Vaccine related autism study?

?? He wasn't. He was advocating this as an alternative to a MEASLES vaccine. Why would anyone use three separate vaccines instead of the MMR? They'd need to hear about how the MMR vaccine caused all sorts of damage to their children - which he fraudulently provided. The alternative? The vaccine that, coincidentally, he has a patent on. (Along with a mumps and rubella vaccine, of course.)

And if they had already received the MMR vaccine, how would they know if they had been "given autism" or a bowel disease? Why, it just so happens that he has a diagnostic test that he can sell you!

Right. But why should he care? He stood to make $43 million a year (his estimate) from sales of his vaccine and his diagnostic test kits.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Nope. A treatment for IBS and measles can't be an alternative to the MMR, which is just for measles, mumps, and rubella. You'd have to have IBS first and then also need your measles shot. That would be a very small sample of the population since most kids don't have IBS. If your kid didn't have IBS, would you get this vaccine that treated it? Ofcourse not. And he wouldn't give it to you either.

There's usually symptoms for bowel disease and autism. Are you saying noone had any way to diagnose these conditions before his test? Ridiculous..

He was anathama to the pharmaceutical/govt/medical union cartel already. How else was he supposed to fund his controversial research and his new proposed clinic? It's not a sin to need money for research. It's only a sin if you don't get it from government grants and corporate sponsors I guess..OMG! From a patent of something HE invented. How horrible!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ironic, therefore, that he was trying to establish his own pharmaceutical/medical cartel based on fraudulent studies, with research founded on child abuse. I guess if you think you can make $43 million a year, you don't have to worry about things like ethics, morality or honesty.

Agreed. It is a sin to lie and abuse children to get that money.

Yes, it is horrible that he abused developmentally disabled children and indirectly caused a great many deaths.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"My daughter was given the MMR by mistake when she was only 3 months old and from that moment on she screamed with coelic and diahrroe up to 17 times a day, doctors told me she was fine over the years and that i was being a fussy mum! she never slept until she was 10 y old when she was diagnosed as having Ulcerative Colitis which is a bowel disease for life and being treated with steroyds and anti inflamamatorys, shes in pain at all times and sometime soon, since her illness has had no improvement she will have her whole bowel removed. from a healthy baby to a life long of unpleasant heath! shes now 15. "

Lucia

Posted by: Lucia Medeiros | August 12, 2013 at 01:06 PM

Get the full unfiltered truth here:

http://www.vaccinetruth.org/gut.htm

 

"Without talking to parents, Dr. Harris suggested that facts had been misrepresented and that the procedures performed on children were not safe, beneficial or even indicated. He also endorsed the statement that research, where there was no likely clinical benefit to children, should not involve anything worse than a blood test.

As a pediatrician with 34 years of practice and the grandfather of a boy who was investigated at the Royal Free Unit in June of 1999, I can assure Dr. Harris and everyone, that the benefits were well worth the small risk we took and of which we were fully informed. We begged to have our boy included in the Wakefield study and patiently waited for nine months for our turn. When his diagnosis was confirmed, we placed him on a liquid formula for 2 months, progressed him to a gluten-free/casein-free diet and started him on the appropriate medications with prompt and sustained improvement of his gastro-intestinal findings, his speech, his social competence and his immune system. Our targeted therapy was selected and proved successful only because we knew the specific pathology he had.

We never felt the investigations were aggressive and we are grateful to this day, for having been included. We believe that the only aggression inflicted on our boy was from the virus that ruined his life, and ours, forever. My grandson has evidence of measles genomic RNA in his gut wall.

Hundreds of endoscopies and colonoscopies are performed on children in order to pinpoint the diagnosis and to formulate the right therapies. A spinal tap in experienced hands is an easy and safe procedure. Much more aggressive investigations are actually performed on infants and children every day and it is safe to state that if the Royal Free program is reinstated, families will be lining up until Hampstead Park.

Dr. Harris is evidently dedicated to the health and welfare of his constituents and of the population at large. There is no doubt that he would be thoroughly distressed if 1 in 100 children died or developed obscure illnesses. Unfortunately, he has not appreciated that a whole generation is being lost and that regressive autism may actually be worse than death, for the children, their families, the communities and the Country. Dr. Harris should realize that sometime, somewhere, he must find the huge funds that are needed for the care that these poor individuals will require for the rest of their lives.

Our children are not simply "autistic" and they do not suffer from a hopeless psychiatric genetic illness that is effectively an Act of God. They have Regressive Autism, a multi-system disease with intestinal, neurological, endocrine and immune manifestations that is precipitated, in all probability, by environmental causes. It is only when that distinction is finally made, that the real causes of this epidemic will be adequately investigated; it is only then that the therapies and educational modalities necessary to limit the damage and improve the prognosis, will be supported.

"Vaccinology" has existed for two centuries; Immunology is a very recent science. Now that more is known about immune disorders and vaccine damage, we should candidly find out where we went wrong.

Maybe indeed, 1+1+1 does not equal 3, when it comes to live viruses and small children?

Maybe in fact, Andrew. Wakefield is right?

Maybe we should look for the truth instead of shooting the messenger?

Reference 1. Ferriman, A. MP raises new allegations against Andrew Wakefield. BMJ 2004; 329:726

Competing interests: Grandfather of a boy with regressive autism"====http://www.vaccinetruth.org/gut.htm

 

Too late. It's already posted now. Now they can all make an informed decision about the issue. God forbid we should let people be more informed about their own children's welfare..

 

"Griffin" was 15 days old. Evidently the author, and you, didn't know this:

"If a pregnant woman has either been vaccinated against measles or had measles, she will pass antibodies against the virus on to her child through the placenta. This form of immunity is known as passive immunity.

Once they are born, babies maintain this passive immunity for about the first six to eight months of their lives, before it starts to wane. If babies were given the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) shot during this period, the vaccine wouldn't do a good job of stimulating the immune system to fight the virus.

"So we have to wait until mom's protection wears off before we can vaccinate the baby, and then we wait a little longer just to be sure," Schaffner said.

That's why the first dose of the MMR vaccine is typically given when a baby is 12 to 15 months old, Schaffner said."

Ofcourse not even vaccines are 100% effective. About 3 % of those vaccinated still get sick. Considering the amount of unvaccinated, which include many who simply cannot get vaccinated due to reactions, allergies, etc. is much lower than that, your attempt to blame epidemics on antivaxxers (at an average exemption rate of 1.5 %) is laughable at best. And let's not forget the main reason many don't get all their kids their required vaccinations on time. They're POOR!

"The CDC, for example, has found that family income is a "significant predictor" of whether or not a child will get all the vaccines they need." Counties across the US with lower vaccination rates are often poorer, one CDC report says. "In particular, lower county-level vaccination coverage rates were found to be associated with higher levels of housing stress."

A new survey of Americans, conducted by a polling firm PorterNovelli, finds the same. And another article, about the latest National Immunization Survey findings, notes that — while the majority of American babies are getting vaccinated, "children living below the federal poverty level had lower vaccination rates than children at or above the poverty level for most vaccinations."

 

Your post is summed up well by this statement:

Yes. Like every other science denier out there - whether it is denial of tobacco risks, lead risks, ozone layer damage, climate change, or evolution - vaccine deniers are just as adept at ignoring basic science and math when that science and match conflicts with their religious, political, financial or ideological goals. For deniers, 1+1+1=4, or "now just a minute", or "THE MATH ISN'T SETTLED!" whenever such denial supports their own selfish goals. Zealots care not for math, or public health, or lives lost - provided their ideological needs are stroked.

Andrew Wakefield is the perfect example. A man who lied to try to enrich himself, and who had no qualms abusing developmentally disabled children to further his own greed. And who even now contradicts himself regularly while claiming he is the hero/victim of some vast, shadowy conspiracy.

How many children will have to die for people to stop supporting him? Hopefully we won't find out.

 

LOL! Actually all you had to do is read my entire post, where I said this:

"Ofcourse not even vaccines are 100% effective. About 3 % of those vaccinated still get sick."

 

So her kid got sick because her own vaccine didn't protect him enough. Get over it. Shit happens..

 

She has no proof of that at all. Noone knows who is sick, why, or whether they are just one of the 3% vaccines don't work for. You're essentially scapegoating a tiny minority of society for a problem you have no proof they are causing. What's after that? Concentration camps?