking at a different subset of children unlike those who were found to regress following the MMR. MMR is not safe for every child and this is certainly not the last word on MMR and regressive autism.
Posted by: Theresa Cedillo | February 06, 2008 at 09:41 PM
Well, for starters, all the "controls" appear to have been vaccinated with MMR.... "There was no evidence of a differential response to measles virus or the measles component of the MMR in children with ASD, with or without regression, and controls who had either one or two doses of MMR."
In other words, what this study found is that there is no difference between children who have had MMR vaccine and those who have had MMR vaccine in their incidence of autism.
If the abstract correctly represents the characteristics of the control groups, it is a clear example of a sham study designed not to shed any light on this important issue, but rather to pull the wool over our eyes.
Posted by: Sandy Gottstein | February 06, 2008 at 01:46 PM
Once again, they're looking for the measles virus in the wrong place. Dr. Wakefield and colleagues are preparing a formal response, but his initial concerns about the study are these:
"This paper contributes nothing to the issue of causation, one way or another. It tells us nothing about what actually happened to the children at the time of exposure. I am increasingly persuaded that measuring things in blood many years down the line tells us nothing about the initiating events in what is, in effect, a static (non-progressive) encephalopathy unlike, for example, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis which is a progressive measles encephalopathy. The gut is a different matter and analysis of mucosal tissues has been very informative since here we see, in the relevant children, active ongoing inflammation."
Posted by: Jane Johnson | February 06, 2008 at 01:20 PM
Commenting on the published research Results:
"No difference was found between cases and controls for measles antibody response."
Nobody ever said that the antibodies have ever meant anything. They are just the suggestion that the vaccine elicited a humoral response. Antibody production by the way does NOT imply immunity. See the related literature for cell-mediated immunity.
"There was no dose response relationship between autism symptoms and antibody levels."
IF anybody has ever looked closely at ASD kids or even attempted to talk to a DAN doctor they would know that the antibody levels of ASD kids are all over the place. What "relationship" is being referred to here?
"Measles virus nucleic acid was amplified by RT-PCR in PMBC from one case with autism and two typically developing children. There was no evidence of a differential response to measles virus or the measles component of the MMR in children with ASD, with or without regression, and controls who had either one or two doses of MMR. Only one child from the control group had clinical symptoms of a possible enterocolitis."
IF anybody has taken a look at Dr. Krigsman's presentations/ research, they would KNOW that only 80% of the ASD kids carry the measles virus in the biopsies. Why in the world did they not do this test on the entire sample of ASD kids to know for sure? Is it because they knew they would not like the findings? As far as evidence of a differential response to the MMR goes, how long did they wait before they checked for this response? One day, two days, a week, a month? Did they even wait for a year, or two years, or even 5 years? How do they make the determination of the length of a "safe" period of time to wait before declaring all is well?
This is what is meant by FAKE research. You can tell it from a mile away because it stinks so bad. All you have to do is actually "read" it and get any DAN doctor to cross-check and verify its validity. Its really simple.
Posted by: Michael | February 06, 2008 at 11:21 AM
When they do studies they ignore anything that hurts their cause and expound upon on minute items that spin or support their agenda.
Subject: My Marie McCormick conversation 6/2004
> >
Shortly after the infamous IOM May
>2004 (stop looking for the vaccine link report) and right after the
> >Mady Hornig mice study was released I decided to contact Marie
> >McCormick at her work to rub the mice study in her face. I called and
> >was unable to get through but left my name and phone number doubtful
> >she would ever call me back.
> >Much to my surprise she did call me back and explained that she had
> >reviewed the mice study and several others but found them irrelevant.
> >I said that it seemed obvious that mercury could cause damage to
> >small children and she got very Bill Clintonesque with parsing words.
> >I remember her saying that the IOM was not asked to look at if
> >mercury caused neurological damage but that the IOM was specifically
> >asked only to make a decision relating to the vaccine/autism link.
> >She seemed to agree that mercury could damage children but kept
> >saying that she was not asked to look at that, only to look to see if
> >there was proof of a vaccine autism connection.
> > I realized after a while I was wasting my time because she was
> >probably the most closed minded person I ever communicated with and I
> >ended the conversation after asking her to reconsider her position.
> >Now I realize she was commissioned to create a report to absolve all
> >the federal agencies of wrongdoing and stop the autism mercury
> >movement. I remember being very sad because I thought how could
> >someone who is supposed to be a healer be so political that they
> >would put out a report denying a vaccine link but not acknowledging
> >the truth they did know about mercury causing neurological problems.
> >
> >Richard Farretta
-----Original Message-----
> >From: Marie McCormick [mailto:mmccormi@hsph.harvard.edu]
> >Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 10:42 AM
> >To: Farretta, Richard
> >Subject: Re: new proof of autism and mercury link
> >
> >We reviewed this study in the recent IOM report. Dr. Hornig did a
> >presentation before the committee.The text is quoted below:
> >
> > Dr. Hornig did a presentation before the committee. On p. 60 of the
> >report: "Although this model uses thimerosal and is possible more
> >relevant to the discussion at hand [i.e. of rodent models], it assumes
> >that autism is caused by an autoimmune reaction. A previous section
> >[of the report] discussed the lack of evidence of autoimmune-mediated
> >CNS damage in the brains of autistic patients.
> > The relevance of rodent models, including the three described
> >above, is difficult ot assess because the rodent "clinical" endpoints
> >may not reflect human ones, because there is limited understanding of
> >the etiology of autism, and because the methods used to cause changes
> >in the animals may bear no relationship to pathogenesis of the human
> >disease. The committee accepts that under certain conditions,
> >infections and heavy metals, including thimerosal, can injur the
> >nervous system. These rodent models are useful for understanding some
> >of the processes by which these exogenous agents may exert their
> >damage. However, the connection between these models and autism is
> >theoretical."
Marie C. McCormick MD, ScD
>
>Sumner and Esther Feldberg Professor
>
>of Maternal and Child Health
>
>Department of Society, Human Development and Health
>
>Harvard School of Public Health
>
>677 Huntington Ave.
>
>Boston, MA 02115
>
>Tel. (617) 432-3759
>
>Fax (617) 432-3755
>
>Email: mmccormi@hsph.harvard.edu
>
> >
Posted by: Richard | February 06, 2008 at 11:13 AM