Autism payout reignites vaccine controversy

Post useful information that you yourself have tried. Treatments that arent part of the Medical Death Cartel Monopoly. Treatment centers that offer real hope.... Healthy Foods, vitamins, minerals... sources for them etc....
pokerkid
Site Admin
Posts: 7781

Autism payout reignites vaccine controversy

Post#1 » Thu Mar 20, 2008 1:36 pm

Dont EVER say we never told you so.
pk


It is not true that no scientific studies have
linked autism with vaccines. Swedish studies, among
others, have clearly shown a causal relationship
between inoculations and the development of autism as
well as ADHD.
A much higher percentage of male youths develop
autism after being inoculated than female children
showing a higher susceptibility among males. The mere
fact that autism and ADHD are nearly unknown among the
Amish which do not vaccinate their children is strong
condemning evidence against vaccines in and of itself.

Scott


Autism payout reignites vaccine controversy

· 08 March 2008
· Jim Giles

JUST as the dispute over whether vaccines cause
autism was dying down at
last, a US government decision has added fresh fuel
to the fire. Last week
it emerged that the federal government is to
compensate a couple who say
that the regular childhood vaccines, given to their
baby daughter in 2000,
caused her to develop autism. Damages have not yet
been set, but could
exceed $1 million.
Significantly, the government's decision says
nothing about whether
vaccines cause autism. Instead, government lawyers
concluded only that
vaccines aggravated a pre-existing cellular disorder
in the child, causing
brain damage that included features of autism.
Nonetheless, anti-vaccination campaigners are
claiming vindication. "It's
official," wrote one autism blogger. "The sky has
fallen. The fat lady has
sung. Pigs are flying."
Autism experts say it is unclear why compensation is
being paid. Almost
5000 other families have lodged similar claims which
are being considered
by the court, but decades of research have failed to
find any link between
vaccines and autism and few experts thought that the
government would pay
up.
Scientists say there is nothing in the medical
history of the child in
question to change that thinking. "I'm stunned that
they decided to
settle," says Jay Gargus, a paediatrician at the
University of California,
Irvine. Exactly why the US government did so is
still being debated, as
details of the decision have been sealed and the
Department of Health and
Human Services won't comment.
Whatever the government's thinking, the worry is
that the decision may
undermine public confidence in vaccines, which is
just recovering after
recent scares over mercury and the measles, mumps
and rubella (MMR) shot.
On 29 February, for example, Republican presidential
candidate John McCain
used a query on the case as a chance to question
whether mercury in
vaccines could be linked to autism.
"A decision like this will definitely make parents
more wary about
vaccines," says Jaime DeVille, a paediatrician at
the University of
California, Los Angeles, and a member of the
government's childhood
vaccines advisory committee.
According to internet newspaper The Huffington Post,
which last week
published leaked details of the court case from
November, the child
developed a fever after receiving scheduled
vaccinations in 2000 for
haemophilus influenzae, chickenpox, polio, MMR,
diphtheria, pertussis,
tetanus and polio, when she was 18 months old.
Autism-like symptoms, such
as poor communication skills, followed. In 2001
physicians concluded that
the child, who has not been named, "demonstrated
features of autistic
disorder".
It transpired that the child's mitochondria, the
powerhouses that provide
cells with energy, were not working normally, and
tests revealed a
mutation in a gene linked to mitochondrial function.
After studying her
medical history, officials at the Department of
Health and Human Services
concluded that the vaccines had "significantly
aggravated an underlying
mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to
deficits in energy
metabolism", causing brain damage with "features of
autism spectrum
disorder".
Proponents of a link between vaccines and autism
have made much of the
mitochondrial disorder, in part because researchers
have wondered for at
least a decade whether autism could be a
mitochondrial disorder. *Autism
runs in families and some of the genes thought to be
involved play a role
in mitochondrial function. Biomarkers for
mitochondrial dysfunction, such
as a build-up of lactic acid, are also elevated in
some autistic children.
David Kirby, the journalist who revealed the
decision, says that in an
"informal survey" of seven other children with cases
pending all show
signs of mitochondrial problems, though he did not
reveal how he got this
information.
Experts say these links do nothing to prove that
autism originates in the
mitochondria. "It's not surprising that
mitochondrial function is
abnormal," says Steven Novella, a neurologist at
Yale University. "With
neurodegenerative disorders almost any marker of
cell health will be worse
than in controls." Without more research, he adds,
it is impossible to say
whether the mitochondrial problems are the cause of
the disease or its
by-product. Those who argue otherwise, are "making
multiple assumptions
that are not established", Novella warns.
Further complications stem from confusion over the
role vaccines played in
the child's condition. Severe inflammatory reactions
are a rare but
established side effect of vaccines, and they can
damage the brain in many
different ways, some of which produce symptoms
similar to those seen in
autism. The mitochondrial disorder might have
prevented the child from
dealing with her inflammation, but it is also
possible that the child's
mitochondrial problems caused the inflammation and
that the vaccines she
received were irrelevant.
Other experts added that parents should not be
dissuaded from getting
their children vaccinated just because of a court
case. "What does this
decision mean?" says **Paul Offit, a paediatrician
at the Children's
Hospital of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. "It
doesn't mean anything. The
question of whether vaccines cause autism is a
scientific one, not a legal
one."
***Numerous scientific studies have addressed the
question, adds Offit,
and all concluded that there is no link. Government
officials, including
those at the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention in Atlanta,
Georgia, also insisted the decision does nothing to
change their thinking.
These caveats may, however, get lost as reaction to
the decision evolves.
Kevin Conway of Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan in
Boston, whose firm
represents around 1200 autistic children with court
cases pending, says he
will start getting his clients tested for
mitochondrial dysfunction. And
Thomas Power, an attorney based in Portland, Oregon,
says he would also
like to see full details of the case, as they could
help his cases of
autistic children seeking compensation.
*The mode of inheritance has not been established or
proven. Monozygotic
twins have been known to have differences with one
twin being autistic and
the other not autistic. Children living in the same
home within a family
can be exposed to the same triggers and it is not a
clear indication of
inherited characteristics if more than one child
displays similar
characteristics.
**Dr. Offit is a patent holder on the Merck's
Rotateq vaccine, and he
profits directly from the vaccine program (Autism
parents have nicknamed
him Dr. Profit). This is clearly a conflict of
interest.
***Since the US government's mantra is that there is
no link between
autism and vaccines, and that autism is not a
vaccine injury, then why is
the government voluntarily paying compensation to an
autistic child out of
the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund, when they can
easily use their
“epidemiological proof” to rule against this child’s
parents’ claim?
What really concern me are health authorities here
in Australia claiming
to have tested the safety of vaccines when all of
these “epidemiological
proof” came out of the CDC, the FDA and the IOM in
the US. I would like to
know exactly when they independently tested the long
term safety of any of
the vaccines here in Australia. By independent, I
mean studies not funded
by vaccine manufacturers or their consultants - with
no conflict of interest.
It is well known amongst scientific circles that the
moment you question
the sacred cow of medical interventions – the
vaccination program, you are
marginalised and mainstream medicine will do just
about anything to avert
scrutiny.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest