Despite Lancet Retraction, the Vaccine-Autism Controversy Remains
Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who coauthored a paper suggesting a potential link between autism and Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine, is one of the most vilified medical practitioners of recent times. He carries the extremely rare dishonor of a retraction of his paper in The Lancet medical journal.
History will ultimately judge who was right and who was wrong about proposing a possible association between vaccination and autistic spectrum disorder. But while Wakefield's critics can condemn, retract, decry and de-license all they want, that does nothing to stop or alter the march of science. The evidence that autism is increasing at alarming rates is now so irrefutable that, finally, the U.S. federal government is climbing aboard the environmental research bandwagon.
Those who have protested with shrill certainty that autism is almost purely genetic, and not environmental in nature, and therefore not really increasing at all, will hopefully recede from the debate. And if those people were dead wrong about environmental factors in autism, couldn’t they also be mistaken in their equally heated denials about a possible vaccine-autism link?
There are now at least six published legal or scientific cases of children regressing into autistic spectrum disorder following vaccination -- and many more will be revealed in due time. More than 1,300 cases of vaccine injuries have been paid out in vaccine court, in which the court ruled that childhood immunizations caused encephalopathy (brain disease), encephalitis (brain swelling) or seizure disorders. Encephalopathy or encephalitis are found in most if not all ASD cases, and seizure disorders in about a third of them.
Nobody seriously thinks that the retraction of The Lancet article, and the international vilification of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, will do anything to make this debate go away. And they are right.
Sources:



del.icio.us
Digg
So, if people were wrong about autism not being wholly genetic (which is something I have not heard most scientists or doctors saying, but let's accept that for the sake of the argument), then couldnt they be wrong about vaccines too? I say we take that a step further - if they were wrong about that, couldn't they also be wrong to claim voodoo doesn't cause autism? Or fairies?
That is as specious as the following argument, that implies that since vaccines can cause symptom x, and kids with autism also often (but not always) present with symptom x, than vaccines can cause that too!
I understand that the debate will not end - neither will the creationism/evolution debate, nor will we ever make it so that everyone accepts that the world is older than 4k years, but that is not because science has not settled the issue.
6 out of a population of 300 million. That's a 1 in 50 million chance. Simple coincidence? Yes.
It is possible for the scientific community to reach consensus and not be entirely right. It is extremely unlikely for the scientific community to reach consensus and be entirely wrong.
Dr. Mercola is obviously a true believer. A true believer who skirts FDA "truthfulness in advertising" laws.
We are all infallible.
Don't let him fool you - he's just another huckster playing concern troll, hoping to sow enough doubt that you'll buy his stuff instead of getting real medical care.
Can we get the appearance that they are unsafe, i.e., the complete protection of companies which make vaccinations from lawsuits out of the law books? If I thought that companies which make billions from vaccinations were actually accountable for 'mistakes', then I might not think there was a conflict of interest for the medical industry to find a link between vaccinations and chronic disease or 'accidental' death.
Do you work for the vaccine companies or just like to make completely invalid arguments? The author used substantial evidence showing vaccinations to be dangerous if given to a person having certain factors. Then you took his retrospective concern for a possible link towards autism and turned it into the evolutionism/creationism debate. This by all means deducts provable evidence into ancient beliefs. Do you understand how much strength and power the vaccination companies hold? Well, Mr. Nurtz, if you lived in the 1950’s, and you gained a small amount of weight, you were told by your family Doctor that you needed to start smoking cigarettes and that there were positively no side effects. This was despite a shockingly large amount of concerned citizens speaking up against the cigarette companies saying that they were a health hazard. Actually, until recently, the Supreme Court has finally started in on actions against the cigarette companies. Why did it take decades for them to start in against the cigarette companies? Why did healthcare take so long to decide against them? It’s because people don’t want to believe against the very thing that they were told was good for them all their lives. Like putting butter on a burn wound (ouch!). Therein lays your very own personal religion Mr. Nurtz. I believe in this debate you would stand firmly opposed any argument against the vaccination companies because once again there is proof that they have caused autistic symptoms in children. Look at the first case with the Supreme Court conceding to the parents of an Autistic child going against the vaccine companies. Then they threw a gag order on it and a guy from the CDC yells out at a press conference
“Vaccines do not cause autism!” It’s more than a little sketchy and quite hypocritical if you ask someone with a working brain. I guess in the end, you’ll have your own brand of creationism where you will hear the evidence when it suites your belief.
Yes, because idiots still exist.
1) My son received two shots that were the equivelent of almost eighty times the safe limit of mercury when ingested in tuna. If the thirmesol containing mercury wasn't an issue or factor why do we still hear warnings from the CDC and the surgeon general concerning the grave health consequences of ingesting mercury?
We watched as our little boy, who began life with such promise, slowly sank into the unknown depths of autism. Maybe it wasn't the thirmesol but it made sense to us. What didn't make sense was how fast and how strong the medical "experts" raised up as one to proclaim that autism and mercury were totally unrelated, Hadn't exposure to mercury been responsible for the mental problems of thousands of people from Roman Emperors to European hatmakers? Why was the possibility that giving injections laced with mercury rejected so quickly, in most cases before any solid research was done
Our son is and will be fine, we went through some bad times during the early years, when we fought doctors, schools, insurance companies and ignorance trying to make the best life possible for our child we would sometimes be accused of being too concerned about money. But I can honestly say that financial gain or fear of financial disaster was never a factor in determining our actions. I wonder how many doctors , politicians and pharmasuetical companies involved in this issue could say the same.
Dr Andrew Moulden has connected ALL vaccines to autism and learning disabilities. He has done ample research. All vaccines cause ministrokes. You can watch his videos on youtube or his website brainguardmd.com
Also there is a new book out "The History of the Peanut Allergy Epidemic" by Heather Fraser.
Heather found out some interesting facts:
The WHO and FDA decided that refined peanut oil is GRAS and does not have to be listed on the package insert of vaccines or other pharmaceutical products.
If you want to know which vaccine contains peanut oil, you are not entitled to know because it is a protected trade secret.
1 in 125 of our vaccinated children have severe peanut allergies - they can go into an anaphylactic shock if they SMELL peanuts.
I want full disclosure of ALL pharmaceutical ingredients. How about you?
Post your comment