Vaccines and autism: a new scientific review

uprising2

Vaccines and autism: a new scientific review
For all those who've declared the autism-vaccine debate over - a new scientific review begs to differ. It considers a host of peer-reviewed, published theories that show possible connections between vaccines and autism.

Ratajczak did what nobody else apparently has bothered to do: she reviewed the body of published science since autism was first described in 1943.

University of Pennsylvania's Dr. Brian Strom, who has served on Institute of Medicine panels advising the government on vaccine safety says the prevailing medical opinion is that vaccines are scientifically linked to encephalopathy (brain damage), but not scientifically linked to autism.

Dr. Strom said he was unaware that human DNA was contained in vaccines but told us, "It does not matter...Even if human DNA were then found in vaccines, it does not mean that they cause autism." Ratajczak agrees that nobody has proven DNA causes autism; but argues nobody has shown the opposite, and scientifically, the case is still open.

A number of independent scientists have said they've been subjected to orchestrated campaigns to discredit them when their research exposed vaccine safety issues, especially if it veered into the topic of autism.

We asked Ratajczak how she came to research the controversial topic. She told us that for years while working in the pharmaceutical industry, she was restricted as to what she was allowed to publish. "I'm retired now," she told CBS News. "I can write what I want."

We wanted to see if the CDC wished to challenge Ratajczak's review, since many government officials and scientists have implied that theories linking vaccines to autism have been disproven, and Ratajczak states that research shows otherwise. CDC officials told us that "comprehensive review by CDC...would take quite a bit of time."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20049118-10391695.html

Monty Burnz

It would be good to do a comprehensive study and hopefully put this debate to bed for good. Although we all know that even if this study finds no link, people will continue to believe - that's human nature. But oddly, if this study does prove a link then I don't think it would work the other way around.

robtri

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It would be good to do a comprehensive study and hopefully put this debate to bed for good. Although we all know that even if this study finds no link, people will continue to believe - that's human nature. But oddly, if this study does prove a link then I don't think it would work the other way around.

there are enough studies done, people believe what they want....

doesnt matter what the report says who wrote it ect... people here have already made up their minds on vaccines, some think they are benifiical and relatively harmless, while others believe they are harmful and have no benifit....

so no matter what the report above says people will still believe their own beliefs

RoboClam

I haven't red ll of Ratajczak's paper yet, I'll finish it tomorrow. I just thought I'd post what I think of it so far. I'm not really impressed. Much of the impact of the paper comes from this section:

"The human DNA from the vaccine can be randomly inserted into the recipient’s genes by homologous recombination, a process that occurs spontaneously only within a species. Hot spots for DNA insertion are found on the X chromosome in eight autism-associated genes involved in nerve cell synapse formation, central nervous system development, and mitochondrial function (Deisher, 2010). This could provide some explanation of why autism is predominantly a disease of boys. Taken together, these data support the hypothesis that residual human DNA in some vaccines might cause autism."

Firstly, the source for this is a personal communication with Theresa Deisher, who as far as I can tell, has not actually published any research on this. Without any kind of research, I don't see why it was included in the paper as it is essentially a shot in the dark. Theresa is actively involved in stopping embryonic stem cell research and is an ardent pro-lifer. Methinks she might have an agenda.

I'm open to correction on this, but it seems that what she's claiming is that DNA, without any vector, can integrate into the genome of a human. This sounds ridiculous to me. How does the DNA enter the cell and travel to the nucleus? How does the DNA integrate itself? This kind of thing can happen between bacteria due to the fact that they have plasmids, which allows for DNA transfer, but we can't do this. We are exposed to lots of DNA all the time and we have methods of reacting to it if it enters cells (because it should never be anywhere other than the nucleus or mitochondria).

There are some interesting parts of this paper so far, but the bit I quoted will make me read more closely and critically. I'll probably post on this again tomorrow.

RoboClam

The Science-Based Medicine blog has written about this story today. I think their assessment of the paper is quite accurate.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=11899

Juicee

RoboClam wrote: »

The Science-Based Medicine blog has written about this story today. I think their assessment of the paper is quite accurate.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=11899

hard to read with all that bile and character assassination from the outset... strange that you don't sense an agenda from this author... methinks.

RoboClam

Juicee wrote: »

hard to read with all that bile and character assassination from the outset... strange that you don't sense an agenda from this author... methinks.

I have no problem with someone having an agenda (obviously everyone has their beliefs), if they can back it up with evidence. If Theresa Deisher had proper research to back up what she was quoted as saying, then it doesn't matter what she thinks, the facts speak for themselves. However all she provided was her opinion and nothing more.

While the article is quite biased, I don't disagree with what it says about Ratajczak’s paper.

Special Ops

ok i know this is an old thread but something has changed in ireland. last year i began single vaccinations for my little fella as i work in the field of autism and was not happy with the MMR. the people who gave the measles vaccines were vaccineireland.com they are now gone. mumps cannot be got in single vaccines now and i can't find anyone to give the rubella one. i don't want to take the chance of infection but what happens if i give him the MMR now after having one does of measles already..

so if anyone knows where i can get single vaccines please let now know or

advice on giving the MMR with the M in him already (about a year ago)

thanks

Dave!

Why would 'Conspiracy Theories' be the place to ask a health related question about your child?

Try here, or ask your GP.

When you say you work in the field of autism, I presume you don't mean scientific research... else you wouldn't have any autism-related problems with the MMR vaccine.