Anti-vaccine attitudes based on that false claim still exist

[tzijlstra]

The numerous studies would have been epidemiological in nature to look for link between MMR and autism. One of the studies by the Cochrane Library involved reviews of other studies involving just over 14 and a half million children. Not one has found evidence of a link.

 

In 2014 another systematic review by the American Academy of Paediatrics went as far to state - There is strong evidence that MMR vaccine is not associated with autism.

 

That is great, did they also decide what autism was and how it occurs? Did they prove that there was not a link between mothers getting their MMR jabs and their children being autistic? Did they exclude the myriad of other potential factors? Did they even regard the numerous manifestations of autism in any of these studies? This is relevant because if you take 'autistic spectrum disorders' as criterium than you are ignoring the fact that there are potentially dozens, if not hundreds of different afflictions that can be considered to be part of that spectrum and can all have different triggers - at which point all studies that look at the whole spectrum by extracting numbers from medical databases are going to fall flat because the key criterium of what they claim to study is not defined enough (X all of a sudden becomes X1,X2,X3,X4... and so on diluting any potential causal relationship).

 

Epidemiological studies are notorious for their flakiness and are continuously under scrutiny by those that discuss the philosophy/theory of science, no offence to my colleagues who do large scale sociological/epidemiological quantitative studies but it is not a field I have particular faith in.

 

PS: I reiterate again that I have no reason to believe MMR jabs are or are not related to autism, I just seriously doubt the science that proves/disproves it on the simple premise that we still don't have a scooby about what autism actually is.

[JFKvsNixon]

That is great, did they also decide what autism was and how it occurs? Did they prove that there was not a link between mothers getting their MMR jabs and their children being autistic? Did they exclude the myriad of other potential factors? Did they even regard the numerous manifestations of autism in any of these studies? This is relevant because if you take 'autistic spectrum disorders' as criterium than you are ignoring the fact that there are potentially dozens, if not hundreds of different afflictions that can be considered to be part of that spectrum and can all have different triggers - at which point all studies that look at the whole spectrum by extracting numbers from medical databases are going to fall flat because the key criterium of what they claim to study is not defined enough (X all of a sudden becomes X1,X2,X3,X4... and so on diluting any potential causal relationship).

 

Epidemiological studies are notorious for their flakiness and are continuously under scrutiny by those that discuss the philosophy/theory of science, no offence to my colleagues who do large scale sociological/epidemiological quantitative studies but it is not a field I have particular faith in.

 

PS: I reiterate again that I have no reason to believe MMR jabs are or are not related to autism, I just seriously doubt the science that proves/disproves it on the simple premise that we still don't have a scooby about what autism actually is.

 

I believe the later studies would be looking for a link between MMR and autism rather looking to disprove a link, and there has not been any evidence linking the two. I repeat not one shred of evidence, statistically or medically and plenty of organisations have tried.

[MAC33]

You don't need organisations to prove a link!

 

Countless parents who have seen their kids regress to a veggie state after vaccination is good enough evidence for me.

[JFKvsNixon]

You don't need organisations to prove a link!

 

Countless parents who have seen their kids regress to a veggie state after vaccination is good enough evidence for me.

 

Even though the research refute any statistical link between the two?

 

I'm not denying that there will be parents will have noticed the signs of Autism arising during the child's development, which just happens to be around the time that they children have had the MMR vaccination. The numbers of these parents have been so small that no suggestion of a statical link between the two has ever been found.

[tzijlstra]

Even though the research refute any statistical link between the two?

 

I'm not denying that there will be parents will have noticed the signs of Autism arising during the child's development, which just happens to be around the time that they children have had the MMR vaccination. The numbers of these parents have been so small that no suggestion of a statical link between the two has ever been found.

 

But what is the value of a statistical link? Seriously JFK, you're a smart fellow, I don't think I am entirely mistaken when I think you work at a Uni? What is the value of a statistical link in this case?

 

They noticed an increase in storks during the same year that more babies were born, there was no causal relation, but once you mapped everything out according to the appropriate parameters you would find one proving beyond doubt that storks deliver babies.

 

How many environmental factors are involved with the development of autism in a child? We haven't got a clue. None. So you can't prove or disprove a link, end of.

[JFKvsNixon]

But what is the value of a statistical link? Seriously JFK, you're a smart fellow, I don't think I am entirely mistaken when I think you work at a Uni? What is the value of a statistical link in this case?

 

They noticed an increase in storks during the same year that more babies were born, there was no causal relation, but once you mapped everything out according to the appropriate parameters you would find one proving beyond doubt that storks deliver babies.

 

How many environmental factors are involved with the development of autism in a child? We haven't got a clue. None. So you can't prove or disprove a link, end of.

 

After no medical link between MMR and Autism could be found, the causation if you like, it's still import to rule out a correlation. As you suggest, maybe there could have been some action that wasn't known that may provide the link. Once statistics also rule out any correlation between MMR and Autism, then it is a sound conclusion to say that there is not link between the two.

 

So before you discount the value of statistics within medical research, this research discussed in the Guardian describes the value:

 

It sought to find out whether children who had older siblings with autism and therefore were at higher risk than most, were more likely to develop an autistic spectrum disorder themselves after having the MMR jab. They found no association between the jab and autism, even among the high-risk children, and regardless of whether they had just the first shot, under the age of two, or the booster as well at around the age of five.

 

Of course, as with any science we can only ever say this is what we know with the information we have, but it is a subject that has been researched exhaustively, and no link has ever been found.

 

Even the conspiracists must acknowledge that there is more money in it for the pharmaceuticals for them to sell multiple vaccines than the MMR.

 

Let us never forget that the whole theory comes from one individual's piece of discredited research, who was later found to have a financial interests in multiple vaccinations and struck off the medical register for malpractice due to his approach to the research.

Edited February 10, 2016 by JFKvsNixon

[Obelix]

You don't need organisations to prove a link!

 

Countless parents who have seen their kids regress to a veggie state after vaccination is good enough evidence for me.

 

Proof?

 

Oh I forget - you dont do "proof" You just spurt rubbish and hope people are not so tiresome as to ask for evidence.

 

Have you answered your list of outstanding questions yet?

 

---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 01:31 ----------

 

But what is the value of a statistical link? Seriously JFK, you're a smart fellow, I don't think I am entirely mistaken when I think you work at a Uni? What is the value of a statistical link in this case?

 

They noticed an increase in storks during the same year that more babies were born, there was no causal relation, but once you mapped everything out according to the appropriate parameters you would find one proving beyond doubt that storks deliver babies.

 

How many environmental factors are involved with the development of autism in a child? We haven't got a clue. None. So you can't prove or disprove a link, end of.

 

IT's up to the proposer of a position to prove it, not to JFK to disprove it.

 

There has been no causal link EVER found between vaccination and autism. The work of Andrew Wakefield has been thoroughly debunked and shownm to be dishonest, false, and for monetary gain.

 

---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 01:36 ----------

 

Well,we had 15 kids collapse recently at a Northampton school after receiving a vaccine.

 

Now I'd say collapsing is a pretty serious adverse reaction.

 

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6889652/Horror-as-up-to-15-kids-COLLAPSE-after-having-jabs-at-school.html

 

We had an entire class at school collapse, and puke, bar a few kids when someone fainted as he was presented with the TB needle.

 

Of course we didnt bother to do something insane like report it to the papers, because we weren't whiney backboneless idiots. It's called group hysteria, and you seem to doa good job of displaying it with every post.

[Phanerothyme]

1. Vaccines carry small risk and not having it causes no risk of side effects.

2.You benefit very little by being vaccinated if all others are and were vaccinated for generation or two as there is almost no risk of catching whatever that vaccine is for.

 

Exactly. There is even a vaccine damage compensation scheme in operation, although there have been petitions to change the eligibility criteria.

 

https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment/overview

 

Any time you deliberately breach the body's circulatory systems and inject anything, there's a risk.

 

It's possible to catch polio from the faeces of a recently immunised child.

 

Risk can be very accurately measured, and has been for vaccines, at great length and in great detail.

 

If people don't believe the figures then they need to measure the risks themselves, in a way that can be replicated.

[MAC33]

Something like 3 billion has been paid out in the States to the unfortunate victims of these shots.

 

That's 3 billion with a B not an M.

 

That's three thousand million----think about that figure for a few minutes!

 

But the damage they do is minimal right?

[sgtkate]

Something like 3 billion has been paid out in the States to the unfortunate victims of these shots.

 

That's 3 billion with a B not an M.

 

That's three thousand million----think about that figure for a few minutes!

 

But the damage they do is minimal right?

 

Compared to my child getting polio I'd say so yes.