All sorts of arguments are thrown around to persuade parents that shots threaten their children with autism. I'd like to discuss 4 of the commonly repeated concerns, 3 flawed...and 1 that I think has merit.
1) Too many shots can overwhelm a child and cause autism. No!
Babies get more vaccines today than 30 years ago, but if you think that means more things are injected into their young bodies...you'd be wrong! That's because immunizations today are much more purified than those of the past.
For example, in 1980, the DPT shot (Diphtheria/Pertussis/Tetanus) was made from a soup of blendarized bacteria (over 1000 different illness particles - antigens - all mixed together). And, the polio vaccine had live virus that actually protected children by triggering a minute case of...polio! Today, our modern DPT vaccine is highly purified, containing only 3-5 bacterial antigens and the polio shot has absolutely no live virus.
Actually, the current trend to give kids more shots is a win-win for them. They win because they're protected from many more illnesses and because they have fewer antigens put into their bodies.
But, some still worry, "Can too many shots overwhelm a baby's immature immune system?" That idea is pretty close to a baby urban legend.
The immune system is a superb multitasking, fighting machine. Every day, babies are bombarded by thousands of threats: irritating pollen; colonic microbes; bacterial invaders from the skin, eyes, nose, mouth; viral swarms; offending dietary proteins; damaged cells; even tiny, little cancers. The immune system's magnificent ability to protect against many, mild attacks at one time is exactly why most babies tolerate several shots at once with no reaction whatsoever. (In fact, a new theory suggests that allergies and asthma may be on the rise in part because we have made the world so clean it doesn't exercise a baby's immune system enough!)
2) Shots hurt the brains of extra-sensitive children. No!
Each of us has special sensitivities. Some have peanut allergies...some get lots of strep throat....and a very, very few get serious reactions to vaccines. I wish we had a test to detect which infants are susceptible to severe measles or big vaccine reactions, but no such test exists.
The good news, however, is that shot risks are tiny compared to the risks of full-blown illness. For example, influenza and chicken pox hammer the immune system 100-1000 times harder than the impact of the flu or pox vaccines. While most kids breeze through the chicken pox shot, even a mild case of real pox can weaken a child's immunity for weeks to months and lead to ear infections, pneumonia and, rarely, toxic shock syndrome. (And, it can often land an adult in the hospital!)
There is one special case of possible vaccine susceptibility that made headlines last year and became a major new focus for those who claim vaccines cause autism. A 19-month-old child developed autism after getting 5 shots. But - and this is a huge "but" - unlike most autistic kids, this one child also has a rare medical problem - Mitochondrial Disease (MD).
Recently, vaccine avoiders have floated the theory that perhaps many healthy looking kids have hidden MD. They suggest that it may be the combination of vaccines plus hidden MD that is triggering autism in so many seemingly normal children.
But, the research suggests that this is unlikely to affect more than a handful of kids. Here's why:
MD is rare (1 in 5-10,000 children). A Portuguese study found ~93% of autistic children had no evidence of MD (and even that 7% figure has yet to be confirmed). In a recent study, scientists from Harvard and Johns Hopkins could find only 25 children with both MD and autism. And, these kids had serious problems rarely seen in most cases of autism (like, delayed walking, acid reflux, liver disorder, severe fatigue, etc).
Fourteen of these kids seemed to be developing normally then suddenly deteriorated into autism during toddlerhood. But only 1/14 (7%) got worse right after shots. (Had 2 or 3 or 5 kids gotten worse after the shots, one could make the argument that children with MD are at increased risk for getting autism after vaccinations. However, as I mentioned in part 1 of this blog, 7% is very close to the number of cases one would expect to be diagnosed right after shots...just by chance.)
Another dramatic finding of this study argues against a link between MD and the national rise in autism incidence: classic autism spectrum disorder affects many more boys than girls (3-9 times more boys!)...but children with Mitochondrial Disease + autism are evenly split between the genders.
While it remains to be proven that children with MD are more vulnerable to shots, there is no doubt that they are super-vulnerable to illness. In other words, MD kids who skip shots can get very sick, very fast it they catch a vaccine preventable disease like influenza or pneumonia.
3) Doctors push risky shots on children to make more money. Please!
This accusation is as appalling as it is ridiculous. Pediatricians labor through 23 years of education; wake at all hours to help worried parents; and desert our own families on weekends and holidays to rush to the hospital to care for sick babies.
In fact, a greedy doctor wanting more money would actually discourage parents from giving their children shots...not encourage it! Why? Because doctors make more money caring for sick kids - needing repeat office visits - than caring for the well.
In truth, the only reason doctors cajole, beg and pressure parents to immunize their children is because we want to protect them - and other children - from the pain and suffering of preventable infections.
I agree that there are too many ties between doctors and big pharmaceutical companies. This must be stopped because it creates the appearance of conflict of interest and the real potential of collusion. However, the record of organized medicine is reassuring. Over the past 30 years, doctors have rejected many vaccines when concerns arose that they were not effective enough or caused unacceptable side effects.
4) Shots can be delayed. MAYBE...but only those risking your child's health.
This is one of the most critical issues facing parents: Are shots a personal choice or a civic duty?
As a pediatrician, I recommend all vaccines, but I suggest parents think of shots as falling into 2 different groups: 1) those given primarily to protect your child, 2) those protecting your child and your neighbors' children.
The first group of shots stops infections like, influenza, rotavirus, hepatitis A, chicken pox and hepatitis B. They help your child but don't give great protection to the community. That is either because the illnesses are very common (spread quickly through your neighborhood even if your child gets the shot) or hard to spread (difficult for your child to give it to others). (Note: Older kids, teens and adults are at risk for hepatitis B. It has caused thousands of cases of liver failure and cancer and so all citizens should eventually get this vaccine.)
The second group of shots stops infections that threaten your child and your community (your neighbor's baby, the elderly, chronic disease sufferers, etc.). These shots include, whooping cough, meningitis (Hib), pneumococcus (Prevnar) and measles. They miraculously halt diseases that are so contagious just one cough, one airplane flight or one germy doorknob can spread them like wildfire through your town.
I believe giving the first group of shots is a parent's personal choice because the suffering you risk is mostly limited to your child and family. Skipping the flu shot, for example, may cause your child to be one of the 36,000 Americans who die from influenza this year, but it probably won't stop a flu outbreak (although it may help to reduce it).
However, giving the second group of shots is an important civic responsibility., because delaying them creates a serious public health risk. By immunizing at least 95% of children with these shots we create "herd immunity" that can totally halt the spread of deadly epidemics in our communities. Herd immunity stymies the spread of disease the way that frequent rain keeps lightening strikes from starting raging forest fires.
Some doctors may fairly argue which vaccines should go into which groups, but the important point is that the shot schedule has some flexibility...it is not written in stone. In fact doctors have repeatedly tweaked this schedule to make it safer and more effective (for example, over the past 30 years, the measles vaccine was pushed from 9 months to 12 months...and now is recommended to be given as late as 15 months of age). However, the second group of vaccines is crucial if we are to protect children in our communities who are too young to get their own shots. Parents who skip these shots may not mean to harm others, but their action significantly increases the risk of avoidable suffering and death to innocent children.
For over 10 years, a huge amount of passion and debate about the cause of autism has focused on vaccines. But recently a totally new suspect has surfaced that warrants investigation as a potential autism trigger. In the last installment of this 3-part blog, I'll discuss the worrisome compounds known as...endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs).
Dr. Harvey Karp is a world renowned child development expert and America's most read pediatrician. Creator of the bestselling DVDs and books, The Happiest Baby on the Block and The Happiest Toddler on the Block, his work has literally revolutionized our understanding of the needs of young children.
The Happiest Baby teaches how parents can calm even the fussiest babies in minutes...or less...and help any baby sleep an extra one to three hours per night. The Happiest Toddler teaches a new way to communicate with children eight months to five years of age that can quickly prevent 50-90 percent of tantrums and boost a toddler's patience and cooperation in just days!
Dr. Karp’s work is taught in hundreds of hospitals, clinics and military bases across the US and has been featured times on shows like Dr. Phil, Larry King Live, The View and Good Morning ... no wonder the NY Times celebrated his work by proclaiming "Roll over Dr. Spock!"
For more information about Dr. Karp and his work, please visit: www.happiestbaby.com or follow him on facebook
The Happiest Baby On the Block: Super Soothing Sleep Sounds
The Happiest Baby On the Block DVD
The Happiest Toddler On the Block
How can this be explained?
I believe that the reports of identical twins both having autism are always comparing twins who have both been immunized. Are there any identical twins besides the ones I listed above where both of them have not been vaccinated and have autism, or one has been vaccinated and one has not, and they both have autism?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-karp/cracking-the-autism-riddl_b_221202.html
I haven't read Dr. Karp's books so I will have to take your word for it. I do know the answer to a couple of your questions though.
You do pose some interesting questions. I would like to offer a few answers.
"Maybe do all the shots in one injection on one day?" - Multiple vaccinations are necessary to increase the number of people protected. No vaccine can create immunity in 100% of all people. For example the measles vaccine creates immunity about 95% of the time. Since measles is so easily transmitted that remaining 5% was enough for the disease to keep spreading. When the second shot was added, immunity increase to the point that the disease could no longer spread.
The same is true for other vaccines. Each time you receive the vaccine your chance of getting immunity from it goes up. If you get all of them at once you only get once chance to get immunity. In other words, two doses of measles vaccine at the same time is like getting just one dose. It would probably be safe but it would not prevent the disease well enough.
The HepB vaccine - This is not just an adult illness. If a mother is chronically infected, then the baby is very likely (about 40% chance) to become chronically infected. Without the vaccine, about 10% of children born to infected mothers will eventually die from chronic HepB infection. It does not cause death right away though. The child lives long enough to grow up and have children of their own (and possibly infect them too). If the vaccine is given within 72 hours of birth, the chance of chronic infection drops to almost zero.
Certainly most women are not infected. Women can be tested for chronic infection, but there is still the chance of false negatives for the test. A false negative to a HepB screening would put the baby at a serious risk. This is However, it is common enough that
I do agree that our children are more important than our own lives (I would also say that about my grandson). This is why I look at the whole picture and realize that the vaccination schedule is the safest way to go. Sure the is honest debate to be had regarding the schedule. Personally though, I think that debate should be on the large scale by people who have the ability to properly assess risks. It would be a shame for a parent to think that, for example, DTaP vaccine should be delayed and then lose their infant to whooping cought.
The issue is not vaccine safety, or M.D. collusion with pharmcos, but vaccine efficacy.
Since vaccines have never been shown by science to prevent disease, why would anyone get a vaccine for themselves or their children?
In my article "Into the Labyrinth: Discovering the Truth about Vaccination," I look at the history of the fraud of vaccination, including the elaborate coverup of vaccine inefficacy and dangers:
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/IntotheLabyrinth.htm
And here's my $200,000 to M.D.s to drink their own poisons:
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/$75,000VaccineOffer.htm
In health,
Jock Doubleday
Director
Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc.
A California 501(c)3 Nonprofit Corporation.
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/links.htm
director@spontaneouscreation.org
This is the kind of ridiculous statement that honest scientists and doctors constantly have to combat. The efficacy of vaccines is even more proven than evolution and almost as proven as gravity.
Multiple polio vaccine trials consisted of over 1 million children and the vaccine was consistently shown to be very effective at preventing the disease. Add to those results the fact that the polio virus, which had existed unchanged for at least a century (probably many centuries), was completely eradicated within a few years of implementing the vaccine. It was not sanitation. It was not diet. It was the vaccine. This kind of proof almost never exists in science, but it exists for polio vaccine efficacy.
At this point vaccine critics usually say, "Vaccinated children still got polio. That proves it didn't work". What those people fail to realize is that no vaccine can prevent infection in 100% of people. Typically, vaccines prevent infection for about 90% of people, give or take a few percent. Enough are protected, however, that the disease eventually dies out.
Stories similar to polio can be told of other vaccines. All vaccines on the schedule have been shown in clinical trials to be effective. Follow up epidemiological studies have confirmed efficacy.
Anyone can call themselves an expert, put up a web page, write articles, etc. It doesn't make their claims true.
So you do believe that vaccines cause autism.
I thought so.
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/ContractPartA.htm
Among the requirements:
1. Submitting to and paying for psychological evaluation using a doctor chosen by Doubleday. The participant does not get to see the "results".
2. Participant has to buy several antivax books!
3. Participant has to pass 2 different knowledge tests (Doubleday doesn't say what for).
4. Participant has to pay $75 per hour to Doubleday for all of his time spent on the “attempt”.
5. Participant has to pay ALL expenses (travel, etc.) for at least five television appearances with Doubleday (it appears this includes paying Doubleday’s costs).
6. Participant agrees to drink a concoction that contains ingredients THAT ARE NOT IN ANY VACCINE.
7. Participant agrees to personally answer every email sent to them on the subject for 5 years!
8. This is only "part A" of the contract. There is no indication what “requirements” are in the full contract. However, part A states that if you sign it but refuse to sign the full contract (which you haven't seen) you have to pay $5000.
There are other ridiculous requirements as well, but space is limited.
In other words this bogus "challenge" is designed to use up hundreds of hours of a doctor's time and cost them 10's of thousands of dollars. At any time Doubleday can claim that the participant did not pass one of the "tests".
"Official data have shown that the large-scale vaccinations undertaken in the US have failed to obtain any significant improvement of the diseases against which they were supposed to provide protection." - Dr. A. Sabin- Developer of the Polio Vaccine
"Many here voice a silent view that the Salk and Sabin Polio vaccine, being made of monkey kidney tissue has been directly responsible for the major increase in Leukemia in this country." -Dr. Frederick Klenner, Polio Researcher, USA
"The greatest threat of childhood disease lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunization."
-Dr. R. Mendelsohn, Author and Pediatrician
Did You Know...
No good information there.
All fruit from a poisonous tree.
They're from a whole other crazy website.
My bad.
The "quote" by Sabin is a typical urban legend nonsense. There is no record of Sabin ever saying or writing anything like it. The only place this quote is found is on the most extreme vaccine critic and anti-vax sites. Nobody can find the supposed source of the quote. The most likely source of this is the criticism Sabin had for Salk's vaccine. Salk's vaccine was more safe. Sabin's vaccine was more effective. Today we use the more safe version.
To describe Dr. Frederick Klenner as a "polio researcher" is misleading. Klenner local doctor who experimented on his patients. He was a proponent of using vitamin C to cure any disease. His polio "research" (http://www.orthomed.com/polio.htm) consisted poorly designed "experiments" of giving several children DOZENS OF INJECTIONS of vitamin C over several days, after which they recovered in about the same amount of time as children normally would). The above quote by Klenner is referenced on only a handful of anti-vax sites.
Robert S. Mendelsohn M.D. was a typical antivax doctor. He was actually against much of mainstream medicine. I am guessing the above quote (which is provably false) is one of his less extreme statements.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090625202008.htm
CHOP is funded by big pharma.
As opposed to the 36 researchers who analyzed 7000 or so samples and put every step of their research, their methods, and their results online for anyone to read and critique, and backed up their decisions and judgements with 56 citations of relevant previous work that's also accessible through PubMed and libraries, topped off with a declaration of their funding sources and statements of impartiality.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000536
Science dissing makes me sad.
From the actual publication:
Funding: The Autism Genetic Resource Exchange is a program of Autism Speaks and is supported, in part, by grant 1U24MH081810 from the National Institute of Mental Health to Clara M. Lajonchere (PI). This work is supported by a seed grant from Penn/CHOP Center for Autism Research, by NIH grant R01MH604687, and a NARSAD Distinguished Investigator Award (MB); by Pennsylvania Commonwealth HRFF and P20-GM69012 (JK); by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services (1 Z01 AG000949-02 to AS); by a fellowship from the Tourette Syndrome Association (BSA); by an Autism Center of Excellence Award (P50HD055784-01 to MS, DHG, co-PI); by an Autism Center of Excellence Genetics Network grant (MH081754 to DHG); by a Research Award from the Margaret Q. Landenberger Foundation (HH); by a Research Development Award from the Cotswold Foundation (HH and SFAG); and by UL1-RR024134-03 (HH). The genotyping and other aspects of the study were funded by an Institutional Development Award to the Center for Applied Genomics (HH) from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090625133053.htm
be the first doc to take the vaccine challange... you could win $200,000 beans-give some to charity.It could be fun.
All you have to do is drink a glass of the vaccine preservatives equal in adult dose to what an infant gets.
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/IntotheLabyrinth.htm
Yes You Can!
I posted this earlier but it must have been deleted for some unknown reason.
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/$75,000VaccineOffer.htm
In addition, a person would have to be crazy to drink something provided by an organization that cites whale.to and vaclib.
It's important to note three other issues.
First, without vaccination, the illnesses that we've worked so hard to combat will return, as we are seeing now with measles. Remember that vaccine preventable illnesses have no cure and cause horrible disability and death. Do we want to return to those times?
Second, you can rest assured that no one is using any child as a "guinea pig", as one commenter put it. This isn't a live experiment going on...it's public health and disease prevention.
Finally, there is an inherent risk of side effects with any medication but that doesn't mean to not give it. The benefits of vaccinating out weight the risks of reaction, just like when you take any medication such as over the counters or an antibiotic.
Keep in mind that all parents love their kids. The issue at hand is without vaccines on board it isn't a matter of if a child will contract one of these horrible vaccine-preventable illnesses, but when.
It's fact it's not been around long & we have no idea what's up the road for these young ladies;
http://uncensored.co.nz/2009/04/20/youtube-urgent-warning-about-gardasil/
Is this one vaccine an exception to what you say?
Even main stream media has been telling us facts concerning injury & death being reported.
Death toll linked to Gardasil/'Untested' vaccine;
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=68454
Gardasil vaccine deaths in UK « End of Men/HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed"
http://www.bing.com/search?q=gardasil+deaths&src=IE-SearchBox=IE8SRC
Vaccine Awakening: Gardasil Death & Brain Damage; CBS-TV Evening News released NVIC"
http://vaccineawakening.blogspot.com/2009/02/gardasil-death-brain-damage-national.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58004
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news57.htm
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/gardasil-vaccine-bad-medicine.html
http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/death.htm
This story is heartbreaking. Death By Lethal Vaccine Injection;
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/08/07/vaccine-death-part-one.aspx
your sources are not up to date and are incorrect.
firstly, this is not a compulsory vaccine and the debate here is about the childhood vaccine schedule (0-6 years), so therefore not relevant.
However, lets look at the EVIDENCE. The reports you link to scaremongering websites like mercola.com, do not follow up with any analysis. The data in these reports are based on 2007 information, where there were 2531 adverse reports, including 9 deaths, out of 7 MILLION doses dispensed.
Now if you actually do some research you will find that the 9 deaths that were reported to the VAERS system up until June 2008 are not actually due to Gardasil. Of these nine deaths, there were four actual deaths confirmed, several were duplicate reports and one girl turned out to still be alive. The four remaining death reports consisted of 2 women who died after suffering pulmonary embolisms and two girls who had influenza of which one died from myocarditis. The two women who suffered pulmonary embolisms were also taking birth control pills which is a known risk factor. Therefore, in the end none of the deaths could be shown to be caused or even influenced by the Gardasil vaccine.
Now, considering that the estimated cases and deaths from cervical cancer in the US for 2009 are 11,270 and 4,070 respectively, I would say that this vaccine would be a pretty effective preventive treatment.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/cervical
your sources are not up to date and are incorrect.
firstly, this is not a compulsory vaccine and the debate here is about the childhood vaccine schedule (0-6 years), so therefore not relevant.
However, lets look at the EVIDENCE. The reports you link to scaremongering websites like mercola.com, do not follow up with any analysis. The data in these reports are based on 2007 information, where there were 2531 adverse reports, including 9 deaths, out of 7 MILLION doses dispensed.
Now if you actually do some research you will find that the 9 deaths that were reported to the VAERS system up until June 2008 are not actually due to Gardasil. Of these nine deaths, there were four actual deaths confirmed, several were duplicate reports and one girl turned out to still be alive. The four remaining death reports consisted of 2 women who died after suffering pulmonary embolisms and two girls who had influenza of which one died from myocarditis. The two women who suffered pulmonary embolisms were also taking birth control pills which is a known risk factor. Therefore, in the end none of the deaths could be shown to be caused or even influenced by the Gardasil vaccine.
Now, considering that the estimated cases and deaths from cervical cancer in the US for 2009 are 11,270 and 4,070 respectively, I would say that this vaccine would be a pretty effective preventive treatment.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/cervical
The Childhood Immunization Schedule: Why Is It Like That?
http://www.cispimmunize.org/pro/pdf/Vaccineschedule.pdf
and
Questions and Answers About Vaccine Ingredients
http://www.cispimmunize.org/pro/pdf/Vaccineingredients.pdf
Infant Primates Given Vaccines On U.S. Children's Immunization Schedule Develop Biomedical And Behavioral Symptoms Of Autism
snip:
"Pittsburgh's Dr. Laura Hewitson, Ph.D., described how vaccinated animals, when compared to unvaccinated animals, showed significant neurodevelopmental deficits and "significant associations between specific aberrant social and non-social behaviors, isotope binding, and vaccine exposure."
Researchers also reported, "vaccinated animals exhibited progressively severe chronic active inflammation whereas unexposed animals did not" and found "many significant differences in the GI tissue gene expression profiles between vaccinated and unvaccinated animals." Gastrointestinal issues are a common symptom of children with regressive autism.
"
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/107994.php
Hewiston's research has never been published. This means it was never subjected to peer review. It also has serious methodological flaws. One such flaw was the size of the control group which was only three subjects. With a group that small it would be almost impossible to reach any statistically meaningful conclusion.
Most interesting is the fact that at the time of the research Hewitson was apparently a complainant in the omnibus proceedings with the "vaccine court". That isn' t proof the study is bad (the poor methods are proof of that), but it doesn't say much about the fact that I never see this disclosed when Hewiston's study is brought up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Hw-Q23S_s&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Epharmalot%2Ecom%2F2008%2F07%2Fare%2Dvaccine%2Ddefenders%2Dfor%2Dsale%2F&feature=player_embedded
Orac's statements are correct that starting an arguement with certain organizations or websites will automatically turn off some critics of vaccines.
And I don't know that that I'd even call folks like Craig, OAB, DRPike and the like vaccine critics, but advocates of increased vaccine safety who do not necessarily believe vaccinations caused the autism. You occassionally appear to be in this camp.
Another camp are those who are certain that vaccines are responsible for the autism, but still want vaccinations, increased studies, but are factual in their presentation of information (except for the certainty concerning autism) -- they dont say vaccines contain things they don't. We can call them proponents of the vaccine autism theory.