Studies Show Vaccination-Autism Link

Post Reply New Topic

You think there's no link? Think again.

100+ studies show that there IS a link:

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/ ... -link.html

[Mod]
Titled edited on 2nd January 2017 to reflect the (lack of) content in the linked blogpost.

Of the studies listed, most do one of the following:

- Examine neurotoxins, not vaccines.
- Demonstrate correlation, not causation.
- Do not mention autism.

The title was therefore highly misleading; immediately debunking was completely appropriate to change how people "frame" this story.

It all boils down to whether you're willing to risk having an autistic child or a dead child.

For some diseases, the most effective way to treat it (once it starts) is through a vaccine.

Also, some of those studies don't even mention the word vaccine.

The problem as I understand it is that they administer a huge cocktail of vaccines in a huge syringe all at once into a little baby.

I always scoffed at the idea of a link between vaccines and autism, until I found out about that. Now I'm not so sure.

If there was a link between vaccines and autism, we would have had a veritable pandemic of autism in the late 1950s-early 1960s, when the polio vaccine (both oral and injected) was massively used. Autism would have been on the front pages, and we would have known much more about autism during that time.

Perhaps, maybe the vaccines should be spread out, and not injected in "cocktail" form.

Maybe they should conduct research into the preservatives which they use in vaccines.

But I am of the firm belief that the benefits of vaccines FAR FAR outweigh the potential pitfalls.

How does this explain:

1. Why the vast majority of vaccinated people are not autistic

2. Why there are autistic people that have never been vaccinated.

Surely the presence of either of the above immediately negates the possibility of a link?

Unfortunately, so many of the studies claiming to find a link turn out to have one of the following financial motives:

1. People aggrieved at having to care for an autistic person, looking for someone to sue

2. People who would profit directly from convincing those aggrieved at having to care for an autistic person that a lawsuit will somehow make life more bearable.

Japan has the highest autism rate in the world. The UK has the second highest. Yet Americans recieve more than 3 times the amount of vaccines as the Japanese do, and also at least 10 more vaccines than people in the UK do.

And, there are far more vaccines that infants, toddlers and older children must endure than their parents did at the same ages. Reducing the variety of vaccines and number of vaccinations would help children if their parents still wish to pursue vaccinations at all; not because of autism, but because of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) where vaccine combinations can create the conditions for ADRs.


The polio vaccine actually created Vaccine-Derived Polio, a not-too-rare result of the "vaccinate them all" mentality in the 1950s and 1960s ... and even today. Perhaps that fact should inform us of the safety and efficacy of all future mass vaccinations. But, autism uniquely? I doubt it; it just doesn't ring true. Even vaccinations which are spread out over time and combined only when two or more vaccines are known to work well together could have ADR problems. Penicillin is considered extremely safe and effective. And yet, I had a serious ADR to penicillin when I was 24-months old. My parents questioned every drug recommendation from my physicians from then on. I do the same now. I make no snap decisions, research the best I can about a drug's known and possible ADRs, and consider my own, personal, "need" for a drug. As a result, I have had no ADRs since my anaphylaxis. In other words, I am sympathetic to those who resist vaccinations unless absolutely needed.

I believe that, because of the increased variety of vaccines and number of vaccinations, most vaccine-related ADRs in the last few decades when autism diagnostic criteria was broadened caused too many parents to see autism-related behaviors and characteristics when, in fact, they were probably seeing ADRs which mimicked autism instead.

I would say, at this point, that there will be a mass vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa for Ebola. A quite-effective vaccine for it was just discovered. Probably millions of people there will be vaccinated in the very near future.

I would advocate for this mass vaccination (with suitable research done, of course!)

I understand your reticence pertaining to vaccines, AspieUtah; it is borne of your experience. Obviously, I also understand the need for more thorough research--with more of a fine-tooth comb than what has occurred previously.

But there are times when the benefits/pitfall ratio must be made use of.

The mass polio vaccine infusion of the 1950's/1960s was needed because polio became a virulently epidemic/pandemic disease during the early 1950s. I wish I could say that some people didn't suffer because of it; but they did. But, in this case, the benefits far outweighed the pitfalls.

Very true. But, in most nations, vaccinated populations are well above the epidemiological threshold against infection. If they fell below threshold, I might be more concerned. Until then, there is ample room for those who resist vaccination while protecting the vast majority.

Not denying that death is worse than Autism.

But there's a 'cult-like' groups of aspies who are like "NO, there's no link, it was disapproved. End of Story!" (But this not how scientific research works) - those are as stubborn as the radical anti-vaccine people.

EXACTLY.

You cannot negate whole body of researches by a simple analysis like the above; even if some vaccines cause autism that doesn't necessarily mean it's the sole factor causing it.

Maybe vaccines do cause autism and maybe they don't. There are studies to suppprt both claims. People have a tendency to manipulate evidence to suit their bias.

Without the Wakefield study, would people link autism and vaccines on their own?

I don't get the other popular opinion here which imply "It's ok if vaccines cause Autism, vaccines' benefits outweighs the risks - End of Story".

I mean, does it even occur to those that those researches my lead to better and less risky vaccines, for instance?

Why would I see the problem with more research?

If even one case of autism in a million occurs, that warrants research

I just don't believe there's a link which warrants withholding vaccines.