Silencing MMR Opposition

Originally posted by loam
FatherLukeDuke:

Thank you for your post.

Those are indeed highly relevant points to consider. Do you happen to know what he asserts in his defense?

[edit on 14-6-2006 by loam]

No, I'm not sure what his defense will be. I am a bit guilty of "trial by discussion board" here to be fair. It should by pointed out that Wakefield is accused of this morally dubious activity and has not yet been found guilty. Though I personally will be very surprised if the lack of ethics approval and undeclared financing accusations are wrong, as the evidence should be pretty clear cut. The Lancet had already withdrawn his paper on the back on this and one of his co-authors had their name removed from it.

He may well be advised by his lawyers not to discuss the case in public, as he could end up damaging whatever defense he is going to make. So we will have to wait and see what happens.

What amazes me is that straight from publishing the paper Dr Wakefield was very vocal in promoting his findings and agressively attacking the medical and scientific establishment. If you are going to do this you better make sure that you are on very solid ground and 100% clean, otherwise they will hammer you.

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Sooo..are you going to post a study or any evidence, or just say "nuh-uh" and post anecdotes from clinics which have yet to produce a study on the topic?

Mariella

First of all do you have a child with autism or know a child with autism? Are you aware of the rate of autism in children? It's 1 in every 280. Look at the rate of diagnosis starting from the time thimerosal was placed in vaccinations. I think you will find that more cases of autism were diagnosed as the rate of thimerosal exposure increased. Why don't you post a study or evidence that refutes the claim that the MMR is not linked to autism, which has no ties to the FDA, CDC or the pharmaceutical companies? All of who have the most to lose if and when a link is proven. So do your research before you post a study or evidence and make sure it is untainted by those listed above. Oh, for the record, my son has autism. So I am well versed in this subject, so bring your a-game if you decide to debate this.

The problem with vacination is that it dosen't work a proportion of the populous so quite a large percentage of the population has to be vacinated for everyone to be protected... that's why the gov etc. wants the populous vacinated.

Originally posted by ss0825ss

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Sooo..are you going to post a study or any evidence, or just say "nuh-uh" and post anecdotes from clinics which have yet to produce a study on the topic?

Mariella

First of all do you have a child with autism or know a child with autism?

Yup, my nephew. He's 10. Cute child, too. His autism was diagnosed several years after receiving the MMR, and his parents don't see any plausible temporal aspect between the vaccine and the appearance of symptoms.

Are you aware of the rate of autism in children? It's 1 in every 280. Look at the rate of diagnosis starting from the time thimerosal was placed in vaccinations. I think you will find that more cases of autism were diagnosed as the rate of thimerosal exposure increased.

The rate is actually much lower. Nice try, though.

Using records from medical centers and schools, the CDC investigators determined the prevalence of autism in children aged 3 to 10 years in metropolitan Atlanta in 1996. Diagnoses in the 987 children identified with autism included autistic disorder, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified, or Asperger syndrome. Schools were the only institution identifying 40% of children with autism, and schools were the most important source of information on black children, children of younger mothers, and children of mothers with less than 12 years of education.

The prevalence of autism was 3.4 per 1,000, with a male-to-female ratio of 4:1, and comparable rates were seen in black and white children.

Link

Why don't you post a study or evidence that refutes the claim that the MMR is not linked to autism, which has no ties to the FDA, CDC or the pharmaceutical companies? All of who have the most to lose if and when a link is proven.

Gladly:
Link 1
Link 2
Link 3

Here are three for starters. The first oe even includes a few more studies and references. Have fun! Also, notice none of these sites were written by people with agendas, they are peer reviewed, as opposed to the opposition's links.

Oh, for the record, my son has autism. So I am well versed in this subject, so bring your a-game if you decide to debate this.

I'm very sorry for your son's condition. It's fantastic that you stay educated on your son's condition, as well. Unfortunately, as I've told many parents before, reading books and web sites is no replacement for experimentation and medical education in this field. If you read a study, and the first thing you think is, "Well that can't be true because I read something else on website X" then most likely, the study is more accurate. Remember, anyone can post anything on the internet, a la ATS, hehe.

Mariella

Just to add another study to that:

www.newscientist.com...

This is the biggest ever study done into MMR and autism. Japan got rid of MMR in 1993 (it was worried about the mumps bit causing meningitis), however the rate of autism increased afterwards:

With his colleagues Yasuo Shimizu and Michael Rutter of the Institute of Psychiatry in London, UK, Honda looked at the records of 31,426 children born in one district of Yokohama between 1988 and 1996. The team counted children diagnosed as autistic by the age of 7.

They found the cases continued to multiply after the vaccine withdrawal, ranging from 48 to 86 cases per 10,000 children before withdrawal to 97 to 161 per 10,000 afterwards. The same pattern was seen with a particular form of autism in which children appear to develop normally and then suddenly regress - the form linked to MMR by Wakefield.

It should be pointed out that Wakefield used only 12 children in his study and it appears he tested them over and over again until he got the results he wanted.

To be honest after this Japanese study I really can't see how some people try to blame the rise on autism cases on MMR, it seems so clear cut that it isn't.

I will also just say that MMR does not contain thimersol, and I don't think it ever has.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Just to add another study to that:

www.newscientist.com...

This is the biggest ever study done into MMR and autism. Japan got rid of MMR in 1993 (it was worried about the mumps bit causing meningitis), however the rate of autism increased afterwards:

...

They found the cases continued to multiply after the vaccine withdrawal, ranging from 48 to 86 cases per 10,000 children before withdrawal to 97 to 161 per 10,000 afterwards. The same pattern was seen with a particular form of autism in which children appear to develop normally and then suddenly regress - the form linked to MMR by Wakefield.

It should be pointed out that Wakefield used only 12 children in his study and it appears he tested them over and over again until he got the results he wanted.

To be honest after this Japanese study I really can't see how some people try to blame the rise on autism cases on MMR, it seems so clear cut that it isn't.

I will also just say that MMR does not contain thimersol, and I don't think it ever has.

That study has ridiculously high numbers of autistic children for Japan, according to them 1 in 62 have it. that's way too high. the US rate is either one in 166 or one in 110, depending on source, and they're sadly leading in numbers.

Source, also posted on last page
The IC -10 Classification: A new autism classification (IC-10) was adopted in 1993 and is mentioned by the authors (page 5, paragraph 1). The potential impact of that change was NEVER considered and not even mentioned by the authors in their discussion.

Most noteworthy is the fact that one year after the introduction of IC-10 in Japan the prevalence rate of autism reached 161.3 / 10,000 or 1 out of 62 children. (Table 1) This is the highest prevalence rate ever recorded in a large epidemiological study and as such, it raises serious questions about the accuracy of the screening process used with the new classification.

PS: iirc, you're right, MMR never contained thiomersal, that's why this alledged connection would be troublesome, the mechanism needs to be understood, be it vaccine related or not.

Originally posted by Long Lance
That study has ridiculously high numbers of autistic children for Japan, according to them 1 in 62 have it. that's way too high. the US rate is either one in 166 or one in 110, depending on source, and they're sadly leading in numbers.

You are right, that does seem very high. Though it should be pointed out that this figure isn't just autism, but autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) and is a very broad measure. The Japanese study also used the same diagnostic criteria throughout, meaning year by year comparisons are valid. Rates of autism and regressive autism were much lower, check the graph at the bottom:

www.jr2.ox.ac.uk...

They still all continued to rise after MMR was ended.

The numbers appear to peak in 1994 and then drop off quite rapidly - I'm not sure why this is.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

The numbers appear to peak in 1994 and then drop off quite rapidly - I'm not sure why this is.

If the effect is limited to the first year and autism is usually diagnosed at the age of five then something changed in the years 89 and 90, if my assumptions are off, it gets a little more complicated....

Originally posted by bsl4doc

Originally posted by ss0825ss

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Sooo..are you going to post a study or any evidence, or just say "nuh-uh" and post anecdotes from clinics which have yet to produce a study on the topic?

Mariella

First of all do you have a child with autism or know a child with autism?

Yup, my nephew. He's 10. Cute child, too. His autism was diagnosed several years after receiving the MMR, and his parents don't see any plausible temporal aspect between the vaccine and the appearance of symptoms. So several years after he received the MMR out of nowhere developed ASD.

Are you aware of the rate of autism in children? It's 1 in every 280. Look at the rate of diagnosis starting from the time thimerosal was placed in vaccinations. I think you will find that more cases of autism were diagnosed as the rate of thimerosal exposure increased.

The rate is actually much lower. Nice try, though.

Using records from medical centers and schools, the CDC investigators determined the prevalence of autism in children aged 3 to 10 years in metropolitan Atlanta in 1996. Diagnoses in the 987 children identified with autism included autistic disorder, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified, or Asperger syndrome. Schools were the only institution identifying 40% of children with autism, and schools were the most important source of information on black children, children of younger mothers, and children of mothers with less than 12 years of education.

The prevalence of autism was 3.4 per 1,000, with a male-to-female ratio of 4:1, and comparable rates were seen in black and white children.

Do the math. 3.4 per 1000 is 1 in 294.
Link
1996? Get a more current study. releases.usnewswire.com...

Why don't you post a study or evidence that refutes the claim that the MMR is not linked to autism, which has no ties to the FDA, CDC or the pharmaceutical companies? All of who have the most to lose if and when a link is proven.

Gladly:
Link 1
Link 2
Link 3

Here are three for starters. The first oe even includes a few more studies and references. Have fun! Also, notice none of these sites were written by people with agendas, they are peer reviewed, as opposed to the opposition's links.

Oh, for the record, my son has autism. So I am well versed in this subject, so bring your a-game if you decide to debate this.

Mariella

Link One study performed by goverment direction. This group is funded by the MRC which is funded by the taxpayers or government
Link Two does not work so I cannot comment.
Link Three study performed by government direction. The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) is a national organisation funded by the UK taxpayer. www.mrc.ac.uk...
If a government requires a vacination and questions arise as to the safety of the vacination I find it very unlikely said goverment is going to come out and admit there may or may not be a problem. See links below
www.rollingstone.com...
www.rollingstone.com...
While these links have no government entities backing them they are as plausible as the ones you posted.

While there very well may be a link, albeit a weak one, I don't see how one can justify a larger number of children dieing of preventable diseases instead of a small number of children developing a nonfatal, but certainly grave, condition.

Mariella

Non fatal?

Come on girl !!

dont be just repeating the things you read your text books.

Being a medical person Mariella, you should have known better than to make such claims.

Half of the Britich doctors fear MMR vaccines and don't vaccintate their children.

Vaccines have caused deaths in children.

Even Tony Blair does not give vaccines to his kids.

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2001/01/12/nmmr12.xml

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2001/01/21/nmmr121.xml

www.telegraph.co.uk.../health/2006/02/13/nmmr12.xml

news.scotsman.com...

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2001/01/21/nmmr221.xml

news.bbc.co.uk...

By the way, nice name.





[edit on 21-6-2006 by mr conspiracy]

thank you Loam!

YES! this is all about silencing the opposition...that is the only reason for it.




edit to include url:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

sorry...just HAD to post this discussion...lets not fool ourselves about the MMR vacccine...

and sorry bsl4doc...I am not convinced
can you do your absolute best to convince me?


[edit on 21-6-2006 by NJE777]

Originally posted by mr conspiracy
Non fatal?

Come on girl !!

Autism is not fatal

Half of the Britich doctors fear MMR vaccines and don't vaccintate their children.

Absolute rubbish.

Vaccines have caused deaths in children.

How many? Any idea how many lives they save?

Even Tony Blair does not give vaccines to his kids.

You know this how? Blair refused to give any details of his childrens medical history to the press to protect their confidentiality. I presume you are a personal friend and that's how you know?

Father,


I didnt say Autism is fatal or non fatal.

Mariella said vaccines are non fatal.

She is our young budding MD on this forum, who only repeat official lines.

You might want to check the links given above.

also here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



but if you want to discuss anything here then thats fine by me.




[edit on 29-6-2006 by mr conspiracy]

OK, one final question: don't you think that tracing autism to a single shot is a bit hard, when many vaccines are administered within a short period of time?

could it be that by 'leaking' an alledged connection between MMR (thi(o)mer(o)sal free) and autism, we're expected to lose credibility by embracing the notion? i mean if the industry knows it's TM and needed to buy time, why not send people off on a tangent? seems mighty easy when you have the media at your disposal, doesn't it?

mercury info taken from the skunk works forum