Vaccine case draws new attention to autism debate

[CyberLaw]

Again, I have yet to see any conclusive scientific fact with "certainty" that vaccines cause autism.

A child may show signs of autism, but the parents do not recognize the signs, but they know "something" may not be right with their kid, yet they don't want to "do anything" about it as it is not "medically" significant. For example: A parent would take a child to the Doctors if they have an ear infection, was in pain or a fever. But a parent would not or may not take a child to the Doctors and say: He/she "just does not seem" right.

The parent may have noticed a child running around and flapping his arms like a bird, but this seemed "like a normal" childhood play. But in essence it is a sign of autism. So when the child gets the "shot", the parents "notice" that something may not be the same with their child, but what they don't realize that the child was not normal before the shot, yet they failed to recognize it.

So of course needing someone or something to blame, "the child" was normal and after the vaccine was not. But the age of autism to develop is up to the age of 3.

Consequently, the child receives the childhood vaccines, so of course this is to blame. But if a person sits down with the parents and "questions" them about actions prior to the shots, it could easily be determined that the child displayed many actions that are "typical" of a child with autism, but these actions were not recognized, nor appreciated by the parents as "being" different.

Parents chalk up......well every child is different, so they fail to see that these symptoms and actions were evident. That is why "Doctors" now screen for autism, because low and behold, they know what the early signs are, not the parent.

So it is the parents who thinks that the kids was normal before vaccines(because they fail to recognize the signs of abnormal) and then after the vaccines, they see the "clear cut" signs and symptoms of autism when the child gets older, so in the parents mind, the vaccines are to blame, but in the Doctors mind, the vaccines are not to blame, because autism is not "caused" by vaccines.

Please if a child that has not had a vaccine and "DIED" as a result of not getting that shot, then the parents can beat them selves up, because they were not acting in the best interest of their child, because their ignorance of not getting a vaccine is selfish and now what they thought they were "doing" in the best interest of their child lead to a preventable death.
\
Again I will repeat the last sentence, children who are not vaccinated, risk the health of any child they come into contact with, depend on "other" to protect them and can die because they are not protected from diseases that are still in society.

Like all the children who died in the UK from Whopping Cough, those parents did not want to risk the "health" of their child because of the evils of vaccine after say for example listening to a biased individual. But those children were not protected from the Whopping cough and are now dead. Gee, let me see, a child may have learning difficulties that MAY have been caused by a shot(but the child is alive and has a long life ahead of them) or not get the shot and the child never has a life again.

Heck a whole community in Northern Ontario had Rubella. They don't believe in vaccinations. A member of this church organization flew from Germany to this community. He spread Rubella because the church members had no anti-bodies to it. Close to 400 people were infected, but low and behold thank goodness the entire town did not catch Rubella as they had been immunized.

But we took the kids to get a booster shot, just in case, as good parents we want to protect our kids from communicable disease that be prevented. We want our kids to be fully protected to the nines any where in the world that they travel to or live from any disease that can easily be prevented. We will not allow our children to be put at risk by people who think that by not vaccinating their child, that they are not putting others at risk and then claim that they are acting in the best interest of their child. The best interest of a child is a parent doing what ever they can do to protect the child and use any means possible to prevent their death from a preventable fatal illnesses.

I for one asked parents before a play date if their child has been fully immunized against preventable fatal diseases. If he answer is: No, I do not believe in vaccinations, they are evil etc. I will not allow our children to associate with the children who put others at risk. As I feel those parents are selfish and wholly dependent on others to protect their children.

 

[Kim Ii]

Cyberlaw,

It is hard to follow your post, but in trying to understand what you are saying, I THINK it is quite clear that you may not have taken the time to research/review Dr. Boyd Haley's findings re: thimerosal (mercury), or Generation Rescue's information and/or information from the National Vaccine Information Center's website.

I have reviewed the scientific information from FOIA, from various researchers and scientists -- I have read David Kirby's book in full, I have interviewed several parents who have children who were completely normal right before a vaccine was given and ultimately, those very same children quit developing normally and, in fact, regressed, shortly after vaccines were given. (You can also find video documentation as to regressive behavior with these children on Generation Rescue's site.)

The same with our son -- he was healthy just prior to receiving a set of vaccines, only to fall into complete somnolence after having received another round of vaccines. After each round of shots, Ryan would fall into a complete slumber (somnolence) for approximately 48 hours. I couldn't awaken him for feeding or for changing. Clearly, something was very, very wrong...

Anecdotal? I think not. We are lucky in that our son's pediatric group fully and completely acknowledged his vaccine reactions (of which are all documented in his medical files).

All I can say is that you will find a vast wealth of information on the Internet, in books, in research papers, in medical libraries, etc., if you REALLY want to dig and find the TRUTH as to vaccine safety issues. As I've said, it's been known in this country alone, since the 1940's, that mercury/thimerosal was a culprit in PINK DISEASE, a disease babies during that time period contracted and which was later linked to the teething rings used at that time. When it became known that mercury was used in these teething rings, it was taken out and presto! No more Pink Disease.

Yes, it's a frightening thought that your own government and various other research groups, medical groups, etc., would hide the Truth from the public, for various (and quite obvious) reasons, but that wouldn't be the first time your government hasn't taken the high road with safety issues regarding medical procedures, dangerous drugs, etc.

Vaccine researchers have had their lives threatened when they've come out and blown the whistle on what's happening in medical labs all over the world vis-a-vis vaccine production.

SUNDANCE Film Festival had a documentary re: the Polio Vaccine on television not too long ago...that particular movie was a very difficult one to watch, but watch it I did and I STILL came away more appalled and frightened than I thought I could be at that time. At the time I saw that movie, I thought I knew all about how much Truth had been kept from the public regarding the vaccine controversy -- I was so naive. There was much, much more I hadn't known.

Our son almost died from vaccine reactions. The first friend I ever made right after we moved to Denver, Colorado years ago, received compensation from the American Government over the death of her baby girl, due to the MMR vaccine. They gave her $250,000.00 -- that money will NEVER, EVER compensate her family over the loss of their beautiful baby girl, though. Money will never be able to replace a human life, but unfortunately, in our very warped and messy way of life, human lives don't always have the value they should...greed and corruption usually take precedent.

 

[Kim Ii]

Here is a quote from Dr. Boyd Haley:

"The symptoms of early infant mercury poisoning and autism are
virtually identical," said Dr. Boyd Haley, chairman of the chemistry
department at the University of Kentucky. "Furthermore, research
indicates that autistic children genetically have a harder time
excreting mercury from their bodies and that many of their
biomedical problems could be caused by mercury."

AND FROM MR. KEVIN BARRY, PRES. OF GENERATION RESCUE:

"In a time when pregnant women are told not to eat fish because it
might contain mercury, why in the world are we still injecting
mercury into our children's bloodstream through vaccines?", asked
Kevin Barry, President of Generation Rescue. "We are completely
mystified about why the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics
are fighting state laws trying to ban mercury in vaccines."

Link to F.A.I.R. AUTISM Interview of Dr. Boyd Haley:

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/dr-boyd-haley-on-mercury-toxicity-and-autism-part-4/2007405789

 

[shadowraiths]

Well even though this is a very heated topic what does everyone think?

Imho, it is highly doubtful that vaccines cause Autism. That is, from the research I've read. For one, there is no data that indicates even a remotely significant correlation between autism and MMRs. Secondly, even if there were, correlation != causation! And finally, Autism was first recognized (and named) in 1943. The MMR was not approved, and hence, used, until 1963. Imho, the latest vaccine theory is yet another unproven theory to add to the growing list of causation theories that have come and gone like the wind. The most devastating, btw, being Bruno Bettleheim's "refrigerator mother" theory which resulted in the removal of thousands of autistic children from their homes in the late 1960s. To date, research does indicate that there is a genetic component. The degree to which that plays in the resulting outcome is still up for debate. I touch upon this in my article, "The Silent Victims," though, only briefly, as the focus of that particular article had more to do with the issue of victimization as opposed to the etiology of the disorder.

That being said, imho and from what I've seen over the past few years, Autism seems to be the new disorder dujour. You know... sorta like ADHD of the 1990s and Bi-Polar of 1980s. While there are indeed children who are tragically afflicted with this debilitating disorder, I think society has become way too ready to jump on the disorder bandwagon to describe (and in some ways, contain) what is otherwise normal childhood developmental issues. With devastating results, I might add. You know, like the ritalin craze and the irreversible brain damage (ala Tardive Diskinesia) that is just now beginning to make itself known. But hey, that's jmo.

 

[CyberLaw]

O.K. when a Ph.D Chemist from Kentucky is smarter then 100 Scientists and Doctors and when his finding are supported by`FACT` and evidence, peer reviewed and published in a mainstream medical journal, then I will stand up and take notice.

But he is the `darling`of the autism and anti-vaccine world, the rest of the world knows that he has no fact and evidence to support his conclusion.

Sorry, now Dr. Boyd Haley is the FORMER head of Chemistry of the University of Kentucky.

A court in 2006, subjected Dr. Haley`s testimony, to what is called a Daubert investigation(where the expertise is evaluated) The court did not accept the expertise of Dr. Haley and Dr. Lucier, who is on the anti vaccine bandwagon.

The court…finds that Dr. Haley’s report does not state an expert opinion that thimerosal causes autism, rather just that he has a theory about how such a thing could happen. At best, he expressed “strong belief” that the cause of “neurodevelopmental disorders in infants” is exposure to an organic-mercury compound such as thimerosal.

It is not even a theory, he has at best a `hypothesis`. What is the difference between the two.

A hypothesis is a working assumption. Typically, a scientist devises a hypothesis and then sees if it ``holds water'' by testing it against available data (obtained from previous experiments and observations). If the hypothesis does hold water, the scientist declares it to be a theory.

So please, this man`s expert testimony was not even allowed into court and you expect me to `believe`his assertions and hypothesis.

I deal with fact......not the fiction. The findings of Dr. Boyd are just that, fiction not supported by fact.

Crackpots come up with assertions all the time. That is why they are not allowed to testify in court.

BTW, autism was first identified in 1943, the MMR vaccine was first used twenty years later in 1963. I guess Dr, Haley "skipped" those facts in his "belief".

 

[2sisters]

I don't want to single you out Cyberlaw but you are coming off a little snooty to the others who disagree with you on this matter. It is of course only my opinion and perhaps you don't intend to be rude. I feel for these mothers and they are just trying to find answers something. There is no need to belittle anyone.
I could be misreading you, and I apologize if I am.

 

[CyberLaw]

I don't intend to be rude. That is just not in my nature. But what irks me is when someone "hold up to be true" a position that has no basis in reality and fact. I could not have looked up Dr. Harley, but I am glad I did.

People want to "believe" a person who they think will support their position. They want to believe Dr. Harley and tell me "this is fact, this is what this one person says, so of course he is right and everyone else is wrong." We believe him because he is right, just like we are.

But that is not the case. The facts don't add up. I don't believe what people tell me. I look at all of the "reviewed" information out there. I look at facts. I am just a "fact and evidence" based personality.

As yet, I have not found a peer reviewed fact based analysis of "the myth that vaccines" cause autism. Nothing.

Another fact that "irks" me to no end is that parents "acting" upon a myth and putting their child's health at risk as well as other parents.

I wish I could transport parents back in time when there was no vaccines and children died and parents and the medical community were "helpless" to save a child's life. You see when people put the public at risk for "what they believe", then it not "only a personal" choice, but a choice(through the parents ignorance and belief)that puts the public at risk.

Remember SARS hit Toronto. I can`t even begin to tell you `the worry`of people. There is no cure for SARS and the mortality rate is very high. You could not protect yourself from getting sick.

Even when SARS hit, the health care system was unable to cope to any degree and this was not a `widespread`outbreak. So I can tell you first hand `how desperate`people were for a vaccine for SARS.

How people were trying to `not become infected`. How nurses did not want to report to work. How parents kept kids home from school. People did not report to work. Shopping malls were empty. People did not eat dinner out, go to movies, sports events. How many events were not attended. People stayed at home, safe and sound. Why risk going to work, going to school, when an illness is upon our city that could kill you.

So yes, I have lived though an illness that cannot be prevented, has a high fatally rate, can infect anyone, and no one could prevent their loved ones from getting sick.

Everyone who worked at a hospital, who had even the slightest temperature or a slight cough(any time a person came to work at a hospital, they were screened at the door) was not allowed back to work for over one week on the `slightest`chance that the temperature and cough was a result of SARS. No one was taking any chances.

Now you know why I am pro vaccine...........because when there is no vaccine, there are deaths. When vaccines are developed and used, people have the means to protect themselves and their loved ones. That is if they choose to protect themselves.......and their kids.

I rather be given the chance and take the opportunity with a vaccine then risk certain death from the disease.

 

[RiverRat]

Just HOW healthy is mercury - the second most toxic element - for the human body?

 

[RiverRat]

I don't want to single you out Cyberlaw but you are coming off a little snooty to the others who disagree with you on this matter. It is of course only my opinion and perhaps you don't intend to be rude. I feel for these mothers and they are just trying to find answers something. There is no need to belittle anyone.
I could be misreading you, and I apologize if I am.

This is why so many just give up.....it IS very painful to be brushed aside as if this were all in our heads. Thank You for your compassion at a time like this.

 

[Kim Ii]

Aahhh, well, I have learned to develop a thick skin with all of this. It is truly amazing the naivete/ignorance of so many who have not either a) had the misfortune of seeing a loved one suffer from vaccines, and b) have not done the mind boggling research so many others, as myself, have done, to try to figure out just what happened to our children.

Through the FOIA, many have been able to glean information otherwise not generally made available to the public. I have documents with transcribed notes from a heretofore "secretive" meeting held in which many physicians and researchers were just realizing the full impact the mercury issue was going to have on the general public. One physician in particular, remarked that his baby grandson was born just that night and he did NOT want his grandson to have any vaccine which contained the toxic compound mercury.

I have at least had the fortune to have found pediatricians who were more than willing to acknowledge that vaccine safety issues needed to be looked at more in depth.

And yes, 2Sisters, thank you for your compassionate words. I'm quite certain that many who have read this thread are silently wondering about this issue themselves, but may be as of yet, unable to believe that anyone would cover up such a story. As I've said, Truth and Fiction are sometimes entwined in vaccine research and more often than we would want to believe, corruption and fearmongering of those who know the truth, takes precedence over whistleblowing.

An example: Here is an interview Jon Rappaport did of a RETIRED VACCINE RESEARCHER. It's well worth the read, if you want to find out what vaccine reserchers know and why they have not come out with what they know re: vaccine safety/production issues:

Here's the link: http://drbenkim.com/articles-vaccine-risks.htm;

Here is a snip:

Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won't say which ones.

Q: Why not?

A: I want to preserve my privacy.

Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

A: I believe I could lose my pension.

Q: On what grounds?

A: The grounds don't matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

Q: Harassed by whom?

A: The FBI.

Q: Really?

A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

Q: So much for free speech.

A: I was "part of the inner circle." If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine.

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It's one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

Q: Why?

A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

Q: And then?

A: I did my own investigation.

Q: What conclusions did you come to?

A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

Q: What conditions?

A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don't contract the diseases as easily.

Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.

Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?

A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases -- say, meningitis -- that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.

Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.

A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.

Q: Which is?

A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.

Q: So you're saying that we have been treated to a false history.

A: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.

Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.

A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.

Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.

A: Well yes, that happened. But that's not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I'm talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors -- that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don't know are in those kidneys.

 

[Kim Ii]

Well, here is that link yet again, as it didn't go through the first time:

http://drbenkim.com/articles-vaccine-risks.htm

 

[shadowraiths]

A court in 2006, subjected Dr. Haley`s testimony, to what is called a Daubert investigation(where the expertise is evaluated) The court did not accept the expertise of Dr. Haley and Dr. Lucier, who is on the anti vaccine bandwagon.

Ummm.... that would be a Daubert hearing (not a Daubert investigation), which is the result of one of the latest precedent setting cases, as they pertain to expert testimony admissibility. To wit (excerpt from an article I wrote last year, emphasis added, mine):

In 1923, James Alphonzo Frye, who had been convicted of murder in the second degree, appealed his conviction on the basis of a "single assignment of error." Frye's attorney had attempted and was denied the testimony of an expert witness regarding the results of a "systolic blood pressure deception test" that indicated Frye was telling the truth when he stated he did not commit the murder. In a December 3, 1923 precedent setting opinion, Chief Justice, Van Orsdel, upheld the ruling, stating the systolic blood pressure deception test had not yet gained wide acceptance by the scientific community. (Frye v United States, 1923)

The result came to be known as the Frye standard (also known as the Frye test), which would be used to determine expert testimony admissibility for the next 50 years. By 1975 expert testimony admissibility criteria, which focused upon scientific method, was codified in Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE). In 1993, during the appeal of another precedent setting case, Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Justice Blackmun noted that the court should act as a "gatekeeper" to ensure expert testimony met FRE 702 scientific standards, specifically in the areas of testability, peer review, error rates, and general acceptance.

Expert testimony admissibility was further clarified in the 1997 General Electric Co. v. Joiner opinion, wherein Chief Justice Rehnquist ruled that expert testimony should not be excluded solely upon the basis that an expert might only be able testify to a limited degree of certainty--which some argue does not rise above guesswork and/or biased speculation. In the 1999 case of Kumho Tire Company v Carmichael, Justice Breyer recognized Dennis Carlson Jr's ipse dixit expertise, noting that FRE 702 does not distinguish between scientific knowledge and special knowledge, thus further clarifying expert testimony admissibility criteria. Although expert testimony admissibility criteria have changed during the past century, several states continue to rely upon the Frye test.​

As far Dr. Boyd Haley's situation regarding the Daubert Hearing, I'm not sure why you are citing peer review considering that Dr Haley has over 112 peer review articles. I guess I am wondering how many peer review papers you require to "stand up and take notice"? Furthermore, peer review is but one prong of the Daubert hearing that must be met to qualify as an expert in Daubert states. The other three are are testability, error rate, & general acceptance. And finally, from my read of the Beaty opinion, the issue resulting in the inadmissibility of his expert testimony appears to be the lack of a definitive (i.e., that "it could cause" rather than "it did cause") as opposed to their "expertise" in the field.

John & Jane Doe v Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc

"Dr. Haley's report does not state an expert opinion that thimerosal causes autism, rather just that he has a theory about how such a thing could happen… [T]he Court finds that neither of the proffered reports of Dr. Haley nor Dr. Lucier are sufficiently reliable under Daubert on the general causation issue because neither is relevant to the ‘task at hand.’ It would be an unacceptable scientific leap to suggest that they serve as proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, of Plaintiff’s claim that the thimerosal in RhoGAM can cause autism."

PDF: click here
​

That said, while I do not doubt that vaccines can exacerbate pre-existing conditions, I am admittedly surprised that you seem to. Esp since you claim that your opinion is based upon sound science. Perhaps a little more research is in order? Or not. :shrugs:

 

[shadowraiths]

From the article you posted:

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It's one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

And herein lies the core issue: informed consent. Alas, it is tough to be "informed" when the very body that was put in place as the gatekeeper, is corrupt in and of itself.

 

[CyberLaw]

Mercury is a naturally occurring metallic substance. Minute quantities of mercury are in air, water, soil, and all living matter. Mercury exists as both inorganic and organic forms, and the organic methyl mercury is the most toxic to humans.

Mercury vaporizes into the air from natural soil deposits. Rain washes mercury out of the air and returns it to rivers, lakes, oceans, and the soil. This cycle of vaporization and washing-out has probably taken place since the earth formed. Because plants and animals evolved in the earth's environment, all contain trace quantities of mercury.

www.cdc.gov.

In July 1999, the Public Health Service agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agreed that thimerosal should be reduced or eliminated in vaccines as a precautionary measure.

Since 2001, with the exception of some influenza (flu) vaccines, thimerosal is not used as a preservative in routinely recommended childhood vaccines.

So let me see, has incidents of autism "dropped" dramatically since 2001, because there would have to be a "huge" drop in autism cases if that was so and mercury was the "cause" of autism.


Actually with the elimination of mercury in vaccinations, autism rates have increased.



That would lead one to believe that there is no link between autism and vaccinations.

Can someone tell me why autism affects boys more then girls. If mercury is the case, then they would be affected equally.

WWW.cnn.com - January 7, 2008

For their study, California public health officials calculated the autism rate by analyzing a database of state-funded centers that care for people with autism and other developmental disorders.


They found the prevalence of autism in children aged 3 to 12 increased throughout the study period. For example, 0.3 per 1,000 children born in 1993 had autism at age 3 compared with 1.3 per 1,000 children born in 2003. Similar trends were found in other age groups.


"These time trends are inconsistent with the hypothesis that thimerosal exposure is a primary cause of autism in California," the researchers wrote.

Beliefs in at least my opinion, do not trump facts and evidence.

www.autism-society.org

There is no known single cause for autism, but it is generally accepted that it is caused by abnormalities in brain structure or function. Brain scans show differences in the shape and structure of the brain in autistic versus non-autistic children. Researchers are investigating a number of theories, including the link between heredity, genetics and medical problems. In many families, there appears to be a pattern of autism or related disabilities, further supporting a genetic basis to the disorder. While no one gene has been identified as causing autism, researchers are searching for irregular segments of genetic code that autistic children may have inherited.


You may note: No where does it say: Do not get your children vaccinated because vaccinations cause autism.



www.autismconnect.com - regarding a court case


Doctors and vaccine manufacturers are watching these cases anxiously. They fear that the autism-vaccination claims, despite being discredited by researchers, will scare parents out of vaccinating their children. This appears to have happened in other countries, such as Britain, leading to mini-epidemics of diseases such as measles (which, ironically, can cause brain damage).

I really do think there is a small(hopefully) small percentage of parents who refuse vaccination of their kids based on very flawed information that has no basis in science and reality. Those parents, according to many article risk the health of their children by not getting vaccinations.

So be it, they can make "their own" choice for their own kids, but please, do not risk the health of other kids. This thread has reminded me, though, that we need to go to our Doctors and get all of our shots updated.

You never know.....you just don't and I want my family protected. All it takes is one person to infect millions if no vaccine exists to protect people against disease.

 

[Linda7NJ]

WHAT??????????????

from an above article:

"Also, most people don't know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue"

 

[CyberLaw]

This thread is just too `far gone`for me to participate. Why don`t we just call it a day and blame vaccinations for every illness, sickness, on the planet.

Lets see: Vaccinations cause: (Insert medical condition here) and I am never going to allow my kids to get vaccinations.

www.catholic.org. - regarding vaccination

The first one is the WI-38 line (Winstar Institute 38), with human diploid lung fibroblasts, coming from a female fetus that was aborted because the family felt they had too many children. It was prepared and developed by Leonard Hayflick in 1964 [3] and bears the ATCC number CCL-75. WI-38 has been used for the preparation of the historical vaccine RA 27/3 against rubella [4].

The second human cell line is MRC-5 (Medical Research Council 5) -- human, lung, embryonic -- (ATCC number CCL-171), with human lung fibroblasts coming from a 14 week male fetus aborted for "psychiatric reasons" from a 27 year old woman in the UK. MRC-5 was prepared and developed by J.P. Jacobs in 1966 [5]. Other human cell lines have been developed for pharmaceutical needs, but are not involved in the vaccines actually available [6].

So not having a vaccination against rubella: The consequences thereof:

For example, the severe epidemic of German measles which affected a huge part of the United States in 1964 thus caused 20,000 cases of congenital rubella [2], resulting in 11,250 abortions -- spontaneous or surgical -- 2,100 neonatal deaths, 11,600 cases of deafness, 3,580 cases of blindness, 1,800 cases of mental retardation. It was this epidemic that pushed for the development and introduction on the market of an effective vaccine against rubella, thus permitting an effective prophylaxis against this infection.

The severity of congenital rubella and the handicaps which it causes justify systematic vaccination against such a sickness. It is very difficult, perhaps even impossible, to avoid the infection of a pregnant woman, even if the rubella infection of a person in contact with this woman is diagnosed from the first day of the eruption of the rash. Therefore, one tries to prevent transmission by suppressing the reservoir of infection among children who have not been vaccinated, by means of early immunization of all children -- universal vaccination.

Universal vaccination has resulted in a considerable fall in the incidence of congenital rubella.

The vaccines that are incriminated today as using human cell lines from aborted fetuses, WI-38 and MRC-5, are the following: [7]

A) Live vaccines against rubella [8]

-- Monovalent vaccines against rubella Meruvax® (Merck, United States), Rudivax® (Sanofi Pasteur, France), and Ervevax® (RA 27/3) (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium)

-- Combined vaccine MR against rubella and measles, commercialized with the name of M-R-VAX® (Merck, United States) and Rudi-Rouvax® (AVP, France)

-- Combined vaccine against rubella and mumps marketed under the name of Biavax® (Merck, United States)

-- Combined vaccine MMR -- measles, mumps, rubella -- marketed under the name of M-M-R® II (Merck, United States), R.O.R.®, Trimovax® (Sanofi Pasteur, France), and Priorix® (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium)

B) Other vaccines, also prepared using human cell lines from aborted fetuses

-- Two vaccines against hepatitis A, one produced by Merck (VAQTA), the other one produced by GlaxoSmithKline (HAVRIX), both of them being prepared using MRC-5

-- One vaccine against chicken pox, Varivax®, produced by Merck using WI-38 and MRC-5

-- One vaccine against poliomyelitis, the inactivated polio virus vaccine Poliovax® (Aventis-Pasteur, France) using MRC-5

-- One vaccine against rabies, Imovax®, produced by Aventis Pasteur, harvested from infected human diploid cells, MRC-5 strain

-- One vaccine against smallpox, AC AM 1000, prepared by Acambis using MRC-5, still on trial.

Well I wonder how many lives have been saved from two abortions(one by choice the other medically required) back in 1964 and 1966.

I am sure the 11,250 abortions that were by choice or not and the 2,100 deaths, that resulted before the rubella vaccination, as a result of catching rublla far outweigh the two "cell" lines derived in 1964 and 1966 which were used for the widespread development of the vaccinations that have saved millions, upon millions of lives worldwide and will continue to save millions of lives in years to come.

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

WE have a family history of some of the medical conditions that you mention and again, no one in our family has had any severe adverse reaction to any vaccines. Sorry to disappoint you. No autism in our immediate or extended family.

If your child has had an reaction to a vaccine, then that would be a great indicator that future problems may exist.

But again, I know of many, many parents of kids with the medical conditions that you mention and they have had no adverse reactions to vaccines either.

Can you please "cite" any medical information that indicates that the "past and present" mercury levels has a clear and present "adverse" affect on children and is a direct cause of autism.

No if and or buts, but pure scientific conclusion instead of theory and myth. I would like peer reviewed published article from a medical doctor and or association that clearly states that vaccines are the cause of autism.

Because the rate of autism has gone up, but the levels of mercury has gone down or is non existent in most if not all childhood vaccines. Parents can request mercury free vaccines.

Again, I have yet to see any publications from a "trusted" source that states that vaccines cause autism.

A genetic factor is in play in autism. That is why you have more then one child in a family with autism. Different ages, different ages for vaccines, but all of the kids have autism.

Heck I have common skin condition, I have food allergies, oldest has a Learning Disability and the youngest has asthma and we have never had any adverse reaction to any vaccine. When I got my vaccines, heck they must have been loaded with mercury as it was some time ago.

Oldest had a drug reaction from penicillin also which was quite serious, but again no reaction to vaccines.

Looked up your article, Boyd Haley is a Ph.D, not a medical doctor.

Sorry to dispel your theory.............that is what it is a theory. An unproven one at that....snip

.

Do a little more research. Asthma and Learning Disabilities have also been indicated in vaccine injury. Sorry to disappoint you.

We never had autism in our family either. My oldest, (15 Male) was diagnosed at 3. Had every vaccine known at the time, because I was a "good mother". Disappeared into the deaths of hell at 20 months old, after his MMR, Hib, 3rd Polio, and DTP. (8 diseases in one visit!!...and I was late getting him in...thank God, or he would probably be worse) 2nd child, (9Male) NO vaccines except the Hep B at birth, which was given without my consent less than 1 hour after he was born c-sect.) He is the top of his class. Parent-teacher conference on Friday was a dream, teacher said he was the most intelligent kid she had taught in 10 years, :woohoo: (Before the herd mass vaccine schedule).
You believe what you want, but PLEASE don't belittle the parents who have witnessed a regression so serious in their child after a round of vaccines, that there is no doubt in their gut the vaccines caused it.

Oh to answer on another post you made...there have been many drugs pulled off the market in the last few years that caused devastating side effects to some, NOT ALL, but SOME people. Fen-Phen combo. NorPlant, and Celebrex just to name a few that comes to mind.

 

[bigbuck]

Thank you INTERESTEDWOMAN! It must be really easy for some to talk down to and belittle us who have watched in HORROR as our happy healthy children crash into the hell that is autism after they were vaccinated. Perhaps if they saw it with thier OWN eyes not through a firiends, buddiies, cousins, child. They would KNOW how we feel!

:furious:

 

[Linda7NJ]

This thread is just too `far gone`for me to participate. Why don`t we just call it a day and blame vaccinations for every illness, sickness, on the planet.

Lets see: Vaccinations cause: (Insert medical condition here) and I am never going to allow my kids to get vaccinations.

www.catholic.org. - regarding vaccination

The first one is the WI-38 line (Winstar Institute 38), with human diploid lung fibroblasts, coming from a female fetus that was aborted because the family felt they had too many children. It was prepared and developed by Leonard Hayflick in 1964 [3] and bears the ATCC number CCL-75. WI-38 has been used for the preparation of the historical vaccine RA 27/3 against rubella [4].

The second human cell line is MRC-5 (Medical Research Council 5) -- human, lung, embryonic -- (ATCC number CCL-171), with human lung fibroblasts coming from a 14 week male fetus aborted for "psychiatric reasons" from a 27 year old woman in the UK. MRC-5 was prepared and developed by J.P. Jacobs in 1966 [5]. Other human cell lines have been developed for pharmaceutical needs, but are not involved in the vaccines actually available [6].

So not having a vaccination against rubella: The consequences thereof:

For example, the severe epidemic of German measles which affected a huge part of the United States in 1964 thus caused 20,000 cases of congenital rubella [2], resulting in 11,250 abortions -- spontaneous or surgical -- 2,100 neonatal deaths, 11,600 cases of deafness, 3,580 cases of blindness, 1,800 cases of mental retardation. It was this epidemic that pushed for the development and introduction on the market of an effective vaccine against rubella, thus permitting an effective prophylaxis against this infection.

The severity of congenital rubella and the handicaps which it causes justify systematic vaccination against such a sickness. It is very difficult, perhaps even impossible, to avoid the infection of a pregnant woman, even if the rubella infection of a person in contact with this woman is diagnosed from the first day of the eruption of the rash. Therefore, one tries to prevent transmission by suppressing the reservoir of infection among children who have not been vaccinated, by means of early immunization of all children -- universal vaccination.

Universal vaccination has resulted in a considerable fall in the incidence of congenital rubella.

The vaccines that are incriminated today as using human cell lines from aborted fetuses, WI-38 and MRC-5, are the following: [7]

A) Live vaccines against rubella [8]

-- Monovalent vaccines against rubella Meruvax® (Merck, United States), Rudivax® (Sanofi Pasteur, France), and Ervevax® (RA 27/3) (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium)

-- Combined vaccine MR against rubella and measles, commercialized with the name of M-R-VAX® (Merck, United States) and Rudi-Rouvax® (AVP, France)

-- Combined vaccine against rubella and mumps marketed under the name of Biavax® (Merck, United States)

-- Combined vaccine MMR -- measles, mumps, rubella -- marketed under the name of M-M-R® II (Merck, United States), R.O.R.®, Trimovax® (Sanofi Pasteur, France), and Priorix® (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium)

B) Other vaccines, also prepared using human cell lines from aborted fetuses

-- Two vaccines against hepatitis A, one produced by Merck (VAQTA), the other one produced by GlaxoSmithKline (HAVRIX), both of them being prepared using MRC-5

-- One vaccine against chicken pox, Varivax®, produced by Merck using WI-38 and MRC-5

-- One vaccine against poliomyelitis, the inactivated polio virus vaccine Poliovax® (Aventis-Pasteur, France) using MRC-5

-- One vaccine against rabies, Imovax®, produced by Aventis Pasteur, harvested from infected human diploid cells, MRC-5 strain

-- One vaccine against smallpox, AC AM 1000, prepared by Acambis using MRC-5, still on trial.

Well I wonder how many lives have been saved from two abortions(one by choice the other medically required) back in 1964 and 1966.

I am sure the 11,250 abortions that were by choice or not and the 2,100 deaths, that resulted before the rubella vaccination, as a result of catching rubella far outweigh the two "cell" lines derived in 1964 and 1966 which were used for the widespread development of the vaccinations that have saved millions, upon millions of lives worldwide and will continue to save millions of lives in years to come.

For the record, I am pro choice.

Thank you for posting all that information here, it's fascinating!

 

[Kim Ii]

I just found this short article this morning and thought I would post it. Very interesting -- I hadn't heard about this at all. I find this article so interesting because our son was given the hepatitis B vaccine as a newborn, a vaccine I did not know at the time, I could have opted him out of. This was the first vaccine he suffered a reaction to -- a vaccine I was told several years ago they no longer give at this hospital (in Denver, CO) to its newborns because, "it was too reactive."


Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Vaccine Companies Investigated for Manslaughter

French judges probe firms over vaccinations -source

Fri Feb 1, 2008 3:32am EST

PARIS, Jan 31 (Reuters) - "French authorities have opened a formal investigation into two managers from drugs groups GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L: Quote, Profile, Research) and Sanofi Pasteur over a vaccination campaign in the 1990s, a judicial source said late on Thursday."

"Judge Marie-Odile Bertella-Geffroy also opened an investigation for manslaughter against Sanofi Pasteur MSD, a joint venture between Sanofi Aventis (SASY.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) and Merck (MRK.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the same source said."

"The investigations follow allegations that the companies failed to fully disclose side effects from an anti-hepatitis B drug used in a vaccination campaign between 1994 and 1998."

"There was no immediate comment from the companies or the two managers involved."

"From 1994 to 1998, almost two thirds of the French population and almost all newborn babies were vaccinated against hepatitis B, but the campaign was suspended after concerns arose about possible secondary effects from the treatments."

"Some 30 plaintiffs have launched a civil action in the case, including the families of five people who died after vaccination. (Reporting by Thierry Leveque; Writing by James Mackenzie; Editing by David Holmes)."