There is not a clear causal relationship between vaccines and Autism. As a speech-language pathologist looking at the history of this disorder, our understanding and ability to identify it has increased over time. Autism is not just a vague neurological disorder. It is a specific neurological disorder that is distinguishable from other neurological disorders (such as MS and ALS). While some occur together (ASD and ADHD) that is not always the case. Additionally, there is a very clear familial / genetic connection for Autism spectrum disorders. If we're also bringing anecdotal cases into the discussion, most people (adults and children) I know who are neurotypical have had most or all of their "scheduled" vaccines over the course of their lives. The straight line statement made by the speaker you referenced saying more vaccines = more illness is simply wrong. It is also misleading and irresponsible.
While I agree that the necessity of some vaccines (such as COVID, HPV and chicken pox) is debatable and should never be forced / mandated on people, I also don't think vaccines should be written off in their entirety and have done a great deal of good ... such as in the cases of polio, smallpox, rubella and tetanus for example.
Saying that most are fine is not responsive, since by definition the healthy are able to resist harmful assaults on their well being. As any scientist knows, these things are on a bell curve -- it's the vulnerable who are at risk.
Who is to say that your newborn is NOT vulnerable? A quick perusal of the manufacturers' own inserts reveals that they are contraindicated in many cases, yet every child is lined up to take them before any assessment can be made.
Logically, it's not the same to say "everyone who gets the shot will get sick" (a claim not made by the way, by me or Kirsch despite your statement) and "many who are healthy had the shots" (your claim).
The problem is that autism is NOT specific. It IS vague. Yet the individual markers for autism as popularly understood are described by harmful effects of shots.
Since the motto of medicine is (or used to be) First, do no harm, it behooves parents to do due diligence and meanwhile, leave a healthy child be where there is doubt.
Appreciate you taking this on. Since I’ve been following your writing on LMLD and here your perspective has changed and I just want to say I really respect your intellectual honesty.
As an aside, I find myself wondering regularly about the natural law consequences of vaccinations (and other medical abominations) on those who are not complicit in the evil and likely don’t even know about it. If you haven’t seen the Plotkin deposition someone took some time to go through the more then 9 hours of footage and pull short clips. This is him admitting that babies, orphans and the mentally handicapped were used for research … https://youtu.be/Ms_FbdWq2G4?si=yfnA_3AjpwC4UqMf … a few years ago there was a clip from the deposition where he admitted something like 72 aborted (still living) babies were used in one study for a vaccine. I can’t find it now, but that’s a shabby mess of a foundation that’s going to have some serious consequences.
I have posted some clips from Stanley Plotkin occasionally. There is one that's particularly chilling where he says that Catholics think he's going to Hell for using aborted fetal tissue, and he basically says he is fine with that.
Anyone who says the babies are probably not aborted or not for this reason has not seen this man's testimony and is deceiving himself.
I have also seen research that shows DNA is carried through to the vaccines (as it must be, or otherwise why would those allergic to eggs not be able to take the shots developed using chicken eggs?). I'm sure such studies are discouraged. But there are, as you suggest, "natural law" reasons why it would be detrimental for the patient to be injected with this material, along with all the other components.
Maybe someday people will have the courage to just look the whole thing in the face.
I would like to see a study done on the prevalence of autism in non vaccinated children.
Thank you for this post - it is brave and absolutely critical because parents are making decisions about their child’s healthcare and if something happens to their child, the parent needs to be able or stand before their child and justify why they did or didn’t do something.
The very fact that this kind of discussion is largely prohibited, along with hidden coercion pushing vaccines (in australia there are financial and educational penalties if your child is not fully vaxxed) and the immunity given to vax companies should make anyone discerning this issue pause.
What happened to manufacturers being held responsible for their products? (Many are not aware that drug companies have immunity for harm caused by vaccines, uniquely.)
Ok, this isn't the point of the article, but seeing that PANDAS was mentioned to such a wide audience is incredibly heartening. PANDAS is a subset of the PANS diagnosis. Our son has PANS and it is a life-changing neuropsychiatric syndrome. I can't tell you how many times I hear of parents whose child was misdiagnosed for years and years, usually because doctors are ignorant or completely deny that PANS is real. Even the official diagnostic criteria doesn't line up with Stanford research and the lived experience of so many. Sorry to be so tangential.
How do we know that much of increase in numbers of cases of autism are not due to an increased understanding and awareness in doctors and parents of the conditions. Personally I’m convinced it’s possible that several people in my own family and extended family probably fall somewhere on the autism spectrum by todays standards but are not likely to ever get a formal diagnosis. For example a child today might be diagnosed with autism but his uncle or parent and grandparents may also have it but never have been diagnosed because it wasn’t a thing on the radar for most people. The numbers of cases might look like a sharp increase when really the increase might be less significant.
That idea is something that could be an explanation. However, if you listen to Steve Kirsch and look up the VAERS record, you will see that in many cases the onset is sudden.
Again, once you stop thinking of it as autism and start thinking of it as a neurological disorder, you will see it.
Even the concept of a spectrum is misleading and if people were not so determined to ignore vaccine harm, they would address the ambiguity and imprecision of such a "diagnosis."
It's time to start thinking outside of the box the pharmaceutical industry has put us in and get answers.
And it's becoming even more widely known due to Robert Kennedy - God bless him. He is appealing to a lot of people at a grassroots level.
Yes, he has been a stalwart fighter!
There is not a clear causal relationship between vaccines and Autism. As a speech-language pathologist looking at the history of this disorder, our understanding and ability to identify it has increased over time. Autism is not just a vague neurological disorder. It is a specific neurological disorder that is distinguishable from other neurological disorders (such as MS and ALS). While some occur together (ASD and ADHD) that is not always the case. Additionally, there is a very clear familial / genetic connection for Autism spectrum disorders. If we're also bringing anecdotal cases into the discussion, most people (adults and children) I know who are neurotypical have had most or all of their "scheduled" vaccines over the course of their lives. The straight line statement made by the speaker you referenced saying more vaccines = more illness is simply wrong. It is also misleading and irresponsible.
While I agree that the necessity of some vaccines (such as COVID, HPV and chicken pox) is debatable and should never be forced / mandated on people, I also don't think vaccines should be written off in their entirety and have done a great deal of good ... such as in the cases of polio, smallpox, rubella and tetanus for example.
No shot should ever be mandated, period.
Saying that most are fine is not responsive, since by definition the healthy are able to resist harmful assaults on their well being. As any scientist knows, these things are on a bell curve -- it's the vulnerable who are at risk.
Who is to say that your newborn is NOT vulnerable? A quick perusal of the manufacturers' own inserts reveals that they are contraindicated in many cases, yet every child is lined up to take them before any assessment can be made.
Logically, it's not the same to say "everyone who gets the shot will get sick" (a claim not made by the way, by me or Kirsch despite your statement) and "many who are healthy had the shots" (your claim).
The problem is that autism is NOT specific. It IS vague. Yet the individual markers for autism as popularly understood are described by harmful effects of shots.
Since the motto of medicine is (or used to be) First, do no harm, it behooves parents to do due diligence and meanwhile, leave a healthy child be where there is doubt.
This truly horrifying. Thank you for this post!
Appreciate you taking this on. Since I’ve been following your writing on LMLD and here your perspective has changed and I just want to say I really respect your intellectual honesty.
As an aside, I find myself wondering regularly about the natural law consequences of vaccinations (and other medical abominations) on those who are not complicit in the evil and likely don’t even know about it. If you haven’t seen the Plotkin deposition someone took some time to go through the more then 9 hours of footage and pull short clips. This is him admitting that babies, orphans and the mentally handicapped were used for research … https://youtu.be/Ms_FbdWq2G4?si=yfnA_3AjpwC4UqMf … a few years ago there was a clip from the deposition where he admitted something like 72 aborted (still living) babies were used in one study for a vaccine. I can’t find it now, but that’s a shabby mess of a foundation that’s going to have some serious consequences.
Thank you.
I have posted some clips from Stanley Plotkin occasionally. There is one that's particularly chilling where he says that Catholics think he's going to Hell for using aborted fetal tissue, and he basically says he is fine with that.
Anyone who says the babies are probably not aborted or not for this reason has not seen this man's testimony and is deceiving himself.
I have also seen research that shows DNA is carried through to the vaccines (as it must be, or otherwise why would those allergic to eggs not be able to take the shots developed using chicken eggs?). I'm sure such studies are discouraged. But there are, as you suggest, "natural law" reasons why it would be detrimental for the patient to be injected with this material, along with all the other components.
Maybe someday people will have the courage to just look the whole thing in the face.
I would like to see a study done on the prevalence of autism in non vaccinated children.
Thank you for this post - it is brave and absolutely critical because parents are making decisions about their child’s healthcare and if something happens to their child, the parent needs to be able or stand before their child and justify why they did or didn’t do something.
The very fact that this kind of discussion is largely prohibited, along with hidden coercion pushing vaccines (in australia there are financial and educational penalties if your child is not fully vaxxed) and the immunity given to vax companies should make anyone discerning this issue pause.
Yes!
What happened to being fully informed?
What happened to manufacturers being held responsible for their products? (Many are not aware that drug companies have immunity for harm caused by vaccines, uniquely.)
Ok, this isn't the point of the article, but seeing that PANDAS was mentioned to such a wide audience is incredibly heartening. PANDAS is a subset of the PANS diagnosis. Our son has PANS and it is a life-changing neuropsychiatric syndrome. I can't tell you how many times I hear of parents whose child was misdiagnosed for years and years, usually because doctors are ignorant or completely deny that PANS is real. Even the official diagnostic criteria doesn't line up with Stanford research and the lived experience of so many. Sorry to be so tangential.
How do we know that much of increase in numbers of cases of autism are not due to an increased understanding and awareness in doctors and parents of the conditions. Personally I’m convinced it’s possible that several people in my own family and extended family probably fall somewhere on the autism spectrum by todays standards but are not likely to ever get a formal diagnosis. For example a child today might be diagnosed with autism but his uncle or parent and grandparents may also have it but never have been diagnosed because it wasn’t a thing on the radar for most people. The numbers of cases might look like a sharp increase when really the increase might be less significant.
That idea is something that could be an explanation. However, if you listen to Steve Kirsch and look up the VAERS record, you will see that in many cases the onset is sudden.
Again, once you stop thinking of it as autism and start thinking of it as a neurological disorder, you will see it.
Even the concept of a spectrum is misleading and if people were not so determined to ignore vaccine harm, they would address the ambiguity and imprecision of such a "diagnosis."
It's time to start thinking outside of the box the pharmaceutical industry has put us in and get answers.
Watch Candace Owens’ program “A Shot in the Dark” on The Daily Wire about vaccines.