Cracking The Autism Riddle: Common Sense About Vaccines And Autism
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).
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I never heard before that vaccines could cause autism. In my personal opinion I think that's impossible because I got every vaccine the pediatrician recommended to my mom and I never showed autism or a similar disorder. Dr Joseph Humpherys disusses the latest news in the world of Autism and Pediatric Care in a video that you can watch in the next link: http://www.symposier.com/video/122/Healing-Solutions-TV-Episode-1
I met the parents of identical twin girls a week ago. One was fully vaccinated. The other one received no vaccines b/c she was not healthy enough. The vaccinated one has severe autism. The unvaccinated one has no visible health problems.
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?
Would you please show me a study where equivalent levels of aluminum injected into any animal resulted in anything less than measurable braindamage? Its been called a neurotoxin from the outset, its not supposed to be put into the veins of an infant with less than a liter of blood. Hell, its even a law that they cant put more than 25 micrograms in a liter of solution for an ADULT! so on what basis have we concluded that a newborn can handle 250 micrograms? somebody cite me that study please, thanks.
Dr. Karp, I believe you are mistaken about vaccines playing no role in the "autism epidemic." I believe we are seeing a "vaccine injury" epidemic. Please everybody, read Dr. Robert Sears book, "The Vaccine Book; Making the Right Decision For Your Child."
I am not aware that Sears offers any credible evidence that vaccines have caused an autism epidemic. It's not even clear that there is an epidemic.
Thanks
The third installment of Dr. Karp's series has been posted.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-karp/cracking-the-autism-riddl_b_221202.html
If we get the swine flu, do we still need the vaccine?
Immunizations help in preventing the disease. If you already have A-H1N1, then there is no way to prevent it.
I love Dr. Karp (not his singing) but his books Happiest Baby and Happiest Toddler. I know he's coming from a place of wanting to aide parents in feeling secure in the care of their children. But as a Parent of one 14 month old who was recently up all night with my toddler who was coughing like a seal with the croup and struggling for breath, I can tell you it's a lot easier for a pediatrician, however well motivated, to say you should give your baby the drugs they're selling then it is for the parent to agree. It seems to me that spreading the schedule is better, holding back vaccines for adult illnesses like HEP B makes sense, and pushing back on the ridiculous amount of vaccines drug companies want to sell us also makes perfect sense from a parent's point of view. My baby is more important than my life, and I'm going to question the doctors about everything they want to do to my beautiful little baby. And frankly, if the vaccines are just little attacks to the immune system which are fine, why would Dr. Karp say it's a good idea to extend the schedule at all? Why wouldn't he be advising us to truncate the schedule as much as possible. Maybe do all the shots in one injection on one day? Because it's NOT SAFE!
Part 1:
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.
Part 2:
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 relevance of the Harvey Karp's article is zero.
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
"Since vaccines have never been shown by science to prevent disease,,,"
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.
At this point a critic will usually respond with a few cherry picked facts about the polio vaccine (such as problems with the initial vaccine). This would, of course, be a tactic to try to divert attention from the fact that the vaccine was shown to be very effective in preventing disease, which was the main point of Doubleday's post.
"This kind of proof almost never exists in science, but it exists for polio vaccine efficacy"
So you do believe that vaccines cause autism.
I thought so.
Regarding that supposed “challenge”, here is one part of the contract to which a doctor must agree.
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".
Three links to your conspiracy-theory website, plus the another in your e-mail.
Chock full of useful information, like how 9-11 was Teh CONSPIRACY!!1!
And just that quickly, you have removed yourself from consideration of being taken even a little bit seriously.
"Since vaccines have never been shown by science to prevent disease...."
Are you kidding me?! Seriously, what planet do you live on?
If it gets FDA approval (and subsequent use) it has to demonstrate efficacy.
I think your statement best exemplifies the delusional state you live in.
Thanks for your input, Jock, & please forgive the insults you were met with.
Fair minded people paying attention to these discussions/debates see right through mean spirited attacks like you came under, for the distractions they are, so please don't feel bad.
They can use all information from both sides of this matter, to make their own minds up as to what's, what.
It's important we stand up to the likes of these people opposing us with their relentless agendas & have our say.
This thread's almost at a close but the next & final article Dr. Karp promised should be posted anytime soon & should prove very educational & interesting.
I hope you'll be there so you can help by adding all you have to bring to our table, Jock.
Marsha,
Really? Good information is always welcome but this Jock guy has been thoroughly rebutted and shown to be not credible, And yet, you leap to his defense, casting yourself and him as martyrs who are unfairly attacked.
Yes, we have an agenda: to keep people as safe as possible, both from preventable diseases and from having a moment's chance to believe inaccurate information.
You can ignore me all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that you are repeatedly putting out atrociously bad information that has the potential to lead to the death of people. If you think that's not going to be countered, then you're wrong on that, too.
Come on, Moffie, you can do better than this. You should want to do better than this. You seem to pick the most outrageous posters to link yourself to. Why?
http://www.naturalmom.com/vacfacts.htm
"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...
Sorry moffie.
No good information there.
All fruit from a poisonous tree.
Oops. Thought mof's quotes were from Jock's crazy website.
They're from a whole other crazy website.
My bad.
Geee. No mention of vaccines here either. Go figure!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090625202008.htm
Why would they, it's CHOP.
CHOP is funded by big pharma.
It must be nice to have no need to think. Say "Big Pharma" and your work is done.
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.
Uh huh. "Funded by big pharma". Laughable!
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.
Funny, no mention of vaccines anywhere.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090625133053.htm
And this quote from the article: "Autism is a common and heterogeneous neuropsychiatric disorder with manifestations of impaired social interaction and communication as well as repetitive behavior or restricted interest, the researchers explained. It is also one of the most heritable of all mental disorders, suggesting that genetic factors play an important role in development of the disease."
The sooner they get a swine flu vaccine the better. I've just been diagnosed with it and feel absolutely wretched!
I'm sorry! I hope you feel better soon.
Come on Dr.Karp!
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!
That sounds like a joke, JayZee, but it's for for real & here's the June 2009 update.
I posted this earlier but it must have been deleted for some unknown reason.
http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/$75,000VaccineOffer.htm
Let's see, the "offer" claims that there will be ethylene glycol in the mixture and ethylene glycol is NOT in vaccines. Considering this, I think any doctor would say no.
In addition, a person would have to be crazy to drink something provided by an organization that cites whale.to and vaclib.
Jock's challenge is a joke, and anybody who still believes it is uninformed and unserious.
Here in the states we aren't worried about swine flu. You can't die from it unless you have an underlying condition.
in your own words; "BS"
Get well soon kruddler.
Get well soon! Sorry to hear you are ill :(
Thanks for the well wishes :)
As a pediatrician, I can attest that all of us take an oath to do no harm when we graduate medical school and we continue to uphold that oath with everything we promote for the health and well being of children, including universal vaccination. Studies are clear that the vaccines are safe and that they do not cause autism. If people would think more with their minds and not their emotions, I truly believe they would start becoming more able to believe that.
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.
DrGwen, how do you explain Gardasil, if you say our children aren't guinea pigs?
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
mofmars,
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
mofmars,
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
DrGwenn,
I posted this in a different area in this discussion, but I want to make sure that you see it.
Recently, I met the parents of identical twin girls. The twins are 5 years old. One was not healthy enough at birth to receive vaccines. The other twin was vaccinated according to the U.S. recommended schedule, including the flu vaccine.
The twin who was vaccinated has severe autism. The twin who was never vaccinated has no visible health problems. How do you explain this? They have the same genes, so they should both be autistic, correct?
As a pediatrician I want to let everybody know that the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has information on immunizations that was developed and written by working pediatricians in response to what parents are asking.
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
Dr.Gil, I didn't see a report on this study at your links, just in case you might like to read it too...
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
This is not a study. It is an unpublished poster presentation. Dr. Hewitson is a petitioner in vaccine court.
Most of the vaccine critic sites don't even go near this one. "Fourteenstudies" doesn't cite it, even though they still cite Wakefield's discredited research.
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.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
