 |
|
|
 |
||
|
| Letters * A Fatal Assumption * Some Flaws in the Paper that Exonerates Mercury
|
 |
|
By Michael A. Gruttadauria, DC, DACAN What kind of flawed reasoning is that? Do they think we are stupid? Despite the mercury (thimerosal) being removed from vaccines, the rate of autism continues to increase. Therefore, via deductive reasoning, since mercury was removed from vaccines, and the autism numbers continue to grow, it can’t be the vaccines causing autism! Here is where the flaw in the argument shows up: Because of the incredibly neuron-toxic nature of mercury, it was always assumed that mercury in the vaccines was the culprit in vaccine causing autism. (That may not be accurate) No one can deny the concomitant rise in autism and the increase in the vaccination schedule in the early 1980s. The assumption that mercury was to blame may be a fatal assumption. Mercury can play a role in the incidence of autism being up, but with this new study, the CDC now has ammunition against the vaccine-autism link. What if it was not the mercury in the vaccine, but the overwhelming impact that 36 vaccines have on a developing child’s brain? Fundamentally, I tend to think that autistic children have a problem of their immune system, which is the “faulty immune regulation.” Hence they have abnormal immune reactions to measles virus and/or MMR vaccine” Vijendra K. Singh, Ph.D., Research Associate Professor of Neuroimmunology, Utah State University, an international expert in the autoimmune causes of autism: Here are some real vaccine facts: Studies have shown that as families improve their living conditions, hygiene, nutrition, literacy and education, the risk of life-threatening acute infectious, inflammatory diseases very much decreases. Families with poor living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and literacy would generally be most likely to benefit from vaccinations. Families with good living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and education probably would benefit from vaccinations very little or not at all. Individuals with a tendency to allergic or auto-immune diseases are likely to be harmed by vaccinations. (1,2,3) Side effects of vaccination are usually allergic or auto-immune inflammatory reactions caused by the shift of the immune system’s reactivity from the Th1 side to the Th2 side. Modern medicine is just beginning to recognize this. (4) Modern medicine has not scientifically measured the risk/benefit ratio of any vaccine. Research into the risks of vaccines is very inadequate, according to two comprehensive reports on vaccines by the U.S. Institute of Medicine in 1991 and 1994. (5) The CDC has never proposed, designed, funded or carried out a single clinical study on autism. (6) For the thirty years after autism was identified, it grew at the constant rate of 1-in-10,000 babies born. The number of autistic infants only grew if the population did. So when my generation had one or two vaccines in the 1960's, the rate of children having autism stayed the same. That would change, however, not from an increase in population, but due to the growing number of vaccines given to babies, most of which contained thimerosal. In 1978, the CDC added the triple shot MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) to the growing baby immunization program, starting a frightening, irreversible, and detrimental trend: Doctors began giving more vaccines, at younger ages, for many diseases to which babies wouldn't be exposed until later in life (hepatitis B), with the new vaccination protocols all blessed and sanctioned by the CDC. None of the new baby vaccines was backed by a single study on its individual safety; nor was a single study done on the safety of the multiple vaccinations now given. By 1978, the rate of autism had increased four times, going from the previous rate of 1-in-10,000 to 1-in-2,500. Over the next ten years, the autism rate would climb again to 1-in-1,000 in 1991, when the DTP triple shot and hepatitis B were added to the vaccine chart, both of which contained thimerosal. By the end of 2000, the rate mushroomed yet again to 1-in-250. Not only did the population of ASD children grow, so did the total number of vaccines given to babies, from about ten in 1983 to 22 vaccines or more today. The result of this ill-advised, force-fed mandate has been catastrophic. The rate of children born with ASD has increased again to 1-in-150. In short, the occurrence of autism has increased at a rate of 1,700% over the past twenty years or more than 6,000% over the past thirty years. Meanwhile, the U.S. population during the past twenty years has grown from 236 to 300 million people, or at the rate of 21%. (7) Are we making a huge mistake and ignoring what seems to be common sense? Vaccinating our children right now amidst an epidemic of Autistic Spectrum Disorders is like playing Russian Roulette. When my daughter was born, my wife and I discussed vaccinations. All of our nieces and nephews had them with no apparent problems. We went ahead and allowed her to receive the vaccines; she was diagnosed with PDD-nos at 18 months. Our son was born two years later, and we were determined not to make any mistakes. We delayed the vaccination schedule and split up the dosages. He too was diagnosed with PDD-nos at 18 months. Our newest addition has had NO VACCINATIONS and, at 13 months, he is by far our most neurologically advanced child. He was walking and babbling at 10 months with great eye contact, connected to us, no sensory issues and is really in tune. Now, can you tell me that the vaccinations play no role in the etiology of Autistic Spectrum Disorders? References: 1 McKeown, T. The Modern Rise of Population. New York: Academic Press, 1976. 2 McKeown, T. The Role Of Medicine: Dream, Mirage, or Nemesis? New Jersey: Princeton University Press 1979. 3 Sagan, L.A. The Health of Nations. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1987. 4 Rook, G.A.W., Zumla, A. "Gulf War Syndrome: Is It Due to a Systemic Shift in Cytokine Balance Towards a Th2 Profile?" The Lancet 349 (1997): 1831-1833. 5 Robin, Eugene, M.D. "Some Hidden Dimensions of the Risk/Benefit Value of Vaccine" from the First International Public Conference on Vaccination. Alexandria, Virginia September 1997. 6 F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP - Studies that Count, Studies that Don’t 7 James Ottar Grundvig - The Sting of Thimerosal in Autism -The Epoch Times Michael A. Gruttadauria, DC, DACAN is a Board Certified Chiropractic Neurologist with a practice focused on Autistic Spectrum Disorders in Plainview NY. He is also the father of two children diagnosed on the spectrum. www.lispectrum.com • • • Some Flaws in the Paper that Exonerates Mercury By Dr. Paul G. King First, the research paper mentioned in the news reports falsely states that flu shots were recommended in 2004 when the first "recommendation" was in April 2002" "Bridges CB, Fukuda K, Uyeki TM, Cox NJ, Singleton JA. Prevention and Control of Influenza Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2002 Apr 12; 51(RR03): 1-31 with underlining added for emphasis, 'The 2002 recommendations include five principal changes or updates, as follows: . . ., influenza vaccination of healthy children aged 6-23 months is encouraged when feasible . . .'" Second, the paper also ignores/does not address the indirect mercury poisoning by Thimerosal in flu shots recommended for pregnant women in 2nd & 3rd trimesters in 2002 (see previous reference) and in all trimesters from 2003 onwards. This would increase MAX exposure by about 25 micrograms of mercury from Thimerosal or, if the 2004 number of "40.2" quoted in article is correct, to about 65 micrograms. Third, since the developing fetus weighs much less than the post-natal child, the mercury-poisoning effect is magnified by anywhere from about 2 to 100 depending upon when in the gestation of the child the mother is injected - so that, in effect, the maximum "effective" dose a child conceived in 2002 or later may receive (when a Thimerosal-preserved flu-shot given to the mother "during pregnancy" is factored in) "could" have the same effect as a as post-natal child's receiving a "200+ microgram" bolus dose at birth -- thus reducing the mercury exposure while increasing the risk of damaging mercury poisoning by a factor of 10 times or more by dosing the fetus under the guise of protecting the mother & the fetus from influenza by using vaccines thet are not effective & have been shown to increase the risk of birth defects in the children -- a win-win situation for the mercury poisoners but a lose-lose situation for the American public deceived by such practices.! Based on all of the above, any prudent person should realize that this article is intentionally under- stating the "effective" maximum exposure from the pre-natal flu shot to the mother and mistating the date at which the CDC/ACIP first recommended that children 6 months to 23 months should be given a flu shot. In additon, by continually widening the age range for the children and adding a second dose in at 6 months initially and then changing that recom- mmendation to a second dose the first time vaccinated, so that now (for the 2006-2007 flu season) children from 6 months up to 9 years of age are now covered, the maximum total dose exposure to Thimerosal from 6 month to age 9 for a fully vaccinated child has been increased to about 225+ micrograms and, if the child's mother is inoculated with a Thimerosal- preserved flu shot, 250+ micrograms of mercury from the influenza vaccines alone plus the mercury from the other Thimerosal-preserved lots of the other vaccines and/or Thimerosal-containing lots of pther vaccines vaccines that the child received. So much for eliminating mercury from childhood vaccines and the reductions claimed! With respect to the knowing addition of a harmful vaccine, the Thimerosal-preserved influenza vaccine, to the vaccination schedule for 2002, please look into a 1960s study that found statistically significant increased rates for birth defects in children born to mothers given this vaccine (this study is discussed in the 1982 edition of Heinonen et al.'s Birth Defects and Drugs in Pregnancy [from the Geiers' posting & attached]). Hopefully, this information, when verified, will help set the record straight for the KNOWING mercury poisoning of children by Thimerosal- containing vaccines and the duplicity involved in reducing the Thimerosal exposure in some vaccines while knowingly adding another Thimerosal- preserved vaccine, the Thimerosal-preserved flu shot, to the vaccination recommendations for pregnant women and the childhood vaccination schedule without proof of safety to the required standard, "sufficiently nontoxic" (21 CFR Sec 610.15) -- required for all vaccines in 1973 if not before. RE: Rick Rollens Response 1. His date for an expected decline persumes no pregnant woman and no child under 3 years of age born after December 2006 received a Thimerosal-preserved flu shot -- even though a "temporary" waiver was granted in 2006 that permitted the Thimerosal-preserved vaccine to be given. 2. The start of decline date also depends upon a rigorous enforcement of the law so that no Thimerosal-preserved influenza vaccine is permitted to be used on pregnant women and children under 3 and the State of California elects to purchase ONLY "no Thimerosal" vaccines for pregnant women and children under 3 years of ang and only "no Thimerosal" or "trace Thimerosal" vaccines will be given to children 3 years of age and over. Also, the actual case data and population numbers USED for each birth cohort should be secured from the contact author so that their findings could be checked and their validity, or lack thereof, could be independently confirmed. - Dr. King www.dr-king.com - THANK YOU - |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright Notice: The above items are copyright protected. They are for our readers' personal education or research purposes only and provided at their request. Articles may not be further reprinted or used commercially without consent from the copyright holders. To find the copyright holders, follow the referenced website link provided at the beginning of each item. |
Lenny Schafer editor@sarnet.org The Schafer Autism Report is a non-profit corporation |
| Unsubscribe here: http://www.sarnet.org/frm/unsub2.htm |
