babble » blogs » Strollerderby
Strollerderby
Court Rules: No Link Between Autism and Vaccines (Again)
The autism/vaccine “debate” is winding its way through a variety of courts. Lawsuits pend and will pend for years to come, but another has ended in a victory for science: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a lower court’s ruling that Michelle Cedillo’s autism was not caused by the mercury-based preservative in the MMR vaccine she received in 1995. The Cedillo case was one of a series of test cases chosen to try to determine whether alleged autism injuries could file claims under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
What does that mean for the remaining vaccine lawsuits and claims? It may be the beginning of an end. One the one hand, there are some five thousand other cases pending before the U.S. Court of Federal claims, and this was one of three test cases taken on to essentially determine if court would need to consider all 5,000+ and how. All of the claims have been rejected so far, and this is the second of the three to be upheld on appeal, although further appeal may be available. Three other test cases, handled last year, also resulted in upheld rejections of the claim that the vaccine caused autism. These families can still sue the vaccine manufacturers directly, but this avenue of financial redress is beginning to look pretty closed off.
But will it have any effect on the complacent parents who, with a “better safe than sorry” excuse, put kids who genuinely can’t be vaccinated at risk by refusing to vaccinate their own? Nah. It’s going to take more than some silly court ruling to do that.
Many people have written eloquently about the dangers having a growing herd of unvaccinated kids create for all children, and the fact that parents who choose not to vaccinate are free-riding on the rest of us. Babble has done a great piece on how those parents justify their actions. The L.A. Times ran an article by a physician who’s seen first-hand the effects of not vaccinating, from work in the slums of Mumbai with families who had no access to vaccines, to watching the child of wealthy Hollywood anti-vaccine types admitted to the hospital with whooping cough. Those effects are escalating: California is in the midst of its largest whooping cough outbreak in decades, one of many across the country. Of course, in many cases, it’s not the unvaccinated kids who are dying as a result, but the infants who are exposed by contact with them. Keeping immunization rates high protects those infants, and any kids who actually can’t be vaccinated, or whose vaccine wasn’t 100% effective.
But then, you knew that. Most people do. It’s just that a startling number think it doesn’t apply to them. A distant risk to someone else’s child just doesn’t seem worth subjecting your own kid to that still faintly mysterious prick—plus, of course, shots hurt, and they make kids cry, and it’s so much easier and more pleasant to get through the doctor’s visit without them.
Go Back To Strollerderby
0 Comments
Wow commented on Aug 30 10 at 12:23 pmWhile I do agree that vaccinations are vitally important, I have to take issue with your treatment of families with “alleged” autistic children. You call out the parents who hesitate to get the shots as simply being “complacent”. They are not complacent – they are scared silly. Many of your other points vilify the parents that tried to do the right thing by getting the shots in the first place. Have you ever talked to a parent with an “alleged” autistic child? A child that, before the vaccinations, was communicating their emotions? We all have different body chemistry, that is part of the reason that there are so many different medicines out there. They work on different people in different ways. To think that you can pump chemicals into thousands of small children without any adverse reactions is naive. These parents understood the known risks of getting vaccinated, and were willing to accept these risks. However, they were not informed of the additional preservative chemistry nor were they given an opportunity to choose from a batch without the preservative. And to suggest that parents of these “alleged” victims are looking for free money through “avenue[s] of financial redress” is also offensive. Taking care of a special-needs child is incredibly expensive. And when all signs point to a condition caused by companies who chose to use these chemicals and HIDE it from the public, it is not unrealistic to expect that company to share in the consequences. It is so easy to approach this subject with sarcasm, but there is so very much more to it than that. Don’t make villains out of the families who are suffering because they tried to do the right thing. Of course shots hurt and make kids cry – but the kids with autism endured the shots, and that faintly mysterious prick changed their lives. Their parents did the right thing at the doctor’s office. As a result, many of these people will hurt and cry for the rest of their lives. And some silly court ruling will never change that.
Miki commented on Aug 30 10 at 12:36 pmExcept, since you brought up pertussis- that vaccine DOES cause injury and death. I buried a child who developed an encephalitis reaction after his infant series at 2,4 and 6 months, that resulted in severe cortical atrophy, and led to his subsequent death.
Lest you think I do not quite understand the concept of “herd immunity”, I assure you that I do. After much thought and more than a few sleepless nights keeping guard, our next 3 children have all been vaccinated with said DTP and DTaP series to no ill effect.
But don’t suggest there exists no risk of real damage, though rare. Some parents come to a different decision than I, and I can assure you that it wasn’t an attempt to merely have an “easy” and “pleasant” doctor visit.
Don’t think a day ever goes by that at least a small “what if I hadn’t?” thought doesn’t go through my mind. Or the minds of those children who suffered very real, very documented adverse reactions to various vaccines.
Miki commented on Aug 30 10 at 12:38 pmEdirted to correct “Or the minds of those children who suffered very real, very documented adverse reactions to various vaccines.”
to:
“Or the minds of those PARENTS OF children who suffered very real, very documented adverse reactions to various vaccines.”
Rosana commented on Aug 30 10 at 1:43 pm*GASP* Really? :)
These people are never going to end the debate because they will always find lame reasons to argue that vaccines cause Autism.
Firs the retracted study, then the mercury in vaccines and now, the vaccine schedule. They will keep moving on and on among made up reasons to explain their believes. Sad!!!
KJ Dell'Antonia commented on Aug 30 10 at 2:33 pmYou’re right, perhaps it is easy sarcasm. I did not intend to suggest that there are no risks with vaccines, only that this isn’t one of them. The difficult decisions Miki made with three of her children suggest that even under those horrible circumstances, some parents still see that the collective benefit outweighs the risk, and it’s that willingness that protects most of our children.
I also didn’t mean to suggest that any of the people in question don’t have autism. It’s the autism “injury” from the vaccines that’s alleged. I imagine the autism itself is very real.It’s the complacent parents certain that their kids will never suffer from any of these illnesses, or worse, pass them on to an infant or another child, that make me angry.
Andrea commented on Aug 30 10 at 3:13 pmAnd how many courts ruled, for nearly FIFTY years, that cigarette smoking ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER?
The studies thus far looking at the link between autism and vaccines DO NOT USE unvaccinated children as a control group. That’s right. You read that correctly. For example, when exploring whether the mercury in MMR causes austism, the Lancet study compared children who received all vaccines against other children who received all vaccines EXCEPT the MMR. The Lancet study DID NOT compare the rates of austism in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. The CDC REFUSES to fund such a study, despite the fact that there are ample unvaccinated children to enrol in a voluntary study. A privately funded study in Oregon that compared vaccinated and COMPLETELY UNVACCINATED children found that vaccinated boys had nearly 300 times the rate of autism compared to unvaccinated boys.
Until we have a national study comparing the rates of autism in vaccinated and unvaccinated children, my children will remain unvaccinated until they are physically big enough to handle the vaccines.
Laure68 commented on Aug 30 10 at 3:30 pm@Andrea – people use the cigarette analogy, but it is absolutely not the same. The science, since the 30′s at least, has shown that cigarettes cause cancer. Just like the science today cannot show a link between vaccines and autism. And you talk about mercury but thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001. (It was actually removed in 1999, but it took 2 years to use up the vaccines that were already manufactured.) Since then there has been no drop in autism rates.
Do you have a link to that Oregon study? Up to now, all the (retrospective) studies I have seen have actually shown that unvaccinated kids have a higher incidence of autism. (The reason being that areas where vaccination rates are low tend to be higher-income, and these people are more likely to be able to get a diagnosis of autism.) I like science and would be interested in seeing other studies, though. (The anti-vaxxers I have met have been the opposite. They have already set in their minds that vaccines cause autism, and no amount of data will change their minds.)
Laure68 commented on Aug 30 10 at 3:33 pmAlso, when people complain that the CDC will not fund a study comparing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations, they are usually talking about a prospective study. Sure, a prospective study is the best way to gather data, because you can control for other factors while a retrospective study can never do this. However, a prospective study would entail taking a large number of children and not vaccinating them while them, their parents, and their physicians wouldn’t know which kids were vaccinated and which were not. Since we understand the great benefits of vaccines, this would be absolutely unethical, and would never pass a review board. People don’t understand that, in order to start a clinical trial, you have to have some preliminary data showing that it is a good idea. (That is, the theory being tested in feasible and it won’t cause a large risk to the general population.)
bettywu commented on Aug 30 10 at 6:54 pmThank you Andrea for proving the point that there is no amount of reason that will ever break through. Please keep your kids the hell away from babies and pregnant ladies.
goddess commented on Aug 30 10 at 7:07 pmShouldn’t pregnant ladies be up-to-date on their own vaccines? And people take newborns out in public WAAAAAYYYYYY to early compared to years gone by. There was a good reason people kept kids in fo the 1st 2 months, whenever possible.
Also- do you realize that vaccines are not 100% efficacious? n fact, the current Varivax only was found to be 40% efficacious, thus the need for another booster. The pertussis component of the DTaP is only 80-85% effective after the series is given. Vaccinated children can also be carriers/transmitters of these diseases.
goddess commented on Aug 30 10 at 7:08 pmHow many adults here have current pertussis vaccine status?
Laure68 commented on Aug 30 10 at 7:50 pm@goddess – yes, vaccines are not 100% effective. That is why it is so important for everyone to be vaccinated, save for those who have a medical reason not to be. Even though they are not 100% effective on an individual basis, if most people get vaccinated that will stop the spread of the disease and will help those who didn’t get immune through the vaccine. The small pox vaccine was not 100% effective either, but we were still able to eradicate the disease.
I for one do have my pertussis booster. Our doctor recommended it to us about 4 years ago, and both my husband and I got the shot. I guess I should be thankful that our doc is so up to date and thorough, because I have heard many people say they don’t have this booster.
Laure68 commented on Aug 30 10 at 7:51 pmbtw, when I say “most people” I mean the percentage necessary for herd immunity.
Wow commented on Aug 30 10 at 10:44 pmKJ – While I still don’t agree with you (about the vaccination/autism link) – I *do* appreciate the response and clarification. Keep on writing and bringing these issues out for rational discussion!
Linda commented on Aug 30 10 at 11:58 pmActually, autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated children are the same.
Rosana commented on Aug 31 10 at 9:25 amSee, now the use the cigarette argument. Tomorrow, they will move on to some other argument.
Samantha commented on Aug 31 10 at 12:54 pmNot everyone who is delaying or avoiding vaccines is doing it because of autism fears. I have significant allergies which don’t allow me to receive most vaccines and I’ve chosen to delay my daughters vaccines because I do not want to take a chance that she will likewise have these allergies. Part of that also means that I am choosing not to take her to as many places for the first few months because I know she won’t be receiving vaccines on the recommended schedule.
Honestly, I am also concerned at how many recommended vaccines there are. Neither my husband or I ever had a flu shot as a child (nor as adults) and Hep B was not recommended until I was in high school. I’m not sure I agree that low-risk newborns need a vaccine against that.
Vaccines exist for a reason, but I don’t see what’s wrong with questioning things either, rather than blindly trusting the medical profession.
Andrea commented on Aug 31 10 at 2:29 pmNational Autism Prevalence Trends From United States Special Education Data
Pediatrics, March 2005, Craig J. Newschaffer, PhD [Johns Hopkins University].This study shows that the rise in the incidence of autism is real and that the greatest increase took place between 1987 and 1992, which matches the timing of the near-tripling of vaccines given to our children and the tripling of mercury within those vaccines.
This study is worth reading, too. It is one of the only studies that compares vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years
Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, September 2008, Carolyn Gallagher and Melody Goodman.“The odds of receiving EIS [special education services] were approximately nine times as great for vaccinated boys (n¼46) as for unvaccinated boys (n¼7), after adjustment for confounders. This study found statistically significant evidence to suggest that boys in United States who were vaccinated with the triple series Hepatitis B vaccine, during the time period in which vaccines were manufactured with thimerosal, were more susceptible to developmental disability than were unvaccinated boys.”
And, while it is true that thimerosal, a type of mercury, was removed from vaccines, another type of mercury called ethyl mercury remains, and may be even more toxic than the thimerosal. Thimerosal continues to be used in flu shots.
Add your take:
Note: Babble is a supportive, diverse community. We encourage a range of opinions,
but any unduly hostile comments will be removed.
Comments are delayed up to 15 minutes
Lori Garcia 
Joslyn Gray 
Amber Doty 
Julianna Miner 
Monica Bielanko 
Sierra Black 
Meredith Carroll 
Carolyn Castiglia 
Sunny Chanel 
Madeline Holler 
Rebecca Odes 
Danielle Smith 
Danielle Sullivan 
Katherine Stone 
The Walt Disney Company supports Babble as a platform dedicated to honest, engaged, informed, intelligent and open conversation about parenting. However, the opinions expressed on this site are those of individual parents/writers and do not reflect the views of Disney. In addition, content provided on this site is for entertainment or informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, treatment, or safety advice.
0