No Link Between Vaccinations And Autism
A definitive study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry shows that there is no link between childhood vaccinations and autism. Despite the sharp reduction in the use of a preservative, thimerosal (which contains mercury), since 2001, autism rates in California continued to rise.
The findings came from a look at children diagnosed with autism in California from 1995 to 2007. It found that the number of autism cases continued to rise through that period even though the preservative thimerosal — nearly half of which is made of ethylmercury — was removed from most vaccines in 2001.
The data "do not show any recent decrease in autism in California despite the exclusion of more than trace levels of thimerosal from nearly all childhood vaccines (and) do not support the hypothesis that that exposure (to it) during childhood is a primary cause of autism," the study concluded.
Some earlier studies had linked mercury to autism, theorizing that as more and more children were being vaccinated against more health threats, it could explain increases in autism.
But a 2004 report from the U.S. Institute of Medicine said a review of existing studies did not appear to back the mercury-autism theory.
What causes autism remains a mystery. Some experts have said the increased number of cases is due at least in part to more awareness, an expanded definition, education and other factors.
This, of course, will not change the mind of a certain scion of a political dynasty who has made a living off his scaremongering. What is of concern is the number of people who have bought into that mendacious mercury mythology and have kept their children from being properly immunized. That may be a public health crisis in the making. We have already seen epidemics of mumps break out in the Midwest. Failing to vaccinate your children is so seventh century.
Junk Science, Left Wing, Medicine | Gaius Tuesday, 8 January , 2008
By sestamibi, Tuesday, 8 January , 2008 @ 11:20 am
As the father of a nine-year old autistic son, I want to express my thanks for your courage in taking on the autism lobby. All too many of its members prefer to spread blame using junk science rather than look for the real causes, find effective treatments, and do the right thing for our kids.
By sam, Tuesday, 8 January , 2008 @ 11:52 am
The last paragraph is so important that you had to repeat it?
By Gaius, Tuesday, 8 January , 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Stupid WordPress bug bit again. Thanks for pointing that out.
By feeblemind, Tuesday, 8 January , 2008 @ 1:24 pm
You see this phenomenon over and over. People rejecting good and beneficial scientific advances on the basis of miniscule or imagined risks associated with the advance. The phenomenon has been with us forever. 300 or so yrs ago when the first small pox vaccine was created, critics were sure they would turn into cows if they were injected because the vaccine was extracted from cows. Sometimes I wonder how we made it out of the tree tops.
By Lars Walker, Tuesday, 8 January , 2008 @ 3:58 pm
Interesting story, passed on by John Eidsmoe in his book, Christianity and the Constitution. When Benjamin Franklin was a young printer working for his brother in Boston, they got involved in a science vs. faith conflict, over smallpox vaccination. The Franklins sided with the scientists who (surprisingly, or perhaps not) were against vaccination, in opposition to the local Presbyterian clergy, who encouraged it.
Years later, Franklin’s only son died of smallpox. He had never been vaccinated, and Franklin felt guilty about it. After that (it appears) his attitude toward the Presbyterians softened noticeably.
By Sam, Wednesday, 9 January , 2008 @ 11:39 am
The perception of risk by the public is a fascinating area to study. For instance, many people are more scared living next to nuclear power plant than of dying in a car accident, even though the odds of dying in a car accident are far higher. I think it has to do with how much control a person has over the risk. No control over what happens at the nuclear plant, versus much more control over their driving (even if they have little if any control over other drivers.) In my profession we see that in things like opposition to siting power lines near inhabited areas despite a negligible (and probably nonexistent) threat to their health.
People have no control over bad reactions from vaccinations, but they do have control over whether their children get a vaccination, so many choose to not vaccinate despite the risk of disease. Heck, I had measles, mumps and chicken pox as a kid (before vaccines were available), and they did me no lasting harm that isn’t apparent only after reading a bunch of my blog comments.
A personal anecdote: A niece of mine had twin children that both ended up with varying degrees of autism. When my daughter became pregnant, at the baby shower, my niece was urging my daughter to not get her baby vaccinated, and told about the mercury/autism thing. Luckily my daughter didn’t heed her advice, but there is a lot of tragedy and heartbreak with a child that doesn’t turn out perfectly. Parents will seize on anything that provides them with and explanation and lessens the guilt and pain they feel.