It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Infant Monkeys Given Doses of Vaccines Develop Autism Symptoms

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Well I have two little monkeys, both of whom have had the entire British vaccine programme, and they have turned out alright


Although they do get a little crazy after having skittles


Personally I question the vaccine autism link, diagnosis for the spectrum have increased in children, however there is a better understanding now of the traits we associate with being autistic, as a consequence diagnostic processes have become more effective at picking autism up.

Plus, aren't we all on the autistic spectrum somewhere along the line ?!




posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Everyone knows I am not big on the vaccine blame game

but I must say... this makes me



and the Autism started to surface in my child after the MMR vaccine, which we had spaced out quite a bit from when they wanted it done. Maybe this is why his is high functioning?

My opinion is changing.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I'm not a fan of vaccines, haven't had one since I was a kid, I'll make my own antibodies thank you very much.

And if anyone is still looking for the actual study, you can find it here: www.ane.pl...



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Ok so I have found a little more out about this study. This is not recent. It comes from 2008 and is apparently actually the work of Andrew Wakefield. For those who don't know Wakefield he was a major advocate of the autism-vaccine link and published a paper in 1998 supporting the claim. Since that time Wakefield's research has been found to be primarily made-up. In February 2008 he had his medical license revoked and in 2010 30 different charges related to his work were proven among which included a dozen charges related to the abuse of developmentally challenged children. Shortly before his license was revoked he submitted a paper to the journal NeuroToxicology but the paper was not published after he was exposed. This paper was then pretty much broken up into three different papers which his proteges attempted to have published. This paper is one of them. In fact if you check out the abstract it even has a special thanks section for Wakeman. I'll see if I can turn up a peer-reviewed rebuttal to this paper but in the mean time here is a response from Scienceblogs.

Too much vaccine/autism monkey business for me to be involved in--but apparently not Laura Hewitson


Looks like you didn't take a very deep look at what really happened to Andrew Wakefield. Remember who you're dealing with: rich vaccine companies who saw the very first REAL evidence that would threaten them. Go look into what actually happened to Andrew Wakefield.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I actually fail to see how people can't make a correlation between the early 90s, when childhood vaccines more than quardrupled, and the explosion of autism that followed.

The only other correlation few have noticed is around the same time, peanut allergies exploded too - might help to know that they used to put peanut oil in the vaccines...

I remember when my nephew, from Mexico, said "why is everyone over here allergic to peanuts, but no one is in Mexico?" They didn't push the same vaccines in Mexico, or any much at all.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by thebtheb
 


As hard as they try to keep a lid on it, this witch hunt against Dr. Wakefield is going to blow the MMR scandal wide open with his lawsuit against his accusers, whether it goes to court or not.

www.ageofautism.com...


BMJ’s lawyers will say whatever is most convenient in their attempt to quash Dr. Wakefield’s lawsuit and keep it from reaching trial. They did the same when denying Brian Deer received a letter from a parent accusing him of misrepresenting his own son’s case in the BMJ series.

However, I would imagine a motion’s strength depends on whether the arguments made in that motion could be legally made under oath in a court of law. That is not the case here; the BMJ’s argument of external review is not even consistent.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by thebtheb
 


One, anyone even remotely familiar with research will tell you that correlation does not imply causation. Second, other things changed in the early 90s as well. For example the DSM-IV was released in 1994 which overhauled the diagnostic criteria for autism.

As for Wakefield, while I am the one who originally brought him up he is irrelevant to this discussion. The research presented is extremely shoddy and no serious researcher would ever try to draw conclusions from it. In fact it's supposedly a pilot study so conclusions aren't supposed to be drawn from it. On the topic of Wakefield I will point out that no one has successfully replicated the results of his 1998 study that is pretty much the basis for the autism-vaccine connection.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
I have been to several training courses and biohazard schools.. recently I was at a training class on how to deal with autism in children. One of the biggest links to autism is vaccines. The companies won't tell you this because it deals with Billions of dollars. Ask Doug Fluttie about his son. He can tell you to the date and time his son became autistic. It was right after his vaccinations. He is one of the biggest anti vaccine people out there and with good reason. Just some info.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I can understand if the child suddenly developed autism right after vaccines that a parent would be distraught and would incline towards becoming "anti-vaccine" for everyone because of their misfortune. However this is like saying that everyone should stop eating peanuts because more children are allergic to them today than twenty years ago. I understand that some people are so allergic they can even die from a reaction if immediate care is not available. The same goes for anything you have a severe allergic reaction to. But the vast majority of people enjoy eating peanuts with absolutely no harmful effects. The same goes for vaccines.

Obviously the overwhelming majority of children receive the benefits of vaccines with NO side effects at all. Lately there have been threads on ATS supporting a ban of vaccines or encouraging all parents to forego vaccines for their kids. In my opinion this is the same type of paranoid response of a parent who would not allow their child to ever try a peanut (or any food, painkiller or antibiotic too) because of a report about an increasing number of allergies.

There is no basis for claims that today's society would benefit if the majority of people went without vaccinations. There are too many people living close together and world travel is more prevalent now than any time in history. It is reasonable to assume that a much greater disasater in numbers of death and disability would occur if the majority of people went without vaccines than the number of children having reactions to vaccines. I understand and have sympathy for a parent's distress if their child is one of the exceptions to the rule and develops autism.

I have allergic reactions to naproxin. The first time a took it I had a severe reaction and had to call an ambulance. And I know I am not the only one this has happened to. But because the majority benefit from this painkiller it would be unreasonable to expect a ban on naproxin because of my own experiences. We all understand that any food or medicine, including vaccines has the potential to cause a severe allergic reaction in predisposed individuals. And since there are only so many kids who develop autism after vaccines it looks like the reaction is the trigger for a predisposed, perhaps genetic tendency to develop autism, in my opinion.

If anything it seems the research and time should be spent trying to figure out why certain children seem to experience this reaction from vaccines and develop better screening methods.
edit on 1-5-2012 by TZela because: adding thoughts for clarification.

edit on 1-5-2012 by TZela because: spelling correction



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by PrincessofSwords
These need to be stopped.
Injections of this sort do not help immunity..
They make you weaker.

I was pressured into a flu vaccination two and a half years ago.
I haven't been the same since.
Talking is super rough.
Went a bit off my rocker for a while..
Only now getting back to normal

Thanks, OP, hopefully this article will go viral

The fact they have NEVER run safety tests on these???
INCOMPETENT.



mm read the previous responses now..
And I must question.
Maybe his credibility was destroyed BECAUSE of his findings?
Medicine is Money.
But I am not as knowledgeable about this subject..
Only that it makes sense to me; cause and effect.
edit on 30-4-2012 by PrincessofSwords because: (no reason given)

do you even understand how vaccines work? they trigger your immune system, how does something that triggers something natural to happen "weaken" anything?
please explain your reasoning because it boggles my mind how anyone can say that.

someone please explain to me why something that works for 99.99% of all people should be disallowed? there are a lot of things that turn out bad for a fraction of people but we don't ban them, yet people want vaccines banned because less than a fraction of people are believed to develop autism, it is absurd.
it is all emotional knee-jerking, based on selfishness. the amount of lives vaccines have saved is documented and supported by statistics.

see this is the problem though, there is no evidence that wakefield lost credibly because of some nefarious plot by "big pharma" or his findings somehow threatened "big medicine" by showing vaccines are dangerous.

what we do have is evidence that he lies about his findings in order to prop up his false beliefs about vaccines, what we have is proof that he hurts his own credibly and destroyed his career by lying about his findings.

sorry to hear you had a bad reaction to a vaccine, it happens. that doesn't mean vaccines should be banned though.
edit on 1-5-2012 by demongoat because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by demongoat
 


do you even understand how vaccines work? they trigger your immune system, how does something that triggers something natural to happen "weaken" anything?
please explain your reasoning because it boggles my mind how anyone can say that.


Aren't you presupposing that humans are born without natural immune systems? And are you implying that you do know how vaccines work? Do you even know and understand the various elements and chemicals in vaccines and how they impact an individual's chemical make up? If that was known, even by the creators, why would they have to continuously test vaccines already on the market on lab animals? Why wouldn't the results be part of the public domain, rather than held so closely to the vest? Why do vaccine producers lobby so hard for legislation to insulate themselves from wrongful death and injury suits?

someone please explain to me why something that works for 99.99% of all people should be disallowed? there are a lot of things that turn out bad for a fraction of people but we don't ban them, yet people want vaccines banned because less than a fraction of people are believed to develop autism, it is absurd.
it is all emotional knee-jerking, based on selfishness. the amount of lives vaccines have saved is documented and supported by statistics.


Statistics provided by whom? Why do these official statisticians feel the need to quash the conclusions of any dissenting research group?

see this is the problem though, there is no evidence that wakefield lost credibly because of some nefarious plot by "big pharma" or his findings somehow threatened "big medicine" by showing vaccines are dangerous.

what we do have is evidence that he lies about his findings in order to prop up his false beliefs about vaccines, what we have is proof that he hurts his own credibly and destroyed his career by lying about his findings.


No, what we have is proof of the lies told by the editor of the British Medical Journal, who was even forced to retract some of those lies. Wakefield wasn't the only victim of those lies. Do you even know how many specialists (who actually treat patients, unlike the editor of BMJ) were involved in that study?



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


You made some great points in your above post! To reiterate, if all this vaccine science was so right and perfect, why are the pharmas so protected and secretive?

I'll tell you why... for the same reason all the companies that have lots to hide are insulated, Monsanto, RJ Reynolds....money talks.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 


Thanks. Too bad I don't have as many answers as questions.


Yeah, money has always been one of the primary motives for murder, although outright killing the host is usually accidental, its far better to figure out ways to go on profiting from the victims for as long as you can keep them (semi) alive with other products you create. Do a search on autoimmune disorders and vaccines. Its diabolical.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 08:26 AM
link   
my mother never believed in Vaccines and as a result i have never had one injection in my life and the result is i am never sick and i feel i have a stronger Immune system to other people. i am not saying these vaccines dont work in some ways but i do believe childrens bodies are over loaded with them right from birth which cant be good for them.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 




Aren't you presupposing that humans are born without natural immune systems?

Triggering a natural immune response is different to not having a natural immune system at all.

Are you trying to be a troll?


And are you implying that you do know how vaccines work? Do you even know and understand the various elements and chemicals in vaccines and how they impact an individual's chemical make up?


Chemicals?

Do you know how a vaccine is made?

Here is the process.

1st Take your strain of nasty bug and inject it into a horse.

2nd Wait for the horse to develop immunity to the strain.

3rd Extract blood from the horse.

4th Separate the blood from the anti-bodies and discard blood cells(and a few other nasties that will react with the human body).

You now have a vaccine.

There are other process's for making a vaccine but the above is by far the most common(often using chicken eggs to incubate the strain prior to injecting it into the horse).

A hundred years ago a vaccine was simply the puss out of a lesion of an infected person who had developed the anti-bodies injected into someone who hadn't.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:59 AM
link   
These are the symptoms of Autism.


Social interactions and relationships. Symptoms may include:
Significant problems developing nonverbal communication skills, such as eye-to-eye gazing, facial expressions, and body posture.
Failure to establish friendships with children the same age.
Lack of interest in sharing enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people.
Lack of empathy. People with autism may have difficulty understanding another person's feelings, such as pain or sorrow.

Verbal and nonverbal communication. Symptoms may include:
Delay in, or lack of, learning to talk. As many as 40% of people with autism never speak.
Problems taking steps to start a conversation. Also, people with autism have difficulties continuing a conversation after it has begun.
Stereotyped and repetitive use of language. People with autism often repeat over and over a phrase they have heard previously (echolalia).
Difficulty understanding their listener's perspective. For example, a person with autism may not understand that someone is using humor. They may interpret the communication word for word and fail to catch the implied meaning.

Limited interests in activities or play. Symptoms may include:
An unusual focus on pieces. Younger children with autism often focus on parts of toys, such as the wheels on a car, rather than playing with the entire toy.
Preoccupation with certain topics. For example, older children and adults may be fascinated by video games, trading cards, or license plates.
A need for sameness and routines. For example, a child with autism may always need to eat bread before salad and insist on driving the same route every day to school.
Stereotyped behaviors. These may include body rocking and hand flapping.


Now, can somebody tell me how a Monkey can be exhibiting these symptoms, since most of them involve language and several sound like behavior I've seen at the zoo or in videos of normal monkeys?

I'm all for blaming the problem on a vaccine being a trigger, but saying Monkeys get the same symptoms is very misleading.

Also, some of those symptoms could crossover with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder - which could cause all kinds of problems for a little kid. Just look how it effects adults. A painful shot might cause something like PTSD for a little kid - just as physical abuse would.
edit on 7-5-2012 by CryHavoc because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


So he had his license revoked? Nothing amazing there, look what he was trying to do.




Indeed. Look at what he was 'trying to do': pass of fraudulent work. He was caught and exposed. You can review his papers and the peer-reviewed dissection of them if you really want to educate yourself.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by OccamAssassin
 


Yeah, I know what the natural immune system does.

I don't have to know how to make a car to know that putting foreign substances into the gas tank can blow the engine.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


So he had his license revoked? Nothing amazing there, look what he was trying to do.




Indeed. Look at what he was 'trying to do': pass of fraudulent work. He was caught and exposed. You can review his papers and the peer-reviewed dissection of them if you really want to educate yourself.



And now he's exposing his exposers, as has already been pointed out several times on this thread.


ETA: But you'll probably have to follow the trial on obscure websites because we all know the MSM isn't going to say anything to upset their biggest advertisers at the pharma companies or the ad council.
edit on 7-5-2012 by frazzle because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by frazzle


And now he's exposing his exposers, as has already been pointed out several times on this thread.



Sooooo... the FACT that his theory was based on provably fraudulent claims, that doesnt bother you?

What you accept as 'evidence' of something would make any credible scientists laugh.




top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join