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 …
-
-
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
Since back then, strong evidence has been found for prenatal causes, e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29346770 implicates a number of mutations, and suggests a mechanism for how valproic acid causes ASD. It's an exciting time - we're actually learning a lot about the causes of autism!
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @dkegel
Yes all those genetic mutations in one generation. How exciting! (But whatever you do, don't look at those studies that suggest some links to vaccines, and particularly don't listen to the CDC scientist who says they have covered this up. He can't be telling the truth.)
1 reply 3 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
*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).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dkegel
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
1 reply 4 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dkegel
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.
1 reply 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
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...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dkegel @SharylAttkisson
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 ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dkegel @SharylAttkisson
... 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?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I couldn't believe it either! It took more than a year of me reading and talking to some of these scientists and whistleblowers to think there might be something to what they were saying. Very surprising indeed. But I'm glad I listened.
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.