Yesterday the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, the organization proposing that hypothesis, issued a press release stating its founder and lead scientist, Dr Theresa Deisher, had presented her organization's initial findings at the International Meeting for Autism Research in Philadelphia May 20-22....
Backing up, the Puget Sound Business Journal reported in May that the M. J. Murdock Charitable Trust had bestowed a 2-yr $500k grant to SCPI to study the relationship between autism and vaccines that contain residual human DNA and also to determine just how much human DNA is in those vaccines.
The grant award was hefty enough for the PSBJ to speculate SCPI's research "could expand a debate in biomedical ethics reminiscent of the clashes over the use of stem cells." (Of course those stem cells would be embryonic, with PSBJ didn't mention. But I digress.)
PSBJ also reported that since SCPI's inception in 2008 it has received $425k from angel investors and $700k in donated professional services.
Bottom line: SCPI is a player.
SCPI reported its presentation at the autism research meeting was met with "shock and gratitude." The study focused on "improper integration of the residual DNA as a possible contributor to autism, particularly in genetically susceptible infants."
Dr. Deisher reported, "It is known from gene therapy studies that injected naked DNA can be transported to the brain (Wang et al. 2001); that improperly integrated therapeutic DNA has caused cancer in young children (Hacein-Bey-Abina et al. 2008); and that shorter DNA fragments have a higher probability of entering the nucleus [of the cells] (Lechardeur et al. 2002)."
Deisher reported that she and physicist Marissa LaMadrid, PhD, "are investigating whether improper insertion of DNA into the vaccine recipient cells can cause autism," with 4 major areas of research.
I said earlier one area of study is how much human DNA those vaccines contain. Dr. Deisher reported, "The levels of residual DNA are well over FDA-recommended limits. Meruvax-II contains >140ng/vial ssDNA and >30ng/vial dsDNA, with average lengths of 215bp. Havrix contains >270ng/vial ssDNA and >30ng/vial dsDNA. The FDA-recommended amounts are 10ng/dose."
That alone sounds scandalous.
LifeSiteNews.com provided additional helpful info:
As the abstract of the study indicates, autism rates in the US and the UK began to increase around the same time that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine switched from using animal cells to using human cells that had been derived from aborted fetuses.
The use of such cells means that the vaccine might contain residual human DNA fragments. Dr. Deisher told LSN that "short fragments of human DNA residuals in vaccines present two well-documented potential physiological dangers" and "the possibility for auto-immune reactions." While the immune system recognizes the DNA as foreign, its similarity to an individual's own DNA can cause the immune system to attack parts of the individual's own body.
Another danger springs from the length of the DNA fragments. Residual DNA fragments consisting of less than 250 base pairs (bp) have been shown to have a higher probability of entering the nucleus of human cells. Once inside the nucleus, short DNA fragments can integrate with the genome of the cell. The probability of integration is 1 billion times greater with DNA from the same species than with DNA from another species, according to the abstract.
The study explained that, as the average human DNA fragment length in the rubella vaccine is 220bp, it would be especially likely to enter the nucleus of a cell. Moreover, 25 of the "recombination hotspots" where the DNA fragment could likely combine are located in some of the autism-associated genes (AAG). Thus, such recombination could be one of the causes of autism.
According to SCPI, before children received many vaccinations and before vaccines contained aborted fetal DNA, only about 1 of 10k children was diagnosed with autism, whereas now 1 of 150 is diagnosed.
At first, I thought the aborted cell line-autism "link" was whimsical speculation (no offense) but now I am definitely intrigued. Keep us posted on the latest advancements!Posted by: Scott at June 4, 2010 4:52 PM
Man, I hope that I can convince my pediatrician to use the alternative (abortion-free) vaccines for my kids instead. My middle child has Failure-to-Thrive, multiple food and environmental allergies, and a speech delay. I am starting to wonder if his speech delay has something to do with the vaccines? I read somewhere once that a woman remembers that she had been talking fine up until she received a series of vaccines as a toddler and she stopped talking for an entire year.
I don't understand why they are using aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines anyway when there are plenty of other, non-human cell lines available that are safe and effective.Posted by: army_wife at June 6, 2010 9:59 AM
I am pro-life and I have a son with autism. I hate the thought that they would use fetal cells in any vaccine or anywhere else. But, I have to say, if this study does not prove to have merit, it will hurt the autism community. There have already been many studies related to vaccines that have not yet given sufficient evidence to satisfy the medical industry (and others) that the vaccines cause autism. It is terrifying these days to "risk" vaccinating...and yet the doctors believe the vaccines are safe.
Autism "hype" should not be used as the "excuse" to protest the abortion and abuse that leads to the use of fetal cells in vaccines.
If there is no merit to the study, then the pro-life community should STILL protest the use of fetal cells...and my guess is that the real purpose of this study is to create awareness so as to convince parents to say no to these vaccines.
Fighting for life means working to preserve the embryos, praying for an end to abortion and everything that contributes to the decision to abort, and fighting against the theory that Autism could be diagnosed in the womb...only to result in abortion (this is the general plan for many in the research community and it is scary).
For once, as a mother of an autistic child, I would like the autism-related controversies and hype to stop getting in the way of treatment of children who already have autism.Posted by: Suzanne at June 9, 2010 2:58 PM