Is anyone here getting any help from NAS ?

autismtwo said:

Stuffed

You are right, you can't talk to an organisation be it ATOS, UK Government, WCA, or the NAS which does not listen , or pretends to listen, or listens but only takes the cherry picking good points as a data collection strategy to justify a policy, cut or funding. Until there is enough anger on the streets nothing happens and even then.  This country needs a total overhaul.

Exactly the current system is not sustainable and the elite in control are penalising the majority to maintain their positions. Politicians not so long ago went for a pay rise while throwing people out of jobs.

With regards to NAS a simple question for them to answer-

Can the National Autistic Society explain why they collect funds for Aspergers and Autism and why the majority of diagnosed adults are not assisted when in dire straits-like myself about to become homeless through no fault of my own.

(other than the simple reason there is no profit in us)

Stuffed

You are right, you can't talk to an organisation be it ATOS, UK Government, WCA, or the NAS which does not listen , or pretends to listen, or listens but only takes the cherry picking good points as a data collection strategy to justify a policy, cut or funding. Until there is enough anger on the streets nothing happens and even then.  This country needs a total overhaul.

Notice the common theme of us all diagnosed with autism and all recieving no help at all even when through no fault of our own we are being stitched up either by a WCA or for those of us told we didn't need to attend and have proof-still denied rightful entitlement.

Everyone blames ATOS and in away they are complicit, the government lost a commons debate recently on ATOS and WCA. But something proven not fit for purpose continues.

Just like poll tax direct action will be needed for change

Thank you scorpion for your reply and link to wikipedia for the MMR, which I have read.

It appear to be largely an establishment demolition job on Wakefield, and even the LSC withdrew funding for the parents class action, and Wakefield had to abandon his action against Despatches when his legal costs started to get to over half a million which producers paid. Sadly in law might and money are all powerful, and it is usually imposible for any David to win over Goliath, even if right and justice shoulld require it.

All this proves is that a link between the MMR vaccine and autism has not been proved, or some might say not been allowed to be proved. The latest of posts  in feb 2012 from the Cochrane Library states however' the design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies both pre and post marketing are largely inadequate'- so it is saying they haven't got much evidence to judge if there is a link, which shows a great flaw in the establishment's control of the safety of MMR.

This information does not in anyway deal with the possible connection between vaccines, other than MMR, and autism ie the posible connection with the use of thimerosol in vaccines and the development of autism.

There is a post which can be found in the web under' Monkeys given standard doses of popular vaccines develop autism symtoms showing the effect of thimerosol on monkies- I'm afraid I do not know how to but in links.   

Are traditional ASD and Asperger syndrome caused by the same of different things?

Justice,

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy then when you're done reading that, and all the aritcles linked to in the Sources at the bottom, if you still have any doubts over the veracity of our claims come back and I'll easily find more evidence for you.

Why would anything in my post lead you to such a meaningless marginalisation of my post. ?

Meaningless is so far as some theories are only deemed conspiritorial until they are proved right ie Saville, Hillesborough, Plegate/ Mitchell, the wonderful care of  the NHS in Staffordshire hospital, we do not eat horse, and the Sun orbits the earth, which is flat.

 As stated I would just be interested in the robustness of the evidence that you assert,  proves no link between autism and vaccines,  particularly if  it means asking the question is interpreted as me thinking there is some sort of conspiracy.

Hope said:

So you believe in conspiracy theories? I am not paid by the NAS to say that vaccines do not cause autism, and Scorpian has not been either. I speak in an independent capacity as someone on the spectrum.

I wish I was!

So you believe in conspiracy theories? I am not paid by the NAS to say that vaccines do not cause autism, and Scorpian has not been either. I speak in an independent capacity as someone on the spectrum.

As this site uses NAS  IT et al, de facto NAS controls this site as any post can be  removed, or a member disallowed.

The reaction to one sentance amongst my extensive posts, on a possible connection between  autism and vaccines excited so much objection ie three separate individual comments, also may appear to show that NAS's mission is controlling the site.

The latest from scorpio does not state the research that showed no link between vaccines and autism, and I am sure that anyone reading this site, would be interested in this reseach, so could a link, or details by referance to the web, possibly be provided. The only research I am aware of is that by Wakefield, whose methods were later discredited, but by an establishment who backed, and promoted the vaccines so may be a conflict of interests.

What surprises me is that my posts raise many other issues in far more detail, yet they have not been commented on, and I cannot understand why investigations into the causes of autism, one of which could be  vaccine related, should raise such interest and derision. If there is no such link then why the concern, that this be clarified and throughly investigated,particularly if large sums have already been paid out by a USA court to an autistic girl by a vaccine manufacturer.

justice said:

Thanks for getting back on this Arran, you illustrate how NAS controls this site and allows it as a sop to their members' voice.

NAS is so tied up with the establishment ie local authorities pay for their schools, and universities/ colleges validate their programmes, there is such a lot of mutual beneficial back slapping,it would be difficult to unpick NAS. One thing is for sure that the purest and best charities are those that adhere to their original purpose and constitution and remain as independent from the state as possible.

We could get nearer this model with the use of the latest social services policies to provide personal services for  the autistic, bought and chosen and controlled by the carer. I think charity has to start as it began, bottom up, and then each discrete local community can link up on a website etc, not the opposite as is happening with NAS, and the voluntary sector that bloomed into a bureaucratic, money making, campaigning monster under new labour.

best wishes, have a nice day..   

If the NAS is so controlling, why is it allowing this discussion to continue?

justice said:

no-one has ever investigated or even researched into the links between vaccines and autism.

This is where you are wrong, Justice.

Yes, they have.

And they have found that there is no good scientific evidence for vaccines causing autism.

Hope,please be assured that my reply was in no way a personal attack on your posting.

As we do not know what the causes of autism are,  and science per se will always be uncertain, the fact that science can only be based on the evidence available at the time, means we need more information to be gathered on the causes of autism, and any possible connection with the increased use of vaccines. As on our present evidence and science, a connection cannot be ruled out. The only research I am aware of does not compare the rates of autism for the vaccinated  against those for unvaccinated, as it is argued that it would be unethical to leave children unvaccinated. This leaves the results of  this research fundamentally flawed. We could compare rates of autism, in groups that have refused vaccination, most particularly the MMR, or the unvaccinated third world- this would remove the flaw, but would practically be very difficult.

On googling the topic it can be seen that there has been a big recent lobby of congress in the USA to investigate the connection.

Logic dictates the huge increase in autism is not just due to greater awareness, there appears logically there must be some modern cause, which is why there should be more research into the causes of  autism, particularly as the labour government plowed so much money into NAS, and yet it restricts its mission to not reseaching into the cause of autism.

The world has always been a frenetic, noisy place, but as a child, meeting my friends' large families, there was never anyone even that different,let alone remotely resembling my daughter's behaviour, and whilst it is possible they may have been concealed out of sight, I'm sure someone would have heard of them, or let slip about their existence. I am not necessarily talking about those  now classed as aspergers/ high functioning autistics, but the severely autistic, who are locked into a world we do not understand, and appear to be now often chemically coshed, and placed permenently in residential care,as society does not wants to cope with, or understand their needs.

Hope,please be assured that my reply was in no way a personal attack on your posting.

As we do not know what the causes of autism are,  and science per se will always be uncertain, the fact that science can only be based on the evidence available at the time, means we need more information to be gathered on the causes of autism, and any possible connection with the increased use of vaccines. As on our present evidence and science, a connection cannot be ruled out. The only research I am aware of does not compare the rates of autism for the vaccinated  against those for unvaccinated, as it is argued that it would be unethical to leave children unvaccinated. This leaves the results of  this research fundamentally flawed. We could compare rates of autism, in groups that have refused vaccination, most particularly the MMR, or the unvaccinated third world- this would remove the flaw, but would practically be very difficult.

On googling the topic it can be seen that there has been a big recent lobby of congress in the USA to investigate the connection.

Logic dictates the huge increase in autism is not just due to greater awareness, there appears logically there must be some modern cause, which is why there should be more research into the causes of  autism, particularly as the labour government plowed so much money into NAS, and yet it restricts its mission to not reseaching into the cause of autism.

The world has always been a frenetic, noisy place, but as a child, meeting my friends' large families, there was never anyone even that different,let alone remotely resembling my daughter's behaviour, and whilst it is possible they may have been concealed out of sight, I'm sure someone would have heard of them, or let slip about their existence. I am not necessarily talking about those  now classed as aspergers/ high functioning autistics, but the severely autistic, who are locked into a world we do not understand, and appear to be now often chemically coshed, and placed permenently in residential care,as society does not wants to cope with, or understand their needs.

''Certainty in any event is anathema to science per ce, but particularly dangerous when we do not know what causes autism''.

Did I ever suggest that we do know precisely what causes autism? Did I ever suggest that Science is about certainty or dogma?  The precise cause of autism is still open to debate, but some causes (like vaccines) have been ruled out by a careful examination of peer-reviewed evidence. Science is based on evidence  and reason, it is not sacrosanct and can make mistakes, but the current consensus is that vaccines do not cause autism.

The most well established reason why autism rates are apparently growing is simply down to greater awareness and detection rates. Autism itself has always existed.

There is no proven evidence that autism is less prevalent elsewhere.

As autism is at epidemic levels and increasing in the well vaccinated western world, particularly in the USA, but is far less prevalent elsewhere, and there appears to be little research into the causes of autism, and NAS is precluded from such research ,it is impossible to assert that there may not be a connection between vaccinations and autism. 

I read in the New Scientist that a vaccine company in the USA paid out millions of pounds in damages to an autistic girl, whose genetic tests showed a propensity to autism, as they conceded scientific evidence that the vaccine could have worsened this, and caused or exacerbated her autism.

Certainty in any event is  anaethema to science per se, but particularly dangerous when we do not  know what  causes autism, and no-one has ever investigated or even researched into the links between vaccines and autism.

justice: Vaccines do not cause autism. There is no Government conspiracy here, but the evidence has proven it to be so. Vaccine use has grown, and rightly so, in the last century, and many diseases have gone into decline. The worrying trend now is that, post Wakefield, vaccination rates have gone down, and we are seeing a re-emergance of dangerous diseases, like measles.

I assumed, as should be the case, that anyone could join this group or any part of the website by joining via the internet I did. Having said that as all employees are now , NAS ones will be srictly controlled by their employment codes of conduct and therefore too frightened of losing their jobs to have a trust worthy opinion on NAS. 

No site should be hived off into different sections, secrecy, conduitism etc is anaethema to provision of information and leads to repetition and frustration in communication.

Thanks for getting back on this Arran, you illustrate how NAS controls this site and allows it as a sop to their members' voice.

NAS is so tied up with the establishment ie local authorities pay for their schools, and universities/ colleges validate their programmes, there is such a lot of mutual beneficial back slapping,it would be difficult to unpick NAS. One thing is for sure that the purest and best charities are those that adhere to their original purpose and constitution and remain as independent from the state as possible.

We could get nearer this model with the use of the latest social services policies to provide personal services for  the autistic, bought and chosen and controlled by the carer. I think charity has to start as it began, bottom up, and then each discrete local community can link up on a website etc, not the opposite as is happening with NAS, and the voluntary sector that bloomed into a bureaucratic, money making, campaigning monster under new labour.

best wishes, have a nice day..   

justice said:

Any group can set up a facebook group and do exactly what we are doing here and there are other private blog sites, that can be set up.

I prefer web forums to Facebook because the owner has full control over it. Facebook users are at the mercy of Zuckerberg's business interests and the CIA spy machine.

After this site's setting up costs, it costs NAS nothing to run it.

This is why I refuse to accept the reason the NAS did not support Talha Ahsan was purely financial. It would have cost nothing to add a page about him to the NAS website to raise awareness and direct viewers to the official campaign site.