AIBU to remind everyone that the MMR vaccine does NOT cause autism?

[TheHodgeoftheHedge]

Seeing as this worry comes up so many times on MN and in wider life, I feel obliged to post this and remind everyone that MMR has not link to autism whatsoever, as yet another HUGE study has found.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/mmr-vaccine-autism-antivax-measles-study-andrew-wakefield-a8808086.html

Thanks.

Quite frankly not better than saying "death to ... whatever minority".

Lweji you’re really showing your ignorance now and have no idea of the point I am trying to make
Bacteria have a specific function in the body in a specific area... E. coli for instance... if E. coli get into the blood stream of course they are going to cause serious issues. Another example is meningitis... most of us carry the bacteria that cause meningitis.. I.e you dint catch it... it’s when these bacteria cross the bloood brain barrier that there’s an issue. And the mechanism in which this happens isn’t really understood

Blood transfusions are widely recognised to suppress the immune system ...look it up

You might want to add peter Duesberg to that list along with a whole host of leading researchers.

How is it even possible that bacteria out or in place cause disease then?

Yes Katerina I found the picture of the medical doctor on the front of the book desperate as well (if not misleading). Gary Goldman's phD appears to be in computer science.

From those who feel that side effects they had to vaccines weren't taken seriously or recorded you can report them yourself to the mhra yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk

Lweji I’ve just posted a lengthy explanation of Béchamp counter theory ....your latest replies, totally misunderstanding what I’m saying, mean either you haven’t read it or simply don’t understand the basic concept

Blood transfusions are widely recognised to suppress the immune system ...look it up

I'm clearly too ignorant to. Why don't you give me the peer reviewed paper to show it? A Cochrane review will suffice

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7713588

Where the phenomena is used fir beneficial effect is blood transfusions given prior organ transplant as it reduces the chance of rejection due to suppressing normal immune function

I caught up with this thread just now. The tears of laughter are streaming down my face at Cath’s comments.

I appreciate that it’s actually a very serious thing that people put this kind of crap about on the internet - and very insulting too. But Cath’s medical theory is so much a cross between medieval superstition and Madam Pomfrey at Hogwarts that it’s also genuinely funny.

@OwlBeThere I have spoken to a lot of people who would agree with what your sayin about vaccine damage , as I said we believe my sons autism is caused by his chromosome deletion,not autism is so complex and I don't think there is one cause but I do e is people would stop minimizing how severe autism can be I don't think it's help full to says things like well Einstein was probably autistic to parents like me ,when my child can't even talk.

Thanks for the link. But the author doesn't compare the immune suppression to AIDS. Do you think the two are the same?
Blood transfusions, antibiotics, anal sex, drugs, etc existed well before the AIDS epidemic.
Is it coincidental that HIV virus spread can be mapped to the emergence of AIDS?

Is it coincidental that AIDS is different when people are infected with HIV1 or 2?

And mind, of course not all immunodepression is caused by HIV. But it's inevitable that people infected with HIV, without any sort of treatment, develop immunodepression. Acquired immunodepression.

It's offensive to all the people who died before treatment and to all the researchers who worked hard to unravel the mysterious disease and finally managed to develop effective treatment that prolongs patients' lives to just dismiss the link.

More than that, it's dangerous and it's criminal because it leads to lack of prevention and treatment and ultimately to deaths. Like in South Africa.

This thread is going down well then!!!!!!!!!! I believe that nobody can say 100% what causes measles so the OP is unreasonable. Nobody can state that sadly!!!

Or autism

And i believe the OP has just put this post on to stir up trouble, which is not nice.

’But the author doesn't compare the immune suppression to AIDS. Do you think the two are the same?

Firstly U asked me to provide a reference that blood transfusion caused immune suppression ...which I did.. it’s obvipusly a phenomenon you’re not familiar with.

Second: AIDS is simply immune suppression allegedly caused by the HIV retro virus. There are NO new diseases associated with ‘AIDS’. They are all illnesses that existed long before HIV and were known to be caused by immune suppression due to other issues.

I doubt you could tell the difference between immune suppression alledgedly caused by HIV vs immune suppression caused by meth or repeated blood transfusions (other than the presence of antibodies to so called HIV... which aren’t exclusive to HIV) .....because ‘AIDS’ presents so differently in each individual

Callmedoctor... I agree... I think these vaccine threads are designed to go one way only.. most posters questioning vaccines in any way are too scared to post.

Ahh, Peter Duesberg, subject of many a misconduct hearing. Apparently nobody has died of AIDS in South Africa...

Exactly.

My original point was that governments need to tackle reduced uptake with emotional intelligence. They need to engage with parents who are ignored and silenced. I feel like I see both sides and I cannot be the only one. It's so obvious to me what the solution is. If I can see it, thousands, millions of others would see it too. Instead of another study to dogmatically insist that vaccines are safe, they need to step back and spend money specifically on what evironmental factors switch on autism. And the 1 in a 100,000 children that get IBD following MMR, what makes a child vulnerable to being that one? spend money on that!!!! Study that! And people will start trusting governments not to order them to offer up their child to the greater good.

No doubt there'll be a queue of people to shoot down what little I"ve dared to say.

DuchessOfPhysics indeed x

Firstly U asked me to provide a reference that blood transfusion caused immune suppression ...which I did.. it’s obvipusly a phenomenon you’re not familiar with.
Which I thanked you for. It's not unreasonable to think of it, and I can think of a mechanism, but not to the extent of AIDS that can lead to people dying. I'm not an immunologist, or transfusion expert. I work with the germs themselves.

Second: AIDS is simply immune suppression allegedly caused by the HIV retro virus. There are NO new diseases associated with ‘AIDS’. They are all illnesses that existed long before HIV and were known to be caused by immune suppression due to other issues.

Yes, and yes. It has nothing to do with HIV causing AIDS, which is a specific condition.
The diseases associated with AIDS are called "opportunistic diseases", because they are more common in AIDS patients and some of them rarely cause illness in immunocompetent individuals, and because the extent of these diseases is much worse in AIDS patients. As it is in many other immunossupressed individuals. We tend not to talk about AIDS patients in relation to risk for these diseases, but immunodeficient/supressed or not immunocompetent individuals.
But, when an individual infected with HIV shows up with these diseases, then it's classified as not just infected, but as having the condition named AIDS.
The problem with these diseases when associated with AIDS (and other immunesupressions) is that treatment alone doesn't work well. The immunesupression must be addressed as well. HAART has also helped decrease the incidence and seriousness of these diseases.
I work with one of them. The incidence of this particular disease rose in Europe with the AIDS epidemic and declined significantly with HAART implementation. AIDS patients with this disease couldn't get rid of it unless their CD4 count was sufficiently high.

I doubt you could tell the difference between immune suppression alledgedly caused by HIV vs immune suppression caused by meth or repeated blood transfusions (other than the presence of antibodies to so called HIV... which aren’t exclusive to HIV) .....because ‘AIDS’ presents so differently in each individual

Ahhhh. Before HIV was associated with AIDS, AIDS was defined as a specific condition. It is defined by a low CD4+ cell count. CD4 lymphocytes, or T helper cells, are a class of white blood cells that produce cytokines. There are also CD8+ lymphocytes, which are the ones that produce antibodies, natural killer cells, and a couple of others. More may yet be discovered.
Other types of immunesupression are more generalist, or affect other types of cells, or affect macrophages.
The thing about HIV is that its presence does leave to destruction of CD4+ cells. The mechanism of entry and how it affects the cell is well studied.
A 2012 summary: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3405824/
There's also a lot known about how HIV kills CD4+ cells (infected and not infected)
A 2014 summary: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4452072/

(from quick google. HIV is not my field of study)

HIV is not only detected by the presence of antibodies against HIV. It is also detected by the presence of antigens (proteins of the virus itself) and by the presence of nucleic acids. Viral RNA can be detected specifically and shown to be HIV, and not any other retrovirus.

A quick look at sensitivity and specificity of a rapid diagnostic test (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756447/) shows "100 % sensitivity and 100 % specificity with whole blood specimen and 100 % sensitivity and 82.86 % specificity with serum specimen for the detection of HIV-1"
That's within the parameters of most diagnostic tests and it is actually quite good compared to most. This is not considered poor specificity, particularly if you look at the results from whole blood.

Mind, you that this is a rapid first line test. Current tests done in labs are more sensitive and specific too. And for diagnosis confirmation, labs will do more than one test (as a pp posted earlier) because no lab wants to give a false positive or negative results.

So, it's not true at all that diagnosis of HIV is not accurate.

The problem with all your messy explanations about injectable drugs, anal sex, antibiotics and transfusions is that there is no mechanism to explain how all those different things can possibly cause specific CD4+ count defficiency.
Whereas with HIV it can be seen and tested in the lab.

And the 1 in a 100,000 children that get IBD following MMR, what makes a child vulnerable to being that one? spend money on that!!!! Study that! And people will start trusting governments not to order them to offer up their child to the greater good.

It's not that simple.

Vaccines work to protect individuals as well as entire communities. If a vaccine can cause an adverse effect, the disease is likely to cause an even worse effect, so it can be argued that the child that develops IBS after a vaccine could have died if they got the disease.

It would be excellent if it could be studied exactly how (and if...) any vaccine causes side effects. But we are not there yet. Individual medicine is still a long way away.

Still, when at risk groups are known, they are advised against vaccination.

The risks and benefits of individual vaccines are discussed and information is given, if people look it up. There are more vaccines available, and in more forms, than those given by governments in funded vaccination programmes. Vaccines are included in vaccination programmes after being reviewed by panels of experts.

But I suppose it's easier to scream demanding perfection from governments than to research the subject properly.

T cell count deficiency can occur in perfectly healthy individuals who dont have an HIV diagnosis .... yes it can be a sign of a weakened immune system but is also a recognised phenomenon in perfectly healthy people too... another thing that can’t be reconciled by the current thinking

Why do you say it can't be reconciled?

Immunedefficiencies can be caused by a number of factors.

The presence of HIV leads to death of CD4 cells, immunedefficiency and death in untreated people.
It is seen in cultures of CD4 cells, as well as in animal models and in humans.

Low numbers of T cells can be completely unrelated to the supposed presence of HIV. It can occur in perfectly healthy individuals... T cell counts go up and down naturally and aren’t necessarily related to poor health.

So answer this... if the presence of antibodies to a pathogen means immunity to that pathogen ...( the basic principles of how vaccines are supposed to work).. why doesn’t the presence of supposed HIV antibodies = immunity to ‘HIV’

And interesting comments from a Montagnier himself