Six Lethal Sins of CDC A Toxic Legacy of Lies: Part 3 Autism Numbers
Note: Part 2 and Part 1.
By James O. Grundvig
PART III AUTISM NUMBERS
CDC and NCBDDD Director Coleen Boyle’s other talent, beyond paying foreign mercenary scientists to manipulate data to produce desirable results, has been their ability to knead and suppress the skyrocketing autism incidence rates, which have exploded from 1 in 2,500 in 1990 to 1 in 250 at the start of the new millennium. In 2014, CDC announced ASD rates had shot up yet again to 1 in 68 for every child born in the United States.
Then an odd thing happened on March 31, 2016: CDC announced victory of sorts. Autism rates had stabilized, unchanged from two years ago at 1 in 68. In CDC’s corrupt ivory tower view, it was something to cheer about as it gave the false perception that CDC had the epidemic finally under control. It does not. And the lie of the “better diagnosis epidemic” continues.
The Philadelphia Inquirer website, Philly.com, gushed: “The autism rates was 1 in 68 children in 2012, the same as it was in 2010, according to the latest data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”[1]
But that statement was wrong. In 2010, CDC’s rate of ASD incidence had climbed to 1 in 88. Even if the reporter had been correct, he was taking CDC’s word at blind allegiance, which he could have torpedoed the false number had the reporter done a bare minimum search online. Then, he would have discovered that HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in October 2009 “had no idea why” the rates had climbed to 1 in 100 children on the spectrum, and said: “The prevalence of autism might be even higher than previously thought . . . We don’t know if it has gone up, and we are hoping to unlock these mysteries.”[2]
No such luck. No mysteries were ever uncovered by HHS, NIH, CDC or any other health agency for the last seven years. Mainstream press never bothered to look into the unmitigated tragedy of a growing legion of children with learning disabilities, leaky guts, shot nervous systems, brain signaling malfunctions, muscle atrophy, and a Vaccine Court that refuses to compensate most of the victims, which number well over one million victims today under 18 years old.
And yet, the announcement had been trumpeted with great relief at CDC, as if Coleen Boyle had run the 26 miles in ancient Greece, from Marathon to Athens, shouting “Nike!” before collapsing to the ground. Two problems, however, emerged for the director of National Center of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities in her agency’s victory lap, besides it being false and premature.
First, a disorder that has spread like wildfire across the United States for the past 25 years, with a clear environmental impact—not only genetics—is nothing to boast about. The second problem is more pervasive and symptomatic of what the Centers for Disease Control has become since the 1980s when it added “Prevention” to the agency’s name and failed to conduct the Agent Orange Studies, as mandated by the 101st U.S. Congress.
For CDC, its bought press, and its legion of fall-in-line physicians, who have claimed the sharp rise in ASD rates was due to “better diagnosis.” That long foisted canard is dying a slow excruciating death in Utah court. That’s because a second CDC whistleblower has emerged in 2016, this one outing the falsifying of diagnoses of surveillance records at CDC monitoring sites in the Beehive State.
3.1 CDC WHISTLEBLOWER NO. 2
Just as CDC had touted autism rates remain “unchanged” on the eve of Autism Awareness Month, a new whistleblower emerged in Dr. Judith Pinborough-Zimmerman.
In 2008, CDC announced that autism rates had increased to 1 in 88, or 300% more than it was in 2000. In March 2012, the University of Utah’s Dr. Pinborough-Zimmerman announced that the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) project in Utah showed a different trend line, and it’s seismic if proven true. She announced that ADDM had “found that one in 47 Utah children, one in 32 boys, falls under autism classification. This means that, from 2002 – 2008, autism prevalence increased 78% nationally and 157% in Utah.”[3]
The above chart, a split-graph clearly shows ASD rates climbing—with the exception of one state, Utah. Why? Yet, the steep decline in the Utah autism numbers didn’t parse with what was actually happening in the field at the monitoring sites. That was why Judith PinboroughZimmerman filed a lawsuit to expose the manipulation, errors and omissions of data.
“In documents filed on January 4, 2016 in the Federal District Court, District of Utah, (Case No. 2:13cv1131) the former Principal Investigator for the Utah ADDM Network site, Judith PinboroughZimmerman asked for the right to a jury trial to adjudicate a range of claims against her employer, the University of Utah, with respect to Zimmerman’s work as an autism researcher for the ADDM Network.”[4]
So far, she has testified the following statements in court:
- “The [university researchers] were publishing data under people’s names who had not done the work and that the data contained uncorrected errors.”[5]
- “I think the fact that I reported data errors, research misconduct, is significant.”[6]
- “On or about December 2012, Dr. Zimmerman also reported the same concerns she had made to the University’s Privacy & Security office to the United States Department of Health and Human Services.... She reported her concerns to the CDC as well.”[7]
According to the lawsuit, the errors were not confined to Utah; that was likely standing operating procedure for CDC surveillance and monitoring sites around the country. The co-author or principle investigator of nine (9) studies, according to a 2012 study in which she was the PI found: “The [autism spectrum] disorder occurs in Utah boys at a rate of nearly three times that of Utah girls. The study also found significantly higher autism rates among white Utah children when compared to non-white children, among whom the rate is 1 in 154. For white children, the rate is 1 in 25.”[8]
In review of her own study, Pinborough-Zimmerman said, "Regardless of the reasons for the changes reported in this study, increases of this magnitude will have a significant long-term impact on our communities and families. As researchers, we are continuing to work with our local and national partners to find answers."[9]
What they are continuing to work on is a giant lie, a cover up for a failed CDC health program and for HHS having wasted years and millions of dollars in not mitigating the autism epidemic.
A deposition on the “uncorrected errors” of a Utah site employee, Amy Henderson, stated: “This is email correspondence amongst Judy, myself, Jon Baio at the CDC, the statistician, Tyler, abstractor, Geoff, regarding correcting errors within the 2008 and 2010 ARCHE databases . . .”[10]
“Tyler . . . came to me with a list of tracking IDs . . . so basically children's ID for me to look up in the database to double check some information. When I went in to double check the information, it was—the information he wanted was irrelevant to what I—to what this is talking about, which was I noticed that the ICD9 codes were in a strange format in the database . . . There were a variety of different errors. Some ICD9 codes had leading zeros that shouldn't have leading zeros, some of the ICD9 codes had—I think it was the leading zeros that ended up being the biggest problem because a 0299 code is very different than 299.0 code.”[11]
Conclusion: The ADDM lie attempted to show that the autism numbers weren’t really going up, but CDC and pediatricians were doing a better job of diagnosing children with ASD. Dr. Coleen Boyle has run that lie since she honed that technique during the failed 1980s Agent Orange Studies.
3.2 EPA VS. CDC INFLECTION YEARS
One of the bigger issues regarding autism numbers is the methodology used to accurately count the increases over the years. Incredibly, the EPA and CDC still can’t agree on when the inflection point occurred. Did it take place in 1988, as the EPA believes, two years after the National Childhood Vaccination Injury Act of 1986 gave vaccine manufacturers the license to expand its immunization program, adding more vaccines to the schedule? Or did the inflection point occur in 1992, the year Denmark removed thimerosal from all of its vaccines, as CDC suggests?
For Mark Blaxill, father of an autistic son, advocate against the runaway vaccine program, and chairman of HealthChoice.org, the difference in analyzing the data from 1988 (EPA) and 1992 (CDC) is huge, since it’s another way of the agency omitting an entire dataset of people, thus giving the appearance that the autism epidemic isn’t as bad as proclaimed.
“. . . We should be supporting data collection in New Jersey, which by all accounts has some of the best collection methods, and has the highest autism rate—1 in 46—in the ADDM system that determines the national rate. Plus we know that in Atlanta the CDC has been doing their own autism surveillance for a while, and has data going back to the1986 birth cohort,” Mark Blaxill said in an interview.[12]
Muting the noise of data, by omitting large tranches of it, has been a CDC staple as old as Coleen Boyle’s manipulation of data with the Agent Orange and Danish Studies she oversaw, somehow finding no association between toxins and injured people, including babies, infants, and children.
In another Pinborough-Zimmerman study, she found “ASD administrative prevalence per 1,000 children age four, six, and eight in the three county surveillance region in Utah by year, sex, and record. . .” that “children aged eight showed prevalence increase from 6.5 in 2002 to 10.2 in 2006.”[13]
3.3 BROKEN METHODOLOGY BY DESIGN
As Mark Blaxill pointed out, CDC kept the best records on ASD rates in New Jersey and Georgia, except when they didn’t line the results in the long delayed 2004 Atlanta study, which omitted a huge portion of African-American children out of the data analysis and then went on to destroy the paperwork and raw data, according to CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson.
Other than that, sleight of hand machinations, and the “dog ate my data” from inside Coleen Boyle’s NCBDDD division, everything is fine and normal, except those stubborn rising ASD incidence rates.
Remarkably, the CDC shot itself in the foot by introducing a new methodology in 2015 when it found a different way to count and backtest autism numbers. That method produced a whopping increase of 1 in 45, which exploded through the 1 in 68 ceiling claimed by CDC in March 2016.
From a Washington Post article on CDC’s announcement, “The number of autism cases in the United States appeared to jump dramatically in 2014 according to new estimates released Friday, but researchers said that changes in the format of the questionnaire likely affected the numbers.”[14]
“The report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Center for Health Statistics shows that the prevalence of autism in children ages 3 to 17 went up about 80 percent from 2011-2013 to 2014. Instead of 1 in 80 (or 1.25 percent) children having autism—a number that has alarmed public health officials in recent years and strained state and school system resources—researchers now estimate that the prevalence is now 1 in 45 (or 2.24 percent).”[15]
The USA Today reported the same result differently, claiming, “More than 2.2% of children ages 3 to 17—about one in 45—have autism, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's National Health Interview Survey, conducted in 2014. The annual survey found autism rates of 1.25%, or one in 80 people, from 2011 to 2013.”[16]
Well, 2.2% is quite far way from what UK has examined as 1% of its population has autism. Why so much more of the dreaded disorder in the United States? Is it some micro-toxin in our water, soil or food that migrates into our bodies, bloodstreams and brains that has placed the US as the world leader in autism spectrum disorder? Or is it something else? Like, the hyper-aggressive vaccine schedule that has leeched into the lives of all Americans in all states, in all socioeconomic strata, by mainlining toxins, like a drug, direct into the blood and passed the blood-brain barrier?
Not satisfied with mainstream media failing to look beyond its nose during the autism crisis, I, as a journalist, contacted the study’s principle investigator Benjamin Zablotsky of CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, to discuss the findings in the November 2013 Health Statistics Report.[17]
Dr. Zablotsky wrote in an email: “I can tell you briefly that we believe the increase seen in the 2015 report was the product of a measurement effect. The increase seen could be explained by changes we made to the survey itself, including expanding the wording of the ASD question, changing the format of the ASD question, and positioning the ASD question before a question on other developmental delay when it previously came after a question on other developmental delay. The increase seen in the 2013 report was likely due to recently diagnosed children with previously unrecognized ASD being captured in the 2011 National Survey of Children’s Health.”
During the phone interview, Zablotsky said, “CDC made changes in our survey questionnaire, but that the counting of autism numbers by CDC [ADDM] monitoring sites is the gold standard.”
CDC’s methodology suffers from poor design: When data is everywhere, data is nowhere.
In summary, CDC has had no method at all, except propagating the lie that it has been better diagnosis than autism numbers have risen with a direct correlation to the new vaccines that came onto the market in early 1990s, after the erection of Vaccine Court protected the manufacturers from any product liability or tort law.
Finally, at the 2016 INFAR Autism Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto, of the MIND Institute at UC Davis, gave the keynote speech on “Toxins in Children.” In one slide she blew up the myth that the rise in autism rates have climbed 600% since the start of the millennium and that only 204% can be attributed to change in DSM criteria, changes of age that trend younger, broadening the scope of “milder cases,” and blaming older ages of mothers (4%).
From her published study and that slide, she wrote in 2009, “. . . The possibility of a true increase in incidence deservers serious consideration.”
It deserves more than that from CDC, NCBDDD, NIH, FDA and HHS. Those agencies, and the World Health Organization (WHO), must stop lying to the public and finally admit the “environmental” and “toxin” components to this crisis, and look at the bloated Vaccine Schedule and the toxins, such as thimerosal and aluminum, that can and have harmed a growing subpopulation of babies, infants and children, who are clearly “allergic” to those elements and cannot naturally chelate them out of their systems.
It’s also past due, that CDC and NIH fund research to find the biomarkers that should exclude those who would become autistic as a result of an overload of toxins in their systems, and begin to craft a Vaccine Program, like one that an oncologist, “known the world’s richest doctor,” Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong wants to change the way we treat cancer patients by tailoring those treatments based on genes and responses to various therapies.[18]
In other words, CDC should focus on biomarkers as a way to both exclude babies and children, who are susceptible to the toxins in vaccines, and tailor treatments for those on the spectrum.
But don’t hold you breath until a new president can clean out the executive rot inside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, since the agency appears it can neither control nor prevent the epidemics of diseases and disorders impacting a generation of children.
[1] U.S. Autism Rate Unchanged at 1 in 68 Kids: CDC, Philadelphia Inquirer, March 31, 2016.
[2] Kirby, David, Kathleen Sebelius: “Autism Now Hits 1 in 100 Children. We Have No Idea Why,” Age of Autism, October 3, 2009.
[3] Gauthier, Christopher M., 1 in 47 Children in Utah with Autism Spectrum Disorders, blog, March 29, 2012.
[4] CDC Might Have Committed Fraud Again over Autism, TheTruthLibrary.info, April, 5, 2016.
[5] IBID.
[6] IBID.
[7] IBID.
[8] Cortez, Marjorie, Utah shows highest rate of autism in new study, KSL TV, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 29, 2012.
[9] IBID.
[10] Blaxill, Mark, The Autism Emergency Continues 1 in 68 Children Born in 2004, Health Choice, March 31, 2016.
[11] IBID.
[12] Olmsted, Dan, Weekly Wrap: Mark Blaxill on How the CDC Manipulates the New Autism Rate, Age of Autism, April 2, 2016.
[13] Pinborough-Zimmerman, Judith, Changes in the Administrative Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders: Contribution of Special Education and Health from 2002–2008, Springer Science, May 3, 2011.
[14] Eunjung Cha, Ariana, Autism cases in U.S. jump to 1 in 45: Who gets the diagnosis, in 8 simple charts, Washington Post, November 13, 2015.
[15] IBID.
[16] Szabo, Liz, Study finds more than 2% of children have autism, USA Today, November 13, 2015.
[17] Zablotsky, Benjamin, Estimated Prevalence of Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities Following Questionnaire Changes in the 2014 National Health Interview Survey, CDC National Center for Health Statistics Report, Number 87, November 13, 2015.
[18] http://www.businessinsider.com/dr-patrick-soon-shiong-on-cancer-gps-test-and-nanthealth-2016-6
[1] U.S. Autism Rate Unchanged at 1 in 68 Kids: CDC, Philadelphia Inquirer, March 31, 2016.
[1] Kirby, David, Kathleen Sebelius: “Autism Now Hits 1 in 100 Children. We Have No Idea Why,” Age of Autism, October 3, 2009.
[1] Gauthier, Christopher M., 1 in 47 Children in Utah with Autism Spectrum Disorders, blog, March 29, 2012.
[1] CDC Might Have Committed Fraud Again over Autism, TheTruthLibrary.info, April, 5, 2016.
[1] IBID.
[1] IBID.
[1] IBID.
[1] Cortez, Marjorie, Utah shows highest rate of autism in new study, KSL TV, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 29, 2012.
[1] IBID.
[1] Blaxill, Mark, The Autism Emergency Continues 1 in 68 Children Born in 2004, Health Choice, March 31, 2016.
[1] IBID.
[1] Olmsted, Dan, Weekly Wrap: Mark Blaxill on How the CDC Manipulates the New Autism Rate, Age of Autism, April 2, 2016.
[1] Pinborough-Zimmerman, Judith, Changes in the Administrative Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders: Contribution of Special Education and Health from 2002–2008, Springer Science, May 3, 2011.
[1] Eunjung Cha, Ariana, Autism cases in U.S. jump to 1 in 45: Who gets the diagnosis, in 8 simple charts, Washington Post, November 13, 2015.
[1] IBID.
[1] Szabo, Liz, Study finds more than 2% of children have autism, USA Today, November 13, 2015.
[1] Zablotsky, Benjamin, Estimated Prevalence of Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities Following Questionnaire Changes in the 2014 National Health Interview Survey, CDC National Center for Health Statistics Report, Number 87, November 13, 2015.
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/dr-patrick-soon-shiong-on-cancer-gps-test-and-nanthealth-2016-6
Just want to point out that while the new doctors are being brainwashed in medical schools and residency programs, it is important to remember that if they follow the schedule, they too will personally experience a 1 in 25 or 1 in 48 (or whatever it is) incidence of autism. I guess it depends on how good the brainwashing is as to what they do with that personal experience. I think most, like the Polings, will understand exactly what happened, and that will change the way they practice medicine and their view of the CDC. Come to think of it, the medical school instructors teaching the great lie will also have their share of personal experience.
I think there is pressure on the house of cards from many sides.
Posted by: Linda1 | June 12, 2016 at 07:56 AM
Just to add,
If you want an obvious example of how this 'greater good' idea translates into eugenics-type ideology, consider the omission by the CDC of the African-American boys' contingent in their study, all measures taken supposedly 'for the better'.
As is clear, such connotations are utterly untenable, which is why you find shills like Gorski trying desperately to persuade people that it is the makers of Vaxxed who are taking advantage of such minorities, the underprivileged etc.
The connotations with eugenics are in my view their ultimate Achilles heel.
Posted by: Eddie Unwind | June 11, 2016 at 11:25 PM
@Kostoff
You're talking about constitutional change, and I'd agree, it seems pretty inconceivable. In my view the only way for a shift to occur is if the various sponsors, congressmen etc begin to feel that their position on the matter becomes outwardly untenable.
One may shrug off claims - even evidence - of corruption, malfeasance, and so on, so long as the notion of 'all is for the better' remains conscionable - however barely - and is thereby sustained. As everybody is already familiar, the 'all is for the better' now translates as 'all for the greater good'. Now this, as you'd be well aware, is truly a seismic ideological shift for very much the worse, since the resultant pattern is inevitably 'sacrificed for the greater good', to 'willingly sacrificed for the greater good' (for one is in agreement with the notion, no?), and all of its grisly, miserable connotations.
It can take people awhile to get used to the connotations of such a shift, such shifts, as is becoming clear, being a extension of pro-vax extremist ideology. It can take awhile for people to become accustomed to the idea that their children are essentially forming a part of a totally un-constitutional experiment in the name of vaccine science.
And it can take time for those to realise that there exists a clear link between Greater Good ideology, humans being sacrificed for the sake of experiment, and eugenics. I don't believe at all that the majority of those who are pro-vaccine are eugenicist-types, but inadvertently or otherwise the parallels are unmistakeable.
How many sponsors, senators etc do you fancy will happily have their names aligned with eugenics ideology? Unconstitutional?
Posted by: Eddie Unwind | June 11, 2016 at 09:22 PM
Ronald Kostoff, You always make cogent points -- most with I am in accord. IF, and I'm afraid you are correct. that Legislators are oblivious (and bribed by their Pharma contributions), then only a new Chief Executive such as Trump can (perhaps) come to the rescue.
OTHERWISE, It really comes down to a groundswell of individual physicians, pediatricians, the Nursing Array, Physician Assistants, on and on, FINALLY realizing how toxic AND counterproductive are all the child vaccines. This, however, is not likely; for instance I get many Physician Journals and they all pro-everything-vaccine.
So, the medical professionals' revolt depends their listening to a groundswell of parents and grandparents who have rebelled against the Vaccination Onslaught, and are actively/vocally telling their doctors to "get lost."
Since the medical profession is so lock-step - Nazi style - on their Immunization Agenda - they will and do ignore parents; it seems only citizens rebelling can stop the infant/child vaccination insanity.
Posted by: david m burd | June 11, 2016 at 08:31 PM
Again SO sorry, SO embarrassing!!!!
That platform would always have my vote.
Posted by: Annie | June 11, 2016 at 06:50 PM
hi david, i'd invite you to update your canada flu saga with a post for us whenever you want == dan
Posted by: Dan Olmsted | June 11, 2016 at 10:48 AM
John, Thanks for telling us (as you have before) about the meager annual "flu deaths" in the UK being way under 100, and how you Brits are also lied to. BUT, in Canada (and perhaps the U.S. also - I have to double check) it even gets more bizarre about lying about flu deaths.
Canada's Public Health Agency clearly states a "flu-associated" death does not have to be attributable to influenza. "A POSITIVE LABORATORY TEST IS SUFFICIENT FOR REPORTING (emphasis by me)." YET, it is still reported as a flu death. See the last line in their official Note below:
"Note: Influenza-associated hospitalizations are not reported to PHAC by the following Provinces and Territory: BC, NU, and QC. Only hospitalizations that require intensive medical care are reported by SK. ICU admissions are not distinguished among hospital admissions reported from ON. Data may also include cases reported by the IMPACT networks. The number of new influenza-associated hospitalizations and deaths reported for the current week may include cases from ON that occurred in previous weeks, as a result of retrospective updates to the cumulative total. It is important to note that the hospitalization or death does not have to be attributable to influenza, a positive laboratory test is sufficient for reporting."
I hammer on the outright lies about fabricated flu deaths because it is beyond criminality when the U.S. CDC promotes TWO flu shots for infants, the first shot at 6 months, the second shot 4 weeks later, and these shots are but 1/2 the syringe volume for adults. So, over 4 weeks an infant of maybe 10 pounds receives the same dosage as a 200 pound adult. And for decades Thimerosal was in every flu shot, and even today if the shot comes from a multi-dose container. And even the single shots have traces of Thimerosal amounting to billions of mercury atoms. AND, even smaller premature infants get injected with syringe doses as if they were full term! On top of all this, the infant's mother has been ALSO been coerced to get a flu shot while pregnant, thereby exposing her developing fetus to all the dose's toxins including Thimerosal's ethymercury.
WHEN ARE THESE CDC CRIMINALS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR CRIMES?
Posted by: david m burd | June 11, 2016 at 10:20 AM
James Grundvig,
"But don’t hold your breath until a new president can clean out the executive rot inside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention"
The President can appoint a CDC Director without Senate confirmation, unlike appointing an NIH or FDA director. However, there are major steps required in order for a CDC Director to be appointed who would 'clean house'. First, given the obvious political resistance, the President would have to be HIGHLY motivated to want to change the type of person leading the CDC. The only candidate who has made any statements about problems with e.g. vaccines is Trump, and that was only during questioning in one of the debates. He never mentions it at rallies, and I don't believe it is anywhere near one of his high priorities. Clinton, Sanders, and Cruz seem comfortable with the status quo.
But, even if the President wanted to change the CDC leadership, where would he/she find the typically high profile person ordinarily selected for such a position who shared the President's view on vaccines? The high profile researchers/physicians tend to be solidly pro-vaccine.
But, even if the President found someone to appoint with an open mind towards vaccines, what would the President do about the other components of the biomedical infrastructure? The FDA approves and regulates vaccines. The NIH performs research on vaccines. NIAID (NIH) conducts and supports research on new and improved vaccines and is a worldwide leader in the basic immunology research that underpins all vaccine research and development. The Directors of FDA and NIH require Senate confirmation.
Right now, there is a unified front among the above Federal agencies on the 'safety' of vaccines. There is no way the Senate would confirm FDA and NIH Directors who would agree with a CDC 'renegade' on vaccine safety. A situation where the CDC questioned vaccine safety and the NIH/FDA said there is no safety problem would lead to chaos. I see no Presidential candidate willing to create such a situation.
The problem is further compounded by the lack of support the infrastructure base would give to a transformed CDC. The medical schools, researchers, clinicians, are almost solidly behind the present pro-vaccine approach. There is no way the Federal agencies responsible for vaccine research and oversight could oppose the infrastructure base that is actually doing the research and administering the vaccines. They depend heavily on the infrastructure base of experts.
Here's the problem, James. The people at all levels of vaccine promotion and oversight are more interested in 'doing well' than 'doing good' (no different from most people in most professions in our society). 'Doing well' requires they get money from Federal or corporate sponsors to advance their careers, and pro-vax promulgation is the path to that success today. No different from the politicians, who find a pro-vax stance insures influxes of funds from campaign donors. Until this intrinsic conflict is overcome, I don't see vaccine trend reversal in any meaningful way.
Posted by: Ronald Kostoff | June 11, 2016 at 10:17 AM
Linda: "Doctors are standing up and publicly taking a stand."
Yes, like Dr Rachael Ross of The Doctors @ 15.12:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXUhT_zAzcU&list=PLeiMYLBd1wS532MVnBAWfB8xb8_-mpQem
Posted by: ATSC | June 11, 2016 at 08:54 AM
David
Similar lies about flu mortality have been documented in the UK. An average 33 deaths were being recorded a year when the Department of Health was claiming 12,000 or more.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/sir-liams-skeleton-the-uk-department-of-health-fabricates-flu-deaths-to-boost-vaccination.html
Posted by: John Stone | June 11, 2016 at 08:46 AM
To those who have wondered about autism rates in Canada: Canada's Public Health Agency is very similar to the U.S. CDC, and completely lies about their annual flu deaths, to fear monger and promote flu shots. Just like the U.S. CDC lying every year about 35,000 annual U.S. flu deaths, Canada's officials tout 3,500 flu deaths each year. In fact, actual truthful medically reported flu-associated deaths have for many years been down in the hundreds for both countries.
Here's the Canada Public Health Agency quote:
"What health professionals need to know about flu: Influenza is a highly contagious respiratory infection. It is caused primarily by the influenza A and B viruses. Seasonal influenza causes approximately 12,200 hospitalizations and 3,500 deaths in Canada each year."
It's clear that Western allopathic health agencies are as dishonest as it gets, in order to put fear into the populace and exert their CONTROL over everyone. As is happening right now with the laughable Zika "threat". No fiction writer can ever outdo what happens in real life when it comes to government agencies manipulating and controlling a docile gulllible public.
Posted by: david m burd | June 11, 2016 at 08:04 AM
@Kostoff, Linda,
It is the following that rings true to me and leads me to believe that such efforts are not in vain. Wakefield - according to the American political activist John Jay Chapman's definition of the term - is a true radical, and such radicals tend to create the circumstances for change on a scale hitherto inconceivable.
'The radicals are really always saying the same thing. They do not change; everybody else changes. They are accused of the most incompatible crimes, of egoism and mania for power, indifference to the fate of their own cause, fanaticism, triviality, want of humour, buffoonery and irreverence. But they sound a certain note. Hence the great power of consistent radicals. To all appearance nobody follows them, yet everyone believes them. They hold a tuning fork and sound A, and everyone knows it really is A, though the time-honoured pitch is G#. The community cannot get that A out of its head. Nothing can prevent an upward tendency in the popular tone so long as the real A is kept sounding.'
Posted by: Eddie Unwind | June 11, 2016 at 07:29 AM
annie -- you can spell my name any way you want as long as i can count on your vote on election day. my platform -- no mandates. informed consent. parents rule!
Posted by: Dan Olmsted | June 11, 2016 at 07:24 AM
Dr. Kostoff,
"I'll believe 'it's over' when I see State mandates being reversed, REAL safety studies performed, the Schedule being reduced, injury liability restored to the manufacturers, serious Congressional hearings, and other TANGIBLE accomplishments. "
Of course. Let me be more specific. There has been a tremendous breakthrough in mainstream media reporting. They're actually reporting and reporters are actually going to see the movie. Dr. Wakefield is being treated with respect. Flashback to the disgraceful Anderson Cooper interview and compare. The truth is being brought to thousands of people now via the film and via a cooperative media. That's huge. Doctors are standing up and publicly taking a stand. This is the first step, the fall of the first block. The others that you list cannot stand without this first block in place. It's all coming down.
Posted by: Linda1 | June 11, 2016 at 06:39 AM
In the UK we have comparable rates of autism to the US. We don't vaccinate infants routinely against Hep B or Chicken Pox but at the present time the schedule is impressively long (again we don't have mandates just a compliant population and no real informed consent):
8 weeks
5-in-1 vaccine – this single jab contains vaccines to protect against five separate diseases: diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough (pertussis), polio and Haemophilus influenzae type b (known as Hib – a bacterial infection that can cause severe pneumonia or meningitis in young children)
Pneumococcal (PCV) vaccine
Rotavirus vaccine
Men B vaccine (NEW vaccine introduced September 2015)
12 weeks
5-in-1 vaccine, second dose
Men C vaccine
Rotavirus vaccine, second dose
16 weeks
5-in-1 vaccine, third dose
Pneumococcal (PCV) vaccine, second dose
Men B vaccine second dose (NEW vaccine introduced September 2015)
One year
Hib/Men C booster, given as a single jab containing meningitis C (second dose) and Hib (fourth dose)
Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, given as a single jab
Pneumococcal (PCV) vaccine, third dose
Men B vaccine, third dose (NEW vaccine introduced September 2015)
2-6 years (including children in school years 1 and 2)
Children's flu vaccine (annual)
3 years and 4 months
Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, second dose
4-in-1 pre-school booster, given as a single jab containing vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough (pertussis) and polio
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/pages/vaccination-schedule-age-checklist.aspx?tabname=NHS%20vaccination%20schedule
Some of these vaccines have been added on relatively recently and will not yet have influence the already very high numbers of autism cases in our schools, but the gung-ho approach to adding on to the schedule is very much part of the culture.
Posted by: John Stone | June 11, 2016 at 05:53 AM
Linda1,
"Short of having the military force vaccinations on the population of this country, it's over. The lies are being brought to light."
I'll believe 'it's over' when I see State mandates being reversed, REAL safety studies performed, the Schedule being reduced, injury liability restored to the manufacturers, serious Congressional hearings, and other TANGIBLE accomplishments.
Posted by: Ronald Kostoff | June 11, 2016 at 05:37 AM
Which would have been much more flattering had I spelled his name correctly........
sorry Mr. OlmstEd
Posted by: annie | June 11, 2016 at 12:30 AM
Birgit, good luck finding an autism prevalence rate for Canada. Over a decade ago our government conducted an ad hoc survey in Eastern Canada, reporting a rate of 1 in 91, but since then nothing has been done. When autism is brought up in the news here, instead, they defer to the US rate of 1 in 68. Often they just report the rate without mentioning that they're referencing the CDC. And why is there no effort to determine a rate for Canada? I would have to agree with you that we are too scared to look
http://autismontario.novosolutions.net/default.asp?id=133&Lang=1&SID=
Posted by: Greg | June 10, 2016 at 10:39 PM
Short of having the military force vaccinations on the population of this country, it's over. The lies are being brought to light.
****************
Totally agree, the vaccine lie is over.
Parents worldwide are waking up to the truth about what vaccines have done to their babies. And in most cases, they're remembering that they were tricked into holding their babies down, so those vaccines COULD be injected !!!
I would say that anyone who had anything to do with this crime, OR the effort to cover it up, would do well to abandon their tired old propaganda. And start looking a good place to hide.
Because there's gong to hell to pay for this one.
Posted by: Barry | June 10, 2016 at 10:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjap6w5lrY
"Chaffetz and Love Send Reps to Vaxxed Full House. Pls Thank Them!"
Posted by: Linda1 | June 10, 2016 at 09:39 PM
@Birgit Calhoun, and Everybody,
Never, ever, trust what Wikipedia says. NEVER, EVER, though of course they have facts such as birth dates, etc., that are correct.
On anything else that is subjective, Wikipedia is worthless - or promotes outright lies.
Posted by: david m burd | June 10, 2016 at 09:00 PM
Linda1,
I hope you are right that it is over.
Unfortunately, although the things you listed are good signs I don't think it is over yet. The purchase of film rights does not necessarily mean that the film will be made; in fact such a purchase can be used to delay/prevent the making of a film.
Pharma may very well be wounded right now. However, please remember the old saying: a wounded animal is a dangerous animal.
Posted by: Carolyn M | June 10, 2016 at 08:29 PM
Birgit,
I've read that non-English speaking countries have a fraction of the autism the US and UK do, doubtless because we give the most vaccines. I read that Sweden has an autism rate of three in 10,000, the same as ours in the '70s, before the vaccine epidemic started. It seems strange that journalists have not investigated this and written and done TV programs about the huge difference, and brought up the question of why? How can there be such a vast discrepancy and no one is aware of it?
Posted by: cia parker | June 10, 2016 at 07:33 PM
Dr. Kostoff,
"The only way the larger problem can be turned around is with a complete revamping of Congress, the Executive Branch, and their step-child, the Courts."
The one thing that tyranny must have in order to succeed is soldiers on the ground. When the people and the providers "stand up and rise up" (to quote the amazing Sheila Ealey), it will turn around. And it is turning around right now because of Vaxxed. If you haven't seen these, please do:
https://vimeo.com/167832832
“Get off the bus!” Sheila Lewis Ealey unites Compton!
ABC News (ABC News was the outlet that chopped Del Bigtree's 20 minute interview into 5 seconds a few months ago. See the change in reporting - see the physician's statement at the end of the article and the 2 embedded videos):
http://ktul.com/news/local/autism-film-vaxxed-now-playing-in-tulsa
Atlanta OB/GYN Kathryn Hale, MD, MPH:
http://www.abundanthealthlife.com/vaxxed/
The Vaxxed filmmakers have been meeting with state and federal legislators. Robert De Niro is in the process of making his own documentary with one of the most powerful producers in Hollywood. The rights to Dr. Wakefield's book, Callous Disregard, and his life have been purchased by Hollywood's most successful screenwriter.
Short of having the military force vaccinations on the population of this country, it's over. The lies are being brought to light.
Posted by: Linda1 | June 10, 2016 at 07:16 PM
I just learned from Wikipedia that vaccination in Germany is recommended by the health administration, and not mandatory.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | June 10, 2016 at 06:29 PM
I don't know how vaccines are applied in Germany today. When I went to school there, all children were vaccinated at school. I don't remember if parents had to sign something. One of the vaccines was for smallpox, the other polio. That was in the '40s and '50s.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | June 10, 2016 at 06:22 PM
I endorse Dan Olmstead for president. :)
Posted by: annie | June 10, 2016 at 06:00 PM
Of course it matters which children are counted and whether they stop counting. For all I know the European countries also want to downplay their own vaccine/autism connection. Still, it would be nice to see a break-down of each individual European country and Canada and how that compares to the corresponding vaccination schedules.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | June 10, 2016 at 05:42 PM
Dan Olmsted, Thanks for your call for calm.
Unfortunately, such policies (aka politics) manifest in taking in immigrants such as the Muslim Somalis, particularly into Minnesota, have wrought havoc - not just regarding their coming into an alien culture - BUT - poisoning their Somali children with incredibly dogmatic vaccinations dictated by our insane medical system.
AND, now, with quite a few of these Minnesota Somalis heading out to join the ISIS Jihad around the planet.
Thus we have the worst of all worlds: Terribly disabled Somali Muslim families via vaccinations living in a frigid climate opposite their climate in homeland Africa, but also being dependent upon an American Health System that actually caused their misery and dependence. And Islamic jihad in our midst.
There's many crucial factors in this whole Immunization/Immigration Disaster -- and, Yes - it is NOT completely specific to our Republican/Democrat politics.
BUT, I've got news for all: "The sky is blue, the world is round, and vaccinations cause autism."
Posted by: david m burd | June 10, 2016 at 05:08 PM
The German schedule definitely has less vaccines on it than the American (certainly no hep b at birth) and likely there are no mandated regarding school. Since there are fewer, cooperation may be higher.
Posted by: @Birgit | June 10, 2016 at 04:00 PM
Hi David
London, where I live, is multi-cultural. We have a new mayor of London who is a Muslim - I just saw him sitting in St Paul's Cathedral (on the TV) at the Queen's 90th birthday celebration. I and the majority of Londoners prefered him to the other guy who was presumably Christian, and of part Jewish origins. I am surrounded in our part of town by friendly Muslims who I meet every day. It would appall me if these people felt they were under attack for who they are - that is terrifying feeling which I know - and it would lead to a deterioration of civil life. We have on the whole managed our problems better than the French.
Other than that I hope our message on this site is for everyone.
Posted by: John Stone | June 10, 2016 at 03:42 PM
John Stone: PS
Thanks for your incredible efforts on the children and their families, it's a given!
As a personal note (to All), when I have gone to England over the decades I truly enjoyed the British/Irish/Scottish culture. And when I've gone to Japan I actually wanted to experience THEIR culture. Going to Switzerland I enjoy THIER Swiss culture. On and on.
THE LAST thing I want to see is your English/UK culture being drowned by an immigrant Islamic flood that has been idiotically allowed to take over much of your country. And that also applies to our U.S.A. with our Judeo-Christian Founding and Judeo-Christian Values, the true strength of our country.
IF I want to experience Islamic/muslim culture I can go elsewhere such as the Middle East. If all this offends others I accept your wrath -- so be it.
Thanks again John for your immense efforts.
Posted by: david m burd | June 10, 2016 at 02:56 PM
cmon gang let's let trump and clinton be. i am not interested in a political argument when there is so much we agree on ... we cannot and do not and have not and will not endorse anyone for president. -- dan
Posted by: Dan Olmsted | June 10, 2016 at 02:44 PM
John Stone, Just so you get it straight, Donald Trump is against ILLEGAL immigrants who have broken our U.S. law by ILLEGALLY creeping into our country, the United States of America.
NO other country in the world - correct me if I'm wrong - closes their eyes to such ILLEGALS.
Also, as to your comment also condemning Trump's view of "minorities" -- Donald Trump is referring specifically to Islamic muslims applying for entry to the U.S. Might you think about the endless Islamic terrorists' carnage going on for years?! In every country in the World, and, has happened often here in the U.S., the most obvious the recent slaughter in San Bernadino in California by the Islamic/muslim couple.
John, finally, as to medical politics on many issues -- predominately and crucially -- the UK and the USA vaccination carnage is as political as it gets (as you of course know). THE FUTURE of the UK and the USA depend on stopping this through politics perhaps more than any other venue, BECAUSE the medical establishments are hopelessly corrupt and WILL NEVER admit to their horrors.
Posted by: david m burd | June 10, 2016 at 02:27 PM
So if the Utah autism rate in Caucasian kids is 1 in 25, the rate in boys is 1 in 17, or 6%. You would think someone would be alarmed (other than us)...
@ronald kostoff: the system will change when enough parents refuse to vaccinate. That will happen when enough parents are more afraid of the vaccines than the illnesses they target. So what we do on an individual basis to increase awareness is important. Each person who wakes up helps spread the real information. Coupled with the scary and ever-increasing rates of vaccine injury, things will change. The only question is how many millions of kids will be seriously injured first, and whether we will still be viable as a nation-state when we finally stop.
Posted by: Tim Lundeen | June 10, 2016 at 02:24 PM
Birgit
It is a bit vague, and also these are no doubt projections for entire populations rather than children. What we are seeing in the US and the UK is the rate soaring every year for children since 1988. Quite a lot of them of course will now be adults.
WHO say 1 child in 160
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/autism-spectrum-disorders/en/
The British government said it was 1 in 100 in 2004 but afterwards they stopped counting.
Posted by: John Stone | June 10, 2016 at 01:03 PM
I just checked with a German autism website. They don't have statistics for Germany. Their statistics are based on a combination of Europe, Canada and the United States: http://www.autismus.de/was-ist-autismus.html
By what I can tell the rate of all autism in those countries seems to indicate that 1 in 143 children has an Autism Spectrum Disorder. I am wondering why the rate is so different here in the US. What are those countries doing that is different and better?
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | June 10, 2016 at 12:29 PM
Ronald,
Even when Congress holds hearing, nothing is done. In May 1999, there was a congressional hearing on the safety of the hep-B vaccine. It found that it was not safe and that mercury should be withdrawn from it forthwith. Merck said that it would stop making it with mercury, but continued to sell its mercury-containing stock until its expiration date several years later. So, regardless of the findings that the vaccine was dangerous, and it should not be made with mercury, Capital Region Medical Center in Jefferson City, Missouri, gave it to my newborn at midnight the day she was born, May 5, 2000, without permission and despite my having told her future pediatrician a month before that I did not want her to get that shot, as I had read it often caused autism. She reacted with vaccine encephalitic screaming syndrome AND symptoms of mercury toxicity. She was later diagnosed with autism. The hospital broke three federal laws: giving the vaccine without permission, without giving me the vaccine information sheet with symptoms of vaccine reaction (a few of them), and failing to keep the brand and lot number of the vaccine until she was 21. It also failed in its duty to not give a vaccine found in the congressional hearing to be dangerous, or at least not to give it without permission. And no one cares. I realized what had happened after the statute of limitation for Vaccine Court had lapsed.
The vaccine issue, including every level of the medical system, all branches of government, the academic system, and the media, is totally controlled by the vaccine industry, and it's hard to see how anything will be accomplished until most parents are willing to engage in civil disobedience, if necessary, to refuse the vaccines they don't want regardless of mandates. And willing to research the issue before requesting any vaccine.
Posted by: cia parker | June 10, 2016 at 12:15 PM
Posted by: Greg | June 10, 2016 at 11:01 AM
Ignoring politics is like ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Politics is central to any real progress on a number of health issues, including autism.
We have a government-industrial-media complex (GIMC) that essentially controls the USA and much of the world. In particular, the GIMC controls what enters the market, how it is tested, and how it is regulated. The central problem with vaccines (and wireless radiation, glyphosate, atrazine, fluoridation, biosludge, astroturf, etc) is that no credible safety testing has been done, is being done, or is projected to be done. There is no political oversight on the regulatory agencies with respect to health impacts, and Congress is more than happy with that situation.
The only way the larger problem can be turned around is with a complete revamping of Congress, the Executive Branch, and their step-child, the Courts. I see no credible pathway for accomplishing this, and, in fact, the trends are in the opposite direction. The money required for national political campaigns is so large that those mainly subservient to the funding arms of the GIMC will be our choices.
Whoever becomes President will be able to do little about health improvement from the above (and many other) causes of illness. Congressional action is required to modify the laws, fund the regulators, and hold hearings when performers are not doing their jobs. Do you see any of this happening?
The Presidential candidates available are the worst I can remember for protecting the public against myriad causes of ill-health. Jill Stein is probably the best overall (for all the potential causes of disease, not only vaccines); she has zero chance of being elected. Sanders was probably next best; unless Hillary gets indicted, he is out of the game. Trump may offer a very slight glimmer of hope for the vaccine issue, but I don't see him doing anything on the many other causes of disease mentioned above. Additionally, given his recent actions since he became the presumptive nominee, it's not clear to me that he really wants the job of President. I don't see Hillary doing very much to change the status quo; her views on vaccines have been well-reported on AoA.
Posted by: Ronald Kostoff | June 10, 2016 at 09:06 AM
Apologies!
Last sentence should read 'We should allow room for the development of science and therefore our children'.
Posted by: Eddie Unwind | June 10, 2016 at 08:49 AM
For me as a parent, the fact that vaccines are linked to plethora of neurological disorders etc signifies something barely discussed, yet in a young child may amount to the most horrific of consequences. I'm speaking of the degree of potential spiritual (as well as psychic) damage. You may term it something else, say, Non-Corporeal Transcendence, if you want a more catchy-sounding term, but ultimately it really doesn't matter.
Anybody dismissing the degree of its importance, or believing it to be a mere side-issue, is, to say the least, out of touch. In his wonderful appendix to The Devils of Loudun, Aldous Huxley makes plain that we are all instinctively oriented towards this type of transcendence. He divides it into three categories; upward, horizontal, and downward. By far the majority are all too familiar with the downward kind of transcendence, 'achieved' (I use the term tentatively, for obvious reasons) via the use of drugs, alcohol, 'herd-intoxication', and so on.
Of course Huxley himself - as The Doors of Perception makes plain - experimented with mescaline. But this invalidates nothing pertaining to the veracity of his previous observations (in the appendix), since the facts of drug-induced transcendence and the tragic consequences which routinely follow are so overwhelmingly apparent as to be self-evident, as are the forms of creative transcendence via invention etc both for better and for worse (horizontal) and the unadorned spiritual kind (upward).
Often the most obvious of facts such as this eludes us. Yet no normally receptive parent is immune to the spiritual dimensions of their own child. Rather, you could pretty much say that a baby is virtually all spirit, since they have not yet formed any clear distinctions regarding their experience of the world. The categories that distinguish and compartmentalise our sense of reality as we get older simply do not exist for them. The pain from a bang on the head is not pinpointed or located; it possesses them. The same is true of their joys and tantrums, which at that moment define their whole existence, igniting a sense of wonder in the parent who immediately recognises the totality of their sentiment. The same is true of their imagination, via which the vividness of their experiences cannot be adequately conveyed and yet is something observed by their parents day in day out.
Observable in equal measure is the grotesque pattern of behaviour whereby those lacking or fearful of a child's capacity for sensitivity and receptiveness cannot resist the tendency - as it is unfortunately perhaps the most wretched aspect of our condition - to try and stamp it out, often through mockery, sarcasm, as well as accompanying forms of emotional and physical abuse.
But vaccines might just be doing the work for the wretched among us. We simply have no idea what degree of spiritual damage the current vaccine schedule may inflict upon children, since we as yet have not the science to investigate such matters. But given our constant preoccupation with non-corporeal transcendence and the fact that the experience of children is a constant play on this very theme, the importance of this issue cannot be underestimated. To the contrary, it is perhaps the most essential thing for all human beings.
In short, since a baby possesses the near-divine inability to not distinguish between corporeal and incorporeal worlds, if you damage a baby's brain, you damage their entire spiritual nature. To dismiss this on the basis that such damage cannot be measured is not merely an incredibly primitive assumption, but establishes the most dangerous kind of precedent and ideology.
We must allow room for science, and therefore, our children.
Posted by: Eddie Unwind | June 10, 2016 at 08:05 AM
Hans
It seems likely from the unpublicised British figures that the rate could now be 1 in 20 among younger children in the UK. In the case of the Korean study it can't really be separated from the attempt to create customers for the pharmaceutical products AS were hoping to develop (I don't know where that is now that Dawson, Ring and Wang have all departed) but it is notable that three-quarters of the positively screened children in that study had been withdrawn by their families before the project was completed, so there was evidently an air of mistrust. On the other hand with the Scottish figures I cited these are actual diagnoses which the government aren't keen to brag about.
Posted by: John Stone | June 10, 2016 at 04:55 AM
ATSC
The true rate of Autism is smthg like 1 in 30 or greater .
Stephanie Seneff's shock predictions are really not nearly such a surprise when you know the facts .
South Korea returned 1 in 38 five or so years ago .
The Somalian Community of the WEST is returning 1 in 8
The Ugandan community of North Germany is returning 1 in 6
The rate amongst white children in Utah is 1 in 25 (Zimmerman)
1 in 2 is the new reality . Anything else is just an accounting trick .
This is PharmaGeddon . The Autism Holocaust ,
Colleen Boyle is going to Jail for life . Gerberding her cellmate .
Posted by: Hans Litten | June 10, 2016 at 04:20 AM
Del Bigtree on the William Thompson U turn :
"if they dare try re-working the data , I'll bury them with it"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXUhT_zAzcU&list=PLeiMYLBd1wS532MVnBAWfB8xb8_-mpQem
Posted by: Sophie Scholl | June 10, 2016 at 01:53 AM
John Dan Stone , you commented recently that you thought the tide may have turned to some extent in our favour . As pleased as I was to read that , I was wondering what caused you to draw that conclusion (because you've always been so conservative of our chances in the past) .
I've watched the wonderful Chicago Autism One conference on YouTube year after year but playing to half empty audiences . But wow look at it this year . JUST YOU LOOK :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXUhT_zAzcU&list=PLeiMYLBd1wS532MVnBAWfB8xb8_-mpQem
Posted by: Sophie Scholl | June 10, 2016 at 01:43 AM
Autism is a worldwide problem.
There are some interesting graphs on this page showing Autism prevalence in Australia:
http://www.a4.org.au/prevalence2015
"In 2012, A4 observed that at least 1 in 63 Australian school children has a formal autism diagnosis".
And in New Zealand:
http://www.autismnz.org.nz/about_us/news/world_autism_awareness_day_2014
"It is estimated that 1 in every 88 children is on the autism spectrum. Based on this figure – that’s approximately 50,000 Kiwis, and the number is growing daily. "
"Growing daily" and yet twenty plus years ago, most doctors had never met a child with autism, and very few people had even heard the word, but it has become so commonplace today that everyone knows someone on the spectrum, and no one is concerned, apparently. Reminds me of boiling the frog:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
Posted by: ATSC | June 10, 2016 at 12:48 AM
If we can't talk about politics, we can't really talk about autism.
And, friends should be able to talk about anything. I am appreciative to hear all views. I find the exchange edifying regardless of whether I agree or not.
Posted by: Linda1 | June 09, 2016 at 10:48 PM
If you talk to the other side they will tell us autism is genetic and there is no reason to believe any race is more or less affected.
*****************
Sure. Today's autistic children all 'inherited' it from their parents.
None of whom.... have it.
Posted by: Barry | June 09, 2016 at 10:01 PM
If you talk to the other side they will tell us autism is genetic and there is no reason to believe any race is more or less affected. They will also add that minority kids are usually under diagnosed. So, in sum, we can expect the real Utah autism rate to be 1 in 25 affected kids. Think about that again. 1 in 25 Utah kids have autism! And, if Utah has the best surveillance methods, and presumably the most accurate numbers, that rate should hold true for the entire US.
For the life of it, I will never understand why so few care about the autism holocaust, or even see it.
Posted by: Greg | June 09, 2016 at 07:16 PM
Bob Moffit: I always appreciate what you have to say here, and I'm not certain I've ever told you so.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | June 09, 2016 at 07:01 PM
John Stone: Comment all you want on our politics, as far as I'm concerned; you always have something thoughtful and edifying to say. I spent 15 hours on Tuesday helping at the polls (lots of first-time voters), and thanking people for coming out, even though I left my own ballot largely blank, and am completely cynical about government. I've been voting since 1970, and I've never seen anything as ridiculous as this election in my time. In any case, it matters little who is elected President. Congress holds the purse strings, and we know how honorable they are. The anger the public feels is in our favor in turning the tide on forced vaccination, and that anger will not be going away any time soon, since the basis of much of it is economic.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | June 09, 2016 at 06:58 PM
Bob... I'm not American but I am on this side of the pond — and on a clear day I can see the Adirondacks. Do I get to tell you what I think of your presidential politics?
It's a rhetorical question because like Dan I've sworn an oath of silence on Trump, at least in this forum. But you should realize that people all around the world are expressing legitimate concerns about who your next president will be.
Posted by: Cait from Canada | June 09, 2016 at 06:27 PM
John .. trust me .. as I said .. with the greatest of respect .. I am not "offended" by your views on U.S. presidential primaries .. but .. in all honesty .. I do not feel AoA is the proper forum for personal "political opinions".
Maybe it is just me .. but .. I believe our AoA community already has enough issues that divide us .. without adding personal political opinions to the mix .. such as .. what 'menaces minorities" .. or .. is considered "scary to vulnerable people".
Just my own personal opinion ... hopefully no offense taken .. because .. trust me .. no offense intended.
Posted by: Bob Moffit | June 09, 2016 at 06:14 PM
But Bob I won't be offended if you offer your views on Brexit. Or any British politician.
Posted by: John Stone | June 09, 2016 at 05:12 PM
Great article, great series, thank you AoA and James.....yes, Colleen Boyle is quite the grotesquerie .... this one's for you, Colleen:
"I am gross and perverted, I'm obsessed 'n deranged, I have existed for years but very little has changed
I'm the tool of the government and industry too for I am destined to rule and regulate you
I may be vile and pernicious but you can't look away
I make you think I'm delicious with the stuff that I say
I'm the best you can get have you guessed me yet? I'm the (pHarma) slime oozin' out
from your TV set
You will obey me while I lead you and eat the garbage that I feed you until the day that we don't need you don't go for help . . . no one will heed you
your mind is totally controlled It has been stuffed into my mold and you will do as you are told until the rights to you are sold
That's right, folks . . .don't touch that dial....."
-Frank Zappa (mostly)
Posted by: Ottoschnaut | June 09, 2016 at 04:56 PM
just saw some archive of Hillary from 2006 saying she wanted to build a wall between the US and Mexico . There is no escaping the politics Dan .
Everything about Vaccine derived Autism hinges on Politics (and pressuring them to do the right thing and investigate the truth ). But they wont - may the CULL continue (for that is what it is). Anyone shocked by my opinion needs to immerse themselves are great deal further for no other logical conclusion can be reached (incredibly they have turned genocide into a profitable business - they must be so proud) .
Bilbergers meeting in Dresden today !
Posted by: Sophie Scholl | June 09, 2016 at 04:42 PM
@ John Stone
"I think Dan was appalled by the way Trump was menacing minorities. You have no idea how scary some of this talk is to vulnerable people. The fact that he might have some modestly sensible opinions on vaccination doesn't make the rest alright. But Hilary is a horror show and a half too."
Am hoping you will agree with Dan:
"I've taken a vow of silence on trump. my opinion doesn't matter any more or less than anyone else's. now that we're a nonprofit we won't and can't endorse anyone for president, not that we ever have. aoa is a welcoming forum for any and all political views. -- dan"
-----------------------------------------------
My friend .. believe me when I say with the greatest of respect .. I promise to stay silent on Brexit .. but .. would appreciate the same from the "other side of the pond" on our national presidential politics.
Posted by: Bob Moffit | June 09, 2016 at 04:13 PM
Have just checked the website of the UK's National Autistic Society and read their statement re link between MMR and autism. They state 'there is no link' and 'believe no further attention or research funding towards examining a link...' Part of their evidence is 'doctor struck off' and they direct you to the BBC website! There is more on that page, but you get the drift.
This is where people with children diagnosed with autism would go for help and advice! The corruption in UK is just as insidious as US, but we have further to go because parents are less aware here. I agree with you, John, about the BBC. They are completely biased, but I think they are under the thumb of our totally corrupt Government.
Bring Vaxxed to UK - be interesting to see the Government's response
Posted by: susan | June 09, 2016 at 02:59 PM
I watched as whole towns that never had a case of Autism suddenly have Autistic kids on every block within about 6 years time directly after the increase in vaccines. That was before most of the food became GMO, before much of the Chemtrails and so on. Today the cause is being obfuscated by pointing the blame onto the environment-It's the water some say, it's the air.. its the soil, its the food… While the water, air, food is getting mucked up and can contribute to illnesses such as cancers and other diseases, Brain Encephalitis aka Autism is from kids being shot with vaccines. There are so many scholars playing the middle line by pointing to the environment as it is safe but that does no favor to the cause at hand.
Posted by: Shelley Tzorfas | June 09, 2016 at 02:52 PM
UGH!!! The wretched minions at the CDC do not get to have it both ways!
They do not get to say that too many parents are erroneously not following the vaccine schedule due to a false belief that vaccines are linked to autism AND THEN say, see, the autism rate has plateaued.
"Correlation is not causation", we need "community immunity". Science is not a catch phrase!!!
I realize that the article clearly points out that the rate has not actually plateaued, but I just felt compelled to point out the disconnect.
PS: Thank you SO MUCH to ALL of the brilliant and brave editors and commentators here at AoA for all the work you do...... no matter which demagogue in our wretched two party system you support for president.
Posted by: Annie | June 09, 2016 at 01:59 PM
It helps understanding where Coleen Boyle is coming from when looking for what role she played and is now playing at the CDC.
How did she get to be in charge of birth defects? It wasn't because of compassion for those poor souls who were affected by Agent Orange (let's not forget it contains dioxin) or any other toxic substance. She was put there to protect the use of Agent Orange and the companies that make it as a tool in warfare.
She was, I am guessing, put there to make sure that toxic substances needed for nefarious government and warfare programs could be maintained in the capacity for which they were manufactured. With that mindset, it is not far-fetched to assume that her mission has always been one to protect the manufacturing end of toxins. Hint Agent Orange is not the only toxic substance that causes birth defects. Why has she done nothing to get rid of Thimerosal from vaccines? Why has she done nothing to make sure that vaccines do not cause mitochondrial dysfunction etc.?
If indeed her mission was to prevent birth defects she did nothing to keep toxic substances from appearing in vaccines. She may be paid by the government, but she is a tool of the pharmaceutical industry and probably at the CDC to keep lawsuits from happening. Her background includes statistical analysis.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | June 09, 2016 at 01:32 PM
I've taken a vow of silence on trump. my opinion doesn't matter any more or less than anyone else's. now that we're a nonprofit we won't and can't endorse anyone for president, not that we ever have. aoa is a welcoming forum for any and all political views. -- dan
Posted by: Dan Olmsted | June 09, 2016 at 01:30 PM
Hans
I think Dan was appalled by the way Trump was menacing minorities. You have no idea how scary some of this talk is to vulnerable people. The fact that he might have some modestly sensible opinions on vaccination doesn't make the rest alright. But Hilary is a horror show and a half too.
Posted by: John Stone | June 09, 2016 at 12:41 PM
Dan Olmsted will be pleased , stopping Trump at all costs :
http://www.infowars.com/elizabeth-warren-ready-to-join-hillary-clinton-and-the-bankers/
And Elizabeth Warren was the interviewer of CDC: Schuchat is that sham propagaada .
Posted by: Hans Litten | June 09, 2016 at 11:01 AM
That autism has flatlined at 1:68 is a flat out lie. Ask any school board or teacher, especially a preschool or primary school teacher.
Posted by: Educator | June 09, 2016 at 11:01 AM
Hans
I wouldn't say it is led by the BBC. The BBC are always led by the government and its surrogate agencies like Sense About Science and Science Media Centre. Admittedly, the sanctamoniousness of the BBC is truly nauseating. But perhaps they are only taken seriously now by people of a certain generation.
Posted by: John Stone | June 09, 2016 at 10:45 AM
Love this :
"Remarkably, the CDC shot itself in the foot by introducing a new methodology in 2015 when it found a different way to count and backtest autism numbers. That method produced a whopping increase of 1 in 45, which exploded through the 1 in 68 ceiling claimed by CDC in March 2016."
Please , people of the Unites States , do not look anywhere else for answers but the US itself .
For the state censorship being exercised in the UK is astounding and omnipresent (all BBC led).
We hear nothing at all from the UK crimino-thorities anymore . Complete Silence .
Thanking Dr. Judith Pinborough-Zimmerman for doing a brilliant job , see William Thompson , that is how to do it properly .
Posted by: Hans Litten | June 09, 2016 at 09:29 AM
"It deserves more than that from CDC, NCBDDD, NIH, FDA and HHS. Those agencies, and the World Health Organization (WHO), must stop lying to the public and finally admit the “environmental” and “toxin” components to this crisis, and look at the bloated Vaccine Schedule and the toxins, such as thimerosal and aluminum, that can and have harmed a growing subpopulation of babies, infants and children, who are clearly “allergic” to those elements and cannot naturally chelate them out of their systems."
We are long past time for these public health "agencies" to "admit the environmental and toxin components to this crisis" .. as these agencies have proven themselves to be far more invested in "denying" the environment has anything to do with this crisis.
There is a stark difference between "search for truth" for what is CAUSING this CRISIS .. and .. what amounts to deliberate COVER-UP of disastrous consequences resulting from failed vaccine policies.
In my honest opinion .. the continual DENIAL of the CAUSE .. has become grounds for legal CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS.
Posted by: bob moffit | June 09, 2016 at 08:57 AM
Good Morning James
I must point out that the 1% autism figure for the UK population is just another political fix, which I have written about very extensively in these columns. The announcement of the 1% rate in British adults in autumn 2009, remarkably just as Kathleen Sebelius was talking about a 1% rate in US children, was always a fraud: a tenuous projection based on false methodology, and published with the political intent of denying that MMR was responsible for a rise in autism. This is not isolated from the issues you are talking about here because the fraudulent publication was often cited by Tom Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Heath and chair of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, both in publications and at the committee. It is no more separate from this story than the shenanigans you have reported on in Denmark. National Statistics in the UK with the help of the Department of Health also managed to freeze the childhood rate at 1% by ceasing to count after 2004.
However, the reality is very different. If National Statistics and the Department of Health stopped counting the children a dozen years ago, other parts of government did not. For instance, the most recent figure from Scottish schools - as of September 2015 - was 1 in 58 (11,722 out of 680,007). If you operate on the principle established by Baron-Cohen that there are two cases undiagnosed for every three diagnosed that would actually mean 1 in 35. But it is still worse again among younger childen: the rate has more than doubled since 2009 for a rolling cohort of 4 to 18 year-olds.
Additionally it has been pointed out to me that the US CDC does not include the figures on its list of international studies
http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/documents/asdprevalencedatatable2016.pdf
and the recent Assessment Report which has downgraded the figures from "National Statistics" to "experimental" and states regarding the 1% figure:
"HSCIC might have helpfully labelled these statistics as ‘experimental’ ... "HSCIC might consider when seeking to develop a new measure .... whether it is appropriate to label the statistics as ‘experimental’ until the fitness for purpose and robustness of the outcomes can be determined"
And that this was in consequence of:
".... a series of detailed questions ..... centred around:
-the indirect comparisons made between the prevalence of ASDs in adults (estimated at around one per cent from this study) and ASDs in children (estimated as around one per cent from other two other studies) and concerns that these measures are not comparable;
-and the sampling and estimation techniques applied in ASD 2007, and whether they introduced bias – for example, potential bias introduced by the under-count of missing people with more-severe mental health disorders. "
https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Assessment-Report-326-National-Study-of-Health-and-Wellbeing-in-England-Adult-Psychiatric-Morbidity-Survey.pdf
It might also be mentioned that UK citizens who are asked to take part in a "national health and wellbeing survey" should be warned that this is a mask for a "national mental health morbidity survey". It is, of course, illegal to obtain data with such a deception but that's a testament to how far government ethics have fallen.
Posted by: John Stone | June 09, 2016 at 06:08 AM