The Great Beyond

Science moves forward by disproving itself; this is how research provides new information. Heated comments such as this one by Daniel Cressey only prove the vehemence of the commenter, not what he hopes to dismiss. I'm sure that when it was first suggested that it was the dirty hands of doctors that spread "childbed fever," the outcry was probably similar. So let's just wait and see the results of comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children, shall we? Is there any other real test? Besides, most people feel it likely that the rise in autism is caused by a gathering storm of environmental insult, which includes the outlandish and excessive (and dare I say, highly profitable) current vaccine schedule.

UK parents of children injured by the MMR vaccine have written a book called "Silenced Witnesses." Before one passes judgment, one should read it, talk with the parents, and look at the children's lab test results. Vaccine-strain measles in lesions lining the gastrointestinal mucosa; measles inthe brain; antibodies to myelin basic protein... what misery. These children need anti-virals, anti-inflammatories, and open-minded physicians able to handle the sad paradox that a product intended to improve health is having the opposite effect in a subset of genetically susceptible children. Intellectual curiosity and compassion must trump denial and vested interests.

This blog is supposed to be part of Nature yet where is the science? Daniel Cressey appears to be able to say whatever he thinks, quoting and giving an infomercial for Orac, the "anonymous" cancer vaccine guy/md. Are you also friends with Brian Deere over in the UK? How about Paul Offit? Geez. Could you at least give some of the science on mitochondria disease vs mitochondria dysfunction and how that relates to vaccines?

In reference to the comments below and as referred to in the article, there is simply no evidence that MMR and autism are linked. In fact, I entirely agree that it dangerous for politicians to spout such spurious claims without being aware of the facts.

Each of the above contributors quoted the vested interests that are apparently involved. What about the very real dangers of these diseases returning? Are these the same vested interests which eradicated smallpox?

Before one passes judgment one should also read some scientific data on this. Studies which compare vaccinated children to unvaccinated have been done many times and if you look at the really big whole population studies there appears to be no link. Here are two example studies: a Japanese study titled "No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study". Even if you read the abstract its message is pretty clear. A Danish study published in new england journal of medicine (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/347/19/1477) examined around half a million children out of which 1/5th wasn’t vaccinated and found that the risk of getting autism and vaccination are not related. I honestly find it funny/scary that to this day people read some book from authors who know little about the subject and reach a conclusion based on nothing, but because it reaches the person on the emotional level it must be taken as gospel without thinking about it first.

The core problem is that dishonesty by people defending vaccines is practically habitual. Studies are regularly cited to prove claims that, upon examination, the authors' words do not support. The justification for dishonesty is obvious: reduced vaccination rates result in increased incidence of well-known illnesses.

What vaccination defenders such as this "Orac" person neglect is that habitual lying about results of studies leads to distrust, which leads to reduced vaccination rates.

No finite number of statistical studies can demonstrate that (e.g.) injecting neurotoxins is safe. At best they can show that it does not cause a particular illness in the general population. They cannot show that it does not trigger that illness in certain particularly susceptible individuals. The difficulty of proving a negative is not a reason to ignore concerns; it's a reason not to inject the stuff.

Vaccines containing neurotoxic compounds were injected into children for years after they were said to have been eliminated from the supply chain. "Hot" vaccine lots are typically all injected before any recall can be initiated. The vaccine industry has a lot to answer for, that even its successes in reducing infection rates cannot excuse.

We need an overhaul of how vaccines are administered that acknowledges some ambiguity in their benefits, and recognizes the self-interested nature of much of the promotion of new vaccines. Most of us don't have any choice about whether this stuff is injected into our children, and bland assurances have too often been found to be contradicted by facts. Need it be said that suppressing the facts not the right response?

Michael D's comment "Studies which compare vaccinated children to unvaccinated have been done many times and if you look at the really big whole population studies there appears to be no link" is a lie.

The two reference he gave compared children vaccinated with MMR or not with MMR; they did not compare "vaccinated children to unvaccinated". See the difference?

Dear Vax900. I do see the difference; I was a bit careless with how I worded it. This however doesn't make me a liar but thanks for that personal attack.

From what I can see you propose an experiment where you do not vaccinate the child from anything.

It is an interesting proposal but I do struggle with the ethical side of it. Do you?

I do believe that now days there are plenty of vaccinations which are pointless unless there is a big chance that a person was going to be exposed to it but to get rid of vaccination all together is one of the stupidest things humanity can do. Thanks to vaccination we got rid of a few diseases i.e. polio. In case of polio I find it very amusing how quickly people forget what debilitating disease it was (perhaps you should read up on it).

PS @ Nathan Myers: Botox has neurotoxins and is injected by multiple people but is considered to be relatively safe at that dose

Michael D: I wasn't aware that Botox injections were now required for children to participate in public education. Things sure do change. My daughter hasn't had hers yet.

Hello, excellent site, very rich in content and correctly carefully thought out, personally I found here much interesting and useful.....Well! I am an obssessed blogger. I don't see blogs as funny thing. I see blogsphere a platform to exchange knowledge and expertise...