MMR jab and autism - new link

[patch2006uk]

The OP meant no harm. It was an honest mistake and she was just trying to be helpful. I will always vacinate my children against this. My children have been all vaccinated and none of them are autistic.

I don't think anyone is blaming the OP really. I'm certainly just frustrated that the media is allowed to peddle lies and untruths that affect public health so significantly. This thread is actually quite good-the links that have been shared are really interesting and if someone was having doubts, they'd hopefully get some accurate info from it

 

[PeanutBean]

There are very real reasons to be concerned about vaccinations. Every vaccination carries a risk of encephalitis for example. But those risks are extremely small and should be compared with the risks of the diseases themselves together with the likelihood of transmission. The herd immunity is an important concept but there are parents who do not feel they would take that small risk for the benefit of the population as a whole. There's no right or wrong but collectively our individual decisions do make a significant difference to others, for better or worse.

My oldest nephew is autistic. It was clear he was born with it. We were told that a good paediatrician can spot it very early on as autistic babies apparently don't develop the usual interest in faces. From this individual case we get the feeling it is a metabolic disorder that manifests with the characteristic mental signs. My nephew has a ketotic disorder and I think this kind of thing is usual for people with autism. Interestingly my sister's other two kids have both had bad reactions to their vaccinations. One has been in hospital with it. Not life-threatening reactions obviously or I doubt she would have completed their vaccination courses (which she has).

 

[TropicalFruit]

I shared this link a little while back, bunch of good information: https://www.thesmokingjacket.com/lifestyle/vaccination-debate

 

[angel2010]

When choosing a pediatrician for Carter, I asked what he thought of vaccines and he said that if I wasn't going to vaccinate, then I should choose a different pediatrician.

 

[tootsies]

Perhaps I can shed a little light into the known causal factors of Autism.
My degree was First Hons. in Human Genetics and I worked in Great Ormond Street for a while as a Clinical Cytogeneticist (diagnosing genetic disorders in pregnancy based on indicative factors noted at ultrasound scans resulting in CVS or Amniocentisis). I also had to spend half my time as a genetic counsellor, reporting back the results to parents in laymen's terms and counselling them through the repurcussions (sp?)
(I since changed careers, trained as a secondary teacher of Science and then moved on to where I am now, a special needs teacher in an ASD Unit within a mainstream school - the genetics job was so depressing).

I saw a lot of diagnosis of Autism in my career as a Geneticist. Yes, there are known genetic components, namely genes identified on chromosomes 7 and 17, but Autism is known as a 'multifactoral' disorder. It can be both genetic and environmental, or either alone. Hence the huge spectrum we see that is defined by ASD. A PCR screen for the missing gene can show that this is the cause, or slight asphyxiation at birth can be noted as the only unusual factor in the child's development. The problem is, the nature of ASD means a lot of parents will not offer their child to testing programmes to try and understand the disorder more thoroughly - can you imagine sending your 3 year old ASD child for a blood test to run a gene screen to create a database for reference? It is EXTREMELY difficult in the field of science to research a huge spectrum disorder with so many causal factors.

One thing for definite, there is no link between MMR and autism. Yes, you can say 'but it hasn't been DISPROVED, either' all we like, but there has never been a case where a link is indicated. In a sad way, the Dr Wakefield study brought it to the forethought of every scientist in the field - a spotlight affect. Therefore, MMR and Autism is perhaps one of the most prolific research areas in the world to date. With the spotlight shining, there is still no reported link. This speaks volumes to me.

Out of interest Pinklightbulb, is your OH also against separate immunisations done privately? There is certainly no link there and your child will be safe.

 

[WW1]

The concerns about the perceived MMR / autism link wont die whilst old media articles are being re-hashed about it (No offence to the OP as I'm sure she didn't do it on purpose).

This simply wont go away and it is completely flawed. Thanks to previous posters who have quoted the Ben Goldacre stuff - it really is worth reading.

The trouble with the media and science is that most journalists are NOT scientists and therefore don't seem to be able to identify the difference between a valid, reliable study and a complete crock of poo! Of course, add that to the fact they want to sell papers and bingo! Scare stories ahoy.

It makes my blood boil that a) The daily fail can print this and get away with it and b) that so many people read it and believe it verbatum. All media is biased in one way or another and people really need to read newspapers with a critical eye!

Sorry - rant over

 

[PeanutBean]

WW1 I work as a science communicator and as a professional group we regularly argue long and hard about why science is so consistently badly reported. Certainly journalists who are not specialists is science are a part of the problem, particularly when the topic comes to the forefront and is dealt with more current affairs reporters rather than within the science pages. There are also issues with scientists as poor communicators; the brevity of press conferences; journalists who don't further research; and headline writers who simply get the context all wrong.

In this case Wakefield engineered the situation so completely that it took the world by storm. Even with the extra research that has consistently shown no link and his being entirely discredited (in the UK at least) the depth of parental fear continues to propagate the myth. It does seem astonishing that it could still be going on like this but we only need to consider climate change to see it's not an isolated case where science is concerned.

 

[WW1]

WW1 I work as a science communicator and as a professional group we regularly argue long and hard about why science is so consistently badly reported. Certainly journalists who are not specialists is science are a part of the problem, particularly when the topic comes to the forefront and is dealt with more current affairs reporters rather than within the science pages. There are also issues with scientists as poor communicators; the brevity of press conferences; journalists who don't further research; and headline writers who simply get the context all wrong.

In this case Wakefield engineered the situation so completely that it took the world by storm. Even with the extra research that has consistently shown no link and his being entirely discredited (in the UK at least) the depth of parental fear continues to propagate the myth. It does seem astonishing that it could still be going on like this but we only need to consider climate change to see it's not an isolated case where science is concerned.

I agree wholeheartedly. I also think that science teaching in schools should concentrate more on identifying what a scientific study really means and how to weed out the valid from the nonsense. I think we're still too heavily focused on remembeing facts rather than understanding the scientific process.

There are no easy answers I suppose. All we can do is try to dispell the myths when they arise. Your job sounds really interesting by the way!

 

[JaniceT]

Totally agree with the media thing. Popular belief not so long ago was that the world was flat. So publicity goes a long way. Science is not fact. It is an accepted belief until proven otherwise.

 

[PeanutBean]

Oh yes definitely. The skill of critical analysis should be in with the three Rs! Even following a scientific career it wasn't til near the end if my degree that I really began to understand the scientific process and that even a peer reviewed published paper can have over-extrapolation in its conclusions or flaws in its methodology. Often it is the media taking the results wildly out of context though as they love a 'new cure for cancer' story.

In science teaching it is so tricky though. All the science in society stuff is supposed to be teaching that science literacy aspect but everyone jumps on it saying it's dumbing down. Can't win!

Thanks. My job is interesting though this particular one I've been in for nearly 5 years now so hoping for a change soon! I want to get back to my marine biology specialism, maybe work on coastal stewardship type projects rather than the general sci com I do now. You might be interested in the ASE if you don't already know about them.

 

[pinklightbulb]

tootsies: My OH is against all varations of the MMR whether done separately or as an all-in-one. As I've said above thread, he knows it is genetic, but believes it was triggered by the vax as the timing between the jab being given and the sudden regression he and the mother noticed was around 48 hours. He thinks that if he does carry the autism gene, he doesn't want to risk *anything* triggering it in Eamon, and feels that it is too much of a risk to give it to him because of the circumstances last time around with his first boy.
If Eamon turns out with autism without the vax, as I said, OH will know he is wrong but I really don't want that to be the case just to 'prove' to him the vax has no effect. I would rather not give the MMR to Eamon if it gives him peace of mind while Eamon is not showing any signs and has never of becoming autistic. If it doesn't happen, OH may well think he was onto something about the vax being responsible for his first son, but there is no harm in that to me. (And I can't stress 'TO ME' enough, I really can't.) It won't matter either way if Eamon remains OK, will it? If not, well, I was right and he was wrong but that is very petty to me.

 

[patch2006uk]

tootsies: My OH is against all varations of the MMR whether done separately or as an all-in-one. As I've said above thread, he knows it is genetic, but believes it was triggered by the vax as the timing between the jab being given and the sudden regression he and the mother noticed was around 48 hours. He thinks that if he does carry the autism gene, he doesn't want to risk *anything* triggering it in Eamon, and feels that it is too much of a risk to give it to him because of the circumstances last time around with his first boy.
If Eamon turns out with autism without the vax, as I said, OH will know he is wrong but I really don't want that to be the case just to 'prove' to him the vax has no effect. I would rather not give the MMR to Eamon if it gives him peace of mind while Eamon is not showing any signs and has never of becoming autistic. If it doesn't happen, OH may well think he was onto something about the vax being responsible for his first son, but there is no harm in that to me. (And I can't stress 'TO ME' enough, I really can't.) It won't matter either way if Eamon remains OK, will it? If not, well, I was right and he was wrong but that is very petty to me.

Just to let you know there aren't any concerns over the separate vaccines. Dr Andrew Wakefield himself even has the patent for a single measles vaccine! (conflict of interests, eh doc?)

 

[Katt]

If Wakefield has a patent for the single vaccine, surely that is reason enough to avoid it?

 

[patch2006uk]

If Wakefield has a patent for the single vaccine, surely that is reason enough to avoid it?

Well quite. Although if your concern is the autism link (however unfounded) then a vaccine from the man who started the whole nonsense off should at least be safe from a dailyfail smear campaign!

 

[pinklightbulb]

That is interesting, I didn't know that. Just FTR, OH knows this Dr. was struck off the register for this study. He knows it was flawed, but from his own experience, can't get away from the coincidental timing. That is what made his mind up, not the study or anything.

 

[JaniceT]

I have delayed some vaccines, opted out of some 'optional' vaccines (there are hundreds of optional vaccines by the way), had a few on schedule and definitely delaying MMR for after 2 years or opting out if baby still does poorly after his 3rd dtap. It's really up to a parent on how and what to do. I believe every child is special and vaccines should be catered to them based in individual weight, immunity levels, allergic reactions, etc.

 

[Ozzieshunni]

Has the op even commented again? Seems silly just to post something controversial and leave. Maybe it was done on purpose to cause drama.

 

[pinklightbulb]

^ Was just starting to wonder that myself....

 

[WW1]

Has the op even commented again? Seems silly just to post something controversial and leave. Maybe it was done on purpose to cause drama.

I don't think this was the case but if it was it hasn't worked - I think this thread has been very civil given the nature of the topic!

 

[Ozzieshunni]

Has the op even commented again? Seems silly just to post something controversial and leave. Maybe it was done on purpose to cause drama.

I don't think this was the case but if it was it hasn't worked - I think this thread has been very civil given the nature of the topic!

Never said it wasn't.