Firstly, the dates proving vaccine safety are just as old, and of course there a more recent ones - these were just the first I cut and paste from my list because I've broken it down into the different vaccines. These are for the first vaccines, the one's that some people wrongly say eradicated the diseases, that were given out between 1940-1980. The science, like above, proves there were a lot of issues with these vaccines, hence they changed the formula, going from live cell to synthetic, among other things. The pattern goes release a vaccine, real life proves them to be ineffective (despite how the figures that have no limitations are fudged to say otherwise), it's reformulated and then the current new trend is to release the new formula before it is properly tested (usually because they have pre-approval aka making you and your kids are the lab rats). There are no safety studies on the current vaccines - there hasn't been the time. It might be time to dig a little deeper past popular media, or the conclusions of compromised stakeholder studies, and look at the actual information in the body of the study - they often don't match up. A lot of assumptions and predetermined views find themselves in the conclusion that aren't backed up by the actual facts. Anyway, at least I'm providing entries that can be looked up to back up my POV - have you?

Secondly, I didn't say that all the references above were peer reviewed and published, I said I had others like these that were peer reviewed and published, not that many of the above aren't. The ones that aren't are government sponsored reviews and reports and effect legislature - how can these not be considered relevant? Comprehension can be effected when someone reads something determined to be combative/oppositional rather than in the mind of open discussion.

My little friendly but opposing banter with Rockin is because we have a history of this type of discussion. It wasn't saying these threads were only for anti-vaxers nor was it involving anyone else. As he says, he has a tendency to talk down to people about this stuff - aka gets really offensive because he makes it personal rather than simply discussing the topic. Perhaps it is a little unfair not to give him benefit of the doubt this time. I have no problem entering a discussion of opposites - trolling on the other hand, I have no patience for. You know the saying: once bitten twice shy, an all that.

I, in particular, find the claim that autism rates are only the result of better diagnosis offensive and narrow minded, particularly seeing the cause it theoretically still unknown by the medical establishment. It completely dismisses and belittles what hundreds of thousands of parents have seen with their own eyes just because we haven't had it rubber-stambed by some guy in a lab coat.

To RockinSAHD - did you even read that journal entry that you referenced? I don't actually see how it supports your view. These ones are interesting though (I will warn you, they all disagree with you):

Mark F. Blaxill "What's Going on? The Question of Time Trends in Autism ", Public Health Reports (1974-), Vol. 119, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 2004), pp. 536-551

Eric London, Ruth A. Etzel, "The Environment as an Etiologic Factor in Autism: A New Direction for Research " Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 108, Supplement 3 (Jun., 2000), pp. 401-404

Michael Szpir, "Tracing the Origins of Autism: A Spectrum of New Studies" Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 114, No. 7 (Jul., 2006), pp. A412-A418

Gillian Baird, Hilary Cass, Vicky Slonims "Diagnosis Of Autism" BMJ: British Medical Journal, Vol. 327, No. 7413 (Aug. 30, 2003), pp. 488-493



This on in particular states that "medical sources" combined with an ineffective enzyme (see my statement about CYP450 system) plays a large part in the mercury levels within non-fish eating (just in case people want to blame it on that) autistics. It's 2010 too, hopefully that's recent enough... (not that the dates of the studies above actually change the fact that highly vaccinated groups still caught the disease...)

Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Peter G. Green, Lora Delwiche, Robin Hansen, Cheryl Walker, Isaac N. Pessah, "Blood Mercury Concentrations in CHARGE Study Children with and without Autism" Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 118, No. 1 (Jan., 2010), pp. 161-166