Curious: What exactly do we hate about Autism Speaks?

Post Reply New Topic

If you are that au fait with everything, obviously you have no need to listen.

... except for the fact that you chose to quote them on it, and I replied.

I absolutely did not make such a meaningless statement. You should try reading other people's short responses to your long eulogies for Autism Speaks.

Then why is it not only at the top of their list of treatments (a list which was there in a single page, a couple of days ago, but now seems to have moved into the sidebar menu), but also followed by an unbroken sequence of behaviour modification (brain-washing) techniques based on it (with the exception of TEACCH).

Thank you.

You made an assertion that was not correct that I failed to read the information from the website. I simply responded that I was familiar with all the information, you presented from the website, and pursued it further. I wasn't suggesting I was an expert on it. I didn't realize the same person that founded ARI/DAN founded the Autism Society of America. Info. that Herr Grimm presented. That was interesting.

I was incorrect in making a universal statement that your response had nothing to do with what I was discussing. It was indeed a correlation that you presented that had a loose association with Autism Speaks official policy statement on vaccines, however I suggest no real causation that would disprove Autism Speaks policy statement.

Much of ARI/Dan's alternate environmental research has been shot down. But the founder has certainly contributed a great deal to help autistic people, that needed help as well, through his half decade effort.

It's already been proven that the amount of thirmesol in vaccines was not enough to cause symptoms of autism, but the general understanding that Mercury damages the nervous system, is a well documented fact, so the potential thirmesol association/correleation was worth pursuing, although not proven true.

It was taken out of vaccines, which while no association or causation was proven, it can't hurt not to have a form of mercury injected into an infant. Probably an overall wise decision. ASA and NAA still believe there could be somekind of association between mercury in the environment and autism. And studies continue to link the general environmental factor of mercury as a possible link to Autism, along with many other environmental factors.

Sorry, I didn't quote your exact words. Association and Correlation mean close to the same thing though.



correlation is not causation, though is a pretty good description of many of the arguments that are presented that autism speaks is up to no good, and reasons why people shoud hate the organization on a personal level.

More than a few examples:

They sponsored a conference that Andrew Wakefield spoke at so this means they are an anti vaccine organization.

The VP of Autism Speaks reportedly sent an interview, that talks to the importance that people should understand that there is no proven link between autism and vaccines, from the autism speaks website, to an individual that supported the idea that thirmesol in vaccines was not safe.

This means that the VP is an anti-vaccine guy because he was in contact with an "anti-vaccine" guy. And there was a conpiracy because it sounded like he wanted to distance himself from the indivdual that he contacted, in the private email, that was publically released.

ABA is the first treatment listed in a series of therapies commonly used in the US that they present as information on their website; this means it's their favorite therapy.

They talked to Watson the guy behind the human genome project, at his laboratory about autism. This guy is a proponent of some extreme eugenics ideas, so since the founders of Autism Speaks met with him, it means they support his eugenics ideas.

Someone at a conference that represents autism speaks didn't let an autistic person speak, so there is an organized effort by autism speaks to censor autistics.

Someone's comment was seen as offensive, and got deleted on the Autism Speaks facebook site, so this means there is an organized effort to censor autistics.

Even though the organization is only one of the three top national autism organizations in the US, to actually promote the proven benefits of vaccines, the fact that they list third party references and books on their site, that they clearly state they don't recommend, that question the safety of vaccines, thirmesol, etc. means they are trying to scare parents into believing vaccinations are not safe.

They have some third party references to Defeat Autism Now related doctors, among many other medical professionals that provide support for autism; that they clearly state they don't personally recommend, in their disclaimer statement.

Some of these Doctors believe that heavy metal poisioning is associated with autism, so they suggest chelation as possible treatment for heavy metal poisioning in Autistic children.

This means that autism speaks supports chelation as a therapy for autism, although on their site, it clearly states that the FDA does not even support chelation research as safe on autistic children, and it is not an FDA approved treatment for Autism.

However, if a blood test shows serious heavy metal poisioning it is an approved treatment for that by itself.

Recent research suggests that some autistic individuals do not detox heavy metals the way that normal individuals do, and other research suggests they do. The thirmesol research regarding vaccines has been disproven as a link with autism, but the overall association with autism and mercury is still one that is being pursued by research world wide.

Thirmesol is not even in vaccines anymore, in the US, so mercury and vaccines are no longer a concern, except for the people that still insist they should have legal rights to compensation, because they believe their children were harmed by them, regardless of what research has determined. Believing there was a government conspiracy, to coverup the problem through biased research.

In this case some of the parents believe the correlation that autism speaks has with their partnership with the CDC, along with their pro-vaccine stance, means they are part of a government conspiracy to cover up the thirmesol issue with the government.

While at the same time there are other people suggesting they are an anti-vaccine organization, because they support research on subgroups of autistic individuals that may have underlying biological issues that make them more succeptible to the effects of vaccines, that is research reccommended by highly respected individuals in the medical community.

A company used internationally, based in China, to sequence genomes, is sequencing genomes in partnership with Autism Speaks. This means there is a conspiracy with Autism Speaks and the Chinese Government. And more proof that they are a Eugenics organization.

They study genetics of autism, and it was hoped that a definitive cause of autism might have been discovered, therefore they are a NAZI organization, and an abortion organization, because woman might use that information, from a prenatal test, if it were developed, to exercise their legal right to have an abortion.

They would be responsible for murdering innocent autistics, because they were associated with this world wide research, not the individuals that chose to use that information, for their decision for a legal abortion, not to mention the many other organizations that have been pursuing the same genetic research for 14 years, and normally no mention at all of the actual for-profit organizations that are specifically pursuing genetic tests for autism.

A company told a guy that they couldn't produce his T-shirts with an Autism Speaks slogan on it, because of autism speaks. Finally when someone asked autism speaks if it was actually a problem, it was understood as the companies error, the guy admitted it was not autism speaks error, but the same false story still circulates as the truth.

Autism Speaks lawyers sent a cease and desist letter to a teenager that ran a website, that they stated infringed on their registered trademarks, that they were at obligation to protect.

This means they were intentionally bullying a fourteen year old autistic girl by threatening to sue her for her legal right to parody, although there is no evidence that they knew the individual was either a teenager or an autistic individual that built the website when they sent the letter, no legal proof that they made a threat of suing the girl, and no legal proof that the website actually met legal guidelines for fair use.

And finally no physical evidence of the website even exists, to test any legal claim that it met fair use guidelines at this point in time.

Autism Speaks employees are highly paid to run a multi-million dollar charitable organization with world wide influence, this means they are intentionally ripping off parents by inflating their salaries, although the expenses of the organization clearly meet and exceed required BBB standards, meet IRS standards for Non-profit organizations, and are at the same level as similiar sized charitable organizations with world wide influence, on watchdog group sites like guidstar.org.

Not only does this mean autism speaks is ripping off parents, all the other charitable organizations are ripping off people too, because they are getting big paychecks too, for what they do.

They made two videos that portrayed a very negative side of autism. This means they hate all autistic people. People criticized them for it because they found it offensive, they removed it from their website to accommodate those individuals concerns, this still means they hate autistic people.

They said they want to eradicate autism, remove it from the history books. This means they want to get rid of autistic people.

They used Cancer, Aids, and Diabetes in the same sentence to express an analogy of the prevalence of autism. This means that are suggesting that Autism is as bad, if not worse than Cancer, Aids, and Diabetes all put together, because it is more prevalent than all three of these diseases put together. It also means that Autism is a disease.

They did an interview that stated they are not pursuing a prenatal test, do not want to get rid of autism and understand that some people with autism are gifted, apologized for mistakes they admitted to making in the past, that were not intended to offend anyone, stated that a cure meant curing the co-morbid conditions related to autism, along with other questions that individuals in the autistic community came up with.

Someone from autism speaks said this, all people from autism speaks lie, so this means that none of what they say can be trusted.

Autism speaks should have more autistic people on their board. Autistic people that are associated with autism should no longer be part of online communities, particularly if they recieve a paycheck from the organization. These people can no longer be trusted because of the association with autism speaks.

And finally, Autistic people speak, some autistic people don't agree with what they say, so they have no right to say they can speak for autistic people by calling themselves autism speaks.

The part about the grandson of the founder losing the ability to speak through regressive autism, and the whole thing being motivated by their personal experience of wanting that child to have a voice, as well as others like him, might have something to do with it, too.

Most everything here from what I can see is a misunderstanding of correlation equaling causation that once one is provided all the facts, don't quite mean the same thing as they do when part of the story is presented.

It is obvious that some PR mistakes have been made by the organization, because some have taken offense to the words, pictures, and videos they have used portray autism. They have admitted to those mistakes.

As far as real evidence that the organization is somekind of real threat to autistic people. There really isn't anything solid that I've seen so far that proves that, certainly nothing that would stand up in a court of law.

Their intentions appear to have been good, they've made some mistakes, but there appear to be many more organizations out there, that based on the main concerns that have been mentioned about autism speaks, apply much more to those other organizations that Autism Speaks.

They are rarely mentioned here, unless there is some type of correlation between them and autism speaks.

Examples would be the Autism Research Institute/Defeat Autism Now, Autism Society of America, National Autism Association, and all the "for profit" research corporations that are actively seeking a prenatal/postnatal genetic tests for autism.

The Judge Rottenberg Center JRC has gotten some threads for obviously truly bad stuff, and that reminds me, another example:

Autism speaks heavily denounced the penn state tragedy, but did not denounce JRC like they denounced the Penn State Tragedy, so this means that Autism Speaks was at fault for not making a simliar statement of denouncement about JRC. Penn State was a better opportunity to make themselves look good, so they snatched up that opportunity.

It's interesting to watch an urban myth grow. It appears to have started with the name, and the latest part that I have heard is the conspiracy with the Chinese Government.

Meanwhile they continue to get free advertisement here, moreso I think from interesting correlations, and the continuing drama, than any intentional effort to promote the organization.

This is one of those unintended "NT" phenomenons that I don't think some understand is the actual result of what is seen by some as an admirable effort to try to bring the organization down.

I don't support anything bad that an organization might do, I would be interested in seeing any facts backed up by evidence that they are intending significant harm to autistics; if you have access to that I would like to see it.

As was shown with Penn State Football, no organization no matter how well respected is subject to reproach, and yes, in the US, unlike the Autistica organization in the UK, the Autism Speaks organization in the US, is highly respected, by the overwhelming majority of the public.

The UK has Universal health care. It must make a huge differrence in the diagnosis of Aspergers, and the influence that higher functioning autistic people have there.

I recently saw a statistic from a source in the UK, that stated a third of individuals are identified as diagnosed with Aspergers over there, for total cases of ASD's. Could be because of the recent research done in the UK on the adult population; I'm not sure.

Over here there aren't any good statistics for Aspergers, Wiki provides one that indicates about 5 percent, way below what I saw for the UK. It would probably be 30 percent over here, if all the folks without health insurance with Aspergers had the ability to get diagnosed. Maybe that will change in the US in the future with better access to healthcare.

And with that, maybe there will be more support and rights for people with Aspergers over here. It's pretty non-existent now. We have the "ADA", but it doesn't appear many want to take advantage of it, in the workplace, that have Aspergers.

Let's see:

When did this happen? I said in the References page they had Wakefield's workplace. I never said they sponsored one. Not that I am aware of.



Not reportedly. He did. David Kirby realized his error when he posted it on the Evidence of Harm forum and deleted it.



Which it was. Because you are presuming a long-standing, well-respected autism blog just makes up stories to bash Autism Speaks.



You yourself admitted you would take the books down, and you made the insane notion that they might stay up because you don't want to make others angry. The very sentence in the statement that says, "well, they MIGHT cause symptoms," is unethical and proven repeatedly false.



They don't recommend the DOCTOR. If you know the treatment doesn't work, it should not be there. It explicitly states a homeopath on one reference thread. Can you explain to me how homeopathy works PERIOD, not just for someone with autism? The medical community doubts if DAN! actually gives support.



Never said that AT ALL. If you know the treatment does not work, and it says the treatment their reference page, why is it there?



What research? Show sources. please.



That is NOT what it says. It says immunizations might trigger the onset. Not my argument at all, and I am sticking to the statement you gave me. Nevermind that highly respected individuals in the scientific community were very negative of Bernadine Healy's statements when she said something to that extent in an interview.



Apparently I did not make myself clear, and I understand that. I apologize. When they said "Cancer, Diabetes, and Juvenile AIDS combined" in the video, it was really just "Cancer and Diabetes," with juvenile AIDS (with no significant prevalence compared to the other two, and really extraneous) thrown in. It was shock value.

The other things you mentioned are secondary to what is important for me, and I'll let the others speak about that. To be honest, I felt the "parody site" was VERY borderline, and if I was a company I would have done the same thing. And the books, despite how unfair I think they are, are actually clean, because the trick is electricity, Internet, "building maintenance," etc. is included in that percentage figure, and is acceptable according to the law.

My point is there is EXTREMELY bad, false, and dangerous science on the site. This is not just my argument, this is known scientific and medical fact based on reading other journals and autism-related material. The site FORMAT may have changed, but the CONTENT never did. In fact, every positive thing I found got buried after a week and the resources still were there as if nothing happened in current events. That is dishonest to me. I don't understand how long it takes to read an article, note "hey, this is bad information and might mislead people," (which they dd for the "parody" site) and take it off. They make more than enough money for someone to check the website for errors. You agreed the books should be taken down anyway.

My statements were not in reference to you directly, just a summary of how correlated events have been used in opposition to Autism Speaks, that had no direct causal ties.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/08/why-is-autism-speaks-sponsoring-a-conference-featuring-andrew-wakefield/

This particular incident was used by someone else to suggest that it was evidence that Autism Speaks supports Wakefield's disproven theories.

I used the word reportedly because I didn't see an autism speaks website address in the emails that were presented.

And I also didn't see an effort to get Bell's response in defense of the assumption that the individual made in the article that there was evidence that he was supporting Kirby's cause, against the safety of vaccines.

Since the interview supported the fact that there were no proven links with autism and vaccinations, I don't see it as support for Kirby. The only thing that was presented in the interview was respected scientific facts regarding vaccinations, and other potential environmental impacts associated with autism that merited further study from the Director of the NICHD.

I think it would be better for them to ask Bell himself on his intentions rather than to assume what his actual intentions were from a few words in an email. At most it appears he was trying to distance himself from Kirby, for PR reasons, and probably trying to get the word out that Autism Speaks vaccination policy was in aligment with the director of the NICHD. There is really no way of knowing for sure though, without asking him.

This happened before with the T-shirt incident and the Parody site, assumptions and judgements were made, without any input from Autism Speaks. In one case the incident was cleared up, in the other case a clear explanation was given.

The last time I looked at their book reference section they had a Wakefiled book there, and from what I can see it has been removed. He was the only individual whose vaccine research was discredited that had a book there that I am aware of. Looking at the other books some are actually pro-vaccine, and the others argue the thirmesol conspiracy theories.

But, since thirmesol is no longer in vaccines, I don't really see much danger there to convince people not to vaccinate.

Since, Mercury is associated with Neurological damage that wasn't too far fetched of a theory, and there was enough concern to remove it from vaccines, so it's not surprising some still hold these government conspiracy theories.

I agree with the research that provides evidence that the amount of thirmesol in vaccines did not cause problems for autistic children, however there is a significant amount of mercury sources in the environment as a whole that could influence neurological damage, depending on the extent of exposure.

It's already a known fact that mercury is a neurotoxin, the link provided below regarding a correlation between autism and mercury in recent research, speaks to that issue in more detail. It's not close to conclusive, but it's pretty interesting.

The only book I see there that could reasonably be one that might convince people not to vaccinate is the "Vaccine Epidemic" book. That one seems over the top to me, although, it doesn't present any fraudalent facts that I can see from researching the book. And mit hasn't been widely discredited as far as I can see.

That is the only book I see a real concern about; if it was up to me I would remove the book from the list. The website it links one to reminds me of the the terrorist threat level warnings we use to get in the US.

There are also books there that talk against pseudoscientific cures for Autism, pretty much every point of view is presented.

My strongest objection in the past was the fact that Wakefield's book was still there after he had been discliplined for fraud. Not seeing the same problem there I saw before. It appears they heard the criticism about Wakefield's book and removed it unless I missed it.

The "might trigger the onset of symptoms of autism", was in reference to their specific support of research in the biology or genetics of a subgroup of autistic children that could make them more succeptible to ill effects of vaccines that they are pursuing

That research was recommended by the Director of CIHD, Alexander, as presented in the same interview that Bell forwarded to Kirby, and is supported as a valid scientific area of research to continue with.

I don't see anything unethical about research in support of public health concerns, as long as the merit of the research has been established in the scientific community. They clearly state that parents should vaccinate their children to protect from serious disease and state the benefits of vaccines have been proven to outweigh any risks, in the other statement I presented regarding findings from the Institute of Medicine.

There are risks in all vaccines just as there are risks in wearing a seatbelt. In both cases science has weighed in on the benefits outweighing the risks.

One does not need to ignore the risks either, as seen with children and seat belts in the past.

In this case there appears to be a specific area of concern that remains, in rare cases associated with autism that should not be ignored due to possible underlying biological or genetic conditions.

I'm not seeing that as unreasonable or unethical, and understand that some don't want to see any research at all, but I can't see harm in pursuing a remaining valid area of concern. It could potentially be beneficial to some autistic children in the future.

Actually my blue cross blue shield insurance covers massage therapy for fibromyalgia, although my rheumatologist won't recommend it, and hypnotherapy, which is nothing more than the power of positive suggestion.

I don't really know what specific homeopathic remedies the particular individual offers for autism, but one can make an informed decision about that, as well by talking to their doctor or researching the available evidence on any efficacy that is produced from it.

I would imagine in most cases homeopathy reduces anxiety through the power of positive suggestion just like hypnotherapy does. The mind plays a role in this, and it appears to have a significant impact on some, at least temporarily.

I personally can't see what it would do for autism, except for potentially reducing anxiety in some cases. I haven't researched the specifics, but from what I have seen in general of homeopathy, that seems to be the main effect, reduction in anxiety levels through positive suggestion, placebo effect, positive illusion, power of prayer, or whatever one wants to call it; they all seem to temporarily reduce anxiety for some individuals.

Seems like I remember some research that suggested hypnotherapy and the placebo effect doesn't work as well with an autistic mind, so that might not be a good route to go, for an autistic person. That would be an interesting study in itself.

Chelation is only FDA approved for Heavy metal poisioning, and DAN certified doctors can only use it if a blood test indicates heavy metal poisioning. Insurance won't cover it without the appropriate diagnostic tests. Thirmesol has been out of vaccines for almost 10 years, so if there is heavy metal poisioning it's not a vaccine related issue now, it would be an area of concern in other areas of the environment.

Link regarding recent research on autism and mercury in the environment.:

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20110908-22477.html

I mispoke using the word detox. Some research shows autistic children excrete heavy metals more, some less. There is no definitive evidence in either direction. The recent research isn't specifically related to detoxification, instead, over exposure to mercury from environmental causes.

I understand that Bernadine Healey died, last Summer. From what I read about her on Wiki she didn't support the Institute of Medicine report of no conclusive evidence on a link between autism and vaccines and she thought there was a government conspiracy to cover up the problem.

That is opposite from Autism Speaks official stance that I provided evidence for both from the Institute of medicine and in regard to their partnership with the CDC since 2006, and general cooperative effort with the US government on all matters related to autism, through the different national institutes.

Every resource on their site, isn't backed up by science, but it appears among other national organizations in the US, that they by far are a more reputable organization in regard to a scientific view in their official statements regarding autism, the vaccine issue, and science in general.

It appears that both the ASA and NAA are more in alignment with the "Vaccine Epidemic" book that appeared as a reference on Autism Speaks reference page.

here is my question for autism speaks bashers,not that im a A.S sapporter at all.if autism speaks is so hung up on these vaccine theories,then why are people so concerned about eugenics.why would an org. that believes autism is caused by enviremental factors,want to use pre natal testing and abortion to curb the quote"autism epidemic".wouldnt that be like someone who thinks violence is caused by social injustice,using dna samples of convicts to findout if there is a genetic link to violence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal#Autism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlatio ... _causality
http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/s ... stics.aspx

Thanks for the definitions; I'm not seeing where they refute anything that I have said here, other than thiomersal has been removed from vaccines.

My reference was to childhood vaccines; I didn't specify childhood vaccines; in case that was unclear, I was referring to the vaccine concerns related to thiomersal for children, when I stated thiomersal was removed from vaccines 10 years ago. I understand that thiomersal is still in a few vaccines, for adults, in the US and UK, and is not regulated in some other countries.

The way you used correlation is not causation, in relationship to a correlation between vaccines and the triggering of autism symptoms that you used, reminded me of all the correlations people use for Autism Speaks that equal causes with no proven evidence, other than the correlations themselves.

Autism speaks didn't say vaccines trigger the onset of Autism symptoms in their policy statement on vaccines. They said they might trigger the onset of Autism symptoms in rare groups of individuals, that is a hypothesis, to be researched, not a statement of correlation is causation.

Anyway, I used it as an analogy, for the Inferences and Assumptions that people come to in support for hatred of autism speaks. I understand that inferences and assumptions not based on actual evidence would have been as good a phrase to use, but I thought the analogy to be appropriate, all things considered.

Thanks for the NAS link from the UK. It does explain the statistic of 36 per 10,000 for Aspergers was from actually screening and examining a population of children in 1993.

As far as I know this hasn't been done in the US.

Then I noticed when they gave statistics for the total ASD's they use a number of 90 out of 10,000, almost identical to official US numbers in US of 91 out of 10,000, using similiar methodology.

In addition, they indicate very few individuals with Aspergers where identified in that overall study.

Pretty much sounds like what is going on with statistics in the US.

However, there haven't been any cross screening and examinations of children in the US, for Aspergers, I know of, that are published in the US.

I'm guessing, if they did, the statistics might be similiar, if they perfromed such a study in the US for Aspergers.

Interesting that Wiki doesn't provide that information on the 36 out of 10,000 number from that study, but I guess, it is because of the methdology they use, instead of using pre-existing diagnoses, as the CDC does, and the other study for total ASD's reported on the NAS site in the UK.

Last edited by aghogday on 01 Dec 2011, 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I want clarification about this before going further.

Are you implying that homeopathy has a legitimate medical use/is a legitimate medical field? Just a yes or no will do.

Because they have research in both fields. I don't know what else to tell you. I don't prescribe to the 'eugenics' angle really, but that is not for this thread or my argument right now.

EDIT: Actually, if you say autism is caused by both genetic and environmental factors, they would not be contradictory positions.

I don't like those ret*d puzzle ribbons.

I guess you got bored trying to pull this off on PPR?

That depends on what one means by legitimate.

If by legitimate you mean legal, yes techinically it is a legal form of alternative/complementary medicine, the FDA regulates homeopathic remedies associated with it, and there are licensed medical doctors that also are certified in homeopathy whom legally practice homeopathy in their medical practice as complementary medicine per Wiki.

In some countries it is a legitimate field of alternative/complementary medicine that is part of the training in medical universities per Wiki.

If by legitimate you mean has it been proven by science to be medically effective, beyond the placebo effect, no, not conclusively, per Wiki.

If the placebo effect is all one is looking for as a result in pursuing homeopathic remedies, it's a reasonable pursuit, however an expensive one considering that the remedies themselves have been scientifically proven no more effective than a sugar pill, per my opinion.

I don't like them because they discount the children whose parents can document a clear link to vaccine induced autism, as opposed to being born this way. Vaccines DO hurt people. Many parents have sued and won millions from the US Centers for Disease Control, which has a huge trust fund to pay out lawsuits from people injured or killed from their experimental vaccines.
The HPV vaccine has killed over 83 American girls/women. Many people link Sudden Infant Death syndrome to accute vaccine toxicity. All flu vaccines contain thimerasol/mercury.

check out: garynull.com for a load of info on the damages vaccines have caused.

*I am of the belief that vaccine induced Autism, or other issues, are caused from a combination of the child's weakened immune system and the toxic fillers, formaldehyde, aluminum, and yes sometimes mercury that get injected directly into their bloodstream.

I don't like the Autism Speaks commercials either. They remind me of those sad
puppy and kitten commercials from the ASPCA, etc. ... I mean, doesn't Toni Braxton sound sad in her new Autism Speaks commercial with her son?

Just for clarification, per the CDC website, in the US thirmerosal is not included in single dose units or nasal sprays with the vaccines. Although, thirmerosal has not been correlated with autism per scientific studies, if a parent is still concerned and wants their child to be vaccinated for the flu they can use single dose units, if they want to avoid thirmerosal, in the flu vaccine.

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/thimerosal.htm

Don't know if you have visited the autism speaks website, by they do still support research in the potential underlying biology and genetic issues with autism that along with vaccinations might trigger the symptoms of autism in rare groups of individuals.

It is in their policy statement there, and there are links in this thread to other articles on their website as well, regarding their policy on continued limited research in this area.

They would be doing all a disservice if they were to indicate that vaccines cause autism when their is no scientific research, that currently supports that this idea.

However, they continue the research where it is merited, so they are neither discounting the children that have been documented to have fallen ill after the vaccinations and have exhibited symptoms of autism, or the vaccinations that are important in protecting all against dangerous viruses.

A recent report shows a resurgence in the measles virus in Europe, that is suggested to be caused by a reduction in vaccinations their over the fear of vaccines, in the last 10 years. A similiar report was also released in the US, recently.

It's really a controversial issue, where it is important that all the available facts are provided, that allow a parent to feel comfortable giving the vaccinations, that are considered necessary by public health services, to their children.

I went to the Gary Null site, and noted where he suggests that the HIV virus does not cause AIDS and suggests alternative means of treatment, disregarding current scientific treatments. Because of that statement I would question, any other information he may provide there on whether or not it has scientific merit.

Vaccines do have side effects, and some have suffered those side effects, however current research from the Institute of Medicine, part of the Academy of Sciences, state the benefits outweigh the risks, and there is no proven link between vaccines and autism.

They aren't associated with the government, and are an independent, highly respected medical organization. I trust that they are providing the best information possible on these issues, based on the best science available to pursue the issues of concern that people have.

I don't like the sad charitable organization commercials either, I choose not to watch them.

As sad as they are, it is what viscerally motivates many to contribute to worthy causes.

I hate them because I am f*****g SICK of being seen as a disease, something broken, something that needs to be fixed.

I have strengths and weaknesses-- just like anyone else. Mine are just different.

I am f*****g SICK of hearing about what a burden I am, how hard loving me is, how unfortunate for my spouse and children, how unrewarding it must be for them...

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

Autism Speaks has done about as much for my well-being as the kids who pushed me down the stairs and told me to die in grade school.

Autism has a lot more to say than what they're willing to acknowledge.

Bunch of self-righteous NT parents who just want to revel in feeling sorry for themselves because they didn't get the life, or the child, they expected. GET OVER IT!

Love the child-- and the life-- you have. That's what I try to do every day-- and that's what your autistic kid is going to have to do someday. Stop making it harder.

you are a vaccine troll.a person who just gets a quik membership here for purposes of spreading anti vaccine propaganda,then once they said what they wanted they leave