1. Patients launch a $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
No Longer Naive in the Ways of The Beast
After having lived for years with ME/CFS, Jody Smith learned there's more to this beast of an illness than she realized, and that what might help one person may not help others ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

CDC to Study Vaccines and Autism

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Bob, Mar 18, 2011.

  1. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,432
    Likes:
    8,569
    England, UK
    CDC to study link between Vaccines and Autism

    An article on The Huffington Post...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/cdc-to-study-vaccines-and_b_837360.html

  2. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,432
    Likes:
    8,569
    England, UK
    This looks like very interesting research, and it seems very relevent to ME.

    Although, I don't know how serious the CDC are about this research (i.e. Will they actually want to find a connection between vaccines and autism, or will these research projects be set up to find no connection?) (Call me a cynic!)

    The similarities between ME and Autism seem extraordinary when reading this article... You could almost swap the word 'autism' for 'ME'.


    After years of denial of a link between autism and vaccines, suddenly we have this proposed research, and this statement:


    And this statement by the IACC:



    This whole article is fascinating!
  3. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,852
    Likes:
    2,196
    WA, USA
    for reals? sounds really interesting, but I'm having difficulty believing it, for obvious reasons
  4. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,852
    Likes:
    2,196
    WA, USA
    I hope they add endocrine disruptors to the list of environmental concerns. These evidently don't cause cancer, but that's no reason to write them off as a possible cause for any sort of disease at all.
  5. Andrew

    Andrew Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,943
    Likes:
    1,189
    Los Angeles, USA
    I can't make this out. Can anyone tell which group in the CDC will be doing the research? If it is not the same group that does CFS research, I think it could work out.
  6. toddm1960

    toddm1960 Senior Member

    Messages:
    155
    Likes:
    3
    Rochester, New York
    This does sound like very promising research, too bad the CDC is doing it. Do you really think they WANT to find causitive agents in these vaccines? My guess is they'll look about as hard as they did for XMRV. I'm going to predict the results right now.............All vaccines deamed safe, continue getting them, all lawsuits are null and void.
  7. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,460
    Likes:
    1,838
    Sofa, UK
    I'm having a bit of a hard time believing this myself, but maybe the unexpected narcolepsy effect induced by the H1N1 vaccine in at least 12 countries - which affected particular genetic subgroups - has given a few people some pause for thought at long last. That was a massive smoking gun: a novel neurological pathology caused by a new vaccine, and also associated with specific genetic subgroups: I'm not aware of that phenomenon having been directly and unambiguously observed before now. It's an enormous wake-up call, it seems to me - because that's precisely the kind of scenario one was directed towards by a consideration of the MMR controversy and it's also consistent with vaccine theories regarding the origin of ME/CFS...and now it seems that scenario has at last been "caught in the act" with H1N1...

    I find the above quote extraordinary, but incredibly refreshing, because this is precisely the point about the studies that supposedly 'debunked' the MMR/autism claims. A consideration of that MMR/autism science, about a year ago, led me to precisely the same conclusion: that the population-based studies that claimed to debunk the connection were illogical because of their failure to recognise that subpopulations may be more susceptible to specific effects (and there's a second issue regarding the possibility of specific batches of vaccine being infected which was also not addressed by those studies). So it's amazing, but very encouraging, to see the Institute of Medicine recognising this point, because it was a plain truth that seemed to have been completely ignored.

    So it will be interesting to see what the CDC come up with; I guess both sides of the debate would tend to bet heavily on 'nothing'...but you never know...
  8. ixchelkali

    ixchelkali Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,105
    Likes:
    263
    Long Beach, CA
    I'm glad that they are willing to consider that not everyone may have the same reaction to any given "environmental exposure." It will be interesting to see if their well-defined subsets show different results from large epidemialogical studies. Large, ill-defined epidemiological studies (done by the CDC, in large part) have been the primary roadblock to finding treatments for ME/CFS, in my opinion.
  9. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,432
    Likes:
    8,569
    England, UK
    I found the whole article extraordinary... I couldn't quite believe what I was reading...
    Whenever we discuss this sort of thing we often get accused of being conspiracy theorists...
    And this is the US government's official Autism body saying it!
    All the time the governments and scientists have been saying that there's absolutely no link, and anyone who says that there is, is being totally irresponsible.

    I think it's research that could possibly have very important implications for the ME community.
    But it's a shame that the CDC have to be involved with any of this research!
  10. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,460
    Likes:
    1,838
    Sofa, UK
    Quite right! But it might just be that the science is at last beginning to catch up with what ideas that have until now been so unthinkable for medical researchers that they were ridiculed as 'conspiracy theories'.

    In the last couple of years, the unintended spread of a biosafety level 2 recombinant retrovirus has been documented, as has the vaccine-mediated infection of livestock with previously-unknown retroviruses; the H1N1 vaccine has been caught causing a novel neurological condition in genetically susceptible populations; and now, in an effort to debunk the XMRV-CFS connection, researchers have argued that XMRV itself was created in the lab during the process of passing cells through mice...and then somehow escaped and spread all round the world as 'contamination' (without infecting any humans or causing any harmful effects, of course ;) ).

    That's quite a list of findings to be able to cite, and anybody arguing that vaccines may have been causing harmful effects that weren't previously recognised has a lot more solid evidence to cite in support of that hypothesis now than they did a couple of years ago. A clear potential mechanism for unintended vaccine damage has now been established, and note that this mechanism does not involve mercury, thimerosol, or any of the other major theories: it's a new scientific discovery that novel retroviruses can be unintentionally created in the lab, unintentionally spread around the world, unintentionally spread in vaccines, and then can cause novel neurological diseases in specific genetic populations...and the implications of those possibilities will now have to be explored.
  11. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,432
    Likes:
    8,569
    England, UK
    Gosh, wasn't the world a simpler and safer place when we were all clearly just hysterical and deluded!

    Mark, what are you referring to when you say: "unintended spread of a biosafety level 2 recombinant retrovirus has been documented"? Do you mean XMRV?

    And what are you referring to when you say: "the vaccine-mediated infection of livestock with previously-unknown retroviruses"?

    Also, where were the neurological reactions to the H1N1 vaccine recorded? Was it in the USA? I haven't heard of this before.

    Yes, funny how it all conveniently fits into a neat and tidy package for them.
    XMRV exists only in a lab cell line, and so it hasn't entered the human population.
    So no problem then!

    This all seems quite explosive to me...
    I always thought that any answers to ME would be due to cutting edge research at the forefront of scientific exploration... And that ME research might also find answers to many other diseases... But i never imagined that XMRV would be linked to vaccines so quickly, and that the news would take the world by storm...

    Do you think that it's the XMRV that has made people sit up and take notice, or do you think it's all the separate threads coming together to form a bigger picture?
  12. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,460
    Likes:
    1,838
    Sofa, UK
    Nope, the one I had in mind has "99% identity to a synthetic retrovirus which was engineered in the 1980s"...
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19772602

    The one I was thinking of was posted here a year or more ago. My recollection is that some form of livestock was found to have actually been infected, via vaccine, with a (retro?)virus from another species; I think it may have been cattle or sheep that were infected with a pig virus but I probably misremembered some of that. (Very frustrating!). However in my search I did come across this example of a human virus that was sent out to be used before it was discovered that it was contaminated with a pig virus...
    http://forums.aboutmecfs.org/showthread.php?3874-rotavirus-vaccine-contaminated-with-pig-virus

    It was first reported in Finland, then elsewhere in Scandinavia. The other 9 countries have reported to GlaxoSmithKline about the problem but the WHO has not revealed which countries (!). Search GoogleNews for "narcolepsy swine flu vaccine" and you'll find plenty about it. It was in TIME magazine, and somewhere in the British press I think (a friend told me about it) but has not exactly been widely reported by the wonderful free press in this country, naturally...

    Here's one report:
    http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9L8L9700.htm

    Likewise...although of course XMRV itself hasn't been linked to vaccines, as such; it's just that this seems to be where so much of the circumstantial evidence is pointing. Actually, what put me onto this line of inquiry myself, in the first place, was investigating the people (like the Bad Science and Science Media Centre types) who have been so hostile to us...and then looking at who else they have also been hostile towards...so The Lobby start to become a useful way to track down a whole range of suppressed science: follow their rabid obsessions and you tend to find yourself looking at some rather suspicious situations. But while I'm saying that, I do want to emphasise that The Lobby doesn't necessarily know that what it's debunking is true - it just knows that, if true, it would be harmful to the interests they are protecting, and that's all they need to know in order to go into attack mode. That's an important point to bear in mind to avoid slipping into out-and-out conspiracy mode.

    Good question. Well I'd say that XMRV has definitely woken up a whole lot of people to the dangers inherent in neglecting ME/CFS. The very plausibility of the XMRV theory has really made a lot of people notice how badly we have been ignored and how dangerous that policy has been for everyone. How much difference that will make in the long term, we will have to wait and see.

    At the same time, I do get the sense that there are wider trends here, and a sense of "information wanting to be free". I see growing interest from scientists in the role of viruses in ideopathic human diseases, and tantalising clues as to the possible involvement of endogenous retroviruses - the processes involved here are at the frontiers of scientific knowledge, and they seem to be very complex processes, so it's natural that we are only just beginning to understand them. At the same time, from the other side of the fence there's growing pressure from the public for authorities that have always had a paternalistic attitude towards our health to tell us the truth about what's really going on, and a cancerous distrust of those authorities that can only be resolved by a revolution in transparency and by radical reform of the process of scientific research and publication.

    I suppose the way I see it is: lots of different trends are coming together and seem to be pointing in the same direction...but exactly what all this is really leading to, only time will tell...
  13. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    7,432
    Likes:
    8,569
    England, UK
    Thanks Mark,
    Interesting stuff.
    Thanks for the links and info.

    With regards to paternalistic governments,
    I have realised recently that the internet has almost put our community on an equal footing with the establishment...
    We've all managed to tear apart the PACE Trial since it was released, and made sure that everyone knows about how utterly weak it is, and how the evidence that it provides actually works in our favour, once the data is scrutinised.
    This has all been due to so many of us working on the same project in real time, with instant access to all the information on the web.
    A few years ago, we would have just been passive observers as the establishment accepted the authors' conclusions and imposed them onto us.

    The same is happening with XMRV of course, whereby we can keep the worlds' eyes focused on the subject so it doesn't get buried.
    The amount of publicity it's getting at the moment is wild.

    I love the way you've used the 'The Lobby' against themselves, by looking at the information they've been active against!
    That's inspired!
  14. richvank

    richvank Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,717
    Likes:
    735
    Hi, all.

    I, too, think this announced research by the CDC is a big deal, especially the explicit recognition of the possibility that there can be vulnerable subgroups because of differing genetics. As far as I can tell, this has been ignored in the past when drugs or chemicals or vaccines have been tested for safety. If a large population is tested, and it looks O.K. for the great majority, then it's approved, and it's just too bad for those few who have a genetic susceptibility. This has not been dealt with very well in the past, in my opinion, and it's great to see an "official" recognition of this issue and
    at least a stated plan to investigate it. It will be very interesting to watch how this goes, since the CDC committee that recommends the vaccine schedule for children has sitting members who represent the vaccine makers. I guess the autism problem has just gotten big enough that they have had to bite the bullet and really look at this.

    Rich
  15. markmc20001

    markmc20001 Guest

    Messages:
    877
    Likes:
    80
    I must say that it is still to be determined if this spread of a retrovirus was all unintentional. I know it is unthinkable, but obviously it is unthinkable to avoid research into the biological cause for CFIDS all these years while being aware it could be a spreading virus. All the time spewing loads of bogus psychobabble research and making sure everybody is well aware of the garbage science through the corporate owned media. Not to mention screwing people with LTD policies in the process to boot.

    They have had technology for scanning for retroviruses since the 1980's at least when they discovered AIDS. Not to mention the 90's when gene research started. Using a retrovirus for gene therapy is waaaay more advanced than simply finding a retrovirus.

    If it were unintentional, they would have tried to correct it 20 years ago when Defreitas warned them of a retrovirus.

    We are talking about the smartest people in the world, with an unlimited budget, and millions of lives in their hands. They don't make "unintentional" mistakes like this.

    I think a more likely scenario is "they" thought nobody would be able figure out their little retrovirus vaccine trick, especially given control over the media and government agencies.

    Stunning eah? I'm stunned every day I go back and read Hillary Johnson's web blog, or when a rushed XMRV negative article comes out on every media source around the planet.

    Sorry. I really hope we, the people, get our government back and get on to finding treatments.
  16. ggingues

    ggingues $10 gift code at iHerb GAS343 of $40

    Messages:
    3,877
    Likes:
    751
    Concord, NH
    I concur.

    GG
  17. markmc20001

    markmc20001 Guest

    Messages:
    877
    Likes:
    80
    EXACTLY. Once one looks into it objectively, (with your own brain and not what one reads in the mainstream news) it just gets deeper and deeper.
  18. Cloud

    Cloud Guest

    "The CDC will also study mitochondrial dysfunction and the potential risk for post-vaccine "neurological deterioration," and convene an expert panel on the feasibility of studying health outcomes such as autism among vaccinated and unvaccinated children".

    " the CDC said it will convene an "external expert committee to offer guidance on the feasibility of conducting such studies and additional studies related to the immunization schedule, including studies that may indicate if multiple vaccinations increase risk for immune system disorders."

    "That federal panel, along with the CDC's Immunization Safety Office, HHS's National Vaccine Advisory Committee, and even the national Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) now all support further research into a possible association between autism and immunization".


    Sounds good....guess we will have to wait and see. They haven't committed to anything yet.

    1 in a 100 kids now with Autism. We need immediate changes to the childhood vaccine schedules. Most of these "required" childhood vaccines are for diseases that carry little to no threat to our kids now. Stop the non essentials, continue with the essentials, stop the multi-dose vaccine practice, space them farther apart, and do real "independent" research on the safety and efficacy of vaccines. No more unsafe vaccine practices until they are able to effectively screen those at risk for these horrible adverse reactions. It's no longer justifiable (never was) to allow collateral damage to a few, in order to protect the majority, and deny the extent of the damage happening.

    My first thought on the CDC doing this study was that it's similar to having Phillip Morris study the relationship between tobacco and cancer. But this study is being recommended from higher up and may have little to with what the CDC thinks of the new direction. I'm interested in the Autism communities reaction to this news.

    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/03/...dc-to-study-vaccines-and-autism.html#comments
  19. Mark

    Mark Acting CEO

    Messages:
    4,460
    Likes:
    1,838
    Sofa, UK
    I think this kind of thinking actually represents a case of not being paranoid enough. In the kind of scenario you are considering, where the retrovirus was spread deliberately, with the knowledge of person or persons unknown, there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that such information will ever come to light. Anybody who is capable of perpetrating something such as that, is more than capable of irrevocably covering their tracks. People who pursue this kind of theory may think that everyone else is just being naive, but actually IMO it's they who are being naive about the subjects they're discussing. Would you include the possibility of an attack on the human race by invisible aliens in your theorising? Is that really any less plausible than a successful organised plot by humans to spread a retrovirus through the human race for purposes unknown?

    There's just no point in pursuing these kinds of theories; speculating about what is by definition unknowable is a good entertainment and can be an interesting 'thought experiment' or an entertaining speculation...but in practical terms, it's completely pointless. We need to focus on more practical lines of inquiry if we want to make progress.


    Yes, all of this is what goes on; those are the observable facts, and everything from then onwards is theorising as to the why. From my reading about the history of the UK's Science Media Centre, about 'The Lobby', etc etc, the whole philosophy of those groups is fairly clearly laid out. It's a clear but rather mundane 'conspiracy' (if one insists on using that word): the philosophy is simply to defend scientific and industrial progress from any kind of public scare about the harmful effects of technology. The powers that be act on the assumption that it's their responsibility to manage these problems, that they act in the greater good, that there will inevitably be problems and casualties, and that it's not possible for an uninformed and illogical general population to engage with those kind of complex moral dilemmas.

    The current events in Japan are an illustrative example. Imagine yourself in the position of somebody who has to advise the population of Tokyo whether they should evacuate. Imagine that you knew that if you advised people to do so, more lives would be lost in the panic than would be saved by the evacuation. I'm not saying that's the situation, but it's an illustrative moral dilemma.

    When it comes to the psychobabble and the distortion of science in the media, those phenomena can easily be explained by these sort of kneejerk defences of the status quo, and by the tendency of the system as a whole to support theories that are consistent with its own interests. I think the Wessely school just got popular because their ideas were so much more convenient for government. There doesn't need to be any grand plan for things to work out as they have.

    I think that's only half-true. Gammaretroviruses are by definition much smaller; an order of magnitude smaller than retroviruses like HIV, for example. XMRV was only discovered in 2006. The sheer scale of the search for new viruses is unimaginable on a human level; it's perfectly plausible that there are still retroviruses that haven't been spotted yet. We're dealing with an absolutely vast search space here.

    That doesn't follow at all. This logical leap is a good example of the failure of imagination that leads to an illogical conclusion. It's perfectly feasible that - as now - a whole lot of people in authority just didn't believe Defreitas' theory was a realistic possibility, had a few quick looks for the virus, didn't find it, and gave up on what seemed like a fruitless search. That's a far, far more likely explanation than the idea that all these people - and we're talking about a lot of people here - were involved in a deliberate coverup that has spanned decades and decades. At the very least, if we're being realistic, we have to realise that the vast majority of people involved in the search for DeFreitas' virus can't possibly have been part of some deliberate conspiracy. It's just not plausible that so many people, so many leading scientists, could have such incredibly dark knowledge and it didn't leak out in any form. And if the majority of people were simply innocently doing what they thought was right, then why not everyone?

    Nonsense. They are definitely not the smartest people in the world, they are just the most ambitious in their field. They definitely do not have an unlimited budget, they just have a lot of money. They have millions of lives in their hands, and huge responsibility - which means in practice that they are balancing all kinds of impossible equations. At the time in question, they were also trying to deal with the beginnings of the AIDS crisis, at a time when all budgets were under pressure with the first gulf war...there's no infinite pot of money, these things had to be balanced.

    And the idea that they "don't make unintentional mistakes" is very strange. These are humans, dealing with questions of huge complexity and uncertainty: of course they make mistakes! The idea that "the people in charge" must be all-powerful, all-knowing, and completely infallible, is quite ridiculous and not consistent with history at all.

    This is also illogical, because if they are all-powerful and all-knowing and knew that what has happened would happen, then they would also know that people would notice sooner or later. Conversely, if they are incompetent enough to make the mistake of underestimating the people's ability to start putting two and two together, then they are incompetent enough to have failed to follow up Defreitas' work purely because of that incompetence. At this point, you're trying to have it both ways with regards to the omnipotence of the alleged conspirators...

    There's no dispute from me that the stupidity of the system and the whole tale of woe is an epic one, and no dispute that anti-XMRV articles are rushed out frantically and illogically and plastered across the media. We know and understand a lot more now about how and why that sort of thing happens - and it's all about systematic bias and modern scientific practices, not about sinister organised conspiracies.

    Yes, there are conspiracies/lobbies to protect industrial interests and to hide inconvenient truths, and I wouldn't rule out the possibility that there may even be people who know and have concealed information about errors and unintended harmful consequences of vaccination programmes (or whatever), that may be relevant to our illness. But there's no need for such theories in order to explain the conservative behaviour of people who seek to deny XMRV; all that's needed really is the observation that people in power - and scientists especially - tend to be extremely conservative people, and the observation that the system acts to defend itself against threats both real and imaginary. There's no need and no purpose in going any further than that.

    Ditto, and Amen. :D
  20. WillowJ

    WillowJ Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,852
    Likes:
    2,196
    WA, USA
    I have always thought this as well. :)

    I think it's very interesting that they are finally even talking about looking at subpopulations and cumulative effect of vaccines. These are long-needed, long-delayed topics.

    Some of the vaccines continue to be needed because the lack of risk is likely because of vaccinating, although that could use some study. But some of the vaccines are unnecessary. Benefit-to-risk ratio for chickenpox is not in favor of adding a vaccination for that, in my opinion. And I have heard of doctors repeating an entire set of vaccines for a toddler three days later because the child was vaccinated three days prior to the scheduled recommendation. Ignorant, reckless. Why do the doctors think they have a brain if they don't plan to use it ever?

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page