Vaccination & epidemic

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

There are many factors involved, I absolutely agree. There is usually no one cause of autism even in a specific individual, let alone across all cases. But you can control for all those factors when you study the data, in order to isolate whether one factor is contributing or not. And in the link I provided earlier, they did just that. They surveyed 9,000 families living in roughly the same geographical area, the same culture, the same chemicals. The ones who didn't vaccinate had significantly lower rates of not just autism, but ADHD and asthma as well. This is the only major study that has compared vaccinated to unvaccinated children, which is really the question. All of the other studies compare autistic children to other autistic children, which as you point out, only leads to the conclusion that there are many causes of autism. But that's like saying there are many causes of cancer--you can still reasonably conclude that all the people with lung cancer probably got it from smoking, but only when you compare people who smoke to people who don't, not people who have lung cancer to people who have cervical cancer.

What I find interesting about that study is that the highest percentage of children diagnosed with ASD or AD falls under the partially vaccinated category. Its not a large difference, but for some individual categories, autism for example, partially vaccinated cases double the unvaccinated, fully vaccinated, and fully+ vaccinated categories.

I'm wondering if this is just a statistical error due to a smaller sample size or if there might be a correlation.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by lumberjim

there is no profit to be made in studies that are pure science.

I don't think that line of thinking is productive, or at least, it's not something you should draw direct conclusions from. You might say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis." But you should never say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis, therefore my hypothesis is true."

Unprofitable studies happening at CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vsd/vsd_studies.htm

Including:

In response to public concerns, VSD researchers have begun a case-control study to examine the association between thimerosal and autism rigorously. The study aims to determine whether exposure to thimerosal in infancy or in utero is related to development of autism. The study will also evaluate whether exposure to thimerosal in infancy is related to development of the subclass of autism predominantly associated with regression. As part of the study, researchers will use automated data and registries to identify children with autism (cases) and without autism (controls). In-person examinations, telephone interviews, medical chart reviews, and immunization tracking systems will be used to collect information on vaccine history and other possible covariates. Recommended by the Institute of Medicine, this VSD study will be the first rigorous, epidemiological study conducted on the issue of thimerosal and autism. Data from this VSD study should provide the best available scientific information on whether a causal association between exposure to thimerosal and the development of autism is possible.

This study is in the data collection phase.

[lumberjim]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I don't think that line of thinking is productive, or at least, it's not something you should draw direct conclusions from. You might say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis." But you should never say "There is a systematic bias against my hypothesis, therefore my hypothesis is true."

Unprofitable studies happening at CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vsd/vsd_studies.htm

Including:

[url="http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vsd/thimerosal_outcomes/"][b]

it was just a comment about how things get done. not really about biases. if there is money to be made, it makes sense that many people will want to do it. if not....then it's a lot harder to get money behind that kind of stuff ....especially with all the other areas of research going on.

maybe if there were little ribbons to create awareness.

[Undertoad]

I think it's really odd, and interesting, that they removed the county with the highest population and the only major metropolitan area in the state.

I think it's really odd that they removed data that they felt was proven invalid and didn't invalidate the entire survey.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Tiki

families who choose not to vaccinate, unless they are carefully screened, may also be less likely to have their children tested for neurodevelopmental issues.

Less likely to test for and acknowledge ADHD, I will grant you. But less likely to test for asthma? I find that unlikely. And with autism, well, that just isn't possible, as anyone who has actually lived with an autistic child can tell you. There are a handful of autistic children who are developmentally delayed, but generally calm. The vast majority are a daily struggle of tantrums and are often literally unable to be taken out in public.

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

What I find interesting about that study is that the highest percentage of children diagnosed with ASD or AD falls under the partially vaccinated category. Its not a large difference, but for some individual categories, autism for example, partially vaccinated cases double the unvaccinated, fully vaccinated, and fully+ vaccinated categories.

I'm wondering if this is just a statistical error due to a smaller sample size or if there might be a correlation.

Part of that may be because parents often stop the vaccination schedule of younger siblings of autistic children as soon as they realize their older child has a problem. But genetically, those siblings are still far more likely to be autistic than your average vaccinated or unvaccinated kid.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by DanaC

The medical profession, especially after the autism thing, haven't responded to parents with doubts as if they are rational responsible adults; they have instead responded with judgmental hysteria.

They're not the only ones.. you can see right here in this thread how most people act. It's as if most people don't want a sound discussion on the topic, they've made up their mind and their goal is only to defend their position.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by Tiki

Just some food for thought, for those who still believe that the entire Wakefield scandal is about one journalist with a personal mission:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5070670.stm

I do put some blame for the reemergence of measles at the feet of delusional celebrities (and if you don't know why I call Jenny McCarthy a "delusional celebrity", it's likely that you have been lucky enough to have missed seeing her old website and the bizarre statements she made there - ooh, remember when she was all into the "indigo" thing?)
http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.co...ount/Home.html

Bump.

[morethanpretty]

So just to clarify for myself. The main issue that needs to be investigated about the vaccinations/vaccination schedule is not whether not it causes the disease, but whether or not it amplifies the severity of a pre-existing condition?
I could see how that might be a possibility, and also why it would be so difficult to track down.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

So just to clarify for myself. The main issue that needs to be investigated about the vaccinations/vaccination schedule is not whether not it causes the disease, but whether or not it amplifies the severity of a pre-existing condition?
I could see how that might be a possibility, and also why it would be so difficult to track down.

Actually all of those issues need to be researched more completely.

[Undertoad]

It turns out a shitload of studies have been done on MMR, thimerosal, and simultaneous vaccination.

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi...10.1086/596476

Twenty epidemiologic studies have shown that neither thimerosal nor MMR vaccine causes autism. These studies have been performed in several countries by many different investigators who have employed a multitude of epidemiologic and statistical methods. The large size of the studied populations has afforded a level of statistical power sufficient to detect even rare associations. These studies, in concert with the biological implausibility that vaccines overwhelm a child’s immune system, have effectively dismissed the notion that vaccines cause autism. Further studies on the cause or causes of autism should focus on more‐promising leads.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

So just to clarify for myself. The main issue that needs to be investigated about the vaccinations/vaccination schedule is not whether not it causes the disease, but whether or not it amplifies the severity of a pre-existing condition?
I could see how that might be a possibility, and also why it would be so difficult to track down.

That's my understanding with stuff like childhood eczema. Certainly that was posited by medical peeps when I was growing up. Our GP considered it a possible reason for my sudden (as in days after) jump from normal childhood eczema, to hospitalised and bandaged head to foot.

[DanaC]

The trouble is, because someone has tried to jump the gun and offer proof that wasn't really proof of a correllation with one condition (autism) anybody suggesting any potential link between vaccines and any other condition is shouted down.

[jinx]

Here's what UT's article says

In the United States, using the Vaccine Safety Data Link, researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examined 140,887 US children born during 1991–1999, including >200 children with autism [25]. The researchers found no relationship between receipt of thimerosal‐containing vaccines and autism.

Here's what the study referenced says

OBJECTIVE: To assess the possible toxicity of thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCVs) among infants. METHODS: A 2-phased retrospective cohort study was conducted using computerized health maintenance organization (HMO) databases. Phase I screened for associations between neurodevelopmental disorders and thimerosal exposure among 124 170 infants who were born during 1992 to 1999 at 2 HMOs (A and B). In phase II, the most common disorders associated with exposure in phase I were reevaluated among 16 717 children who were born during 1991 to 1997 in another HMO (C). Relative risks for neurodevelopmental disorders were calculated per increase of 12.5 micro g of estimated cumulative mercury exposure from TCVs in the first, third, and seventh months of life. RESULTS: In phase I at HMO A, cumulative exposure at 3 months resulted in a significant positive association with tics (relative risk [RR]: 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-3.38). At HMO B, increased risks of language delay were found for cumulative exposure at 3 months (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01-1.27) and 7 months (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.13). In phase II at HMO C, no significant associations were found. In no analyses were significant increased risks found for autism or attention-deficit disorder. CONCLUSIONS: No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.

[Undertoad]

i was offended by the tone of the 1st post in this thread because i knew we'd argued about this in the past, and felt like it might be directed at me and my family.

this surely isn't the old LJ we've known and loved all these years.

get over it NANCY

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Less likely to test for and acknowledge ADHD, I will grant you. But less likely to test for asthma? I find that unlikely. And with autism, well, that just isn't possible, as anyone who has actually lived with an autistic child can tell you. There are a handful of autistic children who are developmentally delayed, but generally calm. The vast majority are a daily struggle of tantrums and are often literally unable to be taken out in public.



Part of that may be because parents often stop the vaccination schedule of younger siblings of autistic children as soon as they realize their older child has a problem. But genetically, those siblings are still far more likely to be autistic than your average vaccinated or unvaccinated kid.

Full-blown autism, sure, but what about Aspergers? It's gone untested-for until recently. My best friend's son, who is also my son's best friend, has a mild form of autism, and until recently most of his TEACHERS were unwilling to recommend him for testing because they said he was just shy and needed to apply himself. I've known this kid for years and it's clear to me that he's not like other kids... nor is my youngest daughter... but I could easily see people in a more socially isolated setting, with holistic views (which I have no problem with) seeing these children as simply variations on normal, and not needing testing.

I don't think there is a single thing wrong with viewing ADHD or Aspergers as variation on normal rather than as diagnosable disorders, but you have to admit that replying on accurate self-reporting and excluding the only metropolitan area in the state could have a major effect on the survey, which for these reasons I cannot consider a valid study.