Since I wrote this article in 2008, the rate of autism -- according to the government -- has gotten much, much worse as our govt. and "best" experts are still mystified as to how to reverse this. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-open-question-on-vaccines-and-autism/ …https://twitter.com/dkegel/status/987853815687790592 …
-
-
*shrug* Many studies have looked at whether vaccines are involved, and the answer seems to be 'no'; see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24814559 . The evidence for prenatal causes, by comparison, is quite compelling (see above).
-
The scientists I have relied on (including some who have worked for govt and some in vaccine industry) indicate they believe it's like a lot of things: genetics and then exposures... Like smoking/lung cancer. Most people who smoke will never get lung cancer
-
Sure - genetics and *prenatal (and maybe perinatal)* exposure. The mutations in question appear to be largely de novo. They have been going on for ages & are not uncommon; but when they happen to genes that control brain development, they tend to be selected against by nature.
-
And, as the head of CDC immunization --and others-- have stated, vaccines may trigger autism in susceptible children (perhaps these are some of the susceptibilities). Doesn't mean it explains all the autism/ADD but some scientists believe it's a factor.
-
Ah, but when did they say that? As one of them said later: "The beauty of science is that you are taken where the evidence leads you. [Early in 2011] I thought that there was some chance that postnatal factors might lead to some cases of autism - particularly in children...
-
that had a genetic or other medical predisposing condition. But, our own research has argued against this view. Later in 2011, we published a paper about brain changes in children with and without regression (Nordahl et al 2011). We found that it was the children ...
-
... with evidence of regression that generally had enlarged brains. We also found that head enlargement started at 4-6 months of life - long before the behavioral regression." Science moves on when better info becomes available. Do you?
-
That's what I did. I used to be like you on this topic. But I do listen with an open mind when I talk to scientists, government insiders, whistleblowers who sometimes go against the grain and have proven reliable in the past.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.