The Trouble with the ANTI “Anti-Vaccine” Movement: How They Hijack the Issue; Distort the Facts; and Totally Miss the Point
By Julie Obradovic
1. They believe there is an anti-vaccine movement.
This may surprise a lot of people, but there actually isn't an "anti-vaccine movement”. Although there are definitely people who believe no vaccine is a good vaccine, the controversy has never been solely about whether or not vaccines are good or bad; it's been about whether or not they are being used responsibly and have been properly investigated for their role in chronic health conditions.
The more appropriate term to describe people raising this important question would be consumer safety advocates, seeking informed consent, more research, product liability, and policy reform.
Only a few possibilities exist to explain why those who insist on using the "anti-vaccine" label anyway continue to do so: they erroneously assume anyone who questions a product's safety is automatically against it; they believe vaccines already are being used as responsibly as they possibly can be and have been properly investigated; or they choose to use a red herring label like "anti-vaccine" to manipulate people.
2. Anyone who disagrees with them is an idiot.
If the first line of attack doesn't work it will almost always be followed by an insult. Not only are people who disagree portrayed as dangerous lunatics who want to see the world explode in infectious disease, supposedly they are also "flat-earthers" who can't accept the world is round. Certain journalists have gone so far as to suggest it's no wonder their children have problems.
Such commentary is breathtaking in its insensitivity, entirely unnecessary, and most troublesome once again, not true. Even the CDC has recognized for years, most recently in a study on Hepatitis B uptake, that the most common demographic of a person who questions vaccine safety or refuses them is a highly educated mother with a master's degree.
When faced with this unpleasant fact, anti “anti-vaxxers” are left with little place to go. Some have started calling these parents “superstitious”, “defenders of pseudo-science”, or “conspiracy theorist” instead.
3. They blame Dr. Wakefield for everything.
Dr. Wakefield has now become the scapegoat for the whole controversy. Supposedly this man and his team of researchers, who had the audacity to suggest there might be a problem with the MMR that warranted further study, is single-handedly responsible for the plummeting vaccine uptake throughout the country.
This too is untrue. Parents who implicate the MMR in their children’s Autism represent only a sub-set of parents. Dr. Wakefield's study was not and never has been the whole story where vaccines and Autism have been concerned.
4. They just don’t get it.
Although the controversy appears to be about vaccines, it goes much deeper than that. Quite simply, many parents have lost faith in their physicians.
While some would like to believe this is because parents are impressionable conspiracy theorists that can’t distinguish fact from fiction, arguably the medical community has brought this problem on themselves.
They sold out to the pharmaceutical industry. They have a terrible track record for children’s health. They refuse to examine how they might be responsible for that. They dismiss the testimony, experience and suffering of thousands of parents and children. They threaten parents with ultimatums. Most important, they are completely inept at dealing with Autism and always have been.
At this very moment, doctors still can’t agree on what Autism is, how to define it, when it started, if it’s a problem, who has it, if it’s treatable, how it’s treatable, or what to do about it. In fact, the only thing they feel completely confident telling the world about Autism is who didn’t cause it: them.
To the intelligent parent, their credibility is completely lost.
Furthermore, the idea that better diagnosis or a broadening of the definition is responsible for the disproportional number of children identified with Autism now-a-days is an assault on the common sense of the average middle aged person, old enough to clearly remember the non-existent condition in their peers thirty years ago; young enough to verify this in their elders; and astute enough to see the reality of their children’s sick generation in their own families, schools and neighborhoods.
As a response, the medical community has taken the position that parents actually can’t believe what they live or what they see, their reality a misdiagnosed illusion. In essence, people without a white coat are unqualified to understand their own world.
What a condescending insult if ever there was one.
5. They repeatedly distort or exaggerate the facts.
The amount of studies done on the relationship between vaccines and Autism is limited. Only one ingredient (Thimerosal) and one injection (the MMR) have ever been studied. The quality, integrity, depth, and extent with which they have are at the heart of the controversy. (Objectors = Flat-Earthers. Got it?)
To put it into perspective, there are currently over 20 injections (more than 36 vaccines) given to children before kindergarten, and at last count, over five-dozen ingredients in them depending on the manufacturer. Most often these injections are given simultaneously. No study exists on the safety of doing so.
More disturbing, only a few studies have used American children as the study group. Even worse, each and every one of them was funded and/or completed by a vaccine patent holder, a vaccine manufacturer, or a public health agency or agent responsible for vaccine uptake. Often it is a combination of all three.
In spite of these blatant conflicts of interest, the studies have been touted as conclusive evidence of a lack of correlation; this even though several studies have come to contradictory conclusions. Several, for example, show Thimerosal, a mercury-based neurotoxin, is beneficial to children’s health. One shows it has an indeterminable effect. One shows it possibly prevents Autism. Others show it causes tics, speech delay, and behavior delays.
Furthermore, no study exists on the differences between health outcomes among vaccinated and never vaccinated American children. The medical community claims this is impossible or unethical to do, even though thousands of American children are never vaccinated right now.
6. They pretend to be the gatekeepers of science.
Gone are the days of limited access to information. With the advent of the Internet, scientific information is readily available to whoever would like it. While certainly this doesn’t qualify anyone who reads it as being an expert, it does mean that a new phenomenon has developed: consumer-scientists who question what he or she is being sold.
Combined with the mounting instances of pharmaceutical fraud, the lack of urgency or answers for Autism, and the availability of this scientific information, parents have become a critical voice of what they have uncovered: compromised research; conflicts of interest; non-sensical methodology; idiotic results; and unanswered questions.
When faced with these criticisms, the medical community has taken the position that lay members of society, such as parents, are unqualified to make these claims. They dismiss their concerns as embarrassingly amateur, not to be taken seriously. That may be so, except for one thing.
It was a lay member of society, a journalist with no medical background or scientific expertise, who first claimed Dr. Wakefield committed fraud. It was the same journalist who examined the research and concluded it was, then allowed to publish his findings in a medical journal. The medical community has made him their champion.
The double standard is astounding.
7. They fail to acknowledge the context of the controversy.
In the vaccine controversy, there are four major players: the consumer, the government, the medical community, and the pharmaceutical industry. The consumer purchases a product manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry that is mandated for use by the government that is given to them by the medical community.
Should the consumer get hurt by the product neither the pharmaceutical industry nor the medical community can be held liable. Instead, the consumer pays a tax on the product that funds a court run by the government that determines if they were hurt and to what extent.
The science and experts they use to make that determination are provided from the defendants themselves: the medical community, government, and pharmaceutical industry. If it is determined the consumer was in fact injured, the government awards compensation from the consumer tax fund. In other words, the injured consumers pay themselves.
This, for many citizens just realizing it, is insane.
Fear, however, allows it to continue. Consumers are repeatedly told this is all for their own good and that to dismantle the system would lead to certain death. The subsequent abandonment of the pharmaceutical industry from the market (should they actually be held accountable for their product) would make it so, they claim. Policy makers believe it.
Coupled with the fact the government is now partnering with the pharmaceutical industry to create vaccines in public-private partnerships, we now have a situation in which the government is profiting from their use while simultaneously serving as their regulator and recommender. Believe it or not, we have actually legislated the ability to legally kill someone for profit without liability.
In the case of the Autism controversy, the problem is simple: consumers are accusing the government, pharmaceutical industry, and medical community of collectively causing Autism, yet the government, pharmaceutical industry and medical community are the only ones who have been allowed to investigate themselves to determine if they are guilty. Astonishingly, they keep coming up innocent.
Still, many believe the sheer volume of people involved in those entities makes any connection between them and the crime of which they are being accused impossible; hence, the conspiracy theorist accusation. Surely someone, somewhere, they justify, would have stopped it.
Unfortunately, this is not a good argument. Too many people have never been a deterrent to corruption or the perpetuation of atrocities, especially when there is money and accountability involved; in fact, it is almost always precisely because there are so many people involved the problem continues. It’s systemic. One needs only examine the housing crisis as evidence.
8. They over-simplify the problem.
The debate over whether or not vaccines are being used responsibly has many folds. It is not just about whether or not they cause Autism or other chronic disease. It is also about whether or not we have appropriate consumer education, are violating civil rights, have properly assessed the risk-reward ratio over the long term, have properly identified or supported vaccine injury, and whether or not the right people are in charge of doing the right science to determine that. It is also to bring attention to the fact we have legislated the ability of our government to kill someone for profit without criminal liability.
But perhaps most difficult of all, the vaccine controversy is really just a microcosm of a much larger issue. When being forced to vaccinate in order to participate in society, parents are to accept their child may be injured or killed for the sake of other children. They are also to accept there is no way of identifying who that child may be. Their only comfort is statistical rarity; a statistic mind you, created by those who manufacture, profit from, regulate, and are responsible for vaccine uptake…and can never be held accountable if they are wrong.
When parents decline, weighing the immediate risk-reward ratio carefully, they are told opting out and putting their child first is immoral and selfish, leaving the rest of the world’s children in danger, perhaps the most counterintuitive position a parent can take. Even so, vaccination, society insists, is the right thing to do for everyone; that, above all else, should come first.
This is medical communism.
Historically, communism has failed at least in part for the fact that it didn’t value the individual. Every time enough disregarded individuals became strong enough to overthrow the government that considered them meaningless, they did. Contrary to what one would have expected, it was never immoral to put the individual ahead of the whole; it was actually immoral not to.
With our current vaccine policy, we are witness to this now. Everyone, it seems, wants to matter.
9. They have no hypothesis.
The hypothesis of those who believe Autism is primarily, but not exclusively, an iatrogenic disease is simple: heavy metals and toxins when coupled with microbes such as bacteria or viruses are able to penetrate the central nervous system and/or damage the immune system, thereby leading to systemic malfunctions that manifest as the symptoms of Autism and other health conditions in a susceptible person. Depending on the exposure, timing, and combination, the manifestations vary.
Vaccines contain both heavy metals and microbes and would be one way of causing such a problem, especially since they deliver them artificially into the body via injection. Medications, as well as other toxins, like pesticides per se, would possibly contribute too.
This is a reasonable and plausible hypothesis to explain the explosion in chronic disease we have documented in the industrialized nations of the world over the last 200 years. The chemical soup in which we now live is frightening. Everyone can agree on at least that.
Evidence to support this hypothesis abounds. Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill brilliantly documented the likelihood of this phenomenon in their extraordinary book, Age of Autism: Mercury, Medicine, and a Man-Made Epidemic. They also uncovered a similar set of circumstances that would explain why polio became more dangerous in the late 19th and early 20th centuries: pesticides. To ignore what they have discovered is a disservice to humanity.
The pursuit to pinpoint one causal factor of Autism and other chronic conditions appears to have been short-sited. This is not moving the goal posts; it’s finally seeing the bigger picture. For if they’re right, the studies on vaccines and Autism thus far have not properly assessed the significance of the total toxic burden mothers and children bear or how the ability to tolerate it varies. Even in the few that have tried, selected exposures have been theoretical only (as have been the amounts of Thimerosal when they were assessed).
But unfortunately, this hypothesis is being ignored. Instead, ridiculous theories abound, not the least of which that Autism is purely genetic. There is no such thing as a genetic epidemic. Additionally, in spite of millions of dollars in research, and in spite of how some doctors are spinning it, no Autism gene has ever been found. More important, toxins can alter gene expression. Differences found may not be causal, but rather evidentiary.
In the mean time, alternative hypotheses have surfaced. Pajamas. Depressed dads. Old, schizophrenic moms. Living too close to the highway. Pollution. Rainfall.
Admittedly insulting at first, they may be on to something. Pajamas are doused in antimony, an anti-flame retardant. Depression and schizophrenia both have connections with heavy metals. Older moms have a larger toxic burden. Highways are made from concrete; concrete dust contains mercury. So does pollution. And let’s not forget pesticides.
As Dan and Mark have both stated repeatedly, facts cluster around a good hypothesis. Theirs is by far the best one ever presented.
10. They have an excuse for everything.
Everything regarding Autism is a coincidence. From the observations of the first doctor to identify the disorder in 1943, to the symptoms, to the timing, to the anecdotal evidence of parents, to the prevalence and incidence rates, to the improvement and recovery, all of it is considered best explained by coincidence.
When the rates of Autism began to skyrocket in the mid 1990’s, right after the amount of mercury tripled in vaccines, moved up to the day of birth, and more vaccines began to be added to the schedule, they claimed to have simply missed everyone that had Autism for decades prior.
As the explosion continued over the next fifteen years, and schools and doctors and parents became overwhelmed with the demands of these children, they claimed they were over-diagnosing. They took it even further and said it was parents, not them, who were actually to blame. Parents were greedily seeking services for their children they didn’t deserve.
(Perhaps this shouldn’t have been a surprise, however. Parents, especially moms, have always been blamed. Doctors hypothesized for years, until the 1970’s in fact, that Autism was the subconscious reaction of a child who felt their mother wanted to reject or even kill them. This is why Autism was originally put in the psychiatric realm and remains to this day.)
Now, almost twenty years into the epidemic, they have come to another coincidental conclusion. From 1943 to 1994, they misdiagnosed. From 1994 to 2011 they over-diagnosed. And now, in 2012, they need to UN-diagnose; thus the new DSM-V criteria.
The absurdity is stunning, if not criminal. By their own admittance, they have no idea what they are doing. One wonders if they even realize they are nullifying all of the science done on Autism thus far with this change. For if you still don’t even know what Autism is, how can you have appropriately studied what causes it?
11. They fail to recognize their tactics aren’t working.
Were I not an educator who has grown accustomed to separating the critique of my profession from myself, I’m not sure I would be able to say the things I have. This essay is an indictment of the medical-industrial complex, not an individual.
I have just thoroughly and thoughtfully laid out the position for why the vaccine controversy continues. I will continue to do so as long as I live, or until at which time it is no longer necessary. I am confident other parents like me will do the same. Calling us names, censoring our stories, or dismissing our concerns will not deter us.
Until then, it is simply not true to say there is nothing to debate. It is simply inexcusable to censor or stop the conversation. It is simply juvenile to use insults to describe those who refuse. And mark my words; it’s a waste of breath.
Parents, the consumers of these privately made products mandated for use by their government and given to them by their doctors, will fund and complete the science they demand. It is not a matter of if, but when. Hell hath no fury like that of a parent scorned, especially one told that their life is lie and that neither their child nor their suffering matters.
It is time for everyone to remember what we are seeking: health and wellness for all of the world’s children. We simply disagree on how to best attain it. The tactics being used to dismiss us serve no purpose other than to prolong it.
Julie Obradovic is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism.
My son had a titre done for measles too and it also very high. I did not give boosters since he still has immunity.
Posted by: autism mom | July 09, 2014 at 03:31 PM
excellent article, concise and thoughtful..thank you
Posted by: Stacee | July 09, 2014 at 03:01 PM
I have a 26 year old daughter with severe autism. I refused further vaccines after she turned 5. Got titers done this year found her measles titre remains sky high. What does THAT mean? She had her childhood MMR vaccines but no boosters. Have to wonder if this is chronic measles infection. How many vaccinated kids with autism have had titers done ?
Posted by: sue Gazzara | July 09, 2014 at 12:14 PM
I would like ask The Respected Doctors To please help me Out with this problem which have right now I am leaving in afghanistan and i have lab result with me two sets of result with me that indicates that No hepatites B viruse DNA was detected the second lab test Indicates that not detected and show normal result for liver enzymes and bilirubin Indicates normal lever funcation I Recevied a Hepatitis B vaccine Beacuse I was A medical team Empolyee in afghanistan in the past Please help me out with this issue which i currently have right now I am looking for someting to get my blood to be Negative right now when I am checking my bloods its positive Because of vaccaine Immunum response to my body I would to ask the Great doctors to hok me up with anti surface HBS someting to get Blood turns back negative I would be very kind and approciated.
Posted by: ahmad walid | January 20, 2013 at 11:51 AM
While I have not thought the MMR antigens were the only issue with vaccines even when I first considered vaccines as a problems I am curious about a matter I don't recall reading an explanation for regarding Dr. Wakefield. It is realted to the information in the link below about the "legal aid" his party apparently obtained. The problem with vaccines does not rest on what occurred with Dr. Wakefiled, but I was wondering if anyone, possibly even John Stone might weigh in and give perspective about this part. It is a link to Brian Deer's info, and I wish to know the truth on this.
"MMR doctor given legal aid thousands"
http://briandeer.com/mmr/st-dec-2006.htm
Posted by: Visitor | April 09, 2012 at 05:33 PM
Oh, plus, they are crazy cyber stalkers too. I'm not talking about the rational pro-vaccine people, and I know you aren't either. I'm talking about the anti-anti-vaccine people who spend all day following the supposed anti-vax person around the internet, sending letters to people they come in contact with, try to get speaking engagements shut down, report every last thing to every last reporting agency they can, send death threats, hack into servers, submit fake reports to search engines of phishing schemes, etc.
Posted by: Ana Bananarama | February 21, 2012 at 12:38 PM
After this article received over 3400 views when it was reposted on the Autism Speaks forum, the moderators were pressured to relocate it from "Autism in the News" (at the top of the forum page) to "Vaccines in the News" (at the very bottom). "Vaccines in the News" is a relatively new category on the forum that was developed, under pressure from the pharma/ND camp, in order to try to take the subject of vaccines out of "austism in the news."
I refer them to #11 in the above article.
Posted by: K.A. | February 21, 2012 at 11:23 AM
Harold, I also noticed that you never commented on my comment under A)
A) provided irrefutable evidence that there is NO chronic inflammation and NO immune and autoimmune pathology in autism – i.e. no microgliosis, no abnormalities in cytokine/chemokine levels in blood, CNS- CSF and GI tract, no mast cell activation, no odd goings on with NK cells and lymphocytes, no abnormalities in brain stem/autonomic nervous system that are in any way linked to the immune system. Also irrefutable evidence that there are no abnormalities in levels and activity of infectious agents and their by-products in autism (LPS levels in the blood, gut dysbiosis, polyomaviruses in the brain etc).
Was it an oversight on your part or could it be that you yourself (as I suspect great majority of anti-anti-vaccine folks) haven't a faintest clue of the pathological issues in autism? You prefer to seek comfort in numbers and read statistics, rather than real research?
Posted by: Natasa | February 17, 2012 at 05:34 AM
@Harold: "Why can't you accept strong epidemiological evidence that there is no link between vaccines and autism?"
Because those "studies" cited as evidence are laughably weak. Pathetic as science. And because statistical numbers are easily manipulated. And because population that DID GET sick was never EVER studied properly.
re you comment: "Isn't "B)" already demanding the impossible? Vaccines are immune "stressors" (so are infections and many other things), they do work by generating an immune response" to an antigen."
My point exactly!!! (we are getting somewhere ;)
Posted by: Natasa | February 17, 2012 at 05:27 AM
Harold ,
The challenge I posed to you was pretty damned simple:
To provide just two measly pieces scientific evidence:
- one which presents irrefutable scientific proof that any vaccine has ever prevented a disease of any kind
- one which presents irrefutable scientific proof that there is no link link between vaccination status and autism
And then explain for the rest of us exactly HOW the those studies represented scientific proof of their respective claims.
Its not the first time I've posed those questions, and like everyone before you, you completely failed to answer them.
However, i have yet to see anyone put so much effort into evading the questions. For most people here, vaccine damage is a VERY REAL issue, that has caused immeasurable misery both for us and our children. For you however, it at best represents an intellectual conundrum... but most likely represents an opportunity that you accepted, to sell your soul and for a quick buck from Big Pharma.
I realize that this is unlikely to even register on your conscience, but this site primarily exists to right a wrong that was knowingly inflicted upon innocent children. Do us all a favour Harold, and go get yourself a real job.
Posted by: Barry | February 16, 2012 at 09:01 PM
Rare???
what is rare????
Rare is 1 out of 11,000 - is it? That is what the information provided to me at the health department about the DPT shot in the 80s.
That is about the average rate that kids are born with PKU in which the medical profession demands that each new born be tested for ---in order to change the diet and save the child. CONCERN; Compassion, almost makes me tear up!
Truth is a DPT shot reaction back in the 1980s was really 1 out of 300to 350 ---LIARS !
Bless your heart Harold --- you still have trust. And may God truly bless you and keep you safe. I truly wish I was still a fool.
Posted by: Benedetta | February 11, 2012 at 04:05 PM
Hi Harold
Question is given that you agree vaccine damage does occur
1) How do we quantify it in an official culture greatly hostile to its recognition - ie you have to try and sue the government etc with medical profession being generally as unhelpful as possible?
2) Given this culture of aggressive denial, exemplified by your attitude - although you deserve a little credit for trying here - how do we minimise risk of damage, as opposed to just controlling public perceptions?
If the argument on the other hand the argument is that vaccines are safe because you can trust the government, manufacturers and doctors there does not seem to be any rational basis for that belief.
Posted by: For Harold | February 11, 2012 at 02:48 PM
I asked -
"1) Is there any evidence that could convince you that any type of vaccine is beneficial? If so, please specify what that evidence is; if not, please explain why not.
2) Is there any evidence that could convince you that there is no significant link between vaccination status and autism? If yes, please specify what type of evidence you would accept; if not, please explain why not."
Obviously, most people guessed that I come from a vaccine-supporting position; nevertheless, these are straightforward questions. Question "1)" could be rephrased to say "net" beneficial.
The answers fell into two categories.
Several are from people who have been through the experience of a child with severe health problems. I don't intend any unkindness or disrespect toward people in this position; I wish the best for you. Any honest person agrees that rare but serious side effects have been associated with vaccines. I can't judge from brief internet postings, but of course, at least some people do have children who had such reactions. These may have been unforeseeable, or in some cases, it may have happened that someone was injured by a vaccine even though a contraindication was present. There may be cases of misdiagnosed vaccine reaction, as well. All of these things are possible.
However, and I realize that this is no comfort at all to people who have been impacted, these may be either examples of rare tragedies (nothing can make human life perfectly safe, sadly), or, if vaccines were given where there was a contradindication and/or clear vaccine side effects misdiagnosed, they may even be examples of medical mistakes.
Obviously, neither I nor anyone else can tell from internet comments if any of this is the case.
I strongly support using vaccines only in an appropriate way, and efforts to reduce the incidence of side effects, and so does any other reasonable person.
The evidence to date seems to show that vaccines have a very low incidence of side effects, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13164#toc, which is cold comfort to those who have experienced the side effects, but everything in life has some risk. A lot of evidence suggests that very environments may increase the risk of allergies; on the other hand, very I asked -
"1) Is there any evidence that could convince you that any type of vaccine is beneficial? If so, please specify what that evidence is; if not, please explain why not.
2) Is there any evidence that could convince you that there is no significant link between vaccination status and autism? If yes, please specify what type of evidence you would accept; if not, please explain why not."
Obviously, most people guessed that I come from a vaccine-supporting position; nevertheless, these are straightforward questions. Question "1)" could be rephrased to say "net" beneficial.
The answers fell into two categories.
Several are from people who have been through the experience of a child with severe health problems. I don't intend any unkindness or disrespect toward people in this position; I wish the best for you. Any honest person agrees that rare but serious side effects have been associated with vaccines. I can't judge from brief internet postings, but of course, at least some people do have children who had such reactions. These may have been unforeseeable, or in some cases, it may have happened that someone was injured by a vaccine even though a contraindication was present. There may be cases of misdiagnosed vaccine reaction, as well. All of these things are possible.
However, and I realize that this is no comfort at all to people who have been impacted, these may be either examples of rare tragedies (nothing can make human life perfectly safe, sadly), or, if vaccines were given where there was a contradindication and/or clear vaccine side effects misdiagnosed, they may even be examples of medical mistakes.
Obviously, neither I nor anyone else can tell from internet comments if any of this is the case.
I strongly support using vaccines only in an appropriate way, and efforts to reduce the incidence of side effects, and so does any other reasonable person.
The evidence to date seems to show that vaccines have a very low incidence of side effects, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13164#toc, which is cold comfort to those who have experienced the side effects, but everything in life has some risk. A lot of evidence suggests that very environments may increase the risk of allergies; on the other hand, very dirty environments increase the risk of infectious disease.
The question is whether the probability of injury from the diseases that vaccines effectively prevent is greater than the probability of injury from vaccines. The answer is that the diseases are much more dangerous.
Also -
"Harold, some of your questions are a bit moot. I mean we have basically taken away childhood illnesses"
However, because of vaccines. I am old enough not to have been vaccinated against chicken pox or mumps; I had both, despite being raised in a very hygenic environment. These viral illnesses are intensely contagious and prevalent in the environment; hygeine alone won't prevent them. Neither of these diseases hurt me much. However, like all chicken pox victims, I am now at risk for "shingles". Had a teenaged or adult man caught mumps from me, he would have been at risk for severely painful mumps orchitis (infection of testicle) and subsequent loss or reduction of fertility. Older people than me can remember polio; polio has recurred in some parts of the world where there was resistance to vaccination.
"Harold turn your questions around to yourself
1) Is there any evidence that would convince that at least one vaccine that has been recommended by the CDC might not be benificial. Is there any evidence that would convince you that vaccines and autism is linked?????"
Of course. But I have not seen it yet.
"1) Yes, absolutely. And yes, like Stagmom, I would consider vaccines for my children, depending on circumstances. My decision would depend on the neurological and immune status of that particular child and type of vaccine versus the risk and consequences of that particular infection. In other words weighing risks versus benefits of each.
2) personally I would be convinced only if someone both
A) provided irrefutable evidence that there is NO chronic inflammation and NO immune and autoimmune pathology in autism – i.e. no microgliosis, no abnormalities in cytokine/chemokine levels in blood, CNS- CSF and GI tract, no mast cell activation, no odd goings on with NK cells and lymphocytes, no abnormalities in brain stem/autonomic nervous system that are in any way linked to the immune system. Also irrefutable evidence that there are no abnormalities in levels and activity of infectious agents and their by-products in autism (LPS levels in the blood, gut dysbiosis, polyomaviruses in the brain etc).
B) provided irrefutable evidence that vaccine do NOT act as immune stressors and are NOT capable of triggering cytokine storms and long-term immune-mediated pathology, are not capable of reactivating latent infections and introducing novel replication and recombination-competent contaminants and half-dead vaccine-strain pathogens that are able to escape compromised immune system and establish long-term residency in host."
Why can't you accept strong epidemiological evidence that there is no link between vaccines and autism?
Isn't "B)" already demanding the impossible? Vaccines are immune "stressors" (so are infections and many other things), they do work by generating an immune response to an antigen.
Anyway, the original hypothesis was that thimersal as a preservative in vaccines was linked to autism, not that the actual antigenic component against which immunity is provoked was the problem.
I still can't see all the comments, and there are some others I wanted to respond to, but anyway, I will stop here.
Posted by: harold | February 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM
Harold;
Please read this blog and then read my next blog and see how boring it is to have to have to hear the same stuff again and again.
Any reply you make, has been heard before by me. There is no reply - I promise you that I have not heard.
*I heard it in college when I majored in Microbiology.
*I heard the same speech from my children's ped -- he must have had the same professors.
*I heard it from my best ex friend -- that did not finish college as a youth, because she was so boy crazy! Instead she messed around half her life and then went back in her late 40's, and finished her nursing degree.
*I heard it from my daughter - and her friend that were both nursing students and knew the professors were lying because of thier own personal experience. (her fellow nursing friend actually witnessed her son reacting to the DTaP -- and she brought him to the nurse's graduation -- and the nursing professions all knew what was wrong with him as they watched him with smiles on thier lips but worried eyes.
*I have heard it on the Kawasakis disease website, as I told what I say, would not accept a growing epidemic was genetic and they kicked me off.
* I have heard it on the Huffington post site from over bearing Autism Newsbeat and Wombles who told me that it happened a long time ago and to get over it.
What could you possible say that I have not heard???? Perhaps I am sorry it happened. I will try to help it from happening to others. I will do all in my power to see that this immune based disease will be treated as such and look for real cures? Now that would surprise m
Posted by: Benedetta | February 11, 2012 at 10:37 AM
Harold;
Any reply you make, has been heard before by me. There is no reply - I promise you that I have not heard.
*I heard it in college when I majored in Microbiology.
*I heard the same speech from my children's ped -- he must have had the same professors.
*I heard it from my best ex friend -- that did not finish college as a youth, because she was so boy crazy! Instead she messed around half her life and then went back in her late 40's, and finished her nursing degree.
*I heard it from my daughter - and her friend that were both nursing students and knew the professors lying (her fellow nursing friend actually witnessed her son reacting to the DTaP -- and she brought him to the nurse's graduation -- and the nursing professions all knew what was wrong with him as they watched him with smiles on thier lis but worried eyes.
*I have heard it on the Kawasakis disease website, as I told what I say, would not accept a growing epidemic was genetic and they kicked me off.
* I have heard it on the Huffington post site from over bearing autism beat and wombles who told me that it happened a long time ago and to get over it.
What could you possible say that I have not heard???? Perhaps I am sorry it happened. I will try to help it from happening to others. I will do all in my power to see that this immune based disease will be treated as such and look for real cures? Now that would surprise me!
Posted by: Benedetta | February 11, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Is it possible to view the older comments? I would like to add some replies.
Posted by: harold1 | February 11, 2012 at 08:02 AM
Fantastically written Julie! we need more of this. Very eloquently explains our stand point and the current state of affairs with profit driven pharmaceutical companies. I was a little confused by your reference to communism but realised the perception of communism in America and in Europe too for that matter is the models of Russian and Chinese capitalist dictatorships and oppression. This isn't true communism or socialism. In fact true socialism respects the human rights of the individual and represents them as opposed to the corporations. The Socialist Party (England and Wales) demands an end to pharmaceutical profit mongering at the expense of lives. Its the only party that wants to nationalise pharma and reclaim it under democratic control. Talk to them. http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/main/Home This is nit picking of course but i thought you might be interested in the idea :) Anyway thank you for such a brilliant and astute analysis. Vicki Green
Posted by: Vicki Green | February 11, 2012 at 07:50 AM
http://jabsloonies.blogspot.com/2012/01/jackie-fletcher-is-brainless-moron.html
Appear to be running scared. They are very keen on insults and censorship threats.
Posted by: Lokasmasta | February 11, 2012 at 04:15 AM
I do not have a vaccine injured child, and when I see the devastating consequences to our helpless children, and also to our animal companions, I am filled with a mixture of anger, frustration and sadness.
The worst part of it for me, is in facing the ignorance, and bullying of pro-vaccine proponents as they blame me and others like me for 'spreading diseases' when it is they who we should be wary of; watching them bringing in shills to make points for them, since generally they are very uninformed and fall back on so-called experts; the name-calling and accusations because I dare to question and investigate on my own, thereby defying 'conventional wisdoms'.
My heart goes out to all victims of this incredibly profit-motivated hoax upon mankind.
Posted by: teri | February 11, 2012 at 02:52 AM
I'm with you, Barry.
Posted by: Donna L. | February 10, 2012 at 09:04 PM
Hi Dazydee:
Thank you for adequately proving the point the author was trying to make. You have perfectly shown those who are skeptical of the Vaccine Movement why its Movement is inept at meaningful discussion about who should be vaccinated, at what age (if at all) and which vaccines may actually have some benefit.
Flaming the author just proves to Vaccine Skeptics that this is the only tactic at your disposal, and that you think it's best to just stick your tongue out and say nanny nanny boo boo. Or is it, I know you are but what am I? Regardless, thanks for making the author's point.
The sand pile is thataway >>>>>>
Posted by: unherdof | February 10, 2012 at 08:44 PM
I am the parent of a vaccine injured child. And the reason that injury occurred, is because I led him to it based on a long standing belief that vaccines were safe and effective.
The only thing more devastating than my sons unnecessary injury, was when I later realized that my belief in vaccines was based on nothing ore than insidious propaganda. I went looking for proof that vaccines actually did eradicate diseases..... and there simply isn't any. You'll find lots of industry funded "scientific looking" documents, intentionally written to obfuscate the issue. But if you spend less than an hour on each one, trying to tease out the underlying science, you'll find there isn't any in there.
Vaccines are the biggest hoax in the history of mankind, and it's anything but an accident. They don't now, nor have they ever prevented diseases of any kind. They create disease, and in so doing create lucrative markets for the drugs that vaccine makes ALSO happen to sell.
I am 100%, completely anti-vaccine, and I have no problem admitting it. The reason I feel that way, is because of how they devastated my sons health. And I struggle to understand how anyone can expect me to feel any other way.
Posted by: Barry | February 10, 2012 at 06:13 PM
The number who are critical regarding vaccines is rapidly rising. This is understandable.
More people are investigating vaccines, as they investigate the contents of jam or biscuits before considering buying.
More are reading the officially approved information in package inserts, this being accessible in internett:
http://vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm
This includes official information about disgusting animal tissue ingredients:
http://vactruth.com/2012/01/21/fly-in-my-vaccine-soup/
In addition, more are aware that vaccinated people may infect the unvaccinated,that vaccine induced herd immunity is a myth and that there is widespread corruption on all levels regarding vaccines.
Is it any wonder that the more one investigates, the more one disagrees with vaccination?
Posted by: Sandy | February 10, 2012 at 09:39 AM
Dazydee:
You obviously do not have a child who has been injured by vaccines.
Posted by: Mary | February 10, 2012 at 08:38 AM
How refreshing to hear a fellow educator discussing this so matter-of-factly. I love it. I am so burdened and heartbroken for all children. The hypocracy is astounding in this world! We educators have to reeducate people to understand what is really going on.
Posted by: Sue Muncy | February 10, 2012 at 08:15 AM
It is also fun to ask what part of the Simpsonwood meeting minutes people didn't read, and exactly which part of Dr. Thorsen's study in Denmark was made up since he stole a lot of the grant money so SOMETHING had to be fudged.
Posted by: Andy Cutler | February 10, 2012 at 02:38 AM
Harold,
I will produce my vaccine injured son, is that enough evidence for you?
Elizabeth Gillespie
Posted by: AussieMum | February 10, 2012 at 12:49 AM
Great response, Natasha!
Posted by: ATTN: Natasha | February 09, 2012 at 10:50 PM
You asked:
1) Is there any evidence that could convince you that any type of vaccine is beneficial? If so, please specify what that evidence is; if not, please explain why not.
For me it has nothing to do with recognizing a convincing piece of evidence anymore that vaccine(s) protect against some infectious diseases; it is a matter of losing faith that the risk of each and every vaccine really is negligible for my child and every child. This is based on personal experience of witnessing my child have a serious, disabling adverse vaccine reaction (paralysis and brain damage) and having my child's doctor deny it; then further experiencing the backlash of a medical system that holds vaccines so sacred (undeservedly) that suggesting otherwise and seeking answers and treatment exposed us to an attitude that can only be described as contempt. Too many parents, along with their families and friends, have witnessed healthy children succumb to chronic illness and disability post vaccination, demonstrating that the risk communicated to us as negligible is not only not reliable, but is a risk far greater and more insidious than the diseases we are taught to fear. This, exacerbated by the denial of the very real suffering of our children and the refusal to offer proper medical investigation and treatment for their injuries, is why we distrust not only the medical community's assurances of vaccine safety but the integrity of the system itself. Comparatively, when you observe children who suffer from infectious disease being treated with proper medical care post haste, respect and compassion, you realize you made a disastrous mistake for your child by choosing to vaccinate.
Spend a day in a pediatric primary care clinic and see what health problems walk in the door. You may not see any outward signs of a specific infectious disease that a vaccine has been created for, but you will be overwhelmed with the sheer volume and variety of children suffering from life-long chronic diseases of immune system dysfunction.
2) Is there any evidence that could convince you that there is no significant link between vaccination status and autism? If yes, please specify what type of evidence you would accept; if not, please explain why not.
When the medical community and the media touting selected evidence as having asked and answered the question turns out to be pure rubbish upon examination, what message do you think that sends to parents who already question the veracity of the medical advice they're already suspicious of. More to the point, there is already convincing evidence (Hannah Poling) that vaccines and/or the toxins contained in them can and do cause immunological damage that manifests as neurological pathology symptoms defined as "autism."
Posted by: Attn: Harold | February 09, 2012 at 08:39 PM
Harold, some of your questions are a bit moot. I mean we have basically taken away childhood illnesses and so you have to weigh the chance of your child maybe getting a disease as an adult which could be worse. I would like no thim ( in Canada I believe we only do single dose vials), no aluminum, no contaminants like mycoplasma. I may consider another MMR for my son but would be much more apt to give single mumps, so since it's not available I have not done it. I would never get a flu shot for me or mine because of documented GB after a grandmother had it. No way to Gardasil- not studied enough yet asnto safety or efficacy. Chicken pox, no way. Both kids had the real version and swam in toxic lakes and were fine- we never did the "anti-bacterial" products. Hep B doesn't have a great safety profile either and I have observed more children developing. Seizu disorders after the grade 5 hep b series.
Posted by: Jen | February 09, 2012 at 08:02 PM
Harold's questions, which are very familiar incidentally, are not those of genuine intellectual curiosity but of the truly indoctrinated, and even of the inquisition. These are simply industrial products with possible benefits and risks. How do they become an article of belief?
I have had this from leading vaccine proponents in the UK: they want some kind of beautiful submission: everything has be bent to their view. They can't understand why anyone woud disagree (but this is largely because they are not listening).
Posted by: John Stone | February 09, 2012 at 07:23 PM
Harold turn your questions around to yourself
1) Is there any evidence that would convince that at least one vaccine that has been recommended by the CDC might not be benificial.
(Please keep in mind that you have not just come from the doctor's office from getting a vaccine and holding a baby with 105 temp in your arms, and then been stupid enough to believe the docts when they say all is fine and hit 'em again to see the same thing happen only this time the kid passes out with the 105 temp and the next day it has a heart murmur where there was no heart murmur before, and the X rays says it is a boot shaped heart because of inflammation, but all is fine -- docts say it is not the vaccine and so hit 'em again and you do to watch the 105 temp and a stroke!
Of course this little brief tale (of just one of my kids, I have not told you about my daughter or husband's reaction to the tetanus really DPT shot and Hep B) was not enough proof for you I am sure-- Three times my son reacted and still not enough, right?
If that is how it is then you are not being fair now are you????????
2.) Is there any evidence that would convince you that vaccines and autism is linked?????
Well it has been 25 years now that my son suffered from the above stroke. And he did have full blown austism for a while, eye contact not there, spinnning, did not speak but a few words untill he was in the third grade, school system said he had PDD-NOS, other developmental docts also said he had tourettes, he did have seizures after the stroke, but about four years old he went off of seizure med and I was told he was fine. Although he had absentee seizures a lot,but I was told they did not exist by the docs even though even the teachers in school were on to me to do something???? When my son reached puberity he began to have myclonic jerks and then full blown seizures, docs said he was fine, and the teachers were begging me to do something. Keep in mind this is only my son -- I have not told you about the vaccine reactions again and again of my daughter or my husband.
But you don't care about what I have to say. You don't care what I have witnesses. You just don't care.
Posted by: Benedetta | February 09, 2012 at 06:53 PM
Harold wrote :
Questions for the author or anyone else who has commented here.
1) Is there any evidence that could convince you that any type of vaccine is beneficial? If so, please specify what that evidence is; if not, please explain why not.
2) Is there any evidence that could convince you that there is no significant link between vaccination status and autism? If yes, please specify what type of evidence you would accept; if not, please explain why not.
************************
We could do it that way Harold, but that approach seems backwards in my opinion.
We're the ones being told that there's a mountain of science which supports both the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Yet the people who say that, are never able to produce any of it.
Instead of us asking us what we want to see, how about you go that supposed mountain of evidence, and pick just two pieces from the pile:
- one which presents irrefutable scientific proof that any vaccine has ever prevented a disease of any kind
- one which presents irrefutable scientific proof that there is no link link between vaccination status and autism
And then, please explain for the rest of us exactly HOW the content of each study represents scientific proof of their respective claims.
Posted by: Barry | February 09, 2012 at 06:43 PM
Harold,
1) Yes, absolutely. And yes, like Stagmom, I would consider vaccines for my children, depending on circumstances. My decision would depend on the neurological and immune status of that particular child and type of vaccine versus the risk and consequences of that particular infection. In other words weighing risks versus benefits of each.
2) personally I would be convinced only if someone both
A) provided irrefutable evidence that there is NO chronic inflammation and NO immune and autoimmune pathology in autism – i.e. no microgliosis, no abnormalities in cytokine/chemokine levels in blood, CNS- CSF and GI tract, no mast cell activation, no odd goings on with NK cells and lymphocytes, no abnormalities in brain stem/autonomic nervous system that are in any way linked to the immune system. Also irrefutable evidence that there are no abnormalities in levels and activity of infectious agents and their by-products in autism (LPS levels in the blood, gut dysbiosis, polyomaviruses in the brain etc).
B) provided irrefutable evidence that vaccine do NOT act as immune stressors and are NOT capable of triggering cytokine storms and long-term immune-mediated pathology, are not capable of reactivating latent infections and introducing novel replication and recombination-competent contaminants and half-dead vaccine-strain pathogens that are able to escape compromised immune system and establish long-term residency in host.
I can only speak for myself of course.
Posted by: Natasa | February 09, 2012 at 06:08 PM
Dazydee, in response to your pointless post, I only have one suggestion: put some walk into your talk and vaccinate yourself with the full childhood vaccine schedule, which I doubt you even know. I'm not asking you to adjust for your adult weight or pull a Paul Offit and take 10,000 vaccines. Just go in and get a "catch-up" load, as if you're never-vaccinated. Film it and document it on youtube.
If you're too much of a coward to do this, here's a compromise: inject yourself with the shots that gave Hannah Poling "autistic-like symptoms."
Until you and your skeptic basement dweller clones do this, you have absolutely nothing ingenious to contribute here.
Posted by: is little dazydee up to date? | February 09, 2012 at 02:32 PM
Harold, I'm Kim from aofa - we don't know who you are or what are your motives, so I'd encourage caution in our responses. I hope you understand. If you spend time at AofA reading our science and vaccine safety specifically, you'll find many answers to your questions.
Let's say Anthrax is proven to be in my town in a bioterror attack and neighbors are dying - would I consider giving my family the vaccine? Yes. I gave my kids all their routine toddler shots. (The older two.) Once they each had had seizures, developmental delays, immune and gut problems I stopped. I weighed the risk and the reward for my own children. I think every parent should have that right - I am pro choice. In women's health - and vaccination policy. I am not in favor of mandated medical procedures that carry known risk and that are protected from product liability - open up liability and then I think we'd see positive changes both in product safety and perhaps uptake. Best, KIM
Posted by: StagMom | February 09, 2012 at 01:41 PM
Questions for the author or anyone else who has commented here.
1) Is there any evidence that could convince you that any type of vaccine is beneficial? If so, please specify what that evidence is; if not, please explain why not.
2) Is there any evidence that could convince you that there is no significant link between vaccination status and autism? If yes, please specify what type of evidence you would accept; if not, please explain why not.
Posted by: harold | February 09, 2012 at 01:33 PM
Lynn, you just said a mouthful. Why are "they" so surprised that it is all catching up with them?
Posted by: jen | February 09, 2012 at 11:56 AM
1. You believe there is an ANTI “Anti-Vaccine” Movement
2. Anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant
3. You blame Big Pharma for everything
4. You just don't get it
5. You repeatedly distort or exaggerate the facts.
6. You pretend to be the shiny white knight to rescue us all
7. You fail to acknowledge the context of the controversy.
8. You over-simplify the problem.
9. You ignore all hypotheses that are not "the one"
10. For you, everything is good enough as an excuse to keep up the fight against vaccines
11. You fail to recognize their tactics are working (why else would you have written this post?)
This whole post could be written the other why around and would be equally true. Everything you say about them can be said of you, if you pick one example and generalize it (like you have done)
Posted by: dazydee | February 09, 2012 at 11:49 AM
VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
Great article Julie. You did forget 1 important subtitle however.
THEY ARE DISHONEST ABOUT EVERYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO VACCINES AND THE PEOPLE THAT SELL THEM.
Other than that you said what needs to be said no question
VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
Posted by: WILLIE | February 09, 2012 at 11:07 AM
well said Peter.. the Pharmaceutical industry is a cartel. They are like Octupi with tentacles in many key sectors. I wonder where all that drug money is going? Fund wars, feed the media, spread propoganda, Wall Street, Acadamia, control research influence government policy, buy off government officials, control/use the credibility of medical community to further their agenda and keep the public drugged up while paying for it.
What a scam! ...a global, gargantuan scam.
I would love to contact the producers of the documentary "Inside Job" to do an expose like they did on Wall Street meltdown.
If the American public would just step back and see what is happening they would be shocked at how institutionalized the corruption has become and how dangerous the Cartel is. I suppose that is why the Cartel wants the public drugged up so they will never see the truth. It's "Just take your drugs and shut up!"
Posted by: Sarah | February 09, 2012 at 10:20 AM
Fantastic article! Everything is precise. I do not need the government to give me a reason for my son's autism. We had seen it with our own eyes when a healthy boy lost his speech and became unresponsive by the age of 2. After my son went thru multiple detox protocols, he recovered. A lot of autistic kids in our area went thru the same protocols. They all benefited. However, medical community is not interested in our cases. They ignore us because our kids are the proof that their theory that autism is genetic is wrong. Thank you Julie!
Posted by: Sveta | February 09, 2012 at 09:44 AM
Great post, Julie. Thank you.
Here's a short note from a consumer safety advocate:
What’s wrong with this picture? Our kids are arguably some of the most heavily-medicated and heavily-vaccinated kids in the world.
Alarming New Studies: 50% of U.S. Children Have Chronic Disease/Disorders, 21% Developmentally Disabled
http://journal.livingfood.us/2011/05/26/alarming-new-studies-50-of-u-s-children-have-chronic-illnesses-21-developmentally-disabled/
Posted by: patrons99 | February 09, 2012 at 08:57 AM
Look its simple. Vaccine involve huge profit. Put some intelligent "mafia-like" people at the top to pump off any resistance.
And then to legitamize the operation, just make some
VIP from the goverment sector company shareholders. Voila the invincible money generator.
Posted by: Peter Xi | February 09, 2012 at 08:05 AM
There are, however, those of us who think there is no responsible way to use vaccines.
Posted by: Shawn Siegel | February 09, 2012 at 07:43 AM
Fabulous!
Posted by: Jim | February 09, 2012 at 07:14 AM
They also almost always bring up the issue of "herd immunity."
I LOVE this article. Thanks for giving us something to share with friends and family who think we are conspiracy theorists.
Posted by: Amie | February 09, 2012 at 02:44 AM
What "they" don't seem to get...there are just too many children to hide. Everyone knows someone who has a child with autism, somewhere on the spectrum. What did "they" think was going to happen when too many of us have the same story...we talk and we know that thimerosal is involved in this poisoning. Come to our homes, come live with our children, come here our stories. "They" only make-up stories about the parents, and ignore the children and the many young adults, and now try to un-diagnosis...like we really want our child to have autism. My son received terrible school services even with the autism diagnosis. It was an ugly battle for ten years.
Posted by: Lynn Bardsley | February 09, 2012 at 02:26 AM
What a wonderful article by Julie Obradovic, typical of Age of Autism's dignified, but quietly assertive and very informative output. AoA has many excellent contributors and an excellent 'ethos', which is in direct contrast to the 'tone' of some of those other websites, which aim to undermine AoA's reasoned arguments.
I do not usually bother with THOSE websites. Becky Fisher's 'Jabloonies' profane rants against Jackie Fletcher's JABS support organisation, have been going on for a long time, and Jackie very sensibly, mostly ignores them. Recently, John Stone reproduced on AoA, Jackie's excellent BMJ Rapid Response to Fiona Godlee's belated article, finally informing the BMJ readers their journal and its editor was getting sued by Andrew Wakefield, over Brian Deer's defamatory article, 'How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed'.
I was googling the BMJ to check whether there had been any more rapid responses. The search engine also came up with Becky's 'Jabloonies' latest rant, about John Stone reproducing Jackie's BMJ letter on AoA in its entirety, including the bits BMJ left out!!:-
http://jabsloonies.blogspot.com/2012/01/jackie-fletcher-is-brainless-moron.html
"Jackie Fletcher is a brainless moron. Oh, I just can't be f***ing bothered. How can people take this sh*t seriously? OK. She's got a rabid....."
Becky's 'Jabloonies' rant is full of vile profanity against Jackie and AoA contributors, but I strongly object to profanity coming up on the search engine where children can see it.
I used the 'report' system in an attempt to complain to Google, but there was NO category to complain about profanity; instead I pressed the 'hate' button. Google then came up with a disclaimer stating that they were US based and had NO influence on a UK based site.
I regard this as a ridiculous 'cop out' on the part of Google. In the UK, if Jabloonies had directed their profane hate material against black persons or Muslims, this would have brought an immediate police charge and 'Becky' could have been jailed. Instead, the beautiful, dignified mother of a profoundly disabled 'admitted to be vaccine damaged' son, is apparently regarded as 'fair game' for a cyber hate campaign.
Since this rant also involves AoA, a US based site, I am asking you all to complain to Google using the same 'report' button on the Jabloonies rant above. Paul Offit and his cronies are presently trying to 'persuade' Google to put up warnings on AoA and other so called 'anti vaccine' sites.
Let's all complain about this kind of vile invective on THEIR sites!!
Posted by: Jenny Allan | February 09, 2012 at 02:21 AM
Having spent 10 years reading daily on this issue, I heartily agree with Julie. And I frequently find myself reeling at the shameless gall of boundlessly cruel vaccine injury denialists whose moral compassion withers in inverse proportion to their unhealthily and unjustifiably inflated egos.
Posted by: nhokkanen | February 09, 2012 at 12:48 AM
Julie, that's about the best written treatise on the state of vaccination religion that I've seen. Thanks.
Posted by: dan barrett | February 09, 2012 at 12:37 AM
Not only that - but Dr. Wakefield should not be blamed for anything. He's done nothing wrongp; the measles comebacks were entirely the result of men like Britain's MMR Chief David Salisbury who withdrew the option for single shots, causing vaccination rates to plummet and children to die of measles. It's fair to say Dr. Salisbury's Department killed those children, as well as the children killed by the MMR vaccine.
************
To take that one step further... how do we know that there really were any measles outbreaks at all? Because main stream media tells us so?
I grew up in an age when measles was pretty common. And moreover, was commonly regarded as a benign illness. I find it hard to believe that children in England suddenly started dying of measles epidemics, based on nothing more than a supposed drop in vaccination rates.
Those reports lack credibility based on the nature of the measles virus alone. But even more so when you realize that the information was coming from the very organizations who were clearly trying to demonize Andrew Wakefield
Just like everything else that we've been told about vaccines, these measles "comebacks" were likely nothing more than fiction
Posted by: Barry | February 08, 2012 at 11:44 PM
Brilliant Article. Thanks Julie.
Jennie and Keith Horne-Roberts,parents of Harry RIP, Urabe strain MMR victim.UK.
Posted by: Jennifer Horne-Roberts | February 08, 2012 at 11:26 PM
Julie,
Excellent! Another point of reference that will withstand the cynics and narcissistic SOB's that will try to ridicule it!
Posted by: Barry S | February 08, 2012 at 10:59 PM
One of the best, most concise and to the point articles I have ever read! Great work!!!
Posted by: Sherry Eshraghi | February 08, 2012 at 09:44 PM
Somebody buy this Lady a bottle of champagne.You spoke from
your heart Ms.Julie Obradovic.Thank you from the bottom of
my heart to put this message out so beautifully with love,care,class,strength and heart.
Posted by: oneVoice | February 08, 2012 at 09:40 PM
Thank you so much -- what an excellent article!!!
Posted by: Twyla | February 08, 2012 at 09:38 PM
All Lifes Very Best All The Time.
Posted by: Dean | February 08, 2012 at 09:15 PM
Extremely well written! Thank you for making the information available in an easy to read, informative and non-biased platform. The burden of proof should be on them to prove the safety of any vaccines!
Posted by: Darby Vorce | February 08, 2012 at 07:23 PM
Wow Julie, this is all so,so true!!! Well done!
Posted by: owntruth | February 08, 2012 at 07:09 PM
*then (LOL!)
Thanks for an awesome article ... one I will bookmark for sure! I have one son (age 18) who is completely unvaxed, and have provided his info to someone who was gathering info to compare vaxed and unvaxed children. (Sorry I forget the details of who it was) So, the science is starting to happen, and any statistics that I have seen have all clearly indicated the much better health of unvaccinated children. The truth will come out in the end ... just hopefully sooner than later!
Posted by: Andrea von Schoening | February 08, 2012 at 07:00 PM
That has to be one of the best articles I have read in a very long time! This is something that so needed to be said!!! Thank you Julie for saying so beautifully what so many of us think and feel!
Posted by: Tasha | February 08, 2012 at 06:57 PM
Julie, what a brilliant article. You are to be commended for the way you lay all this out without resorting to insults and hyperbole. Bravo.
Posted by: Mike | February 08, 2012 at 06:50 PM
You are so AWESOME!
Posted by: julia | February 08, 2012 at 05:54 PM
Julie, this is a wonderful article. My favorite section is part 4.
This sums up why parents don't trust many pediatricians: "At this very moment, doctors still can’t agree on what Autism is, how to define it, when it started, if it’s a problem, who has it, if it’s treatable, how it’s treatable, or what to do about it."
How can a parent of a child (or children) with autism have any faith in such a doctor? It is madness. Wellness visits are about preventive medicine. What these visits cannot prevent, most obviously, is autism.
Posted by: Not an MD | February 08, 2012 at 05:06 PM
Hi Benedetta,
Autistic people have too much or too little of this or that in this or that part of the brain 70% of the time.
Cannabis is found to reduce or increase that or this a little in the opposite way to autism in 70% of neurological correlates.
I have fun laying this stuff out in tables. In my head :)
Yes Kim I can send you a mail, did you mean about treatment or my musings on what causes the 'autisms'?
Posted by: Cannabis for Autism | February 08, 2012 at 03:45 PM
Beautiful, Julie.
"we have actually legislated the ability to legally kill someone for profit without liability."
There it is, in black and white. There's no way in hell they can spin that into anything other than what it really is: criminal.
Somebody buy this gal a beer!
Posted by: Donna L. | February 08, 2012 at 03:13 PM
I think it comes done to the burden of proof. If you are injecting anything into a child, then you have the burden of proving it is safe.
Posted by: Mary E Tormey | February 08, 2012 at 01:58 PM
Cannabis, we follow you on Twitter and believe me, I've talked to families from coast to coast about the logic of medical marijuana over psychiatric meds. We're on the same side - but autism and vaccines is a big part of AofA. Why do you send me an email with some thoughts on how we can learn more? [email protected] K
Posted by: StagMom | February 08, 2012 at 01:57 PM
StagMom yes I care about causation and I enjoy writing about it but treatment must come first and I think there is more than one cause of autism and I think we'll all know 99% of it within 15 years.
In the meantime, can we please have more warrior mums fight for safe legal access to our medicine?
Posted by: Cannabis for Autism | February 08, 2012 at 01:41 PM
Julie,
Your article is outstanding!
Laurette
Posted by: Laurette Janak | February 08, 2012 at 01:40 PM
Wow, you hit the nail on the head, repeatedly. Amazing.
Posted by: Valerie | February 08, 2012 at 01:20 PM
I would also like to note that Genetically Modified Foods came to the kitchen table in the mid-1990's and I believe this is also playing a large part in Autism and other diseases on the rise.
Posted by: Mel | February 08, 2012 at 01:13 PM
Stagmom, this person has a point imo. While pinpointing the causes is paramount to prevention of future cases, it might not help the existing ones much in the short term. Not without knowing the exact mechanism of injury.
Many diseases are being treated while the cause is still unknown or unconfirmed. It is not an ideal situation of course, but only knowing the cause is not ideal either as in itself does not bring straighforward solutions. Unless of course autism in each child has a simple single cause with off-the shelf treatment waiting to be picked up.
Posted by: Natasa | February 08, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Cannabis;
Let us be scientific here.
Cannabis is known to slow and damage the front part of the brain.
Do you think a brain of a child that is trying to get over an autoimmune disease or a brain injury needs something like that when it is trying to heal.
Posted by: Benedetta | February 08, 2012 at 12:16 PM
I once upon a time was a cult follower of the religeous based vaccine is good always, preaching college professors.
So much of a cult follower was I that had to be hit, and then asked to be hit again, and oh, yes again, and again.
We were lucky to escape this cult with our lives even though we had to leave our health behind.
My kids had all their shots that were acquired at five years old -- except for my son - who got out of his last two pertussis shots (only)- due to a stroke after his third one and haveing seizures.
As some one here said once - I am an antivaxer now *NOW*.
Posted by: Benedetta | February 08, 2012 at 12:09 PM
It is difficult to believe that any pediatric nurse would STILL take a 6 month old infant into the back room... away from the parents...
and give them the Hep B, DTaP, Hib, IPV, PCV, Rotavirus, and a flu shot with Thimerosal at the same "well baby" visit.
But I am sure it happens every day.
It is beyond sadly comical that a doctor who's vaccines have been pulled off the market for harming children, STILL has an infant vaccine on the market with "DEATH on the package insert"... as he writes books on the "Threat of the anti-vaccine movement"
The endless hype of Dr. Nancy, Matt Lauer & Dr. Paul Offit
today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/27453507
Posted by: cmo | February 08, 2012 at 11:57 AM
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
― Upton Sinclair, I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked
Posted by: Theodore M. Van Oosbree | February 08, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Cannabis for autism, you want to treat autism but don't care about causation? Sorry to hear that.
Posted by: StagMom | February 08, 2012 at 11:29 AM
Cannabis is medicine for autism. I'd rather talk about treatment than this vaccine thing please.
Posted by: Cannabis for Autism | February 08, 2012 at 11:25 AM
Much needed article, thank you.
Anti-vaccine movement is a myth. Just like autism-genes are a myth.
Anti "anti-vaccine" narrative is a religious one, based on myths. This from people who think themselves guardians of science. Oh the irony.
Posted by: Natasa | February 08, 2012 at 11:00 AM
This is a wonderful essay, and I also will send it to everyone I know. I would just like to add, though, that I (who have a daughter autistic thanks to the hep-B vaccine at birth) think that, while the chemical soup in which we live is extremely dangerous and a contributing factor, the buck pretty much stops at vaccines. Both my arms were paralyzed for two days after getting a tetanus booster (brachioplexal neuropathy), and I later developed multiple sclerosis. I read a lot of books about M.S., and, as in the case of autism, there were a lot more questions than answers. One thing I learned was that the first case occurred in a Swiss nobleman in the early nineteenth century, when he was struck by a classic exacerbation while grieving at the funeral of a friend, but the symptoms soon remitted. The book said that if such a strange and dramatic disease had existed before that time, it would certainly have been described by the many intelligent scientific minds which had kept careful descriptive records for thousands of years. It was new, and, not coincidentally, it occurred just a few years after the smallpox vaccine had begun to be given to many thousands of Europeans. There is similarly no record of hay fever or many other autoimmune disorders existing before the early nineteenth century. There is no record of anyone having classic autism before Dr. Leo Kanner examined the first cases starting in 1938, a few years after rich people started to give the new pertussis vaccine to their children. He wrote in 1943, in his landmark article in which he coined the term "autism," that it was a condition that had never before been seen or described by anyone. It was a mystery why only rich children were affected, a mystery which persisted until the 1960s, when government programs made the DTP available to all, and autism spread to all social classes. The leap in cases of autism occurred soon after the MMR started to be given in the U.S. in 1979 (major trigger of autism), followed by the Hib in the mid-1980s, hep-B at birth in 1991 (this was also a major cause of autism, as in my daughter's case), varicella in about 1995, Prevnar in about 2003, hep-A in the mid-2000s, flu vaccine for all in 2004, Offit's new and improved rotavirus vaccine a few years ago, HPV about five years ago, meningococcal has been given to more and more groups over the last ten years or so. Is it any wonder that we see twenty times more cases of autism than we did thirty years ago? How could it be any different?
I absolutely agree that we need to reduce the chemical burden we are all exposed to in our environment, but I admit that I am one of those you referred to at the beginning of your article, as believing that no vaccine is a good vaccine. Every vaccine sets in motion some degree of brain and immune system damage in the recipient, but the damage may not be apparent for years, and the patient as well as the doctors will most likely just scratch their heads in bafflement as to the cause. There is treatment available for all of the vaccine-preventable diseases, homeopathic, naturopathic, and anthroposophic medicine are able to successfully treat even viral diseases which allopathic medicine can't do much for. Crisis care in hospitals is better than it used to be. These are the avenues we should pursue, because vaccines absolutely do not provide the easy, quick, harmless, drive-through disease protection they promise.
Posted by: cia parker | February 08, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Yes, Julie, as to point number one, I tried to respond to someone named Lawrence about his protest that "none of them will ever tell you which vaccines they do believe could be useful or worthwhile." I did try to respond with my thoughts but borac has completely banned me, even though he said he would "let me post again if I didn't use a sock puppet." He can take his sock and stuff it in his mouth. I won't even bother looking over there again. I actually think that it's possible for me to consider measles or mumps as single shots (and if they don't contain mycoplasma!). And really that's only because they have taken them away as normal childhood illnesses.
Posted by: jen | February 08, 2012 at 10:26 AM
Bravo! Standing ovation!
Posted by: Jenny | February 08, 2012 at 10:13 AM
Book sense, but no common sense is a way of describing many of these know-it-all personalities; who in actuality really know nothing. We have a distorted picture of true intelligence now-a-days because our current measures of intelligence are limited to just one dimension (technical intelligence) and ignores important areas of intelligence like wisdom, common sense, critical thinking, social skills and practical knowledge. Common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; the fatal flaw of modern ruling elites lies in their lack of common sense.
Posted by: Rachael | February 08, 2012 at 09:53 AM
Julie, this is the single best explanation of the autism/vaccine controversy that I have ever read. Thank you, I plan on sending it to many friends and family that I have been trying to make aware of this nightmare for the better part of 2 decades. A few successfully, but sadly most too trapped in the sea of misinformation and medical/Pharma propaganda. I have often felt alone and isolated in this battle for the health of our children, being the lone voice for years among family and friends who frankly, thought I was off my rocker! The tide has been turning a little lately and as my other children have grown they have added their voices to the fight. Like you Julie, and so many others, I will continue this fight until I have taken my last breath. God bless all the warriors in this most important battle for the future of all children.
Posted by: Denise Ferraro | February 08, 2012 at 09:51 AM
As usual Julie .. you have given us an excellent critique of the myriad of ways our government-industrial-medical communities have "hi-jacked the issue of autism" .. by .. "distorting the facts" .. conveniently .. "missing the point" .. that parents have a UNIVERSAL-HUMANITARIAN RIGHT to question the safety of vaccines this cabal recommends and approves for our children.
It is obvious the government-pharmaceutical industry-medical communites .. are determined to avoid the same .. or even worse .. financial consequences suffered by the tobacco industy when tobacco's "junk science" FINALLY collapsed .. ending forever their successful, decades long, morally bankrupt effort .. that denied any link between "cancer and cigarettes".
Unfortunately .. what makes the vaccine industry far more dangerous than what was the once powerful tobcacco industry .. is the fact that a majority of the US Supreme Court .. after reluctantly acknowledging that vaccines are "unavoidable unsafe" .. decreed that parents denied justice in the VACCINE COURT .. no longer have a Constitutional Right to sue for justified compensation in State or Federal Courts.
Still .. even with all the success enjoyed by the vaccine industry .. every year more and more "highly educated" parents voluntarily choose to "opt out" .. as more and more vaccines are recommended and approved for their children.
Which should be clear and convincing evidence the vaccine industry is losing in the only court that matters .. the "court of public opinion" .. where truth and common sense will ultimately prevail.
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | February 08, 2012 at 09:05 AM
Thank you Julie- I will us this article as a template for discussion at tomorrow IOM Meeting "Committee on the Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule" at Pew Charitable Trust.
On another matter- read this take down by Media Matters of Sharryl Atkisson-
http://mediamatters.org/research/201202070004
Scroll down to the quotes from Mnookin and Gorski. Shame on them!
Posted by: Ottoschnaut | February 08, 2012 at 09:02 AM
Thank you Julie for taking the time to write this essay. The best summary I have read in a long time. I will share this with everyone I know. Thank you.
Posted by: Sonja Lopez | February 08, 2012 at 07:05 AM
Well done Julie,
While there is some willingness by the mdeical world to acknowledge the increase in autoimmune diseases there is a telling unwillingness to admit an increase in Autism. This is partially the reason why there is little interest in dealing with the immune/autoimmune part of Autism. If the autoimmune/immune aspet of much or most Autism is admitted and studied in earnest it is hard to explain why it would be an autoimmune related condition that is not increasing.
Autoimmunity: Many diseases, same cause
"Researchers believe that both genetic and environmental factors lead to autoimmune disease. They also agree that autoimmune disorders are on the rise worldwide.
"Studies show that the incidence of multiple sclerosis in Padova, Italy, has risen from less than 100,000 cases in 1979 to over 400,000 in 1999," said AARDA Executive Director Virginia T. Ladd. "In Finland, incidence of type-1 diabetes has more than doubled in children in the past 30 years. Additionally, celiac disease is more than four times more common today in the U.S. than it was 50 years ago."
As autoimmune disorders become more prevalent, it's important that general practitioners -- often the first doctors to see patients -- become better versed in their symptoms."
http://www.local10.com/thats-life/south-florida-health/family-care/Autoimmunity-Many-diseases-same-cause/-/7039966/8602996/-/148g81kz/-/
Then again, maybe all of these autoimmune conditions are being diagnosed better or over diagnosed.
Posted by: Visitor | February 08, 2012 at 07:04 AM