Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026
Andrew Wakefield's MMR/autism study 'fraud', says British Medical Journal
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
My generation should have been wiped out in that case! I recall mothers having measles, mumps, rubella and ChickenPox parties in the 70s - done so the children would catch the illnesses and get them over and done with!
How lucky for them:In roughly the last 150 years, measles has been estimated to have killed
about 200 million people worldwide. During the 1850s, measles killed a
fifth of Hawaii's people. In 1875, measles killed over 40,000 Fijians,
approximately one-third of the population. In the 19th century, the
disease decimated the Andamanese population. In 1954, the virus
causing the disease was isolated from an 11-year old boy from the United
States, David Edmonston, and adapted and propagated on chick embryo
tissue culture. To date, 21 strains of the measles virus have been
identified. While at Merck, Maurice Hilleman developed the first
successful vaccine. Licensed vaccines to prevent the disease became
available in 1963.
link
A bit more relavant info:
HOW COMMON ARE THESE DISEASES?
Measles:
Prior to the introduction of the measles vaccine, by the age of 25 years
almost everyone had suffered from measles infection. In Ireland the number
of cases of measles reported annually has dropped significantly since the
introduction of the measles vaccine in 1985 and the MMR vaccine in 1988
as shown in Figure 1. In the 1950s in Ireland an average of 8,500 cases of
measles were reported each year. In the 1970s an average of 7 children
died in Ireland every year from measles. In 1985 there were almost 10,000
cases of measles notified. By 1991 this had dropped to 135.
Outbreaks of measles, however, continue to occur in Ireland. In 1993 over
4,328 cases of measles were reported. In 2000 over 1,600 cases of
measles were reported to the National Disease Surveillance Centre (NDSC).
Most of these cases were in the Eastern Regional Health Authority area
and there were three associated deaths. The uptake of MMR vaccine in
Ireland is currently not high enough to prevent outbreaks from occurring.
...
CAN CHILDREN DIE FROM MEASLES?
About one million children worldwide die from measles each year making
it the eighth commonest killer disease of children. Death rates for measles
vary depending on age. On average, between 1 in 2,500 and 1 in 5,000
cases die from measles. However, in recent years, deaths from measles
have been reported as approximately 1-2 per 1,000 reported cases in the
United States. This has also been the experience in several recent
outbreaks in Europe due to low vaccine uptake, where there have been
fatal cases of measles. In Ireland eight deaths from measles were reported
to the Central Statistics Office between 1990 and 1999. There were
three deaths and over 1,600 reported cases in Ireland in 2000 and three
deaths in 2,961 reported cases (1 in 1,000) in the Netherlands during an
outbreak in 1999/ 2000.
The risk of death is significantly higher in children developing measles under
one year of age. This group are not currently offered the vaccine as they
are too young and can only be protected through the ‘population
protection’ of high vaccine uptake. Young adults who acquire measles at
an older age also have a higher rate of encephalitis. A serious
complication of measles in children is subacute sclerosing
panencephalitis (SSPE). This is a rare degenerative neurological
condition that can develop some years after natural measles infection and
causes gradual loss of function and death within a few years. The risk is
greatest in those who were infected at a young age. The average interval
from measlesinfection to the onset of SSPE is around eight years. Measles
vaccine directly protects against SSPE. (I hope people understand what this
is saying! How fun do those measels parties sound now???)
WHY IS THE MMR VACCINE SO IMPORTANT?
Population protection (also known as ‘herd immunity’):
This means that if someone incubating measles (or mumps or rubella) has
contact with others in the community, the disease will not spread if
immunisation uptake rates are high as the chance of being in contact with
someone who is not immune is so small if most people have immunity.
Children who cannot be immunised (e.g. those with leukaemia, cancer or on
immunosuppressive treatment) depend on high population levels for their
personal protection as do children under one year of age. Women who
have not been immunised against rubella depend on high ‘population
protection’ to prevent them from catching rubella and their babies
being damaged. (Children, pregnant women, leukemia patients & cancer patients
depend on the population immunizing itself for their survival).
Potential eradication of disease:
The World Health Organisation concluded in 1996 that measles eradication
is feasible through immunisation. This will only occur, however, if uptake of
the vaccine is high. Smallpox has already been eradicated by vaccination
and rapid progress is being made towards eradication of poliomyelitis
through immunisation. Many countries have already virtually eliminated
measles (e.g.) Finland, Sweden, Spain and United States.
...
MMR vaccine is a live virus vaccine. This means that it contains measles,
mumps and rubella viruses that have been modified (or attenuated) so
that they are extremely unlikely to cause disease symptoms in humans.
The vaccine has been developed to produce an immune response sufficient
to protect children against the real disease, with no illness at all or only a
very mild version of the illness.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CATCHING MEASLES AND
HAVING THE LIVE VIRUS VACCINE INJECTED INTO THE BODY?
The difference between catching measles and receiving the vaccine relate
to the fact that the measles virus is in an attenuated form in the vaccine.
As a result the vaccine strain can stimulate the child’s immune system to
protect them from future infection with the wild virus, without the
complications associated with wild virus infection. On the other hand
infection with the wild measles virus weakens the immune system, often
leading to a secondary infection such as pneumonia or middle ear infection.
Like all vaccines, side effects can occur with MMR. However these are
almost always trivial and, as can be seen from the table below, the small
risks from the vaccine are far outweighed by the substantial risks
associated with wild measles infection.
Complications of measles versus MMR vaccine.
Measles
Ear infection: 1 in 20
Hospitalised: 1 in 5
Encephalitis: 1 in 1,000
Pneumonia: 1 in 20
Death: 1 in 2,500 to
1 in 5,000
MMR vaccine
Ear infection: 1 in 2,000
Hospitalised: 1 in 1,000
Encephalitis: 1 in 1,000,000
Pneumonia: None
Death: None
DOES THE MMR VACCINE CAUSE SERIOUS DISEASES?
AUTISM
Autism is a condition that involves delayed speech and communication. The
first signs of autism tend to show at around 1-2 years of age. The MMR
vaccine is also given around thisage, so it is not surprising that some
parents have linked the two events. However, there is no evidence that
MMR causes autism.
The suggestion of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism was first
made in a Danish TV programme in 1993, by a mother of twins, one of
whom had autism, which the mother believed was caused by the MMR
vaccine. At that time, no scientist had ever suggested a link.
In 1998, Dr Andrew Wakefield and colleagues in London published a paper
in the Lancet describing 12 children with developmental and bowel
problems. Eight of the children had autism, which the parents reported
began soon after vaccination with MMR. The hypothesis put forward was
that the MMR vaccine caused a leaky bowel. This allowed a toxin to enter
which affected the brain and caused autism. This hypothesis is not proven,
and the researchers themselves stated that they had not proven a link
with MMR vaccine.
A number of studies have failed to demonstrate any link between MMR and
autism. A UK study published in the Lancet in June 1999 by Taylor et al.
looked at the immunisation records of 498 cases of autism, born between
1979 and 1998. They found no change in trends in autism after the
introduction of MMR, no difference in the age at diagnosis between
vaccinated and unvaccinated children and no clustering of developmental
regression in the months after vaccination.
A Finnish study by Patja et al. that reviewed adverse drug reactions
reported, after 1.8 million individuals were immunised with 3 million doses of
MMR, that no case of inflammatory bowel disease or autism was linked to
the vaccine during a long follow up period (1982-1996). An earlier paper by
Peltola et al., using the same Finnish dataset, identified those vaccinees
for whom gastro-intestinal (GI) symptoms were reported and traced them
to check the prevalence of autism. Out of 31 children with GI symptoms
none developed autism.
In February 2001, a UK study was published in the British Medical Journal
by Kaye et al. The study reported a notable rise from 1988 to 1999 in the
diagnosis of autism as recorded by UK general practitioners. Over that
same time period there was no change in the proportion of children who
had been vaccinated with MMR. The study authors concluded that these
data provided no evidence to support a causal association between MMR
vaccination and the risk of autism.
A paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association in March 2001
by Dales et al. compared trends over time in autism and in MMR
immunisation coverage in California. The paper concluded that ‘these data
do not suggest an association between MMR immunisation among young
children and an increase in autism occurrence’.
Read Me (Pdf containing a lot more interesting info than the parts I've posted)
You are playing with trouble by relying on folk wisdom which originates
from a really bad case of correlation necessitates causation & unscientific
& falsified fearmongering & it could does lead to people dying.
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Phill Ewinn wrote: »Yeah, you tell 'em. Fvck Tony Blair, the brittish medical society et al. Fill those babies with mercury ! You the fvckin' man.
What about the British medical society et al? I think you'll find that the
only people mentioning these et al. people are the posters on here who
are stating that mercury was taken out of vaccines as a "precautionary
measure" even though
"Major scientific and medical bodies such as the Institute of Medicine and
World Health Organization (WHO) as well as governmental agencies such
as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the CDC reject any
role for thiomersal in autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders. Multiple
lines of scientific evidence have been cited to support this conclusion,
such as the clinical symptoms of mercury poisoning differing significantly
from those of autism. In addition, multiple population studies have not
found an association between thiomersal and autism, but have found that
rates of autism have continued to increase despite removal of thiomersal
from vaccines. In spite of the consensus of the scientific community,
many parents continue to believe thiomersal is linked to autism."
link
0 -
-
I've just discovered that a compound named dihydrogen monoxide commonly
containing chlorine is exposed to the public daily even though exposure to
the compound for an extended time period results in death. In the year
2000 alone nearly half a million people worldwide died from over-exposure
to this chemical compound, link, what is wrong with the youth of today??? :eek:
The companies are making a killing off harvesting this chemical compound
and feeding it to the public, they use it in a lot of their products to cut costs!!!!
Ban it!!! Ban it!!! Ban it!!! :mad:0 -
Shocker, doctor and medical researcher who has devoted his life to developing a vaccine which has saved thousands of lives in developing countries is also a strong advocate of vaccines! Stop the press!
Offit has serious conflicts of interest and is a proven liar (he even had to redraft one of his books and pay Generation Rescue a large sum as a result). He receives millions working with Merck and simply can not declare himself as being unbiased on the issue of vaccine's and their possible role in regressive autism, all the while: profiting heavily from the status quo, the very notion is laughable.
With regards to him saving lives, his first rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn when it was found that it increased the chances of children developing bowel blockage by 60% (one infant died five days after receiving the vaccine). Congress also reprimand him for his voting practices on the CDC panel with regards to his own vaccine.
He's not the hero you think he is.Instead anti-vaxxers prefer to resort to conspiracy thinking and ad hominem attacks to defend their position, because they know that the science shows that vaccines are safe.
Which "anti-vaxxers" exactly??
You always post this nonsense but never quote anyone that would prove them to be: "anti-vaccine". So, who are they, where are they - these members of the "anti-vaccine movement" that you keep going on and on about? The parents of autistic children? Generation Rescue? Age of Autism? Who? Age of Autism, Generation Rescue etc are most certainly NOT "anti-vaccine" and NEVER EVER have been either, in fact they go out of their way to provide information on how best to vaccinate.
From what I can tell, they tend to spend their time calling for toxins to be removed from vaccines (hence their slogan: Green Our Vaccines) and they also recommend single vaccines and spacing (to those that stil have that option that is) but their main goal has always been 'further research' (and science based at that, hate to burst your bubble on it being any other kind).
Now, you may not agree with "spacing of vaccines" or with the call to remove further "toxins" and the like, that's your business - but please stop calling these people "anti-vaxxers", they're not and to continue to so, just shows your ignorance. It's akin to labeling people that were calling for seat belts to become mandatory back in the 80's, as being "Anti-automobile".However at this point there's been a huge amount of research done on the subject, the majority of which shows that there is no link between MMR and autism, so she is clearly ignoring the research and using elaborate conspiracies as her justification.
You KNOW very well that these groups are NOT "ignoring" the research done so far, so why are you regurgitating this nonsense. Why don't you just debate the issues that these people have and stop trying to label them as "nuts" all the time.Also, in Japan they stopped giving the MMR jab in 1993, yet autism rates continued to rise. If there was a link, then rates would surely plummet after the vaccine was stopped.
You were told why these studies were flawed, pay attention. I mean, you don't have to agree with the reasoning, but quit with the bullshit of people ignoring studies, it's simply not true.The research has been done, the jury is out.
More bull****, the jury is NOT "out".
For a jury to be "out", they have to be contemplating something and the studies that need to be done in order for them to be "contemplating", are not being done. The only research at the moment is coming from small independent groups with poor funding who, even if they do publish something - they will just get debunked for the study being too small.
If people like you would quit talking bollox by saying that the research has been done and that "science" proves there is no connection between vaccines and autism, then proper irrefutable studies might actually take place.Whatever causes autism, it is not the MMR jab.
Look, Wakefield NEVER said that MMR was the "cause" of autism, it's a myth.
From the 1998 research paper that appeared in the Lancet:
So, enough already with this witch hunt, even if he did do all he is being accused of (which I don't believe for a second he did) it still wouldn't amount to a hill of beans, as the research in this area is still ongoing with out him and will be for quite sometime.We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described. Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue.
If there is a causal link between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and this syndrome, a rising incidence might be anticipated after the introduction of this vaccine in the UK in 1988.
We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction. In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation.
Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine.
The only way to stop the debate is to do the research that is needed and not keep pointing to flawed studies and declaring them to be some kind of proof.
0 -
FFS these anti vaccine nut jobs are all the same. It's always "I'm not anti vaccine", "more research is needed", "those studies are flawed", "we have no problem with high quality research". Of course the truth is that they are anti vaccine and the only research they will accept as "high quality" is that which supports their agenda, no matter how poorly performed (bonus points if it's disseminated by way of youtube). Naturally they tend to be the same nuts that are anti water fluoridation.OutlawPete wrote: »Offit has serious conflicts of interest and is a proven liar (he even had to redraft one of his books and pay Generation Rescue a large sum as a result). He receives millions working with Merck and simply can not declare himself as being unbiased on the issue of vaccine's and their possible role in regressive autism, all the while: profiting heavily from the status quo, the very notion is laughable.
With regards to him saving lives, his first rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn when it was found that it increased the chances of children developing bowel blockage by 60% (one infant died five days after receiving the vaccine). Congress also reprimand him for his voting practices on the CDC panel with regards to his own vaccine.
He's not the hero you think he is.
Which "anti-vaxxers" exactly??
You always post this nonsense but never quote anyone that would prove them to be: "anti-vaccine". So, who are they, where are they - these members of the "anti-vaccine movement" that you keep going on and on about? The parents of autistic children? Generation Rescue? Age of Autism? Who? Age of Autism, Generation Rescue etc are most certainly NOT "anti-vaccine" and NEVER EVER have been either, in fact they go out of their way to provide information on how best to vaccinate.
From what I can tell, they tend to spend their time calling for toxins to be removed from vaccines (hence their slogan: Green Our Vaccines) and they also recommend single vaccines and spacing (to those that stil have that option that is) but their main goal has always been 'further research' (and science based at that, hate to burst your bubble on it being any other kind).
Now, you may not agree with "spacing of vaccines" or with the call to remove further "toxins" and the like, that's your business - but please stop calling these people "anti-vaxxers", they're not and to continue to so, just shows your ignorance. It's akin to labeling people that were calling for seat belts to become mandatory back in the 80's, as being "Anti-automobile".
You KNOW very well that these groups are NOT "ignoring" the research done so far, so why are you regurgitating this nonsense. Why don't you just debate the issues that these people have and stop trying to label them as "nuts" all the time.
You were told why these studies were flawed, pay attention. I mean, you don't have to agree with the reasoning, but quit with the bullshit of people ignoring studies, it's simply not true.
More bull****, the jury is NOT "out".
For a jury to be "out", they have to be contemplating something and the studies that need to be done in order for them to be "contemplating", are not being done. The only research at the moment is coming from small independent groups with poor funding who, even if they do publish something - they will just get debunked for the study being too small.
If people like you would quit talking bollox by saying that the research has been done and that "science" proves there is no connection between vaccines and autism, then proper irrefutable studies might actually take place.
Look, Wakefield NEVER said that MMR was the "cause" of autism, it's a myth.
From the 1998 research paper that appeared in the Lancet:
So, enough already with this witch hunt, even if he did do all he is being accused of (which I don't believe for a second he did) it still wouldn't amount to a hill of beans, as the research in this area is still ongoing with out him and will be for quite sometime.
The only way to stop the debate is to do the research that is needed and not keep pointing to flawed studies and declaring them to be some kind of proof.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
OutlawPete wrote: »Which "anti-vaxxers" exactly??
You always post this nonsense but never quote anyone that would prove them to be: "anti-vaccine". So, who are they, where are they - these members of the "anti-vaccine movement" that you keep going on and on about? The parents of autistic children? Generation Rescue? Age of Autism? Who? Age of Autism, Generation Rescue etc are most certainly NOT "anti-vaccine" and NEVER EVER have been either, in fact they go out of their way to provide information on how best to vaccinate.
These people perhaps? I don't think it's that hard to do a google search
to find anti-vaxxers, in fact all you need to do is to look at the
evidence Squod gives below to find some :pac:OutlawPete wrote: »You KNOW very well that these groups are NOT "ignoring" the research done so far, so why are you regurgitating this nonsense. Why don't you just debate the issues that these people have and stop trying to label them as "nuts" all the time.
How could group X not be ignoring the research? There is absolutely no
evidence in support of any of the claims made in this thread whatsoever
& the only potential evidence was falsified & discounted. Even with these
"toxins" there is no evidence & they were removed to quell irrational
concerns. How can they not be ignoring the research if they continue
on with any form of objections when the research says that there are no
concerns to highlight?OutlawPete wrote: »Look, Wakefield NEVER said that MMR was the "cause" of autism, it's a myth.The suggestion of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism was first
made in a Danish TV programme in 1993, by a mother of twins, one of
whom had autism, which the mother believed was caused by the MMR
vaccine. At that time, no scientist had ever suggested a link.
In 1998, Dr Andrew Wakefield and colleagues in London published a paper
in the Lancet describing 12 children with developmental and bowel
problems. Eight of the children had autism, which the parents reported
began soon after vaccination with MMR. The hypothesis put forward was
that the MMR vaccine caused a leaky bowel. This allowed a toxin to enter
which affected the brain and caused autism. This hypothesis is not proven,
and the researchers themselves stated that they had not proven a link
with MMR vaccine.
A number of studies have failed to demonstrate any link between MMR and
autism. A UK study published in the Lancet in June 1999 by Taylor et al.
looked at the immunisation records of 498 cases of autism, born between
1979 and 1998. They found no change in trends in autism after the
introduction of MMR, no difference in the age at diagnosis between
vaccinated and unvaccinated children and no clustering of developmental
regression in the months after vaccination.
link
But he used falsified evidence according to the various evaluations of hisIn February 1998, a paper written by Wakefield and 12 other doctors about
12 autism spectrum children was published in the Lancet. The paper
described what its authors suggested was a new syndrome, raising the
possibility of a link between a novel form of bowel disease, autism, and the
MMR vaccine. In the study's "findings", the authors noted that the parents
of eight of the twelve children linked what were described as "behavioural
symptoms" with MMR, and in its "results" reported that the onset of these
symptoms began within two weeks of MMR vaccination. In the
published Lancet summary, known as the "interpretation", the authors
wrote:
"We identified associated gastrointestinal disease and developmental
regression in a group of previously normal children, which was
generally associated in time with possible environmental triggers." These
possible triggers were reported to be MMR in eight cases, and
measles infection in one. The paper was instantly controversial, leading
to widespread publicity in the UK and the convening of a special panel of
the UK's Medical Research Council the following month. One study
done based in Japan found that there was no causal relationship between
the MMR vaccine and autism in groups of children given the vaccine and
children who did not receive the MMR vaccine, after it was stopped from
being administered to children in 1993.
Although the paper said that no causal connection had been proven,
Wakefield called for suspension of the triple MMR vaccine until more
research could be done, at a press conference and in a video news
release issued by the hospital. According to BBC News, it was this
press conference, rather than the Lancet paper, that fueled the MMR
vaccination scare. According to the BBC, "He told journalists it was a
'moral issue' and he could no longer support the continued use of the
three-in-one jab for measles, mumps and rubella. 'Urgent further research
is needed to determine whether MMR may give rise to this complication in
a small number of people,' Dr Wakefield said at the time." He said,
"If you give three viruses together, three live viruses, then you potentially
increase the risk of an adverse event occurring, particularly when one of
those viruses influences the immune system in the way that measles
does." He suggested parents should opt for single jabs against measles,
mumps and rubella, separated by gaps of one year.
link
work & every other study employing similar techniques have found no
connection whatsoever. So by the use of falsified evidence he proclaims
in a press conference that there is considerable doubt to be cast on
standard practices, with subsequent studies refuting his claims time &
again but for some reason there is still a question
So he never said it was a "cause", all he did was say it was unethical to
use standard medical practice because he went public about his
unrepeatable evidence that has subsequently been called falsified by
the medical establishment.OutlawPete wrote: »If people like you would quit talking bollox by saying that the research has been done and that "science" proves there is no connection between vaccines and autism, then proper irrefutable studies might actually take place.
Lets put it this way. There are a large amount of studies illutrating that
there is no causal connection between autism & vaccines or that the
mercury in vaccines does any harm. There are absolutely no credible
studies indicating any connection between vaccine's and autism.
Also,
So we can trust your opinion that "irrefutable studies" need to be done,The notion has also diverted attention and resources away from efforts to
determine the causes of autism.[18] The 2004 Institute of Medicine report
committee recommended that while it supported "targeted research that
focuses on better understanding the disease of autism, from a public
health perspective the committee does not consider a significant
investment in studies of the theoretical vaccine-autism connection to
be useful at this time."
link
even though an irrefutable study is outside of science because the prerequisite for a study to be
considered scientific is the notion of refutability as the authors will clearly state, or we
can take the opinion of an Institute of Medicine committee who state
that this controversey is actually not useful (which means funds are
being diverted from more worthwhile causes).OutlawPete wrote: »So, enough already with this witch hunt, even if he did do all he is being accused of (which I don't believe for a second he did)
Will be interesting to see how this pans out, meybe the second time heAs of January 2011, Wakefield has continued to maintain his innocence. He
claims that Deer is a "hit man who was brought in to take [him] down" and
that other scientists have simply taken Deer at his word. While on
Anderson Cooper 360°, while claiming he hadn't read the BMJ articles yet,
he denied their validity and denied that Deer had interviewed the families
of the children in the study. He also urged viewers to read his book,
Callous Disregard, which he claimed would explain why he was being
targeted, to which Anderson Cooper replied: "But, sir, if you're lying, then
your book is also a lie. If your study is a lie, your book is a lie."[78]
Deer responded to Wakefield's charge that he was a "hit man" by
challenging Wakefield to sue him for libel:
"If it is true that Andrew Wakefield is not guilty as charged, he has the
remedy of bringing a libel action against myself, the Sunday Times of
London, against the medical journal here, and he would be the richest man
in America." He also noted that Wakefield has previously sued him and lost.
is suing this man he will come out on top :pac:
The bottom line is that there is no question on the topic of vaccinations
or mercury if you're relying on scientific evidence, all of which backs
the usage & continued usage of these procedures. If you want to argue
that folk wisdom based off no evidence other than a lack of understanding
of the phrase "correlation does not necessitate causation" then do so
at your own peril. Arguing that you have any justification for your concerns
is unacceptable though & extremely misleading.
:pac:
Two things to notice about your source:
First:
Safeminds:
"Non-profit organization founded to investigate and raise awareness of the
risks to infants and children of exposure to mercury from medical products"
I'm sorry but I'll stick with the latest of 20 studies from non-biased
organizations
and second:Yes, the other day Laura Hewitson published as lead author a study in a
journal that I had never heard of before (Acta Neurobiologiae
Experimentalis) entitled Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala
growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study.
Think of it as Monkey Business in Autism Research, Take 3. But before I go
into this study, perhaps it's a good time to recap Monkey Business in
Autism Research, Take 1 and Take 2. Note that this research is the same
research that was published in NeuroToxicology last fall and then
withdrawn in February in the wake of Wakefield's disgrace due to his
having had his medical license taken away by the General Medical Council
in the U.K.
Basically, this "research," first reported in an abstract at IMFAR back in
2008, is crap science through and through. It suffers from so many
methodological flaws that I still marvel that it managed to get through
any sort of peer review, much less IACUC review, and its lead investigator
has a massive conflict of interest. I once complained about the "studies"
that came from these experiments as being what's known as the "minimal
publishable unit" (a.k.a. MPU). In other words, Wakefield and his cronies
appeared to be doing one monkey experiment and then chopping it up into
as many individual papers as they can. From that, there were the three
abstracts at IMFAR, the NeuroToxicology paper--and now this latest
atrocity against science.
Read all of me for correct context & a thorough explanation of why it's bunkThimerosal (Mercury) In Vaccines Not Linked To Autism, New Research
Main Category: Autism
Also Included In: Pediatrics / Children's Health | Public Health | Immune System / Vaccines
Article Date: 14 Sep 2010
A new study has found no association between infant and prenatal
exposure to thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative used in a
number of vaccines, and autism. In an article published in the medical
journal Pediatrics, the authors wrote that thimerosal in vaccines "does
not increase the risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)". They actually
found that children with ASDs had had less exposure to thimerosal-
containing vaccines than the children in their study who did not have an
ASD.
The scientists examined managed care organization records and carried out
interviews with parents of 256 children who had been diagnosed with an
autism spectrum disorder according to a standardized personal evaluation.
752 children of the same age who did not have an ASD were also assessed
in the same way.
They found, in fact, that higher-than-average exposures to thimerosal
were less common in children with autism compared to the non-autism
group. Babies vaccinated with more thimerosal-containing vaccines up
to the age of 7 months, as well as those receiving more such vaccinations
up to the age of 20 months appeared to be less likely to develop an autism
spectrum disorder, compared to those who received no thimerosal-
containing vaccines during the same periods of life.
One in every four parents is afraid of vaccinating their children because
of a perceived autism risk.
This study is the latest of almost 20 to find no association between
childhood vaccinations and autism, using a variety of methods and
data sources - they all say there is no evidence of any link between
thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism risk.
http://www.medilexicon.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=201047
http://www.researchautism.net/autism_autistic_asperger_news_story.ikml?ra=4826
Try to find a relevant personal opinion in my posts, I haven't given oneOf cousrse you'll ignore anyone else's opinion but your own sponsoredwalk.
because this is a topic in which personal opinions really have no place. In
fact it's personal opinions that are causing harm tbh0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Not much point in me going through this in much depth, since others already have, and you've bought the propaganda hook line and sinker, even going so far as to defend Andrew Wakefield. However in brief...OutlawPete wrote: »Offit has serious conflicts of interest and is a proven liar (he even had to redraft one of his books and pay Generation Rescue a large sum as a result). He receives millions working with Merck and simply can not declare himself as being unbiased on the issue of vaccine's and their possible role in regressive autism, all the while: profiting heavily from the status quo, the very notion is laughable.
With regards to him saving lives, his first rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn when it was found that it increased the chances of children developing bowel blockage by 60% (one infant died five days after receiving the vaccine). Congress also reprimand him for his voting practices on the CDC panel with regards to his own vaccine.
He's not the hero you think he is.
Wow, this is actually a bit sickening. The rotavirus vaccine saves more than 200,000 lives every year, but one infant died from it, so therefore we should be weary of Paul Offit, and he shouldn't be commended.
It's sickening the depths to which you people will stoop.
Paul Offit, and others who devote their careers to saving lives, should indeed be commended, and they are heroes.OutlawPete wrote: »Which "anti-vaxxers" exactly??
You always post this nonsense but never quote anyone that would prove them to be: "anti-vaccine". So, who are they, where are they - these members of the "anti-vaccine movement" that you keep going on and on about? The parents of autistic children? Generation Rescue? Age of Autism? Who? Age of Autism, Generation Rescue etc are most certainly NOT "anti-vaccine" and NEVER EVER have been either, in fact they go out of their way to provide information on how best to vaccinate.
From what I can tell, they tend to spend their time calling for toxins to be removed from vaccines (hence their slogan: Green Our Vaccines) and they also recommend single vaccines and spacing (to those that stil have that option that is) but their main goal has always been 'further research' (and science based at that, hate to burst your bubble on it being any other kind).
Now, you may not agree with "spacing of vaccines" or with the call to remove further "toxins" and the like, that's your business - but please stop calling these people "anti-vaxxers", they're not and to continue to so, just shows your ignorance. It's akin to labeling people that were calling for seat belts to become mandatory back in the 80's, as being "Anti-automobile"
Well they urge parents to delay vaccines, allowing a greater window for diseases to infect children; they tell parents (or suggest) to avoid certain vaccines (like chickenpox) for no good reason, based on shoddy reasoning; they recommend bogus and dangerous therapies and fill parents of autistic children with false hope of a miracle cure.
They have pretty much no legitimate points regarding the vaccines that are currently available, so their campaigns are not helpful at all. The side-effects and risks are well known, and are very slight compared to the risk of not vaccinating.
Whether they oppose vaccines or not, the effect of their propaganda campaigns is to put doubt in the heads of parents who are at the mercy of whomever appears to know what they are talking about. The science that they use to justify their actions is complete crap and has been shown many times to be. So:
(a) putting doubts in parents heads
(b) based on bad science and shoddy research
(c) resulting in diminished vaccination rates and outbreaks of preventable diseases
(d) children dying as a result
I think anti-vax is a fair enough term for them. Anti-science at the least.OutlawPete wrote: »You KNOW very well that these groups are NOT "ignoring" the research done so far, so why are you regurgitating this nonsense. Why don't you just debate the issues that these people have and stop trying to label them as "nuts" all the time.
You were told why these studies were flawed, pay attention. I mean, you don't have to agree with the reasoning, but quit with the bullshit of people ignoring studies, it's simply not true.
Maybe 'igoring' is the wrong word -- 'dismissing' is probably more accurate. Have a look through their '14 studies' website, and you can see on what basis they dismiss them all. The most tenuous of conflicts of interests. Pretty much all of the researchers in the studies have declared any potential conflicts of interest up front, but is that the case with the anti-vax researchers? err... no.
Generation Rescue have their own agenda and can hardly be considered unbiased, can they? Yet they don't see any conflicts of interest when they fund crap studies to support their position.
What about Laura Hewitson, who carried out a ridiculously bad study in monkies, linking vaccines to autism, which Generation Rescue promotes? Well she's also involved in the Autism Omnibus proceedings, suing for injuries allegedly resulting from vaccination. Might have a bit of a conflict of interests, eh?
The less said about Andrew Wakefield the better I guess. Generation Rescue and their pals continue to support him, even after all of the ethical violations and conflicts of interest that have come to light.
For those interested (I'm sure not you, OutlawPete), you can read a very detailed take-down of the '14 studies' website that Generation Rescue started here. It's written by Dr David Gorski, an oncologist I believe, who has nothing to do with developing vaccines. However he probably shook hands with Paul Offit a few times, so that's no doubt sufficient in your eyes to undermine his article.
Another (short one) here, by Steven Novella.
BTW dunno what your problem is with what I said about Japan. Did they not stop giving the MMR vaccine? Did autism rates not continue to rise? Does this not suggest that there is no link?
Also BTW, whoever said that Tony Blair doesn't support the MMR vaccine, read this.OutlawPete wrote: »More bull****, the jury is NOT "out".
For a jury to be "out", they have to be contemplating something and the studies that need to be done in order for them to be "contemplating", are not being done. The only research at the moment is coming from small independent groups with poor funding who, even if they do publish something - they will just get debunked for the study being too small.
If people like you would quit talking bollox by saying that the research has been done and that "science" proves there is no connection between vaccines and autism, then proper irrefutable studies might actually take place.
Nonsense, there's been several large-scale epidemiological studies done involving thousands of children in different countries, and they've all shown no connection between vaccines and autism. They're dismissed by people like you on the flimsiest of grounds, which are then not applied consistently to their own research.
When the MMR vaccine is removed from a country, autism rates continue to rise, as do outbreaks of measles.
The science has been done. If there were any link between MMR and autism, then it would have shown up in one of the many large-scale studies.OutlawPete wrote: »Look, Wakefield NEVER said that MMR was the "cause" of autism, it's a myth.
From the 1998 research paper that appeared in the Lancet:
Even if he didn't personally (I'm not digging through every quote by him -- he did enough to put the question in parents' heads), that's exactly what his supports do, so it's irrelevant really.OutlawPete wrote: »So, enough already with this witch hunt, even if he did do all he is being accused of (which I don't believe for a second he did) it still wouldn't amount to a hill of beans, as the research in this area is still ongoing with out him and will be for quite sometime.
And yet your pals at Generation Rescue and Age of Autism still support him and his study, so what are you talking about?OutlawPete wrote: »The only way to stop the debate is to do the research that is needed and not keep pointing to flawed studies and declaring them to be some kind of proof.
People who haven't been brainwashed like Pete here can look at the blog posts I linked to earlier for a discussion by qualified medical researchers of the literature available.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW1IEqKuf6s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERTgmlfxj7I
Advertisement