Study showing vaccines cause autism is 'elaborate fraud'.

Pages

British Medical Journal article.
Link to Anderson Cooper's interview and comments.

Andrew Wakefield's 1998 paper showing a link between vaccinations (specifically the MMR vaccination) and autism was an elaborate fraud, according to investigative reporter Brian Deer.

Of course, there has long been debate about this issue, with most of the scientific research heavily favouring the vaccines as being safe and in no way causing autism. Ten of the co-authors of the paper withdrew their names after it was shown that Wakefield failed to mention that he had received over GB£400,000 to support his case. The Lancet, which published the controversial paper, retracted it in February 2010, after calling it 'fatally flawed' as early as 2004. And of course, Wakefield was stripped of his medical licence in May 2010.

The anti-vaccine movement has already responded saying that Wakefield is the victim of a smear campaign. Wendy Fournier of the National Autism Association says that she cannot imagine why Wakefield would distort data, and that he is a man of integrity.

Personally, I'm all for vaccinations. There has been no credible study linking the MMR vaccine to autism. The fear that Wakefield's report and various anti-vaccine activist groups have stirred has caused a significant drop in vaccine rates, with the result that children are dying of things they shouldn't be, like pertussis (whooping cough). Infection rates are going up, and herd immunity is being compromised. I sincerely hope that all parents who are on the fence about vaccinating their children will look at the evidence and protect their children by vaccinating them.

Hopefully the ones on the fence will come down on the right side, and a few of the "anti-vaccination" people will come around. There are some people who are very heavily invested in the myth, however. Parents who used to unreasonably blame themselves now have something to fight. Others have tied the cause to their reputation. Those are the people who will use things like, "he seems like too nice a guy" as a defense. You can't measure "niceness." They won't be changing their minds.

How one can base an immutable belief on the testimony of a single document that has since been found to be faulty, flawed, dishonest, and has even been retracted, I will never understand.

You mean Jenny McCarthy was wrong? That's unpossible!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

That is awesome.

And the comments by Jenny McCarthy on how the pharmaceutical industry is using the media to try to discredit the anti-vaccination crowd, something that the anti-vaccination crowd has been doing for years whenever they parade an autistic person in front of the cameras like some mascot, is pure hypocrisy.

I really hope that Wakefield and his collaborators get some old-school British justice (pike --> head).

Sadly, the wikipedia entry on Jenny McCarthy has been reverted. For a short while, it read:

... is an American adult model, comedian, actress, author, and activist/murderer whose ardent anti-vaccine quackery has doomed an unknown number of children to painful deaths by otherwise controllable diseases.

It makes you wonder -- is it worthwhile to become a social pariah to a huge majority of the world if you generate a small cadre of viciously loyal followers? Are Fred Phelps and Jenny McCarthy successful?

I have a sliver of sympathy for Wakefield. His premise was simple-I need to make my more costly and new medicine look good and sell it. Then the sh*t storm spiraled out of control. And what has become lost is how some groups like anti science, anti-medicine will cling to anything. But it also shines a light on our terribly flawed pharmaceutical structure. I am still unclear where the line is that he crossed that homeopaths, or other alternative snake oils have not, or where Pfizer has not with their marketing. Was his sin trying to peddle it on a legitimate journal?

I have no sympathy for Wakefield. His personal wealth has absolutely nothing to do with science, and if that is how he determined the content of his paper, then he is not a scientist. His sin was trying to peddle his nonsense on a legitimate journal, yes, because you see that is what makes the journal legitimate and that is its purpose.

There is no justification for this. Children have died slow, painful deaths because of what he did out of greed, and he tarnished the name of the Lancet in the process.

The only sympathy I have for him is in that I would not wish to be him right now.

Nevin73 wrote:

You mean Jenny McCarthy was wrong? That's unpossible!

Can't be. She seems so nice!

KingGorilla wrote:

I am still unclear where the line is that he crossed that homeopaths, or other alternative snake oils have not, or where Pfizer has not with their marketing. Was his sin trying to peddle it on a legitimate journal?

For me, the line he crossed is that he falsified data in his report, and that as a result of that falsified data, there are currently kids who otherwise would not be sick.

He also paid children at a party to take their blood.... Very ethical.

TBH, i thought we were past all this a couple of years ago. It's sickening the epidemics of measles that're ripping through children younger than 10 right now. Stupid parents and stupid media....

Mud, I am more wondering how he crossed this line yet the British Chiropractic Assn or any number of flavor of the month nonsense(ear candles, tea steam, herbs, etc) has not crossed the same or a similar line. It seems like arbitrary enforcement of ethics when conmpared to the grander scheme. We had senators trying to get faith healing covered by Medicare last year even. Wakefield seems, to me, more a symptom of the business of treatment than a greater problem.

He and age of autism are probably higher profile. But behind the scenes of the AMA we have accupuncture being advised for treating chemo nausea with similar "studies" to Wakefield's backing them up.

I'd bet good money that we'll never see any statement of regret, apology or responsibility from Jenny McCarthy & the rest of the celebrities pushing this.

Tanglebones wrote:

I'd bet good money that we'll never see any statement of regret, apology or responsibility from Jenny McCarthy & the rest of the celebrities pushing this.

Because they'll never admit they're wrong. Every new piece of evidence against Wakefield and the vaccine-autism link is just more proof of the vast conspiracy between Big Pharma and the scientific community to give all our children autism.

muttonchop wrote:

Because they'll never admit they're wrong. Every new piece of evidence against Wakefield and the vaccine-autism link is just more proof of the vast conspiracy between Big Pharma and the scientific community to give all our children autism.

Imagine the bedlam when Big Pharma creates an autism cure.

KingGorilla wrote:

Mud, I am more wondering how he crossed this line yet the British Chiropractic Assn or any number of flavor of the month nonsense(ear candles, tea steam, herbs, etc) has not crossed the same or a similar line. It seems like arbitrary enforcement of ethics when conmpared to the grander scheme. We had senators trying to get faith healing covered by Medicare last year even. Wakefield seems, to me, more a symptom of the business of treatment than a greater problem.

He and age of autism are probably higher profile. But behind the scenes of the AMA we have accupuncture being advised for treating chemo nausea with similar "studies" to Wakefield's backing them up.

I think it's a combination of falsifiability and evidence of wrongdoing/causing harm.

Homeopaths et al. make a bunch of claims about their pseudomedicine, but nothing concrete (i.e. they stick to claims along the lines of "X is good for Y"). By publishing data in a journal article, Wakefield was making concrete claims (along the lines of "X amount of Y causes A amount of change in B") in an official context that could be tested. That was shown to be false, so he got nailed to a wall.

The other aspect is that while homeopaths etc are generally selling something that may have no medical merit, it doesn't actually cause harm either (so long as it's used as a complementary rather than an alternative medicine). That gets into a grey area - what lengths do you go to to protect consumers? Should those high-priced gold-plated "performance" HDMI/RCA cables be banned, for example? It's further complicated by the placebo effect, since while the $500 magic water may be no more effective than tap water in a double-blind clinical trial, for some people it will be more effective than not taking anything. In contrast, scaring people into not getting vaccinations directly causes harm.

Of course, some homeopaths advise using their treatments to replace conventional medicine, and thus cause harm. I'd cheerfully jail those people for manslaughter, personally.

muttonchop wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

I'd bet good money that we'll never see any statement of regret, apology or responsibility from Jenny McCarthy & the rest of the celebrities pushing this.

Because they'll never admit they're wrong. Every new piece of evidence against Wakefield and the vaccine-autism link is just more proof of the vast conspiracy between Big Pharma and the scientific community to give all our children autism.

Hooray for confirmation bias!

Kraint wrote:

Sadly, the wikipedia entry on Jenny McCarthy has been reverted. For a short while, it read:

... is an American adult model, comedian, actress, author, and activist/murderer whose ardent anti-vaccine quackery has doomed an unknown number of children to painful deaths by otherwise controllable diseases.

Yikes. I'm not a parent, but seriously...one study convinces you that vaccines are bad? Despite all the evidence to the contrary. That's not very good science.

Seth wrote:
muttonchop wrote:

Because they'll never admit they're wrong. Every new piece of evidence against Wakefield and the vaccine-autism link is just more proof of the vast conspiracy between Big Pharma and the scientific community to give all our children autism.

Imagine the bedlam when Big Pharma creates an autism cure.

Nah, they'll never be able to cure already-existing cases. They'll just come out with a vaccine.

My wife spends too much time on pregnancy.org, where McCarthyism (heh) is pretty rampant, so I'm constantly having to talk her off this ledge. I will say, though, that the flu vaccine seems pretty useless, and I really don't understand the Chicken Pox vaccine. I remember going to a Pox Party as a kid so that I'd get it, but apparently they vaccinate now -- but it's only like 85% effective in early testing, so there are a bunch of people getting it as adults, when it's quite deadly, as opposed to as young kids, when it's a totally awesome time when you get to stay home from school and eat pudding, all for a little minor itching and discomfort. Our daughter got it at 11.5 months (they vaccinate at your 1st year checkup), and it was the first case our Ped. had seen in a child in over a decade. Crazy.

The MMR will become the MMRA. Of course, the rabble rousers will just call this a case of A Scanner Darkly. Or Homer Simpson's quote about beer would work too. "Vaccines: the cause of, and solution too, all of life's problems."

I share your attitudes on flu and chicken pox vaccines.

Duoae wrote:

He also paid children at a party to take their blood.... Very ethical.

Dammit. I knew there was something especially hinky about that clown...

muttonchop wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

I'd bet good money that we'll never see any statement of regret, apology or responsibility from Jenny McCarthy & the rest of the celebrities pushing this.

Because they'll never admit they're wrong. Every new piece of evidence against Wakefield and the vaccine-autism link is just more proof of the vast conspiracy between Big Pharma and the scientific community to give all our children autism.

This, and also...

They'll just keep moving the goal post. If we prove it's not mercury that causes it, then it must be some other chemical that hasn't been removed yet. If it's not one vaccine, then it must be the cumulative stress of the overall vaccine schedule. If that theory doesn't pan out, then it's only because the studies didn't account for a particular subset of children who are vulnerable to the vaccines and so on.

Flu can be deadly... it is a serious illness. Healthy people almost always survive, but if you're at all immunocompromised, elderly, or otherwise not in good shape, it can kill you.

We often confuse colds with flus.... if you don't feel like you got hit by a bus (and wish you maybe HAD been), it's not a flu.

Mytch wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:

You mean Jenny McCarthy was wrong? That's unpossible!

Can't be. She seems so nice!

And she sincerely believes. Doesn't that count for something?

Malor wrote:

Flu can be deadly... it is a serious illness. Healthy people almost always survive, but if you're at all immunocompromised, elderly, or otherwise not in good shape, it can kill you.

We often confuse colds with flus.... if you don't feel like you got hit by a bus (and wish you maybe HAD been), it's not a flu.

Flu kills between 100 and 1633 Americans annually, according to the CDC, and as you've pointed out, it's typically weaker members of our society -- the young, the old, the frail. I just question, at those microscopically low levels of risk, if an annual flu vaccine is ten pounds of prevention.

Interestingly, it makes getting a flu shot a lot like insurance. You're probably not going to get the flu, and you're almost definitely not going to die from it, but...hey it's 1 shot.

I may re think getting one.

(the flip side is that in years where there's a shortage, do I feel comfortable potentially taking a flu shot from someone who needs it more than I?)

Seth wrote:

(the flip side is that in years where there's a shortage, do I feel comfortable potentially taking a flu shot from someone who needs it more than I?)

You're still helping build herd-immunity. You never know which surfaces you touched may next come into contact with someone who is immuno-compromised. If it's something everyone needs to get, might as well get it and not be part of the problem. When there is a shortage, those who need it more than you (infirm, very old, very young, pregnant, etc) do get preferential dibs anyway, and the decision is made for you by people who are more aware of shortages and necessity.

KingGorilla wrote:

Mud, I am more wondering how he crossed this line yet the British Chiropractic Assn or any number of flavor of the month nonsense(ear candles, tea steam, herbs, etc) has not crossed the same or a similar line. It seems like arbitrary enforcement of ethics when conmpared to the grander scheme. We had senators trying to get faith healing covered by Medicare last year even. Wakefield seems, to me, more a symptom of the business of treatment than a greater problem.

He and age of autism are probably higher profile. But behind the scenes of the AMA we have accupuncture being advised for treating chemo nausea with similar "studies" to Wakefield's backing them up.

The difference is that my doctor is not reading about homeopathy in a trusted medical journal that's supposed to give him an overview of recent developments in the field of medicine. You're talking about personal beliefs and you're talking about politics. That's fine. This is America and people are allowed to believe what they want. That doesn't mean they're allowed to publish their beliefs as facts in a scientific journal.

Ballotechnic wrote:
Kraint wrote:

Sadly, the wikipedia entry on Jenny McCarthy has been reverted. For a short while, it read:

... is an American adult model, comedian, actress, author, and activist/murderer whose ardent anti-vaccine quackery has doomed an unknown number of children to painful deaths by otherwise controllable diseases.

Yikes. I'm not a parent, but seriously...one study convinces you that vaccines are bad? Despite all the evidence to the contrary. That's not very good science.

I believe that she has a son with autism and felt he was cured by diet change etc. and [i]I believe she feels it was brought on when he got a vaccine. Like 99% of people personal experience trumps science all the time.

Tanglebones wrote:

I'd bet good money that we'll never see any statement of regret, apology or responsibility from Jenny McCarthy & the rest of the celebrities pushing this.

Why would they apologize if they believe they are right? Have you hear apologies for the war in Iraq from those who started it? No, they move the goal posts - we didn't find WMDs, but he was still evil, etc. They admit some bad intel but then still support the action. These folks are no different.

Don't get me wrong, I think these people are wrong and I think following them is dangerous for everyone but acting like they should dump their beliefs just because science hasn't backed them up yet is silly. Do you (or someone you know) still pray? It has been shown not to help medically so why bother? Have you seen Jesus? Touched the holes in his hand? Do you then just give up on belief?

People who believe this don't need science for support. They have faith. If science agrees that is great but it certainly is not a requirement.

And frack we live in a country where over 50% of the people still believe in creationism! It is just silly to be pretend science guides most of our beliefs.

Amoebic wrote:
Seth wrote:

(the flip side is that in years where there's a shortage, do I feel comfortable potentially taking a flu shot from someone who needs it more than I?)

You're still helping build herd-immunity. You never know which surfaces you touched may next come into contact with someone who is immuno-compromised. If it's something everyone needs to get, might as well get it and not be part of the problem. When there is a shortage, those who need it more than you (infirm, very old, very young, pregnant, etc) do get preferential dibs anyway, and the decision is made for you by people who are more aware of shortages and necessity.

Thanks for pointing this out. Vaccinations are not all about you not getting sick. It is about the herd.

farley3k wrote:

I believe that she has a son with autism and felt he was cured by diet change etc. and I believe she feels it was brought on when he got a vaccine. Like 99% of people personal experience trumps science all the time.

That is what she's said. Unfortunately autism is one of the more over-diagnosed disorders out there, and there it's not something that's "cured". If her son was "cured", he never was autistic.

Pages