China Coronavirus

[RedHand88]

How do childhood vaccines cause Autism? What is the proposed mechanism and where is the evidence?

[Last Man]

Well there certainly some concerning signals in that 50 years ago the incidence was 1 in some hundreds now it might be as high as 1 in 20,( these figures are from memory so don't hang me, the uptick is pretty stark). The increase in 3rd world countries appears to track mass vaccination also.
A few theories have been proposed such as toxic adjuvants used to provoke the immune response to the antigen/antigens in a particular vax or another very interesting "bolus theory" where most vaccines are injected intramuscularly there is high potential for a "slug" for want of a better word to enter the vascular system and very quickly travel around the body. The immune system is triggered to mount a very concentrated response and depending on where in the body can cause lasting harm. For example the brain, heart, lungs, pancreas. 
This strikes a chord with me personally as my daughter received her MMR as a 4 year old. within an hour the injection site was very swollen and inflamed and she was quite unwell and not improving. 2 weeks later diagnosed T1 diabetic.
Undoubtedly work need to be done to settle these questions but it will most likely never be funded nor will scientists risk their livelihoods/careers as there are so many vested interests in keeping things as they are. Unless we the parents/grandparents/consumers demand clarity. We might find out it is something else entirely!
Just to wrap my point up,the term "misinformation" is becoming way over-used, I see it all as ideas/information that deserves to be considered and respectfully debated. Then decide for yourself and go on about your business and do the best you can.
Happy Christmas and New year, health and happiness to all.

[RedHand88]

It has been looked at though, extensively. There are dozens of studies which prove there is no link. None. It is a complete falsehood to say there is.

I really don't believe the 2 sides of this argument deserve equal credence either, in the same way the flat earth v globe earth sides do not deserve to be taken similarly at face value.

[Tony Baloney]

It has been looked at though, extensively. There are dozens of studies which prove there is no link. None. It is a complete falsehood to say there is.

I really don't believe the 2 sides of this argument deserve equal credence either, in the same way the flat earth v globe earth sides do not deserve to be taken similarly at face value.

+1. I do believe those studies linking low IQ and fervent belief in conspiracy theories 

[theskull1]

A few theories have been proposed such as toxic adjuvants used to provoke the immune response to the antigen/antigens in a particular vax

It has been looked at though, extensively. There are dozens of studies which prove there is no link. None. It is a complete falsehood to say there is.

Let me explain how those studies were conducted just to add to LM's post

In EVERY vaccine safety trail, the 'placebo' contained the adjuvant ingredients of the vaccine (so only the active vaccine component was missing).
The trails compared the adverse reactions in the group who got the active vaccine with those who got the 'placebo'. If the adverse reaction numbers were similar the conclusion was the vaccine was safe as it was no worse than the placebo. What has NEVER happened in the history of vaccine development is using a saline placebo to understand if the adjuvant is causing the adverse reactions more so than the active vaccine component. Surely we can all agree that this leaves a very big unknown. 

 

[Premier Emperor]

Well there certainly some concerning signals in that 50 years ago the incidence was 1 in some hundreds now it might be as high as 1 in 20,( these figures are from memory so don't hang me, the uptick is pretty stark).

People are getting diagnosed with autism nowadays would have been dismissed as being a bit odd 50 years ago.

[RedHand88]

A few theories have been proposed such as toxic adjuvants used to provoke the immune response to the antigen/antigens in a particular vax

It has been looked at though, extensively. There are dozens of studies which prove there is no link. None. It is a complete falsehood to say there is.

Let me explain how those studies were conducted just to add to LM's post

In EVERY vaccine safety trail, the 'placebo' contained the adjuvant ingredients of the vaccine (so only the active vaccine component was missing).
The trails compared the adverse reactions in the group who got the active vaccine with those who got the 'placebo'. If the adverse reaction numbers were similar the conclusion was the vaccine was safe as it was no worse than the placebo. What has NEVER happened in the history of vaccine development is using a saline placebo to understand if the adjuvant is causing the adverse reactions more so than the active vaccine component. Surely we can all agree that this leaves a very big unknown. 

 

I'm sorry but this is just not true at all....

The notion that vaccines are somehow linked with Autism started off the back of a proven fraudulent now retracted study (Wakefield 1998). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud

Like I said, there are a huge amount of studies that prove there is ZERO link between vaccines and autism.
Here is a meta-analysis which covers 10 studies and 1.2million children...

https://www.autismspeaks.org/science-news/no-association-between-autism-vaccines#:~:text=A%20meta%2Danalysis%20of%20ten,measles%2Dmumps%2Drubella%20vaccine.

(For comparison, the Wakefield study involved a grand total of 12(!) children

Now please, for the love of God STOP pushing this nonsense on a GAA forum.

[Wildweasel74]

Never seen as much crap talked, and none of us a doctor.

[PadraicHenryPearse]

I read somewhere there is higher instances of autism when the women is older giving birth.

I dont get the people will loss their livihood/career aspect. Work will be peer reviewed etc. it will then it will be replicated etc.

[Milltown Row2]

There are multiple reasons, some will hang their hat on one reason because of something that's happened to them.

When we talk about an upsurge, yeah older women having children in their mid 30's and 40's a concern considering 50 years ago most people were married by the age of 21! So another trend to be looked at. But it still happened back in the day, we just didn't have a name for it.


In my class during primary school I definitely had at least 3 or 4 lads who were on the spectrum, plenty including myself with some form of ADHD and those with dyslexia.

But h

aving any form of medication could have an adverse reaction to your health.

So is it better to 'gamble' with chances of getting the many dangerous illnesses that the vaccines cover or very low chance of taking the vaccine to help with preventing life threatening illnesses?

Do what you want for you, but let others decide for themselves.

[Wildweasel74]

There's is apparently increased risk [not sure % probably just a few %)of sthing going wrong with child birth from 40 and up. You expect increased risk to be honest.

[Tony Baloney]

There's is apparently increased risk [not sure % probably just a few %)of sthing going wrong with child birth from 40 and up. You expect increased risk to be honest.

In general the average age of first time mothers is a fair bit higher than our generation. This absolutely will bring a higher prevalence of "issues". MR is also correct that these "issues" are not new as I'm sure we all had people in our school who were somewhere in the neurodiverse spectrum. There were people in my secondary school who would now be in a special needs school. Secondary education back then didn't know what to do with those with additional educational needs.

[Last Man]

I read somewhere there is higher instances of autism when the women is older giving birth.
If the data analysis confirms an associational risk I certainly would welcome the work to establish causation, people should understand better the risks of deciding to have kids later in life.

I dont get the people will loss their livihood/career aspect. Work will be peer reviewed etc. it will then it will be replicated etc.
Scientists have families to feed and mortgages to pay like all of us so he who pays the piper calls the tune, the fact that the raw data is very often witheld now from published studies tells its own story.
The LMHR study in the states which has rattled Lipidology and the statin therapy industry significantly was crowd funded. I am hopeful this might offer us a way to decouple research from vested interests on a wider scale.
At least one prominent ex scientific journal editor has admitted that the way the peer review process is currently being applied is seiously questionable.
It is just human nature, we cant help ourselves.
That is why I personally lean towards the precautionary principle.
 

[Last Man]

Do what you want for you, but let others decide for themselves.
Amen Brother I couldn't agree more!!

[Milltown Row2]

Someone pays someone in every walk of life meaning there's a vested interest in nearly everything we do for someone else's needs, whether you're self employed or working for big pharma!

We live we die, enjoy the moment

Happy Xmas ya filthy animals