Some of the Vaccines commonly used for Children, cause Autismin Children a recent Study reports.
Vaccines (Photo credit: www78)
If people know some basic details of Vaccine they would know that these dangers are always inherent.
Apart from the process of making Vaccine, there is guarantee that the Vaccine would prevent the disease, not withstanding the tall claims.
A vaccine is a biological preparation that improves immunity to a particular disease. A vaccine typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism, and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins. The agent stimulates the body’s immune system to recognize the agent as foreign, destroy it, and “remember” it, so that the immune system can more easily recognize and destroy any of these microorganisms that it later encounters.
“Vaccines can be prophylactic (example: to prevent or ameliorate the effects of a future infection by any natural or “wild” pathogen), or therapeutic (e.g. vaccines against cancer are also being investigated; see cancer vaccine“).
(NaturalNews) If vaccines play absolutely no role in the development of childhood autism, a claim made by many medical authorities today, then why are some of the most popular vaccines commonly administered to children demonstrably causing autism in animal primates? This is the question many people are now asking after a recent study conducted by scientists at theUniversity of Pittsburgh(UP) in Pennsylvania revealed that many of the infant monkeys given standard doses of childhood vaccines as part of the new research developed autism symptoms.
For their analysis, Laura Hewitson and her colleagues at UP conducted the type of proper safety research on typical childhood vaccination schedules that the U.S.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) should have conducted — but never has — for such regimens. And what this brave team discovered was groundbreaking, as it completely deconstructs the mainstream myth that vaccines are safe and pose no risk of autism.
Presented at theInternational Meeting for Autism Research(IMFAR) in London, England, the findings revealed that young macaque monkeys given the typical CDC-recommended vaccination schedule from the 1990s, and in appropriate doses for the monkeys’ sizes and ages, tended to develop autism symptoms. Their unvaccinated counterparts, on the other hand, developed no such symptoms, which points to a strong connection between vaccines and autism spectrum disorders.
Included in the mix were several vaccines containing the toxic additive Thimerosal, a mercury-based compound that has been phased out of some vaccines, but is still present in batch-size influenza vaccines and a few others. Also administered was the controversial measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which has been linked time and time again to causing autism and various other serious, and often irreversible, health problems in children (http://www.greenhealthwatch.com)
“This research underscores the critical need for more investigation into immunizations, mercury, and the alterations seen in autistic children,” said Lyn Redwood, director ofSafeMinds, a public safety group working to expose the truth about vaccines and autism. “SafeMinds calls for large scale, unbiased studies that look at autism medical conditions and the effects of vaccines given as a regimen.”
Vaccine oversight needs to be taken from CDC and given to independent agency, says vaccine safety advocate
Adding to the sentiment, Theresa Wrangham, president ofSafeMindscalled out the CDC for failing to require proper safety studies of its recommended vaccination schedules. Unlike all other drugs, which must at least undergo a basic round of safety testing prior to approval and recommendation, vaccinations and vaccine schedules in particular do not have to be proven safe or effective before hitting the market.
“The full implications of this primate study await publication of the research in a scientific journal,” said Wrangham. “But we can say that it demonstrates how the CDC evaded their responsibility to investigate vaccine safety questions. Vaccine safety oversight should be removed from the CDC and given to an independent agency.”
Be sure to read this thorough analysis of the study by Catherine J. Frompovich ofVacTruth.com:
Other Links for Reference:
Research or propaganda?
A recent study  which found no evidence of a link between MMR and autism was widely trumpeted by the media. It compared 1,294 children diagnosed with autism or other pervasive development disorders (PDDs) between 1987 and 2001 in England and Wales with 4,469 children of the same sex and similar age who were registered with the same general practices but did not have a recorded diagnosis of autism. Around 80% of both the autism and non-autism groups had received an MMR jab.
The validity of this MMR vaccination study has been challenged. It was based on the UK General Practitioner Research Database (diagnostic reports from GPs), whose validity as a basis for epidemiological research has been widely criticised. It stands accused in particular of massively under-reporting diseases like autism. These are often diagnosed by educational specialists rather than GPs so, inevitably, are not included in the GP database.
None of these studies differentiated between autism in general and the ‘regressive autism’ highlighted by Dr Wakefield and others, where a child whose neurological development appears to be normal starts to regress (about 10% of autism cases). Several questions need to be answered:
- Why are researchers not differentiating between autism in general autism and ‘regressive autism’?
- The 2002 Danish study researchers must have known that the Danish Health Service only diagnosed autism at five years old plus. Why did they limit their study to children under five?
- Why has the UK and US media given the Danish study re-run so little coverage?
and going back in MMR history …
- Why was the 1992 mass MMR programme in the UK followed a year later by a sudden rise in autism levels?
- Why were further mass MMR campaigns in late 1994 and in 1996 both followed by sudden and steep rises in autism figures a year later?
Can there any longer be doubt that the medical establishment wants to obscure any possible link between ‘regressive autism’ and the MMR jab?