Steve Kirsch has written a detailed piece about child autism:
In over 50% of parents who noticed a rapid regression in their child’s development, vaccination within 2 days was a common factor.
But this is the type of study that no mainstream autism researcher has ever done and the autism support groups will never fund. These organizations are all united in their belief that vaccines don’t cause autism. They will never fund the research that will show they were wrong.
Our grandson is Autistic. His mother says that membership in any/all of the support groups is contingent upon parents acknowledging that there can be no discussion of childhood vaccines as a cause of autism.
Is there one, just one, professional association, union, advocacy group, etc in this whimpering, grovelling country that hasn’t alllowed itself to be completely compromised?
Here is a conundrum for you. Our eldest is high functioning autistic. We remember the day of the abrupt change was the the day of the shot. She now works as a social coordinator for an autistic charity in a large city. She will not hear of or discuss any connection with sacrosanct vaccines. We, they unwashed, are not scientists.
She also got whooping cough from the DPT vaccine. Damn cough lasted for weeks. GP would not admit it. My wife and I both recognized it as whooping cough, having both had it years earlier.
I’m waiting for the entertainment of a certain mammal, who will weigh in.
It’s not a bad rule. In the past, they probably had people derailing the group from its actual purpose — which is presumably helping to deal with autism rather than investigating the causes of autism — with their theories.
If someone wants to make the case that vaccines cause autism, they’re free to do so outside of such groups.
All vaccines are poisonous. Vaccines are the ultimate in quackery, based on the purposely taught lies regarding viruses by those who rule over us.
The “Spanish Flu”, and the Coronahoax were two entire vaccine-caused scamdemics that murdered millions.
But because controlled state media says otherwise, the sheep bleat dutifully along a la 1984.
No they are not.
The Coronahoax (good phrase) was not a vaccine. I expect Spanish Flu was likewise a medical cock-up. I read one account that suggested it was Aspirin poisoning, although I doubt that was widespread.
Yes they are.
The Coronahoax was just that. They simply renamed the existing seasonal flu, itself caused by flu vaccine shots.
The only real threat was the vaccine “cure” to the non-existent threat.
The Spanish Flu was entirely caused by vaccines. This isn’t even debatable. The US soldiers who were given the vaccine had severe negative reactions to it, including death. And they took it preventatively having not even yet been deployed or sick.
Just like the Coronahoax rollout, those who lived in communities where no one had symptoms were pressured to take the vaccines, and then and only then did symptoms appear.
I would add that SDA had a piece not that far back regarding Darwin and his feelings on vaccines – not a fan.
The inherent logic being that you weaken the herd.
Letting the weak live seems compassionate until it eventually brings about a catastrophic cull.
Huh? Kinda the same reason I’m not a fan of welfare dependency
Autism is an invented disease, originating I believe in the 1970s? It is a disease that has developed into a full spectrum of symptoms, a spectrum that we all exist on. How about stupid parents not willing to accept they have stupid children. Autism has become an industry extracting money from governments for special schooling, etc.
As to vaccines, they are on the whole beneficial, notwithstanding the Covid Blarney Science injection, which was not a vaccine and totally fraudulent.
From Wikipedia (yes, I know):
“Classic autism—also known as childhood autism, autistic disorder, or Kanner’s syndrome—is a formerly diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder first described by Leo Kanner in 1943. It is characterized by atypical and impaired development in social interaction and communication as well as restricted and repetitive behaviors, activities, and interests.”
My son started showing symptoms right after a vaccination (don’t remember, I think it was DPT). Back then, the autism rate was 1 in 2500. Now, it’s about 1 in 38. Vaccines may be, but aren’t guaranteed, to be safe.
My youngest son.., when in elementary school … refused to look anyone in the eye, and literally would not answer any adult when spoken to.
We never tested him for autism …
He was “shy” … and simply didn’t have anything to say to random people. He grew out of it … before he could ever get diagnosed as a new … statistic … in the epidemic of autism.
A silly post, Robert. Silly.
I think Robert meant to say ADHD, not autism.
That one is invented, for sure.
fred
and a silly post from you, most dyslexics have ADD or ADHD, I have ADD!
“Autism is an invented disease, originating I believe in the 1970s?”
Dude. Please. Do you know who you’re talking to here? Does Kate need to do another one of those credential posts where everybody says what their specialty is?
Go look up Dr. Asperger, and then look up Ashkenazim Jews, who have had autism for a very long time. Centuries. They’re known for it.
Also super common in Scotland, and part of the reason red hair on a man is a warning from the Gods. Also possibly why the modern world was invented by the Scots, with some German help around the edges. (Germans like the fiddly, high-precision bits.)
Easy on the red hair.
Every hear the term “ginger snap”?
That vaccines cause autism is one of most debunked hoaxes in recent history. It is harming children by convincing parents not to vaccinate them.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5007135/
Robert, if you want to reintroduce this nonsense, you’d better bring solid evidence.
And this isn’t it. Kirsch tells us nothing we need to know. He doesn’t tell us what “autism speciality practice” this is, what the numbers are (except that they are “small”), nothing useful at all. Basically, we can only take Kirsch’s word for it.
“Robert, if you want to reintroduce this nonsense, you’d better bring solid evidence.”
Nice attitude, mammal. Maybe a little reasoned counter-argument would be more helpful? Possibly you could talk about -why- small numbers are a problem?
If you know why, anyway.
My argument wasn’t over the “small” sample size. I don’t even know what Kirsch means by small, as he provides no numbers. My argument is the fact that there was no evidence or links to evidence provided whatsoever.
As such, a counter argument isn’t needed. The article is just Kirsch making unverifiable claims. It’s worthless.
“no evidence or links to evidence provided whatsoever.”
Because it’s the records of a private clinic. A clinic where the study could be done, but isn’t done because the guy doesn’t want to be kicked out of medicine. And because he probably only has hundreds of cases at most, being one clinic. More likely dozens. You’d need pretty much the whole autism patient population of the USA or Britain to find anything worth talking about, it isn’t that common a thing.
But on the other hand, Mr. Kirsch is making some hefty claims which the clinical findings of one clinic would be insufficient to prove. Show me all the clinics, then I might be inclined to see money getting spent to do it properly.
The point is, no conclusions about vaccines and autism should be drawn from the article, as it’s virtually fact and evidence free. As the article stands, it’s just an unsupported claim. The reasons for that matter little to the person trying to determine if there’s a link between autism and vaccines.
That certain vaccines cause autism is one of most government-attacked realities in recent history. It is harming children by convincing parents to vaccinate them, despite the overwhelming, obvious, and immediate evidence of the damage caused.
“Basically, we can only take Kirsch’s word for it.”
Yeah. Better to wait and hear what Faucci and Tam have to say
Anytime Fauci makes makes a claim, you have every right to say “Show me the evidence.” In fact, you should.
But it goes both ways. You need to demand evidence even for claims you want to be true.
There is no one I know who wants this claim to be true: pharmaceutical companies regularly develop medications with terrible side effects and habitually cover up their criminal negligence with the collusion of government experts.
If that’s the case, anti-vaxx crowd here should be happy when evidence that runs counter to that belief is presented. Instead they often respond with remarkable anger and vitriol.
I wonder if that’s because the evidence is presented by the same sources that have lied, denied, and re-tried so many times in modern history?
The evidence in support of COVID vaccination came from countless health institutions from around the world.
In contrast, the evidence against COVID vaccination was almost all shoddy, and much of it came from the same people (e.g., Peter McCullough).
“The evidence in support of COVID vaccination came from countless health institutions from around the world…
Here, let me finish that sentence for you:
… who accepted assurances from the pharmaceutical companies that the witch-piss was safe and effective.
Let me finish that sentence for you…
…who carried out large-scale randomized controlled studies to assess the safety and effectiveness of the COVID vaccines for themselves.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2105290
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765
This is what many anti-vaxxers don’t seem to get. Much of the evidence for the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines did not come from the pharmaceutical companies, but from independent researchers world wide.
One of the problems with blaming vaccines for autism is that there’s no known -mechanism- that we know causes autism. If you knew the mechanism (and you knew what autism even is in the first place because we don’t know that either) then you might be able to show vaccines were the cause that set the mechanism of disease in motion.
There is also the problem that many people have autism and never got childhood vaccines. Its hereditary. Runs in families. Historically recorded, y’know.
So really what you have here is just more junk-science alarmism, with guys pretending correlation equals causation. Is autism -correlated- with vaccination? Maybe? Could be? But not strongly correlated, or it would be obvious and nobody would wonder. If you look at the study design it will seem familiar,
The old example is smoking tobacco. Is tobacco -correlated- with lung cancer? Yes. Is it -strongly- correlated? Eh. Kinda? It’s wishy-washy. You drill down into the research, and you find an awful lot of correlation equals causation and guys trying to make a name for themselves. 80% of it is crap, honestly. And really, cancer is still a black box overall.
Does smoking tobacco CAUSE lung cancer? We don’t know that, because we don’t know what makes lung cancer happen. There’s no known mechanism yet.
But does smoking cause heart disease? YES! Yes it does, and the mechanisms are well understood.
So this autism thing is like lung cancer studies, but worse. You’ve got a sudden onset behavioral condition that you can describe, but you don’t have any understanding of what makes the patient behave that way. You’ve got a suspicion that -maybe- the sudden onset is CORRELATED (close in time to) a medical intervention, childhood vaccination. But you don’t have a large sample of patients because it’s a comparatively rare condition.
Then there are accusations of conspiracy leveled by people who want the study to be done, which pre-Covid I would have dismissed but post-Covid I’m quite inclined to believe. Politics, y’know.
On the bright side, this will be cleared up when large American insurance companies turn their AIs loose in the medical records looking for patients they can disallow. If there’s a strong-ish correlation between childhood vaccination of any type and expensive-to-treat autism behavioral disorders, they will find it. And LEAK it to the press, probably blaming #Trump
They’re not likely to find one. The question has been researched to death, and there’s no correlation to be found. Here’s a meta-analysis of 164 (!) controlled and cohort studies:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264410X14006367?via%3Dihub
“They’re not likely to find one.”
I’m a strong believer in going looking for trouble, myself. An LLM-based search of the massed medical records of the entire population would be a powerful tool for putting a lot of these anecdotal theories down once and for all, or alternatively show that there’s something worth pursuing there. There’s a big difference between a sample and -everyone-.
I also look forward to all the “Scientism” shenanigans and political back-scratching a search like that would turn up. There’s a lot of bad behavior covered up by sheer obscurity in charts. The nurses write it all down, but because it’s in a chart as thick as the New York City phone book, it’ll never see the light of day. Until, at last, the All-Seeing Eye gazes upon it.
The thought of all those smug faces crumbling into tears because they got caught, it fills me with joy.
If someone did carry out such a search, and if it concluded that many fringe beliefs are without foundation, it would have no affect whatsoever on their adherents. They didn’t reason their way into their beliefs and they’re not going to be reasoned out of them.
And in this particular case, I wouldn’t blame them. LLMs are powerful but they are not all powerful, and their black-box aspect does not engender confidence. “An LLM said so” is not an argument.
“…it would have no affect whatsoever on their adherents.”
A bold claim, sir. Dare I say “if you want to reintroduce this nonsense, you’d better bring solid evidence”? It seems I dared.
“An LLM said so” is not an argument.”
Mere correlation is never an argument. If the correlation is drawn by an LLM that doesn’t make it more (or less) an argument than if it is drawn from anecdote. A correlation is where you begin forming a hypothesis, and a method for disproving it. If you can’t disprove it, then you -might- have something worth talking about.
Case in point, today a British MP, their minister of health, admitted on TV that the tranny scam is a scam, a man can’t be a woman, trans-women are men, and etc. An entire social/medical movement that never had anything to do with science or evidence, never anything worth talking about there, and it didn’t matter because it was popular in the journals and all the right people were pushing it. Now being pitched under the bus, not a tear will be shed.
There’s a LOT of those out there these days, and I’ll applaud every time another bites the dust. May the mighty LLMs speed the day.
From my perspective the problem is a simple one. Austism is not one things. It is a cluster of symptoms with many potential causes. And since the powers that be have decided to amalgamate all of them, including Aspberger’s, as if it’s all one disease with one cause it can’t be properly studied. Aspies can do very well in the right supportive environment and lumping them in as autistic really messes up the picture. The Aspie collective is running around proclaiming there is nothing wrong with them, they’re just different. They are right, but it does nothing to help a struggling parent with a nonverbal level 3 autistic child. For some it’s genetic. For some it’s the vaccines. (Too many reports of regression after the vaccines to dismiss.) For some it is a genetic predisposition that can be triggered by specific circumstances like possibly a reaction to a vaccine AND Tylenol but not always. It’s a multifactorial condition with high variance in presentation. Those are the absolute hardest conditions to understand and to treat properly. A parallel is asthma. There are at least six distinct types of asthma. And the biased blind idiots in charge of Public Death (corrupted by Big Pharma) do what they always do with both asthma and autism. They lump all the members of the disparate group together, do a statistical analysis and then say “Nothing to see here folks” or “This Big Pharma treatment fixes one portion so it should fix everyone, problem solved!” because the signal group gets drowned out of the data by all the other types. Try being an asthmatic who doesn’t respond to inhaled steroids. You arrive wheezing, in crisis, and the steroids don’t work. They make you worse. The ER doctor immediately accuses you of not taking your puffers properly because Big Pharma has declared inhaled steroid the treatment for all asthmatics, and the ER doctor refuses to give you zithro which you know works. Instead they give you a lecture about preventing antibiotic resistance, how to use your puffers properly, and a prescription for even stronger puffers. When you tell them it’s not working they classify as a difficult patient who won’t follow advice. I know this from personal experience. I am both a high functioning Asperger’s (and I do not care if saying that is ableist and politically incorrect) and a steroid resistant asthmatic.
It’s only Aspergers if it actually comes from the Asperger region of Germany. Otherwise it’s sparkling assholery.