Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now can you please tell me how they determined the genotypes/variants used to identify the genetically at risk cohort for the epidemiology?
Surely, since autism is GENETIC they haven't just been researching the epidemiology on ALL the vaccinated/less vaxxed kids, have they? They DID isolate the genotypes; right? I mean, without that cohort; the epidemiology wouldn't correlate GRAVITY with a FALLING OBJECT. So they did that, first, right?
WRONG.
What I find amazing is that if genetics cause autism, then the rate of autism should be constant. There should be the same percent of kids with autism now as there was 200 years ago.
What I find amazing is that if genetics cause autism, then the rate of autism should be constant. There should be the same percent of kids with autism now as there was 200 years ago.
Is there? No. Not even close.
I'm willing to bet that the broad autistic phenotype (BAP) has been increasing to meet the evolutionary demands of our technological era. A superior phenotype for the job, really. But there is a curious thing about some of the genes that are consistently found with this phenotype:
The HLA's & the IL's (interleukin) control cytokine responses to vaccines & are immune-mediating genes. And the BAP variants on those genes are consistently associated with adverse events from vaccination. The phenotype WAS superior but vaccines are causing the pathological response of autism.
We may have effectively shot ourselves in the evolutionary foot, this time. So nope; no such thing as a 'genetic epidemic' & so long to survival of the fittest.
Why? A meta-analysis of news stories regarding flu-deaths? How could anyone forget the stories; all the same with different names?
"X catches flu. Gets worse, not better. Goes to doctor/urgent care/ER & they do nothing. Two days later; X is dead. From flu-related pneumonia or sepsis."
Now, you cant treat influenza with ABX but that's the only way to treat secondary pneumonia & sepsis. Doesn't anybody know how to listen to breath sounds anymore with a stethoscope? Those people wouldn't have died if the CDC wasn't having their ABX awareness campaign at the same time. FFS.
Really? A CDC campaign caused flu deaths? Now you’re really scraping the bottom of the barrel for coincidence.
How do you know doctors didn’t use their stethoscopes? That’s a part of EVERY exam I’ve ever had when I’m sick. Even if it’s a stomach bug.
Not to mention, pneumonia is secondary to flu because it happens after flu begins not concurrently. When I had pneumonia secondary to flu, I’d already been sick for 5 days. I saw the doctor day 1 and my lungs were clear. Day 5 I felt even worse and he diagnosed pneumonia. How many people are failing to go back when their symptoms worsen?
That’s far more likely than doctors not listening to people’s lungs when they come in with flu.
What I find amazing is that if genetics cause autism, then the rate of autism should be constant. There should be the same percent of kids with autism now as there was 200 years ago.
Is there? No. Not even close.
Can you please post the link that shows autism rates in 1719?
I never said they did. I said they are the leading cause of Coincidence in the world & that my son regressed into Coincidental Autism after vaccines. And yes, my daughter died from Coincidental SIDS, within 24 hours of vaccines too.
Vaccines do not cause autism.
SIDS is no more likely to happen after vaccination than in the absence of vaccination.
"In this case, I have concluded that petitioners have presented sufficient evidence and
testimony to entitle them to compensation in the Vaccine Program. I have not concluded that
vaccines present a substantial risk of SIDS. In fact, the evidence is to the contrary. The vast
majority of vaccine recipients do not succumb to SIDS."
This statement appears to contradict the Special Master's own decision. That has resulted in criticism.
Now can you please tell me how they determined the genotypes/variants used to identify the genetically at risk cohort for the epidemiology?
Surely, since autism is GENETIC they haven't just been researching the epidemiology on ALL the vaccinated/less vaxxed kids, have they? They DID isolate the genotypes; right? I mean, without that cohort; the epidemiology wouldn't correlate GRAVITY with a FALLING OBJECT. So they did that, first, right?
WRONG.
WRONG.
They do not identify the genes first and then identify a "genetically at risk cohort". You have it backwards. They take a cohort with autism and look at gene frequencies compared to a cohort without autism. Then they look at what those genes do to see if they can find correlations with features of autism.
What I find amazing is that if genetics cause autism, then the rate of autism should be constant. There should be the same percent of kids with autism now as there was 200 years ago.
Is there? No. Not even close.
How are you going to do that when the term autism was not even coined until 1908?
Meanwhile, the criteria for the diagnosis have changed. Asperger's syndrome has completely disappeared. Poof! It is gone. Did you know that? It is now just "autism spectrum disorder". Does that mean people who formerly had Asperger's syndrome have disappeared. Obviously not. They have just been reclassified.
Similarly, many people who were called "mentally retarded" fifty years ago are now on the autism spectrum.
Also, having the diagnosis can provide access to services that might not otherwise be available. That provides incentive to make the diagnosis.
They do not identify the genes first and then identify a "genetically at risk cohort". You have it backwards. They take a cohort with autism and look at gene frequencies compared to a cohort without autism. Then they look at what those genes do to see if they can find correlations with features of autism.
Hi Suzy. Yes, obviously that is how you determine what variants are consistently found in ASD.
Fun fact; my son & I are now participants in SPARK research. I am very much a believer in ASD as a multifactorial genetic disorder. However; the evidence that autism is an immune-mediated multifactorial genetic disorder, really cannot be ignored.
I already know that the research I want to see has not yet been done & one of the studies I would like to see involves doing the epidemiology of vaccines with autism that takes into consideration the known genetic variants involved.
Instead of studies such as the Denmark studies, that looked at vaccines/vaxxed = ASD VS 'less vaxxed = ASD?
I would like to see if vaccines/genetically at risk = ASD. This is simple & I believe there is enough data now to conduct this study. You can't say autism is genetic & then not conduct the epidemiology on those with the genetic risk factors; that's incomplete research & it's likely diluting the risk ratio.
This isn’t a VAERS Report. This is a payout (hard to get) from the special vaccine court. The family won their case. Not an easy thing to do. As we know, the court NEVER admits that the vaccine is at fault. That’s how they operate but the family won and his death was tied to the vaccines administered.
"In this case, I have concluded that petitioners have presented sufficient evidence and
testimony to entitle them to compensation in the Vaccine Program. I have not concluded that
vaccines present a substantial risk of SIDS. In fact, the evidence is to the contrary. The vast
majority of vaccine recipients do not succumb to SIDS."
This statement appears to contradict the Special Master's own decision. That has resulted in criticism.
You’re cherry picking. Read further.
Quote:
In this case, I have concluded, after review of the evidence, that it is more likely than not that the vaccines played a substantial causal role in the death of J.B. without the effect of which he would not have died. The role of inflammatory cytokines as neuro-modulators in the infant medulla has been well described and is likely the reason for a significant number of SIDS deaths occurring in conjunction with mild infection. I have concluded that it is more likely than not that the vaccine-stimulated cytokines had the same effect in this vulnerable infant during sleep.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
