Vaccine Follow up

Well friends, I really appreciate your thought-provoking comments and questions. Thank you for sharing. Thank you for being kind, even when your views differed from mine. Those thoughts and comments and questions have pushed me to research further. It's been interesting to say the least.

Before I get in to some of the things I learned/found, let me tell you the main theme that I've discovered here:

TALKING ABOUT VACCINES IS SIMILAR TO TALKING ABOUT RELIGION. THOSE WHO FEEL THE STRONGEST ABOUT IT ARE THE ONES WHO WILL NEVER BUDGE. These two sides will, in effect, "bible bash" with each other, determined to prove themselves right-- each side backing themselves up with pages of scientific research and studies.

So both sides claim that the "other" studies are false and manipulated. Both sides claim that the other is lying. Unfortunately, there is no "Book of Mormon" to clear up the matter- in this case, it is simply a matter of each person/parent deciding who they believe the most- and then to follow their recommendations.

So---as you probably can probably tell, I have chosen to believe in the studies that I cited in my previous post. And I will continue to share a few more in this one, although I recognize that they will not change some of your minds. And that's okay. I mostly share them for the people who didn't know this kind of research even existed-- who didn't know that even though the media is telling you that "there is no proof that vaccines cause autism", there is actually a lot of proof that vaccines do DAMAGE.

We should also clarify the difference between "causation" and "correlation." You need to recognize that we know that there is not yet undeniable proof that vaccines CAUSE ANYTHING. Because as you and I both know, many people seem to be vaccinated without ANY side effects that we are aware of. Therefore, I believe that we will most likely never see a statement that vaccines CAUSE certain things, because you need a very high percentage of reactions (more reactions than non-reactions) to make that claim. An good example of causation is ACCUTANE. If you go on the acne medication called Accutane (which I did in college...it worked like a charm...) then you had to be on TWO forms of birth control (or if you live in Utah, the doctors will take your word that abstinence is your form of BC), but anyway, they knew that Accutane DEFINITELY CAUSES birth defects, if you are pregnant. They were very careful about making me take pregnancy tests before letting me start taking it, and I was CONSTANTLY warned about birth defects. The difference here is that Accutane is optional, whereas these days, vaccines are (practically) not.

Now- there are thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands or parents out there, who will emphatically say, THIS VACCINE HARMED MY CHILD, THIS VACCINE CAUSED BRAIN DAMAGE TO MY CHILD...etc. They can't prove anything- it is their opinion, and their word against anyone else's. Now, as a mother, I can say that I know things about my children that nobody else knows. I know when their behavior is just the tiniest bit "off." I know when they are starting to get sick, I know when Ella has the tiniest bit of tummy distress. You, as a mother, can agree with me. Mothers especially are very in tune with their children. So I think it is downright ridiculous for people to just disregard the thousands of mothers who say they saw small (or incredibly obvious) regression of their child, after the time of a vaccine. I have only brought up one case, because I know the mother personally- but these stories are out there. I, for one, cannot ignore them. Others can dismiss them, because they believe that it was a very rare instance, and will probably never happen to their child. But these stories are becoming more and more common, and soon I don't think people will be able to ignore them anymore. Along with all these stories of vaccines hurting children, we have also heard stories where unvaccinated children have gotten deathly ill, or even died from the disease. And so I guess what it really comes down to is this: You are taking a risk either way. You might believe that your child is more in danger of getting the disease, then having a reaction to a vaccine. Again, that is your choice and nobody should give you a hard time for it.

It is a gamble either way. You roll the dice- either take a chance that the vaccines will harm you, or a chance that the diseases will kill you.

We have decided to take the risk of our children getting the diseases. After looking at the statistics on mortality rates, I realized that while some of these diseases are serious, it is only a very, very small number of people who end up dying from them. And the one who contracts them, and then recovers from them, emerges with a VERY strong immune system, and lifelong protection from ever contracting it again. A mother who has had measles (and developed immunity to it) even passes on that antibody to her future children (for the first year of their life). So I don't fear the disease, in fact, I don't like the scare tactics they use to try to get people to believe that their child is as good as dead if they contract measles or polio. It's just not true. I believe that my child has a statistically higher chance of vaccine damage than they do of death or permanent damage as a result of measles, polio, small pox, hepatitis, pertussis, etc. etc.

I know the risk I am taking, and this is the one I feel better about.

NOW- having said all that, let's talk about some of the great points you guys brought up. (Thank you for bringing some of these things up, I have never even thought about some of these things, to be honest.) So I will share some of my thoughts and answers.

#1: How do you find a doctor who will support you if you want to do an alternative vaccine schedule? I learned this lesson the hard way. Right after we moved here, I got a referral from a friend, she just mentioned that she LOVED her pediatrician! He was nearby, so I took Annie there for a 12 month check-up, then I informed the doctor that we would not be getting shots. To make a long story short, he RIPPED into me, told me every scary story he could think of about unvaccinated kids, made me feel like the WORST mother alive for putting Annie at risk of that, and I left his office crying, and I NEVER WENT back to him. It was a horrible experience. He was soooooo rude to me. So then I got serious, and I used google, searching through mommy-type forums of people near my community. (Other ways are to call pediatricians one by one, and ask the front desk if the doctor allows alternative schedules. Or you can try to find out if people in your neighborhood or ward are pro/or anti-vax, and get referrals from other mother's who prefer the alternative schedule, or no-schedule for that matter. My experience was very unique. I found a forum of some mom's who were discussing the topic, took one of the doctors suggested and found our my insurance covered her. A few weeks later I was trying to recall her name so I could make an appointment. The name in my head was a Dr. Pearl Browne. I called her up and made an appointment, and have been with her ever since. The FUNNY thing is that was not even CLOSE to the name that was suggested on the forum, and I totally ended up at this doctor by coincidence. She is a lovely, African American doctor from Africa, with a heavy accent and a mostly shaved head. And at the first appointment, she told me that while she doesn't agree with my choice, she absolutely believes in a mother's right to make health decisions for her children. And she never once mentioned a word about it again. Her nurses always bring me in an exemption form to sign. And now I am really excited because she just added the new doctor who rather than being neutral, actually showed some support for my decision.

#2 Do you still take your girls to well check-ups? Yes- I do regularly, I like to know if they are growing properly and I also like to have the labwork done to screen for lead and such. My kids just never get shots, and we always sign the form mentioned above.

#3 What about the possibility of plastic and other toxic material being tied closely to Autism? Great point. I haven't read that book, or looked into that aspect, but but I am going to now! Sounds very interesting Like I mentioned earlier, we really can't talk about anything CAUSING it, but I think that those types of things could definitely CONTRIBUTE to it happening. It might be things like chemicals in cleaning supplies, maybe while a mother is pregnant, or the toxins in plastic leeching through to the baby. I think it makes a lot of sense that a lot of the problems we are seeing these days (not just Autism, but the increase of other things like ADHD, cancer, and infertility, etc) could be related to a BUILD UP of all kinds of toxic things (+ plus the simple genetic factor that seems to be passed on) and then once you hit the point of TOO MUCH, the brain just hits the point of damage, and sometimes can't recover from it. I think that the toxins in vaccines are just pushing our little babies brains to the point of TOO MUCH...really soon...really young. Especially when we, as pregnant mothers, accidentally expose our fetus' to things, without any idea that we're doing it. I don't know...there is so many things that could be causing the problems of today...but in general, it seems like the healthier we live, the more natural...the less processed/chemical...the better. But, as I mentioned before- the stories of parents seeing their children damaged at some point following a vaccine-- it just seems silly to keep calling it a coincidence.

#4 What about the LDS Church's stance on Vaccination? (I am paraphrasing Jamie W. who pointed out that the church donates $$$ to assist international countries with vaccinations, such as measles, and also, to adopt a baby through LDS Social Services, the baby has to be up to date on vaccines.) Another great question! Totally made me stop and think! In addition to those questions, you should also know that in order to serve as a missionary in a foreign country, for the LDS church, you have to get the recommended vaccinations. (**It should also be noted that missionaries are given the option to OPT OUT of these vaccines, as long as they know that they will get a STATE-SIDE mission call, should they not get the vaccines. You should also know that a missionary is supposed to be up-to-date on their vaccines before they even turn in their papers.)

Hmm..where to start. The church, wisely, does not take a stand on controversial issues like this. They seem to leave it up to the individual families as to the personal health decisions they make. By giving missionaries the opportunity to decline any vaccines, they are respecting the agency of the individual. I like that. I think it sends a message that it is okay to choose not to vaccinate. I also think the following:
A- I believe that it is safer to vaccinate an adult than a child, or to vaccinate after the important brain-forming years of infancy.
B- I think there is a much higher risk of catching these diseases in foreign and 3rd world countries than there is in the United States.
C- I know that health care is much better here than any of the 3rd world countries, and that someone who could easily survive measles or polio here in the US, could just as easily die from it when they aren't getting good nutrition, clean water, and helpful medications. In fact, I found this quote:
"A site called Measles Initiative says that (7), "Measles is a leading killer of children in many developing countries for several reasons. Children are already compromised with poor living conditions, they are infected at very young ages when their immune systems are not strong, malnutrition is rampant in many homes, and many families do not have access to medical care to treat measles and its complications. Measles, itself, does not kill children. Instead, complications from measles attack the child's already weak immune system. Measles attacks the body, inside and out. It is similar to HIV in the sense that when it knocks down the immune system, the child becomes susceptible to the myriad of diseases that fester in poor living conditions."
D- I do think that vaccination can do a lot of good. I think they save lives. I think that in some places in the world, it probably is better to take the risk of brain damage and other complications, in order to try to get a population healthier. I think some vaccines do work as they are supposed to. I am not saying they are evil. (otherwise, why would the church be donating millions of dollars to help these countries get the vaccines?), especially in countries with a low standard of living. What I AM saying is that these same populations are not being overloaded with 36 different vaccines in 18 months (with only 8-25 lbs of body weight to assimilate the drug and preservatives.) Those people also are probably not as exposed to the same chemicals and toxins that we are exposed to in our food and water supply. Things are just different here than they are there. I just don't think that the vaccines are effective enough or needed enough, or that they are doing ENOUGH good for me and MY FAMILY, here in the United States of America.

I asked Samuel what he thought about the Missionary Program and LDS Family Services requiring the vaccines. He thought it made sense, because for ANY church or organization to run a missionary or adoption program, they will have to receive approval from government organizations. I haven't looked into it (if someone else has, let me know) but I am fairly certain that they are just following the requirements given them from the whomever it is that they have to answer to. Our missionaries are recognized throughout the world, and the program has to be run perfectly if we are going to keep trying to take the Gospel to every nation of the world, or if we are going to assist thousands of well-deserved parents in adopting a precious child. I am curious with the adoption issue, which I haven't researched- perhaps there is an "opt out" exemption as well? I actually called LDS Family Services, and they gave me the phone number of the man in charge: David McConkie, General Sunday School President. (wow!) He was out of town so I left him a message. (He didn't call me back. Oh well, I guess he had bigger things to worry about.) It was funny because the first person at LDS services, who answered the phone, said that she (personally) agreed with me, that too many vaccines might be harmful, and that she was hopeful that the church would provide some sort of exemption (in the future.) She explained that a newborn baby is placed in a home, and then a worker comes to the home 3 times in the next 6 months or so to follow up and see how it's going. (And at this point, they ask to see the baby's shot record to see if the immunizations are up to date.)

I think that as this issue gets bigger and parents become more aware of it, the church may make provide an opt-out option, if they don't already. But if they don't, and I were trying to adopt a child this way, I would just go ahead and just have my child immunized, and hope for the best. Although I will be honest and say that I know of parents who will fake immunization records. I'm not saying I condone it. I just know it's been done. But let's also remember the 12th article of faith that says, "We believe in ...obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." So that is what I think about the church's position on it. Until the prophet comes out and tells us to vaccinate (or not vaccinate for that matter), then I think it's up to the individual.

#5 Will your kids still be able to go to kindergarten if they don't have their shots?
Yes, as of today (hopefully this won't change), parents have the right to sign exemption forms for their children, and they can still be admitted to school. You can sign a medical exemption form, if you know that your child has a medical allergy to something in the immunizations (for example, did you know that egg preservatives are used in the flu shot? People who are allergic to eggs should never get a flu shot- they are way more likely to have bad reactions to it.) or you can claim religious reasons (which is what I will be doing) BUT YOU CANNOT CLAIM BOTH. I don't know if people will try to take away the freedoms we have to claim a religious exemption, that will be a sad day. That will be day we watch a lot of other freedoms stripped away too.

#6 What about Dr. Andrew Wakefield and his "discredited" study?
I saved this one for last, because there is a TON of info on it. I spent hours looking into it. If you want the shortened version, scroll all the way down to the bottom of this post, and read the "Myths" and the answers, given by Dr. Wakefield himself, in his book, Callous Disregard.
(I know some people won't believe him, but after reading his book and hearing his side of the story, there's no doubt in my mind that he's telling the truth.)

But here's a little more to the story if you weren't aware of the controversy that has surrounded him:

Dr. Wakefield was looking into the possible link of those commonly experienced gut disorders in children under five years old as a precursor to their autism related behavior. That link to MMRs was actually made by the parents of those 12 participating children. They were doing fine until they received MMR vaccinations, and the parents reported this to Dr. Wakefield's team. Dr. Wakefield included the parents' reports in the case study findings.

Including parents' observations in case study reports is highly appropriate. Dr. Wakefield's only conclusion was the measles/gut disorder connection to autistic behavior possibilities merited further study.

#1 He was later accused of making up these children's symptoms (which is ridiculous, since someone had already studied and documented most of the same children, so that didn't hold up)

#2 He was accused of not following the proper "ethical standards" for collecting blood samples from healthy children (he used the children of his friends, and had them sign parental consent forms. Apparently he was supposed to get approval from some ethics board first, which he says he was not aware of at the time. Whether or not that's true, I don't know, but THAT is why they stripped him of his medical license.)

#3 The medical journal that published his study later retracted it because of the utter CHAOS that broke out as a result (the UK saw a huge reduction in people getting the MMR shortly after the media started telling people that he'd found a link to autism- again- this is not what he claimed, but it was enough to scare people.

#4 He was later accused of having a financial interest in the outcome, as the parents in the study were also trying to form a lawsuit.

Well, people, my opinion in a nutshell is this: His study IS ONLY ONE STUDY. TRUE OR FALSE, ONE STUDY DOESN'T MAKE OR BREAK ANYTHING. It's the accumulation of MANY studies that has changed my mind about vaccines, and on top of that, literally THOUSANDS of stories from parents who saw their kids have very serious side effects after vaccines. All that evidence is enough for me to conclude that there is a problem with the current system as it stands today. So-- even if this study was a total fraud, it wouldn't make me want to vaccinate.

I did a lot of research to get past what the media wants to say or believe about Dr. Wakefield and his study. I read parts of his book. I watched a long interview on youtube. And I can say that I am impressed with him as a person, and I believe him, and I trust him. He makes a good point when he urges us to look at what happens to ANY doctor who does a study and gets results that hurt that vaccine industry. In his words, it's just a "witch hunt," and that any doctor who dares put his name on a study like that has probably "been fired, denied research grants, their articles are rejected by the more “prestigious” science journals, and they are no longer invited to speak at national meetings. The atmosphere of fear is pervasive — all generated by the pharmaceutical giants and the media."

It seems that there are powerful people who won't want people hearing about these studies. And that bothers me. If they're trying to hide information from me, well, it just makes them look more guilty.

So first of all, people like to say that. Dr. Wakefield's results cannot be replicated. That's false. Not only have plenty of other studies found similar things, some of them were found BEFORE Wakefield's paper ever came out. Here's a few of those:

According to a Mike Adams article, fourteen months before Dr. Wakefield's paper was published, two other researchers discovered the same problems of gut disorders and autistic behavior in seven children. Their 1996 presentation was called "Entero-colitis and Disintegrative Disorder Following MMR - A Review of the First Seven Cases." Those seven cases became part of the final twelve cases in Dr. Wakefield's 1998 Lancet paper. This and other facts disprove accusations that Wakefield fabricated the twelve reports.

A more recent Wake Forest University study determined that 70 of 82 autistic children they studied had measles virus in their guts. Interestingly, the measles virus strain they discovered was not a wild virus -- it was the same strain used in MMR vaccines.

A Russian born U.K. pediatrician, Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, has not only established the connection of gastrointestinal tract disorders among the very young to autistic and other behavioral problems, she cures them with proper diet and supplementation. She learned how the hard way, by curing her own autistic son.

Dr. McBride coined the acronym GAPS for her book Gut and Psychology Syndrome. She describes the dietary solutions to her explanations of how the gut and the brain are connected. This relationship has been known by traditional Chinese medicine for centuries.

In a recent U.S. lecture, she mentioned that her colleagues were afraid to mention Dr. Wakefield due of the witch-hunt conspired against him earlier. But she acknowledges his research efforts as accurate contributions to her practice.

The U.K. government refuses to compensate cases of encephalitis (brain disease) due to vaccine injury. This could be part of the reason there was such an uproar over his study.

So why was the study discredited, and why was he taken before the GMC (General Medical council) and what "fabrication" did he admit to? Well, go ahead and read the article. It had nothing to do with fabricating the STUDY or whether or not Autism was linked to the MMR; He was being ripped apart for something he said at a meeting with Autistic parents, where he joked around about taking blood sample from children at a birthday party. And as this news article says, it is clear that "Wakefield makes stuff up." So he MUST have fabricated those results that NOBODY can replicate, right? That's a silly argument. In his defense, Wakefield said his work has been "grossly distorted" and that he was the target of "a ruthless, pragmatic attempt to crush any attempt to investigate valid vaccine safety concerns."

The General Medical Council hearings had nothing to do with falsifying evidence, but rather that there was some misappropriation of funds for non-personal gain and that some of the children who underwent programs of investigations (re: Lancet report) for research purposes had not received Ethics Committee approval.

The truth is that the case against the present vaccine schedule is very powerful and built on the findings of some of the most prestigious researchers in the world. The problem is the media and academia are so controlled by the pharmaceutical giants that the general public has no idea that this research even exists.

By destroying reputations and stopping further research, pharmaceutical-controlled vaccine proponents hope to have a national law mandating all people receive every vaccine recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which is under the absolute control of the vaccine manufacturers.

In conclusion:
I found something on a blog that I think sums up the issues perfectly; I hope everyone will at least take the time to read what she wrote, as it's a fair assessment of what's going on these days.

taken from http://outrunning-autism.blogspot.com/2010/07/callous-disregard-book.html

Just yesterday I received my copy of Andrew Wakefield’s Callous Disregard. I stayed up late and woke up early in order to read it as quickly as I could. I succeeded, and I’m so glad I did. I feel great relief knowing more of the details and having some misconceptions cleared up. Even I, who followed the case and the studies fairly closely, was misinformed about some of the details—important ones! I let the media fill in some of the blanks, which turned out to be completely inaccurate. I fear many have done the same, and it would be a shame to let it (the media) be taken at face value. It would be a huge disservice and ingratitude to a man—an unselfish man; a Saint; a hero to medicine, research and our children; a man by the name of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, to not hear what he has to say.

Like many, I have been bombarded with conflicting messages about the MMR, vaccines in general, mercury and autism. I have been frustrated with the media and the doctors I’ve encountered who have been hostile and fully dismissive of any connection to any of the aforementioned in the causation of autism. My own daughter suffers from Asperger’s and Crohn’s disease, though she was never vaccinated. Therefore, I personally don’t have a blame-axe to grind with the vaccine manufacturers, but I do have personal knowledge of how bowel issues affect and intensify my daughter’s behaviors--autistic behaviors--and how these behaviors have improved immensely as I’ve healed her bowel issues. Basic biochemistry can illustrate how the constituents in vaccines can lead to bowel issues, like those which Dr. Wakefield discovered in 12 children.

The beef I have with the vaccine manufacturers (and doctors in general) is the lack of safety studies, lack of informed consent, and lack of education. When questioning doctors on vaccinations and autism, I am quickly told vaccines no longer contain thimerosal and therefore there is no need for concern. When I ask what preservative has replaced thimerosal, I am repeatedly told “I don’t know”. Six different doctors with whom I have spoken didn’t know what preservative replaced thimerosal and/or what its neurological or physical effects might be on a child. It was clear these doctors were also unaware that thimerosal is not the only ingredient or constituent in vaccines that has been implicated as a concern and possible causative factor in autism; it’s but one of many.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield is a doctor who made a discovery, one that would have been much easier to hide -- which is what many doctors in his position might do. If we don’t do everything we can to support these doctors who bravely and ethically dissent from orthodoxy, we are going to be in big trouble. If we don’t at least take the time, regardless of our position on the argument, to hear the position of the other side, we are cowards. We have chosen the path of least resistance, the path of popularity, and the path that has gotten us to where we are today: 1 in 110 children with autism, regulatory agencies corrupted and supported by the very establishments they are to regulate, doctors being trained by the pharmaceutical companies to sell drugs and not health, relying on the drug companies that profit from the administration of drugs to study their safety, and researchers afraid to question anything controversial for fear of being ruined. We have to take a step back and question the logic here…a big step back.

If there is a tragedy second to that of the children who suffer with autism, it is the war that some parents are waging against other parents of children with this disorder for their differing ideologies. It is the refusal to come together, as a united front, to find common ground, respect, and compassion for one another. It is the hateful spewing of insults and dismissing of intelligence and credibility because we seek answers from different sources. Imagine the power we parents would have-- the support, the network, the movement-- if we’d agree to find common ground and work together to do what we all want to do most: to help our children and the children who are yet to come. There is no harm in looking into genetic factors, nor is there harm in greening our vaccines. There is no harm in researching drugs, nor is there harm in looking at biochemical components. Someone should be working on each of these things, it needn’t be opposing forces.

With Dr. Wakefield's permission, excerpts from the book:

Myths:

The Lancet paper was funded by the Legal Aid Board (LAB)

False - Not one penny of LAB money was spent on the Lancet paper. A LAB grant was provided for a separate viral detection study. The latter study, completed in 1999, does disclose the source of funding. The Lancet paper had been submitted for publication before the LAB grant was even available to be spent.

My involvement as a medical expert was kept secret

False - at least 1 year before publication, I informed my senior coauthors, the head of the department, the dean of the medical school, and the CEO of the hospital. This fact was also reported in the national press 15 months prior to publication.

Children were "sourced" by lawyers to sue vaccine manufacturers

False - Children were referred, evaluated, and investigated on the basis of their clinical symptoms alone, following a referral from the child's physician.

Children were litigants

False - at the time of their referral to the Royal Free, the time material to their inclusion in The Lancet paper, none of the children were litigants.

I had an undisclosed conflict of interest

False - The Lancet's disclosure policy at that time was followed to the letter. Documentary evidence confirms that the editorial staff of The Lancet was fully aware that I was working as an expert on MMR litigation well in advance of the paper's publication.

Did not have ethics committee (EC) approval

False - The research element of the paper that required such an approval detailed systematic analysis of children's intestinal biopsies, was covered by the necessary EC approval.

I "fixed" data and misreported clinical findings

False - There is absolutely no basis in fact for this claim and it has been exposed as false.

Findings have not been independently replicated

False - The key findings of lymphoid nodular hyperplasia (LNH) and colitis in ASD children have been independently confirmed in five different countries.

Has been retracted by most of the authors

False - 11 of 13 authors issued a retraction of the interpretation that MMR is a possible trigger for syndrome described. This remains a possibility and a possibility cannot be retracted.

The work is discredited

False - Those attempting to discredit the work have relied on the myths above. The findings described in the paper are novel and important.

OKAY FRIENDS! That's all for now! Looking forward to any more questions or comments. Thanks again to everyone who was kind in their comments, or kind enough to not leave one, if they wanted to really tell me off. I hope this helps.