New study shows no connection between full vaccine schedule and autism. - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-28-2013, 06:22 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
I'm sure folks will come along and explain how that's not what it means at all (wink1.gif), but for your reading pleasure:

http://triblive.com/mobile/3746544-96/vaccines-autism-antigens

I'm trying to find a copy of the actual study.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:13 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
I won't comment on the study itself until I see the whole thing. But was anybody, on MDC or elsewhere, making the argument that the U.S. vax schedule in the aggregate causes autism?

That's not a snarky or rhetorical question. I just haven't heard the argument. (And to be fair, I don't follow all of the threads here).

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:31 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
The actual study isn't out until tomorrow. I have a hard time keeping the arguments straight, but there definitely is a claim that vaccines cause autism, although I'm honestly not sure if people think getting one is just as bad as getting them all or what. It will be interesting to see what exactly the study compares.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 12:54 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Here's a bit more information: http://www.postcrescent.com/viewart/20130328/APC0101/303280470/Full-vaccine-schedule-safe-kids

A quote from Geraldine Dawson at Autism Speaks (not involved in study):

"This study shows definitively that there is no connection between the number of vaccines that children receive in childhood, or the number of vaccines that children receive in one day, and autism.”

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 06:52 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

Funny, Dawson's comment is a scientifically different conclusion from the study's conclusion. 

 

Further perspective can be gained here: http://autism.about.com/b/2009/09/10/is-autism-speaks-mis-spending-its-money-your-opinion-requested.htm

 

Many of the comments are interesting as well. 

 

Seems like there is a question of whether Autism Speaks is a front group for the pharmaceutical industry, who is directly benefitting from Autism Speaks, while families of severely autistic children, who are desperate for immediate help, are not benefitting an any way shape or form. 

 

But even the mildly affected autistic community dislikes Autism Speaks: http://www.examiner.com/article/why-autistic-people-don-t-like-autism-speaks

 

I suspec that that dislike extends to Chief Scientific Officer Dawson, who pulls in a salary of $650K and oversees funding of studies that attempt--and fail--to find the non-vaccine cause of autism. 

 

For those whose autism IS linked with vaccines, this is like attempting to prove that cigarettes are not linked with lung cancer.  

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 06:55 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Taxi have you found a copy of the actual study?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 06:59 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 07:52 AM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,032
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)

 Is this the study? I found it on your link above.

"Increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not associated with risk of autism," by Frank DeStefano, MD, MPH, Cristofer S. Price, ScM, and Eric S. Weintraub, MPH, appears in The Journal of Pediatrics (www.jpeds.com), DOI 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.02.001, published by Elsevier.

 

 

Why don't I trust Elsevier, you ask? It is part of the Reed-Elsevier group.

 

"The Lancet, the journal the paper was published in, is owned by global publishing giant Reed-Elsevier. Reed-Elsevier own 2,460 scientific journals, as well as the magazine New Scientist."

 

"Reed-Elsevier's CEO, Sir Crispin Davis, is a non-executive director of GlaxoSmithKline. And his brother, Sir Nigel Davis, was a judge who withdrew legal aid from families who claimed their children were damaged by GlaxoSmithKline's MMR vaccine."

"Worse still, in 2009 the pharmaceutical giant Merck was sued for paying Elsevier to create a fake journal to promote their products."

 

(And, for those of you interested,  Reed-Elsevier was also the company Peter Power of Visor Consultants was running mock terror drills for on the morning of 7/7.)


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 08:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
So any commentary on the actual study?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 08:49 AM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I was reading the insert that came with a particular vaccine (I can't remember which vaccine; I need to find it). Among the side effects it had autism listed right there in black and white. This is information directly from the company that manufactures the vaccine. I believe it was for pneumonia but I can't remember the brand.

It also had SIDS as a side effect.

I will look for the actual insert I am speaking of. But I just remember thinking WTH? So much time spent saying vaccines do not cause autism and then it's listed as a side effect.

I'm no scientist. I'm just a mother who thinks that doesn't make any sense.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 08:54 AM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,032
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

So any commentary on the actual study?

The study published by a company with questionable motives/agenda?

No.


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 10:41 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Dalia the process for adding side effects to a package insert may not be what you would expect. When they do preclinical trials anything that shows up in the treatment group above a certain number, even if its just by random chance, gets put on the package insert. Even if its not substantially different than the control group or overall population. Theres no requirwment for evidence of any kind of causal relationship. It's kind of a cya thing. Then those inserts don't really change, even as more and more science is done after the vaccine is licensed and put into use.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 11:07 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

So any commentary on the actual study?

Well, some of us actually have children at home today, so it's not like we have unlimited time to search for and analyze studies, let alone post 20 times a day.

 

But so far, what jumps out at me (including some copy/paste):

 

 

"Of the remaining 752 controls included in the analysis, 186 had an SCQ score <16 but had indications of speech delay or language delay, learning disability, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or attention deficit disorder, or tics, or had an individual education plans."

 

186 of the 752 controls had possible symptoms of autism.  Those were the CONTROLS?  Nearly 25% of the CONTROL group may have had possible symptoms of autism????

 

Also, they studied the possible relationship of autism to total antigenic exposure.  Most of the scientists who ARE seriously questioning whether vaccines are causally related with autism are not worried about antigenic exposure as they are worried about the effect of things like aluminum and thimerosal. "Admittedly, this approach assumes that all proteins and polysaccharides in a vaccine evoke equivalent immune responses, whereas some proteins actually may be more likely than others to stimulate an immune response.14 "

 

"How evidence of early neurodevelopmental delays would have affected our results is not clear; it might have resulted in lower vaccination levels if parents were concerned about vaccinating their children, or possibly higher vaccination levels through more frequent contact with the healthcare system. "  BUT THEY DID NOT COMPARE VACCINATED VS UNVACCINATED CHILDREN.

 

"We thank Dr Paul Offit for his assistance in determining the antibody- stimulating protein and polysaccharide content of specific vaccines. 

 

Aha--now we know why:

1) the focus of the article is on the relationship between vaccine antigen exposure and autism (rather than the cumulative effect of heavy metals from vaccines)

2) why there is no comparison of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated (surely if they were combing through the records of three different managed health cares, they could have found some unvaccinated individuals, even back then).

 

Most importantly, it explains the MASSIVE discrepancy between the conclusion of the study and Geraldine Dawson's ridiculous conclusion:

 

STUDY CONCLUSION: "It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposures in infancy, including vaccines; however, we found no association between exposure to antigens from vaccines during infancy and the development of ASD with regression."

 

Geraldine Dawson's conclusion:  "This study shows definitively that there is no connection between the number of vaccines that children receive in childhood, or the number of vaccines that children receive in one day, and autism.”"

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 11:26 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)

At a very cursory glance, I would say the title should really be:

 

"antigen level from vaccines not linked to autism in vaccinated individuals"

 

That is not quite the same no connection between full schedule and autism. 


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 11:51 AM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Yeah when I wrote the original thread title, Kathy, the full study hadn't come out yet I was going based on the article. The study is definitely limited in scope to the concept of "too many too soon".
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 12:48 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm sure folks will come along and explain how that's not what it means at all (wink1.gif), but for your reading pleasure:

http://triblive.com/mobile/3746544-96/vaccines-autism-antigens

I'm trying to find a copy of the actual study.

Well, now that we've explained that the conclusion of the study is not at all what your thread title says it is, what would you like to do about it?

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 02:57 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The study concerned antigens, not vaccines, true? Or did I miss something in my skim?

I have got to go, anyway. There's just no time for debate today.
pek64 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 03:16 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
It concerned vaccines and looked specifically at the effect of antigens.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 03:17 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Quote:
The study concerned antigens, not vaccines, true? Or did I miss something in my skim?

 

In my skimming it appears to me that they took about 1000 kids who had been vaccinated and looked at the number of antigens received by all of them via vax and then determined the group of kids with autism got the same number of antigens as the group of kids without autism, which ya know makes sense if they are all on the same or similar vax schedules.

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 03:46 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Where does it say they were all vaccinated or Ben that they were all vaccinated on the same schedule?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 03:59 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

As i said I was skimming... do you see a chart showing children broken down by number of antigens received? Is there any children listen in a zero group?(i am on my tablet and not going to attempt to open the pdf on here.)

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:12 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
You should check it out when you're back at computer. They have several graphs breaking down the distribution of antigen exposure.

Looks like they also examined thimerosal exposure as a secondary analysis and found no relationship.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:30 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Well, now that we've explained that the conclusion of the study is not at all what your thread title says it is, what would you like to do about it?

Still waiting for an answer.  After all, you DID (rather snarkily) say, 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm sure folks will come along and explain how that's not what it means at all
 

And then you admitted that both the title of your thread and the article did not match the conclusion of the study itself:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Yeah when I wrote the original thread title, Kathy, the full study hadn't come out yet I was going based on the article. The study is definitely limited in scope to the concept of "too many too soon".
 

So what would you like to do now?  Would you like to change the title of your thread?

 

And do you have any comment on the fact that the study ADMITTED the possibility that some autism cases may be related to vaccines? "It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposures in infancy, including vaccines..."

 

Or do you prefer to leave the title of your thread as is, which may mislead readers in to wrongly believing that the "new study shows no connection between the full autism schedule and autism?"

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:32 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

Okay... on page 4 I am seeing three charts called Distribution of total cumulative antigen exposure among asd cases and controls, by age range

 

0 - 3 months there were 48 and 42 percent in the 0-25 range, next when they include up to 7 months it drops to 0 and 1 percents, and lastly when it groups 0 to 2 years the number in the zero to 25 group is totally zero.

 

So what am I missing? Where would unvaccinated children receive antigens that would place them in higher level groups by the age of two?

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:38 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Sorry, I wasn't intending to claim that a large proportion of unvaccinated children were included. Just challenging the assumption that they weren't. It would be unusual for that percentage to be higher than it is in the overall population, which is a fraction of a percent. What I do see is evidence that a variety of schedules were used, including some delayed schedules.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:49 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Quote:
Just challenging the assumption that they weren't.

 

Based on the Zero to Two chart showing no children with zero antigens, I think it is safe to assume that this was a study of vaccinated children, possibly on varying schedules.

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 04:52 PM - Thread Starter
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Well now that you've actually checked, yes.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 05:10 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Quote:
Well now that you've actually checked, yes

 

nm

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 03-29-2013, 06:47 PM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Dr. Sear's response to the study:

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Dr-Bob-Sears/116317855073374?ref=ts&fref=ts

 

I found it quite interesting.

nia82 is offline  
Old 03-29-2013, 08:07 PM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Wow. I didn't realize how much I love Dr. Sears until now. Thanks for the link, nia82!

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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