Vax and Autism, ages? - Page 4 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 01:52 AM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sm ... please when you have time, could you read this post and place your list here for discussion:

http://mothering.com/discussions/sho...8&postcount=85
yabba kina is offline  
#92 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 11:13 AM
 
Tracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: "It's Chinatown, Jake"
Posts: 12,454
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
Tracy, I got a bit side-tracked so to answer your question: A high number of women do shed vaccine virus in breastmilk (about 45-68%) when administered the vaccine post-partum. Vaccine virus or antigen can be recovered in about half of those breastfed infants and of those, about 25% show transient seroconversion to rubella virus with no clinical disease.

SM

SM, do you have a link? thank you.

Check out New Moon on my Astrology Site

http://tracyastrosalon.blogspot.com/

 

Tracy is offline  
#93 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 01:03 PM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tracy View Post
SM, do you have a link? thank you.
Sure thing:
http://tinyurl.com/39omx4
http://tinyurl.com/3bpxym
http://tinyurl.com/2p6eb4

There are a couple of older articles that I need to get electronic versions of or scan the hardcopies in if you are interested.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#94 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 01:12 PM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yabba kina View Post
sm ... please when you have time, could you read this post and place your list here for discussion:

http://mothering.com/discussions/sho...8&postcount=85
Please refine your request to a specific topic and I would be more than happy to. My professional and familial obligations rather time constraining after all.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#95 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 02:45 PM
 
DQMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,069
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is purely anecdotal and not about the MMR but I feel compelled to post about the vunerable age part.

My nephew was fine until he received a series of rabies shots at age 3 1/2. He then stopped speaking, began toe-walking, and hand-flapping.

Had this occurred at 15 or 18 months, the drs would have written it off as coincidence, because regression commonly occurs at those ages. But it is harder to see it as coincidence at 3 1/2 years of age.

Three drs told my sister that he probably had a genetic predisposition to autism and then the rabies vax triggered full-blown autism. One was his regular ped, one was his developmental ped at a major university hospital, and the third was the resident neurosurgeon at the same university hospital, who is one of the top pediatric neurologists in the country.

So the rabies vax can do it. And not just at 15 or 18 months, which is the age we commonly hear about. Can the MMR? Who knows.
DQMama is offline  
#96 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 03:33 PM
 
Scattershoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
yabba kina,

I asked you about the demyelination differences in the reasearch, if they existed, because I am interested if the processes and outcomes are different. I realize that very little is researched in regards to potential vaccine problems, but if someone has taken the time to look into the research I would like to know what they found.

As far as the brief mention of Lorenzo's Oil, I asked that because I was wondering if the demyelination issues (or a similar physical outcome) could have been linked to a vaccine, in your opinion, even though that was never mentioned in the movie.

I've been away for a couple of days so I just realized that you thought Science Mom asked this. I don't pretend to be a scientist or well-versed on all these topics. I'm a just an interested party that has been injured by vaccines and has worked with many children and parents suffering vaccine reactions.

Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. - Oscar Wilde
Scattershoot is offline  
#97 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 07:39 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
Please refine your request to a specific topic and I would be more than happy to. My professional and familial obligations rather time constraining after all.

SM
here's the list. it's your list. you gave the topic
Quote:
There are numerous studies and one that I know has even followed rubella infected children for 50 years.
yabba kina is offline  
#98 of 118 Old 09-12-2007, 07:42 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
scattershoot. sorry about that.

i'm no scientist either. your brains are as good as mine or anyones. reading medical literature doesnt require a degree. just a brain, google dictionaries and knowing people who you can ask questions to to sort our the things that dont make sense. the av. mom is way more intelligent that they think; they just think they arent because theyre told theyre not.
yabba kina is offline  
#99 of 118 Old 09-13-2007, 02:16 PM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
YK, I also included the PMID numbers (below the links):
http://tinyurl.com/3yfdp5
16814433
http://tinyurl.com/39ue9t
10360309
http://tinyurl.com/3ajaf5
8309517
http://tinyurl.com/23fqrl
8037908
http://tinyurl.com/yra2vn
1353568
http://tinyurl.com/ytoaty
4170037

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#100 of 118 Old 09-13-2007, 10:33 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
YK, I also included the PMID numbers (below the links):
http://tinyurl.com/3yfdp5
16814433
http://tinyurl.com/39ue9t
10360309
http://tinyurl.com/3ajaf5
8309517
http://tinyurl.com/23fqrl
8037908
http://tinyurl.com/yra2vn
1353568
http://tinyurl.com/ytoaty
4170037

SM
u'r funny sm you complain coz I put up poser 1969, then you put up menser 67?

but wots really got me, is why you put most of these up anyway?

congenital rubella isn't the topic here, like i've said a few times already.

the only one you've put up which might have the slightest bearing of the mechanisms whereby a rubella infection or vaccination in a child, might provoke autism would be the third url on infantile spasms, and at a huge stretch possible choroidal neovascularisation in the fourth could be massages, stretched and manipulated to fit somewhere.

now before I organise family so as i can make a journey to the big stack to chery pick, can you explain to a dum ole horsebreeder, just what most of those articles have to do with mechanisms which would be involved with mmr vaccines and autism. or not as the case may be?

i just don't understand how you got to pick those references with the way the discussion in the thread was going.

but if you want to talk about congenital rubella and all its goriness, rather than mess up what the op wants to yab about, do you want to start a new thread, so we can actually talk on topic? and even then, you'll have to spell out what it is about congenital rubella you want to talk about.

r u basically saying that even if any component of the mmr, might even theoretically cause autism, that that's infinitely preferable to crs?

if so where are the numbers to show that the total population of crs in the past vastly exceeds the autism that might (as some here believe) be caused by the vaccine now?

don get me wrong.

i'm happy to talk.

just need to know how what you want to talk about fits the op's bill.
yabba kina is offline  
#101 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 01:58 AM
 
Tracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: "It's Chinatown, Jake"
Posts: 12,454
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
Sure thing:
http://tinyurl.com/39omx4
http://tinyurl.com/3bpxym
http://tinyurl.com/2p6eb4

There are a couple of older articles that I need to get electronic versions of or scan the hardcopies in if you are interested.

SM
Sorry it took me a bit to get back to you, SM

first of all it is interesting that there aren't any links to more current research. those were from the early 80's right. Seems curious.


Anyway, more to the point

It seems your point (I believe) is that CRS and the rubella virus causing mental retardation is apparent from birth.

But the rubella disease virus and the rubella vaccine virus are two different viruses. And just because the rubella wild-type virus causes such severe damage that is apparent at birth does not mean that the vaccine virus must either cause the exact same degree of damage or be completely absolved,

It seems your position is --that what is known about the wild-type virus and presuming that the vaccine virus must act exactly the same way or be completely safe.

What about the In-between?

We actually don't know if the vaccine is causing neurological illnesses. But it's just plain odd to me or maybe even misguided to think that because it's not causing severe mental retardation at birth, that it's therefore causing absolutely no damage whatsover.

Check out New Moon on my Astrology Site

http://tracyastrosalon.blogspot.com/

 

Tracy is offline  
#102 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 06:38 AM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Tracy, There may be some more contemporary studies with regards to rubella virus and breastmilk but I haven't come across them. Although I would guess that since it was not something that posed a risk, no one was going to get any grant money to beat a dead horse. Additionally, look back at the studies that involved vaccinating pregnant women; if there were no cases of CRS as result of vaccination with live rubella virus during pregnancy when the fetus is most vulnerable then why would you believe that vaccinating a >= 1 year old will somehow mimic the effects of CRS?

No, rubella vaccine virus is the same virus as the wild-type virus; the only difference is that the former has been attenuated to lose its pathogenicity. The vaccine provokes a rubella-specific immune response without full-blown disease right? I think you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole; ask yourself by what mechanism or pathway does infant rubella vaccination cause autism or mental retardation? All the data we have discussed, taken together (and I would suggest reading the full-texts and not just the abstracts) do not support your hypothesis.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#103 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 09:09 AM
 
insider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
if there were no cases of CRS as result of vaccination with live rubella virus during pregnancy when the fetus is most vulnerable then why would you believe that vaccinating a >= 1 year old will somehow mimic the effects of CRS?
If I'm correct, she never said the vaccine would mimic the effects of CRS. Information related to the rates of CRS caused by the wild-type virus are not relevant to whether or not the vaccine causes some other form or degree of neurological damage. In fact if you check the literature you'll see that the vaccine virus has been shown to cause damage to neurons and brain tissue in vitro. Is it so much of a stretch to want to see some clinical research on the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
No, rubella vaccine virus is the same virus as the wild-type virus; the only difference is that the former has been attenuated to lose its pathogenicity.
The viruses are both genotypically and phenotypically different. It is certainly accurate to describe them as different. And - the virus is not attenuated to lose its pathogenicity. The virus is attenuated to lose only its acute pathogenicity. A few attenuated viruses have actually developed greater capacities to cause neurological damage as a result of the attenuation process. They cause a milder form of acute disease but they have acquired, in the process, a receptor or function that permits a more distributive phenotype, especially with regard to neurological invasion. The chronic pathogenicity of the attenuated viruses are unstudied and unknown but can not assumed to be milder.
insider is offline  
#104 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 07:26 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sm i need you to explain to me your thinking before we can work out what we are talking about here here.

as in, what mechanism is involved in autism and rubella, because like I said, congenital rubella syndrome is completely irrelevant.

it seems to me you are confusing two different issues.
yabba kina is offline  
#105 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 08:47 PM
 
Tracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: "It's Chinatown, Jake"
Posts: 12,454
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
yes, Insider is right. I didn't make that leap, SM.

I do wonder what the hell is going on with Rubella vaccine and especially in light of all the other vaccines that children now get, how does that impact babies bodies? I"m not asking for an answer from you... I'm just telling you where I was coming from...

I do think Insider and Yabba who clearly are smarter than me are asking interesting questions.

Check out New Moon on my Astrology Site

http://tracyastrosalon.blogspot.com/

 

Tracy is offline  
#106 of 118 Old 09-15-2007, 09:04 PM
 
insider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well I don't know that I was saying anything interesting - just trying to find common ground. I don't think anyone is making the claim that it is absolutely certain rubella vaccine can not cause any type/form/degree of neurological illness. And clearly no one can say that it is definitely the culprit in autism. I'd guess the difference is more in our estimated probabilities that rubella vaccine is causing neurological consequences. I actually have no guess as to what probability that might be. My argument would be that more research should be done. Maybe make one less B-2 bomber and put that extra 2 billion dollars into vaccine safety research.
insider is offline  
#107 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 01:07 AM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by insider View Post
If I'm correct, she never said the vaccine would mimic the effects of CRS. Information related to the rates of CRS caused by the wild-type virus are not relevant to whether or not the vaccine causes some other form or degree of neurological damage. In fact if you check the literature you'll see that the vaccine virus has been shown to cause damage to neurons and brain tissue in vitro. Is it so much of a stretch to want to see some clinical research on the issue.
My apologies to Tracy as I apparently did not qualify my statement properly. I believe that rubella vaccine having a causal association with regressive autism would be more accurate? If that is the case then what are the pathological changes that occurs with such in vitro studies? First, high numbers of anti-RV IgGs are required to observe demyelination so can it be said that that this resembles in vivo conditions? In one experiment, anti-RV antibodies had no cytotoxic effects on either cholinergic or GABAergic neurons (enzymatic markers of neuronal activity) and in fact , values were higher in treatment groups than controls. Additionally, anti-RV antibodies had a synergistic effect on astrocytes. So if I wished to speculate (and cherry-pick) I could just as easily say that anti-RV antibodies may have a protective effect but I could not really support that statement.

Quote:
The viruses are both genotypically and phenotypically different. It is certainly accurate to describe them as different. And - the virus is not attenuated to lose its pathogenicity. The virus is attenuated to lose only its acute pathogenicity. A few attenuated viruses have actually developed greater capacities to cause neurological damage as a result of the attenuation process. They cause a milder form of acute disease but they have acquired, in the process, a receptor or function that permits a more distributive phenotype, especially with regard to neurological invasion. The chronic pathogenicity of the attenuated viruses are unstudied and unknown but can not assumed to be milder.
The RA27/3 vaccine strain shares 98% homology at the nucleotide level with the progenitor wild-type virus (BLAST) and there is a 31 amino acid alteration. The immune response to the vaccine is very similar to natural infection although a lowered quantity of antibody responses. So if you wish to call this a different virus, I won't argue semantics on this one.

As far as some attenuated viruses causally associated with neurotropism e.g. Urabe mumps strain and meningitis well that was established and that strain was withdrawn from many markets. The rubella vaccine has been in use for nearly 40 years now; what are the structural changes of the immundominant regions do you propose have occurred that could attribute rubella vaccine with regressive autism?

It is being studied indirectly, if you refer to my previous posts about neurotropic rubella infection, there are specific markers of demyelination that can be detected via MRI and CT scan as well as a specific immunological profile such as elevated myelin oligodendrocyte glycoproteins; T-cell clones to myelin basic protein and microglia elevation. Do autistics demonstrate a higher incidence of multiple sclerosis or Guillian-Barre Syndrome? Do you think that it is possible or even plausible that of all the autistic children that are brain scanned, spinal-tapped and venepunctured that such a profound profile would be completely missed by the medico-scientific community that is dedicated to autism research?
Quote:
I don't think anyone is making the claim that it is absolutely certain rubella vaccine can not cause any type/form/degree of neurological illness. And clearly no one can say that it is definitely the culprit in autism. I'd guess the difference is more in our estimated probabilities that rubella vaccine is causing neurological consequences. I actually have no guess as to what probability that might be. My argument would be that more research should be done. Maybe make one less B-2 bomber and put that extra 2 billion dollars into vaccine safety research.
I do wish to clarify that I don't claim that the rubella vaccine does not have a causal association with neurological disease just that I do not see any evidence that it is associated with regressive autism. As to your last sentence, I couldn't agree more, in fact make that a half dozen less B-2 bombers.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#108 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 03:43 AM
 
insider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom
The RA27/3 vaccine strain shares 98% homology at the nucleotide level with the progenitor wild-type virus (BLAST) and there is a 31 amino acid alteration.
Humans share more than 98% of their genome with chimpanzees. Does that mean humans and chimps are not different. So... 31 amino acid alterations... Is that supposed to be a lot or a little. To me that means there are a potential of 31 different phenotypic changes between the wild-type and vaccine viruses. How many have been characterized? You must already be well aware that a single amino acid substitution in a single gene can cause a significant phenotypic change (it's actually been documented for the measles vaccine virus). But the point here is rudimentary: you can't use congenital rubella statistics for the wild-type virus to substantiate safety claims for the vaccine virus. The phenotypic differences between the two viruses have not been characterized.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom
The immune response to the vaccine is very similar to natural infection although a lowered quantity of antibody responses. So if you wish to call this a different virus, I won't argue semantics on this one.
It's definitely not semantics. This belies the very heart of your argument: you attempted to treat the wild-type virus as indistinguishable from the vaccine virus so that you could present CRS/wild-type data to assume the safety of the vaccine virus. I don't disagree with you on the grounds of semantics, I disagree with you because the differences between the wild-type and vaccine viruses can not be dismissed as you've done. While the genotypic differences may have been 'counted', the phenotypic differences (the actual effects of the gene alterations) are almost entirely uncharacterized. Therefore you can not possibly know that the vaccine virus does not contain some mutation that alters its neuropathology.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom
As far as some attenuated viruses causally associated with neurotropism e.g. Urabe mumps strain and meningitis well that was established and that strain was withdrawn from many markets.
Okay, you cited the Urabe example - Great! You've clearly demonstrated that you understand attenuation can lead to increased neuropathology. So what are you arguing with me for? The point was not how often it happens, the point was that it can! happen. And that means it can happen for rubella, too. Maybe you want to argue with me about whether it did happen. Well, it can't be ruled out. And that's really all I was trying to say.

And I should point out that the Urable example doesn't scratch the surface of what research has been done on this topic. Measles is by far the best documented with well over a hundred papers researching it or discussing it.

But getting bogged down in the specifics of the neuropathology of measles, mumps or even rubella virus is not very useful. The point is that vaccine attenuation means attenuation of acute clinical symptoms only. It does not mean that all characteristics of the virus are attenuated. I originally brought this up as a counterfact to the statement that attenuation makes the virus mild. So there is absolutely no need to get bogged down in the minutiae of specific examples where attenuation increased neuropathology. It can happen. You've admitted that by offering your own example.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom
The rubella vaccine has been in use for nearly 40 years now; what are the structural changes of the immundominant regions do you propose have occurred that could attribute rubella vaccine with regressive autism?
This question does not make sense to me. You're trying to tell me that in order to attribute autism to a 40-year old vaccine, I must detail the structural changes of the immunodominant regions. Okay, first off, I haven't attributed regressive autism to the rubella vaccine - what I'm saying is that you can not rule it out. That moots the entire question but I'll continue. Secondly, changes to a virus do not have to occur in the immunodominant regions for there to be a change in neuropathology. This is basic stuff and should hopefully not lead to further digressions. Thirdly, structural changes do not need to be quantified in order to identify changes in neuropathology. In fact that's almost never the way it happens. You do not need to know the tertiary structure of a protein (viral or otherwise) to determine if it exerts an effect, e.g. binds to something. I honestly hope that this will not devolve into further tangential debate. Because none of that is even relevant. The artificial hurdle that you constructed for me to jump over only gets in the way of the legitimate point that you were actually making: the vaccine has been around for 40 years so for the vaccine to now be causing an epidemic of autism, there must be interceding variables that have prevailed on the vaccine in the last 40 years to produce such an effect. Obviously the variables do not need to be located in the tertiary protein structure of the immunodominant region of the rubella vaccine virus.

Anyway, there are some differences between rubella vaccination 40 years ago and rubella vaccination today. There are many. Some of them may indeed impinge on immunodominant viral structures. Some of them affect the pathology of the virus without even changing the viral genome. But regardless, the vaccine can not be absolved simply because it's been around for 40 years - many variables pertaining to rubella vaccination have occurred or been introduced in the last four decades. And I don't need to prove that those variables do cause neuropathological changes leading to autism. The relevant issue is that these variables can change neuropathology and that a possible change in neuropathology has not been ruled out. You can argue the probability but not the possibility. Additionally, neuropathology of the rubella vaccine virus can not be ruled out on the basis of wild-type data on CRS.

I apologize for the length of this post. I felt that your response to my criticism expanded the argument into areas that were not particularly relevant. I attempted here to cauterize the loose ends and corral the argument back toward the original points that were made - or at least to articulate myself better.


insider is offline  
#109 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 04:17 AM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by insider
Anyway, there are some differences between rubella vaccination 40 years ago and rubella vaccination today. There are many
The new practice of vaccinating non-immune mothers after delivery comes to mind. This leads to not only newborn infants being infected within days of being born, but those babies also happen to be the ones without any passive immunity whatsoever.
mamakay is offline  
#110 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 04:44 AM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Active immunisation with rubella vaccine has not been commonly associated with neurological complications. We report the case of a 23-year-old woman who developed a mild, distal demyelinating neuropathy after immunisation with the live attenuated RA 27/3 rubella strain. Post-immunisation immunologic studies carried over 24 months showed the presence of antibodies to the RV proteins, particularly to the capsid antigen, and to the myelin basic protein (MBP). A similarity between a C antigen motif and a sequence of the MBP was found by computer analysis. The cross-reactivity was confirmed by immunising mice with a synthetic peptide derived from the MBP, which developed a strong humoral response to RV and MBP. This finding raises the possibility that a virus-induced immune response could lead to an autoaggressive reaction responsible for demyelination.

PMID: 10321986
yabba kina is offline  
#111 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 05:01 AM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Intrathecal rubella-antibody synthesis in multiple sclerosis.Lebon P, Schuller E, Marteau R, Lhermitte F.
PMID: 73657


Intrathecal rubella antibodies in an adolescent with Guillain-Barré syndrome after mumps-measles-rubella vaccination.Mühlebach-Sponer M, Zbinden R, da Silva VA, Gnehm HE.
PMID: 7720751

The results indicate that measles virus may be an active immunogen within the CNS in many MS patients and in some patients with chronic myelopathy, giving rise to an oligoclonal IgG antibody response.

PMID: 1113135


European Journal of Paediatric Neurology : Intrathecal synthesis ...MS is characterized by a polyclonal intrathecal immune response with non-specific synthesis of antiviral antibodies, especially to measles virus, rubella ...
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1090379806001644

so, if you can get them from both measles and rubella... um.. i wonder what happens when you put three viruses together?

is this study what you need?

http://www.med.muni.cz/biomedjournal...04/249-256.pdf.

Quote:
MRZ reaction reflects the intrathecal synthesis of specific IgG antibodies against one, two or three of the measles (M), rubella (R), and varicella zoster (Z) viruses. It is expressed in the form of antibody indices (AI). The specific antibody index is the most sensitive inflammation parameter in CSF analysis (2). The positive MRZ reaction supports the diagnosis of a chronic disease like multiple sclerosis or autoimmune disease with involvement of the CNS, already at the time of first clinical symptoms (3).
so whatd'ya reckon will happen when they stick chickenpox vaccine in with mmr? nothing?

i know you will be able to point me to lots of studies that dismiss any correlation between mmr, hep b or any other vaccine and demyelination, but i'm not buying that. i know far 2 many people who'v had prevaccine tests and been okay, then had vaccines and when they got sick and got tested you'd think they were from new planets.
yabba kina is offline  
#112 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 11:49 AM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by insider View Post
Humans share more than 98% of their genome with chimpanzees. Does that mean humans and chimps are not different. So... 31 amino acid alterations... Is that supposed to be a lot or a little. To me that means there are a potential of 31 different phenotypic changes between the wild-type and vaccine viruses. How many have been characterized? You must already be well aware that a single amino acid substitution in a single gene can cause a significant phenotypic change (it's actually been documented for the measles vaccine virus).
Very funny (really) but my point being that I do not wish for those reading to believe that the vaccine virus is different to the point of causing an entirely different constellation of pathologies. The phylogeny would support this.
Quote:
But the point here is rudimentary: you can't use congenital rubella statistics for the wild-type virus to substantiate safety claims for the vaccine virus. The phenotypic differences between the two viruses have not been characterized.
I am not, I have clarified that in my last post and I have discussed the neurotropism that has been observed in some vaccine recipients.
Quote:
It's definitely not semantics. This belies the very heart of your argument: you attempted to treat the wild-type virus as indistinguishable from the vaccine virus so that you could present CRS/wild-type data to assume the safety of the vaccine virus. I don't disagree with you on the grounds of semantics, I disagree with you because the differences between the wild-type and vaccine viruses can not be dismissed as you've done. While the genotypic differences may have been 'counted', the phenotypic differences (the actual effects of the gene alterations) are almost entirely uncharacterized. Therefore you can not possibly know that the vaccine virus does not contain some mutation that alters its neuropathology.
Oh, please don't do this; I have never said or implied that the vaccine virus was indistinguishable in order to manipulate the discussion. I do not dismiss them either; are you not speculating that the vaccine virus can be responsible for undocumented neuropatholgy?
Quote:
But getting bogged down in the specifics of the neuropathology of measles, mumps or even rubella virus is not very useful. The point is that vaccine attenuation means attenuation of acute clinical symptoms only. It does not mean that all characteristics of the virus are attenuated. I originally brought this up as a counterfact to the statement that attenuation makes the virus mild. So there is absolutely no need to get bogged down in the minutiae of specific examples where attenuation increased neuropathology. It can happen. You've admitted that by offering your own example.
I do believe that discussing the neuropathologies specific to rubella virus and rubella vaccine virus are germane to this discussion because there is speculation that since attenuation of other vaccine viruses has produced adverse pathologies then it must be happening or has happened with the rubella vaccine strain. Maybe it has and maybe the effects are protective but the suggestion that it is occurring in the absence of well-documented clinical appearance as well as immunological markers is not sound and based upon pure speculation.

Quote:
This question does not make sense to me. You're trying to tell me that in order to attribute autism to a 40-year old vaccine, I must detail the structural changes of the immunodominant regions. Okay, first off, I haven't attributed regressive autism to the rubella vaccine - what I'm saying is that you can not rule it out.
My question was in response to this statement:
Quote:
They cause a milder form of acute disease but they have acquired, in the process, a receptor or function that permits a more distributive phenotype, especially with regard to neurological invasion.
I am assuming that this is the basis for your contention that rubella vaccine virus may be contributing to some unknown neuropatholgy so I ask what structural changes have occurred that would lead you to conjecture that rubella vaccine virus is doing so.

Quote:
Anyway, there are some differences between rubella vaccination 40 years ago and rubella vaccination today. There are many. Some of them may indeed impinge on immunodominant viral structures. Some of them affect the pathology of the virus without even changing the viral genome. But regardless, the vaccine can not be absolved simply because it's been around for 40 years - many variables pertaining to rubella vaccination have occurred or been introduced in the last four decades. And I don't need to prove that those variables do cause neuropathological changes leading to autism. The relevant issue is that these variables can change neuropathology and that a possible change in neuropathology has not been ruled out. You can argue the probability but not the possibility. Additionally, neuropathology of the rubella vaccine virus can not be ruled out on the basis of wild-type data on CRS.
I do not absolve rubella vaccine on the simple basis of longevity of utilisation. But nearly 40 years is a sufficient time to document pathologies associated with rubella vaccine virus and I simply don't see a logical progression to regressive autism as has been suggested. I don't care to speculate on such matters and while I cannot rule it out, I also won't make such a leap without a sound basis. I frankly don't understand how you can insist that since attenuation can cause neuropathologies (which also occur with the wild-types) ergo since rubella vaccine virus is attenuated it too is probably causing neuropathologies but not with the same immunological profile as has been observed. You have ignored my question with regards to MS and GBS symptoms observed at a higher incidence in autistics and you have not qualified what kind of neuropathologies would possibly be observed with an atypical rubella vaccine virus infection only titillation for an audience that, in large part, believes that vaccines are the cause for a constellation of disorders.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#113 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 03:13 PM
 
insider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
are you not speculating that the vaccine virus can be responsible for undocumented neuropatholgy?
Obviously. The neuropathology of rubella vaccine is undocumented because it is unresearched. The safety of the vaccine is an assumption. Maybe you have good reason to believe the assumption. My point is that the vaccine can have neurological consequences. It has not been ruled out. The problem is that you call it 'undocumented' neuropathology. But since no one has ever looked you could just as easily call it 'as yet described' neuropathology. Someone should look just to rule it out. Until then any claim that the vaccine does not cause neurological illness is mere speculation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
You have ignored my question with regards to MS and GBS symptoms observed at a higher incidence in autistics
I've already answered one irrelevant question (I've answered it twice now, see below). I can't answer every question that does not relate to the current argument. You can ask me about CRS and wild-type virus and I'm not going to answer you because we're talking about neuropathology of the vaccine virus which is phenotypically different from the wild-type virus. And before you accuse me of ignoring your question perhaps you should check the number of times I've had to repeat my statements because you either ignore them or misrepresent them:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
I am assuming that this is the basis for your contention that rubella vaccine virus may be contributing to some unknown neuropatholgy so I ask what structural changes have occurred that would lead you to conjecture that rubella vaccine virus is doing so.
And yet as I've already pointed out, there do not need to be structural changes to the tertiary structure of a viral protein for the virus to manifest a different pathology. That's very basic immunology. Many, many external factors are documented to cause changes in viral pathology. In fact there's an entire field of study that shows how external factors are the most important determinants of disease pathology. You must already know this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
the suggestion that it is occurring in the absence of well-documented clinical appearance as well as immunological markers is not sound and based upon pure speculation.
The contention that the rubella vaccine virus can not cause neurological illness contradicts what is known about the virus. It does happen. The only thing that's left to debate is how often it happens. You seem to want a prospective safety study that shows rubella vaccine manifesting neurological sequalae. Well, nobody has done that research so you're not going to see it. By that very token, you can't rule it out. Which is what I keep repeating.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
and you have not qualified what kind of neuropathologies would possibly be observed with an atypical rubella vaccine virus infection
Asked and answered (see my previous post). I'm not going to repeat myself here. BTW, the term atypical does not mean what you think it does. The vaccine infection does not need to be atypical to cause neurological illness. I'll repeat this once more: external factors can alter disease pathology. When that happens it's not called atypical. "Atypical" infection is a different thing altogether and nobody, not you or me, has been talking about atypical infection to this point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
I dont' care to speculate on such matters
And that's exactly what you're doing. There is no prospective safety data on rubella vaccine and neuropathology. You are speculating that it's safe. You're citing papers here and there but none of them are the same type of evidence you're demanding from me. And in the absence of the type of evidence you and I would both like to see, it is incumbent upon the vaccine manufacturer to prove that the vaccine is safe. That data that you want to see should exist, if only to exonerate the vaccine. Yet it does not and that's why I keep repeating the mantra: you can not rule out that the vaccine causes neurological illnesses.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
I frankly don't understand how you can insist that since attenuation can cause neuropathologies (which also occur with the wild-types) ergo since rubella vaccine virus is attenuated it too is probably causing neuropathologies
This is dishonest on your part (either that or you didn't even read my previous post). I have very clearly argued that neurological illness can happen. I have conistently argued for the possibility, not the probability. No one knows the probability of neurological illness following rubella vaccination (no one has looked). I have been very clear on this point - Please don't misrepresent me again.
insider is offline  
#114 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 04:25 PM
Banned
 
Science Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 949
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Insider, I am sure we can go about parsing each others statements into next week so I will simply ask you to qualify your statement that the rubella vaccine can cause neuropathologies aside from what we already know. Sure, we can say that it causes jock-itch or one's toenails to spontaneously eject but it hasn't been documented so we can speculate that it does.

SM
Science Mom is offline  
#115 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 04:34 PM
 
Genesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 3,415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:

knit.gifMama to reading.gif  and  babygirl.gif
Genesis is offline  
#116 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 04:45 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
mamakay is offline  
#117 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 06:19 PM
 
insider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Science Mom View Post
I will simply ask you to qualify your statement that the rubella vaccine can cause neuropathologies aside from what we already know.
Asked and answered. Let's call it a day then.
insider is offline  
#118 of 118 Old 09-16-2007, 06:27 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sm you said
Quote:
No one knows the probability of neurological illness following rubella vaccination (no one has looked).
and why do youthink that might be? after all, as the pmid numbers which you've parsed over show.... they've seen evidence that the rubella vaccine could have a causative role.

but its one thing to see cases, and decide to investigate it.

i think that it should be compulsory for all medical people to take drawing lessons. that way they will learn to look, and see what is really there, instead of what they think is there. so many doctors look but don't see :

:
yabba kina is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off