Published on 12, July, 2020
I don't think I've perused this site in a long time......maybe 5 or 6 years.
I watched Louis Theroux's excellent documentary last week (aired in UK on 19/4/2012) and thought there would have been at least one discussion at this site. Unless I've missed it, here's one to get the ball rolling.
These are my thoughts on the current situation. I haven't put any links to my theories but if anyone wants them I'll list them separately.My son was diagnosed ten years ago with high-functioning autism. Concerns were raised at his 3.5 year assessment as he wasn't speaking. After 6 months of tests, the CDC (Child Development Centre) made their diagnosis. My wife cried on the sofa while I hugged her. I can remember all the 'milestone' dates as if it was yesterday.Tom did vocalise from the beginning and started to talk around 9 months. By 12 months he had a few words. After his MMR (15 months) he lost those words. He didn't have much shared non-vocal communication either (ie. staring at a cup or a toy that he wanted). It was something we watched for like a hawk in his sister when she came along 4 years later.Of course, when we underwent an 'Early Bird Training Programme' for parents of newly diagnosed children after his diagnosis, the child psychologist informed us that it was a coincidence that his words should disappear around the same time as the MMR jab. To be honest in those days, I didn't think it was the jab that caused his autism as he didn't have any massive side-effects. Not like some of the parents we met on that course. Over the eight weeks it took place, we swopped stories and some of the parents noticed immediately after the jab a change in their children. Their stories of incessant crying and fits in some cases were heart-breaking even if, from a medical standpoint, they were only anecdotal. I've always wanted to go back and ask the child psychologist where she found the information that says 'autism' begins to show between fifteen and eighteen months of age. Over the years of study, I've never come across a piece of research that covers this. It's only with hindsight now, that it seems a pretty convenient way of covering up any damage that might occur through a much increased vaccination program that we now have.So there it is. My research over the last ten years has brought me to the indisputable conclusion that the increased rates of autism are down to ONE significant cause, with a myriad of possible results.That cause is of course the vaccination schedule.The myriad of possible results I stated above, is because although vaccinations are the trigger for setting the autistic brain in development, I don't think they are acting alone. I think the damage is further fuelled by the food intake of the children and their individual DNA make-up. I actually think the idea that 'autism' has a possible 'genetic' make-up (the inheritence theory), is probably only a small risk factor compared to the massive risk that vaccinations pose.My silver bullet for making such a bold statement lies in a very, very, simple fact. Take any un-vaccinated population around the world (the Amish community in the USA is a good example). The rate of autism is between 1 in 10,000 - 15,000). The reason why the rate is difficult to assess more accurately, is because the incident rate is so small and because there are not many places left where the actions of Big Pharma have not been steamrollered through (cue the image of Ewan McGregor trekking through the backs of beyond in India and Nepal last Sunday evening to deliver vaccines to a remote village. I do hope he goes back with a film crew when the first cases of 'autism' are reported in the future). Compare that rate to the New Jersey rate which I was absolutely shocked to read as being 1 in 29.You also have to do your homework where vaccinations are concerned. I am in no doubt we will look back on this period of medical history and consider the actions of some people in authority with the same feelings we have towards the clinicians who experimented on patients with mental health problems in the sixties and seventies. When I ask most people 'how many children do you think died of measles in the UK in the year preceding the introduction of the vaccine?' Most answer in the thousands. They are shocked when I say '30'. And out of those we don't know how many had such 'underlying health problems' (as the BBC News is always keen to point out) that they would have unfortunately died of something else anyway. That isn't to say that measles is a simple disease with no risks. Of course in serious cases, encephalitis can cause serious problems. But we've come a long way since the Second World War and cases of measles and their complications were dropping year on year. Mumps never killed anyone and the same for Rubella. If it sounds as if I think the MMR jab is the sole cause of autism, I don't. I think it's the combination of everything. The thimerosal (mercury) preservative in the vaccine, the use of animal tissue and other genetically modified material, make vaccines potentially fatal. You never hear about the risks, but search around and you'll find cases of death, paralysis and other debilitating disorders because of vaccines.You may ask, 'if vaccines are the cause, then why don't they affect everybody?' I think in part, they probably do. If you correlate the rises in asthma, eczema, hay-fever, mouth-ulcers and a whole host of other non-life threatening disorders (actually asthma is life-threatening) between vaccinated and un-vaccinated populations the evidence is once again there to be found. You have to disregard almost 95% of medical research because it often is funded by pharmaceutical companies for the sole purpose of demonstrating the 'safety' of their products. Any negative findings are routinely hidden from the rearch data, thus making the results meaningless.What I found quite shocking in Louis' film was the visual evidence of what I'd been reading about over the years. The rate of obesity in the States is currently running at 37% of adults and 1 in 2 of every child. The figures are mind-blowing. The States also has been Monsanto's GM playground and coupled with a massive lack of nutritional value to the food results in what I perceived on my TV yesterday. When the young man was collected from the hostel to spend the day with his mum, I was shocked to see him tucking into the fast food. His actions looked entirely like an addict trying to get a fix. I don't mean this in an offensive way, but if the 'fuel' of autism is the action of a diet upon a damaged body, as many clinicians working in the field suspect, then we need to fix these addictions.I realise my views are probably very controversial, but if anyone is feeling pangs of guilt from subjecting their children to the vaccination schedule, I would advise them to let it go. We can only do what we think is for the best, and I'm in no doubt that we all acted in what we thought was the best interests of our children. I actually think the term 'autistic' is becoming redundant now for the simple reason that I've met too wide a 'spectrum' of children and adults who are termed 'autistic' for it to be meaningful. I think of my child's 'autism' now, as a result of someone else's incompetence on the good days, and down-right evilness on the bad days. I also think we need a term that expresses exactly what these children have ended up with .....a term such as 'government damaged' but with a positive spin. Tom hasn't had any more vaccinations since the age of about 3. What I've learned about the whole process of vaccinations means I will not subject him or his sister to any further vaccinations until they are old enough to weigh up the evidence themselves and then make their own decisions. Funnily enough, the autism specific advisor who was one of the team who delivered that very first 'Early Bird Programme' I mentioned above ten years ago, told me she had had four children herself. She's since retired but guess what?..........none of her children ever had any vaccinations whatsoever.Food for thought.
As I said I haven't visited this site in a long time, but I was surprised to find how large the NAS has grown (if the size of the website is anything to go by). What further surprised me was the availability of data concerning everything to do with managing autism (from behaviour to legals, education to work etc). There is a lot of stuff on here. What I could't seem to find easily was any mention of causes of autism.
Where are the voices suggesting what the causes of this 'development disorder' are?
Where are the independent research papers outlining various inquiries into possible causes?
Surely this should be the number one priority for an organisation dealing with autism, shoudn't it?
I know only too well how difficult it is getting any help to deal with my son's autism, but if I could stop one more child and their family going through the journey that we've gone through, I would.
If, as I have claimed, the rise in 'autism' that we've seen over the last thirty years, that correlates perfectly with the increased vaccination schedule, is due to vaccinations then parents need to be informed of the risks involved. Then can they make an informed decision as to whether the risk of 'autism' and the subsequent pressure it places upon the family ( ie.the immense emotional and financial strain, the Extreme Love that Louis talks about) is worth the risk BEFORE accepting vaccinations.
I would have foregone ALL vaccinations for my children if I knew then what I know now.
I welcome your comments and debate.
Al
Hey Jim,
My thoughts on 911 were not made after watching one video.
What about university lecturer Kevin Barrett:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl8N6S48Tag
Watch this YouTuber, 'physicsand reason'. He explains more in his videos than the whole of the NIST report ever did.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
Any naysayers are usually dealt with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU&feature=related
The demolitions expert Danny Jawenko featured in this next video describes his thoughts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw
This is a report of his death in suspicious circumstances
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2011/07/dutch-demolition-expert-danny-jowenko-dies-in-car-crash/
I don't work in insurance, but I would be interested to know what the probability is of all those people dying.
My point in mentioning all this, is because they are the independent voice. They are not members of professional institutions who are paid to do a job and whose livelihood and professional reputation is at risk if they ever spoke out.
You see, for me when I learned about Building Seven, everything changed. If that is a lie, then anything can be a lie. If the whole world can be fooled when the evidence is staring them straight in the face, how much easier then to suggest autism has always been around in large numbers....it's just that we haven't looked for it. Why is there no mention of it then in literature, in articles, in medical journals before the 1960s? Are you saying that the Victorian asylums were full of Asperger's and autistic people, because even if we accepted that they were full of nothing but autistic people (autistic meaning Aspies as well) it wouldn't account for the rate we are seeing today. The maths just doesn't add up.
I think in the end though, you can present all the evidence you want to people and we all believe what we want to believe. For example, you could show me all the sworn Affidavits that you like from expert witnesses to 911 that the buildings fell because of fires and impact. I wouldn't believe it because I know there are only three steel buildings in the world that have ever fallen....all occurring on that day.
The same is true, FOR ME, around vaccinations. It makes no sense to me that they could possibly be BLACK OR WHITE in implementation. When my wife and I conceived our daughter, we know the risk of Down's Syndrome was 1 in 100 given her age. We decided the risk was worth taking. If someone had said to me, delay vaccinating your son. The risk of him catching measles is THIS, the risk of him developing HIB disease is THIS etc,
we could have made an informed decision. Instead, we are treated like cattle.
I hope this is of use to anyone contemplating vaccinations, although I realise that they probably end up at this site after the fact.
Scorpion,
You seem intent on winning the argument, whatever the argument is /was and I am not going to go through all your replies.
I have read lots of what Tony Attwood has to say. I've listened to his radio interviews and for me the idea that '"When you've met one person with an ASD... You've met one person with an ASD!" strenghthens my case that the smokscreen is here, alive and functioning as it has been designed to do.
I have read lots on Autism over the ten years. From thimerasol to glutathione, from ABA to PECS. From Shattock to Baron-Cohen and another 8Gb worth of data. I do pray that I'm wrong about vaccinations because I fear for the future. I can see a day, coming quite soon I think, when an H1N1 virus will be implicated in urging everyone to get a vaccination. The vaccination will spread the disease although I don't think we will see 'Cytokine Storms' as in the 1919 Spanish Flu, for the simple reason that our communication setups are too independent for this to pass without being noticed. I think it will be a slow burn disease, where everything appears fine for a few months, maybe even a year but then develops at an exponential rate and one which totally overwhelms all forms of medical help. I truly hope I'm wrong about this. The only way this could happen at present I think is through voluntary vaccinations.
Hope,
I have read a lot of Baron-Cohen's work. 'The Essential Difference' is one book I used to lend to people. I think his ideas of input/ output, systemitizing brain etc. are valid for generalisations about the population. His idea of testosterone levels in the amnio fluids (if I remember rightly) seems to correlate to the digits of the hand idea. The visual acuity theory his team tested seemed to explain youngsters having difficulty with facial expressions and visual contact (and also how a youngster can enter a strange room and be drawn to a tiny mark on a wall that no-one else has ever seen).
I also was impressed that you could articulate his ideas about empathy, because I think identifying anything then leads eventually to understanding, even if it's arrived at differently. I do agree that my son is one of the nicest (if not the nicest) people I know, because what you see is often what you get (no scheming, back-stabbing, hidden agendas, ulterior motives etc.)
I'm not sure I have anything more to add to this discussion.