Strollerderby

I don't get why people are taking medical advice from Jenny McCarthy anyway.  

People who don't vaccinate their kids should be looking at people who do with gratitude, because us vaccinators are helping keep deadly diseases out of the kiddie pool (so to speak).

As a result of her advocacy of anti-science, McCarthy was declared "Douche Bag of the Year 2008" by the panel of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe.

McCarthy is a prostitute who used her body for money.  Why should i take medical advice from a hooker?

oops, I meant to put that in quotes (from wikipedia)

@KeriF, what other reasons, the goalposts they are a-shiftin'.

Exactly, Manjari.  It freaking boggles the mind.  "My doctor says it's absolutely necessary for her health and the well-being of our community, but this PLAYBOY BUNNY says..."

I have to say, while I disagree with McCarthy's stance on vaccines, I find it irrelevant and misogynistic to refer to her former jobs as a reason to discount her intelligence.  I really think it's disgusting of you all.

Laura, I'm not sure why this makes you upset. It is not saying that she is stupid because of her former job. However, being a Playboy bunny does not qualify onr as a medical expert. She is writing books and showing up on talks shows to basically give medical advice. She does not know how to analyze medical information, thus she is unqualified. (For example, there is this geologist that goes around giving advice on vaccines. She is not an expert either, and I view her in the same way.)

imo, this is a leftover from the Bush days where being smart and qualified were viewed as being overrated, and being intelligent and educated was looked down upon.

Laura,

If she was a former Playboy Bunny who had GONE TO MED SCHOOL or graduate school in biology or whatever, that would be one thing.  She didn't.  She's entirely self-taught.  I'm a graduate of the University of Google medical school myself and I know you can learn an awful lot on your own, but it doesn't make you the equal of the entire medical establishment, let alone superior to it!  

Um, Laura?  She WAS a playboy bunny.  She is NOT a doctor.  It's not "disgusting" to point out the difference and to further point out that parents should take the medical advise of doctors over that of a model.  Unless, of course, you just popped in here to do a little trolling.

"I'm a graduate of the University of Google medical school myself..."

Diera, that's too funny. I think we went to the same school.

Also, Jenny McCarthy is completely silly. She thinks that she is an indigo mother and her son is a crystal child. If you look up those things, you can get an idea of how much people should NOT be taking advice from this woman.

What gave Jenny McCarthy her voice is the fact that she is the mother of an autistic child.  How many who posted here have that distinction??  How many of you have had to sit across from a doctor and hear that diagnosis?  And then look at your child and realize what this new life has in store???

She has said that she believes it was the MMR that caused her son's Autism but does not recommend that people not vaccinate.  She recommends that parents question their doctors.  Ask to have the vaccinations spread out over time.   We live in a society where doctors are not questioned enough, if at all.  

Recently Dr. Oz told Oprah's audience that only 10% of the time do people seek second medical opinions but that second opinion changes the diagnosis and or treatment 30% of the time.  Doctors are suppose to work for the patient.  They shouldn't be listening to pharmaceutical companies first and patient last.  

According to a article in the Journal American Medical Association 285: 1183-85, 2001] the autism rates of the 1970's were 1 case of autism for every 2500 children.  According to a report from the CDC in 2007 it is now 1 case for every 150 children.  

If those were SIDS rates this would be a lot different discussion.  If 1 in 150 children were dying would our society be as judgmental of those parents?  It would be declared a national emergency!  

But these children aren't dying they are slipping into a dark silent world.  Their parents are watching them fade away.  Who are any of us to judge them?  Especially if you are one of the lucky 149 parents that has a healthy child.

Here is a website that contains some interesting information for any who may be open minded enough to care.

educate-yourself.org/.../califoregonunvaccinatedchildrensurvey03nov07.shtml

Cat, the study you have a link to is very iffy. First of all, this "study" was performed by a market research firm, not scientists.  Another problem is that the 2 populations vary greatly in size, which makes the margin of error much larger. Also, there is a quote in this "study" saying that one county had very unusual results, and if that county was excluded, the populations of vaccinated boys and unvaccinated boys were similar. (Also, the 2 populations of girls were similar.)

Actual, scientific studies have shown no link between vaccines and autism.

And I'm sorry, but having an autistic child does not make you an expert. I had a baby, but does that make me an OBGYN?

I agree you should ask your doctor questions (I definitely do), but the problem is that there is so much misinformation out there that people think they are educating themselves where they are actually miseducating themselves, especially when they don't understand basic science. (Which is true for a large part of the US population, unfortunately.)

Ms. McCarthy's "activism" has caused many children to be sick and some to die, for absolutely no reason. She should be ashamed of herself.

Cat, you talk about the increase in autism rates from the 70's until now. Before 1980, there was not even a definition of autism. Most patients who would have been autistic were classified as something else. In 1980, a very stringent definition came into existence. There were 6 criteria, along the lines of "child persistently does not respond." A child had to meet all 6 criteria to be considered autistic. In 1994, the criteria changed again. There were 16 very vague criteria, such as "child shows signs of not communicating". A child only had to meet 8 of the 16 criteria to be considered fully autistic, and even fewer to be considered mildly autistic. It took a while for doctors to learn about the new criteria, and many thought they were too loose. As more and more parents learned of the criteria, more went to the doctors asking if their child was autistic. This is why there is a continuing, upward trend.

There was a recent study, cited in Babble, where it was stated that only 10% of today's autistic children were considered "mildly autistic". However, this study did not take into account the change in criteria or the higher rate of testing.

It's the science that's bad, the statistics are off, the parents of sick children are the problem??  You people should hear yourselves.  You've made up your minds and have passed judgment.  I really hope you don't consider yourselves Christians.  

Tonight kiss your healthy children goodnight and just count your blessings.  And God forbid you find yourself in need of understanding and compassion because the medical system has screwed you I hope you find people better than yourselves.

Cat, wow!

When we abandon science and put emotion in its place, we can take our troubles in any direction.

Those of us who trust science and actual facts shouldn't consider ourselves Christian? We have made up our minds because we have seen the data, and we have actually seen what can happen when children do not get vaccinated. It sounds like you have made up your mind that the medical system has screwed these kids, based on no actual facts. You also seem not to care about these kids who can get these horrible diseases.

Actually, why am I even arguing with you. Since you don't care about logic, it won't make a difference anyway.

btw, who said the science is bad? It is the pseudo-science that is the problem.

"These days, being opposed to vaccine-autism research puts one outside of the "mainstream" (and let's be clear, supporting such research in no way makes one "anti-vaccine" -- that charge is a tired, diversionary charade -- an ugly lie perpetrated by vaccine industry allies and their blind supporters."  From Robert F Kennedy, Jr. and David Kirby's article titled "Autism, Vaccines and the CDC: The Wrong Side of History" posted on January 27, 2009 on The Huffington Post

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../autism-vaccines-and-the-c_b_161395.html

Quite the read.

I have read David Kirby before. The problem I see with this article is that he says that "the evidence connecting America's autism epidemic to vaccines mounts", but then cites very little evidence, and does not cite at all the real mounting evidence that there is no link. (Most of what he cites in his article are quotes instead of data.) There is the Hannah Poling case, which was one individual, and even the panel that rewarded the money stated that they did not reach a definitive conclusion. (The vaccine court has a very low standard of proof.)

I have no emotional connection to vaccines. As a scientist, when I was pregnant I heard about this possible link and researched in with an open mind. However, in my years of studying clinical trials, I have rarely seen something with such a high benefit and low risk as vaccines. Low risk does not mean no risk. Every single thing you do in your life has a risk. Vaccines have such a high benefit, that I can't understand how anyone would want to not vaccinate their kids. And unfortunately, this is what is happening. Near where I live there was an outbreak of measles where there was a high population of unvaccinated children. That really broke my heart. (We live in a 1st world country in the 21st century. This just shouldn't happen.)

The real reason a lot of people want to stop performing these studies is because there have already been studies showing there is no significant vaccine-autism link, and they would rather have this money going into something else. (Like finding a real cause/cure for autism.) For example, David Kirby talks about Autism Speaks wanting to fund a study on thimerosal. What is the point of this, when it has already been removed from childhood vaccines?

There is also the feeling that the anti-vaccine people will never believe any amount of data, so what is the point? (I know this is not the most logical reaction.) Many people thought that thimerosal was the cause of autism. When that was removed in 2001, and the autism rate continued to rise, they still could not admit that they were wrong.

If there was an unlimited amount of money and time, I would have absolutely no problem with this research going on forever. The question is what are we not studying.

Honestly, I would be interested in seeing some real data on this subject, but I have yet to find any. There was Dr. Wakefield's study of 12 patients, that was later refuted by 10 out of 12 of his colleagues. This was really the start of it all. As much as people say they don't trust the thousands of data points showing no vaccine-autism link, they hold onto these 12 data points for dear life.

Cat... get help.  Seriously.

www.sun-sentinel.com/video

The problem is that you want those who are effected by this epidemic to take their lumps and shut up.  How fortunate for those who don't have an emotional reaction to this issue.  I know too many parents dealing with the needs of their autistic children, a few in my own family.  It must be nice to be so cavalier, that is not a luxury I have been afforded.  

What offends me here isn't that you have your beliefs about your own children.  No one called you names or passed judgment on you for having your children vaccinated.  But  you feel the need to pass judgment on fellow parents who are also trying to make the best choices for their children?  Like I said if you are one of the lucky 149 count your blessings.

Why spend the money on more studies?  To try to prevent more families from suffering this fate.  A cure would be a miracle but prevention would be ethical and moral.  In 1981 they had a blood test to detect AIDS in the blood supply.  The blood companies said no, it would be too costly.  They waited 4 years for a more cost effective test.  How many lives were sacrificed for the bottom line?  That is the system that is making these decisions.  It's not about children or families but about quarterlies and bottom lines.    

Jenny McCarthy was referred here as "Douche Bag of the Year", a prostitute and hooker.  I was told to "get help".  I know why I care so much about this issue but if you have healthy kids and this doesn't touch your life then why do you care so much?  If it's not your fight then stand aside.

Doctors and scientists are always right, until they're wrong.  History testifies to that, over and over.  

gpgirl, thanks for such a rational, intelligent comment.