Is Autism Caused By Vaccination?

Dr. Vernon Coleman believes autism is caused by vaccination. He presents seven facts to support this claim.

He argues that the increase in autism cases correlates with the rise in vaccinations and suggests that severe autism is simply vaccine-induced brain damage.

By Dr. Vernon Coleman

The number of children diagnosed as suffering from autism has rocketed just as the number of children being vaccinated has risen. This isn't just true of the UK; it's true of all countries where children are vaccinated. I have for many years believed (and argued) that epidemiologically and logically all varieties of autism (including such brands as Asperger's) are nothing more than vaccine damage. Where's the evidence? Well, there's a startling absence of research but in the USA, a huge medical practice of paediatricians with 30,000 child patients do not vaccinate their patients at all. They have no patients with autism. In the old days, such an observation (known as epidemiological research) was regarded as valuable. Today, bizarrely, it is dismissed as irrelevant.

Some patients with autism are severely damaged and some are lightly damaged. Only a complete fool (or someone more enthusiastic about money than truth) would deny that there might be a link. But when a research project was set up to investigate any link between vaccination and autism, drug companies applied to a court for an injunction to stop the research. Now, why would they do that? Here are seven incontrovertible facts. Fact one: Autism is (in its more serious forms) a disorder which involves brain damage. Fact two: Vaccines cause brain damage. (If vaccines are known to cause brain damage, isn't it logical to assume that they may also cause the disease which is known as autism but which would, I believe, be more properly and honestly known as vaccine brain damage? I suspect that the children currently being diagnosed as "autistic" are actually suffering from various levels of brain damage caused by vaccines – and should have been awarded damages by drug companies, doctors and the Government.) Fact three: The incidence of autism has rocketed as the number of vaccinations being given has also rocketed. There's a surprising correlation between the two. If someone noticed a statistical correlation between the number of people sucking humbugs and the number of people losing their teeth, I bet you a devalued pound to a devalued penny that teams of highly paid medical scientists would start investigating. (The humbug manufacturers would complain but I doubt if they have as much clout as the international pharmaceutical industry.) Once rare (in the 1990s it was generally accepted that autism affected no more than 4 or 5 people in every 10,000), it is now officially claimed that autism affects more than 100 in every 10,000 children in Britain. (Some experts claim that the real figure is much higher than this.) Figures from around the world show that the incidence of autism is rising in all developed countries – just as the number of vaccinations given is rising. None of this proves that vaccines cause autism but how anyone can simply deny the possibility of a link between vaccination and autism is quite beyond me. The epidemiological evidence is overwhelming. Fact four: Children who suffer from brain damage after vaccination are numbed and need a good deal of stimulation. They respond well to flashing lights, colours and movement. Exactly the same thing happens with children suffering from severe autism. Fact five: Some so-called experts claim that autism is caused by environmental pollution. Curiously, these "experts" do not believe that injecting foreign matter into small children is pollution. Fact six: A number of parents have reported that their autistic children responded particularly badly when they were given their childhood vaccinations. From the evidence reported to me, I believe that if children scream a good deal after vaccination, or are unusually quiet, or show other unusual signs, then there is, I believe, a real chance that they will develop autism. Fact Seven: The American Government has reportedly accepted that vaccines may cause autism. I believe, and have believed for many years, that autism is caused by vaccination. I believe that the evidence (including the epidemiological evidence) supports this hypothesis. I suspect that some children have a hereditary susceptibility and respond badly to vaccination. And if vaccines are known to cause brain damage, isn't it logical to assume that they can also cause autism? Isn't it logical to at least want to do some pretty high-powered research to find the nature of the link? Part of the problem is that there isn't really any clear way to define autism. It is a ragbag diagnosis used to describe a whole range of symptoms – ranging from severe brain damage to relatively mild behavioural problems. Many doctors now agree with me that severe autism is simply vaccine-produced brain damage while very mild autism may merely be an excuse to be used when a child doesn't do as well as its parents expected. In those circumstances, the diagnosis provides a social excuse for academic failure. The word autism is used, like the word cancer, as an umbrella term for a range of different problems. Patients with autism are said to have development disorders which affect their ability to interact socially and to communicate with other people though this is a fairly recent interpretation and the word now seems to be used as a catch-all for a whole range of problems. (In one medical dictionary on my shelf, autism is defined as "morbid self-absorption" which hardly fits the range of symptoms seen.) These days, I suspect that the word is used more as a dustbin word rather than an umbrella word. It helps the profession appear to know what is the matter when they don't and, at the same time, it enables them to avoid taking any responsibility for what has happened. The word is used to describe almost any symptoms which doctors cannot explain. Social workers and other professional morons play the game because it enables them to build well-funded empires around the "care" of autistic patients. For governments it is, of course, a lot cheaper to provide a modest amount of "care" for autistic patients than to acknowledge that these children have been made ill by the official vaccination policy, and should have been provided with vast amounts of compensation. Every day that vaccination programmes continue, makes it ever more unlikely that governments will ever accept that there is any association between the two. Doctors and drug companies and politicians much prefer to talk about autism rather than brain damage because the former suggests a natural disease while the latter suggests that there may be an external cause. Innocent and desperate parents collude with this nonsense because they prefer to describe their children as autistic than as brain damaged. Those who oppose the conclusion that vaccination causes brain damage which is in turn often mislabelled as autism sometimes claim that the recorded incidence of autism is going up because doctors are better at making the diagnosis. This is patent nonsense for which there is no scientific evidence. (It is, I must point out, also possible that the incidence of autism is going up for the same reason that the incidence of other fashionable pseudo diseases such as ADHD is going up. They may all be rising because they are fashionable and popular diseases which suit the personal and political motives of various groups of people – particularly parents who are looking for an appropriate label to stick on their child. Certainly, the list of symptoms said to be associated with autism is now increasing so rapidly that it will soon be easier to diagnose someone as not suffering from the disorder.) I believe that autism was devised so that drug companies could avoid the embarrassment of seeing children described as vaccine-damaged. Once the new disease had been invented, drug companies started to sell treatments for this newly created and non-existent disease. You have to admire their marketing brilliance. The drug companies (and the doctors, hospitals and politicians who support them) all claim that there is no link between autism and vaccination. (But then they would, wouldn't they?). They claim that there is no convincing scientific evidence proving a link between the two. On the other hand, there is no convincing scientific evidence disproving a link between vaccination and autism. The one scientific paper I've been able to find that claims to disprove the link between autism and vaccination was written by a group who worked for the Government in Denmark. One of the researchers involved has reportedly been charged with stealing more than $1 million in autism research money from the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, USA. In answer to those who still claim that there is no link between vaccination and autism, I would again remind readers that the US Health Department's National Vaccine Injury Compensation Programme has reportedly accepted that hundreds of children have officially developed autism after vaccination. That goes quite a long way towards proving that I'm right and the vaccine supporters are wrong. The above essay is taken from `Anyone who tells you vaccines are safe and effective is lying: Here's the proof.' The book can be purchased by CLICKING HERE

About the Author Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc practised medicine for ten years. He has been a full-time professional author for over 30 years . He is a novelist and campaigning writer and has written many non-fiction books. He has written over 100 books which have been translated into 22 languages. On his website, HERE , there are hundreds of s which are free to read.