Peripheral immune challenge with viral mimic during early postnatal period robustly enhances anxiety-like behavior in young adult rats.
If not Thimerisol, or Aluminum, or Too Many Too Soon, or Too Many Acute Effects, Then Safe
Aluminum Load is Safe
Too Many Vaccines Too Soon isn't a problem
There are no studies looking at parenteral aluminum in neonates or long term aluminum load from the series that don't show problems
Multiple Clinical Studies Have Found No Problems
The Evidence strongly indicates Vaccines are Damaging
The lead author of this study was also the lead author on the study cited by William Thompson as fraudulent
'Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Regarding the 2004 Article Examining the connection of MMR Vaccine and Autism'
Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism
CDC Scientist: "We scheduled meeting to destroy vaccine-autism study documents"
This study basically compares children who got DTP and dozens of vaccines to DTaP and dozens of Vaccines
The Risk of Autism is Not Increased by "Too Many Vaccines Too Soon"
Routine vaccinations and child survival: follow up study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa
Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination
Mitkus et al reports no results pertinent to parenteral aluminum in neonates
The effect of vaccination on children's physical and cognitive development in the Philippines
American Academy of Pediatrics, April 2013, Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence
On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes
A proof the Philippines Study shows no harm from vaccines would go here???
The Pertinent Evidence Indicates that Aluminum in the Vaccine Series is Toxic in the quantities administered
Bishop et al NEJM 1997 in a placebo controlled test reported 40mcg/kg caused a loss of 1 mental development point.
The Vaccinated in the Philippines (Bloom et al) study begin about 2.5 standard deviations ahead and finish about half ahead.
Aluminum Neurotoxicity in Preterm Infants Receiving Intravenous-Feeding Solutions
Aluminum exposure from parenteral nutrition in preterm infants: bone health at 15-year follow-up.
Infants receive about 4.4 milligrams of parenteral aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines
Institute of Medicine Survey found no problems
Infants receive more aluminum from diet than from vaccines
Oral polio vaccination and low case fatality at the paediatric ward in Bissau, Guinea-Bissau.
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
Benefits of routine immunizations on childhood survival in Tari, Southern Highlands Province, Papua New Guinea
On Time Vaccine is a poor proxy for more or earlier vaccines.
Study Beset with Severe Methodological Difficulties
Administration of aluminum to neonatal mice in vaccine-relevant amounts is associated with adverse long term neurological outcomes
Glia activation induced by peripheral administration of aluminum oxide nanoparticles in rat brains
Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain
Injected aluminum not an analog to vaccine amount
Animal Studies report brain or immune system damage
Animal Studies report repeated vaccination leads to auto-immune disease.
Animal Studies indicate vaccination during critical periods of brain development damages brain development
Self-Organized Criticality Theory of Autoimmunity
All the epidemiology comparing those who got more vaccines to less indicates vaccines cause damage
Vaccine model of antiphospholipid syndrome induced by tetanus vaccine
Postnatal Inflammation Increases Seizure Susceptibility in Adult Rats
Peer Reviewed Studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated indicate vaccines cause damage
Vaccines have been found to have contaminants such as retroviruses, animal viruses, Heavy metal nano and microparticles, human DNA and glyphosate
The vaccines are bypassing five evolved filters to inject aluminum in large quantities
A positive association found between autism prevalence and childhood vaccination uptake across the U.S. population.
Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism
The study has an obvious confounder. The most straightforward interpretation of the results indicates it shows MMR does cause autism.
Monkey study reported significantly slower reaction times on learning test for 2008 series group than controls
Examination of the safety of pediatric vaccine schedules in a non-human primate model: assessments of neurodevelopment, learning, and social
As Known at the Time, Polio vaccines were contaminated with SV-40 at least until 1978, and probably into the '90's.
10 times as much porcine circovirus was found in Rotarix Vaccine as the Active Ingredient Rotavirus
Human Fetal DNA Reported Found Contaminating Vaccines, and Correlated to Autism
The Thimerisol isn't causing autism
Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies
The reliability of the Claim "Animal Studies Virtually All Report brain or immune damage" is Independent of Whether Animal Studies Reliable
Reliability of animal data
More than 1000 parents of autistic children have taken the time to post videos claiming the vaccine visibly caused the autism
Unclear how well neonate kidneys can remove vaccine blood aluminum
Polio Vaccine Also Reported Contaminated with chimpanzee coryza virus, renamed Respiratory Syncytial Virus. RSV kills millions of infants/yr
Non-peer reviewed data on unvaccinated versus vaccinated indicates the unvaccinated are much healthier
KiGGS study of 13400 Germans found too few unvaccinated for good statistics, but they seemed healthier
On Time Vaccine is a Proxy for Prior Propensity to have Smart Healthy Children, so Studies Confounded.
On Time Vaccine is a Proxy for Little Vaccine Reaction
1 girl in 10 visits ED within 42 days of HPV
The Thimerosal Studies cited have many common confounders.
Aluminum Adjuvants Correlated with ASD Across Nations and Times
The big advantage of the animal models is, they are RPC studies
Adverse events following HPV vaccination, Alberta 2006 to 2014
Multiple studies find that Thimerisol or MMR is significantly protective against ASD or developmental disorders or delays
A Sizable IQ drop from Aluminum isn't ruled out by anything I've found, and Recent Testing on Millenials supports it.
Seemingly any test that is run finds contaminants. These are More Risky than commonly admitted.
Homestead Health Services have 35000 unvaccinated patients in Chicago and have never seen an autism case
General Non-specific Morbidity is Reduced After Vaccination Within the Third Month of Life : the Greifswald Study
Could this study be set up any better to measure the placebo effect and call it real?
In addition to everything else, there is an extensive literature on ASIA (Autoimmune (Autoinflammatory) Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants)
A Review of the Institute of Medicines 2002 Immunization Safety Review: Multiple Immunizations and Immune Dysfunction
A Review of the 2011 Institute of Medicine Report: Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality
A Review of the 2004 Institute of Medicine Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism
Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe
Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain
Transient suppression of atopy in early childhood is associated with high vaccination coverage
Damaged Kids are Being Given Less Vaccines, Not Kids Who Get More Vaccines Are Protected
Cargo Cult Science
A Summary of the Conclusions I Draw from This Diagram
A study in the phillipines measured heavily vaccinated versus unvaccinated children.
A study in Germany measured unvaccinated versus vaccinated children
This article summarizes multiple studies looking at unvaccinated populations.
This is inconsistent with the Alum theory
The statistic picked from this article is misleading
HPV dosage procedure
ED visit rates
This is false
You have offered no evidence whatsoever that the resulting rate is not significant, for ED Visits
These Studies Are All Discussed Elsewhere and Shown Not To Support Vaccine Safety
Whats wrong with the articles cited in here
The "placebo" always contains an adjuvant.
They test for limited duration, not as titers fade
There's evidence attached right there
The cited figures are highly significant.
A Number of These 9240 Excess ED Visits May Be Early Manifestations of ASIA (Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome induced by Adjuvants)
This appears to be based on a questionable calculation of the background rate
This requires proof. That a single study of a single vaccine didn't imply many acute effects, does not prove vaccines don't have too many acute effects.
This requires proof. That a single study of a single vaccine didn't imply many acute effects, does not prove vaccines don't have too many acute effects.
Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination
This appears to be based on a questionable calculation of the background rate
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
These Studies Are All Discussed Elsewhere In this topic and Shown Not To Support Vaccine Safety
The Pertinent Evidence Indicates that Aluminum in the Vaccine Series is Toxic in the quantities administered
This is inconsistent with the Alum theory
Infants receive about 4.4 milligrams of parenteral aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines
This is false
The cited figures are highly significant.
This appears to be based on a questionable calculation of the background rate
An extensive scientific literature spells out how aluminum causes autism
I stand corrected
Heavy metal nanoparticle and microparticle contamination of 43 out of 43 human vaccines tested
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
These Studies are Largely Corrupted by the Fact that Almost All Papers Compare Highly Vaccinated Individuals
Evidence shows increased risk of diabetes from Hib vaccine exceeds benefits
This paper presents no evidence whatsoever that the vaccine series is safe
A study comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated homeschoolers found huge damage
Any side effects of vaccines are significantly outweighed by their benefits
Mitkus et Al make numerous other errors including ignoring animal studies showing higher toxicity at lower levels than the one they use and ignoring particulate aluminum
This is not relevant to the question of safety as explicitly defined in the topic statement
Multiply replicated tests find vaccines contaminated with glyphosate
Perinatal immune activation produces persistent sleep alterations and epileptiform activity in male mice
Yellow fever vaccine has frequent adverse events, some of which are fatal or involve psychosis
Study shows neurological problems correlated with recent vaccine
All the epidemiology comparing those who got more vaccines to less indicates vaccines cause damage
These studies are nearly always confounded by Parent behavior
Lots of Evidence Gardasil far more damaging than claimed benefit
Journal article Open Access Role of NMDA receptor autoimmunity induced by food protein containing vaccines, in the etiology of autism, type 1 diabetes, neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders
Mitkus et al showed its safe
Probability Mode is OFF, so that doesn't matter. And I have now updated it to be purely a remark, so doesn't affect rating or probaility
99.75% of dietary aluminum is pooped out. About 250 times more aluminum reaches systemic flow from vaccines in infants..
Infants' exposure to aluminum from vaccines and breast milk during the first 6 months.
Animal Studies report results tending to indicate the aluminum is toxic in the quantities administered
Animal studies show slow bioaccumulation in organs such as the brain
On Time Vaccine is a Proxy for Prior Propensity to have Smart Healthy Children, so Studies Confounded.
The animal literature is ignored by the safety surveys, and it confirms the epidemiology showing damage and danger
This block just duplicates the rest of the arguments, and it messes up the probability calculations.
Vaccines are Safe
The Thimerisol isn't causing problems
There aren't too many acute immediate effects
Studies looking at long term effects have found no damage
Multiple Esteemed Organizations Have Surveyed the Literature and Found No Problems
All the epidemiology comparing those who got more vaccines to less indicates vaccines cause damage
Metab Brain Dis. 2011 Sep;26(3):237-40. doi: 10.1007/s11011-011-9244-z. Epub 2011 Jun 4. Peripheral immune challenge with viral mimic during early postnatal period robustly enhances anxiety-like behavior in young adult rats. Konat GW, Lally BE, Toth AA, Salm AK.
Abstract Inflammatory factors associated with immune challenge during early brain development are now firmly implicated in the etiologies of schizophrenia, autism and mood disorders later in life. In rodent models, maternal injections of inflammagens have been used to induce behavioral, anatomical and biochemical changes in offspring that are congruent with those found in human diseases. Here, we studied whether inflammatory challenge during the early postnatal period can also elicit behavioral alterations in adults. At postnatal day 14, rats were intraperitoneally injected with a viral mimic, polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (PIC). Two months later, these rats displayed remarkably robust and consistent anxiety-like behaviors as evaluated by the open field/defensive-withdrawal test. These results demonstrate that the window of vulnerability to inflammatory challenge in rodents extends into the postnatal period and offers a means to study the early sequelae of events surrounding immune challenge to the developing brain. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21643765
We have ruled out Thimerisol causing problems, and too many vaccines too soon causing damage, and too many acute effects causing damage, and vaccine aluminum causing damage, and therefor vaccines are safe. This is essentially the argument the American Academy of Pediatrics put out under the title "Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence", except widened by adding Aluminum to the list of dangers.
http://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/AAP-Vaccines-studies.pdf
The Aluminum Load from the Vaccine Series isn't causing problems.
Too Many Vaccines Too Soon isn't a problem
There are no empirical studies of parenteral aluminum in neonates or long term aluminum load from the series that don't show problems. And thus the safety surveys don't cite one. So how can they possibly show safety? The meta-analysis and safety surveys all only cover papers, none of which are sensitive to the aluminum (or other issues) and all of which have the same confounders.
The paper they cite on the subject, Mitkus et al, reports no empirical results. It computes a theoretical estimate of blood aluminum (with various questionable assumptions) and compares it to an MRL based on dietary experiments in weaned animals.
However, direct experiments injecting the aluminum in neonates reports its toxic, and a
randomized Placebo controlled test in preemies of parenteral aluminum indicated a loss of a mental development point for every 40mcg/kg of parenteral aluminum. That translates into perhaps almost 2 IQ points for the Hep B given at birth alone.
For example: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=double+blind+vaccination+study
About 187,000 results.
The Evidence strongly indicates Vaccines are Damaging
While normally an ad hominem attack is inappropriate, one has to question when the lead author on a key study the CDC cites for proving that MMR doesn't cause autism was also a coauthor on another heavily cited study that a coauthor has come forward to say was fraudulent, and that they scheduled a meeting to illegally destroy documents. This is particularly true when at the time of the accusation (the webpages have since been modified) the earlier paper was one of the few cited by the CDC webpage to argue MMR doesn't cause autism and the latter paper was the only one cited by the CDC webpage arguing there is no problem with too many vaccines too soon.
August 27, 2014 Press Release, “Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Regarding the 2004 Article Examining the Possibility of a Relationship Between MMR Vaccine and Autism” FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-AUGUST 27,2014 STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998. I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed. ... http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/
Update: that link has been removed but the original statement can still be found here: http://vaxxedthemovie.com/statement-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-2004-article-examining-possibility-relationship-mmr-vaccine-autism/
http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476%2813%2900144-3/abstract Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism Frank DeStefano, MD,MPH, Cristofer S. Price, ScM, Eric S. Weintraub, MPH DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.02.001
Abstract To evaluate the association between autism and the level of immunologic stimulation received from vaccines administered during the first 2 years of life. Study design We analyzed data from a case-control study conducted in 3 managed care organizations (MCOs) of 256 children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and 752 control children matched on birth year, sex, and MCO. In addition to the broader category of ASD, we also evaluated autistic disorder and ASD with regression. ASD diagnoses were validated through standardized in-person evaluations. Exposure to total antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides from vaccines was determined by summing the antigen content of each vaccine received, as obtained from immunization registries and medical records. Potential confounding factors were ascertained from parent interviews and medical charts. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess associations between ASD outcomes and exposure to antigens in selected time periods. Results The aOR (95% CI) of ASD associated with each 25-unit increase in total antigen exposure was 0.999 (0.994-1.003) for cumulative exposure to age 3 months, 0.999 (0.997-1.001) for cumulative exposure to age 7 months, and 0.999 (0.998-1.001) for cumulative exposure to age 2 years. Similarly, no increased risk was found for autistic disorder or ASD with regression. Conclusion In this study of MCO members, increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines during the first 2 years of life was not related to the risk of developing an ASD.
https://sharylattkisson.com/cdc-scientist-we-scheduled-meeting-to-destroy-vaccine-autism-study-documents/
De Stefano et al 2014 compares patients by the number of “antigens” they receive, rather than the number or timing of vaccines. Table 1 in De Stefano et al 2013 (scroll down for image) http://jpeds.com/webfiles/images/journals/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf
defines what is meant by this. DTP has 3002 antigens while no other common vaccine in their data set had more than a handful. That means that patients who got DTP and other vaccines had more than 3000 antigens and were the high antigen group, compared to patients who may well have gotten equally many or earlier or more vaccines, but didn't get DTP. (Many of them got DTaP instead.) This study compared two groups of patients that seem likely to have gotten roughly the same number of vaccines, and the same timing, and the same aluminum. It doesn't seem they would have found a different result, for example, if the aluminum in vaccines were the sole cause of autism. What's more, it seems that if they replaced table 1 with aluminum content and just re-processed, they may get a more informative result. They haven't done that.
Editorial of The Journal of Pediatrics http://www.jpeds.com/content/JPEDSDeStefano
Results: Mortality was lower in the group vaccinated with any vaccine compared with those not vaccinated, the mortality ratio being 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.53 to 1.03). After cluster, age, and other vaccines were adjusted for, BCG was associated with significantly lower mortality (0.55 (0.36 to 0.85)). However, recipients of one dose of diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis or polio vaccines had higher mortality than children who had received none of these vaccines (1.84 (1.10 to 3.10) for diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis). Recipients of measles vaccine had a mortality ratio of 0.48 (0.27 to 0.87). When deaths from measles were excluded from the analysis the mortality ratio was 0.51 (0.28 to 0.95). Estimates were unchanged by controls for background factors. http://www.bmj.com/content/321/7274/1435
Routine vaccinations and child survival: follow up study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa Commentary: an unexpected finding that needs confirmation or rejection BMJ 2000; 321 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7274.1435 (Published 09 December 2000)
Mitkus RJ, King DB, Hess MA, Forshee RA, Walderhaug MO., Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination, Vaccine 29(51) 9538-43 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001122
Abstract: Aluminum is a ubiquitous element that is released naturally into the environment via volcanic activity and the breakdown of rocks on the earth's surface. Exposure of the general population to aluminum occurs primarily through the consumption of food, antacids, and buffered analgesics. Exposure to aluminum in the general population can also occur through vaccination, since vaccines often contain aluminum salts (frequently aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate) as adjuvants. Because concerns have been expressed by the public that aluminum in vaccines may pose a risk to infants, we developed an up-to-date analysis of the safety of aluminum adjuvants. Keith et al. [1] previously analyzed the pharmacokinetics of aluminum for infant dietary and vaccine exposures and compared the resulting body burdens to those based on the minimal risk levels (MRLs) established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. We updated the analysis of Keith et al. [1] with a current pediatric vaccination schedule [2]; baseline aluminum levels at birth; an aluminum retention function that reflects changing glomerular filtration rates in infants; an adjustment for the kinetics of aluminum efflux at the site of injection; contemporaneous MRLs; and the most recent infant body weight data for children 0-60 months of age [3]. Using these updated parameters we found that the body burden of aluminum from vaccines and diet throughout an infant's first year of life is significantly less than the corresponding safe body burden of aluminum modeled using the regulatory MRL. We conclude that episodic exposures to vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvant continue to be extremely low risk to infants and that the benefits of using vaccines containing aluminum adjuvant outweigh any theoretical concerns.
Mitkus et al has multiple problems for assuring safety.
(1) They took no measurements. Its a model, a theory, a hypothesis about how the vaccine series aluminum might be safe, if its assumptions were true in the world.
(2) The MRL they use is based on experiments in which post-weaning rats and mice were fed dietary aluminum till they almost looked sick, and then dividing by 30. In other words, Mitkus et al is totally uninformed about the toxicity of injected aluminum in neo-nates. There is no reason to believe the toxicity in neo-nates will be similar to adults, because the aluminum may impact development. The experiment of injecting aluminum in vaccine relevant amounts has been done, both in animals and humans, and the authors reported it is in fact highly toxic.
(3) They assume that blood aluminum will be quickly removed by the kidneys, but it is highly unclear that that applies to the particular salts of aluminum used in vaccines, particularly when bound to vaccine antigen.
(4) The estimate used in Mitkus et al for the background aluminum was based on assuming a factor 20 of body aluminum to blood aluminum, based on experiments in adults. It seems plausible the fetus, constructed in the clean placenta, might have a much smaller ratio. The adult has had years for circulating blood to get deposited in organs, the fetus hasn't. So their estimates are questionable here too.
(5) The estimate used in Mitkus et al for dietary absorption was .75%, which was admittedly a guess. Experiments have found values closer to .25%, increasing the ratio of vaccine to dietary aluminum by a further factor of 3.
Mitkus et al suggests that if neonates had the same toxicity for parenteral aluminum as adults do for dietary aluminum, and if their kidneys remove vaccine aluminum like adult kidneys remove other aluminum salts, then the aluminum load may be safe. Unfortunately, direct experiments contradict at least the first of these.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/program-on-the-global-demography-of-aging/WorkingPapers/2011/PGDA_WP_69.pdf
Free pdf http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036846.2011.566203
Journal David E. Bloom, David Canninga & Erica S. Shenoy, The effect of vaccination on children's physical and cognitive development in the Philippines, Applied Economics Volume 44, Issue 21, 2012 p 2777-2783
Summary We use data from the Cebu Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Survey in the Philippines to link vaccination in the first two years of life with later physical and cognitive development in children. We use propensity score matching to estimate the causal effect of vaccination on child development. We find no effect of vaccination on later height or weight, but full childhood vaccination for measles, polio, TB, and DPT significantly increases cognitive test scores relative to matched children who received no vaccinations. The size of the effect is large, raising test scores, on average, by about half a standard deviation.
http://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/AAP-Vaccines-studies.pdf
On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes Michael J. Smith, MD, MSCE, Charles R. Woods, MD, MS http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/6/1134.abstract
ele20 was offered as a challenge of n48, since ele20 was said to offer evidence that vaccines did not do damage.
However, ele24 has challenged whether the results of ele20 support or refute vaccine safety.
To defend the offered challenge of n48, a rebuttal to ele24 ought to be offered here.
The Pertinent Evidence Indicates that the Aluminum in the Vaccine Series is Highly Toxic in the quantities administered. All of the peer reviewed papers that report empirical results pertinent to parenteral aluminum in neonates, report it is highly toxic in the quantities administered. These results indicate it is likely costing the vaccinated population multiple IQ points, bone density, and causing other problems. The injections are bypassing 6 evolved filters to inject aluminum in far higher quantities than would otherwise be present.
Bishop et al provide a direct, placebo controlled measurement of the effects of aluminum in 1.85kg premature babies. Hospitals give intravenous feeding to preemies, and there was a little residual aluminum in it, so the authors decided to test if reducing the aluminum in the intravenous solution would lead to better results on a mental development index tested at 18 months. If you look at table 1, you can see that a less than 1.85 kg preemie got about 75mcg= 1.85kg*40 mcg/kg more aluminum per day on the normal aluminum than the low aluminum. And it cost him per day about 1 point on the mental development scale at 18 months, which seems projectable to 1 IQ point when he grows up, although it might be they will recover later. It also might be the impact on development will continue and get worse, there’s no obvious reason to believe one over the other. Their bone structure is also still apparently damaged at 15 years old. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19858156
Let’s estimate what damage the vaccines are doing under the assumption suggested by this data that 40mcg/kg of injected aluminum early in life costs you an IQ point on average. (and some bone density, and maybe other things.) The Hep B vaccine which administered at birth, and at 1 month, and at 6 months has 250mcg of aluminum, and according to the CHOP guide reassuring parents on aluminum there’s 4000 mcg in the whole series before 6 months. http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-center/aluminum.pdf
The average infant birth weight is 3.5kg and the average 6 month old is 7.5 kg. The single Hep B at birth is about 70 mcg/kg by itself, which might translate into almost 2 IQ points. The whole series is something in the vicinity of 600 mcg/kg which might translate into something like 15 IQ points. Maybe the aluminum isn’t as damaging at birth as a few weeks early, or at 6 months, but maybe it is. There’s still plenty of brain development going on.
In the Philippines, Bloom et al (ele20 http://truthsift.com/search_view?id=406&nid=4113 ) looked at scores on intelligence test results at about 12 years of age for a population surveyed on vaccines at 24 months. They found a sample of only 85 children who had received all of DPT, measles, polio, and TB, and a control sample of 1022 children who had received none of them, out of a total survey of 1975 children. Note the survivorship bias in the data. Any children who died before age 12 either from receiving the vaccines or from not receiving them, were not counted, and its unclear whether children who developed severe problems like autism would have been included either. They attempted to deal with the hidden factor bias by choosing matched members of the unvaccinated for the vaccinated, based on fitting a simple linear regression to features like mother's education and water supply in home. They then found that the fully vaccinated scored about half a standard deviation higher on cognitive tests and were about the same height and weight as the fully unvaccinated, although they note "the matching of treatment and control groups may be imperfect if there are unobserved confounding factors that affect both vaccination and cognitive development. We therefore do not see our results as definitive."
There seems to be an evident confounding factor. It seems likely that virtually every parent in the Philippines, or at least virtually every intelligent, educated parent motivated to invest in their children, would have as an important goal vaccinating their children. If basic intelligence has any meaning, it is highly connected to ability to succeed at difficult real world tasks on which other, less intelligent people, might fail; and this task of getting children vaccinated further folds in motivation to invest in children. Thus succeeding in this task seems in and of itself as strong a proxy for propensity to produce smart children as one could think to devise. By choosing to consider only fully vaccinated children, Bloom et al have selected a group that is fully 1.5 to 2 standard deviations ahead of the mean at this proxy, the top 85 out of 1975 individuals in the distribution, and the controls are all in the lower half of the bell curve, so the mean vaccinated are perhaps 2.5 standard deviations ahead of the mean control in this measure of propensity to produce smart children. That they are finding only .5 standard deviation increase in test scores and no benefit in height from this factor suggests the explanation that the vaccines are causing a 2 standard deviation loss compared to a placebo.
To put this in perspective, this is like two parents who both got 750 on the SAT having a child who got 550. Are they happy with his result? I would suggest they reanalyze their data to deal with hidden factors as in the Guinea-Bisseau studies, by comparing individuals who got at least 1 DTP shot to individuals who got no vaccines, and that they compare individuals who got only BCG to individuals who got DTP. I predict if they do, they will find results like the Guinea-Bisseau studies showing that the early adjuvanted vaccination is causing damage.
Aluminum Neurotoxicity in Preterm Infants Receiving Intravenous-Feeding Solutions Nicholas J. Bishop, M.D., Ruth Morley, M.B., B.Chir., J. Philip Day, Ph.D., and Alan Lucas, M.D. N Engl J Med 1997; 336:1557-1562May 29, 1997DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199705293362203 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199705293362203#t=articleResults
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19858156 Pediatrics. 2009 Nov;124(5):1372-9. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0783. Epub 2009 Oct 26.
Aluminum exposure from parenteral nutrition in preterm infants: bone health at 15-year follow-up. Fewtrell MS1, Bishop NJ, Edmonds CJ, Isaacs EB, Lucas A. Erratum in Pediatrics. 2009 Dec;124(6):1709.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: Aluminum has known neurotoxicity and may impair short-term bone health. In a randomized trial, we showed reduced neurodevelopmental scores in preterm infants who were previously exposed to aluminum from parenteral nutrition solutions. Here, in the same cohort, we test the hypothesis that neonatal aluminum exposure also adversely affects long-term bone health, as indicated by reduced bone mass. METHODS: Bone area (BA) and bone mineral content (BMC) of lumbar spine, hip, and whole body were measured with dual radiograph absorptiometry in 13- to 15-year-olds who were born preterm and randomly assigned standard or aluminum-depleted parenteral nutrition solutions during the neonatal period. RESULTS: Fifty-nine children (32% of survivors) were followed. Those who were randomly assigned to standard parenteral nutrition solution had lower lumbar spine BMC, apparently explained by a concomitant decrease in bone size. In nonrandomized analyses, children who were exposed to neonatal aluminum intakes above the median (55 microg/kg) had lower hip BMC (by 7.6% [95% confidence interval: 0.12-13.8]; P = 0.02), [corrected] independent of bone (or body) size. CONCLUSIONS: Neonates who are exposed to parenteral aluminum may have reduced lumbar spine and hip bone mass during adolescence, potential risk factors for later osteoporosis and hip fracture. These findings need confirmation in larger, more detailed studies. Nevertheless, given our previous finding of adverse developmental outcome in these individuals and the sizeable number of contemporary infants who undergo intensive neonatal care and are still exposed to aluminum via parenteral feeding solutions, the potential adverse long-term consequences of early aluminum exposure now deserve renewed attention
Vaccine Ingredients - Aluminum "While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet." http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum#.ViaqRcuRb04
The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety: Stakeholder Concerns, Scientific Evidence, and Future Studies (2013) Committee on the Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK206948/
While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet. Breast-fed infants ingest about 7 milligrams, formula-fed infants ingest about 38 milligrams, and infants who are fed soy formula ingest almost 117 milligrams of aluminum during the first six months of life.
Childrens Hospital of Pennsylvania, Vaccine Education Center, Q&A Volume 4 2012, Q&A Aluminum in Vaccines: What You Should Know
http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-center/aluminum.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15297050
Vaccine. 2004 Aug 13;22(23-24):3014-7. Oral polio vaccination and low case fatality at the paediatric ward in Bissau, Guinea-Bissau. Aaby P1, Rodrigues A, Biai S, Martins C, Veirum JE, Benn CS, Jensen H.
Abstract Oral polio vaccine (OPV) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccines are given simultaneously in routine immunisation programmes in developing countries. It is therefore difficult to determine the separate effects of these vaccines on survival. We used the shortage of DTP vaccine in Bissau to examine the impact of OPV on the case fatality at the paediatric ward in Bissau. For 719 children less than 5 years of age whose vaccination card had been seen at admission and who had not yet received measles vaccine, having received OPV only was associated with a case fatality of 6% compared with 15% for children having received combined DTP and OPV vaccinations, the case fatality ratio (CFR) being 0.29 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11-0.77). Even if children fleeing the hospital were assumed to have died shortly after leaving the hospital, the case fatality would still be lower for children having received OPV only (CFR = 0.41; (95% CI 0.20-0.81)). The tendency was similar for children hospitalised with pneumonia, diarrhoea, and presumptive malaria. Control for background factors had no impact on the estimate. In areas with high mortality, OPV administered alone may have non-specific beneficial effects or DTP may have a negative effect for children who had received both DTP and OPV.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15561755 Int J Epidemiol. 2005 Feb;34(1):138-48. Epub 2004 Nov 23.
Benefits of routine immunizations on childhood survival in Tari, Southern Highlands Province, Papua New Guinea. Lehmann D1, Vail J, Firth MJ, de Klerk NH, Alpers MP.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Non-specific beneficial as well as deleterious effects of childhood immunizations have been reported in areas of high mortality. This study aimed to determine the effects of diphtheria-tetanus-whole-cell-pertussis (DTP), BCG, hepatitis B, and measles vaccines on mortality in the highlands of Papua New Guinea (PNG). METHODS: Demographic events for children born in 1989-1994 who were under monthly demographic surveillance in Tari were recorded from birth until age 2 years, out-migration, death, or the end of the study period. Data on BCG, hepatitis B, DTP, measles and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination were collected monthly from clinic records. To allow for different characteristics of immunized and non-immunized children, analysis included conditioning on a propensity score for vaccination, adjusting for differences in children's background characteristics. RESULTS: In all, 101/3502 children (3%) who had at least one vaccine died between ages 29 days and 24 months were compared to 112/546 (21%) who had none. BCG was associated with lower mortality in the 1-5 month age group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.34), measles vaccine with lower mortality at age 6-11 months (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.17, 1.01), and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine with lower mortality at age 12-23 months (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.93). One or more doses of DTP was associated with lower overall mortality (HR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.44), particularly in the 1-5 month age group (HR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.34), and also in those who had had prior BCG (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.91). CONCLUSION: Routine immunizations are effective in reducing overall mortality in young children in an area of high mortality. In particular, DTP, whether considered separately or in addition to BCG, was associated with a lowering of overall mortality, in contrast to findings reported from Guinea-Bissau.
Smith and Woods compared neuro-psychological results for patients who'd gotten all vaccines on time, compared to patients who hadn't, and found no substantial differences. Other studies, such as many attempts to look at cumulative Thimerosal exposure, implicitly use the same proxy, since the patients in the low Thimerosal group may have just gotten the vaccines later.
On Time vaccine is a poor proxy for more or earlier vaccines for two reasons.
(1) On Time Vaccine is intuitively a proxy for prior likelihood to produce healthy intelligent children
(2) Children who have vaccine reactions are pushed into the late/low vaccine group if their parents delay the vaccines on this basis, or because they are sick.
This study compared outcomes in a largely unvaccinated population in Papua, New Guinea, reporting almost opposite results to the Guinea-Bisseau study, eg they found DTP greatly decreased mortality rates. However, there are severe methodological difficulties with this. This study attempted to control for confounding factors using the method of propensity scores, "an efficient estimator of the adjustment estimand, formed by an arbitrary set of covariates S; it makes no statement regarding the appropriateness of S, nor does it promise to correct for any confounding bias, or to refrain from creating new bias where none exists."[27,p 349] http://bayes.cs.ucla.edu/BOOK-09/ch11-3-5-final.pdf Judea Pearl, "Understanding propensity scores". In, Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference (Second ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-89560-6
The set of covariates they corrected for did not contain the type of proxies for parental circumstances and abilities that the Guinea-Bisseau studies controlled for such as whether there is water or a toilet in the home, or maternal education or vaccine status. As with each of the above studies, it appears highly likely that parents with a high prior propensity to vaccinate their children also have a high propensity to feed them well and maintain sanitary circumstances.
Furthermore, they binned by set of vaccines given, so that a patient who had only BCG would contribute person-days to the BCG bin until they died or got another vaccine, say DTP, in which case they began to contribute person days to the BCG+DTP bin. This method inherently biases the bins for fewer vaccines to be over-weighted with data for younger patients relative to bins for vaccine supersets, and since in their data the mortality rate for the youngest patients was far higher than for older ones, this injects a large bias into their reported results.
Injections of a “high” and “low” Al adjuvant levels were designed to correlate to either the U.S. or Scandinavian paediatric vaccine schedules vs. control saline-injected mice. Both male and female mice in the “high Al” group showed significant weight gains following treatment up to sacrifice at 6 months of age. Male mice in the “high Al” group showed significant changes in light–dark box tests and in various measures of behaviour in an open field. Female mice showed significant changes in the light–dark box at both doses, but no significant changes in open field behaviours. These current data implicate Al injected in early postnatal life in some CNS alterations that may be relevant for a better understanding of the aetiology of ASD.
Administration of aluminum to neonatal mice in vaccine-relevant amounts is associated with adverse long term neurological outcomes C.A. Shaw, Y. Li , L. Tomljenovic, Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry, V 128, November 2013, Pages 237–244 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0162013413001773
Sprague-Dawley rats were intraperitoneally injected with nanosized aluminum oxide, (NSAO); non-nanoscaled aluminum oxide, or vehicle (saline). The numbers of ED1+, GFAP+, and nestin+ cells in cortex and hippocampus were significantly higher in NSAO-treated rats than nNSAO- or vehicle-treated rats; thus, NSAO has potential effects on the innate immune system of rat brain.
X. Li,H. Zheng, Z. Zhang,M. Li, Z.Huang, H.J. Schluesener, Y. Li, S. Xu,Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine 5 (2009) 473–479 Glia activation induced by peripheral administration of aluminum oxide nanoparticles in rat brains http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19523415
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3616851/
Intramuscular alum-containing vaccine injection in mouse induces Al deposition in distant tissues Alum-containing vaccine (36 mcL corresponding to 18 mcg Al) was first injected in the TA muscles of C57Bl6 mice. It induced an acute inflammatory reaction which stabilized after d4 in the form of collections of typical alum-loaded MPs with large hematoxylin+ and Periodic Acid Schiff+ cytoplasm in muscle envelopes (Figure (Figure1a).1a). In parallel, the local Al tissue concentration determined by atomic absorption spectrometry decreased by 50% from injection to d4 and then remained stable until d21 (2,342, 1,122, and 1,180 mcg/g of dry muscle tissue, respectively). Al was additionally located in muscle and distant tissues by PIXE [19]. Random scanning of 20 ?m thick sections, sampled and processed with careful protection against environmental Al, disclosed significant Al signals in muscle, spleen and brain (Figure (Figure1b-c).1b-c). In brain, Al spots accounted for 38, 21, and 37% of 500 × 500 ?m tested fields at d21, and months 6 and 12 (mo6 and mo12) post-injection, respectively (mean = 31.5%; n = 73 fields, Figure Figure1d).1d). The dip at month 6, was either due to interindividual variations in aluminum handling or to sampling problems related to variable proportions of grey and white matter in the randomly scanned areas (see below). The spot size ranged from about 1 to 14 ?m. By comparison, five unvaccinated mice showed only seven positive out of 94 tested fields (mean = 7.4%). These results confirmed that Al derived from alum can be translocated to, penetrate and persist in brain tissue [21-23]. Al depots detected in spleen and brain could have resulted from either physical translocation of alum particles, or in situ aggregation of soluble Al, or both.
http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum#.VaQ6gvlVhHw
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia website shows the different amounts of aluminum in common vaccines, all of which are <.85 mg, and many of which are about .25 mg. It also says that "infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines" under the "Aluminum in vaccines" section. http://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set2clinical/cj41c067.pdf and http://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/data/set2clinical/cj41c068.pdf show that 97% of children have weight at or above 2.4 kg at birth, and 5.8 kg by six months. The study in n14 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/26289225_Glia_activation_induced_by_peripheral_administration_of_aluminum_oxide_nanoparticles_in_rat_brains
injected rats "once every second day for 30 or 60 days with nanoscaled aluminum oxide (NSAO; 1 mg/kg or 50 mg/kg)." Within a week, the rats are exposed to more aluminum oxide / kg than human infants are exposed to aluminum adjuvant / kg in six months. Furthermore, the rats were tested for effects after 30 and 60 days of injections every other day, after which the rats would have received a much greater amount of aluminum / kg. Thus, this study is not testing for the effects of comparable amounts of aluminum.
Animal Studies report brain or immune system damage.
Animal Studies report repeated vaccination leads to auto-immune disease.
Animal Studies indicate vaccination during critical periods of brain development damages brain development
Self-Organized Criticality Theory of Autoimmunity Ken Tsumiyama, Yumi Miyazaki, Shunichi Shiozawa Published: December 31, 2009DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008382 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0008382
Background The cause of autoimmunity, which is unknown, is investigated from a different angle, i.e., the defect in immune system, to explain the cause of autoimmunity.
Methodology/Principal Findings Repeated immunization with antigen causes systemic autoimmunity in mice otherwise not prone to spontaneous autoimmune diseases. Overstimulation of CD4+ T cells led to the development of autoantibody-inducing CD4+ T (aiCD4+ T) cell which had undergone T cell receptor (TCR) revision and was capable of inducing autoantibodies. The aiCD4+ T cell was induced by de novo TCR revision but not by cross-reaction, and subsequently overstimulated CD8+ T cells, driving them to become antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL). These CTLs could be further matured by antigen cross-presentation, after which they caused autoimmune tissue injury akin to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).
Conclusions/Significance Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host's immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system's self-organized criticality.
The studies commonly cited by authorities to claim vaccines are safe compare individuals who got one particular vaccine and dozens of others to those who got dozens of others. Such a study wouldn't show statistically significant damage unless the particular vaccine causes at least damage comparable by itself to the damage caused by all the other vaccines. But peer reviewed animal studies indicate that any vaccine causes damage if it occurs at the wrong time, and indicate that repeated vaccines cause autoimmune problems, and indicate the total aluminum load is a problem, and indicate that many vaccines may suffer from damaging contaminants. So there is considerable reason to suspect every one of them simultaneously.
All the epidemiological studies that compare individuals who got more vaccines to individuals who got less, either indicate that more is worse, or have gross methodological problems that invalidate them.
Vaccine model of antiphospholipid syndrome induced by tetanus vaccine L Dimitrijevi?, I ?ivkovi?, M Stojanovi, V Petrui, S ivanevi-Simonovi doi: 10.1177/0961203311429816 Lupus February 2012 vol. 21 no. 2 195-202 http://lup.sagepub.com/content/21/2/195.abstract
Abstract Successful induction of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) in two different non-autoimmune prone mouse strains, BALB/c and C57BL/6, was achieved by tetanus toxoid (TTd) hyperimmunization using different adjuvants (glycerol or aluminium hydroxide), and different adjuvant pretreatments (glycerol or Complete Freund’s Adjuvant (CFA)). APS had different manifestations of reproductive pathology in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice: fetal resorption (as a consequence of extreme T-cell activation obtained in the course of pretreatment), and lowering of fecundity (as a consequence of polyclonal B-cell stimulation), respectively. In BALB/c mice fetal resorption coincided with glycerol and CFA pretreatments, while in C57BL/6 mice lowering of fecundity was most obvious in CFA-pretreated mice immunized with TTd in aluminium hydroxide. Both molecular mimicry and polyclonal B-cell activation occur in APS induction, with molecular mimicry effects being dominant in BALB/c mice, and polyclonal cell activation being dominant in C57BL/6 mice. Confirmation of molecular mimicry effects, which in the condition of T-cell stimulation generated fetal resorptions in the BALB/c strain, was achieved by passive infusion of monoclonal antibody (MoAb) T-26 specific for TTd and anti-?2-glycoprotein I obtained after TTd hyperimunization. High polyclonal B-cell activation in C57BL/6 mice prevented fetal resorption but induced fecundity lowering, as was the case in passive administration of MoAb T-26 in this mouse strain. Passive infusion of anti-idiotypic MoAb Y7 into C57BL/6 mice induced fetal resorptions and confirmed the above suggestion on the protective role of polyclonal B-cell stimulation in fetal resorptions.
Postnatal Inflammation Increases Seizure Susceptibility in Adult Rats Michael A. Galic1, Kiarash Riazi2, James G. Heida1, Abdeslam Mouihate2, Neil M. Fournier, Sarah J. Spencer, Lisa E. Kalynchuk, G. Campbell Teskey, and Quentin J. Pittman The Journal of Neuroscience, 2 July 2008, 28(27): 6904-6913; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1901-08.2008 http://www.jneurosci.org/content/28/27/6904.full
Abstract There are critical postnatal periods during which even subtle interventions can have long-lasting effects on adult physiology. We asked whether an immune challenge during early postnatal development can alter neuronal excitability and seizure susceptibility in adults. Postnatal day 14 (P14) male Sprague Dawley rats were injected with the bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and control animals received sterile saline. Three weeks later, extracellular recordings from hippocampal slices revealed enhanced field EPSP slopes after Schaffer collateral stimulation and increased epileptiform burst-firing activity in CA1 after 4-aminopyridine application. Six to 8 weeks after postnatal LPS injection, seizure susceptibility was assessed in response to lithium?pilocarpine, kainic acid, and pentylenetetrazol. Rats treated with LPS showed significantly greater adult seizure susceptibility to all convulsants, as well as increased cytokine release and enhanced neuronal degeneration within the hippocampus after limbic seizures. These persistent increases in seizure susceptibility occurred only when LPS was given during a critical postnatal period (P7 and P14) and not before (P1) or after (P20). This early effect of LPS on adult seizures was blocked by concurrent intracerebroventricular administration of a tumor necrosis factor ? (TNF?) antibody and mimicked by intracerebroventricular injection of rat recombinant TNF?. Postnatal LPS injection did not result in permanent changes in microglial (Iba1) activity or hippocampal cytokine [IL-1? (interleukin-1?) and TNF?] levels, but caused a slight increase in astrocyte (GFAP) numbers. These novel results indicate that a single LPS injection during a critical postnatal period causes a long-lasting increase in seizure susceptibility that is strongly dependent on TNF?.
All the peer reviewed studies I've found comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated either indicate vaccines are causing problems, or have gross methodological problems that invalidate them. This includes several studies in third world countries which have relatively high rates of unvaccinated. A big confounder in these studies is that the unvaccinated have much lower rates of access to medical care, parental resources, clean water, etc. In spite of this, they have better outcome in some studies, and after reasonably correcting for it or other problems, in the rest I've linked.
The peer reviewed studies I've so far found that actually compared vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals mostly come from the third world, where there are more unvaccinated patients. Two studies compared vaccinated to unvaccinated in developing nations, one in rural Guinea-Bissau in the 1990s, and one in the Philippines in the early 1980s. Note that in both these places the early vaccine schedule consists of BCG (or TB), DTP, and OPV, in the first months of life, and measles or MMR at 18 months. The only vaccine in this list with injected adjuvant is DTP.
These surveys found large unvaccinated populations, but the unvaccinated were clearly more deprived than the vaccinated as shown by data like access to clean water and mothers' education. So hidden factors appear to clearly favor the vaccinated. In rural Guinea-Bisseau, scientists polled 15,351 mothers of 6 month olds to see which infants were vaccinated, and then came back a year later to see who was still alive. Kids who'd gotten at least one vaccine had a relative mortality of .74 compared to kids who'd gotten none. After cluster, age, and other vaccines were adjusted for, BCG was associated with mortality (0.55 (0.36 to 0.85)). However, recipients of at least one dose of DTP had relative mortality (1.84 (1.10 to 3.10)) and recipients of one dose of OPV had relative mortality 1.81 (1.07 to 3.05). Recipients of measles vaccine had a mortality ratio of 0.48 (0.27 to 0.87). When deaths from measles were excluded from the analysis the mortality ratio was 0.51 (0.28 to 0.95).
A second study in Guinea-Bisseau reports that having previously gotten DTP in addition to OPV more than doubled mortality for kids in the pediatric ward up to 5 years of age compared to kids who only got OPV, from 6% to 15%. These results suggest that DTP, and possibly OPV, are doing harm.
A hypothesis suggested by the above animal data on early injections, is that DTP is damaging the immune systems of the recipients so that they die of various causes. Moreover, BCG is a scratch, not an injection, and it's effectiveness is controversial [25]. A hypothesis consistent with these facts is that BCG vaccine is serving largely as a placebo, doing neither harm nor good but merely a proxy for propensity to get vaccinated, a hidden factor representing parental circumstances and child raising skills. If that is the correct explanation, then the true increased mortality compared to a placebo for DTP in Guinea-Bisseau would be at least 3. Since measles deaths were not a factor, and MMR is given at 18 months and does not contain adjuvants, MMR could have a similar role here.
In the Philippines, Bloom et al looked at scores on intelligence test results at about 12 years of age for a population surveyed on vaccines at 24 months. They found a sample of only 85 children who had received all of DPT, measles, polio, and TB, and a control sample of 1022 children who had received none of them, out of a total survey of 1975 children. Note the survivorship bias in the data. Any children who died before age 12 either from receiving the vaccines or from not receiving them, were not counted, and its unclear whether children who developed severe problems like autism would have been included either. They attempted to deal with the hidden factor bias by choosing matched members of the unvaccinated for the vaccinated, based on fitting a simple linear regression to features like mother?s education and water supply in home. They then found that the fully vaccinated scored about half a standard deviation higher on cognitive tests and were about the same height and weight as the fully unvaccinated, although they note "the matching of treatment and control groups may be imperfect if there are unobserved confounding factors that affect both vaccination and cognitive development. We therefore do not see our results as definitive."
Unfortunately, there seems to be an evident confounding factor. It seems likely that virtually every parent in the Philippines, or at least virtually every intelligent, educated parent motivated to invest in their children, would have as an important goal vaccinating their children. If basic intelligence has any meaning, it is highly connected to ability to succeed at difficult real world tasks on which other, less intelligent people, might fail; and this task of getting children vaccinated further folds in motivation to invest in children. Thus succeeding in this task seems in and of itself as strong a proxy for propensity to produce smart children as one could think to devise. By choosing to consider only fully vaccinated children, Bloom et al have selected a group that is fully 1.5 to 2 standard deviations ahead of the mean at this proxy, the top 85 out of 1975 individuals in the distribution, and the controls are all in the lower half of the bell curve, so the mean vaccinated are perhaps 2.5 standard deviations ahead of the mean control in this measure of propensity to produce smart children. That they are finding only .5 standard deviation increase in test scores and no benefit in height from this factor suggests the explanation that the vaccines are causing a 2 standard deviation loss compared to a placebo. I would suggest they reanalyze their data to deal with hidden factors as in the Guinea-Bisseau studies, by comparing individuals who got at least 1 DTP shot to individuals who got no vaccines, and that they compare individuals who got only BCG to individuals who got DTP. I predict if they do, they will find results like the Guinea-Bisseau studies showing that the early adjuvanted vaccination is causing damage.
Vaccines have been repeatedly and recently found to have contaminants including retroviruses, animal viruses, and human DNA. The polio vaccine continued to be used although it was known early to be contaminated with SV-40, which was believed to cause cancer. Chimpanzee Coriza Virus is also reported to have become the human disease (RSV) as a contaminant of polio vaccine, and is reported to infect millions of children each year.
One would like to think the vaccines would be periodically quality controlled looking for multiple contaminants, given the published evidence of contaminants and of damage caused by them, but no such results appear to be published.
A recent inspection of off-the-shelf vaccines found 43 out Of 43 human vaccines examined had heavy metal nanoparticles and microparticles contamination.
If evolution worked so hard to keep aluminum out, is it safe to by pass all these filters?
(1) The mother's digestive system filters 99.75%
(2) Her Kidneys rapidly filter almost everything else that makes it into circulation.
(3) The placenta is believed to filter out Aluminum and construct the fetus in a clean room.
(4) The mother's milk is very low in Al, because it benefits from the mother's filters.
(5) The infant's digestive system filters 99.7%.
100's of times as much injected aluminum reaches the blood of the infant from vaccines as breast milk. According to the estimates used in Mitkus et al, the vaccine aluminum load is roughly equal to the background load (and dominating the dietary load.) That means it is doubling the aluminum load. If nature worked so hard to get the load down, is it safe to double it? However, the estimate used in Mitkus et al for the background aluminum was based on assuming a factor 20 of body aluminum to blood aluminum, based on experiments in adults. It seems likely the fetus, constructed in the clean placenta, might have a much smaller ratio. The adult has had years for circulating blood to get deposited in organs, the fetus hasn't.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2011;74(14):903-16. A positive association found between autism prevalence and childhood vaccination uptake across the U.S. population. Delong G.
Abstract The reason for the rapid rise of autism in the United States that began in the 1990s is a mystery. Although individuals probably have a genetic predisposition to develop autism, researchers suspect that one or more environmental triggers are also needed. One of those triggers might be the battery of vaccinations that young children receive. Using regression analysis and controlling for family income and ethnicity, the relationship between the proportion of children who received the recommended vaccines by age 2 years and the prevalence of autism (AUT) or speech or language impairment (SLI) in each U.S. state from 2001 and 2007 was determined. A positive and statistically significant relationship was found: The higher the proportion of children receiving recommended vaccinations, the higher was the prevalence of AUT or SLI. A 1% increase in vaccination was associated with an additional 680 children having AUT or SLI. Neither parental behavior nor access to care affected the results, since vaccination proportions were not significantly related (statistically) to any other disability or to the number of pediatricians in a U.S. state. The results suggest that although mercury has been removed from many vaccines, other culprits may link vaccines to autism. Further study into the relationship between vaccines and autism is warranted.
Hum Exp Toxicol. 2011 Sep;30(9):1420-8. doi: 10.1177/0960327111407644. Epub 2011 May 4.
Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? Miller NZ, Goldman GS.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/
Abstract The infant mortality rate (IMR) is one of the most important indicators of the socio-economic well-being and public health conditions of a country. The US childhood immunization schedule specifies 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year—the most in the world—yet 33 nations have lower IMRs. Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of r = 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. Nations were also grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges: 12–14, 15–17, 18–20, 21–23, and 24–26. The mean IMRs of all nations within each group were then calculated. Linear regression analysis of unweighted mean IMRs showed a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, with r = 0.992 (p = 0.0009). Using the Tukey-Kramer test, statistically significant differences in mean IMRs were found between nations giving 12–14 vaccine doses and those giving 21–23, and 24–26 doses. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs is essential.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism
Anjali Jain, MD; Jaclyn Marshall, MS; Ami Buikema, MPH; Tim Bancroft, PhD; Jonathan P. Kelly, MPP; Craig J. Newschaffer, PhD
ABSTRACT Importance Despite research showing no link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism spectrum disorders (ASD), beliefs that the vaccine causes autism persist, leading to lower vaccination levels. Parents who already have a child with ASD may be especially wary of vaccinations. Objective To report ASD occurrence by MMR vaccine status in a large sample of US children who have older siblings with and without ASD. Design, Setting, and Participants A retrospective cohort study using an administrative claims database associated with a large commercial health plan. Participants included children continuously enrolled in the health plan from birth to at least 5 years of age during 2001-2012 who also had an older sibling continuously enrolled for at least 6 months between 1997 and 2012. Exposures MMR vaccine receipt (0, 1, 2 doses) between birth and 5 years of age. Main Outcomes and Measures ASD status defined as 2 claims with a diagnosis code in any position for autistic disorder or other specified pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) including Asperger syndrome, or unspecified PDD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification 299.0x, 299.8x, 299.9x). Results Of 95?727 children with older siblings, 994 (1.04%) were diagnosed with ASD and 1929 (2.01%) had an older sibling with ASD. Of those with older siblings with ASD, 134 (6.9%) had ASD, vs 860 (0.9%) children with unaffected siblings (P < .001). MMR vaccination rates (?1 dose) were 84% (n = 78?564) at age 2 years and 92% (n = 86?063) at age 5 years for children with unaffected older siblings, vs 73% (n = 1409) at age 2 years and 86% (n = 1660) at age 5 years for children with affected siblings. MMR vaccine receipt was not associated with an increased risk of ASD at any age. For children with older siblings with ASD, at age 2, the adjusted relative risk (RR) of ASD for 1 dose of MMR vaccine vs no vaccine was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.49-1.18; P = .22), and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses compared with no vaccine was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.31-1.01; P = .052). For children whose older siblings did not have ASD, at age 2, the adjusted RR of ASD for 1 dose was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.67-1.20; P = .50) and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.78-1.59; P = .55). Conclusions and Relevance In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.
This study reports results on the younger siblings of autistic older siblings. Thus there is an obvious confounder in that parents of younger siblings who observe that the MMR vaccine visibly caused the autism of the older sibling will almost certainly withhold the vaccine from the younger sibling. In fact, there are a large number of anecdotal reports of precisely that: parents who say that within minutes or days of receiving the MMR vaccine, their child who had been normal became autistic. The study reports that MMR is protective against autism in the oldest age group by almost a factor of 2. (The result is barely not significant, but is nonetheless highly suggestive.) The most straightforward explanation for this is that the MMR causes autism in some genetically susceptible individuals, and when it does it does so in a way that is visible to the parents who then withhold it from the younger siblings. So the younger siblings of autism victims who do not get the MMR vaccine also are highly likely to be genetically susceptible to get autism, whereas the younger siblings of autism victims who are given the MMR vaccine by their parents are not as likely to be genetically susceptible. It is unclear why one would craft a study with such an obvious confounder.
Note that there is a repeated finding that early Thimerosal is significantly preventative of general developmental disorders, unspecified developmental delay, and attention deficit disorder (Andrews et al) and ASD(Price et al.)
This tends to confirm the hypothesis that the protective effect consistently observed in these three experiments is an artifact of parents observing damage in their children, and suspending or delaying further vaccines, thus putting high risk or ASD kids into the "low vaccine" or "low thimerisol" pool.
Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al, Thimerosal Exposure in
Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United
Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association, Pediatrics September 2004,
VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584.full-text.pdf
Cristofer S. Price, William W. Thompson, Barbara Goodson,et al, Prenatal and
Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of
Autism, Pediatrics October 2010, VOLUME 126 / ISSUE 4
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/4/656
Although the overall tenor of the discussion in this paper was to argue that it exonerated Thimerosal containing vaccines, and a breakdown of the data into groups was not published for most of the experiments, and the word "aluminum" does not appear in the report, the group getting the 2008 vaccine series presumably was injected with the aluminum in the 2008 vaccine series.
Because there was not a breakdown into groups on most of the tests, its not possible to say too much about the effects of the aluminum, but the paper does report regarding the Learning test:
"The TCV [Thimerosal containing vaccine] group had the slowest overall reaction times and was significantly slower than the control group (mean difference, 1.83; 95% CI: 0.96, 2.69). The 2008 group also had reaction times significantly slower than the control group (mean difference, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.12, 1.70)."
Incidentally, clearly the key question that needs to be addressed first is whether the vaccine series is doing damage to the recipients. Therefor it is unclear why the limited experimental resources were divided into 6 different groups, rather than 2: a control group and a group receiving the current series.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4455585/
Examination of the safety of pediatric vaccine schedules in a non-human primate model: assessments of neurodevelopment, learning, and social behavior.
Curtis B, Liberato N, Rulien M, Morrisroe K, Kenney C, Yutuc V, Ferrier C, Marti CN, Mandell D, Burbacher TM, Sackett GP, Hewitson L. 2015. Environ Health Perspect 123:579–589; PMCID: PMC4455585
Abstract Background In the 1990s, the mercury-based preservative thimerosal was used in most pediatric vaccines. Although there are currently only two thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCVs) recommended for pediatric use, parental perceptions that vaccines pose safety concerns are affecting vaccination rates, particularly in light of the much expanded and more complex schedule in place today. Objectives The objective of this study was to examine the safety of pediatric vaccine schedules in a non-human primate model. Methods We administered vaccines to six groups of infant male rhesus macaques (n = 12–16/group) using a standardized thimerosal dose where appropriate. Study groups included the recommended 1990s Pediatric vaccine schedule, an accelerated 1990s Primate schedule with or without the measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccine, the MMR vaccine only, and the expanded 2008 schedule. We administered saline injections to age-matched control animals (n = 16). Infant development was assessed from birth to 12 months of age by examining the acquisition of neonatal reflexes, the development of object concept permanence (OCP), computerized tests of discrimination learning, and infant social behavior. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance, multilevel modeling, and survival analyses, where appropriate. Results We observed no group differences in the acquisition of OCP. During discrimination learning, animals receiving TCVs had improved performance on reversal testing, although some of these same animals showed poorer performance in subsequent learning-set testing. Analysis of social and nonsocial behaviors identified few instances of negative behaviors across the entire infancy period. Although some group differences in specific behaviors were reported at 2 months of age, by 12 months all infants, irrespective of vaccination status, had developed the typical repertoire of macaque behaviors. Conclusions This comprehensive 5-year case–control study, which closely examined the effects of pediatric vaccines on early primate development, provided no consistent evidence of neurodevelopmental deficits or aberrant behavior in vaccinated animals.
On this tape, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13QiSV_lrDQ , Dr. Maurice Hillman, The Merck Chief Scientist, discusses how the polio vaccine was administered although they knew it was contaminated with SV-40, which they strongly believed caused cancer. According to the tape, the monkeys from which the vaccine was being grown, were being kept in epidemic conditions crowded into cages, so they were all sick with a variety of viruses which then contaminated the vaccine stock. As Hillman discusses, SIV could very well have entered the human population this way as well. This reference reports the polio vaccine was still contaminated with SV-40 as recently as 1978: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16288015
Cancer Res. 2005 Nov 15;65(22):10273-9. Some oral poliovirus vaccines were contaminated with infectious SV40 after 1961. Cutrone R, Lednicky J, Dunn G, Rizzo P, Bocchetta M, Chumakov K, Minor P, Carbone M.
This publication describes a boy who died of SV-40 riddled brain cancer in 1997. His parents didn't have it and it wasn't in his chord blood. http://www.sv40foundation.org/Alexander.html
This reference argues that up to half of all Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma is due to SV-40: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11897278 Lancet. 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):817-23. Association between simian virus 40 and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Vilchez RA, Madden CR, Kozinetz CA, Halvorson SJ, White ZS, Jorgensen JL, Finch CJ, Butel JS.
There are various stray retroviruses and the like in vaccines to this day. http://www.virology.ws/2010/03/29/deep-sequencing-reveals-viral-vaccine-contaminants/
Viral Nucleic Acids in Live-Attenuated Vaccines: Detection of Minority Variants and an Adventitious Virus J. G. Victoria, C. Wang, M. S. Jones, C. Janis, K. McLoughlin, S. Gardner and E. L. Delaware http://jvi.asm.org/content/84/12/6033
examined 8 live virus vaccines and found varied contaminants, including 10 times as much porcine circovirus was found in Rotarix Vaccine as the Active Ingredient Rotavirus. In addition to that: "Mutations and minority variants, relative to vaccine strains, not known to affect attenuation were detected in OPV, mumps virus, and varicella-zoster virus. The anticipated detection of endogenous retroviral sequences from the producer avian and primate cells was confirmed. Avian leukosis virus (ALV), previously shown to be noninfectious for humans, was present as RNA in viral particles, while simian retrovirus (SRV) was present as genetically defective DNA. Rotarix, an orally administered rotavirus vaccine, contained porcine circovirus-1 (PCV1), a highly prevalent nonpathogenic pig virus, which has not been shown to be infectious in humans. Hybridization of vaccine nucleic acids to a panmicrobial microarray confirmed the presence of endogenous retroviral and PCV1 nucleic acids." Incidentally, the porcine circovirus suggests that pork is used in the production process. The details of the production process are not published, and the authors speculate it may be porcine trypsin, used during the propagation of Vero cells. Has full disclosure been given to Rabbis and Imams considering whether the vaccine is kosher?
http://soundchoice.org/scpiJournalPubHealthEpidem092014.pdf
Impact of environmental factors on the prevalence of autistic disorder after 1979 Theresa A. Deisher, Ngoc V. Doan, Angelica Omaiye, Kumiko Koyama and Sarah Bwabye
"Residual human DNA (single and double stranded) levels from the human fetal cell lines used to manufacture Meruvax® (Rubella, Merck & Co. Inc.), the rubella component of MMRII®, and HAVRIX® (Hepatitis A, GSK Biologicals) were measured using commercially available ELISA kits (Pico Green (dsDNA) and OliGreen (ssDNA)) (Life Technologies). DNA fragment sizes were determined using SYBR gold staining after 4% agarose gel electrophoresis. Notably, the viruses in the Meruvax®, MMRII® and HAVRIX® vaccines are mRNA viruses, not DNA viruses, and since the mRNA was degraded by heat treatment prior to oligonucleotide measurements, the DNA results are indeed specific for human DNA, the only DNA in the mRNA virus vaccines (Oker-Blim et al., 1984; Wikipedia 2014a; b; c)."
The headline of this paper was that they report that changes in contamination as different vaccines were introduced as being significantly correlated with autism rates. However the quote above by itself reports that the vaccines are measurably contaminated.
The Thimerisol isn't causing autism.
Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies
Luke E. Taylor, Amy L. Swerdfeger, Guy D. Eslick
Vaccine 32 (2014) 3623–3629
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367
The reliability of the Claim "Animal Studies Virtually All Report brain or immune damage" is Independent of Whether Animal Studies are themselves Reliable as Predictors of human effects.
This is an interesting question, which could and perhaps should be added as an assumption to other statements on this diagram, but n40 isn't one of them.
When the Challenge was added, n40's title was less clearly stated, so I have edited that as well to make clear why e11 no longer applies.
The animal model is assumed to be a useful analogue of the human disease model
A Youtube page with more than 1000 videos from parents of autistic children claiming they were harmed by vaccines: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%23hearthiswell
Here is a video showing a large number of parents assembled in an auditorium who believe their child was normal before receiving vaccination and visibly became autistic after it and who believe they can document this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwtxyzmwUgU
http://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf
Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA. Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism? J Inorg Biochem. 2011 Nov;105(11):1489-99 SEC 4.2
Although the half-life of enterally or parenterally absorbed Al from the body is short (approximately 24 h), the same cannot be assumed for adjuvant-Al because the sizes of most antigen-Al complexes (24 to 83 kDa [60,106,107]) are higher than the molecular weight cut-off of the glomerulus of the kidney (~18 kDa [108]) which would preclude efficient excretion of Al adjuvants. In fact, a longer elimination period is one of the major properties of effective vaccine adjuvants, including those using Al salts [2,14]. Additionally, the tightness of bonding between the Al adjuvant and the antigen is considered a desired feature that can be used to predict the immunogenicity of vaccines [109]. Experiments in adult rabbits demonstrate that even in an antigen-free form, Al-hydroxide, the most commonly used Al adjuvant (Table 2) is poorly excreted. The cumulative amount of Al-hydroxide in the urine of adult rabbits as long as 28 days post intramuscular injec- tion was less than 6% as measured by accelerator mass spectrometry [110]. Al-phosphate was more efficiently excreted (22%) [110]. Finally, it is important to recognize that neonates have anatomical and functional differences crucial for toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics of neurotoxic metals (e.g., an immature renal system and an incomplete BBB), which would further compromise their ability to eliminate Al adjuvants [2,4,5].
http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e2398/rapid-responses
Polio eradication: a complex end game BMJ 2012;344:e2398 Vera Scheibner (Published 02 April 2012)
Chanock and Finberg (1957. Recovery from infants with respiratory illness of virus related to chimpanzee coryza agent. II. Am J Hyg; 66: 291-300) reported on two isolations of similar agents from infants with severe lower respiratory illness (bronchopneumonia, bronchiolitis and laryngotracheobronchitis). The two viruses were indistinguishable from an agent associated with the outbreak of coryza in chimpanzees (CCA virus) studied by Morris et al. (1956). A person working with the infected chimpanzees subsequently experienced repiratory infection with a rise in CCA antibodies during convalescence. They proposed a new name for this agent “respiratory syncytial virus” (RSV). RSV has spread via contaminated polio vaccines like a wildfire all over the world and continues causing serious lower respiratory tract infections in infants...
Simoes (1999. Respiratory syncytial virus infection. Lancet; 354: 847-852) wrote “Since it was identified as the agent that causes chimpanzee coryza in 1956, and after its subsequent isolation from children with pulmonary disease in Baltimore, USA, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) had been described as the single most important virus causing acute respiratory-tract infections in children. The WHO estimates that of the 12.2. million annual deaths in children under 5 years, a third are due to acute infections of the lower respiratory tract.”...
Data from ten developing countries, with intense polio vaccination, showed RSV the most frequent cause of LRT infections (70% of all cases).
Various surveys that don't seem to have been published compare the completely unvaccinated to the vaccinated.
The largest survey of unvaccinated is at http://www.vaccineinjury.info/survey/results-unvaccinated/results-illnesses.html
and summarizes self-reports of over 12,000 unvaccinated children. A table comparing their results to an official German survey of their vaccinated population (KiGGS, ele49) is attached.
From Vaccination Status and Health in Children and AdolescentsFindings of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS)
Roma Schmitz, Dr. oec. troph. Christina Poethko-Müller, Dr. med., Sabine Reiter, Dr. rer. nat. and Martin Schlaud, MSc, PD Dr. med.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057555/
A study of 13000 Germans only found several dozen unvaccinated, so didn't have great statistics. However, as reproduced from the results below the unvaccinated had somewhat less diseases. Comparing these German findings for vaccinated children, to the findings of an informal online survey that has attracted a similar number of self reports about unvaccinated children, the vaccinated appear to have far more illnesses, cf ele49
http://truthsift.com/search_view?id=406&nid=5008
Results
Evaluable data on vaccinations were available for 13 453 subjects aged 1–17 years from non-immigrant families. 0.7% of them (95% confidence interval: 0.5%–0.9%) were not vaccinated. The lifetime prevalence of diseases preventable by vaccination was markedly higher in unvaccinated than in vaccinated subjects. Unvaccinated children aged 1–5 years had a median number of 3.3 (2.1–4.6) infectious diseases in the past year, compared to 4.2 (4.1–4.4) in vaccinated children. Among 11- to 17-year-olds, the corresponding figures were 1.9 (1.0–2.8) (unvaccinated) versus 2.2 (2.1–2.3) (vaccinated). The lifetime prevalence of at least one atopic disease among 1- to 5-year-olds was 12.6% (5.0%–28.3%) in unvaccinated children and 15.0% (13.6%–16.4%) in vaccinated children. In older children, atopy was more common, but its prevalence was not found to depend on vaccination status: among 6- to 10-year-olds, the prevalence figures were 30.1% (12.9%–55.8%) for unvaccinated children versus 24.4% (22.8%–26.0%) for vaccinated children, and the corresponding figures for 11- to 17-year-olds were 20.3% (10.1%–36.6%) versus 29.9% (28.4%–31.5%).
Conclusion
The prevalence of allergic diseases and non-specific infections in children and adolescents was not found to depend on vaccination status.
In a society where parents almost universally believe vaccines are good for their kids, giving more vaccines or more on-time vaccines is a strong proxy for parental performance. It selects richer, more able, more intelligent, more interested parents. it is a real world test of IQ and parenting ability. This is a bias in many studies.
A number of studies compare patients who got vaccines on time (thus for example, got relatively a lot of HG in the first several months) to patients who may have gotten the same or more vaccines, but got them later.
Patients are likely to have delayed the vaccinations because the parents observed reactions to earlier vaccines, or because the child was sick at the time for his vaccine. This of course tends to put any “vaccine casualties” into the late vaccine group—which is then interpreted as the low vaccine group.
Testimony of visible vaccine damage is too pervasive to be ignored. Over 1000 parents have posted videos on Youtube, for example, testifying to their beliefs that they saw their child acquire autism from a vaccine, some quite striking in evidentiary detail. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%23hearthiswell
How otherwise does one explain the repeated finding that early Thimerosal is significantly preventative of developmental disorders[1], ASD[2], and MMR is preventative of ASD in younger siblings of ASD victims[3]? While its possible these results are due to chance (although each were reported statistically significant), these consistent results suggest that children who have visible reactions (or in the latter case, whose sibling does) upon receiving the vaccine are being pulled from the pool and placed into the group considered "lower vaccine" by parents choosing to delay or cancel their vaccines.
[1] Thomas Verstraeten, Robert L. Davis, Frank DeStefano, et al. Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases Pediatrics 2003;112;1039-1048 http://putchildrenfirst.org/media/5.5.pdf
[2]Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al,Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association,Pediatrics September 2004, VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584.full-text.pdf
[3] Anjali Jain; Jaclyn Marshall; Ami Buikema; et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism, JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
10% (19,351/195,270) have an emergency room visit within 42 days of getting HPV. 1/200 are hospitalized. The conclusion of the study: (I kid you not):" Conclusions
Rates of AEFI after HPV immunization in Alberta are low and consistent with types of events seen elsewhere."
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X16002036
Adverse events following HPV vaccination, Alberta 2006–2014. Xianfang C. Liu, , Christopher A. Bell, , Kimberley A. Simmonds, , Lawrence W. Svensona, Margaret L. Russell, Vaccine Volume 34, Issue 15, 4 April 2016, Pages 1800–1805
This appears to be more than twice the normal rate of ED visits, cf
http://www.cfhi-fcass.ca/sf-docs/default-source/reports/risk-analytica.pdf figure 4, page 23.
(Thanks to B. Webb for directing my attention to the latter reference.)
The authors mention (but not discuss) the timing of hospitalization events.
There were 958 hospitalized people (1053 hospitalization events.) 34.6% within 1–14 days, 32.8% within 15–28 days, and 31.9% within 29–42 days (data not shown).
Note this data is inherently biased to be pushed later into the period, because it includes multiple events for the same person, and the first event takes time. Neglecting that bias we still find about 13.6 excess events in the first third and an SD of about sqrt(1053*1/3*2/3)=15.29705 for events expected in the first third, so we're up about .9 SD in the first third.
Then we have about 7.3 excess events in the second third relative to the third, and an SD of sqrt(681/4)=13.0, so we are independently up about .56 SD here.
This timing evidence supports the hypothesis that the excess 5% of girls going to the ED is caused by the vaccine, rather than the null hypothesis that the vaccine was unrelated by about 1.06 SD. Presumably if the 5% are causal, there are also a lot of others damaged who go to their Doctors' office or don't seek medical attention. Also perhaps its a symptom of underlying damage that isn't entirely cured by an ED visit.
It would be nice to see the ED visit timing data, which is a much bigger sample so might be highly significant, but the author's don't even mention it. I take this omission in addition to their Conclusion as further evidence that many doctors and journals are suffering from a severe case of Cognitive Bias, basically unwilling to recognize what's in front of their noses, that vaccines are doing systemic damage of types the doctors and journals are simply unwilling to contemplate.
This study cites several studies of cumulative Thimerisol dosage.These do not however compare Thimerosal to a placebo, rather the low-Thimerosal patients may have other vaccines not containing Thimerosal that the high Thimerosal patients may not have. Also the patients are not classified by total Thimerosal, rather by Thimerosal in a period such as 0-3 or 0-7 months, and then the patients are evaluated later. In Vaerstraten et al, for example, only neurodevelopmental diagnoses made after 1 year are included , so that patients that were more immediately damaged by early Thimerosal could have been excluded and the low-Thimerosal patients may be diagnosed due to proximate Thimerosal effects from later vaccine administration that the high-Thimerosal patients were not subject to, having had them earlier.
Vaerstraten et al also observed that the patients who received the most Hg in the first 7 months of life also had many more well-child visits, and many more URI visits in the second year of life. Rather than contemplate the possibility that this is evidence that the Thimerosal or the vaccines are damaging the immune systems of the patients, they adopted criteria that selected sicker than random controls, only using controls “restricted to children who had made at least 1 visit to a clinic or an emergency department at the same month of age as cases.”
An even bigger confounder is that many of the patients are likely to have delayed the vaccinations because the parents observed reactions to earlier vaccines, or because the child was sick at the time for his vaccine. This of course tends to put any “vaccine casualties” into the late vaccine group—which is then interpreted as the low vaccine group.
[1] Thomas Verstraeten, Robert L. Davis, Frank DeStefano, et al. Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases Pediatrics 2003;112;1039-1048 http://putchildrenfirst.org/media/5.5.pdf
[2]Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al,Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association,Pediatrics September 2004, VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584.full-text.pdf
Lucija Tomljenovic, Christopher A. Shaw Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism? J. Inorganic Biochemistry Nov;105(11):1489-99
2011 doi:10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2011.08.008 http://omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf
abstract
Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are serious multisystem developmental disorders and an urgent global public health concern. Dysfunctional immunity and impaired brain function are core deficits in ASD. Aluminum (Al), the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant, is a demonstrated neurotoxin and a strong immune stimulator. Hence, adjuvant Al has the potential to induce neuroimmune disorders. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, two key points ought to be considered: (i) children should not be viewed as “small adults” as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults; and (ii) if exposure to Al from only few vaccines can lead to cognitive impairment and autoimmunity in adults, is it unreasonable to question whether the current pediatric schedules, often containing 18 Al adjuvanted vaccines, are safe for children? By applying Hill's criteria for establishing causality between exposure and outcome we investigated whether exposure to Al from vaccines could be contributing to the rise in ASD prevalence in the Western world. Our results show that: (i) children from countries with the highest ASD prevalence appear to have the highest exposure to Al from vaccines; (ii) the increase in exposure to Al adjuvants significantly correlates with the increase in ASD prevalence in the United States observed over the last two decades (Pearson r = 0.92, p b 0.0001); and (iii) a significant correlation exists between the amounts of Al administered to preschool children and the current prevalence of ASD in seven Western countries, particularly at 3–4 months of age (Pearson r=0.89–0.94, p=0.0018–0.0248). The application of the Hill's criteria to these data indicates that the correlation between Al in vaccines and ASD may be causal. Because children represent a fraction of the population most at risk for complications following exposure to Al, a more rigorous evaluation of Al adjuvant safety seems warranted.
If you have a bunch of studies with confounders, you have to worry about confirmation bias.
If you had RPC human studies, they could perhaps overrule RPC animal studies. But RPC animal studies would provide valuable evidence no matter how many confounded studies oppose them, because they open the possibility all the confounded studies are due to confirmation bias.
Adverse events following HPV vaccination, Alberta 2006–2014
Xianfang C. Liua, Christopher A. Bellb, , Kimberley A. Simmondsb, , Lawrence W. Svensona, , Margaret L. Russella, ,
Vaccine Volume 34, Issue 15, 4 April 2016, Pages 1800–1805 doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.02.040
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X16002036 ; ;;
Results
Over the period 195,270 females received 528,913 doses of HPV vaccine. Of those receiving at least one dose, 192 reported one or more AEFI events (198 AEFI events), i.e., 37.4/100,000 doses administered (95% CI 32.5–43.0). None were consistent with VTE. Of the women who received HPV vaccine 958 were hospitalized and 19,351 had an ED visit within 42 days of immunization. Four women who had an ED visit and hospitalization event were diagnosed with VTE. Three of these had other diagnoses known to be associated with VTE; the fourth woman had VTE among ED diagnoses but not among those for the hospitalization.
Conclusions
Rates of AEFI after HPV immunization in Alberta are low and consistent with types of events seen elsewhere.
Multiple studies find that Thimerisol or MMR is significantly protective against ASD or developmental disorders or delays[1][2][3]. It seems unlikely, even to the authors of the studies, that this is a real effect, and they put it down to a fluctuation, even though each reports that the effect is statistically significant. However, since it keeps repeating, it seems it must have a better explanation. The hypothesis that makes the most sense is that parents are observing that vaccines damage their kids, or the older sibling of their kid in the case of Jain et al, and withholding further vaccines from their kid or delaying them. In each of these papers, that would have the effect of producing an apparent protective effect for Thimerisol or MMR, because in each case the visibly damaged kids (or sibling of a damaged kid) would be moved into the "low vaccine" group.
Moreover there is extensive anecdotal evidence for parents observing visible damage to their kid from MMR or Thimerisol containing vaccines. For example, more than 1000 parents have posted videos on Youtube[4], testifying to their beliefs that they saw their children acquire autism from a vaccine, some quite striking in evidentiary detail.[4]
[1]Cristofer S. Price, William W. Thompson, Barbara Goodson,et al, Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism, Pediatrics October 2010, VOLUME 126 / ISSUE 4 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/4/656
[2]Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al, Thimerosal Exposure in
Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United
Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association, Pediatrics September 2004,
VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584.full-text.pdf
[3]Anjali Jain; Jaclyn Marshall; Ami Buikema; et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR
Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism,
JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
[4] https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%23hearthiswell
There have been recent estimates and a fair amount of evidence that people are stupider than they were in Victorian Times by about 15 IQ points (for example http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000470 ), and SAT scores fell dramatically during the 1970’s, there were 40% fewer verbal scores over 650 in 1980 as 1970 in spite of the fact many more people took the test, (and they have been renormed ever since so its hard to tell what’s happening) so some substantial IQ fall due to aluminum doesn’t seem implausible on its face. There’s also the “Flynn Effect”, whereby IQ’s had been reported to be rising by 3 IQ points per decade, perhaps due to better nutrition and environmental stimulation, which also has been said to have reversed recently in the developed world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect A vaccine decline could be obscured by a Flynn effect, or could be what cancelled it. Also the average IQ today would have to include as never before the ASD who comprise maybe 2% of the infants now and who are down maybe 30 points in IQ on average. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21272389
The recent and dramatic debacle the US millenials had in world testing
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/02/u-s-millennials-post-abysmal-scores-in-tech-skills-test-lag-behind-foreign-peers/
may also be a symptom. The US has by far the most exensive vax schedule and the countries at the top of the lists all have much shorter schedules. Examining the rankings further, Italy and France were the only 2 countries in Europe to be vaxing infants for Hep B well before 1995, and some regions in Spain were as well, http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=201 and these nations round out the bottom of the chart with the US. South Korea (which did fairly well) seems to have only added Hep B to the official series in 1995 (too late to have had impact on most of the millenials taking this test). Japan and the other nations near the top either don’t give it routinely, as far as I can tell, or started recently.
While we are remarking on possible effects of vaccine aluminum on society, its also worth recalling that C.A. Shaw, Y. Li , L. Tomljenovic, (2013) found mice who received the aluminum in the US vaccine schedule showed large weight gains and defensive anxious behavior. If humans are suffering similar complications, that would potentially explain why children have become so heavy, both in the US and other nations such as India, and why students in college campuses across America in 2015 and 2016 began demanding "safe zones". http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0162013413001773
http://jvi.asm.org/content/84/12/6033.full
J Virol. 2010 Jun;84(12):6033-40. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02690-09. Epub 2010 Apr 7.
Viral nucleic acids in live-attenuated vaccines: detection of minority variants and an adventitious virus.
Victoria JG, Wang C, Jones MS, Jaing C, McLoughlin K, Gardner S, Delwart EL.
Abstract
Metagenomics and a panmicrobial microarray were used to examine eight live-attenuated viral vaccines. Viral nucleic acids in trivalent oral poliovirus (OPV), rubella, measles, yellow fever, varicella-zoster, multivalent measles/mumps/rubella, and two rotavirus live vaccines were partially purified, randomly amplified, and pyrosequenced. Over half a million sequence reads were generated covering from 20 to 99% of the attenuated viral genomes at depths reaching up to 8,000 reads per nucleotides. Mutations and minority variants, relative to vaccine strains, not known to affect attenuation were detected in OPV, mumps virus, and varicella-zoster virus. The anticipated detection of endogenous retroviral sequences from the producer avian and primate cells was confirmed. Avian leukosis virus (ALV), previously shown to be noninfectious for humans, was present as RNA in viral particles, while simian retrovirus (SRV) was present as genetically defective DNA. Rotarix, an orally administered rotavirus vaccine, contained porcine circovirus-1 (PCV1), a highly prevalent nonpathogenic pig virus, which has not been shown to be infectious in humans. Hybridization of vaccine nucleic acids to a panmicrobial microarray confirmed the presence of endogenous retroviral and PCV1 nucleic acids. Deep sequencing and microarrays can therefore detect attenuated virus sequence changes, minority variants, and adventitious viruses and help maintain the current safety record of live-attenuated viral vaccines.
Also Viruses and Virus Nucleic Acid Contaminate Many Vaccines: Risks of cancer and creation of new pathogens should not be underplayed by regulators Prof. Joe Cummins http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Viruses_and_Virus_Nucleic_Acid_Contaminate_Vaccines.php
Measles vaccine Attenuvax grown in chicken embryo fibroblast cells was contaminated with Avian leucosis (myeloid leucosis cancer virus) and avian endogenous retrovirus. Yellow fever 2vaccine YFvax grown in chicken embryo fibroblast cells was contaminated with avian endogenous retrovirus. Herpes 3 vaccine Varivax grown in MRC-5 human cells from aborted foetuses was contaminated with human endogenous retrovirus K. Rota virus vaccine Rotarix grown in Vero E6 (African green monkey ) cells was contaminated with with porcine circovirus 1 and porcine circovirus 2. Rotavirus Rotateq vaccine grown in Vero (African monkey) cells had Baboon endogenous retrovirus as contaminant. Measles mumps vaccine MMR II grown in chicken fibroblast cells had Avian endogenous retrovirus and human endogenous retrovirus K as contaminants; and Rubella vaccine grown in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblast cells was contaminated with Human endogenous retrovirus K. Rubella vaccine meruvax II grown in WI-38 human lung fibroblast cells contained human endogenous retrovirus-K.
and concludes:
"Human and veterinary vaccines have been found contaminated with wide array of viruses that are deemed harmless or less risky than the attenuated live virus of the vaccine. These contaminating garbage viruses are nowhere near as well investigated than they should have been prior to the commercialization of the vaccines. The contaminating garbage viruses are deemed harmless because they do not elicit sera conversion (production of antibody) even though the garbage viruses frequently produce proteins that are toxic in specific tissues. The contaminating garbage vaccines are actively cytotoxic in some cases, and potentially so in other cases by mutation or recombination to create new retroviruses that are life threatening. Among the garbage viruses, the small circular single stranded DNA viruses deserve special attention as they are so widespread in the human and animal populations. Such widespread dispersal of TTV and circoviruses could cause disaster. The first step in dealing with the garbage viruses is to provide informed consent to those being vaccinated with contaminated vaccines. The second is to carry out post-release monitoring for potential hazards from mutation and recombination, as highlighted in this article."
"My partners and I have over 35,000 patients who have never been vaccinated. You know how many cases of autism we have seen? ZERO, ZERO. I have made this statement for over 40 years: "NO VACCINES NO AUTISM". --Dr. Mayer Eisenstein
Similar evidence from Amish and from Home Schooled in Florida. Its apparent from observation that the unvaccinated have very low autism rates. When an Amish appears who has ASD, invariably was vaccinated (or in a few cases had very heavy heavy metal exposure).
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2009/05/22/a-pretty-big-secret/
Journal of Infection (2000) 41, 172–175
doi: 10.1053/jinf.2000.0718, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
General Non-specific Morbidity is Reduced After Vaccination
Within the Third Month of Life – the Greifswald Study
S. Otto*, B. Mahner, I. Kadow, J. F. Beck, S. K.W. Wiersbitzky and R. Bruns
Objectives: The incidence of many serious infectious diseases fundamentally decline as a success of consequent vaccination regimens. However, it is a matter of discussion if vaccination might cause unspecific negative side effects on theimmune system. To answer this, we performed a clinical study on children with the question as to whether there is anenhanced frequency of infection diseases after vaccination or not.
Methods: The study population (n496) was randomized to a group of vaccinated children (first vaccination on the 60thday of life, n201) and a group of unvaccinated children (first vaccination on the 90th day of life, n295). Frequenciesof unspecific, morbidity-related signs were recorded by the mothers with a diary card. These data were taken for furtherstatistical analysis to determine if the factor “vaccination” does have a significant effect on the variable “morbidity”.
Results: Various infectious disease-associated symptoms (vomiting, coughing, signs of rhinitis, restlessness, rash andpain) were significantly less often seen in vaccinated than in non-vaccinated children.
Conclusions: Our study revealed that children who received vaccination against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HiB and poliomyelitis simultaneously within the third month of life do not exhibit enhanced frequencies of infectious disease-associated symptoms. In contrary, the frequencies of infection-associated symptoms were found to be significantly reduced. This might be caused by a vaccination-associated unspecific enhancement of immunological activity (e.g. mediated by interleukin 2) or by other presently still unknown factors.
The Placebo effect is the very well established effect that something like 1/3 of patients are helped if the Doctor prescribes a placebo. The exact flip side of this is patients who don't get a placebo have to think they are worse off than the patients who do. In this case, you have Mothers being told they have to wait for their kid's vaccine, which they have been repeatedly told is highly necessary to his health. Its clear they were anxious, because 13 of them insisted on changing to the early vaccination group. Then they don't even ask that the kids be sick, or even go to the Doctor. They have the mothers keep a journal. Since the disparity in reported symptoms is much less than I would have expected from the placebo effect, I would say this study is perfectly consistent with the vaccines actually doing a lot of damage to the immune system, being masked by an even bigger placebo effect given the way the experiment was carried out.
Incidentally, they comment on not doing the experiment double blind by giving all the kids injections at 2 months half of which would be placebos. They say that would be unethical because it would expose half the kids to an extra saline injection. Let me get this straight. Its unethical to give half the kids in their group an extra saline injection, but its just fine giving all the kids in the world dozens of injections full of aluminum and antigens without any RPC tests?
This study also suffers from the common problem that putting kids who get vaccinated exactly on time into a "high vaccine" pool is highly prejudicial because (a) parents who succeed in getting them vaccinated exactly on time are being selected by a real world intelligence/achievement test which is likely a proxy for prior propensity to produce smart/healthy children and (b) some kids miss the date because they are sick (or in other experiments because they've had a prior vaccine reaction) which puts sick or vaccine damaged kids into the "low vaccine" group.
In this study 114 out of 335 kids (36%) who were assigned to the early vaccine group were dropped because they didn't get it on time.
Front. Neurol., 05 February 2015 | http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2015.00004
Biopersistence and brain translocation of aluminum adjuvants of vaccines
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2015.00004/full ;
An entire issue of Lupus [11,table of contents at http://lup.sagepub.com/content/21/2.toc ] was recently devoted to ‘ASIA’ – autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants [12], with at least 9 papers each presenting data indicating numerous autoimmune problems are caused by vaccine adjuvants.
===
Immunol Res. 2014 Dec;60(2-3):376-83. doi: 10.1007/s12026-014-8604-2.
Chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia following immunization with the hepatitis B vaccine: another angle of the 'autoimmune (auto-inflammatory) syndrome induced by adjuvants' (ASIA).
Agmon-Levin N1, Zafrir Y, Kivity S, Balofsky A, Amital H, Shoenfeld Y.
Author information
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to gather information regarding demographic and clinical characteristics of patients diagnosed with either fibromyalgia (FM) or chronic fatigue (CFS) following hepatitis B vaccination (HBVv) and furthermore to apply the recently suggested criteria of autoimmune (auto-inflammatory) syndromes induced by adjuvants (ASIA), in the aim of identifying common characteristics that may suggest an association between fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue and HBV vaccination. Medical records of 19 patients with CFS and/or fibromyalgia following HBVv immunization were analyzed. All of which were immunized during 1990-2008 in different centers in the USA. All medical records were evaluated for demographics, medical history, the number of vaccine doses, as well as immediate and long term post-immunization adverse events and clinical manifestations. In addition, available blood tests, imaging results, treatments and outcomes were analyzed. ASIA criteria were applied to all patients. The mean age of patients was 28.6 ± 11 years, of which 68.4 % were females. 21.05 % had either personal or familial background of autoimmune disease. The mean latency period from the last dose of HBVv to onset of symptoms was 38.6 ± 79.4 days, ranging from days to a year. Eight (42.1 %) patients continued with the immunization program despite experiencing adverse events. Manifestations that were commonly reported included neurological manifestations (84.2 %), musculoskeletal (78.9 %), psychiatric (63.1 %), fatigue (63.1 %), gastrointestinal complains (58 %) and mucocutaneous manifestations (36.8 %). Autoantibodies were detected in 71 % of patients tested. All patients fulfilled the ASIA criteria. This study suggests that in some cases CFS and FM can be temporally related to immunization, as part of ASIA syndrome. The appearance of adverse event during immunization, the presence of autoimmune susceptibility and higher titers of autoantibodies all can be suggested as risk factors. ASIA criteria were fulfilled in all patients eluding the plausible link between ASIA and CFS/FM.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25427994 ;
See also: https://vaccinesafetycommission.org/pdfs/13-2013-Autoimmunity-Perricone.pdf
Immunization Safety Review: Multiple Immunizations and Immune Dysfunction Kathleen Stratton, Christopher B. Wilson and Marie C. McCormick, Editors, Immunization Safety Review Committee, Board on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10306.html ISBN: 0-309-50866-5, 152 pages, 6 x 9, (2002) Institute of Medicine.
The recent IOM vaccine survey restricted itself to the last 10 years of studies, referencing the 2002 survey as having looked at the impact of multiple vaccines in depth up to that time. I wanted to be sure I hadn’t missed any earlier important studies that might contain cogent evidence against the hypotheses of multiple vaccine damage vectors. So I went to see what they were relying on. The 2002 study states:
"The scope of the committee’s inquiry can be summarized in the following three questions:
1. Do multiple immunizations have adverse short-term effects on the developing infant immune system that are reflected in increased susceptibility to heterologous infection (infections other than those targeted by the immunization)?
2. Does exposure to multiple antigens, as administered in vaccines, directly and permanently redirect or skew the immune system toward autoimmunity, as reflected in type 1 diabetes?
3. Does exposure to multiple antigens, as administered in vaccines, directly and permanently redirect or skew the immune system toward allergy, as reflected in asthma?
The committee was unable to address the concern that repeated exposure of a susceptible child to multiple immunizations over the developmental period may also produce atypical or non-specific immune or nervous system injury that could lead to severe disability or death (Fisher, 2001). There are no epidemiological studies that address this. Thus, the committee recognizes with some discomfort that this report addresses only part of the overall set of concerns of some of those most wary about the safety of childhood immunization."
Note for starters that they explicitly conclude that there is no published evidence to address whether multiple vaccinations can cause death or severe disability or mental damage. This is a problem because autism comes under mental damage and animal studies show mental damage and there is significant epidemiology, even some discussed in this IOM survey, to indicate death. So its interesting already to see how anybody could conclude vaccines are safe, when the IOM is saying there isn’t published information to address whether the series will kill you or damage your nervous system.
Next note that they don’t address the safety of the aluminum at all, as may be verified by searching the pdf on “alum”. There is some discussion about the merits of alum as an adjuvant, but zero consideration of iatrogenic effects or toxicity. Also the document doesn’t contain the term “contaminant” or “retrovirus” or “circovirus”. My contention is that the scientific literature strongly supports the hypotheses that vaccine aluminum is highly toxic in the quantities administered, that early and or multiple vaccines are damaging brain and immune system development, and that contaminants such as animal viruses are damaging, and that there are no papers in the peer reviewed literature whatsoever providing cogent evidence against any of these three hypotheses. Apparently the IOM 2002 aren’t going to rebut most of that.
They claim to review 2.multiple antigens and auto-immunity and 3. multiple antigens causing asthma, but I haven’t reviewed that part because antigens seems to be a less interesting vector, as we saw in discussing De Stefano et al 2014. DTP has over 3000 antigens and almost nothing else has more than a handful. Both sides of a study are going to have had multiple immunizations and aluminum and multiple opportunities for contaminants, which may largely mask any effect of multiple antigens if one exists. If you read them and find something striking let me know. The IOM report itself says “the committee concludes that the epidemiological and clinical evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between multiple immunization and an increased risk of allergic disease, particularly asthma.”
So they haven’t claimed its safe wrt asthma. Isn’t the law that the FDA is supposed to certify drugs are safe before they go on the market? How can they when the IOM admits they don’t have evidence on the subject? Shouldn’t patients at least be warned vaccines may cause asthma and allergies?
Now lets review what the IOM say about (1) heterologous infection.
“Heterologous Infection
The committee reviewed several case-control or cohort studies (Black et al., 1991; Burstein and Fleisher, 1994; Davidson, 1991; Griffin et al., 1992; Kristensen et al., 2000) and a randomized controlled trial (Otto et al., 2000) . . . Despite these variations and limitations, the overall findings from the studies consistently demonstrated either no effect or a beneficial effect of multiple immunizations on heterologous disease. Therefore, the committee concludes that the epidemiological and clinical evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between multiple immunizations and an increased risk of heterologous infections.“[Bold in the original].
So I reviewed the studies they reviewed. As I will detail, my conclusion based on my review is that all the studies they reviewed but one are so hopelessly confounded as to provide no useful evidence on the subject. The one study remaining suggests strongly that the vaccines are causing damage. It has been confirmed by other independent studies since their study.
General Non-specific Morbidity is Reduced After Vaccination Within the Third Month of Life – the Greifswald Study S. Otto, B. Mahner, I. Kadow, J. F. Beck, S. K.W. Wiersbitzky and R. Bruns, Journal of Infection (2000) 41, 172–175, doi: 10.1053/jinf.2000.0718
Otto et al is the only “randomized controlled trial” so lets start with that. Otto et al randomly selected some kids to go into a pool to have their 2 month vaccines at 3 months and then asked the mothers to keep a record of whether the kids had any symptoms, “unspecific, morbidity-related signs… with a diary card.”
The Placebo effect is the very well established effect that something like 1/3 of patients are helped if the Doctor prescribes a placebo. The exact flip side of this is patients who don’t get a placebo have to think they are worse off than the patients who do. In this case, you have Mothers being told they have to wait for their kid’s vaccine, which they have been repeatedly told is highly necessary to his health. Its clear they were anxious, because 13 of them insisted on changing to the early vaccination group. Then the study doesn’t even ask that the kids be sick, or even go to the Doctor. They have the mothers keep a journal. Since the disparity in reported symptoms is much less than I would have expected from the placebo effect, I would say this study is perfectly consistent with the vaccines actually doing a lot of damage to the immune system, being masked by an even bigger placebo effect given the way the experiment was carried out.
The authors comment on not doing the experiment double blind by giving all the kids injections at 2 months half of which would be placebos. They say that would be unethical because it would expose half the kids to an extra saline injection. Let me get this straight. It would be unethical, with parental permission, to give half the kids in one experiment an extra saline injection, but its just fine giving all the kids in the world dozens of injections full of aluminum and antigens without any RPC tests against actual placebos?
This study also suffers from the common problem that putting kids who get vaccinated exactly on time into a “high vaccine” pool is highly prejudicial because (a) parents who succeed in getting them vaccinated exactly on time are being selected by a real world intelligence/achievement test which is likely a proxy for prior propensity to produce smart/healthy children and (b) kids miss the date because they are sick (or in other experiments because they’ve had a prior vaccine reaction) which puts sick or vaccine damaged kids into the “low vaccine” group. This was not a small effect in this study: 114 out of 335 kids (36%) who were assigned to the early vaccine group were dropped because they didn’t get it on time.
Next we have Black SB, Cherry JD, Shinefield HR, Fireman B, Christenson P, Lampert D. Apparent decreased risk of invasive bacterial disease after heterologous childhood immunization. Am J Dis Child. 1991;145:746–769.
This is yet another paper that finds a protective effect for vaccines that is not expected, and ignores a plausible hypothesis explaining this protective effect but invalidating or even reversing the study’s impact on vaccination safety.
Black et al compare invasive bacterial disease victims to controls drawn from a sample of patients. Its clear from their table 2, that the invasive bacterial disease victims are drawn from a distribution that doesn’t go to the doctor often for well care visits. 73 of the cases had 0 or 1 well care visits in the previous 6 months, against only 23 with 2; whereas for the controls the ratio was 15 to 22. Presumably patients who don’t go for a well care visit, for whatever reason, are a priori unlikely to have been vaccinated, since vaccinations typically occur at well patient visits. Clearly, however, there is no basis in their data to conclude the vaccines failed to make the disease more likely, without some better understanding of the subpopulation from which invasive bacterial disease patients are drawn. They missed the lede. Their data are demonstrating nothing about vaccines, because they demonstrate there is a sub-population highly susceptible to invasive bacterial disease which isn’t getting medical care, perhaps children of drug addicts.
Does recent vaccination increase the risk of occult bacteremia? Burstein JL, Fleisher GR. Pediatr Emerg Care. 1994 Jun;10(3):138-40.
Burstein et al compare patients who are sick with one complaint to patients who are sick with other complaints and all of who are getting lots of antibiotics, as well as lots of vaccinations. Perhaps that would make sense if you were interested in one complaint, or one vaccine. Obviously its not going to tell you anything reliable in a climate where multiple vaccinations are causing multiple complaints, which is precisely what the evidence indicates.They are compared on the recency of vaccination, which also biases patients who got the vaccine further from the disease also got it younger, yet another confounding factor. But perhaps the biggest problem is, the animal data reports vaccine simulants damage immune systems permanently, they damage development. So you need to look for lasting or even increasing damage from vaccines as well as damage proximate to the vaccine.
DTP Immunization and Susceptibility to Infectious Diseases Is There a Relationship? Michael Davidson, MD, MPH; G. William Letson, MD; Joel I. Ward, MD; Angela Ball, MD; Lisa Bulkow, MS; Peter Christenson, PhD; James D. Cherry, MD, MSc Am J Dis Child. 1991;145(7):746-749. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1991.02160070046020.
I haven’t read the article, because it is critiqued in the paper itself, as described in the IOM study. “The authors note that a possible explanation for the lack of difference observed in the study is overmatching. Overmatching is where cases and controls closely resemble each other on factors related to the exposure of interest. In this study, matching based on the number of DTP vaccines received may have resulted in the lack of difference in the timing of DTwP immunization between cases and controls. However, the authors observed that matching according to the number of DTP vaccines was necessary and reduced potential confounders such as those related to health status.”
Apparently the controls got the same number of DTP’s as the cases, so again not very informative. For the second part of the study, the IOM notes:
“The authors note that the higher frequency of disease in the pre-DTP group compared to the post-DTP group may have resulted from a “well-child effect,” whereby immunization of children with illnesses was postponed until they were well.”
Seems sensible. If some of the parents wait till the kids have been healthy for 30 days before administering DTP, which might be a sensible precaution, then you are definitely going to get distorted results.
Finally the IOM committee read:
Kristensen I, Aaby P, Jensen H. Routine vaccinations and child survival: Followup study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa. BMJ. 2000;321:1435–1438.
In rural Guinea-Bisseau, scientists polled 15,351 mothers of 6 month olds to see which infants were vaccinated, and then came back a year later to see who was still alive. Kids who’d gotten at least one vaccine had a relative mortality of .74 compared to kids who’d gotten none. After cluster, age, and other vaccines were adjusted for, BCG was associated with mortality (0.55 (0.36 to 0.85)). However, recipients of at least one dose of DTP had relative mortality (1.84 (1.10 to 3.10)) and recipients of one dose of OPV had relative mortality 1.81 (1.07 to 3.05). Recipients of measles vaccine had a mortality ratio of 0.48 (0.27 to 0.87). When deaths from measles were excluded from the analysis the mortality ratio was 0.51 (0.28 to 0.95).
The difference between this study and the previous studies reviewed above is: this study is a lot cleaner, it is looking at mortality in a very clean before and after fashion, and the result it is finding is opposite to the very obvious bias that the kids getting vaccines are also getting better care and have wealthier parents and better sanitation. All the previous studies, as we have seen, are worthless. This study actually is interesting evidence that DTP at least is doing damage.
Since the IOM report in 2002, a second study in Guinea-Bisseau confirmed the first, reporting that having previously gotten DTP in addition to OPV more than doubled mortality for kids in the pediatric ward up to 5 years of age compared to kids who only got OPV, from 6% to 15%.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15297050 Vaccine. 2004 Aug 13;22(23-24):3014-7. Oral polio vaccination and low case fatality at the paediatric ward in Bissau, Guinea-Bissau. Aaby P, Rodrigues A, Biai S, Martins C, Veirum JE, Benn CS, Jensen
These results suggest that DTP, and possibly OPV, are doing harm. As I have reviewed, there is significant literature indicating vaccine aluminum, vaccine interactions with brain and immune system development especially as shown in the animal literature, and vaccine contaminants are doing harm. So its a plausible hypothesis that DTP is damaging the immune systems of the recipients so that they die of various causes. Moreover, BCG is a scratch, not an injection, so it seems unlikely to contribute to the vaccine damage vectors I have identified, and it’s effectiveness is controversial even among people who usually accept vaccines. A hypothesis consistent with these facts is that BCG vaccine is serving largely as a placebo, doing neither harm nor good but merely a proxy for propensity to get vaccinated, a hidden factor representing parental circumstances and child raising skills. If that is the correct explanation, then the true increased mortality compared to a placebo for DTP in Guinea-Bisseau would be at least 3. Since measles deaths were not a factor, and MMR is given at 18 months and does not contain adjuvants, MMR could have a similar role here as a proxy for good care.
I have also previously reviewed, of course, much other evidence that the vaccines are damaging. Here my purpose was to review the IOM 2002 study, demonstrating that it had no rational basis for claiming safety, and that it cited no papers cogently opposing our remarks on the dangers of vaccine aluminum, contaminants, or developmental interactions as reported in the animal literature. Its worth emphasizing however, one thing I discovered in this review, that the IOM survey explicitly declined to claim safety in several aspects after examining the literature. They said they found insufficient literature to state that multiple vaccines weren't causing atypical or non-specific immune or nervous system injury that could lead to severe disability or death, nor did they find sufficient literature to state that they weren't causing asthma or allergies.
Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality
Kathleen Stratton, Andrew Ford, Erin Rusch, and Ellen Wright Clayton, Editors; Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines; Institute of Medicine, The National Academies press 2011. PDF Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality
The authors consider vaccine condition pairs, to decide if the literature supports or rejects the hypothesis the vaccine causes the iatrogenic condition. Looking at table D3, which looks at vaccine- condition pairs for causality,
- there are 14 for which the evidence is said to convingly support causality, the vaccine is causing the condition.
- There are 4 where it favors acceptance.
- There are 5 where it is said to favor rejection, including MMR causing autism.
- And there are 123 where the evidence is insufficient to evaluate.
Also, the survey pretty much only looks at vaccines as individually causing conditions. It doesn't address at all the safety of the aluminum, the contaminants, the timing and multiplicity of vaccines interacting with development of brain and immune system, which are iatrogenic vectors that I believe are well established by the scientific literature.
Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism,
Immunization Safety Review Committee,Institute of Medicine of the National Academies,ISBN: 0-309-53275-2, 214 pages, 6 x 9, (2004) http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10997.html
"The committee reviewed the extant published and unpublished epidemiological studies regarding causality and studies of potential biologic mechanisms by which these immunizations might cause autism. The committee concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. The committee also concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. The committee further finds that potential biological mechanisms for vaccine-induced autism that have been generated to date are theoretical only."
The survey does not consider aluminum, contaminants, or multiplicity and timing interactions. Nor do they consider the possibility that vaccine virus takes lodge in the gut of some individuals and causes autism. For all of these there are peer reviewed papers that tie them to autism or brain damage. It does not consider the possibility of multiple causes-- which invalidates pretty much all the studies they cite. If both thimerisol and timing or contaminants or aluminum of other vaccines are independently contributing to autism, its going to obscure and make it impossible to see any statistically significant effect in the studies they consider, which compare kids getting numerous vaccines to kids getting numerous vaccines.
They do not consider the possibility that parents see their kids damaged by vaccines and thus stop vaccinating or delay vaccinations. A kid that visibly develops problems on the first thimerisol shot may well never get another. And also, kids miss vaccinations and have them delayed because they are sick. It is a systematic and huge bias in every study they consider that some kids are placed into the low vaccine or low thimerisol bin *because* they were vaccine damaged or sickly. This by itself invalidates all the studies they rely on for establishing safety.
There's plenty of evidence to confirm such visible problems. The IOM study in fact says they reviewed 1348 VAERS reports of autism immediately after a vaccination. Even if such events may be purely circumstantial, their perceived nature will bias the experiments putting damaged kids into low vaccine bins. Its putting the cart before the horse to assume parents can't ever recognize their kid be damaged, as an assumption in testing whether vaccines damage.
In fact there is significant evidence to show this is exactly what is happening. There is a repeated finding that early Thimerosal is significantly preventative of general developmental disorders, unspecified developmental delay, and attention deficit disorder[1] ASD[2], and that MMR is signficantly preventative of ASD in younger siblings of ASD victims[3]. Each study's authors put this down to chance, but the repeated finding makes this unlikely.
These consistent results support the alternative hypothesis that children are having visible reactions (or in the latter case, their sibling has the reaction) and being pulled from the high vaccine or high thimerisol pool by parents choosing to delay or cancel their vaccines.
[1]Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al, Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association, Pediatrics September 2004, VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3
[2]Cristofer S. Price, William W. Thompson, Barbara Goodson,et al, Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism, Pediatrics October 2010, VOLUME 126 / ISSUE 4 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/4/656
[3]Anjali Jain; Jaclyn Marshall; Ami Buikema; et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism, JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
The studies the IOM rely on have other problems as well.
Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M. 2003. Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism. JAMA 290(13):1763-6. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/pdf/HG_8.pdf
This paper took advantage of the fact that Denmark reformulated its Pertussis vaccine to take out the thimerisol for a while to try to compare kids who got more thimerisol vaccines to kids who got less thimerisol vaccines. "Doses administered before June 1, 1992, were considered to contain thimerosal, and doses administered after June 1, 1992, were considered thimerosal free."
The first problem is that if parents observe the child having problems, they withhold or delay further vaccines, which biases the problem children to the low thimerisol group.
A second problem is they changed the definition how they diagnose autism during the period from in patient to in and out. "In 1991-1994, only inpatients were included in the Danish Psychiatric Central Register. From 1995, both inpatients and outpatients were included." So the kids getting high thimerisol (early) are almost certainly more underdiagnosed (or less overdiagnosed) than the kids getting low thimerisol (later in the period.) And this relative underdiagnosis appears plausibly to be by an order of magnitude or more, since another study on Danish Data reported 13.5 times as many outpatient diagnosis as inpatient.
Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M. A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(19):1477-82.
Thomas Verstraeten, Robert L. Davis, Frank DeStefano, et al. Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases Pediatrics 2003;112;1039-1048
Patients were classified not by total Thimerosal, rather by Thimerosal in a period such as 0-3 or 0-7 months, and then the patients are evaluated later. In Vaerstraten et al, for example, only neurodevelopmental diagnoses made after 1 year are included, so that patients that were more immediately damaged by early Thimerosal could have been excluded and the low- Thimerosal patients may be diagnosed due to proximate effects from post 1yo Thimerosal containing vaccine administration that the high-Thimerosal patients were not subject to, having had them earlier.
Vaerstraten et al also observed that the patients who received the most Hg in the first 7 months of life also had many more well-child visits, and many more URI visits in the second year of life. Rather than contemplate the possibility that this is evidence that the Thimerosal or the vaccines are damaging the immune systems of the patients, they adopted criteria that selected sicker than random controls, using controls “restricted to children who had made at least 1 visit to a clinic or an emergency department at the same month of age as cases.”
Its also interesting to note that some of these authors were making presentations on their data showing relative risk of as high as 7.6 in the high thimerisol group, but somehow these results never were published. See http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmission_IncreasedRiskOfDevelopmentalNeurologicImpairmentAfterHighExposureToThimerosal-containingVaccine_.pdf
for the abstract of such presentation. This seems evidence of confirmation bias at the least. and for additional evidence see: http://www.safeminds.org/blog/2014/01/23/new-disclosures-vaccine-safety-datalink-vsd/
and also: http://www.autismrawdata.net/1/post/2011/11/simpsonwood.html
The more vaccines an infant has gotten before a VAERS report event, the more likelihood he has of being hospitalized. The hospitalization rate increased linearly from 11.0% for two doses to 23.5% for eight doses. Linear regression analysis of hospitalization rates as a function of the number of reported vaccine doses yielded a linear relationship, with an R2 of 0.91. Also, infants who had received more vaccinations are significantly more likely to die.
The hospitalization rate decreased linearly from 20.1% for neonates to 10.7% for older infants. Linear regression analysis of hospitalization rates as a function of patient age yielded an R2 of 0.95. Also younger infants who had an adverse reaction were three times more likely to die of it than older ones.
http://www.jpands.org/vol21no2/miller.pdf Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 21 Number 2 Summer 2016 Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe Neil Z. Miller
http://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7015-11-99
Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain
Zakir Khan, Christophe Combadière, François-Jérôme Authier, Valérie Itier, François Lux, Christopher Exley, Meriem Mahrouf-Yorgov, Xavier Decrouy, Philippe Moretto, Olivier Tillement, Romain K Gherardi†Email author and Josette Cadusseau BMC Medicine201311:99 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-99
Intramuscular injection of alum-containing vaccine was associated with the appearance of aluminum deposits in distant organs, such as spleen and brain where they were still detected one year after injection.
Transient suppression of atopy in early childhood is associated with high vaccination coverage Gruber, C., S. Illi, S. Lau, R. Nickel, J. Forster, W. Kamin, C.P. Bauer, V. Wahn, U. Wahn, and the MAS-90 Study Group. 2003. . Pediatrics 111(3):e282-e288.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/111/3/e282
"Children were grouped into dose percentiles according to cumulative doses of any vaccine given up to 5 years of age (<10%, 0–11 doses; 10%–50%, 12–14 doses; 51%–90%, 15–20 doses; >90%, 21–27 doses).
Results. The cumulative vaccine dose was inversely related to atopic dermatitis prevalences at 6 months (13.8%, 5.2%, 5.1%, and 4.5%), 2 years (16.9%, 10.9%, 7.4%, and 3.7%), 3 years (27.6%, 16.4%, 13.5%, and 4.5%), and 5 years (28.3%, 16.0%, 9.3%, and 11.9%). Asthma followed a similar pattern at age 3 (22.4%, 8.6%, 6.7%, and 6.3%), age 4 (20.0%, 8.6%, 8.9%, and 8.1%), and age 5 (20.8%, 12.6%, 10.3%, and 5.5%). Allergic sensitization rates were inversely related to the cumulative vaccine dose at age 2 (37.5%, 29.1%, 23.8%, and 12.9%).
Conclusion. Children with a higher vaccination coverage seemed to be transiently better protected against development of atopy in the first years of life."
"Apart from diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis vaccines, relatively few children received other aluminum-containing vaccines (hepatitis B, N = 1; tick-borne encephalitis vaccine, N = 96). No dose-response relationship was found regarding atopic manifestations, total serum IgE, or allergic sensitization at 5 years of age or earlier (data not shown)."
There appears to be no reason to believe the correlation means the vaccine is protective against atophy and asthma, rather than the results following from parents delaying or withholding vaccination for kids they perceived damaged by earlier vaccines, at risk from vaccines, or sickly. Indeed, if Gruber et al are really doing what they say, they are binning the kids by the total amount of vaccination they had by 5. So to claim the vaccination was causing the lack of atophy at six months would imply future vaccines prevented earlier atophy. It seems much more likely earlier atophy caused lack of later vaccines. The aluminum results could well result from a combination of aluminum damage to those who got more, and patients who were more evidently damaged fleeing into the low aluminum pool by withholding further vaccinations.
There's plenty of evidence to confirm parental concern. The 2004 IOM study on autism says they reviewed 1348 VAERS reports of autism immediately after a vaccination. Even if such events may be purely circumstantial, their perceived nature will bias the experiments putting damaged kids into low vaccine bins. Its putting the cart before the horse to assume parents can't ever recognize their kid be damaged, as an assumption in testing whether vaccines damage. And even if they can't, its clear, they will often assume when their kid gets sick after a vaccine that they shouldn't give him more, lifting him into the low vaccine, low aluminum, or low thimerisol group in the design of all these experiments. Thus sick kids are being systematically moved into the low vaccine bin.
Gruber et al is the fourth study I've found declaring that vaccines are strongly protective in ways never expected. There is a repeated finding that early Thimerosal is significantly preventative of general developmental disorders,unspecified developmental delay, and attention deficit disorder[1] ASD[2], and that MMR is signficantly preventative of ASD in younger siblings of ASD victims[3]. Each study's authors put this down to chance, but the repeated finding makes this unlikely. These consistent results support the alternative hypothesis that children are having visible reactions (or in the latter case, their sibling has the reaction) and being pulled from the high vaccine or high thimerisol pool by parents choosing to delay or cancel their vaccines.
It appears that pretty much every study cited by safety studies either studies one vaccine in kids that have gotten dozens, or is confounded by the fact that the sick kids are being put into the low vaccine bin because they are sick and often likely because their parents believe vaccines were the cause, and in fact there is considerable evidence to indicate the parents can spot it.
[1]Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al, Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association, Pediatrics September 2004, VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3
[2]Cristofer S. Price, William W. Thompson, Barbara Goodson,et al, Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism, Pediatrics October 2010, VOLUME 126 / ISSUE 4 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/4/656
[3]Anjali Jain; Jaclyn Marshall; Ami Buikema; et al. Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism, JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534-1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
But there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult science.
That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school--
we never explicitly say what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the
examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it
out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a
principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a
kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you
should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what
you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your
results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other
experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.
Richard P Feynman CARGO CULT SCIENCE (adapted from Caltech Commencement Address 1974)
https://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm
So did Gruber et al (2003) (a) not notice that their results could be explained by vaccines being withheld from the sickly, or (b) not bother to comment on it?
Likewise, the IOM 2013 Survey The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety: Stakeholder Concerns, Scientific Evidence, and Future Studies wrote of Gruber et al: "the committee believes that this was a well-constructed and well-reported study and may serve as one example of a means by which the U.S. immunization schedule could be studied."
If they didn't notice, they have a confirmation bias that is quite striking. If they did, they are by Feynman's definition involved in Cargo Cult Science.
http://lifeboat.com/blog/2016/06/the-top-ten-reasons-i-believe-vaccine-safety-is-an-epic-mass-delusion ;;;
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036846.2011.566203
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057555/
https://thoughtscapism.com/2015/04/10/myth-no-studies-compare-the-health-of-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-people/
Gunea Bissau results specifically implicate at most one vaccine, which contradicts the theory that aluminum levels are the key to vaccine related damage, and that total amount of immunization is at fault.
HPV vaccines are given in 3 doses, with gaps between 2 and 6 months. The gaps measured are within any one of those dosages. There's a total window of about 115 days where these hospitalizations could have occurred.
The resulting rate is not significant compared to the normal population.
http://www.gardasil.com/why-3-doses/3-to-complete-faqs/
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1197/j.aem.2007.02.030/pdf
Its perfectly consistent with the aluminum theory. In the first place, DTP was the only vaccine the kids in Guinea Bisseau were getting that contained aluminum, so for Guinnea-Bisseau the aluminum theory is the single vaccine theory.
In the second place, the theory that the aluminum is damaging does not preclude other damage.
In the third place, as described in the statement, the Guinea- Bisseau results seem best explainable by a model in which BCG is basically a placebo, a proxy for prior propensity to get vaccinated, and all the vaccines are doing some measure of harm compared to that.
The data here that is the most significant is no doubt the ED visits, which I gave evidence seem to be roughly twice the background for people in Canada in the age group. For 19,000 visits, that twice the background is very highly significant.
They didn't give the precise timing data for the ED visits. But we computed that the timing data on the hospitalization was of interesting statistical relevance, although not significant all by itself.
These Studies Are All Discussed Elsewhere and Shown Not To Support Vaccine Safety
https://thoughtscapism.com/2015/04/10/myth-no-studies-compare-the-health-of-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-people/
We summarize here briefly challenges to each of the papers it summarizes, which were mostly already on this topic. We will endeavor to expand on this shortly if time permits.
The first study cited, Contagious Diseases in the United States from 1888 to the Present Willem G. van Panhuis, M.D., Ph.D., John Grefenstette, Ph.D., Su Yon Jung, Ph.D., Nian Shong Chok, M.Sc., Anne Cross, M.L.I.S., Heather Eng, B.A., Bruce Y. Lee, M.D., Vladimir Zadorozhny, Ph.D., Shawn Brown, Ph.D., Derek Cummings, Ph.D., M.P.H., and Donald S. Burke, M.D http://www.febrilnotropeni.net/newsfiles/3777NEJMms1215400.pdf ;;;
compares disease rates before and after vaccination introduced, under the assumption the only thing changing was the vaccine. However, the clinical definition of the disease was invariably substantially restricted, rendering the before and after comparison inappropriate. (After the vaccine was introduced, if they didn't really narrow the clinical definition to only include cases involving the actual virus in questioh, there would have been a lot of questions raised that weren't pertinent before.) Also, it doesn't consider the background. All of these diseases were already waning before the vaccine, and other non-vaccinated diseases also waned, so its very reasonable to ask whether even without the vaccination the vaccinated diseases would have also dropped, perhaps faster than they did with it. The pure assumption this paper makes that they would have stayed otherwise constant is ludicrous.
Another class of illnesses induced by the vaccine that this data ignores are the class of subclinically infected patients whose vaccine-derived resistance has faded to the point that they, for example, get flu-like symptoms from measles virus, but are not diagnosed with measles. These were shown to exist by Chen et al, Measles antibody: reevaluation of protective titers http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2230231
For much more on why the case made in this paper ignores and is invalidated by a mass of contrary evidence see the other diagram http://truthsift.com/node_info?nid=5276&superNode=No&subNode=No&isFlagged=No&probability=1&likelihoodEstimateT=0.5&likelihoodEstimateF=0.5&likelihoodEstimate=0.5&rating=TE
The second paper: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104063 Ten Great Public Health Achievements—United States, 2001-2010 provides no evidence vaccines were responsible for saving lives, it just makes a bunch of unsupported assumptions. Again, see the above cited diagram for more on the subject.
The 2011 German study was already discussed in and shown not to support vaccine safety and benefit by ele51 http://truthsift.com/node_info?nid=5009&superNode=No&subNode=No&isFlagged=No&probability=1&likelihoodEstimateT=0.5&likelihoodEstimateF=0.5&likelihoodEstimate=0.5&rating=TE Basically, it didn't get very many unvaccinated in its survey, but the ones it did find were generally found to be healthier than the vaccinated. Comparing this study to larger surveys of unvaccinated, and the data seem to indicate the vaccinated are faring much worse than the unvaccinated.
The 2013 German study http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(13)01860-5/abstract doesn't in fact compare vaccinated to unvaccinated. It compares patients who have had multiple vaccines, they only study a few of them.
The Nigerian study is blatantly confounded by the fact that the reason kids had no vaccinations in the society, was extreme poverty and poor conditions. What was so striking about the Guinea-Bisseau studies is they found vaccines to be damaging even counter to this strong confounding factor, when you controlled by comparing people who got one vaccine to people who got another. It seems likely the BCG vaccine there was simply serving as a placebo, a proxy for prior propensity to be vaccinated which is a proxy for wealth and good parents, and thus the extreme difference in mortality between the patients who got DTP and the patients who got BCG is showing that the DTP is doing a lot of damage.
The flu vaccine effectiveness is completely confounded by the fact that the way they measure effectiveness in flu vaccines, including the ones the CDC cites in the study the article cites, counts collateral damage to the immune system of patients as vaccine effectiveness.
"Vaccine Effectiveness" is what they usually talk to you about. Here's how they often measure vaccine effectiveness, especially I've noticed for flu vaccines. "Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100% x (1 - odds ratio [ratio of odds of being vaccinated among outpatients with influenza-positive test results to the odds of being vaccinated among outpatients with influenza-negative test results])" http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6401a4.htm ;;;
In other words, they take people presenting to the Doc for a respiratory illness and divide them up into 4 groups, first by whether they got the flu vax, and second by whether they have the flu or some other respiratory complaint. Let VF be the guys who were vaxed and have flu, VI be the guys who were vaxed and have some other respiratory infection, NF be guys who weren't vaxed and have flu, and NI be guys who weren't vaxed and have some other respiratory infection. Vaccine Effectiveness = 100% X (1-(VF/NF)(NI/VI))
cf http://truthsift.com/search_view?statement=Vaccine-Effectiveness-used-to-measure-flu-vaccines-gives-a-higher-score-to-a-flu-vaccine-if-it-damages-the-immune-system-of-the-recipient.&id=386&nid=2823 for more discussion.
Invariably the "placebo" contains the adjuvant. If you find any that aren't, please post. They never compare the vaccine to a population that just gets saline.
The theory of Original Iatrogenic Sin holds that when one is vaccinated, the immune system learns one way to respond and forgets its alternative pathways. As the initial titer benefit fades over time, people are thus predicted to be worse off. The studies don't look at this.
Also they don't look much at whether the vaccine recruited resources to fight one disease, hamper response to others, especially over time.
For measles, for example, according to published reports, 3/4 of the population is subject to a sub-clinical infection involving flu like symptoms and possible contagion, but not the charactertistic rash, only 7 years from their last booster, and protection wains further from there. At what if any point vaccinated patients have a higher expectation of becoming badly sick if exposed to measles than unvaccinated patients is utterly unknown, and nothing also is known about susceptibility to other diseases. http://truthsift.com/node_info?nid=5284&superNode=No&subNode=No&isFlagged=No&probability=1&likelihoodEstimateT=0.5&likelihoodEstimateF=0.5&likelihoodEstimate=0.5&rating=TE
The two citations show the rate is almost exactly identitcal to the background rate accounting for demographics.
From the http://www.cfhi-fcass.ca/sf-docs/default-source/reports/risk-analytica.pdf figure 4 p23, 45 out 100 girls in the age group make an ED visit per year. Here we have 1/10 in 42 days, which is a rate of 87 per year, nearly twice as much.
Using the normal background rate of .45/year, we would have expected about .45*195,270*42/365 = 10,111 ED visits, but 19,351 were observed. That's an excess of 9,240 ED visits.
The standard deviation for this number of people can be computed as sqrt(Np(1-p)) for p the probability of making an ED visit in the background, in this case .45*42/365. It is 98. That means the number of ED visits observed was about 9240/98 = 94 standard deviations in excess of the expected. In other words, the event was highly highly significant and the vaccine most likely causally connected unless there is some other systematic bias.
As proved in the attached proof ele148, this data represents 9240 additional ED visits beyond what is expected due to normal background rate.
As indicated in the linked paper, the girls getting HPV sometimes, for all we know quite often, go on to develop the ASIA syndrome that devastates their lives. There is no good reason to believe some or many of these additional ED visits may not be due to early indications of ASIA, as the study only reported on Venous thromboembolic events (VTE).``
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12026-016-8820-z
Severe somatoform and dysautonomic syndromes after HPV vaccination: case series and review of literature Beniamino Palmieri, Dimitri Poddighe, Maria Vadalà, Carmen Laurino, Carla Carnovale, Emilio Clementi
First Online: 09 August 2016 DOI: 10.1007/s12026-016-8820-z
Palmieri, B., Poddighe, D., Vadalà, M. et al. Immunol Res (2016). doi:10.1007/s12026-016-8820-z
Abstract
Human papilloma virus (HPV) is recognized as a major cause for cervical cancer among women worldwide. Two HPV vaccines are currently available: Gardasil® and Cervarix®. Both vaccines enclose viral antigenic proteins, but differ as to the biological systems of culture and the adjuvant components. Recently, a collection of symptoms, indicating nervous system dysfunction, has been described after HPV vaccination. We retrospectively described a case series including 18 girls (aged 12–24 years) referred to our “Second Opinion Medical Network” for the evaluation of “neuropathy with autonomic dysfunction” after HPV vaccination. All girls complained of long-lasting and invalidating somatoform symptoms (including asthenia, headache, cognitive dysfunctions, myalgia, sinus tachycardia and skin rashes) that have developed 1–5 days (n = 11), 5–15 days (n = 5) and 15–20 days (n = 2) after the vaccination. These cases can be included in the recently described immune dysfunction named autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA). HPV vaccine, through its adjuvant component, is speculated to induce an abnormal activation of the immune system, involving glia cells in the nervous system too. Further researches should aim at defining the pathological and clinical aspects of these post-vaccination diseases and identifying a genetic background predisposing to these adverse reactions.
The challenged statement considered that 19,500 girls made ED visits out of 195,000 vaccinated within 42 days of vaccination, and compared that to the fraction of 195,000 girls who would be expected to make an ED visit with 42 days. However, these 195,000 girls received 530,000 HPV vaccinations, so it is unclear how many 42 day periods are appropriate per girl. As such, the reported number of ED visits could be consistent with the background.
The analysis done in the statement of the hospitalizations does show some evidence the HPV vaccine is causing those, but its not significant.
This requires proof. That a single study of a single vaccine did not immediately demonstrate too many acute effects does not prove the vaccine series does not have too many acute effects.
This requires proof. That a single study of a single vaccine didn't immediately report to many acute immediate effects does not prove that the vaccine series does not have too many immediate acute effects.
Mitkus RJ, King DB, Hess MA, Forshee RA, Walderhaug MO., Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination, Vaccine 29(51) 9538-43 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001122
Abstract: Aluminum is a ubiquitous element that is released naturally into the environment via volcanic activity and the breakdown of rocks on the earth's surface. Exposure of the general population to aluminum occurs primarily through the consumption of food, antacids, and buffered analgesics. Exposure to aluminum in the general population can also occur through vaccination, since vaccines often contain aluminum salts (frequently aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate) as adjuvants. Because concerns have been expressed by the public that aluminum in vaccines may pose a risk to infants, we developed an up-to-date analysis of the safety of aluminum adjuvants. Keith et al. [1] previously analyzed the pharmacokinetics of aluminum for infant dietary and vaccine exposures and compared the resulting body burdens to those based on the minimal risk levels (MRLs) established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. We updated the analysis of Keith et al. [1] with a current pediatric vaccination schedule [2]; baseline aluminum levels at birth; an aluminum retention function that reflects changing glomerular filtration rates in infants; an adjustment for the kinetics of aluminum efflux at the site of injection; contemporaneous MRLs; and the most recent infant body weight data for children 0-60 months of age [3]. Using these updated parameters we found that the body burden of aluminum from vaccines and diet throughout an infant's first year of life is significantly less than the corresponding safe body burden of aluminum modeled using the regulatory MRL. We conclude that episodic exposures to vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvant continue to be extremely low risk to infants and that the benefits of using vaccines containing aluminum adjuvant outweigh any theoretical concerns.
The challenged statement considered that 19,500 girls made ED visits out of 195,000 vaccinated within 42 days of vaccination, and compared that to the fraction of 195,000 girls who would be expected to make an ED visit with 42 days. However, these 195,000 girls received 530,000 HPV vaccinations, so it is unclear how many 42 day periods are appropriate per girl. As such, the reported number of ED visits could be consistent with the background.
The analysis done in the statement of the hospitalizations does show some evidence the HPV vaccine is causing those, but its not significant.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
These Studies Are All Discussed Elsewhere in this graph and Shown Not To Support Vaccine Safety
http://truthsift-env.qh5iy45he4.us-east-2.elasticbeanstalk.com/search_view?id=406&next=5009
The Pertinent Evidence Indicates that the Aluminum in the Vaccine Series is Highly Toxic in the quantities administered. All of the peer reviewed papers that report empirical results pertinent to parenteral aluminum in neonates, report it is highly toxic in the quantities administered. These results indicate it is likely costing the vaccinated population multiple IQ points, bone density, and causing other problems. The injections are bypassing 6 evolved filters to inject aluminum in far higher quantities than would otherwise be present.
Gunea Bissau results specifically implicate at most one vaccine, which contradicts the theory that aluminum levels are the key to vaccine related damage, and that total amount of immunization is at fault.
Vaccine Ingredients - Aluminum "While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet." http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum#.ViaqRcuRb04
Its perfectly consistent with the aluminum theory. In the first place, DTP was the only vaccine the kids in Guinea Bisseau were getting that contained aluminum, so for Guinnea-Bisseau the aluminum theory is the single vaccine theory.
In the second place, the theory that the aluminum is damaging does not preclude other damage.
In the third place, as described in the statement, the Guinea- Bisseau results seem best explainable by a model in which BCG is basically a placebo, a proxy for prior propensity to get vaccinated, and all the vaccines are doing some measure of harm compared to that.
From the http://www.cfhi-fcass.ca/sf-docs/default-source/reports/risk-analytica.pdf figure 4 p23, 45 out 100 girls in the age group make an ED visit per year. Here we have 1/10 in 42 days, which is a rate of 87 per year, nearly twice as much.
Using the normal background rate of .45/year, we would have expected about .45*195,270*42/365 = 10,111 ED visits, but 19,351 were observed. That's an excess of 9,240 ED visits.
The standard deviation for this number of people can be computed as sqrt(Np(1-p)) for p the probability of making an ED visit in the background, in this case .45*42/365. It is 98. That means the number of ED visits observed was about 9240/98 = 94 standard deviations in excess of the expected. In other words, the event was highly highly significant and the vaccine most likely causally connected unless there is some other systematic bias.
The challenged statement considered that 19,500 girls made ED visits out of 195,000 vaccinated within 42 days of vaccination, and compared that to the fraction of 195,000 girls who would be expected to make an ED visit with 42 days. However, these 195,000 girls received 530,000 HPV vaccinations, so it is unclear how many 42 day periods are appropriate per girl. As such, the reported number of ED visits could be consistent with the background.
The analysis done in the statement of the hospitalizations does show some evidence the HPV vaccine is causing those, but its not significant.
More than two dozen scientific papers now spell out how vaccine aluminum causes autism. It has been shown that aluminum levels in the brains of autistics are very high. It has been shown that aluminum from vaccines goes to the brain and raises IL – 4 levels there. This inflames the brain and causes autism. This is nicely spelled out in the following blog post which contains extensive references to scientific literature.
https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/4/1/international2018
That refutation seems correct. It does not seem you can demonstrate from the data presented that excess emergency room visits were significant.
Scientists tested off-the-shelf vaccines and found 43 out of 43 Were contaminated with heavy metal microparticles and/or nanoparticles.
https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/IJVV-04-00072.pdf
Considering what is known about effects of such particles and what is not known, it seems likely these particles are causing serious health problems. The above link also mentios this. Attempted refutations have blithely pretended these were molecules but in some cases that's off by a factor of 10 to the 13th.
it's a pity the issue is being ignored because as the authors mention, this is probably just coming from industrial contamination in the process and if they merely took it seriously and examined the production lines they could probably fix this problem.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
Every paper that assesses the safety of one vaccine in human subjects, and virtually every epidemiological paper I've found that the authorities cite on safety, compares patients who got vaccine A and dozens of other vaccines to patients who may not have gotten vaccine A, but got dozens of other vaccines. Such a paper manifestly won't find statistically significant evidence of damage unless vaccine A causes damage by itself greater than or comparable to the damage caused by the entire rest of the vaccine series. The Few Exceptions to this are Rebutted Elsewhere on this Topic for Various Other Reasons. The Statements This Statement is Challenging Involve Studies Particularly Effected.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114674/?fbclid=IwAR3HwOEOak0iO0r1iuvdct5s73Z7t9geCPVTPBemzVJsV4PwmoiECTUuoJo
If you read it you will find that it discusses no studies indicating the vaccine series is safe and in fact argues there aren't any. If you search the document on "alum" or "contaminants" you don't find either term. No animal studies are considered.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK206948/
The study compared homeschooled children that were vaccinated to unvaccinated homeschooled children, the idea being that since all the children were homeschooled they might be less likely to differ systematically in other variables. The vaccinated kids were found to have vastly more chronic conditions including 30 times as much hayfever (a higher Association with vaccination than between lung cancer and smoking) 22 times as much allergy medication, and 4.3 times as much autism spectrum disorder.
https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php
https://info.cmsri.org/the-driven-researcher-blog/vaccinated-vs.-unvaccinated-guess-who-is-sicker
evidence of harm does not address the issue of the quantification of "safe" and more importantly how the potential harm compares to measurable benefits (to individuals and to society) of specific vaccinations.
As detailed here: https://vaccinepapers.org/debunking-aluminum-adjuvant-part-2/ Mitkus et make numerous other errors. For one thing they completely ignore particulate aluminum which seems to be the most dangerous kind of adjuvant aluminum. Injected adjuvants form nanoparticles and microparticles of aluminum bound up with antigens which escapes removal from the bloodstream and winds up in the brain. For another thing the single animal study of dietary aluminum they rely on ignores other animal studies of dietary aluminum finding much higher toxicity at lower levels. these studies reviewed here: http://vaccinepapers.org/the-foundation-for-al-adjuvant-safety-is-false/ include three studies that showed toxicity at much lower levels which were published before mitkus et Al was even published, so their ignorance of these was either extremely ill-informed or unethical.
The question of weighing benefits and damage is not relevant directly to the truth and provability of the topic statement, But is addressed in a different topic: http://truthsift.com/search_view?topic=The+Evidence+Is+Weak+That+Vaccines+Have+Saved+More+Lives+than+They+Have+Cost++&id=520
the definition of safety as.debated here Is detailed in the topic statement body.
https://www.momsacrossamerica.com/glyphosate_in_childhood_vaccines
Perinatal immune activation produces persistent sleep alterations and epileptiform activity in male mice
https://www.nature.com/articles/npp2017243#abstract
Report argues that the conditions seen are similar to comorbidities observed in ASD in humans.
A Clinical study in Singapore reported that 63% of adults age 21 to 50 getting the vaccine in a controlled experiment reported adverse events, and that was after excluding two thirds of their volunteers for risk factors which might have increased their likelihood of adverse events. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841882/
The vaccine is known to have adverse events including complete systemic failure, death, and psychosis although since reporting is purely voluntary and rare it's hard to get data on just how common serious effects are. However the evidence indicates they're not so rare. https://www.infowars.com/cdc-yellow-fever-vaccine-has-serious-sometimes-fatal-side-effects/
A 2017 study shows that onset of various neurological problems such as anorexia nervosa, chronic disorder, ADHD, and OCD are correlated with receipt of vaccines in the last three months. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00003/full
The studies commonly cited by authorities to claim vaccines are safe compare individuals who got one particular vaccine and dozens of others to those who got dozens of others. Such a study wouldn't show statistically significant damage unless the particular vaccine causes at least damage comparable by itself to the damage caused by all the other vaccines. But peer reviewed animal studies indicate that any vaccine causes damage if it occurs at the wrong time, and indicate that repeated vaccines cause autoimmune problems, and indicate the total aluminum load is a problem, and indicate that many vaccines may suffer from damaging contaminants. So there is considerable reason to suspect every one of them simultaneously.
Every study that follows for example some ingredient like thimerisol, compares a high thimerisol group to a low thimerisol group that got less vaccines. But parents almost always vaccinate until they see or believe they see vaccine damage in their kid, when they are likely to quit. Whether they are correct or not, this preferentially puts sick kids in the low group. This completely ithese studies.
As a result of this confounding, numerous studies have reported a statistically significant protective effect of thimerisol against autism.
[28] Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association, Nick Andrews; Elizabeth Miller; Andrew Grant et al, Pediatrics September 2004, VOLUME 114 / ISSUE 3 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584.full-text.pdf
[29] Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism, Cristofer S. Price, William W. Thompson, Barbara Goodson,et al, Pediatrics October 2010, VOLUME 126 / ISSUE 4 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/4/656
[30] Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism, Anjali Jain; Jaclyn Marshall; Ami Buikema; et al. JAMA. 2015;313(15):1534–1540. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3077. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444
1. A placebo is supposed to be an inert substance that looks just like the drug being tested. But in the Gardasil clinical trials, Merck used a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant called AAHS instead of using an inert saline placebo.
2. Among girls and women who received the vaccine and among girls and women who received AAHS, an astonishing 2.3% in both groups experienced conditions indicative of "systemic autoimmune disorders," many shortly after receiving Gardasil.
14. Annual deaths from cervical cancer in the U.S. are 2.3/100,000. The death rate in the Gardasil clinical trials was 85/100,000--or 37 times that of cervical cancer.
16. According to Gardasil's package insert, women are 100 times more likely to suffer a severe event following vaccination with Gardasil than they are to get cervical cancer.
17. The chances of getting an autoimmune disease from Gardasil, even if the vaccine works, are 1,000 times greater than the chances of being saved from a cervical cancer death.
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/25-reasons-avoid-gardasil-vaccine?fbclid=IwAR1YkuqYS252jzA6q94sF7KeFLVLywhC5AuRQoTEmv-E8344UMbcCYDN0_Y
(Links to sources for each claim in that article. )
23.12.18, Revised: 23.01.19, Accepted: 23.02.19
ABSTRACT
Vaccines contain numerous animal and plant proteins (soy, peanut, sesame, maize, wheat, etc.). Vaccine excipients are
derived from plant or animal sources. The mechanism of animal protein induced autoimmunity was previously described.
Following a report associating maternal gluten intake to type 1 diabetes in the offspring, plant proteins were investigated.
The Pandemrix vaccine induced narcolepsy due to molecular mimicry between a H1N1 nucleoprotein peptide in the
vaccine and the human hypocretin receptor 2. The BLASTP match score for this peptide was used as a baseline. BLASTP
showed strong sequence alignment between gliadin, a wheat protein, and the human ionotropic N-methyl-D-aspartate
receptor (NMDAR). Analyzing further, strong sequence alignment was found between soy, peanut, sesame, maize, wheat
and human glutamate receptors (GR), both ionotropic and metabotropic. There are reports of boosted wheat allergy and
de novo synthesis of NMDAR antibodies following immunization. Once immunized with plant derived antigens, antibody
levels will be increased by dietary exposure to these antigens. GR are expressed in the brain, heart, pancreas and the T
cells of the immune system. Vaccine induced GR antibodies (GRA) disrupt or destroy GR thus precipitating numerous
disorders. This explains the epidemic of food intolerances and food associated immune mediated disorders.Intestinal
barrier disruption has been proposed as a cause for food associated autoimmune disorders. However, intestinal barrier
disruption may itself be the result of GRA. GRA also disrupt the blood-brain barrier. This allows other anti-brain
antibodies access to their targets. Vaccine-induced GRA can therefore explain a wide variety of disorders including autism,
type 1 diabetes, attention deficit hyperactivity, epilepsy, schizophrenia, autoimmune encephalitis, Huntington’s, Parkinson’s,
dementia, cancer and allergies.The ultimate solution is to immediately remove all non-target proteins from all vaccines.
https://zenodo.org/record/2636969#.XQuDzafMxgc
In a society where parents almost universally believe vaccines are good for their kids, giving more vaccines or more on-time vaccines is a strong proxy for parental performance. It selects richer, more able, more intelligent, more interested parents. it is a real world test of IQ and parenting ability. This is a bias in many studies.
The scientific evidence establishes with a high degree of confidence that vaccines cause serious health problems in less than 1% of recipients, and also don't cause less serious problems in a high fraction of the population.
In serious health problems, we include SIDS (death), ASD, auto-immune disorders, cancer, life threatening allergies, narcolepsy, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. To claim that vaccines are safe it seems a minimal prerequisite should be that it be established they don't do such serious harm to a significant fraction of the population. Perhaps other conditions should be added, and it would be nice to insist on less than 1/1000 individuals suffering such catastrophic loss, adding together the numbers that acquire any of these serious conditions from vaccines.
In less serious health problems we may include such things as lesser IQ loss. We stipulate that if vaccines are causing an average IQ loss in the population of say 5 points, that would be quite serious to the future of the world. Maybe an average loss of 1 IQ point would be acceptable, but it would be nice to rule out more substantial average loss. We also include such things as Epilepsy, Migraines, Skoliosis, Diabetes Miletus, Asthma/Chronic Bronchitis, Hypothyroid, or a weakening of the immune system leading to substantially greater susceptibility to illnesses such as flu or respiratory illnesses. For example, it would be nice to rule out the possibility that receiving the vaccine series causes a child to have on average twice as many respiratory illnesses as an unvaccinated child would. If parents believed vaccines are causing one or more of these various problems in more than 5% of the population, many parents may reasonably reconsider their decision on whether or when to vaccinate their children, or which vaccines to give them, and physicians and pharmaceutical companies may redouble efforts to make safer vaccines. So we ask whether it may be established as well that this isn't happening.
And also, to establish safety, it would be reasonable to ask that it is established that less debilitating but annoying problems be ruled out as being caused in a high fraction of the population, such as perhaps 25%. This may include Hayfever, Otitus Media, Herpes, Neurodermatitis, Sinusitis, Allergies, Hyperactivity. To say that vaccines are safe, it would be reasonable to demand that the evidence taken as a whole gives a reasonable observer perhaps at least a 90% confidence that none of these three problems is happening.
In addition it might be noted that vaccines exist as a reaction to various catastrophic illness and that considerations of their safety should be weighed alongside the risk associated with these ilnesses and the extent to which vaccines are successful in protecting against this risk. Another diagram has been added discussing this subject http://truthsift-env.qh5iy45he4.us-east-2.elasticbeanstalk.com/search_view?topic=The-Evidence-Is-Weak-That-Vaccines-Have-Saved-More-Lives-than-They-Have-Cost--&id=520 .
The studies commonly cited by authorities to claim vaccines are safe compare individuals who got one particular vaccine and dozens of others to those who got dozens of others. Such a study wouldn't show statistically significant damage unless the particular vaccine causes at least damage comparable by itself to the damage caused by all the other vaccines. But peer reviewed animal studies indicate that any vaccine causes damage if it occurs at the wrong time, and indicate that repeated vaccines cause autoimmune problems, and indicate the total aluminum load is a problem, and indicate that many vaccines may suffer from damaging contaminants. So there is considerable reason to suspect every one of them simultaneously.
All the epidemiological studies that compare individuals who got more vaccines to individuals who got less, either indicate that more is worse, or have gross methodological problems that invalidate them.
2
5
REPLY
EDIT
DELETE
27
2
