Studies Show Vaccination-Autism Link

Post Reply New Topic

Roll the dice and take your chances about no vaccines.

A family by me is burying a kid who died from measles this week.

The child was not medically fragile before he/she became ill. The family is in the higher socioeconomic bracket. College educated parents.

But the good thing is the child didn't develop autism. Managed to make it to age 4 without a stim in sight. Woo and Hoo! Take that FDA, the Medico and Pharma complex. That showed THEM.

I don't care anymore let the anti vaxers westle with Uncle Darwin and see who wins.

Humanity has become so spoiled and stupid, we deserve to die out.

Enjoy.

https://youtu.be/QgpfNScEd3M

I'm pretty sure a lot of snobbery is because some autistics are offended at the idea that people want to find ways to prevent autism.

In fact I find a lot of those in that pro-vaccine "cult" are really proud of having autism. Not saying it's a bad thing, just an observation.

Hypothetically lets say that thermasol and mass vaccinations do cause autism, big pharma has been covering it up, and it finally gets exposed in a way that can not be ignored.

People are complaining adults are being told they are not autistic now. A common mantra of the "anti vaxx" movement is "where are the 50 something autistics?" or "there were no autistics when I was growing up" . Under this scenario, this will be considered validated. If this scenario plays out, say goodbye to the Nuerodiversity movement as anything but a small fringe crackpot movement considered harmful charlatans like the anti vaxx movement is looked at now. The idea of "difference" will be considered invalidated. Autistics will be considered as not human or not fully human, something akin to mutants. The idea that "autism" has kidnapped a perfectly normal person would be considered validated. There would be no legitimate reason not to cure autism or genetically engineer it out of existence.

I understand fully that scientists would never say that, there would be caveats galore and the facts would only partially back the above up. It will not matter, facts do not matter in politics, emotional needs do. The Autism scientists would have been proven to be spectacularly wrong and part of a conspiracy to cover up for big pharma and thus would have little to no credibility.

I believe some vaccines cause autism. In 2000 (when I was about 9 or 10) all the kids at my school had to have a vaccination for some type of Meninjitis. But a special needs professional phoned my mum up the day before and told her not to let me have the vaccination because it could "make my Asperger's worse", probably meaning I would turn into a non-verbal autistic kid or something. So I didn't have the vaccination.

I never actually knew if it was actually true or not. I mean, most 9-year-olds with mild Asperger's aren't diagnosed, so if they had the vaccination, would they suddenly have turned into an autistic kid?

It's also just been linked to vitamin-D deficiency in utero.

It's almost like it wants a reason to happen

I have no problem accepting that there might be several factors which can lead to autism. Genetics, birth trauma, chemical exposure - it might have been a different root cause for each of us. For any medication, there will always be a small percentage of people who react badly, and it makes sense to me that some people will react badly to vaccines.

That being said, I do think it's better to vaccinate and maybe(?) risk a tiny chance of autism, than to not vaccinate, and risk a scientifically proven, much larger chance of even worse problems.

If the anti-vaxxers actually lived in the pre-vaccination era, I would say they would change their minds about not taking vaccines.

Imagine living in a world where diseases like smallpox, whooping cough, diphtheria, and that ilk were rife? A world where one would find constant quarantine notices on your neighbors' doors, and "X's" written on doors of houses where somebody died.

Even in the 1950's, they would close swimming pools for weeks (in the hottest part of the summer) because of polio.

I'm sure that this point has been made already, but I wanted to chuck my hat in to the ring regardless.

I think this all can be reduced down to bias. A site like HealthImpactNews (for example) has a strong "alternative medicine"/anti-pharm editorial direction, so will subject work that supports its agenda to less scrutiny than that which opposes it. Many autism/vaccine studies that report positive findings have large conflicts of interest that lean on research to produce certain results. This can be further confounded by poor scientific method and/or confirmation bias within the studies themselves, not to mention poor conclusions being drawn.

The answer is that it would be nice if we were all suitably equipped to critically appraise things presented as fact (something any research study worth a damn will not do, they merely comment on how strong a link appears to be) and be mindful of what agendas are at play when we read things condensed down and presented as being news.