Interesting article re vax and autism...

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Interesting article re vax and autism...
55
Tue, 02-02-2010 - 3:57pm

I don't believe that vaccines caused my son's autism nor do I believe it causes autism in general.

Deb


<

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Mon, 02-15-2010 - 2:44pm

In all fairness, I have not kept fully up on the Wakefield saga. And, I am not one that believes that two wrongs make a right. (In other words, I have a hard time with some of the language in this opinion); that however said, there are some interesting points made, imo.


----------


Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO
February 14, 2010
NewsWithViews.com


I’ve been asked many times over the last few weeks to share my opinion on the verdict of the U.K’s General Medical Council (GMC) about Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the retraction of his 1998 article, “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children” by the medical journal, Lancet. The many inquiries fall into four basic questions, answered below.


Question #1: What do you know about Dr. Wakefield’s 1998 paper? Do you feel the response of the GMC was appropriate?

Answers:


1. Dr. Wakefield’s paper was SIMPLY a case study of 12 children. Hundreds of case reports are published each year in the medical journals….and are essentially ignored. He didn’t make *any claims* in his original paper that has gotten all the attention.

2. His original paper was simply a hypothesis, not a claim, of the connection to Autism. Be sure to read the original paper; it’s only 5 pages long.

3. Wakefield published 32 peer-reviewed papers since 1998. NONE of these were mentioned or retracted.


4. Wakefield’s most recent research incriminates the use of hepatitis B vaccines in newborns. The first phase of this monkey study was published three months ago in the journal Neurotoxicology, focused on the first two weeks of life. Baby monkeys received a single vaccine for Hepatitis B, mimicking the U.S. vaccine schedule, and were compared with matched, unvaccinated monkeys. The vaccinated monkeys, unlike their unvaccinated peers, suffered the loss of many reflexes that are critical for survival. Discrediting Wakefield’s work over a perceived “ethical” issue would serve to discredit this new research, protecting the vaccine industry once again.

5. Dr. Wakefield’s research was never questioned by the GMC. The ruling focused on what was called “unethical behavior” – drawing blood at a children’s party, even though the parent’s who were present had given their fully informed consent. In fact, in an open letter to the Lancet, the parents of the 12 children in the study rebuke the GMC, politely calling them liars.

6. Dr. Wakefield has never been “anti-vaccine.” His work has always been focused on finding an explanation for WHY so many autistic children have terrible bowel disease.

7. Dr. Wakefield has always recommended single antigen vaccines. He hypothesized that the three live viruses given together in the MMR vaccine are the source of potential problems in at least SOME children.


Question #2: Do you have concerns over Dr. Wakefield’s failure to disclose financial links to a malpractice attorney and to patents he was working on to develop a single vaccine solution?


Answers: I was rather surprised at the question and my response is, no. I don’t feel one bit concerned about that particular issue. I’m not even sure the accusation is 100 percent true; it could be simply a pharma spin/smear. There is so much impropriety among the Players in the vaccine business that any singular accusation about Dr. Wakefield’s work toward developing a single-antigen vaccine to make things safer for children TRULY amounts to “the pot calling the kettle black.”


Consider this:


1. Dr. Paul Offit, who sat on the Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices (ACIP) committee, the committee who approves all the vaccines given to children and adults, holds the patent for the Rotavirus vaccine, (the one that was withdrawn) AND a patent on the current Rotavirus vaccine which is known to cause pneumonia and still some cases of intussusception. It is rumored that he made millions on his vaccine patent and that big pharma bought all his books, so he could make millions more.


2. Dr. Sam Katz sat for year on the ACIP committee having been the developer of the MMR vaccine (particularly the attenuated measles vaccine). He simultaneously consulted with all of the vaccine manufacturers.


3. Dr. D.A. Henderson, credited with smallpox vaccine eradication, consulted simultaneously with all the vaccine manufacturers for year.


4. Dr. Julie Gerberding, after serving eight years as head of the CDC, was recently named President of Merck vaccines. This is one of the most visible and blatant examples of a gross conflict of interest. Just barely past the 365 day mandatory “wait time” imposed on persons who pass from public service into private sector jobs, she was welcomed with open arms. Does anyone think she just might have insider information to share with her new boss, and not just about vaccines?


Question #3: Do you think the Lancet was justified in pulling the paper for pure scientific reasons?


Answer: It was inappropriate for the Lancet to retract his 1998 paper. What did it prove? By focusing on this paper with such fanfare, the general public has been lead to believe that Wakefield’s 1998 Lancet paper, a case report, was the ONLY paper and the ONLY research Wakefield has ever done. They sure paint it that way, don't they?


• NOT ONE mainstream reporter mentioned the 32 research papers published in peer-reviewed journals since 1998.
• NOT ONE mainstream reporter interviewed Wakefield for "balanced reporting." What does that say about the story...and the bought-and-owned, generally lazy press?
• AND NOT ONE mainstream reporter dared to report that Wakefield's observation, finding vaccine-strain measles in the gut of *some* autistic children, has been replicated by other researchers.

Rands

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2010
Wed, 02-10-2010 - 11:35pm


spriteospring

and

onlinemom2000

WELCOME to the board!!! It's always nice to see new people, no matter which side you're on.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-23-2009
Wed, 02-10-2010 - 2:21pm

Personally, I don't think it's the vaccines themselves that are causing harm.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-10-2010
Wed, 02-10-2010 - 9:12am
I'm not replying to anybodies post in particular. I just think it's interesting that something like this can be "retracted" and everyone will buy into it. Who knows..another 10 years down the line they might find a more positive link between vaccines and autism and retract their retraction. Best to be informed about it by multiple sources. Even if it doesn't cause autism I'm still not cool with my daughter being injected with monkey liver membrane and other animal tissue, formaldehyde, ammonium sulfate, fetal bovine serum, hydrolized gelatin.. just to name a few, which if you ask a doctor (MOST) he can't sign off saying that he doesn't use vaccines containing these and other variously disgusting ingredients...he gets them from pharm. companies and very few doctors even care what is in them (in my opinion.. it seems obvious). I refuse to allow my daughter to be injected with that, whether I was and am fine or not. It's just discomforting. Just food for thought.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 10:54pm

>>There's a least two studies out there that say you're wrong. If I had time I would find them both, but here is one of them.<<


Well, it's what I believe, based on what I've read, and my own personal family history.

Deb


<

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 10:39pm

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say.

Deb


<

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2010
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 2:36pm

Really, no matter how many studies are done, if they are ignored then the pretending can continue. Like this one:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0008382

The conclusion is pretty clear:

"Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host's immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system's self-organized criticality."

I've posted it all over the place and still, nobody will touch it. I guess they are ignoring it. Or maybe there's just controversy over what can and can't be considered an autoimmune disorders.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2010
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 2:07pm

That's the big question...I'm sure the answer has the word "placebo" or "unethical" in it somewhere.

My kids will remain vaccine-free too so I think your choice is a wise one.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2010
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 2:04pm
I can see where you're coming from. A lot of my kids classmates are high functioning. Being homeschoolers, we see a lot more of that because our kids don't spend their days with the same 30 kids through elementary school each year. I can usually spot autism, even high functioning, but that's because I spent my entire life around all ranges of autism. Most people won't recognize it unless, like you say, the child exhibits "rainman"-like behavior.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-21-2010
Sat, 02-06-2010 - 1:58pm

"while I don't have figures to prove otherwise,"

No one else does either. Maybe they'll get smart enough to figure it out one day and actually look at those figures. For now, there is *something* stopping them from doing so. I can't for the life of me figure out what that something could be...oh nevermind, it's that placebo thing again. How could I forget? Looking at after the fact numbers would totally be unethical.

Pages