Tag: autism

Psychedelic use linked to reduced distress, increased social engagement in autistic adults

A recent study has found that some autistic adults report lasting improvements in their mental health and social lives after using psychedelic drugs. The research, published in the journal Psychopharmacology, revealed that a significant number of autistic individuals attributed reductions in distress and social anxiety, along with increased social engagement, to a single, impactful psychedelic experience. However, the study also highlighted that a minority of participants experienced negative effects, emphasizing the need for caution and further research in this area.

There is a growing interest in the potential of psychedelic drugs to treat various mental health conditions, such as depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, in the general population. Autism spectrum disorder, a developmental condition characterized by challenges in social interaction and communication, as well as repetitive behaviors, often co-occurs with mental health difficulties. Autistic individuals are known to experience higher rates of anxiety, depression, and loneliness, and often report a lower quality of life compared to non-autistic people.

While psychedelics are being explored as therapies for mental health in broader populations, there is very little scientific understanding of how these substances affect autistic individuals specifically. Some anecdotal accounts suggested that psychedelics might be helpful for autistic people, potentially by improving their understanding of themselves and their emotions, but rigorous research was lacking. The new study aimed to investigate the experiences of autistic adults who have used psychedelics and to understand if they perceived any changes in their mental health and social abilities as a result.

To conduct their investigation, the researchers used an online survey to gather information from adults who identified as autistic. Participants were recruited through advertisements on social media platforms, online forums related to psychedelics and autism, and by collaborating with an organization called the Autistic Psychedelic Community. The advertisements were carefully worded to encourage participation from individuals with both positive and negative psychedelic experiences. To be included in the study, participants had to be at least 18 years old, fluent in English, and either have a formal diagnosis of autism from a healthcare professional or self-identify as autistic. They also needed to have used a psychedelic substance at least once in their lives.

A total of 284 people completed the survey. For their analysis, the researchers focused on 233 participants who reported that their most ‘impactful’ psychedelic experience involved a classic psychedelic drug, such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) or psilocybin (the active compound in magic mushrooms). The other participants who were excluded from the main analysis had reported that their most impactful experience was with substances like MDMA, cannabis, or ketamine.

Keep reading

A new paper finds vaccinations increase the likelihood of autism by 4.4 times; a “noted expert in covid” makes a poor attempt to debunk

Last Thursday, a peer-reviewed paper was published in the journal Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.  The objective of this study was to determine the association between vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders in 9-year-old children enrolled in the Medicaid programme from birth.

The researchers analysed claims data for 47,155 nine-year-old children.  They found that children with just one vaccination visit were 1.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (“ASD”) than the unvaccinated.  Shockingly, children with 11 or more visits were 4.4 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD

The reviewing editor was James Lyons-Weiler, PhD.  Dr. Peter McCullough is not mentioned in the paper but is on the editorial board for the Clinical Research section. 

In an effort to debunk the paper’s findings, a Substack page titled ‘Unbiased Science’ said the paper should be disregarded because it was published on a “WordPress blog” and peer-reviewed by Dr. Peter McCullough, “a known promoter of medical misinformation.”

Science, Public Health Policy and the Law is a science-based knowledge, not narrative-dictated knowledge journal that works to make sure that only objective knowledge is used in the formation of medical standards of care and public health policies.

Unbiased Science is led by its founder  Dr. Jess Steier, a “public health scientist” and co-founder of Vital Statistics Consulting.  She has developed “multiple modes of scientific communication on covid.” According to her biography:

Dr. Steier is a noted expert in COVID-19. She has designed and led multiple COVID-19 related research projects for the largest FQHC [Federally Qualified Health Centre] in New York State, and has developed multiple modes of scientific communication of COVID-19 related information, including diagnostic and antibody testing, population health outcomes, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Dr. Steier hosts The Unbiased Science Podcast, the goal of which is to dispel misinformation and misconceptions across an array of science and public health topics.

She holds a Certificate in Patient Safety, as well as a Certificate in COVID-19 Contact Tracing from the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. She also holds COVID-19 Certifications (in Psychological Health First Aid for COVID-19 and Returning to Work: Safe Work Practices) from the American Red Cross.  

For someone who is a “noted expert” there is surprisingly little about her to be found from an internet search.  In fact, the only websites that appear to mention her are her own.  As for her claims that she has developed “multiple modes of scientific communication,” we can only guess what her turn of phrase actually means but it sounds like psychobabble for “covid propaganda.” Regardless, it seems she has a vested interest in keeping the false covid narrative alive, which even with a good dollop of imagination cannot be described as “unbiased.”

Keep reading

‘Jaw-dropping’ Study Finds Vaccinated Children Have 170% Higher Risk of Autism

Vaccinated children have a 170% higher chance of being diagnosed with autism compared to unvaccinated children, according to a new peer-reviewed study.

The study also found that vaccinated children had a 212% greater likelihood of developing a range of other neurodevelopmental disorders, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), epilepsy/seizures, brain inflammation and tic and learning disorders.

According to the study, the childhood vaccination schedule is likely a significant contributor to the higher rate of autism and neurodevelopmental conditions in vaccinated children.

The study of 47,155 9-year-old children enrolled in the Florida Medicaid program since birth was published on Jan. 23 in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, said the paper “is unignorable simply by the soundness of its methods.”

“The sheer hazards associated with severe childhood diseases is jaw-dropping,” Jablonowski said.

Keep reading

New peer-reviewed study again confirms childhood vaccines are likely responsible for nearly 80% of the autism cases in US

A stunning new autism study was just published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature: “Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid” by Mawson and Jacob.

The study examined Florida Medicaid data obtained from the now defunct DEVEXI.

Note: It is critically important to the US government that databases such as DEVEXI are shut down ASAP so that research revealing the harms of vaccination can no longer take place. Mawson was lucky to get access to this data before DEVEXI was shut down. He mentions in the paper a conversation with Mitch Praver, co-founder of DEVEXI on 07/19/2018.

Keep reading

The ‘Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism’ Trope is False — Systematic Review

A scientific review paper published January 10 documented how the CDC’s claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is based on studies which do not support that deduction.

The culmination of the medical establishment’s work to claim that vaccines do not cause autism came in 2019 in the form of a population-based observational study by Hviid et al.

“However, as detailed in this critical review, Hviid et al. did not faithfully intend or interpret the data to test this hypothesis and, therefore, cannot possibly have falsified it,” the scientific review said in the ‘Abstract’ section. “We elucidate methodological flaws, discrepancies, irreproducibility, and conflicts of interest for Hviid et al.”

This is a big blow to the vaccine-industrial-complex, as the Hviid et al. study seemed to be a crowning achievement of sorts.

“This study was hailed at the time by the U.S. media and medical establishment as conclusive proof that the MMR vaccine does not increase the risk of autism, even among “genetically susceptible children,” the scientific review said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

Perhaps shockingly to some, this scientific review even implied that the Hviid et al. study was not just a work of incompetence, but rather malicious misrepresentation and flat out deceit, perhaps venturing into the realm of fraud.

“We further conjecture that researchers who faithfully serve the status quo of a vaccine orthodoxy know how to design studies to produce the desired results,” the scientific review said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

Notably, the authors discussed how the Hviid et al. study is not applicable in the real world, where infants get copious amounts of vaccines along with life’s other risk factors and environmental conditions.

“In addition, we further illustrate that the conclusion from Hviid et al. cannot be generalized to the CDC childhood vaccination schedule, salient features of which have remained oblivious to so many opinion leaders, regulators, mainstream media, and professional associations in the USA,” the scientific review said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

The authors gave some historical background early on in the ‘Abstract’ section, then ventured into the Covid-era later in the section.

“The controversy surrounding measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination and autism has been ongoing for over 30 years. It is rooted in the gaslit, parent-led, grassroots movements of the 1990s and was further fueled by a case-series clinical study in 1998 by Wakefield et al., which hypothesized a causal link between MMR vaccination, gut inflammation, and autism,” the scientific review said in the ‘Abstract’ section. “Looking at the broader picture, in the post-COVID-19 era, stereotyping, social stigma, shunning, condescension, and polarization of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children have only been exacerbated and intensified. We would retort that health freedom, parental autonomy, and open, frank, and honest scientific debate, not consensus or censorship, are the only pathways to foster real advancements for true service to our children, families, and the wider society.”

Keep reading

Why Is California an Autism Hotspot?

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has surged in children in recent years, even among those who are just 4 years old.

According to data from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network, the overall prevalence of ASD in 2020 was 21.5 per 1,000 children aged 4. This marks a 26% increase from 2018, when the prevalence was 17 per 1,000.

The numbers are not uniform across all regions, with California reporting the highest rate at 46.4 per 1,000, while Utah saw the lowest at 12.7 per 1,000. Stark gender and racial disparities also exist in ASD diagnoses.

Boys are diagnosed with autism more frequently than girls, with a prevalence of 32.3 per 1,000 compared to 10.4 per 1,000 for girls, whose ASD symptoms often differ from their male counterparts.

Overall, however, in 2020, 1 in 30, or 3.49%, of children ages 3 to 17 were diagnosed with autism — that’s about 33 per 1,000 individuals.

Shifting demographics: Autism rates higher in certain groups

Recent data reveals a significant shift in autism prevalence among different racial and ethnic groups. For the first time, the ADDM Network reported that white children aged 8 years have a lower prevalence of autism compared to their Black, Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander peers.

Specifically, the prevalence was 24.3 per 1,000 among white children, while it was 29.3 among Black children, 31.6 among Hispanic children and 33.4 among Asian or Pacific Islander children.

Another compelling aspect of the latest autism statistics is the nuanced relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and autism prevalence. Unlike earlier years, where higher SES was strongly associated with increased autism diagnoses, the 2020 data shows a more complex picture.

In three out of the 11 ADDM Network sites — Arizona, New Jersey and Utah — children from lower-income households exhibited higher autism prevalence. When data from all sites were combined, there was a noticeable trend of lower autism prevalence in higher SES census tracts.

However, the differences across low, medium and high SES groups were relatively modest, ranging between 23 to 27.2 per 1,000 children.

Understanding when children are diagnosed with autism is important for ensuring they receive timely interventions. The 2020 ADDM Network data provides valuable insights into the age at which children receive their first autism diagnosis.

The median age of earliest known autism diagnosis was 49 months, with significant variations across states — from as early as 36 months in California to as late as 59 months in Minnesota.

Additionally, children diagnosed with ASD who also have an intellectual disability tend to receive their diagnoses earlier, with a median age of 43 months compared to 53 months for those without an intellectual disability.

Keep reading

President Trump Named TIME Magazine Person of the Year, They Refuse to Use His Iconic Image, and Slap Him with a Fake Fact-Check

President Donald Trump was named TIME Magazine Person of the Year on Thursday morning.

TIME Magazine refused to use the iconic image of President Trump facing the assassin’s bullet.

That would be obvious and too honest for the TIME staff.

TIME also couldn’t help themselves and fake fact-checked President Trump on the link between vaccines and Autism.

TIME says without hesitation that there is no link. They got this from Big Pharma.
Millions of Americans today would disagree.

Keep reading

There has long been damning evidence of how CDC covered up vaccine-induced autism. Black male toddlers who received the MMR at a young age were at 3-4 times the risk of autism as other children

I recently received a treasure trove of electronic documents from deep inside the CDC. These documents have never been made publicly available.

The documents include voice-recordings, emails, hand-written notes, diagrams, and data.

The often repeated claim that “vaccines don’t cause autism” is quite simply inconsistent with this evidence which can be authenticated.

I am working with Trevor Fitzgibbon to pitch this to all the mainstream media so that I’m not talking to an echo chamber with this data. It is much better if we can get the blue-pilled media to red-pill their peers; it’s unlikely to happen any other way.

This is a huge scandal and our kids having been paying the price for decades all because the CDC doesn’t want to publicly admit they were wrong

I spoke with a top journalist at Inside Edition who thought that it’s one of the biggest stories of the decade. He said he would try to interest his friends at 60 Minutes and other outlets in viewing the data (the story is too big for IE).

I will keep you apprised.

The documents can be authenticated by people inside and outside the CDC.

I’ve sent the documents to others on our side (just in case something happens to me).

Brian Hooker analyzed the CDC autism study data from the DeStefano paper; the evidence I received confirms what he found

The Hooker paper is published in the scientific peer-reviewed literature and is simply an analysis of the data that the CDC officials told CDC scientist William Thompson to destroy.

See the 3.86 odds ratio in the last row? See the .005 p-value? Those are damning. There is no way to explain such large effect sizes.

This is why Coleen Boyle ordered Thompson to destroy the subgroup data showing the high OR value: because they couldn’t make the signal go away so they made the data go away.

Also, the evidence I obtained shows that Coleen Boyle would have flatly refused to testify in Congress about the matter had US Congressman Bill Posey been able to follow through on his desire to have a hearing. Why would she do that if they weren’t hiding anything? Unfortunately, Posey was ordered by his peers in Congress to nix the investigation to protect the drug companies. That’s why it never happened.

OR= 3.86 with a p-value of .005 is an absolute train wreck.

It means that most of the autism in that subgroup is caused by vaccines.

There is no other viable explanation of the data.

If the MMR shots are safe with respect to autism, all the OR values in the table above should all be very close to 1 (and the p-values should be >0.10) because these are measure of the timing of the MMR shot (not the timing of the autism diagnosis) which has to be IRRELEVANT if the shots are safe.

Keep reading

Over 300 pages of evidence from the CDC show that vaccines cause autism

I recently received a treasure trove of electronic documents from deep inside the CDC. These documents have never been made publicly available.

The documents include voice-recordings, emails, hand-written notes, diagrams, and data.

The often repeated claim that “vaccines don’t cause autism” is quite simply inconsistent with this evidence which can be authenticated.

I am working with Trevor Fitzgibbon to pitch this to all the mainstream media so that I’m not talking to an echo chamber with this data. It is much better if we can get the blue-pilled media to red-pill their peers; it’s unlikely to happen any other way.

This is a huge scandal and our kids having been paying the price for decades all because the CDC doesn’t want to publicly admit they were wrong

I spoke with a top journalist at Inside Edition who thought that it’s one of the biggest stories of the decade. He said he would try to interest his friends at 60 Minutes and other outlets in viewing the data (the story is too big for IE).

I will keep you apprised.

The documents can be authenticated by people inside and outside the CDC.

I’ve sent the documents to others on our side (just in case something happens to me).

Brian Hooker analyzed the CDC autism study data from the DeStefano paper; the evidence I received confirms what he found

The Hooker paper is published in the scientific peer-reviewed literature and is simply an analysis of the data that the CDC officials told CDC scientist William Thompson to destroy.

Keep reading

The bulk of credible science finds vaccines ‘can and do’ cause autism 

It’s amazing how many media figures remain so uninformed on the proven links between vaccine and autism. Without knowing the subject thoroughly, they keep falsely claiming the links have been “debunked.” 

Quite the opposite. 

I understand, because I was surprised, too, at what I learned when I was first assigned to cover the subject of vaccine safety at CBS News in 2001. At the time, I knew nothing about how vaccines work, scientific studies linking them to autism and many side other effects, or the medical and industry complex set up to defend them at any cost.

As an investigative reporter looking into this topic independently for more than two decades, I have helped expose a lot of what many are desperate to cover up. Some of my work on the topic has received journalism awards, and it has been cited favorably in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The news that’s been revealed in this time period, including compelling studies, testimony, court cases, and other evidence, is now easily accessible to any reporter who knows better than to simply google and get the industry and medical establishment approved narratives; or rely upon information from the vast network of groups, organizations, and fake “fact checkers,” ultimately set up by industry to spin us all.

With Donald Trump about to enter a second term in office, appointing and relying upon figures in public health who are familiar with the facts on these controversies (and willing to act upon them), we are already being exposed to incessant and increasingly desperate propaganda. 

The propagandists have important connections and plenty of money to spend to wield influence, as they long have, with federal agencies, members of Congress, and in media. They support fake “fact check” groups like Health Feedback and Science Feedback, dominate social media narratives, provide “journalism resources” that give false information, control medical information distributed by our once-esteemed public health agencies, influence medical associations, and back nonprofits that are designed to sound independent but put out industry misinformation. 

They have proven they will go to any lengths to protect their billion dollar profits and to try to stop any disruption of the corrupt medical establishment built to support them. 

Keep reading