Friday, March 7, 2014

75 studies that show no link between vaccines and autism UPDATED to 107

Edited to fix links and to add more studies for a new total of 107 on 11 March 2014

Guest blog, compiled by Allison Hagood, Luci Baldwin, Kathy McGrath and Nathan Boonstra and originally published on the "Your Baby's Best Shot" Facebook page. I am grateful for the permission to repost!

If anyone still tries to pull the "vaccines cause autism" card on you, provide them with a link to this note!

Albizzati, A., Moré, L., Di Candia, D., Saccani, M., Lenti, C.  Normal concentrations of heavy metals in autistic spectrum disorders.  Minerva Pediatrica.  2012. Feb;64(1):27-31 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22350041

Afzal, MA., Ozoemena, LC., O’Hare, A., Kidger, KA., Bentley, ML., Minor, PD. Absence of detectable measles virus genome sequence in blood of autistic children who have had their MMR vaccination during the routine childhood immunization schedule of UK.   Journal Medical Virology.  2006 May;78(5):623-30.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16555271

Ahearn WH. What Every Behavior Analyst Should Know About the "MMR Causes Autism" HypothesisArchive of Behavior Analysis in Practice.  2010.   Spring;3(1):46-50. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22479671

Allan, GM., Ivers, N.  The autism-vaccine story: fiction and deception?  Canadian Family Physician.  Oct 2010; 56(10): 1013. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2954080/

Andrews, N., Miller, E., Grant, A., Stowe, J., Osborn, V., & Taylor, B. (2004).  Thimerosal exposure in infants and developmental disorders: a retrospective cohort study in the United Kingdom does not support a causal association.  Pediatrics, 114, 584-591. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342825 

Andrews, N., Miller, E., Taylor, B., Lingam, R., Simmons, A., Stowe, J., Waight, P.  Recall bias, MMR and autism.  Archives of Disease in Childhood.  Dec 2002; 87(6): 493–494.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1755823/pdf/v087p00493.pdf

Baird, G., Pickles, A., Simonoff, E., Charman, T., Sullivan, P., Chandler, S., Loucas, T., Meldrum, D., Afzal, M., Thomas, B., Jin, L., Brown, D.  Measles vaccination and antibody response in autism spectrum disorders.  Archives of Disease in Childhood.  2008 Oct;93(10):832-7. doi: 10.1136/adc.2007.122937. Epub 2008 Feb 5.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18252754

Berger, BE., Navar-Boggan, AM., Omer, SB.  Congenital rubella syndrome and autism spectrum disorder prevented by rubella vaccination--United States, 2001-2010.   BMC Public Health.  2011 May 19;11:340. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-340. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21592401

Black, C., Kaye, JA.  Relation of childhood gastrointestinal disorders to autism:  nested case-control study using data from the UK General Practice Research Database.  British Medical Journal.  2002; 325(7361):419-21.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7361.419

Bower, H.  New research demolishes link between MMR vaccine and autism.  British Medical Journal.  1999.  Jun 19;318(7199):1643. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1116011/

Chen, W., Landau, S., Sham, P., & Fombonne, E. (2004).  No evidence for links between autism, MMR and measles virus.  Psychological Medicine, 34(3), 543-553. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15259839

Christie, B.  Scottish expert group finds no link between MMR and autism.  British Medical Journal,  2002. May 11;324(7346):1118. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1172158/

Clements, CJ., McIntyre, PB.  When science is not enough – a risk/benefit profile of thiomersal-containing vaccines.   Expert Drug Opinion Safety.  2006. Jan;5(1):17-29. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16370953    

Dales, L., Hammer, S. J., & Smith, N. J. (2001). Time trends in autism and in MMR immunization coverage in California.   JAMA, 285(9), 1183-1185. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11231748

De Los Reyes, EC.  Autism and immunizations: separating fact from fiction.  JAMA Neurology.   2010;67(4):490-492. doi:10.1001/archneurol.2010.57. http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=799645

DeWilde, S., Carey, IM., Richards, N., Hilton, SR., Cook, DG.  Do children who become autistic consult more often after MMR vaccination?  British Journal of General Practice.  2001 Mar;51(464):226-7.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1313956/

Demicheli, V., Jefferson, T., Rivetti, A., & Price, D. (2005).  Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4. (a review of 31 studies) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22336803

DeStefano, F.  MMR vaccine and autism: a review of the evidence for a causal association.   Molecular Psychiatry.  2002;7 Suppl 2:S51-2.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142951

DeStefano, F., Chen, RT.  Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: No epidemiological evidence for a causal association.  The Journal of Pediatrics.  2000 Jan;136(1):125.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10681219    

DeStefano, F., Bhasin, T. K., Thompson, W. W., Yeargin-Allsopp, M., & Boyle, C. (2004).  Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan AtlantaPediatrics, 113(2), 259-266. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14754936

DeStefano F., Price CS., Weintraub, ES.  Increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines is not associated with risk of autism.   Journal of Pediatrics.  2013 Aug;163(2):561-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.02.001. Epub 2013 Mar 30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23545349

DeStefano F., Thompson, WW.  MMR vaccine and autism: an update of the scientific evidence. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2004 Feb;3(1):19-22.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14761240

DeStefano F., Thompson, WW.  MMR vaccination and autism: is there a link?  Expert Opinion on Drug Safety.  2002 Jul;1(2):115-20.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12904145

DeStefano, F.  Chen, RT.  Negative association between MMR and autism.  Lancet. 1999 Jun 12;353(9169):1987-8.  http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(99)00160-9/fulltext

DeStefano, F., Chen, RT.  Autism and measles-mumps-rubella vaccination:  controversy laid to rest?  CNS Drugs.  2001. 2001;15(11):831-7.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11700148

D’Souza J., Todd T.  Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and the development of autism or inflammatory bowel disease: the controversy should end.  Journal of Pedatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics.   2003 Jul;8(3):187-99. doi: 10.5863/1551-6776-8.3.187. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3469143/

D’Souza, Y., Fombonne, E., Ward, BJ.  No evidence of persisting measles virus in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from children with autism spectrum disorder.  Pediatrics.  2006 Oct;118(4):1664-75.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17015560

Doja, A., & Roberts, W. (2006).  Immunizations and autism: A review of the literature.  The Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences, 33(4), 341-346. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17168158

Elliman, D., Bedford, H.   MMR: where are we now?  Archives of Disease in Childhood.   2007 Dec;92(12):1055-7. Epub 2007 Jul 11.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2066086/ 

Farrington, C., Miller, E., & Taylor, B. (2001).  MMR and autism: further evidence against a causal association.  Vaccine, 19(27), 3632-3635. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11395196

Fitzpatrick, M.  The end of the road for the campaign against MMR.  British Journal of General Practice.  2007 Aug;57(541):679.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17688775

Fombonne, E., & Chakrabarti, S. (2001).  No evidence for a new variant of measles-mumps-rubella–induced autism.  Pediatrics, 108(4), e58-e58. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11581466

Fombonne, E., Zakarian, R., Bennett, A., Meng, L., & McLean-Heywood, D. (2006).  Pervasive developmental disorders in Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Prevalence and links with immunizations.  Pediatrics 118(1) e139-e150; doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2993. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/e139

García-Fernández, L., Hernández, AV., Suárez Moreno, V., Fiestas, F.  Addressing the controversy regarding the association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.  Revista Peruana de Medicine Experimental Salud Publica. 2013 Apr;30(2):268-74. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23949514

Gentile, I., Bravaccio, C., Bonavolta, R., Zappulo, E., Scarica, S., Riccio, MP., Settimi, A., Portella, G., Pascotta, A., Borgia, G.  Response to measles-mumps-rubella vaccine in children with autism spectrum disordersIn Vivo 2013 May-Jun;27(3):377-82. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23606694

Glasper, EA.  New evidence reaffirms the safety of the MMR vaccine.  British Journal of Nursing. 2002 Jun 27-Jul 10;11(12):794.  http://www.internurse.com/cgi-bin/go.pl/library/article.cgi?uid=10298;article=BJN_11_12_794_0

Halsey, NA., Hyman, SL.  Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autistic spectrum disorder: report from the New Challenges in Childhood Immunizations Conference convened in Oak Brook, Illinois.   June 12-13, 2000.   Pediatrics.  2001 May;107(5):E84.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11331734

Hayney MS.  Vaccine Safety:  no link between thimerosal and autismJournal of American Pharmacists Association.  2003. 2004 Nov-Dec;44(6):725-6. http://japha.org/article.aspx?articleid=1039011   

Hertz-Picciotto, I., Green, P., Delwiche, L., Hansen, R., Walker, C., & Pessah, I. (2010).  Blood mercury concentrations in CHARGE Study children with and without autism. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(1), 161-166. doi:10.1289/ehp.0900736 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20056569

Hensley, E. Briars, L.  Closer look at autism and the measles-mumps-rubella vaccineJournal of American Pharmacist’s Association.  2003.  2010 Nov-Dec;50(6):736-41. doi: 10.1331/JAPhA.2010.10004.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21071320 

Heron, J., Golding, J., ALSPAC Study Team.  Thimerosal exposure in infants and developmental disorders: a prospective cohort study in the United Kingdom does not support a causal association.  Pediatrics.  2004 Sep;114(3):577-83. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342824

Hessel, L.  Mercury in vaccines.  Bulletin of the National Academy of Medicine. 2003;187(8):1501-10.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15146581

Hiroshi, T., Suzumura, S., Shirakizawa, F., Wada, N., Tanaka-Taya, K., Arai, S., Okabe, N., Ichikawa, H., Sato, T.  An epidemiological study on Japanese Autism concerning Routine Childhood Immunization History.  Japanese Journal of Infectious Diseases.  56, 114-117, 2003. http://www0.nih.go.jp/JJID/56/114.pdf

Honda, H., Shimizu, Y., & Rutter, M. (2005).  No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study.  Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.  46(6), doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01425.x.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15877763

Hornig, M., Briese, T., Bule, T., Bauman, M.L., Lauwers, G., Siemetzki, U., Hummel, K., Rota, PA., Bellini, WJ., O’Leary, JJ., Sheils, O., Alden, E., Pickering, L., Lipkin, W.I.  Lack of association between measles virus vaccine and autism with enteropathy: a case-control study.  2008.  PLoS One, 3(9), e3140. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003140. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18769550  

Hurley, A., Tadrous, M., Miller, ES.  Thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism: a review of recent epidemiological studies.  Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics.  2010 Jul-Sep; 15(3): 173-181.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018252/

Hviid A., Stellfeld, M., Wohlfahrt, J., Melbye, M.   Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism - No causal relationship found.  JAMA. 2003 Oct 1;290(13):1763-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14519711

Insitute  of Medicine (US) Immunization Safety Review Committee.  Immunization Safety Review:  Vaccines and Autisms.  Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2004. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20669467

Iqbal, S., Barile, JP., Thompson, WW., DeStefano, F.  Number of antigens in early childhood vaccines and neuropsychological outcomes at age 7–10years.  Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety.  2013 Dec;22(12):1263-70. doi: 10.1002/pds.3482.  Epub 2013 Jul 12. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23847024

Jefferson, T., Price, D., Demicheli, V., Bianco, E., European Research Program for Improved Safety Surveillance (EUSAFEVAC) Project.  Unintended events following immunization with MMR: a systematic review.  Vaccine.  2003 Sep 8;21(25-26):3954-60. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12922131

Jick, H., Kaye, JA.  Epidemiology and possible causes of autism.  Pharmacotherapy. 2003 Dec;23(12):1524-30.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14695031

Kaye, J. A., del Mar Melero-Montes, M., & Jick, H.  Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: a time trend analysis.  2001.  British Medical Journal, 322(7284), 460-463.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071423/

Klein, K. C., & Diehl, E. B.  Relationship between MMR vaccine and autism.   2004.  Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 38(7-8), 1297-1300.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15173555

Kuwaik, GA., Roberts, W., Zwaigenbaum, L., Bryson, S., Smith, IM., Szatmari, P., Modi, BM., Tanel, N., Brian, J.  Immunization uptake in younger siblings of children with autism spectrum disorder.  Autism.  2014 Feb;18(2):148-55. doi: 10.1177/1362361312459111. Epub 2012 Oct 8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23045216

Lazoff, T., Zhong, L., Piperni, T., Fombonne, E.  Prevalence of pervasive developmental disorders among children at the English Montreal School Board.  Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.  2010 Nov;55(11):715-20.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21070699

Lingam, R., Simmons, A., Andrews, N., Miller, E., Stowe, J., & Taylor, B. (2003).  Prevalence of autism and parentally reported triggers in a North-east London population.  Archives of Disease in Childhood, 88(8), 666-670.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12876158

Madsen, K.K., Hviid, A., Vestergaard, M., Schendel, D., Wohlfahrt, J., Thorsen, P., Olsen, J., Melbye, M.  A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism.  2002.  The New England Journal of Medicine, 347(19), 1477-82.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12421889

Madsen KM., Hviid, A., Vestergaard, M., Schendel, D., Wohlfahrt, J., Thorsen, P., Olsen, J. Melbye, M.  MMR vaccination and autism--a population-based follow-up study.  Ugeskr Laeger.  2002.  Dec 2;164(49):5741-4.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12523209

Madsen, K.M., Lauritsen, M.B., Pedersen, C.B., Thorsen, P., Plesner, A.M., Andersen, P.H. & Mortensen, P.B.  Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism:  negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data.  2003.  Pediatrics, 112, 604-606. doi: 10.1542/peds.112.3.204 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12949291

Madsen, KM.  Vestergaard, M.   MMR and Autism:  what is the evidence for a causal association?  Drug Safety.  2004;27(12):831-40. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15366972

Makela, A., Nuorti, J., & Peltola, H. (2002).  Neurologic disorders after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination.  Pediatrics, 110(5), 957-963.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12415036

Marin, M., Broder, KR., Temte, JL., Snider, DE., Seward, JF., (CDC).  Use of combination measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella vaccine: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).  MMWR Recommendations and Reports.  2010 May 7;59(RR-3):1-12.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20448530

Marwick, C.  US Report finds no link between MMR and autism.  British Medical Journal.   May 5, 2001; 322(7294): 1083.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1120232/

MacDonald, NE., Pickering, L. Canadian Paediatric Society, Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee.  Autism Spectrum Disorder:  No causal relationship with vaccines.  Paediatric Child Health 2007;12(5):393-5.  http://www.cps.ca/documents/position/autistic-spectrum-disorder-no-causal-relationship-with-vaccines

Meadows, M.  IOM Report:  no link between vaccines and autism.  FDA Consumer. 2004 Sep-Oct;38(5):18-9.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15595144

Meilleur, AA., Fombonne, E.  Regression of language and non-language skills in pervasive development disorders.  Journal of Intellectual Disability Research.  2009 Feb;53(2):115-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01134.x. Epub 2008 Nov 27. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19054269

Miller, E.  Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and the development of autism - epidemiologic evidence against such an association is compelling.  Seminars in Pediatric Infectious Diseases.  2003 Jul;14(3):199-206.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12913832

Miller, E., Andrews, N., Grant, A., Stowe, J., Taylor, B.  No evidence of an association between MMR vaccine and gait disturbance.  Archives of Disease in Childhood.  2005.  Mar;90(3):292-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15723921

Miller, L., Reynolds J.  Autism and vaccination – the current evidenceJournals for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing.  2009 Jul;14(3):166-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6155.2009.00194.x. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19614825

Mrozek-Budzyn, D., Kiełtyka, A.  The relationship between MMR vaccination and the number of new cases of autism in children.  Przeglad epidemiologiczny.  2008;62(3):597-604. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19108524

Mrozek-Budzyn, D., Kiełtyka, A.,  Majewska, R.  Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children:  a case-control study.  Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal.  2010 May;29(5):397-400. doi: 10.1097/INF.0b013e3181c40a8a. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19952979

Mrozek-Budzyn, D., Majewska, R. Kiełtyka, A. & Augustyniak, M.  Lack of association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.  Przeglad epidemiologiczny.  2011, 65(3), 491-495. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22184954

Muhle, R., Trentacoste, SV., Rapin, I.  The genetics of autismPediatrics. 2004 May;113(5):e472-86.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15121991

Nelson, KB., Bauman, ML.  Thimerosal and autism?  Pediatrics.  2003.  Mar;111(3):674-9.http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/111/3/674.long

Offit, PA., Coffin, SE.  Communicating science to the public:  MMR vaccine and autism.  Vaccine.  2003.  Dec 8;22(1):1-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14604564

Stratton, K., Ford, A., Rusch, E., Wright Clayton, E.  Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines; Institute of Medicine.  Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality.  Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. (a review of more than ONE THOUSAND studies).  http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13164

Patja, A., Davidkin, I., Kurki, T.,  Marku, J., Kallio, T., Valle, M., Peltola, H.  Serious adverse events after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination during a fourteen-year prospective follow-up.  2000.  Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal.  2000;19:1127-34.  http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/MMR.pdf

Parker, S.K., Schwartz, B., Todd, J., Pickering, L.K.  Thimerosal-containing vaccines and autistic spectrum disorder: A critical review of published original data.  2004.  Pediatrics, 114, 793-804. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342856

Parker, S. Todd, J., Schwartz., B., Pickering, L.K.  Thimerosal-containing vaccines and autistic spectrum disorder: A critical review of published original data.  2005.  Pediatrics. Jan;115(1):200.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630018

Pichichero, ME., Cernichiari, E., Lopreiato, J., Treanor, J.  Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing thiomersal: a descriptive study.  Lancet. 2002 Nov 30;360(9347):1737-41.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12480426

Peltola, H., Patja, A., Leinikki, P., Valle, M., Davidkin, I., & Paunio, M.  No evidence for measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine-associated inflammatory bowel disease or autism in a 14-year prospective study.  1998.  Lancet, 351(9112), 1327. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9643797

Plotkin, S., Gerber, J. S., & Offit, P. A. (2009).  Vaccines and autism: a tale of shifting hypotheses.  Clinical Infectious Diseases, 48(4), 456-461. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908388/

Price, C. S., Thompson, W. W., Goodson, B., Weintraub, E. S., Croen, L. A., Hinrichsen, V. L., DeStefano, F.  Prenatal and infant exposure to thimerosal from vaccines and immunoglobulins and risk of autism.  2010.  Pediatrics, 126(4), 656-664. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20837594

Roehr B.  Study finds no association between vaccines and autism.  2013.  British Medical Journal.  Apr 3;346:f2095. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2095. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23554072

Richler, J., Luyster, R., Risi, S., Hsu, W. L., Dawson, G., Bernier, R., ... & Lord, C. (2006). Is there a ‘regressive phenotype’ of Autism Spectrum Disorder associated with the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine?  A CPEA Study.  Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(3), 299-316. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16729252

Rumke, HC., Visser, HK.  Childhood vaccinations anno 2004. II. The real and presumed side effects of vaccination.  Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde.  2004 Feb 21;148(8):364-71. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15032089  

Schechter, R., Grether, JK.  Continuing increases in autism reported to California's developmental services system: mercury in retrograde.  Archives of General Psychiatry.  2008 Jan;65(1):19-24. doi: 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2007.1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18180424

Schultz, ST.  Does thimerosal or other mercury exposure increase the risk for autism?  A review of the current literature.  Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis. 2010;70(2):187-95. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20628442

Shevell, M.,Fombonne, E. Autism and MMR vaccination or thimerosal exposure: an urban legend?  Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences.  2006 Nov;33(4):339-40. http://cjns.metapress.com/content/xqxx6ha3ufaeuunv/?genre=article&issn=0317-1671&volume=33&issue=4&spage=339

Smeeth, L., Cook, C., Fombonne, E., Heavey, L., Rodrigues, L. C., Smith, P. G., & Hall, A. J. (2004). MMR vaccination and pervasive developmental disorders: a case-control study.  The Lancet, 364(9438), 963-969. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364187

Smith, M. J., & Woods, C. R.  On-time vaccine receipt in the first year does not adversely affect neuropsychological outcomes.  Pediatrics.  2010. 125(6), 1134-1141. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20498176

Solt, I., Bornstein, J.  Childhood vaccines and autism – much ado about nothing?  Harefuah. 2010 Apr;149(4):251-5, 260.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20812501

Singh, VK. Rivas, WH.  Detection of antinuclear and antilaminin antibodies in autistic children who received thimerosal-containing vaccines  - mercury as in thimerosal-containing vaccines is likely not related to autoimmune phenomenon in autism.   Journal of Biomedical Science.  2004 Sep-Oct;11(5):607-10.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15316135   

Steffenburg, S., Steffenburg, U., Gillberg, C.  Autism spectrum disorders in children with active epilepsy and learning disability:  comorbidity, pre and perinatal backgound, and seizure characteristics.   Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology.  2003 Nov;45(11):724-30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14580127   

Stehr-Green, P., Tull, P., Stellfeld, M., Mortenson, PB., Simpson, D.  Autism and thimerosal-containing vaccines: lack of consistent evidence for an association.   American Journal of Preventive Medicine.  2003 Aug;25(2):101-6.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12880876

Taylor, B.  Vaccines and the changing epidemiology of autism.  Child: Care, Health and Development Journal.  2006 Sep;32(5):511-9.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16919130

Taylor, B., Miller, E., Farrington, C., Petropoulos, M., Favot-Mayaud, I., Li, J., & Waight, P. A. (1999).  Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association.  Lancet, 353(9169), 2026-20. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10376617

Taylor, B., Miller, E., Lingam, R., Andrews, N., Simmons, A., & Stowe, J.  Measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and bowel problems or developmental regression in children with autism: population study.  2002.  British Medical Journal, 324(7334), 393-396. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11850369

Taylor, B., Lingam, R., Simmons, A., Stowe, J., Miller, E., Andrews, N.  Autism and MMR vaccination in North London: no causal relationship.   2002.  Molecular Psychiatry.                   7 Suppl2:S7-8.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142932

Thjodleifsson, B., Davidsdóttir, K., Agnarsson, U., Sigthórsson, G., Kjeld, M., Bjarnason, I.  Effect of Pentavac and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination on the intestine.  Gut.  2002 Dec;51(6):816-7.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12427783

Thompson, WW., Price, C., Goodson, B., Shay, DK., Benson, P., Hinrichsen, BL., Lewis, E., Eriksen, E., Ray, P., Marcy, SM., Dunn, J., Jackson, LA., Lieu, TA., Black, S., Stewart, G., Weintraub, ES., Davis, RL., DeStefano, F.,  Vaccine Data Link Safety Team.  Early thimerosal exposure and neuropsychological outcomes at 7 to 10 years.  New England Journal of Medicine.  2007 Sep 27;357(13):1281-92.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17898097

Uchiyama, T., Kurosawa, M., & Inaba, Y.  MMR-vaccine and regression in autism spectrum              disorders: negative results presented from Japan.  2007.  Journal of Autism and Developmental       Disorders, 37(2), 210-217.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16865547

Uno, Y., Uchiyama, T., Kurosawa, M., Aleksic, B., & Ozaki, N.  The combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines and the total number of vaccines are not associated with development of autism spectrum disorder:  first case–control study in Asia.  2012.  Vaccine, 30(28), 4292-4298. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22521285

Verstraeten T., Davis, RL., DeStefano, F., Lieu, TA., Rhodes, PH., Black, SB., Shinefield, H., Chen RT. Safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a two-phased study of computerized health maintenance organization databases.   Pediatrics.   2003 Nov;112(5):1039-48. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14595043

Whitehouse, AJ., Maybery, M., Wray, JA., Hickey, M.  No association between early gastrointestinal problems and autistic-like traits in the general population.  Developmental Medicine and Childhood Neurology.  2011.  May;53(5):457-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.03915.x. Epub 2011 Mar 21.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21418197

Weisser, K., Bauer, K., Volkers, P., Keller-Stanislawski, B.  Thimerosal and immunizations - evidence does not support the hypothesis of a potential relationship between neurodevelopmental disorders and thiomersal-containing vaccines.  2004. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz.  Dec;47(12):1165-74. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15583887

MMR vaccine is not linked to Crohn’s disease or autismCommun Dis Rep CDR Weekly. 1998 Mar 27;8(13):113.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9592960

250 comments:

  1. That studies are totally financed by pharmaceutical industries ? And you beleave more to this informations ? you know what is the autism - patology ? Don't vaccinate your childrens and remeamber everyday who is Poul Thorsen, today most wanted for criminal pharmaceutical information ! Liberi Dai Vaccini....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is not how it works, Anon - if you think those studies are financed by industry, do the work and tell us which and by whom.
      Autism is not pathology, it is neurodiversity.
      We have 75 studies on this page - Thorsen (not wanted for information, but for misappropriation of money) is a co-author on 3.
      Vaccination does not cause autism.

      Delete
    2. Thorsen, is not wanted for information? if he didn't pay the labs for their work with the money, how did he get the results, I got it he fabricated them.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous, please tell us which of the other seventy two are paid by "Big Pharma." Give us the paper title, and then a direct quote showing us how it was funded. Then explain why the funding is suspicious with references.

      You blatant accusations are useless without evidence.

      Delete
    4. Anon - Thorsen didn't lead any of these studies and therefore he was not responsible to pay anyone. Here we have 75 studies (the list is longer now, but I have not had the time to update it yet) that show no connection between autism and vaccines.

      Delete
    5. Dear Chris: please disclose the funding for each of the listed studies and demonstrate that the researchers do not directly or indirectly have a conflict of interest. Please then demonstrate which studies have been replicated and independently verified that the original findings were reproducible. That is REAL science...not Pharma checkbook science.

      Delete
    6. I am sorry, but if your are questioning the results and funding it is up to you to show they are questionable.

      For instance the first study is the author is from: "Operative Unit Child Neuropsychiatry A.O. San Paolo Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy."

      The second is from "Division of Virology, National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom" Obviously neither are Big Pharma.

      If you have a question about the funding, then you must find out what pharmaceutical company paid for it.

      Note, my question was the list in Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence. If you had bothered to look you would find that the major funding agencies were entities like the CDC and things like "America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) under contract 200-2002-00732 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)."

      If you have an issue with the above papers, you need to provide the direct quotes of the who is funding it and why that is a problem.

      Delete
    7. By the way, Ms. Brenton, you never really answered the question I asked you eighteen months ago.

      I personally would be very cautious about getting financial/credit advice from someone who cannot figure out who paid for a study, does not know how to read a tabulation of financial data, and does not seem to understand the simple notion that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

      Do you really want that kind of information to stand out when you are Googled? Especially when on the same linked page where you refused to even prove you can read a table you explained "People that get vaccinated are stupid."

      [sarcasm]Absolutely brilliant![/sarcasm]

      Delete
    8. I'm curious as to why Ms. Brenton needs others to do her work for her. Isn't she one of the "well-researched" anti-vaxxers? It's easy to make vapid statements Ms. Brenton, quite another to qualify those statements with actual evidence.

      Delete
    9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsLuR3X6cpg&list=PLJpPObXpZncOfT0bG2ghgkVb2Nxjd_bNe

      Delete
    10. Um, no. Vaccines.Do.Not.Cause.Autism.Period:

      http://www2.aap.org/immunization/families/faq/vaccinestudies.pdf

      Delete
    11. Good grief Argumentum ad YooTubum. Anonymous, YouTube isn't a source any more than a cartoon on the telly.

      Delete
    12. Anon, that was a really crappy attempt at a poison the well fallacy. No wonder you didn't put your name to the comment.

      Delete
  2. What about the over 160 non-pharma studies that show a link to autism, you choose to ignore those, doesn't surprise me, this is a shill site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you bore me Anon. Do you have anything to say?

      Delete
    2. Anon, be a dear then and provide citations to these "160 non-pharma studies". And while you're at it, some evidence of all of the studies Catherina listed are "pharma-funded".

      Delete
    3. I'd love to see the sources on those 160 "non-pharma" studies. Better yet, what journals are they published in? Were they actually peer-reviewed? Are they available in pubmed? Does a single one of them include a statement that supports a direct link between vaccines and autism? Doubtful.

      The truth is, the one published 'study' in any type of legitimate journal that did purport to link vaccines and autism was that of Andy Wakefield, and of course we all know in the end not only was his 'study' retracted, but he was stripped of his medical license due to his blatant fraud, ethics violations, manipulation of data and misrepresentation of his results. Of course, even in that sad excuse for a 'study', Wakefield stopped short of blaming vaccines for autism.

      So you have that I suppose.

      Come on Anon - surely you can do better can't you?

      Delete
    4. http://www.scribd.com/doc/212711282/84-Studies-Showing-Autism-Link-to-Vaccines

      Delete
    5. That document is a mess Questioning Dad. Did you post a link for a specific reason or just shilling? All of those "studies" are either junk and have been refuted, pathetic and performed by those outside their areas of expertise, don't say what you think they say and not relevant. Pick one, any one or three and I'll be happy to explain.

      Delete
  3. One request:

    Could edit the links to the studies to go directly to the PubMed citation. Right now they go to Facebook, and it is quite annoying. Thank you.

    Also, I would like Anonymous to post the best non-pharma study he/she has linking vaccines to autism. Just please make use it is by a reputable qualified researcher, published in a good journal.

    "Reputable" means not having one's legal right to practice medicine revoked.

    "Qualified" means have an appropriate background. So no lawyers, computer scientists, geologists, business professors, etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So that will be a while. No problems.

      Delete
    2. Done - updated to 107 studies and links fixed - let me know should you find anything that is not working

      Delete
    3. Awesome! This is fantastic, and the links work.

      Thanks a million.

      Delete
    4. For your information, Pasteur was not even a doctor or a biologist... and if you make your research about him, you'll discover he stole all this work from other scientists, including Antoine Bechamp who should be the one have his statue everywhere in France... According to Bechamp's cellular theory (as opposed to Pasteur's germ theory), to prevent disease we have to create health and build a strong immune system, disease arises from micro-organisms within the cells of the body. This is only to say a few words about the story of vaccines. As for the studies, there are as much studies and more showing a link between mercury and Autism. How can we give credit to studies conducted directly or indirectly by vaccine makers?

      Delete
    5. How about staying on topic/

      Are any of the studies listed above, authored by Louis Pasteur?

      "As for the studies, there are as much studies and
      more showing a link between mercury and Autism. How can we give credit to studies conducted directly or indirectly by vaccine makers?"

      Really?

      Where are your links to studies showing a link between "mercury" (Thimerosal) and autism?

      Delete
    6. rosylavie: "For your information, Pasteur was not even a doctor or a biologist... and if you make your research about him, you'll discover he stole all this work from other scientists,"

      Huh? He was a chemist, and hired very highly qualified folks. I just recently read the classic 1926 book The Microbe Hunters, plus the more recent Rabid, which go extensively into Pasteur's research. You might try reading those instead of the bastardization of history in "Natural News" and other germ theory denialists.

      Delete
    7. @Chris

      She said "Pasteur was not even a doctor or a biologist." She is correct. What's your issue?

      Reading comprehension much?

      Delete
    8. Maybe that's she's a germ theory denier?

      Delete
    9. I know exactly what was stated.

      Perhaps "rosylavie" and "jv" should check out Louis Pasteur's entry in the Encyclopedia Britanica, where he is described thusly:

      http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/445964/Louis-Pasteur

      "Louis Pasteur, (born December 27, 1822, Dole, France—died September 28, 1895, Saint-Cloud), French chemist and microbiologist who was one of the most important founders of medical microbiology...."

      Delete
    10. Microbiologist ≠ Biologist
      Microbiologist ≠ Doctor

      Delete
    11. Perhaps jv should work on his reading comprehension, because I said "He was a chemist, and hired very highly qualified folks."

      In the book Rabid there is a photo of Pasteur looking on as a medical doctor gave a child a rabies vaccine, obviously because he was not a doctor. He did not work alone, but had colleagues like Roux, Chamberland and Joubert, who were physicians, as noted in The Microbe Hunters.

      Pasteur became one of the first microbiologists by solving the riddle of fermentation, and spoilage. This is where yeasts were found to be why sugars are turned into alcohol, and later some bacteria contribute do spoilage. Again, this is all laid out in the ninety year old book The Microbe Hunters.

      Good grief, people! Stop reading silly websites and learn how to use your local library.

      Delete
    12. Let's go back to "rosylavie's" statement...which "jv" supported and refuses to back down on (emphasis mine):

      "Pasteur was not even a doctor OR a biologist."

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/microbiology

      "the branch of biology dealing with the structure, function, uses, and modes of existence of microscopic organisms."

      Shouldn't you go back to elementary school...say first or second grade...to learn how to read basic English and to acquaint yourself with an English language D.I.C.T.I.O.N.A.R.Y. for word origins and word usages?

      Science Mom and Catherina, we need some new trolls here, who do not have reading comprehension difficulties.

      Delete
    13. It is a sign that the trolls are skating on thin ice when they bring up stuff that happened a hundred and fifty years ago as reasons why vaccines are bad, and diseases are good.

      And of course these same guys who claim Pasteur's work was worthless because he was not a doctor, but are quite willing to think that Gary Goldman (PhD in computer science) and Brian Hooker (PhD in plant biochemistry) are worthwhile "medical" researchers.

      Delete
    14. I suppose if a microbiologist and a biologist are EXACTLY the same thing, I stand corrected. I can't find anything that suggests they are EXACTLY the same thing, but I see no reason why I can't take you fine folks at your word.

      So my bad ... according to you peeps a microbiologist and a biologist are EXACTLY the same thing.

      Delete
    15. Yep, I stand corrected:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biologists#P

      You guys must be right about everything then!

      Delete
    16. @JV - your's was, from the beginning, a very silly argument (on top of supporting someone who is a germ denialist) - making the claim that a "microbiologist" wasn't a biologist....that's just a stupid semantic argument & certainly not becoming based on your original line of reasoning that at least had some basis in reality.

      Delete
    17. Appreciate it, Lawrence. My actual point was to try to troll Chris for nit-picking another poster. I notice he does it quite a bit. I've seen a number of times where someone posts a very sound point (or evidence) in counter to what he is saying, and his response is to nitpick a word or two and then ask them for a PubMed citation as proof of the unprovable. It's tiring and ridiculous. Not that actually providing a PubMed citation actually means anything to him ... he either ignores it or says that particular study has no merit (presumably because it's counter to his argument).

      To be honest, I didn't even read what was said ... just saw Chris' post where he jumped all over someone about something stupid. The dude is a scutch, and I let it get the best of me.

      But now that I have read it, I don't think the OP is saying she agrees with Bechamp's theory ... she's only pointing out what it as historical perspective ... I think that why she says, "This is only to say a few words about the story of vaccines."

      Anyway, as things stand today, vaccines for individuals in the U.S. are still way, way riskier than the alternative. That fact hasn't changed.

      Delete
    18. Ha ... what's especially funny is that you probably think there actually was a study.

      Anyway, I'm not antivax. Vaccines definitely work. The science is sound. And they are definitely useful in many parts of the world, including here to one degree or another.

      My issue (as you know) is that vaccines (here in the U.S., at least) are far, far riskier for individuals than the disease. It's precisely reason, logic and math that has led me to this fact. And we will make our health decisions accordingly.

      That you deny this fact is what casts serious doubt on your ability to reason and apply logic.

      As Lawrence has previously pointed out ... this isn't a question about reason or logic (except for you) ... it's a question of ethics. And for me, the ethical imperative is to do what's right for my child.

      Delete
    19. And we look at the risks in two entirely different ways....and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

      Delete
    20. @Lawrence

      Fair enough. And I appreciate your honest and intellectual approach to this conversation. It highlights well the immaturity and detachment from reality of some of your cohorts.

      Delete
  4. I googled the study you listed "Roehr B. Study finds no association between vaccines and autism. ", I can't find any summary, any citation, any comments on it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why didn't you click on the link under the citation?

      It gives the BMJ citation. Then take that to your local library to find the paper, since not every medical citation is at the University of Google.

      Delete
    2. By the way, it is a BMJ news article about this paper: Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism. It answers the claim about "too many, too soon."

      At the bottom of that page it says: Funded by a contract from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), and by subcontracts from AHIP to Abt Associates, Inc. The findings and conclusions in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

      Do tell us how it is paid for by "Big Pharma", especially in regards to the health insurance companies. In our experience they try to not spend money on pharmaceuticals.

      Delete
    3. I see. Thanks. But I was hoping for something more convincing. When comparing the hypothetical vaccination-autism link with the smoking-lung cancer relation, this study would just show that people smoking two packs of cigarettes are having same chance of getting lung cancer as those who smoke just one pack of cigarettes. What about comparing smokers to people who don’t smoke at all; Maybe some of the studies you listed do such comparison in some way?

      Delete
    4. That makes absolutely no sense. If you don't like that study, then go design one that satisfies your criteria. Then get it approved by an independent review board so that it complies to the Belmont Report. Write a grant to get funding, and then submit to an organization like Autism Speaks, SafeMinds, Generation Rescue. And finally, go do it.

      Delete
    5. I looks like Anon is asking for one of those magical "vax vs. unvax" studies. Of course there are ethical concerns with performing such a widescale study - but the other issue is that even if someone ignored ethics and withheld all vaccinations from 20,000 or so children from birth to age 12 or so, would the anti-vaxxers even accept the results as evidence or would they just move on to other excuses to invalidate the data?

      Truth is we do have a few of these types of studies, and we have evidence from when Japan and the UK pulled back from some of the vaccines due to a knee-jerk reaction (from a certain unethical 'doctor' who has since lost his license no doubt). The probelm is, there is so many cofounders to account for in a true "vax. vs. unvax" that it is doubtful any real evidence would come from it.

      If Anon is honestly interested, I'd recommend starting here: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-perils-and-pitfalls-of-doing-a-vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated-study/

      Delete
    6. How about we simply take those of us with a brain who think independently and refuse jt vaccinate our kids. No ethical consideration regarding "withholding of vaccines" because these children are already completely vaccine free.

      Delete
    7. "How about we simply take those of us with a brain who think independently and refuse jt vaccinate our kids."

      Then it is not double blind random. The point is that you are not supposed to know if your kid got a real vaccine or a placebo.

      What you proposed has already been done with lots of retrospective epidemiological studies, many that are listed above. And every single one has shown no real correlation between vaccines and autism. Check out this recent graphic that explains those studies. I am afraid it disproves your statement that you are one "with a brain who think independently."

      Delete
  5. I am going to be "ANON" to protect my children, I can say from PERSONAL experience that VACCINES can cause AUTISM, I watched it happen to my son. Also, some of the vaccine INSERTS actually have AUTISM listed as "A POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECT" along with DEATH and many other "wonderful" things! You obviously don't ACTUALLY know what you are speaking about, but keep spewing your lies, some idiot will BELIEVE you until, it HAPPENS to their child!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, dear brave Anon, my son was injured by an actual disease before there was a vaccine for it. He is permanently disabled.

      We would take you more seriously if you just provide the PubMed indexed studies from reputable qualified researchers that show a vaccine on the American pediatric schedule causes more injury than the diseases.

      Delete
    2. take your pick, media reports, citations, articles, testimonies, should take 6 months to read, so get on ithttp://whale.to/vaccines/diseases.html

      as to kids being disabled, they have had the Vitamin C cure for infections for 70 years http://whale.to/a/vitamin_c_banners.html

      Psychopaths.

      Delete
    3. you are anon, so less of the sarcasm

      Delete
    4. First of all, "Anon", autistic people have existed long before the creation of vaccines. Secondly, autistic people are born that way. Being autistic is having a different neurotype and thinking differently; it's not "bad" or "wrong", just different.

      People like you who use fear tactics about autism to fulfill their own agendas are spreading more stigmas about autistic people, which is harmful to the autism community (and, therefore, your son). It's also exploiting autistic people. Please STOP exploiting autistic people!

      As an autistic person, I find what you are doing is very offensive to myself and my fellow autistics. We need acceptance, NOT fear.

      Autism is NOT separate from the person, so if you hate autism you hate autistic people.

      Delete
    5. Another mother thinking she knows better than the trained professionals and instead would rather listen to a celebrity, you know, because logic. You people keep relying on herd immunity to keep safe, but that only works if everyone else is vaccinated, so if you were smart, you'd encourage people to vaccinate so that your kid is protected. However, if you ever travel outside of this country, you'd better hope your kid doesn't come into contact with one of these illnesses because obviously you haven't realized the reason we vaccinate for these (Hint: they are not pretty)

      Delete
    6. Chris, deaths are always a better statistic to look at when deciding the true effect of a disease on a population. I know vaccine enthusiasts love to blame the epidemic proportions of autistic children not on vaccines, but on the broader classification of autism and thus the higher rate of autistic diagnosis' in recent years. Okay, then in the same way you can expect doctors to under-diagnose measles cases after the vaccine was releases because they expected there to be less cases.
      But let's suppose that what you are saying is true, that better hospital care contributed to the vast drop of measles deaths long before the vaccine was released. Then we can both agree that the vaccine did not save lives in America, it only lessened the amount of measles cases. In that case, I would conclude that the risk of the vaccine far outweighs the risk of the disease. Please go to the VAERS database and look in 2014 at the deaths and adverse reactions from the disease. You will find 140 deaths and over 40,000 adverse reactions. Statisticians predict that the amount of reported cases of drug reactions represents only 1-2% of actual reactions. These do not even include the long-term effects that may be a result of vaccine ingredients, such as the carcinogen formaldehyde. The risk of measles is virtually zero now, just as it was in 1963. Yet we are overloading our children with toxins to prevent diseases that don't pose any risk to them, even in the rare case that get the disease.

      Delete
    7. Cites whale.to and is whale.to, then calls others "psychopaths." Now I have seen it all.

      Delete
  6. I don't believe that there is a link between vaccines and autism. These vaccines have been tested multiple times and they wouldn't release a vaccine with such a horrible side effect. I'm glad they're posting articles about there not being any links between autism and vaccines. Hopefully, now more parents will vaccinate their kids because of these findings.
    Kat Brennan | http://www.uhcidaho.com/ServicesandPricing/Immunizations.aspx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, well it's been well know and proven for years, and they keep it suppressed as it would destroy the trillion $ drug industry http://whale.to/vaccine/vaccine_autism_proven.html

      as to vaccines being well tested, they never use proper placebos http://whale.to/vaccine/placebos_h.html

      Never tested unvaxed against vaxed http://whale.to/vaccines/never_unvaccinated_controls.html

      and a load of other ploys http://whale.to/a/medical_study_ploys.html

      and it's a racket, been that way for 200 years http://whale.to/a/vaccinesdidntsaveus555.jpg

      Delete
    2. Again, wow......what a load of crap.

      Delete
  7. Gov studies shown to be fraudulent or designed to deceive http://whale.to/vaccine/mmr54.html
    600 studies showing vax autism link, and vaccines unsafe http://whale.to/vaccine/mmr58.html

    1,200 studies showing Vitamin C cures infections http://whale.to/v/c/index.html

    Overwhelming proof, statistical (and disease theory, and vaccine damage like autism) that vaccines are a racket for 200 years http://whale.to/vaccines.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scopie's Law: "In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately... and gets you laughed out of the room."

      Delete
    2. Do try harder, logical fallacy, all you vax quacks have http://whale.to/b/appeal_to_incredulity.html

      Delete
  8. wow, fraud study list, thanks
    get the truth http://whale.to/vaccine/vaccine_autism_proven.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hmmm....so how do those telepathic dolphins, reptilian overlords, hollow earth theories, and FEMA camps work out for you as well?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Vaccines are very important. But vaccines have major safety problems. Vaccine vs. no vaccines is the wrong debate. The debate must be about current vaccines and safer new vaccines.

    For example, a lot of vaccines contain Polysorbate 80. Polysorbate 80 contains oleic acid from plant sources (could be any nut oil, peanut oil etc.). So oleic acid contaminated by food proteins being injected into people will result in people developing food allergies. Oleic acid itself is an adjuvant, other adjuvants like alum are also used. When a child receives several vaccines simultaneously, you have several food protein contaminants and several adjuvants presented to the immune system which results in a high probability of developing food allergies.

    Oleic acid is intravenously administered to cause lung injury in animals for research. So Polysorbate 80 could be the reason for the food allergy and asthma epidemic.

    No research has been done to establish safe levels of food proteins in a vaccine.

    Please see below for more reference to scientific literature:
    http://foodallergycauses.wordpress.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Polysorbate 80 is an emulsifier and DOES NOT contain any peanut oil. It is used in (the dreaded) ice cream, in cosmetics and in injections.

      Peanut oil is not present and was never present, in any vaccine licensed vaccine for use in humans in the United States.

      Delete
    2. Oh, yeah, I get all my medical advice from an art historian turned quack. No thank you.

      Delete
    3. Note to anon about house rules: no name calling in comments. Carry on...

      Delete
  11. I wonder what we would find if we "followed the money"? Perhaps criminal intent paid for by big Pharma? How about the tens of thousands who have been vaccine injured and their families who have to handle the aftermath?
    How about THEIR VOICES?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Mike, first I would say - where are those "tens of thousands" because the numbers don't add up.....just looking at the claims filed in the Vaccine Court, we are talking about a number of people compared to the total number of vaccines given that is a percent of a percent of a fraction of a percent over the past 30-odd years.....somehow, when large-scale population studies are done, all of those people you talk about just suddenly disappear.

      Delete
    2. Mr. Lashewitz, please go through each study listed in Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence, and tell us exactly which pharmaceutical company paid for them. Please include for each study direct quotes that reveal the funding is inappropriate and nefarious.

      Thank you, we anxiously await your detailed analysis of that data.

      Delete
    3. Mr. Lashewitz doesn't have to. It is up to the manufacturer to prove that their product is safe. Not only have the manufacturers NOT proved vaccines are safe, they do in fact admit that they cause profound harm. Page 11 of the Tripedia insert discloses that it causes autism. Tripedia is a vaccine. Vaccines cause autism.

      Delete
    4. Anyone who makes a claim needs to prove a claim. Also Tripedia is no longer used.

      Delete
    5. The old "vaccines haven't been proven safe" gambit - despite each and every vaccine currently in use having gone through the standard and rigorous FDA approval process - including clinical trials, and have large-scale post-release surveillance done to track for other adverse events....not just here, but by regulatory and health agencies all over the planet.....yeah, could you sound any less educated?

      Delete
    6. Dear Lawrence,

      Below, please find listed just a few of the more well known pharmaceutical products that were approved by the FDA, following its "rigorous approval process," as well as long term post-marketing monitoring, only to be later withdrawn after reports of severe adverse reactions and death:

      Baycol/Lipobay
      Propulsid
      Gatafloxacin
      Sparfloxacin
      Temafloxacin
      Trovafloxacin
      Vioxx
      Reductil/Meridia
      Seldane
      Bextra

      Many times this list have been banned in EU and other countries that practice the "Precautionary Principle" which correctly places the burden upon a manufacturer of a new drug (chemical or agricultural product), to prove that it is safe before it can be marketed, and which creates a presumption of lack of safety upon anecdotal evidence that it is not safe.

      Compare this to the U.S. where public policy places the interest of profit above the interest of public health, safety and welfare.

      Finally, I will submit that putative science, in which any researcher has a financial interest in the outcome is inherently unreliable. This is the corporate science model which isn't science at all, but rather, propaganda.

      I further invite you to do your own investigation regarding the statistically significant difference in the approval rate of FDA drug applications reviewed by advisory committees consisting of reviewers who are on pharmaceutical company payrolls and advisory committees consisting of reviewers who are not.

      Delete
    7. Sounds like some really awesome testing they got there ...

      http://www.whale.to/vaccine/mouse_toxicity_test.html

      Delete
    8. That is hilarious. You cited Scudamore's wacky website. Scopie's Law says: "In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately... and gets you laughed out of the room."

      Now I am visibly laughing at you.

      Delete
    9. Chris using Scopies Law isn't any more credible than Whales. It is obvious that each side does not trust the other's source. Doctor's in the vaccine industry who conduct tests for their own company and industry have a conflict of interest. Doctor's who speak out against vaccines actually have nothing to gain but the loss of their jobs and reputation in the medical community. Why are they doing this? They believe vaccines are dangerous and inneffective. Do a little research for me please. Go to CDC's website provided: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsrates1940_60.pdf and scroll down to page 85. Right there is a the Center for Disease control's graph of measles deaths in the last decade (not doctored or twisted by any anti-vax site). Try and locate the year 1963 when the vaccine was introduced. Then come back and tell me the MMR vaccine saves lives.

      Delete
    10. Dear Juliet, the rate of deaths tell you only that hospital care, especially respiratory support for pneumonia improved, it does not tell you about the prevention of the disease. Seriously, you need to explain to us why treating measles is less expensive than preventing it. Really, provide that economic data, comparable to this:

      J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S131-45.
      An economic analysis of the current universal 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccination program in the United States.

      The following is census data on measles incidence in the USA during the 20th century. It is not from the CDC, but another department. Look at the table and explain why the rates of measles incidence dropped 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970.
      Some restrictions:
      do not mention deaths (mortality)
      do not mention any other decade
      do not mention any other disease
      do not mention any other country

      From http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
      Year.... Rate per 100000 of measles
      1912 . . . 310.0
      1920 . . . 480.5
      1925 . . . 194.3
      1930 . . . 340.8
      1935 . . . 584.6
      1940 . . . 220.7
      1945 . . . 110.2
      1950 . . . 210.1
      1955 . . . 337.9
      1960 . . . 245.4
      1965 . . . 135.1
      1970 . . . . 23.2
      1975 . . . . 11.3
      1980 . . . . . 5.9
      1985 . . . . . 1.2
      1990 . . . . .11.2
      1991 . . . . . .3.8
      1992 . . . . . .0.9
      1993 . . . . . .0.1
      1994 . . . . . .0.4
      1995 . . . . . .0.1
      1996 . . . . . .0.2
      1997 . . . . . . 0.1

      Delete
    11. Dr. Gordon & Dr. Sears have made quite a bit of money catering to anti-vax sentiments - both selling books and working with their very well-to-do clientele.

      Andrew Wakefield has made hundreds of thousands of dollars - both in fund raising and speakers fees (and his property in Texas is nothing to sneeze at).....

      I don't see people with no COI - in fact, I see people who are making significant amounts of money off of spreading lies and misinformation about vaccines.

      If you cared to look, there are hundreds, if not thousands of studies, done by independent research groups, educational institutions, etc. that also show the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

      On the other side, I see a very few bad researchers (many of whom have no background in immunology or epidemiology) producing some of the worst research possible to conflate a higher risk and vaccinations.

      Delete
    12. Chris, deaths are always a better statistic to look at when deciding the true effect of a disease on a population. I know vaccine enthusiasts love to blame the epidemic proportions of autistic children not on vaccines, but on the broader classification of autism and thus the higher rate of autistic diagnosis' in recent years. Okay, then in the same way you can expect doctors to under-diagnose measles cases after the vaccine was releases because they expected there to be less cases.
      But let's suppose that what you are saying is true, that better hospital care contributed to the vast drop of measles deaths long before the vaccine was released. Then we can both agree that the vaccine did not save lives in America, it only lessened the amount of measles cases. In that case, I would conclude that the risk of the vaccine far outweighs the risk of the disease. Please go to the VAERS database and look in 2014 at the deaths and adverse reactions from the disease. You will find 140 deaths and over 40,000 adverse reactions. Statisticians predict that the amount of reported cases of drug reactions represents only 1-2% of actual reactions. These do not even include the long-term effects that may be a result of vaccine ingredients, such as the carcinogen formaldehyde. The risk of measles is virtually zero now, just as it was in 1963. Yet we are overloading our children with toxins to prevent diseases that don't pose any risk to them, even in the rare case that get the disease.

      Delete
    13. Juliet: "Chris, deaths are always a better statistic to look at when deciding the true effect of a disease on a population."

      Wrong, wrong, wrong. It ignores the other ways a disease can damage other than death. Things like permanent disability like blindness, deafness, etc.

      "Then we can both agree that the vaccine did not save lives in America, it only lessened the amount of measles cases. "

      No. There are fewer cases of death and disability from the diseases. If you look at the charts on this paper you will see pneumonia is no longer as deadly as it used to be, often due to prevention.

      "The risk of measles is virtually zero now, just as it was in 1963."

      Wrong, wrong, wrong. Without measles vaccination it would come back.

      Now explain why the incidence of measles plummeted 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970.

      Delete
    14. Without the measles vaccination, the public would finally become aware of how many years they have been blinded by the industry. Measles would remain at current levels, and more probably decline, because the virus would no longer be able to be preserved by being repeatably injected into the populations bloodstream, and thus shed from vaccinated persons. Yes Chris, the measles would completely disappear just like scarlet fever, cholera, typhoid, and black death did WITHOUT vaccines. Because that is what diseases have been doing for hundreds of years. Once a population builds up natural immunity, not plastic vaccine immunity, the disease cannot survive. The reason you are not giving statistics for how many people get permanently disabled from measles, is because it is less than a fraction of a percent of those infected, which is why our grandparents would purposefully spread measles to their children so they could get it, be done with it, and have lifelong immunity. The fear that vaccines try to feed Americans about measles is a hoax, just like the recent "epidemic" of 92 people at Disneyland is nothing more than a panic reaction to try and turn the public's attention away from the CDC's federal investigation of fraud. As for your last question, it quite simple. When parents were told by the medical community that they needed to vaccinate their children against measles, it immediately changed their mindset about the disease. Now that their child was vaccinated and they were falsely told that vaccines gave lifelong immunity, parents no longer continued to spread a vastly mild disease among their children, which explains the drop of measles cases during the start of vaccination. It has nothing to do with vaccine efficacy, only natural cause and effect.

      Delete
    15. http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/timelines/measles

      Delete
    16. Juliet: "Chris, the measles would completely disappear just like scarlet fever, cholera, typhoid, and black death did WITHOUT vaccines."

      Except scarlet fever, cholera, typhoid and black death have not disappeared.

      Scarlet fever is a bacterial strep infection, and kids still get that quite regularly. They just get antibiotics before it turns into Scarlet fever and cause rheumatic heart damage.

      Did you not read about the cholera outbreak that happened in Haiti after a huge earthquake? Typhoid also still exists, if you travel to certain areas of the world it is recommended you get the vaccine (I've had a typhoid vaccine). Both cholera and typhoid are transmitted via the fecal/oral route, and are controlled in the USA with sanitation measures.

      Every year a few Americans get bubonic plague from flea bites in the American southwest. If you control rodents and fleas, you can avoid it.

      Now why did measles incidence go down 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970? It obviously not because sewers and clean water appeared first in that decade, nor is it because mice/fleas suddenly disappeared. Also it is a viral infection, and is not cured with antibiotics. Provide actual documentation instead of random hand waving.

      "The reason you are not giving statistics for how many people get permanently disabled from measles, is because it is less than a fraction of a percent of those infected,"

      I did, but it is obvious you don't know how to click on links. But here is another link: The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review.

      Delete
    17. I have already answered these questions. Black fever and scarlet fever have disappeared without vaccines in America due to better living conditions and sanitation.
      Measles rates dropped between 1960 and 1970 because parents no longer were taking their children to other measles infected children to get sick. When the CDC mistakenly told them that the vaccine would give them lifelong immunity, parents found no need to spread measles among their children, and as a result the cases numbers dropped. The article you provided does not apply here, because we are talking about vaccination in America. Percentages of complications and death from measles in less developed countries is to be expected with any disease (vaccinated or not), because the people are not properly nourished and lack the immune system to fight disease in general. The side effects and chance of death from measles is so small that parents would purposefully get their children sick with measles. Stop cherry picking statistics that aren't relevant and come up with better arguments. I know how to click on links, but I also have a brain to understand the significance of what I am reading.

      Delete
    18. "Measles rates dropped between 1960 and 1970 because parents no longer were taking their children to other measles infected children to get sick."

      Prove it. I asked for actual citations, not a blatant assertion.

      "Percentages of complications and death from measles in less developed countries is to be expected with any disease (vaccinated or not), because the people are not properly nourished and lack the immune system to fight disease in general."

      Really? Looking at the references, several of them are about Americans.

      Here is another: Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis: More Cases of This Fatal Disease Are Prevented by Measles Immunization than Was Previously Recognized

      And last I looked, the UK was not a developing country: Review of the effect of measles vaccination on the epidemiology of SSPE

      Delete
  12. Thank you for sharing this. I personally don't believe that there is a link between autism and vaccines. I will make sure to talk to my doctor about every single risk when it comes to the immunization of my child.

    Seth Ashford | http://mypediatriccenter.com/immunizations/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also be sure to ask about the risks posed by the diseases being vaccinated against. For instance, ask him/her about the odds of dying from measles (you might be surprised to find out the odds are on the order of 1 in 100+ million).

      Delete
    2. "order of 1 in 100+ million"

      Only in a highly vaccinated population. That doesn't work when there are large groups that don't vaccinate. Sometimes depending on community immunity breaks down, like the several deaths from measles a couple of years ago in France.

      Delete
    3. The 2011 outbreak of measles in France resulted in six deaths. The population of France is 66,259,012 (from the CIA World Factbook), and most are vaccinated. The outbreak was in areas of low vaccination uptake.

      So that was a chance of one in ten million, so your number is off by at least ten. Not to mention, if we stopped vaccinating that it would be something like one death in about one to five thousand cases.

      Except death is not the only side effect from measles. There is also the one in five chance of pneumonia and one a thousand chance of encephalitis. But, hey! Who cares if a bunch of kids end up in the hospital hooked up to a bunch of machines to make sure they get enough oxygen to their brains!

      So your next response should contain the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers showing the MMR vaccine causes more harm than measles.

      Delete
    4. Also be sure to ask about the risks posed by the diseases being vaccinated against. For instance, ask him/her about the odds of dying from measles (you might be surprised to find out the odds are on the order of 1 in 100+ million).

      Citation again please. That is not true in most countries so show your work.

      Delete
    5. Chris once again do a little research for me please. Go to CDC's website below: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsrates1940_60.pdf Scroll down to page 85. There is the Center for Disease control's graph of measles deaths in the last century (not doctored or twisted by any anti-vax site). Try and locate the year 1963 when the vaccine was introduced. Maybe you haven't seen this before, but you are welcome for informing you that the MMR vaccine hasn't saved a single life in the USA. Please do not compare France with the USA. Measles will not get to US numbers in France until France has the sanitation, infrastructure and lack overcrowding the US enjoys (the real reason you noticed that graph decline on page 85). Let's not start cherry picking data.

      Delete
  13. http://www.naturalnews.com/046614_CDC_whistleblower_vaccine_cover-up_criminal_investigation.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yawn - the statement of said whistleblower was quite a blow to the conspiracy nuts:

      http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

      I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.

      I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.

      Delete
    2. fair enough - he believes in the validity of vaccines. But the main point I think anoynmous is getting at is that Thompson admitted to emission of significant data: fraud.

      This is why a lot of people dont trust information you get from the CDC or government sources. If you want to truly convince people that vaccines are fine then damaging instances such as this against science's integrity must stop occurring to restore trust.

      Delete
    3. If people don't trust scientists then you could give 500 papers and people would discard them.

      Delete
    4. Yawn...love how you pro baby poisoners love to cut and paste...and omit things like:
      "My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and

      Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.



      I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.
      "

      Yeah, he admits that they falsified data and changed protocol to obscure the fact that babies were being harmed by vaccines.

      I see why you would want to skip his little admission in favor of later paragraphs where he tries to save his own butt.

      But that's OK, you go ahead and poison your progeny. I'll keep protecting my little ones from sociopaths like you.

      for those who actually like to read the whole thing, not just cut and paste http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

      Delete
    5. Amen to that! Thompson's admission shows the CDC's unreliability and loss of the public's trust. Then we are supposed to believe that vaccine's save lives. Okay, once again everyone please go to the CDC's website provided: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsrates1940_60.pdf and scroll down to page 85. There is a the Center for Disease control's graph of measles deaths in the last century (not doctored or twisted by any anti-vax site). Try and locate the year 1963 when the vaccine was introduced. Then come back and tell me the MMR vaccine saves lives.

      Delete
  14. "Thompson admitted to emission of significant data: fraud. "

    Which has not been shown. There are significant problems with Hooker's paper.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr. Thomas directly admitted to participating in scientific fraud against American children. It is extremely significant, because you know his attorney vetted or wrote his letter - his attorney allowed him to flat out own up to the fraud.

      Of course, as expected, there was the damage control - keep vaccinating, I believe in them, etc...that one would anticipate from someone who is trying to minimize the backlash of his actions and keep his job.

      The recordings reveal that he regretted his actions and felt guilt for them.

      Finally, perhaps people will realize that scientists are just people, fallible, NOT some sort of group of high priests in some perfect religion. They can be bribed, are subject to confirmation bias, can be paid to end up with the results that are desired by their employer/grant giver, etc...

      Delete
    2. Uh, huh. You might try actually working on everything he said, plus keep in mind he is a psychologist not an epidemiologist.

      Delete
    3. Emission? In quotes, no less.

      Delete
  15. @curious - Dr. Thompson made a statement that is merely his opinion, an opinion that has not been supported by subsequent evidence (larger studies done since 2004 have not shown the same correlation) - and Hooker's study is just a mess, since his methods are completely incorrect & merely window-dressing to try to show when Dr. Thompson told him he might find....interesting that Hooker had to slice and dice the data in a completely different (and illogical way) to tease out the information he "supposedly" found....

    And even more interesting that the paper has been taken down - with concerns about the validity of the results & concerns about the peer-review process.

    ReplyDelete
  16. hello Chris and Lawrence, thank you for your polite replies. First, I wasn't referring to the content of Hooker's paper per say, as you say it has been taken down.

    I just meant Thompson's statement through the legal firm where he claims back in 2004 - before Hooker - significant data was omitted from that particular study. Its not the data that many people are worried about, its the alleged fraud.

    But yes, it could be argued that perhaps he has developed a vendetta against his colleagues for whatever reason - I accept that is a possibility. Or been bribed by someone like Mike Adams etc, and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Curious - because we lack context as to what exactly his issues were - what information specifically was omitted, we can't know whether or not his opinion on it was valid. The CDC is standing by the study results & the data has been available (though no one else but Hooker ever asked for it) for researchers to double check for over a decade.

    And since the 2004 study, we've had numerous other studies published (not just by the CDC, but multiple, upon multiple organizations worldwide) that don't show the same results that Hooker claims to have found - or in any way validate Thompson's concerns.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I won't comment on vaccines themselves but I will point out that all but 12 of the studies here came from the same source The NCBI. With is a goverment funded co.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prove it. Then explain why it is a problem and how it can be solved.

      Delete
  19. #CDCWhistleblower I see that you still link to the Destafano and Thompson et.al. paper that Thompson admitted was a fraud. Typical that you would keep this up as "proof" that we should vaccinate our kids. Yeah, a puncture wound filled with toxic ingredients is exactly how you make a body healthy. Put some formaldehyde, DNA from aborted babies, bovine serum and monkey kidney cells in there, too...cause those yummy vaccine ingredients directly injected into a tiny baby's capillary bed will be taken up into the bloodstream. That aluminum in the shot will cross the blood brain barrier and cause all kinds of fun...like lifetime brain damage. Wow, but maybe we can prevent those kids from getting the dreaded 90 day cough, or the measles spots, or the chicken pox. Let's trade a few days or weeks of inconvenient infection for a lifetime of profound disability....said no mom ever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I see that you still link to the Destafano and Thompson et.al. paper that Thompson admitted was a fraud.
      Of course we still link to it. Thompson neither admitted it was fraudulent nor is he in any position to question the results. He could retract his authorship from the study but hasn't so it obviously can't be much of a fraud at all.

      Yeah, a puncture wound filled with toxic ingredients is exactly how you make a body healthy. Put some formaldehyde, DNA from aborted babies, bovine serum and monkey kidney cells in there, too...cause those yummy vaccine ingredients directly injected into a tiny baby's capillary bed will be taken up into the bloodstream. That aluminum in the shot will cross the blood brain barrier and cause all kinds of fun...like lifetime brain damage.

      This just goes to show how ignorant you are and have to rely upon inflammatory rhetoric. None of those things even cause any harms and I notice you can't even state what they do do. Aluminium doesn't just zoom to the brain, in fact the brain is the last place it goes and has to be complexed in order to even make it across the BBB.

      Wow, but maybe we can prevent those kids from getting the dreaded 90 day cough, or the measles spots, or the chicken pox. Let's trade a few days or weeks of inconvenient infection for a lifetime of profound disability....said no mom ever.

      Good grief I can only hope you aren't a parent.

      Delete
    2. Science mom, please take a minute to go to the International Association of Research on Cancer, a division of WHO. Then read what the international science community classifies formaldehyde as.
      http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2004/pr153.html - You will find that it is a carcinogen. Next time before you say "none of those things cause any harm" do a little research on what is being talked about, and you might not have to put your foot in your mouth. Maybe you have not experienced the tribulation that cancer causes a person, their family, and thier financial security. It is not a two week bed-ridden one time experience which you get lifelong immunity afterward. In contrast, fighting off cancer once doesn't guarantee immunity, but will frequently come back a second, third, or fourth time requiring more chemotherapy. In 2015, there will be an estimated 1.6 million new US cancer victims of which 590,000 will lose their lives. Injecting a known carcinogen into a child's bloodstream breaks the first medicinal rule "do no harm." Please excuse us "misguided" parents for concluding that the MMR vaccine, containing formaldehyde and mercury, bears the greater risk to our child than a case of the measles (should it even occur) It is too bad more parents out there aren't like this woman, who will weigh the actual risks of vaccines instead of blindly trusting the infallible doctor risk their children's health for profit.

      Delete
  20. Let's see what some other professionals have to say on the matter:

    "Like many people reading this post, Dr. Healy at first considered the vaccine-autism link to be 'silly.' But, she said, 'the more you delve into it, if you look at the basic science, if you look at the research that has been done in animals, if you look at some of the individual cases, and if you look at the evidence that there is no link, what I come away with is, the question has not been answered.'"

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/dr-bernadine-healy-dont-d_b_101421.html

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm just going to start by saying I'm not an anti-vaccine person and am not of the opinion that vaccines definitely cause mental disorders. However, that being said, almost all the studies you posted to "prove" there is no link between autism and vaccination (MMR in most cases) are BS. Not to say the studies are making stuff up, it's just that their conclusions are invalid. They all use subjects which have been vaccinated. The common trend is, they look at a bunch of vaccinated children and the ages at which they are vaccinated and then conclude there is no link. That conclusion does not follow since their entire sample consists of a vaccinated population. There is one study I saw that did actually have unvaccinated participants but the entire sample size was just under 500 individuals and they stated their unvaccinated sample was the same percentage as the normal rate in the population. This would put their unvaccinated sample probably somewhere in the range of 10-15 individuals. The statistical errors on that unvaccinated sample will be huge and no valid conclusion can be drawn from it. Why has no one taken a population of say, 10,000 unvaccinated children and 10,000 vaccinated children and looked at autism rates. That right there would be an easy way to show no correlation, and yet, it has never been done. All those "studies" above only consist of one type of population and therefore they do not have a real control sample. Their results are complete nonsense.
    Additionally, there is new scientific evidence to suggest that a vaccine-neurological disorder connection may actually be present, although indirectly, and it is still early and more studies need to be done. It has been shown that vaccines can affect the gut bacteria in monkeys and it has been shown that there is a link between gut bacteria and neurological development in mice. Neither of these have been looked at in humans yet, but given the fact that the "proof" of vaccination safety is anything but and the presence of a vaccine-gut-brain connection, it is not unreasonable that vaccines may cause neurological side effects in a small percentage of the population.

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130605185931.htm

    http://www.nature.com/news/gut-brain-link-grabs-neuroscientists-1.16316

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you suggesting a randomized double blind study? Such a study would be unethical because neither the researcher or the patient/parent would know which study subject received the vaccine and which study subject received the placebo.

      You claim you are not anti-vaccine, but that's a favorite meme straight out of the anti-vaccine playbook.

      Delete
    2. However, that being said, almost all the studies you posted to "prove" there is no link between autism and vaccination (MMR in most cases) are BS. Not to say the studies are making stuff up, it's just that their conclusions are invalid. They all use subjects which have been vaccinated.

      That demonstrates that you didn't read many or any of the studies; there are several which have unvaccinated cohorts. There are also several which examine mercury and no differences in excretion or loads are found between groups just for example. They are only invalid to you because you want them to be. Please post studies which you believe show any link between vaccination and autism.

      Why has no one taken a population of say, 10,000 unvaccinated children and 10,000 vaccinated children and looked at autism rates. That right there would be an easy way to show no correlation, and yet, it has never been done.

      You really don't grasp study design do you. That's not how it works because you have to match. What significance does 10 K have, why don't you explain?

      Additionally, there is new scientific evidence to suggest that a vaccine-neurological disorder connection may actually be present, although indirectly, and it is still early and more studies need to be done. It has been shown that vaccines can affect the gut bacteria in monkeys and it has been shown that there is a link between gut bacteria and neurological development in mice. Neither of these have been looked at in humans yet, but given the fact that the "proof" of vaccination safety is anything but and the presence of a vaccine-gut-brain connection, it is not unreasonable that vaccines may cause neurological side effects in a small percentage of the population.

      Too bad that's not what your citations indicate; you have it pretty much backwards. Why don't you give the nature paper another read.

      Delete
    3. Science Mom, obviously you refuse to believe the link to autism, and that is up to you to weigh the risks and choose for yourself and your children. We can only warn you, but it is your ultimate responsibility. All I can say is why don't you look at CDC's website here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsrates1940_60.pdf and scroll down to page 85. There is a the Center for Disease control's graph of measles deaths in the last century (not doctored or twisted by any anti-vax site). Try and locate the year 1963 when the vaccine was introduced. Then come back and tell me the MMR vaccine works and saves lives. The data shows otherwise.

      Delete
    4. Seriously, why do you equate death with autism? And why do you think it is cheaper to treat measles pneumonia than to prevent it?

      Delete
    5. Another anti-vaxer that doesn't know the difference between mortality and incidence.....why am I not surprised.

      Delete
    6. Chris, I do not equate death with autism. I have reiterated on this blog several times that looking at CDC data, vaccines did nothing to prevent measles deaths. And yet, yes, the controversy that measles is linked to autism has not been decided, especially now that we cannot trust the institutions who have stated these claims. They are not only unqualified to do this research because they have a conflict of interest, but they are under federal investigation for fraud.
      As to you second question, yes I believe it is cheaper to treat measles pneumonia than to vaccinate the world to prevent measles. In 1960, according to your data, there were 245 cases of measles per 100,000 people in the US. According to the CDC (which has a conflict of interest with vaccines) one in twenty measles cases develops pneumonia. That narrows it down to 12.25 measles pneumonia cases in 1960 per 100,000. According to the CDC, a private sector dose of MMR costs $60, so for 100,000 people it would cost $6 million dollars. Are you telling me that 12.25 cases of pneumonia is going to cost $60 million dollars? But wait, this number isn't completely accurate! Because the vaccine manufacturing cost isn't the only cost. The adverse effects, and the money it costs to treat these illnesses must also be factored in. Go ahead and claim that it is perfectly safe, but there is a reason the Vaccine Compensation Fund has awarded over $3 billion to the American public, and spent billions more lobbying the government to protect them from other civil lawsuits. Vaccines don't come cheap my friend.

      Delete
    7. Lawrence, you obviously haven't checked the death rate of measles the past century, because you are still ignorant that measles didn't make a dent in the death rate that had already plummeted by 1963. Sure I would be all for something that saves lives, but MMR does not do that. Risk of autism vs. risk of non-lethal measles is a no brainer.

      Delete
    8. And you have no idea about the difference between incidence rates (which means hundreds of thousands of people were still being infected & although they were surviving, still suffered from the various complications of measles).

      Delete
    9. Juliet: "As to you second question, yes I believe it is cheaper to treat measles pneumonia than to vaccinate the world to prevent measles"

      Prove it, with actual data, not a blatant assertion. Give actual economic data on the costs of treating versus prevention like these:

      An economic analysis of the current universal 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccination program in the United States

      Pediatric hospital admissions for measles. Lessons from the 1990 epidemic.

      Delete
    10. To continue:

      Another financial analysis that is a bit older:
      The Benefits From 10 Years of Measles Immunization in the United States

      "In 1960, according to your data, there were 245 cases of measles per 100,000 people in the US. ... According to the CDC, a private sector dose of MMR costs $60, so for 100,000 people it would cost $6 million dollars. Are you telling me that 12.25 cases of pneumonia is going to cost $60 million dollars?."

      Actually yes. Because before the vaccine almost every child caught measles prior to age eighteen. Children are not given two MMR doses each year, so you need to the chance of pneumonia per total number of children by the time they reach fifteen.

      Presently four million children are born in the USA each year. If we did not spend the $50 to $120 per child to vaccinate each one of the appropriately, about on in twenty will end up in the hospital. That is 200000 (two hundred thousand hospitalizations).

      By the way, recently about one in ten have ended up in the hospital. This is pretty much what happened in Europe and the USA during outbreaks over the past few years.

      Delete
    11. European hospitalization rate was worse - it was something like between 20 - 25% of those infected required hospitalization.

      Delete
    12. Chris, thank you for all that research about our children which you care so much about. What you forgot to mention is that vaccinating each one of those four million children at $60 a dose costs $240 million dollars. What you are wrong to assert is that every child will come down with measles. In your data, it shows that in 1960 there were only 245 cases of measles per 100,000 people in the US. If what you are saying is true, and virtually all children came down with measles, than in 1960 children made up only 0.245% of the population. Preposterous!!! Stop fudging the numbers to support your pre-conceived conclusions.

      Delete
    13. You really do have issues with clicking on links, don't you. I provided three economic analyses of measles and the effect of vaccination, and you totally ignored them.

      Delete
    14. I have no issue with clicking on links. I went to all of your links, two of which lead to pages that do not exist, and read the one article that was valid. The article that was valid was from the CDC and was nothing more than twisted assumptions about measles rates to advertise a product that grows their fiscal earnings. What is obvious to me, is that you either do not take the time to read, or don't have the capacity to understand my arguments, or follow the simple logic therein.
      Let me reiterate for you, in 1960 (the year closest before the introduction of the measles vaccine for which you provided data) there were 245 cases of measles per every 100,000 people. A simple American population search will show you that the population in 1960 was 180 million. You are free to check the math, but that boils down to 441,000 cases of measles. The economic analysis by the CDC of the link you so graciously provided states that the number of measles cases per year in the United States was 4 MILLION person. This is another example of the CDC blatantly over-exaggerating numbers, (in this case 1,000% higher) to convince the gullible masses (don't take it personally) that their product is a real benefit to society. The numbers are not adding up.

      Delete
    15. The census data only showed reported measles cases, which only was about 10% of the actual numbers.

      It is very difficult to estimate the actual amount from the days when phone calls were expensive and there was no internet. It got easier for the 1990 epidemic, but they still not have the internet but faxes. Some of the issues with data collection are explained in Acute measles mortality in the United States, 1987-2002..

      Now that you have critiqued my citations why don't you provide some actual economic data showing it is cheaper to treat instead of preventing measles.

      Delete
  22. It took Edison over 1000 attempts to get the light bulb to work. And you guys are throwing in the towel after only a few?
    It's a good thing Edison didn't take your stance otherwise we wouldn't have light bulbs.
    You pro vaccinators are no different than the scientific community in Galileo's time or in Louis Pasteur's time. You are practically religious when it comes to defending your dogma.
    Unfortunately you will never convince a person who has had an adverse vaccine reaction. I have seen it happen to 3 people. One who is now a vegetable, another is 12 years old with the mind of a 3 year old, and another had seizures for 12 years.
    So go on and pile on the research (which I doubt any of you have confirmed to be legit). But I have seen it happen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, Edison was known for the trial and error mode instead of actually learning some of the material science. His feud with Tesla is evidence that he was often more wrong than right. Also he was not the only one to invent types of artificial light.

      A small hint, if you are going to use the Galileo Gambit, try to read up on the historical figure to separate the fact from the fiction.

      Your anecdotes are not data. There is no reason we have to believe you.

      "So go on and pile on the research (which I doubt any of you have confirmed to be legit)."

      Well considering the research you put into that first sentence, there would be plenty of reasons to doubt your "research."

      Delete
    2. What a ridiculous non-sequitor Anonymous. And no you don't know three "vaccine-injured" people. Anecdotes are not data nor proof. If you don't want to accept rigorous studies, that's your business but don't think for a second that your fabricated fantasies are any substitute.

      Delete
  23. You guys are good at shaming. I assume by your witty responses you guys actually read every word of those scientific papers.
    So just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to sift through all those scientific papers you posted. (And I mean the whole research paper not the abstract). I am just curious because there is a lot of research there.

    If you think Vaccine injuries don't happen then please explain the NVICP created in 1988. "The VICP was established to ensure an adequate supply of vaccines, stabilize vaccine costs, and establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines." http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html

    Also have you ever read any of the inserts for any of the Vaccines? Here I will help you out by giving you one (this is Tetanus toxoid, reduced Diphtheria Toxoid, Acellular Pertussis Vaccine): https://www.gsksource.com/gskprm/htdocs/documents/BOOSTRIX.PDF

    Perhaps it is true that Autism is not caused by vaccines or at least very rarely but to say that vaccines do not cause any adverse reactions is nothing short of silly. What do you think would happen if someone had a serious allergy to one of the ingredients in the vaccine?

    I actually do know three people injured by vaccines. One is my cousin, the other my brother-in law, and the third my friend's son. My mother-in law she is a nurse, my father in law he is a paramedic and my friend is also a nurse. They all believed what you believed until it happened to their kids.

    Have you ever seen what happens when a person has a reaction to a vaccine? Probably not. It was a good thing that my mother and father in law new CPR, otherwise my brother in law would not be here today. But oh that's right they were just nurses those seizures were just a figment of their imagination? What do they know?

    My friend had a normal happy 18 month old. But when she got him the MMR he went from talking and smiling to no reactions. Just a blank stare, all within a few hours. But oh that's right she was a nurse she must have just imagined it.

    My cousin who was also a normal happy baby received her vaccine and immediately deteriorated into a now human vegetable. Have you ever had to feed and change the diapers of a 20 year old? No?

    But I forgot all those studies you posted clearly indicate that they just imagined it all.

    Sometimes when I see a problem it helps to look at the potential consequences of that problem. So let’s assume (yes assuming does make donkeys out of us who do) that vaccines were actually dangerous. That would mean that they would have to pull the vaccines from the shelves. This would immediately cause a spike in dangerous diseases everywhere (much like the current flu vaccine and how it failed). We are not just talking about measles but things like Pertussis, Tetanus, Rabies, etc, etc. you get the picture. Pretty scary, I do agree. Vaccines are important because they are the only line of defense against such scary bugs for civilians and military alike. So if the stakes are so dire then why would the medical community come up with a study that even showed a small chance of a severe adverse reaction to a vaccine? They wouldn't and they couldn't. Because why would they shoot themselves in the foot. It would be nothing short of idiotic.

    But people do suffer from severe adverse reactions and I would be surprised if you found someone to be still pro-vaccine if they themselves had or their child had a severe reaction to a vaccine.

    Also in regards to Galileo are you saying that he was not shunned? Please explain the history to me. And don’t be lazy and tell me to look it up myself. That is just a witty way to get out of doing anything. I have looked it up. I want to hear what your history of Galileo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. actually, the MMR contains such a small amount of virus that it takes a week or longer for adverse effects to occur. Which means that if a child went to a "blank stare" within hours, it cannot have been the MMR.

      Delete
    2. What a huge strawman that Anon built there - we are well aware that vaccines can sometimes cause an adverse reaction (though soreness at the injection site is by far the most common)....but we also know, because of decades of research and follow-ups that occur as vaccine safety is tracked (by the CDC, the FDA, WHO, the EU & other countries) that serious reactions are extremely rare.

      In fact, it is the very same studies that show the overwhelming safety of vaccine that also point out both contra-indications for vaccination and the rate of minor to serious reactions - so your point that reactions aren't mentioned is an extreme falsehood.

      Those who are causing the current outbreak in California should be shamed, because they have allowed a disease that was for all intents was eradicated in the US more than 15 years ago, to fester once again.

      I think of the babies who didn't have a choice - because they were too young to get vaccinated - if one of them is permanently injured or worse, dies (or gets SSPE, which is also a death sentence), then that gets laid right at the feet of the anti-vaccine movement.

      Delete
    3. "Also in regards to Galileo are you saying that he was not shunned? Please explain the history to me."

      He was not shunned, he was put under house arrest by the Roman Inquisition. It was more of a political move than a scientific one. The Church did lots of things to keep itself in power. The same year they tried Galileo the Jesuits outlaws infinitesimals, the concept that makes calculus work. This is why after the 17th century there were very few acclaimed Italian mathematicians (see Infinitesimal: How a Dangerous Mathematical Theory Shaped the Modern World.

      You really need to work on learning basic science and history.

      Delete
    4. A bit more info on Galileo: Galileo was put under house arrest because he began to attack the Catholic Church's theological ideas. If he had never attacked the theology he may never have been put under house arrest. "You really need to work on your basic science and history".

      Chris and thanks for attacking me personally that really makes you a man. But I guess being an a--hole online is easier than in person. It also really lends to your credibility. I bet you are either a Republican or a Christian. But thanks for actually answering my question.

      Also just because a reaction is rare doesn't mean its not serious. Some how statistics mean nothing when it happens to your own kid.

      You know who didn't have a choice either? My cousin she didn't have a choice when she was given a vaccine that turned her into a vegetable due to brain damage. I think its pretty sad when the doctors can't take your family history and allergies into account before administrating the vaccine.

      You can be vaccinated and still spread the disease. Kin of like Typhoid Mary. So it is not always the unvaccinated people's fault.

      Delete
    5. Also the Catholic Church was not concerned about power. They were concerned about their very religion. Because they believed at the time that if Galileo was right then their Bible would be wrong and that would cause huge problems.

      Also in regards to Edison from a few days agao. I believe you missed my point. My point was that Edison copntinued to try to make the light bulb despite being wrong every time. Its called Persistence.

      But this doesn't take away from the fact that major discoveries are usually hard to accept by the scientific communities of the time that they occur in.

      Also I will repeat myself about Autism. Current evidence does show that Autism is highly unlikely. But not 100% impossible.

      There is one reason why I don't trust it. The reason is that unlike other sciences the medical science deals with human beings that are very different from one person to the next. An example: One peron could be unable to digest Alcohol (some Asians) while others can. Some people have an allergy to peanuts. Some people have stronger stomachs. Some people (like me) dont get sick very often while others are sick almost all the time.

      The other issue is that doctors usually blow you off if something sounds unbelievable. An example: My wife is allergic to vitamin A and when she was telling the doctors that they just couldn't believe it. I guess its the idea of : You can't teach an old dog new tricks.

      So the problem, I see, with these studies, is that its hard to really have a good control group and an experimental group. At best it will give you a ball park picture. Thats why I say that I do not totally buy into this theory.

      Also my previous question: How long did it take you to sift through and read all these studies in total? Not just abstracts.

      Delete
    6. @anon - quite a while, actually. And since studies have been done on now millions of people, any effect that vaccines might have is so small that it is impossible quantify (since it would be miniscule - and less than the background noise) or perhaps you'd like to claim that it is a gigantic cover-up that involves millions of medical professionals?

      Delete
    7. Catherina,
      I think you are confused. Children who go into a blank stare within hours of the vaccine do not get it from the small amount of virus in there (a virus can only cause the disease is). The blank stare is caused by the damage of all of the other metallic toxic ingredients.

      Delete
    8. What "other metallic toxic ingredients"? Provide citations.

      Delete
  24. Really? And what about the studies that show there is a link?

    'Annals of Epidemiology';
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170

    Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry;
    http://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf

    The journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health;
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535

    Journal of Toxicology;
    http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jt/2013/801517/

    Journal of Biomedical Sciences;
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534

    Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences;
    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/6/1611.full

    Journals of Child Neurology;
    http://jcn.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1308.abstract

    Department of Pediatrics at the University of Arkansas;
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15527868

    Journal; Lab Medicine;
    http://labmed.ascpjournals.org/content/33/9/708.full.pdf

    And I have many, many more.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'Annals of Epidemiology';
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170


      http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/09/16/autism-causation-and-the-hepatitis-b-vaccine-no-link/

      http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/09/17/another-weak-study-proves-vaccines-cause-autism/

      Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry;
      http://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf


      http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2013/07/10/comment-on-do-aluminum-vaccine-adjuvants-contribute-to-the-rising-prevalence-of-autism/

      The journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health;
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535


      http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/07/08/a-positive-association-found-between-autism-prevalence-and-childhood-vaccination-uptake-across-the-u-s-population-2/

      Journal of Toxicology;
      http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jt/2013/801517/


      "Page Cannot Be Found"


      Journal of Biomedical Sciences;
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534


      http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2009/07/mmr-autism-claim-and-bad-science-part.html

      Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences;
      http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/6/1611.full


      Nothing to do with vaccines and not even clinically-relevant. Nothing but a basis for charlatans to sell supplements. Nothing even came from this other than supplements to sell.

      Journals of Child Neurology;
      http://jcn.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1308.abstract


      http://epiwonk.com/?p=130

      http://epiwonk.com/?p=112

      Department of Pediatrics at the University of Arkansas;
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15527868


      An in vitro study which again is clinically insignificant and nothing to do with vaccines.

      Journal; Lab Medicine;
      http://labmed.ascpjournals.org/content/33/9/708.full.pdf


      An opinion piece, not a study and by someone who began the DAN! nonsense to "treat vaccine injury".

      And I have many, many more.

      I'm sure you do and are equally crappy. But that's what you get when you have mommies sitting around thinking they can science better than actual scientists.

      Delete
    2. Science Mom, the links Darlene posted were from scientists, not moms. They were published by scientists who had nothing to gain but the loss of their reputation and job, speaking out for what they believed in. A stark contrast from the limited sample studies posted above, by doctor's with a conflict of interest in the vaccine industry. Call them crappy, but the news is showing who is the real fraud.

      Delete
    3. Nope, just bad science being pushed by bad scientists.....when you hear hoofbeats, you think horses, not unicorns....

      Delete
    4. Are they "bad" scientists because they are threatening a multi-billion dollar vaccine industry? Absolutely not. Just like scientists who challenged the validity of hand washing as a necessary practice in surgery were laughed at, so too will people like you Lawrence laugh at scientists who independently research vaccines, free of the conflicting interests of the CDC and vaccine bought scientists you support. I'm sure you are aware of the scientific publications nearly a century ago that insisted that smoking had absolutely no link to cancer. Well surprise, the medical scientists, who were influenced by well-paying tobacco companies, were wrong. Vaccines are wrong. The Italian government has ruled that there is a vaccine link to autism, and many other nations are waking up to that fact as well. If you do not think money influences people, you are naive.

      Delete
    5. Medical professionals were questioning the health of smokers as far back as Victorian England -so your analogy is actually incorrect.

      You are the one who remains blind to actual science and history.

      Delete
    6. https://www.facebook.com/vaccinetruth/photos/pcb.10152744235747989/10152744235472989/?type=1&theater

      A facebook posted article dug up from the 1950's. My analogy remains, because it points to the fact that doctors in America are easily swayed by multi-billion dollar industries that put profit over the safety of its customers.

      Delete
    7. Funny - because vaccines weren't a "multi-billion" dollar industry in the 1950s and 60s......

      Delete
    8. Juliet, read this: Smoking and Carcinoma of the Lung

      Also, the guy who runs VaxTruth seems to have issues with veracity: The Navy Fraud Fronting the Anti-Vaxxer Movement

      Now where are the citations explaining the 90% drop of measles cases in the USA between 1960 adn 1970?

      Delete
    9. Thank you Lawrence for correcting that value. I should have said "doctors are easily swayed by multi-million with the potential to become multi-billion dollar industries that put profit over the safety of its customers."

      Chris, I am aware that other scientists around the world were finding the cancerous dangers of smoking, all the while while American doctors were swayed by cigarette advertising and promoted cigarettes as safe. This proves my point further to show a repeat of history in the case of vaccines. While many independent doctors around the world (and many in the US) are voicing their scientific concerns about vaccine safety, the vaccine industry continues to add insult to injury by stubbornly turning a deaf ear to reason. When this is all over, I hope Americans will learn that science is not always infallible and can become compromised by greed and ambition.
      Just a week ago, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons released a statement about their concern over the safety of vaccines.
      http://www.aapsonline.org/index.php/article/american_children_need_access_to_better_vaccines/

      Delete
    10. The AAPS is not a medical organization, but mostly a libertarian political group with strange ideas:
      Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and Strange Bedfellows

      Only John Scudamore's whale.to scientific is more unscientific than they are.

      Now bring up some real citations on why measles incidence dropped 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970.

      Also, the MMR vaccine was introduced in the USA in 1971, and has not changed since 1978 when there was a change on one of the three vaccine strains. It was also the preferred vaccine for the 1978 Measles Elimination program. If the MMR caused autism it would have been noticed in the 1970s and 1980s.

      Now because you linked to that ridiculous article you now also need to come up with verifiable documentation dated before 1990 that autism increased in the USA coincident to the use of the MMR vaccine.

      Delete
  25. No link, yet there have been numerous cases awarded in a court of law where parents have been able to prove that vaccines did cause their child's autism. If there is truly no link, how can these courts be awarding these parents and judging in their favour?

    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If there is truly no link, how can these courts be awarding these parents and judging in their favour?

      Simple answer. They're not but that's what you get when your tin foil is too tight and relying upon dishonest anti-vaxxers and dodgy news sights like PRN.

      http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2011/05/critiques-of-h0lland-et-al-unanswered-questions.html

      How do you like the Gish Gallop back? Now run along, you have some reading to do by actual scientists.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. there is a link and they have proven in a court of law that vaccines DO harm children. They are very hard to win but 3 billion have been paid out due to vaccine injuries.. perhaps the rubberband on your balls is too tight

      Delete
    4. Actually no - the Vaccine Court has properly compensated about 1700 people, who over the last 25 years, suffered a reaction that could theoretically be linked back to vaccine administration.

      Some reactions do occur and in those rare cases, a mechanism (the Vaccine Court) was put in place to make sure they were compensated.

      In comparison, over 120 Billion dollars per year are paid out by insurance companies for car accidents....so compare 2 Billion dollars over 27 years vs. approximately 3.7 Trillion paid out in accident claims for cars over the same period.

      Delete
    5. Science Mom, those who get compensated for their vaccine injury represesent 1-2% of parents who don't come forward because they can't afford lawyers, or worse have believed that their child's injury couldn't possibly be from the vaccine. Why don't you stop harassing people who truly care about the safety of their children and this country.

      Delete
    6. Why do you conflate data? Why do you death measles deaths are the only factor we should be concerned with?

      Delete
    7. "can't afford a lawyer?" - that's funny, since access to legal counsel is provided as part of the Vaccine Court process, at no charge (the legal fees are compensated by the Court).

      And, you're wrong - because follow-up study has shown that "serious vaccine reactions" are more likely to be reported, not less likely....plus you include the various reporting systems that track vaccine reactions - both passive and active, shows that serious reactions are extremely rare.

      if you have evidence to the contrary, we'd love to see it.

      Delete
    8. Lawrence, the legal fees are not compensated by the court if they lose, only if they win, and less than half get compensation for their injuries. Not only that, but everyone has to pay a $400 filing fee before they can even be heard, which would deter parents who know they have less than a 50% chance of getting compensated.
      One in 64 children today are autistic, and even though parents are not always able to link their child's cause of autism, the vaccination counsel has awarded millions of dollars to many different autistic victims. I can provide names of those compensated if you'd like.

      Delete
    9. That's incorrect - fees are paid regardless of the outcome of the case (hence why people like the Geiers are still filing for payment, even after the Omnibus Hearings ended).

      Delete
  26. I'm just curious.

    How do you repeat an experiment if the variables change every time it is conducted?

    I'm just curious because most of, if not all, of these studies and experiments conducted are totally different from one another.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By using statistics, which is a big part of epidemiology.

      Delete
    2. So what does it mean when the you reject the null hypothesis or accept the null hypothesis? Does it mean undeniable proof or is it just a probability.

      Delete
    3. Accepting the null or rejecting the null is based upon probability testing so again, you can't say proven unless you test every single subject and control for every single confounder. Which of course is not feasible.

      Delete
  27. Also is this your argument:

    All studies (regarding vaccines vs autism) have PROVEN that vaccines do not cause autism.
    Therefore vaccines do not cause autism.

    Just want to make sure we are on the same page here.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous, you can't prove a negative. We can say that the preponderance of evidence is sufficient to conclude that vaccines are not associated with the apparent increase in autism prevalence. It is this kind of language which appears squishy to laypeople that is taken advantage of by anti-vaxx pundits. They can lie, we can't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And given the large numbers of studies that have been done, which have now included millions of people (and children) from different parts of the world, if there was any sort of relation between vaccines and autism, it would have shown itself by now......or the effect is so small as to be completely lost in the background noise (i.e. so rare as to be impossible to actually quantify).

      Either way, the anti-vax contingent is nothing more than a bunch of shrill anti-science nut jobs.

      Delete
    2. The CDC has already compensated autistic vaccine victims, yet continues to lie and coverup the truth that their is a link between vaccines and autism, because it would threaten their very profitable monopoly on the nation's youth. In the words of Mark Twain, "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

      Delete
    3. So let me get this right. You said that: "Accepting the null or rejecting the null is based upon probability testing so again, you can't say proven unless you test every single subject and control for every single confounder."

      So then if you can't say "proven" then why do so many people say that it has been "proven"?

      So up above I had a argument which I assumed to be yours. But based on this new info from you. This would be the new argument....

      All studies (regarding vaccines vs autism) have shown EVIDENCE that vaccines do not cause autism.
      Therefore vaccines do not cause autism.

      That really changes everything doesn't it.

      Statistics can change based on simple things: like how you ask a question. The statistics for jobs is different between what the Government puts out and Gallup.

      So here is a story: If we lived in Europe hundreds of years ago and we heard from a sailor that he saw a black swan we would naturally be interested. So then lets say we decided to do a study. We went to different ponds and lakes around Europe recording all the swans that we saw. From this study we would conclude that all swans were white and that the sailor was full of it. However, we would be wrong because there are black swans in Australia/New Zealand.

      All you have is evidence not proof. You just said so yourself.

      Would want to go out into the ocean in a boat that had evidence of floating or proof.

      To many variables? So because the amount of variables was to overwhelming they just discounted them?

      Maybe the Anti-vaxxers are actually so pro-science that they will only accept 100% undeniable proof, not this wishy washy statistics.

      If your experiment needs statistics then maybe you should try to do a better experiment.

      Until you can prove that vaccines don't cause autism the way that I can prove that vinegar reacts with baking soda then I think "evidence" is the word you need to stick with.

      Also you never answered my old question: "How long did it take you to read through all these studies in total?"

      You also never answered my idea that the reason why vaccines have not been shown to cause autism is because they are too important to show that they have problems. Why wold the medical community do a study that showed that their one and only defense against these bugs was faulty?




      Delete
    4. Okay, prove to me that Unicorns don't exist.....

      And given that a multitude of studies have been done - without a single link found between vaccines and autism....and that the anti-vaxers can't even come up with a single biologically-plausible way for vaccines to cause autism, I'd say we can say that hypothesis is dead (and has been for years).

      Delete
    5. So then if you can't say "proven" then why do so many people say that it has been "proven"?

      Because so many studies in different populations asking the question in different ways have been done and none show any association between vaccines and autism. Add to that the OAP cases.

      All studies (regarding vaccines vs autism) have shown EVIDENCE that vaccines do not cause autism.
      Therefore vaccines do not cause autism.


      Overwhelming evidence that is so that the probability that vaccines cause autism is "practically" zero.

      To many variables? So because the amount of variables was to overwhelming they just discounted them?

      Not a good analogy because the survey was not conducted properly to begin with. That's not the case with the numerous vaccine-autism studies and even moreso when combined (see for example Cochrane MMR review).

      Maybe the Anti-vaxxers are actually so pro-science that they will only accept 100% undeniable proof, not this wishy washy statistics.

      No, that would actually be an example of how scientifically-ignorant anti-vaxxers are. Besides, why don't you conduct your own studies? Why aren't you throwing money at qualified researchers instead of dodgy pseudoscientists?

      Also you never answered my old question: "How long did it take you to read through all these studies in total?"

      No idea, I have spent countless hours reading hundreds of studies and hundreds of pages of OAP documents.

      You also never answered my idea that the reason why vaccines have not been shown to cause autism is because they are too important to show that they have problems. Why wold the medical community do a study that showed that their one and only defense against these bugs was faulty?

      That's just conspiracy-laden crazy talk. Vaccines are constantly monitored and several studies each year are published regarding vaccine safety and adverse events.

      Delete
    6. Lawrence what you just stated was a fallacy.

      "Science" Mom...

      "Because so many studies in different populations asking the question in different ways have been done and none show any association between vaccines and autism. Add to that the OAP cases."

      Just like Lawrence that is a fallacious statement. If the studies showed PROOF then what you said would be true. However, your studies only show EVIDENCE and it is because of this your argument is a fallacy.

      The other issue is variables. How can you conduct a legitimate study if you don't account for the different variables?

      I am glad that other sciences aren't so sloppy with their work. Imagine if weather men tried to forecast with only one or two variables. Or if Chemists didn't bother to make sure that each sample they tested was exactly the same as the last.

      Another question. How can you have a control group if you have no control over them?

      The only way to conduct a proper study is eliminate or nearly eliminate all variables. Or at least take them into account.

      In any of the studies did they take into account allergies? genetics? eating habits of the child and of the parents? exercise habits? living conditions at home? outside environment? (location, location, location)

      Here is what you do.....

      1. You need to obtain a large building like a hotel.
      2. Then you select 500 people with no history of autism or other brain disorders.
      3. These people will then become pregnant and live in this hotel.
      4. They will eat the same thing, they will live in the same environment everyday.
      5. They will then deliver their child in the same way (aside from emergency c-sections of course).
      6. These children will be split into two groups of 250 each. One to be the control the other the experimental group.
      7. These babies will then live the exact same lives... in that they live in the same environment they eat the same, etc...
      8. These babies will then be tested for allergies prior to vaccination.
      9. They will then receive their vaccines at the exact same age... down to the day if possible.
      8. Immediately after receiving the vaccines they will undergo a brain scan and other nerve tests once per day. Along with immune tests and other basic medical tests.
      10. These babies will continue to grow and eat in the same environment for a few years or so and these tests will continue everyday that they are there.

      That is just a rough draft.

      With this I have controlled the environment , their eating habits (including in utero). I have taking into account their allergies and family history of medical issues.

      And as a side bonus you could have the kids take the full schedule of vaccines to see if there is a combined effect.

      You will no doubt say that this is not feasible and or too hard.

      I guess its just a lot easier to defend sloppy science experiments.

      I am so glad that some of the great scientists of the past present and future don't have your status quo attitude towards science.

      Delete
    7. Dear brave Anonymous: "However, your studies only show EVIDENCE and it is because of this your argument is a fallacy."

      That is hilarious.

      "The other issue is variables. How can you conduct a legitimate study if you don't account for the different variables?"

      They do when they can, otherwise they admit the limitations.

      "Here is what you do..... With this I have controlled the environment , their eating habits (including in utero). I have taking into account their allergies and family history of medical issues."

      Good luck getting that past the IRB, plus getting it funded.

      "You will no doubt say that this is not feasible and or too hard."

      If you can get approved and funded, go for it!

      "I am so glad that some of the great scientists of the past present and future don't have your status quo attitude towards science."

      I know, isn't just too bad they aren't allowed to do medical experiments on institutionalized kids like the hepatitis b vaccine trials done in Willowbrook. Gosh, they went and closed most of those things down. Just because the children were neglected and victims of what would be now illegal medical trials.

      Delete
    8. I'm glad you find that funny. That must mean that I was wrong. You do have undeniable, 100% proof, non-statistical experiment that not only shows that vaccines don't cause autism in everyone on earth but also shows why vaccines don't cause autism.

      If you can provide that study, or direct me to it I would be pleased to see a real experiment.

      Also I am curious. You didn't answer this question. Every experiment needs a control group right? So can you have a control group that is completely different than the experimental group?

      Delete
  29. these are bogus.. because for one.. no study would be called these titles... they are not studies at all

    ReplyDelete
  30. Some of these are ridiculous, meaning the few that I read. One study was done with autistic children that counted the number of consultations made with the primary care doctor before and after the mmr. They found no change in the number of consultations and call that a study worthy of being used to prove vaccinations don't cause autism! They even admitted in the study that autism is not diagnosed by the primary care doctor. They go to a specialist. Maybe they were consulting the specialist???

    ReplyDelete
  31. Many of those are not even studies, just articles that link to similar studies. If this blog writer can't even do basic research, how are we expected to believe they even understand the writings OF the research?

    Further, the scientific process can't show how things AREN'T linked without proving why something IS linked, that's the problem with these studies and with scientists who try to publish why things *aren't* related.

    It would be like saying "scientists have concluded that although there are a vast number of storks hanging around at the time a woman gives birth, there is no link between storks and giving birth." No. The reason there is no link between women giving birth and storks dropping off babies is because we know, with certainty, that a baby comes out of a woman's uterus.

    We *don't* know what causes Autism-therefore we cannot accurately prove that any one thing does not cause it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, we can - because at this point, millions of people (children) have been studied and no link has ever been found between vaccination status and autism.

      So, either there is a worldwide conspiracy, involving millions of people to cover up the truth, or the potential effect of vaccines on autism is so small that even the largest scientific studies cannot detect it above the background noise....

      So, which one do you think is more likely?

      Delete
  32. Lawrence, wrong. First of all, millions of people have not been studied. The studies on this blog have sample sizes between 20 and 500 people, and I highly doubt the overall number studied even reaches one hundred thousand. If you disagree, please give some evidence of these millions of children.

    Another false assertion is that "no link has ever been found between vaccination status and autism." Not only has hundreds of studies and research shown links to autism, but the CDC itself has done research that shows a link, and as you know is under federal investigation for omitting that research. Which leads us to wonder what other studies they are hiding? Doctor's lack the kahunas to finally admit the vaccines they have promoted can cause autism, and instead pay the media and autistic vaccine victims to keep quiet about the truth. I would respect vaccine industries if they even acknowledged their mistake, instead of discrediting and shunning the growing numbers of doctors who do research that shows any type of threat to their industry. Plus it is not a worldwide conspiracy. Several countries are waking up that fact. One the basis of expert doctor testimony, Italian courts have ruled that vaccines cause autism. You can read it here.
    http://thedailycoin.org/?p=18384#sthash.9h3pCxId.dpbs

    Lawrence, it is no longer a conspiracy when the truth gets out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23959427

      1.5 Million children in just one single study.....

      Ready to move the goal posts again?

      Delete
    2. And growing numbers of what doctors? The ones that seem to shout the loudest are actual chiropractors or naturopaths - neither of whom know the first thing about immunology.....

      Delete
    3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12415036

      Over half a million in that one.

      http://www.wellwithin1.com/MMR.pdf

      This one was 1.8 million persons.

      So where are your studies showing that the 90% drop in measles incidence in the USA between 1960 and 1970 was not caused by vaccination?

      And legal decisions in Italy do not count as scientific citations. The only thing you should be posting as evidence are PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers. This excludes lawyers, doctors who have lost their legal right to practice medicine, geologists, etc.

      Delete
    4. Not to even mention that it was a Court in Italy that both accused and found guilty a group of Seismologists for not accurately predicting an Earthquake.....not exactly the type of Justice System I'd rely on for scientific thought.

      Delete
    5. The "argument of Italian court decision" is one of the worst around. It is as clueless as claiming the MMR vaccine has thimerosal and/or vaccines are injected directly into the bloodstream.

      Or even claiming that Scarlet Fever, bubonic plague, typhoid and cholera disappeared without vaccines. When they are all still around causing people to get sick, even in the USA.

      Delete
    6. Actually its the weakened live Rubella Virus that causes the Autism.

      So it only follows that if a child had a bad reaction to the MMR they could develop ASD from coming down with Rubella

      A 1970's study concluded that idea.

      Chess,S. Autism in children with congenital rubella. J Autism Child Schizophr. 1, 33-47 (1971).

      Chess,S. Follow-up report on autism in congenital rubella. J Autism Child Schizophr. 7, 69-81 (1977).

      Delete
  33. Problem with this report on your list - The other countries in this study only gave the thimerosal filled Hepatitis B vaccine to infected mothers, while the US gave three doses to every baby. You'd have to look to see if they gave Hib, because the four doses had thimerosal also.

    Andrews, N., Miller, E., Grant, A., Stowe, J., Osborn, V., & Taylor, B. (2004). Thimerosal exposure in infants and developmental disorders: a retrospective cohort study in the United Kingdom does not support a causal association. Pediatrics, 114, 584-591. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342825

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What does HepB have to do with Hib vaccine other than they both start with the letter "h"?

      It is 2015... According to this the Hib never contained thimerosal, and the HepB has been free since 1999.

      That was quite a while ago. Do you really only follow kids who are in high school or college now?

      Delete
  34. Another problem - heavy metal levels appear normal because kids with autism can not excrete them. To measure heavy metals, you must do a chelation challenge test. Even then, you will only see what comes out at that time, which is never all of it or you wouldn't have full chelation therapy for anyone exposed in other ways. Albizzati, A., Moré, L., Di Candia, D., Saccani, M., Lenti, C. Normal concentrations of heavy metals in autistic spectrum disorders. Minerva Pediatrica. 2012. Feb;64(1):27-31 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22350041

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From that link: "CONCLUSION:

      There wasn't correlation between autism and heavy metal concentration"

      Delete
    2. So, given that the amount of thimerasol and aluminum salts (both compounds, btw) is exceedingly small - do you believe that these substances have the ability to pro-create?

      Because that's the only way that those types of substances could accrue to the levels that you claim......

      Delete
  35. The biggest problem is the Hepatitis B Vaccine, which has been linked to autoimmunity disorders. The MMR II Product Information specifically states that anyone with a family history of immune disorder should not get the vaccine. Possible result could be Measles inclusion body encephalitis - measles goes to the brain. It's not found in the blood. Clin Infect Dis. 1999 Oct;29(4):855-61.
    Measles inclusion-body encephalitis caused by the vaccine strain of measles virus.
    Bitnun A1, Shannon P, Durward A, Rota PA, Bellini WJ, Graham C, Wang E, Ford-Jones EL, Cox P, Becker L, Fearon M, Petric M, Tellier R.
    Author information
    Abstract
    We report a case of measles inclusion-body encephalitis (MIBE) occurring in an apparently healthy 21-month-old boy 8.5 months after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. He had no prior evidence of immune deficiency and no history of measles exposure or clinical disease. During hospitalization, a primary immunodeficiency characterized by a profoundly depressed CD8 cell count and dysgammaglobulinemia was demonstrated. A brain biopsy revealed histopathologic features consistent with MIBE, and measles antigens were detected by immunohistochemical staining. Electron microscopy revealed inclusions characteristic of paramyxovirus nucleocapsids within neurons, oligodendroglia, and astrocytes. The presence of measles virus in the brain tissue was confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. The nucleotide sequence in the nucleoprotein and fusion gene regions was identical to that of the Moraten and Schwarz vaccine strains; the fusion gene differed from known genotype A wild-type viruses.
    PMID: 10589903 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
    See http://www.fourteenstudies.org/pdf/hep_b.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, you are basing every thing on one sixteen year old case report that clearly says "8.5 months after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination."

      That is remarkable.

      Delete
  36. Vaccines CAN cause autism, along with an array of other permanent horrific conditions. These occurances are NOT rare. Linked below, are 96 published scientific papers which demonstrate these facts. http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2007/06/no-evidence-of-any-link.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please limit your citations to PubMed indexed cases by qualified reputable researchers. Especially since that page bring back this message: "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."

      Yes, I did click on it, and what it brought back was literally nothing. Try again.

      Delete
    2. "Please limit your citations to PubMed indexed cases by qualified reputable researchers" And you can determine their 'reputable'? How?
      Ohhh, you mean of course that IF it is published in PubMed then it is automatically reputable? You are either naive, or just plain ignorant 'Chris'.
      PubMed is not the only source of reputable medical research. The word reputable being as loosely applied here as you do yourself continue to do. The fact that you continually attempt to limit all material to this one source is quite telling in itself.
      The dishonesty I see in many of the "reputable" replies to genuine enquirey and factual statements suggests a motive in itself.
      Denial seems to be in and of itself a growing industry today. We see the same games being played in the gas and oil fraccing industry. Falsified reports, hidden data, etc. etc..

      Delete
    3. PubMed is an imperfect index, nothing else. It is a way to filter out the nonsense. And pages that no longer exist.

      What sources do you have dear brave "Anonymous" that you feel are more reliable. Bring them on, let them be exposed to daylight.

      Delete
    4. So how is insisting that you produce a link on an index of scientific research so terrible compared to that of a blog link?

      The first one is over fifteen years old before some corrections were included. The second one is by clueless undergraduates. The third and fourth one is by some undergraduates using very bad epidemiological math, the third one is by the ophthalmologist dynamic duo near Point Grey, The fifth one is by an associate of Fudenberg... who claimed to create the Wakefield patented transfactor by ironing his marrow on his kitchen table,... and then they get more crazy. One of them even includes a financial business professor!

      What part of "reputable" and "qualified" do you not understand?

      Delete