I was sort of sitting on the fence on the debate about the link between autism and the MMR vaccine ubntil last night when I saw the film “Vaxxed”. It truly puts a new spotlight on the issue. I have a son with autism and like those in the movie, he didnt show symptoms until getting the MMR.
I highly encourage others to see the movie. Here in Kansas City the directors were in attendance during last weeks showing. The movie was sold out and many health care professionals were in attendance and were allowed to ask questions. Some pro vaccination protesters also showed up. It’s all over our localFacebook.
And just so you dont think I havent read the other sides, here are some other links: Vaxxed: Cover up to Catastrophe, Skeptical Reporter. I have also read when people post on this site and others.
After watching this here are some recommendations I have:
That there should be serious research made about the link between the MMR vaccine and autism done by major scientific bodies both inside and outside the US that examines autism of both vaccinated and un-vaccinated children. We should not just rely on the American CDC.
Their should be additional studies looking at a possible link between an increase in autism of black children especially boys when vaccinated according to CDC guidelines.
That parents should be allowed to opt out of CDC vaccination guidelines and instead, be allowed to let their children be vaccinated when they are older and be allowed to be vaccinated with single does vaccines for each separate illness.
Congress should repeal the legislation that shields big pharma companies from being sued.
Countries outside the US not follow US CDC guidelines and instead, create their own.
Persons should also be made aware that senior CDC staff, like the senior members of the US military, often after leaving government service go work for big pharmaceutical firms with high salaries.
PLEASE, Go see this movie and if you can, go when you can ask questions of the persons who made it.
1 and 2 have already been done. Research in the UK, Denmark, Sweden, and Japan all failed to prove any link between vaccines and autism.
For 3, children shouldn’t have to suffer because their parents don’t know how vaccines work. However, as a compromise, I would be able to live with such an exemption provided the children are homeschooled so they don’t risk bringing potentially deadly diseases into mainstream schools.
In re. Point 4: There has already been a class-action lawsuit against ‘Big Pharma’ concerning allegations of a connection between vaccines and autism. The case was dismissed for lack of evidence.
In re. Point 5: I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure this is already the case.
Vaxxed is propaganda, and like all propaganda it is inherently one-sided. Experts the world over have spent decades looking for evidence of a link between vaccines and autism and haven’t found anything. At this point, the only sensible conclusion is that there isn’t any evidence to be found.
There have been so many studies done, and basically any more research would be wasted time and money that could instead go to figuring out better ways to treat autism, or treat or solve other medical issues.
As “Vaxxed” is by all accounts an execrable piece of conspiracy mongering propaganda, directed by none other than Andrew Wakefield (yes, that one) is the above an admission that you are now firmly situated in the anti-vaxx camp?
If you’ve read all that and what has been pointed out on this board numerous times, both about anti-vaxing and the movie itself, and still make the recommendations that you do, then there’s a damn good chance that there is nothing more we can say to you fact-wise that will really matter, will it? Every single one of your suggestions totally ignores facts and evidence that you claim you’ve already examined…so what do you expect of us in this thread that hasn’t been done in the other threads you claim to have read?
If that’s what you get from a movie, then it’s a propaganda piece made by lying liars who ignore the mountain of evidence against them. Here’s one part of the mountain:
“Strong evidence against”. That’s as good as it gets in the world of medical research resulta.
“Fuck you, Andrew Wakefield.” Just thought I’d throw that in. I’d say “fuck Jenny McCarthy,” too but that might imply something positive.
Yes, parents of children with autism want a simple answer. There isn’t one. The “answer” is to quit trying to figure out what caused the problem and turn at maximum speed to effective therapy. The window for maximum results is very small, from earliest possible diagnosis (18-24m) to perhaps 3-4 years. All returns after that are rapidly diminishing.
Really Urbanredneck, the anti-vaccination pseudo scientists are lying to you when they tell you that we need to do research of this outside and inside the USA, it has been done, many times already.
There is no autism epidemic that needs explanation. The increases in diagnosis from autism come from expanding what we consider autism and increased vigilance looking for the symptoms. If you apply current standards for diagnosing autism retroactively, then the same percentage of people in the past would fall under the definition of autism. Autism rates are steady.
Wakefield was paid by a company who wanted to sell a new vaccine product to falsify research that implicated the old vaccine product as being dangerous. It wasn’t just a poor study, it was a deliberate attempt to fabricate evidence to essentially conduct sabotage on medicines that were and are safe. It was investigated by the British medical authorities and his license was revoked and his published data retracted.
There has never been a shred of evidence that vaccines cause autism. If an orange juice company had tried to pay off Wakefield to falsify research showing that existing orange juice brands cause autism, then we’d have a big conspiracy that orange juice causes autism. The vaccine aspect of it is essentially arbitrary.
There’s a mountain of counter-evidence that vaccines don’t cause autism. We’ve spent so much money and valuable researcher hours disproving something that we already knew in the first place but was fixated in the stupid public’s mind as this big conspiracy. We’ve wasted enough valuable research assets trying to calm the utterly stupid public who is immune to the truth anyway.
And now we’ve got a resurgence of diseases that were effectively eliminated because of one asshole who’s making a career out of lying to people to scare them away from one of the greatest medical developments of all time and uncritical masses who latch onto conspiracy theories. It’s a tragedy and anyone who promotes it is disgusting.
So… you’re saying we should teach the controversy? Kidding! Please don’t hit me.
It’s worth noting that not only was Wakefield getting paid to establish a link between MMR and autism but he also had developed a new single vaccine (for measles IIRC) which would only be commercially viable if the MMR vaccine was discredited. Doubly conflicted.
As for the correlation between vaccination and autism, the main reason is simply because autism symptoms being to manifest themselves more overtly around the same age that the MMR is administered. The correlation is linked to age, but does not indicate causation any more than anything else done to or by children at that age does.
And to reiterate SenorBeef’s first point, the reason there are more autism diagnoses is because we know a lot more about autism than we used to. This is a good thing. Maybe there will someday be a cure for autism (or a vaccine!), or maybe it’s something that one is born with, but the more we know the better.
I’ll just mention here that my favorite writer on topics of medicine and medical practice is the American surgeon and researcher Atul Gawande, who has also been a staff writer at the New Yorker for many years. As a medical writer Gawande is deeply knowledgeable, inspiringly eloquent, and scrupulously honest. Last week he gave the commencement address at Caltech and it’s very pertinent to this thread, as it deals with the subject of the distrust of science that plagues our society.
I highly recommend reading the whole thing, but here is the part specifically relevant to the OP:
Vaccine fears, for example, have persisted despite decades of research showing them to be unfounded. Some twenty-five years ago, a statistical analysis suggested a possible association between autism and thimerosal, a preservative used in vaccines to prevent bacterial contamination. The analysis turned out to be flawed, but fears took hold. Scientists then carried out hundreds of studies, and found no link. Still, fears persisted. Countries removed the preservative but experienced no reduction in autism—yet fears grew. A British study claimed a connection between the onset of autism in eight children and the timing of their vaccinations for measles, mumps, and rubella. That paper was retracted due to findings of fraud: the lead author had falsified and misrepresented the data on the children. Repeated efforts to confirm the findings were unsuccessful. Nonetheless, vaccine rates plunged, leading to outbreaks of measles and mumps that, last year, sickened tens of thousands of children across the U.S., Canada, and Europe, and resulted in deaths.
People are prone to resist scientific claims when they clash with intuitive beliefs. They don’t see measles or mumps around anymore. They do see children with autism. And they see a mom who says, “My child was perfectly fine until he got a vaccine and became autistic.”
Now, you can tell them that correlation is not causation. You can say that children get a vaccine every two to three months for the first couple years of their life, so the onset of any illness is bound to follow vaccination for many kids. You can say that the science shows no connection. But once an idea has got embedded and become widespread, it becomes very difficult to dig it out of people’s brains—especially when they do not trust scientific authorities. And we are experiencing a significant decline in trust in scientific authorities.
The simole fact is that autism in children starts to manifest itself at the same age they’re being vaccinated. There is no connection at all between these things, as exhaustive research has shown, but all that the affected parents know is that little Johnny started showing the signs a week after he was vaccinated. That has to be the reason! He was fine till then! No, it isn’t the reason and he wasn’t fine, he was just displaying no visible symptoms until then. It’s the old fallacy,* post hoc ergo propter hoc*.
The film, which I actually watched, is a farrago of distortions and downright untruths. Andrew Wakefield should be ashamed of himself.
)