Unvaccinated Kids with Autism Spectrum Disorders - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 185 Old 01-20-2014, 04:03 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

The whole goal-post discussion is odd and a bit pro-vax playbook as opposed to genuine discussion. I am not sure what the goal is, but I doubt I agreed to it, or agree it has been met. 

 

Kathy, you've just identified a different version of the "moving the goal-posts" fallacy.  Accusing someone of moving the goalposts when there wasn't a goalpost situation in the first place is a fallacy in itself.

 

Vaccine critics: "We have serious concerns about the safety of vaccines;  there is some evidence that mercury is a problem."

 

Vaccine defenders: "But we've shown you (industry-funded, severely flawed) studies that show that vaccines are safe!  And mercury has been used for nearly 100 years, OF COURSE it's perfectly safe! You must be a conspiracy theorist if you believe that it's not safe. THE SCIENCE HAS BEEN DONE. Stop questioning immediately, you're wasting our time."

 

Vaccine critics: "But...your science is seriously flawed, and there are other studies that show evidence of harm.  There are plenty of things that we used to assume were safe, and we've learned that they aren't.  Based on the studies we've seen, thimerosal falls into that category.  And we've recently learned that aluminum might not be safe, either; in fact, we see evidence that it may cause similar neurological problems as mercury."

 Vaccine defenders:  "You're moving the goal posts!  How dare you come up with more questions?!  Vaccines are SAFE. For everyone."

Vaccine critics: "Well, actually, we were thinking that there are one or more at-risk subgroups that may have specific, unanticipated reactions to vaccines; we think those cases should be investigated, so that the subgroups can be identified, and the vaccines can be modified to avoid such reactions in the future. we think mercury and aluminum are issues, and the more we look, the more evidence we find of other possible issues.  We think they should be investigated as well, and not by the industry that profits from them."

 

Vaccine defenders:  "YOU'RE MOVING THE GOALPOSTS!  Vaccines are safe for the vast majority!  They are lifesaving!"

 

"Moving the goalposts" is the response when you either don't want to respond--or can't come up with a good response. We're seeing it used more and more as an attempt to shut down discussion.   As Kathy pointed out, the "goalposts" referred to have never been agreed upon.

 

It's really upsetting to see so many attempts to shut down discussion rather than deal with the problems of vaccines that have been indicated in recent years.

Mirzam, applejuice, nia82 and 7 others like this.
Taximom5 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#62 of 185 Old 01-20-2014, 04:11 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

It's a very clear example of goal post moving. 

 

Now that more and more people are not vaccinating, more and more unvaccinated children with autism are also inevitably popping up.  So how do some NVers deal with this predicament? By moving the goal post to "well, maybe we should look at the vaccine status of their parents, or grand parents, or maybe even GREAT grand parents. I bet at least someone in the last few generations was vaccinated, therefore HA! you still can't rule out that vaccines caused their autism!" 

 

You are essentially raising the bar so high that it would be impossible to ever reach.   How many children do you think exist in the US whose not only mother and father are 100% unvaccinated, but maternal grandmother and great grandmother, maternal grandfather and great grandfather, paternal grandmother and great grandmother, paternal grandfather and great grandfather are also 100% unvaccinated?  

 

My guess is probably zero. Maybe one or two exist, but probably not. 

 

 

 

Really?  So the fact that grandchildren of survivors of acrodynia have a significantly higher rate of autism is something you just want to pretend doesn't exist?    

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3173747/

 

You REALLy want to avoid looking at parents and grandparents for signs of genetic predisposition to vaccine reaction, or for other possible factors in autism?

 

Wow, sounds like a way to avoid finding out the truth to me...

Taximom5 is offline  
#63 of 185 Old 01-20-2014, 04:41 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 
 

It's a very clear example of goal post moving. 

 

Now that more and more people are not vaccinating, more and more unvaccinated children with autism are also inevitably popping up.  So how do some NVers deal with this predicament? 

 

More and more people are not vaccinating? Where did that bit of fiction come from? US vaccination rates average 94.5% for MMR, 95.1% for DTaP and 95% for Varicella (link). The autism rate is now 1 in 50 and has been steadily rising along with the rising number of mandated vaccines.

 

 

There is no 'predicament' for those who choose not to vaccinate.

applejuice, nia82 and BeckyBird like this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#64 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 06:54 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

Really?  So the fact that grandchildren of survivors of acrodynia have a significantly higher rate of autism is something you just want to pretend doesn't exist?    

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3173747/

 

You REALLy want to avoid looking at parents and grandparents for signs of genetic predisposition to vaccine reaction, or for other possible factors in autism?

 

Wow, sounds like a way to avoid finding out the truth to me...

 

 

Don't have time to respond to everyone this morning but do you really think a grandparent survey study that had a response rate of only 23% is good evidence?  

 

I already hashed this out with kathymuggle several months ago and I have no desire to do it again.   Here's the thread http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1391548/from-acrodynia-to-autism-mercury-across-generations-more-evidence-of-harm   Our discussion on this topic starts on the bottom of page 1 for anyone that's interested. 

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#65 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 07:25 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

More and more people are not vaccinating? Where did that bit of fiction come from? US vaccination rates average 94.5% for MMR, 95.1% for DTaP and 95% for Varicella (link). The autism rate is now 1 in 50 and has been steadily rising along with the rising number of mandated vaccines.

 

 

There is no 'predicament' for those who choose not to vaccinate.

 

Again, I don't have much time this morning but here's an article talking about a NEJM study that showed that non medical vaccine exemptions are rising in all states. 

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/09/19/more-kids-opting-out-of-school-required-vaccinations-study

 

"In the current study, Omer and his colleagues compared the rates of non-medical exemptions for school-required immunizations collected by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the school years between 2005-2006 and 2010-2011 with state-level exemption policies.

Even though the rates of non-medical exemptions climbed in all the states over this period, the overall rate was 2.5 times higher in states that allowed philosophical and religious exemptions compared to those that only allowed religious exemptions."

And as for your graph, so what? A lot of things have changed in the last 30-40 years. Cell phones didn't exist.  Neither did the internet.  Or satellite television.  

Here's another fun graph: 

 


 

 

 

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#66 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 07:51 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Again, I don't have much time this morning but here's an article talking about a NEJM study that showed that non medical vaccine exemptions are rising in all states

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/09/19/more-kids-opting-out-of-school-required-vaccinations-study

 

"In the current study, Omer and his colleagues compared the rates of non-medical exemptions for school-required immunizations collected by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the school years between 2005-2006 and 2010-2011 with state-level exemption policies.

Even though the rates of non-medical exemptions climbed in all the states over this period, the overall rate was 2.5 times higher in states that allowed philosophical and religious exemptions compared to those that only allowed religious exemptions."

And as for your graph, so what? A lot of things have changed in the last 30-40 years. Cell phones didn't exist.  Neither did the internet.  Or satellite television.  

Here's another fun graph: 

 


 

 

 

 

 

The bottom line is vaccination rates are plenty high enough for herd immunity (unless vaccines are a worthless hoax). Actually some states, CO included which has (at least for now) both religious and philosophical exemptions, has seen a decrease in exemptions, down 1.3%. Alaska also, with all three exemptions, had a 1.4% decrease in exemptions. Here are the other states which posted a decrease in exemptions: District of Columbia, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico (-1.6) , Virginia, Washington, (It was in the CDC link I provided which I guess you didn't read.). The data I provided was for 2012-2013, your information was out dated. 

 

 

 

Riiiiiight teacozy, organic food causes autism. 

 

Here's so what - the same could be said for vaccines preventing or eradicating disease which is based also on correlation


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#67 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 09:18 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

 

Now that more and more people are not vaccinating, more and more unvaccinated children with autism are also inevitably popping up. 

How many are there - where is that data? 

Mirzam and applejuice like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#68 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 11:25 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

 

The bottom line is vaccination rates are plenty high enough for herd immunity (unless vaccines are a worthless hoax). Actually some states, CO included which has (at least for now) both religious and philosophical exemptions, has seen a decrease in exemptions, down 1.3%. Alaska also, with all three exemptions, had a 1.4% decrease in exemptions. Here are the other states which posted a decrease in exemptions: District of Columbia, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico (-1.6) , Virginia, Washington, (It was in the CDC link I provided which I guess you didn't read.). The data I provided was for 2012-2013, your information was out dated. 

 

 

 

Riiiiiight teacozy, organic food causes autism. 

 

Here's so what - the same could be said for vaccines preventing or eradicating disease which is based also on correlation

 

Well that seems to be your argument.  Vaccines went up and so did autism therefore vaccines cause autism.  

 

I posted a video on the VOS forum that went into many of the studies on vaccines an autism.  One study looked at 10,000 children in California between the years 1980-1994.  During that time, autism diagnoses went up 373% while MMR coverage only rose by 14%.   It was concluded that the relatively small increase in MMR could not possibly be responsible for the huge increase seen in autism.   

 

And no, vaccines preventing/eradicating disease is not just based on correlation.  It has a biologically plausible mechanism for working.  In other words, we know *how* they prevent disease. 

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#69 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 12:34 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 
 

Well that seems to be your argument.  Vaccines went up and so did autism therefore vaccines cause autism.  

 

I posted a video on the VOS forum that went into many of the studies on vaccines an autism.  One study looked at 10,000 children in California between the years 1980-1994.  During that time, autism diagnoses went up 373% while MMR coverage only rose by 14%.   It was concluded that the relatively small increase in MMR could not possibly be responsible for the huge increase seen in autism.   

 

And no, vaccines preventing/eradicating disease is not just based on correlation.  It has a biologically plausible mechanism for working.  In other words, we know *how* they prevent disease. 

 

So why do you think autism has reached epidemic levels then teacozy? Is MMR the only vaccine on the schedule and implicated in autism? Were babies not give DPT vaccines at that time? You know the one that caused so much brain damage that it had to be replaced by the ineffective DTaP? Vaccines cause brain damage which leads to autism (the behaviors associated with a damaged brain). As much as the coincidence theorists are trying to ignore the fact, autism is an autoimmune disorder and that always leads back to vaccines.

 

Sorry but yes, vaccines preventing/eradicating disease is just based on correlation. It is pure speculation, you are deluding yourself if you believe otherwise. Measles deaths in the UK had dropped 99.96% before a vaccine was introduced in 1968, nothing to do with the vaccine. As you can see that was pretty much the same for all the other infectious diseases.

 

 

Now, it was also the case for scurvy which is not an infectious, but a disease of malnutrition, gross vitamin C deficiency. With the graphs below can be seen how improved nutrition, the deaths from scurvy mirror the deaths from infectious disease. Vaccination, doesn't even enter the equation.  Infectious disease deaths, for example measles are still found in countries where children are undernourished and lack adequate, so as we see from declining scurvy, we see deaths from measles and the other infectious diseases decline.

 

(Graphs from Dissolving Illusions. Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History, Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk)

 

I was going to write more, but then thought why bother, this is all going to fall on deaf ears anyway. The research you posted highlights perfectly the religious belief 'science' has in vaccines. 


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#70 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 01:14 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)

For those that want more, here is a link to 35 graphs prepared by Raymond Obomsawin PhD:

 

FIGURE SET I : Natural Infectious Disease Declines Preceding Public Immunization Efforts (vaccines DID NOT eradicate the diseases that plagued humanity)

 

FIGURE SET II : Immunization Effectiveness (vaccines ARE NOT effective)

 

FIGURE SET III : Immunization Dangers (vaccines ARE dangerous)


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#71 of 185 Old 01-21-2014, 02:27 PM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,618
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

It's good to be suspicious of medicines and/or substances put into our bodies, but in my opinion it goes beyond that when medical and scientific consensus is repeatedly ignored.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

It's a very clear example of goal post moving.

 

Now that more and more people are not vaccinating, more and more unvaccinated children with autism are also inevitably popping up.  So how do some NVers deal with this predicament? By moving the goal post to "well, maybe we should look at the vaccine status of their parents, or grand parents, or maybe even GREAT grand parents. I bet at least someone in the last few generations was vaccinated, therefore HA! you still can't rule out that vaccines caused their autism!"

 

This isn't moving a post - and whatever is so wrong with raising the bar?  ALL scientific research begins with a wild guess (aka hypothesis).  If all research ended when the scientist didn't find an answer we wouldn't be where we are today.  You can't just dismiss autism because results seem to vary or because there is no definitive cause or answer.  GOOD research means going above and beyond - you look at one group, don't find any specific answers, what to do...oh wait! You move on.  You adapt the study to investigate other possible causes.  This is called good science, not goal post moving.

sassyfirechick is offline  
#72 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 06:11 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Yup, like I said, the goal post is being moved again.   Now maybe unvaccinated children's autism came from their vaccinated grandparents or GREAT grandparents. 

 

Here's a paper for you to ponder teacozy, so that you understand a bit better how autism can be epigenetic. (Sorry its not open access). I still think that this website explains it all, but I am not sure you have looked at it, so maybe this little sound bite will clue you in a bit. 


 

Quote:

Epigenetic programming of depression during gestation.

 

Gestational factors play a role in the development of several neuropsychiatric disorders including schizophrenia and autism. In utero conditions influence future mental health through epigenetic mechanisms, which alter gene expression without affecting DNA coding sequence. Environmental factors account for at least 60% of the risk for developing major depression, and earlier onset of depressive illness has been observed over the past decades. I speculate that gestational factors may play a greater role in programing depression than previously recognized. Here, I examine recent evidence for a role for gestational factors in programing mood disorders, and how epigenetic mechanisms mediate this effect.

 

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201300089/abstract


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#73 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 10:15 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

So why do you think autism has reached epidemic levels then teacozy? Is MMR the only vaccine on the schedule and implicated in autism? Were babies not give DPT vaccines at that time? You know the one that caused so much brain damage that it had to be replaced by the ineffective DTaP? Vaccines cause brain damage which leads to autism (the behaviors associated with a damaged brain). As much as the coincidence theorists are trying to ignore the fact, autism is an autoimmune disorder and that always leads back to vaccines.

 

Sorry but yes, vaccines preventing/eradicating disease is just based on correlation. It is pure speculation, you are deluding yourself if you believe otherwise. Measles deaths in the UK had dropped 99.96% before a vaccine was introduced in 1968, nothing to do with the vaccine. As you can see that was pretty much the same for all the other infectious diseases.

 

 

Now, it was also the case for scurvy which is not an infectious, but a disease of malnutrition, gross vitamin C deficiency. With the graphs below can be seen how improved nutrition, the deaths from scurvy mirror the deaths from infectious disease. Vaccination, doesn't even enter the equation.  Infectious disease deaths, for example measles are still found in countries where children are undernourished and lack adequate, so as we see from declining scurvy, we see deaths from measles and the other infectious diseases decline.

 

(Graphs from Dissolving Illusions. Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History, Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk)

 

I was going to write more, but then thought why bother, this is all going to fall on deaf ears anyway. The research you posted highlights perfectly the religious belief 'science' has in vaccines. 

 

Every single one of those graphs is showing DEATH rates were going down.  Which is true, due to better medical treatments like antibiotics and better sanitation.  Disease *incidence* is different, and that was not going down before vaccines. 

 

But go ahead and stick your head in the sand if you want.  These kinds of posts certainly do not do your "side" any favors by so blatantly broadcasting your complete lack of understanding of immunology.

 

I suppose it's magic that protects the United States against massive measles/mumps/rubella outbreaks then right?  Because those diseases certainly aren't eradicated, even in 1st world countries.  

 

I encourage other non vaxxers to come forward  and speak up because these posts are just playing into many of the anti vaccine stereotypes that people have, and it doesn't make you look good.  

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#74 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 12:33 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,214
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 223 Post(s)
Qu
 

\

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Every single one of those graphs is showing DEATH rates were going down.  Which is true, due to better medical treatments like antibiotics and better sanitation.  Disease *incidence* is different, and that was not going down before vaccines. 

 

 

Mizram said they were death rates.

 

I don't really get this focus on incident rate.  An incident rate in and of itself is pretty insignificant.  Do we care that many colds circulate?  No.  It isn't the incident rate of a disease - it is its potential for harm.  A decrease in death rates is a pretty major thing.


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  
#75 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 12:34 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

Mizram said they were death rates.

 

I don't really get this focus on incident rate.  An incident rate in and of itself is pretty insignificant.  Do we care that many colds circulate?  No.  It isn't the incident rate of a disease - it is its potential for harm.  A decrease in death rates is a pretty major thing.

Right Kathy, its like measuring road safety by counting the number of cars on the road. Pretty useless.

BeckyBird and sassyfirechick like this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#76 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 12:42 PM
 
OrmEmbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 482
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Every single one of those graphs is showing DEATH rates were going down.  Which is true, due to better medical treatments like antibiotics and better sanitation.  Disease *incidence* is different, and that was not going down before vaccines. 

 

 

 

I think TeaCozy's response above illustrates the one of the fundamental differences that are not often acknowledged in these discussions:  There are many metrics which parents use when making decisions about vaccines.  

There is an implied assumption in the above quote - that those questioning vaccines in general (or their country's current vaccination program) are worried about disease "incident" rates.  Many that I have talked to are not worried about their child getting chicken pox, or rubella, or many of the other viruses/bacterium that we have vaccines for.  That does not mean "I don't want my child to chicken pox but I believe they won't get it"  it means "I am okay with my child contracting chicken pox".  So, good sanitation, nutrition, overall health, better medicine and medical technologies, etc might mean that parents are more comfortable with their child contracting measles and less comfortable with the known and unknown consequences of receiving vaccinations.

BeckyBird and kathymuggle like this.
OrmEmbar is online now  
#77 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 12:48 PM
 
OrmEmbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 482
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)

heh, we're all posting at the same time!

 

: )

OrmEmbar is online now  
#78 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 12:51 PM
 
crayfishgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 561
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
I don't really get this focus on incident rate.  An incident rate in and of itself is pretty insignificant.  Do we care that many colds circulate?  No.  It isn't the incident rate of a disease - it is its potential for harm.  A decrease in death rates is a pretty major thing.

 

This comment seems to contradict itself.  A decrease in death rates is significant, but death isn't the only outcome from VPDs.  There are a multitude of undesirable and significant side effects that parents vaccinate to protect against...the potential for harm.  This is why incident rate is significant and the more important metric for risk assessment. 

teacozy likes this.

Camille~
Mama to F (3/09) and S (3/11); and never forgetting my babe gone too soon angel1.gif(4/10).

crayfishgirl is offline  
#79 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 01:26 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrmEmbar View Post
 
 

I think TeaCozy's response above illustrates the one of the fundamental differences that are not often acknowledged in these discussions:  There are many metrics which parents use when making decisions about vaccines.  

There is an implied assumption in the above quote - that those questioning vaccines in general (or their country's current vaccination program) are worried about disease "incident" rates.  Many that I have talked to are not worried about their child getting chicken pox, or rubella, or many of the other viruses/bacterium that we have vaccines for.  That does not mean "I don't want my child to chicken pox but I believe they won't get it"  it means "I am okay with my child contracting chicken pox".  So, good sanitation, nutrition, overall health, better medicine and medical technologies, etc might mean that parents are more comfortable with their child contracting measles and less comfortable with the known and unknown consequences of receiving vaccinations.

 

What goes along with declining mortality is declining virulence of these infectious diseases. Once there is a vaccine for a infectious disease you are going get a reduction of reporting for that disease. Doctors will diagnose it as a different disease (viral rash), or the disease will be renamed (acute flacid paralysis), or the disease parameters will be changed (paralytic polio which usually resolves in two weeks, will be classified as polio only if paralysis lasts for 90 plus days). When it comes to incidence figures health officials are relying on old, unreliable figures which did not have the benefit of modern highly sensitive IgM testing, so we really don't know what the incidence of these diseases were. We can now see from modern testing that these diseases are widely over diagnosed. For example, laboratory confirmed cases of measles, mumps and rubella in England and Wales, October to December 2004 had 474 notified cases, 589 tested with confirmed 8 confirmed cases. A over diagnosis of 7800%. (SOURCE: CDR Weekly, Volume 15 Number 12 Published: 24 March 2005). This was also seen in the recent South Wales measles outbreak where lab confirmed cases were hugely exaggerated by health officials. Or total confirmed cases of measles by oral fluid IgM antibody tests, 408 notified, 343 tested, 22 confirmed cases. (SOURCE: CDR Weekly, Volume 16 Number 12 Published on: 23 March 2006).

 

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#80 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 01:31 PM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,618
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by crayfishgirl View Post
 

 

This comment seems to contradict itself.  A decrease in death rates is significant, but death isn't the only outcome from VPDs.  There are a multitude of undesirable and significant side effects that parents vaccinate to protect against...the potential for harm.  This is why incident rate is significant and the more important metric for risk assessment.

How so?  I'm not at all concerned about a rash, fever, itching, perhaps some phlegm or a cough.....but death, that's pretty significant.  Seizures or autoimmune disorders as a potential side effect of vaccination - that plays a huge part in my personal decision not to vaccinate.  Everything has it's risks, but the risk of reactions to vaccines is every bit as real if not more common than the real risk of the worst outcome for a VPD.  If death rates are alarmingly high for a particular disease then I'd be concerned, especially if sanitation and treatment didn't change the outcome of the disease.  But that's not the case with anything right now and thus why someone like me would look at my situation (having a DD who reacted adversely to vaccines and is SLOWLY recovering from major GI issues along with some visible skin problems) and compare the DEATH rates of a disease to rate of reaction for a vaccine, and it's a no-brainer for me.  Incidence is insignificant when all things are considered.

sassyfirechick is offline  
#81 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 01:33 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crayfishgirl View Post
 

 

This comment seems to contradict itself.  A decrease in death rates is significant, but death isn't the only outcome from VPDs.  There are a multitude of undesirable and significant side effects that parents vaccinate to protect against...the potential for harm.  This is why incident rate is significant and the more important metric for risk assessment. 

 

Yeah that.   

 

Additionally, I was more responding to this comment Mirzam made "Sorry but yes, vaccines preventing/eradicating disease is just based on correlation. It is pure speculation, you are deluding yourself if you believe otherwise. "   She then goes on to post graphs that show death rates were going down, not incidence.   If she has evidence that disease incidence was going down before vaccines, I would love to see it.  Anyone that truly believes that the fact that vaccines prevent illness is a delusion is not a person that is truly making an informed decision on the risks and benefits of vaccines. 

 

Unless death rates went down to zero then incidence is still very important.  I don't have time to go through each individual disease to explain why, but take Polio for example.  Death rates plummeted after the invention of the iron lung.  Before that invention, children whose muscles were paralyzed in the chest would simply die, unable to breathe.  But even today, there is not some magic cure or pill you can give a child that suffers paralysis from Polio.  People are still living in iron lungs.  So does that mean that the fact that the incidence of polio is now zero in the US is meaningless? because death rates were already going down?  Are wards filled with children living in iron lungs and children walking with leg braces and children permanently disfigured or paralyzed somehow not a big deal because at least they aren't dead? 

 

And no, sanitation will not stop Polio from returning to the US.  The increase in sanitation is a big part of what actually *caused* the massive polio outbreaks in the US.  "Before the 20th century, polio infections were rarely seen in infants before six months of age, most cases occurring in children six months to four years of age.[98] Poorer sanitation of the time resulted in a constant exposure to the virus, which enhanced a natural immunity within the population. In developed countries during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, improvements were made in community sanitation, including better sewage disposal and clean water supplies. These changes drastically increased the proportion of children and adults at risk of paralytic polio infection, by reducing childhood exposure and immunity to the disease.[98]"  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis

 

Another example is diphtheria.  Before the invention of the antitoxin it killed IIRC over 50% of people that had it.  Now days, it kills about 5-10 percent.  So yes, death rates went down significantly before the vaccine but if incidence didn't also go down we would still have tens of thousands of deaths a year still in the US.   I posted a link from a massive study that concluded that there would have been 700,000 cases of diphtheria in the US in 2010 without vaccines. So maybe 60,000 people in the US would die every year instead of 120,000 without vaccines because of modern medicine.   Or we could have vaccines and  because incidence is zero the number of deaths from diphtheria also drops to zero. 

 

To say incidence is unimportant is absurd. 

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#82 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 01:41 PM
 
Meganlauriana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Kings County, California
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I've read that Autism is part of the Methylation Tree which also includes Dymentia, Depression, Alzheimers, etc. The thinking is that austim is genetic to a certain extent, and the correlation between vaccinations and austim is those who have a genetic predisposition (including family history) of these neurological issues and receive this onslaught of chemicals pumped into their brains at such crucial development ages seem to have that austim "gene" triggered. This can also be caused by other toxins in their environment, which lets be real, there are chemicals and crap everywhere. 

 

From what I read, most children diagnosed come from families of the methylation tree and the common auto immune tree (or both) so they are more susceptible. However, from what I see, children without vaccinations have a lower rate of austim diagnosis than that of vaccinated children. At least to my knowledge. I know many parents who vaccinated, their child regressed, and they went on like toxin crazy town to rid their house and food of harmful substances in hopes to see recovery. I've read of some amazing turn arounds for those children. Miracles! 

 

Part of the reason why my sisters and I don't vaccinate our kids is that we have a family history of alcoholism, depression, anxiety, parkinsons and alzheimers and also migraines! The brain is not really our friend, so to speak, so each of us on our own after our own research, decided against it. 

 

The book that talks about the methylation tree is Healing and Preventing Autism by Jerry Kartzinel.

applejuice and Jennyanydots like this.
Meganlauriana is offline  
#83 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 01:50 PM
 
crayfishgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 561
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

Quote:

How so?  I'm not at all concerned about a rash, fever, itching, perhaps some phlegm or a cough.....but death, that's pretty significant.  Seizures or autoimmune disorders as a potential side effect of vaccination - that plays a huge part in my personal decision not to vaccinate.  Everything has it's risks, but the risk of reactions to vaccines is every bit as real if not more common than the real risk of the worst outcome for a VPD.  If death rates are alarmingly high for a particular disease then I'd be concerned, especially if sanitation and treatment didn't change the outcome of the disease.  But that's not the case with anything right now and thus why someone like me would look at my situation (having a DD who reacted adversely to vaccines and is SLOWLY recovering from major GI issues along with some visible skin problems) and compare the DEATH rates of a disease to rate of reaction for a vaccine, and it's a no-brainer for me.  Incidence is insignificant when all things are considered.


I'm not worried about a rash either, but I'm less enamored with encephalitis, hearing loss, etc.  Not death, but still potentially crappy outcomes.  Knowing incident rates is integral to evaluating those risks. 

prosciencemum likes this.

Camille~
Mama to F (3/09) and S (3/11); and never forgetting my babe gone too soon angel1.gif(4/10).

crayfishgirl is offline  
#84 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:06 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crayfishgirl View Post
 
 

I'm not worried about a rash either, but I'm less enamored with encephalitis, hearing loss, etc.  Not death, but still potentially crappy outcomes.  Knowing incident rates is integral to evaluating those risks. 

 

You are basing the outcomes on unreliable disease incident rates on populations that were malnourished and living in third world conditions. Is your child's diet lacking in vitamins and nutrients? Is your child living without clean, running water? Is your living in overcrowded living conditions, sharing a toilet with several families. Is there garbage lying around? Does your child live in a war zone, or do they have to work 12 hours a day in sweatshop conditions? Does you child not have access to modern medical care?


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#85 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:18 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,570
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

You are basing the outcomes on unreliable disease incident rates on populations that were malnourished and living in third world conditions. Is your child's diet lacking in vitamins and nutrients? Is your child living without clean, running water? Is your living in overcrowded living conditions, sharing a toilet with several families. Is there garbage lying around? Does your child live in a war zone, or do they have to work 12 hours a day in sweatshop conditions? Does you child not have access to modern medical care?

 

Nope.  Anyone that has measles is at risk for encephalitis.  It's what Roald Dahl's daughter died from, and they certainly weren't living in squalor or in a third world country. 

 

From 2012-2013 in Europe these countries together accounted for over 93 percent of measles cases. Germany (14%), Italy (28%), the Netherlands (18%), Romania (14%) and the United Kingdom (19%).  There were 8 cases of encephalitis due to measles in that one year alone in these countries.   This was only 12,000 cases of measles, too.  Imagine how many children would suffer if millions and millions came down with measles in the US.  It's not like Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and the UK are third world countries living in squalor without running water.  So there's goes that myth! 

CherryBomb likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
#86 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:30 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,214
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 223 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crayfishgirl View Post
 


I'm not worried about a rash either, but I'm less enamored with encephalitis, hearing loss, etc.  Not death, but still potentially crappy outcomes.  Knowing incident rates is integral to evaluating those risks. 

Knowing incident rates is vital for serious VADs and less vital for milder VAD.

 

Really, I don't overly care about the incident rate of a number of milder diseases associated with vaccines.  Just as vaccinators consider the risks of vaccines low enough to give their child a vaccine, I consider the risks of some diseases low enough that I am not overly worried about my child catching them.  

 

It might just have to be an agree to disagree issues.


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  
#87 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:34 PM - Thread Starter
 
lauren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a state of grace
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)

I realize that many of you debate this topic all the time, on this forum and in other places. For those of us that are not as fond of debate or don't have the time to follow all the charts and graphs, I wonder if the thread could be refocused, or perhaps allowed to die. 

 

I was most curious about the children who have not received vaccines, who have developed autism anyway. Only a few people have touched on this with useful information, most recently meganlauriana with information about the methylation tree (something I will have to look up as I have never heard this term).

 

Could those of you with common history of debate perhaps take it back onto another thread as it has not been helpful to me, and perhaps some of the other members more interested in a common person's look at this, or something new to explore? 

cwill and OrmEmbar like this.

 
lauren is offline  
#88 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:34 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

Measles encephalitis is a listed side effect of the measles vaccine. Encephalitis is associated with the DPT vaccine also.

http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/brain_spinal_cord_and_nerve_disorders/brain_infections/encephalitis.html

Vitamin A is known to prevent this condition and other complications of measles as blindness, deafness, and pneumonia.

Nutritional deficiencies are common in poor classes, but by no means confined to the poor.

Dahl's son died from an accident with a taxicab and his wife later had an aneurysm. 

Benjamin Franklin's newspaper advocated against the smallpox vaccine.

Years later his young son died of smallpox complications, yet having the variolation technique had a many risks associated with it also.

At least Benjamin Franklin had a choice. He thought he made the right choice and he was wrong.

No one really knows if variolation would have saved his son or not.

If Benjamin Franklin advocated in favor of variolation and then had it performed on his son and his son died, Benjamin Franklin would have still have blamed himself.

But people need choices because we all live with our choices.


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
#89 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:46 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,602
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 131 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Nope.  Anyone that has measles is at risk for encephalitis.  It's what Roald Dahl's daughter died from, and they certainly weren't living in squalor or in a third world country. 

 

From 2012-2013 in Europe these countries together accounted for over 93 percent of measles cases. Germany (14%), Italy (28%), the Netherlands (18%), Romania (14%) and the United Kingdom (19%).  There were 8 cases of encephalitis due to measles in that one year alone in these countries.   This was only 12,000 cases of measles, too.  Imagine how many children would suffer if millions and millions came down with measles in the US.  It's not like Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and the UK are third world countries living in squalor without running water.  So there's goes that myth! 

 

How were these children treated? Antibiotics? Fever reducers? I wonder how many cases of encephalitis there were in those countries from the MMR vaccine? 

 

teacozy, you are never going to scare me, Remember, I, and every kid I knew growing up had measles, not one had any complications from them. If you think millions and millions (LOL) of children would suffer adverse affects from measles in the US in this day and age, I really don't know what to say. The only reason could be is that they are no longer as healthy as kids growing up in the 1950s and early 60s.

 

 

 

For over 100 years, there has been a strong association with vitamin A deficiency and adverse measles outcomes, especially in young children. Has the time come for the medical community to recognize that any child presenting with measles complications should be given vitamin A and evaluated for overall nutritional status? If not, what has history taught us?– Adrianne Bendich, 1992 

 


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#90 of 185 Old 01-22-2014, 02:48 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lauren View Post
 

I realize that many of you debate this topic all the time, on this forum and in other places. For those of us that are not as fond of debate or don't have the time to follow all the charts and graphs, I wonder if the thread could be refocused, or perhaps allowed to die. 

 

I was most curious about the children who have not received vaccines, who have developed autism anyway. Only a few people have touched on this with useful information, most recently meganlauriana with information about the methylation tree (something I will have to look up as I have never heard this term).

 

Could those of you with common history of debate perhaps take it back onto another thread as it has not been helpful to me, and perhaps some of the other members more interested in a common person's look at this, or something new to explore? 

I personally know of none IRL, of those I know that work with autistic none have ever told me of any that were unvaccinated and I asked one just recently who has been working with a school district, she said she has never heard of any even when she is among others doing the same type of work, I have never read any data that even talks about it, I see no news reports on it - yet I see this from those who are PRO/support vaccines but ONLY on message boards and none have any real citable data to support their claims, just the same THERE IS. There could be but without real information is is just assumptions with lots of unanswered questions. shrug.gif

 

I'm sorry you are not getting what you want - I don't know what the real number of unvaccinated with autism is, I assume very, very low other wise it would show up in real data- I asked on this thread and received no citable data, in fact my question was unanswered (be it govt or agency that deals with autistic). Without real numbers I really don't think this can go any place-IMO

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

 

Now that more and more people are not vaccinating, more and more unvaccinated children with autism are also inevitably popping up. 

How many are there - where is that data? 

 

 

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Reply

Tags
Vaccines , Vaccinations , Delayed Vaccination , Selective Vaccination , Saying No To Vaccines , Vaccine The Controversial Story Of Medicines Greatest Lifesaver , Vaccinations A Thoughtful Parents Guide How To Make Safe Sensible Decisions About The Risks Benefits , Autism , Autism Encyclopedia The Complete Guide To Autism Spectrum Disorders

User Tag List

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


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