or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Formal Debate Thread: Vaccinated children are more likely to have autism than unvaccinated children.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Formal Debate Thread: Vaccinated children are more likely to have autism than unvaccinated children. - Page 2  

post #21 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

I don't know that any parent of a child who may have suffered a vaccine injury is looking for something to blame. I think they're trying to find how to fix the damage, as soon as possible, and with as much information as possible.  But, as we all know, there are an awful lot of roadblocks--some of which are intentional--put in the way of treating, even identifying vaccine injuries.

I think it is pretty natural, when something goes wrong with our children, to look around  and see what might be the or a cause.  I don't think blame is a bad thing as defined by the dictionary ( Blame is defined as:  to hold responsible; find fault with; censure. ) but it is a loaded word.  I will reword - I don't think parents are picking something out of thin air to pin autism on.  I think some might blame vaccines on some level, but I do not think they are looking for something to blame

 

I also think it is natural (and  fairly brave and noble) for parents who have vaccine injured children to let the world know what happened and that they believe vaccines injured their child.  They are trying to add to a body of knowledge and let parents know that these things happen.  

post #22 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

 

IMO- this is a HUGH generalization that I can't back up with fact-can you?

 

I see the complete opposite- there are parents that DO blame and they file suites and report the injury (s). There could be a whole thread just on those who file. You don't file and seek damages if you don't blame.

I said looking for something to blame - which I edited out.  I do think many parents do blame vaccines for injuries - but I do not think they are looking for something to blame.  


Edited by purslaine - 6/26/12 at 12:14pm
post #23 of 126
Kathy, that is why I really out a lot of faith in the statements from people like the IOM and cochrane. They are made who of people tremendously well qualified to assess the data and studies and weigh various studies appropriately according to how well designed, etc, they are.
post #24 of 126
Thread Starter 

Okay - if I may make a suggestion.  Perhaps not putting a wall of information into one post might be more effective.  I have checked quotes and none of them seem to be over 100 words, so we're clear on copyright violations, however the giant wall of quotes and links that we seem to be favoring this round makes it very hard to read and fully grasp.  

post #25 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdinaL View Post

Okay - if I may make a suggestion.  Perhaps not putting a wall of information into one post might be more effective.  I have checked quotes and none of them seem to be over 100 words, so we're clear on copyright violations, however the giant wall of quotes and links that we seem to be favoring this round makes it very hard to read and fully grasp.  

Oh.  I thought it would be better to have one post of quotes/links refuting Rrrrachel's assertions that 1) there were no studies showing a link between vaccines and autism other than Wakefield's and 2) that it is not relevant how many children get thimerosal-preserved vaccines.

 

Did you want me to separate all those links into separate posts?

post #26 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

 

IMO- this is a HUGH generalization that I can't back up with fact-can you?

 

I see the complete opposite- there are parents that DO blame and they file suites and report the injury (s). There could be a whole thread just on those who file. You don't file and seek damages if you don't blame.

Exactly where do you see people in the US filing damages against vaccines for autism?

You CAN'T sue the doctors or the vaccine manufacturers, no matter what, and HHS is very clear--they do not consider autism to be compensable.

 

So who is filing and seeking damages for vaccine-induced autism?

post #27 of 126
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Oh.  I thought it would be better to have one post of quotes/links refuting Rrrrachel's assertions that 1) there were no studies showing a link between vaccines and autism other than Wakefield's and 2) that it is not relevant how many children get thimerosal-preserved vaccines.

 

Did you want me to separate all those links into separate posts?

 

It might help with making your point.  That is kind of hard to digest in that huge giant post.  Eyes glaze over....:)  

post #28 of 126
Quote:
So who is filing and seeking damages for vaccine-induced autism?

Hannah Poling 

 

do you count what occurred in Italy? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160054/MMR-A-mothers-victory-The-vast-majority-doctors-say-link-triple-jab-autism-Italian-court-case-reignite-controversial-debate.html#ixzz1xu7lMBW5

post #29 of 126

Hannah Poling's case was for vaccine-induced brain damage.  Her parents (and lawyer) were smart enough to keep the word "autism" out of her case, knowing that mention of the word "autism" would get her case automatically thrown out of court.

 

To my knowledge, based on what I have read about her case, her parents were not blindly and frantically looking for something to blame.  They had solid evidence that the 9 vaccines Hannah received caused severe brain damage.  They were absolutely correct to file a claim; in fact, it could be thought that NOT filing a claim would be irresponsible, because it would have allowed people to go on thinking that vaccine injuries like Hannah's don't happen, when, obviously, they do.

 

In Italy, they are apparently allowed to sue for vaccine-induced autism. Here in the US, you cannot.  You cannot sue the vaccine manufacturers, the doctors, nor the government (who mandates the vaccines) for vaccine-induced autism.

post #30 of 126

Seems like the conversation about thimerosal and autism is off topic. The topic is whether or not vaccinated children have more autism. Studies done so far say yes:

 

Generation Rescue, which has a vested interest, did a phone survey, which indicates that vaccinated boys are more likely than unvaccinated boys to have autism, ADHD, or neurological disorders. 

 

Study indicating that boys who receive all three thimerosal containing Hep B shots are more likely to have developmental disabilities than their unvaccinated peers.

 

Anecdotal information on Mayer Eisenstein's practice in Chicago.

 

Dam Olmstead's on the Amish and Autism.

 

We should do a study of the Mothering community.

post #31 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peggy O'Mara View Post

Seems like the conversation about thimerosal and autism is off topic. The topic is whether or not vaccinated children have more autism. Studies done so far say yes:

 

Generation Rescue, which has a vested interest, did a phone survey, which indicates that vaccinated boys are more likely than unvaccinated boys to have autism, ADHD, or neurological disorders. 

 

Study indicating that boys who receive all three thimerosal containing Hep B shots are more likely to have developmental disabilities than their unvaccinated peers.

 

Anecdotal information on Mayer Eisenstein's practice in Chicago.

 

Dam Olmstead's on the Amish and Autism.

 

We should do a study of the Mothering community.

 

Only one of those are actually a "study" (the Hep B one). The rest are...nothing.

post #32 of 126
The generation rescue survey actually showed vaccinated children were LESS likely to have autism then unvaccinated children.

The Olmsted article has been debunked multiple times.
post #33 of 126
Thread Starter 

I think that the thimerosol/autism link could be useful to the conversation if there is research to prove that it had impact before it was removed from vaccines, or if there is research to show that the rates of autism amongst vaccinated children dropped after it was no longer used as a preservative.  For now, I think it is fine and germane to the conversation.

post #34 of 126
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

The Olmsted article has been debunked multiple times.

 Link? 

post #35 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdinaL View Post

 Link? 

 

There is really not a need to debunk fiction with a link, is there?  I mean, he claims that the Amish don't vaccinate.  That's not true.  It's just not.  It's also not true that there is no autism in the Amish.  Anyone who believe that has never actually met an Amish person.  I have.  I've taken care of many Amish children in the hospital.

 

I suggest that everyone learn more about this place:  http://www.clinicforspecialchildren.org/CSC/Home.html

post #36 of 126
Thread Starter 

Nope - no calling it fiction.  You say it has been debunked many times, you provide proof that it has in fact been debunked.  No dismissive statements like calling it fiction.  That's not debating, that's just having a conversation/argument.

post #37 of 126

The Generation Rescue study says that vaccinated children are 2.5 times more likely to have neurological disorders like ADHD and Autism. Here's what they say:

 

The survey, commissioned by Generation Rescue, compared vaccinated and unvaccinated children in nine counties in Oregon and California. Among more than 9,000 boys age 4-17, the survey found vaccinated boys were two and a half times (155%) more likely to have neurological disorders compared to their unvaccinated peers. Vaccinated boys were 224% more likely to have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and 61% more likely to have autism.

 

 

post #38 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdinaL View Post

Nope - no calling it fiction.  You say it has been debunked many times, you provide proof that it has in fact been debunked.  No dismissive statements like calling it fiction.  That's not debating, that's just having a conversation/argument.

 

Fine.

 

Autism in Amish children:  http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/Seizures/2954

 

Comments from a pediatrician who works with the Amish (and vaccinates them!) http://combatingautismfromwithin.blogspot.com/2008/01/guess-what-amish-vaccinate.html

 

Oh, look, they even vaccinate their animals!  http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20120624/NEWS03/706249853

 

The actual numbers- "Thirty-seven percent of the parents responded. Among the 359 respondents, 68% stated that all of their children had received at least 1 immunization, and 17% reported that some of their children had received at least 1 immunization. Only 14% of the parents reported that none of their children had received immunizations."  from this - http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/06/23/peds.2009-2599.abstract

post #39 of 126
post #40 of 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdinaL View Post

I think that the thimerosol/autism link could be useful to the conversation if there is research to prove that it had impact before it was removed from vaccines, or if there is research to show that the rates of autism amongst vaccinated children dropped after it was no longer used as a preservative.  For now, I think it is fine and germane to the conversation.

 

We have no idea whether the introduction of thimerosal-free pediatric vaccines had an impact on the rate of autism or not.

 

Thimerosal-free vaccines BEGAN to be introduced in 2001.

Vaccine manufacturers continued to sell and distribute the thimerosal-preserved vaccines for as long as their shelf life was good.

Pediatricians continued to use thimerosal-preserved vaccines for as long as the shelf life was good.  My pediatrician was still giving them in 2004, and the expiration date had not yet been reached.

 

The current (2012) official rate of autism in the US is based on studies from 2008, on children born in 2000--children who would not have been given thimerosal-free versions because they were not yet introduced.

 

In addition, starting in 2004, doctors began recommending yearly flu shots to infants as young as 6 months old, and to women in all stages of pregnancy.  The vast majority of flu shots have always been thimerosal-preserved, as the flu shot was never included in the FDA's request to the vaccine manufacturers (to make thimerosal-free pediatric vaccines), because in 2001, the flu shot was not part of the recommended pediatric vaccine schedule.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Formal Debate Thread: Vaccinated children are more likely to have autism than unvaccinated children.