Studies Show Vaccination-Autism Link

Post Reply New Topic

Pretty much.

Also while I'm not an anti-vaxxer and I have suspicions that vaccines can at the very least increase the chances of Autism, I do not believe they are a direct cause because Autism is epigenetic.

If there is evidence out there that vaccines can raise the chance of Autism occurring I think it's a sensible choice for governments/scientist to hide that information because the consequences of it being released would be devastating.

citation? i'm pretty sure Autism rates are the same every where through out the world.

My father is 81. You can't imagine all the cousins' funerals he went to as a kid.

Polio
Measles
Mumps
Whooping cough
Diphtheria

And he almost died of tetanus.

Almost every family back then had at least one dead kid that didn't die in infancy.

They grew up on farms, so everything was organic/non GMO. Supposedly that should have made them have super human immune systems to fight off this crap.

My 89 year old uncle has two f****d up legs from polio.

Going to school and finding out a classmate died wasn't a rare event like it is now.

It wasn't a joke having 10 kids. Two died because of new born issues. That leaves you 8. 3 bite it from measles/flu/whatever. That leaves 5 to hopefully take care of you in old age.

Forgot to mix in the rogue accident into the dead tally.

So yeah, buying family plots was pretty common back then. It wasn't so much for grandma or grandpa, but the children who never would make it to adulthood.

http://vactruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/vaccines-have-consequences.jpg

http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/11-countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-autism-in-the-world-357960/?singlepage=1

True, they're not scientific journals, so you can disregard them. The only scientific journal I could find on this subject was from 2009, and the autism rate was still 1 in 150 for America. Data has changed a lot since then.

Unless you can find a more recent scientific journal article about this topic, that's the best information we have.

Last edited by 248RPA on 29 Dec 2016, 9:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Another moderate risk factor?




Caesarean section and risk of autism across gestational age: a multi-national cohort study of 5 million births.

Int J Epidemiol. 2016 Dec 25;:

Authors: Yip BH, Leonard H, Stock S, Stoltenberg C, Francis RW, Gissler M, Gross R, Schendel D, Sandin S

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The positive association between caesarean section (CS) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be attributed to preterm delivery. However, due to lack of statistical power, no previous study thoroughly examined this association across gestational age. Moreover, most studies did not differentiate between emergency and planned CS.
METHODS: Using population-based registries of four Nordic countries and Western Australia, our study population included 4 987 390 singletons surviving their first year of life, which included 671 646 CS deliveries and 31 073 ASD children. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for CS, adjusted for gestational age, site, maternal age and birth year. Stratified analyses were conducted by both gestational age subgroups and by week of gestation. We compared emergency versus planned CS to investigate their potential difference in the risk of ASD.
RESULTS: Compared with vaginal delivery, the overall adjusted OR for ASD in CS delivery was 1.26 (95% CI 1.22-1.30). Stratified ORs were 1.25 (1.15-1.37), 1.16 (1.09-1.23), 1.34 (1.28-1.40) and 1.17 (1.04-1.30) for subgroups of gestational weeks 26-36, 37-38, 39-41 and 42-44, respectively. CS was significantly associated with risk of ASD for each week of gestation, from week 36 to 42, consistently across study sites (OR ranged 1.16-1.38). There was no statistically significant difference between emergency and planned CS in the risk of ASD.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/280 ... t=Abstract

Tawaki has first-hand experience with what can occur if vaccines were not administered.

I would listen to her.

Both of my parents grew up in the 1960s and 1970s in a country that was underdeveloped for that time. Meaning, no vaccines.

My dad doesn't talk much about his family but I know that my mom has at least 3 uncles that died before adulthood. Two died from illnesses in childhood that are vaccine preventable today. Another had a polio-disfigured leg and fell down the stairs because of that and died from a head injury. She also knew children who died or are scarred/disfigured from diseases that are vaccine preventable today. My parents did not hesitate to vaccinate me.

Some parents are so warped they would rather a child dies from non vaccination than a slight risk of autism from vaccination. For them better a dead child than a child with autism.

Some are like that, but I think a lot of anti vaxxers think there is a significant risk from reading "true horror stories" of a happy toddler being vaccinated and severe autism with a host of crippling co morbids soon following. People are very conspiracy theory minded and for good reasons today.

It's interesting how I found out that many relatives died during between 1900-1960-ish.

In my family it was considered "bad luck" to speak about dead children. The kids died, you buried them and life went on.

My family also does not recycle dead children's names. That was considered tempting fate. I wanted to name my DD Natalie. You would have thought I told them I wanted to name her Hitler.

"You can't do that. I had a cousin named Natalie, and she died of mumps in 1930. It's considered disrespectful and mega bad luck."

I asked for the off limits names and there were about 20 on the girls' side. The bulk of what killed them were disease we vaccinate for now.

So when people say they never heard about people dying from tetanus, it could be like my family, it was the custom to never talk about the children or how they died.

My husband had a brother who died at 9 mons old. I didn't know that fact until I had dated him for five years and then was married for five. That child died from the flu in 1963.

I did not read the 100+ studies, but I did read the titles of many. What I saw was that it wasn't the biological component that would cause antibodies in the vaccine recipient, but rather it was mercury (and other mineral) components of vaccines, that was being reported on.

In other words, vaccination in itself isn't implicated; vaccines containing thimerosal and other toxic metal compounds are implicated. This should be no surprise as most of these things are toxic in themselves.

We should be looking to make the vaccination compounds safer, not looking to avoid the activity of exposure to killed or denatured antigens to provoke an immune response.

That's why I mentioned that research should be done pertaining to preservatives, or to substances like Mercury.

Valid point, Bea.

My grandparents have always insisted that there is a connection, since they saw a change in me as a toddler right around the time I got vaccinated (I believe for MMR). I always sort of scoffed at it, but I'm thinking that if there is a connection, it's that people who exhibit autistic traits after being vaccinated were already predisposed to it in the first place. I can identify people on both sides of my family who have autistic traits, most notably my own father.

I think more research needs to be done, and people need to continue being vaccinated in the meantime. Having a rare few people end up autistic is better than having a bunch of people become susceptible to diseases like whooping cough.

I still note that thoughts of a link go back as far as one study in England which had the flaw of small sample size and a further matter of an undeclared conflict of interest.

Its conjecture was further wrakenned by the lack of any convincing mechanism to bring about the changes in brain interconnection now understood to be behind autism.

Its best oeffort appeared to be a conjecture around some damage to the gut or allowing passage of elements from the gut into the blood which might not ordinarily pass.

The active part of a vaccine is the organism which causes the desease against which one vaccinates, BUT, the organism is dead or severely weakened. It trains the body immune system to recognise the organism so that if the person is infected in the future the immune system deals with the organism before it can do any serious harm.

The study was further confounded because others failed to reporoduce the results.

The whole matter looks like a case of fraud, and the consequences have included preventable deaths.

Also, if the vast majority of children are vaccinated, how do they have a decent control group? It would be like saying that a test in Africa indicates that black individuals are more likely to die of communicable diseases because of the color of their skin. There isn't a significant amount of non-black Africans to conduct a proper study, plus it would discount poverty and lack of adequate resources.

Indeed, a Proper study requires two large groups. One receives the vaccine, one receives a dummy, such as saline.

No one receiving or administering the shot knows whether it is actaul vaccine or the dummy.

The rates of development of autism are the recorded over the next few years.

If vaccines are linked to autism one would observe a significant proportion of the vaccinated group to be identified as autistic. This would not be one or two one would be looking for ten percent or more from a large sample.

Similar trials are done to obsrvr whether the vaccine gives any actual protection from the disease and whether harmful side effects are observed.

Mercury was removed from many vaccine preservatives as a precaution some years ago

The best informed opinion one could make from Wakefield's paper at the time was the possibility of some unknown susceptibility in a Very small number of individuals where further research could be valuable, for example identify a case where three separate vaccinations posed a lower risk.

The public may have been suspicious of MMR being g pushed as a cheaper option to the separate vaccinations.

The study only ever fingered the combined Neasels Mumps and Rubella vaccination, not vaccines in general.

As has been stated elsewhere, no other study reproduced Wakefield's conclusions.

Wakefield had no competancy in disciplines such as neuroscience.

Wakefield was being paid by a law firm hoping to make a significant amount of money representing claimants in a civil court action against a Vaccine maker.

Wakefield failed to disclose this payment and the conflict of interest it created.

The flaws in the research were serious that the journal which published the paper withdrew and disowned it. Other researcers identified in the paper have withdrawn their names and disowned it.

There is one entirely circumstantion observation. The regressive presentation of autism is observed varound the time routine vaccinations are received. It is better to observe that vacinnatiobs ate routinely given at or around the age where the regressive presentation ofcautism is observed.