Autism and genetics
[back] Vaccines & autism [back] Genetics ploy Medical Mind Control
[Another way to downplay the vaccine autism connection is to make out 'autism is genetic'. This is a rationalization made by the medical industry. Simon Baron Cohen in the UK is currently flogging this one, and diagnosis, for all it's worth, something the The Institute of Psychiatry seems to excel in.]
Regressive autism doesn't exist,
The Alzheimer's "gene"
Late onset/Acquired autism
Institute of Psychiatry
Vaccine flacks: Professor Sir Michael Rutter Simon Baron Cohen WIZNITZER Autism Speaks
 There's No Denying the Autism Epidemic By Jonathan Rose (a history professor at Drew University, took on epidemic denial in this recent article published on the History News Network).
Autism Speaks Spends $27.4 Million on Genetics Studies since '06
[2011 July] New Autism Twin Study Demolishes Decades-Long Belief in Genetic Causation by Mark Blaxill
[2011 Jan] Paul Offit
and the “Original Sin” of Autism By J.B. Handley OK, let me be clear:
I think Paul Offit is a blowhard liar, a vaccine profiteer and apologist, and
every time he opens his mouth he disrespects my son. When the final chapter is
finally written on this man-made autism epidemic, I will do everything within my
power to ensure that Offit is remembered by history as one of the most sinister,
dishonest, well-funded talking heads pharma ever produced, and that his efforts
served to afflict so many children with autism who may otherwise have avoided
In one of the most absurd snowjobs ever put on the media, Offit, a doctor who has never seen a patient with autism, never treated autism, and never published a study about autism, is somehow considered to be an expert on autism. Given his status as a multi-millionaire vaccine patent holder who has had much of his career supported by Merck, this isn’t just absurd, it’s highway robbery, and yet the media persists, and rarely even mentions Offit’s Mount Everest-sized pile of conflicts.
[2010 Nov] J.B. Handley: Hungry Lie 2.0? “Autism is Genetic” By J.B. Handley[2010 Sept] Interview with Dan Olmsted, Mark Blaxill: 'Age of Autism-Mercury, Medicine, and a Manmade Epidemic'
[2010 May] Frontline’s Producer Feeds the “Hungry Lie” By J.B. Handley
[October 24, 2009] Autism Increase Environmental Not Genetic – Says New Director of USA’s $30.5 Billion Health Research Budget - by childhealthsafety
"Three Kinds of Lies" by Mark Blaxill, MBA
THE FRAGILE BASIS OF GENETIC AUTISM CLAIMS REVEALED BY AN OSOTEN* By Mark Blaxill
[Feb 2007 Autism genetics] Open Letter to Autism Speaks by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
[Nov 2006 Letters] Peter Fletcher/Anne Dachel on the Autism Epidemic
[2006 letter] The Obfuscation of The Iatrogenic Autism Epidemic by Kenneth P Stoller
[2009 April] Have we found key to autism? Scientists hail 'monumental' breakthrough that could help millions
World Autism Pandemic
"THERE ARE NO GENETIC EPIDEMICS" ----- K. P. STOLLER, M.D.
Kanner was the world’s leading expert in child psychiatry. He was the
leader in the field at Johns Hopkins. In 1935, he wrote a textbook that
was over 500 pages long that had detailed, exhaustive descriptions of
every possible malady of childhood that he and his colleagues had ever
seen. There’s not one mention of autism in that 1935 textbook.
When he wrote his paper, published in 1943, he said, “Since 1938 there have come to our attention a number of children whose condition differed so markedly and uniquely from anything seen before that each case merits – and I hope will receive – a detailed investigation of its fascinating peculiarities.” So here is the world’s leading expert on child psychiatry who has already written a textbook. In 1943 he writes that in the last five years, we’ve started to see children and they’re unlike any children we’ve ever seen before.
And he only saw 11 of them. And one of the things we’ve described is that people came from all over the country, all over the world to visit at Hopkins. The notion that autism was around at a rate of 1 in 100 or even a fraction of that is absurd. So the genetic argument at this point collapses on its face. It doesn’t even meet the basic tests of logic and common sense. [2010 Sept] Interview with Dan Olmsted, Mark Blaxill: 'Age of Autism-Mercury, Medicine, and a Manmade Epidemic'
DR. MAX WIZNITZER: (expert witness for the government against the families
who file in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program)-"Well, we know
that in about 10 percent to 15 percent of the cases, we can identify a genetic
OK. Gotta stop right here as Mark Blaxill did a wonderful piece on that "10%-15%" that Dr. W is bringing up... http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/03/the-fragile-b-1.html#more"
1. There is no valid foundation for the claim that 10% of autism cases can be explained by genetic causes. The claim appears to be just another case of a faulty “chain of collective reasoning” and, despite being “generally accepted”, it is specifically wrong.
2. Even when there was documented evidence of a positive diagnostic yield, the evidence was overstated. The overall genetics yield in all of these studies came to less than 7%, and well under 6% if you exclude the single study that claimed to have explained 30% of cases.
3. When you take out known rare forms of autism like Rett and Fragile X syndromes, the reported yields collapsed even further. Nearly half of the foundation of success in generating a diagnostic yield rested on these two exceedingly rare diagnoses."
Professor Sir Michael Rutter along with a troupe of psychiatrists now
or formerly associated with The Maudsley Hospital and The Institute of
Psychiatry at Kings have been working hard at telling the public autism is
solely genetic and denying there is a
world autism pandemic. .....Genetics
cannot account for the large rise we are seeing in autism since the mid 1980s.
So instead what we see are efforts by Rutter and the
King's Institute of Psychiatry other autism denialists to claim there is no
real rise in the prevalence of autism. This claim is unscientific and runs
counter to the facts documented in the formal literature.
The Institute of Psychiatry has or is home to more than its fair share of doctors (psychiatrists mostly) who publish papers claiming autism is genetic and denying there is an autism epidemic (the correct word is pandemic - epidemics have far fewer victims). These doctors include Rutter, Eric Fombonne, (now expert witness in the US in the thiomersal/autism litigation when he had previously published nothing about it), Simon Baron Cohen. It is also home to controversial "Gulf War Syndrome" psychiatrist Simon Wessely, director of the Centre for Military Health Research at King's College London and who had been claiming ME/CFS is not a physical condition but a mental one contrary to the definition used around the world...... Rutter was also an expert witness in Malmo, Sweden in an MMR autism case where the key question was whether autism was solely genetic and not environmental. Rutter's expert evidence was that it was genetic. Professor Sir Michael Rutter & The Drug Industry Connections
As expected by science, extensive searching for a genetic cause of autism has not turned up a significant find that would explain the recent increased rate in autism. The latest genetic find, at best, might explain 0.5% of autism causation. Most agree that a genetic predisposition is likely (like those that lead to low glutathione levels), but that a toxic exposure is absolutely needed. Consider also, that this increased toxic exposure would have had to occur in all 50 states at about the same time as all states have reported similar increases in autism rates. Only something like the government recommended vaccine program fits this need for a time dependent, uniform exposure of a toxin throughout all the states. Dr. Boyd Haley RESPONSE TO 2008 R. SCHECHTER AND J. GRETHER PUBLCIATION
There is no valid foundation for the claim that 10% of autism cases can be explained by genetic causes. The claim appears to be just another case of a faulty “chain of collective reasoning” and, despite being “generally accepted”, it is specifically wrong. Even when there was documented evidence of a positive diagnostic yield, the evidence was overstated. The overall genetics yield in all of these studies came to less than 7%, and well under 6% if you exclude the single study that claimed to have explained 30% of cases. When you take out known rare forms of autism like Rett and Fragile X syndromes, the reported yields collapsed even further. Nearly half of the foundation of success in generating a diagnostic yield rested on these two exceedingly rare diagnoses. THE FRAGILE BASIS OF GENETIC AUTISM CLAIMS REVEALED BY AN OSOTEN* By Mark Blaxill
It has been suggested that this not a real increase but is due
to increased awareness and/or new classifications. If that is so then there must
have been the same number of cases prior to the observed increase as there have
been since. All efforts to identify these earlier cases in both the USA and the
UK have failed. There are only two possible reasons for the absence of earlier
cases. They could all have been spontaneously cured in the intermediate period
(which would strongly suggest that they were not autism cases) or they could all
have died. Both of these possibilities seem remotely unlikely. The conclusion
has to be that the increase is real.
There are only two possibilities to account for this increase. The cause could be due to an inherent or "internal" patient factor or it could be an "external" factor. For all practical purposes the only inherent cause would be genetic, either congenital from a parent or a gene mutation in the child. Whichever may be the case it would necessitate the coincidental occurrence, in about the year 1990, of precisely the same genetic mutation in thousands of individuals in both the USA and the UK. As far as I am aware this has never happened in the billions of years of evolution so this would be a first of monumental proportions.
The observed increase in autism in such a short period of time (15-20 years) therefore has to be real and to have external causality. [Nov 2006 Letter] Peter Fletcher
"At this point, it is believed that about 10% of cases of autism can be accounted for genetically."--B.J. Freeman, Ph.D. Professor of Medical Psychology, Dept. of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences' UCLA School of Medicine.
"They claim that autism naturally occurs at about 18 months, when the MMR is routinely given, so the association is merely coincidental and not causal. But the onset of autism at 18 months is a recent development. Autism starting at 18 months rose very sharply in the mid-1980s, when the MMR vaccine came into wide use. A coincidence? Hardly!"--Dr Rimland
The blind men can’t answer these questions: if autism is a genetic illness, why is the incidence increasing so dramatically? If autism is a behavior disorder, why do the children have chronic bowel problems? Why do they have ear infections, frequent viral infections, and eczema? Why do they have nutritional deficiencies? And why do most autistic children seem to develop normally and then start to regress? These are questions that can’t be answered by their theories. AUTISM: THE EVOLUTION OF A DISEASE by Bryan Jepson, MD
Several of the participants tried to imply that autism was a genetic disorder and therefore could have nothing to do with vaccines. Dr. Weil put that to rest with this comment, "We don't see that kind of genetic change in 30 years." In other words, how can we suddenly see a 300% increase in a genetically related disorder over such a short period? It is also known that there are two forms of autism, one that is apparent at birth and one that develops later in childhood. The former has not changed in incidence since statistics have been kept; the other is epidemic. THE TRUTH BEHIND THE VACCINE COVER-UP By Russell Blaylock, M.D.
This conference, held on June 7-8, 2000 at Simpsonwood Retreat Center, Norcross, Georgia, assembled 51 scientists and physicians of which five represented vaccine manufacturers. These included Smith Kline Beecham, Merck, Wyeth, North American Vaccine and Aventis Pasteur
As a pediatrician, who has been in practice for over two decades, I find it more than a little insulting as well as disturbing to have someone say that these children were always there. ..... For years the vaccine division at the CDC and others have said the reason for the dramatic increase in autism is due to "better diagnosing" and "greater awareness." They have encouraged those like Paul Shattuck to manufacture uncertainty. .... There are no studies that have found the previously undiagnosed or misdiagnosed autistic individuals among older Americans. They simply aren't there. We need to address the real reason for the alarming autism rate. No more secrets or truth-spinning. This is not a faux epidemiological epidemic, nor an infectious epidemic, nor a genetic epidemic (as there are no genetic epidemics). That leaves an epidemic linked to some sort of exposure. [Schafer Autism Report--Pediatrics article May 2006] The Obfuscation of The Iatrogenic Autism Epidemic
"Dr. Michael Goldberg, a California pediatrician and researcher, explained how it was impossible to have an epidemic based solely on genetics. That's the standard excuse the CDC and the NIH have been using to explain how autism has grown from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 300 in just 22 years."--Tim O'Shea, DC
The rationalization chief
There has been a fair amount of study which I think has clearly shown that the disease is at least – or at least has a genetic basis.......So that sort of takes out the environmental influenza and just looks at genetics I think and has – and there has been study after study that has shown that there's at the very least a genetic. [March 2006] Paul Offit Briefs Media On Vaccine Safety Concerns