Friday, 12 March 2010
-
Associated Press and Time Magazine got it wrong - Autism & Vaccines
There was an article in the paper by the Associated Press that declared that the autism-vaccine question has been settled. Funny, that’s news to me.
The reporter, Carla K. Johnson in Chicago, wrote, “…much has been written about research that has failed to find a link between vaccines and autism.” Just a single study raised the question, she said, and it has been retracted. Case closed: “Fear of a vaccine-autism connection stems from a flawed and speculative 1998 study that recently was retracted by a British medical journal. The retraction came after a council that regulates Britain’s doctors ruled the study’s author acted dishonestly and unethically.”
Whether that particular study was retracted because of politics is a matter of debate. This was the study that suggested that the measles vaccine in the MMR shot causes autism. The sample size was tiny, and results were debatable.
Time Magazine on Feb. 25 made a similar claim: “And yet research conclusively shows that vaccines are safe for children; just last month, the U.K. scientist who had published a study linking the MMR shot to autism was found by a British medical panel to have acted unethically.”
I would like to tell these under-informed and surely well-meaning news reporters that there are manifold reasons why and how vaccines could cause autism, and this retracted study addressed only one possibility, that of the measles virus in the MMR somehow running amok.
Another possible vaccine-autism link that seems discredited is the theory that thimerosal, a mercury additive in pre-2001 shots, causes autism. Here’s why it’s discredited–despite the fact that there’s no thimerosal in the shots, autism rates continue to rise.
Therefore, if there is an autism-vaccine link, it probably has to do with something besides those two possible causes. For example, the “too many, too soon” theory which says that the many many sticks that kids get these days, at a very young age, could be a cause. There are other possibilities that we don’t know about yet.
What we do know is:
* that the autism epidemic has risen alongside the number of required shots
* that the anecdotal evidence, including before-and-after videos on Youtube, is overwhelming from families reporting regression soon after taking shots
* that the autism epidemic surely has at least partly an environmental cause, because an epidemic cannot have a solely genetic cause
* that vaccines under development are tested alone, not in combination with others, and
* that the medical establishment has a huge vested interest in creating and marketing vaccines.
What we need is a definitive study that compares vaccinated populations and unvaccinated. THAT study would prove it one way or another, not the tiny measles vaccine study that appeared to be flawed. The Associated Press article I am discussing reports on a University of Michigan phone survey a year ago of 1,552 parents inquiring about whether they were vaccinating their children. It’s a shame surveyors didn’t also inquire about whether their children are autistic, permitting correlation of the two pieces of data.
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to autisable's Autisable Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in autisable's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: curingautism
- About Me: I am Phyllis Wheeler, mother of two kids with Asperger's: "Mike" and "Shannon."
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 1 51 Views: 638 30718 Comments: 5 355 View all posts by curingautism
Comments (3)
Thank you for this! I absolutely agree.
Have you seen this article? Scary, and leaves a lot of people wondering!
What's more likely, that two respected news sources got something wrong or that you are once-again spreading anti-vaccination lies, propaganda, and nonsense?
We know your track record.
Here's what we really know:
-There is no compelling evidence for an actual rise in incidence of autism. Diagnoses are more frequent, but this corresponds to a rise in awareness and improved techniques for diagnosis, and provides no evidence regarding the frequency of the condition before diagnosis techniques and awareness improved.
-While you may be overwhelmed by anecdotes, they are not scientifically relevant evidence and they demonstrate nothing. We have no need to rely on anecdotes when dozens of well-designed studies all tell us the same thing: There is no link between autism and vaccination.
-The definition of the word epidemic does indeed exclude genetic conditions. It also excludes Autism, and for the same reason. Autism is not communicable and as such cannot be an epidemic. The term applies only to infectious disease, which is the sole reason it excludes genetic conditions. As such, your premise is faulty and your conclusion unreliable.
-There is no relevance to the techniques used in testing vaccines. The techniques used to search for a link between vaccines and autism have often been valid, and have never demonstrated that any such link exists. But we can state that more strongly. Dozens of studies have demonstrated that no link between vaccination and autism is feasible.No probable or possible mechanism of action has been proposed which would allow for any such link.This idea has been definitively disproven and debunked.
- Yes, the medical establishment has a huge vested interest in creating and marketing new vaccines: They are inexpensive and highly effective. They save lives and prevent the spread of disease. That should matter to you, too. That it doesn't seem to is worrying.
We've done the science. The science shows that you're barking up the wrong tree. Please stop spreading anti-vaccination propaganda. There is a demonstrated link between anti-vaccination propaganda and childhood death.
We had almost eradicated measles in Britain, soon there would have been no more need for measles vaccinations but now - thanks to people like you - children are once more dying from measles.