Look, just consider two things: 1) Time coincidence is not causation, and 2) Autism rates are climbing in countries that do not use vaccines preserved with the mercury compounds, as well as in countries that have stopped using such vaccines.
If the vaccines preserved with mercury compounds were responsible for increased autism rates, we’d expect to see increased rates only in countries where those vaccines were used. Ergo, we can confidently conclude that it is highly unlikely they are actually a causative factor.
On the other hand, it would be nice to know why the rates are apparently increasing; with such knowledge fears about the vaccines could be assuaged.
Could we have a cite for this? Preferably one involving actual medical diagnoses, and from a source a little more credible than Wired? There are many people out there who think they have Asperger’s, and a disproportionate number of such folks are well-qualified for tech jobs, but I’d wager that folks like the kid described in that article don’t have any developmental handicaps at all. And I doubt that true Asperger’s Syndrome would have any positive value at all, in any workplace.
Quoth Argent Towers:
I would expect the answer to be the same in both cases: some people get luckier with genetics than others. As for an actual mechanism by which the lucky fellow with good genes resists cancer, if they had any strong idea about it, they’d be working around the clock to try to apply that mechanism for those not so genetically blessed.
It’s anecdotal and not general applicable, but livestock engineering authority Dr. Temple Grandin claims that her (diagnosed) Asperger’s Syndrome helps her understand how animals feel, and that other characteristic abilities of Asperger’s (“visual thinking”, sensitivity to stimulus, edetic memory, et cetera) give her a superior ability to do her job (designing livestock enclosures, handling equipment, and slaughter processes that minimize stress on the animals). On the other hand, Grandin is obviously very “high functional” compared to the typical diagnosed Aspie, capable of speaking in front of large groups (if slighly awkwardly), interacting on a personal level to a significant degree, and writing coherently and fluidly. So she’s atypical and so is her work; I doubt this would apply to many occupations and workplaces, and someone with the same abilities but normal interpersonal skills would probably perform as well or better in any given job.
Personally I reckon that doctors and child psychologists have got ‘diagnosis happy’ when it comes to autism.
I have an uncomfortable suspicion that child behaviour might be influenced by their environment, and that modern environments bring out characteristics that would otherwise not have been noticed.
The cat would levitate, unless it was on a treadmill.
Seriously, I wonder if it might be the case that people with a genetic predisposition to autism might be more vulnerable to measles, mumps, rubella or whatever, and that the increased incidence of autism (if indeed there is such an increase) might be because of reduced infant mortality in that group of people.
The theory I’ve heard is that an infant goes through major neurological development leaps just at the same times when they usually receive their standard vaccinations. If a child is autistic, the shifts toward autistic behaviours become obvious at these points…just when the vaccines also happen to be given.
I asked my doctor why the vaccines are given at 2, 4, 6 months and so on…if those are points when the child is undergoing major neurological leaps. Her answer? “It’s convenient, because they’re in for their well-baby checks anyway.”
I didn’t buy it. So, we delayed vaccinations and my children got them at different times, and never more than 2 jabs per visit. It meant a lot of trips to the doctor’s office. It was worth it to me to space them out, to delay a little. So we’re all caught up, all vaccinated (and I hope immunized), just not on the “convenient” schedule. I consider it’s a reasonable alternative, and suspect would reassure parents that vaccines are not the cause, if they could see the neurological shifts happening not when the vaccines are done.
Diagnosis happy? My daughter flaps her arms, spins in circles, grunts like an ape, doesn’t look at us, doesn’t talk to us, doesn’t play with her toys other than to examine them, bangs her head against the walls, and you think it’s that easy to misdiagnose?
What exactly about her modern environment makes those behaviors more noticeable? Because I am pretty damn sure a parent would have known something was wrong with their child in this modern time, and 1000 years ago time.
The 1 in 150 number the CDC is using is based on medical records, eliminating some of the later (like the above post mentioned Steven Spielberg) “Oh I must have Aspergers” people. This is a very real problem, I suggest you go by your local autism treatment facility and see for yourself if this can be just hype.
I also think that some people just refuse to accept the fact that we can’t always prevent some things from happening. Let’s face it-who wants to have to own up to the reality that sometimes our children have something wrong, or get sick-for no reason whatsoever. There HAS to be a reason, in our own minds.
To admit that often times things happen with no cause or reason, is just too frightening. So we need to find something to blame.
AIUI, that is a strawman. The supposed threat was from the MMR shot specifically, that is the combined shot against three separate diseases. I understand that proponents of the theory were advocating giving the child three separate shots. They were never advocating not giving the shots at all.
More, we want to find someone to blame. Go read the ‘lateness’ threads. It seems demanding that others take responsibility is a huge pastime these days. And heaven forfend that science demonstrate that these ‘flaws’ are actually biological conditions! Why if that were true, where would all our blame go? We’d have nobody to look down on!
While you and Quiddity have a good point, modern medicine, and modern science in general, is based on the idea that things do have causes and that, at least sometimes, you can find them out and prevent or fix them.
I for one am glad to live in a world where we don’t just shrug and say, “This is happening for no reason whatsoever.” For one thing, it’d make for some boring episodes of House.
I know of a family with a son that was immunized at the normal ages and was then diagnosed with Autism. When their 2nd son was born, he wasn’t immunized until later- maybe 6 years old- and is not Autistic. Then they had a daughter, who they decided to immunize at the normal ages, and she too is Autistic. You can argue with them all you want about how it’s just a coincidence and that the immunization had nothing to do with the kids’ Autism, but they’ll never believe you.
I’m not at all convinced that vaccines cause autism. Wakefield’s small study that started the whole thing was financed by people looking for someone to sue.
My son wasn’t diagnosed until 5 or 6, but he was clearly a “little bit different” child since birth. His issues grew bigger as he grew bigger and didn’t become “problematic” until he reaced the ages and stages of interacting with other kids.
I always kind of lauged about being asked “what was differrent or unusual at your house?” Uh, nothing. Everything at our house is normal (for us, anyway).
I’m currently reading Grandin’s book Thinking in Pictures, which is part memoir and part survey of autism generally. It’s sort of tough reading, because even though she’s high-functioning her point of view and style of expression is off-kilter enough that the reader has to work pretty hard to stay with her. It’s enormously rewarding, though; she does a great job describing how she perceives the world and processes input, and she makes a good case that mild forms of autism do indeed have some limited marketability in the workplace. Recommended reading for anyone interested in the subject.
This points out a human failing - we prefer stories to statistics, although statistics are much more reliable. Statistics of thousands of cases show no evidence of correlation, much less cause and effect, and it’s easy for the guy on the street to dismiss, but if they read on the internet that some guy knows of a family whose kids’ autism correlates with vaccines, and it makes a much stronger impression.
By the way, there has been some mention of the terms “thimerosal” and “MMR” here, and I want to make sure everyone is clear. The vaccine controversy in the UK was about the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, which never contained thimerosal. In the US, the controversy was not about MMR, but about other vaccines which did contain thimerosal. Both of those explanations have been ruled out by the statistics.
Oh? When she speaks she looks at the audience’s feet insead of her own?
Sorry, couldn’t resist. I’ve seen her and she is obviously not “normal.” Spielberg is a pretentious jerk who has glommed onto the diagnosis of the day because he thinks it’s cool.
Kevin Tredeau would tell you tell that the drug companies know vaccines cause autism, but don’t want to lose money by admitting it, like they did with smoking all those years
I have heard Dr. Grandin speak at veterinary conferences on food animal welfare. She stands up and delivers her information without much interaction with the audience. I imagine she could read the same stuff in an empty room and the presentation would be no different.
No “funny thing happened on the way to the airport” jokes, no humorous asides. But that just means she’s like over 50% of the other speakers on these topics.
The best way I can describe it is that she “thinks like a cow” and thus understands their likes and dislikes.
The claim that a mercury compound (thimerosol) used as a preservative in vaccines, causes autism has been ppopagated by "environmental activist) Robert Kennedy. Among the totally unscientific "analysis"he presents, there is a slight problem: the Danish government did a comprehensive study over several years, and concluded that no such link existed. But people like Kennedy never let facts get in the way.
allow me to propose an alternative: autism rates are "rising’ becuase autism has NO fixed definition. You cannot say: a child who is 6 years old and scores below XX on the YYY test, is autistic. The public shools are interested in "diagnosing’ more and more childhood personality disorders, because it means more funding. The drug companies like it because they sell more drugs. I do not mean to imply that autism is NOT a serious condition-it is and any incidence is too much. But much of the debate is caused by “junk” science, which is propagated by people like mr. Kennedy.
