Vaccines

M

mountainhare

Banned
Banned
Two questions...

Firstly, are vaccines related to autism?

Also, aren't antibodies passed onto babies through a mothers breastmilk? So if a mother has been vaccinated against a disease, doesn't that mean that the baby doesn't have to be?
 
If the first question is stated literally, I don't reckon that vaccines are related to autism.

For your second question, I think the antibodies go into the stomach.
 
mountainhare said:
Firstly, are vaccines related to autism?
Click to expand...

No. The link between the MMR vaccine and autism was the result of a single paper published in <I>The Lancet</I>, a medical journal which I have come to regard as nothing more than a science rag sheet. Many similar studies revealed no link. Immunologists all over the world have lambasted the research as shoddy, poorly conceived and with questionable statistics. Not so long ago <I>The Lancet</I> retracted the paper and admitted publicly that it should never have been published.

There is no established scientific link between autism and MMR vaccine. I can rustle up peer-reviewed journal refs if you need them. Anecdotal stories about such a link are just that – anecdotes. As the old saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data.

mountainhare said:
Also, aren't antibodies passed onto babies through a mothers breastmilk? So if a mother has been vaccinated against a disease, doesn't that mean that the baby doesn't have to be?
Click to expand...

Any beneficial effect from such transference of antibodies is transient. The antibodies don’t last very long. In order for a person to be immune to a pathogen, they need to be able to make the antibody themselves. The body needs to “see” the antigen for itself before it can make antibodies against it. In other words, the body needs to be infected by the pathogen in order to gain long-term resistance/immunity to future infections from that pathogen.
 
The link between the MMR vaccine and autism was the result of a single paper published in The Lancet, a medical journal which I have come to regard as nothing more than a science rag sheet.
Click to expand...
Not from what I have read.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/06/23/nmmr23.xml

Here, scientists are supporting a Dr. Wakefield's findings, that vaccines may be linked to bowel problems in autistic children.

Here is info linking autism and vaccines.
http://www.whale.to/a/a3.html

Pathologists in Dublin have also identified the measles virus in the bowels of children with autism and that this virus comes from the MMR vaccine.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/06/23/nmmr23.xml

http://www.vaccinetruth.org/page_20.htm
This link shows that a mother had child who had severe seizures after vaccinations. There are some resources that seem to make a link between vaccines and autism.

Also, some things of interest.
Studies show that the rate of autism is on the rise. Approximately 15 - 20 years ago, the incidence of autism was 1 in 10,000. These days it's 1 in 250. Most of these cases are regressive autism. The regression in the majority of these occurs after the child receives the MMR. We now give more vaccinations than ever before and people are wondering if this coincides with the increase in autism, food allergies, certain neurological problems, etc

There have been studies on the similarities between mercury poisoning and autism. Mercury poisoning causes symptoms very similar to autism; regression, poor communication skills, and distancing. Maybe some children diagnosed with autism might actually be suffering from mercury poisoning. Many parents who have had the mercury levels tested in their child and they are far above what is considered normal.

Federal Government has set up 'The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program' to help pay for the care of those who have been harmed, or to compensate the families where children have died. Isn't this evidence that vaccines may be harmful?

Until just a few years ago Public Health Service agencies and the American Academy of Pediatrics saw no problem with the level of Thimerosol in vaccines. Now, in the US, they are removing it as a 'precautionary measure'. Isn't this even more evidence for the danger of vaccines, and Thimerosol?

A review conducted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1999 concluded that "the use of Thimerosol as a preservative in vaccines might result in the intake of mercury during the first 6 months of life that exceed the Environmental Protection Agency's safety standards". It is a well known fact that infants are particularly more at risk for damage from mercury due to their small body mass and developing nervous system.
 
Last edited:
mountainhare said:
Not from what I have read.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

You're reading the wrong stuff. It's all the usual anti-vaccination crap. You didn’t provide one iota of scientific evidence to support your misinformed anti-vax agenda, all you did was reference newspaper articles that play to peoples' fears, an anti-vaccination website and the testimony of the very scientist who authored the MMR-vaccinaiton paper that was retracted and roundly dismissed! I won’t waste any more of my time on this unless you can drop the anecdotes and provide some actual <B><I>science</I></B>.
 
What about Dr. Wakefield's studies, and the fact that independent scientists have supported his conclusions (at the start of my last post)?

Also, why can't you address the points I made in my posts? If they are indeed flimsy, then you should be able to tear them apart with ease.
 
The problem is that I don't know what to think, and I was hoping that intelligent people here could critically examine/refute the information I have posted.
 
okay, i don't have time right now, but i'll get into this eventually. for now, here is a statistic from the CDC; "autism and its associated behaviors have been estimated to occur in 2 to 6 per 1,000 births." and how many children get vaccinated again?
and a site about autism: http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=autismcauses
and a quote from the clinician in that fourth article; "I agree that long-term peer reviewed studies do not yet prove the relationship between the MMR and autism, I believe the report was misleading to the general public and especially to parents or parents-to-be."
 
Both vaccines and the viruses have side effects and risks
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/

in there FAQ you’ll find a table which outlines the risk of the disease verses the risk of serious side effects from the vaccine. So the TT vaccine has a serious side effect of death in 1/1,000,000+ people, but the disease causes death at a ratio of 100,000.

Which seems simple, to figure out of you should get vaccinated just compare the risks and the serious of the effect, but at the politicians and national health service level you need herd immunity, and for that to work you need a high level of people being vaccinated (so even if a small number get paralysed the benefit good of total vaccination outweighs the negative), which is the problem with MMR.
But how are vaccines ‘clinically tested’, especially for non-adults? The NHS website talks about ‘Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP)’ being a side effect, and says that it is a ‘long established’ one. Which set me wondering how do side-effects become recognised? If it is a case that vaccines are given, and then the population turns up side-effects that become ‘recognised’ as the vaccine becomes used, then in this age of suspicion is it really any wonder that the test population are worried?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top