Vaccines, Thimerosal, MMR, Mercury Not Associated With Autism

What it says on the tin: A new meta-analysis analyzing data from studies involving 1.3 million children is entitled “Vaccines are not associated with autism.”

If that’s not clear enough, author Luke Taylor and colleagues, who looked at five studies covering 1.26 million children and another five case-control studies of 9920 children, also give the (pre-press) bullet-point version of their findings, published in the journal Vaccine:

There was no relationship between vaccination and autism (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.06).
There was no relationship between vaccination and ASD (autism spectrum disorder) (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.20).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and MMR (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.01).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and thimerosal (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.31).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and mercury (Hg) (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.07).
Findings of this meta-analysis suggest that vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder.
It’s not that we didn’t know that already. But a meta-analysis takes the existing research and grinds the numbers and gives the bigger picture of what the aggregate of the findings tells us. Indeed, looking at the odds ratios the authors report–in which 1 means no effect of vaccine or other variable on odds and less than 1 means reduced odds–the data suggest reduced autism risk among children who received the MMR vaccine.

www.forbes.com...
animals.io9.com...

Another thorough piece of evidence to add to the pile ruling out a causal link between vaccines and autism. Sadly, it's unlikely any amount of evidence will change the minds of the ardent anti-vax true believers. It's mind blowing how people can think one fraudulent pilot study as having more weight than the mountain of evidence debunking it.

Isn't it strange, we can have a thousand scientists shouting "Mercury causes autism" and the only response is to call them loony tunes, yet when one scientist says the opposite then it must be true!

Dont be fooled people!

originally posted by: VoidHawk
Isn't it strange, we can have a thousand scientists shouting "Mercury causes autism" and the only response is to call them loony tunes, yet when one scientist says the opposite then it must be true!

Dont be fooled people!

Citation for these "thousands of scientists" with their relevant expertise? Or perhaps you'd like to stay on topic and state the problems you see with the paper and their methodology in the OP?

a reply to: GetHyped

They only publish the studies they want. There is no obligation to publicly disclose any studies or results that the "BigPharma" companies don't want you to know.

My dad works as a manager in one of those companies... So the explanation he has given to me.
Let's say you do a study for a new drug/substance. Typically, you do the study where you compare the actual drug to a placebo. When the result comes out as 50-50. (that the placebo is as effective as the substance itself, or in other words... the drug doesn't work )
They DON'T publish the study.
They only disclose the results of the studies that suit them or will support their marketing.
Pharma companies are here to gain profit, regardless of ANY social or environmental cost.
It's not about helping people, it's about maximizing the profit.
You can't rely on studies as there is NO obligation to actually publish the results of ALL studies conducted.

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: VoidHawk
Isn't it strange, we can have a thousand scientists shouting "Mercury causes autism" and the only response is to call them loony tunes, yet when one scientist says the opposite then it must be true!

Dont be fooled people!

Citation for these "thousands of scientists" with their relevant expertise? Or perhaps you'd like to stay on topic and state the problems you see with the paper and their methodology in the OP?

All that would achieve would be circular arguments, its a pointless exercise and these forums are full of examples.

But I'll pick up on this what you wrote here -

It's mind blowing how people can think one fraudulent pilot study as having more weight than the mountain of evidence debunking it.

Its NOT one fraudulent paper!!! Thats a LIE!

What really concerns me is the THOUSANDS of parents who all say the same thing - "My child was fine until the vaccinations"
Those parents will tell you to stuff your research down the toilet, because THEY KNOW what damaged their children!

One of the problems as I see it are the people with children that swear their kids were fine until they received their shots at 5 or 6 months.. It is very compelling when the results/evidence is drooling before your own eyes. Maybe just happenstance or bad timing.. But there are plenty of parents who point to the shots. If 1 in 57 or 87 ? babies being born today in the U.S.A. and by the age of 2 are clinically autistic.... something must be going on.
All my kids are grown so I do not have a dog in this fight ... I never get the flu shot and never get the flu; lucky I guess?... One of my daughters is well educated (vast sums of my money) and now that she has children of her own she may not be anti-vax but she also does not run down and have her kids vaccinated for every passing bug that comes through..

It works like this:
1.Problem - 2.Reaction - 3.Solution
1.They vaccinate children (their yet not matured immune system is bombarded with pathogens, therefore being destroyed) + they add a couple of substances like mercury & other stuff, so they MAYBE protect you from getting 1 or 2 diseases, however they will cause you another 10+ diseases.

2.You don't know that vaccines in your childhood caused this so you go to your doctor and complain about your problems. You want your kids to be healthier than you so you, lost in a plethora of lies, educate your children that vaccines are good for you and that they need to be vaccinated in order to prevent horrible diseases. (actually the vast majority of diseases we are being vaccinated for are not present anymore). Anyways, they still get the reaction they wanted.

3.As you age you get ill. You need the god damn pills, you go to your doctor and you get the prescription.
-Your filthy doctor gets paid by the 'BigPharma' by prescribing you their fantastic drug. = Gains profit
-You go and buy the drug at your local pharmacy. = Gains Profit
-Pharmacy orders drugs by their local distribution agency. = Gains Profit
-Phoenix or any other agencies that stock&supply the pharmacies pay the PHARMA companies. = Gain the biggest profit

So everyone gains profit, except you. You lose. You lose your money, your health and your kids' health.

Nowadays, everything in medicine works according to this model.

1.You create a problem.
2.You wait for the public reaction. You make them want a solution.
3.You offer a fantastic solution for the problem you yourself created.

It's just a ... good business.
The general population is clueless about this, they are glad you offered them a solution. And they don't care. They want know the truth.

"It's a big club and you ain't in it." ~ George Carlin

What great news! We can consume mercury without any worries.

My lady will have a Thimerosal and tonic with a twist, please.
And I'll have three fingers of Mercury, neat, in a sipping glass, thx.

Forbes... yeah they have never, ever lied or manufactured a story for the benefit of the corporations ..
ha a trusted news source ... anything with a mainstream label is controlled journalism, how can they be trusted after years and years of lies ... I'll go with void and the others on this one your poll is skewed unfortunately it seems to be falling on "awakened ears"

a reply to: troll killer

Then by all means critique the paper, then.

from the forbes link in the OP:

Findings of this meta-analysis suggest that vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder.

what no 100 % Confidence interval?
it would be nice to see this stuff was safe for certain
published in say something more definitive, like say PubMed

a reply to: Danbones

There is no such thing as "100% confidence interval" in science. The Odds Ratios and Confidence Intervals are there in the OP. Do you hold your own views up to the same impossible standards, or just those you disagree with?

Anyone care to critique the methodology and results as outlined in the paper?

a reply to: 727Sky

Are you saying anecdotal evidence trumps the results of a huge, rigorously conducted study?

a reply to: GetHyped

You misunderstand...

I witnessed it. My 18 month old son was fine.

Got mmr vaccine.

Instantly autistic. SEVERELY autistic.

Instantly!!!!

I had never even heard of a link between autism and mmr. Imagine my surprise.

I now know a lot of parents with autistic children, from where my son goes to school. Most of them say thw same thing... they had never heard of a link between the two.

Picture this:

Someone punches you, you get a black eye.

I say, "there is a study that proves blackeyes are not caused by punches.

You know I am wrong, you argue.

I say, I have been punched in the face, I didn't get a black eye.

I would sound as clueless to you as autism/mmr-connection deniers sound to parwnts that have experienced it firsthand. Firsthand!

Did yoy conduct the study and observe thw results firsthand?

No?

The funniest part:

Doctors rely on parental instinct when it comes to dealing with autism because parents undersrand the children better...

...hmmmm

Re-read rhis until you finally get it...

I was there.

You were not.

About this study, if you read carefully, only 9,924 children were part of the controlled trial, the other million or so was part of a cohort study.

Mercury is a highly toxic heavy metal that resides in the body, and anybody who willingly injest, injects, or consumes it is an idiot. Yet somehow its okay to inject children with it? Seriously?

The timing of this "study" is suspect anyway, as the latest measles outbreak has been in the news. As an engineer, and somebody who, over the years, has done thousands of test, and collected terabytes of data, believe me when I say data can be interpreted any way you want too.

Also, read the epilogue...

As an epidemiologist I believe the data that is presented in this meta-analysis. However, as a parent of three children I have someunderstanding of the fears associated with reactions and effects ofvaccines. My first two children have had febrile seizures after routine vaccinations, one of them a serious event. These events did not stop me from vaccinating my third child, however, I did take some proactive measures to reduce the risk of similar adverse effects. I vaccinated my child in the morning so that we were aware if[sic] any early adverse reaction during the day and I also gave my child a dose of paracetamol 30 min before the vaccination was given to reduce any fever that might develop after the injection. As a parent I know my children better than anyone and I equate their seizures to the effects of the vaccination by increasing their body temperature. For parents who do notice a significant change in their child’s cognitive function and behaviour after a vaccination I encourage you to report these events immediately to your family physician and tothe ‘Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System’.

Same forbes website as initial link.

a reply to: GetHyped

The defense of big Pharma in my mind borders criminal thinking. The reason for thimerosal is simply the low cost that it provides for pushing multi use vials of vaccines. Single dose vaccines would be sooooo much safer for the population, a population that big pharma purports to be protecting. It comes down to profit.

Those of you that want to push the vaccine program would come off a bit more credible if you addressed the possible remedies for a parents concerns, instead of throwing corporate propaganda at us.

Hmmm. So mercury has no effects on the growing brain. Riiiight. Who published this study? The people that make the vaccines?

I'm going to begin this by admitting frustration and I apologize if this comes across as condescending or harsh. I see smart people making this mistake all the time and it is potentially dangerous, distracting from the actual problem and potential solution as well as demeaning to many people on the autistic spectrum. Regarding that last point, my daughter and my self are both diagnosed on the asperger's end of the spectrum. She was originally classified much lower in terms of functioning. I believe that it was early intervention and our ability to accept and understand that her brain was wired differently that has contributed to her success. There is no blame. She is not sick, or flawed. She is what she is. I do have a dog in this hunt/horse in this race/pick your metaphor and I will admit it. While there is an admitted bias here there is something to be said for experience so please hear me out.

originally posted by: 727Sky
One of the problems as I see it are the people with children that swear their kids were fine until they received their shots at 5 or 6 months.. It is very compelling when the results/evidence is drooling before your own eyes.

No.

Most parents don't see their child "drooling" or even deteriorating. That is a disingenuous representation. Also, it is not 5 or 6 months (when drooling would be entirely appropriate anyway but I digress...) it is usually around 20-24 months when parents really suspect something is wrong and therefor they link the behavior in their child they are observing with the MMR vaccine, which is usually given around 18 months. However...

Correlation

Does.

Not.

Indicate causation.

It is an unfortunate trick of timing of the MMR vaccine and human nature (Parents want a simple solution. There is not one.) This is the age when most parents expect to see (as they should) developmental milestones in terms of language and social interaction occurring. With autistic children they will not occur on the normal time-scale, or even at all. Also, at this point there is an increase in frustration in the child because part of their brain is trying to communicate and they have difficulty actually accomplishing this task. Because of this understandable frustration these children will often increase more blatant "tics" and other behavior including "melt downs". In short these kids hit a proverbial developmental wall that is obvious and often dramatic. The lack of communicative and social capacity is frustrating for everyone and parents really begin to hawk-eye the behavior of their child and will start to notice and put into comparative context things they would pass off as quirky or cute before. It is not the vaccine causing this, it is simply that they both generally occur around the same time scale.

So...

originally posted by: 727SkyMaybe just happenstance or bad timing.

Yes and...

originally posted by: 727Sky But there are plenty of parents who point to the shots. If 1 in 57 or 87 ? babies being born today in the U.S.A. and by the age of 2 are clinically autistic.... something must be going on.

Yes. There is something going. Autism manifests on a consistent genetic level. There is a clear genetic propensity that includes a disruption and sometimes doubling in specific genes. I am I admit on even shakier ground here in terms of what people don't want to hear. However, there is a direct correlation in increases in autism in the population as certain behavior and thought processes that were not as successful before become successful. Geeks have a stereotype for a reason. That increase in capacity to understand abstract concepts is often associated with certain fine and gross motor deficiencies as well as a deficit in social capacity. So mildly/high functioning autistic people that would not have been diagnosed as autistic previously are not only having more of an impact on the gene pool but even further, like is attracting like and reinforcing the traits. It is no coincidence that one of the first places that saw a spike in autism was Silicon Valley. The rise of the geeks. We are BREEDING this. Natural selection at work but interpreted through a convoluted social lens. All of this in addition to the quirk of timing of the MMR vaccine and development that has caused so many to make a correlation between the two. People are chasing the wrong rabbit here and it is not only not helpful it is potentially harmful.

For the record, one of my "savant" abilities has to do with understanding broad systems and recognizing patterns within them. Because of this I was able to recognize behavior in my daughter when she was only months old that caused me to suspect autism when many others would have missed it. By the time she was 10 months old I was quite certain but I was unable to convince anyone (including physicians) until she was closer to that stage when the language delays and frustration are obvious.

a reply to: GetHyped

The statistical correlation between the rising incidence of autism and the increasing number of prenatal and neonate vaccination is remarkably strong.

Aluminum adjuvant is correlated with ASD
link to source

Can you eliminate Thimersol preservative statistically as a single cause of ASD? Sure you can with the right statistical treatment. Does that bring use any closer to understanding the cause of ASD? Probably, because there might not be a single cause. Process of elimination works. Does it let vaccines off the hook? Hell no it doesn't.

Emerging evidence that immune system disregulation is correlated with ASD.
link to source

Ask yourself this one question. Why would/should you trust a self-certified bio-active chemical cocktail produced by a profit machine? These groups spend more on marketing than R&D. Including on-line shills to patrol forums.

Purity of manufacturing costs money, so the vaccine you get won't be free of prions, proteins and other contaminants. GRAS ingredients don't need to be listed on the ingredient list. In general, the method of action using aluminum salts to systemically hyper-stimulate one part of the immune system is still an open scientific question. Thimersol is just one small part of that.

Profit machines are not conflicted at all. They do anything and everything to make profit. Sustained human health is not profitable to pharma. Autism and every other health irregularity known, is a profit opportunity. Remember that.

a reply to: GetHyped

A proper analysis must compare vaccinated children to unvaccinated children who have been fully protected from adverse environmental exposures. I do not believe the study accomplished this, so it's just another risk-benefit analysis comparing one worst case scenario with another.

All this study proves is that our world is full of disease-causing contaminants and our children can't avoid exposure.

As regards vaccines, fact is vaccines can cause seizures - many "silent" - and seizures are linked to autism spectrum disorders. One of this study's authors made some interesting comments:

....I vaccinated my child in the morning so that we were aware if [sic] any early adverse reaction during the day and I also gave my child a dose of paracetamol 30 min before the vaccination was given to reduce any fever that might develop after the injection. As a parent I know my children better than anyone and I equate their seizures to the effects of the vaccination by increasing their body temperature. For parents who do notice a significant change in their child's cognitive function and behaviour after a vaccination I encourage you to report these events immediately to your family physician and to the 'Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System'.

Silently Seizing: Unrecognized, Frequently Missed Seizures & Autism

Delaying Childhood Vaccines Ups Postvaccine Seizure Risk