The increase in the incidence of autism from 1990 on may be attributable to more attention being drawn to the syndrome of autism and to achange in the diagnostic criteria from the ICD-8 to the ICD-10 in 1994. Also, outpatient activities were included in the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register in 1995 and because many patients with autism in former years have been treated as outpatients this may exaggerate the incidence rates, simply because a number of patients attending the child psychiatric treatment system before 1995 were recorded for the first time, and thereby counted as new cases in the incidence rates.
Madsen et al., Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence From Danish Population-Based Data, Pediatrics 2003;112;604-606
The Madsen study above is one of the studies referred to by those who assert that "science" has proven that thimerosal in vaccines does not cause or contribute to autism. The usual reference to this study is that after thimerosal was removed from Danish vaccines in 1992 incidence of autism continued to rise. As the authors themselves pointed out the continued rise in autism in Denmark after the removal of thimerosal coincided with changing diagnostic criteria, increased social awareness and different methods of outpatient recording. It is truly amazing that those who assert that vaccines do not cause autism based on such studies now claim that data showing autism diagnoses increases from 1 in 150 to 1 in 91 during the latter half of this decade, more than a decade after the DSM and ICD diagnostic changes. does not necessarily reflect a true rise in autism for the reasons set out in the Madsen quote above.
Should we not also discount the Madsen study, and the claims that thimerosal has been proven safe, because of diagnostic and social awareness changes? Or should we accept the recent data showing increased diagnoses of autism as reflecting a real increase in autism diagnoses>
Which is it Dr. Insel? And what do you think Dr. Offit?
autism
2 comments:
They always want to have it both ways.
For example, with herd immunity they say that we all have to vaccinate in case the shot doesn't work. Then again, they say get the shot, because it works. Which is it?
With respect to the H1N1 vaccine all officials at all levels of government and medical societies have either not done their due diligence or are involved in a cover-up.
Why do I say this? It is because the German Medical Society has rebelled against their government and told all doctors in Germany to halt H1N1 vaccines because they are not safe.
I think that our media is complicit in this matter too, because they are just regurgitating the government propaganda and not providing any investigative reporting nor asking the right questions.
Please let your readers know that they are risking their health by taking the vaccine. If it is not safe for Germans, it is not safe for us. In particular Canada is saying that pregnant women and children need it first, while in Germany they say that those two groups are the ones that should stay away from it, more than any other group.
You can read all about this at:
Click here. German Doctors Revolt over H1N1 Vaccine
Further here are 10 questions from Mike Adams, The Health Ranger, that you can ask of our officials:
#1) Where are the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies proving flu vaccines are both safe and effective?
#2) Where, then, is the so-called “science” backing the idea that flu vaccines work at all?
#3) How can methyl mercury (Thimerosal, a preservative used in flu vaccines) be safe for injecting into the human body when mercury is an extremely toxic heavy metal?
#4) Why do reports keep surfacing of children and teens suffering debilitating neurological disorders, brain swelling, seizures and even death following flu vaccines or HPV vaccines?
#5) Why don’t doctors recommend vitamin D for flu protection, especially when vitamin D activates the immune response far better than a vaccine?
#6) If human beings need flu vaccines to survive, then how did humans survive through all of Earth’s history?
#7) If the flu vaccine offers protection against the flu, then why are the people who often catch the flu the very same people who were vaccinated against it?
#8) If the flu vaccine really works, then why was there no huge increase in flu death rates in 2004, the year when flu vaccines were in short supply and vaccination rates dropped by 40%?
#9) How can flu vaccines reduce mortality by 50% (as is claimed) when only about 10% of winter deaths are related to the flu in the first place?
#10) If flu vaccines work so well, then why are drug makers and health authorities so reluctant to subject them to scientific scrutiny with randomized, placebo-controlled studies?
Todd Nomas
Post a Comment