Slashdot Mirror
Study Confirms No Link Between MMR Vaccine and Autism
An anonymous reader sends word of a new study (abstract) into the relationship between the MMR vaccine and kids who develop autism. In short: there is no relationship, even for kids at high risk of developing autism. From the article:
[Researchers] examined records from a large health insurer to search for such an association. They checked the status of children continuously enrolled in the health plan from birth to at least 5 years old during 2001 to 2012. The children also had an older brother or sister continuously enrolled for at least six months between 1997 and 2012. "Consistent with studies in other populations, we observed no association between MMR vaccination and increased ASD risk among privately insured children.We also found no evidence that receipt of either 1 or 2 doses of MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD among children who had older siblings with ASD." ... [An accompanying editorial said,] "Taken together, some dozen studies have now shown that the age of onset of ASD does not differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated children, the severity or course of ASD does not differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated children, and now the risk of ASD recurrence in families does not differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated children."
Suddenly, you're born and you're literally being assaulted by every germ around you, with probably thousands of them being encountered by your immune system every day.
Are you attempting to agree with me? It is hard enough to come into the world and survive the first few months after birth. Do we need to be given a Hepatitis vaccine the moment you are born. No check for the baby's condition, no testing for health, just pump them with the vaccine is what we should be doing? You want to tell me that this relatively new procedure has nothing to do with childhood illnesses which have skyrocketed since put into practice?
Lets play the Socratic method. Ask your doctor this question: Would he recommend that you get any type of surgery while you have bronchitis? (I just picked a random common illness) If your doctor says "Is it life threatening?" breath a sigh of relief. If they say "Sure" then you should find a new doctor that understands the human body quite a bit better.
Simple fact, our immune systems are not always running at 100% efficiency. Another simple fact, everyone is slightly different. Stuffing 8-12 diseases into every single kid on their 2nd birthday, in a single sitting, is pure lunacy. That would be like claiming that every single patient with strep should have no problem undergoing a tonsillectomy. No, not everyone could withstand that procedure, and any MD with any level of training would be able to tell you this.
How are a *few* shots (7 may seem like a lot to you) going to compare against thousands of things all hitting the naive immune system of an infant all at once, starting from birth, every day?
Absolutely, kids are already inundated with viruses, diseases, and bacteria. Their bodies are learning about how to fight those things without people adding severe diseases and viruses to their system. Adding 1 new disease like we did for 40+ years seemed to be a reasonable number. Hell, when I had the MMR vaccine our Doctors asked us about our general health _before_ giving the vaccine. I will say, as with Polio and Small Pox, most people handled 3 assuming they were in good health.
The CDC entry on Varicella points to the MFR page, it's really too bad that people can't seem to do any of their own studies any longer, but I digress. Vaccine MFR.s all recommend that you are in reasonable good health prior to getting any vaccine. Are you going to tell me that every Walmart and Grocery store pharmacist is checking this with people before they give any vaccines? Or, are they mass pumping these things without checking because they get paid very well when they do? Many of the Doctors are in the same boat, because if they don't push the influenza vaccine (as one example) they can be reprimanded or face disciplinary action at certain medical facilities.
How about the fact that ALL vaccines are produced differently, with different ingredients and attenuation solutions. Some are made from animal and insect parts, others from metals, others from fetal or cadaver parts. That is certainly not to claim that "vaccines" are bad, but that not everyone will react to vaccines which are ALL made and contain DIFFERENT materials.
The simple fact is that In less than 30 years we have had a minimum 312% increase in childhood vaccinations. Autism rates have gone up just a hair under 300%, again according to the CDC. We read those two numbers clear as day, but we are not allowed to look at vaccines as a possible cause? Are you kidding me?
And you moderators censoring should be ashamed of yourselves!
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Try actually searching the CDC site, and you can find some amazing information. Your page is quite different from this CDC page. Funny that attempt to call me a shill yet completely ignore the disclaimer on these pages. How did you miss the fact that the date of your information is from 2008, and provided by Merck. You do know that there are numerous manufacturers of different types of varicella vaccine don't you? And you only cover one.. shame on you.
The page I linked above has this:
(This information taken from MMRV VIS dated 5/21/10. If the actual VIS is more recent than this date, the information on this page needs to be updated.)
Amazingly you find yet more information on that link, I know.. research is hard.
This CDC page says 4 in 1 million. or 1 in 250,000 which is still how many times higher than 100 in 300 Million? I'm not able to find the 1 in 30,000 number at the moment, but I don't need to do so to prove that the odds of death are higher with the vaccine.. for a non-lethal and non-debilitating virus. Sure, I'll retract the 1 in 30,000 and replace it with 1 in 250,000 and you still have 24 times greater chance of death than with the virus (not considering how improvements in medical treatments would change the highest ever rated mortality rate for chicken pox.)
I await your retraction of false allegations and apology for shitty research..
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I picked on the Varicella vaccine for a reason, namely that I have done some hefty research on this. The only misinformation is yours, stop reading the first thing you find and believing it's the gospel. CDC's web site is full of many studies, some more recent than others. So lets clear up two of your completely false points
First, The varicella vaccine does NOT make you immune to shingles. That is a fairy tale, and if it's not on Snopes yet it should be. Manufacturers don't make the claim, and CDC states flat out that Shingles is not impacted by the vaccine what so ever.
Next, there is no such thing as immunity to chicken pox. People who have had the vaccine series still have a 10-20% chance of infection (depending on which study you read on the CDC's site). People who received the live vaccine will amazingly be able to transmit and have all of the chicken pox symptoms with a milder version, and still be infected by a more severe case due to natural exposure. The whole reason for the newer series of both varicella and MMR is that they were only 60-80% effective (again, choose a study). They "believe" that with a series of 3 there is an effective rate of 90%.
Yeah, pushing dubious vaccines is bad. I brought up some legitimate questions which you simply dismissed without doing ample research. "it's certainly not dangerous" is an outright lie. Here I quickly found that the odds for a "severe" reaction to MMR (not MMRV) is 1 in 250,000. Compared to the severe complications to the raw varicella virus, it s certainly more dangerous. I'll certainly be fair and retract the 1 in 30,000 (looks like the CDC removed that link) and go with the 1 in 250,000. My points are all still valid because the vaccine is exponentially higher risk.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
At least seven _additional_ SEVERE diseases/viruses. This is the part I really find baffling from you vaccinate everything all the time people. No, it's not just 7 vaccines. It's 7 MORE nasty things than the body normally has to deal with, including a whole lot of various ingredients that the body has to process in terms of attenuation solutions.
These are not mild and easy to fight diseases and viruses which is why people figured it was a good idea to make vaccines for them. Today, we are giving kids 312% more vaccines than we did 25 years ago. How many long term studies do we have on the impact of vaccines in that time? Only what the manufacturers are giving to the FDA and CDC for the most part.
Again, if you think it's just 7 shots you are either a shill or insane. The Monsanto executive that claimed that vaccines are so safe you could get 10,000 vaccinations in a day. Yet he never accepted bets from a few people to get just 100 or 1000 in a day. Similar to the the guy from Monsanto that claimed Roundup was so "not harmful" you could drink a gallon and it would not harm you, yet he would not take a sip when the interviewer took him at his word and offered a glass.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
"But Chicken Pox doesn't have a treatment drug!!"
Calimine lotion is really not a mystery, and has been around since at least the 1960s when I was a kid and caught chicken pox.
Largest number of "serious" cases on record in the US for chicken pox is 9,000 with a population of about 300million (According to the CDC and US Census data). The highest mortality rate is 100 out of that 9,000 in the same year.
Surely I could agree that _some_ drugs for treatment are cheaper than _some_ drugs for prevention, but not all of them.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.