There is no such thing as "peer-reviewed" any more; while many in the field still claim science papers to be peer-reviewed, what has come out is that it isn't "peer" reviewed (meaning reviewed by medical/science peers with degrees, experience in the field etc.) Some whistleblowers have claimed that 97% (and probably more than that) of "peer-reviewed" papers are absolute fairy tales and are reviewed basically by someone's pet hamster. My husband has been a virologist/immunologist for over 50 yrs, worked for many years at Public Health Dept. of PA advising doctors/public/govt on how to manage disease. He also worked with a Nobel prize winning scientist at her invitation. He agrees with the whistleblowers re: the "peer review" process.
That's an interesting question, and I hope Dr. Lyons-Weiler will answer it. I think we can count on Dr. L-W to meticulously review any article he's thinking of publishing and give the author(s) any feedback warranted. And he certainly has excellent potential reviewers "on his team" (such as Dr. Jessica Rose). Also, I imagine Dr. Blaylock would hand his article to well-qualified reviewers to get feedback before offering it for publication. Whatever peer-review process Dr. Blaylock's article has undergone, I think we can count on it having met the "necessary and sufficient" standard...rather than being a sham like peer review has become in mainstream medical journals.
I agree and have ultimate respect for Dr Lyons, Jessica Rose, etc. I’ve simply found that if I ever try to share data with people who are in the traditional “vaccines are only good” camp, unless my share is bullet-proof (ie peer-reviewed) they tend to immediately write it off as conspiracy theory.
This is an intriguing hypothesis regarding observations we have all intuitively experienced and questioned. My hope is that Dr. Blaylock's work will inspire others to follow the data.
Has anyone done a study on whether certain haplotypes are more subject to autism than others? Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker in his mold toxicity studies discussed high risk haplotypes HLA DR4, DQ3(8) and HLA DR3, DQ2. The NIH did a study in 2017 where they specifically mentioned DR4, DQ3.
I don't know the answer to your question but I do know this: I'm 70 y.o. and when I was a little kid, only 1 in10,000 children got autism. Now, it's 1 in 31 children. I think this points us to something else causing autism rather than it being hereditary, which I highly doubt due to these numbers.
Also there's this: It was very well-known by most people that you do NOT jab a child under age 6 MINIMUM because it could cause numerous health problems. Part of the immune system is in the brain, where autism develops. I was given a jab when 5 yrs. old and very soon after developed symptoms of autism.
I'll let you do the math and decide for yourself what you believe, I'm just giving my 2 cents. I have done lots of research on this.
Barbara, I wrote the book "Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism" and in it reviewed all of the genetic and environmental data up to 2015. kNot much as changed because the only upgrade could be a study that examined both genes AND environmental factors in the same people. We also have an entire course "Genes and Vaccines", if that's of interest. In short, over 1,000 genes have been found that have association with autism, none of which individual explain more than 1%. Some examples: CHD8, NRXN1 del, 16p11.2 CNV, SNC2A, ADNP. All genetic heritability studies have found plenty of room for environmental causes. One cannot say seriously that autism is a genetic disorder.
Researcher William Walsh believes that autism is an epigenetic disorder, and I believe he's correct. The chapter on autism in his book "Nutrient Power: Heal Your Biochemistry and Heal Your Brain" is excellent. I highly recommend the entire book for anyone interested in mental disorders and successful treatment for them.
Thank you for your perseverance and courage to pursue in research and to publish what cost alot of others their livelihood and lives for the truth of the tragic impact of vaccines on our and the world's children and humanity.
This is a long overdue acknowledgement, nonetheless a quite gracious one! He has pioneered and championed questioning the "Status Quo" when it comes to vaccines and neurological damage. I have personally cited him on numerous occasions, and I too have hopes that his work reaches the mainstream and puts bullet holes in this program of advancing deleterious toxic ingredients into God's children....
I am 79 and also had a jab around age 5, followed by symptoms of mild autism. I remember the excruciating earaches and the new shyness and the head pounding.
My hypothesis is that haplotypes DR4, DQ3(8) and DR3, DQ2 will be overrepresented in a cohort of autistic people due to their susceptibility to autoimmune diseases. I consider autism to be the mother of all autoimmune diseases.
"Blaylock’s central thesis is as profound as it is unsettling: that repeated peripheral immune activation during critical windows of brain development—especially by aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines—can prime microglial cells and astrocytes to unleash neurotoxic cascades upon subsequent stimulation. This priming, he argues, leads to persistent disruptions in synaptic pruning, dendritic architecture, and axonal migration, all of which are essential to healthy neurodevelopment."
Bravo, another pair of fine scientists Dr's Shaw (husband and wife team...) and Dr Tomljenovic, she rocked my world when i first started studying this! What a fine lady she is with tons of compassion and not afraid to tell the truth.
This is excellent news! For years I've recommended Dr. Blaylock's article "The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development", and the IPAK journal. Now I'll be able to recommend them in the same sentence.
Dr. Lyons-Weiler, *please* make high quality reprints of Dr. Blaylock's article available at reasonable cost. I and many other parents of vaccine-injured autistic children will want to pass this article out to skeptical relatives and medical/public health professionals...not to mention state legislators who think they are becoming public health heroes by eliminating exemptions to vaccination-for-school requirements. Making reprints available would be a great public service and would also help get the word out about your excellent journal.
Is it just the adjuvants, though, or should we be equally cautious about the entire idea of injecting foreign proteins and other substances for the express purpose of artificially stimulating the immune system?
This is great. Stupid question here…I presume that the publication of this paper means it’s been peer reviewed correct?
There is no such thing as "peer-reviewed" any more; while many in the field still claim science papers to be peer-reviewed, what has come out is that it isn't "peer" reviewed (meaning reviewed by medical/science peers with degrees, experience in the field etc.) Some whistleblowers have claimed that 97% (and probably more than that) of "peer-reviewed" papers are absolute fairy tales and are reviewed basically by someone's pet hamster. My husband has been a virologist/immunologist for over 50 yrs, worked for many years at Public Health Dept. of PA advising doctors/public/govt on how to manage disease. He also worked with a Nobel prize winning scientist at her invitation. He agrees with the whistleblowers re: the "peer review" process.
That's an interesting question, and I hope Dr. Lyons-Weiler will answer it. I think we can count on Dr. L-W to meticulously review any article he's thinking of publishing and give the author(s) any feedback warranted. And he certainly has excellent potential reviewers "on his team" (such as Dr. Jessica Rose). Also, I imagine Dr. Blaylock would hand his article to well-qualified reviewers to get feedback before offering it for publication. Whatever peer-review process Dr. Blaylock's article has undergone, I think we can count on it having met the "necessary and sufficient" standard...rather than being a sham like peer review has become in mainstream medical journals.
I agree and have ultimate respect for Dr Lyons, Jessica Rose, etc. I’ve simply found that if I ever try to share data with people who are in the traditional “vaccines are only good” camp, unless my share is bullet-proof (ie peer-reviewed) they tend to immediately write it off as conspiracy theory.
This is an intriguing hypothesis regarding observations we have all intuitively experienced and questioned. My hope is that Dr. Blaylock's work will inspire others to follow the data.
Let the data lead us where it may.
Has anyone done a study on whether certain haplotypes are more subject to autism than others? Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker in his mold toxicity studies discussed high risk haplotypes HLA DR4, DQ3(8) and HLA DR3, DQ2. The NIH did a study in 2017 where they specifically mentioned DR4, DQ3.
I don't know the answer to your question but I do know this: I'm 70 y.o. and when I was a little kid, only 1 in10,000 children got autism. Now, it's 1 in 31 children. I think this points us to something else causing autism rather than it being hereditary, which I highly doubt due to these numbers.
Also there's this: It was very well-known by most people that you do NOT jab a child under age 6 MINIMUM because it could cause numerous health problems. Part of the immune system is in the brain, where autism develops. I was given a jab when 5 yrs. old and very soon after developed symptoms of autism.
I'll let you do the math and decide for yourself what you believe, I'm just giving my 2 cents. I have done lots of research on this.
Barbara, I wrote the book "Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism" and in it reviewed all of the genetic and environmental data up to 2015. kNot much as changed because the only upgrade could be a study that examined both genes AND environmental factors in the same people. We also have an entire course "Genes and Vaccines", if that's of interest. In short, over 1,000 genes have been found that have association with autism, none of which individual explain more than 1%. Some examples: CHD8, NRXN1 del, 16p11.2 CNV, SNC2A, ADNP. All genetic heritability studies have found plenty of room for environmental causes. One cannot say seriously that autism is a genetic disorder.
Researcher William Walsh believes that autism is an epigenetic disorder, and I believe he's correct. The chapter on autism in his book "Nutrient Power: Heal Your Biochemistry and Heal Your Brain" is excellent. I highly recommend the entire book for anyone interested in mental disorders and successful treatment for them.
I think this immunoexcitotoxicity must also be causal to MCS and CFS.
Thank you for your perseverance and courage to pursue in research and to publish what cost alot of others their livelihood and lives for the truth of the tragic impact of vaccines on our and the world's children and humanity.
This is a long overdue acknowledgement, nonetheless a quite gracious one! He has pioneered and championed questioning the "Status Quo" when it comes to vaccines and neurological damage. I have personally cited him on numerous occasions, and I too have hopes that his work reaches the mainstream and puts bullet holes in this program of advancing deleterious toxic ingredients into God's children....
I am 79 and also had a jab around age 5, followed by symptoms of mild autism. I remember the excruciating earaches and the new shyness and the head pounding.
My hypothesis is that haplotypes DR4, DQ3(8) and DR3, DQ2 will be overrepresented in a cohort of autistic people due to their susceptibility to autoimmune diseases. I consider autism to be the mother of all autoimmune diseases.
"Blaylock’s central thesis is as profound as it is unsettling: that repeated peripheral immune activation during critical windows of brain development—especially by aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines—can prime microglial cells and astrocytes to unleash neurotoxic cascades upon subsequent stimulation. This priming, he argues, leads to persistent disruptions in synaptic pruning, dendritic architecture, and axonal migration, all of which are essential to healthy neurodevelopment."
👏👏👏
Al adjuvant exposure and neurodevelopment: we're continuing the work of Pr Shaw & Dr Tomljenovic.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36136483/
💪
Bravo, another pair of fine scientists Dr's Shaw (husband and wife team...) and Dr Tomljenovic, she rocked my world when i first started studying this! What a fine lady she is with tons of compassion and not afraid to tell the truth.
I have been a subscriber to https://www.blaylockreport.com/, for years...
This is excellent news! For years I've recommended Dr. Blaylock's article "The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development", and the IPAK journal. Now I'll be able to recommend them in the same sentence.
Dr. Lyons-Weiler, *please* make high quality reprints of Dr. Blaylock's article available at reasonable cost. I and many other parents of vaccine-injured autistic children will want to pass this article out to skeptical relatives and medical/public health professionals...not to mention state legislators who think they are becoming public health heroes by eliminating exemptions to vaccination-for-school requirements. Making reprints available would be a great public service and would also help get the word out about your excellent journal.
Is it just the adjuvants, though, or should we be equally cautious about the entire idea of injecting foreign proteins and other substances for the express purpose of artificially stimulating the immune system?
I saw 'all of the above', Tonya ;)
In deep gratitude for Dr. Blaylock's courage and pioneering work.....and to James Lyons-Weiler for his review.