https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php

https://www.oatext.com/Preterm-birth-vaccination-and-neurodevelopmental-disorders-a-cross-sectional-study-of-6-to-12-year-old-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-children.php

or...

https://www.oatext.com/pdf/JTS-3-186.pdf
https://www.oatext.com/pdf/JTS-3-187.pdf

@Aaron, I would add that doctors might diagnose whooping cough more if they were blind to vaccination status, but unfortunately this is the best survey answering the question there is.

The respondents are self reporting, there is no oversight from doctors or submission of proof of legitimate diagnoses.

In addition: parents of unvaccinated children are far more likely to pursue homeopathic remedies AND underreport illnesses, as well as ADHD and autism.

Which is exactly why SELF REPORTING cannot be taken seriously. It's as effective as polling data, meaning entirely unreliable.

Eindecker, when children first become "autistic", following vaccines, parents are told it's a coincidence. But SOMETHING must have caused it and they have no alternative explanation, other than it's genetic. If it is genetic, then why couldn't that also be an explanation why some people are adversely affected by vaccines and others are not? Just like smoking, which causes cancer, but not in everyone!

Eindecker. If we are talking fraudulent research, let's not forget CDC/William Thompson.

Nevertheless, that wasn't my point. I want independent research that will 1) find a cure to redress the harm that has been caused to our children/grandchildren and 2) stop injuries happening to future generations.

We have missions to Mars, we can watch people speaking from the other side of the world, but no scientist has come up with the cause of autism and, therefore, cannot stop it happening to children every day. This was not happening in my generation or my children's.

Even you have to admit there is something very amiss!

Dear Susan don’t you see the supreme irony in your posting We don't give a hoot for your fraudulent science.…..it’s not my fraudulent science, it’s the admittedly fraudulent science from Shaw’s groups who are one of the main proponents of the hypothesis that aluminium adjuvants cause autism, that I commented on.
John I’m sorry but the “curate’s egg gambit” doesn’t apply to scientific papers (only some of the data is rotten, the rest is OK) don't know what happened with the data reporting, and I don't know how much difference it would have made the work Shaw has admitted some of the data is falsified, how much of the rest is to be trusted? The study results are worthless.
Re Cochrane John I’m sure you are aware of the later Australian meta-analysis http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367 looking at outcomes following vaccination in studies involving over 1 million children. The author’s conclusions were very clear:
”Findings of this meta-analysis suggest that vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder. Furthermore, the components of the vaccines (thimerosal or mercury) or multiple vaccines (MMR) are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder.”, no weasel words there.
One final comment John, in view of all the controversy over Shaw’s study no-one at the AoA choose to report on this?
However John I do commend your honesty in your most recent posting that UK ‘flu vaccines do not contain thiomersal, with modern aseptic filling technology there is no need for this preservative in single dose vials, it is only included in multi dose formulations to prevent microbial growth on storage arising from contamination introduced by repeat sampling of a single vial.
For the avoidance of doubt I have also corrected the spelling of my "nom de plume" in honour of Mr Fokker

Eindeker

One reason why I have refrained from commenting much on the Shaw paper is that I don't know what happened with the data reporting, and I don't know how much difference it would have made. I have a pretty good idea what was going on in the papers reviewed by Cochrane. It is worth pointing out - and interesting that you do not appear to know - that the "no credible evidence" quote came not from the paper itself but from the "plain language summary" put out for journalists and the public. The problem was that this was not what the paper said, to quote the abstract:

"Design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post marketing, are largely inadequate"

The position was at best weasel (deliberately misleading) because the absence of evidence was not based on quality research: given individually what they said about the six autism related studies the position was lamentable, and it is even hard to know how they met the selection criteria. You could either conclude that we did not know whether products were safe, or that the way these studies themselves had been conducted - such as those by DeStefano and the Madsen - that something was being hidden. Five of the papers were rated to be of moderate risk of bias and the sixth (by Fombonne) at high risk. If you looked at their data selection as opposed to their conclusions it was fairly clear what was going on, and that straight reporting was off the agenda. Cochrane addressed some of it - the cracks were there if anyone wanted to see them - but it was a fudge.

http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/02/re-evidence-not-bullying

Melanie Phillips - the one journalist who went beyond the plain language summary - was berated by cyber-media bully, Ben Goldacre, as not understanding science, but at least she understood that 'plain language' was very far from plain language.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/12/leveson-inquiry-submission.html

Shaw said readers need to remember "this paper was done on mice"

Eindecker I think Johns right you have had a personality change or a personnel change ....
Cant make it up ..keep talking intrigued.. so you agree that testing on animals is wrong and bares nothing to do with humans whatsoever?
Im sure all the animal rights campaigners will be interested in your change
Unlike THE ONCE great Oxford Uni, Shaw doesn't have the funds supplied by the Gates foundation (Bill )to bribe humans over the door to test typhoid and HPV on their babies and kids.. a bit like Bundy telling his victims no harm would come to them if they would just please just put the handcuffs on.. and come down to the basement then he would torture them for as long as he ould keep them alive...a bit like vaccines?get the drift?

Who would have thought that Trump would get in.Who would have thought the UK would leave Europe.Who would have thought that several European countries would become anti Europe and anti Globalist.Who would have thought that the JFK files would be released last but not least who would have thought that Endecker would side with the animal campaigners.Soon be Christmas bring Thorsen home to face the music.

Pharma for Prison

MMR RIP

Eindeker

Irrespective of Brian Hooker's methodology Cochrane already smelt a rat in 2005:

"The conclusion, however, implied bias in the enrollment of cases which may not be representative of the rest of the autistic population of the city of Atlanta, USA where the study was set."

Obviously, William Thompson was not happy either.

And Cochrane were on the mark again with the Madsen paper:

"The follow up of diagnostic records ends one year (31 Dec 1999) after the last day of admission to the cohort. Because of the length of time from birth to diagnosis, it becomes increasingly unlikely that those born later in the cohort could have a diagnosis."

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/08/cdc-frauds-connections-between-the-destefano-paper-and-the-thorsen-affair.html

These comments may have been a little oblique but they tell you exactly what was going on. As we know these studies were passed on to the IOM by the CDC to undergo "independent" review while being under strict instructions not to find anything (the sort of thing you approve of):

"Dr. McCormick: ...[CDC] wants us to declare, well, these things are pretty safe on a population basis (p. 33).

"Dr. Stratton: ...The point of no return, the line we will not cross in public policy is pull the vaccine, change the schedule. We could say it is time to revisit this, but we would never recommend that level. Even recommending research is recommendations for policy. We wouldn't say compensate, we wouldn't say pull the vaccine, we wouldn't say stop the program. (p. 74)

"Dr. McCormick: ...we are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect...(p. 97)"

http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter6.html

You may have missed my article about thimerosal the other week:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2017/10/autism-and-the-mark-of-thimerosal-a-hypothesis.html

And as we know the schedule just kept expanding.

Regarding the Mawson paper there is nothing unusual in paying to publish with a scientific paper. There is nothing in the story of retraction: one journal chose not to publish following web-bullying by your colleagues.

I would not have thought you admired something like that Sciencemom blog - have you recently undergone a change of personality, or perhaps personel?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6C_zRJqJlc Not sure if I've managed to copy/paste right! If so, this is especially for you, Eindeker.

Well said, John Stone!

Eindeker

What one might note among other things is the bias of the announcement on retraction-watch, the hate talk of Gorski: people who are not remotely concerned about the thoroughly rotten data of DeStefano, or Verstraeten or Fombonne or Madsen. And nor apparently are you. All you concern yourself with are which papers have bureaucratic seals of approval. You've placed your comment under a report of the Mawson paper. Retraction Watch if I remember correctly put out a story that it had been retracted, which to my knowledge never happened. But it wouldn't surprise me if the institutional pressures continue even now. If someone talks of "anti-vaccine pseudoscience" they begin by being the purveyors of pseudoscience themselves. This is bias of a particularly crude, blatant and unpleasant kind. And you come here and talk about "this guy Prof Shaw and his side-kick Tomljenovic"!!!

Info Wars 2.58 in covering it..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4OeSqqZ_NI

Pharma for Prison

MMR RIP

Identity of censoring journal was indeed mentioned: " First Study of Vaccinated versus Unvaccinated Children - Censored by an International Scientific Journal - Now Public Vaccination and Health Outcomes: A Survey of 6- to 12-year-old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children based on Mothers’ Reports, was censored by the journal Frontiers in Public Health".

Back in 2002 when my child was born, some people thought I was crazy for not vaccinating. Well not any longer. I have been waiting 14 years for this vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study. My fears have been validated. Remember that chart which showed the increase in autism highly correlated with the increased vaccination schedule? People said correlation is not causation. Well now we know, it was CAUSATION. Always remember that doctors are fallible, just look at folks who were destroyed by thalidomide, Vioxx, etc. Doctors are not toxicologists and depend on research performed by the Pharma industry hand in hand with the CDC whose entire public health strategy is based on vaccines. Share this study widely and maybe we can get a revised schedule with fewer, greener vaccines.

M.D.D: I also thank you for posting the JB Handley article about aluminum adjuvants. This is a must read. The Al nano particles produce an inflammatory cytokine storm which continues throughout life; they persist, as intended, and can take a year or more to reach the brain, disrupting brain development both in utero and post-natally. Powerful evidence that the primary driver of the epidemic of autism and auto-immune conditions is aluminum.

Problem now:. CDC and AMA are now having pregnant women get the Flu vaccine. This along with a child's vaccines is complicating matters. A study of nonvaccinated should take into consideration the mother's innoculations as well. Now that we are starting to see mothers giving birth who were also over vaccinated, it is hard to just isolate vaccinated vs. non vaccinated. We've poisoned our bodies with too many vaccines, preservatives, artificial colorings and additives, air pollution, pesticides, etc...We've created the perfect storm.

As far as the vaccinated children being vaccinated on schedule, precisely at the right time with the set, AMA-approved vaccines for that well-baby/well-child visit, I had an acquaintance who oversaw vaccines at a medical facility privately confess that doctors regularly "caught up" children with vaccines when the doctors had a chance to see them. She told me that they wanted to vaccinate the children when they had the chance to have them in the office, so some children would get MORE than the AMA-approved, allotted vaccines at any given visit. So some children in this study were likely OVER-vaccinated, too (although as a non-vaccinating parent I think the normal vaccine schedule is horrifically to heavy!)

Benedetta,

I know one individual who reacted as a baby, her mother stopped vaccinating her and she doesn't vaccinate her children as far as I know. One of her children still had (dietary changes significantly helped) severe eczema. One example of how one might be vaccinating generations when vaccinating one.

JB Handley's post is very interesting. Thanks so much!

Hans Litten,

You appear not to have understood anything I have said. I have said consistently that vaccines are dangerous, that I have MS and my daughter has autism, aphasia, and bowel disease from vaccine reactions. It is beyond doubt that standard practice is giving too many vaccines too soon. I do not doubt that every vaccine does at least a little damage, and usually the connection between the vaccine and the problems caused by it is never made. I had a crippling reaction to a tetanus booster when I was 19, my father was paralyzed by a flu vaccine: there is no age beyond which one becomes immune to severe vaccine damage.

I will have to read this study carefully and look at the number of unvaccinated autistic children. I, like most here, believe that vaccines are THE cause of autism, although it may be that vaccinated parents can bequeath their toxic heavy metals and DNA damage to their children which may result in autism even if the children are not vaccinated. A two-fold increase in autism in vaccinated children is not as much as I would have thought.

But you seem to forget the large numbers of people who used to die of what are now vaccine-preventable diseases. And I'd point out that if large numbers of people believe you, that the diseases are NEVER dangerous in well-nourished people, and the vaccines are ALWAYS very dangerous and never beneficial at all, and if they stop vaccinating based on this mistaken belief, then a lot of children would die, there would be a backlash and a return to conventional vaccination practice, at least to some degree.

I have a Mothering book by Peggy O'Mara, Vaccination: The Issue of our Times, published twenty years ago (1997), so it is out of date in many ways, not least of which is that there is not a single mention of autism in it. It has interesting information, though, several very interesting essays by Richard Moskowitz and Dr. Harold Buttram. It has charts with the figures for disease incidence in the worst year in the US since 1920, and figures for incidence now, with additional notes on the death rate.

The worst year for diphtheria was 1921. with reported incidence being 206.939 cases. One out of ten died of it, so about 20,694 people died of it that year, most of them babies and children. On p. 183, it is reported that tribal leader Marie Hughes, chief of an Indian tribe in southern New Mexico, described a diphtheria epidemic in which every last one of the tribe's male children under two years old died of diphtheria because the parents were afraid to give them the vaccine, which was introduced in the US in the 1920s.

Diphtheria can usually be treated with antibiotics at the hospital. It is usually associated with poverty and malnutrition, but not always. It is believed even by vaccine critics to be one of the safer vaccines. (The tetanus, polio, and Hib vaccines are also believed to be among the safer vaccines.) It is not 100% effective, no vaccine is, but it is usually effective.

So what you are going to have to say is that you are uninterested in thousands of babies (increased population now, a lot of impoverished areas, antibiotics continue to lose effectiveness) choking to death from diphtheric membranes closing their throats, making it impossible for them to breathe.

At the time the pertussis vaccine was introduced (before the combination DPT), the worst year was 1934, when there were 265,269 diagnosed cases, with a mortality rate of one in a hundred at that time. so 2,653 deaths a year from pertussis. Fortunately, the disease soon became much milder than it had been, from natural mutations, and mortality had fallen 75% by the 1940s. It has always been a very dangerous vaccine, even in the new acellular form which erased my daughter's words when she got the booster at 18 months, and she was diagnosed with autism two months later. It's only dangerous now to the youngest newborns, less than three or four months old, in whom the vaccine is not effective at all.

The worst year for tetanus (after the thousands killed by it in the Civil War) was 1923, when 1,560 cases were reported, with a 40% mortality, so 624 deaths a year from tetanus. Vitamin C will treat it, but it is not standard protocol. There are effective treatments now, but there is still a fairly high death rate even with hospital care, about 10%.

Rubella is harmless in babies, children, and adults. It is only dangerous to fetuses in the first months of development. The worst year for CRS (congenital birth defects caused by rubella) was in the epidemic of 1964-5, when there were 20,000 babies born with severe defects caused by rubella during pregnancy. The vaccine is dangerous, and often causes arthritis. The disease is mild and beneficial for the development of the immune system (like measles, mumps, and chickenpox). It would be ideal to ensure that all girls got the natural disease in elementary school, even by deliberately giving it to them (same for the other beneficial diseases I mentioned).

I'll have to look up statistics on how dangerous polio was at its height in 1952, when it caused many thousands of cases of permanent paralysis every year.

Hib meningitis was at its worst in the early '80s, when vaccines were becoming less effective at treating it when it occurred. At that time, it caused meningitis in 12,000 babies and toddlers a year, and other kinds of invasive Hib disease in another 8,000. It had a one in twenty death rate even with hospital treatment. The vaccine series was introduced for infants in 1990, and it wiped out invasive HIb disease in the US within a couple of years. It also introduced the peanut allergy epidemic, and caused diabetes in many children. Breastfeeding and avoidance of daycare will prevent it, but it IS a threat to babies still, and the germs are ubiquitous in the environment. Most children have developed subclinical immunity to it by the age of five, if they escape the clinical disease. One in 200 babies got invasive Hib disease in the '80s before the vaccine.

These diseases were not harmless and were not rare. The vaccines have virtually eliminated them. That is true, but of course the vaccines have also disabled a huge percentage of children now. Parents should be judicious and careful, weighing the risks and benefits carefully, but they should never think that because the diseases have almost disappeared, that they could never come back. I have said several times that I think the DT series would be a sensible choice (always a choice, never mandated) after two years old. Breastfeeding prevents most kinds of meningitis (what the mother has been exposed to and developed antibodies to), and is the ideal choice whenever possible for many reasons. For babies not vaxxed and in daycare, the Hib vaccine and Prevnar will be mandated so it won't be a choice, but I think it's a justified regulation. It would be better to wait until four months old, not needed after one year old, and it would be best if parents found an alternative to daycare.

If polio and/or diphtheria were to come back, parents should read as much as they can about the outbreaks, the locations, and the circumstances of those affected, and consider the vaccines for their children. Girls should try to get natural rubella, but if they cannot, they should consider either homeopathic prophylaxis or the vaccine before getting pregnant.

I cannot say anything else. Hans Litten, what you are saying is that it's better to accept potentially tens of thousands of babies and children dying a year from vaccine-preventable diseases than for any of them to get a single vaccine. I cannot go along with that and cannot say it. My mother had a neighbor boy who died of diphtheria in the '30s. The parents were distraught at his illness and called in every doctor in town to try to treat him, but they were not able to, and he choked to death. Have you forgotten how many tens of thousands of babies used to die every year of diphtheria? My father saw a man die of tetanus, brought to the office of his father in Louisiana. Terrible convulsions and paralysis, agonizing pain, and he died of it.

Giving only the DT series would do little harm, there would be few adverse reactions. Adding the Hib series is more problematic, and parents would have to consider it carefully. Objectively, I think that Hib disease disabled or killed more children before the vaccine than peanut allergy, diabetes, or other adverse reactions to the vaccine do now, but it is certainly a decision that must be left up to the parents. And if polio or diphtheria came back, most parents would accept the vaccines for them, and who could blame them? I know I would.

Hans Litten, you should not spend so much time acting as though I were wrong to consider the potential benefits of vaccines as well as the risks. I care about those disabled by vaccine injuries, especially autism, but I also care about babies killed by the diseases.

Jeannette Bishop:
I only know one such parent that gave birth at home, did not vaccinate, and is home schooling.
This Mother was adopted, and has her own health issues.
Two of her children do have autism - mild and she is certain if she had vaccinated they would be worse. Her other two kids also have some health problems that looks to me like it is some kind of mitochondrial disorder or well there are eye problems.

JB Handley wrote an article on my facebook, I have just skimmed over. HE said there was a new study out of China that ties three other known studies all together, of what causes autism. And one of those three things is the Mother's own immune system before or during pregnancy matters. So, to have a vaccinated or unvaccinated study has become a lot more complicated.

This is by-and-large the study (in homeschoolers) that allopathic medicine would have to do according to themselves if I understand them correctly. They claimed they wouldn't be able to adequately match the unvaccinated to the rest of us "regular" people because there were other potentially confounding lifestyle differences.

I just wonder why they don't want to compare overall lifestyle differences for health outcomes to see if we can all learn a few things. I suspect they couldn't find a healthier group of vaccinated children than homeschooled vaccinated children, though there may not be a difference. Something else to study maybe, once the blinders are off, or I probably should say, on.

I agree with the others -- great start! This leaves plenty to debate, discuss and (hopefully) continue to study.

One factor struck me -- why just homeschooled children? I would bet homeschoolers have a much higher population of unvaccinated or semi-vaccinated (not sure that's a word!) kids but I could hear the vaccination Nazis concluding that their better health was affected by simply not coming into contact with nearly as many other kids. Future studies will hopefully include a wider cross-section of children.

This was a start. But it's not nearly enough. There are people who have more money than they could spend in many lifetimes. I wish some of the extremely wealthy would donate several million to honest researchers to conduct a list of studies that need to be done.

So great to see this, FINALLY!!
I'd be curious to learn whether some of the vaccinated children were fully vaccinated or only partially. it would also be interesting to learn if any of the children who were vaccinated had a sibling who wasn't vaccinated due to their older sibling developing a neurodevelopmental disorder.

Like our president has said, it's all rigged.

Eindeker , CIA , Joel - what say you ? now

Let the criminal proceedings begin .

The charge - industrial scale global mass murder (like never ever seen before in history)

The Charged :
Geberding
Boyle
DeStefano
Allsop
Tanya K

(May God have mercy on your souls - for we never will) !

Thanks very much for that Mr Barry very much appreciated and not before time either.Prison for Pharma.

MMR RIP