s/o vaccine threads: would like to make a poll, but can't

[BlsdMama]

Have you by any chance seen the documentary film Vaxxed? If so, what did you think of it?

 

 

 

Does anyone on here have a child who is diagnosed as autistic who was completely unvaccinated?

 

 

 

I have not seen Vaxxed.  We selectively vax and we do delay. 

 

But, to the second question, one of our daughters is undiagnosed Aspie.  Apparently, according to the DSM 5, Aspergers is gone and replaced simply by the general umbrella of "autism," despite Aspergers being pretty unique, imo.   She was totally unvaxed until around age 4 and she *definitely* was Aspie from the time she was very little.  Aspies are often trademarked as well as being *born with* exceptionally large heads, so from my *very* limited experience, it is hard for me to believe that vaxes=cause for autism.  Now, we delay and selectively vax for a host of other reasons, but autism is not on that scale for me personally.

[Crimson Wife]

We need vaccines, I don't want to run the manufacturing companies out of business. That is why the government has taken over compensation for vaccine injuries.

 

We need vaccines but we don't need to give them on the current CDC schedule. I've seen the schedule that I got as a kid and it is MUCH more spread-out and selective. Yet there weren't huge epidemics of vaccine-preventable diseases when I was a kid. The schedule in Iceland has HALF the number of doses and again, they don't have huge epidemics there.

[maize]

We need vaccines but we don't need to give them on the current CDC schedule. I've seen the schedule that I got as a kid and it is MUCH more spread-out and selective. Yet there weren't huge epidemics of vaccine-preventable diseases when I was a kid. The schedule in Iceland has HALF the number of doses and again, they don't have huge epidemics there.

I agree with this, I spread the vaccines out for most of my kids. I've stuck closer to the schedule with the younger ones because life with a big family gets complicated and I have trouble keeping track and making it in for extra appointments.

Edited October 29, 2016 by maize

[HS Mom in NC]

For those who want the vaccine companies to be held accountable for adverse reactions, I have a question. If a person has an anaphylactic allergic reaction to food--say, peanuts--should the farmer who produced that food be held accountable?

 

Wouldn't that result in farmers choosing not to grow peanuts because they are known to be hazardous to a small minority of people?

 

We need vaccines, I don't want to run the manufacturing companies out of business. That is why the government has taken over compensation for vaccine injuries.

 

I agree that companies shouldn't be held responsible for individual reactions.  Failure to meet standards in production or failure of a doctor to examine a patient according to guidelines about who is contraindicated for vaccination should result in them being held accountable,  but I've had reactions to penicillin, morphine and anesthesia that weren't because those things were made or administered badly, it was because of my unique individual body which means no one was at fault. I had a life threatening infection from a stat c-section (the placenta was tearing off.) They had to do it immediately with minimal prep because the placenta came out before my daughter right after they made the incision.   I was very fortunate to live to have an infection. If they had waited to do more prep she would've been dead and I would've too from internal bleeding.  No one was at fault in any of those situations. 

 

  There is a release form that people sign when being vaccinated that clearly states injury and death are a rare possibility.  When my middle daughter had a brain scan with contrast the paperwork clearly stated that 1 in 20,000 people have a severe reaction that results in death or severe injury.  That's perfectly fair.  If she had had a reaction it wouldn't have been anyone's fault.  Sometimes sh!t happens and no one is to blame. 

[Pen]

I have not seen Vaxxed. 

 

I am in favor of vaccination, although I have no problem with parents who choose to carefully consider delaying or spreading out vaccines - the same for skipping some vaccines, but I think that applies to a much smaller number of people.

 

Vaccine injury is real, just as dangers from medication or any type of surgery are real. I don't dispute that. I do think that many people overestimate vaccine injury, particularly as it relates to autism, and underestimate the death and disability that existed prior to vaccines. 

 

I am always open to new information. One thing that I have searched for, without much success, is convincing video of children who were developing normally and then regressed after vaccination. Video cameras with sound have been prevalent for many, many years, and of course now most people have it literally in their hand with smartphones. I know I have tons of video with sound of my now nearly-grown children, but everything I found seemed to be still photos placed into a video, sometimes with a very short video segment that lacked sound. If anyone has a link to what they consider convincing video, I'd be interested. 

 

 

The movie had a few home video bits  (very likely from smartphone) that showed what appeared to be a normal baby/toddler, followed by abnormal apparently after vaccines.  There are also people like actor Aidan Quinn (if I got the name right) who have apparently had a child who follows this same sort of course. No video that I know of, but I have no reason to think he is lying.

 

One family I have known, a neighbor who moved away and we have not kept up since they moved, with an autistic child, the child was always autistic, they said, right from first nursing in hospital.  

 

Two families I knew with autistic children had told me that their autistic children had started out normal in their behavior and development, but then changed following a vaccination and the description fit pretty well to what the film was describing also.  In one of the cases of a family known to me, they had fraternal twins, both vaccinated. One is normal (quite above average really in terms of academics and athletics), the other apparently was equally normal up to age a year and a half or so, but  then changed radically.  At that time, mercury was a suspect issue and the parents of the twins had speculated that maybe one child had gotten more mercury from the bottom of a multidose vial than the other. 

 

There may be multiple things going on getting a catch all label.

 

I don't think it is just a matter of more diagnosis.  That does not fit what I see around me.  There seems to be a lot less Down's now than when I was a kid or young adult, but way more autism.  

 

The child of the neighbors with the autism seemed different than the two people I knew who said their children developed it after vaccination. The one who was said to have been "born with it" seemed locked away in his won world. He would sometimes scream on and on or lash out to some degree, but mostly he would just sit and stare at nothing much or maybe a pattern in a rug, or a spot on a wall--probably he knew what he was looking at, but it was not clear from the outside.  He seemed relatively compliant, would walk if someone took his hand and walked with him, would sit when showed to a chair.  The two who had changed after vaccination were much more aggressive (especially the boy), head butting, going after other children with a shovel, rushing into traffic, that sort of thing.  It is such a small sample size that I don't know if that fits any others.  

[TranquilMind]

  

I also want to know if they filed a claim with the Vaccine Injuries Compensation program? That is the established route to pursue compensation for vaccine injuries in the US. Attorney fees are typically included in the settlement when a claim is approved.

Not easy to recover a claim that way and it takes years. 

[maize]

The movie had a few home video bits (very likely from smartphone) that showed what appeared to be a normal baby/toddler, followed by abnormal apparently after vaccines. There are also people like actor Aidan Quinn (if I got the name right) who have apparently had a child who follows this same sort of course. No video that I know of, but I have no reason to think he is lying.

 

One family I have known, a neighbor who moved away and we have not kept up since they moved, with an autistic child, the child was always autistic, they said, right from first nursing in hospital.

 

Two families I knew with autistic children had told me that their autistic children had started out normal in their behavior and development, but then changed following a vaccination and the description fit pretty well to what the film was describing also. In one of the cases of a family known to me, they had fraternal twins, both vaccinated. One is normal (quite above average really in terms of academics and athletics), the other apparently was equally normal up to age a year and a half or so, but then changed radically. At that time, mercury was a suspect issue and the parents of the twins had speculated that maybe one child had gotten more mercury from the bottom of a multidose vial than the other.

 

There may be multiple things going on getting a catch all label.

 

I don't think it is just a matter of more diagnosis. That does not fit what I see around me. There seems to be a lot less Down's now than when I was a kid or young adult, but way more autism.

 

The child of the neighbors with the autism seemed different than the two people I knew who said their children developed it after vaccination. The one who was said to have been "born with it" seemed locked away in his won world. He would sometimes scream on and on or lash out to some degree, but mostly he would just sit and stare at nothing much or maybe a pattern in a rug, or a spot on a wall--probably he knew what he was looking at, but it was not clear from the outside. He seemed relatively compliant, would walk if someone took his hand and walked with him, would sit when showed to a chair. The two who had changed after vaccination were much more aggressive (especially the boy), head butting, going after other children with a shovel, rushing into traffic, that sort of thing. It is such a small sample size that I don't know if that fits any others.

Down Syndrome these days is frequently discovered prenatally and termination is the most common outcome.

 

That is the clear and accepted reason for lower frequency than in the past.

 

There is way more awareness of autism spectrum disorders, which likely accounts for some of the higher incidence you are noting. There is also a distinct possibility that actual rates are rising--that hasn't been determined with certainty yet. There are endless possible reasons why this could be happening and hopefully we will figure out sooner rather than later what is going on. The vaccine hypothesis at this point seems to be one of the least likely because it has received so much scrutiny and been studied extensively--the claims made in Vaxxed have not been scientifically validated; There is at this point a significant body of research that shows NO correlation between vaccines and autism.

 

Anecdote and parental supposition as to causes cannot take the place of scientific research (imperfect as even that is).

Edited November 3, 2016 by maize

[goldberry]

Not easy to recover a claim that way and it takes years. 

 

Found this on Wiki... 

 

Filing a claim with the Court of Federal Claims requires a $250 filing fee, which can be waived for those unable to pay. Medical records such as prenatal, birth, pre-vaccination, vaccination, and post-vaccination records are strongly suggested, as medical review and claim processing may be delayed without them. Because this is a legal process most people use a lawyer, though this is not required. By 1999 the average claim took two years to resolve, and 42% of resolved claims were awarded compensation, as compared with 23% for medical malpractice claims through the tort system. There is a three year statute of limitations for filing a claim, timed from the first manifestation of the medical problem.

Edited November 3, 2016 by goldberry

[hornblower]

Down Syndrome these days is frequently discovered prenatally and termination is the most common outcome.

 

That is the clear and accepted reason for lower frequency than in the past.

 

Is it actually lower though? The only thing I found on a quick search was this " Between 1979 and 2003, the number of babies born with Down syndrome increased by about 30%." 

 

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/downsyndrome/data.html

[maize]

Is it actually lower though? The only thing I found on a quick search was this " Between 1979 and 2003, the number of babies born with Down syndrome increased by about 30%."

 

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/downsyndrome/data.html

This is interesting, although I was thinking further back than 1979. A lot of my own experience comes from Europe, from countries where abortion is extremely common and accepted in the case of a known Down Syndrome pregnancy. The statistics I have seen for the US also indicate that a majority of women choose to abort if Down Syndrome is confirmed. However, average age of mothers has been increasing in the US, and that leads to higher rates of conception of children with chromosomal abnormalities. If the percentage not aborted (including those not discovered through prenatal testing) remains the same that would lead to higher numbers of babies born.

 

My current pregnancy has some high risk indicators, so this is a bit of a personal interest for me at the moment. I know a lot of families who have children with Down Syndrome as I belong to a religious community that does not consider abortion as acceptable in such cases.

Edited November 3, 2016 by maize

[Tanaqui]

There is way more awareness of autism spectrum disorders, which likely accounts for some of the higher incidence you are noting.

 

It's actually a bit more complicated than that. Let me give you the short history.

 

Waaaaay back in the dark ages, two scientists were working with the children we now would call autistic - Hans Asperger in Vienna, and Leopold Kanner in America. And they both picked the same term for the kids they worked with.

 

Hans Asperger was under pressure to save these childrens' lives from the Nazis, and so he had a tendency to downplay their deficits and upsell their skills. Kanner did not have those same pressures. (It is somewhat common now to assume that Kanner was simply working with a "lower functioning" group, but if you read his actual work it's clear that he had a variety of "functioning levels" with the kids he was working.) Kanner was also the first to note that the parents of autistic children often had autistic traits, and came to the conclusion that it was therefore probably genetic in origin. Later, other researchers took that same fact and came up with the abominable "refrigerator mother" theory, which is patently absurd - you simply can't make a child autistic by not loving them enough, and loving your kids more doesn't make them NT.

 

Skip forward several decades, autism is in the DSM, but it's generally assumed to be very rare, and it's extremely difficult or even impossible to get a diagnosis if you're not "low functioning". Because it's so rare, doctors don't look for it in kids - "think horses, not zebras" - and there is no mandated reporting of new diagnoses. Many children who nowadays would be diagnosed as autistic were diagnosed as "mentally retarded" or "ADHD" or received no diagnosis at all. Additionally, due to a quirk of the diagnostic criteria, if they did consider autism but the patient did not exhibit all points as expected, the diagnosis would be childhood schizophrenia! (And if you're going to tell me that autism and schizophrenia are not at all alike, don't bother, I know.)

 

Eventually interest in Asperger's work spread, and with it came the idea of an autistic spectrum - that is, you could be autistic and still be able to talk, to potty train, and to learn in a regular classroom. This got formalized in the DSM - Asperger's was "autism without significant language delay" and autism was "autism with significant language delay" and formally, that was the distinction. Also, the diagnostic criteria for both conditions was changed so that not matching all of them would not get you a diagnosis of childhood schizophrenia. Instead, many patients got the diagnosis of PDD-NOS.

 

This dramatic change in the diagnostic criteria caused more patients to be diagnosed on the autistic spectrum. (Well, duh.) Due to this increase in cases, there was news about how autism was on the rise, which caused both parents and doctors to be more on the alert for this. Meanwhile, all the states started requiring reporting of new autism diagnoses. More diagnoses = more news, more news = more diagnoses, and now we're at the vicious circle you described. But it would never have happened without the change in the diagnostic criteria.

[Crimson Wife]

 

 

This dramatic change in the diagnostic criteria caused more patients to be diagnosed on the autistic spectrum. (Well, duh.) Due to this increase in cases, there was news about how autism was on the rise, which caused both parents and doctors to be more on the alert for this. Meanwhile, all the states started requiring reporting of new autism diagnoses. More diagnoses = more news, more news = more diagnoses, and now we're at the vicious circle you described. But it would never have happened without the change in the diagnostic criteria.

 

Read the 2 UC Davis MIND Institute studies I linked. The increase in autism is NOT DUE TO DIAGNOSIS CHANGE.

 

It's real. Period.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Read the 2 UC Davis MIND Institute studies I linked. The increase in autism is NOT DUE TO DIAGNOSIS CHANGE.

 

It's real. Period.

 

I only found one link where the increase was mentioned.  It was a paper from 2002 and I linked a more recent study showing that some of the increase is due to diagnostic changes.  Perhaps you missed it.

 

Anecdotal evidence supporting Tanaqui's position, I have a 50+ year old BIL who was diagnosed with "severe mental retardation" as a child who clearly displays autistic spectrum behavior. 

[maize]

Read the 2 UC Davis MIND Institute studies I linked. The increase in autism is NOT DUE TO DIAGNOSIS CHANGE.

 

It's real. Period.

 

I didn't see Tanaqui's post as denying that there could be a real increase in addition to a diagnostic increase. Her post was responding to mine, which suggested that both an increase in awareness/diagnosis AND some other factor or factors could be at play (i.e., actual increase in incidence of ASD) but was just expounding on the causes of the (real) increase in diagnosis that has certainly happened independent of any actual increase in incidence or lack thereof.

 

There have been diagnostic changes, they almost certainly account for some of the increase in diagnoses. Whether or not that plus increased awareness could account for all the increase is, I believe, not a settled question. Certainly many researchers believe that it does not and that actual ASD cases are increasing.

 

If this is true (and it does seem likely based on the data I have seen) I sure hope we find out why soon.

[Tanaqui]

Crimson Wife, I have been studying this subject with varying degrees of depth since I was fifteen and realized that I was autistic. You can ask my mother - I was autistic from the very day I was born. And I'm not alone - both my parents and one out of two uncles are part of the broader autistic spectrum. (Actually, I'm pretty sure that's how they met - my mother has a habit of self-selecting her social group to include other people who are either autistic or part of the BAS.) My maternal grandfather was autistic.

 

I know of many people who thought their older child "turned" autistic until they had another one and realized either a. the two children were both autistic from birth, but the first time around Mom and Dad didn't recognize it or b. the second child was not autistic... and from birth it was very obvious that they were not anything like their sibling.

 

I also personally know many people who didn't realize they were autistic until a child in their family got diagnosed, at which point it slowly became obvious that all the diagnostic criteria were traits that also applied to them.

 

Moving away from anecdotes, studies have shown that when you test adults, you find autism in the same percentage of the population that you find it in children, which certainly does suggest that there is no actual increase. I suppose it's possible that there's been no increase in England but there has been an increase in America, but let's be serious, that doesn't make any sense.

 

We also know that identical twins of autistics have a much higher rate of autism than non-identical siblings, and that siblings of autistics in general have a higher rate of autism than people who aren't siblings of autistics. That, too, points to a large genetic component. Genes just don't change that quickly.

 

ChocolateReign has already answered your comment about that study. She pointed out that that study is old, and that new data contradicts it. You replied with "The epidemic is real" and then, to me, with "It's real. Period."

 

That is not an argument. Repeating "It's real, it's real, it's real" is not going to convince me, or ChocolateReign, or anybody else. Doing it in bold, or italics, or underlined is not going to make it more convincing either, no more than I'm convinced when my ten year old YELLS that I'm being mean instead of stating it quietly.

[Tanaqui]

Oh, Maize, I seriously doubt there's been any actual increase in the incidence rate. Perhaps a tiny, tiny increase if autistics are more likely to have children in the past and also more likely to have those children with other autistics (assortative mating ftw!) but... again, genes just don't change that fast, not in a population.

 

Now, if new data appears, then I will certainly give it my full attention and consideration. I will not just reject it out of hand because I don't like what it says. That would be silly and childish.

[Pen]

 I have a question. If a person has an anaphylactic allergic reaction to food--say, peanuts--should the farmer who produced that food be held accountable?

 

Wouldn't that result in farmers choosing not to grow peanuts because they are known to be hazardous to a small minority of people?

 

We need vaccines, I don't want to run the manufacturing companies out of business. That is why the government has taken over compensation for vaccine injuries.

 

I'm not sure where I fit with regard to, "For those who want the vaccine companies to be held accountable for adverse reactions," since I've not thought my position on that through.  However, I think  you have set up a false dichotomy and analogies that I do not agree are apt.

 

 For one thing, I don't think there is actually any law that necessarily stops a person who has a problem with peanuts suing a peanut farmer. Is there?  Nor that protects a peanut farmer even if the farmer were negligent and produced peanuts that were unusually apt to cause sensitivity, or ones that were particularly contaminated with toxins. Is there a peanut compensation board?  I've not heard of such, but maybe there is.  We could also say that we currently need automobiles given the way our society has developed. So does it follow that there should be a taxpayer funded government compensation board for autos with design flaws that cause them to be unsafe? And for anything and everything else we "need"?  

 

 

 

 

Putting the burden on the corporation may be a disincentive to create the product at all.  But removing the burden from the corporation may be an incentive to cut corners and let things be far less safe and less careful than they might otherwise be.  Perhaps the answer is not an all one way or all the other way solution.

 

Maybe if the burden is on the taxpayer then the taxpayer should also be who gets the profits.  

 

Maybe the burden should be removed in situations of desperation such as trying to come up with a vaccine for ebola during an ebola crisis, but not for standard situations where there is time to do trials into safety and effectiveness for a vaccine, and for it in combination with other vaccines, more like for drug trials.  Maybe the standard for determining liability should be placed at a level that makes it possible to meet reasonable safety and due diligence requirements, but would not exonerate a company or its executives in the case of negligence, or if data were being manipulated. I am sure there are many options besides what your post suggests as the only two.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I'm not sure where I fit with regard to, "For those who want the vaccine companies to be held accountable for adverse reactions," since I've not thought my position on that through.  However, I think  you have set up a false dichotomy and analogies that I do not agree are apt.

 

 For one thing, I don't think there is actually any law that necessarily stops a person who has a problem with peanuts suing a peanut farmer. Is there?  Nor that protects a peanut farmer even if the farmer were negligent and produced peanuts that were unusually apt to cause sensitivity, or ones that were particularly contaminated with toxins. Is there a peanut compensation board?  I've not heard of such, but maybe there is.  We could also say that we currently need automobiles given the way our society has developed. So does it follow that there should be a taxpayer funded government compensation board for autos with design flaws that cause them to be unsafe? And for anything and everything else we "need"?  

 

 

 

 

Putting the burden on the corporation may be a disincentive to create the product at all.  But removing the burden from the corporation may be an incentive to cut corners and let things be far less safe and less careful than they might otherwise be.  Perhaps the answer is not an all one way or all the other way solution.

 

Maybe if the burden is on the taxpayer then the taxpayer should also be who gets the profits.  

 

Maybe the burden should be removed in situations of desperation such as trying to come up with a vaccine for ebola during an ebola crisis, but not for standard situations where there is time to do trials into safety and effectiveness for a vaccine, and for it in combination with other vaccines, more like for drug trials.  Maybe the standard for determining liability should be placed at a level that makes it possible to meet reasonable safety and due diligence requirements, but would not exonerate a company or its executives in the case of negligence, or if data were being manipulated. I am sure there are many options besides what your post suggests as the only two.

 

Are you under the (mistaken) impression that the Vaccine Compensation Program is funded out of the federal budget?  Hint: it isn't.

 

Your peanut farmer analogy is kind of terrible.  While there is no specific law that protects peanut farmers, there has to be a legitimate claim of negligence on the part of the peanut farmer for a lawsuit of that nature to make it into court.  A natural allergy to peanuts /= negligence on the part of the peanut farmer.

 

I am also a bit gobsmacked you are under the impression that vaccines are not heavily tested.  They are.

[Pen]

Down Syndrome these days is frequently discovered prenatally and termination is the most common outcome.

 

That is the clear and accepted reason for lower frequency than in the past.

 

There is way more awareness of autism spectrum disorders, which likely accounts for some of the higher incidence you are noting. There is also a distinct possibility that actual rates are rising--that hasn't been determined with certainty yet. There are endless possible reasons why this could be happening and hopefully we will figure out sooner rather than later what is going on. The vaccine hypothesis at this point seems to be one of the least likely because it has received so much scrutiny and been studied extensively--the claims made in Vaxxed have not been scientifically validated; There is at this point a significant body of research that shows NO correlation between vaccines and autism.

 

Anecdote and parental supposition as to causes cannot take the place of scientific research (imperfect as even that is).

 

 

I agree with the need for research.

 

I am aware of the reason there is less Down's nowadays.  

 

I am also old enough that I have personal recollection of people in iron lungs from polio, and I am reasonably certain that vaccination is a part of why I have not seen that in many years now.

 

I agree that some cases of autism may be due to increased diagnosis of it, that might have been given a different label in another era. 

 

 

However, I do not agree that parental observation, has no place.  

 

Nor that personal observation and anecdote has no place.

 

It would be like looking around and seeing a bunch of thalidomide babies and children, but saying that one cannot say that children with such defects exist because personal observation is meaningless, or saying that it has always existed in the same numbers, but is just a fluke based on a new tendency to get diagnosed. Or due to alarmists thinking that children with stunted limbs is unusual.   On the contrary, I think such observations mean that there should be an increase in the research being done.

 

It is clear to me that there is more autism around than there was in my childhood. I do not know why.  It could even be local to where I am now.

 

I do not think vaccines have been proved to cause autism. But I also do not think that vaccines are proved to be not the reason for at least some of the incidence. I do think there may be more than one thing being labeled "autism." I do think there should be more research being done as to autism causes.  Maybe there are many causes. The folic acid/folate link mentioned above was interesting to learn about.   I do think also that there should be more safety protocols and research into the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, not merely with regard to possible autism issues.

[Pen]

Are you under the (mistaken) impression that the Vaccine Compensation Program is funded out of the federal budget?  Hint: it isn't.

 

Yes. Apparently I was mistaken. Thank you for leading me to look that up.

 

Your peanut farmer analogy is kind of terrible.  While there is no specific law that protects peanut farmers, there has to be a legitimate claim of negligence on the part of the peanut farmer for a lawsuit of that nature to make it into court.  A natural allergy to peanuts /= negligence on the part of the peanut farmer.

 

I think you misunderstand my analogy.  Or missed that I was commenting on someone else's analogy. Or something.  

 

I am also a bit gobsmacked you are under the impression that vaccines are not heavily tested.  They are.

 

 

I do not think that I am under a misimpression in this case in terms of comparison to other things that drug companies do and the testing of vaccines comparative to some other drugs, etc.. But I would not be able to explain more without issues with regard to NDAs.

 

 

Off to look up funding for VCP soon.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Off to look up funding for VCP soon.

 

Excise tax on vaccines.

[Tanaqui]

It is clear to me that there is more autism around than there was in my childhood. I do not know why.  It could even be local to where I am now.

 

When were you a child, and what personal evidence are you basing this on?

 

[maize]

Oh, Maize, I seriously doubt there's been any actual increase in the incidence rate. Perhaps a tiny, tiny increase if autistics are more likely to have children in the past and also more likely to have those children with other autistics (assortative mating ftw!) but... again, genes just don't change that fast, not in a population.

 

Now, if new data appears, then I will certainly give it my full attention and consideration. I will not just reject it out of hand because I don't like what it says. That would be silly and childish.

This is certainly not an issue I have studied in any depth. What little I had seen on it seemed to indicate that the question of whether or not there was an actual increase was not settled.

 

Autism spectrum characteristics in my family certainly seem to be genetic. Also, I seem to recall that research indicates brain differences that are present before birth. Which doesn't rule out some potential trigger prenatally (that folic acid study intrigues me, though I recognize correlation =/= causation). Genetic and environmental factors can certainly interact.

 

I imagine there are twin studies out there that might cast some light on that?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

This is certainly not an issue I have studied in any depth. What little I had seen on it seemed to indicate that the question of whether or not there was an actual increase was not settled.

 

Autism spectrum characteristics in my family certainly seem to be genetic. Also, I seem to recall that research indicates brain differences that are present before birth. Which doesn't rule out some potential trigger prenatally (that folic acid study intrigues me, though I recognize correlation =/= causation). Genetic and environmental factors can certainly interact.

 

I imagine there are twin studies out there that might cast some light on that?

 

https://www.dnalc.org/view/869-Autism-and-Twin-Studies-1-.html

 

http://www.iancommunity.org/autism-twins-study

 

 

It certainly possible that there are environmental factors at play, and as the doctor says in the second link, the best way to find out if that is true starts with understanding the genetic component.

Edited November 5, 2016 by ChocolateReignRemix

[maize]

https://www.dnalc.org/view/869-Autism-and-Twin-Studies-1-.html

 

http://www.iancommunity.org/autism-twins-study

 

 

It certainly possible that there are environmental factors at play, and as the doctor says in the second link, the best way to find out if that is true starts with understanding the genetic component.

Thanks!

[LucyStoner]

I have no doubt that some cases of autism probably do have a genetic link.

 

However, how would genetics as a cause account for sharp rise in number of cases in recent years?

One theory is that the opening of lucrative economic opportunities for people with autism in high tech and other industries where certain traits associated with ASD offer some competitive advantages have led to an increased number of marriage and procreation opportunities for people on the spectrum.

 

ASD definitely runs in my family and I have two sons on the spectrum. I have many elements of the dx criteria myself. So I have looked at this a lot and I do not buy that there is any link between ASD and vaccines. I think there is a mix of genetic and environmental factors to unravel but the science isn't there to support an autism vax link.

Edited November 5, 2016 by LucyStoner

[calihil]

I've seen Vaxxed, loved it.

 

I vaccinated my oldest on schedule until she was 4, then we stopped completely. My second was vaxxed until 18 months, and my last two boys are unvaxxed. My kids are all pretty healthy, except my oldest has signs of learning disability and ADHD. She also has bad eczema that started after her 6 month shots.

 

I know several people who just know their child's autism was caused by vaccines, one even received compensation from the vaccine courts. They all claim that after the MMR their baby had the high fever, horrible high pitch scream, etc, and was never the same after that. Make it it what you want but it's their reality.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I've seen Vaxxed, loved it.

 

I vaccinated my oldest on schedule until she was 4, then we stopped completely. My second was vaxxed until 18 months, and my last two boys are unvaxxed. My kids are all pretty healthy, except my oldest has signs of learning disability and ADHD. She also has bad eczema that started after her 6 month shots.

 

I know several people who just know their child's autism was caused by vaccines, one even received compensation from the vaccine courts. They all claim that after the MMR their baby had the high fever, horrible high pitch scream, etc, and was never the same after that. Make it it what you want but it's their reality.

 

Wait...are you claiming someone has successfully received a payment for autism as a vaccine injury from the National Vaccine Compensation Program?

[December]

We need vaccines but we don't need to give them on the current CDC schedule. I've seen the schedule that I got as a kid and it is MUCH more spread-out and selective. Yet there weren't huge epidemics of vaccine-preventable diseases when I was a kid. The schedule in Iceland has HALF the number of doses and again, they don't have huge epidemics there.

 

From https://www.verywell.com/immunization-schedules-and-statistics-2633742

 

"Sure, they got fewer shots back then, but the more important statistic is the much higher numbers of many now vaccine-preventable infections people (mainly kids) got each year in the years before a routine vaccine was given for protection, such as:

• Pneumonia, meningitis, and blood infections from the Streptococcus pneumoniaebacteria – 63,067 cases and 6,500 deaths
• Meningitis, epiglottitis, and other serious infections from the Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) bacteria – 20,000 cases and 1,000 deaths
• Hepatitis A – 117,333 cases, 6,863 hospitalizations, and 137 deaths
• Hepatitis B – 66,232 cases, 7,348 hospitalizations, and 237 deaths
• Rotavirus gastroenteritis – 3 million cases, 70 hospitalizations, and 20 to 60 deaths
• Chicken pox – just over 4 million cases, 10,000 hospitalizations, and 100 deaths"

 

 

•  

Edited November 5, 2016 by December

[StaceyinLA]

I have really wanted to see the film. I (personally) believe there is a correlation between the high number of vaccines given at such young ages to the rise in autism and autoimmune issues. Babies' immune systems are getting hit from day one, and the aluminum content in vaccines alone should be concerning. Pharmaceutical company-sponsored studies haven't altered my personal thinking on the subject.

 

Also, if you research the diseases themselves, you'll see that most were well on the decline before vaccines were even introduced. That is due to better treatments, cleaner water, improved hygiene, etc. I just don't believe vaccines can take all the credit for eliminating disease.

 

I also don't think vaccines work as well as "they" would like us to believe. Many components wear off sooner than others. Many adults don't follow up with boosters and are at risk later in life. Many who are vaccinated (especially for pertussis) are able to spread diseases without knowing they are infected. The most recent measles outbreak consisted of all fully vaccinated children; elementary age too, so it hadn't been THAT long since they were vaccinated.

 

In my family, my oldest was vaccinated on schedule as an infant. Of course, 26 years ago, she didn't receive nearly as many vaccines. She had boosters at school-age and again before college. A few years later, when she got pregnant, she was NOT immune to rubella, although she had all of her vaccines in a timely fashion. She is generally very healthy, but does have allergy issues that my other kids do not (not saying that is a fault of vaccines; just stating facts). This daughter has taken antibiotics very few times.

 

My second daughter was vaccinated a little delayed, and had a pretty bad reaction to the DTP. I did follow up with her (very few) boosters later, and she also had them before college. When she got pregnant, she was also NOT immune to rubella. This daughter is very healthy. She has taken antibiotics very few times, and all of those were for UTIs in early adulthood.

 

My third daughter had a couple selective vaccines around age 4. She also had a couple boosters as a teen. She was a super healthy child, but tends to be susceptible to strep since her teen years. She has taken antibiotics more than the others due to having strep, but this has only been since she was a teen.

 

My son has had the least shots. He had one DT at 4yo and nothing else until he was headed to college. He has taken antibiotics once in his life and that was for a spider bite.

 

None of my 5 grandchildren have had vaccines. They are 5, 4, 3, 1 and 10 months. The oldest had a single round of antibiotics for fluid behind his eardrum. None of the others have ever had an illness that required medications.

 

For the record, all of my children, and all of my grandchildren, were (and are being) breastfed. I DO believe that makes a huge difference in their health.

[maize]

Wait...are you claiming someone has successfully received a payment for autism as a vaccine injury from the National Vaccine Compensation Program?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/2468343

 

Details of why the cases were settled as they were don't seem to be available.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/2468343

 

Details of why the cases were settled as they were don't seem to be available.

I have read that article before. Damages were a awarded for a brain injury approved by the court, but not for autism.

[TranquilMind]

Wait...are you claiming someone has successfully received a payment for autism as a vaccine injury from the National Vaccine Compensation Program?

 

Hannah Poling received a settlement judgment.  Perhaps she is referring to this case a few years ago.  

 

 

In addition to the first year, the family will receive more than $500,000 per year to pay for Hannah's care. Those familiar with the case believe the compensation could easily amount to $20 million over the child's lifetime.

 

Hannah was described as normal, happy and precocious in her first 18 months.

Then, in July 2000, she was vaccinated against nine diseases in one doctor's visit: measles, mumps, rubella, polio, varicella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and Haemophilus influenzae.

 

Afterward, her health declined rapidly. She developed high fevers, stopped eating, didn't respond when spoken to, began showing signs of autism, and began having screaming fits. In 2002, Hannah's parents filed an autism claim in federal vaccine court. Five years later, the government settled the case before trial and had it sealed. It's taken more than two years for both sides to agree on how much Hannah will be compensated for her injuries.

 

 

Here:  http://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/

 

In acknowledging Hannah's injuries, the government said vaccines aggravated an unknown mitochondrial disorder Hannah had which didn't "cause" her autism, but "resulted" in it. It's unknown how many other children have similar undiagnosed mitochondrial disorder.

 

 

Now that is some interesting wording. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Better article on that case.

 

 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0802904

[December]

 

I also don't think vaccines work as well as "they" would like us to believe. Many components wear off sooner than others. Many adults don't follow up with boosters and are at risk later in life. Many who are vaccinated (especially for pertussis) are able to spread diseases without knowing they are infected. The most recent measles outbreak consisted of all fully vaccinated children; elementary age too, so it hadn't been THAT long since they were vaccinated.

 

 

Which measles outbreak are you referring to?

[ktgrok]

My oldest was in daycare from age 9 months through 3 years. She has followed the CDC schedule except we have held off on Hep B and HPV. She does not have autism.

 

My DS and younger DD followed a delayed, spread-out schedule. DS had the individual measles, mumps, and Rubella shots. Those had been discontinued under pressure from the Obama Administration by the time my youngest was due for the measles shot so I delayed the combo MMR until she was 3.

 

In retrospect, it is obvious that my younger DD was showing signs of autism VERY early in infancy, long before she had most of her shots and years before the MMR. She actually received the autism diagnosis a few months before the MMR. By that point, I felt that there was no reason to hold off on the MMR any longer.

 

She has non-regressive autism, just a very delayed development. She has always seemed much younger than her chronological age. Physically as well as everything else. She didn't lose her first baby tooth until last week at age 7 years 10 mos.

 

The individual measles/mumps/rubella vaccines were nearly impossible to find way before Obama. But that aside, similar issues. My kid on the spectrum was delayed for most of his vaccines, but his issues were there the day he was born. Certainly in the first week. He was totally different, and it was before any vaccines. 

[ktgrok]

I have no doubt that some cases of autism probably do have a genetic link.

 

However, how would genetics as a cause account for sharp rise in number of cases in recent years?

 

A link to certain forms of air pollution has also been shown. My child that tis on the spectrum, I lived a few yards away from I-95 while pregnant with him, drove on that highway back and forth to work, and my office was a few yards away from the I-95 overpass. So lots of exposure to diesel engine particulates (the ones linked). 

 

I moved to an area with better air quality and further from highways with the others, and they are not on the spectrum, but they also have a different father. 

[LucyStoner]

I have not seen Vaxxed. We selectively vax and we do delay.

 

But, to the second question, one of our daughters is undiagnosed Aspie. Apparently, according to the DSM 5, Aspergers is gone and replaced simply by the general umbrella of "autism," despite Aspergers being pretty unique, imo. She was totally unvaxed until around age 4 and she *definitely* was Aspie from the time she was very little. Aspies are often trademarked as well as being *born with* exceptionally large heads, so from my *very* limited experience, it is hard for me to believe that vaxes=cause for autism. Now, we delay and selectively vax for a host of other reasons, but autism is not on that scale for me personally.

My son was dx with ASD, not Aspergers back when Aspergers was a seperate dx and he also has a gigantic head. It's large enough that when he rolled over from his back so early, I dismissed the grandparents' coos in ode to his precociousness by saying his body was merely following where ever his giant head fell.

 

From what I have seen I agree with Autism, Aspergers and PDD all falling into the ASD dx category. My son's symptoms are very similar to many kids who all got a range of different dx.

Edited November 6, 2016 by LucyStoner

[AimeeM]

I have no doubt that some cases of autism probably do have a genetic link.

 

However, how would genetics as a cause account for sharp rise in number of cases in recent years?

I don't necessarily think there has been a sharp rise in the number of autistics in recent years. 

I think there has been a rise in the dx - not the autism. I believe this has more to do with an increased understanding and awareness of it than it does an increased number of actual cases. 

 

For example, I have little doubt that if early intervention had been around when DH was a child, he would have been dx'd as on the spectrum. 

 

 

To answer the original post, all of my children are fully vaccinated. DS7 was delayed, due to medical issues, but was caught up by about 2.5 or 3. DD15 has a language-based learning difference and adhd (learning differences run in my family, and not just in recent years - my father still spells phonetically without a spell check). 

DS4 is classified as autistic (level 3 support/severe-end) with a dual expressive/receptive language delay. He is as vaccinated as the rest of my children. He displayed autistic "traits" in infancy. 

 

My family member's son is unvaccinated and autistic. First she was on the vaccination-causes-autism bandwagon. Now that she has an unvaccinated autistic child, she believes that his autism would have been more severe had he been vaccinated.

Edited November 6, 2016 by AimeeM

[TranquilMind]

Better article on that case.

 

 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0802904

Offit's hysterical bias and financial ties make him hard to take seriously on this issue. He did manage to reign in the typical condescension for his peers though.

 

Normally, he does not.

Edited November 6, 2016 by TranquilMind

[redheadmom]

https://www.dnalc.org/view/869-Autism-and-Twin-Studies-1-.html

 

http://www.iancommunity.org/autism-twins-study

 

 

It certainly possible that there are environmental factors at play, and as the doctor says in the second link, the best way to find out if that is true starts with understanding the genetic component.

 

When I was pregnant last year, I remember reading about gut bacteria, pregnancy and autism.  Not correlation/causation.  Just another link.  Maybe there is an environmental factor, mitochondria tendency, or other element that drs can't see.   I can't find the article from last year, but these are similar.  

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2016/06/autism-and-gut-bacteria-surprising-link-between-mind-and-stomach

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-bacteria-may-play-a-role-in-autism/

[gardenmom5]

I have an asd child.  he was showing  oddities that concerned the neonatologist in the hospital nursery.

 

we also have  an identified genetic link, as well as maternal illness (I had pneumonia from very early in my pg.)  that can affect the production of a specific protein in the placenta.

 

[Pen]

When were you a child, and what personal evidence are you basing this on?

 

 

60's-70's.  Observation of the world around me.

[frugalmamatx]

Answering as best I can without causing issues. 

 

I was vaxed fully except for P from DPT due to a severe reaction to the pertussis portion of the shot as an infant. Thankfully a doctor wrote out a permanent waiver ON my shot record saying I should never get it again. Still have issues getting doctors to accept it though. I got behind for a few years in middle school and then was caught up very fast at age 14 when I went back to public school. I can also pinpoint my auto-immune issues {RA, Graves's, ETC} as to starting at the same time - I think the first popped up about the time I got the last MMR {had 3 in like 2 months according to my shot records}. Suffered from auto-immune hives and increasing food allergies from that point onwards. Now I also did have TB tests every 6 months as well, so it could have been something in those as well. I ended up developing an allergic reaction to the TB test after years. 

 

DD is unvaxed with the exception of hepB at birth {hospital bullied me into giving it as they threatened to call CPS if I didn't}. She developed allergic colitis within hours, and her trigger was Oats. Severe enough to react to minuscule amounts THROUGH nursing. Now yes an Oat allergy runs in the family. But she was fine until after that HepB shot - alert, active, etc. After the shot she seemed off - not something I could put my finger on but just off. I actually remarked on it to the nurse when she brought her back, and my concerns were brushed off. I don't know if it triggered it or not. But I know I went through a year plus of hell with her colitis, and she has multiple severe food allergies that only now at 10 is she beginning to grow out of. 

 

We both are on the ASD spectrum. Not enough to fully diagnose, but enough to be "quirky". DD when she was little was much further on the spectrum and had pronounced autistic behavior but was very high functioning. Didn't seek therapy because of other family issues, and she has bloomed and grown out of it so much that people can't believe she ever was that severe. 

[Shellydon]

As a rehab specialist, I have seen around a dozen children that are completely unvaxxed that are on the autism spectrum, some severally autistic.  In my extended family, the cousins that are completely unvaccinated are the most frequently ill.