A New Epoch For Autism Investigated

the epoch times

By Jake Crosby

I am pleased to announce the expansion of Autism Investigated to The Epoch Times – an international news organization that already spans 35 countries and 21 languages. Notable coverage by The Epoch Times includes award-winning stories on topics such as SARS and organ harvesting, as well as extensive coverage of the CDC whistleblower. Autism Investigated is honored to be associated with such solid journalism.

Posts will continue to run at Autism Investigated, but they will also be hosted by The Epoch Times as well. The results will be greater exposure and a bigger audience for Autism Investigated. As you make your way over to Autism Investigated’s new home, please do not stop commenting and contributing to discussions on autisminvestigated.com. Your voice is still valued here.

Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a Bachelor of Arts in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy and a 2013 graduate of The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services with a Master of Public Health in Epidemiology. He currently attends the University of Texas School of Public Health where he is studying for a Ph.D. in Epidemiology.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

24 Thoughts on “A New Epoch For Autism Investigated

  1. White Rose on November 16, 2014 at 8:35 pm said:

    Good man , Jake .

  2. White Rose on November 16, 2014 at 8:43 pm said:

    This is what it is all about :

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30026001

    An agreement has been signed which will make contraceptive injections available to women in 69 of the world’s poorest countries.
    It is an injection – but not as you know it.
    The special device, with a smaller needle and no traditional syringe, will be sold at just $1 a unit.
    An agreement – signed in the past few days – will make the new way of giving contraceptive injections available to women in 69 of the world’s poorest countries.
    The deal has been reached between the Gates Foundation, the drug company Pfizer and the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation.
    Previously the technology has been used for giving hepatitis B jabs in Indonesia. Burkina Faso was the first country to use it for contraception

    ——& I’d argue number6 is actually number1 :

    Six benefits of family planning
    1. Preventing pregnancy-related health risks in women

    Evidence suggests women who have more than four children have increased maternal mortality risk; avoiding unwanted pregnancies, also reduces the need for unsafe abortions.

    2. Reducing infant mortality

    Closely spaced and ill-timed births contribute to some of the world’s highest infant mortality rates. Infants of mothers who die as a result of giving birth also have a greater risk of death and poor health.

    3. Helping to prevent HIV/AIDS

    Reducing the risk of unintended pregnancies among women living with HIV means fewer infected babies and orphans. Condoms also protect against STIs including HIV.

    4. Empowering people and enhancing education

    Informed choices about their sexual and reproductive health gives women enhanced opportunities for education and participation in public life. Children with fewer siblings tend to stay in school longer.

    5. Reducing adolescent pregnancies

    Pregnant teens are more likely to have preterm or low birth-weight babies, and babies born to adolescents have higher rates of neonatal mortality.

    6. Slowing population growth

    Unsustainable population growth results in negative impacts on the economy, environment, and national and regional development efforts.

    Source: World Health Organization

  3. Lawrence on November 17, 2014 at 2:19 am said:

    @whiterose – and this is bad, why again?

    Less births and smaller families equal slower population growth, higher economic prosperity and lower incidence of infant mortality (and better overall health).

    There are reasons why we don’t have 8+ kids per family anymore….

  4. White Rose on November 17, 2014 at 9:29 am said:

    This is also the reason why 50% of US children are projected to have autism by 2025
    Stephanie Seneff MIT
    Its all part of the same policy .NSSM200 alive and kicking .

    And any comment on the Kenyan\Ugandan Tetanus vaccine\sterilisation rumours Larry ?

  5. Lawrence on November 17, 2014 at 11:28 am said:

    @WhiteRose – yes, actually….check the other thread.bseems like the “Catholic Bishops” couldn’t be bothered to have real tests done and worse, couldn’t even interpret the results they were given.

    But hey, why would ever want to be factually correct, right?

  6. White Rose on November 17, 2014 at 5:47 pm said:

    Larry – was the Roman Catholic Church factually incorrect in 1993 Phillipines , 1994 Mexico , 1994 Nicaragua ?
    Was the BBC factually incorrect when they reported all of this in 1995 ? where else did it occur Larry ?
    And now you expect us to believe 2014 , that they have it wrong again in Kenya \ Uganda ?

    Notice the trend Larry , you vaccine defenders , simply deny everything .
    What next . William Thompson didnt work at the cdc ? Or he was only a minor scientist there ?
    Or he didnt feature heavily in any of these papers ?

    In fact it seems Larry , that William Thompson was in fact the janitor at the CDC and only cleaned the toilets .
    He reported to the chief janitor Poul Thoresen no doubt .

    Next you’ll be telling us vaccines are safe and effective ….. so much tosh Larry .

    • justthestats on November 18, 2014 at 8:56 pm said:

      Surely you have documentation that there was a huge increase in infertility following 1993 in the Philippines, and following 1994 in Mexico and Nicaragua, but only in the areas where people were vaccinated. Why beat around the bush with the vague insinuations? Surely you have the stories about whole villages having to shut down schools, doctors and epidemiologists scrambling to figure out the cause of the sudden drop in birth rates, and maybe even the news stories of the villains involved being sentenced for their crimes. Why are you holding out?

      The trend seems to be the same accusation over and over, but the accusation doesn’t pan out. Reminds me of the story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf, except for the part where there is a wolf at the end, because one hasn’t appeared here. Food for thought.

  7. White Rose on November 17, 2014 at 10:36 pm said:

    http://gaetacommunications.com/site/?p=1092

    Pro-Vaccine Immunologist Admits a Shocking Truth About Vaccines

    For several years, until April of this year, I had been lecturing nationally to health professionals about the great vaccine hoax. Attending one such seminar was a board member of an association of health professionals, who invited me to speak on this subject at their national conference. I did, and had 90 minutes to present the most salient points from my 7-hour seminar. It caused quite a stir, and several clinicians thanked me for having the courage to speak the truth about this controversial subject.

    Later that day, I sat on a panel of four experts to answer questions from conference attendees. Many of the questions were directed at the PhD immunologist on the panel, asking if the statements I had made in the morning presentation were true. To my surprise, the immunologist confirmed every assertion I had made.

    The first was that it is pointless to administer drugs intended to stimulate antibody production to babies who are too young to produce antibodies. Infants in their first year mostly depend on generalized, non-specific immunity, including (hopefully) immunoglobulins from breast milk, to protect their young bodies from infection. They do not produce antibodies of their own until about age one. Despite this basic fact, the medical establishment insists administering a total of 19 shots, containing 24 vaccines, to infants on the 2, 4 and 6 month pediatric visits (Source: cdc.gov). Somehow, the basic facts of human physiology and development do not apply to vaccines.

    You can listen to an audio file of an exchange between an attendee and the immunologist about this question. She declined to be identified in my presentations, including this post, perhaps because she knows that anyone who speaks the truth about vaccines is savaged by the medical establishment and their compliant lapdogs in the mainstream media. It is professional suicide for anyone in conventional medicine to question the unquestionable (yet unproven) assumptions about vaccines: that they are effective, safe and necessary. I have stopped lecturing publicly on this subject for the same reason, because the attacks in recent years have become particularly vicious; and because my main message in my teachings is about personal responsibility, innate wholeness and opening to the largeness of who we are, not just vaccines.

    • justthestats on November 18, 2014 at 8:27 pm said:

      For several years, until April of this year

      Wouldn’t happen to be April First, would it?

      The first was that it is pointless to administer drugs intended to stimulate antibody production to babies who are too young to produce antibodies. Infants in their first year mostly depend on generalized, non-specific immunity, including (hopefully) immunoglobulins from breast milk, to protect their young bodies from infection. They do not produce antibodies of their own until about age one. Despite this basic fact, the medical establishment insists administering a total of 19 shots, containing 24 vaccines, to infants on the 2, 4 and 6 month pediatric visits (Source: cdc.gov). Somehow, the basic facts of human physiology and development do not apply to vaccines.

      Somehow this “basic fact” that infants don’t produce antibodies for a year doesn’t seem to be mentioned in any reference I can find. It seems hard for me to believe that a formula-fed baby could last a year without any kind of immunoglobulin. It seems like the first virus to come along would blow up all the baby’s cells. I also wonder how neonates manage to have allergic reactions without antibodies. But perhaps the most puzzling is why the titers would come up seropositive when they tested the vaccines. That seems pretty hard to explain if there aren’t any antibodies there.

      Do you have any ideas how any of those things could happen if babies don’t make antibodies until they are a year old?

  8. Lawrence on November 18, 2014 at 1:01 am said:

    @whiterose – convenient that there are no names to confirm the story ever happened….

  9. White Rose on November 18, 2014 at 9:53 am said:

    @Just the Stats , what is this then , a pork chop ?

    http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/06/mit-researchers-new-warning-at-todays-rate-half-of-all-us-children-will-be-autistic-by-2025.html
    OR
    http://althealthworks.com/2494/mit-researchers-new-warning-at-todays-rate-1-in-2-children-will-be-autistic-by-2025/

    @Larry , Sister Peroza was her name 1994 phillipines & the BBC program was called Panarama “the human laboratory” .

    Gorski isnt training you guys very well , is he ?
    Are you getting worried now – about your own futures ? and that of your families ?

    • justthestats on November 18, 2014 at 5:48 pm said:

      Maybe you didn’t notice that wasn’t done by a epidemiologist.

      On the other hand, her graph is great — it reminds me of this one, which has a similar Pearson’s coefficient (and would probably correlate pretty well with the things on her graph as well.) I should point out that this graph has an even stronger correlation and so is even stronger evidence for causation.

      But even assuming her thesis is correct, as far as I can tell she’s arriving at that number by taking a linear extrapolation and putting that number into another linear extrapolation, both way outside of the ranges that she actually has data for. I learned in seventh-grade math that linear extrapolation isn’t a very accurate technique when used far outside the range of the data the extrapolation is based on. I also remember there was this girl with the most amazing color of hair that often sat right in front of me. I’ve never seen that color of hair before or since.

      Anyway, I’m surprised that Seneff had the restraint to stop at 2025. If she just continued a few more years, we’d have 2 out of every 1 children being autistic. The sky’s the limit!

  10. White Rose on November 18, 2014 at 6:30 pm said:

    Well I dispute that second graph for a start , with the CDC providing the highly suspect figures for people who literally worked themselves to death (probably another Boyle\DeStefano counterfeit).
    All CDC credibility has been lost . The CDC is bankrupt . this graph is worthless . Sorry .

    We all know by now , there are Thompson statistics , damned statistics proving a definite undeniable link between vaccines & autism dating all the way back to 2003 and there are CDC lies (a false and fake representation of that same data with a criminal slant ) .

    • justthestats on November 19, 2014 at 5:49 pm said:

      Well I dispute that second graph for a start , with the CDC providing the highly suspect figures for people who literally worked themselves to death (probably another Boyle\DeStefano counterfeit).

      Out of curiosity, what possible motivation could they have for “counterfeiting” that number? It seems like an odd thing to risk your career over.

      this graph is worthless . Sorry .

      As proof that General Mills works its workers to death, or maybe that people who work themselves to death like General Mills products? Of course it’s worthless. That’s the point. As an illustration that correlation is not enough by itself to prove causation, even when it’s as strong a correlation as that one was, the graph is great.

      We all know by now , there are Thompson statistics , damned statistics proving a definite undeniable link between vaccines & autism dating all the way back to 2003

      Would that be the statistics your colleague Barry referred to as “idiotic or some other statistics we haven’t discussed yet on this blog?

      and there are CDC lies (a false and fake representation of that same data

      Are you upset that the final data did things like correct for multiple comparisons? Because you tend to find things that aren’t the least bit true showing up as significant if you don’t.

      with a criminal slant ) .

      None of my statistics classes covered criminally slanting data. Would you care to elaborate on the techniques employed?

  11. White Rose on November 19, 2014 at 9:04 am said:

    “and their compliant lapdogs “

  12. White Rose on November 19, 2014 at 1:48 pm said:

    A possible answer for “JustTheStats” with free graph included . took me 5 minutes to find this – why couldnt you do that ?

    http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/5782/at-what-age-do-babies-begin-to-synthesize-their-own-antibodies

    I’ll do more research into it . because I’m sure this will not satisfy your exacting demands .

    Why dont you and Larry eff and blind here , like you do on your own Gorski sites ?
    I rarely ever go and look at those nonsense sites but recently I mistakenly ended up there and was amazed at the truly low life “scientific” language terms you guys engage in .

    • justthestats on November 20, 2014 at 5:33 pm said:

      If you look at that graph a little more closely you’ll notice that babies start producing IgM antibodies more than three months before birth, and they’ve started producing all three immunoglubulins on that graph by six months.

      It is true that neonatal immune systems are less effective than adult immune systems, but it’s exactly wrong to conclude from that that they are ineffective. Seriously, without the ability to recognize rogue protein expression, the first virus the infant was exposed to in any quantity at all would result in death within a few days as so many cells would be turned into self-destructing virus factories that you’d run into total organ failure. You’ll notice that doesn’t happen.

      So to answer your concern about lower levels of immunoglobulins, the result is that it does take more shots for a baby to develop a sufficient immune response to an antigen than an adult. That doesn’t necessarily mean it makes sense to wait — many of the diseases that are vaccinated against in children that young are especially fatal or likely to cause permanent damage for that age group, and each dose does provide some level of protection, since the immune system becomes more sensitive to the presence of the antigen with each vaccination.

      There are some vaccines that don’t produce much of a reaction in children that young. Those vaccines aren’t recommended for use with children that young and show up later on the recommended schedules. That’s because when they tested those vaccines in children that young they didn’t find appropriate levels of sensitization, so it would be a waste to use them on children that young.

      Why dont you and Larry eff and blind here ,

      I actually had to look up what “eff and blind” means, and now I’d like to know who’s been calling themselves “justthestats” while doing that. Either someone else has independently come up with that name, or someone is impersonating me. Either way, genuine justthestats posts from me do not eff or blind, regardless of where you find them.

      like you do on your own Gorski sites ?

      You might be surprised to know I don’t actually own any Gorski sites. 🙂

  13. White Rose on November 20, 2014 at 2:26 pm said:

    I’ve heard some talk of a “Who is William Thompson ?” march on the BBC
    Does anyone have any details ?

  14. White Rose on November 20, 2014 at 5:02 pm said:

    @JUST THE PITS

    On the Kenyan sterilisation program again . Many reports flying around about this genocide .
    Although not so much on the VaccineAutism sites (why would that be ? we are concerned about everyting vaccine)
    But are you able to verify here and now for our audience .
    Is it true they were only vaccinating females ? Do males not get neonatal tetanus ?

    Also hearing the same policy was run in Sri Lanka around 2004 .

    • justthestats on November 21, 2014 at 6:19 pm said:

      Male neonates get tetanus, of course. About 250 literally die from it each year in Kenya. Imagine being a parent watching your newborn die of tetanus. Tetanus is not a pleasant way to go.

      Adult males cannot get neonatal anything, by definition.

      Unlike mothers, fathers cannot transmit tetanus antibodies via breast milk, and if the mother is vaccinated while pregnant, the child will start producing some levels of tetanus antitoxins, while vaccinating the father while the mother is pregnant will not have that effect. But even if the woman isn’t pregnant when vaccinated, the baby is a lot less likely to get tetanus while being born or shortly afterward.

      Clostridium tetani is an obligate anaerobe, so it’s not too surprising that it can’t be transmitted directly from person to person. If males are doing something to infants that put them at risk for tetanus, it’s likely to be a form of abuse that requires more intervention than just a vaccination, and vaccinating the non-infant male wouldn’t help in that case anyway.

      The WHO program you’re talking about has been running since at least 2001. If this is really a mass sterilization/genocide program, why haven’t the fertility rates gone down and the death rates gone up in the countries they’ve been in? Instead, the fertility rates have stayed the same and the death rates have gone down. It’s not a very competent conspiracy.

      You do know how the accusers decided that HCG was present in the vaccines, right? They didn’t tell the labs what were in the vials and ordered a regular pregnancy blood test for them. The tests came back saying that the vaccines were not pregnant. They decided that meant that the vials secretly were anti-HCG vaccines. It really was that bad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation