Misleading reports about autism data - Page 15 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
#421 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 01:53 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

They are safety tested in at least three rounds of tests with increasingly large sample sizes over the course of several years with people.

 

ok. 1. sample sizes are still pretty small. 2. participants are screened to be those with best possible health, this does not reflect real population of real kids with possible health issues, family histories or allergies and reactions, autoimmune disease, etc. --- also this is an issue I find really important about preemies, 3. no true placebos, 4. you are saying years, but as far as I have seen it is much shorter than that, except where testing for remaining immunity. 


Again with the sample sizes. It is a common statistical misconception that it takes a very large sample size to get good data. However, the final phase of testing for vaccines includes thousands of people. Vaccines go through at least three stages of testing, each of which lasts over a year, in some cases several years. Individuals selected for testing are selected to try and match the age and health of the intended recipients of the vaccine, not cherry picked for just very healthy people.

This link does not have info about the time frame, I will try to find you something about that, though.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/resdev/test-approve.htm
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#422 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 01:57 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
"The first of three processes, licensure, involves gaining approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As a result, it is the longest of these processes. It can take years, even decades, before pharmaceutical companies can actually start providing the vaccine. For example, the varicella vaccine took about 11 years to be licensed by the FDA.

Vaccines are usually made by first showing that they are safe and effective in experimental animals. Once this is established, the vaccine becomes an Investigational New Drug (IND) and the company is given an IND license to further study the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine in adults, and eventually, children. Again, these trials can take years, giving companies ample time to provide the FDA with proof of long-term safety and effectiveness."

http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/#Who_licenses

"The creation of a vaccine (cdc.gov) involves scientists and medical experts from around the world, and it usually requires 10 to 15 years of research before the vaccine is made available to the general public. The first step of this extensive process involves several years of laboratory research, in which scientists and researchers identify an antigen that can prevent a disease.

Once the test vaccine has been cleared for further investigation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, at least three more phases of thorough clinical trials are conducted on human volunteers to test vaccine efficacy, to determine appropriate dosage, and to monitor for adverse side effects, etc. These trials usually take several more years to complete. The last phase involves a test group of up to tens of thousands of human volunteers. Unsure if this is a large enough test group? Consider this -– medicines in the United States also go through incredible scrutiny, but their test subject sample sizes are three times smaller than vaccine test subject groups."

http://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/immunization/vaccine_safety/science.htm
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#423 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:06 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

She was president of the red cross briefly before she had to resign in disgrace over the liberty fund mess after 9/11. She was head of the NIH as a political favor for lifelong support of the republican party. Her bonafides as a scientist are lacking, no day the least, she died I guess of a recurrent brain tumor, what's you're point?
Ratajczac's theories just aren't plausible. She also doesn't have much legitimacy as a researcher, not really published, etc.
So no, I don't think either of these women's opinions are worth throwing over the vast majority of researchers and research.

 

I'm stunned at the double standard you exhibit, where you mock and demean high-ranking doctors/researchers  who believe in the possibility of a vaccine/autism connection ("these women," rather than "these doctors"), yet you ignore all criticism of such as Paul Offit, and you cite vicious "pro-science" blogs that are themselves political vehicles.

 

Either hold them all to the same standard, or say nothing.

Taximom5 is offline  
#424 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:13 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post
 Individuals selected for testing are selected to try and match the age and health of the intended recipients of the vaccine, not cherry picked for just very healthy people.

ok, I just picked a Hep B brand since it is given at birth

 

http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

 

 

Quote:
In three clinical studies, 434 doses of RECOMBIVAX HB, 5 mcg, were administered to 147 healthy infants and children (up to 10 years of age) who were monitored for 5 days after each dose
...
In a group of studies, 3258 doses of RECOMBIVAX HB, 10 mcg, were administered to 1252 healthy adults who were monitored for 5 days after each dose. Injection site reactions and systemic complaints were reported following 17% and 15% of the injections, respectively. The following adverse reactions were reported: 

 

Here's the clinical trial info. pretty small sizes, especially for children, and pretty short follow-up... 

unless I am missing something...

how can you say it is safe to vax a low birth weight, premature baby?? just because we do.

 

Slmommy is offline  
#425 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:16 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I do not like hep b at birth, if only because it messes with breast feeding IMO. Those do seem like short follow ups, but those really are not small sample sizes, in terms of statistical power, if the samples were chosen correctly.

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#426 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:17 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
If I held them all to the same standard offit would meet it and these two ladies would not. You are seeing a double standard where there is one I haven't referred to offit as doctor, either, are they even doctors? I'm not sure.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#427 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:21 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

just wanted to also say that... yeah, i probably will not be satisfied with future research until the pharma industry and regulatory govt. agencies are sufficiently divorced. 

Maybe I am just too paranoid, but someone personally profitting off of vaccines having a role in public policy concerning vaccine schedule?? revolving door between govt and pharma employment positions??

How is this tolerated? oh yeah $$$$$

Much of the research "disproving" autism/vax link has funding/researchers with conflicts of interest.

I also think VICP could use a rehaul.

Slmommy is offline  
#428 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:21 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

 

 

 

And yes, I say "Sorry for what you've been through, and I know I wasn't there, but you are wrong about what happened."  Because observations can be misleading.  That's why we have science - to test our observations and make sure that they reflect what is really happening, and so that we can understand what is really happening when our observations don't cut it.  I don't want to be dismissive of their pain.  I want to find its actual cause, so that we can see if it is something we can ameliorate. 

 

Wow, and you haven't been punched in the face for that attitude?  "You" want to find its actual cause?  So you are on the front lines of autism research now?

 

Why are you so hellbent on proving this connection despite a plethora of studies that have demonstrated the lack of evidence for it?  Is your vendetta against vaccines really more important that finding the cause of autism?

 

Because I know enough people who have seen evidence.  I know parents and doctors and educators of autistic children who have seen evidence.  

 

I have no "vendetta against vaccines", and that's a irrationally dramatic way of putting it.  Of course I want the cause of autism found, but like many here, I don't think there is just one cause, and I don't think that pursuing one possible cause negates researchers from pursuing others.  It's not as if my opinion matters, so why are YOU so hellbent on shutting those of us up who want to discuss this?  Is it really affecting your life for a vocal handful of us on MDC to have actual human compassion and want this idea studied further, when we are providing numerous studies with doctors and researchers saying "MORE RESEARCH NEEDS TO BE DONE"?

 

We are saying that there are studies that could definitely disprove a link, and you are saying it wouldn't be ethical.  That's not the same as it not being necessary and you know it.
 

 

 

thegoodearth and Slmommy like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#429 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:23 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Looks like Healy is an md, but I don't think ratajczac is a doctor of any kind, but I'm not sure? She's not referred to as doctor in the article I just read, at least. In any case, it was not a intentional slight.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#430 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:25 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I do not like hep b at birth, if only because it messes with breast feeding IMO. Those do seem like short follow ups, but those really are not small sample sizes, in terms of statistical power, if the samples were chosen correctly.

 

do you think those samples included preemies? lowbirth weight? kids with allergies? kids with strong family histories of autoimmune disorders? kids with unknown immune issues? sick kids?

 

because a lot of those kids do receive vax on schedule since it is "safe" based on small samples of healthy children. small.

147 0-10 kids to represent the millions of newborns receiving this vax. nono02.gif

Slmommy is offline  
#431 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 02:31 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Looks like Healy is an md, but I don't think ratajczac is a doctor of any kind, but I'm not sure? She's not referred to as doctor in the article I just read, at least. In any case, it was not a intentional slight.

 

 yeah, being a cardiologist would mean someone WAS a dr. she died last year.

 

I already posted what Ratajczak said in the interview - phD (post 400)

 

Quote:

There are many similarities between autism and rheumatoid arthritis, which was my first area of study for the masters of science degree.  The PhD was a study of respiratory syncytial virus vaccine. My scientific career was largely involved with immunology and toxicology, which are both intimately involved in autism. In effect, my current research is an extension of my education and experience. "

 

 

Slmommy is offline  
#432 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:10 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

If I held them all to the same standard offit would meet it and these two ladies would not. You are seeing a double standard where there is one I haven't referred to offit as doctor, either, are they even doctors? I'm not sure.

 

You didn't refer to Offit as "this man."

Taximom5 is offline  
#433 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:10 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Ok, thanks.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#434 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:12 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Taxi mom, you're really making something out of nothing. If you'd rather discuss me than the science about autism I can understand that, but maybe start a new thread.
Katie8681 likes this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#435 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:33 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

      Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I think that when some people say "autism is not increasing," particularly in a discussion involving vaccines - what they really mean is "I hate the non-vax movement so much, that I am unwilling to consider that autism is increasing (thus proving an environmental cause to autism ) because  non-vaxxers will use it to say vaccination might be a cause of autism).  A huge increase in the number of kids with autism is being diminished out of fear of giving non- vaxxers fodder.  One would think that research money would be higher if people acknowledge that autism is increasing.

 

*bolding mine*

 

Has anyone here said that though? Or any credible source even? I don't even think the CDC says this. Many do acknowledge that there are lots of factors that likely contributed to the increase in the rate besides an actual increase in autism, but that doesn't equate to "autism is not increasing."

 

      Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Ah, Beckybird…they are poo-pooing your suggestion.

 

They also did not like "let's study vaxxed versus non vaxxed populations"  or "lets delay vaccines to see if the autism rate changes".

 

I find it really surprising that the pro-vax community expect people to vaccinate when they will not give a little or look with an open mind on issues to parents.

 

It wouldn't hurt everyone to keep an open mind. There have been lots of very valid reasons given for all the "poo-pooing." Studies have to be well-designed to have any validity and to be done on humans have to meet certain criteria. People aren't making this stuff up. I'm not opposed to some epidemiological study by the way, but I doubt it would put it an end to the debate.  

 

 

 

AbbyGrant is offline  
#436 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:48 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I have said and read many places that the actual increase in autism might be much much smaller than it looks, and that there might not be one at all. Several studies support this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#437 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:49 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I think the science community gave a lot. They did over two dozen studies exploring the issue.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#438 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:54 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post

      Quote:

 

*bolding mine*

 

Has anyone here said that though? Or any credible source even? I don't even think the CDC says this. Many do acknowledge that there are lots of factors that likely contributed to the increase in the rate besides an actual increase in autism, but that doesn't equate to "autism is not increasing."

 

 I edited the original for clarity.

 

 

It wouldn't hurt everyone to keep an open mind.

 

Agreed.

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#439 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 03:59 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

       Quote:

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I have said and read many places that the actual increase in autism might be much much smaller than it looks, and that there might not be one at all. Several studies support this.

 

I've said it's likely smaller than it appears (and gotten spanked for it here), and there is a lot of support for that opinion.  But it seems most people do leave the door open at least a little, even the CDC. I'd love some links for those studies. Sorry if you already posted them. It's a long thread. 

AbbyGrant is offline  
#440 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 04:13 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
You're right, they almost all leave the door open at least a little.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#441 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 05:29 PM
 
AbbyGrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 nm

AbbyGrant is offline  
#442 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 05:36 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Bokonon, I also know autistic children and their parents. I work with autistic children daily, albeit fairly high-functioning autistic children - it's a side effect of my job not my main focus. I don't generally discuss the causes of autism in face-to-face conversation. But if a parent asked my opinion, I would be honest and I would explain my reasoning.

The onset of autism is observable, but you cannot see the cause with your eyes. You cannot look at a child, or even at a child's behavior over time, and definitively say what caused a disorder the child is suffering from. That has been tried - that is why, back in the day before autism was properly studied, autism was blamed on "refrigerator mothers." It's why people once thought mice spontaneously generated from piles of rags. It is why people used to think that mercury cured syphilis. The list of things people erroneously believed because they SAW them with their EYES is enormous.

Expensive things like medical research have opportunity costs. Opportunity cost means that money and time that is spent on one study cannot be spent on another. Sometimes, that opportunity cost is worthwhile. However, once a conclusion has been replicated many times, it becomes a waste of money to continue to replicate it.

And yes, I believe the straight up vax vs no vax comparison is both unethical and unnecessary. The question has been explored and answered in other ways.
stik is offline  
#443 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:10 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

.

The onset of autism is observable, but you cannot see the cause with your eyes. You cannot look at a child, or even at a child's behavior over time, and definitively say what caused a disorder the child is suffering from..

I would like you to explain, then, the before-and-after video so many parents have of their child the day before a vaccine visit--smiling, joking, clearly talking, engaged child with good eye contact and appropriate response to parent's voice--and the day after the vaccine visit--spinning, flapping, flailing, screaming child, often with red, swollen face, NO eye contact, no response to parent's voice whatsoever.

Also please explain the sudden onset of eve bowel disorder that often accompanies these reactions--and the fact that the child is never normal again.

In this day and age of electronic records, it's ridiculous for you to claim that parents don't see the early signs of autism, or that the descent into autism, for this kids, occurred "sometime around the time of vaccination.". Too many parents have video PROOF of a sudden, enormous developmental regression and an equally sudden onset of medical problems (bowel disorders, food allergies, autoimmune disorders, etc). You can go back and point out teeny weeny little red flags from an earlier age--but all you are proving is that there is an identifiable subset WHO REACTED TO THE VACCINE, AND WHOSE REACTION MIGHT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. You have in no way proved that those children would have developed autism anyway.

And, based on the autism rates from the years when the vaccine schedule was a small fraction of what is today, and based on the autism rates from countries with fewer and later vaccines, it is obvious that they would not have.
Taximom5 is offline  
#444 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:27 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

I would like you to explain, then, the before-and-after video so many parents have of their child the day before a vaccine visit--smiling, joking, clearly talking, engaged child with good eye contact and appropriate response to parent's voice--and the day after the vaccine visit--spinning, flapping, flailing, screaming child, often with red, swollen face, NO eye contact, no response to parent's voice whatsoever.
Also please explain the sudden onset of eve bowel disorder that often accompanies these reactions--and the fact that the child is never normal again.
In this day and age of electronic records, it's ridiculous for you to claim that parents don't see the early signs of autism, or that the descent into autism, for this kids, occurred "sometime around the time of vaccination.". Too many parents have video PROOF of a sudden, enormous developmental regression and an equally sudden onset of medical problems (bowel disorders, food allergies, autoimmune disorders, etc). You can go back and point out teeny weeny little red flags from an earlier age--but all you are proving is that there is an identifiable subset WHO REACTED TO THE VACCINE, AND WHOSE REACTION MIGHT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. You have in no way proved that those children would have developed autism anyway.
And, based on the autism rates from the years when the vaccine schedule was a small fraction of what is today, and based on the autism rates from countries with fewer and later vaccines, it is obvious that they would not have.

 

ooh, ohh, me! I know (hand raised)

 

"studies have proved there is no evidence vax cause autism. anecdotal, coincidental, or maybe they did have some some type of vax reaction but that is not proof it caused autism."

 

The last one is how the compensated injuries which include ASD dianoses fly over... recognizing and awarding for the seizure/brain damage but not the ASD

 

Quote:

#12 Lassiter (1996) “Respondent argues that Eric’s current behavioral manifestations and mental retardation ‘fit the pattern of autistic spectrum disorders with severe mental retardation.’ Dr. Spiro summarizes: “This child had a [DPT-related febrile] reaction following his DPT booster, but, it is clear that he currently fits into the autistic spectrum disorder with retardation.” 

 

#16 Freeman (2003) “It was noted at the hearing that Kienan’s neurologic disorder has features that might cause it to be labeled as “atypical autism,” a condition within the category of “autism spectrum disorder.” I note, however, that even assuming that Kienan’s disorder is correctly classified with the “atypical autism” category, that is essentially irrelevant to my ruling concerning the entitlement issue in this case. As Dr. Kinsbourne explained, Kienan’s autistic type features seem to be a result of the brain damage that caused his severe mental retardation. As Dr. Kinsbourne further explained, brain damage is one of the possible causes of autism. Thus, I cannot see why the fact that Kienan’s disorder may fall within the autism spectrum has any substantial relevance to the question of what caused Kienan’s seizure disorder and mental retardation.”

http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1681&context=pelr

 

Slmommy is offline  
#445 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:27 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

And yes, I say "Sorry for what you've been through, and I know I wasn't there, but you are wrong about what happened."


My children all had varying severe reactions to vaccines--reactions that were eventually diagnosed and documented by mainstream MDs.

And the only thing worse than seeing vaccine-induced seizure/encephalopathy in a 2-month-old is seeing/hearing statements like yours.

Taximom5 is offline  
#446 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:31 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

My children all had varying severe reactions to vaccines--reactions that were eventually diagnosed and documented by mainstream MDs.
And the only thing worse than seeing vaccine-induced seizure/encephalopathy in a 2-month-old is seeing/hearing statements like yours.

 

hug2.gif

Taximom5 likes this.
Slmommy is offline  
#447 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:32 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Studies in Britain, where they have significantly fewer vaccines than us, show the autism rate there is around 1%, roughly the same as it is here. Also, that rate was consistent across age groups, whether you were 8 or 80, contradicting the idea that autism has gotten more prevalent. Earlier someone posted a study comparing vaccinated on schedule vs delayed children and the rate and age of onset for autism was the same. Prevalence rates for Sweden, where they have even fewer vaccines, we're .8%, again, not that far off from us.

http://autismjabberwocky.blogspot.com/2011/11/autism-prevalence-in-gothenburg-sweden.html
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#448 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:36 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Autism rates in Japan also pretty close to ours, even though they have way fewer vaccines. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7076-autism-rises-despite-mmr-ban-in-japan.html
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#449 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:37 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Taximom, for years people CLEARLY SAW WITH THEIR EYES that the sun revolved around the earth.  Every day!  How could you argue that they had it wrong?  How can you deny that the sun appeared over one side of the planet in the morning and disappeared over the other side at night?  How could you explain the way they CLEARLY SAW AND RECORDED WITH MANY, MANY PICTURES that they meticulously drew and checked and compared with other people's meticulous drawings if the sun and stars were not, in fact, revolving around the earth?  Those people were not stupid.  But they were misled.  By their eyes.  

 

No video can show what is happening inside a child.  Videos do not record structures in the brain or physical and/or biochemical mechanisms affecting those structures (or the structures in the gut, for that matter).  They do not record the child's DNA and the genes that DNA codes for or how the genetic make-up of that child interacts with the environment to produce the biochemical and neural stimuli that control behavior.  

 

All a video of an autistic child shows is an autistic child.  I do not have an explanation.  More research needs to be done to find an explanation.  There is no evidence that the cause is vaccines.  That means we need more research on other possible causes.  Asking me (or anyone else) to explain WHAT THE HECK IT IS IF IT'S NOT VACCINES!!!!! is not the answer.  There are dozens of studies on vaccines that have yielded no evidence.  After dozens of studies on the possibility of a link between vaccines and autism . . . we don't know what causes autism.  

 

Back in the day, children got fewer vaccines, but more antigens.  The quantities of adjuvants and antigens involved in vaccines are smaller than the quantities children encounter in ordinary daily life. Even if you continue to feel that vaccines are suspect, the methods we have available have yielded no evidence of that.  If it was as simple as looking at a video of a kid with autism - well, there's a lot of that video around and few ethical issues with making more.   The reason videos of autistic children haven't answered the question is because evidence of autistic behavior is not evidence of the cause of autism.  It's time to look at something else.  

stik is offline  
#450 of 586 Old 04-25-2012, 06:38 PM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Studies in Britain, where they have significantly fewer vaccines than us, show the autism rate there is around 1%, roughly the same as it is here. Also, that rate was consistent across age groups, whether you were 8 or 80, contradicting the idea that autism has gotten more prevalent. Earlier someone posted a study comparing vaccinated on schedule vs delayed children and the rate and age of onset for autism was the same. Prevalence rates for Sweden, where they have even fewer vaccines, we're .8%, again, not that far off from us.
http://autismjabberwocky.blogspot.com/2011/11/autism-prevalence-in-gothenburg-sweden.html

 

since most (all?) people here are saying that they also think other genetic/environmental factors come into play here (no one has said ONLY vax cause autism)... I don't think we can look at just autism rates in different countries. There may be other genetic/environmental factors occuring in different frequencies in different places. Is there also any differentiation in diagnosis criteria?

Slmommy is offline  
Closed Thread

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