What the News Isn’t Saying About Vaccine-Autism Studies ( Sharyl Attkisson )

Sharyl Attkisson ^ | April 25, 2015 | Sharyl Attkisson

[stanne]

Factual disagreement??

No no

It was you who implied I don’t care about eradication of childhood diseases. Liberal argument style.

Go away

[upchuck]

Thanks for the pings, KC and PROCON...

Sharyl
Attkisson
Ping!

Want on or off this ping list? Just drop me a FReep mail.

Amazon link to Sharyl's latest book.

[stephenjohnbanker]

BTTT

[kearnyirish2]

Yes, I’ve heard of that; are the symptoms as unverifiable as “autism spectrum”?

[JimRed]

Almost all studies are financed by a drug company.

Would the study be more valid if it was financed by anti-vac organizations or individuals?

[AnAmericanMother]

I implied nothing - simply stating facts. And I mentioned not only child and adolescent vaccines but adult as well. As an adult I have received cholera and yellow fever vaccines, which have fairly nasty reactions (but really do beat having cholera or yellow fever). I also have had adult whooping cough because my Tdap pertussis immunity ran out before the recommended 10 year on the tetanus component. Not dangerous in adults, just annoying as heck, but if transmitted to kids can be risky.

And after all we are discussing the supposed link between autism and childhood vaccines (that correlation/causation problem).

So I think you are inferring something, but that is definitely your problem and not mine. I won't tell you to go away because I am always interested in a factual discussion, and you have just as much right to post as I do.

See how that works?

[Norseman]

There is at least one additional factor I believe every parent, or prospective parent, should consider and that’s the possibility that a Vitamin D3 deficiency could be the underlying cause that triggers an adverse immune response when given a vaccination.

Dr. John Cannell published a paper several years ago in which he explained his reasoning behind his theory that a widespread deficiency of vitamin D3 (commonly referred to as the sunshine vitamin, since that’s where we get most of our D3) could be causing the rising incidence of autism spectrum cases.

In the late 1980’s pediatricians decided to promulgate the advice that pregnant mothers should practice sun avoidance, and that they should also see that their young children weren’t over-exposed to the sun. The result has been a steady increase in the sun blocking feature of sunscreens.

Because pregnant women are generally very attentive to their doctor’s advice, this advice was widely followed. Dr. Cannell explains that the result was a significant increase in vitamin D3 deficiency in both pregnant women and in their babies, and that this led to significant increases in autism spectrum cases. He even has cases where supplementing vitamin D3 directly has reversed autism behavior, but only in some cases. I believe he said about 25% of the cases he’s dealt with have seen a significant reversal in symptoms and 25% didn’t respond, while about half saw some improvement but not a near reversal. To my knowledge he hasn’t done a paper on those results, so they’re strictly anecdotal.

My main point in relating this: If you have a young child, or are pregnant, or are thinking of becoming pregnant, spend some time reading up on Vitamin D3 as well as on spacing out vaccines.

For the record, unless autism clearly runs in the family, vaccine avoidance is probably a mistake for a lot of reasons, in my opinion. I’m not trying to make an anti-vaccination case here, just informing people on one more thing to consider. Below is a link to Dr. Cannell’s article:

http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/VitDNonAuto/Cannell%20Autism%20Vit%20D.pdf

[Norseman]

>>“I don’t remember anything about autism in the 50’s. Was it called something else then?”<<

Apparently it was referred to medically as childhood schizophrenia prior to the change in terminology to autism. At least that’s what I read somewhere today while reading some sites trying to sort out the actual increase in autism.

[stanne]

Maybe you should read the article and quit annoying and wasting people’s Time

Blech

[Norseman]

>>Absolutely. I once worked with a guy who took both of his sons to doctor after doctor until he found one that would label both sons ‘Aspergers’ so he could get money for special schooling.<<

And, from your telling (by implication), there was absolutely nothing wrong with his kids, right?

I’m betting he’d differ with you on that, but maybe not. Maybe he was just a scum-sucking dirtbag who put his kids through that for the money, labeling them in the bargain.

[upchuck]

Thanks.

[Norseman]

>>... and no matter how hard you dig and how hot you are on the trail of a story, sometimes there is no “there” there.<<

I think you misread the objective of her reporting. It wasn’t to prove the existence of vaccine-related autism. Instead it was to illustrate the extent to which those with an interest in getting everyone vaccinated would go to repress an opposing view that also has some reasonable scientific backing.

Science has certainly been corrupted in the global warming scam; there’s no reason to assume that it hasn’t also been corrupted to some extent when it comes to another government goal, 100% vaccination for childhood diseases.

She makes a good case, as she does for most issues she tackles.

[Kriggerel]

Good to see a little sanity in this thread. :)

[Teacher317]

The supposedly best medical experts in the world who deny vaccines have anything to do with autism remain at an utter loss to explain this generation’s epidemic.

So... because someone label's it an epidemic (it isn't)... and because no known cause has been proven yet... it must be vaccines. Gotchya. Brilliant scientific minds there.

Hey, someone (me) said I don't have enough money. There's no know cause for it, so it must be... Freepers. Please send your moeny to me at PO Box 123, Overthere, IN, 46200.

[dasboot]

Rabid? Check out your own mind.

[John Valentine]

Autism might be preferable to being an asshole like you.

[stanne]

And, as Atkkisson can no doubt attest, bigoted pro corporatist ignorant hatred is where this argument goes

Some mothers choose to be informed and careful consumers. Trey prefer to share what they’ve found with others, after witnessing the anguish of parents, an unprecedented amount, who cannot have a normal family existence for the presence of a screaming violent eight year old who will never have a normal life and never had

Of course there is an unprecedented increase in cases of autism

Calling me nasty names is not an intelligent way to approach it

But that’s just me

[John Valentine]

I made a very innocuous post. It was short, unemotional, informed, and non-agressive.

Yet, you took umbrage at it and called me all these things - emotional, aggressive and ignorant. You also lied about something you didn’t have any knowledge of - that I had not read the article.

Then you doubled down when I called you out on your hypocrisy.

The word I used to describe a person capable of your actions is an accurate one.

Was it intelligent? It was rude, I will give you that, but then it was well deserved considering your boorish bullying on-line behavior. And it just you.

[stanne]

Your post 76 is profane. That’s against FR rules. You want to continue this? Then bring it to the moderators.

Otherwise realize that if you had read the article you’d be informed and open minded re what people are trying to say about this, for the sake of the boys Which you are not

This is a corporatist problem and as such is dealt with from ignoramuses as well as corporatist a with bigotry

Leave me alone

[AnAmericanMother]

I would suggest that the least likely group of scientists to be corrupted (as opposed to those in the global warming scam) are the medical/pharmaceutical ones. They take their jobs very, very seriously. I know some pharmaceutical chemists, and they are pretty boring guys but dead serious about their work, which is as it should be.

The reason global warming "science" has been corrupted is the same reason that social sciences have been corrupted: the politicization inherent in government grants. The agencies mostly control the funding, and we know how Obama's minions have wreaked havoc on the DEA, IRS, BLM, ATF/E, etc. Get the results they "suggest", or you won't get another grant. Even the CDC got into the act with the attempt to treat "firearms deaths" as a public health crisis, but to their credit the rank and file scientists opposed it.

It is actually safer from a corruption standpoint for pharmaceutical cos. and healthcare cos. to fund research than government grants. For example, I would trust the larger drug companies before I'd trust the CDC.