More Evidence that Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

[Godhumor]

Article was posted yesterday on Yahoo by way of HealthDay News, so I'm foregoing LBN.

-----
Infants exposed to the highest levels of thimerosal, a mercury-laden preservative that used to be found in many vaccines, were no more likely to develop autism than infants exposed to only a little thimerosal, new research finds.

The study offers more reassurance to parents who worry that vaccination raises their children's risk for autism, the researchers said.

"Prenatal and early life exposure to ethylmercury from thimerosal in vaccines or immunoglobulin products does not increase a child's risk of developing autism," concluded senior study author Dr. Frank DeStefano, director of the immunization safety office at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The study was released online Sept. 13 in advance of publication in the October print issue of Pediatrics.
-----

http://health.yahoo.net/news/s/hsn/moreevidencethatvaccinesdontcauseautism

It will be interesting to see the write-up in "Pediatrics"

[SidDithers]

1. K&R...

facts are good.

Sid

[activa8tr]

2. True believers will always ignore science and stick with their

stubborn attitudes, their wive's tales, their inexact understanding of what constitutes scientific evidence, their lack of respect for the discipline of people who have spent 10 years after high school and an entire career in intense open-minded studies of science and logic.

Who were the people that discovered that Thalidomide in pregnant women would lead to birth defects? Why, it was these same open-minded scientists!!! They work FOR the Public Health, not against it.

But the true believers in the myths about thimerisol want their world their way, and are never satisfied that someone else's brain power and capacity to absorb facts is greater than theirs. It's sort of a "machismo" of the mind for them, and they always see themselves as the stronger.

But I really appreciate your post... I think if we all post these sorts of things, one by one, we will eventually get a few to give up their paranoia and try rational science for a change.

[rucky]

3. That is evidence that thimerosal doesn't cause autism.

Now to find out what the connection between vaccines and autism is that people are dramatically reporting (including my nephew).

There's a vitamin D deficiency theory that's gaining some validity. First is explains why some kids would get it. Second it explains the recent trend of it happening (people spend less time outdoors).

Something to think about. The case is far from closed. There are still plenty of unanswered questions.

[enki23]

4. The connection between vaccines and autism: they both occur in human children.

It's exactly the same connection as that between going down twisty slides and autism. They both occur right around the same age in most kids. Personally, i have a twisty slide/merry go round shear force hypothesis, though I've heard of studies showing a very strong correlation between the age at which kids spend more time in "time out" and autism as well. The jury is certainly still out on this one.

[rucky]

5. Do you know what studies I'm talking about?

Harvard just released one this summer

[cleanhippie]

22. Link, synopsis?

[rucky]

58. ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19699591?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Vitamin D plays important roles in repairing DNA damage and protecting against oxidative stress--a key cause of DNA damage. Factors associated with vitamin D deficiency will thus contribute to higher mutation rates and impaired repair of DNA. We note how de novo mutations may also help explain why the concordance rate for autism is so markedly higher in monozygotic than dizygotic twins. De novo mutations may also explain in part why the prevalence of autism is so remarkably high, given the evidence for a strong role of genetic factors and the low fertility of individuals with autism--and resultant selection pressure against autism susceptibility genes.

More here:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/health/autism/autism-information.shtml

[Lyric]

8. I read about the Vitamin D link and found it intriguing as well.

It was in a reading for one of my Biology classes, when we were studying genetic conditions and conditions that we aren't sure yet what the cause is. If I remember correctly, the Vitamin D deficiency is not only potentially linked to autism, but also seems to have a connection to autoimmune disorders like psoriasis, Crohns, and lupus. We don't yet understand the full role that certain vitamins fulfill in our bodies; the implications are nuanced and complex. However, I think the science community is moving slowly on this stuff for fear that people might start overdosing on vitamins in an effort to avoid certain illnesses, and god knows there are some vitamins out there that are flat-out deadly if you take too much. Vitamin D is one that you CAN overdose on, so extra care and caution seems wise.

Of course, even if the link IS firmly established, that doesn't necessarily mean that we can "treat" these conditions with Vitamin D, any more than we can treat neural tube defects (after the fact) with folic acid. The intervention point could be during pregnancy, which means that it's the MOTHER'S intake of certain vitamins that matters the most.

Certainly very interesting, at least. And far more likely, IMHO, than a vaccine link that solid, peer-reviewed science has already dismissed.

[KamaAina]

36. Autism as an autoimmune condition could also explain why vaccines can appear to serve as triggers

That's what vaccines do. They provoke immune reactions. And we give so many more of them nowadays; for instance, the chicken pox vaccine, which did not exist in my day, is now mandatory.

[Warpy]

63. Any kid who drops a toy outdoors, picks it up and stuffs it into his mouth

is being exposed to hundreds of antigens at that time, all of which will provoke some level of immune response.

This constant moving of the goalposts just to cling to the notion that life saving vaccines are somehow a problem has gotten beyond old, it's entered the realm of pathological obsession.

Find a new crusade. This one is over.

[madrchsod]

6. you can`t persuade the true believers with per reviewed research

they they to blame something when there is nothing to blame.

[pnwmom]

10. Or the Vaccine Court, apparently, when a case like

Hannah Poling's is in front of them.

I agree that the research shows vaccines are safe for the vast majority of babies. But we have an obligation, through further research (into genetic susceptibility and other conditions) to make these reactions be as few as possible.)

[cleanhippie]

12. You need to read tha case, becasue it isnt what you think it is.....

Poling had a GENETIC issue that may or may not have been expedited by the vaccines. The vaccines did not CAUSE her autism, she was likely going to be autistic anyway.

[pnwmom]

37. Her mother had the exact same genetic condition and she isn't autistic.

There is no evidence that the vaccine "expedited" an autism that would have occurred anyway. A person can, like Hannah's mother, have this condition without any symptoms -- without even knowing about it. What the court ruled wasn't that the vaccine "expedited" her condition, but that the vaccines -- in combination with her underlying disorder -- "resulted" in her autism syndrome.

"Expedite" is very different.

[cleanhippie]

50. I meant to use the word exacerbate, sorry.

But we seem to have a disagreement on what the court ruled. The court did not rule anything, the government did not challenge the case and the parties settled.

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELLSMITH.%20DOE77082710.pdf

[HuckleB]

25. Reality Check.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/09/sharyl-attkisson-blogs-the-hannah-poling-settlement/

[cleanhippie]

30. Good stuff!

Hard to dismiss the facts, but I am sure they will be by the willfully ignorant.

[pnwmom]

38. I know that the CBS researcher isn't a shill of the pharma co.

I don't know who that blogger is.

[HuckleB]

39. Nice red herring.

Er, ad hominem.

Come on, that's your response? Really?

[HuckleB]

74. Two Part Criticism of Sharyl Attkisson's Lack of Journalistic Ethics:

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2008/07/sharyl-attkisso.html

[laconicsax]

72. Self delete n/t

[pnwmom]

7. Except in the rare instances when they do.

Interesting that the thimerosol data -- which are basically moot since it's no longer being added to infant vaccines -- is being so widely publicized now. Is the purpose to distract us from this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-31727_162-10391695.html?keyword=hannah+poling

The first court award in a vaccine-autism claim is a big one. CBS News has learned the family of Hannah Poling will receive more than $1.5 million dollars for her life care; lost earnings; and pain and suffering for the first year alone.
In addition to the first year, the family will receive more than $500,000 per year to pay for Hannah's care. Those familiar with the case believe the compensation could easily amount to $20 million over the child's lifetime.

Hannah was described as normal, happy and precocious in her first 18 months.

Then, in July 2000, she was vaccinated against nine diseases in one doctor's visit: measles, mumps, rubella, polio, varicella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and Haemophilus influenzae.

Afterward, her health declined rapidly. She developed high fevers, stopped eating, didn't respond when spoken to, began showing signs of autism, and began having screaming fits. In 2002, Hannah's parents filed an autism claim in federal vaccine court. Five years later, the government settled the case before trial and had it sealed. It's taken more than two years for both sides to agree on how much Hannah will be compensated for her injuries.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-31727_162-10391695.html?keyword=hannah+poling#ixzz0zW4zdXp0

While the Poling case is the first of its kind to become public, a CBS News investigation uncovered at least nine other cases as far back as 1990, where records show the court ordered the government compensated families whose children developed autism or autistic-like symptoms in children including toddlers who had been called "very smart" and "impressed" doctors with their "intelligence and curiosity" … until their vaccinations.




_______________________________________

Some people here seem to be hung up on the question of whether what Hannah has is autism or "autism syndrome." Besides the fact that this is a distinction without a difference, what parent would care? She had a devastating reaction to the 9 vaccines she received one day, she will never be able to live independently, and her future care has now been agreed -- by the government, which isn't trying to throw money away -- to cost $500,000 a year for life.

I'm NOT saying we should not vaccinate babies. But I am saying we have an ethical obligation, if we're going to sacrifice children like Hannah for the good of the many, to have as few of these reactions as possible -- to continue research into which subsets of children are at special risk for vaccine reactions, and what preventative measures -- like spreading out vaccines or changing adjuvants -- might improve the risks.

[cleanhippie]

11. But it didn't.

Poling had a genetic issue that MAY or may not have been expedited by the vaccines. The vaccines themselves did NOT cause her autism. Period.

[pnwmom]

13. The Court, after reviewing all the evidence, ruled

that there was sufficient evidence that the vaccines she received DID, in combination with her underlying disorder, result in her autism.

Your word "expedite" implies that she would inevitably have developed autism, and that is NOT TRUE. Her mother has the exact same genetic condition and she is perfectly normal. She never had 9 vaccines on a single day, however.

[cleanhippie]

15. No, it did not.

The case was settled with the court ruling that "denied an association between autism and vaccines, "

The court simply ruled on the amount of the settlement.


http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/vaccine-autism-court-award-15m-poling-family

[pnwmom]

40. You're conflating two separate, unrelated rulings!

One was Hannah Poling's case, in which the Court ruled in her favor with respect to her vaccines and her autism syndrome.

The other was a case involving thousands of other children and the MMR vaccine, and the Court ruled against that association with autism.

[cleanhippie]

43. No, I am not! The government did not challenge the case an settled instead.

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELLSMITH.%20DOE77082710.pdf

[pnwmom]

51. You supplied a link but you clearly didn't READ it.

Page 2, paragraphs 2 and 3.

I can't copy it here because it's a PDF file.

The respondent "conceded" that Hannah's condition was "significantly aggravated" by receiving the vaccines.

And the Court made its finding based on the "persuasive" arguments of Hannah's parents and by the government's concessions.

If the government had had the logical means and the research to fight the case, they would have done so -- just as they have in thousands of other cases. But they conceded, because of the evidence provided by the Polings.

[cleanhippie]

52. That is not the same thing as "caused".

Like my Tap water analogy from before. This "proves" nothing and does nothing to help parents who have autistic children that think a vaccines caused it.


I have a celiac condition that is "severely aggravated" by drinking beer, does that mean beer causes my condition and I can then sue the beer companies for money?

[pnwmom]

55. If the government was requiring any of us Celiacs to drink beer,

I would want to sue the government!

But seriously, if you were forced, for the good of others, to consume gluten every day and then developed lymphoma -- one of the risks when a Celiac consumes gluten -- you should be compensated for that lymphoma. Yes, it's possible that you would have developed lymphoma anyway, but far less likely if you avoided all gluten. The government, having forced you to increase your risk, should compensate you for that.

[cleanhippie]

56. I think you are overlooking the point I am trying to make.

I was only making an analogy, not equating the two. Celiac conditions can be diagnosed quickly, easily and cheaply, and affect a much larger part of the population than the genetic issue Poling has.

I think we are in agreement somewhat, but to be honest, I have lost sight of what we disagree on now!

[eridani]

65. Lawyers are not scientists, period n/t

[LynneSin]

14. If I'm correct, didn't the child receive all 9 vaccines at once

I thought they were spread over a period of time to ensure there was no reaction to the vaccines.

[cleanhippie]

18. I think she did.

But so what?

[pnwmom]

44. So what? More stress on her immune system, and this is

what can set off a mitochondrial disorder.

Also, more exposure to adjuvants at one time, since the effects are cumulative -- and the multiple vaccines weren't safety tested in every combination in which they are now given.

[cleanhippie]

61. But how was the doctor to have known?

This is not a routine test performed on all children. Its a rare, very very rare disorder.

[pnwmom]

41. Unfortunately, most doctors give them in large batches,

reasoning that parents won't get their children fully vaccinated if they have to make multiple appointments to do so. This is also the official government recommendation.

Many cautious parents and doctors do decide to spread them out anyway, so if there is a reaction, they'll know which vaccine was involved. Also, the baby is exposed to less adjuvant at a time.

[HuckleB]

26. Here's the full story.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/09/sharyl-attkisson-blogs-the-hannah-poling-settlement/

[cleanhippie]

9. As if the evidence (or lack of it, if you will) was not already mountainous.

If Jenny, her doctor and her lawyer hadn't gotten the exposure from Oprah, we probably would not be having this conversation.


Always amazes me how people can willfully deny tangible evidence staring them right in the face that vaccines do not cause autism.

[pnwmom]

17. Because none of the mountainous evidence can prove

that autism has not been caused by vaccines in specific cases, especially such as Hannah Poling, with her genetic susceptibility.

The research does accept that, in rare cases, vaccines may cause seizures or even life-threatening encephalitis. (And that a few healthy babies, like my sister, can develop encephalitis and die hours after receiving vaccines.)

Why is it such a stretch to accept that that kind of damage to an infant brain could lead to autism symptoms?

[cleanhippie]

20. Its not a stretch

And I am sure that in the rarest of cases, one can find that tap water leads to autism caused by an underlying rare disorder. Does that mean tap water caused the illness? You see the point? EVERYTHING has a risk, some are MORE at risk than others. But when it comes to vaccines, the risk is so low, that the danger is almost zero. Hannah Poling probably had better chance of being abducted than having her vaccines exacerbate an underlying genetic issue, but it was her lucky(or unlucky) day.
Maybe the good that can come from this is that a new test can be developed to screen children for these rare disorders before giving them medicines and vaccines, but until then, vaccine risk is too low to not vaccinate.

[HuckleB]

27. +1

[pnwmom]

34. I agree with part of what you're saying.

"Maybe the good that can come from this is that a new test can be developed to screen children for these rare disorders before giving them medicines and vaccines, but until then, vaccine risk is too low to not vaccinate."

They should be doing research to reduce the number of Hannah Poling's as much as possible. And the vast majority of babies should be vaccinated. But for a few, the risk may be too high to vaccinate. And even the FDA recognizes this. That's why they say, for example, that a child who develops a fever over 105 from a vaccine shouldn't repeat that vaccine.

[cleanhippie]

47. So we are in agreement then?

They should be doing research to reduce the number of Hannah Poling's as much as possible.


I agree. However, the number of Hannah Polings is minuscule, in the less than 1% category. These tests are expensive and time consuming, therefore not feasible until a quick, cheap test can be developed.

[HuckleB]

79. Absolutely.

[cleanhippie]

16. In the Hannah Poling case, the court did NOT rule there was a connection...

in fact, they ruled that there was NOT a connection. The court ruled on the amount of the SETLLEMENT that took place.

http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/vaccine-autism-court-award-15m-poling-family

[pnwmom]

19. Nonsense! That federal court of appeals was ruling on a general

link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Hannah's case was decided by the Vaccine Court in her favor. If the Court hadn't found sufficient evidence, in their opinion, there would have been no settlement.

This is not like a settlement in an ordinary legal matter. The Court made this ruling; this wasn't a private matter between two opposing lawyers.

[cleanhippie]

21. "Although this case was settled before trial by the government in 2007"

Although this case was settled before trial by the government in 2007, the compensation was not agreed upon until now.

http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/vaccine-autism-court-award-15m-poling-family




What are you seeing that I am not?

[pnwmom]

23. The Government's Vaccine Court was the ultimate arbiter.

It had no obligation to reach a legal settlement with the Pauling's - as it has not with thousands of other cases. But it did because of the evidence in front of them.

Your mistake is in your understanding of the word "settlement." In a civil case, two opposing parties may decide to avoid a trial -- or avoid a judge's ruling at the end of a trial -- and reach their own "settlement" without either side conceding the facts. That is what you seem to think happened here. However, that is not the meaning of the word "settlement" in this case. A trial did take place. And a judge made a ruling.

In Hannah's case, the Court ruled that the mountain of evidence in front of them showed that her autism syndrome was the "result" of her vaccines in combination with her underlying disorder. Having made that ruling, the next step was to settle the amount of the financial award. The financial amount was what was "settled" and settled on her.

[cleanhippie]

24. I disagree

but can you point me to a link that has better info that what I am finding myself? Maybe I am misreading the case.

[pnwmom]

32. I don't know what you are reading to give you that understanding,

so how can I respond to it?

I used to be a paralegal assistant, so I'm familiar with how the word "settlement" can be used. Is that what you're questioning?

[cleanhippie]

42. Here is the actual case. The government did not challenge the case, but settled instead

and admitted no guilt or conceded that vaccines and autism has a direct link.

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELLSMITH.%20DOE77082710.pdf




At any rate, are we in agreement that VACCINES themselves do NOT cause autism? And that in THIS case (poling) there were underlying, undiagnosed issues that MAY or MAY NOT have been exacerbated by the vaccines?

[L0oniX]

28. This message was brought to you by big pharma ...have a nice day and be happy.

I don't trust anyone anymore.

[cleanhippie]

29. Can you support your claim with facts and evidence?

That this is big pharma?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

48. So that would be a no, you just decided to post unfounded inflammatory rhetoric?

Got it. Thanks for adding to the conversation.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

33. BIG PHARMA!

Come on. Really?

[pnwmom]

45. How come DUers are so cautious about corporations in every other sphere

except for big pharma?

[HuckleB]

46. There is a difference between caution, and choosing to pretend something is pure evil.

Yelling "BIG PHARMA!" is hardly a legitimate response to a very legitimate study.

[pnwmom]

53. I don't pretend they are pure evil, and I'm not against

vaccinations in general. My children were all vaccinated until one reacted to the DTP vaccine with seizures, and we found out that my sister had died after having the same reaction to the DTP vaccine as a 6 month old. (A cousin also developed a very high fever after that same vaccine and had already been excluded from further pertussis vaccines for that reason.) After that, we continued with all vaccines except for the pertussis.

I DO think that all parents need to be fully informed, and that vaccines should be spread out as much as possible, so that there is less stress to the baby's immune system AND so that -- if a reaction occurs -- it is easier to figure out which vaccine caused the problem.

[HuckleB]

54. I'm sorry.

I don't think your definition of "fully informed" is the same as mine. I actually think parents should get the full story, and know the realities of the anti-vaccine movement.

Considering that you chose to ignore the full story on a topic above by using the old "pharma shill" gambit, it's very difficult to believe what you are now posting here.

[L0oniX]

68. When was the last time you ever saw big pharma give away anything for the benefit of mankind?

Wait until you or a loved one must have a drug or insulin to stay alive and can't afford it ...and then go on with your confidence. Facts and or scientific proof isn't going make any difference then. Trusting that big pharma has our health interest at the core of their decisions is pure ignorance.

[HuckleB]

69. Nice red herring.

Your rant is nothing but crap you chose to offer up since you have no substance to offer.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

71. And on to another classic ad hominem attack.

:rofl:

[L0oniX]

66. Yea ...I see that too. I'm like ..since when does pharma care about anything but their bottom line.

You'd think that no one see's all the law suit commercials focusing on all the pharma products that were given the ok and then were found to be killing or crippling people ...and yet they will still trust big pharma. Long gone are the days when scientists discovered a cure and gave it away for the benefit of mankind.

[xchrom]

35. Recommend

[PBS Poll-435]

49. Duh

Thanks for the article.

[HuckleB]

57. Whoops! Can't have anyone in GD knowing vaccines are safe!

[trotsky]

59. Naw, it's just that the anti-vaxers always turn these into flamefests...

with plenty of Tourrette's-like "BIG PHARMA IS TEH EVUL!" posts and the accompanying accusations of being a shill if you don't swallow the anti-vax party line.

[Throckmorton]

62. Anti-Vaxer's and Curebee's

My kid is broke, it has got to be somebodies fault, and surely not mine. One of the major reason's I stopped attending support groups for children with Autism, was the bombardment from the curbees and the anti-vaxers.

[Odin2005]

64. I am fucking sick of the Curebies. I AM NOT BROKEN.

[Throckmorton]

73. Amen

Both of my children, one 13 and the other 15 are on the spectrum. Neither is Broken, and neither needs a magic cure. What they do need is understanding, and the skills to cope with the neurotypical world.

Playing to their strengths, and not their weaknesses, is working for us.

[alp227]

60. ScienceBasedMedicine.org article about this issue

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6775

I read that before this posting. Seriously, I'll trust the anti-vaxers as much as I'd trust Fox News, Conservapedia, WorldNetDaily, or tabloids (whose honesty lacks really really deeply).

[mzmolly]

75. Which might be pertinent if anyone said that vaccines are THE cause of autism.

"Infants exposed to the highest levels of thimerosal, a mercury-laden preservative that used to be found in many vaccines, were no more likely to develop autism than infants exposed to only a little thimerosal, new research finds."

Where is the data on those never exposed to thimerosal? It may only take a 'little' thimerosal to tip a genetically vulnerable child over the edge.

Another thing I read about the study is the notion that kids actually had a greater change of autism if they had less exposure to thimerosal? Anyone consider the reason that those with autism may have had less expsoure to ethyl mercury, is because their parents stopped subjecting them to harm after they stopped developing normally as a result of vaccination?

Another misleading, miss the mark puff piece for industry...

Thanks for sharing.

[laconicsax]

77. Welcome back! How was that break you took?

[mzmolly]

78. It was short but

nice. Thanks for asking. :hi:

[HuckleB]

76. And yet the fiction spreading anti-vaccinationists have convinced many otherwise.

1 in 4 parents thinks shots cause autism
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35638229/

[HuckleB]

80. Making Money Promoting Anti-Vaccine Myths

http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebiz/2010/04/27/making-money-promoting-anti-vaccine-myths/

[HuckleB]

81. Study: Social influence playing role in surging autism diagnoses

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/08/study.social.influence.playing.role.surging.autism.diagnoses

[HuckleB]

82. New study – “90% diagnostic accuracy”

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/08/new-study-90-diagnostic-accuracy/

[HuckleB]

83. Increase in autism is due to changes in diagnosis, study claims

http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7436/364.3.full