Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mirzam 
From documents just obtained, it has been known for over 30 years that the single measles vaccine can cause SSPE (Subacute Sclerosing Panecephalitis). However, it was also revealed that this issue was not just with the single measles vaccine but the MMR also can cause a SSPE-like syndrome similar to autism.
http://vactruth.com/2012/08/30/government-document-vaccine-unsafe/
I see that there was a concern thirty years ago that the measles vaccine may have caused some cases of SSPE, and that a group was formed to investigate the possibility. What I do not see is anything showing that the investigation turned up evidence to support it was actually happening. Rather, it seems the opposite was true. The CDC currently states the measles vaccine does not cause SSPE.
Of course, it is a little difficult to see what actually happened in the investigation as most of the sources listed on the page linked to do not appear to be available online; If I understand correctly, you actually have to travel and visit the archive in person to read them (and please do not read too much conspiracy stuff into that, can you imagine the huge cost in scanning and making available digitally every single last minor document and set of meeting notes ever stored by a government?).
From what the page does link to that is available online, the author does not appear to be very reliable in accurately representing her sources.
The first source is "The Disabled World News" which the page quotes for a description of the symptoms and progression of SSPE. If you look at the source, it also talks about how important the measles vaccine is for preventing SSPE, but of course the page ignores this part.
The next quote is from a memo circulated in 1972 (which is actually forty years ago):
Quote:
If this information is not worrisome enough, at around the same time, a memo titled ‘Copy Of Notice To Be Circulated To ABE – Measles Vaccine And Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis’ [4] was also sent out, stating that:
‘There has been some concern recently about the suggestion that measles vaccines might occasionally give rise to Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis. Professor Sir Charles Stuart-Harris, as chairman of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, has asked whether members of the Association would be prepared to notify cases we see.’
Note the words ‘might occasionally,’ which in my opinion, were specifically chosen to cover the fact that this was a growing problem.
What does "there has been some concern recently about the suggestion that measles vaccines might occasionally give rise to [SSPE]" mean to you? To me, it means they are concerned that it might be happening and need to investigate it. To the author of the page (Christian England, henceforth referred to as CE), on the other hand, the formation of a group to look into something + a memo saying that there is a concern about it means that not only is it absolutely happening, but it is a huge problem and being covered up!
Quote:
Note the words ‘might occasionally,’ which in my opinion, were specifically chosen to cover the fact that this was a growing problem.
This document, along with many others uncovered, means that the measles vaccination was proving problematic to the neurological well being of young children as far back as 1972. If this were the end of the matter, then it would be easy to assume that the problems had been overcome. However, the problem of vaccine-induced SSPE continued to persist even when the measles vaccination was combined with the mumps and the rubella vaccination to form the MMR triple vaccine.
Um.. okay, but also she has shown us so far is that some people are worried that it may be happening. Where is the evidence that it actually is?
Another bit, quoted from CE's article:
Quote:
Dr. Cavanagh reminded the committee of a SSPE-like syndrome reported from rubella virus infection, noting the reported maternal viraemia and transmission of rubella virus in breast milk, which was discussed in submitted correspondence.
Several other professionals brought up points on this matter. Dr. Christine Miller had completed a study of SSPE surveillance (remember, she was part of the expert SSPE surveillance group) and it was thought that none of her cases were associated with rubella. Dr. Wallace thought the report to which Dr. Cavanagh had referred concerned congenital rubella syndrome, not acquired rubella.
Could the SSPE-like condition being reported at the ARVI meeting have been a non-fatal form of autism? Dr. Rebecca Carley, M.D. firmly believes that it was and she has made her thoughts on the subject very clear. Speaking on a radio show with David Kirby, she told listeners that she believes autism is a non-fatal type of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis caused by demyelination following vaccine-induced encephalitis.
Carley believes that the name of the condition was changed to autism to hide this self-evident fact. [6] She says that if you read the description in Harrison’s paper on SSPE [7], a document used to teach internal medicine to medical students all over the world, it is clear that what is described is in fact autism. In fact, if you read theHarrison’s 10th Edition published in 1983, four years before the ARVI meeting, it states that SSPE can be caused by the measles vaccine.
Basically, she takes a mention of a nebulous "SSPE-like syndrome," at a committee meeting from someone who may actually have been confused and actually thinking of a report on congenital rubella syndrome and ran with this to conclude that autism is actually a mild form of SSPE caused by the MMR. Talk about leaps in logic! This is wild, wild speculation. Perhaps Carley did give better evidence in her radio appearance, but if so, then why does CE rely on a badly out of date "paper" and a single rather confusing mention about rubella in old committee notes instead of presenting that better evidence?
Note the part I bolded. In fact, the bit about the Harrison's 10'th edition stating that SSPE can be caused by the measles vaccine. The page then helpfully links to a scan of the particular reference (http://www.reversingvaccineinduceddiseases.com/files/3638448/uploaded/SSPE_from_Harrisons%20optimized.pdf) where you can see that what it actually says is that "a few reported cases may have been related to measles vaccination. The risk of SSPE following measles vaccinatin is far less, however, than the risk of encephalitis or SSPE folliwing natural measles."
Again, it's a difference of interpretation. I interpret "may have been related to measles vaccination" etc. to mean that they don't know if they are actually related or not, but that they are concerned about the possibility. Saying that the risk is less after vaccination is not actually saying that the vaccine causes SSPE. It could be that the vaccine occasionally does, in which case it is clear that the vaccine causes it far less often than natural measles. Or it could be that the vaccine never causes SSPE, but the vaccinated may still have a small risk of SSPE because the vaccine fails for a small percent of people, and those who get natural measles anyway are at risk for SSPE from the natural measles infection; the risk of SSPE is far less among the vaccinated because vaccination prevents most natural measles cases.
Also, from the scan we can see that the "Harrison's paper" CE keeps referring to is actually the 10th edition of the textbook Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine. Why are they going all the way back to the 10th edition from 1983 when it currently appears to be on its 18th edition (http://www.amazon.com/Harrisons-Principles-Internal-Medicine-Volumes/dp/007174889X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1349804378&sr=8-1&keywords=harrison%27s+principles+of+internal+medicine
)? To remain current, new editions of medical texts must be put out frequently to keep up to date with the results of new research as the questions of yesterday are answered and old mistakes corrected. In this case, my guess would be that it was necessary to go all the way back to the 1983 edition because soon after that the cases that "may have been related to the measles vaccine" were found not to have been caused to it and so later editions did not have this line and perhaps may even state outright (as the CDC does) that the vaccine does not cause SSPE.
And the craziest bit from the scan of the textbook page, bits and pieces are highlighted from the description of SSPE including bits about mental deterioration and SSPE being more common in boys than girls, and there is a handwritten note with an arrow pointing to this saying "THIS IS AUTISM." Guess they just decided to skip the part about blindness, the patient becoming bedridden 6 to 9 months after initial symptoms, and that it is ultimately fatal, that it is most common between the ages of 4 and 20 (how many sixteen year olds suddenly develop severe autism?), and that "incidence has fallen recently" (I presume that fall is due to the sharp decline in measles cases over the last couple decades due to the vaccine).
This page is really confusing as it keeps stating that the measles vaccine causes SSPE as if it was a fact, but every bit of evidence it presents actually shows that it does not. For instance, it has this quote:
Quote:
****** at a conference in the US had suggested that the measles vaccine might cause SSPE. The Committee was informed by ******** that, in the studies, measles vaccine virus had been identified only once in SSPE and that was using techniques no longer used. In the last ten years, every case of SSPE in the US was alleged to have been caused by vaccine viruses since all involved vaccinated children. There had been 23 SSPE cases: all had been studied and none had been vaccine derived, all were wild type measles virus. The only cases where the vaccine virus had been found were individuals with severe immunodeficiency. The argument from ********* was that people who had wild virus infection and then were immunised with measles containing vaccine were at a heightened risk of SSPE. If that view were correct, vaccination should eliminate SSPE. There is limited surveillance on SSPE; what evidence there is suggests it is on the decrease. Data on SSPE from countries without a measles vaccination programme, who had introduced the measles vaccination programme relatively recently (eg. Denmark) might be helpful.
So in the past ten years (prior to 1997, when this is from) all cases were in vaccinated children, but when studied turned out to have been caused by wild virus? (This was before measles was eliminated from North America, remember, and since it covers a period of ten years and SSPE can happen years after measles, some of these wild measles infections could have occurred in the early 80s or even before that). But vaccine virus was found in some cases with severe immunodeficiency? Is that contradicting itself, or is it saying that those with severe immunodeficiency had both vaccine virus and wild virus? It's not clear, which is I expect one of the reasons its marked "not for publication,"a long with stuff like the bit about how data from other countries might be helpful.
What exactly does "Not for publication" mean for stuff like this anyway? I always thought it just meant that it was not ready to be put out there, it hasn't been edited for clarity and fact checked thoroughly and polished for public consumption. Not that it was top secret stuff. CE seems to think otherwise, preceding this quote with " ‘The JCVI Minutes Friday 7th November 1997 NOT FOR PUBLICATION’ [9] (obviously written to hide the truth from the public)" What truth? That SSPE was on a decrease? That vaccination should eliminate SSPE?
So, we have evidence that 30 (or 40) years ago there was concern about SSPE following vaccination and that there was an investigation on the subject, mention from a 1983 textbook that some cases of SSPE "may be related to vaccine," and mention from 1997 that all cases of SSPE in the US for the preceding ten years had turned out to be from wild measles virus, along with a bit of unsupported speculation that those who had been vaccinated for measles then got measles anway were more likely to get SSPE than those who were not vaccinated and got measles (if that is true, and they don't provide any evidence to show it is, it does not necessarily mean that vaccination increases the risk for those who get measles later, it could just mean the same thing which caused them to not respond to the vaccine also made them more susceptible to SSPE).
What conclusions did the investigation reach? Where is the evidence that the vaccine actually can cause SSPE? Is the smoking gun somewhere in the many sources that one can only see in person? If so, why did CE only quote mentions of it as a possibility needing investigation? Why didn't she include quotes or evidence showing that it actually happens?
Follow Mothering