MMR & autism Not just bad science but also falsified

[Deleted User]

poet123 wrote: »

From the research I have read it seems to be underdeveloped immune systems i.e babies and young children that could have issues, not adults.

Do you have any references from this research? What journal is it from?

GlasweJen

Also are there any statistics about babies who are born to mothers who receive an MMR in pregnancy? Does the foetal immune system get over loaded causing these babies to have a higher incidence of autism than the general population?

[Deleted User]

Here's one to scare you.. someone wrote a paper linking increased use of Paracetamol in children (rather than aspirn) to autism.. ooh scary

Good P. "Did acetaminophen provoke the autism epidemic?" Altern Med Rev. 2009 Dec;14(4):364-72.
Link to PDF: http://www.altmedrev.com/sobi2.html?sobi2Task=dd_download&fid=5

So come on pop-scientists with your baseless hypothesis, what is your take on this?

[Deleted User]

Here's another paper to think about:

Hilton S, Petticrew M, Hunt K. "'Combined vaccines are like a sudden onslaught to the body's immune system': parental concerns about vaccine 'overload' and 'immune-vulnerability'.". Vaccine. 2006 May 15;24(20):4321-7

Abstract
The recent controversy surrounding the safety of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) has heightened parents' concerns about the safety of vaccines, and led some to believe that giving vaccines in a combined form may 'overload' children's immune systems. However, to date no studies have been published examining how British parents conceptualise the notion of 'immune-overload' or how they relate this concept to their own children. Eighteen focus groups were conducted with parents between November 2002 and March 2003. The literature on vaccine decision-making suggests that parents base their immunisation decisions on two key risks: those posed by the diseases, and those associated with the vaccines aimed at preventing those diseases. Our study suggested that for some parents a third factor plays an important role, namely their assessment of the ability of their child's immune system to 'cope' with the challenge of combined vaccines, or to fight the disease. We conclude that although there is no scientific evidence that supports parents' fears about combined vaccines causing 'immune-overload', policy makers need to recognise these concerns if they are to successfully persuade parents that combined vaccines are safe.

PDF Link to full article: http://www.hnehealth.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/62496/ParentalVaccineDecisionMaking.pdf

The issue with the MMR is far more to do with the publics attitute and understanding of science than anything else.

Here's a challenge - find a scientific paper documenting 'immune overload'.

poet123

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Do you have any references from this research? What journal is it from?

They are all in the other threads, but from memory it was cited in a recent court cases won in the US for MMR vaccine damage.

Just done a quick google and this is a report in the NS re the case and it mentions the underlying mitrochondrial link.

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/09/family-win-15-million-in-autis.html

GlasweJen

As mitochondrial DNA is always passed down from the mother does that mean that only people with mothers with autistic traits will develop autism if they get an MMR?

[Deleted User]

poet123 wrote: »

They are all in the other threads, but from memory it was cited in a recent court cases won in the US for MMR vaccine damage.

Just done a quick google and this is a report in the NS re the case and it mentions the underlying mitrochondrial link.

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/09/family-win-15-million-in-autis.html

That's a link to a news article about a court case. There's nothing scientific there. They won't even say why the US government decided this one case (out of 5000) to make a settlement.



Not a very good reference. The most recent relevent article i can find is this one:
Shoffner J et al. "Fever plus mitochondrial disease could be risk factors for autistic regression. J Child Neurol. 2010 Apr;25(4):429-34. Epub 2009 Sep 22.

Sorry, can't find the PDF, abstract here: http://jcn.sagepub.com/content/25/4/429.short?rss=1ssource=mfc

[Deleted User]

GlasweJen wrote: »

As mitochondrial DNA is always passed down from the mother does that mean that only people with mothers with autistic traits will develop autism if they get an MMR?

Since autism is a 'spectrum' and not a disease, it's highly unlikely that's a valid hypothesis.

poet123

[FONT=&quot]http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/ABELL.ZELLER073008.pdf

This is another link to the pdf detailing the supreme court decision on another case, a bit longwinded but the bottom line was that the burden of proof had been met.

Re the Poling case, the detail of the case has been "sealed" for the pre requisite number of years for official state secrets. One has to wonder why.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307095/Family-win-18-year-fight-MMR-damage-son--90-000-payout-concerns-vaccine-surfaced.html

Above is a link to a UK case recently won on appeal.


[/FONT]

melancholly

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Here's another paper to think about:

Here's a challenge - find a scientific paper documenting 'immune overload'.

seriously, don't bother. it doesn't matter how much proof from genuine valid studies, from mulitple countries, with all different funding sources you can get, there are people who won't believe you.

indeed, as said in this thread, since you can't prove a lack of an association, just a failure to find one. by that logic we should throw all available money into trying to find the association again, because of anecdotal evidence! the lack of any association in any study should be proof; but it won't be accepted.

how one single event can trigger a spectrum of disorders (which range from social awkwardness through to being unable to communicate and live independently) is unclear. there is no plausible causal mechanism, there is no correlation, but it will (and already has is only a few pages on this thread) descend into government coverup and a reminder of thalidomide (which was a valid treatment untested in a pregnant population, so entirely different but let's not let facts get in the way.

Wakefield will always be seen by some as fighting for the parents - after all, he was helping them fight a legal case so he was. anyone with other views will be seen as bowing to some other agenda.

i admire your efforts, but don't expect to convert anyone!