by Lori M. Gregory
Health Impact News
There are questions being raised about children who are diagnosed with neuropsychiatric disorders and their association with vaccinations, according to the results of a pilot case study published in Frontiers in Psychiatry/Child & Adolescent Psychiatry [1] last month.
The study, which was conducted by researchers from the Yale University School of Medicine and the Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine Department of Public Health Sciences, is based on the principle that the immune system plays a key role in normal brain development and in the pathobiology of several neuropsychiatric disorders. As a result, the autoimmune and inflammatory disorders affecting the central nervous system have been found to be “temporally associated with the antecedent administration of various vaccines.”
Data Suggests Link Between Influenza Vaccine and Anorexia Nervosa Diagnosis
Researchers examined the association between the administration of vaccines in children ages 6-15 years old who have been diagnosed with conditions such as anorexia nervosa, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), tic disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder.
What they discovered was that there is data to suggest that children who were newly diagnosed with anorexia nervosa were more likely to have been vaccinated in the previous 3 months than those in the control group. They also found that children vaccinated with the Influenza vaccinations during the prior 3, 6, and 12 months were also associated with incident diagnoses of anorexia nervosa, OCD, and an anxiety disorder.
Several other associations were also significant, including correlations between hepatitis A with anorexia nervosa and OCD; hepatitis B with anorexia nervosa, and meningitis with anorexia nervosa and chronic tic disorder.
The principal findings suggest that children with OCD, anorexia nervosa, anxiety disorder, and tic disorder were more likely to have received influenza vaccine during the preceding year.
U.S. Special Claims Court Had 1188% Increase in Payouts for Influenza Vaccine Injury
The discovery of the possible link between the influenza vaccine and neurological disorders is significant in this study, especially in light of the fact that the U.S.Special Claims Court had a 1188% increase in payouts to Americans for influenza vaccine injury from 2014-2015 [2, 3].
(Because Congress passed a law in 1986 providing pharmaceutical companies who make vaccines with immunity from prosecution, Americans seeking compensation for vaccine injury must instead sue the U.S. Government in special claims court.)
The Yale/Penn State study also cites the Karussis report [4] which finds that the onset of certain autoimmune and inflammatory disorders affecting the central nervous system has been associated with various vaccines, including idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, and Guillain–Barré syndrome, and more [5], as well as recent data that have emerged indicating an association between the administration of the H1N1 influenza vaccine and the new onset of narcolepsy in several northern European countries [6-11].
Researchers also mention there were limitations in the way the data is reported to insurance companies which make it difficult to fully understand the scope of risk.
For example, they were unable to identify specific risks given that many insurance providers designate insurance billing codes for vaccines in general, without specifying the particular vaccine. They also were using administrative data, which has variables that they were unable to identify, including the fact that early childhood vaccines are grouped together in the first 15 months of infancy and are given at varying times and in different combinations.
Data from 2002-2007 was used for the Yale/Penn State study, which contained a sample of privately insured children in each neurological diagnostic group who were continuously enrolled in school for at least 1 year before their first diagnosis for the condition. The authors also accounted for the fact that vaccines are administered seasonally (before summer camps or the beginning of school), by requiring controls to have had a doctor visit where a vaccine was not administered within 15 days of the date that the corresponding case was first diagnosed with the condition. Subjects were matched with controls according to age, gender, geographical area, and seasonality. To test the specificity of the models, researchers also included children with broken bones and open wounds.
“Those of us seeking compensation for claimants in the vaccine injury compensation program are often challenged by the fact that scientists and medical professionals often decline to give testimony about vaccine injury for fear there will be professional repercussions,” said Robert Krakow, a seasoned litigator who represents families in the vaccine court.
“In addition, many medical professionals are untrained in recognizing vaccine injuries, often attributing the etiology of disorders to unknown causes or guessing that they are psychological in origin. The process often intimidates and deters both claimants and medical professionals from coming forward.
Also, even the government admits that the vaccine injury compensation program has been inadequately publicized, in violation of the Vaccine Act. These factors all contribute to our view that the number of cases that actually make it to court represent a small percentage of the true number of cases of vaccine injury.”
Medical Freedom Community Knows to Read Between the Lines
As is often the case in any scientific journal that publishes data that challenges the vaccination system, and because the study was a pilot program, the authors are cautious to definitively make any substantial claims and are quick to state the findings “warrant further investigation.” They also include additional language designed to inform the medical community and the world at large that their discoveries are “modest” in magnitude. The paper further states that the autism/vaccine link has been “convincingly disproven, despite certain cross sections of the public that still feel the association between the two exists.”
However, experts and members of the medical freedom community know research scientists — when challenging or questioning the vaccination system in general — are often pigeonholed into including boilerplate language that would in any way shape or form discredit the vaccine program or the medical establishment, in order to get their findings published at all. The Yale/Penn State study is no exception; this edict is crystal clear in the last sentence of the authors’ conclusions when they state clearly that “we encourage families to maintain vaccination schedules according to CDC guidelines.”
Those in the autism/medical freedom movement will recognize this language as a protectionist measure to prevent the authors from being ‘Wakefielded’ — a term that emerged after British gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew Wakefield was egregiously stripped of his medical license for questionable reasons, when he examined the link between gastrointestinal health, autism and the MMR.
Mainstream Media Ignoring Results of Yale/Penn State Vaccine Study
Sadly, results of the Yale/Penn State study have gone largely ignored by the mainstream media, despite President Trump’s willingness to publicly address concerns about vaccinations. Last week, Robert Kennedy and Robert De Niro stood side by side at the National Press Club, offering a $100,000 reward to any journalist who can prove the thimerisol component of vaccines is safe. That, too, has been largely ignored by mainstream media, except for the occasional ‘debunked’ narrative that predictably emerges anytime anyone seeks to question the pharmaceutical industry.
While the study, which was a pilot epidemiologic analysis, does infer that there is enough compelling data linking the onset of some neuropsychiatric disorders, it begs the question ‘what’s next?’
Researchers from the Yale/Penn State study say next steps require replication in a larger population-base, including factoring in additional variables such as an individual’s genomic and epigenomic background, microbiome and other factors including administered vaccinations.
Comment on this article at VaccineImpact.com.
References
[1] Temporal Association of Certain Neuropsychiatric Disorders Following Vaccination of Children and Adolescents: A Pilot Case–Control Study, Frontiers in Psychiatry.
[2] U.S. Special Claims Court, 2014-2015 Vaccine Court Judgment Report, http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/reports-statistics.
[3] U.S. Vax Court Sees 400% Spike in Vaccine Injuries,
Flu Shot Wins Top Honors for Biggest Payout, The Mom Street Journal, Nov., 2016, http://www.themomstreetjournal.com/increase-in-vaccine-injuries/
[4] Karussis D, Petrou P. The spectrum of post-vaccination inflammatory CNS demyelinating syndromes. Autoimmun Rev (2014) 13(3):215–24. doi:10.1016/j.autrev.2013.10.003
[5] Pellegrino P, Carnovale C, Perrone V, Pozzi M, Antoniazzi S, Clementi E, et al. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis onset: evaluation based on vaccine adverse events reporting systems. PLoS One (2013) 8(10):e77766. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077766
[6] Pellegrino P, Carnovale C, Pozzi M, Antoniazzi S, Perrone V, Salvati D, et al. On the relationship between human papilloma virus vaccine and autoimmune diseases. Autoimmun Rev (2014) 13(7):736–41. doi:10.1016/j.autrev.2014.01.054
[7] Perricone C, Ceccarelli F, Nesher G, Borella E, Odeh Q, Conti F, et al. Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) associated with vaccinations: a review of reported cases. Immunol Res (2014) 60(2–3):226–35. doi:10.1007/s12026-014-8597-x
[8] Prestel J, Volkers P, Mentzer D, Lehmann HC, Hartung HP, Keller-Stanislawski B, et al. Risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome following pandemic influenza A(H1N1) 2009 vaccination in Germany. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf (2014) 23(11):1192–204. doi:10.1002/pds.3638
[9] Rinaldi M, Perricone C, Ortega-Hernandez OD, Perricone R, Shoenfeld Y. Immune thrombocytopaenic purpura: an autoimmune cross-link between infections and vaccines. Lupus (2014) 23(6):554–67. doi:10.1177/0961203313499959
[10] Heier MS, Gautvik KM, Wannag E, Bronder KH, Midtlyng E, Kamaleri Y, et al. Incidence of narcolepsy in Norwegian children and adolescents after vaccination against H1N1 influenza A. Sleep Med (2013) 14(9):867–71. doi:10.1016/j.sleep.2013.03.020
[11] Partinen M, Kornum BR, Plazzi G, Jennum P, Julkunen I, Vaarala O. Narcolepsy as an autoimmune disease: the role of H1N1 infection and vaccination. Lancet Neurol (2014) 13(6):600–13. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70075-4
Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.
In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.
One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.
Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?
One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”
However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.
The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.
Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.
In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.
Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.
These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.
In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.
