Many parents of vaccine injured children - regardless of which biological mechanism was involved in their children's vaccine-associated regression into autism - support the pioneering work of Andrew Wakefield and his right to pursue his scientific investigation without being persecuted.
In 1988 the controversial MMR vaccine was introduced to the UK. Ten years later Dr Andrew Wakefield published a hypothesis in the Lancet medical journal that provided clinical evidence for an association between the MMR vaccine, intestinal bowel disease and autism. He also suggested that some vulnerable children might be unable to handle being injected with the three-in-one MMR jab.
Since then Andrew Wakefield has steadfastly resisted enormous political and corporate pressure to stop him continuing investigating the potential biological mechanisms for vaccine-induced autistic enterocolitis, even though the number of children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders is rocketing.
Some say Dr Wakefield’s tenacity has made those who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR determined to make an example out of him. I say Dr. Wakefield is being persecuted for taking a scientific position that does not conform to the rhetoric of the profit driven pharmaceutical industries.
Much has been said about the link between environmental chemical toxins such as mercury being a cofactor in the triggering of autism. Heavy metals such as mercury are poisonous toxins that can sensitize the brain and damage the immune system. Unsuspecting mothers can pass on mercury and other toxins onto their children via the placenta and through breastfeeding.
Most people don’t realise they are storing such poisonous toxins in their bodies but, nevertheless, it has been shown that it doesn’t matter who we are or where we live we are all contaminated with various amounts of many different chemical toxins - daily exposure to which is impossible to avoid due to our massive increase of chemical usage.
In November 2003 the WWF’s Chemicals and Health Campaign found highly toxic chemicals in every person tested in a UK-wide blood biomonitoring survey. Justin Woolford of the WWF said "The chemical industry is contaminating the nation and the government is rolling over and allowing it to continue".
Peer reviewed studies published in The Lancet in November 2006 said that commonly-used chemicals are causing a significant rise in developmental brain disorders. The researchers said;”The combined evidence suggests that neurodevelopmental disorders caused by industrial chemicals has created a silent pandemic”.
In light of these rather sobering scientific revelations, no-one could possibly guarantee with any credibility that our children do not have their immune system compromised by toxins and thus safe to receive the MMR vaccine - or indeed any other vaccine designed to stimulate an immune system response - without actually testing the individual child for their level of toxic contamination first.
Logically therefore, unless precautionary tests are given to individual children before they are offered such vaccines, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that some children whose immune systems are significantly compromised by chemical toxins might, as Dr Wakefield suggested, be unable to handle being injected with the three-in-one MMR jab.
To read and sign the petition supporting Andrew Wakefield, M.D., go to
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/GMC/.
Since then Andrew Wakefield has steadfastly resisted enormous political and corporate pressure to stop him continuing investigating the potential biological mechanisms for vaccine-induced autistic enterocolitis, even though the number of children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders is rocketing.
Some say Dr Wakefield’s tenacity has made those who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR determined to make an example out of him. I say Dr. Wakefield is being persecuted for taking a scientific position that does not conform to the rhetoric of the profit driven pharmaceutical industries.
Much has been said about the link between environmental chemical toxins such as mercury being a cofactor in the triggering of autism. Heavy metals such as mercury are poisonous toxins that can sensitize the brain and damage the immune system. Unsuspecting mothers can pass on mercury and other toxins onto their children via the placenta and through breastfeeding.
Most people don’t realise they are storing such poisonous toxins in their bodies but, nevertheless, it has been shown that it doesn’t matter who we are or where we live we are all contaminated with various amounts of many different chemical toxins - daily exposure to which is impossible to avoid due to our massive increase of chemical usage.
In November 2003 the WWF’s Chemicals and Health Campaign found highly toxic chemicals in every person tested in a UK-wide blood biomonitoring survey. Justin Woolford of the WWF said "The chemical industry is contaminating the nation and the government is rolling over and allowing it to continue".
Peer reviewed studies published in The Lancet in November 2006 said that commonly-used chemicals are causing a significant rise in developmental brain disorders. The researchers said;”The combined evidence suggests that neurodevelopmental disorders caused by industrial chemicals has created a silent pandemic”.
In light of these rather sobering scientific revelations, no-one could possibly guarantee with any credibility that our children do not have their immune system compromised by toxins and thus safe to receive the MMR vaccine - or indeed any other vaccine designed to stimulate an immune system response - without actually testing the individual child for their level of toxic contamination first.
Logically therefore, unless precautionary tests are given to individual children before they are offered such vaccines, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that some children whose immune systems are significantly compromised by chemical toxins might, as Dr Wakefield suggested, be unable to handle being injected with the three-in-one MMR jab.
To read and sign the petition supporting Andrew Wakefield, M.D., go to
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/GMC/. 
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 30 comments
Dr Who is a danger to children
25.08.2007 12:40
It was staggering to learn of the temporal associations between triple vaccinations DPT and MMR and the sudden illness or sudden death of Angela Cannings' babies. The first child died within 24 hours and was a bouncing baby before the vaccination. Another child became immediately very ill within 24 hours of the MMR and was dead within 10 days.
The so-called expert witness in the Cannings case was infamous Sir Roy Meadow. Meadow was initially found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the GMC for his unfounded assertion that “one cot death is tragic, two is suspicious and three is murder".
The Deputy Chief Justice, Lord Justice Judge, comments were scathing about Meadows unfounded assumptions, calling the case against Angela Cannings a "travesty of justice", but, remarkably, a year later the disgraced Meadow appealed against his conviction and won because apparently his case "fell far short of serious professional misconduct".
In the meantime even the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, National Immunization Program, promulgates that the risks from MMR vaccine can be deafness, long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness and permanent brain damage.
See:
JT
Anecdotes are no substitute for research
25.08.2007 14:03
citpecs
@ Dr Who
25.08.2007 14:21
Whilst it is true to say that Andrew Wakfield’s findings have allegedly since been “discredited” (sic) - apparently because a team of mainstream researchers who obviously did not what to find anything that would jeopardise their careers, didn’t find anything, and now somewhat incredibility that absence of evidence is being used in an attempt to prove evidence of absence - it is simply foolish to claim the measles virus identified in these children was not from the vaccine.
The fact that the actual vaccine strain of measles virus HAS actually been identified in these children is of no consequence to you it seems.
It should be obvious that this type of obfuscation of the facts speaks volumes about how far those entrusted with our health are prepared to go in order to protect their reputations at the expense of our children’s health and wellbeing.
BBB
‘US scientists back autism link to MMR’
25.08.2007 14:23
“American researchers have revealed that 85 per cent of samples taken from autistic children with bowel disorders contain the virus. The strain is the same as the one used in the measles, mumps and rubella triple vaccine.
“The study replicates findings made by the gastroenterologist Dr Andrew Wakefield in 1998…”
JT
Dear Indymedia
25.08.2007 16:15
As Dr Who says himself; “When your theory isn't confirmed (or is in fact contradicted) by further investigations, it is wrong” – thus by his own admission he is wrong.
JT
Fine ...
25.08.2007 17:40
citpecs
@citpecs
25.08.2007 21:27
What possible reason would you have for denying the testing of children (after all it may even build public confidence in vaccines)?
JT
“it may even build public confidence in vaccines”
25.08.2007 22:39
Toxic Jobs and Postcodes
JT you're chucking masses of irrelevance around
25.08.2007 23:32
Please post a link to the research (in a peer-reviewed journal, obviously) that shows that "toxic contamination" means kids react badly to vaccination.
If you can't, all you have to go on is Wakefield's "suggestion". How is that different from Meadows' "unfounded assumption"? (Both suggestions overstepped the bounds of the scientific evidence when involved as "expert witnesses" in court cases)
"US Scientists Back Autism Link to MMR..."
That's a story in the Telegraph, not actual research. "Research to be presented.." (i.e. not finished yet, prelim results at a conference), "..handful of results" (so we don't know if it's statistically significant).
..........it's more than a year past that story. Why haven't the results been published yet?
One of the links already posted,
* Wakefield never published work on measles in the bowel in 1998.
* The results from O'Leary's study (co-authored by Wakefield, his colleague at the private US clinic) have not been replicated and the diagnosis method thought to be prone to "false positives".
With all due respect to Jason Lloyd, getting ill 8 days after a vaccination is pretty weak anecdotal evidence. What else did he do in those 8 days? How do we know /that/ isn't the cause?
*This* is why research gets done, to tease out Causes from Coincidences.
..........
Who's more likely to be lying to you?
* The guy who pops up in newspapers with sensational claims, never manages to produce evidence that backs it up but runs a nice private clinic that just happens to offer the service indicated by his claims?
* Or the people who say "that's interesting, what evidence have you got for it, and how come when you look at this, this and this there's no effect." Repeatedly?
Dr Who
and BBB
26.08.2007 00:04
I assume you're referring to the O'Leary (2002) study? As well as what I've written above can I refer you to the May 2006, edition of Medical Virology (abstract available here:
I'm not a doctor, just someone who, when presented with a claim and sensationalist headlines, likes to go to the source of the story and make my own mind up. Although sadly the full papers aren't easily available (that's a /real/ scandal), you can get a contact address from the abstract and just ask for a copy or try the nearest big library.
As for "absence of evidence is being used in an attempt to prove evidence of absence".
That's why studies use the "null hypothesis", i.e. they look for evidence of the opposite to what their theory says (can it be explained by, what's the probability of this result being by chance).
1000s of children studied, no evidence found of a link between vaccination and autism. Plenty of evidence that reduced vaccination leads to increases in measles, mumps and rubella and plenty of evidence that increases infant deaths and other nastiness.
That's what signing a petition in favour of Dr Wakefield says you support.
Dr Who
and Dr Doomuch
26.08.2007 00:21
* "environmental stressors WOULD be capable" or "MIGHT be capable" ?
* how do we know triple jabs are "highly significant"? The research says that they are not statistically significant, else an effect would've been noted.
* and your last paragraph, that's half vague and half specific. What kind of "environmental stressor"? Any kind? Noise? Why those diseases?
Wakefield's supporters are asking folk to risk their childrens' health on his say-so. Never mind the stories and what-ifs.
Show people the evidence, we've had too many thousands of years taking the word of priests, rulers and mystifiers as gospel.
Dr Who
@Dr Who
26.08.2007 03:01
As you well know, the pharmaceutical industry (and by proxy their sister companies in the chemical industry) have an unhealthy control over the peer-review system and are therefore less than enthusiastic at looking at health issues which may implicate any involvement on their part in the causation of ill health – this is why the peer-reviewed research published in The Lancet that recently said that commonly-used chemicals are causing a “silent pandemic” was regarded groundbreaking research not because it was the first scientific research into the effects of chemicals on health but because it is the first ‘peer-reviewed’ research of its kind which, of course, explains why the pandemic has been “silent”…!
If you want to challenge me at least have the common sense to practice what you preach and post a link to the research (in a peer-reviewed journal, obviously) that shows that children don’t react badly to vaccination even when they are contaminated with a cocktail of highly toxic chemicals.
Surely testing the children first is not too much to ask for – why are you so opposed to it?
JT
"Undone science"
26.08.2007 12:47
The science around MMR and autism has been done to death. There is no link. 10 years of hype has given us:
* no observed links
* 2 peer-reviewed papers with non-replicable results
* lots of distressing anecdotal evidence compounded by ill-informed newspaper coverage
Vaccine takeup has fallen, while autism continues to rise. (So does measles, mumps and rubella. *There's* a link that can be seen and replicated and is having serious health consequences.)
If you want to suggest that is a result of a conspiracy by vaccine companies, then go ahead. (But wouldn't vaccine companies in fact profit more from selling 3 separate vaccines than a single "three-in-one" jab?)
With no evidence, the anti-MMR people are left with a faith-based position. All the possible mechanisms they suggest aren't being backed up by facts, and so they amount to little more than theology.
How many viruses can dance on the head of a bowel biopsy?
Dr Who
@citpecs & Dr Who
26.08.2007 13:46
Your silence speaks volumes. And Dr Who repeated atempt to derail the discussion in noted.
JT
Keep taking the SSRIs Dr Who…
26.08.2007 15:14
Don’t worry you wont end up killing yourself. The evidence of SSRIs causing suicidal tendencies is the work of nutty conspirators like Dr David Healey and Panorama.
Glaxo (the company that make the MMR) never hid on the evidence that their so-called wonder drugs were so dangerous. And they are not trying to medicate masses of vulnerable people for their own profit regardless of the often fatal consequences for individuals conned into taking them.
And if your still not happy try splashing yourself with some Round-Up weed killer because, as the chemical company that make say, that’s completely harmless too which of course is why our local authorities employ outside contractors to spray this innocuous substance around the paths and edges of our children’s schools. If your child drops a school book on the grass that has been sprayed and then picks up the book and holds it their teeth it won’t cause neurological or immune system problems because the chemical/pharmaceutical industries are completely altruistic and only have our interests at heart.
Not Lord Sainsbury, Michael Fitzpatrick or Simon Wessley
Silly cults
26.08.2007 16:18
"because the chemical/pharmaceutical industries are completely altruistic and only have our interests at heart"
They blatantly aren't, and blatantly don't. That's why it's important to see, read and understand all the data. I don't trust them and I don't trust Andrew Wakefield either. In this case it's him who has produced no evidence that stands up.
*Never* trust a scientist, go and read their work and see if it backs up the claims being made.
You can understand what's being said and why, or you can make your mind up on a position and stick to it regardless.
JT since you have a bee in your bonnet about testing children:
* Test them for what? PCBs? Heavy metals? PAHs? You detect what you look for.
* How would you decide what constitutes a dangerous amount of any chemical?
* If you take the position "any amount is dangerous", at what level does it become "more dangerous" than the known probability of not proceeding with vaccination against diseases that kill 1000s of children a year?
Not so simple is it? Unless you know What you are testing for and Why, your call is empty and unachievable.
And I would suggest, with no evidence of a link between MMR and autism, hardly a priority target for research that would improve their health.
Dr Who
@Dr Who
26.08.2007 23:27
a) Do you acknowledge that we are all contaminated with toxic chemicals?
b) Do you acknowledge that some people are more are contaminated than other?
c) Do you acknowledge that being contaminated with significant amounts of toxic chemicals damages the immune system?
d) Do you acknowledge that live virus vaccines can have a serious adverse effect on people with damaged the immune systems?
Yes, of course you do, you must! Who could logically disagree, after all you would have to be extremely naïve, a fool or a fake persuader to disagree?
Thus, you must logically agree that it is highly irresponsible to vaccinate children without testing them first to see if their immune system can handle the additional stimulation from a vaccine – if, of course, such tests exist.
Do you agree?
BTW, and are you pretending you know nothing of such tests, or is your ignorance genuine? Here’s a clue: What empirical colorations must have been made to declare that chemicals are causing a silent pandemic?
JT
Dear Dr Who
27.08.2007 22:12
JT
Get over yourself JT
28.08.2007 10:06
I made the point before: you can't test for "toxic chemicals", that's so vague as to be meaningless. A diagnostic test is different from the time and resources suitable for doing the basic research (i.e. the Lancet "silent pandemic" study). To make a meaningful, practical test you need to know:
* what chemicals (or group of) pose the risk
* what levels of those chemicals are dangerous
* at what point the risk from those chemicals outweighs the known danger of not vaccinating a child.
If you want people to be tested routinely, this test is also going to have to be cheap, not give false results and offer answers in a short period. A test that doesn't meet these criteria will cause more problems than it solves.
That's a lot of research that would need to be done and the fact remains. NO-ONE HAS FOUND A LINK BETWEEN MMR AND AUTISM, so the test would be meaningless. Not even Wakefield, despite what he says.
You can make all the reasonable point-by-point thought experiments you want, saying "it must be!" doesn't make it so until investigation bears out the links you suggest.
Less kids are getting vaccinated. The result: more and more serious cases of measles, while autism continues to rise.
Anyone who's really concerned about the apparent rise in autism needs to focus on those facts, not running PR flak for a discredited private doctor.
Dr Who
“a range of tests to measure levels of toxic chemicals”
28.08.2007 14:29
Dr's Edelson and Cantor of the Environmental and Preventive Health Center of Atlanta in the US suggest that "chronic exposure to toxic agents, i.e., xenobiotic agents, to a developing central nervous system may be the best model for defining the physiological and behavioral data found in these populations (children with ASD's)".
In their own study of 18 autistic children the doctors carried out a range of tests to measure levels of toxic chemicals in the children's bodies and how well their livers were able to detoxify them.
It was found that all of the children had liver detoxification profiles outside the normal range, indicating an increased toxic load on the liver. The results showed that 16 of the 18 children had levels of chemicals exceeding the maximum safe limit for adults.
In the 2 children where high levels of chemicals weren't detected directly, they were found to have raised D-glucaric acid in their urine which is an indicator of a high level of toxins being metabolized by the liver.
The paper goes on to discuss how these findings of toxicity could cause immune system disruption and lead to the behavioral symptoms associated with autism.
JT
Homepage:
http://www.ei-resource.org/autism.asp
Immunocompromised children should not receive a live virus vaccine
28.08.2007 15:52
JT
Live, attenuated MMR vaccine should be withheld until immune status is known
28.08.2007 15:55
cell-mediated immunity is controversial.”
“Mumps and rubella vaccines are usually administered with measles vaccine (MMR); all are live, attenuated virus vaccines. Vaccination with mumps and rubella vaccines is generally contraindicated in persons with severe defects of humoral or cellular immunity”
“The immunogenicity of mumps and rubella vaccines in immunocompromised persons has not been well studied.”
“Siblings of children with severe humoral or cellular immunodeficiencies, or siblings of children with perinatally-acquired HIV infection, should not receive potentially harmful vaccines until their own immune status is established.”
“Transient immunosuppression may also occur after measles vaccination. Loss
of delayed type hypersensitivity and leukopenia can occur after immunization with live, attenuated measles vaccine. The clinical significance of transient immunosuppression following immunization with live, attenuated measles vaccine in unclear, but may be important in persons whose immune function is compromised.”
“Live, attenuated MMR vaccine should be withheld from the infant until his/her immune status is known.”
“Vaccine safety, efficacy and potential benefit are critically dependent
upon the nature and degree of immunodeficiency in an individual patient.”
“The risks and benefits of vaccination should be considered in the context of the specificity and magnitude of the immune deficits within the individual patient.”
JT
In conclusion
29.08.2007 00:32
Peer-reviewed science agrees that some children will be significantly immunocompromised because they have been contaminated with highly toxic chemicals, and it also agrees that significantly immunocompromised children should not receive live virus vaccines such as DPT and MMR because there is a high risk of serious adverse reactions, including death. Although, remarkably, mainstream medical science, for some reason or other, has not put these two crucial facts together yet.
Thus we are left with the options of continuing to play a Machiavellian (but nevertheless callous), game Russian roulette with children’s lives, or taking a far more responsible attitude of advocating precautionary tests to measure levels of toxic chemicals in individual children, because - as medical science agrees - “vaccine safety, efficacy and potential benefit are critically dependent upon the nature and degree of immunodeficiency in an individual patient”.
Jack Tennant
Cherry pick much?
29.08.2007 08:53
And the second source you selectively cite is also 10 years old and generally goes along with the CDC. "Witheld from the infant until status known" refers to the siblings of children with HIV.
10 years old is significant because that means the advice is from the height of the MMR flap, when advice would be at its most cautious due to the uncertainty between Wakefield's press release and the realisation that his work didn't stand up.
In conclusion: it's not the case that we "know" some children "will" suffer adverse permanent reactions. Those that are at risk have other, existing and more reliable risk factors (like family history) that can be assessed. What the science you quote says is that the risks and benefits of vaccinating immunocompromised children need to be weighed up.
I would suggest that a child with a weak immune system is the one who would benefit most from immunity to measles, mumps and rubella and who has the most to lose from the lower vaccination levels in the population as a whole that we have now, thanks to Dr Wakefield and his media lackeys.
Dr Who
“the benefits outweigh the risks…
29.08.2007 21:56
Bollocks! Your talking through you arse! You haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. What a complete and utter twat you are. I can’t believe I have spent so much time debating this subject with a fucking moron.
JT
MMR killed my daughter
30.08.2007 00:24
“I found out that a strain of the MMR being used in this country had already been banned in Canada. I truly felt that the doctors were unaware of this - but in hindsight, I'm not completely sure they were. As it turned out, the MMR vaccination was banned in Japan in 1992, and that country went back to single vaccines from then on.”
BBB
'Vaccine officials knew about MMR risks'
30.08.2007 00:26
BBB
MMR and compromised immune systems
30.08.2007 00:30
"It seems possible that giving the live measles virus with two other live viruses is too much for the compromised immune systems of these susceptible children…”
BBB
Vaccination is Dangerous
21.12.2007 12:29
The recommended vaccination schedule in the UK (verified with NHS direct, Tel. 0845-4647):
2 months DPT + polio + HIB, Men C
3 months DPT + HIB, Men C
4 months DPT + HIB, Men C
13 months MMR
3-5 years pre-school booster (Dip. Tet + Polio) & booster MMR
10-14 yrs BCG (skin test, possibly followed by vaccine)
13-18 yrs diphtheria, tetanus, polio oral
NHS Direct was not able to state whether the live or inactive polio vaccine is currently used, but said that both are recommended.
Below, you will find a list of ingredients for each recommended vaccine:
DPT: Aluminium phosphate, formaldehyde, ammonium sulphate, washed sheep red blood cells, glycerol, sodium chloride, thimerosal
Polio: IPOL: 3 types of polio virus, formaldehyde, henoxyethanol (antifreeze), neomycin, streptomycin, polymyxin B; Orimune: using 3 types of attenuated polioviruses, streptomycin, neomycin, calf serum, sorbitol
HIB: polyribosylribitol, ammonium sulfate, thimerosal (mercury)
Men C: thimerasol, lactose
MMR: sorbitol, neomycin (not recommended for IV), hydrolyzed gelatin
BCG: glycerine, asparagine, citric acid, potassium phosphate, magnesium sulphate, and iron ammonium citrate. The final preparation prior to freeze-drying also contains lactose.
This is the rubbish the Govt force us to put into our children.
Distopia
Observation from afar
27.01.2008 08:19
CH
Claudia Hanau
e-mail:
naturohanau@aol.com