Age of Autism Weekly Wrap: The Bullies Within
Among the too-small group actively working to end the damage caused by the current vaccine schedule, some spend their time trying to make that group smaller still. If you believe, say, that the main task is to get mercury out of the flu shot; or that promoting a more selective schedule could significantly reduce morbidity and mortality; or that preserving choice is the heart of the matter – well, you risk being run out of Autism Town if that doesn't happen to be their agenda du jour.
It’s their way or the highway, preferably underneath a Mack truck -- a Mack truck that backs over you (and your little dog, too) several times.
I know people who have been slapped down hard by our own side because they said they might consider even one vaccine for their child out of the 16 now recommended by the CDC. One? Heresy! Or because they said that thimerosal in the flu shot is an outrage, but they are not taking a position on vaccines in general – or, God forbid, that they even support them. Smite them with thy staves, ye righteous ones!
Different approaches and priorities can lead to disagreements within activist communities, and that’s fine. There’s room for that within the broad coalition that believes autism is a man-made, vaccine-driven epidemic, and may the best tactics and strategies prevail. But these people descend like Hitchcock’s screeching birds at the least sign of ideological impurity. This week AOA got an e-mail from someone who likes to call themselves “Censored” because we don’t publish every nasty thing they say – I call that Editing. In fact, I got so tired of them (see why below) that now I won’t print anything they write, which is my prerogative because I'm the Editor and that’s what I do – I Edit. Let them create their own blog and ban me!
Last week when I announced our successful matching fundraising campaign and thanked the community, Censored snickered: “If your community support is as strong as you claim, you'd have no need to censor dissenting views within the community. You'd have the confidence to post them. But it's doubtful AoA can withstand or even survive criticism. So you eliminate it.” And then comes the threat: “That won’t be possible on Amazon.”
Say what? Well, Mark Blaxill and I have a book coming out next month called Vaccines 2.0 (it went to press Friday – yay!) that is subtitled, “A Careful Parent’s Guide To Making Safe Vaccine Choices For Your Family.” We labored on this for over a year, and we developed our own Reward-Risk Rating for each vaccine; parents can refer to it as they make their own choices – note well, their own choices. And their choice might be not vaccinating at all, an option to which we give considerable and respectful attention. The book opens and closes, in fact, with a father who decided not to vaccinate his daughter.
No matter. Censored is already foaming at the mouth to start trashing our book on Amazon without our hateful censorship – sight unseen, of course. “I hope your safety claims and recommendations are well supported,” they wrote. “It's hard to imagine how any infant vaccine can be justified based on a risk vs. benefit analysis.” So we are on notice that a book that by any reasonable standard is exceptionally hard on vaccines will be under attack from our own side for its ideological impurity. Oh, great.
And, oh, the injustice – we chose not to publish this comment on AOA! I mean, does cluttering up a comment thread with obscure threats regarding a book not yet published that is deeply embedded in the autism activism community further any useful mission? Uh, no. Intent is everything, and over time people reveal what they are really all about. A few months back they sent an e-mail saying we at AOA “promote an agenda that will not end the [autism] epidemic ASAP - but will prolong it. … Hope you can wash off the blood on your hands.”
Perhaps you see why I'd had enough. Blood on our hands? Yikes, that’s what the other side says. Those who choose to harass and insult others within our small, striving community just because they disagree can go elsewhere and post to their merry little hearts’ content – and they can expect me to call them out for what they are: Bullies.
--
Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism.
@David M Burd,
Sorry to hear about your accident, but hope your hand has healed by now! Ouch...painful just to read about it. I can ALMOST understand them wanting to give you a tetanus for your badly lacerated hand...almost.
But to tell a young pregnant mom that she needed a tetanus shot for a very, very mild cat scratch is just over the top. Unfortunately for me, I didn't know any better and at the last minute (and after being severely reprimanded by my nurse at the time telling me I must not care for my unborn child if I didn't run on over to get the vaccine), I left post-haste during a huge winter storm to receive my tetanus booster.
I still shake my head at my unbelievable naivete at that time...
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 14, 2014 at 12:26 AM
Bayareamom.
Funny thing: I badly lacerated my hand in a domestic accident (trying to scare off squirrels from the bird feeder; yet again the squirrels win). Off to emergency care!
Then, twice, first with copious bleeding at the Emergency Room, and second after being sutured up I was happily told by administering nurses and the PA they were going to give me a tetanus vaccine injection.
No Thank You! Twice I refused their tetanus shot offers. Why? they asked? And I told them why. This teeny inconsequential accident, and the current unnecessary medical vaccination-mania, is done countless times every day - just another factor contributing to our present mess.
Posted by: david m burd | December 11, 2014 at 06:24 PM
More about tetanus and the vaccine by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny:
http://www.whale.to/a/tenpenny1.html
SNIP:
"Tetanus – the disease and the vaccine
Tetanus is a disease caused by the Gram-positive bacterium Clostridium tetani that exists in soil as a spore. High concentrations can be present if the soil has been contaminated with animal or human feces. In the presence of anaerobic (low oxygen) conditions, the spores can germinate and release a potent neurotoxin, called tetanospasmin, into the bloodstream. Dirty, deep puncture wounds that are contaminated with soil are at greatest risk for infection. Wounds that are gangrenous, or injuries caused by frostbite, crush injuries, and burns are also at increased risk.
The incubation period prior to the onset of tetanus symptoms can take several days to several months, depending on the location of the inoculation. Once the spores germinate, the toxin is released into the bloodstream and travels to peripheral nerves, eventually attaching to receptor sites at the nerve endplates. The result is unrelenting, painful muscle spasm.
The four clinical types of tetanus are generalized, local, cephalic, and neonatal, with generalized tetanus being the most common. This form manifests as the classic spasms which can last from seconds to minutes. Death from tetanus is due to spasm of the vocal cords and spasm of the respiratory muscles, leading to respiratory failure. The highest mortality rate for tetanus is seen in the very old and the very young, but on average, it is generally reported in most literature that the mortality rate is approximately 30%. Recovery can take months but is usually complete, unless unforeseen complications occur (1).
Yes, you read it right, complete recovery.
It is an article of faith, widely accepted by doctors and patients alike, that tetanus is almost invariably fatal, especially if the person is not vaccinated. This fear is so deeply entrenched that I have personally seen patients dutifully wait in a busy emergency department for hours to get a tetanus shot because they had sustained a superficial cut while washing dishes. Before I knew better, and because the "standard of care" dictates that every cut gets a tetanus shot, I handed these shots out like candy, believing it was better to "over protect" than to risk the development of a "fatal" case of tetanus.
Discovering that most people recover from an acute bout of tetanus was unexpected, but it was disconcerting to find that many of the reported cases of tetanus were in "fully vaccinated" people. A review of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) from the CDC called "Tetanus Surveillance—United States, 1995-1997" (2) revealed unexpected information and facts. However, because this report is bogged down with complicated statistics that must be methodically disentangled, it is no wonder that few are aware of its contents.."
AND
..."The truth is, the antibody level required to be universally protective is unknown. The "generally accepted" protective level for tetanus antibody > 0.15 IU/mL. This level was proposed by Snead in1937, and has been the accepted "standard" since that time. However, the number is arbitrary and not guaranteed to protect from infection (6). Therefore, routinely vaccinating every 10 years, as the journal article suggests, simply to maintain "adequate antibody levels" is uncalled for and may not only provide the person with a false sense of security, it may actually cause harm.
Tetanus vaccines haven’t gotten the "bad press" many of the other vaccines have recently received. In the zeal to protect from this "deadly disease," it is imagined that the risk of infection far exceeds the potential risk of the vaccine. What harm could it do? I thought the vaccine only contained inactivated tetanus toxin and sterile water. I am convinced that is the perception of nearly all physicians. It was disturbing to learn of the other ingredients that are in the tetanus toxoid vaccine: formaldehyde; sodium phosphate monobasic; sodium phophate dibasic, [an eye and skin irritant that may be harmful if ingested]; glycine, aluminum, and 25 ug. of thimerosal (mercury). There is obviously more to the tetanus vaccine than inactivated toxoid!
In the Emergency Department, if the tetanus status of a patient is "unknown," an additional shot is routinely given, because it is thought to be harmless. However, this is simply bad medicine. If the person doesn’t need the tetanus booster, the vaccine can cause a severe allergic reaction referred to as an Arthus type, Type III hypersensitivity reaction. This side effect is defined as "an acute inflammatory reaction caused by deposition of antigen-antibody complexes into the tissues (7)." The "Arthus type" variation classically causes a reaction only at the injection site, but the result is an acute necrotizing vasculitis and localized necrosis (death) of the tissues. The reaction starts 2-8 hours after a tetanus toxiod injection and occurs if the person has very high serum antitoxin antibodies due to overly frequent injections (8).
In addition to the local reaction, severe systemic reactions can occur. A partial list of adverse events includes headache; nausea; vomiting; arthralgias; tachycardia; syncope (fainting); cranial nerve paralysis; and a variety of neurological complications including EEG disturbances, seizures and encephalopathy; anaphylaxis and Gullian-Barre’ syndrome (9). Recommending "routine" tetanus boosters based on mathematical models of antibody degradation can result in severe complications and is risky business, indeed.."
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 10:20 PM
@Eindecker:
Seriously? The link you've just provided is the sum total of your research re: the tetanus vaccine?
http://www.patient.co.uk/health/tetanus-immunisation
FYI - When I was in my second trimester (1993), I was told by my OB/GYN nurse that I needed a tetanus shot for an extremely mild cat scratch which didn't even break my skin. She stated (as did another emergency room physician when I took my son in for a splinter) that we need booster shots every TEN YEARS.
When you research tetanus, which I have, you will find quite a different story than the proverbial by-line we are oft fed from propaganda type government/medical establishment websites versus the research you can find when you peruse through medical/peer-reviewed journals (which is where I always get my information for the most part).
http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/Dr-Blaylock/tetanus-shot-neurological-diseases-vaccine-complications-DrRussell-Blaylock/2013/09/16/id/525870/
SNIP:
"Question: It has been over 10 years since my last tetanus shot. I am 54 years old, and I really don’t want this shot. Is it foolish of me not to have it?
Dr. Blaylock's Answer:
Your risk of getting tetanus is less than being hit by a meteor. Unfortunately, doctors recommend the shot with little knowledge of real risk of the disease or complications from the vaccine.
Tetanus comes from exposing deep puncture wounds to soil contaminated with animal feces. Cleaning a wound with a mix of peroxide and betadine will kill all tetanus organisms.
The tetanus vaccine has one of the highest complication rates of any vaccine — equal to that of the hepatitis B and Gardasil vaccines. The evidence suggests that such vaccines among older persons can increase one’s risk of a number of neurological disorders."
I think you may want to look up the meaning of 'rubbish,' Eindecker.
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 10:14 PM
@Eindecker:
What are YOUR credentials, may I ask? A Board Certified Neurosurgeon is more than qualified to provide info. on this subject.
I'll take his credentials over most re: this issue, thank you very much.
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 10:02 PM
Thanks for the info, Bayareamom. I think the 200,000 number is actually a low estimate of people currently living with early onset Alzheimer's. I know several who are ignoring their deficits and faking a healthy memory and ability to communicate. They ignore it for as long as they can, then they prepare a living will with a "do not resuscitate" order. I wonder if people with Alzheimer's who die of very mild heart attacks (because of do not resuscitate orders) are counted as passing away from heart disease or from Alzheimer's.
Posted by: Betty Bona | December 09, 2014 at 06:53 PM
@david m burd
Perhaps I can help with your historical smallpox/rubella queries:-
Smallpox vaccine - In the UK this was administered to all children as part of a post war Government initiative to improve the health of the nation's children. The vaccine was administered by innoculation, i.e. the vaccine was scratched into the skin surface. This left a small round scar, which I still have. I never heard of any side effects from this vaccine. My elder daughter got innoculated in 1968, but when I took her younger sister to be vaccinated, fifteen months later I was told the vaccine was discontinued due to Smallpox having been irradiated.
***********
Thanks for the history lesson. But history and science are two completely different animals.
History can be written however the hell someone chooses to write it. Is there any chance that you can produce actual scientific proof, to show that smallpox was in fact eradicated by vaccines?
Because I have the same scar on my shoulder, which i apparently got around 1967. And the only thing I can really conclude from that scar on my shoulder, is that I have a scar on my shoulder.
Posted by: Barry | December 09, 2014 at 06:42 PM
@ Benedetta
Eindeker;Nothing totally to do with good food, and good shelter? Hmmmm Nothing at all"
No Zippo, Zilch, Nada Benedetta because if you actually read the reports the final drive in East Africa was on a sequential country by country basis using identification, isolation & vaccination, and guess what Benedetta that's precisely how it was eradicated over a couple of decades. The WHO cleared South America first before moving onto East Africa, so nowt to do with living standards and all to do with good science.
@Bayereamom
Neither you nor Dr Blaylock has the foggiest idea of what you are talking about let's give a for instance on this little gem from you cut 'n paste:
"Then 30 years after it had been mandated, we discovered that its protection lasted no more than 10 years. Then, I ask my doubting physician if he or she has ever seen a case of tetanus? Most have not. I then tell them to look at the yearly data on tetanus infections – one sees no rise in tetanus cases. The same can be said for measles, mumps, and other childhood infections."
1 Tetanus immunity generally lasts into old age as long as the full course of vaccinations is given in child hood http://www.patient.co.uk/health/tetanus-immunisation so Fail #1 it's not 10 years
Fail #2 herd immunity has no role to play in tetanus (no person to person transmission Bayareamom..)bad example for Dr Blaylock to use don't you think &
Fail #3 yes there is an incidence of tetanus in the elderly because of failing immunity http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(00)04924-2/fulltext
But worst of all Bayareamom is the re-emergence of SSPE in children too young to have had measles vaccination amongst measles outbreaks in non-immunized communtities, latest 2 examples in Germany. A brain wasting version of measles preventable by herd immunity protecting those too young to have been vaccinated except when those communities believe the rubbish written by Blaylock and perpetuated by others
Posted by: Eindeker | December 09, 2014 at 06:27 PM
Alzheimer's Association website:
http://www.alz.org/alzheimers_disease_facts_and_figures.asp
SNIP:
Prevalence
Learn More
"An estimated 5.2 million Americans have Alzheimer's disease in 2014, including approximately 200,000 INDIVIDUALS YOUNGER THAN AGE 65 who have younger-onset Alzheimer's.
Almost two-thirds of American seniors living with Alzheimer's are women. Of the 5 million people age 65 and older with Alzheimer's in the United States, 3.2 million are women and 1.8 million are men.
The number of Americans with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias will escalate rapidly in coming years as the baby boom generation ages. By 2050, the number of people age 65 and older with Alzheimer's disease may nearly triple, from 5 million to as many as 16 million, barring the development of medical breakthroughs to prevent, slow or stop the disease.
Mortality
More than 500,000 seniors die each year because they have Alzheimer's. If Alzheimer's was eliminated, half a million lives would be saved a year.
Alzheimer's is officially the 6th leading cause of death in the United States and the 5th leading cause of death for those aged 65 and older. However, it may cause even more deaths than official sources recognize. It kills more than prostate cancer and breast cancer combined.
Deaths from Alzheimer's increased 68 percent between 2000 and 2010, while deaths from other major diseases decreased. Alzheimer's disease is the only cause of death among the top 10 in America that cannot be prevented, cured or even slowed.
Impact on Caregivers
In 2013, 15.5 million family and friends provided 17.7 billion hours of unpaid care to those with Alzheimer's and other dementias – care valued at $220.2 billion, which is nearly eight times the total revenue of McDonald's in 2012.
More than 60 percent of Alzheimer's and dementia caregivers are women.
All caregivers of people with Alzheimer's – both women and men – face a devastating toll. Due to the physical and emotional burden of caregiving, Alzheimer's and dementia caregivers had $9.3 billion in additional health care costs of their own in 2013. Nearly 60 percent of Alzheimer's and dementia caregivers rate the emotional stress of caregiving as high or very high, and more than one-third report symptoms of depression."
Here's an interesting article:
http://www.ibtimes.com/1940-census-causes-death-then-and-now-433346
SNIP:
..."The death rate of Alzheimer's in the 1930s is not available, but has been increasing steadily since at least the 1980s..."
My family on my Dad's side just recently had to hospitalize my Aunt because of Dementia/Alzheimer's Disease. This Aunt is my Dad's sister. My Dad had four siblings, he being the youngest.
Every. Single. One. Of. My. Dad's. Siblings. Received. A. Yearly. Flu. Vaccine.
EXCEPT FOR ONE...
MY DAD.
And guess what? He JUST turned 80 years old on December 6, 2014, and HE DOES NOT HAVE DEMENTIA. In fact, his social worker just told me that he is FULLY COMPETENT. (Dad's in a Veteran's Home because of other health issues.)
But guess another what? He is also the ONLY ONE of his siblings to REJECT ANY AND ALL VACCINES. He had ONE flu shot, many years ago, and he told me it made him so deathly ill, he would never take one again. Same thing happened to my Mom...
I was a very young child back in the 1960's, but I can still remember my Dad's Grandfather, Michael. Grandfather Michael died at 92 years of age. HE DIED OF OLD AGE. I was 5 years old when Michael died. I remember seeing him one last time as he lay dying in my Grandmother's home.
That man was fully competent until he became too physically ill to speak. But I DO have a great memory and remember much when I was little and growing up. I was surrounded, quite literally, with the elderly in my family life. To the last one, every single one of them was mentally as sharp as a whip until they died. Every last one of them...
We did NOT see Demential/Alzheimer's at this rate of prevalence back in those days, as we do now. I don't have the stats on the figures for Dementia from back in the 1900's until around the 1970's, but again, having lived during the 1960's, and remembering a helluva lot back then, we absolutely did not see this rate of disease in the elderly as we do today.
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 04:35 PM
Eindeker;
Nothing totally to do with good food, and good shelter?
Hmmmm
Nothing at all?
Posted by: Benedetta | December 09, 2014 at 04:27 PM
..." to maximize herd immunity."
What part of "herd immunity" do YOU understand?
The Deadly Impossibility of Herd Immunity Through Vaccination, by Dr. Russell Blaylock
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/
SNIP:
Is Herd Immunity Real?
"In the original description of herd immunity, the protection to the population at large occurred only if people contracted the infections naturally. The reason for this is that naturally-acquired immunity lasts for a lifetime. The vaccine proponents quickly latched onto this concept and applied it to vaccine-induced immunity. But, there was one major problem – vaccine-induced immunity lasted for only a relatively short period, from 2 to 10 years at most, and then this applies only to humoral immunity. This is why they began, silently, to suggest boosters for most vaccines, even the common childhood infections such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, and rubella.
Then they discovered an even greater problem, the boosters were lasting for only 2 years or less. This is why we are now seeing mandates that youth entering colleges have multiple vaccines, even those which they insisted gave lifelong immunity, such as the MMR. The same is being suggested for full-grown adults. Ironically, no one in the media or medical field is asking what is going on. They just accept that it must be done.
That vaccine-induced herd immunity is mostly myth can be proven quite simply. When I was in medical school, we were taught that all of the childhood vaccines lasted a lifetime. This thinking existed for over 70 years. It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades.
If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.
When we examine the scientific literature, we find that for many of the vaccines protective immunity was 30 to 40%, meaning that 70% to 60% of the public has been without vaccine protection. Again, this would mean that with a 30% to 40% vaccine-effectiveness rate combined with the fact that most people lost their immune protection within 2 to 10 year of being vaccinated, most of us were without the magical 95% number needed for herd immunity. This is why vaccine defenders insist the vaccines have 95% effectiveness rates.
Without the mantra of herd immunity, these public-health officials would not be able to justify forced mass vaccinations. I usually give the physicians who question my statement that herd immunity is a myth a simple example. When I was a medical student almost 40 years ago, it was taught that the tetanus vaccine would last a lifetime. Then 30 years after it had been mandated, we discovered that its protection lasted no more than 10 years. Then, I ask my doubting physician if he or she has ever seen a case of tetanus? Most have not. I then tell them to look at the yearly data on tetanus infections – one sees no rise in tetanus cases. The same can be said for measles, mumps, and other childhood infections. It was, and still is, all a myth.
The entire case for forced mass vaccination rest upon this myth and it is important that we demonstrate the falsity of this idea. Neil Z. Miller, in his latest book The Vaccine Information Manual, provides compelling evidence that herd immunity is a myth..."
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 04:15 PM
@ David Burd
As to "eradication of smallpox," I wonder if Dan/Mark would elaborate as to smallpox disappearing due mainly to vastly improved nutrition, etc No David if you read any of numerous articles describing this program you will see the key elements to eradicating this disease were:
Intense identification & isolation of cases
"Ring Vaccination" of individuals/contacts around cases, 300 million doses of vaccine were used in this program
The use of good cold chain storage for the vaccine
The development on the bifurcated needle to administer the vaccine
It has nothing to do with improving nutrition, do you know David N Burd that 300-500 million people died of smallpox in the 20th century?
As for rubella, of course it's totally sensible to vaccinate babies, well before there is any possibility of pregnancy and to vaccinate boys to maximize herd immunity, what bit of that don't you understand?
Do you mind taking the risk of deaf/blind babies being born because of congenital rubella syndrome because you think that rubella vaccine shots should never be given to an infant, but might instead be considered when a girl gets into her teen years. And certainly never be given stupidly to boys at any age
If you want proof that rubella vaccination dramatically reduced congenital rubells read http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/rubella.html Please note "A rubella epidemic in the United States in 1964–1965 resulted in 12.5 million cases of rubella infection and about 20,000 newborns with CRS. The estimated cost of the epidemic was $840 million. This does not include the emotional toll on the families involved
&
"Although reported rubella activity has consistently and significantly decreased since vaccine has been used in the United States, the incidence of CRS has paralleled the decrease in rubella cases only since the mid-1970s. The decline in CRS since the mid-1970s was due to an increased effort to vaccinate susceptible adolescents and young adults, especially women. Rubella outbreaks are almost always followed by an increase in CRS."
Posted by: Eindeker | December 09, 2014 at 03:55 PM
@Linda1,
Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk discuss the concept of "original antigenic sin" in their chapter on whooping cough (Dissolving Illusions), so this concept isn't new to the H1N1. When our immune systems respond to environmental insults, it's the result of thousands of years of evolution ending in a well-tuned and complex system for surviving despite the environmental insults. Vaccines are attempts to replicate the natural immune system, but the complexity and tuning is simply not there, and I don't believe we are capable of developing anything that compares with the natural system that developed over eons. I believe modern medicine took a wrong turn when it focused on vaccines rather than supporting the beautiful immune systems we were given. Of course, people didn't know better when vaccines were first coming into existence, though there was debate. We should know better now. It is not so easy to derail the whole medical system and get it back on the right track. I welcome any attempt at correcting the excess dependence and insistence on vaccines such as Dan and Mark's new book (which I haven't seen yet), but I may personally skip over any sections that discuss choosing less unsafe vaccines. I cannot think of any vaccines I would currently take, but I know many who question vaccines but still want to vaccinate selectively, and I respect their choice. I am just in a different place.
@Jenny Allan,
I respect your choice to take the flu shot and figure you are in the best position to evaluate your circumstances including your risk of Alzheimer's. From my viewpoint, though, I am seeing a very scary increase in the early-onset Alzheimer's group - those in their mid 50s to early 60s. It is particularly scary for me because it is affecting people in my age group that I know - people I care a great deal for. I can't say it is the flu shot or overuse of antibiotics and other drugs, or eating glyphosate in the GMOs. I can see it is happening, and it is not a normal state a affairs that has always been here, any more than teenagers who can't talk and live in diapers is normal. Maybe it is not as prevalent where you live, and maybe these younger people are hiding their descent into Alzheimer's and you haven't noticed, but I see it as a tragedy of our health care system which, though not as big or evident as the tragedy of autism's increase, it's still significant. It isn't fun to lose a loved one in the prime of their careers when retirement is just around the corner. It's heartbreaking when someone's spouse, someone's mother or father, or sometimes someone's son or daughter loses their ability to think and communicate at such an early age. It is easy to say the dementia of Alzheimer's has always been around in the "old folks" group, but I don't remember any of my friends' parents succumbing to this type of dementia at such an early age (except one, and it was a real oddity). I believe that dementia in the old age group has increased as well, and not just from living longer. I would be surprised if the increase in incidence is not at least somewhat related to the increase in incidence of autism. I have not seen the issue addressed in a way that convinces me that there is no increase or that any increase is just from people living longer. Maybe the increase is more evident in the US, but I am convinced it exists.
Posted by: Betty Bona | December 09, 2014 at 03:09 PM
..."Vaccines have played an important role in public health, from the eradication of smallpox to the near-eradication of the rubella virus that can cause fetal harm..."
Quote from Dr. Tom Mack during June 20, 2012 CDC conference:
..."Unexposed community members have negligible risk. There is a substantial risk from a vaccine, as you'll hear in a moment. It is the single most dangerous live vaccine. We would still need to vaccinate and identify contacts. We would need personnel and resources for surveillance rather than mass vaccination. That protection will not be maintained. It will gradually wane and we'll have to do it again and again.
The informed consent that you would have to prepare to vaccinate somebody in the public, if it's honest, would have to say that the dangers would exceed the benefits. And even if you fudged those words in such a way that you were happy and thought it would be convincing, an awful lot of people who ultimately might be exposed would not be convinced. You'd have to go back again anyway. So I don't think it would work and I don't think it would be beneficial.
If people are worried about endemic smallpox, it disappeared from this country not because of our mass herd immunity. It disappeared because of our economic development. And that's why it disappeared from Europe and many other countries, and it will not be sustained here, even if there were several importations, I'm sure. IT'S NOT FROM UNIVERSAL VACCINATION..."
Dr. Sherri T. is, I would consider, alongside Dr. Tom Mack, one of the foremost authorities re: smallpox, both the vaccine and past historical epidemics. I have every one of Dr. T's videos/books regarding vaccines. I've viewed her many lectures on several occasions and obviously, have read her extensive written pieces about this subject matter.
NOT ONCE do either one of these individuals state that after having worked with and/or studied the smallpox issue, that VACCINATION played a key role in eradication.
Not once.
So - begging forgiveness for a bit of anger showing through here, I find it almost incomprehensible that the above mentioned sentence indicating that the smallpox vaccine eradicated smallpox, would be written...in a book, no less, with a claim to helping to educate newbie parents about the vaccine issue.
Forgive the anger yet again, but I just find it absolutely incomprehensible that this type of statement is made by individuals who have vaccine damaged children. It just boggles the mind. I've done intensive research into the vaccine issue for over 20 years now, and if I'd honestly found one single shred of truth behind the need for most, if not any of these vaccines, I'd own up to it!!
But I've not. Not yet, at any rate.
Yes. People have the right to informed consent. But informed consent CANNOT and will not occur when the entire truth/factual information behind TRUE risks/benefits are NOT given to the individual.
And that WILL NOT HAPPEN unless/until each single individual's immune system is considered PRIOR to receiving any vaccine!!! And as of today's date, I know of no such medical lab workup that will/can provide ANY of us with this type information.
In other words, if I WERE to consider ANY vaccine at any given moment, I would have to know what MY OWN PARTICULAR RISKS WOULD BE SHOULD I AGREE TO ACCEPT THOSE RISKS. And given that so little is understood about the human immune system, let alone MY OWN and the risks that I, alone, would/could incur, how on earth can any one individual make that assessment when given a risk/benefit scenario?
THEY CANNOT.
And this is why I am so angry when I see the above statement purporting to show our general populous what the risks/benefits are re: vaccines.
It's too complicated an issue. We do not as of yet have that ability within our medical hierarchies to divest that type information to each individual. And until we do, the risks involved for many are far too significant than the benefits.
Okay - end of rant.
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 02:48 PM
This is a link to Dr. Tom Mack's presentation at the conference Sherri Tenpenny, D.O. attended on June 20, 2002:
http://www.vaclib.org/news/drmacks.htm
SNIP:
"DR. MACK: I wasn't aware of the mandate that I had and I made the arrogant assumption that you might actually be interested in my opinion about the three questions that are open to you, and so I'm going to give it. I will try and deal with the request, as well.
As you probably know, I'm at the University of Southern California School of Medicine. I've been out of the smallpox game for roughly 40 years. My credentials include probably spending more time working up population-based outbreaks of smallpox than virtually anybody ever has. We spent three years in Sheikhupura district in Pakistan and worked up 121 outbreaks, which we estimated were roughly 85 to 90 percent of all the smallpox that occurred in that population of a million or so people. And the experience contrasts somewhat with a lot of the other series because population-based outbreaks include small outbreaks that never result in any hospitalization, and individual importations which never result in any cases coming to the attention of authorities.
So in the Pakistan study, this is roughly a situation where more than a quarter of the people were unvaccinated. It tends to be villages of from two to 20 to 100 crowded compounds, 1,000 to 5,000 people. Any given village received an importation maybe once every ten or 15 years, so these were people who were not familiar with everyday smallpox. And in essence, there was really no medical or public health care, and there are a variety of political and historical reason for that, which we can go into, but the import of it is that there really was no intervention.
You heard several references to my review of the European experience. I'd like to reiterate that this was -- these experiences were in essentially susceptible populations with physicians who were unfamiliar with the disease, media and communication skills much less than today, and the standard of living actually substantially less than today in both Europe and America. So in my opinion, the propensity for spread in both these circumstances is substantially greater than it would be in the United States today.
You're going to hear more about vaccinia. I'm not going to spend any time on that. I just want to point out the last word in this slide, which is VIG. I haven't heard that phrase mentioned today. To me, it should be an extremely important consideration in all of your deliberations because in the absence of VIG, any extensive vaccination would be extremely dangerous..."
..."I have the opinion that doctors and emergency room workers should not be vaccinated a priori, as a category. I think that is true because the likelihood of their being exposed, even under circumstances of importation, is very, very small. And I also think that that will eventually become mass vaccination, whether we want it to be or not. They will be concerned about their families. There will be people making decisions who have not thought through the risk issues.
Policemen and firemen and everybody else who potentially might be exposed under a contingency will demand equal treatment and I don't think it'll work. Unexposed community members have negligible risk. There is a substantial risk from a vaccine, as you'll hear in a moment. It is the single most dangerous live vaccine. We would still need to vaccinate and identify contacts. We would need personnel and resources for surveillance rather than mass vaccination. That protection will not be maintained. It will gradually wane and we'll have to do it again and again.
The informed consent that you would have to prepare to vaccinate somebody in the public, if it's honest, would have to say that the dangers would exceed the benefits. And even if you fudged those words in such a way that you were happy and thought it would be convincing, an awful lot of people who ultimately might be exposed would not be convinced. You'd have to go back again anyway. So I don't think it would work and I don't think it would be beneficial.
If people are worried about endemic smallpox, it disappeared from this country not because of our mass herd immunity. It disappeared because of our economic development. And that's why it disappeared from Europe and many other countries, and it will not be sustained here, even if there were several importations, I'm sure. It's not from universal vaccination.
So if I were the New York health czar, knowing a case would get on the subway, I would rather have the money to prepare field workers than to give mass vaccination. The first unnecessary death from a vaccination complication would result in more, not less, smallpox transmission because people who needed the vaccination under that circumstance would refuse it. The presence of partial herd immunity would not lessen work and might lead to complacency.
So my views on the three questions are obvious. I would choose option one for the first one. I would choose option two for the second one. And I would emphasize the inclusion of local people because CDC cannot respond quickly enough, and there will become -- when the difference between the second or third post-exposure day and the sixth through the seventh post-exposure day might be important. And under option -- number three, surveillance, surveillance, surveillance. It's not ring vaccination, it's surveillance. Vaccination is a subsidiary issue. Thank you very much.
DR. MODLIN: Thank you, Dr. Mack."
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 02:31 PM
Here is an EXCELLENT article written by Sherri Tenpenny, D.O., after attendance at a June 20, 2002 CDC meeting of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices.
This was a one and a half day of testimony prior to posting the recommendations for smallpox vaccination that were currently being considered by the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services.
http://www.whale.to/a/tenpenny2.html
SNIP:
“We interrupt the current programming to bring you this important news update…there has been a reported case of smallpox in Washington, D.C…”
What will happen next?
Pandemonium.
The press has done its job over the last few months reinforcing the belief that an epidemic is about to occur, potentially causing millions of deaths. Americans thousands of miles from Washington will demand the smallpox vaccine, a vaccine with the highest risk of complications of any vaccine ever manufactured and with a dubious track record for success..."
Myth 1: Smallpox is highly contagious
“Smallpox has a slow transmission and is not highly contagious,” stated Joel Kuritsky, MD, director of the National Immunization Program and Early Smallpox Response and Planning at the CDC. This statement is a direct contradiction to nearly everything we have ever heard or read about smallpox. However, keep in mind that this comes “straight from the horse’s mouth” and should be considered the “real story” regarding how smallpox is spread.
Even if a person is exposed to a known bioterrorist attack with smallpox, it doesn’t mean that he will contract smallpox. The signs and symptoms of the disease will not occur immediately, and there is time to plan. The infection has an incubation period of 3 to 17 days,[i] and the first symptom will be the development of a high fever (>101º F), accompanied by nausea, vomiting, headache, severe abdominal cramping and low back pain. The person will be ill and most likely bed-ridden; not out mixing with the general public.
Even with a fever, it is critically important to realize that at this point the person is still not contagious. In fact, the fever may be caused by something else, such as the flu..."
"Myth 2: Smallpox is easily spread by casual contact with an infected person
Smallpox will not rapidly disseminate throughout the community. Even after the development of the rash, the infection is slow to spread. “The infection is spread by droplet contamination and coughing or sneezing are not generally part of the infection. Smallpox will not spread like wildfire,” said Orenstein. He stated that the spread of smallpox to casual contacts is the “exception to the rule.” Only 8% of cases in Africa were contracted by accidental contact.
Transmission of smallpox occurs only after intense contact, defined as “constant exposure of a person that is within 6-7 feet for a minimum of 6-7 days.”[v] Dr. Orenstein reported that in Africa, 92% of all cases came from close associations and in India, all cases came from prolonged personal contact. Dr. Tom Mack from the University of Southern California stated that in Pakistan,27% of cases demonstrated no transmission to close associates. Nearly 37% had a transmission of only one generation, meaning that the second person to contract smallpox did not pass it onto the third person. These statistics directly contradict models that predict an exponential spread to millions.
Even without medical care, isolation was the best way to stop the spread of smallpox in Third World, population dense areas. With a slow transmission rate and an informed public, Mack estimated that the total number of smallpox cases in America would be less than 10, a far cry from the millions postulated by the press.
Dr. Kuritsky said at the CDC Public Forum on Smallpox on June 8 in St. Louis, “Given the slow transmission rate and that people need to be in close contact for nearly a week to spread the infection, the scenario in which a terrorist could infect himself with smallpox and contaminate an entire city by walking through the streets touching people is purely fiction.”
"Myth #5: The vaccine will keep me from getting the infection
Most people believe that all vaccines work to protect them, meaning that the vaccine will be clinically effective. What most people do not know is that vaccines have never been proven to protect them from getting the infection.
This little known fact is not only true for all vaccines, it is also true for the smallpox vaccine. Here are a few examples:
Chickenpox vaccine:
“No data exists regarding post-exposure efficacy of the current varicella vaccine.”
“Vaccinated persons have a less severe out break than unvaccinated” (300vs. 50 lesions.)[xi]
Pertussis vaccine:
"The findings of efficacy studies have not demonstrated a direct correlation between antibody response and protection against pertussis disease.”[xii]
Smallpox vaccine:
“Neutralizing antibodies are reported to reflect levels of protection, although this has not been validated in the field.” [xiii]
Dr. Harold Margolis, Senior Advisor to the Director for Smallpox Planning and Response, stated in Atlanta that “the vaccine decreased the death rate among those vaccinated by ‘modifying the disease’, not by preventing infection.”
TAKE HOME POINTS:
1-Smallpoxis NOT highly contagious. You have time. Don’t panic.
2-Smallpoxis only spread by close contact of less than 6 feet for at least 6-7 days. You aren’t that close to coworkers or commuters.
3-Treatment for smallpox should be surveillance and containment, without vaccination.
4-Smallpoxis not highly fatal. There are treatments for smallpox.
5-The vaccine will not protect you from getting the infection. The vaccine has high complication rates, is an experimental drugand there are many contraindications..."
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 09, 2014 at 02:20 PM
Linda 1: thank you so much! I've got to start organizing these studies for easier access!
Jenny Allan; Linda1 found it bless, her! Would be interested in your thoughts.
Also, I think you missed the one in my last post;
"increased risk of non influenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine"
That one may be germane to you as well.
Hope they are useful.
Posted by: Hera | December 09, 2014 at 01:23 PM
Jenny Allen, thx for your feedback. The "adverse effects" cited below are from a PubMed paper at the NIH National Library of Medicine here in the U.S. And, I would submit the occurrence of such side effects are probably greatly understated as is usual in our recent Pharma history.
ADVERSE EFFECTS OF SMALLPOX VACCINATION
Frequency and Clinical Features
Smallpox vaccine is less safe than other vaccines routinely used today. The vaccine is associated with known adverse effects that range from mild to severe. Mild vaccine reactions include formation of satellite lesions, fever, muscle aches, regional lymphadenopathy, fatigue, headache, nausea, rashes, and soreness at the vaccination site.13,18,19 A recent clinical trial reported that more than one-third of vaccine recipients missed days of work or school because of these mild vaccine-related symptoms.18
In the 1960s, serious adverse events associated with smallpox vaccination in the United States included death (1/million vaccinations), progressive vaccinia (1.5/million vaccinations), eczema vaccinatum (39/million vaccinations), postvaccinial encephalitis (12/million vaccinations), and generalized vaccinia (241/million vaccinations).20 Adverse events were approximately ten times more common among those vaccinated for the first time compared to revaccinees.20 Fatality rates were also four times higher for primary vaccinees compared to revaccinees.21
Inadvertent inoculation is the most common adverse event associated with smallpox vaccination. It occurred at a rate of 529 per million vaccinations in a 1968 study.20 Inadvertent or accidental inoculation usually occurs when a person transfers the vaccinia virus from the vaccination site to another location on their body, usually the eyes, mouth, nose, or genitalia.20,22 Most lesions resolve without therapy, but vaccinia immune globulin (VIG) may be useful for difficult lesions. VIG can be considered for use in patients with severe ocular vaccinia, but it may increase the risk of corneal scarring.17,23
Progressive vaccinia (a.k.a. vaccinia necrosum, vaccinia gangrenosum) is defined as an uncontrolled replication of vaccinia virus at the vaccination site that leads to a slow and progressive necrosis of surrounding tissue.24 Satellite necrotic lesions typically develop, and ultimately vaccinia virus may be found in other tissues and organs.24 This condition typically affects individuals with incompetent immune systems.24,25 The cardinal clinical signs of progressive vaccinia include an unhealed vaccination site >15 days post vaccination, and the lack of inflammation or an immune response at the vaccination site.24,25 Untreated progressive vaccinia is fatal, but treatment with VIG or the antiviral cidofovir may be effective in some cases.24,25 VIG and thiosemicarbazone treatment in the late 1960s and 1970s reduced the fatality rate for progressive vaccinia from near 100% to 33%.23,25,26 Surgical debridement or amputation may also provide some benefit.24, 25
Eczema vaccinatum is a cutaneous dissemination of vaccinia virus that usually occurs in persons with pre-existing skin disease. It is typically mild and self-limited, but it may be severe or fatal, especially in young children. Death is usually caused by extensive viral dissemination, fluid and electrolyte imbalance, and bacterial sepsis.25,27 Treatment with VIG or antivirals may be effective in some cases.25 Supportive care used for burn victims may help retain proper fluid and electrolyte balance and reduce mortality from eczema vaccinatum.2 Improvements in intensive care therapy during the 1960s likely contributed to the lowering of the fatality rate for eczema vaccinatum from 10% to 1% to 2%.26,27
Post-vaccinial encephalitis is a rare adverse event that frequently leads to death, especially in infants and young children. Reported case fatality rates range from 9% to 40%.25,28 Ten to twenty-five percent of surviving patients have permanent neurologic sequelae.25,28 No predisposing conditions have been identified for this condition, and treatment with VIG has little to no effect.21,23,25
Generalized vaccinia results from blood-borne dissemination of vaccinia virus.23,25 Patients affected with this condition have a generalized rash that is typically self-limited and requires no therapy. VIG can be administered to speed recovery.23,25 This condition may occur in immunosuppressed individuals, but it can also affect those without any underlying illness or risk factors.25
Posted by: david m burd | December 09, 2014 at 01:08 PM
@david m burd
Perhaps I can help with your historical smallpox/rubella queries:-
Smallpox vaccine - In the UK this was administered to all children as part of a post war Government initiative to improve the health of the nation's children. The vaccine was administered by innoculation, i.e. the vaccine was scratched into the skin surface. This left a small round scar, which I still have. I never heard of any side effects from this vaccine. My elder daughter got innoculated in 1968, but when I took her younger sister to be vaccinated, fifteen months later I was told the vaccine was discontinued due to Smallpox having been irradicated.
Rubella - Both daughters got this vaccine at age 11-12. Boys didn't. In the UK, Rubella damage to unborn babies has been almost irradicated by the vaccine. Virtually all cases are now associated with immigration, particularly brides for young British born men of Asian descent. These young women are targeted by the NHS, in order to persuade them to be vaccinated before becoming pregnant.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 09, 2014 at 11:45 AM
"The paper I ACTUALLY wanted, was (quote) "that the regular flu shot for example resulted in increased susceptibility to H1N1."
Jenny A.,
Please see my post below. This was not the first report like this. Also, from Sept 2011:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21813667
Reduced antibody responses to the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccine after recent seasonal influenza vaccination.
Posted by: Linda1 | December 09, 2014 at 11:11 AM
From prior comment (and from Dan"s & Mark's book Age of Autism):
"Vaccines have played an important role in public health, from the eradication of smallpox to the near-eradication of the rubella virus that can cause fetal harm ---"
As to rubella, I would guess Dan/Mark would concur that rubella vaccine shots should never be given to an infant, but might instead be considered when a girl gets into her teen years. And certainly never be given stupidly to boys at any age.
As to "eradication of smallpox," I wonder if Dan/Mark would elaborate as to smallpox disappearing due mainly to vastly improved nutrition, etc. The smallpox vaccinations were terminated (as I understand the literature) mainly because of their undeniable toxic side effects, AND, that the smallpox vaccine was belatedly realized as unnecessary, all risk with negligible benefit.
Posted by: david m burd | December 09, 2014 at 08:36 AM
Maybe I am wrong .. but .. I thought our "grass movement" ..
(AoA) orginally united in a "just cause" .. that being .. to force indifferent public health officials to "scientifically explain" why so many parents reported witnessing the same "regression" following vaccinations of their children .. that coincides precisely with a dramatic increase in the numbers of vaccines .. as well as the dramatic increase in autism from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 68 over recent decades.
Which by the way .. public health officials have failed to do .. offering instead numerous "plausible denial explanations".. all meant to "divide" public opinion .. at the same time allowing them the opportunity to avoid doing the scientific research our community has demanded they do.
Unfortunately .. after reading the various "pro and con" arguments relating to this post .. it is fairly obvious we are now a divided community .. the original "cause" that once united us .. identifying why autism has increased so dramatically .. has been replaced for some with a higher priority .. an entirely new "cause" .. which is to "justifiably" proclaim .. loud and clear .. there is no such thing as a "one size fits all .. safe vaccine".
One thing is for certain .. do not believe the prevailing Orwellian b.s. .."Diversity is our greatest strength" .. it is NOT. "Unity" is . and .. will always be .. our greatest strength ... both for our country as well as our grass-roots movement .. and .. if we cannot identify what "unites" us to each other .. we weaken our efforts to succeed.
As for myself .. I wholeheartedly support BOTH positions .. however .. I want public health officials to identify what "caused" regressive autism in my grandson .. and .. if someone I have explicit trust in ... such as .. Dan Olmsted .. writes a book that will contribute to identifying that "cause" .. he has my full support.
Posted by: BoB Moffitt | December 09, 2014 at 07:21 AM
Thank you Hera for your url alleging a flu vaccines link with asthma. I have never had asthma, but agree there has been a recent 'explosion' of child asthma correlating with the increase in child vaccination, and this, along with the increases in child bowel disorders, diabetes, epilepsy and of course autism, deserves more publicity and recognition by our respective governments and health authorities. This is what I am actively campaigning for in my own country. It's an uphill task getting the 'ear' of influential politicians but we must keep trying for the sake of future generations.
The paper I ACTUALLY wanted, was (quote) "that the regular flu shot for example resulted in increased susceptibility to H1N1." I had a purely personal interest in that one, having had 3 H1N1 containing shots, but that matters little.
Thank you Jenny for your links to various mercury causing Alzheimer's hypotheses. To a large extent we are all reading from the same songsheet here. There's no question mercury is one of the most neurotoxic substances known to man and should not be present in ANY vaccine, particularly those administered to children. To quote Dr Wakefield, Thiomersal was 'grandfathered in' to vaccines, more than half a century ago. At least it was removed from most child vaccines in the Western world, but scandalously the UN voted to retain it for African and other third world vaccines.
According to Hugh Fudenberg 5 consecutive annual flu vaccines increases susceptibility to Alzheimers by an order of magnitude. His research was undertaken 1970-80 and without the actual paper and details about the research subjects and protocol, it's difficult to make any hard and fast conclusions on this thread. I agree mercury might well play a part in dementia, but virtually ALL persons my age in the UK, will have considerable amounts of mercury already in their systems due to previous vaccinations and mercury amalgams. Jenny's link also states:-
"The level of mercury exposure used in the test was well below those levels found in many humans with mercury/silver amalgam dental fillings."
Exactly - Having spent more than 6 decades with a mouthful of mercury, I am unconcerned about the flu vaccine. My sister, 10 years older than me refused flu vaccine for years, due to anecdotal concerns about its safety. You know, 'my 80 year old grandad died four months after the vaccine' sort of thing. When she very nearly died after a very bad dose of flu, she changed her mind. That was quite a few years ago and she is still alive with a mind as sharp as a razor. For reasons, which I will not go into on this thread I am unlikely to end up as a dementia burden on the state.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 09, 2014 at 02:27 AM
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/08/swine-study-suggests-flu-vaccination-may-sometimes-backfire
"During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, Canadian researchers identified a greater risk of infection in those who had been vaccinated against seasonal flu, a puzzling finding that researchers are still unraveling, including a group yesterday that revealed more about a mechanism for the process through experiments on pigs.
...in 2010 a large study by a Canadian team put an exclamation point on the earlier findings, reporting that the risk of needing treatment for pandemic flu was 1.4 to 2.4 times greater in those who had been vaccinated against seasonal flu in the previous year.
In the new study, researchers explored the phenomenon in pigs that were infected with the 2009 H1N1 virus after receiving a vaccine against H1N2 influenza. The team, headed by scientists from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), published its findings yesterday in Science Translational Medicine...
The interaction between the vaccine and respiratory disease, called vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD), has been seen before, for example with formaldehyde-inactivated respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination followed by wild-type RSV infection.
The researchers vaccinated piglets that were younger than 6 months old and hadn't been exposed to flu before against H1N2 to explore whether vaccine-induced antibodies might play a role in exacerbating respiratory symptoms. They found some of the piglets got sick with severe pneumonia and had severe lung damage after they were infected with the 2009 H1N1 virus, suggesting that cross-reactive antibodies triggered by the flu vaccine made symptoms worse after infection with a different flu strain.
The part of the experiments that focused on the mechanism responsible for the effect found that H1N2 antibodies in the sick pigs bound to the hemagglutinin (HA) stem rather than the HA head of the 2009 H1N1 virus, and thus weren't able to block the virus from attaching to cells. Instead, the strong cross-reactive antibodies helped the pandemic virus fuse to cell membranes, which appeared to worsen respiratory problems in the vaccinated pigs."
Posted by: Linda1 | December 09, 2014 at 12:59 AM
no vaccines at all is simply not the choice that the big majority of parents are prepared to make.
**********
Homefirst medical services has over 35,000 completely unvaccinated children, who have completely avoided autism. And as far I know, none of them have been ravaged by polio, smallpox, mumps, measles, rubella, chickenpox, Hepartitis……. either.
From where I'm sitting, 'no vaccines at all' is a choice that more of them might want to consider.
I sure wish the hell that I had.
Posted by: Barry | December 08, 2014 at 10:24 PM
"...I am quite aware that AoA, or Dan for that matter does not have an ideological objection to vaccination. Indeed its obvious in the writings here. Yes, when I mentioned AoA having a hardline stance, it's the devotion to shedding a light on vaccine injury and the demand for justice for the victims that I am considering. Mentioning that you are in support of vaccination choice is not in conflict with this 'militancy'. However, taking the extraordinary step to write a book in which you're essentially recommending vaccines is another matter. I just don't see how this sits well with AoA main agenda of being an extremely vocal opponent of vaccination injury, and generally waking the public up to the tyranny of the autism epidemic. I simply see it as bad optics that serves to detract from the agenda, and it may quite possibly embolden our critics who want nothing more than to continue the status quo. Indeed, reading Dan's Wrap, I was in full agreement with his rebuff of Censored, and right up to the point that he mentioned the book. For me, there are already too many vaccine injury apologists out there, and I sincerely hope that AoA is not venturing in this direction."
I was going to write my own personal comment, but Greg's stance on this issue completely conforms with mine. Enough said.
Posted by: Bayareamom | December 08, 2014 at 07:48 PM
Greg and other commenters, thanks for adding your perspective. There are certainly groups that advocate against vaccination period, as well as a not inconsiderable number of our readers. It's also true that there are 4 million children born in the US every year, and many parents are now more open to the idea that delaying, customizing and cutting back the schedule makes sense. We hope to help validate those concerns and give them some basis for their decisions. for example i know a family that delayed vaccination till after age 3 and then gave their child their first shot -- polio. Well, of all the 16 vaccines out there, polio really makes no sense as the first choice. so why not help parents understand that and, if they want to do a modified schedule, cross polio off the list or put it way down, and ultimately expose their kids to fewer shots. we respect the no-vaccines option. we are trying to get beyond preaching to the choir. no vaccines at all is simply not the choice that the big majority of parents are prepared to make.
Posted by: Dan Olmsted | December 08, 2014 at 07:22 PM
Vaccines have played an important role in public health, from the eradication of smallpox to the near-eradication of the rubella virus that can cause fetal harm...
**************
Can anyone on this site PROVE the truthfulness of that statement?
Posted by: Barry | December 08, 2014 at 05:40 PM
Thanks for your response Twyla. I am quite aware that AoA, or Dan for that matter does not have an ideological objection to vaccination. Indeed its obvious in the writings here. Yes, when I mentioned AoA having a hardline stance, it's the devotion to shedding a light on vaccine injury and the demand for justice for the victims that I am considering. Mentioning that you are in support of vaccination choice is not in conflict with this 'militancy'. However, taking the extraordinary step to write a book in which you're essentially recommending vaccines is another matter. I just don't see how this sits well with AoA main agenda of being an extremely vocal opponent of vaccination injury, and generally waking the public up to the tyranny of the autism epidemic. I simply see it as bad optics that serves to detract from the agenda, and it may quite possibly embolden our critics who want nothing more than to continue the status quo. Indeed, reading Dan's Wrap, I was in full agreement with his rebuff of Censored, and right up to the point that he mentioned the book. For me, there are already too many vaccine injury apologists out there, and I sincerely hope that AoA is not venturing in this direction.
Posted by: Greg | December 08, 2014 at 05:23 PM
Hi Jenny Allan; sorry it took so long, finally found one of them. Pretty sure this wasn't the one I was referencing before though, since the other one was the complete study, not just an abstract? Anyway, hope you find it useful.
And at the risk of being very repetitive, this is not meant to be a lecture; risk benefits are between you and your doctor.
It is just following up on your request for the study.
"Increased risk of non influenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine" Cowling et al
They randomized 115 children to placebo group or a trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine group
From the abstract; "over the following 9 months, TIV recipients had increased risk of virologically confirmed non influenza infections ( relative risk 4.40,95% confidence interval: 1.31-14.8) Being protected against influenza, TIV recipients may lack temporary non specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses."
Posted by: Hera | December 08, 2014 at 04:57 PM
There is an endearing need and a desire for all peoples to want to believe in the inherent goodness of their governments and also their Doctors. It is understandable. And at the same time very sad. Because the truth is that neither can any longer be trusted to do the 'right thing' by us, or even to inform us of the truth of a situation that they themselves can neither fully comprehend or control. So it is very much left to the individual to search for valid information.
Power to the People has more relevance today than ever.
Posted by: patricia | December 08, 2014 at 12:22 PM
Hi Twyla,
beautifully put.
Jenny Allan, agree with you re the helpfulness of vaccines against nasal flu vaccinated influenza carriers.
As you point out, those strains should certainly match.
Still looking for that study but meanwhile found another interesting one;
Randomized Placebo controlled crossover trial on effect of inactivated influenza vaccination on pulmonary function in asthma.
To paraphrase the study, they looked at 262 patients aged 16-75 years. they tested peak expiratory flow ( higher means more lung capacity.)half were given the vaccination, half were given the placebo.
11 recorded a fall in PFF of more than 20% after vaccination, and 8 recorded a fall of more than 30%.
(So of the vaccination group of 142, 19 were worse off compared to the placebo group.) Wow.
Then they decided to exclude anyone with a cold. ( Funny that it appears only the vaccinated group got "colds". I wonder how they differentiated between a reaction to the influenza vaccine, a known side effect being cold like symptoms, with a "cold"? it does not appear from a brief reading of the summary and findings that they did. ) After taking out vaccinated people with "colds" then they managed to loose most of the significance, but even then the 30% difference approached statistical significance.
From the study
"Interpretation: "our findings indicate that pulmonary function abnormalities may occur as a complication of influenza vaccination"
but they explain ( of course) that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.
Hard IMO to see how their study supports that stance.
Posted by: Hera | December 08, 2014 at 12:09 PM
Jenny Allen, I get it, it's your opinion that flu vaccine risks are worth you not getting the flu.
For others who may be interested in a rather comprehensive talk about flu shots for elders:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-shots-may-not-protect-the-elderly-or-the-very-young/
For others, please read. I was providing the link because Jenny A. said she'd not heard of any problems with dementia and flu shots. Here is the quote from the link from a talk Fudenberg did for NVIC "According to Hugh Fudenberg, MD, the world's leading immunogeneticist and 13th most quoted biologist of our times (nearly 850 papers in peer review journals): If an individual has had 5 consecutive flu shots between 1970 and 1980 (the years studied) his/her chances of getting Alzheimer's Disease is 10 times higher than if he/she had one, 2 or no shots. Dr. Fudenberg said it was so and that it was due to mercury and aluminum that is in every flu shot. The gradual mercury and aluminum buildup in the brain causes cognitive dysfunction." . . .
"Hugh Fudenberg, MD, is Founder and Director of Research, Neuro lmmuno Therapeutic Research Foundation. Information from Dr. Hugh Fudenberg came from transcribed notes of Dr. Fudenberg's speech at the NVIC International Vaccine Conference, Arlington, VA September, 1997. Quoted with permission."
And Jenny A. (and any newbie reading this column this week) have John's reference to some of the drawbacks of the nasal mist, even though it doesn't contain mercury.
I do want to add this, for anyone interested, too. It's easy to miss out on information that comes and goes with the blink of a new news day, though I know the d3 thing is more complicated in autism. http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/vitamin-d-proven-more-effective-than-both-anti-viral-drugs-and-vaccines-at-preventing-the-flu/
And there are those that research the option of the homeopathic "vaccine" called Influenzium " Homeoprophylaxs with Influenzinum - Influenzinum is a homeopathic nosode prepared from previous cases of influenza. This nosode can be taken at the beginning of the flu season and repeated mid season if needed. Suggested doasge is a single dose, (3 pellets) of 200C followed a week later with three doses in 24 hours." I got that from http://vaccinefree.wordpress.com/homeopathy-disease-prevention-book/
The authors of the book "The Solution" were at a health freedom conference a few years back and their book was compelling.
Also, talking about the cost of chronic health care may be uncomfortable and controversial, but it cannot be ignored. Its not "beyond the pale." It goes hand in hand. I happen to think autism and alzheimers have similar root causes and that both are largely preventable, and we should take what steps are readily available to reduce the risk. What do flu vaccines, whether a jab or a mist, do to telomeres? Shortened telomeres contribute to the natural aging process. Do flu vaccines increase the number of shortened telomeres or increase the rate of damage to them?
Prevention in order to save limited health care tax dollars in the U.S. is a huge point of discussion right now. Everyone knows that health decisions made long ago are affecting our health and economy now, and our decisions today will affect our health and economy tomorrow and 20 years from now and on and on and on . . . It's not one person's decision to get a flu shot, it's millions and billions of people getting repeated vaccines over and over and over. And the fallout, as we've seen with autism, as we logically see now in other diagnosises, may cost trillions over the next few decades. If we alter our course today, we can alter the course of the future. Every little bit helps. Maybe even the decision to change from getting a flu shot every year to getting it every other year, or every 3 years, or every 5 years, might make a positive difference, when done on a population level.
Posted by: Jenny | December 08, 2014 at 12:08 PM
Greg, AoA has never taken a "hard-line" position against vaccines. They do have a pretty hardline position against denying individual choices on vaccines, and for acknowledgement of vaccine injuries (including vaccine-induced autism), and proper study to understand prevention and treatment of vaccine injuries.
Dan and Mark Blaxill wrote in their book "The Age of Autism" (p. 5):
"In tracing the history of autism, we cannot avoid discussion of what we have already acknowledged as a controversial topic: vaccines. Some critics have labeled us antivaccine for even broaching the subject. But our interest has more to do with vaccination as a risk factor, perhaps one of several. We want to state explicitly that we support vaccines as long as they are individually and collectively tested for safety, and not deployed excessively, as part of an overall policy to promote childhood health... We support progress and innovation... We simply want to stop an autism epidemic whose origin we believe can be discerned from a careful examination of its environmental history.
"Vaccines have played an important role in public health, from the eradication of smallpox to the near-eradication of the rubella virus that can cause fetal harm... But too many vaccines too early may be a part of the toxic picture, which almost certainly argues for fewer vaccines delivered with careful attention to the potential for adverse reactions..."
Kim Stagliano wrote in her book, “All I Can Handle, I’m no Mother Teresa” (p. 151):
“Lately, my ‘Kim Stagliano’ Google searches turn up the phrases ‘anti-vaccine’ and ‘anti-vaxxer’. Despite the fact that I vaccinated by two older girls fully when they were younger and have never told a parent, ‘Do not ever vaccinate your child,’ I have been branded with the ‘anti-vaccine’ label.
“It’s a great label if you want to make a quick point and box me into a mythical category for a sound bite…
“Every parent has to do their own homework and consult with their pediatrician to determine family history, possible allergies to ingredients… and other contraindications that might necessitate altering the pediatric vaccine schedule. Does that sound like crazy talk to you? I sure don’t think so. How is ‘look before you leap’ unsound advice?”
```
Vaccines have risks, and diseases have risks. It's not simple weighing the risks and benefits.
Mark Blaxill also wrote about vaccine program reform (not total elimination) here:
From Safety Last to Children First: A White Paper
http://www.ageofautism.com/mark-blaxills-atlanta-man.html
Posted by: Twyla | December 08, 2014 at 11:16 AM
John, it's not an issue of AoA acting in a way that conflicts with its ideological stance on vaccines with Mark and Dan essentially 'moonlighting' as vaccine researchers. It's about whether such activities are consistent with AoA's brand message of incessantly preaching that vaccines are dangerous and have caused untold harm and suffering in a generation of kids, and in lieu of the fact that there are powerful forces trying to deny this message. I sincerely think Dan and Mark's effort deflect from the message. Sure it may be beneficial to have others such as Generation Rescue, or Dr Sears, or Dr Jay discussing which vaccines are safer, but I think its essential to have at least one 'radical' organization that continues to preach, and only preach, that vaccines are dangerous, and those behind them should be held accountable.
Posted by: Greg | December 08, 2014 at 10:52 AM
Hi Jenny Allan; sorry, still tracking down that study ( it was peer reviewed, the only kind I reference.)
And again, I fully support your right to choose.
You mentioned you prefer to see studies, so here are some that may be of interest.
"trace element imbalances in isolated subcellular fractions of Alzheimer's disease brains"
Does inorganic mercury Play a role in Alzheimer's Disease? A systematic review and an Intergrated molecular Mechanism"
"Increased Blood Mercury levels in Patients with Alzheimer's disease"
"Involvement of Environmental Mercury and Lead in the Extiology of Neurodegenerative Diseases"
( To be fair, I did find one other study (also peer reviewed) which suggested a HG ( mercury) link with MS but found high levels of Hg in both Alzheimer's patients and controls, so those authors did not make a statistically significant link.) The rest of these do seem germane to the topic on hand of Alzheimer's and Hg intake.
You mentioned not noticing any problems with low level exposure to mercury.
I can find you lots of studies (if you want) that describe the effects of low level mercury exposure. Kind of like lead; back in the day, lead in petrol/gas, lead in paint, lead in some water pipes, and for the most part no one noticed any subtle damages. It was only acute poisoning that caught peoples attention.
Greg" I don't think people against vaccine injury need to worry about a "brand". If people say what they believe the truth will find its way. And people like Jenny who are only concerned about some vaccines can be a great help in the push for increased vaccine safety.
Vive la difference! There is room for lots of approaches and viewpoints.
Posted by: Hera | December 08, 2014 at 10:36 AM
John- Your well written article abouit Fluenz was read and appreciated by me at the time of publication. My point was aimed at those persons who criticised me for getting vaccinated with a 'useless' flu vaccine. For us old timers this vaccine is at least useful as protection against vaccine flu strains.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 08, 2014 at 10:33 AM
patricia;
I am 100% for sure - all kids are in danger. It all depends on your family history of just how many vaccines they received.
Posted by: Benedetta | December 08, 2014 at 09:04 AM
Jenny
No one else has made the point?
http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/08/nasal-flu-vaccine-british-hazards.html
Posted by: John Stone | December 08, 2014 at 08:50 AM
Jenny Allen believes 'SOME vaccines cause autism in children'....
I believe vaccines cause autism or autistic symptoms, in SOME children.
Aren't we now at the stage in autoimmunology research where we are finding that it is the IMMUNE SYSTEM, that holds the key? And a compromised immune system in children aged only 18 months has to be said to be damaged either from an already 'over vaccinated' child or environmental issues, whether in utero or not.
Posted by: patricia | December 08, 2014 at 08:47 AM
No one else has made this point about child flu vaccines. This year Fluenz,(same as US Flumist) was rolled out for UK pre-school children. This vaccine, which is administered up childrens' noses, contains no mercury, but is known to 'shed', i.e the child is capable of transmitting flu virus to others in close contact. These 'others' could potentially include grandparents. The flu vaccination I and others received, may not protect against emerging flu strains this year, but should at least protect us from being infected from child transmitted vaccine strains!
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 08, 2014 at 08:31 AM
Jenny
There is no doubt that so far the state in the UK has contrived to make sure that vaccines are taken purely at the risk of the recipient. Of course, if you are chronically ill/impaired as a result the state will not recognise the cause but it may in the long term bear many of the costs. There may be a theoretical liability by the manufacturers, but legal aid is so politicised that it is unlikely that there could ever again be a class action.
As to Greg, AoA has never taken an ideological stance on vaccines, unlike vaccine advocates. I don't know what Dan and Mark have done but it doesn't strike me that it is a bad idea to regard these things as products to be reviewed, though I think one of the problems might be finding reliable evidence. Nothing will ensure their unsafety and ineffectiveness of a class products like the public doctrine of infallibility. Of course, the other problem about the pros and cons of individual products is the sheer number of them. There is no doubt that the culture itself and its ideology are lunacy.
Posted by: John Stone | December 08, 2014 at 08:14 AM
Just to recap on some of the comments:-
Censored(above) said :- "It’s hard to imagine how any infant vaccine can be justified based on a risk v benefit analysis."
Anita Donelly said:- "I will never vaccinate my child again but I support your right to shoot up yours--as safely as possible. ) And censored may be right but there is no need to attack, censored, just suggest!"
Jen said:- "Good for you, Dan. I decided to vaccinate my children selectively and I only wish there was more honest information (research) on which to have made even that choice. You just can't please everyone on this issue, it seems."
Adam Mortensen said:- "they are taking a risk with something that is known to be harmful even to the point of death, even with just one vaccine. I don't know if it is even possible to emphasize that enough. Just one vaccine could kill your kid or maim them for life."
Twyla said :- "Thanks for writing about this, Dan. I wish people didn't have to be such jerks. Lots of good comments here."
Holly Riley said:-"As for the question of supporting safer vaccines vs no vaccines: how many of us would have (or did) disregard the warnings of extremists in regards to vaccines? How many of us would have appreciated a moderate source giving facts in a rational way that would lead us to question and critically look at vaccines for our babies?"
Barry said:- "Reward-risk is just another way of saying russian-roulette. Which has no place whatsoever it the process of safeguarding the health of your child.
The only way to ensure that you child isn't injured by vaccines, is to avoid vaccines completely."
Eileen Nicole Simon says :-"It is an outrage that the vaccine schedule has not been modified in response to parental concerns."
rtp says:- "There is no need to fight each other, but nor is there any reason to kowtow to an organisation that would never compromise with us in a million years.
The medical industry is not about to sign its own execution papers by saynig "oh yes I suppose vaccines are really dangerous after all! Let's work together and fix this issue."
I say;- Polarised views and negative/ad hominem comments will not 'fix' the vaccines or make them safer. I prefer to offer solutions, which inevitably would involve compromises. It's time for the entire child immunisation schedules to be completely audited and overhauled, eliminating those vaccines which are completely unnecessary i.e. the diseases are mild in healthy children, or in the case of HPV vaccines, safe preventative measures for cervical cancer are already in place. Some vaccines appear to offer little or no long term protection eg Mumps and Pertussis; in fact the vaccines have made both diseases far more dangerous. Mumps is now endemic in our universities and colleges.
I think Dan was brave to write this article. The bullies are alive and kicking!
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 08, 2014 at 07:31 AM
With all due respect, I must sympathize with Censors’ concern and agree that it is really bad optics for AoA’s Dan and Mark to now write a book essentially promoting vaccines. AoA more than any other ‘anti-vaxx’, or ‘vaccine skeptic’, or ‘whatever’ organization has staked a hard-line position highlighting the serious safety concerns of vaccines, and the poor research behind them, as well as calling attention to the epidemic of a generation of children and young adults maimed by such vaccines, and essentially seeking justice for them. Never mind now that as some as pointed out it is incredible problematic to promote vaccines with the satisfactory scientific research into their safety still outstanding, but how does AoA expects to be taken seriously by the other side if it appears to be now going soft on vaccines? And, make no mistake having staked such a hard-line position AoA is locked into a vicious, gruelling battle with forces that seek nothing less than to ensure that the status quo remains, and vaccines continue to be poorly researched and the epidemic of injured kids remains hidden.
I would also add that AoA’s hardline status has been effective in waking up the public to the ongoing tragedy of vaccines, and so much so that it has garnered AoA the ire of the forces that would like to see everyone continued to be kept in the dark. Hence, we see how much time and energy outfits such as RI devote to attaching us. But now that it appears AoA is going soft by promoting vaccines, I fear this will essentially undermine its gains and signal to the other side that we should not be taken so seriously.
Really, why should they properly research vaccines if we appear to be now satisfied with essentially pseudo-science that suggest that some vaccines might be safer than others? Or how can we seek justice or retribution for the great crime of vaccine injury if we now appear to be merely settling for a reduced vaccination schedule? It is highly problematic for us to call for their heads one moment, and then in another appear to be warm to their products.
I must make it clear the issue is not whether there are benefits to a less hard-line stance. It’s a matter of AoA having adopted a hard-line stance is now betraying its brand. In the same way we wouldn’t consider it wise for a vegetarian organization to adopt a softer stance and suggest which meats are safer, so too it’s unwise for AoA to be now promoting vaccines. Whether Mark or Dan may privately entertain the position that some vaccines are less harmful than others, the AoA’s brand is not served by such public admissions. It’s a sustained resistance against vaccine harms, and seeking justice for the victims. Anything else will only serve as a distraction, and may quite possibly undermine the message.
Posted by: Greg | December 08, 2014 at 06:42 AM
@Jenny:- "Of course in general, if an informed person takes the shot and suffers ill, it would only be fair that the person kindly forgo taxpayer paid medical care and lifestyle costs that result and take financial responsibility of the decision so that the limited taxpayer monies available can go those innocents, both children and adults, who were completely duped by the system and weren't informed at all about the possibility of vaccine harm."
WHOOPS! I have been lectured before about flu jabs on this thread and was expecting more lectures, but to be accused of potentially wasting taxpayer's money on future dementia care is beyond the pale. Apart from anything else, in the UK, persons taken into care are expected to pay for their own care out of their savings. When that is used up, their houses are seized and sold. I am presently supporting a UK campaign which will allow citizens to make 'living wills' enabling a legal dignified painless death in the event of the person suffering from a terminal illness, including Alzheimers. This legislation is presently being debated in Parliament, but I don't hold up much hope for it reaching the statute book.
Free influenza jabs are offered to over 65s in this country. This is heavily promoted by our UK Government which wants to prevent expensive hospitalisations and ill health. Meantime, I will endeavour to keep my mind active and my body as healthy as possible with a good diet and exercise. Cheers!!
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 08, 2014 at 06:29 AM
@Taximom "Your family has been through more than enough at the (bloody) hands of the pharmaceutical industry."
I must correct this misconception. My family has ONE autistic young man, whom we believe was damaged by the MMR vaccine, administered during 1992 when he was a year old. He did not receive the dangerous Urabe version, which had already been banned in the UK, (by the manufacturers NOT the UK Government), but was administered MMR2, which at that time was assumed to be a safe MMR vaccine by the UK vaccine licensing authority. For this reason we do not 'blame' the vaccine manufacturers. Instead we blame the UK Government, which, post Wakefield, has stubbornly refused to acknowledge, far less treat, the physical co-morbidies associated with autism, in particular the bowel disoreders which cause immense pain and distress to sufferers. (The MMR vaccine has never contained mercury).
Twenty two years later there is plenty of evidence of subsequent Big Pharma corruption, aided and abetted by politicians and media magnates like the Murdoch empire. With many previously patented medicines now being substituted by generic versions, vaccines have become the only reliably profitable products for many pharmaceutical corporations, and very profitable they are. This is, to say the least, an 'unhealthy' situation with protecting profits given a higher priority than protecting the public.
Nonetheless, unless we are prepared to shun ALL medicines and vaccines for ourselves and our children, we should acknowledge the positive aspects of modern medicines. I would have died at the age of 15 without the penicillin injections, following peritonitis caused by a burst appendix. Antibiotics have saved my life on at least two subsequent occasions. Yes- I know all about antibiotic caused superbug evolution-and this is also happening with some vaccines, including pertussis, but these issues can and should be addressed by our respective Government Health authorities.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 08, 2014 at 03:19 AM
There is no need to fight each other, but nor is there any reason to kowtow to an organisation that would never compromise with us in a million years.
The medical industry is not about to sign its own execution papers by saynig "oh yes I suppose vaccines are really dangerous after all! Let's work together and fix this issue." Their consciences as individuals may desire such an outcome but their desire for self-preservation (and hence their behaviour as a collective) means that they would never do what would amount to admitting they were complicit in causing grievous bodily harm to babies.
Posted by: rtp | December 08, 2014 at 01:07 AM
For Jenny Allen from Jenny - Here are a couple links. Yes, if you believe that your body is immune mercury and aluminum building up in tissues and affecting you, maybe because you have perfect liver/glutathione processes and no methylation SNPs, and that flu vaccine safety research has exhausted all avenues and there is nothing left to discover about the immune system, it is totally within your right to choose to vaccinate yourself. In any case at all, I STILL think its your right to get the shots, if you want.
Of course in general, if an informed person takes the shot and suffers ill, it would only be fair that the person kindly forgo taxpayer paid medical care and lifestyle costs that result and take financial responsibility of the decision so that the limited taxpayer monies available can go those innocents, both children and adults, who were completely duped by the system and weren't informed at all about the possibility of vaccine harm.
I know that you are able to cross reference and research on your own, so maybe these couple of links might show you a different opinion. Or maybe you've already seen them and were able to dismiss them as not pertaining to your situation. Maybe you already found enough research put out by non-pharma funded researchers to counter point the issues raised on them, in which case I'm open to reading those if you provide them.
I'd rather be safe than sorry. I'll wait for vaccines that are not shot into the blood, a bodily system completely enclosed and protected so as to naturally prevent any such breach, but go through parallel routes of transmission as the natural disease (that is if you still believe you get sick from the sheer presence of the viruses instead of believing you are sick because maybe your vitamin D and C and zinc levels dropped too low to contain them.) I may someday gain more confidence in vaccines when known toxins, and problem ingredients, and ingredients that could cause problems through molecular mimicry, and natural viral and bacterial contaminants are removed, among other things. Maybe it will be something more akin to homeopathic nosodes. At then, hopefully they will have advanced to the point that one wouldn't have to get them EVERY YEAR! That's not much time to recover from a potential neurological insult.
I am rather curious on a separate idea, though. If your body has been either weak in fighting infections, or fighting so strongly that it produces extreme symptoms, what makes you believe that a flu vaccine corrects those problems in you, yourself? Have you had some kind of before and after antibody tests to confirm your body mounts some kind of altered immunological response from the flu jabs - that you are the 1 in 30, or the 1 in 100, that may get benefits from the shot?
http://www.royalrife.com/flu_shots.html
http://metronews.ca/health/363279/canadian-problem-maybe-not-study-finds/
Please don't take any of this as anything other than respectful concern for wellbeing. There are so many in your same circumstances, I'm sure, that it can only be a good thing to publicly weigh pros and cons. It will be interesting to see what Dan and Mark use to weigh the pros and cons.
Posted by: Jenny | December 07, 2014 at 10:42 PM
@Hera
"can't remember the study, will try and find it if you want ) that the regular flu shot for example resulted in increased susceptibility to H1N1."
Yes I WOULD like a reference to this paper, So far I've had 3 annual flu shots containing H1N1 and my age group also has residual protection from historical infections. I do not believe myself to be at risk from H1N1, but I might well still be vulnerable to newer flu mutations. In view of some of the things alleged on this thread, I would also like references to research papers which link senile dementia with vaccines, GMOs and pesticides. The UK researchers might be interested in any such 'findings'. Please don't quote from unofficial 'alternative' or purely anecdotal sources. This will only give those pro-vaccine bloggers more ammunition to criticise AoA for promoting what they call 'quackery'.
Yes it's fine to have and express opinions. What is NOT acceptable is to state these as 'facts', without the evidence to back this up. The 'all vaccines are dangerous' mantra is just as harmful as saying 'all vaccines are safe'. Yes, there are risks with vaccines, as with all medications. There are risks with life. We have to weigh up the benefits versus the risks. Comparing vaccines to 'Russian Roulette' is comparing chalk to cheese, the vast majority of children come safely through the vaccination schedules. Finding out why a significant minority of children sustain vaccine damage should be a priority for our governments and the WHO.
The AoA website is about autism. I thank you all for your good wishes regarding my health, but please don't dilute the autism dialogue here with unsubstantiated claims about Alzheimers. Us old folks don't matter, we won't live much longer. The world belongs to our young people and THEIR health and wellbeing is paramount.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 07, 2014 at 07:55 PM
Dan and Mark, thank you. If you were trying to advise software engineers on how to avoid computer “viruses” that would be ridiculous. But “medical care” has now become a matter of (1) treatment per protocol and (2) outcome assessment by epidemiology.
Medicare is now my insurance, and suddenly finding something to treat is the priority. Hooray for Google, where you will find many lay people questioning the effects of drugs. “Side effects” are the unwanted effects. No medication is specific just for lowering blood pressure. When you ask about risks of “high” blood pressure, you are told you are at 4 percent greater risk for stroke or heart attack. No other measures of your health are used to determine these risks.
It is an outrage that the vaccine schedule has not been modified in response to parental concerns. Doctors treat by protocol as a means of self-protection, which is sad. Those of us who are outliers on statistical estimates must think for ourselves and work to eliminate dangerous treatments.
Posted by: Eileen Nicole Simon | December 07, 2014 at 07:10 PM
Adam,
She's fourteen now, and I should have worked up the courage to try mustard plasters before, I wish I had. Thanks for your suggestions!
Posted by: cia parker | December 07, 2014 at 06:57 PM
@ Cia Parker
Agreed:)
BTW When my kids are sick I boost up my kids intake of Raw milk, Butter Oil and Fermented Cod Liver Oil or as my daughter used to say Codver Willow :). The younger two that are non-vaccinated recover the fastest. I also cut off all sugar and processed foods.
Hope your baby girl feels better and stays well! She's lucky to have a mom like you! :)
Posted by: Adam Mortenson | December 07, 2014 at 06:02 PM
Barry
That's absolutely fine. I was just unhappy with the idea that Mark and Dan should not visit these issues because they are not scientists.
Posted by: Tolerant Debate | December 07, 2014 at 04:34 PM
Adam,
I agree with you that even one vaccine stands a high likelihood of causing lifelong disability or death. We are not ever going to take another one, already having been damaged enough. I have no wish to insult anyone for the vaccine decisions they have made, only want them to be aware of the great and ever-present danger, but I would not say anything to anyone who told me they had just gotten whatever vaccine for themselves or their child. I agree that good nutrition goes a long way to preventing disease, but I would add that it is not going to prevent all disease. My daughter coughed for a month with the enterovirus in September, then another cough in October, and just now eleven days of bronchitis with an extremely constant, severe cough. I was worried, looking for signs of bacterial pneumonia, and probably used too many herbal and combination homeopathic remedies, Vic's VapoRub, Delsym DM too, which did nothing to stop the coughing at night. On Wednesday I used a mustard plaster for the first time ever, I had been afraid to try it, but the coughing had gotten so bad that I worked up my courage, and it was amazing! Her cough went from deep, severe, and constant to much milder immediately, and now is nearly gone! I think we need to teach people how to handle the symptoms of disease, how to treat them with herbal, vitamin, and homeopathic remedies, and also be sure to inform them of what dangerous symptoms are that warrant immediate conventional medical attention. Meningitis is the most dangerous of the VPDs, and if people knew the symptoms (difficulty bending the neck or touching chin to knee, etc.) and how important it was to get on antibiotics immediately, they would feel less need to get the dangerous vaccines for what admittedly are dangerous but rare diseases.
Posted by: cia parker | December 07, 2014 at 03:15 PM
And I might add that any work you do that helps more people see the incredible risk to life and health that vaccines represent is a good thing. I really don't know how you'd find a reward great enough for this much risk, especially when there are much better ways of securing the health of an infant. Please see Nourishing Traditions Book of Baby and Child Care. Excellent nutrition never hurt anyone. It's what our bodies want. Vaccines aren't vitamins. They are poisons on purpose. Vaccines are an assault on your body. Our bodies don't want them. I'll still be happy to read the up coming book and learn all I can from it. I just don't think there will ever be a truly safe vaccine.
Posted by: Adam Mortenson | December 07, 2014 at 01:00 PM
Thank you, Dan, that was a well written plea for both unity and freedom of choice. Yeah, I'm with those who think "censored" is probably a paid troll.
Posted by: Denise Anderstrom Douglass | December 07, 2014 at 12:36 PM
From one Jenny to another:-
"but several years of the flu shot (along with continuing to eat GMOs, glyphosates, and other forms of poisons) can certainly increase the odds of losing your memory - in the form of dementia."
Really? I'm not too happy about blaming dementia in old age on vaccines, or GMOs or pesticides. I happen to believe SOME vaccines cause autism in children; unfortunately as yet this is unproven, mainly because of an official reluctance to properly investigate. However in the UK, vast sums of money have been thrown at research into the causes of dementia; as yet no specific cause has been found. The blunt fact is we are all living longer and brain atrophy is almost inevitable. The UK Government is only concerned about how much this is costing us and the disruption caused to the health and care services. I am presently trying to inform the politicians about the imminent explosion of adult autism cases, but it's an uphill task. They will know it when it happens.
I have known a few persons who succumbed to Altzheimers. They were no more vaccinated than anyone else. Giving the elderly flu jabs is a relatively recent innovation in the UK, and GM foods are presently unlicenced for humans in Europe, (although Monsanto is still pushing for this). Dementia and old age have always gone hand in hand.
There is mercury in the annual flu shots, but mercury in vaccines has been around since the mid 20th century and was present in most of my childhood shots. One of my earliest memories is a visit to the dentist, with my brothers and sisters. The dentist, with his treadle drill, proceeded to fill all our pre and secondary molars with mercury amalgam. More than 6 decades later I still have most of my molars plus mercury, although dentists no longer use mercury to fill teeth. As a secondary school pupil I remember the fun we had chasing blobs of mercury around the lab benches. If this has affected my intelligence I am unaware of it.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 07, 2014 at 12:24 PM
I really like this article, Dan. And loved Bob Moffitts' quote too. There is room for a whole lot of different approaches and beliefs that can allow vaccine safety to become an important issue.
Jenny Allan,it sounds like you are weighing risks and consequences for yourself in a way that makes sense to
you. And I respect your freedom to choose .
(Standard disclaimer; this is not medical advice; am not a doctor.) One thing I have been reading a bit about the flu shot is that is appears it may weaken someones' immune response to other similar illnesses? Had been reading ( can't remember the study, will try and find it if you want ) that the regular flu shot for example resulted in increased susceptibility to H1N1.Wish you and your husband well with your health problems and hope whatever you decide you stay safe and well this winter ( or summer depending on where you are located:) ).
Anita Donolley really sums it up about the possible motivations for people who are very black and white thinkers. Thank you!
You can see a lot about what people really think by what they put their time into, and who they criticize.
Think this book sounds great, and would be the perfect type of book to give to on the fence friends.
Look forward to reading it.
.
Posted by: Hera | December 07, 2014 at 12:19 PM
Barry
I can't help thinking that your point is a bit absurd
***********
Parents of vaccine injured children are arguing in favour of continuing to vaccinate …. and you think my logic is a bit absurd ??
I'm not trying to stop other parents from doing anything, that would be ridiculous. All I'm doing is offering personal input….which I kinda thought comment sections were about. And me offering my opinion, is really no different than what is being done by the people who have created this reward-risk rating.
My point is that I have seen the damage that vaccines can do, and I think it's insane. And because of what I've seen, I will never vaccinate my children again, no matter who volunteers to do research on my behalf.
Now you can call that whatever you want, but I'm going to stick with common sense.
Posted by: Barry | December 07, 2014 at 11:21 AM
I do look forward to reading it, especially in light of Dr. Sears and Dr. Mumpers moderate approaches. Not that there might not still be damage, but reducing any autism at all is a good thing. And its not mutually exclusive to continuing with the goal of zero autism and society's return to lower rates of chronic lifelong debilitating illnesses. But I'm still reading Kent's book.
I also think the entire risk reward thought process is truly and intricate one, and comments reminds me of the Matrix - some parts of it really makes you stop and consider - what would you do in this situation? How to get out of an insane situation? Suicide? In what form - fast and violent or slow, steady debilitation? Maybe take this pill and forget everything? Or would you decide to proceed with the knowledge and truth and deal with the knowledge and all of the fallout and consequences.
Flash to real life, who will have the constitution to continue? Valid question, and we are probably all over the map as the moments and circumstances shift. And with luck, our opinions and approaches adjust logically to incoming new information.
Suicide? not too popular an option. Slow self-destruction? Maybe? Pill to forget? Probably not all in one package, but several years of the flu shot (along with continuing to eat GMOs, glyphosates, and other forms of poisons) can certainly increase the odds of losing your memory - in the form of dementia. True, you may not be living the life of luxury promised in exchange for the pill in the Matrix, but sitting in a wheelchair in an alzheimer's facility while one's child sits in padded room with no one to worry, advocate and protect anymore could be viewed as a form of psychological luxury, too, couldn't it? And with none of the stigma of murder/suicide in the view of the general public. With the added benefit that you may just forget that you've forgotten - truly a life without worry or shame. Can any of us say that sometime that isn't damn attractive? Sometimes the emotional cost of caring sucks.
I recently have reason to be at a convalescent home, but before even getting to the patient I was there to see, a woman sitting in a chair smack dab in the middle of the hallway, left there for who knows what reason, looked up and me and begged me. "Take me . . . Take me . . .," she was saying. That was all she was saying. And there was no way to understand what she wanted. I patted her hand and told her I couldn't because I had to go see someone else. But her pleas are still playing in my head.
Take you where, sweet-voiced lady? out of here? back to your room? to the bathroom? to the group eating area? to a window? take you to physical therapy? take you back in time, to before your flu shots?
Let me flash forward 15 years from today. A woman sits in a chair in the middle of the hall in a cold, bricklined hallway. Is she there because of everything she didn't know? Or is she there because of everything she did? Who will ever know except for her?
Posted by: Jenny | December 07, 2014 at 10:45 AM
Barry
I can't help thinking that your point is a bit absurd - the argument from authority from the other foot. Part of what is amiss is that so often the gaps in vaccine science are all too apparent to a critical and patient layperson. I haven't seen this book but in the end people can just read and assess for themselves as part of an intelligent discussion. I have had enough of people who trade on their status of being scientists but simply want to use it to shut down informed discussion, and what you are in danger of doing is playing the same game.
Posted by: Tolerant Debate | December 07, 2014 at 09:15 AM
We labored on this for over a year, and we developed our own Reward-Risk Rating for each vaccine; parents can refer to it as they make their own choices – note well, their own choices. And their choice might be not vaccinating at all, an option to which we give considerable and respectful attention.
************
So two non-scientists have somehow figured out which vaccines are really poisonous, and which ones aren't as poisonous. And have produced a 'Rating' that parents can refer to, when WE make decisions about which poisonous vaccines that WE will choose to inject into our children.
Reward-risk is just another way of saying russian-roulette. Which has no place whatsoever it the process of safeguarding the health of your child.
The only way to ensure that you child isn't injured by vaccines, is to avoid vaccines completely.
Posted by: Barry | December 07, 2014 at 08:36 AM
Taximom - In the UK, the pneumonia vaccine is not routinely given to old timers, although I believe it is available on request. I haven't had this vaccine, nor will I, but my husband has a lung condition, which prompted our GP to recommend it for him.
I am aware of the Cochrane and other papers and am glad to have immunity to some flu strains, due to bouts of flu contracted as a schoolgirl, and less frequently as an adult. Flu makes me very ill and I will do what I can to avoid this infection, including vaccinations. I know your advice is well-meant, but I am more than capable of making my own decisions about my own body, although I would not wish to impose my views on others.
The situation is very different for children and I feel very sorry for parents having to make vaccination decisions for them. My childhood infections, in addition to flu, included measles, mumps, chicken pox and whooping cough. We all got colds, sore throats and perpetual runny noses. As a result, my immune system is pretty good.
As a child, I was vaccinated against smallpox, polio, diptheria, whooping cough and TB. These diseases were all potential killers and were rife at the time, (although smallpox was irradicated by the vaccine). My parents were very grateful. My husband, who is a few years older caught diptheria,(before vaccinations), and survived.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 07, 2014 at 07:44 AM
@Jenny Allan: I completely understand your reasons for considering influenza and pneumonia vaccines, and I think you're being intelligent and logical in considering them. I have not researched the pneumonia vaccine, so I cannot comment on that.
However, I HAVE done a lot of research on the flu vaccine, and I want to be sure that you are aware that, according to the Cochrane Review (the gold standard of mainstream medical review), the flu shot is particularly ineffective for your age group.
For healthy adults 20-45, under the very best of circumstances (a perfect match between the vaccine and the circulating strains of influenza for that year), 30 people would need to be immunized to prevent ONE CASE of influenza.In a typical year (without a perfect match), 100 people would need to be given the flu shot to prevent ONE CASE. ONE HUNDRED.
According to the CDC, this year is not a typical year. This year, the vaccine and the circulating strains in the US and Western Europe are not a good match, which makes the vaccine a complete waste.
Well, maybe worse than a waste. We don't know what the rate of adverse events following immunization are, because they don't get reported. I suspect that the elderly are more susceptible to vaccine reactions than young, strong, healthy individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry has done an excellent job of masking the total ineffectiveness of the flu shot by partially admitting the truth. As you mentioned in your post, they say that they're guessing which strains to put in the flu shot, so they might get it wrong, and the shot won't be as effective. But the truth is, if they have to inject 30 people with a PERFECTLY-MATCHED shot, in order to prevent ONE FLU CASE, then the shot is woefully ineffective, and not worth the risk.
We also know that there is a link between repeated influenza vaccination and Alzheimer's--and that there is some crossover between Alzheimer's presentation/symptoms and autism. Since you have vaccine reaction/autism in your family, I would wonder if that puts you at higher risk for both vaccine reaction AND Alzheimer's.
And that means that the risk/benefit ratio for you concerning the flu shot is most likely leaning towards more risk than benefit, even considering that older people are more susceptible to complications from influenza.
So I would suggest learning the predispositions to complications from influenza, and addressing those, rather than injecting yourself with toxins in a useless attempt to protect yourself from the flu.
One well-known predisposition for influenza/pneumonia complications is poor lung function. This can be addressed with a good exercise regimen (which many elderly people avoid).
Another one is high sugar intake. That's pretty easy to control, as long as you have the willpower.
If you already have autoimmune issues, that's another predisposing factor. You can partially address these with diet, especially avoiding gluten and dairy (notice the overlap with autism issues, hmmm hammy?). Many people find that homeopathic treatments are effective for autoimmune issues, but I have no personal experience with that.
Systemic yeast infections, household mold issues, and asthma are very common factors for both autoimmune issues and lung issues. Asthma can also be linked with gluten and dairy, as well as with the artificial perfumes and other chemicals found in household cleaners, laundry detergents, fabric softeners, and even skin creams.
Your family has been through more than enough at the (bloody) hands of the pharmaceutical industry. I'd hate to see you go through more because they convinced you to get the (worthless) flu shot. As I said, I don't know enough about the pneumonia vaccine to comment, but I know a HELL of a lot about the flu shot.
Posted by: Taximom5 | December 06, 2014 at 11:29 PM
You guys do a great of job challenging the public to think before vaccinating. Some people are going to vaccinate anyway and so why not give them as much information as possible. I happen to be one of those people that will never take another vaccine and I wish I hadn't vaccinated my children. I cringe thinking of tiny babies getting those shots, but when it comes to adults getting the flu shot some people seem to tolerate it. Also, people are willing to spend hours reading scientific papers or watching lectures on vaccine research, others are not, so why not share with those who want their info in packaged form. We have to learn to tolerate diversities of opinion and levels of interest. Good luck with your book!
Posted by: kapoore | December 06, 2014 at 10:03 PM
Dan, you are one of the few real journalist left. Keep doing your job (as you've done so well for many years). Truth and common sense are precious and rare in media, and you and the AoA team are appreciated greatly my many of us who rarely post comments because we are satisfied, fulfilled and supported by your work. Thank you. Not said often enough.
As for the question of supporting safer vaccines vs no vaccines: how many of us would have (or did) disregard the warnings of extremists in regards to vaccines? How many of us would have appreciated a moderate source giving facts in a rational way that would lead us to question and critically look at vaccines for our babies? Most of us vaccinated without informed consent and regret it. Why? Because the allure of vaccines/pills solving problems is so damn attractive. I'll admit it: I want a good Ebola vaccine. Honestly-I do! But knowing what I do, I will be extremely wary. Fear is so persuasive, and we now have mainstream media and government agencies marketing fear as never before.
The more I know the less likely I am to let my nuclear family get any vaccines, but my extended family and friends are precious to me too, and they are wide-eyed and full of the fear mainstream media and medicine dole out on every corner. How can I help them without alienating them? With sound, easy to read, scientifically credible articles-usually from AoA.
Keep up the good work.
Posted by: Holly Riley | December 06, 2014 at 06:41 PM
Thanks for writing about this, Dan. I wish people didn't have to be such jerks. Lots of good comments here.
Posted by: Twyla | December 06, 2014 at 06:02 PM
First let me say that I am eternally grateful for all the hard, MEANINGFUL work that AoA has done for the autism community. The articles published here and the book The Age of Autism have given me so much insight into my son's condition that I'd otherwise had to have spent years finding out. (if ever I would). They are major reasons why I don't vaccinate my children at all. I know FULL informed consent is the one of the main goals of what you do here. The more fully informed I get the more I believe,
1. The conflicted government health agencies and their liability free industry partners are not to be trusted.
2. None of the vaccines currently on the schedule are adequately tested for safety by the aforementioned untrustworthy responsible agencies.
3.The only truly safe option is not to use the untested, unsafe, documented harmful, government compensated injury causing vaccines.
4. A major paradigm shift away from our current medical system of thought is needed. Something akin to a medical reformation. The main tenet of which would be nutritional counseling and therapy (using traditional foods and cooking techniques) for all ages but particularly for mothers to be.
5. Acceptance (myself included) that if I want to be healthy and have healthy kids, its on me to be responsible with my food choices and theirs. Health doesn't begin in the hospital. It begins in the kitchen.
6. The whole nature of the immune system needs to be better understood before any vaccines are even recommended let alone mandated. Maybe this whole concept of vaccines is a bad idea with lots of unintended consequences.
So I'm not condemning AoA for not taking anti vaccine stance although there is nothing wrong with that stance. (Especially the more you know) I am saying that when people take a position of vaccinating to any degree, they are taking a risk with something that is known to be harmful even to the point of death, even with just one vaccine. I don't know if it is even possible to emphasize that enough. Just one vaccine could kill your kid or maim them for life.(see Gardisil victims). If I was telling people to just space out the shots or make sure they are mercury free (because I was afraid of being labeled "antivaxer") but not tell them that even just one thimerosal free shot could still kill or maim their child and they went ahead with that and their child died I wouldn't be able to sleep at night. Granted the odds against catastrophe are probably better if you space out multiple shots the odds won't matter when a vaccine caused disaster strikes your household and the rest of your life is radically changed from what it could and should have been.
Posted by: Adam Mortenson | December 06, 2014 at 04:15 PM
OMG - Wash my stupid mouth out with soap, what an idiot -Why? I just got a flu jab, complete with full on mercury. My husband of nearly 50 years got one too, plus a pneumonia vaccine. This was not just this year but every year. Yes we are both aware flu vaccines are not always effective, with the manufacturers having to guess which strains will be most active every year, but we are also aware our increasing age related health issues, means contracting influenza can have very serious consequences for us. This is called informed choice.
However, I am vehemently opposed to giving mercury laden vaccines to pregnant mothers and young children. Mostly the risks from these shots are NOT fully explained or discounted by the doctors and nurses, paid to administer them..
A pro vaccine occasional AoA commenter calling him/herself Eindeker, accused myself and Benedetta of calling measles a "mild, inconsequential virus". This was made up rubbish, obviously with the intention of discrediting our very reasonable concerns about the MMR vaccine. In the UK, it was the SINGLE measles vaccine, in use for 20 years BEFORE MMR vaccine, which was mainly responsible for the steep decline in child measles cases. Pre-teenage girls were administered Rubella vaccine to protect their future babies. The much maligned Dr Wakefield merely suggested a return to this safer child vaccination regime. Would that he had been heeded 16 years ago. Vaccinating against mumps has simply altered the timescale of this disease, now being contracted by young adults, when it can cause sterility, instead of during childhood, where it rarely causes any long term problems.
I also have profound concerns about the HPV vaccines; my concerns are also shared in many other countries, including India, Japan, Spain and France. Expressing my worries to the politicians invariably brings that tired old 'millions of jabs with no problems' response. Meanwhile our beautiful teenage girls are being put at unnecessary risk of harm. I say unnecessary, since pap smears have proven very effective at preventing cervical cancer in the past. This procedure is harmless.
It is not uncommon for pro-vaccine trolls to come on to Facebook pages and other social media blogs and forums, pretending to support causes, but instead determined to disrupt and divide. I particularly resent being called an 'anti-vacciner' by the likes of Brian Deer, Matt Carey and David Gorski. This is how they like to portray us in order to discredit our arguments.
I suspect 'Censored' has an agenda which is nothing to do with vaccines and everything to do with discrediting AoA and its contributors. If he posts a nasty book review on Amazon -fine - he will have to buy and read the book first. Brian Deer put a vile diatribe on Amazon following the release of Dr David Lewis's book 'Science for Sale'. It was obvious Deer hadn't read the book; his so called 'review' got the thumbs down from other reviewers and readers.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | December 06, 2014 at 01:50 PM
Good for you, Dan. I decided to vaccinate my children selectively and I only wish there was more honest information (research) on which to have made even that choice. You just can't please everyone on this issue, it seems. I would hope we could all agree that more unbiased, physiological research is warranted for the sake of our children, rather than this biased, epidemiological junk. Anyone who has been to the schools lately would know that there is huge cause for alarm. Our children seem very unhealthy (lots of seizes, asthma) and lots of soft sign neurological damage. And this surely isn't all "genetic" or because these children were born pre-term.
Posted by: jen | December 06, 2014 at 12:47 PM
Rad caroline Kennedy's book about the bill of rights. She describes how the FBI deliberately sent hateful letters between advocates of civil rights purporting to be someone else. The intent was to break the unity. When I saw someone supposedly open to the fact that vaccines cause autism slamming anyone who says some vaccines may be safer than others, I see either a black and white rigid thinker OR I see a troll who is trying to be so extreme they turn everyone on the fence away OR I see someone so hurt and cynical due to this tragedy that they can't trust anyone. We are all friends. We have all suffered. We are all in a different place on this journey. Some of us have grown up hearing stories of family damage by illness and family damage by vaccines. So our hope is to make vaccines safer--or at least explore if that is possible . We are open to your thoughts that that is never possible but you don't have to attack us and put a dagger through our movement for us hear why your thoughts on why you think vaccines can never be safe. The point is that the mainstream won't allow any debate. Censored won't either. And that's why I agree Dan. Don't print comments that are clearly destructive and not trusting of motive of those who have gone to bat for our movement --especially you Dan! . It's destructive and it may be that pharma trolls are putting these comments out there to make us look extreme . There is a reason they lie and say that jenny mccarthy and Andrew Wakefield are anti-vaccine instead of vaccine safety whistleblowers. Most people will listen to a reasonable argument about vaccine safety because duh why are they putting cow and fetal parts and toxins in a vaccine? They are terrified of those facts getting out so they try to put the extreme out--the straw man. That's why pharma media distorts the truth. Censored is playing right into their hands by not letting those of us with more balanced views (vaccines cause autism. Vaccines could be made safer. I will never vaccinate my child again but I support your right to shoot up yours--as safely as possible. ) And censored may be right but there is no need to attack, censored, just suggest! Just say on amazon "dan is on the right track. Personally I think no vaccine is safe because s because xyz" and write your own damn book censored. Believe me you will get attacked by the same people who attack dan plus many many more. Does that give you a clue about why your attack strategy is not only harmful and cruel but counterproductive ?you catch more flies with honey censored. We understand the tragedy that is behind your anger but you have no need to direct it at those who have given their career to end the tragedy and expose it. We would be open to hear you out but not if you attack. . We respect your experiences and thoughts more than any one. You need to respect ours.
Posted by: Anita Donelly | December 06, 2014 at 12:32 PM
Thank you for what I consider to be a reasonable approach to the vaccine issue - sharing a well researched, informative book that allows parents to make our own choices. I feel that so many people who are passionately and often militantly against vaccines haven't actually done any research of their own on the subject and are just absorbing what the internet has to say.
Posted by: Dawn Marcotte | December 06, 2014 at 09:52 AM
I will have to say that I worry that focus will get diffused in environmental causes - like new GMOs, and Round up thoughts.
I know what only I know and that is my kids react to vaccines. Sometimes very slow - taking over 6 months - to with in minutes.
Maybe Round up is causing trouble, but when some one says it fits -- invented back in 76 well the DPT shot was there then too. Autism going up - is the use of Round up -- I was there at the doctor's office in the late 80s holding my vaccine damaged child and looking at the postures behind the doctor of new and up coming vaccines and new CDC guide lines of additional boosters.
And as far as eating GMO and Round up sprayed food - they are grains. Some how vaccine injuries are hand in hand with gut problems and celiacs or at least gluten intolerance.
I understand the confusion - I do; but it is frustrating from what I have observed that the rest of the nation don't know.
Posted by: Benedetta | December 06, 2014 at 09:45 AM
I have never been able to understand the dynamics of any grass-roots movement .. which begins with a "just cause" the entire movement supports .. say .. finding the "cause" of autism's dramatic increase .. then invariably fractures within .. because some in the movement believe there is only one way to find the "cause of autism's rise" .. and .. that way is theirs alone.
I have always ascribed to the idea that any "just cause" already has too many formidable enemies .. best described as powerfully entrenched .. well-financed and positioned "bureaucracies" .. such as .. public health, academia, media, etc .. dedicated to preserving their own self-serving interests .. especially by raising arguments meant to "divide and conquer" the grass-root members until they begin fighting among themselves .. losing all focus on the "just cause" that once "united" them.
My own personal involvement with "grass-roots" movements that were fractured due to internal squabbling over issues .. losing focus on that "just cause" that once united us .. has given me great respect for an Arabic saying thought to be 2,400 years old:
"The enemy of my enemy ... is my friend".
Posted by: BoB Moffitt | December 06, 2014 at 09:19 AM
Blood on our hands?
Pharma just completed a big fund raiser event with their “Ebola vaccine program” which was covered by the mainstream media 24/7. Once a few billion dollars were handed over by world governments for a vaccine, everything became very quiet.
Obviously the dream of Autism research is to find the “Autism gene”/ create a prenatal test, which would then provide for Autism terminations.
Hopefully the Autism gene (4 to 1 boys to girls/ 2 million since 1990) will not be confused with the ADHD gene (4 to 1 boys to girls/ 24 million since 1990) or things could get very bloody.
As always, the “baby vaccine magic” begins with the day one/ hep b vaccine..... first developed for the prostitute, IV drug user market and soundly tested for years in Vietnam.
Posted by: cmo | December 06, 2014 at 09:16 AM
Those who can... Do. Those who can't hide behind screen names and wreak intentional havoc. Just like any garden variety skeptic, troll or Orac reader. Same cloth. Different warp.... Almost as if paid to disrupt vax safety work in a divide and conquer style. Who is the puppet master?
Posted by: Austin Flowers | December 06, 2014 at 08:15 AM