Comprehensive study after study have shown no link between vaccines and autism. In the U.S., the mercury preservative in vaccines blamed by some for autism was removed from common childhood vaccines in 2001 - yet the reported autism rate keeps increasing. Other countries have reported similar findings.
The mothers were wrong.
And children have paid the price for that incorrect “emotional knowledge”, thanks also to the handful of unethical researchers who’ve profited by exploiting vaccine fears.
So if there is just the slightest chance it does cause Autism I would not give it my child. If science wants to end the controversy find the cause of Autism and put the question to rest. Single jabs could be given also instead of the triple jab. Would that not help alleviate the fear?
Science is finding itself more and more at odds with the general public. Not a good place to be. In the last few years I have found scientists looking more like politicians to me. Some one I don’t trust very much. If I had children of the proper age I would skip the vaccine, I had the measles, mumps, and chickenpox when I was small and lived through them. I wouldn’t wish Autism on anyone.
When scientists get to be humans treating humans again I will listen up more.
Forgot to ask what emotional knowledge was exactly? I don’t believe there is a way to separate knowledge from emotion. We humans are emotional, that’s how you can tell us from the machines. So, I would really like an example of unemotional knowledge, if there be some.
It’s interesting to watch small children begin to learn about the world. They don’t understand that 2 is a symbol for a long time – 2+2 is an event for them, not a concept.
ETA – I really like your point about the method of learning and method of use being integral to the value of the knowledge gained. Yep.
While this subject is beyond the scope of this thread, I will note that adhering to the belief that the cause* of autism must be found before allowing one’s children to be vaccinated, dooms many of them (as well as others who will not enjoy the protection of herd immunity) to potentially severe injury and death due to these supposedly benign diseases. If you read the link I provided, you know this is already happening.
Ignorance and generalized disdain for science have fatal consequences.
*Autism likely has multiple causes, and there’s substantial evidence for a genetic component.
I’d like to see you address the point of how we have actually discovered all of the drugs that have recently been recalled, lekatt. It seems like a fairly clear exact contradiction to what you’re stating about the importance of science vs. “emotional knowledge.”
Again, science is willing to second guess itself, in fact science strongly rewards people that can come up with convincing evidence for the positions that most radically contradict the prevailing scientific viewpoints (witness the Noble Prize), and any academic epidemiologist or other person that could use actual evidence to establish a link between autism and vaccination would effectively write their own ticket for the remainder of their career.
You guys need to go check out today’s Oprah. Jenny McCarthy and Holly Robinson Peet are on there discussing autism and vaccines. Both of them have autistic children, and they think vaccines (especially MMR) played a role.
There’s a lengthy “Ask Jenny & Holly” thread going on, and the stories from mothers of autistic kids are just heartbreaking. So many woman are so frustrated; they’re not looking to be wacky, they just can’t find anyone who’ll listen to their concerns and give them credible explanations. These aren’t the crunchistas, BTW, Oprah is far too mainstream for the alternative crew.
Experience is valuable only as far as the status quo is desirable. In other words, if an organization is dysfunctional, experienced people can have more trouble than inexperienced ones, if there experience is similarly dysfunctional (which it usually is). Problems with (apparently) intractable solutions can often be solved by fresh thinking that can get outside the box of tradition.
This of course is not always true - there are many cases where you need to learn a lot about something before you can effectively improve upon it (for example, I learned all about what was wrong with Literary Theory X before I actually learned Literary Theory X, which led to some problems in my understanding). There are also smart and creative people who can overcome their training and think outside the box.
So their experience with their child’s development holds no clues? What if it IS triggered through the something in the environment? Wouldn’t it be important to look at that?
I really don’t know anything about how the causes of autism have been researched, what methodologies they’ve used.
I do know that some mothers of autistic children say that their symptoms began following an illness that immediately followed a vaccination(s). Read the comments on Oprah’s website.
The anti-vax movement isn’t entirely black/white about it, there are plenty of people who argue just against bundling, against certain timing practices, or against a particular shot. And some families have more sensitivity issues than others.
My kids received all of their shots on schedule and haven’t suffered any ill effects, AFAIK.
It might, but probably more in aggregate than as specific individuals thinking back and trying to find patterns.
People can find patterns in almost anything. That’s one of the problems with experience as a problem-solver. We don’t have a rigorous approach to our own memories, and we treat random events with a significance they don’t deserve.
Another poster has addressed this sort of “knowledge”.
From what I can tell, Oprah is trying to appeal to all sides for ratings purposes.
The health of our children (which includes their right to be protected from avoidable communicable diseases) is too important to be left to anecdotes told on Oprah.
Vaccination, water fluoridation, aspartame use - on any of these issues we can give in to emotion and conspiracy theory-driven thinking, or demand rigorous science.
For people who believe in the stated mission of the SDMB, it should be a simple choice to make. The board’s motto is not “Give Ignorance A Chance”.
Just as a point of knowledge, do you have any children, and if so, did you get them the vaccinations. If you don’t have children then you have no emotional concerns for this issue, making it easy for you to ok the vaccine for others.
Another point is how accurate are the studies done by science on this issue, are they infallible?
About this board: many people on this board say one is ignorant for believing in God. Yet, can produce no evidence of the non-existence state of God. So how about the vaccine, are the studies certain or not. Can you state they are absolutely certain. Even if the odds were a million to one I would not gamble with my child.
Oprah, I would trust anyday, she is a caring, compassionate woman. I have yet to see the compassionate side of science. Maybe someday?
I’ll give my kids the necessary vaccinations for all the major things, same as I did, sure. Give my kid a flu vaccination? No way! I’m not worried about them getting autism whatsoever, but I want my kids to have a strong immune system.
I don’t have children. What I did have as a child (in pre-vaccine days) was a host of diseases that were debilitating, but fortunately had no permanent effects. Others were not so lucky. Inferring that people without children cannot have concerns over the issue, ignores the continuing impact of diseases like measles.
I realize this thread has gotten off track some, but this particular issue provides a good example of the dangers of relying on anecdote and emotion, while ignoring valid research…
What about the chances some other environmental factor is causing autism? I can’t state for certain that Barbie dolls are not causing the increase in autism.
And what do you think are the odds of a child dying as a result of not receiving vaccination? Larger or smaller than the chance of vaccination causing autism?
That’s exactly the problem - the perceived risk from vaccinations is greater than the risk from the diseases they prevent.
There is a correlation (not causation) between the increase in the number and variety of vaccinations given to children, and the increase in the diagnosis (and incidence?) of autism.
Experiential knowledge (“My neighbor’s kid just plain changed after he got his shots”) trumps a pamphlet from the AAP. Doctors are in a hurry - some of them can’t and others simply won’t take the time to explain the real risks and benefits.
But it’s interesting that Oprah has taken this step. I imagine she’ll be getting a lot of calls from the medical establishment and I’ll betcha we’ll be hearing more on the issue from her.
It’s also interesting because kids who aren’t vaccinated are getting sick, and their mothers are posting about it. If they start regretting their choice and are willing to divulge it, that will have an impact as well.