Parents of autistic children ‘feel guilty’ over MMR
 |
| VACCINE FEARS: Steven Livingston, right, with his brother Martin, 12, and parents Laura and James. |
Parents of autistic children have reported feelings of anxiety and guilt over whether they should give their children the MMR vaccine, a new study has found.
They have told researchers they felt they had "let their children down" by deciding to give their children the triple vaccine to ward against measles, mumps and rubella, despite assurances from scientists and doctors that it is safe.
Researchers from the Medical Research Council (MRC) said the parents also reported being let down by doctors, health professionals and health visitors over what they felt was unclear and inconsistent guidance over MMR.
The MRC yesterday called for better support for parents and understanding of the dilemmas they face when confronted with conflicting medical advice.
It follows the controversy over the safety of MMR, linked in 1998 to autism by Dr Andrew Wakefield in a paper he published in the Lancet medical journal, leading to levels of MMR immunisation dropping.
Although those claims have now been largely discredited, the MRC study found that anxiety among parents with autistic children over MMR's safety have been slow to abate.
In what is thought to be the first time that parents' experience of the controversy has been researched, the MRC followed 38 parents of children with autism in 10 focus groups across the UK.
Shona Hilton, an associate researcher at MRC and one of the report's authors, said health professionals, parents and policy makers needed to be aware of the uncertainties parents face when making decisions about vaccinations.
"It's not only parents with autistic children but anyone with children that can feel anxious about what is in the child's best interest," she said.
Ms Hilton said, in addition to giving professional medical advice, doctors and other health professionals had to be attuned to the emotional strain that parents were placed under by the MMR controversy.
After Dr Wakefield's article was published in 1998, immunisation levels of MMR dropped from 92% across the UK to 80% in 2003-04, according to the Health Protection Agency. However, statistics published earlier this week show that immunisation rates in Scotland have begun to recover.
A spokesman for the Scottish Executive Health Department said: "It is a positive sign that the uptake of the MMR vaccination remains at a higher level than in recent times, as figures published earlier this week show. This is testament to the efforts of health professionals and parents in ensuring children are protected against the risks these diseases pose."
One of the parents involved in the MMR study said she felt uncertain about what the right choice over immunising her children was.
Laura Livingston, a bank worker, has two children, the youngest of which, Steven, has autism and learning difficulties. He was diagnosed six years ago, aged three, when controversy over the MMR jabs was at its height.
As a result, Mrs Livingston, from Knightswood in Glasgow, decided against giving Steven his MMR booster jab. But she says she does not know what she would do if she had to face the choice again.
"You're damned if you do and damned if you don't," she said.
Although she says her GP gave her impartial and helpful advice about whether to give her son his second MMR jab, she feels a lot of parents didn't receive this and were pressured into immunising their children.
Jab controversy
The controversy over MMR - the triple immunisation jab given against measles, mumps and rubella - flared up after a 1998 article by Dr Andrew Wakefield, published in the Lancet medical journal, alleging links to autism.
At a press conference to publicise the study, Dr Wakefield, a gastroenterologist, called for MMR to be replaced.
Subsequent studies have since failed to confirm the link and Dr Wakefield has faced widespread condemnation over his claims.
It has emerged that some children who took part in the research were also the subject of another study funded by legal aid to find out whether they had a compensation claim against the vaccine makers.
Dr Wakefield failed to disclose to the Lancet that he had received £55,000 from legal aid for the second study but denied a conflict of interest. He is due to face a disciplinary hearing before the General Medical Council in July.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Isabella Thomas, Somerset on 11:36am Fri 30 Mar 07
Well, this is a first! Speaking to parents of autistic children.
Do you think the government will examine the children and find out why they are so ill after the MMR vaccine?
Do you think they will speak to the parents about the side-effects the children suffered after the MMR vaccine?
My youngest autistic son had an apology from a doctor in a London hospital for ignoring his symptoms after I took him to another country urgent treatment. My son now has panic attacks about going back to that same hospital because he says he is not believed.
Dr. Wakefield was one of the first doctors to listen to us parents.
How many doctors do the same? How many doctors treat mothers like idiots?
The word 'mothers' is not a good name in the medical profession these days.
Mothers (and fathers) need to be respected much more. They are on the front line of their children's health and know what they are talking about.
Doctors will NOT fill out the yellow cards when parents say their child had a reaction to the MMR vaccine.
Just wait until our children reach adulthood.
It will be the tax payer who will have to look after them and this is because they don't exist in the eyes of the government or the medical profession.
I asked the doctor in London if any research was taken place on the disease my children have and he said 'no'
If all of these children were 'blind' all **** would break loose.
Enough is enough and we parents are starting to fight back.
[bold]bold[/bold]
Well, this is a first! Speaking to parents of autistic children.
Do you think the government will examine the children and find out why they are so ill after the MMR vaccine?
Do you think they will speak to the parents about the side-effects the children suffered after the MMR vaccine?
My youngest autistic son had an apology from a doctor in a London hospital for ignoring his symptoms after I took him to another country urgent treatment. My son now has panic attacks about going back to that same hospital because he says he is not believed.
Dr. Wakefield was one of the first doctors to listen to us parents.
How many doctors do the same? How many doctors treat mothers like idiots?
The word 'mothers' is not a good name in the medical profession these days.
Mothers (and fathers) need to be respected much more. They are on the front line of their children's health and know what they are talking about.
Doctors will NOT fill out the yellow cards when parents say their child had a reaction to the MMR vaccine.
Just wait until our children reach adulthood.
It will be the tax payer who will have to look after them and this is because they don't exist in the eyes of the government or the medical profession.
I asked the doctor in London if any research was taken place on the disease my children have and he said 'no'
If all of these children were 'blind' all **** would break loose.
Enough is enough and we parents are starting to fight back.
Posted by: David Thrower, Warrington, Cheshire on 12:15pm Fri 30 Mar 07
Dr. Wakefield's hypothesis has been disputed, but not discredited. There are now fifteen separate published papers linking regressive autism with the novel gut pathology, ileal-lymphoid nodular hyperplasia. There are five more study papers linking the hyperplasia to measles virus. And there are a further five more published papers linking the measles virus (in the gut) to MMR vaccination. These studies involve many dozens of researchers, not just Dr. Wakefield, in several different countries. Are they all wrong? Have thery just made these findings up, out of boredom, or a wish to be controversial and wilfully damage their careers? Of course not. Wakefield was just the first of many, to actually listen to the parents, and investigate their stories clinically, rather than to simply parrot what the drugs companies and health "experts" told them. The full truth will out in the end.
Dr. Wakefield's hypothesis has been disputed, but not discredited. There are now fifteen separate published papers linking regressive autism with the novel gut pathology, ileal-lymphoid nodular hyperplasia. There are five more study papers linking the hyperplasia to measles virus. And there are a further five more published papers linking the measles virus (in the gut) to MMR vaccination. These studies involve many dozens of researchers, not just Dr. Wakefield, in several different countries. Are they all wrong? Have thery just made these findings up, out of boredom, or a wish to be controversial and wilfully damage their careers? Of course not. Wakefield was just the first of many, to actually listen to the parents, and investigate their stories clinically, rather than to simply parrot what the drugs companies and health "experts" told them. The full truth will out in the end.
Posted by: Wendy Pickering, Sussex on 12:33pm Fri 30 Mar 07
It's simple - neither the NHS nor our government is interested in investigating children who have become ill post MMR vaccination. Even the existence of the vaccine measles virus in my son's brain tissue has been ignored. You would have thought that experts would have got into a huddle in order to find out what had gone wrong. There is no answer at present and they are not interested in finding one.
It's simple - neither the NHS nor our government is interested in investigating children who have become ill post MMR vaccination. Even the existence of the vaccine measles virus in my son's brain tissue has been ignored. You would have thought that experts would have got into a huddle in order to find out what had gone wrong. There is no answer at present and they are not interested in finding one.
Posted by: IH, South East England on 12:34pm Fri 30 Mar 07
DT, please point us to the papers where Wakefield's hypothesis has been tested. In my readings of Wakefield's work I could find no scientific basis for a link between the measles component of the MMR vaccination and autism. Wakefield I understand only postulated that there could be a link.
Parents have to decide whether any risk associated with vaccinations in early childhood are greater than the risk of contracting a deadly disease. So any information you have that can assist in that risk assessment would be helpful.
DT, please point us to the papers where Wakefield's hypothesis has been tested. In my readings of Wakefield's work I could find no scientific basis for a link between the measles component of the MMR vaccination and autism. Wakefield I understand only postulated that there could be a link.
Parents have to decide whether any risk associated with vaccinations in early childhood are greater than the risk of contracting a deadly disease. So any information you have that can assist in that risk assessment would be helpful.
Posted by: Susie Farouggia, Greece on 12:42pm Fri 30 Mar 07
My son was very ill after having the MMR at 17 months since which time he has made good progress with various interventions (such as GF/CF diet), which are often derided as 'alternative' by the medical profession, particularly here in Greece. There is a wealth of published information about MMR/vaccinations in general, available to interested parties (eg parents) which indicates the need for much more (honest) research - but sadly this appears to be all but invisible to those who hold the purse strings. Short-sighted to say the least.
My son was very ill after having the MMR at 17 months since which time he has made good progress with various interventions (such as GF/CF diet), which are often derided as 'alternative' by the medical profession, particularly here in Greece. There is a wealth of published information about MMR/vaccinations in general, available to interested parties (eg parents) which indicates the need for much more (honest) research - but sadly this appears to be all but invisible to those who hold the purse strings. Short-sighted to say the least.
Posted by: Catherine Williams, Ross-on-Wye on 1:00pm Fri 30 Mar 07
I started refusing MMR for my children in 1992 when I found out that the rubella component is grown on the cells of an aborted baby. (27 others were aborted before a virus was ( isolated). I am therefore fortunate in that most of my 8 children have been saved the risks of this dangerous and immoral vaccine.
I was told by another doctor who was aware of Dr Wakefield's research before it was published to avoid having measles and mumps vaccines together due to the worrying findings. There was no suggestion that his work was anyway suspect.I think it disgusting way he has been vilified by the government to protect their friends in the vaccine industry. I managed to get single does alternatives for most of my children before the controversy then found that the government was making it difficult to get them with lies and deliberate distortions.
The scientist who linked mad cow disease to the risk of CJD in humans was vilified by the Tory government and turned out to be correct. Remember the burger being forced on his child by Tory minister. Blair won,t show his child had MMR because its obvious he or his wife would,nt risk it for their child.
I started refusing MMR for my children in 1992 when I found out that the rubella component is grown on the cells of an aborted baby. (27 others were aborted before a virus was ( isolated). I am therefore fortunate in that most of my 8 children have been saved the risks of this dangerous and immoral vaccine.
I was told by another doctor who was aware of Dr Wakefield's research before it was published to avoid having measles and mumps vaccines together due to the worrying findings. There was no suggestion that his work was anyway suspect.I think it disgusting way he has been vilified by the government to protect their friends in the vaccine industry. I managed to get single does alternatives for most of my children before the controversy then found that the government was making it difficult to get them with lies and deliberate distortions.
The scientist who linked mad cow disease to the risk of CJD in humans was vilified by the Tory government and turned out to be correct. Remember the burger being forced on his child by Tory minister. Blair won,t show his child had MMR because its obvious he or his wife would,nt risk it for their child.
Posted by: Maggie Johnson, Somerset, England on 1:02pm Fri 30 Mar 07
All my 3 sons (ages 25,21,and 16)had the MMR injections. My youngest son has complex special needs, medical and educational. He received his in 1990 and I was unaware of the potential risks. He was diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome(an autistic spectrum disorder) in 1999. If I had any more children, which I won't, I would opt for single vaccines. If I have grandchildren in the future, I hope they receive single vaccines. The Government must have spent millions of pounds on the campaign to convince parents that the triple vaccine was 'safe'. Maybe this money would have been better spent on providing single vaccines (instead of parents paying for this themselves). The uptake may then have been higher and parents less anxious about having their children vaccinated. I wish there were more Drs like Dr. Wakefield, who listen to parents, and look for reasons why this condition occurs. He is a brave man to fight for what he believes in and I am disgusted with the way he has been treated.
All my 3 sons (ages 25,21,and 16)had the MMR injections. My youngest son has complex special needs, medical and educational. He received his in 1990 and I was unaware of the potential risks. He was diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome(an autistic spectrum disorder) in 1999. If I had any more children, which I won't, I would opt for single vaccines. If I have grandchildren in the future, I hope they receive single vaccines. The Government must have spent millions of pounds on the campaign to convince parents that the triple vaccine was 'safe'. Maybe this money would have been better spent on providing single vaccines (instead of parents paying for this themselves). The uptake may then have been higher and parents less anxious about having their children vaccinated. I wish there were more Drs like Dr. Wakefield, who listen to parents, and look for reasons why this condition occurs. He is a brave man to fight for what he believes in and I am disgusted with the way he has been treated.
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 2:52pm Fri 30 Mar 07
I think it is very interesting to note how manipulative this study is, and how it works on the basis that MRC science is correct, and is not subject to extreme commercial and institutional bias. For the MRC the only real issue is how brow beat parents more effectively: they do not give **** what we parents think or why we think it. So many parents have experienced regressive autism and recall adverse vaccine experiences (which we were told to disregard at the time).
Even so, I personally was for many years not entirely sold on the vaccine hypothesis. However, I could not understand why health officials were trying to sell the transparently false hypothesis that the was no autism epidemic - when in fact there was an approximately 7 fold rise in statemented autistic spectrum disorder children born locally (Haringey) between 1987 and 1992, and this seemed to be mirrored across the country. The truth is that these were the years when the vaccine schedule underwent transformation. MMR introduced in 1988, the accelerated DPT schedule in 1990 with 75 micrograms of mercury. HiB in 1992.Then you find that the people who have reviewed the policy are the ones who introduced it in the first place.
The who basis of the present vaccine programme is socially repressive. If it goes wrong no one in the medical profession, or in government will want to listen to you: the normal rules for attending to adverse drug reactions are suspended. The theoretical proposition is that by far the greater danger lies in not having the vaccine, but the reality is that the science has not be done, the parents have not been listened to and the children have not received proper medical scrutiny.
I think it is very interesting to note how manipulative this study is, and how it works on the basis that MRC science is correct, and is not subject to extreme commercial and institutional bias. For the MRC the only real issue is how brow beat parents more effectively: they do not give **** what we parents think or why we think it. So many parents have experienced regressive autism and recall adverse vaccine experiences (which we were told to disregard at the time).
Even so, I personally was for many years not entirely sold on the vaccine hypothesis. However, I could not understand why health officials were trying to sell the transparently false hypothesis that the was no autism epidemic - when in fact there was an approximately 7 fold rise in statemented autistic spectrum disorder children born locally (Haringey) between 1987 and 1992, and this seemed to be mirrored across the country. The truth is that these were the years when the vaccine schedule underwent transformation. MMR introduced in 1988, the accelerated DPT schedule in 1990 with 75 micrograms of mercury. HiB in 1992.Then you find that the people who have reviewed the policy are the ones who introduced it in the first place.
The who basis of the present vaccine programme is socially repressive. If it goes wrong no one in the medical profession, or in government will want to listen to you: the normal rules for attending to adverse drug reactions are suspended. The theoretical proposition is that by far the greater danger lies in not having the vaccine, but the reality is that the science has not be done, the parents have not been listened to and the children have not received proper medical scrutiny.
Posted by: Joe from Alamo on 3:03pm Fri 30 Mar 07
The article on autism by Jill Neimark in the April Discover magazine was quite illuminating. The article reports some of those in the autism field do not think that it is a coincidence that the autistic children have chronic diarrhea or a large number of ear infections.
About ear infections, in the October 2003 issue of the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders there is a ‘letter to the editor’ on ear infection. The letter reports that sleep apnea may be the cause of ear infections. At the end of an apnea, there is a rapid expulsion of air. Applying the concept of Bluestone and Beery (1976), this exhalation could open the eustachian tube and blow material, including infectious organisms, into the middle ear.
I am also of the opinion that sleep apnea underlies colitis.
The article on autism by Jill Neimark in the April Discover magazine was quite illuminating. The article reports some of those in the autism field do not think that it is a coincidence that the autistic children have chronic diarrhea or a large number of ear infections.
About ear infections, in the October 2003 issue of the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders there is a ‘letter to the editor’ on ear infection. The letter reports that sleep apnea may be the cause of ear infections. At the end of an apnea, there is a rapid expulsion of air. Applying the concept of Bluestone and Beery (1976), this exhalation could open the eustachian tube and blow material, including infectious organisms, into the middle ear.
I am also of the opinion that sleep apnea underlies colitis.
Posted by: Paula Stepankowsky, Longview, Wash. USA on 10:20pm Fri 30 Mar 07
Contrary to what this article states, Dr. Wakefield's research has not been ''largely discredited.'' In fact, further biological research being conducted here in the United States and elsewhere in the world is showing a growing connection between infant immune system dysfuction, genetic susceptibility, the cummulative impact of the growing number of vaccines on the infant immune system and environmental triggers for autism. So please do more complete research the next time you write about this topic. Parents have every right to be seriously concerned about this issue.
Paula L. Stepankowsky
Longview, Wash.
Contrary to what this article states, Dr. Wakefield's research has not been ''largely discredited.'' In fact, further biological research being conducted here in the United States and elsewhere in the world is showing a growing connection between infant immune system dysfuction, genetic susceptibility, the cummulative impact of the growing number of vaccines on the infant immune system and environmental triggers for autism. So please do more complete research the next time you write about this topic. Parents have every right to be seriously concerned about this issue.
Paula L. Stepankowsky
Longview, Wash.
Posted by: lara hawkings, london on 10:56pm Fri 30 Mar 07
My son is 4 he meet all his milestones, he had the mmr but that was the icing on the cake for him, he has ASD now, which we are treating bio medically which is having a really positive effect on him, he is a different boy to the young boy that was diagnosed last summer. So tell me, how can autism be neurological if by giving my son nutritional supplements & ensuring he as a gf/cf diet he is 'getting better' this is without any therapy. What does not help parents is that constipation & bowel probelms are treated as normal ! what does not help parents is the fact that health visitors give out a questionaire to mums instead of seeing the child themselves to assess how they are developing! This sub type autism is a medical condition which can be treated; the voice of parents must unite & become louder & stronger together so we cannot be ignored.
My son is 4 he meet all his milestones, he had the mmr but that was the icing on the cake for him, he has ASD now, which we are treating bio medically which is having a really positive effect on him, he is a different boy to the young boy that was diagnosed last summer. So tell me, how can autism be neurological if by giving my son nutritional supplements & ensuring he as a gf/cf diet he is 'getting better' this is without any therapy. What does not help parents is that constipation & bowel probelms are treated as normal ! what does not help parents is the fact that health visitors give out a questionaire to mums instead of seeing the child themselves to assess how they are developing! This sub type autism is a medical condition which can be treated; the voice of parents must unite & become louder & stronger together so we cannot be ignored.
Posted by: k on 4:22pm Sat 31 Mar 07
As a parent of 2 autistic children - one of whom has had the MMR and the second for whom we have not given it to because of our concerns - I think that basically discredit the theory that it is the main trigger of autism in children.
I think the focus needs to be on genetics and pre-screening much like the medical community has been able to do with Downs Syndrome.
I can understand parent's anxiety though.
ken
As a parent of 2 autistic children - one of whom has had the MMR and the second for whom we have not given it to because of our concerns - I think that basically discredit the theory that it is the main trigger of autism in children.
I think the focus needs to be on genetics and pre-screening much like the medical community has been able to do with Downs Syndrome.
I can understand parent's anxiety though.
ken
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 6:46pm Sat 31 Mar 07
Ken, I do not believe that anyone has claimed that MMR is an exclusive cause of autism. It has been used as a straw argument by the other side to discredit the MMR-autism hypothesis. I am sure that there are many hostile environmental influences but autism was not common before the vaccine drive of the late 1980s eaarly 90s. I believe the accelerated DPT+mercury schedule was equally signifcant. I do not believe in a genetic explosion (what cause?) and I do not believe "better identification": where are all the over-twenties?
John Stone
Ken, I do not believe that anyone has claimed that MMR is an exclusive cause of autism. It has been used as a straw argument by the other side to discredit the MMR-autism hypothesis. I am sure that there are many hostile environmental influences but autism was not common before the vaccine drive of the late 1980s eaarly 90s. I believe the accelerated DPT+mercury schedule was equally signifcant. I do not believe in a genetic explosion (what cause?) and I do not believe "better identification": where are all the over-twenties?
John Stone
Posted by: john, UK on 8:10am Mon 2 Apr 07
[italic]"largely discredited"[/italic] is a piece of nonsense from Vaccine HQ, purely to try and [italic]disecredit[/italic] Wakefield.
[italic] "emotional strain that parents were placed under by the MMR controversy."[/italic] So it looks like this latest "study" is an effort to place more pressure on people like him for stressing parents.
As John Stone points the vaccine people try to make out vaccine critics say '[italic]MMR only[/italic] ' cause autism or '[italic]mercury vaccines only[/italic] ' cause autism and then straw man that difference , when I haven't read anyone except less informed journos make that mistake.
Autism took off after the intro of mercury DPT vaccine, and then any more poisons (called vaccines) added to the numbers.
"I think that the biological case against Thimerosal is so dramatically overwhelming anymore that only a very foolish or a very dishonest person with the credentials to understand this research would say that Thimerosal wasn’t most likely the cause of autism."---Dr. Boyd E. Haley
"largely discredited" is a piece of nonsense from Vaccine HQ, purely to try and
disecredit Wakefield.
"emotional strain that parents were placed under by the MMR controversy." So it looks like this latest "study" is an effort to place more pressure on people like him for stressing parents.
As John Stone points the vaccine people try to make out vaccine critics say '
MMR only ' cause autism or '
mercury vaccines only ' cause autism and then straw man that difference , when I haven't read anyone except less informed journos make that mistake.
Autism took off after the intro of mercury DPT vaccine, and then any more poisons (called vaccines) added to the numbers.
"I think that the biological case against Thimerosal is so dramatically overwhelming anymore that only a very foolish or a very dishonest person with the credentials to understand this research would say that Thimerosal wasn’t most likely the cause of autism."---Dr. Boyd E. Haley
Posted by: Bronwyn Hancock, Sydney, Australia on 9:52am Mon 2 Apr 07
“[italic]Damned if you do, damned if you don’t[/italic] ?” That is only if one rejects the attempt to cover up the link to autism but still accepts without researching it the propaganda that vaccines prevent diseases, and that diseases like measles (or mumps, rubella or chickenpox) are “deadly”.
If anyone was to suggest the latter 40 years ago, they would be laughed at. That propaganda has only been aimed at the masses since the introduction of the measles vaccine. Sure, it is remotely possible for a child with measles to die, but [bold]only[/bold] if they have a severely compromised immune system and the disease is managed badly enough. Normally the disease is [bold]beneficial[/bold] – it is there to prime and mature a child’s immune system (Lancet 1985). Hence the measles parties before the vaccine introduction and propaganda.
And once one sees the link of the various vaccines to autism, how could one still accept the propaganda that vaccination protects against diseases? Vaccines are only able to cause autism, SSPE, etc, because the viruses/bacteria are directly injected past the important outer levels of the defence so they are able to lodge in the gut wall and/or the brain etc (plus the poisons in the vaccines weaken the remaining defences at the same time). One can’t put “bypassing defences” and “protection” in the same sentence.
Vaccines give the pathogens deeper access to cause damage. Sure, the disease symptoms will not usually appear, but most of those symptoms are the pathogen being dealt with by the defences. Vaccines bypass these, so there is [bold]no protection[/bold] and [bold]no process of developing immunity[/bold] . On the contrary, people who have been vaccinated have contracted the disease several times, and/or developed the [italic]atypical[/italic] form, which [bold]only[/bold] occurs in the vaccinated and can cause pneumonia, encephalitis and meningitis which are harder to treat (look up "[italic]atypical measles[/italic] " in any medical dictionary).
Unvaccinated children are much healthier, more alert, more aware, and happier, escaping the suffering from immune systems that are [italic]sensitised[/italic] by vaccines.
So the reality is “[italic]Damned if you do, a healthier child if you don’t[/italic] .” Is that a difficult choice?
Once someone lies, you know you can’t trust anything else they tell you. Always [bold]follow the money[/bold] , [bold]question[/bold] , and [bold]research.[/bold]
“
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t ?” That is only if one rejects the attempt to cover up the link to autism but still accepts without researching it the propaganda that vaccines prevent diseases, and that diseases like measles (or mumps, rubella or chickenpox) are “deadly”.
If anyone was to suggest the latter 40 years ago, they would be laughed at. That propaganda has only been aimed at the masses since the introduction of the measles vaccine. Sure, it is remotely possible for a child with measles to die, but
only if they have a severely compromised immune system and the disease is managed badly enough. Normally the disease is
beneficial – it is there to prime and mature a child’s immune system (Lancet 1985). Hence the measles parties before the vaccine introduction and propaganda.
And once one sees the link of the various vaccines to autism, how could one still accept the propaganda that vaccination protects against diseases? Vaccines are only able to cause autism, SSPE, etc, because the viruses/bacteria are directly injected past the important outer levels of the defence so they are able to lodge in the gut wall and/or the brain etc (plus the poisons in the vaccines weaken the remaining defences at the same time). One can’t put “bypassing defences” and “protection” in the same sentence.
Vaccines give the pathogens deeper access to cause damage. Sure, the disease symptoms will not usually appear, but most of those symptoms are the pathogen being dealt with by the defences. Vaccines bypass these, so there is
no protection and
no process of developing immunity . On the contrary, people who have been vaccinated have contracted the disease several times, and/or developed the
atypical form, which
only occurs in the vaccinated and can cause pneumonia, encephalitis and meningitis which are harder to treat (look up "
atypical measles " in any medical dictionary).
Unvaccinated children are much healthier, more alert, more aware, and happier, escaping the suffering from immune systems that are
sensitised by vaccines.
So the reality is “
Damned if you do, a healthier child if you don’t .” Is that a difficult choice?
Once someone lies, you know you can’t trust anything else they tell you. Always
follow the money ,
question , and
research. Posted by: Deborah Nash, Dartford Kent on 12:50pm Mon 2 Apr 07
I am the mother of a 13 year old autistic boy who regressed into autism and suffered severe diarrhoea which lasted for years; and started just 4 days after he was given the MMR. Soon after he was diagnosed at age 3 we visited a leading immunologist and asked the question "Do you think his problems are due to the MMR vaccine?" His reply was "I cannot say that his condition is definitely due to the MMR but what I would say is that on no account should you allow him to have the booster". Take what you will from his reply!
I have asked the medical profession to examine my son but no one wants to know about vaccine damage - because the risk of finding anything places ones medical career in jeopardy.
One of the first questions asked on any disability allowance form is to name the doctor/consultant who oversees and cares for the
patient with regard to his disability. Well, The simple answer is NO ONE CARES ABOUT MY SON'S DISABILITY AND DEFINITELY NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE CAUSE. As far as the NHS is concerned these children are untreatable and therefor not worth the time or money that follow-up care would cost. Dr Wakefield is one in a million but he cannot be expected to care for all our damaged children.
This "controversy" will never go away until we get to the truth. The medical profession can ignore it but they do so at their peril because eventually it will come back to haunt them.
I am the mother of a 13 year old autistic boy who regressed into autism and suffered severe diarrhoea which lasted for years; and started just 4 days after he was given the MMR. Soon after he was diagnosed at age 3 we visited a leading immunologist and asked the question "Do you think his problems are due to the MMR vaccine?" His reply was "I cannot say that his condition is definitely due to the MMR but what I would say is that on no account should you allow him to have the booster". Take what you will from his reply!
I have asked the medical profession to examine my son but no one wants to know about vaccine damage - because the risk of finding anything places ones medical career in jeopardy.
One of the first questions asked on any disability allowance form is to name the doctor/consultant who oversees and cares for the
patient with regard to his disability. Well, The simple answer is NO ONE CARES ABOUT MY SON'S DISABILITY AND DEFINITELY NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE CAUSE. As far as the NHS is concerned these children are untreatable and therefor not worth the time or money that follow-up care would cost. Dr Wakefield is one in a million but he cannot be expected to care for all our damaged children.
This "controversy" will never go away until we get to the truth. The medical profession can ignore it but they do so at their peril because eventually it will come back to haunt them.
Posted by: Joan Campbell, Glasgow Scotland on 3:50pm Tue 3 Apr 07
How many more children have to suffer the horrible adverse reactions to the MMR before the government and pharmaceutical companies take heed. I refused the MMR booster after my 14 month son was vaccine damaged by his first MMR. Since then he lost all his language and skills that he acquired. A couple of years later he was having seizures and I put him on a gluten and casein free diet plus a bio-medical intervention to help his condition. He is improving all the time but I know I shall have to look after him always. I have come to terms with this but I am disgusted at the way he has been treated by the powers of government and they should be ashamed of themselves for turning a blind eye. | support Dr Wakefield and pray that he is cleared of any made up wrong doing.
How many more children have to suffer the horrible adverse reactions to the MMR before the government and pharmaceutical companies take heed. I refused the MMR booster after my 14 month son was vaccine damaged by his first MMR. Since then he lost all his language and skills that he acquired. A couple of years later he was having seizures and I put him on a gluten and casein free diet plus a bio-medical intervention to help his condition. He is improving all the time but I know I shall have to look after him always. I have come to terms with this but I am disgusted at the way he has been treated by the powers of government and they should be ashamed of themselves for turning a blind eye. | support Dr Wakefield and pray that he is cleared of any made up wrong doing.
Posted by: John Richardson, Oban on 7:49pm Sun 8 Apr 07
I'm not sure what to make of the fact that almost all of the replies to this news item are from English litigants in the MMR/MR group litigation. Either our trusty Herald is uncommonly well-read south of the Border, or we're seeing a campaign group write-in.
I'm not sure what to make of the fact that almost all of the replies to this news item are from English litigants in the MMR/MR group litigation. Either our trusty Herald is uncommonly well-read south of the Border, or we're seeing a campaign group write-in.
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 2:35pm Mon 9 Apr 07
John Richardson
I wonder what your interest is in MMR litgants if you think you can identify them for sure - I certainly am not one. Once a story is on the web it is not surprising that concerned people locate it.
John Richardson
I wonder what your interest is in MMR litgants if you think you can identify them for sure - I certainly am not one. Once a story is on the web it is not surprising that concerned people locate it.
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 3:04pm Mon 9 Apr 07
On reflection I would like to make an objection to John Richardson routine sneer at MMR litigants. If my autistic son had fallen clearly into the MMR group (he had a fierce reaction to DPT) I do not know whether I would have had the the courage to embark on the emotional roller-coaster of litigation when others did. As it was the saw the Legal Services Commission under political direction from above remove support just as the case was being proved. It is an unpleasant reality that the Government were more successful in their hate campaign against the MMR litigants than in other attempts to take out their opponents before public opinion, but this is quite certainly the nature of what happened.
http://www.jpands.org/vol11no4/millerc.pdf
On reflection I would like to make an objection to John Richardson routine sneer at MMR litigants. If my autistic son had fallen clearly into the MMR group (he had a fierce reaction to DPT) I do not know whether I would have had the the courage to embark on the emotional roller-coaster of litigation when others did. As it was the saw the Legal Services Commission under political direction from above remove support just as the case was being proved. It is an unpleasant reality that the Government were more successful in their hate campaign against the MMR litigants than in other attempts to take out their opponents before public opinion, but this is quite certainly the nature of what happened.
http://www.jpands.org/vol11no4/millerc.pdf
Posted by: John Richardson, Oban on 5:44pm Mon 9 Apr 07
Further research reveals that a link has been placed to this page at the website of an anti-MMR campaign group, of which Mr Stone and most of the other names at this page show up as members.
At another website, Mr Stone is identified as 'a doyen of petty complainers' and an officer of the aforesaid anti-MMR group.
The braying of a mob who wish to put other peoples children at risk in their greedy hunt for unwarranted compensation needs to be shown up for what it is.
We need to protect our children, not fall victim to sly write-in campaigns by pressure groups.
Further research reveals that a link has been placed to this page at the website of an anti-MMR campaign group, of which Mr Stone and most of the other names at this page show up as members.
At another website, Mr Stone is identified as 'a doyen of petty complainers' and an officer of the aforesaid anti-MMR group.
The braying of a mob who wish to put other peoples children at risk in their greedy hunt for unwarranted compensation needs to be shown up for what it is.
We need to protect our children, not fall victim to sly write-in campaigns by pressure groups.
Posted by: Jenny Robertson, London on 7:25pm Mon 9 Apr 07
Nice one, John Richardson - you have beautifully demonstrated the art of media manipulation, so beloved of our health authorities.
Lots of nifty little techniques in place in such a short space. Such as:
Demonisation and marginalisation - by labelling opposing views as extremist and fringe, for instance, "anti-MMR group, pressure groups"
Ad hominem attacks (shooting of the messenger, personal attacks to undermine credibility) eg: "a doyen of petty complainers".
Setting up a straw man by misrepresenting the argument in order to attack it, eg: "those who wish to put other people's children at risk."
The use of logical fallacy; manipulating responses rather than using valid argument: for instance in an emotional way "greedy hunt for unwarranted compensation." And also an appeal to fear: "We need to protect our children, not fall victim..."
I am not an English litigants in the MMR/MR group litigation but a UK citizen who is sick and tired of health authority "spin" and NHS cover-ups.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation
Nice one, John Richardson - you have beautifully demonstrated the art of media manipulation, so beloved of our health authorities.
Lots of nifty little techniques in place in such a short space. Such as:
Demonisation and marginalisation - by labelling opposing views as extremist and fringe, for instance, "anti-MMR group, pressure groups"
Ad hominem attacks (shooting of the messenger, personal attacks to undermine credibility) eg: "a doyen of petty complainers".
Setting up a straw man by misrepresenting the argument in order to attack it, eg: "those who wish to put other people's children at risk."
The use of logical fallacy; manipulating responses rather than using valid argument: for instance in an emotional way "greedy hunt for unwarranted compensation." And also an appeal to fear: "We need to protect our children, not fall victim..."
I am not an English litigants in the MMR/MR group litigation but a UK citizen who is sick and tired of health authority "spin" and NHS cover-ups.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 8:48pm Mon 9 Apr 07
John Richardson
Thank you for pointing out the reference to me by Brian Deer, who - of course - has not made a penny from this matter and provides his services to the Sunday Times for nothing.
John Richardson
Thank you for pointing out the reference to me by Brian Deer, who - of course - has not made a penny from this matter and provides his services to the Sunday Times for nothing.
Posted by: Gus the fuss, Planet autism on 9:38pm Mon 9 Apr 07
John Richardson(would the real John Richardson please stand up have you no interest to declare as Brian Deer always states he always has none,or has Jenny just blown your cover and you work for the NHS)
Deer has no money coming back on the misery he writesNeither does any of the board of the GMC !FOR YOUR OPINNION The pharma paymasters,will put you on the endless talks circuit to unsuspecting doctors,of course shares in said companies,free flights,cash for opiinnion,cash for talks ,free holidays,free accomodation free,free,free,etc etc etc all you have to do is slaughter the innocents with the vaccines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYCDVxOx--w
John Richardson(would the real John Richardson please stand up have you no interest to declare as Brian Deer always states he always has none,or has Jenny just blown your cover and you work for the NHS)
Deer has no money coming back on the misery he writesNeither does any of the board of the GMC !FOR YOUR OPINNION The pharma paymasters,will put you on the endless talks circuit to unsuspecting doctors,of course shares in said companies,free flights,cash for opiinnion,cash for talks ,free holidays,free accomodation free,free,free,etc etc etc all you have to do is slaughter the innocents with the vaccines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYCDVxOx--w
Posted by: Joan Campbell, Glasgow Scotland on 2:52pm Tue 10 Apr 07
Shame on you John Richardson saying that parents were involved in the MMR/MR Litigation only for the compensation. We have a right to say our children were damaged by the MMR, we have a right to srart an anti MMR campaign if we wish, so that the general public is aware of the dangers. We have a voice and by God you will not shut me up ever. Good luck to you on your silly quest of trying to undermine the parents and professionalls who believe the damage has been done to our children now teenagers.
Shame on you John Richardson saying that parents were involved in the MMR/MR Litigation only for the compensation. We have a right to say our children were damaged by the MMR, we have a right to srart an anti MMR campaign if we wish, so that the general public is aware of the dangers. We have a voice and by God you will not shut me up ever. Good luck to you on your silly quest of trying to undermine the parents and professionalls who believe the damage has been done to our children now teenagers.
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 3:09pm Tue 10 Apr 07
Just to note that Suday Times/C4 journalist , Brian Deer, has admitted that he does not understand the science in the MMR controversy:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7491/552#100186
so it is very curious that he seems to have been granted some kind of license to destroy Andrew Wakefield's reputation on the basis of no more than a hunch.
Just to note that Suday Times/C4 journalist , Brian Deer, has admitted that he does not understand the science in the MMR controversy:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7491/552#100186
so it is very curious that he seems to have been granted some kind of license to destroy Andrew Wakefield's reputation on the basis of no more than a hunch.
Posted by: Guss the fuss, Planet autism on 10:06pm Wed 11 Apr 07
JR
Also mate come along and see the flesh never mind statistics,you ??@@@?@@?@%% Anytime when the sun shines sunshine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-1upEG2mlE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC1j4cka_3Q
JR
Also mate come along and see the flesh never mind statistics,you ??@@@?@@?@%% Anytime when the sun shines sunshine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-1upEG2mlE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC1j4cka_3Q
Posted by: John Stone, London N22 on 11:18pm Wed 11 Apr 07
My spy network, incidentally, has been unable to detect the presence of anyone called John Richardson in Oban:
http://www.192.com/
My spy network, incidentally, has been unable to detect the presence of anyone called John Richardson in Oban:
http://www.192.com/
Posted by: Andy P., Aberfeldy on 1:41am Thu 12 Apr 07
John Richardson - Oban is the key here, and I think you have a serious case of WCSTS (West Coast Small Town Syndrome). I grew up in Argyll and still live in the Highlands so can readily recognise the classic symptoms. To overcome your irrational and insular thoughts, you first need to open your mind to the idea that the internet being trans-national, people from south of the Border, and beyond, are allowed to contribute to Scottish newspaper's website. Especially if they have vaccine-damaged children, and the topic of the discussion is how such parents feel about the quality of the guidance they were given about MMR by the medical profession. Hope you get better soon.
John Richardson - Oban is the key here, and I think you have a serious case of WCSTS (West Coast Small Town Syndrome). I grew up in Argyll and still live in the Highlands so can readily recognise the classic symptoms. To overcome your irrational and insular thoughts, you first need to open your mind to the idea that the internet being trans-national, people from south of the Border, and beyond, are allowed to contribute to Scottish newspaper's website. Especially if they have vaccine-damaged children, and the topic of the discussion is how such parents feel about the quality of the guidance they were given about MMR by the medical profession. Hope you get better soon.
Posted by: Wendy Pickering, Sussex on 11:52am Thu 12 Apr 07
I agree with John Richardson's statement, "We need to protect our children." Isn't that what parents have attempted to do in either allowing their children to be vaccinated, or declining vaccinations. We should protect future generations, and one way of achieving that is for full investigation of a possible sub-set of vaccine damaged ones. I am a greedy litigant - not only do I want my son to be compensated so that he can pay for his own future care after my death, I want the truth to be out in the open, I want to see huge apologies and for those in powerful positions to be disgraced. Yep, that's certainly one greedy mummy.
I agree with John Richardson's statement, "We need to protect our children." Isn't that what parents have attempted to do in either allowing their children to be vaccinated, or declining vaccinations. We should protect future generations, and one way of achieving that is for full investigation of a possible sub-set of vaccine damaged ones. I am a greedy litigant - not only do I want my son to be compensated so that he can pay for his own future care after my death, I want the truth to be out in the open, I want to see huge apologies and for those in powerful positions to be disgraced. Yep, that's certainly one greedy mummy.
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (30)
