Wednesday, August 7, 2019

Vaccines Not Primary Cause of Autism

Four Reasons

Empirical Science


Ultrasound fetal hazards far outweigh vaccine hazards.

Ultrasound damage is empirically proven at low intensity, at clinical intensity, and this happens with 100% reliability. This goes beyond "risk assessment". The question becomes not if, but why are they doing this? [ref]

Ultrasound is officially described as "harmless". Clearly there is a heavy political component, an investment in fetal damage, which should not be surprising in the context of Machiavellian medical monopoly practice. [ref] [ref]

A few seconds of ultrasound can damage the fetus.



Autism Initiation Timeline


Autism is initiated in the womb at approximately the 20th week gestation. [ref]

This corresponds with prenatal ultrasound, not vaccines. Doctors do not advise routine vaccination at the 20th week, but they do force by intimidation, pregnant women to undergo ultrasound at the 20th week.

Thus, ultrasound fetal damage is the sine qua non for autism. There are exceptions where other forms of radiation could have damaged the fetus, such as x-rays. Vaccines are not a sine quo non.

Vaccines could be a trigger like many other environmental stressors, but more likely it is the antibiotic preservative in the vaccine, not the vaccine itself.

Two interviewees in Wakefield's movie, Vaxxed, inadvertently describe "antibiotics" as the primary causative stressor -- despite the film's intent -- to promote the concept of vaccine-caused autism.[ref] I spoke several times at length with Wakefield during the Vaxxed premiers in New York. He was "impressed" but would not allow further discussion.

Ultrasound "potentiates" antibiotics by a factor as much as 100x! This use of ultrasound is an emerging but controversial antibiotic technology, yet conspicuously not controversial when applied to a fetus.

Cuba: No Autism


Despite 100% vaccine compliance in Cuba, including the MMR, there has been virtually no autism!

Cuba could not afford to buy or maintain ultrasound machines, thus there was virtually no autism. 

Lately Cuba is being donated ultrasound machines, and Cuba is suffering some rising autism rates. More recently, with trade barriers falling, DUS sales reps are meeting high level officials in Cuba, preparing major sales campaigns.

Japan: Rising Autism


The MMR vaccine was cancelled circa 1992, when Japan suspected that the MMR might be causing autism, yet autism increase more than ever before!

In 1992 Japan increased ultrasound machine allowed intensities by at least 8x-15x. Autism increased though MMR was canceled. They were following the 1991 increase by the FDA.


Discussion


Vaccines are dubious products. Even vaccine manufacturers admit that vaccines are not proven safe nor effective. [ref]

Vaccines are not proven effective because the disease causation paradigms (germs) are not valid. Environmental toxicology is missing from all aspects of disease epidemics --  despite massive industrial poisoning at all disease epicenters in proportion to disease intensity. [ref]

Nevertheless, the vaccine controversy is a controlled narrative that primarily serves as a smoke screen. Because most anti-vaxers believe in the mainstream disease causation paradigms (germs), the mainstream is able to trick anti-vaxers into dramatizing germ theory and hiding greater medical horrors, such as ultrasound.

For example, the following article will keep anti-vaxers excited, as they shout how The New York Times "admits" that vaccine viruses are causing disease.



Anti-vaxers should be arguing causation in terms of toxicology, not virology.

Vaccines are secondary, one of the several subsequent environmental stressors that can trigger "autism" in the already ultrasound-damaged child.

RFK Jr., Age Of Autism, Blaxill, Wakefield, Handley, etc.


Why do these prominent anti-vaxers have it so wrong? None will answer my emails or personal in-the-face requests for dialogue. None of the autism nonprofits will answer. They avoid obvious resolution of the autism epidemic, merely herding the sheep along without causing an effective rebellion. They are compensated well as they mislead people into the virology morass.

For example,

RFK, Jr., promotes vaccine causation for autism (2/15/2017)

A lot of people say well maybe it’s the glyphosate, from the pesticides, maybe it’s PFOA from flame retardants, maybe it’s ultrasound. There’s a number of hypotheses, they all should be investigated. But none of them has the timing, or the sexual dimorphism that we see that we need to explain, when we look at these disorders [except vaccines]
RFK, Jr. conspicuously places ultrasound last, behind "flame retardants". That's not a mistake. He is wrong about vaccines because they do not have the timing of autism initiation (described above).

He is wrong about a unique "sexual dimorphism" for vaccines -- because males and females usually respond differently to any poisoning.


* * *

_____________

Please share this URL and visit harvoa.org.
_____________

Disclaimer: This is for discussion only. For medical advice see a trusted medical professional without delay.

Copyright 2019 harvoa | All rights reserved.

14 comments:

  1. At first glance, this piece of yours, based purely on reading the title would seem to suggest you are dismissing any connection between autism and vaccines altogether. It would have been better to entitle it a bit differently like: “vaccines may not be the primary cause of autism”, since as I am about to reveal, I think you have left a lot of questions unanswered as to your methodology.

    In response, a pro-vaxxer like Dr. Paul Offit, who also happens to be a media mouthpiece regularly used to promote vaccination, might come up with a rebuttal like "even anti-vaxxers now admit that vaccines are not the cause of autism". He would thus get some airtime to further "debunk" any critical connection between vaccines and the development of various diseases.

    Delving into the "meat" of your short article, resolves some of these concerns for me, since I am already well aware of the necessity to have some sort of pre-disposition towards developing autism, which, if an environmental toxin is added, usually results in the "storm" necessary to push a child over the edge.

    I am also aware of the fact that autism can have any number of environmental triggers. But before we get to that we need to define what autism is. According to my layman understanding as an engineer and not a medical or science professional, autism is an umbrella term used to describe a series of neurological/developmental and gastrointestinal symptoms that commonly show up in childhood. Each individual who is diagnosed as being autistic, possesses a unique set of symptoms that fit into the overall definition of autism. These symptoms, their severity and how they are manifested are unique to that person.

    I feel that your position paper is too limited in scope to be able to prove, either for or against the notion that autism is caused primarily at the 20-week gestation period by ultrasound alone, since even the study you referenced didn't prove that causality. Of course, I should take the time to do my due diligence by trying to find the studies that do, since I have known about the risks of ultrasound for several years, just that I could never a particular reason to single out ultrasound over other environmental factors.

    Nevertheless, when my wife had our first son, we minimized the level of exposure he would have to this device, and he only received 1 or 2 scans early in pregnancy and one more just before birth, where I insisted it should be a very quick scan. He did not receive one at the 20 week mark. He thus received half or fewer than half the number of scans as the average baby in utero in most countries receives these days.

    Therefore, in order for the hypothesis made to have the kind of proof needed to be a "smoking gun", I feel you would need to expand considerably on a number of factors, that were not explained in any detail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the advice. Vaccines are hell, but ultrasound is a much more reliable hell, as I think will agree if you read my cheap ultrasound book. www.harvoa.org

      Delete
    2. There is also my in-depth article at
      http://www.townsendletter.com/April2017/ultrasound0417.html

      Delete
  2. Starting with the notion that Cuba doesn't have autism, despite a 100% vaccination rate (which is probably more likely to be 97-99%, rather than 100%). But even this is dubious. Cuba is a Communist country, and Communist countries tend to be less than transparent. And it's not just Communist countries.

    Developing countries like to impress foreign officials, especially westerners, with progress made on "human development" factors in order to receive extra funding from the likes of the WHO, the World Bank and other agencies. It's the "carrot and stick" approach. A country must make progress in certain areas, and they get the funding.

    Thailand is a country I know well - which just so happens to claim a 99% vaccination rate on international comparison charts. However, the truth was revealed when I went to a provincial government office one time. I just happened to walk past the provincial health authority office, with a graph depicting the actual vaccination rates. I took a picture of it. It clearly showed that the provincial and national rates of vaccination for all VPDs were far below the figures they provide international agencies with. The vaccination with the highest uptake nationally was the BCG shot, since it's automatically given in hospitals on the day of birth. The uptake was listed at 96% nationally, but only around 86% in that province. Other vaccines had a coverage between 75 and 89% (although I think there was one with just 57% coverage), and national figures for other vaccines, including the MMR and Dtap were on average in the 80-90% range. The overall vaccination rate nationally, depending on how that is defined, would thus be around 85-90% at best, since even the BCG figure doesn't state whether 96% of all births took place in the hospital and thus every baby received such a shot. It's more likely that the 96% figure refers to the coverage of the BCG vaccine for babies born in hospital with 4% not receiving one for various reasons, but without knowing the national percentage of births outside a hospital facility. There is reason to believe a substantial percentage of the population still gives birth at home, despite official figures to the contrary. Urban and village residents with access to a health facility mostly give birth in a hospital setting, but for people living in the forests and remote areas, it is likely the exact opposite. Anyway, this is one proof of sorts, that the Cuban figures could be fudged.

    Another one is how autism is defined. Until recently, Asperger's syndrome was considered a separate disorder often separated from autism. Now it's defined as "high-functioning autism" and may be lumped into the same category, which also inflates the figures. Therefore, what diagnostic criteria was used to label a Cuban child as being autistic or not? Subtle forms of developmental delay are often misdiagnosed or left out of official statistics. Therefore, the Cuban claims of "no autism" are further weakened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. Yes my article is not a rigorous study. However, vaccines can be argued forever in terms of their contribution to autism. Less argument is required for ultrasound causation -- if you were read my cheap book on ultrasound. I think will be shocked over the ability of ultrasound to damage a fetus.

      Delete
  3. Official and unofficial statistics all point to a sudden spike in the rate of autism diagnoses, both in the United States and several other countries, post 1990 or so, coinciding with several factors, but primarily an increase in both coverage and the number of vaccine doses given to children. Prior to the early 1990s, despite the ubiquitous vaccination programs in place in the US since the 60s and in most developing countries that started around the late 70s, autism was very rare. Therefore, in the case of Japan, the same factors are likely to apply.

    It is clear that not every child that receives a vaccine will go on to develop autism, far from it, that would be too obvious. Vaccines affect boys and girls differently, and as your thesis seems to suggest, are a secondary cause that pushes children over the edge, which seems to be a plausible one. But as even Dr. Kirby's book "Evidence of Harm" shows, relying on one causative factor as the only explanation for the increasing incidence of autism, can easily be disproven by other factors.

    In that book, mercury is cited as being the primary cause. The group being referenced “Safe Minds”, which includes Mark Blaxill of Wakefield fame (although he later left the group he helped to found) initially came on board with the MMR causes autism theory, but Albert Enayati, another father of an autistic child would focus on the mercury (thimerosal).

    Turns out that mercury would apparently be removed from childhood vaccines several years later, but the incidence of autism continued to increase. How is this so? Well, there are several possible explanations.

    One is that mercury, instead of being removed entirely, was now being used in the manufacturing process and filtered out, leaving "trace amounts" remaining. Since mercury is highly cell destructive even in nanometer doses and any amounts under 0.5% can allow a vaccine to be declared as "mercury free", it may not be surprising that autism continued to climb, but not exclusively for this reason. You see, vaccine schedules have been expanded over time so by the early 2000s when the mercury was supposedly removed, more vaccine doses were added to the schedule. Then you have the flu shot, which contains by far the largest amount of mercury of any vaccine being recommended to children and put on the schedule a few short years later and that vaccine is given annually.

    Aluminum salts have also been studied as a factor in causing the development of neurological conditions. Then you have Tylenol, often given to calm a screaming child after their vaccinations, which seems to exacerbate any reactions as it depletes glutathione. I could reference studies and vaccine inserts, but I’m sure you’ve already seen them; if not, let me know.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That leads me to your point about vaccines not being given at the 20-week gestation mark or before. Firstly, you didn't explain what you meant, although I think you vaguely referenced the vaccines given to pregnant mothers. Since around 2011, pregnant women are given vaccines both a flu shot AND a Dtap (to protect their child from whooping cough). The recommendations for when these vaccines should be given has evolved over time, but as far as I understand it, the flu shot is now recommended any time before 20-25 weeks, while the tetanus shot is given at 26 weeks. At this point you can see why it becomes a little fuzzy to determine which causative factor is the most significant, unless you take into account all the factors I've presented, and others that I haven't, such as the child's or mother's exposure to fluoride and dental amalgams prior to, during after the pregnancy.

    Of course, neither Cuba nor Japan likely gave pregnant mothers any sort of vaccine during the 90s, assuming your Cuba autism figures are from the same time period. In which case, you would need to conduct a study comparing the incidence of autism in the USA, Japan and Cuba during the same time period, otherwise, no valid statistics can be drawn since the environmental factors are different.

    When are the autism diagnoses made? At which age? Even if autism supposedly develops in the womb, which is exactly what the mainstream claims, it doesn't fit exactly with reality. I think it may develop in the womb for some babies, but not all. These days it's more likely to happen that way than in the past, since maternal vaccines and ultrasound are more widely used than several decades ago. GMO foods, pesticides, air pollution and other environmental factors are, putting aside industrial emissions affecting populations residing in certain areas, more common now than in the past.

    Any vaccine can be a major causative factor for the development of autism and other developmental disorders. Focusing only, or mainly, on MMR like Wakefield and initially, Blaxill did is misdirection as you have made clear, especially since the focus was on the viruses contained within as being the primary agent of autism causation. I single out vaccines mainly from a toxicological point of view and due to most children all across the world being given them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To pregnant women, vaccines may be advised, but ultrasound is virtually required.

      Delete
  5. My own brother is a case in point. He was born in western Europe in the mid-80s and was given his normal childhood vaccines. I'm not sure if he was given an ultrasound or not, but at the time, the norm was to be very conservative in their use and my mom kind of distrusted them too. It's possible that she underwent one or two scans but it wouldn't have been more than that, if at all. No vaccines were given at birth (the BCG shot was given in the Communist countries but not western Europe). The earliest was at 2-3 months, which, in most parts of Europe still stands (unlike in the USA where a Hep B shot is given at birth). He had a normal childhood, was neurotypical until a tetanus shot caused him to develop strange neurological symptoms including OCD at the age of 11. Literally from one day to the next he changed. This was made worse by various medication over the course of time. He is probably best described as medium functioning today, able to express his thoughts with some difficulty and repeating things a lot but unable to hold down a job. Our mother developed tics from a vaccine of some sort (likely tetanus, but not sure) at the age of 24, which continues to cause her jerky movements to this day.
    Finally, any component of any vaccine, either in isolation or in combination, can be a causative factor. You made reference to the antibiotic neomycin in the MMR shot as being the problem, which it could very well be. However, it is disingenuous to treat the antibiotic component as separate to the rest of the vaccine. All a vaccine is from a toxicological standpoint, is a concoction of several toxic agents, human and animal DNA and saline for injection, the latter could be considered quite safe on its own.

    I don't think there have been any studies that look at the individual components of vaccines and their effects on the human immune system, although there have been a couple that look at individual vaccines and the vaccinated/non-vaccinated studies, like the Goldman one, which suggested that the more vaccines given, the worse the health outcomes. I am happy to be corrected should you have been able to find any.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Low level ultrasound has been shown to "potentiate" the toxicity of any subsequent poison, such as a vaccine -- by a factor of 100x. A child can appear normal following ultrasound, but its hormonal system cellular structures can be permanently damaged.

      It is more obvious to the eye, that the subsequent poison is the "cause", however, ultrasound is the more damaging factor. Ultrasound is insidious.
      See www.harvoa.org/chs/pr/dusbk1det.htm

      An in-depth article is at:
      http://www.townsendletter.com/April2017/ultrasound0417.html

      Delete
  6. RFK now has an article on Ultrasound relationship with autism.

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/known-culprit/ultrasound/prenatal-ultrasound-not-so-sound-after-all/

    Maybe it was direct response to your post above? Was about a month after.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for that timeline!

      This appears to be the work of his staff, not RFK. RFK has always put ultrasound down the list and put vaccines at the top of the list. Their article quotes me and... others who are copying or referencing me. So in this new push against ultrasound.

      This also might have been a motivator for his staff and others whom the staff is reading:

      My in-depth article at
      http://www.townsendletter.com/April2017/ultrasound0417.html

      Delete
    2. Agreed.

      I have been following the Children's Health Defence site for a couple of months and have been mostly impressed but also thinking, why the heck doesn't he use the best weapon available to him and attack germ theory itself? I proceeded to search for "germ theory" on the website and found an article from 2018 by Sayer Ji called "Why Everything You Learned About Viruses Is WRONG"

      https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/why-everything-you-learned-about-viruses-is-wrong/

      So....RFK and/or his staff are fully aware of the fallacy of germ theory but as you mentioned before, maybe positioning yourself on that hilltop is deemed unsafe by someone with his kind of exposure and he might be concerned he could isolate his followers, which is why he doesn't put it front and centre?

      Delete
    3. Yes, "virus" is a sacred political term. And I have been told that if a professional ("scientist, journalist or politician") critiques a virus, he will "lose publishing, funding and employment -- overnight".

      Hopefully, they will continue to allow us mice to squeak the truth.

      A few years earlier, Sayer Ji had published my "Everything You Learned About the Cause of Polio is Wrong".

      https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/everything-you-learned-about-cause-polio-wrong

      Sayer Ji:

      Pinterest and MailChimp have “deplatformed” Ji, and he claims to have been “shadow-banned” from Facebook, Microsoft Outlook, Gmail and Google.

      https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/pseudoscience/popular-health-guru-sayer-ji-curates-scientific-literature-his-bachelors-degree-philosophy

      Delete

Coronavirus Pandemic 2019: REFS

[Source article] Air Pollution and COVID-19 Cadotte, Marc. “Early Evidence That COVID-19 Government Policies Reduce Urban Air Pollution,...