They are at it again

Post Reply New Topic

Families will make case for vaccine link to autism

that concept is such crap. genetics has much more empirical evidence. Besides they stopped putting mercury in vaccines after 2003 and there are still children being born with autism

Last edited by matsuiny2004 on 12 May 2008, 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's just more mothers trying to cast imaginary blame on an imaginary problem. They're probably still attached to the "refrigerator mother" concept and are wildly looking for something else so that they can maintain their egos... I personally don't blame them for having an autistic child, as that is completely out of their control (aside from not having children, although I wouldn't consider that an option). I do, however, blame them for being such douchebags about it...

Conspiracy talk show host Alex Jones is telling them that the Powers That Be are lying about halting the mercury in vaccines and have actually increased the dosage to 5x the mercury.

I will say this... while there is certainly strong evidence that mercury doesn't cause autism, there is also pretty strong evidence from many decades of research that it does cause severe brain damage, even in trace amounts.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKuznYVn40s[/youtube]
It is definitely bad stuff.

It is also known that brain injuries can cause many autism-like symptoms, especially frontal lobe damage. So while it may not be technically causing autism, they still might have a hell of a case.

Here is the link to the story about the families making the case on the west coast:
http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynamic/ ... CTION=HOME

Exactly why I avoid them like the plague. It isn't just the mercury you have to worry about, it's the aluminium, formeldehyde, anti-freeze (in some countries), aborted fetal tissue, bovine tissue, monkey kidney tissue, egg albumin (what's that gonna do to your child if they're allergic but not yet eating solids so you don't realise?), free glutamates, live viruses - to name just a few! - and what they're going to do when they're combined, and THEN on top of that what they're going to do when they're given in high doses as in combined vaccines, people being administered several at once, and the effects of them accumulating over time (as the majority of those are bio-accumulative).

The mercury militia drive me mad because it isn't just the mercury that's the problem - it distracts from the real problem with them.

Don't shoot me - I have never and will not buy the thimersol/mercury theory - but I am slowly coming to believe that there are many children with undiagnosed microndial disorders or sensitivities that are being harmed by the vaccines, and end up displaying symptoms that resemble autism. I don't know how else to account for these "recovery" stories. But it isn't the mercury, it seems to be about a gut reaction (literally, not figuritively). And it's only a small percentage. I think that small percentage needs to be sliced off and understood better that the rest of the parents, whose children really have not been affected by the vaccines, can get on with life and stop chasing rainbows. It hasn't been productive to discount these stories all together. They exist, but NEED to be sliced off and distinguished, so everyone knows who should try some of the remedies, and who should not - the majority I continue to believe will be in the "should not" category.

I'm sure you're right... autism is such a complex disorder there's no reason why there can't be several different causes leading to the same group of often obscure symptoms and indicators. And if thousands of people are screaming "My child turned autistic after a vaccine!" surely that's reason to investigate - so perhaps it isn't true genetic autism, ok, that's fine. But that doesn't mean it's not a problem and it's not something else extremely closely resembling autism that WAS caused by whatever caused it, and it doesn't mean those parents can't get their help and heal their children from whatever it was that did trigger their autistic state. I often wonder if some of the other more serious co-morbids (like digestive tract issues) are linked in to all this too?

The only reason parents say "My child turned autistic after getting vaccinated" is a matter of coincidence: outward autistic traits don't become prevalent until 2 or 3 years of age, which just happens to be the time when most countries are vaccinating children...

As it stands, minor damage to the brain from a miniscule amount of mercury is preferable to massive brain damage from bacterial meningitis...

No amount of mercury is safe, but again, it's not just the mercury in them that can have devastating consequences on neurological systems. Don't be distracted by a single ingredient.

The 'autism appears around that age' thing doesn't really hold water either - I'm sure some might associate it with vaccines as that's what they've heard, sure, but there are way too many who for years have been saying it happened very noticeably the night of the vaccine, or the day after, or their child screamed a strange scream for two days then stopped talking altogether. We're talking thousands of families in the days before the internet and before the theory became widely known, in dozens of countries. It can't just be coincidence. We know they can cause reactions, we know some of them can be extremely severe, and we know they're effectively a cocktail of different chemicals that all affect the brain - why is it so difficult to accept that maybe, just maybe, there's something to it, and that even if it isn't *real* *genetic* autism, it's something resembling it and worth investigating?

I would think mercury poisoning would affect the brain in other ways than anything resembling autism... for one thing, the ability to socialize is still present in most brain-damaged NT's, even if the speech center is destroyed...

Also, the damage wouldn't emulate any of the benefits of autism such as a system-centered mind with certain intense interests... Come to think of it, that may explain why mothers who keep saying that "autism doesn't provide positive effects" are the ones bitching about vaccinations... If this theory were true, they are only experiencing negative traits that emulate autism to begin with...

Could be something in it!

Personally, I don't think the mercury - at least, on its own - has much to do with autism, purely because from what I've seen of true mercury poisoning (a friend's daughter has it) it's nothing like autism. Yes, it's severe and awful and horrific, and it does impair her brain function in some ways, but autism it is not.

But despite that, mercury in any amount is toxic and it has no place in the body.

How about looking at the definition of "recovery," and perhaps seeing that "improving" does not equate to "recovery." If that's the case, then Temple Grandin is recovered. Moreover, spectrum kids (and adults) can develop and learn without any unproven "biomedical" treatments. There has been exactly one case we know of where vaccines (maybe) aggravated mitochondrial dysfunction and autistic symptoms. On what grounds are we to assume that there's a significant population who also has mito dysfunction and autism traits? I'm suspicious of this because no one in the anti-vaccine camp breathed a word about mitochondrial dysfunction until the Hannah Poling case.

Thimerosal is a different isotope of mercury, which needs to be recognized, and it's not warranted to think that micrograms of it could cause significant damage. It has also been removed from most childhood vaccines, making it an unlikely culprit for the cause of autism. Brain damage from mercury poisoning looks nothing like autism, and it can also be tested for by actual toxicologists.

On an unrelated note, can we bury the urban myth that vaccines contain aborted fetuses? Geez. Aborted fetuses are disposed in the same matter as all other medical waste.

There IS human fetal tissue in vaccines.


Measles (Attenuvax) - Human Albumin
Mumps (Mumpsvax) - Human Serum Albumin
MMR (MMR II) - Human Serum Albumin
MMRV (ProQuad) - Human Serum Albumin
MMRV (ProQuad) - MRC-5 Cellular Protein*
Rabies (Imovax) - Human Serum Albumin
Rabies (Imovax) - MRC-5 Cellular Protein*
Varicella (Varivax) - MRC-5 DNA and Cellular Protein*
Zoster (Zostavax) - MRC-5 DNA and Cellular Protein*

The MRC-5 cell line is commonly utilized in vaccine development, as a transfection host in virology research, and for in vitro cytotoxicity testing. Initiated in September 1966 by J. P. Jacobs, the cell line was derived from the human lung tissue of a 14-week-old male fetus aborted from a 27-year-old woman.

The ingredients list from the CDC -
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbo ... able-2.pdf


Text quoted from:
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/tech ... cells.html


Other sources:
http://www.cogforlife.org/fetalvaccines.htm
Has a list of alternatives without the human fetal line, including those in development


Besides all that, there's also chick, bovine, and monkey fetal/non-fetal tissue in many others to contend with. Again, refer to the CDC list.

I've read several parent accounts now that are not "improved," but much closer to "no longer fitting a spectrum diagnosis." A recent one I read DID test for microndial disorders, after the fact, and while doing a host of therapies seemed to have the most dramatic results from a diet change. Studies have ruled out thirmerisol as a trigger pretty effectively, but what if there is something else? For a very small percentage? I agree that more often than not it's all a perception problem, because of the way the condition progresses, but it would be negligent to not look into these unusual cases and figure out what makes them different, if they are different. Look at it this way: once the markers are known for who can succeed with such treatments, we'll have less parents using them inappropriately. Parents need to know when to treat and when not to treat. You can't expect them to hear these stories and not try out the treatments. While you and I know they are going to fail most of the time, how can a parent know that? They can't. Not until we know better why some kids get "better" and others do not, and perhaps it really is true that those kids who got "better" never really were autistic at all, just showing a negative reaction to a shot. It's got to be ruled out on that basis. The mercury has been looked at; now it's time to look somewhere else.

Ah yeah, I read that in the newspaper this morning. Jeez, I keep wondering at the stupidity of whoever is letting these people go to trial on such nonexistent evidence.

As long as Autism Speaks has parents believing that Autism is worse than Cancer 10 fold, parents will want to get rid of Autsim however they can. This really comes down to hope, if Autism is genetic, then there's no hope of curing it, but if it's a disease, there is hope for a cure, so they go with the latter because it makes them feel better. This is also because if it's genetic, there's no one to blame but their own genes, but if it's a disease, they can blame whoever they want, and since signs of Autsim typically become noticeable around the same time as early vaccines are administered, especially when a kid appears to be normal and the signs start after a year or so, the vaccines seem like a good candidate.

It's a hysteria thing, kind of like George Orwell's "War of the worlds", where a radio show did a play of a fake news broadcast made to sound like one that would be made if aliens attacked, hundreds of people believed the broadcast to be a real news broadcast. If that wasn't enough, hundreds called the police claiming to see the alien spacecrafts, when what they were hearing on the radio was actually a fictional play. These people were duped into believing something that wasn't true because the radio station didn't explain well enough that the broadcast was in fact fiction, so they panicked and thought they saw something that they clearly didn't.

This is similar because there's the coincidence of signs of Autism becoming noticeable at the same time as the vaccinations, people who don't understand the forces at play are making the assumption that there is a connection and making rash decisions off that assumption. You see this often in religion, like that case where the woman found a piece of a grilled cheese sandwich with what vaguely looked like a face, couple that with the fact that she was taught for her whole life that there's a god that performs miracles, this led her to quickly put 1 and 1 together to come to the conclusion that there was no other possible way that the pattern in the bread that vaguely looked like a face was in fact a miracle. Remember a few years later when someone found a face of the Virgin Mary under a bridge in New Jersey and it turned out to be a urine stain, same thing, quick assumptions turned into solid beliefs by those who don't understand what's really happening.

In a predominantly curebie-parent myspace group I joined (not because I agree with the group, I just like to stay informed of what they believe at the moment), there's a woman claiming that it was fast food that gave her kid Autism.

Then there's Autism Speaks' claim that the number of Autistic kids is rising, claiming that this makes Autism an epidemic. It really wasn't too long ago when Asperger's and PDD-NOS were not considered part of the Autistic spectrum, now they are, and those diagnosises are included, so it's not that there's more Autistic kids, it's just that more are being diagnosed than previously would.