Andrew Wakefield found to have faked research on vaccines/autism. Murder?
You know those annoying crazes and hysterias populations go through? Like the measles vaccination/autism scare? Well, it turns out that the World's Biggest Scumbag, Andrew Wakefield, has basically brought measles back from the realm of depression-baby scare stories, single-handedly, for a little personal fame.
THE doctor who sparked the scare over the safety of the MMR vaccine for children changed and misreported results in his research, creating the appearance of a possible link with autism, a Sunday Times investigation has found.
Confidential medical documents and interviews with witnesses have established that Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients’ data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition.
The research was published in February 1998 in an article in The Lancet medical journal. It claimed that the families of eight out of 12 children attending a routine clinic at the hospital had blamed MMR for their autism, and said that problems came on within days of the jab. The team also claimed to have discovered a new inflammatory bowel disease underlying the children’s conditions.
The results of "Doctor" Wakefield's precious little shennanigans?
Despite involving just a dozen children, the 1998 paper’s impact was extraordinary. After its publication, rates of inoculation fell from 92% to below 80%. Populations acquire “herd immunity” from measles when more than 95% of people have been vaccinated.
Last week official figures showed that 1,348 confirmed cases of measles in England and Wales were reported last year, compared with 56 in 1998. Two children have died of the disease.
Hahaha stupid fucking humans.
So, anyway, I'd like to suggest that the British government haul Wakefield up on two counts of murder, 1290 cases of attempted murder, and one case of being a gigantic douchebag.
Am I out of line, here? I mean, his malicious acts led to two deaths and 1290 additional life-threatening situations, right? And this wasn't a MISTAKE in research, it was outright fraud.
EDIT: Forgot to add the link:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683671.eceDoesn't sound like he had any good intentions.:(
Definate douchebag.
Murderer?
Inject him with the measles.
Inject him with the measles.
Oh, something tells me HE'S had the vaccination. You know, before his horrific "discoveries".
I'll take "Kick him in the cunt" for $500.
I have friends who have bought into this wholesale.
There are people on this board who are anti-immunisation, MMR scare or not.
And I have heard many, many mothers on TV, in radio interviews and in person who swear blind that their children changed completely, the day after receiving the injection. And who claim that the Government pushing the GPs to use MMR as opposed to separate injections was along the lines of the Nazis experimenting with concentration camp prisoners.
He didn't really need to push people very hard.
Saddam has WMDs. Nothing has changed. One can think logical or one can entertain emotions. Childhood leukemia created by electric wires? Same people easily deceived by Rush Limbaugh also believed that leukemia myth. It’s not hard to think logically. And yet so many so hate their computer as to plug it into a surge protector. So many automatically believe myths rather than first asking 'why'.
And yet so many so :question:hate:question: their computer as to plug it into a surge protector.
:unsure:
2 deaths from measels?
how many less from SIDS?
Saddam has WMDs.
I'm going to start calling you "the six degrees of WMDs."
No subject - no, make that
no subject is more than six degrees from WMDs.
Not saying you are wrong, mind you, just saying.
Why? [SIZE="1"]do I keep reading them.[/SIZE]
2 deaths from measels?
how many less from SIDS?
Do you have a peer-reviewed study showing a link between MMR vaccinations and SIDS?
nope.
I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere. I just appear to be too dense to appreciate it.
Enlighten me?
I'm going to start calling you "the six degrees of WMDs."
Whenever a discussion is about people who don't think logically - who want to be scammed - then no better example is 'Saddam had WMDs'. The ideal example of people who just *know* despite facts.
An MMR myth could not happen to anyone who learned from the 'Saddam had WMD' lie. A lie always cited when people believe their emotions rather than reality. No better example of how many will deny facts to entertain emotional bias.
I will take full responsibility for any of the myths I choose to beleve in.
bites tongue - move along
I will take full responsibility for any of the myths I choose to beleve in.
Like the American Government blew up the Twin Towers?
There was an article on the news last night about a town just north of Brisbane where I live which has a less than 66% immunisation rate and is soon to be considered dangerous for tourists (which is where the town makes its money from) because there's likely to be outbreaks of measles and whooping cough, both of which are making a comeback thanks to generally lower levels of immunisation in the community.
This is a dangerous game people are playing with their childrens lives.
ETA: Damn liberal pinko hippies!
I have friends who have bought into this wholesale.
Yeah, you're right in the middle of cuckoo-land. Your region is sending out emissaries to bamboozle the masses with this hogwash.
If you would quit watching their movies and TV shows and buying their albums, these wackjobs wouldn't have quite such a far reach.
Do it, do it for the children. Quit sending your entertainment dollars to LA. Send them directly to me instead, and I promise to entertain you.
I wonder if the people who choose not to immunise their children realise how much infant mortality has decreased since immunisation became mainstream.
Sorry, but this issue really bothers me because if diseases like measles and whooping cough, not to mention polio and hepatitis become 'ordinary' illnesses again, where does that leave the babies who are only just begining their immunisation schedule? The very young and the very old are always most susceptible to these diseases and if they're more prevalent in society, then who is going to start popping off because of them?
If you choose not to immunise your child, you're not only being irresponsible as a parent, you're being socially irresponsible also.
Flame away.
A friend of mine's baby got whooping cough a week before the scheduled immunization was to occur. She spent over a week in the hospital on a feeding tube. It is serious shit.
I wonder if the people who choose not to immunise their children realise how much infant mortality has decreased since immunisation became mainstream.
Sorry, but this issue really bothers me because if diseases like measles and whooping cough, not to mention polio and hepatitis become 'ordinary' illnesses again, where does that leave the babies who are only just begining their immunisation schedule? The very young and the very old are always most susceptible to these diseases and if they're more prevalent in society, then who is going to start popping off because of them?
If you choose not to immunise your child, you're not only being irresponsible as a parent, you're being socially irresponsible also.
Flame away.
What she said. If it is such a bad thing I think we need to stop trying to immunize all those Africans./sarc
From
The Spectator
The campaign against Wakefield in the Sunday Times has been led by journalist Brian Deer.
What the Sunday Times did not report was that the GMC investigation into Wakefield was triggered by a complaint from...Brian Deer, who furnished the allegations against him four years ago. He has thus been reporting upon the hearing into his own complaint. Since when has a reputable paper published a story by a reporter who is actually part of that story himself -- without saying so – and who uses information arising from the disciplinary hearing which he himself has instigated and which is investigating allegations he himself made in the first place?
Wakefield has issued a detailed refutation of Deer’s allegations
Vaccines and Autism: The Unending Story (
Newsweek)
The first question for the court, then, was whether Bailey had Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis, and its answer was yes, based on medical records. It then addressed the question of whether the MMR vaccine can cause ADEM, and here there was precedent: Two previous vaccine cases, in 1994 and 2001, had led to decisions that ADEM can be caused by natural measles, mumps, and rubella infections, as well as by measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines. In Bailey’s case, the court ruled, the MMR had indeed caused his Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis.
For the final step, the court wrestled with whether Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis can cause pervasive developmental delay, and whether it caused Bailey’s. (Just to reiterate, the issue was PDD, not autism. As the court said in its decision, Bailey “more likely than not suffers from PDD, and not from autism.”) Here, the medical literature leaves plaintiffs much more room than does the literature on classical autism. The government argued against the claim that ADEM can cause pervasive developmental delay, of course, acknowledging “that Bailey currently suffers from PDD, and that the MMR vaccine can cause ADEM" but disputing "the biologic plausibility [of] whether ADEM can lead to PDD.”
...
The government agreed to a lump sum of $750,000, and an annuity that will provide as much as $70,000 to $100,000 a year for Bailey once his parents are not able to care for him.
Well, you know, I don't have all the facts because I still haven't been able to review the case files myself. But my understanding is that the child has a -- what we think is a rare mitochondrial disorder. And children that have this disease, anything that stresses them creates a situation where their cells just can't make enough energy to keep their brains functioning normally. Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you're predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism.
link
The director of the CDC hasn't been able to review the relevant case files (ie.
Hannah Poling)... she must be busy with more important stuff... but still admits that vaccines can cause 'autism-like symptoms'
Yes, but only insofar as the vaccine gave them an illness, and they were genetically predisposed to develop this life-altering condition in response to an illness somewhere along the line.
My friend's daughter has Type 1 diabetes. Genetically, she was a ticking time bomb. It was pretty much a guarantee that she was going to get it at some point. It happened that when she was four, she got hand-foot-and-mouth disease, a pretty typical disease as far as kids go, and it triggered the shutdown of her pancreas. But it's entirely possible that a vaccine when she was younger could have triggered it too. Would the vaccine have "caused" her diabetes in that case?
I don't know Clod.
I would think it ethical for the CDC/FDA to know the answer to that before mandating vaccines though...
I don't know Clod.
I would think it ethical for the CDC/FDA to know the answer to that before mandating vaccines though...
Mandating vaccines stopped epidemics that caused far more serious loss of life, disabilities, etc.
You want to stack up these alleged "vaccine victims" with, say, the number of people paralyzed with Polio since we started recording cases?
Or the number of people that died of smallpox vs the number of people who died from the vaccine (nobody denies the occasional fatality from the vaccine in that case)?
Wow, we went right from screaming MURDERER!! about a researcher who wanted some safety studies done on shit they want to inject into healthy children - to well yeah, they can fuck people up but still....
You don't think no longer shitting where we drink, throwing sewage and garbage into the streets, drinking from the same cup hanging off the water bucket, not bathing ever much less washing the hands, doctors not washing their hands... none of these things made a difference? It was all the vaccines? Antibiotics knocking out secondary infections... nothing?
The polio vaccine being successful means it's all good eh? Whatever comes down the pike is just awesome because no one ends up in an iron lung anymore. 36 injections before age 2 and more in the works because if a little is good, more is better right? Besides, the government would never let anything hurt us.
It amazes me though, the different reactions to "vaccines might cause harm to some people" vs. "you might get the flu".
Wow, we went right from screaming MURDERER!! about a researcher who wanted some safety studies done on shit they want to inject into healthy children - to well yeah, they can fuck people up but still....
Because only sick kids get polio or measles.
Or words to that effect.
Wow, we went right from screaming MURDERER!! about a researcher who wanted some safety studies done on shit they want to inject into healthy children - to well yeah, they can fuck people up but still....
You don't think no longer shitting where we drink, throwing sewage and garbage into the streets, drinking from the same cup hanging off the water bucket, not bathing ever much less washing the hands, doctors not washing their hands... none of these things made a difference? It was all the vaccines? Antibiotics knocking out secondary infections... nothing?
The polio vaccine being successful means it's all good eh? Whatever comes down the pike is just awesome because no one ends up in an iron lung anymore. 36 injections before age 2 and more in the works because if a little is good, more is better right? Besides, the government would never let anything hurt us.
It amazes me though, the different reactions to "vaccines might cause harm to some people" vs. "you might get the flu".
Do you understand the differences in prevention and treatment between bacterial and viral infections?
about a researcher who wanted some safety studies done
But there's a difference between doing safety studies even if they're unpopular, and faking the results of those studies.
A journalist said he faked the results of his study (not a safety study) - none of the other co-authors have said he did or it wouldn't have taken a journalist and 11 years to raise the alarm.... I'll wait for more info before jumping on the MURDER!! bandwagon myself.
Thx for representin' teh cuckoo bandwagon, tho. We can't have our fist-shaking threads too insular.
[SIZE="5"]jinx[/SIZE] [COLOR="White"]. . . [/COLOR] [SIZE="3"]I just called you a cuckoo[/SIZE]
I know and I'm planning to kill myself in a few minutes because I am so hurt by your callousness. I hope you're happy now.
Right after you kill yourself, do you mind if I have sex with your body while it's still warm?
No but you can hump my leg.
Right after you kill yourself, do you mind if I have sex with your body while it's still warm?
My GOD you are sooo insensitve.
You insensitive bastard! I lost my still warm body on 9/11.
Yea, well I lost my Virginity on 9/11 and I still never got it back. MIA!
I'm SO glad Flint is 1500 miles away from my house.
Don't say that, dude. We would totally party.
i know.....i was just playing the straight man for your little joke about fucking my wife's dead body.
BOY....it sounds a LOT worse when I say it
Should we expect people to have some kind of negative reaction to what I said?
Should we expect people to have some kind of negative reaction to what I said?
Don't count on it.
Should we expect people to have some kind of negative reaction to what I said?
Actually, I think you've laid the groundwork well enough that you can pretty much get away with saying pretty much anything, and people won't think any less of you.
Then the time has come. For me to stand up in the middle of a church and say "GOD IS A NIGGER FAGGOT!"
Only if you do it at the end of a song, and give a resounding "ba-dum-CHSSSSSH" on your kit after you say it.
I'm gonna swing a boom arm over, and, during the middle of a song, insert that statement in the form of soulful gospel-style background lyrics.
Do you think I could pass it off--have people assume they misheard me during the general noise of the whole band playing? Would they confront me?
I'm gonna swing a boom arm over, and, during the middle of a song, insert that statement in the form of soulful gospel-style background lyrics.
Do you think I could pass it off--have people assume they misheard me during the general noise of the whole band playing? Would they confront me?
If we are your only audience you have little to worry about.
I'm gonna swing a boom arm over, and, during the middle of a song, insert that statement in the form of soulful gospel-style background lyrics.
Do you think I could pass it off--have people assume they misheard me during the general noise of the whole band playing? Would they confront me?
Does the term crucify ring a bell?
The nigger faggots will be pounding the nails. :thepain3:
Then the time has come. For me to stand up in the middle of a church and say "GOD IS A NIGGER FAGGOT!"
http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=17227
for those of you that missed this thread
In 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist at London's Royal Free Hospital, published a study in the prestigious medical journal Lancet that linked the triple Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine with autism and bowel disorders in children. The study - and Wakefield's subsequent public statements that parents should refuse the vaccines - sparked a public health panic that led vaccination rates in Britain to plunge.
Wakefield's study has since been discredited, and the MMR vaccine deemed to be safe. But now medical authorities in the U.K. have also ruled that the manner in which Wakefield carried out his research was unethical. In a ruling on Jan. 28, The General Medical Council, which registers and regulates doctors in the U.K., ruled that Wakefield acted "dishonestly and irresponsibly" during his research and with "callous disregard" for the children involved in his study. (See the year in health 2009.)
After the finding, Wakefield, who now heads an autism research center in Austin, Texas, described the decision as "unfounded and unjust." He added that he had "no regrets" over his work.
The General Medical Council, which will now decide whether to revoke Wakefield's medical license, highlighted several areas where Wakefield acted against the interest of the children involved in the 1998 study. It criticized Wakefield for carrying out invasive tests, such as colonoscopies and spinal taps, without due regard for how the children involved might be affected. It also cited Wakefield's method of gathering blood samples - he paid children at his son's birthday party $8 to give blood - and said that Wakefield displayed a "callous disregard for the distress and pain the children might suffer."
The panel also criticized Wakefield for failing to disclose that, while carrying out the research, he was being paid by lawyers acting for parents who believed their children had been harmed by the MMR jab.
The panel's ruling follows a refutation of Wakefield's research from the scientific community. Ten of 13 authors in the Lancet study have since renounced the study's conclusions. The Lancet has said it should not have published the study in the first place, and various other studies have failed to corroborate Wakefield's hypothesis. (Watch a video on the story of an uninsured woman.)
Despite this, the effects of the media frenzy surrounding Wakefield's research - a study found that MMR was the most written about science topic in the U.K. in 2002 - continue to be felt in Britain.
Vaccination rates among toddlers plummeted from over 90% in the mid-1990s to below 70% in some places by 2003. Following this drop, Britain saw an increase in measles cases at a time when the disease had been all but eradicated in many developed countries. In 1998, there were just 56 cases of the disease in England and Wales; by 2008 there were 1,370.
Link*shrug*
There are many responses, clarifications and salient points that could be offered for the UK ruling and several other factually incorrect points in that article.
But I've been instructed by my therapist to stay the fuck out of these threads, as they are "negatively affecting my ability to cope" with my shitty life right now. So I'll have to defer to jinx indefinitely.
[size=1]No worries classicman, it's not about you. Just bowing out for the time being.[/size]
I'm so sorry clobber... I wish there was something I could do to help. I really do.
It's cool. I just need to practice keeping my mouth shut and keeping my distance from the topic. There's a light at the end of the tunnel, I just gotta get through it.
I'm in your corner.
let me know if i get in the way.
You're in my way. Does that count?
In 5 posts this thread took me from heartfelt sympathy to lol'ing.
sheesh reading the cellar is sometimes like being bipolar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
@ clodfobble - I'm sorry you are having a tough time. :(
Things will get better.
Clod has mucho fortitude, but she is allowed to let it all get to her at times. Im glad you are seeking the help of a therapist, Clod. Being able to let it all out and having someone else try to sort it out can be reassuring even if it doesn't really answer the problem at hand. Although I was rooting for you all the way, I think staying away from this fight for a while is an excellent idea. Having to defend your side of the fight ad nauseam is quite fatiguing.
[size=1]The best part is that this therapist, by complete coincidence, turned out to have a previously-autistic teenage daughter who has recovered from about 95% of her symptoms through biomedical treatments. If I believed in signs... [/size]
You're in my way. Does that count?
*puts his butt on dana and farts*
[size=1]The best part is that this therapist, by complete coincidence, turned out to have a previously-autistic teenage daughter who has recovered from about 95% of her symptoms through biomedical treatments. If I believed in signs... [/size]
Wow.
There's tons of them out there. They're just too tired of fighting; they figure they saved their kids and that's enough. That's basically what she's telling me to do, but I've only agreed to it for the short term for now.
They announced on the morning news that some study that had linked autism to some kind of vaccines, they had changed their mind and now want to take that back. This was a short blurb on the local morning news. I don't have any details other than that.
That was classicman's link. The Lancet, the journal that originally published the study, is retracting it.
I saw that on the morning crawl on MSNBC, Flint.
Wait what They retracted it already?
The journal is retracting the original 1998 paper.
A complete dissection of every issue surrounding the ruling, written by a man with both a PhD and a JD. It's long, but of course if this situation were simple enough to be explained by a run-of-the-mill AP article, it wouldn't have remained controversial for the last 11 years.
The way this story broke (and has continued to break) in the 90s has been damaging to everyone, on both sides. For a start we now have 'sides'. The initial story frightened thousands of parents into not vaccinating their children and we've consequently seen an exponential rise in dangerous childhoos illnesses, which had previopusly been all but wiped out. The way the rebuttal occurred (not helped by the shortcuts the original researcher took) has led people who should be looking at it dispassionately to batten down the hatches and 'take a side'. Anybody attempting to look into it properly, is labelled a crackpot and effectively becomes a pariah in scientific and medical circles.
It shouldn't be a matter of 'sides'.
There are two 'needs' at play here and there is no logical reason for them to be mutually exclusive.
There is a 'need' to prevent the high levels of infant mortality caused by such illnesses as measles and Rubella. Tackling that has to happen at a massified, societal level: vaccinations work against this need.
There is also a 'need' to ensure that individual children are not adversely affected by those vaccinations.
Now we have a situation where the vaccination is suspect enough, to enough people, that levels of vaccination have fallen below the 'critical mass' required for them to be effective at a mass level. And at the same time, all research into the individual effects of vaccination seems stymied.
The same people who advocate mass vaccination should be at the forefront of investigating how to ensure it is safe at an individual level. mass vaccination is beneficial at a mass level; but if yours is the child who is harmed so that we as a society can reduce infant mortality; that's pretty cold comfort.
The initial story frightened thousands of parents into not vaccinating their children and we've consequently seen an exponential rise in dangerous childhoos illnesses, which had previopusly been all but wiped out.
Keep in mind that (in the US) we do not vaccinate for typhus, typhoid, TB, and one of the biggest pre-vaccine era killers: scarlet fever. Yet, their prevalence decreased right along with the diseases we do vaccinate for.
The measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, and as the CDC points out, it reduced measles deaths from about 400-500 per year to 1 or 2 - although there were epidemic years in 1970-72, 1976-78, and 1989-91.
According to the Vital Statistics of the United States, in the 63 years prior to the measles vaccination introduction, death rates declined from 13.3 per 100,00 to 0.2 per 100,000.
They used to blame the epidemic years on vaccine failure. Now they blame it on Wakefield.
Whooping cough in NJ
All of the infected children had been vaccinated, but Hunterdon officials said the immunity to the vaccine can wane between ages 7 and 9 and that there is no licensed vaccine for children in that age group.
From the BBC news site in 2008:
Measles cases in England and Wales rose by 36% in 2008, figures show.
Confirmed cases increased from 990 in 2007 to 1,348 last year - the highest figure since the monitoring scheme was introduced in 1995.
Health Protection Agency experts said most of the cases had been in children not fully vaccinated with combined MMR and so could have been prevented.
Immunisation expert Dr Mary Ramsay said the rise was "very worrying", adding measles "should not be taken lightly".
More than 600 of the 2008 measles cases occurred in London, where uptake of the vaccine for MMR - measles, mumps and rubella - is particularly low.
Public confidence in the triple MMR vaccine dipped following research - since discredited - which raised the possibility that the jab may be linked to an increased risk of autism.
It led to some parents opting to pay privately for single vaccines.
Across the UK, 84.5% of two year olds have been immunised with their first dose of MMR.
But by age five, when children are recommended to have a second dose, the latest uptake figures are 77.9%.
There are still many children out there who were not vaccinated as toddlers over the past decade and remain unprotected
Dr Mary Ramsay, Health Protection Agency
Q&A: Measles
Since 2005, the number of cases of measles has been rising year on year. There have also been sporadic outbreaks of mumps in recent years.
This isn't a case of an 'epidemic year' this is a progressive rise in the number of cases: year on year. Particularly noticeable in areas where take up of vaccines is at its lowest.
Health Protection Agency experts said most of the cases had been in children not fully vaccinated with combined MMR and so could have been prevented.
It led to some parents opting to pay privately for single vaccines.
??
Originally Posted by jinx
Keep in mind that (in the US) we do not vaccinate for typhus, typhoid, TB, and one of the biggest pre-vaccine era killers: scarlet fever. Yet, their prevalence decreased right along with the diseases we do vaccinate for.
The measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, and as the CDC points out, it reduced measles deaths from about 400-500 per year to 1 or 2 - although there were epidemic years in 1970-72, 1976-78, and 1989-91.
According to the Vital Statistics of the United States, in the 63 years prior to the measles vaccination introduction, death rates declined from 13.3 per 100,00 to 0.2 per 100,000.
Please keep in mind that typhus and typhoid are often water born diseases. Strides in public health have reduced the incidence of these diseases considerably. TB is in fact on the rise again, and many strains are now immune to the drugs once used to treat them. This is true here in the US and even more so in the third world. Finally, doctor report the drop in scarlet fever to be in part due to better diagnostics now available. Measles and diptheria among others were often misdiagnosed as scarlet fever.
Strides in public health have reduced the incidence of these diseases considerably.
Yes I agree. I'm a big fan of sanitation and nutrition. :)
@ Jinx: the option to use singlew vaccines is available but not on the NHS. One of the problems with it has been that parents have started out getting the single vaccines, but not completed the programme.
Personally, i think if the single vaccine were available on the NHS and parents better supported in that option we could have saved a lot of trouble. As it is the medical profession are so completely wedded to the idea that the MMR vaccine is safe and does not cause autism that all parents who have concerns ion that area are treated as if they're an over-credulous, superstitious awkward squad.
It was specifically the MMR vaccine that was linked to autism originally, I believe.
Let me know if anyone wants the full article.
[COLOR=green]Published online May 24, 2010[/COLOR]
PEDIATRICS (doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2489)
[SIZE=-1]Articles[/SIZE]
On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes
Michael J. Smith, MD, MSCE, Charles R. Woods, MD, MS
Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky
Objectives
To determine whether children who received recommended vaccines on time during the first year of life had different neuropsychological outcomes at 7 to 10 years of age as compared with children with delayed receipt or nonreceipt of these vaccines.
Methods
Publicly available data, including age at vaccination, from a previous VaccineSafety Datalink study of thimerosal exposure and 42 neuropsychological outcomes were analyzed. Vaccine receipt was defined as timely when each vaccine was received within 30 days of the recommended age. Associations between timeliness and each outcome were tested in univariate analyses. Multivariable regression models were constructed for further assessment of the impact of timeliness on neuropsychological outcomes after adjustment for potential confounders. Secondary analyses were performed on a subset of children with the highest and lowest vaccine exposures during the first 7 months of life.
Results
Timely vaccination was associated with better performance on 12 outcomes in univariate testing and remained associated with better performance for 2 outcomes in multivariable analyses. No statistically significant differences favored delayed receipt. In secondary analyses, children with the greatest vaccine exposure during the first 7 months of life performed better than children with the least vaccine exposure on 15 outcomes in univariate testing; these differences did not persist in multivariable analyses. No statistically significant differences favored the less vaccinated children.
Conclusions
Timely vaccination during infancy has no adverse effect on neuropsychological outcomes 7 to 10 years later. These data may reassure parents who are concerned that children receive too many vaccines too soon.
Would love to see one that compares vaccinated kids to unvaccinated kids, instead of differently vaccinated kids if you come across one.
Wakefield's observations replicated:
Japanese study
NJ Medical School studyPublicly available data, including age at vaccination, from a previous VaccineSafety Datalink study of thimerosal exposure and 42 neuropsychological outcomes were analyzed.
I wonder if that's one of the several studies done by the "researcher" who has now disappeared along with $2 million dollars of the CDC's money. Re-using the same (bad) data isn't my idea of ethical methodology.
I wonder if that's one of the several studies done by the "researcher" who has now disappeared along with $2 million dollars of the CDC's money. Re-using the same (bad) data isn't my idea of ethical methodology.
Well you'd be able to find out by looking at the bibliography.
Hey, you guys wanna hear something funny that happened to me? Just today, I got an email from a family that I've gotten to know very well over the last year. The bittersweet news they shared is that they are moving away to California, because they just got back the full neuropsych evaluations on their sons--and the verdict is that both boys are 100% fully recovered from autism, not a single hint of a symptom. So they're packing up and starting over in a new place, where no one knows their boys ever had a diagnosis.
If I get the time, maybe I'll draw up a cartoon about it so you can understand what I'm saying.
Cartoons are fine, but I only believe stuff if you get that movie trailer guy, with the voice... you know, he'd be all like "IN A WORLD... WHERE NUCLEAR BOMBS... AND JIM CARREY" etc. etc. "ONE MAN..." and then put the part there where you tell me what's what. You get that guy with the voice on there and I am SOLD.
Oh, and Clod, I'm sorry about how the nuclear bombs and the Jim Carreys made the terrorists win against your email friends who are moving to California where all the crazies live.