I take a keener interest in the autism-vaccine conspiracy nonsense, now that I'm taking my very young son to the doctors every few months for his shots. It bothers me no end that not every parent does the same, and that some are stubbornly clinging to the discredited notion that autism is caused by non-existent mercury-containing vaccines. Absent anything original to add to the debate, I recommend a column by Apoorva Mandavilli, which the editors of Nature have seen fit to make freely available to one and all. Here's a bit of what she has to say:
I sympathize with these parents and can understand their need to find a reason for their children's suffering. But I trust in science, and I can't ignore the fact that so many peer-reviewed studies -- and every scientific panel entrusted with evaluating those studies -- has come to the same conclusion: neither the MMR vaccine nor thimerosal is associated with autism.Perhaps understandably suspicious, some of the families believe there is a conspiracy to hide or muddle the evidence. Again, I can sympathize. But these studies and panels have been led by reputable, independent scientists from all over the world.
For example, Danish scientists looked at the records of more than 500,000 children born over eight years and found no association between the MMR vaccine and autism. A large study of more than 5,000 children in the United Kingdom came to the same conclusion. A prestigious panel of the US Institute of Medicine met over four years, heard from dozens of experts and reviewed more than 200 studies, and in 2004 also dismissed a link between the vaccines and autism.
Read the rest here.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Thanks for the link - I missed it. I've been following this court case through posts on Autism Diva's blog. http://www.autismdiva.blogspot.com/
Its really quite a remarkable story. However, I have found parents of autistic kids to be the most involved and self-educating group imaginable. There is true dedication to helping their children and great frustration and not knowing what's going on. There is palpable hunger for understanding in the air at meetings of these guys. One can easily understand how some may be led astray by false hope. I suspect their energy, however, will help lead to discovery of ultimate causes, despite these dead-ends.
There was a huge "coup de theatre" today when Dr. Fombonne testified.
The Petitioners case is shattered.
I hate that piece of writing that you linked. The writer knows nothing in her naive piece of writing. Quoting here and there... silly.
Vaccines will cause unknown diseases if the infant is susceptible. You can never fully trust the vaccine factories, how they manufacture the vaccines.
Mick said "Vaccines will cause unknown diseases if the infant is susceptible. You can never fully trust the vaccine factories, how they manufacture the vaccines."
So what kind of evidence do you have to back that up with? You know your answer may actually have to including some of that silly stuff known as "quoting". You are going to have to show that the infant is more susceptible to the vaccine versus the actual disease. Like exactly how much more horrible is the DTaP than pertussis or tetanus, or what kind of massive injuries are in store for a baby if given the Hib vaccine versus getting Haemophilus influenzae type b? Actually, infants are not given the MMR, so that is not part of the equation (MMR is not given until they are more than a year old, when they are technically not infants).
Shall we just not trust any medical manufacturing facility? Stop giving vaccines completely, forego antibiotics, insulin, anticonvulsants, and beta-blockers because they may not be 100% safe?
You also may want to check out the posts at:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/medicine/antivaccination_lunacy/
It is unfortunate that it bothers you to no end - all this discussion about vaccine's causing Autism. Perhaps you would feel differently if infact you were the parent searching for answers as to what happened to your child or children. Perhaps if you walked in the shoes of one family living with Autism , you may too second guess this theory. Perhaps if you had two children diagnosed with Autism - like myself, you may think twice about vaccinatng your new born child. Perhaps you should not be so quick to judge the decisions, chioces and beleifs that one family may have. Perhaps a family who is living with Autism is aware of this possible risk or in fear of this possible risk and they are not willing to gamble with there childs life again.Perhaps a family living with Autism has likely done more research on this topic than someone who is just sick of seeing the headlines. perhaps it hits a nerve where you may auctually think there may be some truth to it, and you just feel guilty or unsure about vaccinating your family.Perhaps you should not be so quick to judge others, when you clearly do not have the answers.
Perhaps you should not be so quick to judge others, when you clearly do not have the answers.
Daynna, knowing what does NOT cause a particular condition is just as important as knowing what DOES cause it.
The science is saying that there is NO evidence to suggest that either the MMR vaccine or thimerosal in any vaccine, or even any vaccine full stop, causes autism. That's fine. I know now that when I have kids, I can give them their shots and not have to worry about the shots causing them to be autistic. Or that if my first child were autistic, it would still be safe to vaccinate the subsequent ones.
What you're asking science to do is like putting your hand into a bucket full of dozens of ping pong balls at a raffle and miraculously pulling out the one that has the winning number on it, first time.
It doesn't work like that. The way it works is to pull them all out of the bucket one by one and examine them closely, and if they don't have the magic number on them, throw them aside.
We may not have all the answers, but we are in a good position to judge the "autism-mercury-vaccine" proponents, because we do have one of the answers - that all the scientific evidence points to them being wrong.
I'm fascinated by your comment "But I trust in science."
There's an interesting conversation ongoing on a professional science museum list serve, about the creationism museum in Kansas. One writer noted that she thought science educators, by teaching science as an item of faith, have set themselves up for a religious counter-move which wants to set up religious faith or trust against scientific faith or trust.
The problem with "trusting in science" is that, unless you personally have in-depth knowledge of a particular field, you are really trusting in the SCIENTISTS, not the science. I believe in atomic theory because I'm taught that it is true: not because I have personal experience with viewing and making sense of subatomic structure.
Certainly, the scientists who have conducted the CDC and NIH autism studies can assure you that their science is appropriatelyl conducted and accurate. The scientists involved with gut/virus related research can tell you the same. As a lay person you can look at their research and it looks perfectly legit.
But honestly, I don't feel I can "trust" that because it's called "science" it's therefore unbiased, appropriately structured, and accurate in its outcomes. In fact, it is BECAUSE it is science that I think we are bound to question.
Lisa Rudy
(www.autism.about.com)
The Danish "scientists" that many reference when refuting the link between vaccines and autism is interesting. Please re-read the "study". There was no mercury or thimerosol in the MMR vaccines used in the "study" by those "scientists". If thimerosol and mercury do not cause health problems; why did Eli Lilly attach a piece of legislation on to the Homeland Security bill absolving them of any wrong doing associated with health damages regarding thimerosol? Why was thimerosol removed from vaccines in the US in 2001; only to learn that the remaining supply of vaccines with thimerosol were used until there were none?
As I understand it, mercury or thimerosal would never be used in a live-virus vaccine such as the MMR because it would kill the viruses.
The MMR/live virus controversy is actually quite separate from the thimerosal controversy (although in the present Cedillo vaccine court trial the Cedillo's are claiming that thimerosal weakened their daughter's immune system thus making it more vulnerable to the later measles vaccine).
Lisa
We don't want your sympathy. We want you to read the science on our side.
knowing what does NOT cause a particular condition is just as important as knowing what DOES cause it.
Justin - exactly my point - as a mother of Autistic twin boys I am not convinced that this DID NOT cause their autism. My children were vaccinated in 1998 at that time mercury and thimerisol were both used. and it is not uncommon for one child to get upto 9 vaccines in one day. It is also very notworthy to mention it is up to the manufacturer's to pull this from the shelf. Are you so trustworthy in them as well? Do you know where your vaccines come from? are you willing to take that chance?
Maurine Meleck "We don't want your sympathy. We want you to read the science on our side."
Could you please list this science?
Here is another Danish study specifically on thimerosal:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/112/3/604
There are several others taking place in other countries (UK, Canada, US, etc)
I am the parent of an Autistic child. I do not fully believe the vaccine theory. I believe that there are many possibilities and vaccination could be the cause. I do not believe that the studies done can be considered conclusive and concrete, it is possible that something is being overlooked. I do not believe that stopping vaccinations is the answer, however, going back to the original vaccination schedule couldn't hurt. I think that anyone saying that parents looking for a cure or further research are annoying or crazy, should spend a day with one of our children and see why it is that we push so much. You cannot judge these parents for looking for all the possibilities, wouldn't you? Unlike most parents, i am not looking for a cure. I just want answers.
I don't know about going back to an "original" vaccine schedule. I know of kids who were pretty disabled by getting the actual Hib disease (and one mom whose first child died from it). These are kids who are or would be graduating from high school about now.
Like this woman: http://www.metrokc.gov/health/immunization/newsstories.htm#hearing
Though they say the Hib vaccine was available in 1985, it was only for older kids. It only became available for infants in 1990.
Stick to fish.
That is what I meant. The original schedule before the ones instituted after 1990, back when the chances of Autism were 1:10,000.
Actially, the incidence of autism was the same in reality... but no one was counting it for schools.
The year autism became a service catagory for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was 1990: http://interverbal.blogspot.com/2005/09/reviewing-autism-prevalence-use…
Having a three year old child with no speech in 1991, I can tell you how difficult it was to get a real diagnosis, treatment and school placement. Then when we firt got Internet I went online asking about "dyspraxia", only to get responses on "dyslexia" (okay, maybe those really could NOT read!).
There has been a definite increase in awareness. So much so that I've seen kids who are now dianosed with autism that would never have qualified for the special ed. program my son was it!
Oh, and remember in 1990 the pertussis vaccine was the DTP, not the DTaP and the they were still using the OPV for polio. Do you think that the oral polio vaccine was protective for autism?
Gah!!! I just saw this article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070619.wxltesting1…
Anyway, this part is very familiar: "Even after Emilie Montgomery's three-year-old son, Fraser, was diagnosed with a language disorder, the comments kept on coming: Boys are late talkers. Why bother with a special preschool? He's just a late bloomer."
But if you read the rest of the article, you will see that people are more aware of speech and language disorders and are seeking EARLIER intervention.
Oh, by the way... my son is not autistic. Autism is not the only communication disorder out there. My son had a seizure disorder which prevented him from receiving the older DTP pertussus vaccine at a time our county was going through a real pertussis epidemic (though recent research shows that it really did not increase seizures, oh well). He would have been protected by herd immunity, but the vaccine complacency be eroded. So we had to be very careful who he came in contact with.
It was at the same time measles made a comeback in the USA, killing over 120 real people.
When herd immunity is compromised... it can be deadly.
Just a another thought:
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg19426094.200-us-vaccines-…
Quote that shouts at you: "Other researchers cited by advocates of the mercury hypothesis also have links to products sold to parents."
The big thing about this is anything that brings $$$$$ to the scaremongers like the Geiers (who seem to want to chemically castrate children for lots of bucks!!).
Lisa
"The scientists involved with gut/virus related research can tell you the same."
Yes, one of those scientists (Dr. Nicholas Chadwick) testified under oath that he worked with Wakefield, and tested the samples for Wakefield for measles virus, and every single sample he tested with PCR was negative. There were a number of false positives that he verified were false positives. He informed Wakefield they were false positives and Wakefield published them as "true" positives anyway.
http://autismdiva.blogspot.com/2007/06/omnibus-hearing-chadwick-and-bre…