I'd like to deal today with vaccines.
The subject is 'up' for me because of (a) recent reports out of both the US and the UK that the authorities, spooked by more parents starting to refuse vaccinations for their children, are mooting making the vax schedule mandatory; and (b) two letters I have written this week to two different papers, regarding articles they ran on this subject - ie, articles that interface with this subject, unbeknownst to the journalists involved.
More on that subject area later. First, the letters:
[This to the (Scotland) Sunday Times on the occasion of an article of theirs on a study linking paracetamol to asthma and other allergies]
21 September 2008
I must take exception to Lois Rogers' statement that "there remains no glimmer of an explanation of the origins of (allergies)" (Comment, September 21).
Studies have shown that with the increase in the vaccination schedule there was an increase in levels of allergies/asthma and full-blown anaphylaxis. Other studies have uncovered the connection: ingredients in vaccines - whose job it is to elicit an inflammatory response, thus triggering the body's antibodies - when administered with a food protein, result in long-term sensitization to that food antigen.
This explains why babies and toddlers react on their first exposure to the peanut or other antigen: the babies have been sensitized by their vaccines to the proteins through breast milk or formula ingested at the time of vaccination. This also explains why children are anaphylactic to a variety of proteins, such as different treenuts, peanuts, egg, legumes, milk, seeds, etc, depending on what proteins the mother ate at the time of vaccination; and also on the molecular-weight similarity to ingredients in the vaccines themselves; and also to the latex stoppers in the vials.
Why isn't this link being recognised? I think it's obvious: the health authorities don't want anything jeopardizing their vaunted medical modality of vaccinations. Not even the truth about the full extent of their side effects. Not very scientific.
We need a major debate on this issue, especially because we're not just talking about allergies as adverse events to various vaccines. We're talking about a whole host of autoimmune and neurological-development conditions associated with them. That debate is long overdue - and is not helped by newspaper articles that continue to promote ignorance about these matters.
As for the calpol link: It is given when babies have fever. Many babies run a temperature from their jabs. To look solely at paracetamol as the potential culprit is to be myopic - or deliberately obfuscatory.
Yours etc; including a
P.S. An excellent website for info in this regard is vran.org
[And this, to The (Glasgow) Herald, on a feature article on dyspraxia]
25 September 2008
"According to experts, there are references to dyspraxia in medical literature dating from the 1950s and 60s, yet still little is known about it today" (Hands-on experience essential, Focus, September 25). That is because the medical authorities don't want to know, and would prefer to leave such conditions to therapy, including drug therapy.
Anybody who has studied this matter, of the likes of ADD and ADHD and dyslexia and dyspraxia and ASD and PDD-NOS and a whole host of such neurological-development acronyms, knows that they date in large from the beginning of the rollout of the mass vaccination programmes at that time.
Much of this could have been avoided if the authorities had instituted long-term studies of this new medical modality. Alas, they chose to believe that the benefits of various vaccines 'far outweighed' their risks - whatever all those risks proved to be - and so they have stonewalled any legitimate consideration of debate on the matter.
With studies finding "up to 8.5% of UK children [suffering] from dyspraxia" ('Harrowing delays' in dyspraxia diagnoses, report finds; same edition) and comparable figures for the other, similar conditions, this assumption - of the benefits-vs-risks of vaccines - is far from a settled matter.
Fortunately, attention is being paid to this issue wit the rise of ASD. But it's all way past time. In the meantime, parents should start doing their own research on these matters. And with the principle of informed consent to a medical procedure still in force in western countries, they have not only a right to, but a responsibility to.
It's a shame we can't trust our authorities in this area. But it's obvious that it's the same in all areas of society. Sad; but true.
[As for this matter of neurological-development conditions being dated back to the 1950s time period, I think it relevant to quote an email I sent over a year ago (February 28, 2007) to Dan Olmsted, former UPI journalist and one of the founders of a website dealing with autism called Age Of Autism]
I have just read the NAA's mailing of today, containing your article on the early days of the autism story. VERY good work in bringing all this to light.
[ Ed. note: Dan had done a study of the first few case histories of autism reported on in child psychiatrist Dr Leo Kanner's research, first reported in 1943 - a time when vaccination against whooping cough was becoming increasingly popular and widespread. But I'm getting ahead of myself...Dan's article highlighted the families's connections with mercury, esp. - at that time - in fungicides.]
There is another side to the story of Kanner's noting that many of the parents were "intelligent...well-educated...". This side was gone into in Harris L Coulter's important book 'Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American Brain' (1990). If you can't get hold of a copy of it (though I encourage you to move heaven and earth, and old/used-book sites to do so), or don't have it handy, this is the relevant portion.
It's from his Chapter 1, section entitled A Puzzling Feature (pp 51-3):
"An unexplained feature of autism on its initial apearance [sic] was its curious frequency in well-educated families - especially professionals such as physicians, lawyers, professors, and accountants.
"Of Kanner's first 100 cases, 96 of the fathers were high-school graduates, 87 had attended college, 74 had graduated from college, and 38 had done graduate work. Of the mothers, 92 were high-school graduates, 40 had graduated from college and eleven had done graduate work. This was an astonishingly high level of educational attainment, especially for women and especially for the 1930s. Also unexpected was the finding that 70 of the women had taken jobs, while many had continued working even after marriage! 'To this day,' Kanner observed in 1954, 'we have not encountered any one autistic child who came of unintelligent parents.'
[Ed. Note: This factor, of the educational attainment of the first families, is undoubtedly what led Dr Bruno Bettelheim to his psychoanalytical concept of autism being due to a 'refrigerator mom'.]
"In 1964 Rimland concluded that 'the parents of autistic children form a unique and highly homogeneous group in terms of intellect and personality.'
"In 1967 a systematic study was done proving that Kanner's observations were correct. A 1970 study made a similar finding - that 47 percent of the parents of autistic children had completed college, while a number had done advanced study for the M.A. or Ph.D. This contrasted sharply with the parents of other categories of mentally disturbed children, where as few as nineteen percent of the parents were college graduates.
"Attempts have been made, but without success, to link this skewed distribution of cases to genetic factors in the middle-class or upper-class population of parents.
"One point insufficiently stressed in the early surveys was the high incidence of parents working in medicine or connected with it. Kanner's first 100 cases included eleven physicians (five psychiatrists), three Ph.D.'s in the sciences, one psychologist, and one dentist; of the mothers one was a physician, three were nurses, two were psychologists, one a physiotherapist, and one a laboratory technician.
"But there were other medical connections which did not necessarily appear in the statistical breakdown...[etc.]
"Kanner noted: 'Many of the fathers and most of the mothers are perfectionists...The mothers felt duty-bound to carry out to the letter the rules and regulations which they were given by their obstetricians and pediatricians.'
[Ed. note: What a remarkable observation. Too bad more wasn't made of it earlier on!]
"But these early data showing a proponderance of educated parents have now been superseded; since the 1970s the skewed distribution no longer obtains. In the United States autism is now evenly distributed, with no social class or ethnic group being particularly favored.
"Hence the conclusion is now reached that the earlier data were mistaken, 'based on outdated research...No social or pschological characteristics of parents or families have proven to be associated with autism.' But is this correct? Was the earlier research done badly, or did the source population for autistic children change between 1940-1950 and the1970s? This latter possibility has not been investigated.
[And now here it comes:]
"A real shift in the socio-economic distribution pattern of autism can readily be explained in terms of childhood vaccination. When the pertussis vaccine was first introduced, being offered by the occasional forward-looking pediatrician to parents anxious to do 'everything possible' for their children and avid for the latest wonders off the medical assembly-line, who were the first takers? Not the blue-collar workers, who could not afford these frills and are, in any case, often suspicious of doctors. Free vaccination at public health clinics (where today the vast bulk of lower-class children get their shots) was still for the future. Only the prosperous - who could afford private physicians - were in a position to request this vaccine. And these same prosperous and educated parents, especially educated and ambitious mothers with some exposure to medicine, would have insisted on it.
"This explains the skewed distribution of autistics in the early decades. Kanner, who was such an acute observer in all other respects, was no less so in this one.
"As vaccination programs expanded and became obligatory in nearly every state, rich and poor alike could seek the benefits of the DPT shot. The incidence of autism evened out, and researchers assume that the earlier statistics were incorrect!"
In this book, and in his earlier one (1985) co-authored with Barbara Loe Fisher titled 'DPT: A Shot in the Dark', he is particularly suspicious of the damage done by the pertussis element in that particular vaccine. But it would be a helpful investigation to look at the thimerosal element as well, in the vaccines of the period. [Ed. note: At least one of the DPT shots in current time still has thimerosal in it. And at least two have aluminum as well; both neurotoxic.] Indeed - as you state in your article - vaccines themselves are not the only factor; and therein lies the environmental role of such as mercury. But Coulter's book is an excellent source for looking into the roots of autism (and other Minimal Brain Damage conditions, like ADD, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, etc etc - which all took off in the 1950s period; precisely when the mass vaccination programs took off).
Keep up the excellent work, Dan (etc.)
I rest my case. Except to point out that from these tell-tale beginnings, we have gone on to discover vaccine linkages as well with the following side effects:
Arthritis/arthralgia. Convulsions/seizures/epilepsy. CFS/ME. Type 1 diabetes. Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Lupus. Multiple sclerosis. OCD. And. And. And...
Not easy to find out. (Although the Classens have identified the Hib vax, with its connection to type 1 diabetes, as clearly of greater risk than the benefits. And Rita Hoffman of vran.org has pointed out its introduction, and later, enhanced versions, being connected to the increase in food anaphylaxis in children.)
It's obvious. The authorities don't want to go there. They're cutting the incidences of the childhood diseases, and that's good enough for them.
Not good enough for a growing number of parents, who are mad as hell, and are not going to take it any longer.
And good for them, for bringing this matter to our attention.
This matter, in general, of the growing authoritarianism over our lives.
As Ayn Rand said:
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."
Thanks; no thanks.