Study Linking Vaccine, Autism Shouldn't Have Been Published ("fatal conflict of interest.")

http://www.foxnews.com/ ^ | Saturday, February 21, 2004 | http://www.foxnews.com/

[Sabertooth]

Even if MMR does not cause autism, there are other well-established side effects...

You get no argument from me that parents should have the option of splitting the MMR vaccine. As you posted, side-effects are marginally more likely, but more importantly, a heavy-handed insistence on giving the MMRs all at once plays to the fear mongering of the extreme, anti-vaccine quacks.

There is also a risk that the vaccine will be improperly stored or improperly administered. There are cases of infants being given the adult dose or being given the wrong vaccine. As long as humans are fallible, these risks will never be eliminated.

Quite so, and ongoing testing and research for ever safer vaccination techniques is a prudent and necessary endeavor.

The benefits of the MMR vaccine to an individual in the U.S. are lower than the risks because mumps, measles and rubella are extremely uncommon (only a few hundred cases per year). Moreover, although these can be serious diseases they are rarely fatal. Yes, I know, the reason the incidence rates are so low is because of the vaccine. But that doesn't change the bottom line reality: an unvaccinated child in the U.S. is extremely unlikely to get any of these three diseases.

That's principally because of herd immunity. If the parents of a million newborns a year were to forego MMR vaccines either together or seperately, we'd see a marked increase in the occurence of those diseases in the next five to 10 years.

Parents who don't have their children immunized for measles, mumps, and rubella are irresponsible cheats, as far as I'm concerned. They risk not only the health of their own children, but also the greater community, and especially the unborn should their infectious child come into contact with at pregnant woman.

The same agument applies for the Hepatitis B vaccine.

Like you with your first-born, I padded along with my daughter and went the full route with the Hep B vaccine, trusting that the doctors knew best. Since then, however, I've seen little to convince me that the Hep B vaccine is necessary and much to make me skeptical of the motivations for it. Unlike the other diseases targeted by child vaccination programs, Hep B has never been an infectious childhood disease, and I wouldn't authorize it again.

This is a pretty good resource...

QuackwatchSM Your Guide to Health Fraud, Quackery, and Intelligent Decisions   Operated by Stephen Barrett, M.D   If you write, please mention how you found this Web site.

Misconceptions about Immunization

Introduction

Immunizations should be part of routine health care obtained through one's personal physician (or in some instances, through one's local health department). Long-lasting protection is available against measles, mumps, German measles (rubella), poliomyelitis, tetanus (lockjaw), whooping cough (pertussis), diphtheria, chickenpox (varicella), Hemophilus influenzae b (Hib), and hepatitis B. Immunization against all of these is recommended for children by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Practice, and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

All states now require proof of immunization or other evidence of immunity against some of these diseases for admission to school. However, the requirements vary from state to state, and exemptions may be granted for medical, moral, or religious reasons.

Immunization is also important for adults. Those unprotected against any of the above diseases (except whooping cough) should consult their physicians. Tetanus boosters should be administered every ten years. Flu shots (which give only seasonal protection) and immunization against pneumococcal pneumonia are recommended for high-risk patients, elderly individuals, and certain institutional populations.

The success of vaccination programs in the United States and Europe inspired the 20th-century concept of "disease eradication" -- the idea that a selected disease can be eradicated from all human populations through global cooperation. In 1977, after a decade-long campaign involving 33 countries, smallpox was eradicated worldwide. Polio caused by wild virus has been eradicated from the Western Hemisphere; childhood vaccination levels in the United States are at an all-time high; and disease and death from diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, mumps, rubella and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) are at or near record lows. In April 1999, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control issued a fact sheet with some interesting statistics about the impact of vaccination on childhood diseases.

• Average annual number of smallpox cases in 1900-1904: 48,164.
  United States cases per year since 1950: 0.
  Worldwide cases per year since 1977: 0.
• Average annual number of diphtheria cases in the U.S. in 1920-1922: 175,885.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 1.
• Average annual number of pertussis cases in 1922-1925: 147,271.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 6,279.
• Estimated average annual number of tetanus cases in 1922-1926: 1,314.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 34.
• Average annual number of paralytic polio cases in 1951-1954: 16,316.
  U.S. cases of wild type poliovirus in 1998: 0.
• Average annual number of measles cases in 1958-1962: 503,282.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 89.
• The number of mumps cases in 1968: 152,209.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 606.
• Average annual number of rubella cases in 1966-1968: 47,745.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 345.
• Estimated average annual number of cases of congenital rubella syndrome in 1966-1968: 823.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 5.
• Estimated average annual number of Hib cases before vaccine licensure: 20,000.
  U.S. cases in 1998: 54.

Common Misconceptions

At least ten misconceptions can lead parents to question the wisdom of immunizing their children. If you encounter others you would like Quackwatch to address, please contact us.

• Misconception #1: because of better hygiene and sanitation, diseases had already begun to disappear before vaccines were introduced.
• Misconception #2: The majority of people who get the disease have been immunized.
• Misconception #3: There are hot lots of vaccine that have been associated with more adverse events and deaths than others. Parents should find the numbers of these lots and not allow their children to receive vaccines from them.
• Misconception #4: Vaccines cause many harmful side effects, and even death -- and may cause long-term effects we don't even know about.
• Misconception #5: DTP vaccine causes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
• Misconception #6: Vaccine-preventable diseases have been virtually eliminated from the United States, so there is no need for my child to be vaccinated.
• Misconception #7: Giving a child more than one vaccine at a time increases the risk of harmful side effects and can overload the immune system.
• Misconception #8: There is no good reason to immunize against chickenpox (varicella) because it is a harmless disease
• Misconception #9: Vaccines cause autism.
• Misconception #10. Hepatitis B vaccine causes chronic health problems, including multiple sclerosis.
• Misconception #11. Thimerosal Causes Autism

Opposition by Chiropractors and Naturopaths

Large percentages of chiropractors and naturopaths advise parents not to immunize their children. These actions are irresponsible and can cause serious harm both to patients and to our society as a whole.

For Additional Information

• U.S. Centers for Disease Control
  • National Immunization Program offers answers to common questions.
  • CDC Information Hotline: (800) 323-2522.
• The American Academy of Pediatrics answers common questions and provides its recommended childhood immunization schedule.
• Health Canada: Laboratory Center for Disease Control
• The Immunization Action Coalition, whose mission is to increase immunization rates, offers childhood and adult immunization information and answers questions by email.
• The Immunization Gateway: Links to many other authoritative sites.
• Immunization Newsbriefs: Online and e-mail newsletter from the National Network for Immunization Infoirmation
• The Vaccine Page: Vaccine news and a database
• Healthy People 2010: Surgeon General's goals for immunization
• Immunization: The Inconvenient Facts: A science-based response to Viera Scheibner.
• National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Jordan Report 2000: Accelerated Development of Vaccines
• National Network for Immunization Information
• Vaccine Education Center (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia)

Quackwatch Home Page

This page was revised on April 20, 2002.


Quackwatch Immunization Thread Here

[Sabertooth]

I can see how junk science like this gets into newspapers -- scientifically speaking, the average reporter has a second-grade education -- but how in the hell does it get into a mainstream, peer-reviewed medical journal?

Grants' Fever, an infectious psychological condition increasingly seen in the scientific communities of industrialized countries. To trace the outbreak to its source, follow the money.

Any time a controversial study is published, a slew of new research is required, creating the opportunities for grant applications which are often administered by bureaucrats with political interests. The politicization of science through government intervention generates a need for sensationalism even among scientific journals.

[Dianna]

I personally only know 2 autistic people (1 cousin, now in late 50's, and one son of a friend.) Both were first born of early 20's mothers, but that qualifies as anecdotal evidence, not scientific.

My son, diagnosed with Asperger, is my first born and I was 22.

It is intriguing to see many of us say that. But what can it mean? For hundreds of years women have routinely had babies in their twenties.

[Doctor Stochastic]

...didn't reveal that they were being paid by a legal aid service looking into whether families could sue over the immunizations...

Why wasn't this put as a paragraph at the end of publication. In all my publications, I have put my affiliation and source of funding. Not doing so would be indicative of dishonesty.

[Clinton Is Scum]

"Parents who don't have their children immunized for measles, mumps, and rubella are irresponsible cheats, as far as I'm concerned. They risk not only the health of their own children, but also the greater community, and especially the unborn should their infectious child come into contact with [a] pregnant woman."

Let's take this apart:

"They risk not only the health of their own children..."

Sabertooth, as I argued above, the risks of the vaccine for a given individual outweigh the benefits. If you dispute this, why do you dispute it? If you do not dispute it, then this one part of your argument is not valid.

"...but also the greater community..."

Let's be clear about this. The risk they pose to the community is extremely low, because the risk that they will get any of these three diseases is extremely low. They are about as likely to be struck by lightning. But people do get struck by lightning, and let's say an unvaccinated child does get extremely unlucky and contracts mumps, measles, or rubella. Assuming that vaccination confers immunity, the only people threatened by a child who has mumps, measles, or rubella are those WHO ARE THEMSELVES UNVACCINATED. Do you think that it is reasonable for unvaccinated people to expect to be exposed only to vaccinated people? I do not. I think that people who elect not to vaccinate themselves ought to accept the fact that they are at higher risk of these diseases,and shouldn't complain if others also opt not to get vaccinated.

"Unlike the other diseases targeted by child vaccination programs, Hep B has never been an infectious childhood disease, and I wouldn't authorize it again."

Kudos to you for challenging the medical establishment! But I am not sure I follow the logic. Hep B, it is true, is very very rare among children. But children do get it. The childhood incidence of Hep B is not very different from that of mumps, measles, or rubella. Hep B can be transmitted by biting and whatnot, so I don't understand why Hep B is fundamentally different from mumps, measles, or rubella. In short, if it is morally wrong to opt out of the MMR vaccine, surely it is also morally wrong to opt out of the Hep B vaccine.

[TomB]

So Wakefield was lying, who'd a thunk it?

Another one bites the dust.....

[Poohbah]

Has anyone ever done a study about the average age of autistic children (at birth) ?

Average age of autistic children at birth: 0 years.

Average age of non-autistic children at birth: 0 years.

[TomB]

The risk they pose to the community is extremely low, because the risk that they will get any of these three diseases is extremely low. They are about as likely to be struck by lightning. But people do get struck by lightning, and let's say an unvaccinated child does get extremely unlucky and contracts mumps, measles, or rubella. Assuming that vaccination confers immunity, the only people threatened by a child who has mumps, measles, or rubella are those WHO ARE THEMSELVES UNVACCINATED. Do you think that it is reasonable for unvaccinated people to expect to be exposed only to vaccinated people?

First of all no vaccine is 100% effective, so it is imperative that as many people are vaccinated as possible to confer herd immunity upon the population as a whole.

Second, you argument is based on the premise that only a very few people forego vaccinations. As the number of unvaccinated people rise, the incidence of that disease rises also.

[TomB]

I wondered about that question myself. ;-)

[rightwingmomX2]

sabertooth,

since you posted mostly pro-vaccine websites I must provide a "fair and balanced" approach.

www.vaccinationnews.com will provide the truth about vaccines. The American Pediatric Society admits they only report about 10% of reaction to vaccines.

My son has some serious issues that we can trace directly to the dtap vaccine. Doctors do not tell people that there are contraindications to vaccines.

My daughter was fully vaccinated and I never thought twice to question vaccines. Now my son will pay for my lack of information for the rest of his lilfe.

another website to look up is

http://www.909shot.com/

[Sabertooth]

Sabertooth, as I argued above, the risks of the vaccine for a given individual outweigh the benefits.

Only so long as parasitizing off of herd immunity is kept at low levels. When the numbers of unvaccinated parasites is sufficient, not only will the individual risks increase, but so will those to the greater community. Even if my family is vaccinated, we would be affected by a whooping cough epidemic.

Let's be clear about this. The risk they pose to the community is extremely low, because the risk that they will get any of these three diseases is extremely low. They are about as likely to be struck by lightning.

This analogy doesn't fly. The risk is kept low only so long as the numbers of the unvaccinated are kept low. As those numbers increase, herd immunity is decreased. The risks to the unvaccinated are increased not just by their own state, but also by the state of other unvaccinated. So, unlike lightning strikes, which are random and not contagious, the risks of non-vaccination are cumulative to the individual as more in the community remain unvaccinated.

Assuming that vaccination confers immunity, the only people threatened by a child who has mumps, measles, or rubella are those WHO ARE THEMSELVES UNVACCINATED.

Including the unborn.

Do you think that it is reasonable for unvaccinated people to expect to be exposed only to vaccinated people? I do not. I think that people who elect not to vaccinate themselves ought to accept the fact that they are at higher risk of these diseases,and shouldn't complain if others also opt not to get vaccinated.

No, they shouldn't. However, I haven't gotten the impression that many anti-vaccine folks are aware that they are parasitizing off of herd immunity, and that proselytizing their parasitism makes it increasingly dangerous to them and to others who buy into it.

I'll stop short of saying that vaccinations ought to be compulsory, but parents who opt not to vaccinate their children to the basic slate of infectious childhood diseases ought to be maligned and ostracized, and they should form their own Petri Dish schools for their antivaccine experimentation on their progeny.

At that point their safety net of herd immunity would vanish, and I'd bet many would awaken to the risks posed by their parasitism.

Hep B can be transmitted by biting and whatnot, so I don't understand why Hep B is fundamentally different from mumps, measles, or rubella. In short, if it is morally wrong to opt out of the MMR vaccine, surely it is also morally wrong to opt out of the Hep B vaccine.

Because Hep B isn't a childhood disease spread by casual transmission, nor does it pose a threat to the unborn in the way that more easily transmitted childhood diseases do.

[aruanan]

The editor of the Lancet, Dr. Richard Horton (search), said Dr. Andrew Wakefield and a team of British scientists who conducted the study on the triple measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine didn't reveal that they were being paid by a legal aid service looking into whether families could sue over the immunizations.

Not only did these guys not bite the hand that feeds them, they threw in a good measure of leg hound to boot.

[Sabertooth]

since you posted mostly pro-vaccine websites I must provide a "fair and balanced" approach.

www.vaccinationnews.com will provide the truth about vaccines. The American Pediatric Society admits they only report about 10% of reaction to vaccines

That website is pushing the same MMR-autism link that has been discreditied by several studies, including the one on which this thread is based. It's hysterical and irresponsible.

My son has some serious issues that we can trace directly to the dtap vaccine. Doctors do not tell people that there are contraindications to vaccines.

I'm sorry about your son, and pediatricians ought to be more informative, not just about the risks to the individual of vaccinations, but also about the basic history of vaccines and epidemiology.

That basic History, however, is generally omityted or distorted by the anti-vaccination zealots.

My daughter was fully vaccinated and I never thought twice to question vaccines. Now my son will pay for my lack of information for the rest of his lilfe.

Life is not without risks, and the risks of non-vaccination, if no one is vaccinated, are far greater than the risks of vaccination. Old cemetaries are littered with the graves of children who succumbed to infectious childhood diseases in the pre vaccination era.

another website to look up is

http://www.909shot.com/

Very lopsided advisory on page one of that website...

BEFORE YOU VACCINATE ASK EIGHT QUESTIONS:

en Español

Is my child sick right now? Has my child had a bad reaction to a vaccination before? Does my child have a personal or family history of: vaccine reactions convulsions or neurological disorders severe allergies immune system disorders Do I know if my child is at high risk of reacting? Do I have full information on the vaccine's side effects? Do I know how to identify a vaccine reaction? Do I know how to report a vaccine reaction? Do I know the vaccine manufacturer's name and lot number?

Notice that there is nothing in this advisory about the history of epidemiology, childhood diseases, and vaccines. I also noticed a number of autism articles. My faith in that website is not especially high.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

My 14 year old "autistic" grandson just got a perfect score on an international Math Counts test. Took his ACTs as a 7th grader--scored 22 with 25 in math.

He still does annoying things like walking on his tippytoes and holds his hands somewhat high. He gets along well with others at school and the kids respect him because they recognize his intellect.

He was interviewed on a local radio station and came across great so his verbal skills are good.

It is scary to think about what the future holds.