Strollerderby

I can't tell you how much I've agonized over our decision to vaccinate our recently-diagnosed autistic daughter.  This man should be sent to prison.

Thank you such much for this post. Most of his colleagues had already written a paper stating that his conclusion was wrong. This just shows how low he actually did stoop. And yes, this is the basis for the entire anti-vax movement. It is time to finally stop this.

Amy, can you list these scientists who have raised these issues? Most scientists I have met and read about have said there is no vaccine-autism link. All of the scientific evidence points to having no link. This was the only real "data" that existed, and now we know it was fabricated. Jeanne is right indicating that the argument should really be put to rest.

Please do give the names of these scientists you are talking about. Maybe there is data out there, but I have yet to see any.

Oh, and please stop using thimerosal as an example. This was taken out of all childhood vaccines (except the flu vaccine) in 2001. Here in California, it is also now not in the pediatric flu vaccine either. Despite this, there has been no decrease in the autism rate. This should prove that thimerosal was not causing autism.

Anyone can raise an issue. You need some actual data to make this argument last for this long.

@Amy, I am a scientist, and I too have studied this issue a great deal. The fact is there is no real argument against the fact that the benefits of all these vaccines greatly outweigh the risks. All of the evidence points to this. If you have any other data indicating the opposite, please cite it. I have done so much research, and have only found emotional fears, no actual scientific data, supporting the anti-vaccine movement.

Every single study I have seen on the "overwhelming the system" argument has shown no actual evidence of this.  All the doctors I've spoken to about it say they support it only to make nervous parents more likely to vaccinate at all.  Please stop. Stop trying to frighten people away from valuable medical treatment.  Or just become a Christian Scientist already and call it a day.

My first thought was that I hope he gets charged with manslaughter for the recent measles deaths, and fined for measles outbreaks. Then I found myself thinking that if people are going to value minority medical research published in, say, Rolling Stone over thorough and scientific studies, then maybe this is just another example of Darwinish (or whatever the intelligent design cuties would have us call it).

Let me start by saying that I am not anti-vaccine in any way. I feel like Amy needs a little defense here however.  She didn't use the word "autism" in her comment and she didn't say that thimerosol was still used in the MMR vaccine or even most vaccines. The flu vaccine is one which we are all supposed to be giving to our kids because they are "vulnerable", and it still does have thimerosol in it in most places, so Amy isn't deluded on that one. And yeah, there are "real" scientists who are concerned about number of vaccines babies get at one time, which is not to say that on an epidedemiological level it's not still beneficial to society to vaccinate babies in this way. The vaccine autism link seems to be virtually nonexistant but that doesn't mean that all discussion on vaccines should end, or that Amy is wrong to still have concerns about vaccines. Laurel and gpgirl,you shouldn't have attacked that comment without reading it more carefully.

I apologize if I came across as overly critical. In reading Amy's post, it is true she did not talk about autism specifically. I would like to know what kinds of things she is talking about, though.

Please understand the frustration, though. I will often hear people say things like "there are scientists out there that think babies are getting too many vaccines at once", but don't say who these scientists are, or what the basis of their thinking is.

So, I guess I should have just asked the question - can you let us know who these scientists are, and if you have any info on why they think this, that would be very helpful. The only scientist I have ever heard of that is against vaccines is this geologist who has no medical training or background.

In any case, can parents please, for petessake, start vaccinating again??

My neighborhood in Brooklyn does not have a high enough vaccination rate to support herd immunity, and I'm going to be more than upset if my daughter gets the measles!

Seriously, I'm considering moving just because it's like we're in the third world over here.

My pediatrician spaces out my children's vaccinations to prevent overwhelming their immune system.  She says most of the time when she offers the same option to other parents they say "no".  They dont want to have to come back every 6 weeks or so!  They want to come in only when they absolutely have to.  

Laure68

I am a geologist too and support vaccines for all children.  I watched a perfect, beautiful child die on Nightline the other night.  She was a newborn infected with Tetanus in Africa.  We the viewer got to watch her struggle for her last breath and her mother die inside with her.  I think every parent who decides not to vaccinate be required to send the money they would have spent on their childs' vaccinations to a third world country so another child or their mother can get those same vaccinations.  I think most would jump at the chance to have what so many here in the land of plenty take for granted.

My son was due for his MMR shortly after the Hanna Pollard (sp?) case and the fear drove me to question my previously pro vax on schedual stance. I asked our Ped about breaking up the MMR and spacing it, and she pointed out that this would mean that our child's immune system would never get to rest as it would constantly have to be on high alert. There is also a minute, yet very real human and mechanical error factor involved with every procedure. Simply stated, the more shots, the more the chance for mistakes, so we decided to vax on sched and reading this makes me even more happy about our decision.

I've done another round-up post -- who is saying what about the Deer articles on Wakefield in the London Times.  I've included this post.

<a href="lizditz.typepad.com/.../11-years-on-wakefield-manufactured-data-showing-mmrautism-link.html">11 years on, Wakefield Manufactured Data showing MMR-Autism Link?</a>

How much time and money has been spent on the anti-vax movement when it could have been spent on autism research? We don't seem to be much further ahead in that area and that is the true disservice this movement has caused.

"How much time and money has been spent on the anti-vax movement when it could have been spent on autism research? We don't seem to be much further ahead in that area and that is the true disservice this movement has caused."

I just felt this needed repeating.

Wow. It's discouraging that it's taken so long to investigate, or at least so long for it to come to light. I know autism rates have increased but I also wonder how many more children are now being diagnosed as autistic, when in the past they would not have been. I have a cousin who was dx'd as "mentally retarded" when she was four. She's now 40 and I can't help but think that nowadays, she would probably receive an autism dx. Unless the child has Down Syndrome (or another  known cause of retardation) it seems most children do not receive the "mentally retarded" label.

So there could be other reasons the "autism" rates are increasing.

It posted before I added, "As long as the child is able to receive the services s/he needs, that's the important thing."

I am a mother of a little boy diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum.  I agree with other families that something is causing this epidemic and it could very well be environmental, i.e. pollution, chemical.

Clearly more unbiased studies need to be done, this is certainly not the way it should happen with false information.  

The vaccine scare started because so many moms can trace their child's diagnosis back to the same point...just months after the MMR and at the end of 18 months of shots.  

I vaccinated my son.  We have no family history of auto-immune problems or learning disabilities.

His pediatrician looked at his pointing and babbling at 1 year and SWORE ON HER MEDICAL LICENSE he would never have autism.  Now he does and I didn't see it for months because she assured me. I never looked. The medical community is far from perfect and none of you know the torment we mothers go through blaming ourselves for our choices.  The shots might not be to blame, but if they are, I am the one who held him down as he got them and I am the one who will fight for the rest of my life to get his the therapies and treatments he needs.  

I invite you to a week of the hell I live through daily.  The looks, the stares, the whispers about me as a mom.  Very few diagnoses give the public this right to criticize because our little children, who are screaming from sensory overload in Walmart don't look disabled.  They are adorable, well dressed, well fed children.  Yet, they are being bombarded by overstimulation from lights and music and people.  Wouldn't you want answers?

Karen,

I absolutely would want answers.  Which is why, if I were the parent of an autistic child, I would be advocating the immediate cessation of investigation into a question that has been ANSWERED (is it the vaccines?) and the redirecting of those resources into investigation of other things.  For instance, we've heard a lot about BPA recently - has anyone looked at that in connection to autism?  Or the hundreds of other man-made chemicals that we're all apparently bathing in all the time?  Why do the vaccines get so much attention when this creepy thing of manufacturing by-products winding up in our bodies gets such short shrift?

Actually, although I'm not the parent of an autistic child as far as I know, I advocate that anyway.

Sue, you are right. Before 1980, there was no criteria for autism, so very few people were diagnosed as such. In 1980, there were very strict criteria defined. In 1994, there criteria were changed again, and were defined much more loosely. There was a study where a group of kids who were diagnosed recently were subjected to the pre-1994 (but post-1980) criteria, and only 25% met this older criteria. If you believe this study, that means, based on the change in criteria alone, we should see a 4-fold increase in autism solely based on the changing criteria. This does not include increased screening, earlier screening, etc.

The reason the numbers did not jump suddenly in 1994 is that it takes time for doctors to adapt to the new criteria. Also, as the criteria gets circulated, people start seeing the symptoms in their kids themselves.

That is not to say that there is no actual rise in autism. It is just impossible to know what it could actually be.

Now, I don't want to take anything away from those out there who have kids who are autistic. This is such a hard thing to deal with from day to day. However, as some have said earlier, we have spent so much time and money investigating vaccines as the cause, when this has been proven false so many times, that we are no closer in determining what could be causing autism, or what the real increase is.

Very interesting, gpgirl. Thanks for taking the time to write that out.

Karen--I'm sorry :(  Sounds rough.

This doctor and many people in the autism community are speaking out about the very information in this post. Please read on and notice that everyone pro-vaccine in this posting is not dealing with austism.  Please stop saying autisic children.  We don't say canceric people...they are people first, with autism.  It is insulting.

spectrumpublications.com/spectrum-magazine-home.html

It's about time the myth about vaccinations is shown to be the fraud that it is. Unfortunately, there are many who will perpetuate the fraud to push their own agendas and prey upon unsuspecting, desperate parents. We have enough to deal with as it is, without misinformation. I've detailed some of these challenges in a recent book, "The Daddy Diaries".

@anonymous - I have read Dr. Wakefield's response. He skirts most of the big issues, such as the fact that several of the children had symptoms of autism before receiving the MMR shot. He says that he did not have that information at the time. However, as a researcher, it is his responsibility to find that information out. In any case, now that he knows this, he still refuses to modify his conclusion. He never actually denies that these children did have these symptoms prior to the vaccination.

Even if it is true that he did not know this information at the time, what is his reasoning for not modifying his original "study"?

Also, I am really frustrated that those of us who are scientifically minded and can plainly see that there is no MMR-autism link are viewed as being against people with autism. I would say we are more for them than the anti-vax crowd, since we would like to find a real cause for autism.

Finally, even if this study was completely legit, they only involved 12 patients! There are thousands of points of data showing that the MMR vaccine is safe, but the same people who don't believe this data hand onto these 12 points of data like there was some holy shroud around them.

btw, here is one professor's analysis of Dr. Wakefield's paper. This analysis assumes he did not lie or fabricate any data, but still states that he could not have reached a conclusion that there is a casual link between the MMR vaccine and autism. (In fact, Dr. Wakefield himself states in his paper that there is no link. He only heavily implies that there is, and has stated that there is in his subsequent talks.)

briandeer.com/.../lancet-greenhalgh.htm

People wanting a Christian perspective on why autism exists might enjoy a free podcast at www.mic.mypodcast.com entitled "Why is there autism? A Christian perspective" issued by Midnight In Chicago.

Many other free podcasts on autism spectrum disorders are available there also.

Not everyone agrees that "person with autism" is to be preferred:

renaeden.autiblogger.com/.../person-with-autism-or-autistic

web.syr.edu/.../person_first.htm

Anyway, the implication that you can only be pro-vax if you don't have autism in your own family is erroneous.  I have encountered many parents of autistic children/children with autism who are pro-vaccination, they're just frequently not as vocal as those who are anti-vaccination activists.  

Besides, even if ALL parents of children on the spectrum blamed the shots, that wouldn't make it true.  There is a reason we do studies of these things, it's because our brains are wired in ways that make us likely to draw bad conclusions without the kind of distance and objectivity that we can get in a study.  We fall prey to placebo effects, confirmation bias, confusing correlation with causation, and other problems.  I don't blame parents for being frantic for answers, I just don't get why *this* particular answer has gotten so entrenched that no amount of counter-evidence seems to be enough to dislodge it.

The Vaccine Court's release of its opinion on Darwin's 200th birthday was fortuitous, seeing as the vaccine-autism faithful have a good deal in common with religious fundamentalists.  They are so invested in their ideas that they ignore or attack any evidence to the contrary, and treat gaps in the opposing evidence as further proof in their favor.

The obscenity of the "anti-vax" movement is stupefying-- a campaign to reinstitute open sewers or ban refrigeration could scarcely threaten greater violence to the public health.

I have much more to say on this topic <a href="holyprepuce.blogspot.com/.../a>.