I'm going to post the article and my comments in blue mixed in it. I am not an expert of any sort, just a concerned mom and Canadian Citizen with lots of questions about this topic. I'm doing my own research to see what I find. These are my findings below. If you want to see the whole article you can follow the link above. Here goes (remember the article is in black print and my comments and findings are in blue):
This is not finished, but it's taking too long and getting quite long so will post it and update it as I can. I'm still researching some history information that I want to know about the vaccines and autism statistics. I'll post it as an update and state here when it's done. Thanks for reading!!
"I know. Some mom coming out in favor of vaccines shouldn't be breaking news. There's nothing edgy about siding with most parents, nearly all the world's governments and the vast majority of medical researchers and practitioners. But more of us need to do it.
When I see debates about vaccines online -- and as someone who writes about parenting culture I see a lot -- I used to pat myself on the back for not getting mixed up in the fray. I mean, what's it to me what other people do with their kids? I'm secure in my own choices. Besides, even if I wanted to change the minds of anti-vaccine advocates, how could I?
I have two reasons for rethinking my silence: Jack and Clio. I came to know both children through their mothers' blogs and have been following along with their diagnosis and treatment for leukemia. Their illnesses prevent them from receiving live vaccines such as the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) shot. Some kids get diagnosed before they have a chance to receive all of their vaccines, but even kids who were vaccinated, as Jack and Clio were, remain vulnerable to contagious diseases because of their compromised immune systems. The idea that they could be exposed to a vaccine-preventable disease while they are enduring treatment is troubling.
"but even kids who were vaccinated, as Jack and Clio were," - I know nothing about Jack and Clio but just reading JJ Keith's statement that they were vaccinated, is it not possible that their leukemia came from being vaccinated? One of the links down below has an author who's son contracted leukemia from vaccines. This I found while not looking for this information. What would I find if this was my main focus?
You might be thinking, "No worries, because those kids are protected by herd immunity." Well, so many parents are foregoing vaccines now, quite often in progressive communities like the ones in which Jack and Clio live, that herd immunity is threatened. In California, where I live, there is a database of vaccine rates listed by school. There are pockets where the vaccine rates are dipping below 50 percent. For herd immunity to be effective, vaccination rates need to be at least in the ballpark of 80 percent.
What I take from this paragraph is that people who do not vaccinate their children are only doing this because they believe their children are safe because of 'herd immunity'?? Is there any possibility at all that the parents made the choice because of other reasons?
There seems to be two main types of parents who are skipping routine immunization for their healthy children: the ultra-crunchy and the ultra-conservative (plus a third group that I'll address later). The two camps of "ultras" might not seem to have a lot in common, but they're buying their doomsday rations from the same catalog, if you catch my drift. Both groups often have intense distrust of modern medicine and the government. (And not for nothing, as it often feels like the United States government is actively searching for ways to intensify the paranoia of its citizens. I mean, WTH with that NSA stuff?)
I have to remind myself when reading this article that it's based on JJ Keith's experiences in California. Not here in the Lower Mainland of BC.
She says there are 2 main types, plus a third group that she will address later. Doomsday rations? Isn't shooting formaldehyde, spermicide and other toxic chemicals directly into the bloodstream of a 2mo old baby a doomsday ration all on it's own?? I don't have to be a scientist to know that formaldehyde is not friendly for growing cells.
However, while there is nothing more "natural" than large numbers of children dying in a Malthusian cesspool of unchecked contagious disease, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that we should avoid that. This shouldn't be a controversial opinion. The increasing success of the anti-vaccine movement is endangering not only immune-compromised children such as Jack and Clio, but also infants too young to be vaccinated. To say nothing of the unvaccinated children themselves.
I don't know many anti-vaxers myself but I'm pretty sure they would agree with me that all people would like to avoid "large numbers of children dying in a Malthusian cesspool of unchecked contagious disease". I can also say that I'm pretty sure that people don't choose to be anti-vaxers to spread disease. Also, another certainty (just a feeling really) that they make this choice for their children to be healthy. There are lots of sources that state that vaccines are carriers of cancers or are cancer causing, contain monkey viruses and toxic chemicals. I'm not really sure what the pseudo-science is that I keep seeing in articles written by pro-vaxers but I'd like to think that the sources I'm reading aren't spreading lies. So wouldn't the choice to not inject your child with cancers or cancer causing agents, monkey viruses and toxic chemicals be a good enough reason?
From the CDC here is a list of ingredients: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf
Here is an MMR vaccine package insert: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf
Here are some links and info on what I found to back up my statements above:
Here are some links and info on what I found to back up my statements above:
Vaccines contain cancers or are cancer causing:
Beta-propiolactone - The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified beta-propiolactone [found in flu vaccines] as a Group 2B, possible human carcinogen. - http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/propiola.html
Beta-propiolactone - The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified beta-propiolactone [found in flu vaccines] as a Group 2B, possible human carcinogen. - http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/propiola.html
Octoxynol-10 (Triton X-100) - "Detergents and emulsifiers promote tumors and cause cells to leak or explode by weakening their walls, with no mechanism for regulating destructive activity. " http://www.project.nsearch.com/profiles/blogs/secret-sterilizing-ingredients-in-many-vaccines
Formaldehyde - see the information below under toxic chemicals.
Vaccines contain viruses: - SV40 - there are studies that show this monkey virus was in the polio vaccines of the 60's and because of this it contaminated future vaccines because they use the original as a seed for the next generations. Also, proof that the virus was in there is that they found antibodies to the virus in children of these generations who had no exposure to the virus.
http://www.sv40foundation.org/CPV-link.html
"According to the IOM report “SV40 Contamination of Polio Vaccine and Cancer”:
The committee concludes that the biological
evidence is strong that SV40 is a transforming [i.e., cancer-causing]
virus, . . . that the biological evidence is of moderate strength that
SV40 exposure could lead to cancer in humans under natural conditions,
[and] that the biological evidence is of moderate strength that SV40
exposure from the polio vaccine is related to SV40 infection in humans.[83]"
http://www.sv40foundation.org/CPV-link.html
"Xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV) is a recently discovered human retrovirus that has been found in both chronic fatigue syndrome & prostate cancer patients. There is a potential safety concern regarding XMRV in cell substrates used in vaccines..."
http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/scienceresearch/biologicsresearchareas/ucm127327.htm
"porcine circovirus type 1 PCV1) is highly prevalent in swine and was recently reported in some rotavirus vaccines."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21835219?dopt=Abstract
Vaccines contain toxic chemicals:
Octoxynol-10 (Triton X-100) - is a spermacide! "In a 1977 study in the Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, triton X-100 was listed in a table of "most potent spermicides" that would produce 100% stripping of human sperm and the dosages needed for such an effect." & "Detergents and emulsifiers promote tumors and cause cells to leak or explode by weakening their walls, with no mechanism for regulating destructive activity. Detergents are used extensively in cell research precisely because of their ability to break cells open for further analysis. This catastrophically mimics the membrane attack complex (MAC). It is also in other flu vaccines such as pandemrix and vaxigrip vaccines." - http://www.project.nsearch.com/profiles/blogs/secret-sterilizing-ingredients-in-many-vaccines
http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/scienceresearch/biologicsresearchareas/ucm127327.htm
"porcine circovirus type 1 PCV1) is highly prevalent in swine and was recently reported in some rotavirus vaccines."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21835219?dopt=Abstract
Vaccines contain toxic chemicals:
Octoxynol-10 (Triton X-100) - is a spermacide! "In a 1977 study in the Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, triton X-100 was listed in a table of "most potent spermicides" that would produce 100% stripping of human sperm and the dosages needed for such an effect." & "Detergents and emulsifiers promote tumors and cause cells to leak or explode by weakening their walls, with no mechanism for regulating destructive activity. Detergents are used extensively in cell research precisely because of their ability to break cells open for further analysis. This catastrophically mimics the membrane attack complex (MAC). It is also in other flu vaccines such as pandemrix and vaxigrip vaccines." - http://www.project.nsearch.com/profiles/blogs/secret-sterilizing-ingredients-in-many-vaccines
Formaldehyde - "Formaldehyde is a colorless, flammable, strong-smelling chemical that is used in building materials and to produce many household products. It is used in pressed-wood products, such as particleboard, plywood, and fiberboard; glues and adhesives; permanent-press fabrics; paper product coatings; and certain insulation materials. In addition, formaldehyde is commonly used as an industrial fungicide, germicide, and disinfectant, and as a preservative in mortuaries and medical laboratories. Formaldehyde also occurs naturally in the environment. It is produced in small amounts by most living organisms as part of normal metabolic processes."
"...some studies of humans have suggested that formaldehyde exposure is associated with certain types of cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies formaldehyde as a human carcinogen (2). In 2011, the National Toxicology Program, an interagency program of the Department of Health and Human Services, named formaldehyde as a known human carcinogen in its 12th Report on Carcinogens (3)."
"This analysis showed that those who had performed the most embalming and those with the highest estimated formaldehyde exposure had the greatest risk of myeloid leukemia."
"...NCI investigators have concluded that exposure to formaldehyde may cause leukemia, particularly myeloid leukemia, in humans." - http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/formaldehyde
The above is from the perspective on inhaling or skin contact with formaldehyde. In both these instances the body has barriers that the toxin must pass through (nasal passage, lungs then tissue or skin) before getting in to the blood which then it is filtered out through adult functioning organs. Can it truly be safer to inject it straight into the blood stream (in any quantity) of a almost newborn baby whose organs aren't even fully developed yet?
The FDA states that "The amount of formaldehyde present in some infant vaccines is so small compared to the concentration that occurs naturally in the body that it does not pose a safety concern, according to a study using a mathematical model developed by scientists at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)." - a model developed by the FDA themselves? Where's the third party proof that it's safe? How is this considered credible and not 'pseudo-science'? Also, it says "some" vaccines. What about the other vaccines that this statement doesn't apply to???
"Formaldehyde is diluted during the vaccine manufacturing process, but residual quantities of formaldehyde may be found in some current vaccines." - residual quantities?? what does mean? That it doesn't follow their safety mathematical model??
Also, the FDA states in their website that the "Exposure to formaldehyde from vaccines differs from environmental exposure because the small amount of formaldehyde via injection with a vaccine occurs briefly and only occasionally. When the body breaks down formaldehyde it does not distinguish between formaldehyde from vaccines and that which is naturally produced or environmental." - There are a couple of things that are wrong here, in my opinion. Any man made chemical is not exactly like the naturally made namesake. Do we have technology exact enough to truly state that the body does not distinguish or do anything differently with the chemically made version of anything? Another thought about natural vs chemical facsimile is where is the natural formaldehyde made in the body? Is it made and then safely transported to be trapped in fat cells or is safely excreted by the body, either way never to make it to the blood stream. If this is the case or even close to it, shooting an exact replica of something, no matter how closely made it is, straight into the bloodstream so that it can go to the brain will be a completely different matter than a naturally occurring substance that is handled safely by the body. I'd love to look into this but sadly time does not allow and this blog is long enough as is! One vivid thought about this whole idea is that we all produce poop and urine in our bodies. They're both very natural and everyone has them. Would you shoot even a tiny bit of either of them into your arm? But really, they're both very safe, some cultures use urine in poultices on the skin to heal skin rashes and the like.
Also, when they say "or environmental" the environmental form of formaldehyde is known to be dangerous as can be seen from my quotes and links above. So if the body does not distinguish between the man made chemical in the vaccine or the environmental one then are they not admittedly shooting an environmental facsimile, known to be cancer causing, into an infants bloodstream? Also, if you look at the ingredients list for the vaccines (provided in a link above) there is formaldehyde in 21 out of the 51 vaccines stated (this count is from me scanning quickly and so could have missed some). I've read that children normally receive anywhere up to 36 vaccines by the age of 6. So, if 21 of the possible vaccines they could be getting numerous times have formaldehyde, does that still fall under the FDA's mathematical model tested with one vaccine and one dosage? Where are the studies and mathematical models that show multiple vaccines with formaldehyde given at one time and given throughout the infants life to age 6? No child only gets one vaccine and one dose in the regular vaccine schedule.
Also, when they say "or environmental" the environmental form of formaldehyde is known to be dangerous as can be seen from my quotes and links above. So if the body does not distinguish between the man made chemical in the vaccine or the environmental one then are they not admittedly shooting an environmental facsimile, known to be cancer causing, into an infants bloodstream? Also, if you look at the ingredients list for the vaccines (provided in a link above) there is formaldehyde in 21 out of the 51 vaccines stated (this count is from me scanning quickly and so could have missed some). I've read that children normally receive anywhere up to 36 vaccines by the age of 6. So, if 21 of the possible vaccines they could be getting numerous times have formaldehyde, does that still fall under the FDA's mathematical model tested with one vaccine and one dosage? Where are the studies and mathematical models that show multiple vaccines with formaldehyde given at one time and given throughout the infants life to age 6? No child only gets one vaccine and one dose in the regular vaccine schedule.
http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/scienceresearch/ucm349473.htm
http://www.naturalnews.com/037653_vaccine_additives_thimerosal_formaldehyde.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/042012_vaccine_facts_vaccine-damaged_children_CDC.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/037653_vaccine_additives_thimerosal_formaldehyde.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/042012_vaccine_facts_vaccine-damaged_children_CDC.html
Neomycin Sulfate is a toxin and antibacterial - used to be used as a topical cream called neosporin but "safer" alternatives are now used. "NEUROTOXICITY (INCLUDING OTOTOXICITY) AND NEPHROTOXICITY FOLLOWING THE ORAL USE OF NEOMYCIN SULFATE HAVE BEEN REPORTED, EVEN WHEN USED IN RECOMMENDED DOSES." - http://www.rxlist.com/neomycin-sulfate-drug.htm
Aluminum Phosphate - "Animal and human studies have shown that aluminum can cause nerve cell death [1] and that vaccine aluminum adjuvants can allow aluminum to enter the brain, [2,3] as well as cause inflammation at the injection site leading to chronic joint and muscle pain and fatigue. [4,5]" "EDF Suspected - cardiovascular or blood toxicant, neurotoxicant, respiratory toxicant, respiratory toxicant. Implicated as a cause of brain damage; suspected factor in Alzheimer's Disease, dementia, convulsions and comas. More hazardous than most chemicals in 2 out of 6 ranking systems. On at least 2 federal regulatory lists. " http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=44
"Aluminum is a neurotoxin and it is harmful to all cells in the body, but it seems to concentrate in area's like the brain, liver, thyroid, and lung tissue. In the bodies typical handling of aluminum, it generally runs it through the intestine and what gets to the kidney generally gets filtered out, however in large amounts it become toxic, and when injected into the body, it is escorted past the bodies natural defense system. MSDS on aluminum phosphate: The toxicological effects have not been fully investigated, because of this, chronic effects on humans are not available. Aluminum is hazardous if inhaled, ingested, or comes in contact with skin. In it's natural state it is a powder, handling requires a respirator, gloves and protective clothing. I believe it is safe to say from this information that aluminum phosphate in vaccines could also be potentially hazardous if it is injected." http://voices.yahoo.com/aluminum-phosphate-vaccines-1697151.html - This article's author has a son who got leukemia from vaccines.
MSG - Monosodium Glutamate - is a neurotoxin! Many people are familiar with this one as it is known to cause migraines when eaten. Read more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037653_vaccine_additives_thimerosal_formaldehyde.html
MSG - Monosodium Glutamate - is a neurotoxin! Many people are familiar with this one as it is known to cause migraines when eaten. Read more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037653_vaccine_additives_thimerosal_formaldehyde.html
Mercury (Thimerisol) - There are NO safe levels to inject mercury into a human being let alone a tiny infant!! Read more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037653_vaccine_additives_thimerosal_formaldehyde.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/042012_vaccine_facts_vaccine-damaged_children_CDC.html
The list goes on and on but this list is long enough I think!
Something else she states in the above paragraph of the article and that I've read by other pro-vaxers - " The increasing success of the anti-vaccine movement is endangering not only immune-compromised children such as Jack and Clio, but also infants too young to be vaccinated. To say nothing of the unvaccinated children themselves." This is quite a loaded statement. Where is her proof that non-vaccinated children/people spread disease?
"We know there are places around the country where there are large numbers of people who aren't vaccinated. However, we don't think those exemptors are driving this current wave. We think it is bad thing that people aren't getting vaccinated or exempting, but we cannot blame this wave on that phenomenon. Next question." - Anne Schuchat, MD
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/t0719_pertussis_epidenmic.html
"Our unvaccinated and under-vaccinated population did not appear to contribute significantly to the increased rate of clinical pertussis. Surprisingly, the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children in the eight to twelve year age group."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22423127
I just read another article that states that vaccinated children are spreading disease to people when they just receive a vaccine. This occurs because the vaccine is live and also is contaminated with other live viruses.
"Excretion of small amounts of the live attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination."
Vaccine Package insert - http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf
Flu vaccines shed (contaminate non-vaccinated) http://www.fda.gov.downloads/Biologics/BloodVaccines/Vaccines/Appr
http://www.naturalnews.com/042012_vaccine_facts_vaccine-damaged_children_CDC.html
The list goes on and on but this list is long enough I think!
Something else she states in the above paragraph of the article and that I've read by other pro-vaxers - " The increasing success of the anti-vaccine movement is endangering not only immune-compromised children such as Jack and Clio, but also infants too young to be vaccinated. To say nothing of the unvaccinated children themselves." This is quite a loaded statement. Where is her proof that non-vaccinated children/people spread disease?
"We know there are places around the country where there are large numbers of people who aren't vaccinated. However, we don't think those exemptors are driving this current wave. We think it is bad thing that people aren't getting vaccinated or exempting, but we cannot blame this wave on that phenomenon. Next question." - Anne Schuchat, MD
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/t0719_pertussis_epidenmic.html
"Our unvaccinated and under-vaccinated population did not appear to contribute significantly to the increased rate of clinical pertussis. Surprisingly, the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children in the eight to twelve year age group."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22423127
I just read another article that states that vaccinated children are spreading disease to people when they just receive a vaccine. This occurs because the vaccine is live and also is contaminated with other live viruses.
"Excretion of small amounts of the live attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination."
Vaccine Package insert - http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf
Flu vaccines shed (contaminate non-vaccinated) http://www.fda.gov.downloads/Biologics/BloodVaccines/Vaccines/Appr
Some members of both camps of ultras subscribe to the idea that there is a "coordinated media blackout" to conceal the dangers of vaccines because "the exact same people who own the world's drug companies also own America's news outlets," as one recently viral article put it. Even if that were true, our alleged oligarchy doesn't own science and history. Science has repeatedly disproven a link between vaccines and autism. History has shown that vaccine-preventable diseases flourish where there is no herd immunity.
Regarding the "disproven link between vaccines and autism" see below with multiple links I found with studies.
"History has shown" - isn't science way better now than when these diseases were rampant? and aren't our societies in Canada and the US considerably cleaner?
Actual history shows
Being informed parents who research the recommendations of their pediatricians is one thing. Doctors aren't infallible. However, anti-vaccine advocates are asking parents to disavowing nearly the entire medical establishment and for much the same reason that cults cut off their followers from their families: If someone is to be convinced of something that cannot be supported legitimately, then legitimate sources must be discredited -- however clumsily.
Mayim Bialik, the sitcom actress and parenting activist, is part of the crunchy camp of vaccine deniers. As the spokesperson for the Holistic Moms Network, she's quite forthcoming with her opinions about co-sleeping and breastfeeding. However, she has mostly refused to comment on vaccines other than to say that she doesn't vaccinate her children. A wise choice, since if she were effective at convincing enough people not to vaccinate, herd immunity will be further compromised and her own unvaccinated darlings will be endangered.
This is the problem with not vaccinating: It's safe only as long as the majority does vaccinate. Enter the conservative camps of ultras. Recently, Eagle Mountain International Church in Newark, Texas, a megachurch where the pastor was critical of vaccines, suffered a measles outbreak so severe that the pastor reversed his stance and sent his followers post haste to the doctor to get some shots before the megachurch suffered an even more mega epidemic.
The ideas of anti-vaccine advocates have been allowed to spread because vaccinating parents tend to not be radicalized enough to bother with arguing with them. However, this tendency for vaccinating parents to stay out of the discussion is what's causing vaccination to lose its bandwagon appeal. Anti-vaxers are loud. The rest of us need to be loud too, because there's nothing crunchy about a resurgence of polio.
Where's the proof that polio is going to 'resurge'? Is this not just a scare tactic? Asking people to live for possibilities in the future? Do we not have science on our side to help us if we get sick? Polio is still around and always has been. Under the WHO it has been renamed. Check this one out for yourself, I'll update with the link if I remember where I read it.
So I'm writing here not to the anti-vaccine activists, but to other people like me. People who vaccinated their children but avoid saying too much about it because it seems like it's hopeless or none of our business. Even if it feels like we'll never change the mind of anti-vaccine advocates -- and we might not -- we can do our best to head off new recruits to their movement. Vaccines are different from every other parenting issue in that the choices that parents make affect everyone else as well. Vaccines are everyone's business.
Remember that third camp of anti-vaccine advocates that I mentioned? Many of them are parents of children with autism who badly want an explanation for why their child is atypical. Science doesn't know why, except that the link between autism and vaccines has been repeatedly disproven. All parents -- myself included -- want to believe we can protect our children from everything, but we can't. We just friggin' can't.
First of all, why do each of the pro-vaxer articles I've read call on Mr. Wakefield and that dilemma? Is this all they have to go on? Is this their only solid looking proof they can depend on? There are so many doctors who believe the same thing he does.
Also, before I get into all the links and stuff about autism, I've found some good articles and studies that show vaccines cause brain damage. This is what can lead to autism in people who have the chemical make-up to be autistic. It's like diabetes. Not everyone has the chemical make-up to be type 1 diabetic, it's in the genes. But this also doesn't mean if you have the genes you are guaranteed to get it, it depends on your environmental factors (lifestyle, what you subject yourself to with regard to food). So with autism, the environmental factor is the vaccines. One way they do this is by affecting parts of the brain that prevent disease.
"Repeatedly disproven". This is another thing I keep seeing by pro-vaxers. I think Mr. Wakefield was railroaded because he was showing something Big Pharma didn't like. The link provided by JJ Keith states that Mr. Wakefield was "allegedly violating ethical research practices on several counts." Allegedly doesn't mean he was convicted and so doesn't mean it's fact and the 'several accounts' are not listed, so what ethical research practices? There are a lot of doctors who have been accused of violating different laws and losing their medical licenses or being threatened to and a number of these have been turned around or revoked by the same authorities who accused them in the first place. As listed in an earlier blog here are the names I found in Dr. Carolyn Dean, MD ND's book "Death by Modern Medicine": Dr. Carolyn Dean, Dr. Joseph Krop, Dr. Frank Adams, Dr. Michael Smith, Dr. Ravikovitch and see www.kospublishing.com for more. From their stories it seems that these doctors just had minds of their own and someone didn't like that.
Also, before I get into all the links and stuff about autism, I've found some good articles and studies that show vaccines cause brain damage. This is what can lead to autism in people who have the chemical make-up to be autistic. It's like diabetes. Not everyone has the chemical make-up to be type 1 diabetic, it's in the genes. But this also doesn't mean if you have the genes you are guaranteed to get it, it depends on your environmental factors (lifestyle, what you subject yourself to with regard to food). So with autism, the environmental factor is the vaccines. One way they do this is by affecting parts of the brain that prevent disease.
"Repeatedly disproven". This is another thing I keep seeing by pro-vaxers. I think Mr. Wakefield was railroaded because he was showing something Big Pharma didn't like. The link provided by JJ Keith states that Mr. Wakefield was "allegedly violating ethical research practices on several counts." Allegedly doesn't mean he was convicted and so doesn't mean it's fact and the 'several accounts' are not listed, so what ethical research practices? There are a lot of doctors who have been accused of violating different laws and losing their medical licenses or being threatened to and a number of these have been turned around or revoked by the same authorities who accused them in the first place. As listed in an earlier blog here are the names I found in Dr. Carolyn Dean, MD ND's book "Death by Modern Medicine": Dr. Carolyn Dean, Dr. Joseph Krop, Dr. Frank Adams, Dr. Michael Smith, Dr. Ravikovitch and see www.kospublishing.com for more. From their stories it seems that these doctors just had minds of their own and someone didn't like that.
“Likely major
post-vaccine neurological complications, which usually ensue more than 48 hours
after vaccination, tend to be permanent nerve damage to the central nervous
system, including seizures (especially if there is no increase in body
temperature), hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes, postvaccinal encephalitis,
postvaccinal encephalopathy, and autism.”
“…in recent months, courts, governments and vaccine manufacturers have
quietly conceded the fact that the Measles Mumps Rubella (MMR) vaccine most
likely does cause autism and stomach diseases. Pharmaceutical companies have
even gone so far as to pay out massive monetary awards, totaling in the
millions, to the victims in an attempt to compensate them for damages and to
buy their silence.”http://worldtruth.tv/courts-quietly-confirm-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism%E2%80%8F/
Some other links for the autism validity:
http://www.realfarmacy.com/mmr-vaccine-causes-autism-courts-quietly-confirm/
http://www.thinktwice.com/s_autism.htm - this link provides a list of quite a few studies that prove the autism link.http://www.realfarmacy.com/mmr-vaccine-causes-autism-courts-quietly-confirm/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535 - US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health website
Here's a little proof too that people in high places are not looking out for our best interests: "...And I was astonished by this and I said to Dr Elizabeth Miller of the Health Protection Agency, ‘why would you do this, if your principal concern is to protect children from serious infectious disease? Why would you remove an option from parents who are legitimately concerned about the safety of MMR?’ And her answer was extraordinary. She said to me, ‘if we allow parents the option of single vaccines, it would destroy our MMR program.’ In other words, her principal concern seemed to be full protection of the MMR program and not protection of children.”
Anti-vaccine advocates are fond of telling people to "do the research." I have. I side with science. And I side with Jack and Clio."
There a lot of loud pro-vaxers out there and they don't have a whole lot of scientific documentation to back up their claims. Also a lot of the moms I've spoken with just believe because they're afraid of their child getting sick. Is that a good reason to take a giant leap into the unknown with your loved one? To trust the medical establishment so blindly? Do your own research please. I've found more than enough information to scare me into wanting to know more. Another thought about Vaccines is that since they're made by Big Pharma, isn't it Big Pharma who makes all the drugs that are advertised on TV with a list of side effects like Liver Disease, Heart Attacks, Bloating, Bowel problems, etc etc. How can there be no serious side effects of a vaccine (drug) made by the same establishment?
