CurlTalk

Autism and vaccines - new findings

AmandacurlsAmandacurls Posts: 6,252Registered Users
«1

Comments

  • cymprenicympreni Posts: 9,609Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    I'd need a more reliable source.
  • WileE-DeadWileE-Dead Banned Posts: 24,963Banned Users
    I think much of it has to do w/ our environment. We did not have this prob years ago...:dunno: jmo But, it is scary, that's for sure...
    0004.gif

    Ever since the sports thread wars I have sensed a special connection between [edit] & Wile. Like the connection oil has to water. I almost can't speak of it. Wait....my eyes are misting. ~asq
    Let’s just stay together and tell the world to kiss our ass. ~P


  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    I've done a lot of reading on the subject and I personally don't think that there is a connection between vaccines and autism. But, I also think that until they can pinpoint the specific things that "cause" autism there will always be speculation that vaccines cause autism especially since many of the vaccines are given at the same time that autistic symptoms typically appear.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    I'd need a more reliable source.

    I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. The study was conducted by epidemiologists at Columbia University and the results were published in a peer-reviewed journal. That's pretty reliable in my opinion.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • cymprenicympreni Posts: 9,609Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    gemini12 wrote: »
    I'd need a more reliable source.
    I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. The study was conducted by epidemiologists at Columbia University and the results were published in a peer-reviewed journal. That's pretty reliable in my opinion.

    I mean as far as the article, and not necessary the study. I would need to read the actual study, and know the background of the actual people who did it.

    A few years back, newspapers everywhere were posting this "study" linking autism to too much tv. But anyone who actually bothered to investigate this study, which most journalist didn't, would have realized right off the bat that it was bogus. The man had no qualifications whatsoever, he was a business statistician. He never even contacted 1 family affected with autism. He only noted that there was a similar rise in cable subscriptions and autism rates in 1 county in California. But many newspapers didn't bother to fact check, and just ran with it. Just when we thought we were getting away from blaming the parents for autism. But few of those papers ever printed a retraction,and if they did, it went unnoticed as most retractions go.

    And it wouldn't matter to me what university it came from, I would have to know about their backgrounds. I don't automatically trust a person because they're from such-and-such. Last year there was a bill the autism community was fighting for. It's purpose was for research and treatment. Believe it or not, there has yet to be even 1 large scale study done on which treatments are affective and which aren't, and why some treatments help some and not others. The biggest opponents of that bill were the CDC and APA.

    So no, I don't necessarily trust every source of information.
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Posts: 31,258Registered Users
    cympreni wrote: »
    gemini12 wrote: »
    I'd need a more reliable source.
    I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. The study was conducted by epidemiologists at Columbia University and the results were published in a peer-reviewed journal. That's pretty reliable in my opinion.

    I mean as far as the article, and not necessary the study. I would need to read the actual study, and know the background of the actual people who did it.

    A few years back, newspapers everywhere were posting this "study" linking autism to too much tv. But anyone who actually bothered to investigate this study, which most journalist didn't, would have realized right off the bat that it was bogus. The man had no qualifications whatsoever, he was a business statistician. He never even contacted 1 family affected with autism. He only noted that there was a similar rise in cable subscriptions and autism rates in 1 county in California. But many newspapers didn't bother to fact check, and just ran with it. Just when we thought we were getting away from blaming the parents for autism. But few of those papers ever printed a retraction,and if they did, it went unnoticed as most retractions go.

    And it wouldn't matter to me what university it came from, I would have to know about their backgrounds. I don't automatically trust a person because they're from such-and-such. Last year there was a bill the autism community was fighting for. It's purpose was for research and treatment. Believe it or not, there has yet to be even 1 large scale study done on which treatments are affective and which aren't, and why some treatments help some and not others. The biggest opponents of that bill were the CDC and APA.

    So no, I don't necessarily trust every source of information.



    Here's the complete published study findings:

    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plosone.org%2Farticle%2Finfo%253Adoi%252F10.1371%252Fjournal.pone.0003140" class="Popup
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    Thanks for the link!
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • redcelticcurlsredcelticcurls Posts: 17,502Registered Users
    gemini12 wrote: »
    I've done a lot of reading on the subject and I personally don't think that there is a connection between vaccines and autism. But, I also think that until they can pinpoint the specific things that "cause" autism there will always be speculation that vaccines cause autism especially since many of the vaccines are given at the same time that autistic symptoms typically appear.

    ITA with this. PA had had some measles issues lately from the non-immunizing crowd. I'd hate to see widespread return of some of these diseases.
    Kiva! Microfinance works.

    Med/Coarse, porous curly.
  • mad scientistmad scientist Posts: 3,530Registered Users
    ITA with this. PA had had some measles issues lately from the non-immunizing crowd. I'd hate to see widespread return of some of these diseases.

    We are currently dealing with a fairly significant mumps outbreak in our area that is probably going to get even bigger now that school has started. It started in a non-vaxing Christian community.

    The odd kid here and there that isn't vaxed doesn't concern me, but in an area like mine where entire communities are not vaccinated, it does scare me. My daughter is severely allergic to eggs and can't be vaccinated against certain things - I am relying on herd immunity to keep her safe.

    That said, I don't think that vaccines are not without risk. I worry about loading kids with antigens and with heavy metals. I feel more comfortable and chose to spread out my kids vaccinations.
  • cymprenicympreni Posts: 9,609Registered Users Curl Neophyte

    Thank you. Do you have any aspirin, tylenol, etc to go with that?

    It is way too early to read such jargon, but anyways, here are my initial thoughts.

    First of all they were funded by the CDC and NIH, who were big opponents of the Autism research funding bill.

    2) Their research group consisted of 25 kids with autism and 13 as a control group. That's hardly conclusive IMO knowing the broad spectrum of autism.

    3) they excluded anyone with known genetic factors in their study. And a big chunk of the vax/autism hypothesis is that some people are born with a genetic predisposition to autism, and the exposure to certain things including vaccinations and environmental stuff is what brings it out.


    Now I haven't done any other fact checking, and probably won't least for a while. Even as I type this, I am procrastinating filling out the paperwork for yet another evaluation for Kade. I think I'd rather cut off my leg with a plastic spork then go through this again.
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    ITA with this. PA had had some measles issues lately from the non-immunizing crowd. I'd hate to see widespread return of some of these diseases.

    We are currently dealing with a fairly significant mumps outbreak in our area that is probably going to get even bigger now that school has started. It started in a non-vaxing Christian community.

    The odd kid here and there that isn't vaxed doesn't concern me, but in an area like mine where entire communities are not vaccinated, it does scare me. My daughter is severely allergic to eggs and can't be vaccinated against certain things - I am relying on herd immunity to keep her safe.

    That said, I don't think that vaccines are not without risk. I worry about loading kids with antigens and with heavy metals. I feel more comfortable and chose to spread out my kids vaccinations.


    I completely agree with everything you said. It really scares me how many people are not vaccinating their kids because of a completely speculative link between vaccines. Those vaccines protect kids (and society) against some really horrible diseases, but you're right that they're not without risk...but, then again, so is just about everything in life.

    And, I think by altering your kids vaccination schedule you're taking a smart approach to try to minimize the risks while still getting the benefits of the vaccine.

    As for the study that started this thread....I read the study and to me it shows that they've disproved the theory that the MMR vaccine "causes" (I hesitate to use that word...) autism through the gastrointestinal tract mechanism.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • Who Me?Who Me? Posts: 3,181Registered Users
    cympreni wrote: »

    I mean as far as the article, and not necessary the study. I would need to read the actual study, and know the background of the actual people who did it.

    I want to hug you for saying this. Media outles very, very often pick up stories about scientific studies where they do not understand the actual conclusions the authors of the study made.

    And just because something was done at a good school, and in a peer-reviewed journal does NOT mean it is actlually reliable. Plenty of total crap gets published in peer-reveiwed journals, even the well-renowned ones.

    I just took a really quick look at the study. It looks like it had a sample size of 38 children. There is no possible way any general conclusions can be made off of a sample size of 38 children. It's more of an information-gathering exercise than a study with generalizable results, for sure.
    "I don't know! I don't know why I did it, I don't know why I enjoyed it, and I don't know why I'll do it again!" -BART SIMPSON
  • preciousjewel76preciousjewel76 Posts: 679Registered Users
    For what it's worth, I have degrees in both microbiology and infectious disease epidemiology, and worked for several years at a state public health department. I fully plan to vaccinate my baby once he arrives. Vaccines aren't perfect (the risks were already alluded to in this thread), but they are without a doubt effective in the prevention of deadly diseases. And as an epidemiologist, let me just point out that it took decades of scientific research to conclude that smoking causes cancer. I appreciate the research being conducted to investigate the link between vaccines & autism, but until causality is established, I choose to rely on the evidence - vaccines prevent disease.
    4A - dense, medium strands - APL/BSL - 3+ years natural!

    :love7:YAY!: GF Triple Nutrition Conditioner, YTCu Color Care Conditioner, Shea Moisture Deep Treatment Masque, LOTD AV Gel, EVCO, JCN&S, KCCC, buns and updos!
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    3) they excluded anyone with known genetic factors in their study. And a big chunk of the vax/autism hypothesis is that some people are born with a genetic predisposition to autism, and the exposure to certain things including vaccinations and environmental stuff is what brings it out.

    That's not how I interpreted it. The genetic factors that they excluded are known and identified genetic syndromes such as Trisomy 21 and Fragile X. It's already known that people with these syndromes have developmental issues and that's completely different from the hypothesis that some as yet unidentified genetic factors predispose some people to develop autism.

    But this also wasn't the purpose of the study and including anyone with known genetic factors would have added an unnecessary variable. This study had a very specific purpose which was to prove/disprove a theory that arose from a study in 1998 suggesing a link between the MMR vaccine, gastrointestinal tract problems, and autism.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    Who Me? wrote: »
    I want to hug you for saying this. Media outles very, very often pick up stories about scientific studies where they do not understand the actual conclusions the authors of the study made.

    And just because something was done at a good school, and in a peer-reviewed journal does NOT mean it is actlually reliable. Plenty of total crap gets published in peer-reveiwed journals, even the well-renowned ones.

    I just took a really quick look at the study. It looks like it had a sample size of 38 children. There is no possible way any general conclusions can be made off of a sample size of 38 children. It's more of an information-gathering exercise than a study with generalizable results, for sure.



    So, what does make a study reliable? I put a lot more faith in a study by educated professionals at a respected university that's published in peer-reviewed journal than anectodal "evidence".

    And, for the record, the original study that suggested the GI + MMR + autism link was based on evidence from only 12 children, yet many people had no problem believing that study.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • cymprenicympreni Posts: 9,609Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    gemini12 wrote: »
    Who Me? wrote: »
    I want to hug you for saying this. Media outles very, very often pick up stories about scientific studies where they do not understand the actual conclusions the authors of the study made.

    And just because something was done at a good school, and in a peer-reviewed journal does NOT mean it is actlually reliable. Plenty of total crap gets published in peer-reveiwed journals, even the well-renowned ones.

    I just took a really quick look at the study. It looks like it had a sample size of 38 children. There is no possible way any general conclusions can be made off of a sample size of 38 children. It's more of an information-gathering exercise than a study with generalizable results, for sure.



    So, what does make a study reliable? I put a lot more faith in a study by educated professionals at a respected university that's published in peer-reviewed journal than anectodal "evidence".

    And, for the record, the original study that suggested the GI + MMR + autism link was based on evidence from only 12 children, yet many people had no problem believing that study.

    Most wouldn't deny that smoking during pregnancy can cause low-birthweight babies, but I can guarentee that it wouldn't be too hard to find 25 woman who smoked all through pregnancy and gave birth to 9+ lb babies.

    This effects MILLIONS. If one out of 150 kids were kidnapped, and first 25 just happened to be similar we wouldn't automatically assume the same for the rest without further investigation. I've participated in autism studies. I was only 1 out of hundreds of people who did so. Autism isn't rare, it wouldn't have been too hard to find more participants.


    And it's called a spectrum disorder for a reason. The symptoms of autism can be on either extreme. Some have gi problems some don't; some tested positive for heavy metal poisoning and some don't; some have intellectual disabilities some have genius level iqs and some are average; some are sensory avoiders while others are sensory seekers; some avoid social situations and some thrive in it. In my mind no small study with so many limits and so few participants could ever answer the question.
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    This effects MILLIONS. If one out of 150 kids were kidnapped, and first 25 just happened to be similar we wouldn't automatically assume the same for the rest without further investigation. I've participated in autism studies. I was only 1 out of hundreds of people who did so. Autism isn't rare, it wouldn't have been too hard to find more participants.

    I don't disagree that autism disorders affect many, many children and adults, but this study was very focused--it required children who were in a certain age range, had their MMR vaccine within a specific time frame, and most importantly, had GI problems. That significantly narrows the pool of prospective participants. I admit that more participants would be better, but I don't think you can automatically dismiss the results just because hundreds of children weren't evaluated, especially since this study backed up other studies that showed no evidence of a MMR-GI-autism link.

    I guess the way I look at it is that this study, combined with the others done previously, indicates that the theory of the MMR-GI-autism link isn't valid and that resources can now be spent to investigate other theories or possible causes of autism disorders.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • EilonwyEilonwy Posts: 12,389Registered Users
    Cympreni, you wrote in this thread you are doubtful about the study, because "they were funded by the CDC and NIH, who were big opponents of the Autism research funding bill." I recall reading about your distrust of the CDC, specifically when it comes to the autism-vaccine issue, in other posts of yours.

    Do you dislike the CDC because they deny a link between autism and vaccines, or for another reason?
  • WileE-DeadWileE-Dead Banned Posts: 24,963Banned Users
    For what it's worth, I have degrees in both microbiology and infectious disease epidemiology, and worked for several years at a state public health department. I fully plan to vaccinate my baby once he arrives. Vaccines aren't perfect (the risks were already alluded to in this thread), but they are without a doubt effective in the prevention of deadly diseases. And as an epidemiologist, let me just point out that it took decades of scientific research to conclude that smoking causes cancer. I appreciate the research being conducted to investigate the link between vaccines & autism, but until causality is established, I choose to rely on the evidence - vaccines prevent disease.
    :hello1: :notworthy:
    0004.gif

    Ever since the sports thread wars I have sensed a special connection between [edit] & Wile. Like the connection oil has to water. I almost can't speak of it. Wait....my eyes are misting. ~asq
    Let’s just stay together and tell the world to kiss our ass. ~P


  • Curly Girl FlaCurly Girl Fla Posts: 1,834Registered Users
    For what it's worth, I have degrees in both microbiology and infectious disease epidemiology, and worked for several years at a state public health department. I fully plan to vaccinate my baby once he arrives. Vaccines aren't perfect (the risks were already alluded to in this thread), but they are without a doubt effective in the prevention of deadly diseases. And as an epidemiologist, let me just point out that it took decades of scientific research to conclude that smoking causes cancer. I appreciate the research being conducted to investigate the link between vaccines & autism, but until causality is established, I choose to rely on the evidence - vaccines prevent disease.

    Very eloquently put :)
  • HighlyAddictiveHighlyAddictive Posts: 139Registered Users
    My now 26 month old son suffered a SEVERE reaction to DTaP at age 5 months. I noticed that his left eye was bothering him; he's started rubbing it a lot and it was tearing up and looking irritated. A few days later I noticed that his eye seemed to look "crossed" - it had started pulling toward his nose. I immediately made a doctor's appointment and by the time he was seen, my baby's left eye was fully crossed. He was very agitated and cried a lot! Possibly from the double vision. His pediatrician was able to determine it to be caused by Sixth Nerve Palsy - the sixth cranial nerve is responsible for basically turning the eye out. He had to see a pediatric ophthalmologist who specialized in Sixth Nerve Palsy and had continual tests (MRI's, etc) and therapy.

    THANK THE LORD that my son's eye eventually returned to normal. He still has a bit of a lazy eye at times, but considering the long road he could have had (surgeries, etc) he is truly BLESSED! I NEVER....repeat N-E-V-E-R allowed him to be vaccinated again. He has not received a vaccine since age 5 months and he is perfectly healthy. I do want to add that he is exclusively breastfed, sans table food. And honestly ladies, if you do breastfeed, your baby will receive a healthy and adequate dose of immunities from you. His pediatrician states that as long as I continue to feed him healthy (I'm a HUGE pusher of fruits, veggies, and non-red meat!) and maintain proper hygiene (hand washing, etc) he will be fine. He will only require minimal vaccines in order to start school as opposed to the slew of vaccines they would have given him over the first two years of his life. Of course I have to be more vigilant for signs of him contracting something. But at this point (aged 24.2 months) his body has already developed plenty immunities naturally.

    In conclusion, yes - any physician worth his degree will tell you that vaccines honestly do pose a risk (hence all the consent signing) but if they are really honest, they will also tell you that vaccines are not an ABSOLUTE necessity, especially if you breastfeed. Use absolute caution when allowing your child to receive DTaP and MMR vaccines. When in doubt, go with your gut. I swear to you I had had second thoughts prior to my son's DTaP but I did it anyway. Don't let doctors bully you either! In the process, I spoke with several doctors and a couple were adamant that it didn't happen due to the DTaP....while the vast majority admitted it to be rare but very possible.

    Okay....I'm done! Off to play with my hair!!!!:compress:
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]There is no art in easy.™

    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fpublic.fotki.com%2FHighlyAddictive%2F" class="Popup
    PW: curlyclue
    Just go with the 'fro :afro:
  • cymprenicympreni Posts: 9,609Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    Eilonwy wrote: »
    Cympreni, you wrote in this thread you are doubtful about the study, because "they were funded by the CDC and NIH, who were big opponents of the Autism research funding bill." I recall reading about your distrust of the CDC, specifically when it comes to the autism-vaccine issue, in other posts of yours.

    Do you dislike the CDC because they deny a link between autism and vaccines, or for another reason?

    Tell you the truth I am undecided on the issue. My kids are getting the necessary vaccinations on a delayed schedule, not by my wishes, but on the suggestion of their ped who by her own words is too wussy to give too many shots at once.

    Tell you the truth, I'm not as educated on this subject as I should be. When my son was diagnosed it destroyed me. For a long time it took everything I had just to function. I didn't have enough left over for research. By the time I did, I didn't see the point about worrying about the past. Trying to deal with the present is hard enough. But I won't right off such research for future children.

    My problems with the CDC, APA, and NIH are not just over vaccinations. The NIH fought the autism bill because they thought it was pointless and we had better more important things to spend our money on, specifically listing the war and national security as bigger priorities then the future of our children. APA and autism groups have been butting heads for years, and not just over vaccinations, over everything.

    Despite 6 evaluations performed by 6 different teams of experts and that doesn't include ones done by individuals and they all agree, but my ped still doesn't believe my son has autism. And that's because she looks for what the APA tells her to look for, which is the most obvious and stereotypical cases. And they don't even bother to teach doctors how to treat autism. They are in such denial over autism they will fight every step of way.

    I had to fight for the evaluations. Which were a nightmare. I had everything I had ever did or didn't do questioned. I had to sit through hours of developmental interviews when 90% of the answers came up no and feeling like the biggest jerk in the world because I didn't see it before. I had brought up a few concerns to my ped, but she always said he's still in the normal range or just mildly delayed and he'll catch up on his own. But the fact is he tested having serious delays in every area of development. And yet still I had to fight for treatment.

    When I finally worked my way up to the big boy hospital for their evaluation. After hours of grueling tests and questions. They came in said "your son has autism, here's a pamphlet have a nice day." I asked what I was supposed to do, and they started saying something about long-term care facilities. My son was only 2 years old!!!

    I thought surly his ped would know and help. Her response was IF he has it, then there's nothing you can do. I had to fight with the doctor just to get speech and occupational therapy. she didn't see anything wrong with a 3 year old with the speech and fine motor skills of a 9 month old. I asked why so much trouble once, and was told they were only doing what the APA recommended.

    No one of official capacity ever helped me. I had to figure it out on my own and fight for it. I've had to fight with doctors, fight agencies, therapists, fight with his school almost ever year (he started school midway through the year at 2 1/2). I've been treated like a hypochondriac and attention seeking and money grabbing, denied countless times by people who don't even know what they're talking about. AND I AM ****ING SICK TO DEATH OF FIGHTING WITH THE VERY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO FREAKING HELPING! Instead of helping they are doing what the NIH CDC and APA instructed them to do which usually results in blaming denying and ignoring the problem.

    But you want to know what the real tragedy is, is stories like mine are more common then not. I asked several support groups both online and in person, where I can find better educated doctors, the universal answer is "good luck if you find one then tell us."

    We have a serious problem on our hands and they are dragging their asses. THAT is my main problem with them.

    There was more I wanted to say,and I"m sure I didn't answer the question fully. But this has really upset me so much that I have a serious migraine going and I can't concentrate anymore. Sorry for length and rant and anything else.
  • KaiaKaia Posts: 8,815Registered Users
    We did a lot of research on vaccines, and at this time, I do not believe vaccines cause autism. I'm more inclined to believe it's environmental, linked to all the crap added to our food and water (fluoride for example, which most people think is great in drinking water). However, I don't believe vaccines are harmless and I think they may have other health ramifications.
    *Poster formerly known as Bailey422*

    Here's all you have to know about men and women: women are crazy, men are stupid. And the main reason women are crazy is that men are stupid. ~ George Carlin
  • KaiaKaia Posts: 8,815Registered Users
    Eilonwy wrote: »
    Do you dislike the CDC because they deny a link between autism and vaccines, or for another reason?

    Not cympreni, but I distrust the CDC because it's a government agency and their main goal is not to find truth but to uphold public policies. I believe generally when they do studies, they want a certain conclusion to be drawn from it to support whatever policy they're trying to enact or defend at the time.
    *Poster formerly known as Bailey422*

    Here's all you have to know about men and women: women are crazy, men are stupid. And the main reason women are crazy is that men are stupid. ~ George Carlin
  • SpiderSpider Posts: 3,380Registered Users
    My kids are both vaccinated. I'm not sold on the Gardisil yet for DD but there's still time.

    In the past the concern has not been about all vaccines, but the ones given at 15 and 18 months, and that's when many parents start to notice odd or different behavior in their children (withdrawn, slow speech development, won't play with other toddlers...).

    There was a segment on Today within the last couple of years that had a specialist and some interesting findings. A panel of Autism doctors and researchers viewed home videos of random children around 12 months (usually at their 1st birthday) and they were able to tell by almost complete accuaracy which children were later diagnosed with Autism and which ones were not, by subtle signs that early on. Leading the 15/18 month vaccine concern to be likely invalid.
    Don't let your heart be broken. Let it love.
  • CynaminbearCynaminbear Posts: 4,476Registered Users
    I chose not to vaccinate my kids 11 years ago, long before the autism/mmr idea was circulating. Therefore, this study doesn't change my mind in any way.
    I'd still caution every parent to research the issue on their own and not take their doctor's word or the AMA or APA's word on the safety or efficacy of vaccines. They alone are responsible for their child, they alone have to deal with the ramifications of the vaccine or the disease, not the doctor who gives it or the drug company that provides it or the APA that recommends it.
    There's no such thing as global warming. Chuck Norris was cold so he turned up the sun.
  • gemini12gemini12 Posts: 146Registered Users
    There was a segment on Today within the last couple of years that had a specialist and some interesting findings. A panel of Autism doctors and researchers viewed home videos of random children around 12 months (usually at their 1st birthday) and they were able to tell by almost complete accuaracy which children were later diagnosed with Autism and which ones were not, by subtle signs that early on.

    Wow, I hadn't heard about that but it sounds very interesting.
    CG as of 8/28/08
    thin/fine 2a/3a hair

    Still searching for my HG's, but currently loving:
    Rinse out: AOHR
    Leave in: Giovanni Direct
    Styling: KCCC, LOOB, TW, TT, HESMU
  • Oregano  (formerly babywavy)Oregano (formerly babywavy) Posts: 5,297Registered Users
    For what it's worth, I have degrees in both microbiology and infectious disease epidemiology, and worked for several years at a state public health department. I fully plan to vaccinate my baby once he arrives. Vaccines aren't perfect (the risks were already alluded to in this thread), but they are without a doubt effective in the prevention of deadly diseases. And as an epidemiologist, let me just point out that it took decades of scientific research to conclude that smoking causes cancer. I appreciate the research being conducted to investigate the link between vaccines & autism, but until causality is established, I choose to rely on the evidence - vaccines prevent disease.


    I understand this point - yet I do not believe that all information would be disclosed to us, or that all information has been researched.

    I also understand, as a parent whose child has exhibited autistic behavior, that it's terrifying to make a decision where one second of a 15 minute well baby appointment could destroy the child I have grown to know.

    I also can't ignore the idea that HMO's, drug companies, doctors, are all financially connected. If they DID come out with some strong evidence stating that vaccines have the possibility to cause autism, think of the money that would be lost. Health insurance covers something like a dozen (i'm guessing here) vaccines for EVERY child before they even enter into school. That's a lot of money going to drug companies for these vaccines for EVERY child in America. Even if there was evidenciary support that SOME children could develop Autism from vaccinations, the amount of parents that would deny the vaccinations for their children would be staggering.

    What it comes down to is, which is a bigger risk? The risk that the child COULD become autistic, or
    COULD come in contact with Polio.
    ~ the artist formerly known as babywavy ~

    Please excuse any typos. For the time being, we are blaming it on my computer.
  • preciousjewel76preciousjewel76 Posts: 679Registered Users
    babywavy wrote: »
    I understand this point - yet I do not believe that all information would be disclosed to us, or that all information has been researched.

    I also understand, as a parent whose child has exhibited autistic behavior, that it's terrifying to make a decision where one second of a 15 minute well baby appointment could destroy the child I have grown to know.

    I also can't ignore the idea that HMO's, drug companies, doctors, are all financially connected. If they DID come out with some strong evidence stating that vaccines have the possibility to cause autism, think of the money that would be lost. Health insurance covers something like a dozen (i'm guessing here) vaccines for EVERY child before they even enter into school. That's a lot of money going to drug companies for these vaccines for EVERY child in America. Even if there was evidenciary support that SOME children could develop Autism from vaccinations, the amount of parents that would deny the vaccinations for their children would be staggering.

    What it comes down to is, which is a bigger risk? The risk that the child COULD become autistic, or
    COULD come in contact with Polio.

    You raise some very valid points. You're right; the average pediatrician does not release the entire body of research on a vaccine before suggesting it to a patient. And how many parents have the time or resources to do independent research on their own? Were it not for my background and job experience, I'd probably be inclined to just accept whatever my pediatrician suggested for my child. BTW, I don't necessarily believe that my child will need every vaccine out there, and I still intend to research the ones I do choose to have administered to my child.
    What it comes down to is, which is a bigger risk? The risk that the child COULD become autistic, or
    COULD come in contact with Polio

    I don't think anyone could quantify those risks at this point. Hopefully, the research will provide us with an answer in due time.

    BTW, I'd be less concerned about my baby being exposed to polio (which has been eradicated from North America) than something like measles or whooping cough.
    4A - dense, medium strands - APL/BSL - 3+ years natural!

    :love7:YAY!: GF Triple Nutrition Conditioner, YTCu Color Care Conditioner, Shea Moisture Deep Treatment Masque, LOTD AV Gel, EVCO, JCN&S, KCCC, buns and updos!
  • EilonwyEilonwy Posts: 12,389Registered Users
    Cympreni, thank you for your thoughtful reply.

    (Ok, this part below is not directed at Cympreni, or any other posters in this thread! I'm expressing my opinion without referring to others' opinions. I just wanted to include this disclaimer because I know that this can be a touchy subject.)

    I personally think that part of the cause of the autism-vaccine issue is that good parents want to be able to protect their children from experiencing difficulties. At the same time, a lot of things are just beyond everyone's control.

    I would guess that it's pretty common for parents of children with congenital problems of any kind to feel guilty about it. After all, as humans, we always want some kind of explanation or justification. "Something didn't work out the way it usually does, and there was nothing you could do about it," just isn't satisfying.

    Many cognitive disorders simply involve developmental delays--not development followed by regression, as in autism. (I'm sorry if I'm not using the right terminology, but I hope people know what I mean.) This probably makes it especially easy for a parent to feel like they did something to cause the autistic symptoms. From there, it's not a huge leap to blame something you do have control over, such as vaccines.

    Vaccines, as has been repeated throughout the thread, are definitely not without risk. A lot of vaccines that aren't administered to the general public (they're reserved for certain scientists, military personel, etc) can have some pretty scary side effects. However, as others have mentioned, people who aren't immunized to common illnesses depend on people who are immunized in order to stay healthy. It would really be a shame if communities once again start losing infants and children to common infectious diseases.
«1