UPDATE from CNN: Retracted autism study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds (See Post#221)

[Bliz]

My best response would be the 1000s of anecdotal incidences (i know, not scientific but it cannot be denied) of full blown autism occurring directly after vaccination.

Of course it can be denied. Quite the opposite, it can't be trusted without MUCH more because as everyone knows correlation =/= causation. Here's just one way it can be rejected. Suppose kids get vaccines when they're 3. Suppose autism typically manifests at age 3. And there you go. No causation whatsoever, but two things independently happen at the same age: autism typically manifests, and kids get vaccines near their birthday. Some will inevitably line up more closely than others. Parents incorrectly assume that because symptoms first manifested near the time of the vaccine, the vaccine must somehow be responsible. But that is a false conclusion.

Some people are liars looking for a payday in a lawsuit against a manufacturer. Some people are just desperately looking for a cause and don't like "we don't know" for an answer. "Directly after" takes on a whole new meaning in hindsight, when we think we're right and are trying to remember how soon after the vaccine the symptoms *really* manifested. It was really soon after, right? Immediately after? Surely it couldn't have been before, or could it? I'm sure many of them believe it's true. But that doesn't make it true, any more than the Redskins winning on sunday is attributable to me wearing a particular jersey.

[Ken]

Actually, there isn't any real evidence between being poor and autism.

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/161/10/916.full

If anything, it appears to be more present in higher socioeconomic status.

Ya, I was actually referring to quality of food 'poorer' vs poor people. I have seen afluent people persist on Micky Ds...

http://aut.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/07/27/1362361311413397.abstract?rss=1

Though there is some thought that is mostly driven by better diagnosis of mild cases.

Remember, some of the most associated values are the age of parents. Wealthier people tend to have kids later.

Again, a lot of 'Wealthier' people have no idea what a good diet consists of either and put every 'trendy' horrible thing into their bodies. I'm not sure of the significance of poor vs rich when it comes to autism. I think it is casting waaaay to wide of a net, and that is by design to keep the funds coming in.

Such as:

(and before you start spewing some random stuff from the internet go back and look at this thread so I don't have to repeat myself

http://www.extremeskins.com/archive/index.php/t-305257.html. Try and be specific as to what you think is a neurotoxin and what vaccine in the US actually contains it, and remember things like phenols are a broad range of chemicals that include toxic chemical like phenol, but also include the amino acid Tyrosine and phenylalanine, which we need to live, and they all don't have the same affect, and other things have different chemical characteristics when added to other things (e.g. sodium is a metal that reacts explosively in water. Sodium chloride is table salt.) so be specific about the actual chemical.)

For the record, I did go back and read that thread. I hope you did too for all of the points that I made that were pretty profound if i do say so myself. I know everyone got really stuck on the fact that I copied and pasted with spelling errors from a site less reputable than some would utilize typically. So some decided to rail against my approach instead of the absolute fact that I raised that Aluminum is a neurotoxin. It is also pretty funny that the 'Photographer' understood the neuro toxicity of Al and the self proclaimed experts on this site didn't apparently. Plain and simple. I will support that FACT now:

New England Journal of Medicine

Conclusions

In preterm infants, prolonged intravenous feeding with solutions containing aluminum is associated with impaired neurologic development.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199705293362203

February, 2012

Mechanisms of Aluminum Adjuvant Toxicity and autoimmunity in Pediatric Populations

Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22235057

However, it is now clearly established that there is a bidirectional neuro-immune cross-talk that plays crucial roles in immunoregulation as well as brain function. In turn, perturbations of the neuro-immune axis have been demonstrated in many autoimmune diseases encompassed in "ASIA" and are thought to be driven by a hyperactive immune response; and (iv) the same components of the neuro-immune axis that play key roles in brain development and immune function are heavily targeted by Al adjuvants. In summary, research evidence shows that increasing concerns about current vaccination practices may indeed be warranted. Because children may be most at risk of vaccine-induced complications, a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine-related adverse health impacts in the pediatric population is urgently needed.

March, 2012

Aluminium (Notice Different Spelling for all of you Spelling Champs!!!) overload after 5 years in skin biopsy following post-vaccination with subcutaneous pseudolymphoma

CHU Poitiers, Department of Biochemistry, 86 021 Poitiers, France.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22425036

Abstract

Aluminium hydroxide is used as an effective adjuvant in a wide range of vaccines for enhancing immune response to the antigen. The pathogenic role of aluminium hydroxide is now recognized by the presence of chronic fatigue syndrome, macrophagic myofasciitis and subcutaneous pseudolymphoma, linked to intramuscular injection of aluminium hydroxide-containing vaccines. The aim of this study is to verify if the subcutaneous pseudolymphoma observed in this patient in the site of vaccine injection is linked to an aluminium overload. Many years after vaccination, a subcutaneous nodule was discovered in a 45-year-old woman with subcutaneous pseudolymphoma. In skin biopsy at the injection site for vaccines, aluminium (Al) deposits are assessed by Morin stain and quantification of Al is performed by Zeeman Electrothermal Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. Morin stain shows Al deposits in the macrophages, and Al assays (in μg/g, dry weight) were 768.10±18 for the patient compared with the two control patients, 5.61±0.59 and 9.13±0.057. Given the pathology of this patient and the high Al concentration in skin biopsy, the authors wish to draw attention when using the Al salts known to be particularly effective as adjuvants in single or repeated vaccinations. The possible release of Al may induce other pathologies ascribed to the well-known toxicity of this metal.

Nope, no way that a brain disorder could EVER be associated with vaccines. NO WAY POSSIBLE. lol.

No study does because this has been a moving target by the anti-vaccine groups. First, it was the MMR vaccine, and then it was thermisol, and now it is total vaccines.

Wakefield's original MMR study was duplicated at least 5 times. I have posted them on here before. Hardly a settled debate on MMR. A cherry picked correlative thermerisol study also hardly ends that debate. Why wouldn't total vaccinations be the logical area to look at since a) the vaccine schedule has more than quadrupled in the last 20 years the well established toxins that are in the vaccines and c) the fact that these toxins accumulate until they hit a point where they become devastating.

No, no reason to look there....

But somebody not getting something like the DTaP vaccine has significantly decreased the real amount they are getting before 2.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/0-6yrs-schedule-pr.pdf

If it was total vaccines, it is hard to believe not getting the DTaP vaccine wouldn't be tied to a reduction in autism.

Especially when things like maternal health and the age of parents do show up.

You have to remember the tremendous push to get the flu shot that was not there previously. That is also the most toxic of the vaccines IMO because the multi dose vials still have mercury in them. People take their kids to get this shot every year. I want to know how you account for that toxicological load on these poor kids?

[mjah]

Ken, please join my club! See sig for details.

Executive positions are available.

[zoony]

Ken, please join my club! See sig for details.

Executive positions are available.

Seriously, if the government and big pharm came out and said there was a link, do you suppose that would be the equivalent for Ken to the round room/piss in the corner treatment?

[Special K]

OMG I love this thread.

[Jumbo]

[MaddogCT]

"According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly 900,000 measles-related deaths occurred among persons in developing countries in 1999."

But somehow the CDC claims that over 40 years later, 900k people are still dying and the vaccine is widely used and available.

Developing countries means does NOT have the vaccine.

:doh:

[Jumbo]

Ken's appearances give me a chance to play with pics, old & new. For that and his thick skin (he's like a Timex), I am actually appreciative.

[Ken]

"According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly 900,000 measles-related deaths occurred among persons in developing countries in 1999."

Developing countries means does NOT have the vaccine.

:doh:

Oy vey.

Did you miss the part about 450 dying every year in america where everyone got it and there was no vaccine?

---------- Post added April-17th-2012 at 10:47 PM ----------

Ken's appearances give me a chance to play with pics, old & new. For that and his thick skin (he's like a Timex), I am actually appreciative.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s107/jumboskins/Ipitythefool.jpg

I would rather engage in intellectual debate like PeterMP does....

But the pictures are fine, just wish people would actually look at what is being posted instead of just mocking because they do not understand.

[PeterMP]

So some decided to rail against my approach instead of the absolute fact that I raised that Aluminum is a neurotoxin. It is also pretty funny that the 'Photographer' understood the neuro toxicity of Al and the self proclaimed experts on this site didn't apparently. Plain and simple. I will support that FACT now:

Just to be clear, we've gone from vaccines being full of neurotoxins to the vaccines that contain Al (which all of them don't have) have a single molecule that can be a neurotoxins whose neurotoxicity is never known to be similar to autism.

(At this point in time, I think the presence of Al is the most concerning thing about vaccines, and I wouldn't be shocked that in some subset of the population at the levels it is being given in vaccines it is causing some problems. However, there is no real evidence that at the levels it is given that it can cause problems or that the problems it causes are similar to autism, and Al is a common contimiant of lot's of things:

http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/hot-topics/aluminum.html

Now, I'll readily admit that taking something orally is different than taking something intra-muscular, but still it isn't like your body is overly sensitive to Al.)

Wakefield's original MMR study was duplicated at least 5 times. I have posted them on here before. Hardly a settled debate on MMR.

I'd be curious to see them as even most of Wakefiled's co-authors have disavowed the work showing the link between the MMR and autism or MMR and gi disorders (not autism and gi disorders).

A cherry picked correlative thermerisol study also hardly ends that debate. Why wouldn't total vaccinations be the logical area to look at since a) the vaccine schedule has more than quadrupled in the last 20 years the well established toxins that are in the vaccines and c) the fact that these toxins accumulate until they hit a point where they become devastating.

No, no reason to look there....

You have to remember the tremendous push to get the flu shot that was not there previously. That is also the most toxic of the vaccines IMO because the multi dose vials still have mercury in them. People take their kids to get this shot every year. I want to know how you account for that toxicological load on these poor kids?

1. These studies aren't looking at people in vastly different years. They are essentially looking at people that for whatever reason are on different vaccination scheduels.

2. You can get signle dose influenze vaccine or the nasal spray.

3. The biggest issue you don't seem to understand though is autism is affecting things well before the normal diagnosis. People aren't getting multiple influenza vaccines before having changes happen. Nobody is getting a influenze vaccine before 6 months, and we can already start to see changes in the brain at 6 months.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57380647/study-brain-scans-detect-early-signs-of-autism/

And behavioral issues at 1 year (so that would be one flu vaccine):

http://psychcentral.com/news/2011/10/14/early-detection-of-autism-may-lead-to-better-interventions/30363.html

The idea that this happens after the later vaccinations where they obviously show symptons isn't the case.

If accumulation of metals from vaccinations as you describe it was the real cause of autism my 6 year old w/ her next flu vaccine would be at risk to get autism.

That isn't what happens.

These kids are "abnormal" in terms of brain development at the earliest possible time people have looked at them. Autism is best tied to pre-birth things. The data suggests that the issues occur before these kids are even born.

[MaddogCT]

Again, what part are you arguing? Vaccines work?

What was the death rate AFTER Vaccines?

Annual US measles deaths have declined from 408 in 1962 to 0 from 1993-present [213].

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.full

As for the seriousness of measles:

Measles remains a leading cause of death and disability-adjusted life-years lost [214]. Community-based studies during the 1970s and 1980s revealed measles case-fatality rates of 3%–34% [215–217], 10–20 times those in industrialized countries.

High case-fatality rates in developing countries are due to a young age at infection, crowding, underlying immune deficiency disorders, vitamin A deficiency, and lack of access to medical care. Before the introduction of measles vaccines, one-third of children in many developing countries were infected in the first and second years of life, and most children were infected before age 5 years [195, 221, 222]. An estimated 125 million preschool-aged children are estimated to have vitamin A deficiency, placing them at high risk for death, severe infection, or blindness as a result of measles

Ken, measles is a serious freaking desiese. I wish you would take that part seriously. Its not benign. Its a killer. if it didnt kill or cause blindness, etc, there would not be a vaccine.

Its not like they have a vaccine for acne. (That would be a huge cash machine!)

:logo:

[Hubbs]

Okay, so I have a relevant question for everyone, to which I have no favored answer:

Even before this announcement, the link between vaccines and autism was seen as relatively ridiculous. This just seems to confirm that label. However, autism rates are absolutely out of control. As far as I understand these things, some of the explosion—even much of the explosion—can be attributed to the simple factor of more common diagnosis of the disease, but still, we're talking about increases in child autism of more than 100% in just two years, and in some cases, IIRC, in just one year. I don't think that can be solely attributed to more doctors saying, "Yup, that's autism." So if not that... what the hell is going on, and why is autism going from an extreme rarity to something that's relatively common? Given the acceleration in the rate of autism, this seems to be something that we as a society really need to figure out. Now. Yesterday, in fact. At the risk of being repetitive, what the hell is going on?

[Henry]

Okay, so I have a relevant question for everyone, to which I have no favored answer:

Even before this announcement, the link between vaccines and autism was seen as relatively ridiculous. This just seems to confirm that label. However, autism rates are absolutely out of control. As far as I understand these things, some of the explosion—even much of the explosion—can be attributed to the simple factor of more common diagnosis of the disease, but still, we're talking about increases in child autism of more than 100% in just two years, and in some cases, IIRC, in just one year. I don't think that can be solely attributed to more doctors saying, "Yup, that's autism." So if not that... what the hell is going on, and why is autism going from an extreme rarity to something that's relatively common? Given the acceleration in the rate of autism, this seems to be something that we as a society really need to figure out. Now. Yesterday, in fact. At the risk of being repetitive, what the hell is going on?

Excellent question. Years ago before Ken showed up and beat this thread to death with the wacky stick I actually did address this issue, somewhere around post #41. A recent study came out saying that now 1 in 88 kids is on the spectrum. That should be a HUGE cause for alarm. Fifteen years ago the rate was 1 in 150. We are way past waving this off as over-diagnosing.

Autism research needs to be stepped in a big way. Both cause and effect. I in no way whatsoever endorse Ken or his views, but it really does amaze me how much we still don't know about autism. Considering the resources this country has at it's disposal we should be doing better.

[PCS]

I recently read an article,(which I can try to find),that had a few Doctors discussing the rise in cases and they said a part of that,(major?),was the broadening of the criteria for the diagnosis of Autism.

[PeterMP]

Okay, so I have a relevant question for everyone, to which I have no favored answer:

Even before this announcement, the link between vaccines and autism was seen as relatively ridiculous. This just seems to confirm that label. However, autism rates are absolutely out of control. As far as I understand these things, some of the explosion—even much of the explosion—can be attributed to the simple factor of more common diagnosis of the disease, but still, we're talking about increases in child autism of more than 100% in just two years, and in some cases, IIRC, in just one year. I don't think that can be solely attributed to more doctors saying, "Yup, that's autism." So if not that... what the hell is going on, and why is autism going from an extreme rarity to something that's relatively common? Given the acceleration in the rate of autism, this seems to be something that we as a society really need to figure out. Now. Yesterday, in fact. At the risk of being repetitive, what the hell is going on?

I think what we are going to see is the increase in autism is related to an increase in people being susceptible to having autistic kids having more kids and other medical advances and changes in society.

What seems to be associated with autism?

Age of the parents.

People are having kids later, partly due to changes in society and because they can because of changes in medicine.

IVF.

A medical advance that allows people that didn't used to have kids have kids.

Certain types of anti-depressants.

Maybe the anti-dpressants are a cause and maybe they aren't, but I'd be willing to bet that people that suffer from depression used to be less likely to have kids in general (formed healthy relationships less well). Related to this people that have siblings with autism tend to have abnormal brain formation (especially related to the areas involved in empathy) even though they themselves aren't diagnosed with autism. It hasn't been demonstrated, but I'd be willing to bet, they are more likely to have psychiatric issues as they grow older (which means they'd benefit from improvements in psychiatric healthcare). And they are more likely to have autistic children themselves.

Mothers that have obesity/diebetes (pregnency induced included) are less likely to have normal healthy babies. They are more likely to need a C-section and to have pre-mature babies. Both situations that have been improved because of healthcare advances affecting the survival of the kids, the mothers, and their ability to have subsequent pregnancies, and the kids are more likely to have issues with diabetes and obesity. And high blood sugar levels are tied to reduced fertility (so fewer pregnancies), except we know help with that because of advances in medical and health sciences.

Lastly, societal support for autistic kids and their families. If you have an autistic child, you are more likely to have another. I'll bet that previously having a single autistic child was enough of a drain on family resources (money, time, etc) that it acted as a deterent to having other children. I'll bet with the emphasis on special ed in schools and other programs that has been reduced, and you see more families with an autisitc child having subsequent children.

[bcl05]

I have resisted wading into this mess, but what the heck. Here we go again.

For those who don't know, I'm a clinical geneticist, and a significant part of what I do is evaluate kids with autism (and other intellectual disabilities) for specific genetic syndromes or underlying disorders. I get asked about the increasing numbers for autism at least once a week.

The latest big study to hit the lay press is the CDC work that reported "1 in 88" kids with autism. The study is an interesting one, but one should take those numbers with a big grain of salt. The way they found "cases" of autism was to look at abstracted (de-identified) records from all kids through age 8 at a number of locations. They looked at both educational records and medical records. They had study personnel who looked at those records for signs of autism spectrum disorders and reached the 1-in-88 number. At no point did they confirm an actual diagnosis, and no children identified through this record review were then targeted for more detailed neuropsychologic testing. It was basically a population survey for symptoms, intentionally designed to cast as wide a net as possible. Its a valuable and well-designed study, but the reporting on it has not accurately described their methods and their limitations.

Also, the DSM criteria for autism are extremely vague. They include criteria like "failure to develop peer relationships appropriate for age level," "lack of social or emotional reciprocity," and "impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others." These are ambiguous, without objective measures, and much is left up to the clinician regarding the interpretation. With the increase in services for and awareness of autism over the past decade and more, more and more kids are being shoe-horned into these diagnoses. I don't think there is a true increase in the most severe forms of autism at all.

Also, autism is a symptom, not a single disorder. It is a description of what people do or don't do, and there is not a single cause. People have looked hard for causes of autism, and the most fruitful area to look has been genetics. We can now (with current and widely available testing) find a genetic cause of autism around 20% of the time (up from 3% of cases 5 years ago). This increase in the yield of genetic testing has come from technological improvements in testing that was spurred by the human genome project. I have a lot of confidence that as next-generation sequencing becomes more routine, the proportion of autism cases explained by genetic abnormalities will increase significantly. Researchers have worked extremely hard to find environmental causes of autism and have so far been largely unsuccessful.

The conspiracy theorists do a great disservice to those who want to really understand what is happening with these kids and distract from the real issues of a complex problem.

[Forehead]

I recently read an article,(which I can try to find),that had a few Doctors discussing the rise in cases and they said a part of that,(major?),was the broadening of the criteria for the diagnosis of Autism.

This is what I was going to ask, as a non-scientific person who really doesn't want to wade through the sewage in this thread. Couldn't the rise in autism correlate somewhat to a better understanding of the disease as well as a broadening of the scope of what constitutes autism? Sort of like ADHD being on the rise to explain kids who don't pay attention in school?

[Henry]

This is what I was going to ask, as a non-scientific person who really doesn't want to wade through the sewage in this thread. Couldn't the rise in autism correlate somewhat to a better understanding of the disease as well as a broadening of the scope of what constitutes autism? Sort of like ADHD being on the rise to explain kids who don't pay attention in school?

From earlier in the thread (and two years ago):

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/media/video/.../bearman.shtml

Dr. Bearman: Well that’s a complicated question, but I think we can pretty uniquely associate about a quarter of the increase from the birth cohorts from 1992 to 2001 which is a lot, to diagnostic change on the border between diagnosis and mental retardation in autism. I think we can associate about 16 percent of the increase on the other border between autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders on the spectrum: Asperger’s, PPDNOS etc. And those are largely non over-lapping components of increase, so that’s about 40 percent. I think the spacial clustering itself adds another few percent. I would say I am confident that 40 percent of the increase I think I know what caused that. That leaves a lot of increase left, 50 percent is a lot to look for still.

Widening the net is part of it. It's not everything.

PeterMP, it's weird. Not saying it means anything but not one of the items on your list would apply to my wife and I. Go figure.

[PeterMP]

PeterMP, it's weird. Not saying it means anything but not one of the items on your list would apply to my wife and I. Go figure.

There are exceptions to every rule.

To sort of repeat what bcl05 said this is especially going to be true for autism because it isn't really the disease, it is a symptom.

It is likely multiple things actually cause autism. We are going to find that we can understand what causes autism in a large percentage of people (in time), but there are still going to be cases that we don't understand (though I also think are diagnosis of autism is going to sharpen based on things other than behavioral traits as actual different diseases will respond differently to different treatments).

When you look at broad based autism, you are going to see the factors related to the larger percentage of things. The things causing the fewer cases are going to slip by.

But it is unlikely the minor causes are causing the increase.

30 years from now, there are going to be kids that are born where doctors are going to say even before the kid is born because of X, Y, and Z, your kid is at high risk of autism so we are going to do A, B, and C.

There are going to be other people that doesn't happen to that start to show symptoms in the 12 month-18 month range where the doctor is going to then say, your kid is getting autism so we are going to start doing 1, 2, and 3.

And the parent is going to ask why didn't we know sooner, and the doctor is going to say, we don't know. You and your child don't have any of the factors that we know are associated with autism.