Immunizations/Vaccinations

[shetuck]

I'll have you guys know that it's next to impossible to find a hot picture of a clothed Jenny McCarthy, but I guess these things are all relative.

Don't believe me? Do a "bareback" (safe-search off) google on her.

 

[muffler dragon]

I was only saying that the "herd effect" should be taken into consideration. I wasn't saying how much weight any individual should assign to it.

Thanks to you and your information, I have had the opportunity to learn about it. I will try to evaluate it more and more as well.

I'd simply suggest that you consider what risks your child is not being exposed to because of the fact that large portions of the herd are, indeed, vaccinated. I'm not suggesting that there's a free-rider thing going on. I'm just saying that there is significant value in the network effect of mass immunization.

And that's another valid point to read, ingest, and chew on. I will admit that, on this topic, it's hard for me to see the forest for the trees. Your point of view is very much welcomed.

There are numerous factors to which autism can be attributed, many of which are much more pernicious than the exceedingly slight potential risk associated with immunizations.

I have to state that I don't know how you can quantify the risk of vaccinations as to how they MAY be linked to autism as "exceedingly slight". I've not seen anything that says one way or another. Do you have anything that states this? I would love to see the reports.

A number of those who single out vaccination are, in my opinion, looking for a scapegoat. It's a natural reaction. I might have the same reaction. Nonetheless, anecdotal evidence doesn't prove / disprove anything (no in this day and age).

I understand this. I've just not seen anything that states that the possibility is not there. Which once again brings up back to which is the bigger cause for concern. But I digress...

And it doesn't hurt that Jenny McCarthy is HAWT! Easier to get everybody's attention that way. So I say that the CDC needs to find a HAWT spokes-model as well, but that's a different debate!

It is certainly a different debate. And I would like to state that neither Jenny McCarthy nor any other celebritization of the debate has been a part of my consideration.

That's a good thing. I'm not sure the original Oregon trail blazers had such good fortune (or such good sanitation, either). Point being that our generation is deriving some measure of benefit from previous generations' willingness to immunize themselves en masse.

Quite true. I won't argue that point in the slightest. But since I've been in Oregon for only three years, I can't go much more into that anyway.

 

[muffler dragon]

Age Determination?

Shetuck:

I had a question that you and/or your wife may be able to answer. How are the ages determined for administration of the vaccines?

In some of the documentation I've read recently, I've seen 12-month, 15-month, 6-year-old, 8-year-old, and so forth. I've also had discussions with a naturopath and my child's former pediatrician regarding infant antibodies. The statement was made that infants don't produce their own antibodies for the first six months of life. These things have prompted me to wonder the following (which is tied into my initial question above):

1) IF infants can't produce their own antibodies; then what use is there to vaccinations within the first six months of their lives?
2) What would be the problem with waiting to vaccinate at 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10 years of age when the children are bigger and so forth? Has a study ever been done to determine if later ages might be more advantageous?

The age thought has come up, because I find myself less concerned about having vaccines administered to my daughter as she ages (she's six now). With that in mind, I also don't like the idea of vaccine cocktails. I would much rather a singular vaccination and then give time in between.

These are just random thoughts, but I wanted to ask.

Thanks.

 

[shetuck]

...I have to state that I don't know how you can quantify the risk of vaccinations as to how they MAY be linked to autism as "exceedingly slight". I've not seen anything that says one way or another. Do you have anything that states this? I would love to see the reports...

Link

The bolded sections are as I found them in the report.

Also, I think it's important in this particular case to bear in mind that the possible link isn't necessarily between the vaccine itself and the onset of autism, but rather the preservative that was used in them.

The committee concludes that although the hypothesis that exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines could be associated with neurodevelopmental disorders is not established and rests on indirect and incomplete information, primarily from analogies with methylmercury and levels of maximum mercury exposure from vaccines given in children, the hypothesis is biologically plausible.


Causality

There are no published, controlled epidemiological studies bearing directly on the question of whether or not thimerosal-containing vaccines could cause neurodevelopmental disorders. Two unpublished epidemiological studies were presented to the committee. The first study was a controlled epidemiological study that tested the hypothesis that certain neurodevelopmental disorders are related to exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines. The study was based on data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)?a large linked database that includes vaccination, clinic, hospital-discharge, and demographic data. The VSD, formed as a partnership between CDC and seven health maintenance organiza tions (HMOs), was initiated in 1991 and covers approximately 2.5 percent of the U.S. population.

The study was conducted in two phases. Phase I was designed to screen data for potential associations between thimerosal-containing vaccines and selected outcomes. Phase II was designed to test the hypotheses generated in the first phase. Both phases were designed as retrospective cohort studies, but the study populations differed.

Preliminary results of the Phase I analysis produced statistically significant but weak associations (relative risk ratios < 2.00 per 12.5 μg increment of mercury) between various cumulative exposures to thimerosal-containing vaccines and the following neurodevelopmental diagnoses: unspecified developmental delays; tics; attention deficit disorder; language and speech delay; and general neurodevelopmental delays. No association was found between exposures to thimerosal and other neurological disorders, including autism, or renal disorders (Stehr-Green, 2000, 2001). Re-analyses of the Phase I data were presented at the IOM committee?s meeting in July 2001, showing positive but weak associations (relative risk ratios < 2.00) with several neurodevelopmental diagnoses (Verstraeten, 2001). Although the detailed results of the re-analysis differ slightly from the original analysis, the magnitude of the associations was generally consistent with those in preliminary analysis.

The Phase II study population provided a sufficient number of cases for analysis of only two of the outcomes, ADHD and speech delays. The Phase II analysis, however, identified no significant differences in risk with the receipt of thimerosal-containing vaccines and these two outcomes; however, the small sample size limited the power of the study to detect a small effect, if it exists(Stehr-Green, 2001; Verstraeten, 2001). The committee concludes that the Phase I and II VSD analyses are inconclusive with respect to causality.

The only other epidemiological analysis presented to the committee is an unpublished ecological analysis of rates of autism during the period of increased exposures to thimerosal through the recommended childhood immunization schedule (Blaxill, 2001). Absent other controlled epidemiological analyses, ecological data are usually noncontributory to causality assessments. The case reports found in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) were uninformative with respect to causality.

Thus the committee concludes that the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between exposure to thimerosal from vaccines and the neurodevelopmental disorders of autism, ADHD, and speech or language delay.

cont'd...

 

[muffler dragon]

Link

The bolded sections are as I found them in the report.

Also, I think it's important in this particular case to bear in mind that the possible link isn't necessarily between the vaccine itself and the onset of autism, but rather the preservative that was used in them.

Thanks, Shetuck. I believe that I HAVE read that elsewhere.

However, I came upon a statement yesterday that was rather interesting in this regard:

Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ...[Pediatrics. 2003] - PubMed Result

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative in vaccines, is a risk factor for the development of autism. We examined whether discontinuing the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines in Denmark led to a decrease in the incidence of autism. DESIGN: Analysis of data from the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register recording all psychiatric admissions since 1971, and all outpatient contacts in psychiatric departments in Denmark since 1995. PATIENTS: All children between 2 and 10 years old who were diagnosed with autism during the period from 1971-2000. OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual and age-specific incidence for first day of first recorded admission with a diagnosis of autism in children between 2 and 10 years old. RESULTS: A total of 956 children with a male-to-female ratio of 3.5:1 had been diagnosed with autism during the period from 1971-2000. There was no trend toward an increase in the incidence of autism during that period when thimerosal was used in Denmark, up through 1990. From 1991 until 2000 the incidence increased and continued to rise after the removal of thimerosal from vaccines, including increases among children born after the discontinuation of thimerosal. CONCLUSIONS: The discontinuation of thimerosal-containing vaccines in Denmark in 1992 was followed by an increase in the incidence of autism. Our ecological data do not support a correlation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and the incidence of autism.

*emphasis mine.

Edit: I may be reading the abstract wrong, but it appears to be saying that the thimerosal MAY not be a factor.

 

[shetuck]

Thanks, Shetuck. I believe that I HAVE read that elsewhere.

However, I came upon a statement yesterday that was rather interesting in this regard:

Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ...[Pediatrics. 2003] - PubMed Result

*emphasis mine.

Edit: I may be reading the abstract wrong, but it appears to be saying that the thimerosal MAY not be a factor.

Yeah... it's all good (for me). I realize that connection hasn't been proven or disproven. I also realize that the CDC and the NIH aren't always the end-all-be-all in these types of things to the extent that they're largely concerned with large-scale public health and welfare issues. While I doubt that anybody thinks even low doses (I'm not talking homeopathic level "low") of mercury is a good thing, in either case, I don't think this thread is about the connection between thirmerosal and autism. Though, iirc, the North American cases presented in the public media area based on the use of thirmerosal in the vaccines.

And don't ask me what "large-scale" means...

I was just trying to back up my "exceedingly slight" comment about the incidence of autism connected with vaccinations.

 

[Taosman]

Many of us who have elderly parents see how drugs are pushed on them by doctors with too close ties to drug companies. It's a fact that the drug companies run the FDA, self policing doesn't work so some skepticism of drugs and vaccines is warranted. Do your own research and make an informed decision before using any drug. You have an obligation to your children and elderly to make the best, informed decision for them. The last Flu vaccine is a great example of a vaccine that was pushed/sold and was totally usless against that version of the Flu. Ask yourself why was it pushed on us?

 

[BUCKYLE]

It's a fact that the drug companies run the FDA...

 

[Taosman]

Conflict of interest? "Charged with protecting the public, the FDA gets most of its drug approval budget from pharmaceutical companies."
http://www.sptimes.com/2007/07/01/Worldandnation/Companies_run_trials_.shtml

 

[buckeyefool]

. It's a fact that the drug companies run the FDA,

I'm gonna need to see a link from a reliable source on that. Of course since it is "fact" I am sure you will have no problem providing it.

 

[Taosman]

We could go into the whole FDA funding thing, but it would lead to politics and since this is not a "political" forum feel free to go start that discussion in the Poli Forum.

 

[MaxBuck]

Many of us who have elderly parents see how drugs are pushed on them by doctors with too close ties to drug companies. It's a fact that the drug companies run the FDA, self policing doesn't work so some skepticism of drugs and vaccines is warranted. Do your own research and make an informed decision before using any drug. You have an obligation to your children and elderly to make the best, informed decision for them. The last Flu vaccine is a great example of a vaccine that was pushed/sold and was totally usless against that version of the Flu. Ask yourself why was it pushed on us?

Regardless of your political position or feelings about the FDA, you must be aware of the differences between flu vaccination and vaccination against such diseases as polio, diphtheria and tetanus. With flu we are not seeking herd immunity, but rather lessening of individuals' susceptibility to viral infection. I don't care two hoots about whether people get flu shots; that's purely an individual choice, unlike the others.

 

[purple]

This is one interesting twisted walk, lol.

I have to say the more I learned by having dogs I had to decide on as well as my own experiences with shots the less I like them. I don't vaccinate myself for flu. I do get the others as far apart as legally possible. My dogs get rabies and Lyme and a couple others as required by law. I didn't give them all at once, I took three visits to get my puppy through the ton they wanted. He got microchipped twice as well so that influenced the decision as well.

I think there is alot of over medicating "just in case" and not because we really need them.

 

[Redhawk]

AMNews: March 2, 2009. Landmark ruling finds no link between vaccine and autism ... American Medical News

Washington -- Vaccine supporters rejoiced Feb. 12 when judges in a special federal court rejected the theory that the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine combined with the preservative thimerosal caused the disabling autism that affected three children and their families.

The three had served as the petitioners in test cases representing about 5,000 families who sought damages from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The families believed vaccines, particularly the MMR vaccine administered to their children as infants, caused the disorder.

But the judges, known as special masters, ruled that the vaccine was not to blame. In doing so they lined up on the side of a massive amount of scientific evidence gathered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Institute of Medicine that also failed to find a link between the vaccine and the disease. The special masters made clear the petitioners could not receive compensation through the VICP.

The court sifted through 5,000 transcript pages and more than 700 pages of posthearing briefs. They reviewed 939 medical articles for one case alone -- well beyond the 10 typically reviewed in a vaccine action. Physicians provided testimony on both sides of the issue.

Special master George L. Hastings chastised the physicians who testified in support of the autism-vaccine link. He wrote that the family whose case he heard had been "misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment."

After studying the evidence, Hastings wrote in his decission that the reports and advice given to the family by physicians who proposed a causal connection between their child's autism and the MMR vaccination "have been very wrong."

The decision was welcomed by physicians who view vaccines as one of the greatest public health tools.

It was "enormously, enormously helpful," said Paul Offit, MD, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and an outspoken critic of the anti-vaccine movement.

Although science already had cleared the vaccine of blame, the ruling adds important weight, he said. "I think the public views courts as independent reviewing agencies."

Most physicians are optimistic that the blame directed toward vaccines will now begin to dissipate and attention will focus on autism's other possible causes. Genetic research, for example, is beginning to yield clues.

"Autism is a heart-wrenching condition," said Joseph M. Heyman, MD, chair of the American Medical Association's Board of Trustees, "and the upheaval felt by parents whose children suffer with autism is understandable -- as is their search for answers."
Continuing the search for a cause

"We need ongoing research into the causes of autism, but cannot let unfounded myths keep us from giving our children the proven protection they need against infectious diseases," Dr. Heyman said.

Peter Hotez, MD, PhD, is president of the Sabin Vaccine Institute at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., and the father of a 16-year-old daughter with autism. He was surprised it took the court so long to reach a decision, because "there is no plausible mechanism by which these vaccines could cause autism." The proceedings had begun in 2007.

"It is quite clear this is a genetic condition associated with abnormalities in neural migration and brain structure," he said.

The decision could mark the "beginning of the end" of the movement to blame vaccines for autism, Dr. Offit said. Although, he noted, "there is a core group of parents for whom nothing will ever change that, no IOM reports or court decisions."

Some advocacy organizations for people with autism were disappointed and angered by the decision. Autism Speaks, which has offices throughout the U.S. and abroad, said in a statement that it would continue to support research that addresses questions about the vulnerability of some individuals to the adverse effects of vaccines. The National Autism Assn., based in Missouri, expressed outrage at the court's decision, calling it "a broken promise of medical care following a vaccine injury."

But many physicians hope parents who had rejected vaccines for their children will now opt for them.

Despite evidence to the contrary, the belief that the vaccine could trigger autism has caused immunization rates to drop in some parts of the United States and in other countries. This downturn has triggered outbreaks of measles and mumps.

"In some respects, vaccines have been their own worst enemies," said Robert W. Frenck Jr., MD, professor of pediatrics in the infectious diseases division at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. "Many families ... have never seen the diseases these vaccines prevent."

Dr. Frenck related a childhood experience in which he visited a young friend with polio. The friend was in a room full of people in iron lungs. The image was disturbing. "When there was a vaccine available for polio, no one thought twice about getting it."

And even in the midst of current fears of an autism-vaccine link, many parents remain committed to vaccination. Jocelyn Kuhn of Cincinnati, whose 7-year-old son Michael is autistic, made sure all three of her children were fully immunized. "The thought of not vaccinating my kids scares me to death."

Most health professionals share this perspective.

"Vaccines are one of the best public health accomplishments of all time and have proven time and time again their ability to keep horrific diseases at bay," Dr. Heyman said.

As a vaccine researcher, Dr. Hotez travels to developing nations and sees the toll taken by vaccine-preventable diseases. "To think we could see a resurgence of these diseases in the U.S. because parents aren't vaccinating their kids is devastating."

With one ruling handed down and one more still to come from the special masters -- on whether thimerosal alone might have caused autism -- all parties agree that families, such as the Cedillos, whose teenage daughter, Michelle, was at the center of one of the test cases, deserve attention and support.

In his decision, Hastings praised the Cedillo family's "loving, caring and courageous nature."

 

[jwinslow]