Vaccination & epidemic

[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.

[TheMercenary]

Why has this thread begun to sound like a discussion between supporters and opponents of gay marriage, abortion, or Bush?

[Aliantha]

Because there's two sides (at least) and both have some very valid points which the other side (in general) doesn't want to acknowledge.

[DanaC]

*Nods* That's my understanding of how it works over here as well Jinx.

With my eldest niece, my brother and SiL were extremely reluctant to let her have the MMR jab. She had childhood eczema, very much like I did at that age. This was before the autism thing. They tried to get individual, staggered jabs and faced pretty much a brick wall on it. Not sure what the situation was like a few years later when Soph was born, but I have also heard of other parents having problems.

Not sure where I read it now, but a couple of years ago when this was doing the rounds of the cellar before, I went checking out some stuff and found an artcle in which medical professionals were arguing that the problem was parents trying to stagger the jabs, because in their opinion, many parents never take their child to complete the programme, once the first one is done. Which, they said, was why they were strongly encouraging parents not to opt for the single jabs. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe there were very few circumstances in which the NHS would provide single jabs. In order to get single jabs, these parents would have to pay private fees, where parents accepting the MMR would get it for free. Not sure whether that's still the case. I suspect it's another of those postcode lottery situations, where it depends on your local health authority.

So, parents who wanted to stagger their child's jabs, were treated as a problem. And, made to feel that they were being individually, and socially, irresponsible for not simply accepting the MMR as matter of course.

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. Parents, who have accepted their wisdom on the need to vaccinate, but who have sought to personalise that according to unknown risks (unknown to the medical profession as well) and their own responsibility to their children, have been configured in the press and by medical professionals as hysterical, irrational and socially dangerous. Rather than facilitating increase in take up, they have pushed away people who were in fact open to their ideas. By insisting that their way was the only way, they made the situation far worse.

[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.

[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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by jinx

Here's what UT's article says



Here's what the study referenced says

What I get from those sitations is that there is no proof that these are not normal variations seen in populations where there could be other causes not studied by the original research. They see the variations but that does not mean there is a truely causative relationship.