Vaccines don't cause autism (duh)

[Jimmy Stang]

This is timely:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/the...children,35731

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I am starting to think we should just put anti-vacciners on an ice flow....

Floe.

Sorry UCB, couldn't resist bugging you a little.

As an aside, pertinent to the vax discussion, I would recommend an excellent book, called Your Baby's Best Shot: Why Vaccines Are Safe and Save Lives. It's co-authored by E. Allison Hagood and Stacy Mintzer Herlihy.

Your Baby’s Best Shot is written for the parent who does not have a background in science, research, or medicine, and who is confused and overwhelmed by the massive amount of information regarding the issue of child vaccines. New parents are worried about the decisions that they are making regarding their children’s health, and this work helps them wade through the information they receive in order to help them understand that vaccinating their child is actually one of the simplest and smartest decisions that they can make. Covering such topics as vaccine ingredients, how vaccines work, what can happen when populations don’t vaccinate their children, and the controversies surrounding supposed links to autism, allergies, and asthma, the authors provide an overview of the field in an easy to understand guide for parents.

Even if you're not a parent, it's excellent reading. The forward is by Paul Offit.

Originally Posted by Booklist

This thoroughly researched book should convince even ardent vaccine skeptics that the benefits of giving kids shots to prevent illnesses far outweigh any negatives. The authors are not big names in the vaccine world (one is a freelance writer, and the other is a psychology professor). Yet they show a commanding knowledge of their topic. In a coup that lends credibility to their scientifically sound book, they nabbed a foreword by Paul Offit, the famous University of Pennsylvania pediatrician who coinvented the rotavirus vaccine and who forcefully (and correctly) maintained that autism is not linked to inoculations. Herlihy and Hagood present many interesting facts: today there are vaccines against 22 diseases; George Washington and Abraham Lincoln survived smallpox; in 1979, smallpox officially became “the first disease conquered by human efforts”; the flavor enhancer MSG is added to vaccines to preserve their efficacy. An index would have been helpful, but this book, with its extensive notes and bibliography, should go a long way toward convincing even the most leery that vaccines save lives. (Booklist)

[Harry Lime]

Wow, there is a lot of vitriol on this thread. I have to admit that I've only scanned through the posts, as when someone begins labeling the other party I tend to tune out myself.

There is a lot of reference to the 'science' community being this cohesive whole of integrity. It's not. Much of the backlash that this thread is seeing is probably based in the perceived honesty of the source. That source being an industry which has been known to put profit before the health of its customers.

I believe in vaccination. I also believe that if a pharmaceutical company doesn't have a monetary reason to improve their product, they won't. Every time I get a vaccination for something, I feel like I'm being inundated with 1970s science.

Is there anyone on here, who isn't one of the attack dogs, who knows whether vaccinations are continuously updated in quality and effectiveness, or are we getting the same juice I did when I was in grade 3? Sorry if this is a repeated question.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Wow, there is a lot of vitriol on this thread. I have to admit that I've only scanned through the posts, as when someone begins labeling the other party I tend to tune out myself.

Anti-vaxxers are no different than flat-earthers or young earth creationists. Their views are indisputably wrong, and they should be treated with contempt.

Is there anyone on here, who isn't one of the attack dogs, who knows whether vaccinations are continuously updated in quality and effectiveness, or are we getting the same juice I did when I was in grade 3? Sorry if this is a repeated question.

Yes, the ingredients of vaccines are updated over time. From the US Center for Disease Control (CDC):

Over the years, some people have had concerns that autism might be linked to the vaccines children receive. One vaccine ingredient that has been studied specifically is thimerosal, previously used as a preservative in many recommended childhood vaccines. However, in 2001 thimerosal was removed or reduced to trace amounts in all childhood vaccines except for one type of influenza vaccine, and thimerosal-free alternatives are available for influenza vaccine. Evidence from several studies examining trends in vaccine use and changes in autism frequency does not support such an association between thimerosal and autism. Furthermore, a scientific review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) concluded that "the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal–containing vaccines and autism." CDC supports the IOM conclusion that there is no relationship between vaccines containing thimerosal and autism rates in children.

Emphasis added.

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Con...ism/Index.html

[corporatejay]

Sadly.....

An Ontario mother is sending a warning to parents who choose not to vaccinate their children, with a now-viral photo of her five-week-old daughter who ended up in hospital after contracting whooping cough.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/mother-...#ixzz2yKc2Vug0

[strombad]

I think we could safely say there are three distinct groups in this discussion:

Pro Vaccine
Believe in the benefits of vaccine, come from a large variety of backgrounds and utilise varied sources of scientific information to sort their claims. Scientific information is either trusted after critical thinking or trusted outright. Science is key, critical thinking is important but not always utilised.

Anti-Vaccine
Rely on misinformation and claims proven distinctly false to backup their claim, use information sourced only from those without scientific credibility. Claim to be thinking, but blatantly ignore any actual pieces of information. Neither science nor critical thinking are deemed important.

Question Science
Claim to be of a pro-vaccine stance while preaching less criticism of the anti-vax crowd and more criticism of science. Claim critical thinking is important, but can't be bother to think critically about both sides of the argument, so they sit essentially in the middle. Generally untrusting of 'Big Pharm' or regulated bodies that may profit. Science is secondary to critical thinking.

I don't know what I find more bothersome, the anti-vaccine crowd or the pseudo intellectual crowd that praise critical thinking and 'what if' over cold, hard evidence. On one hand, you have the anti-vaccine crowd. Their a fun bunch, similar to (as previously stated) the 'world is flat' group, and 'cigarettes aren't bad at all!' group. Both looked on historically with laughter. On the other? The great 'voices of reason'! Capable, apparently, of greater critical thinking than the general population. Ironically, these people are only actually critical of science, and take a stance that (while not directly defending anti-vaxx) looks more favourably on a position where absolutely no critical thinking is utilised to come to their conclusion (anti-vax) over a position that is the most logically sound with or without critical thinking.

In short, yeah, we get it, you don't trust big pharm but you get vaccinated anyway, clearly you're misunderstanding the conversation if you think you're some how more intellectually sound than pro-vaxx. If anything, you're much closer to the anti-vaxx crowd than the crowd that can ACTUALLY use critical thinking and scientific information to come to their conclusion.

I swear, the "Wow you pro-vaxxers are mean!" crowd would pipe down if we were making fun of someone who said "The sun isn't hot," which, frankly, is about as sound of a claim as "vaccines are more dangerous than not getting them (autism!!!!)".

[Inglewood Jack]

is there a vaccine that helps prevent severe cases of ignorance? did anyone make that joke yet?

[Flamesoholic]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Wow, there is a lot of vitriol on this thread. I have to admit that I've only scanned through the posts, as when someone begins labeling the other party I tend to tune out myself.

There is a lot of reference to the 'science' community being this cohesive whole of integrity. It's not. Much of the backlash that this thread is seeing is probably based in the perceived honesty of the source. That source being an industry which has been known to put profit before the health of its customers.

I believe in vaccination. I also believe that if a pharmaceutical company doesn't have a monetary reason to improve their product, they won't. Every time I get a vaccination for something, I feel like I'm being inundated with 1970s science.

Is there anyone on here, who isn't one of the attack dogs, who knows whether vaccinations are continuously updated in quality and effectiveness, or are we getting the same juice I did when I was in grade 3? Sorry if this is a repeated question.

Here's my perspective;

A lot of the vitriol and anger comes from being absolutely frustrated by these people's refusal to reconsider that the "study" and that stupid ex-stripper they are basing their autism claims on has been proven over and over to be false.

I'm angry as hell that these people are jeopardizing my family's health. I'm angry because once I give birth in November I will have to worry about what interactions we could have that could increase chances of my newborn getting infected with a completely preventable, potentially fatal disease that these people are allowing to resurge.
The arrogance and selfishness of anti-vaxxers infuriates me. They are jeopardizing those who legitimately can not get vaccinated and are decreasing the protection for those of us who have vaccinated, all because they believe that they know better than the people who have dedicated their lives to bettering human health.
They constantly talk about how us pro-vaccine people need to better educate ourselves to the "truth" but they won't take their own advice and read peer reviewed, proper scientific studies on why the anti-vax stance is dangerous.

If they want to keep speculating on the cause, there are tonnes of new studies out there that speculate what could be the link to autism. Why do they hold on to the one thing that hurts innocent people? The one "study" that has been proven false?
Just in a quick search through google and there's articles that there could be a link to Tylenol use during pregnancy and autism. Why aren't they jumping on that bandwagon? Or the urban smog theory? Or Monsanto? (I mean they get blamed for everything else so why not?) Or here's a crazy one, what about the possibility that it is all just genetics? They refuse to consider anything but their stubborn belief that it's the vaccines.
If it was just them getting hurt by their decision then I would probably just shake my head and quote Forrest Gump's mother quietly to myself, but it's not just them. They are dangerous, dangerous people. Basically they are public health terrorists and I'm one pissed off Momma bear in protection mode.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by troutman

I'm starting to think vaccinations should be mandatory, like seat belts.

I think what should be brought in are consequences for failure to vaccinate your children. Doesn't Ontario have some kind of law that if your child has not been vaccinated that the child can be denied entrance into the school system?

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Sadly.....

With Pertussis, the infection is usually carried from a/the adult, who hasn't updated their vaccination. So not only vaccinate your kids, but check into what boosters that you, as the adult, need to get.

We have a friend who was planning on stopping by a health unit to check and see what adult boosters she needed, and got sick before she could get there and it was Pertussis. She was pretty ill, and had to inform a whole schwack of people about it, since it's so contagious.

You can get the booster in your 3rd trimester, if you're pregnant, between weeks 27 and 36, to pass on some short term protection to your newborn.

[Burninator]

Further to what Flamesoholic said there are constantly posters in these threads "just asking questions" but they don't listen to the answers. They just use the guise of "asking questions" to promote their anti-vaccination stance.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Further to what Flamesoholic said there are constantly posters in these threads "just asking questions" but they don't listen to the answers.

Also known as 'askholes.'

[corporatejay]

Or JAQoffs

[joe_mullen]

the amusing thing about the big pharma anti-vax argument is that big pharma actually has a great incentive to NOT have people vaccinated. it costs significantly more to treat sick people than to prevent disease. if we stop enough people from vaccinating (for any condition), eventually enough will get sick to the point where health care costs skyrocket even further, causing a profit bonanza for, you guessed it, big pharma.

obviously, there are many more relevant reasons for why we should all be vaccinated that other have written about very eloquently.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

the amusing thing about the big pharma anti-vax argument is that big pharma actually has a great incentive to NOT have people vaccinated. it costs significantly more to treat sick people than to prevent disease. if we stop enough people from vaccinating (for any condition), eventually enough will get sick to the point where health care costs skyrocket even further, causing a profit bonanza for, you guessed it, big pharma.

obviously, there are many more relevant reasons for why we should all be vaccinated that other have written about very eloquently.

That's almost true. However, Big Pharma has done their homework and they determined that the money they are losing out vaccinating things like the Measles is more than made up by the revenue they make on medications treating people with autism, autism that was a result of the original vaccination.

/pure and utter sarcasm

[IliketoPuck]

Its pretty simple.

If you strip away the hyperbole from each side, no one is denying that vaccines help reduce the prevalence of serious diseases in society.

How then, can you in good conscience, knowingly subject the most fragile and susceptible members of our society to an increased risk of fatal or life altering diseases, that can be almost entirely prevented by vaccination?

The statistics about 1/38, 1/48, 1/whatever kids have autism are irrelevant (even though vaccines do not cause autism). Those with autism can live happy, functioning lives in society. If your actions cause someone to contract a fatal disease, you take away their opportunity at life. Period.

Not vaccinating is reckless and endangers those in our society who cannot protect themselves. That's not up for debate. Knowingly putting infants, those with immunodeficiencies, and the elderly at risk is reprehensible.

Backing up arguments with psuedo-science and straw-man's does not make one sound intelligent. It only amounts to more noise being created about something which should not be up for discussion. Sadly, in our society oftentimes those who stomp their feet the loudest gain the most traction.

It's one thing if your actions only impact you. When your actions impact society as a whole, and most importantly, those who can't protect themselves from your actions, those actions should have consequences.

My wife and I have a 5 month old daughter. The recent measles outbreak in Calgary is troubling, because we have no way of controlling if we might come into contact with it. It certainly won't affect either of us since we've had our vaccinations, but my daughter does not get to have that protection yet. I can't even imagine the rage I would feel if she contracted a disease that is completely preventable if certain members of society would get their heads out of their collective....

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

What do you mean by "science" people?

She's referring to you and I. We, and countless others, suck. Damn.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

My wife and I have a 5 month old daughter. The recent measles outbreak in Calgary is troubling, because we have no way of controlling if we might come into contact with it. It certainly won't affect either of us since we've had our vaccinations, but my daughter does not get to have that protection yet. I can't even imagine the rage I would feel if she contracted a disease that is completely preventable if certain members of society would get their heads out of their collective....

One thing to put you at ease. Your 5 month old daughter likely has naturally aquired passive immunity to measles right now if your wife was vaccinated, as maternal antibodies are passed through the placenta in pregnancy, as well as found in breast milk (which can also then help with bacterial infections in the gut). This provides the induction of passive vaccine responses for around the 1st year of life, depending on the individual.

[Nage Waza]

Here is a reddit post from an autistic person and his stance on anti vaxxers (NSFW):

http://www.reddit.com/r/offmychest/c..._spectrum_hey/

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Hockeymummabear3

With 1 in 42 boys with autism, pretty soon we won't have enough kids to scrape together a weak minor hockey league. That should worry people. Unfortunately, the "science" people are more worried about just shutting down genuine conversation and mire nuanced questions on the issue. It isn't so black and white as some try to make it.

So based on studies that have been debunked repeatedly, you would rather risk your child (or someone else's child) get incredibly sick or even die from an entirely curable disease, just to be positive your child isn't autistic? When people with autism often live perfectly happy, wonderful, productive lives? When it's been proven time and again that vaccines don't cause autism? Which means your child could end up autistic and it could also die of a horrible, preventable disease.

That's some damn good parenting there, well done.