Posted on 01/24/2008 6:05:55 AM PST by Kaslin
Grant the anti-childhood vaccine fanatics this; they are dogged. No amount of data and no number of studies from any array of sources will sway them from their beliefs – or claimed beliefs – that thimerosal, a mercury-containing vaccine preservative once used in many such injections, is causing the so-called “autism epidemic.”
Therefore a California Department of Public Health study in the current Archives of General Psychiatry hasn’t either. Nevertheless, for the rest of us there are two valuable lessons. First, the lack of a thimerosal connection to the developmental disorder has once again been reaffirmed. And second, those fanatics really and truly are fanatical – as a British Medical Journal book reviewer put it, an “angry and paranoid universe.”
These people operate over 150 anti-vaccine web sites that claim not only a thimerosal-vaccine connection but a Massive World Wide Conspiracy to cover up of the alleged link. They are often hateful people who have sent death threats to Public Health Service officials who subsequently quit their jobs in fear.
As a precautionary measure – surely influenced by the anti-vaccinationists – thimerosal was removed from all childhood vaccines as of March 2001 (except flu shots, which contain a trace amount.) The angry paranoids and those who make a living catering to them confidently declared that soon the California data would show a dramatic drop in diagnoses.
Indeed they quickly asserted it had done so, as did former New York Times writer David Kirby, author of the influential 2005 book Evidence of Harm - Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy. Never mind that this alleged peak, in 2002, came far too early to have reflected cessation of thimerosal use. (Huffington now writes for the left-wing Huffington Post blog.)
Later the father-son team of Dr. Mark and David Geier published a study they claimed showed a dramatic 35 percent drop, also beginning in 2002. The Geiers make their living as expert witnesses and consultants for lawyers who make claims against the government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
But now there has been enough time, and the news is good for parents and bad for the fearmongers. The Archives study evaluated autistic children referred to the state’s Developmental Services System and covered the years 1995 to March of 2007. It included children age three and above. If thimerosal-preserved vaccines cause autism, the researchers said, diagnoses should have started falling in 2004 – not 2002.
But as this chart from the paper shows, there been no plummet, no decline, no leveling. There hasn’t been the least bit of decrease in the increasing number of cases.
Further, the California findings are hardly anomalous. As the Archives paper noted, “Our findings are in concordance with the rigorous 2004 review of at least 12 previous published and unpublished studies by the IOM Immunization Safety Committee, which concluded that the body of evidence rejected a causal relationship between [thimerosal containing vaccines] and autism.”
Included in the IOM review were three studies looking at the entire populations of Sweden, Denmark, and Canada respectively. In all three countries thimerosal-containing vaccines were discontinued in the late 1990s and yet, as in California, autism rates climbed at the same pace.
The main problem with the “angry and paranoid universe” is that its members have terrified parents throughout not only the U.S. but the world into refusing to vaccinate their children. These parents become free riders, relying on those parents who do vaccinate to keep diseases at bay through “herd immunity.” That means that immunization rates in the wider population are high enough (for example, 85 percent for diphtheria) to protect those not immunized.
But if enough people free ride, herd immunity is lost and what follows is the return of childhood diseases we hardly think about anymore. Diseases like pertussis (Whooping cough) have made comebacks in countries as diverse as the U.K., the U.S., Australia, Japan, and Sweden after anti-vaccinationist scares. Pertussis cases went from fewer than 8,000 in the U.S. in 2001 to over 25,000 in 2005.
The anti-vaccine crowd aren’t merely harmless kooks. They harm their own children as well as others. It’s time our Public Health Service starts using publicity campaigns rather than just scientific findings to start fighting back.
If these vaccinations are so safe then why do parents have to sign waivers for their children to receive them.
—lawyers—
There’s always a small chance of a severe allergic/immunological reaction, and no medical authority has ever claimed otherwise. That’s what the waiver is for. Vaccines do not cause autism, period.
Forget the mercury... why would anyone with a brain, take a shot where the odds of getting the disease are 1 in 1 million, but the odds of getting a very bad side-effect are in in 50,000?
the key word in post #2 is LAWYERS....
Damn vaccinnes, I never dropped/switched words before getting them...
Nothing is perfectly safe. There are always possibility of allergic reactions, infections from unsterile needles, needles broken off in the arm, etc. However, the general idea is that having the vaccination is safer than not having it.
Now, how that balances out depends on how dangerous the disease is versus how dangerous the vaccine is. When smallpox was rampant, a small death rate from the vaccine was considered acceptable compared to the death rate of smallpox. With smallpox eliminated everywhere except for a few research labs, the smallpox vaccine isn't worth the risk. Is the polio vaccine worth the risk? Listen to a room full of children on respirators because their lungs no longer work and then answer that. Is the chicken pox vaccine worth the risk? I don't know if it is for a disease that is annoying rather than deadly.
We make decisions that put our lives at risk every day. Did you drive to work this morning? Some people in America died because they decided to drive today instead of hiding under their blankets. No one would say that cars should be outlawed because of the risk (no, not even Nader). Similarly for vaccines - the benefits outweigh the risks.
Conversely, if enough people "free ride" then we'll have a statistical base to see if there are developmental distinctions that may help identify problems with vaccines, such as animal viruses.
There have been families with KNOWN reactions FORCED to take 2nd and third boosters.
SAFETY profile. 100% probability of a reaction vs. 1 in a million disease..
Then that is a problem, but if their reactions aren’t known then their safer off taking the vaccine.
The general rule is this, if the chances of a person getting a disease are higher then the chances of a person having an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then you get the vaccine. Why can’t some people get that?
Since you mentioned your questions about the chicken pox vaccine, how do you feel about the push to make it mandatory? There are two questions here
1. Should vaccinations be mandatory?
2. To what level should parents have discretion concerning the timing of vaccinations? (For example, should I be “allowed” to refuse to vaccinate my newborn for a disease that is almost exclusive to IV drug users?)
Your analogy of driving is interesting, but consider this version. I agree that we all take risks when we drive, but how would you react to a government mandate that you avoid an intersection with known accidents and instead drive over a bridge of unknown safety?
In the end, the debate is all about the rights of parents to make decisions concerning their children.
I don’t see why parents should be forced to have their daughters be vaccinated with gardasil.
my take is if you do not vaccinate your children, and your child gets a disease and passes it on to my children, are you criminally liable for my childs illness? I would say yes, and lock your butt up....
IMHO Gardasil is a bit of a different situation because it doesn’t protect against a public health risk; it protects against a personal health risk. I think it’s moronic for a parent not to have their child vaccinated with Gardasil, it doesn’t impact those of us out here in the world riding a subway with that kid. If a parent denies MMR or other vaccinations, that puts all of the innocent bystanders at some risk, and risks epidemics as well.
FIX:
ALTHOUGH I think it’s moronic for a parent not to have their child vaccinated with Gardasil, it doesn’t impact those of us out here in the world riding a subway with that kid.
It’s “for your own good” and any debate on the issue makes you a “ludite” or in the case of Governor Goodhair Perry’s HPV “executive order” a “prude”.
Good question. Chicken pox is more annoying than anything, but it puts a person at more risk of having shingles later in life. I'm pretty sure my father in law wishes there had been a vaccine available. He gets ferocious, debilitating headaches with shingles.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.