Many feel that the vaccine-autism debate is based upon unfounded fears, and they are prone to alarm the herd with regard to the selfishness of those who opt out of the regular vaccination schedule.
The herd mindset disregards those who have proven to suffer as a result of the vaccination process.
The popular media and vaccination interests do not want to be distracted in their endeavors, in not only insisting upon vaccination for all, but also increasing the number and types of vaccinations to a mind-boggling level; this is for the herd, and so it is good and right. These of the mandatory vaccination mindset may become frustrated by the earliest detection tools (at-risk for autism) that many are striving for within research fields; this is because those who are determined to be at-risk for autism via earliest detection -- should probably opt out of vaccination.
Each generation must contend with genetic disparity that comes about, and seems to be on the increase. However, where there is already a genetic predisposition to develop autism, there should not be added insult via vaccination. This is because there would most likely be atypical response to the vaccination.
We can never completely know why research professionals opt for a particular pursuit of cure, cause, or illness identification. We can only hope that at some point things will come together for a common good. A question that comes to mind is, does vaccination serve the herd all that well if it is actually contributing to increases in autism? I know about the cost of autism, having a daughter who has gone from earliest label of severe autism, to co-morbid condition of psychosis NOS (schizophrenic presentation), to doing much better now.
I am abundantly aware that the cost of autism has actually created an industry. The autism affected have become a commodity.
Where there is industry, there is the possibility that self-interest trumps truth. Evident today is the emergence of true dilemma that presents within atmospheres where -- if a group might be able to get something significantly gratuitous from an autism hypothesis which might become fact, they are compelled toward portions of the data that allow their calculated guesses to become manipulated givens. The possibility to experience significant gain once a hypothetical autism fiction becomes peer-reviewed fact, causes a perspective that might be blind to the data that contains contrary elements that the hypothetical pursuit entails; and this kind of perspective results in incomplete interpretations of relevant data.
Sometimes possibility of gain can mean falsification on purpose:
The Sins of Science provides information about an emerging new rule..."Rule breakers rule - everything from data fabrication to falsification, plagiarism to fraud to embezzlement is on the roster of rotten scientific behavior. It's a high-stakes game where pressure is frenzied to publish positive results." (Toronto Sun)
So, our researchers have the challenge of sifting through all of the extemporaneous data even in their learned halls. Can colleagues even trust overall data and conclusions in peer-reviewed research?
There are also the experts who actively allow misinformation to further a cause. They allow information askew, in order to achieve their preferred end game.
A recent example of information askew has to do with vaccination, and the predominant insistence that whooping cough increase had been caused by autism fears and parents not vaccinating their children. As it turned out, many who had come down with the whooping cough had already been immunized and a more virulent strain was what contributed to the outbreak. In the process of investigating the matter, some experts were simply and earnestly trying to figure out why the whooping cough outbreak had transpired. Many more experts entertained blaming untrue autism fear assumptions as fact, doing such in order to further making mandatory -- more policies for vaccination.
Even more recently, where there have been measles outbreaks, the blaming assumptive crowd has already begun to blame autism fears. This will probably result in more policies about ensuring more vaccinating. Truth does not really matter for some policy makers, fiction as fact works pretty well in furthering their objective.
"...50% of faculty and 43% of graduate students have "direct knowledge" of scientific wrongdoing, including fraud, falsification and plagiarism, in their labs."(Sins of Science)
What of those involved in prestigious research -- is their atmosphere increasingly becoming one of non-science? The smartest among us publish their chosen hypothesis, and with alarming frequency, follow through by adhering in an almost religious fashion to the beginnings of their educated guess or idea. They seem to guarantee their hypothesis as a kind of promise with regard to return on investment -- for whomever might find fiscal advantage; and may have funded the research. Are scientists chasing funding? If so, their pursuits are akin to Solomon's chasing of the wind; meaningless. What good can science such as this possibly represent?
Does vaccination contribute to development of autism?
Vaccination Courts: There are autism affected children who have co-morbid disorders that are associated with probability of damage from vaccination, and peer review does accept instances where vaccination is the cause for devastating neurological illness. There have been cases that have prevailed to do with vaccination injury that resulted in brain damage. Recently, historical court decisions have been investigated, so that autism might be verified in the children who have prevailed in litigation. This is because it had been determined that, the only diagnostic labels given emphasis when the decisions were filed, were the co-morbid medical labels that were present with co-occurring autism. A conscious effort seems to be made with regard to disallowing the term autism. This is discrimination against persons and truth.
Autism as Psychiatric Label, Co-morbid Disorder as Verifiable Cause: Autism is a label given based upon expert clinical observation. Autism is not associated with known physical cause. The autism label defines a condition evidenced by clinically exhibited features, of deficits and excesses that are present. Autism is many times accompanied by conditions like; mitochondrial disease or disorder, seizures, phenylkentonuria, congenital rubella, tuberous sclerosis, hypothyroidism, and hearing impairment.
Autism Label Confuses the Issue: Autism is a kind of missed-diagnosis because we do not know exactly what causes the manifestation of autistic features. The autism label is mishandled by many media outlets, and some in the expert community. Both use the autism label in an alarmingly general fashion, in order to deny the known risk of injury from vaccination. Nobody knows what causes autism, however much is known about the co-morbid conditions that many times contribute to clinically exhibited features, of deficits and excesses that are present in a child.
Known Vaccination Risks: There are risks involved in vaccination, albeit the medical community has made a choice to allow a few to fall into devastating illness so that the many might never be exposed to certain illnesses. The herd's overall wellness is emphasized when insisting upon the good of vaccinations. Even as, for the herd - opting out of vaccinations has always been considered reasonable under conditions where known predispositions to increased risk are present. This is important as we begin to hear more about how genetically-conditioned differences in susceptibility of some children makes them vulnerable to the process of vaccination that seems harmless for the majority.
Courchesne's recent study with regard to excess neurons present in those with autism allows for some questions. If there is indeed an autism subset with genetic factors that predispose them to have excess neurons, and if they can be identified as at-risk via diagnostic imaging at an early stage in development, should these infants opt out of the usually prescribed vaccination schedule?
There are almost 40 conditions that suggest contraindication for various vaccinations according to the CDC - and with that almost 60 notes for instructions to do with contraindications.
Some even proposed theoretical risks:
"MMR does present known and theoretical risk. Contains albumin; theoretical risk of transmission of CJD and viral diseases." The preceding a byline on many information resources to do with Measles Mumps Rubella (MMR). Other indications are given, as far as reasons for opting out of the MMR vaccination.
Residual DNA in Vaccination Carries Potential to Produce Productive Prolonged Infection: Our very own government has considered the continuing alterations and manipulations of the cell lines being developed in order to produce vaccinations. Cell lines utilize fetal tissue from abortion and thus, residual DNA from that fetal material is in vaccination cell lines. Designer Cells as Substrates for the Manufacture of Viral Vaccines, a report on designer cells utilized for development of vaccines (FDA initiated report), considers overall productive infection as a risk consideration - not just infection that results in cancer.
From Designer Cells..."Residual DNA has the potential, upon inoculation into the vaccine recipient, to produce infectious virus from this DNA and thus establish productive infection."
Very recently, one child suffered serious ill effects 24 hours after her last injection of Gardasil. Her parents asked an expert to step in an evaluate. The expert found that recombinant HPV DNA was present in the girls blood, even as it should not be -- and this from the Gardasil vaccination. Inserts that accompany the Gardasil vaccination at first stated there was no viral DNA in the product. Inserts were later revised, and even official governmental acknowledgments were revised with the fact that - yes, there actually is a little bit of virus in the Gardasil, but not enough to cause infection. Tell that to the family of the girl who is suffering. Additionally, the expert who discovered the residual DNA seems to have been thrown under the bus by professionals who should want to show concern for the fact that recombinant HPV DNA was found in the aforementioned child's blood two years after injection.
Recombinant HPV DNA, genetically engineered for vaccination, acts differently than natural HPV DNA -- it may enter a human cell: "Once a segment of recombinant DNA is inserted into a human cell, the consequences are hard to predict. It may be in the cell temporarily or stay there forever, with or without causing a mutation. Now the host cell contains human DNA as well as genetically engineered viral DNA." (Lab finds HPV DNA in blood of Gardasil recipient 2 years post-vaccination)
Ongoing Risk Assessment of Cell Lines Used to Produce Vaccinations: Behind the scenes, risk assessment is always at play - with regard to the cell lines that are utilized in order to produce vaccinations. Assessing risks of DNA residual presence in vaccines requires some absolute knowledge with regard to the amount of residual DNA being delivered via inoculation; that absolute number allows for understanding with regard to the probable amount of infectious agent being introduced -- therefore the risk rate for adverse events can be determined. Keeping DNA residuals at 10ng or below is constantly emphasized in the government initiated report, however it appears that this is not really enforced in the strictest sense - it is left to those who produce vaccines to practice diligence.
What can never be known, is if the manufacturers of vaccines have historically practiced due diligence by testing for amounts of residual DNA present in their products. Also, the recommendations for limiting DNA residual amounts came about decades after cell lines were established and utilized for production of vaccinations. We can never really know exactly how much of this residual DNA has been in vaccines, from a historical perspective.
Infection, Neurological Illness Connections: What about infection anyway? Current research with regard to neurological illness (in general) find many experts who are coming up with data which demonstrates that the various neurological illnesses might have a lot in common - even though the they are recognized by many differing names. Dementia is proposed to have a number of possible causes including infectious viruses, bacteria, disease-carrying parasites and fungi. Researchers have established a link between HIV and Creutzfeldt-Jakob (CJD) and the onset of dementia. One source believes that there may be common factors between prion diseases and other human diseases such as autism and Alzheimer's. If one were allowed to consider all things in our increasingly politically correct world, is it reasonable to ask if vaccinations present increased risk of detrimental infection that results in neurological illness for some?
It is possible. Especially as I considered comments on a virology site:
There is a huge world of viruses to test, notwithstanding undiscovered viruses or mutant viral genomes. There is a bit of history with regard to DNA tainting vaccines, as with SV40 and the polio vaccine.Any scientist knows that there will always be uncertainty and we can only do the best we can...For vaccines, certainty in safety might be better described as validated safe via current mechanisms available for said validation. Sometimes, as in the case of (recently) detecting porcine circovirus DNA in rotovirus vaccine, finding the flaw is a happy (or unhappy) accident.Because we don't know about certain viruses, could it be that we actually transmit them first through vaccines or blood transfusions?There are many more unintended things that have transpired in the history of vaccination, not just the recent example given by the above virologists.
Possible Autism Causes, Various and Environmental: How curious it is, that so many experts perceive autism to be a neurological illness, but the medical community and even vaccine manufacturers can simply say they did not contribute at all to the (dramatic increase) in autism...and this doable only as long as medical diagnostics do not yet perceive the exact neurological causes that contribute to presentation of autistic features. Reality in current research implies multiple causes for autism. Possible cause is about everything to which our children are exposed to in their environment, including vaccination.
*****
Valerie chronicled events with regard to her family's experiences surrounding autism that turned to schizophrenic like psychosis, over a sixteen year period. In "Hello, Dr. Wells" she offers a diverse sample of information via the inclusion of surveys, assessment reports, journal entries, medication evaluations, educational reports and medical reports. These are woven throughout a poignant and sometimes heart wrenching account. Upon Sarah's autism diagnoses at three years of age, Valerie was moved to constantly observe the challenges and remember everything about them. As years passed and complications from worsening autism ensued, observations and memories were written down for the sake of remembrance. Valerie lends poignancy, clarity, tenderness and humor, while also giving useful and realistic glimpses of what autism actually means for many families, educators, and medical professionals.
"Hello, Dr. Wells" is available on the web at no cost. Just Google it.