Some scary autism statistics.

[MyWifesSkin]

1 in 36 South Korean babies are now deemed to have some form of autism. 1 in (48 - 50) in the UK. Three decades ago the US figure was ? 1 in 25,000. (The drugs used to treat autism, atypical anti-psychotics, are frank neurotoxins - so if the autism does not create a Patient For Life the drugs probably will).

 

54% of US children have chronic illness.

[swansont]

What does the poll have to do with your post? Not only is there no established connection between vaccines and autism, IIRC a causal connection has been demonstrated not to exist.

[mississippichem]

The MMR vaccine/autism link has been debunked countless times including articles in the peer reviewed literature. The original paper that attempted to establish the link had been retracted. What new evidence do you bring to the table?

[Arete]

The MMR vaccine/autism link has been debunked countless times including articles in the peer reviewed literature. The original paper that attempted to establish the link had been retracted. What new evidence do you bring to the table?

 

Just to add some links for mississippichem:

 

http://www.bmj.com/c...2/7284/460.full

"the data provide evidence that no correlation exists between the prevalence of MMR vaccination and the rapid increase in the risk of autism over time"

 

http://jama.jamanetw...rticleid=193604

"Essentially no correlation was observed between the secular trend of early childhood MMR immunization rates in California and the secular trend in numbers of children with autism enrolled in California's regional service center system"

 

http://www.nejm.org/...56/NEJMoa021134

"There was no association between the age at the time of vaccination, the time since vaccination, or the date of vaccination and the development of autistic disorder."

 

http://www.sciencedi...140673699012398

"Our analyses do not support a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism. If such an association occurs, it is so rare that it could not be identified in this large regional sample."

 

http://www.bmj.com/c...4/7334/393.full

"These findings provide no support for an MMR associated "new variant" form of autism"

 

http://jama.jamanetw...rticleid=197365

"The results do not support a causal relationship between childhood vaccination with thimerosal-containing vaccines and development of autistic-spectrum disorders."

Edited June 22, 2012 by Arete

[John Cuthber]

1 in 36 South Korean babies are now deemed to have some form of autism.

The drugs used to treat autism, atypical anti-psychotics, are frank neurotoxins

if the autism does not create a Patient For Life the drugs probably will

54% of US children have chronic illness.

http://xkcd.com/285/

 

We have a speculations forum for this sort of stuff.

Edited June 23, 2012 by John Cuthber

[MyWifesSkin]

Here is a speech on these matters by Dr Andrew Wakefield, the party that got struck off, he certainly has not retracted the paper. Assume it was the learned journal that retracted it; I wonder if they carry advertising from the drug corporations?

 

 

It is depressing you all take the attitude you do. It should be obvious that power will try to control science, the main object being to say: 'You've got to agree with us, this is science.' Power will not take orders from the scientific method, or anything else. To support power's fake version of science is to betray real science. Wakefield was struck off to keep the rest of them honest.

 

Like historians and economists, scientists should factor in that they have been as much indoctrinated as educated.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

This is being moved to speculations.

MyWifesSkin, this means you're going to actually have to start backing up your claims with proper evidence.

[mississippichem]

Can refute the papers cited by Arete? Why are so sure that there is a conspiracy? Pony up the scientific evidence!

[imatfaal]

Here is a speech on these matters by Dr Andrew Wakefield, the party that got struck off, he certainly has not retracted the paper. Assume it was the learned journal that retracted it; I wonder if they carry advertising from the drug corporations?

 

 

It is depressing you all take the attitude you do. It should be obvious that power will try to control science, the main object being to say: 'You've got to agree with us, this is science.' Power will not take orders from the scientific method, or anything else. To support power's fake version of science is to betray real science. Wakefield was struck off to keep the rest of them honest.

 

Like historians and economists, scientists should factor in that they have been as much indoctrinated as educated.

 

Andrew Wakefield was struck off for multiple instances of serious professional misconduction, breach of trust, breach of ethics and dishonesty.

 

With regard to nine of the eleven children.., it determined that Dr Wakefield caused research to

be undertaken on them without Ethics Committee approval and thus without

the ethical constraints that safeguard research. ... It was in the

context of this research project that the Panel found that Dr Wakefield caused

three of these young and vulnerable children, (nos. 3, 9 and 12) to undergo

the invasive procedure of lumbar puncture when such investigation was for

research purposes and was not clinically indicated. This action was contrary

to his representation to the Ethics Committee that all the procedures were

clinically indicated. In nine of the eleven children (2,1, 3, 4, 9, 5,12, 8 and 7)

the Panel has found that Dr Wakefield acted contrary to the clinical interests

of each child. The Panel is profoundly concerned that Dr Wakefield repeatedly

breached fundamental principles of research medicine. It concluded that his

actions in this area alone were sufficient to amount to serious professional

misconduct.

 

 

You can read the ruling here http://www.gmc-uk.org/Wakefield_SPM_and_SANCTION.pdf_32595267.pdf

 

Andrew Wakefield was not a scapegoat - nor is he a scientist. He was rightly struck off for failing to put patient health above everything else and for ignoring ethicial considerations. It is quite clear that he was convinced of the correctness of his notion and he allowed nothing to challenge that; not the facts, not childrens well-being, and not the truth.

[MyWifesSkin]

Andrew Wakefield was not a scapegoat - nor is he a scientist. He was rightly struck off for failing to put patient health above everything else and for ignoring ethicial considerations. It is quite clear that he was convinced of the correctness of his notion and he allowed nothing to challenge that; not the facts, not childrens well-being, and not the truth.

Agree he wasn't a scapegoat, his role was to send the signal 'Don't step out of line'.

 

Only speculating but the official line was probably that autism was psychiatric - a science free zone that appalls parents - no clinical investigations are undertaken, no matter how florid the symptoms. Wakefield disagreed.

 

'Put patient health above everything else' That'll be why they give AZT to pregnant women then? (Just picking the most bizarre thing I could think of).

 

The parents demonstrated in his favor outside the GMC.

 

The GMC are held in contempt by almost everyone. Their job is to police a guild, they know nothing of science and care less.

[John Cuthber]

The problems was not that he "stepped out of line": the problem was that he was a liar and a fraud.

[Phi for All]

It is depressing you all take the attitude you do. It should be obvious that power will try to control science, the main object being to say: 'You've got to agree with us, this is science.' Power will not take orders from the scientific method, or anything else. To support power's fake version of science is to betray real science. Wakefield was struck off to keep the rest of them honest.

 

Like historians and economists, scientists should factor in that they have been as much indoctrinated as educated.

What makes science and the scientific method different are the sheer numbers of people salivating to overturn accepted theory or find something wrong with mainstream practice. These people would gain more "power" if they could do so than they would by playing along with some sort of conspiracy.

 

No offense, but the difference between you and them is that they have to back up their refutations with rigor and supportive evidence, whereas, so far, you get to just make insinuations and quote unsupported assertions. There are simply too many people out there with the capability of revealing a fraud of the magnitude you're suggesting.

[MyWifesSkin]

What makes science and the scientific method different are the sheer numbers of people salivating to overturn accepted theory or find something wrong with mainstream practice. These people would gain more "power" if they could do so than they would by playing along with some sort of conspiracy.

 

No offense, but the difference between you and them is that they have to back up their refutations with rigor and supportive evidence, whereas, so far, you get to just make insinuations and quote unsupported assertions. There are simply too many people out there with the capability of revealing a fraud of the magnitude you're suggesting.

But it is well known that institutions react so as to oppose change. People were stuck with the 4 or is it 5 elements for centuries weren't they?

 

Wakefield tried to reveal the fraud; the system reacted so as to neutralize him.

 

Most people have something they regard to be obviously rubbish but which is apparently universally regarded as true, they should generalise a bit.

 

Psywar trailer:

 

Psywar film:

 

(Serious point: plenty of evidence exists, it is largely that I am zero use at finding it. Perhaps I'll post about how to look for stuff).

Edited June 24, 2012 by MyWifesSkin

[Phi for All]

But it is well known that institutions react so as to oppose change. People were stuck with the 4 or is it 5 elements for centuries weren't they?

That's a generalization. Not all institutions are alike. And science has progressed a great deal since the concept of classical elemental natures.

 

Wakefield tried to reveal the fraud; the system reacted so as to neutralize him.

This is a perception that isn't as well supported as the facts surrounding Wakefield's deliberate falsifying of data in his studies.

 

Most people have something they regard to be obviously rubbish but which is apparently universally regarded as true, they should generalise a bit.

I can't think of anything like this. Help me out with some examples of what you're thinking about.

 

(Serious point: plenty of evidence exists, it is largely that I am zero use at finding it. Perhaps I'll post about how to look for stuff).

Evidence has very specific definitions in science. Arete gave some excellent links to peer-reviewed studies several posts ago. You should read them, and see how the studies were performed. This is one of the best ways to look for stuff.

[jeskill]

MyWifesSkin: Your first post seemed to insinuate a lot without actually clarifying your argument. So, I'm confused about what exactly your argument is. Are you suggesting that the prevalence of autism has increased due to vaccinations? Are you suggesting that there is a tendency to over-diagnose autism? Or are you suggesting that there is a tendency to over-prescribe medications for autism?

1 in 36 South Korean babies are now deemed to have some form of autism. 1 in (48 - 50) in the UK. Three decades ago the US figure was ? 1 in 25,000

 

This statistic seems to come from a really interesting population-wide study on autism. It is noted that,

 

But experts said the findings did not mean that the actual numbers of children with autism were rising, simply that the study was more comprehensive than previous ones.

(Non-sequitor... I would have assumed the NY Times used Times New Roman as their font, instead they use Georgia. Weird.)

 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2012 by jeskill

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

MyWifesSkin, you might like to read Brian Deer's articles about Wakefield, as published in BMJ:

 

http://briandeer.com/solved/bmj-wakefield-1-1.htm

http://briandeer.com/solved/bmj-wakefield-2-1.htm

 

Wakefield was in it for the money, not the science.

[MyWifesSkin]

That's a generalization. Not all institutions are alike. And science has progressed a great deal since the concept of classical elemental natures.

 

 

This is a perception that isn't as well supported as the facts surrounding Wakefield's deliberate falsifying of data in his studies.

 

 

I can't think of anything like this. Help me out with some examples of what you're thinking about.

 

 

Evidence has very specific definitions in science. Arete gave some excellent links to peer-reviewed studies several posts ago. You should read them, and see how the studies were performed. This is one of the best ways to look for stuff.

 

Bit of evidence. I'll get back, if I may, this evening.

 

http://www.nature.co...ll/479157a.html

• It is indeed a sad reflection on the medical professionals that have offered any number of varying opinions on this important debate that none have suggested actually investigating and taking care of the so called "Lancet 12" children.
   
  Except the medical professionals that undertook those investigations.
   
  One the senior co-author of the Lancet 12 study John Walker-Smith, a world renowned paediatric gastroenterologist awarded a lifetime achievement award by his peers, had this to say.
   
  "Am I too naive to ask all people of goodwill on both sides of this debate to speedily agree on an independent research agenda that will finally resolve this matter? Such an agenda must involve non-epidemiological research, focusing on the bowels of these children."
   
  What then are we to make of the published observations of the team of paeditric gastroenterologists that stated in 1998 and examined 'actual patients' and their physiology.
  (Simon Murch, Mike Thomson and John Walker-Smith.)
   
  First, this mucosal abnormality has been apparent in 47/50 children within the autistic spectrum, whether or not there is any perceived link with immunisation. Thus the lymphoid hyperplasia/ microscopic colitis changes were found in over 90% of the autistic children studied.
   
  "the lymphoid hyperplasia in many cases is remarkable, with germinal centres showing higher numbers of proliferating (Ki67 positive) cells than we have detected in any immunodeficient controls with lymphoid hyperplasia.... The colitis itself is variable, but may feature crypt abscesses, increased macrophage infiltration and unregulated class II major histocompatibility complex expression."
   
  If there was no bowel disease / colitis then how does one sufficiently explain ...
   
  "we have noted important behavioural responses in several of the children when their intestinal pathology is treated"
   
  Which has been emphasised by the Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Disorders in Individuals With ASDs: A Consensus Report
   
  The prevalence of gastrointestinal abnormalities in individuals with ASDs [autistic spectrum disorders] is incompletely understood.
   
  2006 research conducted by Valicenti-McDermott M et al Prospective descriptive reports from autism clinics have described significant gastrointestinal symptoms in at least 70% of patients"
   
  This has also been further evidenced by 2011 research undertaken by University of California Medical, once again notable that it undertook direct information from autistic patients and families.
   
  Parents reported significantly more GI problems in children with ASD (249/589; 42%) compared with their unaffected siblings (20/163; 12%) (p < .001). The 2 most common Gl problems in children with ASD were constipation (116/589; 20%) and chronic diarrhea (111/589; 19%)
   
  The impact on actual families is serious..
   
  "An emerging literature suggests that individuals with ASDs and gastrointestinal symptoms may be at higher risk for problem behaviors than those with ASDs who do not have gastrointestinal symptoms"
   
  "Problem behaviors are the single most important factor in determining quality of life for individuals with ASDs and their caretakers."
   
  The guidance for medical professionals is clear ...
   
  For a person with an ASD who presents for treatment of a problem behavior, the care provider should consider the possibility that a gastrointestinal symptom, particularly pain, is a setting event, that is, a factor that increases the likelihood that serious problem behavior (eg, self-injury, aggression) may be exhibited.
   
  There is a clear and present danger that prejudicial commentary and investigation of autistic children may result in real harm to not only the child themselves through lack of treatment of underlying gastroenterology symptoms but also to carer's and their families.
   
  
  • Report this comment
  • 2011-11-10 07:28:58 AM
  • Posted by: john smith

  [*] #29991 References for previous post.

   

  Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine

  Original Text

  Simon Murch a, Mike Thomson a, John Walker-Smith a

  Authors’ reply The Lancet, Volume 351, Issue 9106, Page 908, 21 March 1998 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)70323-8

   

  Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Disorders in Individuals With ASDs: A Consensus Report – Timothy Buie et al Pediatrics Vol. 125 No. Supplement 1 January 1, 2010

  pp. S1 -S18 (doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-1878C)

   

  Valicenti-McDermott M, McVicar K, Rapin I, Wershil BK, Cohen H, Shinnar S. Frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms in children with autistic spectrum disorders and association with family history of autoimmune disease. J Dev Behav Pediatr.2006;27 (2 suppl):S128â€" S136

   

  J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2011 Jun;32(5):351-60. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e31821bd06a.

  The prevalence of gastrointestinal problems in children across the United States with autism spectrum disorders from families with multiple affected members.

  Wang LW,

   

  • Report this comment
  • 2011-11-10 07:40:16 AM
  • Posted by: john smith

[Arete]

Bit of evidence.

 

Except your link and excerpt specifically state the study does not show any evidence linking the MMR vaccine to autism. It shows a correlation between autism and gastrointestinal abnormalities, and that treating a painful gastrointestinal disorder can solve a behavioral problem in an autism sufferer.

Edited June 25, 2012 by Arete

[Appolinaria]

I'm under the impression that vaccines are essentially voluntary since from what I've seen all it takes is a mere signature confirming religious exemption or personal reasons to avoid them. Good conspiracy.

[immortal]

There is indeed some causal connection between the immune system and the development of autisic behaviors as this study shows.

 

Researchers find evidence of link between Immune Irregularities and Autism

 

However the study was conducted on mice and it doesn't mean that it necessarily works the same way in humans too.

 

In future studies, the researchers plan to examine the effects of highly targeted anti-inflammatory treatments on mice that display autism-related behaviors and immune changes.

Edited July 18, 2012 by immortal

[Arete]

There is indeed some causal connection between the artificially heightened immune system response of an expectant mother and the development of autistic like behaviors symptoms in the subsequent offspring as this study shows.

 

Researchers find evidence of link between Immune Irregularities and Autism

 

Additions in bold.

 

Again, the above study does not link the MMR vaccine, or any vaccine with autism. What the above study shows is that an immune response to a viral infection of the mother during pregnancy, or maternal immune activation may be a risk factor in the development of autistic disorders in the foetus- not the vaccination of either mother or child. If anything, the study supports an indirect benefit of vaccination in that if the mother was vaccinated against the virus before she fell pregnant, the conditions which lead to the autistic symptoms in the offspring may have been prevented.

 

Actual PNAS article: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/07/10/1202556109.full.pdf+html

[John Cuthber]

There is indeed some causal connection between the immune system and the development of autisic behaviors as this study shows.

 

Researchers find evidence of link between Immune Irregularities and Autism

 

However the study was conducted on mice and it doesn't mean that it necessarily works the same way in humans too.

It is important to remember that, if there turns out to be some link however strong (or weak) then it won't in any way vindicate the original paper or Andrew Wakefield's actions.

[immortal]

If anything, the study supports an indirect benefit of vaccination in that if the mother was vaccinated against the virus before she fell pregnant, the conditions which lead to the autistic symptoms in the offspring may have been prevented.

 

Actual PNAS article: http://www.pnas.org/...9.full.pdf+html

 

So in a sense only an overactive immune system is more susceptible to develop autistic symptoms and not an immune response from a vaccination?

Edited July 18, 2012 by immortal

[Arete]

So in a sense only an overactive immune system is more susceptible to develop autistic symptoms and not an immune response from a vaccination?

 

So what they did in this study was to challenge the immune system of pregnant mice by injecting them with a synthetic simulation of viral RNA, which causes the mothers to have an immune response similar to what they would have to an acute viral infection. This is long been known to cause physiological differences in the offspring compared to controls, particularly to do with chronic inflammation and abnormalities in the central nervous system of offspring. In this study, they linked that type of response to autistic like behaviors in the offspring.

 

So, what it shows is that there may be increased risk of autism (along with a host of other behavioral and physiological abnormalities) in a baby if the mother experiences an acute viral infection while pregnant.

 

So, while it may not be the best idea to get vaccinated with an attenuated virus while pregnant, but given expectant mothers aren't generally vaccinated with MMR, it in no way shows a link between MMR and autism. It does show that if a vaccination administered prior to preganancy can prevent an acute infection by a viral agent while pregnant, it might prevent autism (rather than cause it).

Edited July 18, 2012 by Arete

[MyWifesSkin]

Andrew Wakefield was struck off for multiple instances of serious professional misconduction, breach of trust, breach of ethics and dishonesty.

 

 

You can read the ruling here http://www.gmc-uk.or...df_32595267.pdf

 

Andrew Wakefield was not a scapegoat - nor is he a scientist. He was rightly struck off for failing to put patient health above everything else and for ignoring ethicial considerations. It is quite clear that he was convinced of the correctness of his notion and he allowed nothing to challenge that; not the facts, not childrens well-being, and not the truth.

Professor Walker-Smith, Wakefields's co-accused, had this decision reversed by the courts recently. Presumably Wakefield is thereby vindicated.

 

autistic spectrum disorders

http://www.lancet.co...5696-8/fulltext

 

"The refusal by government to evaluate the risks of MMR properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history.

 

There are very powerful people in positions of great authority who have staked their reputations on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves".

 

Dr Peter Fletcher; Former Chief Scientific Officer for the Department of Health (responsible for vaccine safety).

 

www.ane.pl/pdf/7021.pdf catherine DeSoto Univ of Northern Iowa toxic heavy metals and autism

 

http://www.huffingto..._n_1326377.html

 

http://www.greenheal...r-evidence.html :

MMR vaccination - eightfold autism risk

 

A re-run of the 2002 Danish MMR vaccination - autism study [2], but this time also including children aged five and over, rather than cutting off at four years old, found that the Danish autism rate had in fact risen eightfold over the period since the introduction of the MMR vaccination.

 

"I have always thought since I first heard about the Somali children that this really proves the causal role of vaccines. The Amish children who have no vaccines have no autistic-like disorders and the Somali children who are newly exposed to aggressive vaccine programmes have exceptionally high levels! What more evidence is needed?" Former UK Science Chief [Dr Peter Fletcher] -- Vaccines Cause Autism: "What More Evidence is Needed?"