Waiting Room Observations
Levi Quackenboss On The Epidemic Of Coincidence Disorder

Dachel Wake Up: The Selling of Autism

Dachel Morning Wake UoBy Anne Dachel

Kids with autism, that mysterious disorder that we didn’t know anything about until about 25 years ago, are now a fact of life in America and around the world.  Autism happens--we need to learn to live with it.

These four stories demonstrate what I mean. No one cares WHY your child is autistic. There's nothing we can do about that. In fact, we don't even want to talk about it!

Autism has been mythologized into normal and acceptable "difference." It's along the same lines as near-sightedness and being left-handed. It's just the way some people are. The BEST way to do that is to have the press convince us with stories every hour on the news ...

...saying all we need to do is be aware, provide accommodations, and get involved

...attributing all the kids with autism to "better diagnosing" and "an expanded spectrum" and never admitting that there's been a true increase, no matter how bad the numbers are

...showing photos and videos of typical looking, happy kids playing or interacting with therapists ...evidence that autism isn't a really serious condition

...alleging that genes are involved...a subtle attempt to once again blame the parents

...talking about the research looking into the "mystery" of autism--evidence that we care about autism

 ...coining terms like "autism friendly" and "sensory friendly" to describe all the  accommodations we're forced to provide for this ever-increasing population that can't function under normal social conditions

...pretending that the recognized rate affects all age groups even though we're always talking about kids when autism is discussed

...never using words like "regression," "crisis," "epidemic," or "prevention" when talking about the disorder

July 17 SooToday.com Soo Ste. Marie, Ontario: Autism, the city, and a sensory playground

The AAF wants to partner more closely with the city in an ongoing effort to make municipal facilities and services more equitable to those with autism as well as partner to seek federal and provincial funding to accomplish those goals.

The AAF and the city are already working together.

They are currently engaged in a pilot project at the city-owned John Rhodes Centre Pool to create a once-a-week two hour-long ‘Sensitive Swim’, essentially a quieter hour for not just those with autism but anyone who finds loud noises and rushing water overwhelming.

The city also donated the property and all the labor for the construction of the new Adventure Playground and Interactive Sensory Play Area, or “sensory playground”, in Bellevue Park that will be officially opened the day after Monday’s council meeting.

There's this story from Ireland, and my family came from all over Ireland, that shows the numbers just don't matter anymore.  So they were wrong about the rate. It's really one in every 65 kids, not one in 100, like they previously thought. Two smiling ladies, one holding a book with puzzle pieces symbolizing autism are more proof that nothing is wrong. We just need to support these people.

July 15, 2016, Breaking News Ireland: 14,000 students in Ireland have a diagnosis of autism, new report reveals

One in every 65 students has a diagnosis of autism according to the recently released National Council for Special Education (NCSE) report.

This equates to approximately 14,000 students, much higher than the one in every 100 previously estimated.

The report is the first major report published by the body on the education of students with autism in almost 14 years.

 No one is ever concerned that stories about autism are exclusively about CHILDREN AND YOUNG ADULTS with autism and their needs. How can we neglect all the adults that are supposedly out there handicapped by the same disability? Or maybe the truth that anyone involved with autism knows is that WE DON'T HAVE AN ADULT POPULATION EVEN REMOTELY CLOSE TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH AUTISM.

If you want more proof of the big autism cover-up, look at what Congress just did. The Senate unanimously showed their concern for autism by funding for wandering and autism education. Tracking devices will be made available. Why we weren't worried about this twenty-five or fifty years ago is something we aren't willing to talk about. I hope Senator Charles Schumer is around in the coming years as hundreds of thousands of young adults with autism need a place to live and something to do.

 July 14, 2016, PIX11 New York, NY: Senate unanimously passes Avonte’s Law to prevent wandering from special needs individuals

 U.S. Senate has unanimously approved to pass a bipartisan bill known as Kevin and Avonte’s Law, which aims to help those with autism or other conditions that may wander away from their caregivers.

Named in honor of  Avonte Oquendo and Kevin Willis, two boys who perished after wandering, the bill would allocate funding to the appropriate agencies for more training programs and autism education. If approved, the law also provides access to resources for individuals who’ve become separated from their caregivers. Additionally, local tracking technology will made available if the individual has gone missing.

New York Senator Chuck Schumer, who originally proposed the bill, tweeted out the news.

Personally, I want to retitle this report as "Autism Hopelessness: Doctors haven't done a thing with autism research and they never will."

Senator Schumer has been involved in autism issues for the last few years. Still, he's not doing anything to address the cause of autism.

See our past coverage on Schumer and autism:

2014

2013

2012

What has been Senator Schumer's response to the charge that our top health care agency has covered up a link between vaccines and autism? Has anyone talked to him? Expressing concern over children with autism wandering off and dying is laudable, but it hardly addresses the health care emergency we all face. And if he's not interested in what's making our kids so sick, he better plan on providing millions of tracking devices because we're going to need them.

In talking about autism three years ago, Schumer called autism "an age-old problem." Has he bought into the no real increase claim? Autism has always been here, we just never did anything about it until now thanks to the efforts of people like Schumer.

July 13, 2016, NBC10 Rochester NY: Autism Hope: Doctors have made strides with autism research, but there's a long way left to go

VIDEO:

Anchor Janet: "[Autism is]...an issue facing an awful lot of families. ..."

Anchor Brett: "The developmental disorder is more common than you might think..."

Reporter Jennifer: "Autism was first recognized and described by medical professionals in the late 1930s, ... now with one every 68 children being born on the autism spectrum, the type of research has changed...."

Dr. John: "One of the extraordinary aspects of autism is just how little we know about the neuropathology. What is it about the brain that's gone awry that produces autism?...

"Here at the University of Rochester we have a superb system of clinics for capturing kids on the spectrum. We'd be one of the better places in the world at diagnosing early, following the children, really getting them involved in reach protocols.

"That gives us then potential targets to go after with interventions, therapies and drugs and so on."

Dr. John Fox isn't worried about WHY so many children have autism. He talks about genetic mutations and autism running in families. That fact that WE KNOW NOTHING FOR SURE ABOUT AUTISM is an "extraordinary aspect of autism."

This doctor and hundreds like him now make their living from autism. We all just have to accept kids ending up with a diagnosis, because, as the reporter said, children are "being born on the autism spectrum."

We're shown happy, attractive, engaged children. Autism isn't a bad thing--it's just the way some people are.

Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism.

Comments

Stagmon

E, you have told us you are autistic, yet here you tell us you have not been diagnosed. Adult diagnosis is uncommon, and fraught with self-diagnosis, which is not what Age of Autism community readers deal with in their / our kids.

Also, while our kids can have meltdowns, few of us would describe them as dangerously violent. Even the toughest rage, while appearing violent, stems from lack of ability to communicate opposed to sheer menace. What you describe as your family sounds almost feral.

But yes, police interaction is always a worry. Most of all for our kids who can not speak.

Kim

Elisivah Lanelle

Before regressing into a raging Autistic menace at the age of 38, I worked in the healthcare industry for the last ten years. The strangest phenomena here in Texas is the deliberate denial of coverage for services rendered with the diagnosis codes for Autism, ASD, Asperger's, and other Autistic billing codes. Also, I have been searching for an accurate diagnosis for my condition since 2009 (when I finally admitted I needed some help). I have been diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder... but am stunned to find that practitioners are absolutely refusing to give an adult an Autism diagnosis (except one I found this year who was actually willing to come to my home and treats adults with ASD). They won't even listen to me when I ask about it or question the diagnosis given me previously. Why is the medical community ignoring adult Autism in Texas? Texas Medicaid and some United Healthcare plans, specifically, will NOT pay for any services billed by providers with Autism diagnosis codes. There's something strange going on here. Also, why is my Autism getting worse? I am regressing to a teenage-like state!!! This is strange. And I am too tired now to get mad anymore. I just need some help. There seems to be none.

ATSC

Cia Parker,

Diagnosis of polio couldn't have been reliable until laboratory confirmation of cases began in 1958, one year after Dr David Rutstein wrote that article. I find it interesting that as a professor and head of the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Harvard Medical School faculty that this appears to be the only article he ever wrote about polio. Was he aware that the diagnostic criteria had changed in 1955, and that many other diseases and toxic poisoning clinically look like polio? Take the huge number of AFP cases in India - the only country that still manufactures DDT.

http://i1.wp.com/jeffreydachmd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Rise-of-Acute-Flaccid-Paralysis-AFP-and-Fall-of-Polio.jpg


"Is there evidence that in 1965 it only looked as though there were only 61 paralytic polio cases, when really there were the same 17,000 cases of paralysis there had been in the fifties? "

In order to be able to answer that question truthfully we would need to know how many of the reported cases of paralysis per year just before the 1955 revision of the criteria actually had paralysis lasting for more than 50 to 70 days after onset and had laboratory confirmed polio virus infection.

I think we have to listen to Dr Bernard Greenberg's testimony at the time. As the head of the department of biostatistics of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health and chairman of the Committee on Evaluation and Standards of the American Public Health Association he was clearly not an anti-vaccinationist. He said, "Simply by changes in diagnostic criteria, the number of paralytic cases was predetermined to decrease in 1955-1957, whether or not any vaccine was used."

To give credit to Salk's vaccine for the decrease was dishonest.

Grace Green

Cia Parker, this is where you have to be careful with statistics - half the children hospitalized with measles in 1920 died of it. But those who were hospitalized were the most severely effected, and this doesn't tell us what was the percentage of all those who were infected. Just a small point, but statistics can give such a wrong impression.

Linda1

Dr. Kostoff,
You keep speaking up. We are not losing all the battles. We are getting stronger by the day because of voices like yours. It may seem like we are facing overwhelming odds, but even though people don't know the details (until they are told), I think many if not most know that they're being lied to.

Keep up the good work.

Ronald Kostoff

Linda1,

"This was a report commissioned by the president. Anyone hear about it?"

We have a Press that is neither responsible nor accountable. If someone were to lie before a handful of people in a Court of Law, they could be convicted of perjury, and suffer severe consequences. If, however, members of the media (in the largest sense) lie (through commission or omission) to millions of people, thereby placing them at heightened risk for disease or worse, they suffer no adverse consequences. In fact, they are usually rewarded for the lies that benefit their 'handlers'.

Case in point. A couple days ago, Melania Trump gave a speech at the GOP convention. This was more or less an introductory speech, and she may have used a paragraph from a previous Michelle Obama speech. For more than a day, the mainstream media treated this as the top news story. They framed the speech as though it was a major blunder, showing the incompetence of the Trump campaign, and hurting his chances in November.

Really; this is the most critical issue we have in the world today for the media to place on the front page? But, that's the game. They don't mention Thompson's revelations, they don't advertise the recent study showing the links between wireless radiation and cancer, they don't mention the report you reference, etc. People will die prematurely as a result of this media malfeasance, yet neither the owners nor the reporters will suffer any adverse consequences.

And we, like sheep, continue to play their game by their rules. And, we wonder why we continually lose the battles!

Linda1

Dr. Kostoff,

"We have this belief that if we only can expose the truth, the outcomes will change for the better. Maybe that's a result of our educational system..."

Yes, the educational system does not teach us that the world is run by psychopaths.

I have another example to add to your list. A few years back there was a report of a president's council on cancer where the scientists made the recommendation that in order to decrease the rate of cancer that citizens should avoid carcinogens, making the strong statement that people should opt for organic produce. This was a report commissioned by the president. Anyone hear about it?
Of course not. The rich continue to eat the unpoisoned food while the poor continue to eat the food laced with poison.

I have my own small way of rebelling. When I go into a supermarket, instead of asking where the organic food is, I ask where is the food that doesn't have poison?

http://www.organicitsworthit.org/learn/presidents-cancer-panel-report/

LOOK AT THIS - In searching for the President's Panel Report mentioned above, I found it - it was the 2008-09 report. But I also found that the 2012-2013 the report was:

2012-2013 - Accelerating HPV Vaccine Uptake: Urgency for Action to Prevent Cancer

Cover page with links to all of them here:
http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualReports/

This is a fun quote from page 36 of the 2008-09 report:

"According to EPA statistics, more than 600,000 children born each
year test positive for unhealthy levels of methylmercury,169 exposures that may put
them at risk for brain damage and future learning disabilities."

Nice to know, isn't it. The children are being poisoned. They know it. They tell us, as if telling us is a heroic act in itself. Nothing is done. Nothing changes. I'm channeling George Carlin right about now.

Gary Ogden

cia: Not voting at all, like I did in 1972, was my plan until I spoke to my daughter on the phone on Sunday. She said a lot of people she knows are considering J.S. I think I'll stick with my original plan. The choices this year are far worse than they were in '72. I am well acquainted with the lawsuit (an amended complaint was filed last week with eleven additional plaintiffs), and I truly think that after the hearing the judge will issue a temporary restraining order barring enforcement of SB 277, which will likely tie it up for a couple of years. One of the new plaintiffs has received two rejection of enrollment letters from her son's middle school (K and 7th grade are the gateway years), which is blatantly unconstitutional in California. Possibly no other state has a stronger legal structure against discrimination of any kind in K-12 education.

 ciaparker

Gary,

I was going to vote for J.S., but read that she supported a practice I find reprehensible, and so would not vote for her. I saw a survey that said that about 25% of Americans are planning to refuse to vote for either one, and that votes were split about 50 50 between the candidates in the other 75%. I think at this point I'm just not going to vote, a sort of vote boycott in protest. I hope it will make them wake up that they have so many sitting it out.

Did you see Levi Quackenboss' article the other day about a new lawsuit filed against SB277? It sounds great, they have an state official who admitted that her office is out to take the license away from doctors who give exemptions, even though that's illegal.

 ciaparker

ATSC,

I've read that passage. I'm sure it's true that some cases of polio were misdiagnosed. But if it's true that diagnosis became more reliable in 1955, then the figures from 1955 on that I quoted in my comments should be more reliable, and they still show many thousands of cases of polio and paralytic polio a year. Coxsackie and Guillain-Barre very rarely cause permanent paralysis, and I don't think aseptic meningitis causes paralysis at all. The doctor in the Atlantic article I quoted said that there aren't many contagious diseases that cause paralysis in children. Guillain-Barré is not contagious, but is an auto-immune reaction, usually to a vaccine, though not always. The doctor thought that the rates of paralytic polio that he quoted from 1956 and 1957 were accurate with a five to ten percent error rate. The drop in polio after vaccination started in 1955 was amazing, and I really think it was because of the vaccine.

Since there has never been any proof that any cases of diagnosed polio in the '50s were actually something else, it is a hypothesis. It may be true to some degree, but I don't think to as large a degree as is currently often thought. I think the balance of evidence shows that polio for several posited reasons became much more devastating than it had been before the early twentieth century, and for several decades terrified our country, with good reason. I completely support reducing or eliminating the use of dangerous chemicals in the environment, and, in an outbreak, would try to avoid the use of sugar. But it's hard to avoid all dangerous chemicals in today's world, and I think the polio vaccine saved a lot of people from death or crippling. That being said, I'm completely against the hep-B vaccine, MMR, pertussis vaccine, flu vaccine, varicella, hep-A, etc. But I think we need to differentiate. And not give the polio vaccine now, at a moment when there's thankfully no longer any polio in the US.

 ciaparker

David,

I think Nature is a cruel taskmaster. It took centuries for measles to become the usually mild disease it had become in developed, well-nourished countries by 1960. Even in 1900, it had a high death rate in the UK and the US. I read that at a hospital in Pennsylvania, half the children hospitalized with measles in around 1920 died of it. I think Nature throws stuff at us with the unconscious understanding that it's adapt or die! Eventually both the disease and people's immune systems make adaptations which permit peaceful coexistence, even benefit from what were formerly killer diseases. But a lot of people were mowed down before that moment is reached.

I just took my daughter to the pool and read at the side of the pool. When I first read about Aaby's study showing the great benefits of natural measles in those African children it didn't kill, I thought yes! That's the way to go! No vaccine, just a natural healing and educational process, with ultimate benefits for those individuals AND the species. EVEN though more lives were spared by getting the vaccine. But then I imagined a sickly child before me. I agree that weak children are probably more apt to have serious vaccine reactions, and autism was unknown there before vaccines were introduced. But I imagined that the child was mine, sickly and malnourished through no fault of my own, but had a better chance of surviving the next few years at least if he got the measles vaccine, and a good chance of dying if he got measles. I distrust WHO, the CDC, the UN and Bill Gates, and don't think they're in it out of love for humanity. But I had a hard time deciding that my child would be better off dying than getting the vaccine. I think I would need to know how many children in my country had autism, how common it was to be severely vaccine-damaged, before making that decision. It would be a hard decision to make, playing God, really, and I would really need to see what the disease is like in those countries, see actual children with it. If vitamin A and C were available, I guess I might come down in favor of refusing the vaccine.

Gary Ogden

cia parker: Thank you for your thoughtful response. I find little, if anything, to disagree with. I'm just so thoroughly disgusted with what has become of our nation that I don't trust anything the government (or medical industry) promotes. And now our president, who in 2007 spoke in forcefully favor of GMO labelling, has the Dark Act on his desk, and you can bet he will sign it. What gives me hope is the SB 277 lawsuit, my family, and this wonderful community here. Am considering voting for the Green Party candidate in the fall, even though they don't really represent much of what I wish to see. What I wish to see is vaccination becoming entirely voluntary, and an overturning of NCVIA; the restoration of our grasslands and soils, and the elimination of corn ethanol; the de-licensing of Roundup and neocotinid fungicides; and the deportation of all lobbyists to Devil's Island, with nothing but bread and water for sustenance.

david m burd

@ Interested Party,

Yes, If the (hopelessly corrupt) CDC did not keep expanding the definition of AIDS, the U.S. would lose over 95% of today's U.S. AIDS cases diagnosed each year. By the way no other country in the whole World expanded AIDS definitions as did the U.S. --- consequently all other countries' AIDS cases (and related deaths) are but 1% percent to 2% percent per capita of the U.S.

Of course this is completely ignored by our U.S. Media --- and by the way, Duesberg has thousands of top medical professionals around the World that agree and support his analyses.

The AIDS' scenario fabricated here in the U.S. is directly comparable to the ten-times Catastrophe-of-Vaccine-Damage wrought upon our U.S. children, and, BY the same Criminals at CDC and NIH, abetted by Mainstream Media.

david m burd

As to every vaccine, including measles, there is more to it that meets the eye, for instance with Cia's remark: "Measles disappeared almost as soon as they started giving the vax (classic measles, the kind that swept through schools every few years)."

What perhaps most of us realize, Nature MEANT our human infants and children to go through the tempering process of these many childhood "diseases" in order to make us healthy for life that (if people actually check) our unvaccinated elderly ancestors easily lived until age 90 or so - and did so going back many generations - just check the tombstones at old cemeteries.

Touching again on measles, I submit the dangers of the measles vaccine (AND its unknown contaminants) are completely unacceptable for families that have well nourished children. Even IF babies and children are malnourished they would actually be MORE SUSCEPTIBLE to vaccine-damage. I submit this scenario is for all childhood vaccines.

There are other vaccines such as anthrax of course, but our Military History on this clearly has shown the anthrax vaccine(s) has ruined, and killed, scores of thousands of our military for life.

As to new vaccines for Ebola, Zika, Coronavirus, Bird Flu, on and on, they are a gigantic GOV'T Scam that keeps our oblivious public in fear, yet falling on their knees thanking our Medical/Gov't Criminals for their heroic efforts to protect the public. As humorist Dave Barry says: "I am not making this up."

cia parker

Gary,

I agree with most of what you say. Dissolving Illusions gives contemporary figures and studies which show that smallpox became an inconsequential disease (in most cases) in the US after an outbreak in 1897. I was surprised when my elderly neighbor told me many years ago that her older sister had had smallpox in 1928, but both she and the boy she got it from had fairly mild cases and recovered without pock marks. When I read Dissolving Illusions, I realized why it had been so mild. I don't think it became that mild in most of the Third World. I think the vaccine used in the nineteenth century was unscientific, ineffective, and very dangerous. I think the one developed and used in the twentieth century was more effective, though still dangerous. I haven't read enough about smallpox in the twentieth century to have a well-based opinion on the vaccine's use in the Third World in the twentieth century.

I agree that both pathogens and animals have a remarkable capacity to adapt and develop survival mechanisms. It's in the survival interests of the pathogens to mutate to become less virulent: they can propagate more widely if they don't kill quickly or just don't kill. And both people and animals adapt to the presence of the pathogen in many different ways. Probably both had a role in making measles, pertussis, diphtheria, and scarlet fever much less dangerous than they had been in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. And immunity from natural exposure is far better than vaccine immunity. I completely agree. I had measles when I was six, and still hope that my daughter may get it and reap the benefits for her immune system.

And I agree that vaccines have been pushed beyond reason for financial gain, with much corruption and chicanery.

After that it becomes harder. Aaby did a study in Africa which showed that children who got the measles vaccine were dramatically less likely to die of measles, which is common and often fatal there where most children are malnourished. But children who actually got measles and recovered, as at least 90% of those who get it do even in Africa, had only one-fifth of the chance of dying in subsequent years than those who either got the vaccine and didn't get measles, or those who just didn't get measles. Having natural measles provides training to the immune system which provides long-term non-specific survival value not provided by the vaccine. In the big picture, more lives were saved by giving the measles vaccine than by letting the fittest children get the quintupled survival value of getting natural measles. But many of those lives saved were those of malnourished children or those weaker for other reasons. The health of the species would be better served by promoting survival of the fittest, but it would mean the cruel deaths of the weakest. And the fact that vaccines do nothing to provide adequate nutrition, housing, and jobs for those saved, who swell the already huge population, means that their use creates problems not present in traditional societies.

I don't know the answers. But if I lived when a contagious disease for which there was an even moderately effective, usually apparently safe vaccine, was killing a lot of people, I would seriously consider taking it and giving it to my daughter. We're not fit, that's just the way it is, both of us are seriously vaccine-damaged (DPT and dT in my case, hep-b and DTaP in hers, no MMRs), and in a state of nature would just die, but I still would want life for both of us if I could make it more likely. We both wear bracelets that say Do not vaccinate, but under certain (unlikely) circumstances, I would let dogma go and get a particular vaccine (not a slew of them just on principle).

cia parker

Linda,

I read many different sources of information. It's not a religion in which I am only allowed to get my doctrine from approved foundational texts. (Actually, as a believing Christian, I think it's a case of Pascal's god-shaped area in the human soul always being filled with something, even if it's not God, and this is true of both the vaccine religion and the anti-vaccine religion.) I don't believe that conventional sources of information on vaccines use only falsified figures. Immunize.org said: "in the immediate pre-vaccine era (i.e., early 1950s), between 13,000 and 20,000 paralytic cases were reported each year. After the development of the inactivated (Salk) injectable vaccine in 1955 and the live (Sabin) oral vaccine in 1961, the number of polio cases dropped dramatically. In 1960, there were 2,525 paralytic cases reported, but by 1965 this number had fallen to 61."

Do you think that there were many fewer cases of paralytic polio than this in the early '50s? That there continued to be just as many cases of paralytic polio after the vaccine was given almost universally, it was just called something else? Do we still have 15,000 children a year paralyzed by something that's not polio? Do you believe in polio? Do you have supporting figures consistent with what the US experienced in the '40s, '50s, and '60s?

I'm not going to say or think that the only valid evidence is that brought by anti-vaxxers. Anti-vaxxers have egos and livings to make as well as conventional researchers, and are not immune to exaggeration and distortion of evidence to try to make it say what they want it to say.

I found this article last night from the Atlantic archives, a doctor writing in 1957 about the sharp decease in polio and in paralytic polio in one year's time. The evidence he gives is confusing and contradictory in parts, but I think it is always like that in the real world: he says himself that it is inconsistent in parts. It was interesting that he said that paralytic polio is easily recognized and few other infectious diseases cause paralysis. Immunize.org said that there were between 13 and 20 thousand cases a year of paralytic polio in the early '50s before the vaccine. This doctor says that there were 10,000 some-odd in 1955, the year the vaccine started to be given in the latter half of the year, and 6,500 in 1956. The evidence seems to support the vaccine's having saved many thousands of children from a life of paralysis.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1957/02/how-good-is-the-polio-vaccine/303946/

"Paralytic cases, however, are easily recognized, and paralysis only rarely occurs in other infectious diseases. Thus the total number of paralyzed cases is more reliable for year-to-year comparison. When the paralytic cases to December for 1955 and 1956 are compared, the decrease is much smaller than that of the total cases. There was a drop from 10,405 paralytic cases in 1955 to 6565 in 1956, a decrease of about one third, although there is a possible 5 to 10 per cent error here because of incomplete reports. Reliable records on numbers of paralytic cases for the United States are available for only the last two or three years, and they are, therefore, not precisely helpful at this time in interpreting the sharp decrease of this year. However, the seriousness of the paralytic disease and the reliability of reports on such cases will make this the best index for measuring the effect of polio vaccine in the future."

cia parker

Cynthia,

I completely agree that the severity of a disease does not make a vaccine safe. But if the chance of severe disability or death from a disease might very well be greater than the risk of damage from the vaccine to prevent it, I think it's reasonable to take the vaccine. I have read a lot about the dangers of the pet vaccines: it's beyond doubt that they are what have caused an epidemic of neurological and autoimmune disease in our pets, and I agree with the vets who advise not giving any more vaccines after two puppy or kitten doses for distemper, canine parvovirus, and rabies. But for a pet who ever goes outdoors, I think that those are valuable vaccines for him. Then no more.

Parents must make the vaccine decision for their children. I agree that every vaccine can be dangerous and every vaccine does at least a small amount of damage, and often horrendous damage. But even though the diphtheria, polio, and tetanus vaccines are not always safe and not 100% effective, I think the diseases are serious enough that if I lived in a time and place that had a lot of people killed or disabled by them, I would probably get the vaccines for myself and my children. Dr. Sears does not recommend the polio vaccine at this time because there's no polio in the US now. He recommended that the parent not tell others that he decided not to get it because if a lot of people don't vax for it, polio may come back. If I had lived in Texas in 1952, where many thousands of children had been recently crippled or killed by polio, I would have accepted the risks of the vaccine and gotten it for my children and myself, even if I had been aware of SB40 etc. If I had it to do over again, I would not have let my daughter get the polio series; if polio came back, I would.

Ronald Kostoff

Linda1,

You are very welcome!

Unfortunately, almost all the reporting I do on wireless radiation is negative. Despite the newly released $28-million multi-year study by The National Toxicology Program (NTP) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which found a causal relationship between RF in cell phone frequencies and malignant brain cancers (glioma), as well as benign nerve tumors (schwannomas) of the heart in male rats, the FCC moved full speed ahead to promote the untested 5G technology. The data made no difference in their decision!

This disconnect between data and outcome is becoming all too prevalent. Thompson alleged how the link between MMR vaccine and autism was deliberately suppressed by the CDC. One would have thought that a revelation of this magnitude would have resulted in a major re-evaluation of vaccination strategy. Yet, since that time, some state mandates were passed, and more mandate proposals are in the pipeline.

Director Comey showed in detail how Hillary Clinton lied about her handling of classified material, yet recommended no prosecution. Any of the readers who violated security regulations 1/10 as much as Hillary would, at a minimum, be out on the street today.

Finally, there is the FCC disconnect described above.

We have this belief that if we only can expose the truth, the outcomes will change for the better. Maybe that's a result of our educational system, which tends not to emphasize how the real world of political and economic influence works, and mutes the effect of the truth. What we seem to be finding in many cases is that exposing the truth borders on irrelevancy. We are playing a game whose rules were created by the rich and powerful to protect the rich and powerful. We are destined to lose if we continue to play by those rules, as evidenced by the direction of wireless radiation implementation, vaccine schedule enhancement and mandate elimination, glyphosate and fluoridation use, etc.

Ronald Kostoff

Not Relevant,

"Just a warning on Cod Liver Oil: too much pre-formed Vitamin A can be toxic to the liver."

Any fish oil, like megadoses of supplements, is not a whole food. If high quality fish are available, why would one want to take the fragmented fish oil? The cited article by Ray Peat conflates fish oil with fish. But, as the following reference states (https://draxe.com/the-worlds-longest-living-cultures/): "Fish is a very common staple in diets of the long-living. Whether they live in the mountains or by the sea, trade for fermented fish paste or eat brook trout, these cultures value fish in their diets. What is important to remember here is that the fish these cultures eat is, for the most part, wild-caught, not farmed." Mercola also has a good summary of the caveats (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/12/23/high-fish-diet.aspx). I would emphasize the wild-caught requirement, and add that low-temperature cooking would be most preferable, to minimize the generation of advanced glycation end products.

Linda1

Thanks to Dr. Kostoff for continued reporting on wireless.

Ronald Kostoff

Patience,

"These stories are so discouraging."

Unfortunately, they are a microcasm of the much larger picture. The FCC recently approved 'fast tracking' the 5G spectrum rollout on 14 July by a unanimous vote. See the following articles for the infrastructure increases that will accompany 5G. Additionally, there is very little research on the health effects at the much higher frequencies characteristic of 5G. Martin Pall has provided potential mechanisms that could link non-ionizing radiation to autism!

https://memoryholeblog.com/2016/07/11/fcc-fast-tracks-5g-spectrum-wireless-despite-links-to-cancer-dna-damage/
http://stopsmartmeters.org/2016/07/08/wireless-health-science-firmer-than-ever-as-fcc-poised-to-say-screw-health-and-approve-5g-wireless-micro-cell-invasion/
http://www.saferemr.com/

Linda1

Cia,
You're quoting from immunize.org?

Interested Party

The re-definition of Polio reminds me of what happened with AIDS. From reading Duesberg, I have become convinced that the diagnostic criteria for AIDS was broadened to create the illusion of an epidemic.

Not Relevent

I like this website. People here a seriously committed to truth.

Just a warning on Cod Liver Oil: too much pre-formed Vitamin A can be toxic too the liver. CLO also contains very unsaturated oils. Here is an article by Ray Peat on the topic if fish oils: http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/fishoil.shtml

I wouldn't post it if I didn't think that this contains more truth than the WAPF and Mercola's websites combined.

Gary Ogden

cia parker: I always appreciate what you have to say here. For me it is not a matter of belief. I gave up religion decades ago. I wouldn’t trade the moral foundation religious training gave me for anything, but I found the theology and practice of the church spiritually and intellectually unsatisfying. You are correct that confirmation bias is an easy trap to fall into. For me, it is a matter of reasoning, the drawing of conclusions from known facts. Facts from a wide variety of disciplines and historical records. This is why evolutionary theory, though much modified since the days of Darwin and Wallace (modifications which they would surely embrace) is considered today to be scientific truth, to be a central principle in understanding the history of life on Earth; it has such a wealth of confirmatory evidence from diverse disciplines, and no better falsifiable descriptor of the evidence has emerged. The facts leading to my conclusion that vaccination has no positive social value come from historical records and accounts; and from biology. We must always have some degree of skepticism of statistics, but we can always learn something from them because they are usually reasonably accurate. Accounts, particularly by physicians, and before the pharma capture of medicine, we shouldn’t disregard, but give them the benefit of doubt. This evidence is a mixed bag, and without question neither supports nor undermines my conclusion. The biology offers a wealth of evidence of amazing complexity, but three things stand out for me: 1. Understanding the natural history of living forms. Higher animals evolve slowly, from centuries to millennia; microbes, on the other hand, communicate and share genetic material within and across species; they evolve very rapidly. Smallpox mutated into a much more benign form around the turn of the twentieth century. It would be folly to attribute that development to a vaccine. 2. The very ancient biological capacity for adaptive response. Prior to the twentieth century measles could be a dangerous disease, killing up to twenty percent of affected children. By the middle of the past century, serious complications and death had become exceedingly rare (at least in the US), while measles still swept through the population every two or three years. 3. The results of CDC vaccination policy, a holocaust which cannot be denied, and which is destroying our nation, especially the bright, the athletic, and the boys. I believe it was Karl Popper who put it this way: “It takes only one black swan to prove that not all swans are white.” How many measles deaths and disabilities since MMR was licensed? How many MMR deaths and disabilities since it was licensed? Here is the black swan right before our eyes. I conclude that vaccination is simply not biologically plausible as a health intervention, at least not in any form that has been used, and is much too dangerous to be used on an unsuspecting population. The very idea that we can eliminate microbes with our puny tools is the height of absurdity; it is hubris run amok.

Cynthia Cournoyer

If DDT (for instance) gave a virus CNS access resulting in paralysis, then we should stop exposing people to DDT (we did), rather than devise an alternate route to the CNS by way of a vaccine. Assault compounded by another assault.

By today's standards of treating forms of transient, or even permanent paralysis, including NOT immobilizing limbs and using tiny breathing apparatus, in the 1940's and 1950's, we would not have the scarring memories of crippled children and iron lungs. We don't see braces and iron lungs because the technology progressed, not because we don't have dangerous viruses (flacid paralysis, enterovirus, etc.).

The severity of a disease or malady does not MAKE a vaccine safe. The horror of any disease does not make a vaccine effective. You can not live your life once with vaccines and live your life once without vaccines to make an honest comparison. So if it is possible anywhere, to live a life free of vaccines and free of polio (which it is) then I make that choice.

Not every nation vaccinated to the extent we did, and they recovered from polio nonetheless. The areas which continued to see polio in the world, were in the nations most covered by American (and others) polio vaccine campaigns, as in India.

As far as "reasoning backwards" that is an interesting way of putting it. However, if declining disease coincides with other declining diseases, we can't blindly accept it was purely because of that one vaccine. I have been observing the vaccine controversy for almost 35 years and I feel people who don't vaccinate, do have facts and science and reason on their side. We just choose to believe a different set.

It sounds like some make the argument that because we were poisoning our children with DDT, that we should be thankful we invented a polio vaccine. I just can't go there.

cia parker

The books I read didn't have figures for the numbers of patients paralyzed by polio. I just found what is below. I found that Coxsackie virus very rarely causes permanent paralysis, nor does Guillain-Barre syndrome. Figures would have to be provided showing that the same number of patients were paralyzed before and after the polio vaccine to say that polio didn't really exist or was never a big problem, and had no effect. Is there evidence that in 1965 it only looked as though there were only 61 paralytic polio cases, when really there were the same 17,000 cases of paralysis there had been in the fifties? And if coxsackie and Guillain-Barre syndrome don't cause permanent paralysis the way polio often did, then what could have caused 17,000 cases of paralysis which no one but the families noticed?

"Before a polio vaccine was developed, polio epidemics were common in the United States. For example, in the immediate pre-vaccine era (i.e., early 1950s), between 13,000 and 20,000 paralytic cases were reported each year. After the development of the inactivated (Salk) injectable vaccine in 1955 and the live (Sabin) oral vaccine in 1961, the number of polio cases dropped dramatically. In 1960, there were 2,525 paralytic cases reported, but by 1965 this number had fallen to 61."

http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4215.pdf

Dan Olmsted

I just think the evidence is persuasive that some vaccines, including the polio vaccine, do in fact work. that is not any kind of blanket recommendation, because for instance the chickenpox vaccine seems to work to suppress chicken pox but ends up triggering more shingles. things like measles in childhood probably play a protective role that means we should have left bloody well alone even if there are rare severe cases. the whole modern vaccine schedule is nuts. in our book vaccines 2.0 we have a negative rating for polio even though we believe it works. polio is not a circulating virus and protecting the "herd" against some imagined outbreak is not enough to overcome the risks of the vaccination, especially as it just adds to insanely overloaded vaccine schedule. in 1952, the year i was born by the way, the calculation might have been different. the virus-toxin model i'm using really has relevance to autism because it illustrates the microbe plus metal equals manmade mayhem idea. I've written it to convey that the arsenic exposure is the key trigger of a harmless disease. if there were no environmental factor there would be no need for a vaccine as poliovirus illness is generally benign unless it gets "amplified" by something like arsenic. the same applies to a great deal of modern illness in my view. -- dan

cia parker

Gary,

The polio vaccines caused the body to develop antibodies to polio, so that the virus couldn't get a hold in the body it infected. The body may have been weakened by a toxin, DDT, arsenic, sugar, but the second necessary factor was the virus penetrating and doing damage to the nervous system. If the body already had antibodies, then the immune system repelled it, so the virus was unable to do this damage, regardless of the immune system being compromised by contaminating factors.

cia parker

Garry,

I just don't think that there were the same number of children being paralyzed and dying before and after the vaccine, from polio or non-polio paralysis. I think that it's a case of wanting to believe that no vaccine has ever done any good for anyone, and seeking evidence to support the desired hypothesis, rather than looking at what really happened. I have read that many cases of what was really Guillain-Barré paralysis or aseptic meningitis were mistakenly diagnosed as polio. Guillain-Barré was only recognized in the '70s around the time of the flu vaccine fiasco, and may occur only as a vaccine reaction. Aseptic meningitis doesn't cause paralysis. When polio came through a community, many children were struck down in those weeks with temporary or permanent paralysis: after the vaccine, they no longer were, not in the same numbers, not by the tens of thousands.

This is not an honest say to reason: it's reasoning backwards from the desired outcome that all vaccines are always in every case ineffective, worthless, and dangerous, accepting no information that doesn't support that outcome. Not many Americans believe that, or ever will believe it, and they shouldn't. It's a religious credo, unworthy of being used by parents reasoning their way to a vaccine decision.

ATSC

Cia Parker,

"In 1956, the rates dropped precipitously: 15,140 cases in the country, 566 deaths. In 1957, 5,485 cases in the country, 221 deaths. By 1960, only 3,277 cases in the country."

Simply the result of polio being re-defined in 1955:


http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/polio.htm

"Manipulation of Polio Statistics in the 1950's

Dr. Bernard Greenberg, a biostatistics expert, was chairman of the Committee on Evaluation and Standards of the American Public Health Association during the 1950s. He testified at a panel discussion that was used as evidence for the congressional hearings on polio vaccine in 1962. During these hearings he elaborated on the problems associated with polio statistics and disputed claims for the vaccine's effectiveness. He attributed the dramatic decline in polio cases to a change in reporting practices by physicians. Less cases were identified as polio after the vaccination for very specific reasons.

Testimony...."Prior to 1954 any physician who reported paralytic poliomyelitis was doing his patient a service by way of subsidizing the cost of hospitalization and was being community-minded in reporting a communicable disease. The criterion of diagnosis at that time in most health departments followed the World Health Organization definition: "Spinal paralytic poliomyelitis: signs and symptoms of nonparalytic poliomyelitis with the addition of partial or complete paralysis of one or more muscle groups, detected on two examinations at least 24 hours apart." Note that "two examinations at least 24 hours apart" was all that was required. Laboratory confirmation and presence of residual paralysis was not required. In 1955 the criteria were changed to conform more closely to the definition used in the 1954 field trials: residual paralysis was determined 10 to 20 days after onset of illness and again 50 to 70 days after onset.... This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease, namely, paralytic poliomyelitis with a longer-lasting paralysis. Furthermore, diagnostic procedures have continued to be refined. Coxsackie virus infections and aseptic meningitis have been distinguished from paralytic poliomyelitis. Prior to 1954 large numbers of these cases undoubtedly were mislabeled as paralytic poliomyelitis. Thus, simply by changes in diagnostic criteria, the number of paralytic cases was predetermined to decrease in 1955-1957, whether or not any vaccine was used.

From Intensive Immunization Programs, Hearings before the Committee on Interstate & Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 87th Congress, 2nd Session on H.R. 10541, Wash DC: Us Government Printing Office, 1962; p. 96-97"


Dr Suzanne Humphries talks about this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqhnp-NYGC4


cia parker

Cynthia,

Most people realize that no vaccine can be made absolutely safe for everyone. We realize that every drug, not just vaccines, causes side effects in everyone, and some of them are very serious in some people. It's always a question of doing a risk/benefit analysis: if there were a danger of an infection becoming deadly, I'd recommend taking the risk of the antibiotic and worry about everything else later. If there were an outbreak of diphtheria or polio, most people would be willing to take the risk of the vaccines for them.

You can see from the statistics I cited earlier that many thousands of children were saved from dying or being crippled by polio by the polio vaccine. The polio vaccines worked. Most people would want to save our children from such a fate first and try to deal with any adverse consequences later. We're not all going to have the same opinion on this or anything else, but all Americans of a certain age remember polio and are proud of how so many millions pulled together in many ways in many campaigns to put an end to polio in developed countries. It's too bad that many people's thoughts on vaccines begin and end with smallpox and polio, making it hard for them to understand the concepts of vaccine encephalitis, autoimmune disease caused by vaccines, immune system weakening by vaccines, damage caused by adjuvants and preservatives, and how they prevent the immune system from getting needed practice in combatting disease. But we just have to work with the situation as it is, and part of that is recognizing the success of the polio vaccines in ending a terrible scourge.

Gary Ogden

Cia Parker: It is not possible to meaningfully compare any statistics for paralytic polio prior to 1955 with those compiled later, simply because the diagnostic criteria were changed at the time of the release of the Salk vaccine in 1955, which significantly reduced the number of cases of paralytic polio by calling many of them something else. Laboratory confirmation was not used before 1958. From a 1960 JAMA paper, quoted in Dissolving Illusions (bold as quoted):
“During an epidemic of poliomyelitis in Michigan in 1958, virological and serological studies were carried out with specimens from 1,060 patients. Fecal specimens from 869 patients yielded no virus in 401 cases, poliovirus in 292, ECHO (enteric cytopathogenic human orphan) virus in 100, Coxsackie virus in 73, and unidentified virus in 3 cases. Serums from 191 patients from whom no fecal specimens were obtainable showed no antibody changes in 123 cases but did show changes diagnostic for poliovirus in 48, ECHO viruses in 14, and Coxsackie virus in 6. In a large number of paralytic as well as nonparalytic patients poliovirus was not the cause. Frequency studies showed that there were no obvious clinical differences among infections with Coxsackie, ECHO, and poliomyelitis viruses. Coxsackie and ECHO viruses were responsible for more cases of “nonparalytic poliomyelitis” and “aseptic meningitis” than was the poliovirus itself."

Cynthia Cournoyer

The more you investigate the human immune system, the more you could conclude that no vaccine has benefits that outweigh the risks. Polio for example, renaming the virus, pesticide connection, almost universal immunity from natural exposure, epidemics coinciding with poverty, overcrowding and a lack of breastfeeding, casts doubts on the vaccine itself.

The dialogue here proves my point about the success (or failure) of our mutual movement to show the dangers of vaccines. As long as you believe that a vaccine COULD be made safe or effective gives the premise right back to our opponents. They see us as weak and able to give in to the argument that we need to improve vaccines and put up with collateral damage at the SAME TIME. Any desire to rest on the hope that vaccines could or would have actually wiped out disease, is intoxicating and they know we are fascinated with that idea. Keeps this movement going on and on and on, racking up collateral damage.

Dan, I love your work, mostly because it was your work that put me at peace with the idea that the holy grail of vaccines (polio) can now be put aside.

michael

Regarding the polio vaccine--will we ever know how many SV40 induced brain cancers or other cancers attributable to SV40 have occurred in the baby boomer population (and perhaps beyond). That piece of information would be valuable to the public to truly weigh the costs and benefits of the polio vaccination program.

I have no trust in what ever passes off as medical science with the system that is so utterly corrupted and undeserving of trust.

cia parker

I picked up the book The Polio Years in Texas again, I had never finished it, and it's very interesting. It gives a lot of specific information with many names and dates. In its appendices, it gives the number of reported cases of polio in the US, number of deaths, and another chart for the number of cases in Texas compared with the whole country for each year. I didn't know that Texas was the state hardest hit, which may explain my family's enthusiasm for the vaccine. I was born in Beaumont, Texas, when the vaccine had started to be universally given. As Dr. Langmuir said, polio never disabled a huge number of children in the big picture, but it hit unpredictably and crippled many, causing everyone to fear it. The official charts say that polio really didn't become a big problem until 1943, when the national rate went from 4,167 reported cases in 1942 to 12,450 in 1943. In Texas there were 738 cases reported in '43. Rates climbed until in 1952, there were 57,879 reported cases nationwide, with 3,984 cases in Texas. That year there were 3,145 polio deaths nationwide. Even accepting that very few people exposed to polio were ever crippled or killed by it, that's still a lot of tragic outcomes.

On p. 146, Heather Wooten describes the testing of Salk's vaccine. I learned that testing on children began in the spring of 1954, and that my mother's town, Taylor, Texas, was chosen to represent the north Texas region, and Orange County, where Aunt Alma and Uncle Tyler lived near Beaumont, to represent east Texas. (And several more. They were chosen because each had a big metropolitan area which had been hard hit by polio.) Half the children were given placebo and half the Salk vaccine, and 35,000 parents volunteered their children for the trials. All three shots were given by June 1955, and then they waited to see who might get polio. The results were announced on April 12, 1955 (my parents were in New Mexico on their honeymoon that day), and the Thomas Francis report announced that the vaccine was safe and effective: it gave 80-90% protection from paralytic polio, 60-70% effective against Type I virus, 90% effective against Types II and III. In that year of waiting for results, there were 28,985 cases of polio reported in the US, 1,368 deaths, and 3,090 cases in Texas. Starting in 1955, efforts began to vax every child in the country, which took a while. In 1955, there were 28,985 cases in the country, 1,043 deaths, 1,930 cases in Texas. In 1956, the rates dropped precipitously: 15,140 cases in the country, 566 deaths. In 1957, 5,485 cases in the country, 221 deaths. By 1960, only 3,277 cases in the country.

I think it's disingenuous to try to deny that the vaccine was stunningly successful in stopping polio. Everyone absolutely has the obligation to research it for himself to decide whether or not to take the vaccine series or get it for his children: it wasn't 100% effective, there was the Cutter incident and the SV40 situation which probably caused thousands of cases of cancer over several decades: the vaccine itself sometimes caused serious reactions, but Dr. Sears says that it is the least reactive of the vaccines. All children in my generation (except my roommate Tina, whose family didn't get her the vaccine and she got polio in 1958 and was crippled by it, still is) got the vaccine and did not get polio, and had very healthy childhoods, no polio, no autism, or obvious vaccine reactions. I think it's important to think that if polio made a comeback in your town and you read the figures on how many were dying or being crippled by it, especially if they were comparable to the rates I cited in the mid-fifties, if you had to make the decision whether or not to get the vaccine, you'd have to balance the memory of vaxxed children in the '60s, no polio, no autism, little autoimmune disease against the belief that even one vaccine stands a high risk of doing serious and irreparable damage. I think the risk is not high, but low: it exists, but in the midst of a polio epidemic, most people would rather take the vaccine.

Measles disappeared almost as soon as they started giving the vax (classic measles, the kind that swept through schools every few years). Pertussis disappeared after they started giving the pertussis vaccine, only to resurface with the ineffective acellular vaccine. Chickenpox disappeared soon after starting the varicella vaccine. Very few pet dogs and cats now get rabies, because of the rabies vaccine. Feline and canine distemper have all but disappeared for the same reason. Most vaccines do what they are supposed to. It's an entirely different question whether it's wise to give any particular vaccine, or the number recommended, and one that everyone must decide for himself after researching it.

Gary Ogden

Dan: As the poliovirus occurs nearly universally in populations without any cases of paralysis (e.g., the Xavante of Brazil, who had true herd immunity), a cofactor such as a toxin must be necessary to produce the disease. If this is the case, how is it possible for a vaccine to play any role in preventing the disease called polio? Only an anti-toxin force field would do the trick. A vaccine certainly has no positive effect on a weakened immune system, another likely cofactor in infectious disease outbreaks. A complete lack of immunity, such as with measles today, unlike in our childhood, can be a dangerous thing for infants and adults. But how can poliovirus be considered an infectious agent, given the Xavante and others? With a severely compromised immune system even a normally minor infection can be fatal. My contention is that vaccines completely miss the boat. Only the amazing resilience of human biology keeps more from being obviously harmed by them. By the way, the polio series continues to grip. It's a real pleasure to watch your brain in action.

cia parker

I agree with Dan. The vaccines did stop the polio outbreaks. It's important that we be truthful if we want to be believed and trusted. Vaccines are a double-edged sword: they can prevent disease, but they can also cause severe disability or death. Everyone can understand that. Penicillin has saved millions of lives, but some people are allergic to it, and have died when they get it. It is not regarded as the Holy Grail, all good, never harmful. Everyone can learn to regard vaccines the same way, and, like antibiotics, can also understand that excessive use of antibiotics causes resistance, antibiotic failure, and, again, death. Antibiotic destroy the microbiome, which in many cases is hard to restore, just as vaccines prevent the immune system from getting the practice it needs combatting real diseases to become strong and competent. Giving a lot of antibiotics, like vaccines, degrades their usefulness for everyone, and results in death for some.

Bayareamom

@Dan Olmsted:

Just curious - have you read this? Have you viewed her lecture on vaccines and polio?

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2011/11/17/smoke-mirrors-and-the-disappearance-of-polio/

david m burd

@Dan,

Your simply saying "the polio vaccine" has stopped polio epidemics seems to me to contradict all your writings (in my view), that illustrate that the endemic polio "virus" throughout Humankind is virtually 100% harmless by itself.

Taken out of context (and maybe within context) your words justify the universal use of polio vaccines.

From my assessment there are very real benefits of all infants and children acquiring the polio enterovirus, virtually all sailing through its barely noticeable infection, and therefore benefitting the rest of their lives from having benefitted HAVING Polio, with their strengthened immune systems.

To me, it's 99.999% benefit, .001 negative as to polio infections. As to the variety of injected (or oral) polio vaccines there are ALWAYS negative consequences, to what extant is impossible to estimate, but our current carnage of vaccine-damage I would bet is partly due to polio vaccines.

michael

I don't know when the great unraveling of "the Big Lie" ( a variation of the JB Hadley expression "Hungry Lie") will come, but it will come and I suspect with some harsh accountability. The attempt to normalization of autism in all its forms, just another component of "the big lie".

I thought the Daschel/Conte http://www.ageofautism.com/2016/06/the-whistleblower-the-dogs-wont-hear-vaccine-whistleblower-.html
article made this powerful point--

"It wasn’t simply the MMR vaccine and TCVs that were on trial in the OAP.

It was Vaccinology itself. If vaccines were shown to cause autism, an entire industry could collapse, the prestige of the medical establishment would be forever damaged and the country would have to deal with the responsibility and the reality that thousands of people were injured in the name of public health.

The whole empire constructed around Vaccinology was under attack and desperate times called desperate actions. And, (damn it!), every times numbers were run on data sets having to do with autism and vaccines, the data screamed that there were associations."

The Whole Empire, as it is today constructed, is built upon lies, fraud and criminal behavior. There is only so much they can get away with--and they know it. They are running out of suckers who believe in their cock and bull.

Dan Olmsted

i do think polio vaccine stopped polio outbreaks.

Cynthia Cournoyer

John,
Yes, they know. That is the point. As long as the culture accepts vaccines as "life savers" (e.g. polio), then we cannot coexist with a vaccine-autism paradigm. And they know we can't.

Vaccine promoters are counting on our collective sympathy toward vaccines. They "did save lives, they need to be safer, we need to pick and choose." As long as our culture holds on to any of these beliefs, vaccinating will not be ultimately blamed for autism, or any other malady for that matter.

Yes, the answers lie with the ability to hold someone accountable in court. Short of that (we are very short of that right now), we have to stop giving the vaccine industry customers. Opting out, no matter what and in droves. Once that number explodes and becomes a voting-block, we will start to win. We are on our way.

Patience (Eileen Nicole) Simon

Anne, These stories are so discouraging. I am on the train to DC right now to attend the IACC meeting tomorrow. The agenda and public comments are online already. I submitted a lot of comments, for starters because the advances in science stated at the April meeting were that obese and diabetic women have more autistic children, and having babies too close in age is associated with autism.

Science = understanding of brain injury underlying language disorder, repetitive movements, and diminished awareness. I will continue to try to bring attention to how the brain is affected by all of autism's many causes. I wish I knew how to be heard, or maybe how to be understood?

John Stone

Cynthia

They knew that their would be casualties (the VICP system was predicated on it) and obviously encephalopathy and mental impairment of some kind was going to be high on the list. Given the very ambitious programs which were being initiated did they not dream that it would be this be this bad, or did they just not care? In the UK vaccines are even better. We have a Vaccine Damage Payment Unit which never pays out and if doctor ever so much as suggests the possibility of a vaccine injury they face trumped charges and being stuck off by the General Medical Council. The British government knew the old DPT vaccine was dangerous, and what did they do - they accelerated schedule knowing that no one would ever be able to do anything about it. Parents would have go to prison rather than Department of Health admit that there was anything wrong.

Cynthia Cournoyer

The lack of curiosity about the origin of autism could stem from people already having a hunch that it might be vaccines. And that is a place no one can go. The culture accepts vaccines as life savers. That simple characterization of vaccines cannot coexist with the true cause of autism.

The toning down of the rhetoric about epidemic, emergency, regression, crisis, or prevention is the strategy toward accepting autism as another form of "normal." Some see the vaccine-autism connection as a threat to their beliefs, paradigms, profession or way of life. So the quickest way to relieve pressure is to normalize, minimize and accept, transforming a disaster into a win.

Looks like we've almost arrived at autism being a non-problem.

Susan

My child can look like a "happy, attractive, engaged " child for a few minutes at a time, as long as he's had his vitamins, 5HTP, L-theanine, L-carnosine, cod liver oil and prescription medicine .
My mother would have had a nervous breakdown if it took that much effort to put a smile on my face when I was a child.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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

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

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

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

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

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)