Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
njtosd
ParticipantI took another look around and found this article from Autismspeaks.org that shows a review 10 studies representing 1.2 million cases of autism and analyzes the effect of vaccines. This article goes so far as to state that if anything, the MMR vaccine is PROTECTIVE AGAINST AUTISM. I would question the protectiveness but wonder whether the data speak more to the genetics of the parents in terms of their ability to make a decision whether or not to vaccinate (i.e. parents on the autism spectrum might be less likely to vaccinate and more likely to have children with autism), but that is a separate issue.
Participant[quote=zk]And perhaps your misunderstanding of how this works is also partly responsible for your suspicion of a cover up. If you think that each new case needs to be investigated in order to understand what’s happening, then you’d expect the government to be very interested in each new case. The reason they’re not as interested as you’d like isn’t because of a cover up. It’s because the science has already been done. Many times. At some point, you’re just wasting your time and money investigating something that’s already been proven incorrect. The government doesn’t want to hear about it if you suspect that you were cured by bloodletting, either. That’s not because of a cover up. It’s because the science has been done already.[/quote]
I tend to agree with the idea that the decision not to treat (if this actually happened) was motivated by something other than a cover up. I also agree that it would be an improper use of public funds to continue investigating a claim that has been reasonably investigated in the past and found to be unsupported.
Which reminds me of one other question that I had for CARenter. Is there a reliable database somewhere showing these “thousands” of children who have been harmed? Do they appear on the VAERS database? If so, what is the name of the symptom that they developed following their vaccination? If they are not in the database, are there thousands of letters from the CDC explaining why they were excluded, or even confirming that they were excluded?
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]If I do x and y happens shortly thereafter it’s gonna be very hard 4 me to believe in my bones there’s no causation even if the science is overwhelming otherwise.
This local pattern spotting is how each of us had surviving ancestors…there was no time to wait for science[/quote]
One of my professors long ago used the following example to illustrate the problem with believing that two things coincident in time are causally related:
….[T]he greatest factor was mistaking correlation for causation. The classic example of this logic error: claiming that people going through the revolving doors of Macy’s department store power the escalator inside. The proof? When you look inside the store when the doors are locked, the escalator is no longer moving!
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]Here’s some legal advice.
If you have to go to trial and choose between 2 lawyers. One who’s real good with the law, data or scientific evidence….and another one who seems a little dumber but who is a riveting storyteller…
Take the latter.[/quote]
I have known a few who were good at both – and that is the best. But I agree, if you have to choose, take door number two. Most decisions are made emotionally.
ParticipantCARenter – The thimerosal was removed for the same reason that there is not a 13th floor in most buildings. There are enough people who believe that something bad will happen to them on the unlucky 13th floor that the building management gives in and pretends that the 13th floor doesn’t exist. And I’m sure if I googled it there is someone out there with evidence that bad things have happened to office dwellers unlucky enough to work on the 13th floor.
Participant[quote=CA renter]
Let’s just say that if you had personally experienced what these other families had, my guess is that you would feel differently. Sometimes, anecdotal evidence is enough to make one question the official message.
And, just as you’ve noted in your other posts, the benefits of vaccination to society generally outweigh the risks to certain individuals who might be genetically(?) predisposed to autism which might be triggered by vaccinations. That is reason enough for the medical community to circle the wagons and refute any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that might cause people to stop vaccinating their children in large numbers.
BTW, these parents were all very well-educated and financially well-off. They were not uneducated “idiots” who were looking for a payout from the pharmaceutical industry.[/quote]
You have absolutely misinterpreted what I said. Just for clarity – I do not believe that vaccines have EVER caused autism. I do believe that people with allergies to eggs might develop a serious allergic reaction to a flu vaccine (if it’s a heat killed vaccine where the virus was grown in eggs). You and I agree that there has been no proof of a systemic sensitivity to thimerosal, therefore I do not believe that it is (was) a consideration when deciding on whether to vaccinate.
Being smart does not stop people from being misguided (Unibomber etc). As I’ve said in an earlier post I think the parents of autistic/Aspergers kids have a higher than average chance of displaying symptoms that might tend to interfere with their ability to interpret the causation of their children’s affliction.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Well, I’m very much a numbers, facts, and figures type of person with an IQ above the 99th percentile, and I’m also intelligent enough to know when a conflict of interest exists. Some don’t have that same ability, or they’re too naive to understand why or how it might exist.
Again, anecdote almost always precedes science. People thought that Dr. Semmelweis was an “idiot” for thinking that washing hands might bring down hospital fatality rates. There are so very many examples where the medical community was doing something that was completely harmful to patients…and there were always “discredited idiots” who would cause an outcry about these practices…and they were eventually proven right. There are countless stories like this.[/quote]
Wait – you believe in IQ tests?? The data against those is mountainous compared to the data supporting a vaccine autism link. In any event, I would point to the helicobacter pylori controversy as a more modern example of what you are saying (ulcers caused by bacterial infection rather than acid/stress). In that case, the ridiculed doctor provided clear experimental data that he was right, the ridicule stopped, and those that discredited him had to eat crow. You never hear of people having surgery for ulcers anymore (good meds also contribute to this improvement). When (and if) similar data is generated to support your view, enough reasonable people exist who will take notice. The problem is that data supporting a vaccine/autism connection don’t exist other than anecdotally.
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]i didnt know parents mattered in those things autistic. i know a guy who is very very organized, hyperorganized, and demanding of order, and he has an autistic kid. i wonder if that is correlated somehow.[/quote]
I’m sure it is. For example: “When you look at “extreme” autism symptoms, genetics plays almost the only role, according to [a] study, led by clinical psychologist Thomas W. Frazier II of the Cleveland Clinic.”
http://iancommunity.org/autism-twins-study
There is some suggestion that the rise in autism has to do with assortive mating. In other words, in the 50s (and earlier), geeky math professors married the nice girl that they met in high school or the secretary at work or a nice salesgirl – so the geeky-ness (aspergers) was diluted. Now geeky male math professors (engineers, etc.) have the opportunity to meet geeky female math professors (engineers, etc.) at work and tend to marry them. According to the theory, there is a resulting concentration of whatever genes these are, rather than the dilution that may have happened in the past, thus giving rise to an increasing rate and severity of these symptoms.
ParticipantOne factor that I think influences the discussion about autism is that autism has a strong genetic component. In other words, on average, the rate of autism spectrum symptoms is much higher among the parents of autistic children. That would suggest that the people most interested in elucidating the causation of autism (parents of autistic children) are very likely to be afflicted with some level of autism-like symptoms themselves. These symptoms, in turn, may influence their view of the disorder and its causation. For example, parents of autistic children would be expected, on average, to have more trouble with preoccupations and more difficulty perceiving the whole of a situation vs. the parts. They may also have more difficulty factoring in the social influences that gave rise to the autism/vaccine scare (I.e. Lawyers paying Andrew Wakefield in hopes of getting big $ judgments for themselves and their clients). Which is not to say they are wrong …. But it does make you wonder.
ParticipantUnless you have a child with a demonstrated thimerosal sensitivity (and I”ve not seen any recorded cases of such), the portion of my text that you bolded doesn’t come into play. BTW, when you are quoting me, please do not add emphasis without noting “emphasis added by CARenter” (or whoever) or better yet, please don’t change my text at all and instead use your comments to express your views. You have sort of changed the meaning of what I said by bolding – as that text describes a very minor exception.
Please see Am. Acad. Of Ped. Summary of vaccine studies showing (among other things) complete lack of evidence of problems with thimerosal or a benefit in stretching schedule of vaccination. But perhaps the AAP is part of a conspiracy against children – you never know …….. https://www2.aap.org/immunization/families/faq/vaccinestudies.pdf
PS when did you buy the non-thimerosal vaccines?
ParticipantFor example, based on the data contained in the VAERS system there have been, at most (including coincidences, etc.), 338 deaths in the U.S. since 1990 attributable to all of the diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccines combined. In contrast, in 1921 ALONE, diphtheria ALONE was responsible for more than 15,000 deaths. For those out there who don’t know how death from diphtheria occurs, the diphtheria toxin results in a “pseudomembrane” slowly growing over the trachea, eventually suffocating the victim. Parents and/or family members watched this happen over 15,000 times in 1921. I’m sorry, Rand Paul IS an idiot.
Participant[quote=CA renter]
Remember that those who are ahead of science tend to be ridiculed by the current scientific establishment. It doesn’t help anyone’s cause to call those who have a different opinion “idiots” or “conspiracy theorists.” Anecdote almost always precedes science. Those “idiots” just might be right.[/quote]
Remember that those who are ridiculous also tend to be ridiculed by the current scientific establishment. It’s a cost benefit analysis. Yes, there will be a small number of people who are harmed by vaccines. But, overall, unless there are clear contraindications (egg allergy, etc.) being vaccinated is safer than not being vaccinated. For anyone who is interested, all of the reported vaccine adverse events since 1990 are here: http://vaers.hhs.gov/index. (Not sure whether someone else has pointed that out already.) My sister had varicella pneumonia (chicken pox in the lungs) in the 1960s at the age of 4. She was hospitalized where she contracted measles. She recovered, but it was a huge issue. Can’t understand why anyone would risk that.
Participant[quote=zk][quote=Aecetia]”The current Ebola virus’s hyper-evolution is unprecedented; there has been more human-to-human transmission in the past four months than most likely occurred in the last 500 to 1,000 years. Each new infection represents trillions of throws of the genetic dice.”
A lame and disappointing article. Just another fear monger with incomplete and incorrect information. He’s afraid that ebola could go airborne. But no human virus has ever changed its mode of transmission:
And the Canadian researchers did not prove that ebola “could be transmitted by the respiratory route from pigs to monkeys.”
http://healthmap.org/site/diseasedaily/article/pigs-monkeys-ebola-goes-airborne-112112
Nevermind the sensational title of the above link. Read the article.[/quote]
I agree with you in large part, however, we do not have perfect information with respect to viruses in terms of their history of changing or not changing modes of infection. Since all viruses presumably evolved from a single virus, we should probably assume that such a change has taken place – but over millenia, not in a few years.
Participant[quote=Aecetia]”The current Ebola virus’s hyper-evolution is unprecedented; there has been more human-to-human transmission in the past four months than most likely occurred in the last 500 to 1,000 years. Each new infection represents trillions of throws of the genetic dice.”
It seems as though people are always concerned about evolution in terms of mode of transmission. So far, it hasn’t been known to happen.
” We know the virus is mutating. Could it adapt in a way that makes it airborne?
It’s highly unlikely. It would be unusual for a virus to transform in a way that changes its mode of infection. Of the 23 known viruses that cause serious disease in man, none are known to have mutated in ways that changed how they infect humans. Of course, we only know about a small portion of the existing viruses.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/09/03/can-ebola-go-airborne/
-
AuthorPosts
