Vaccine-caused autism: How can we ignore it?

A generation ago, autism was found in five of 10,000 births. Today it is one in 150. Genetic disorders do not present as epidemics; this cannot be purely a genetic phenomenon without a trigger. And it is not a case of better diagnosing. So, what is the trigger? "Reasonable individuals" might be asking if it's vaccines. How can we ignore these autism rates and at the same time discount any dialogue that includes rejecting vaccination?

Phil Elmore's column on vaccines and autism, "Don't buy the vaccines-autism myth," presupposes that the success of modern technology automatically extols virtue upon vaccines, as if there is no credible controversy. He tries to assure people that there is no reason to ever fear vaccines-causing autism because "so much credible evidence exists to the contrary." Elmore forgets that complicated technology is not infallible. Product recalls abound. Costly mistakes are made in medicine every day. Drugs are recalled. Pharmaceutical companies are sued. Vaccines are sometimes pulled from the market. He may not know that credible evidence showing an association between vaccines and harmful effects is regularly suppressed and ignored. The controversy is gaining strength and credibility, not simply because of celebrity spokespeople, but because this evidence validates observations and first-hand experience.

Calling parents "superstitious" when they choose not to vaccinate is convenient for those who promote vaccines. However, most parents choosing not to vaccinate take this position after much digging for information they can't find in their doctor's office, after much heart-wrenching and soul-searching, and after tapping into the deepest part of a mother's love for her child.

Vaccine-related autism is real to a family who recently won a case for vaccine damage, entitling them to compensation. In a landmark admission of vaccine-caused injury, the case concluded: "Vaccines aggravated a rare underlying metabolic condition that resulted in a brain disorder 'with features of autism spectrum disorder.'"

Since 1988, nearly $2 billion has been awarded to vaccine victims through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

Just one generation ago, the list of recommended vaccines was 23 doses of seven vaccines. Today, it has tripled to 69 doses of 16 vaccines by the age of 18.

If there were any problems with vaccines at all, it is safe to say we have tripled these problems. And where are the studies that have concluded it is safe and effective to give multiple doses of multiple vaccines at the same time, or on such a vigorous schedule? They don't exist. Stop and think. Without these studies, isn't it possible that "medical technology" is more interested in selling vaccines than finding out if they have a cumulative negative effect?

Mr. Elmore's "medical technology" is responsible for recommending more and more vaccines simply on the belief that all vaccines are safe and good. In the absence of legitimate studies and questions, we find an epidemic of "stolen" children forming right before our very eyes. And don't doubt these mothers who are front-row witnesses to the regression of their previously healthy children. Their diagnoses are correct; their symptoms are palpable and documented. Treating the hazardous effects of toxins and observing the consequential improvement in health is not unrealistic in any other setting. But if the vaccine is the toxin, people recoil at the thought of helping these children, simply because questionable studies say it isn't real. Is this fair and honest to these suffering families? Denying there is a problem just adds suffering.

Do we know about the studies that are so quick to "confirm" that vaccines do not cause autism? Most people, including Mr. Elmore, blindly accept the conclusions of these studies without taking a close look at what formed those conclusions. These studies were carried out in the United States, Great Britain, Denmark and Sweden. They compared receiving a vaccine with no thimerosal (mercury), some thimerosal and more thimerosal. They never compared them with a population receiving no vaccines. Is that honest? Do we ever wonder, I mean seriously wonder, let alone actually study it, why unvaccinated Amish children don't show up with autism on a regular basis?

Real studies have been carried out and duplicated, connecting the MMR (measles) vaccine to autism. Because the mainstream world of medicine chooses to ignore those facts does not automatically make them "propaganda." This is a controversial subject. Dispensing with it by calling those who have questions or observations "willful, ignorant American citizens" will not make the controversy disappear.

The new epidemic of vaccine-caused autism is not the view of a few hysterical mothers out to pick a fight. This issue has legitimate medical people doubting the unquestioned acceptance of vaccines. Educated people with real questions. I contend that "rational human beings" need to "suspend their better judgment" (to quote Elmore) when blindly accepting numerous vaccines that contain so many potentially harmful ingredients.

The anti-vaccine movement has a celebrity spokesperson because the problem finally became so huge that it encroached the world of professional acting. Thank our lucky stars that a powerful, influential, connected person could give a face and a voice to so many parents who, if given the same celebrity circumstances, would yell just as loud as Jenny McCarthy.