[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble, 05-18-2009

Yes, because I also think an honest examination would force them to conclude that the current vaccination schedule is too aggressive, and that certain specific vaccinations carry extra risks and should be performed with even more caution; and in the long term view, I think it would also open the research path of trying to identify those kids who are genetically at risk.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble, 05-19-2009

There are many factors involved, I absolutely agree. There is usually no one cause of autism even in a specific individual, let alone across all cases.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble, 5-21-2009

It is, in fact, demonstrably genetic. Siblings of autistic children have a 2-8% chance of being autistic, somewhere between 50 to 200 times the rate of the general population. But the debate rages over whether it is purely genetic, or whether it is the susceptibility which is genetic, and that without the environmental triggers it would remain dormant, so to speak. (As a comparison, diabetes is also known to be genetic, but the rate of diabetes is much higher today than it used to be because of environmental triggers setting off the disease, like poor diet and lack of exercise.) If one acknowledges that the actual rate of autism is rising, mathematically speaking they must acknowledge that there is an environmental factor, because there is no such thing as a genetic epidemic. This is why many institutions are desperate to prove there are not actually more cases of autism now than there used to be, because if there are, it means there's a cause.

That's just in the first four days of this thread. Do you really want me to systematically quote myself from the beginning? It is you who has consistently denied the possibility of a vaccine either triggering, or exacerbating, an existing predisposition or condition.