Anti-Vaxxers in a nutshell.

Post Reply New Topic

The hypothesized reason as to why the vaccines wouldn't cause adverse effects in everyone or a larger cross section of people from what i have found is that some people have an inherited propensity of how well their body ejects the mercury. Initially and still it is a common belief that the ethylmercury in the shots ejects out of the body faster than methylmercury, but that was because of things like hair and urine tests that showed so little in hair and urine excreted - but from what i understand they didn't test the amount they put in versus the amount that came out and the amount of a difference that accumulated in the brain and organs. i also don't think it's *just* vaccines but environmental. i worry about the future, and if taking thimerosal out of the equation would lessen the amount of people having to deal with this condition, i think it should not be dismissed so easily when scientific studies have shown that it is a neurotoxin that does affect the glutamate homeostasis.

^ I honestly haven't followed the vaccine controversies closely, but since anti-"anti-vax" has clearly become a religion, I'm naturally inclined to be skeptical of their claims.

Speaking biologically, "autism" is a phenotype, and a highly variable one at that. It certainly can be produced by more than one genotype -- indeed, there are probably multiple genes involved, all of which are subject to epistatic effects (gene-gene interactions). Furthermore, each one of those genes, taken individually, has a "norm of reaction" -- a range of phenotypes that it can produce depending upon environmental conditions.

Research studies *presume* that they are examining homogeneous populations -- an experimental group and a control group. But if you don't know the genetic basis of the condition, then obviously you don't really know whether you have a homogeneous population (and in fact, you almost certainly know that you do not). Common biological sense tells you that even if a given environmental condition (vaccine treatment) is harmless for certain genotypes, it may well be harmful for others, perhaps for an unidentified subpopulation; and since you don't really know the underlying genetics, unidentified subpopulations of that kind may well exist.

Thiomerosal is not and never was in the MMR.

The MMR (the combined vaccination for mumps, measles and rubella) was introduced in 1971. ASD condtions existed long before this.

Not all autistic people since the MMR was introduced were vaccinated at all. There have always been families who chose not to vaccinate for various reasons.

Not all "scientific studies" (most, perhaps) actually prove anything. Proof is derailed by many, many factors: some are design faults, methodology used, control of confounding variables, sampling techniques, statistical error, experimenter bias, data type-of-analysis errors, confirmation bias, matching "theorised facts" to fit experimental theory, tunnel vision, corruption in the peer review system, corruption in the reporting of results and even the reporting of raw data, absence of control groups, poor selection of control groups... and so on. Science generally produces very few black and white, uncontestable findings. Science is a process, not a set of facts. Even in the 21st century, this is not well understood by the general public, anti vaxxers, some researchers and the media people get these "facts" from.

Autism appears to have been in the world for a long time; the role of mutations in caucasian populations may or may not make this group more likely to produce infants on the AS spectrum. There is still a lot of work to do.

The main cause of exposure to mercury is teeth fillings (not all teeth fillings contain mercury). So if the Anti-vaxxers are right, then people with mercury in their teeth of in their mother's teeth should be on the spectrum compared to people whose mothers have no teeth-mercury and whose children have none. It seems unlikely. Adults and dentists in the 21st century increasingly moved away from the use of mercury in teeth fillings, so if the AV idea was correct, then AS rates should have declined significantly, rather than increased.

That's my view in a nutshell. Wakefield was struck off for valid reasons. He is not a doctor anymore.

Personally I didn't mention the MMR, and I think the MMR and the whole Dr. Wakefield scandal was simply a way to try to invalidate everything people had to say regarding thimerosal. Thimerosal has been in vaccines since the 30s, was taken out of most around 99, but then put into the flu vaccines in 2002 that, if a pregnant woman and newborn follow the vaccination schedule for flu shots, they actually get more thimerosal now from those vaccines than what people were getting before through the other vaccines. Autism has been around a long time, and there has never been nailed down a reason for it or a way to diagnose other than a plethora of symptoms. The following website I know is not necessarily a scientific source, but it does bring up some logical points. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/88323

It's about a vaccine court case conceded in 2009 about how one girl won in the courts because they state the autistic tendencies came about because of an underlying mitochondrial disorder that was, in the court's opinion, exacerbated by the child's vaccines. It says this, "4) If the government is claiming that this child does NOT have autism, then how many other children might also have something else that merely “mimics” autism?

Is it possible that 10%-20% of the cases that we now label as “autism,” are not autism at all, but rather some previously undefined “look-alike” syndrome that merely presents as “features” of autism?

This question gets to the heart of what autism actually is. The disorder is defined solely as a collection of features, nothing more. If you have the features (and the diagnosis), you have the disorder. The underlying biology is the great unknown.

But let’s say the government does determine that these kids don’t have actual “autism” (something I speculated on HuffPost a year ago). Then shouldn’t the Feds go back and test all people with ASD for impaired oxidative phosphorylation, perhaps reclassifying many of them?

If so, will we then see “autism” cases drop by tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people? Will there be a corresponding ascension of a newly described disorder, perhaps something like “Vaccine Aggravated Mitochondrial Disease with Features of ASD?”"

It's worth a read IMO, i don't know what's happened with this since, but it's interesting.

Meta-analyses are the single most powerful tool available to scientists, because they actually pool the results of multiple studies, and run statistics on that pooled data set. This provides much larger sample sizes than you could normally achieve, and it largely overcomes the fact that sometimes a study reaches the wrong conclusion just by chance (i.e., the odds of the pooled data from multiple studies producing an erroneous conclusion is much, much lower than the odds of a single study being wrong). As a result, these studies are considered to be the highest level of evidence.

There is only one meta-analysis for vaccines and autism, but it’s a big one (Taylor et al. 2014). It had a sample size of over 1.2 million children, which is an extraordinarily large sample size that provides tremendous statistical power. Nevertheless, this study did not find any associations between autism and vaccines, thimerosal, or mercury. To date, that is the most conclusive answer, scientifically speaking.

It's impossible for there to be a correlation between vaccines and autism.

There was never a spike in autism after Jenner introduced the smallpox vaccine to the "masses." Or after the introduction of all the vaccines subsequently. We would have seen a concurrent spike in autism cases during the time when the injected and oral polio vaccines were introduced in the 1950s and 1960s.

I guess some of the preservatives in vaccines should be investigated for unwanted side-effects in general---but there's probably no correlation in them, either.

Sometimes, I do wonder whether the trauma of receiving a vaccine could have adverse effects on children.

No, it doesn't mean that I would ban vaccines. The benefits of vaccines far, far outweigh any potential untoward events.

And that is the crux of the problem with today's mentality.

I would not be surprised if vaccines, even those properly made and administered have directly caused autism. Getting vaccinated entails risk. Everything we do in life entails risk. The heart of being an adult is learning to weigh risks in decision making. Mistakes and pretty bad ones at that will always be made judging risks no matter how rigorous we are.

We as a society are becoming less and less accepting of this fact of life. If something is not perfect today it is not a bad decision or bad luck there must be a nefarious conspiracy involved. I think our technology giving us instant answers is the main reason why for this mentality.

those who say vaccines causes autism are insulting the autism foundation. im sorry but i don't take those kind of people seriously.

I suspect that people, attempting to settle the issue, with guilt-ing tactics rather than objectivity, are not thinking in an autistic way. Maybe, they were shopping for doctors, or self-diagnosed.

None of the socalled independents do any independent research. It is all information, compiled , from the public domain. You can hear what the scientists say, in their own words, see video of what happens, on a microscope slide.

What's so political, about that.

I think those people hatched out of nutshells. That's why they're so nuts.

I have two comments, on this thread.....


I have GREAT respect for your knowledge on mental health issues, and so-forth----but, PLEASE use that same intelligence, that allowed you to say "Not all "scientific studies" (most, perhaps) actually prove anything. ", and "Science is a process, not a set of facts.", to let someone else express their opinion, without you giving them a flat-out "No". SURE, you have the right, as anyone, to express your opinion----but, your posts come-across, as "YOU'RE wrong, and I'M right".

2. I ALSO think it's quite possible that shots can cause Autism----but, as I've said, before, I feel it's A possible cause, not THEE cause (as in, "one-and-only"), as I think it's possible that our ingestion of metals (pretty much, all types), through foods and meds, etc., could also be a factor (like, who knows, maybe lead in our drinking water, for instance, and pesticides, metals in toothpaste, metals in talcum power----and, the list goes on-and-on).

I like your comment...lol

I haven't researched the "autistic epidemic", but I have heard it mentioned that identifying autism is much easier these days...
Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it really the case that it might simply be "fake news" and that it is simply a perception of a dramatic increase?



The operative word was "formal"...
Now it makes sense...
I can understand why others were confused...

All settled...
Move along people...
Nothing more to see here...

They are dangerous because by not getting their kids vaccinated, they are risking their lives and lowering herd immunity. Its horrible that they will risk their kids lives because they don't want them to be like me.

Some think they are endangering their children's lives because of the possible averse reaction to the vaccine...
There is a small percentage who do react badly to some drugs...
Personally, I think on the balance of probability, it is usually better to vaccinate since the incidences of problems are minuscule, based on information I have seen...

the girl from that video is posting in this thread, cool!

Practically everything you do in life incorporates an element of risk/vs reward.

But you don't see a guy with a gunshot wound saying to the paramedics, "Go away, I should just stay home because it's possible the ambulance will crash and kill me on the way to the hospital." And even the farfetched possibility of an ambulance crash is many times more likely than an adverse reaction to a vaccine.

Although maybe ambulances are just a big pharma conspiracy too...