Guardian: Surge in numbers of children with autism

[jomica]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/sto...2121521,00.html

 

Interesting reading.

 

 

... and Andrew Wakefield in front of GMC ....

 

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/sto...2121522,00.html

Edited July 8, 2007 by jomica

[Mumble]

Hmm, worrying and interesting.

 

I think SBC's response is very measured and sensible - although I am a little biased. I do think it is dangerous teritory to go into the MMR debate again. It will be interesting to see if the wider media picks up this story.

 

One thing that concerned me was that there seemed to be no mention in that article (I'm off out to get a copy of the paper now so I can read it fully - plus I need some fresh air) was that they didn't say what they included within ASDs. Some people only include autism/AS, others include autism, AS, ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Dsypraxia and most other ND (neuro diverse) conditions. Without knowing what they are counting and how they are working with their statistics, it is very difficult to make any informed opinion. I do wonder if this has been done for effect - I hope not because that is not what we need. Making it so 'widespread', particularly artifically through miscounting, potentially has the effect of dismissing the real difficulties that ASD individuals face on a day-to-day basis.

 

Mumble.

[lorryw]

This has become such a meaningless debate for me. I personally dont feel there is a link between the MMR and autism, but that is my opinion.

The real debate should be about the future and what will happen to all these youngsters. School and education is a vital but very small part of life. The services available after education are either non existent or not fit for purpose. Autism is not "educated away" it is a life long condtion which requires well planned and funded services.

[jomica]

This has become such a meaningless debate for me. I personally dont feel there is a link between the MMR and autism, but that is my opinion.

 

It's a debate that I've followed, although I don't think my 10 yo son's autism was as a result of having the MMR. Looking back, the signs were there already.

 

However, I was interested in Wakefield's quote that he whilst he couldn't prove that MMR definitely does cause autism, the Department of Health seems happy enough to say that it definitely doesn't, without any proof.

 

The real debate should be about the future and what will happen to all these youngsters. School and education is a vital but very small part of life. The services available after education are either non existent or not fit for purpose. Autism is not "educated away" it is a life long condtion which requires well planned and funded services.

 

I take the point from an earlier poster that we don't know exactly what diagnoses the researchers have used to compile their figures - though it sounds to me that they have used all the different conditions that may be linked to the autism spectrum. However, if 1 in 58 is the stark reality it means that local authorities and other agencies are really going to have to gear themselves up to providing appropriate services for children with ASDs and related conditions, as it seems from this that it certainly isn't going to go away.

[baddad]

One thing that concerned me was that there seemed to be no mention in that article (I'm off out to get a copy of the paper now so I can read it fully - plus I need some fresh air) was that they didn't say what they included within ASDs. Some people only include autism/AS, others include autism, AS, ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Dsypraxia and most other ND (neuro diverse) conditions. Without knowing what they are counting and how they are working with their statistics, it is very difficult to make any informed opinion. I do wonder if this has been done for effect - I hope not because that is not what we need. Making it so 'widespread', particularly artifically through miscounting, potentially has the effect of dismissing the real difficulties that ASD individuals face on a day-to-day basis.

Mumble.

 

Hi all...

Mumble, I totally agree. though it's not a popular line of thought I too believe that there's a real danger of heading into the same kind of 'muddied' waters we see now with ADHD/ADD and dyslexia. That doesn't deny the existence or the implications of either disorder, it just acknowledges that misdiagnosis can go both ways.

 

I've expressed my feelings about MMR many times since I joined the forum, so won't go into that debate again, but it's good to see that two of the experts behind this new report are acknowledging the potential link. The more professionals that do so the more likely we are to see real independent investigation and trials undertaken, rather than this round of gainsaying and half truths perpetuated by the government and manufacturers who stand to lose so much if they are wrong.

Interesting to see SBC rejecting the theory in favour of high level testorone in the womb, which he himself has theorised.

 

L&P

 

BD

[Mumble]

Well I've read the full article expecting the worst, and I have to say, with the exception of the difficulty in not explaining where the 1/58 statistic comes from, the reporting seems fairly balanced and there certainly wasn't much that I wanted to jump up and down and get angry about. There's certainly a great deal of coverage - the front page article and its continuation further into the paper, a double page spread and a separate article which also briefly looks at autism. Interestingly none of the other 'nationals' seem to have picked this up.

 

I was slightly concerned by some of their description of what autism 'is' in that it didn't seem to acknowledge a spectrum - rather too much of the 'all autistic children . . .' and that leads into my second difficulty: the articles mentioned children all the way through, with one exception referring to people. Autism is a life-long condition and it must be recognised as such. You do not stop being autistic at 18 and support services need to recognise this.

 

One thing I particular liked was this short phrase: 'Autism baffles science. Unlike diseases - and autism is a neurological condition, not a disease - few experts would claim to know exactly what causes it' (p.9). I think it's very rare for the mass media to achnowledge autism as a neurological condition - it would certainly be helpful if more were to do so.

[jomica]

The Daily Mail also has the story at:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1774

 

but I guess the level of reporting doesn't quite match that of the Grauniad

 

and the Telegraph also has it:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../nautism108.xml

Edited July 8, 2007 by jomica

[Mumble]

Well I've just skimmed both of these - they recognise a spectrum and then go on to define it totally incorrectly. I have no time for this sort of dangerous reporting:

'They cover a "spectrum" ranging from severe cases of "classic" autism, through a variety of "pervasive developmental disorders", to much milder Asperger's syndrome.' (This is the Mail one - the telegraph is almost identical)

 

'Much milder' AS neglects the difficulties I and other individuals face on a day to day basis. Is it any wonder I struggle to get people to understand and to access the support I need when such misunderstanding is so wide-spread? It is a shame I have a lot of work I should be doing, else a letter to the editor may have been forthcoming.

 

Not so happy Mumble

[Cat]

I now personally believe that the numbers are growing because of a Molotov cocktail effect. If it is true that we are what we eat, then look at what we eat and what the food that we eat contains. Look at the chemicals in all of our everyday things like washing up liquid. Look at the air that we breathe. We have holes in the ozone layer. We are not as clever as we think. OK if we take this to the enth degree then nothing is safe anymore and yes we could all be hit by a car today - BUT - if we are honest we have played around with nature and look where it has got us.

 

So I can not accept that the debate re MMR is irrelevant as it is all part of a cocktail effect and unless we do something the numbers could well continue to grow. And yes I firmly believe we need to be addressing the needs of those with the diagnosis but we also need to see if there is anything that can be done to halt the increase. Sticking our head in the sand is not working.

 

Cat

[Lucas]

I have to challenge hookum about Autism in all its forms, it's an impulse.

 

Check some of the Autistic community blogs; the story was revealed only a few hours after going to print in the Observer yesturday to be almost entirely a fabrication. The research team are shocked that such statements have been attributed to them, their study is unpublished and not even finished, their permission was never sought prior to the Observer prejudicing it. Data was selectively leaked and the team has now launched an investigation to find out who.

 

Primary suspects are Carol Stott and Fiona Scott. Stott had her contract at Cambridge terminated in 2004-2005 for unprofessional conduct. Scott is still at Cambridge. Both had access to the data, both were also business partners selling their services as 'expert' witnesses in MMR litigation even though they are Psychologists, not Immunologists. I think it would be interesting to dig up exactly what their testimonies were. Carol Stott now works for Andrew Wakefield at Thoughtful House.

 

It's speculated at the moment that one of them possibly leaked skewed data to the Observer because Wakefield is going to the GMC to have his conduct examined and he and his supporters are clambering for what superficial support they can get and the Guardian/Observer has been notoriously uncritical along with the Daily Mail that repeated the story today even though it was known to be false yesturday.

[mossgrove]

I'm with Lucas on this one.

 

The article was published in conjunction with a hugely sympathetic 'exclusive interview' with Andrew Wakefield himself allowing him more or less free rein to paint himself as a campaigner for truth and justice when the real situation is far more complicated than that.

 

 

Simon

[Karen A]

Hi If you are right Lucas and Mossgrove I think the Editors of the papers concerned should be ashamed of themselves.Each time reports are published there is a wave of speculation that impacts so many people.Do people not care how their behaviour impacts others ? Karen.

[Lucas]

Simon Baron-Cohen's response is now in the Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_...icle2060575.ece

[jomica]

Thanks Lucas - that's really interesting and gives the earlier reporting perspective.

[florrie]

Well my son went into a coma after his mmr jab and whilst I don't believe it caused his autism I bellieve he was made worse by it.

 

I have heard of other people whose children totally regressed, some left in a vegetative state , after mmr jab including a friend of mine.

 

If these people say this is what happened to their children I tend to believe them, if anyone says they don't think the mmr jab is linked to their child's autism I also tend to believe them, but do not tell me that my son's autism was not affected by the mmr jab becasue it was, and I did say "affected" not "caused".

 

Andrew Wakefield at least was trying to look into what was causing these problems in children, how many members here have had gps who have tried to find out what is causing their children's problems, my gp did nothing to help us, there has no proper record kept of the fact he went into a coma after his mmr, so if records aren't accurate made how can they be reliable . In fact they have gone out of there way to be unhelpful and destructive

 

We have had to fight for any recognition of his very significant difficulties having to go privately, It would have been a godsend to have had a doctor like Andrew Wakefield.

 

All drugs are not 100% safe, just because they affect some people does not mean to say they affect everyone ie thalidomide caused disabilites in children, that was proved eventually after many years it did not cause disabilities in everyone.

 

I am convinced that there is a link between mmr and some people's autism and I find it worrying to say the least that people are categorically saying it isn't, when in my son's case and others it is. I am convinced too that eventually this will be proved

Edited July 12, 2007 by florrie

[Bullet]

[

Andrew Wakefield at least was trying to look into what was causing these problems in children,

 

Andrew Wakefield deliberately let false information be presented as fact. He had been specifically told that the positive results were, in fact, false positives and he still presented them as hard data.

Edited July 12, 2007 by Bullet

[boffin#1]

I think we need more people like Andrew WAkefield who are actually wanting to examine patients rather than rely on frankly unproven and badly constructed research. Has anyone reasd the information on which the main study that says MMR is safe is based. It is deeply flawed and is based on a trawl of GPs records. Having read some of these they are hardly objective. GPs rarely record on the yellow forms any adverse reactions to vaccines or medicines as they are supposed to do.

 

This is one little piece of objective research that shows thimerisol is causing ASD:

 

A Case Series of Children with Apparent Mercury Toxic Encephalopathies Manifesting with Clinical Symptoms of Regressive Autistic Disorders

 

Impairments in social relatedness and communication, repetitive

behaviors, and stereotypic abnormal movement patterns characterize

autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). It is clear that while

genetic factors are important to the pathogenesis of ASDs, mercury

exposure can induce immune, sensory, neurological, motor, and

behavioral dysfunctions similar to traits defining or associated with

ASDs. The Institutional Review Board of the Institute for Chronic

Illnesses (Office for Human Research Protections, U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services, IRB number IRB00005375)

approved the present study. A case series of nine patients who presented

to the Genetic Centers of America for a genetic/developmental

evaluation are discussed. Eight of nine patients (one patient was

found to have an ASD due to Rett's syndrome) (a) had regressive

ASDs; ( had elevated levels of androgens; © excreted significant

amounts of mercury post chelation challenge; (d) had biochemical

evidence of decreased function in their glutathione pathways; (e)

had no known significant mercury exposure except from Thimerosal-

containing vaccines/Rho(D)-immune globulin preparations;

and (f) had alternate causes for their regressive ASDs ruled out.

There was a significant dose-response relationship between the

severity of the regressive ASDs observed and the total mercury dose

children received from Thimerosal-containing vaccines/Rho (D)-

immune globulin preparations. Based upon differential diagnoses, 8

of 9 patients examined were exposed to significant mercury from

Thimerosal-containing biologic/vaccine preparations during their

fetal/infant developmental periods, and subsequently, between 12

and 24 mo of age, these previously normally developing children

suffered mercury toxic encephalopathies that manifested with

clinical symptoms consistent with regressive ASDs. Evidence for

mercury intoxication should be considered in the differential diagnosis

as contributing to some regressive ASDs.

 

This is the kind of research that is needed on an ongoing basis to get to the bottom of the causes of ASDs and similar conditions.

 

The growth in ASD is not caused by "fairy dust". Why the explosion is treated so calmly is baffling it nearly as prevalent as AIDs globally and the impact on future life prospects for many is catastrophic. The complacency of Government to this is unsurprising given the absence of orgtanised meaningful campaigning for more and better focussed research into cause and effect in order to try to stem or reverse the growth trend. There is a cause. The pharmaceutical companies who produce drugs have no interest in finding out as it would cause their drug sales and profits to fall. Government is wholly incapable of contolling either pharmaceuticals or psychiatrists or the medical profession generally in this area. See Angela Browning MP's annual closure debate in the Commons for the extraordinary state of affairs where psychiatrists who do not unerstand the condition are allowed to present expert witness statements. Health Minister when asked to require training of "provincial" psychiatrists in ASDs has failed tp press the matter successfully with the Institute of Psychiatry for two years since it was first suggested as necessary.

[boffin#1]

And this is the result of a three year review into the same subject in the House of Representatives.Dan Burton _Indiana May 20, 2003Report of Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness- Mercury in Medicine taking unnecessary risks

If I was cynical I would conclude that there was deliberate and reckless disregard for human rights involved in the failure to promptly deal with thimerosol when it was found to be dangerous. This is a crime on the same scale as war crimes and concentration camps. It is truly awful to think that hundreds of thousands of lives if not millions have been blighted by bureaucratic inertia and failure to act on identified dangers on a scale that is MIND BOGGLING

Edited July 13, 2007 by boffin#1

[Cynical]

Well I've just skimmed both of these - they recognise a spectrum and then go on to define it totally incorrectly. I have no time for this sort of dangerous reporting:

'They cover a "spectrum" ranging from severe cases of "classic" autism, through a variety of "pervasive developmental disorders", to much milder Asperger's syndrome.' (This is the Mail one - the telegraph is almost identical)

 

'Much milder' AS neglects the difficulties I and other individuals face on a day to day basis. Is it any wonder I struggle to get people to understand and to access the support I need when such misunderstanding is so wide-spread? It is a shame I have a lot of work I should be doing, else a letter to the editor may have been forthcoming.

I'm sorry, but pointing out that Asperger's Syndrome is milder "in comparison" than "severe cases of "classic" autism" is neither dangerous reporting nor denigrating anyone's diagnosis.

 

If someone correctly points out that a severe example of a disability is at the opposite end of the scale to a mild example of the same disability, I fail to see what is dangerous about it or how it is an example of a misunderstanding.

 

Asperger's Syndrome presents unique challenges that carers of severely autistic people don't face - but saying that it is a milder form of ASD is neither dismissing these challenges nor implying that parents and carers of Aspies have it easy.

[Minxygal]

I take the point from an earlier poster that we don't know exactly what diagnoses the researchers have used to compile their figures - though it sounds to me that they have used all the different conditions that may be linked to the autism spectrum. However, if 1 in 58 is the stark reality it means that local authorities and other agencies are really going to have to gear themselves up to providing appropriate services for children with ASDs and related conditions, as it seems from this that it certainly isn't going to go away.

 

Actually it's the opposite that seems to be happening, as the figures increase agencies like SS are choosing to de-catagorise ASD as being in the catagory for help. Here in Notts having an ASD diagnosis means that you don't now qualify for someone from the disability team, I suppose cos thats easier than putting support plans into place to support families having to live with it on a daily basis.

[Bullet]

"The growth in ASD is not caused by "fairy dust"."

 

This is the DSM III criteria for autism in 1980:

 

DSM III (1980)

 

Diagnostic criteria for Infantile Autism

 

A. Onset before 30 months of age

 

B. Pervasive lack of responsiveness to other people (autism)

 

C. Gross deficits in language development

 

D. If speech is present, peculiar speech patterns such as immediate and delayed echolalia, metaphorical language, pronominal reversal.

 

E. Bizarre responses to various aspects of the environment, e.g., resistance to change, peculiar interest in or attachments to animate or inanimate objects.

 

F. Absence of delusions, hallucinations, loosening of associations, and incoherence as in Schizophrenia.

 

 

 

This is the DSM IV criteria for autism (2000):

 

299.00 Autistic Disorder

 

A total of six (or more) items from (1), (2), and (3), with at least two from (1), and one each from (2) and (3):

Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction.

failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level

a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest)

lack of social or emotional reciprocity

Qualitative impairments in communication as manifested by at least one of the following:

delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied by an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication such as gesture or mime)

in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others

stereotyped and repetitive use of language or idiosyncratic language

lack of varied spontaneous make-believe play or social imitative play appropriate to developmental level

Restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least of one of the following:

encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus

apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals

stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g. hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole body movements)

persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas, with onset prior to age 3 years: (1) social interaction, (2) language as used in social communication, or (3) symbolic or imaginative play.

The disturbance is not better accounted for by Rett's disorder or childhood disintegrative disorder.

 

Most people did not have the awareness or understanding of why a child might be different twenty years ago. Without this knowledge they could pick up on the fact the child was different and they might note all the ways the child was different, but unless they put those differences together they wouldn't think of the correct diagnosis. As a child I actually fit very accurately the criteria for this:

DSM-III (1980)

 

Diagnostic Criteria for Childhood Onset Pervasive Developmental Disorder

 

A. Gross and sustained impairment in social relationships, e.g., lack of appropriate affective responsivity, Inappropriate clinging, asociality, lack of empathy.

 

B. At least three of the following:

 

1. sudden excessive anxiety manifested by such symptoms as free-floating anxiety, catastrophic reactions to everyday occurrences, inability to be consoled when upset, unexplained panic attacks,

 

2. constricted or inappropriate affect, including lack of appropriate fear reactions, unexplained rage reactions, end extreme mood lability,

 

3. resistance to change in the environment, e.g., upset if dinner time is changed, or insistence on doing things in the same manner every time, e.g., putting on clothes always in the same order,

 

4. oddities of motor movement, such as peculiar posturing, peculiar hand or finger movements, or walking on tiptoe,

 

5. abnormalities of speech, such as question-like melody, monotonous voice,

 

6. hyper or hypo-sensitivity to sensory stimuli. e.g., byperacusis,

 

7. self-mutilation, e.g., biting or hitting self, head banging.

 

C. Onset of the full syndrome after 30 months of age and before 12 years of age.

 

Absence of delusions, hallucinations, incoherence, or marked loosening of associations.

 

 

And I think that at least a couple of paediatricians suspected something along these lines and I might have got a diagnosis of atypical autism, or childhood schizophrenia, or personality disorder but because I was deemed to be academic and because my mum especially didn't want me labelled and because only a few paediatricians would have had the awareness at the time there wasn't seen as the need to push for a diagnosis. I can think of several pupils in my school including myself when I was a teenager who nowadays would easily have got a diagnosis of being on the spectrum. Not borderline, or might have traits, but slap bang fits the DSM IV criteria perfectly. But we didn't get the diagnosis then and were just left to get on with things, often with damaging results. But those pupils would have made up the 1 in 166 quite easily.

Edited July 13, 2007 by Bullet

[boffin#1]

Bullet. I know the DSM criteria.

But the key growth take off is between 1988 and 2000 and DSM IV is you say 2000.

It just doesn't wash that the criteria have been loosened. It does co-incide with the introduction of the MMR jab in 1988 though. Spurious correlation maybe but doubtful.

Growth and intensity of onset vary according to overall mercury. methylmercury and ethymercury uptake though. And that increases as both infants and young children have more jabs because apparently mumps measles and rubella are life threatening although I had all in childhood and have survived the experience unharmed. Trouble is that today's doctors cannot remember that these conditions were with very very few exceptions minor childhood illnesses.

Overall level of infant and early childhood jabs has a good prima facia link with increased rates of ASD ADD ADHD and across countries so not a policy change or loosening of criteria.

Research showing trend reversal when thimerosol is removed from vaccines is interesting.

Nobody has yet explained why measles virus sits in the gut.

Nobody has yet staisfactorily explained why ASDs have more gut related problems associated with absorbtion.

Nobody has yet explained why ASDs are all more prone to wheat and casseine allergies.

Nobody has explained why ASDs have severe gut problems.

My observation anecdotal as it is and based on a small family sample is that there is a problem with absorbtion through the gut wall lining that in turn affects everything else associated with ASDs

And my stepson went into a coma 3 days after his MMR booster and there is no record of this being connected to it in his medical records.

There is NO RELIABLE DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR ASD it is no more than an opinion.

Edited July 13, 2007 by boffin#1

[bid]

There is NO RELIABLE DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR ASD it is no more than an opinion.

 

Why do you think this...can you explain further, please?

 

Bid

Edited July 13, 2007 by bid

[Bullet]

http://breathspakids.blogspot.com/2007/06/...-andrew_28.html

 

Quoted from the link:

 

"Dr Nick Chadwick started to work as a graduate student in Dr Wakefield's lab in the Royal Free Hospital in 1994. The lab started to focus on testing samples and tissue from autistic patients in 1996. Chadwick was responsible for processing the materials and looking for measles RNA. He reported that there were never any confirmed findings of measles RNA. The only positives that were obtained were rapidly shown to be false positives and he reported this. "

[TheNeil]

It just doesn't wash that the criteria have been loosened. It does co-incide with the introduction of the MMR jab in 1988 though. Spurious correlation maybe but doubtful.

 

Interesting. I was born in 1974 and didn't have the MMR jab. My father was born in 1948 and didn't have the MMR jab. My grandmother was born in <God-knows-when>...and didn't have the MMR jab. And yet all three of us have either been diagnosed as being AS or display(ed) significant AS traits.

 

Scaremongering by the press and those seeking to find a 'simple' reason do nothing to help Autistic people and everything to put lives at risk. The MMR jab, despite what the popular press and media might like to make out, does not lead to Autism. What it does do is protect children from Measles, Mumps and Rhubella (which I've probably spelt wrong but can't be bothered to check on Google).

 

To say that there is no reliable diagnostic criteria for ASDs and is instead nothing more than opinion is a very brave thing to say on a forum specifically for ASDs. That's not to say that you're not entitled to your opinion but you are about to open up a real can of worms. Admittedly there is no 'absolute test' but that isn't how ASDs work. In fact many medical 'conditions' rely on little more than opinion - is there an 'absolute test' to determine Parkinson's? Or multiple-personality disorder? In the case of cancer (for example) a surgeon can open up the patient and there is the tumour but when it comes to conditions that affect the brain and the personality, what is there to see? Open up the head and what do you see? A brain - of the 'problem' there's no sign.

 

I don't know what your connection with the ASD world is but to seemingly base so much of your reasoning on the popularist theories and half-baked mistruths makes me one very scared AS bunny. Why do so many people need to work so hard to find a 'cause' or, worse still a 'cure'? Why can't people accept that some of us are 'different' (and very often are proud to be 'different') and that nature has simply made us this way?

[bid]

Like TheNeil, my father was born in 1929, and had a dx...not sure if he had any vaccinations way back then!

 

I didn't have MMR as I'm too ancient myself, although I did have the standard vacs. of the time (mid to late 60's).

 

I do wonder whether vacs may trigger an adverse reaction in children who have the genetic susceptibility...or do they cause something that is like autism, but isn't genetic autism, IYSWIM?? In the same way that severe epileptic seizures, brain damage, or severe illness like meningitis, etc, can cause 'autism', but not 'genetic' autism?? In other words are there two things going on here: 'genetic autism', and 'aquired autism' through some kind of damage??

 

The diagnostic criteria for ASC seem pretty comprehensive to me.

 

Bid

[Bullet]

What TheNeil said.

[boffin#1]

Firstly, there is little merit in knocking the messenger because you do not like the message. Secondly if you are going to it would help if you read the post and followed the links.

There is evidence that late onset ASD and other similar like ADD ADHD Krone's Tourrette's may have a vaccine connection. It is possible that measles virus (non-vaccine measles virus may also replicate the vaccine.)Oh fiddlesticks. What the heck and all that. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. I do not want to cause upset. But read this list of international research linking measles virus to gut to autoimmune breakdown and autism.

 

Research on Measles virus, gut problems and autoimmune breakdown and autism

 

To those of you upset by saying there is no diagnostic criteria for ASDs it was what the Senior Clinical Psychologist who diagnosed my stepson told us. When my partner was diagnosed by Utah Frith she said she had been reluctant to give a diagnosis because of the "heavy burden" the diagnosis carried. I have lived with both a partner and a stepson on the spectrum for 2 decades. I have read book after book all with different perspectives of the condition. I have read research by the bucket load from this country, USA, Canada, Australia.

What is clear is that it is a spectrum that is fuzzy round the edges. Assumptions about it by many experts are completely wrong. Society is not equipped to deal with it because the main problems for those with ASDs are dealing with people and systems that have not got a clue about what they are doing and they throw meds and inappropriate services at it reluctantly and largely ineffectively.

 

It will be a classic example of too little and too late as ASDs hit the 1m mark out of 60m population how is society going to adapt. It shows precious little sign of doing so yet.

[baddad]

Hi all - was sort of keeping out of this (see my earlier post!) as i've sort of said it all on this subject time and time again - BUT -

 

ALL of the components of MMR have historic links with autism: In the case of Measles/Rubella these are direct causal links, while Mumps is linked with meningitis which itself has been implicated directly. Prior to the Medical Research Councils' vehement defence of MMR the direct links were cited in pretty much all material written on the subject (look at older reference material by (i.e.) Lorna Wing etc) and while they are not now directly linked this is because of changing theories about the nature of autism rather than new research which undermines the old associations.

Additionally, the first MMR vaccine is administered at the precise stage when the infant brain is undergoing the most comprehensive chemical and physical develpomental changes it will ever undergo (don't quote me on the figures, but it's something like 70% of the brains development occurs in the first 3 years after birth),..

None of which proves that there's a link between MMR/Autism, and whatever the nature of any link that might exist it is certainly not a straighforward one, but the casual reassurances offered to counter suggestions of a link have no more 'weight' behind them than the accusations themselves - the 'evidence' that is cited being without exception either non-specific data (often only 'recounts' of OLD non-specific data, at that!) or reliant on 'flagging' systems that are/were in themselves inherently flawed.

The government pamphlet MMR 'The facts' has been riddled with inconsitencies and false claims from the first day of issue.

Truth is, no one KNOWS at this stage whether there is or isn't a link (unless you accept the possibility of medical cartel cover-ups) there are just far bigger numbers of medical professionals who think it 'unlikely' than there are who think it IS 'likely'.

Totally agree with all of the other stuff - improved diagnostics, better recognition, wider definitions etc, but none of those things are totally convincing for an 'old codger' like me who sees far more children with visible, noticable problems than there were 25 years ago, and that old chestnut about 'residential care' doesn't cover it either, because we're talking about the eighties, not the forties or fifties....

 

Sorry - soap box away!

 

L&P

 

BD