Vaccines and Autism: A Story of Medicine, Science and Fear
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-02-02/vaccines-and-autism-story-medicine-science-and-fear
In 1998 a research paper was published that linked the childhood measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to the onset of autism, a life long developmental disorder. Follow up studies could not replicate the findings casting doubt on its conclusions, and earlier this year it was proven that this original study was, in fact, fraudulent. But the damage was done. Childhood vaccination rates dropped resulting in outbreaks of measles and whooping cough. Funds that would have gone to new research into the causes of autism were diverted, and surveys indicate that about one in five Americans continues to believe that a childhood vaccine can trigger autism. A story of fraudulent medical research and its consequences.
Guests
Seth Mnookin
Author of "The Panic Virus: a True Story of Medicine, Science, and Fear." He is a contributing editor at "Vanity Fair" and a former senior writer for "Newsweek."
Dr. Roberta DeBiasi
pediatric infectious diseases physician at Children’s National Medical Center
Alison Tepper Singer
Founder and President of the Autism Science Foundation, formerly Executive Vice President of Autism Speaks, served on the federal Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC.)
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Your ignorance is amazing, notwithstanding the fact that you misspell chiropractOR. I am a licensed physician in my state. You can check with your state law to determine that we have ALL powers of a physician within our scope of practice.
I am extremely disappointed in this show. The panel collectively holds one view - i.e. vaccines have been exonerated in relation to autism causation and opponents of vaccines don't understand or don't "believe" science.
Many scientists and researchers have looked at the studies that have been conducted that supposedly refute a connection between vaccines and autism and have found the methodology and conclusions faulty. There is plenty of information that parents can access that questions all of the assertions these panelists are making. The National Vaccine Information Center, International Medical Council on Vaccination, Generation Rescue and Fourteen Studies websites are four of many resources. The fact that credible science on the other side is not being presented with equal consideration on shows like this is irresponsible and does nothing to help parents make an informed decision about vaccinating their children. What does it say about these panelists' adherence to open scientific inquiry when they wish to discount, discredit or ignore the evidence that is being discovered and presented on the other side? Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of NIH, feels more research is necessary. Over one hundred doctors, nurses and scientists have attached their names to a document just issued by the International Medical Council on Vaccination questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.
The doctors, researchers, scientists and educated parents who have done their own investigations into the link between vaccines, autism and a host of other auto-immune and inflammatory conditions are armed with more information than shows like this one could possibly dispel. I find it unfortunate that Diane Rehm and the show's producers felt it was necessary to exclude these informed voices. Please listen to this interview with Dr. Suzanne Humphries at http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=BAE7F6323813CFAFB8338173FB11D429 to get another perspective.
After reviewing on this blog how the VAST majority of commenters were similarly aware of Ms. Rehm's obvious biased and less-than-credible reporting... I just want to say WELL DONE LISTENERS! Ms. Rehm just gave a free commercial to the vaccine industry.. and you REFUSED to let her get away with it! You should be proud of yourselves. NPR and its reporters have had a long history of NOT criticizing the medical community appropriately.. ESPECIALLY the vaccine industry. Does the Ombudsman for NPR read this blog? Sir/Madam Ombudsman: This is NOT fair reporting to your listeners. Ms. Rehms ignorance of THOUSANDS of MD's, scientists, Chiropractors who oppose vaccines is so expansive that this show could very easily be labelled 'Vaccine Propaganda.' I request that you email me at my registered email address for this blog and explain to me why you feel this biased reporting is in keeping with NPR's standards for fair journalism. You should NOT have broadcast this insipid effort to shame MILLIONS of concerned parents, nearly all of whom have very rational and real concerns about a corrupt vaccine industry. SHAME ON YOU
Prior to when our son was born we specifically asked if the HepB vaccine was something that had to be done. We knew nothing about vaccine safety or anything, just didnt want him given the needle on his first day out of the comfy womb.
Less than an hour after his birth I saw (as did the video camera that was recording the events) the nurse just about to inject Ben. I reacted quickly and stopped her.
When Ben was diagnosed with autism all his medical records were gathered and we discovered he had been given the HepB shot anyway.
When I questioned the hospital administrator about this he told me it was required by the insurance company that covered their liability issues.
Diane thank you so much for tackling this topic! While it is true that no parent wants to blindly follow guidelines and reccomendations when they have a fear that they might be subjecting their child to unecessary harm, vaccinating your child against these devasting diseases is not an example of that. It seems since the now discredited study has done so much to make people lose sight of the priveldge and responsiblity that parents have to vaccinate their children, and I find it so frustrating that people can take steps to not vaccinate while driving their children around on the interstate while talking on their cell phones. I guess what I am trying to say is that yes, I do not believe we should blindly trust the medical or pharmeceutical community and that scientists as well as the public should be keeping an eye on the motives of those who tell us what to do. But I also feel that we as individuals should take more steps to monitor our own risky behavior and become educated about what true risky behavior is, and understand the impact we have on those we share this world with. We have so many..to not act any smarter is embarrassing.
Also, for another story on the vaccine debate, there was a really informative "this American Life" epsiode a few years ago that has firsthand interviews with people involved with the San Diego measles outbreak (which you can listen to for free)
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/370/ruining-it-fo...
Thanks again Diane for this timely show and thanks also to your guests.
What if there is one or more harmful side effect(s) from vaccines that we are unaware of? Interpretations of research seem oft too quick to defy intuition. So many scientific discoveries are by accident!
rcv - "I find it so frustrating that people can take steps to not vaccinate while driving their children around on the interstate while talking on their cell phones."
The odds of a deadly life threatening injury caused by a vaccine is about a million to one, just about the same as being struck by lightening. Would you leave your year old baby in the middle of a field during a thunderstorm? We as parents must be educated on the true risks in order for us to make an informed consent. I think the problem is we have been lied to.
There were 31,553 reported adverse reactions to vaccines in 2010. http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/data/
I deeply appreciated the comment made by the mother of two autistic children during which she stated that she’d much rather have them alive with her—despite the challenges of their condition—than take the chance they may have succumbed from a childhood disease because she neglected to vaccinate them. Nine years ago my 20 year old daughter had her brain resectioned to remove a tumor. Sometimes I miss the person she was before her surgery, but I can’t imagine what life would be like without the person she is now.
Pharmaceutical companies are not out to get you; having a life saving vaccine available to your child is a priviledge. Educate yourself and stop listening to the media for your medical advice.
I thought Diane's guests on this topic were offensive. They repeatedly made statements indicating that anyone who doesn't agree with them should not be heard because they are ignorant, ill-informed, and scientifically ignorant. They also used denigrating analogies comparing anyone who doesn't agree with them to "Birthers" and people who think they can fly. Making fun of your antagonist is the tactic of those who have no other means to establish their position. "Oh, you're just too stupid to understand!" seems to be their point-of-view. A lot of people will cave under that kind of pressure, because they don't want to be considered dumb -- but what is dumber than being led around by the nose by the a-little-mercury-won't-hurt-you pharmaceutical industry?
The posted link to the interview with Suzanne Humphries does not work.
Please Google Suzanne Humphries and then listen to the hour-long interview with her on natural news. I'd be surprised if anyone could just brush this off as nonsense.
The main concern is that either someone is 100% pro-vaccine and considers them harmless or they are to be ignored and labeled crazy.
People like Humphries should be included in a debate like this so that the public has access to all the information.
I just fixed the link in my post to the Suzanne Humphries interview. It should work now. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. You can also listen to her interviewed on the Gary Null Show on Progressive Radio Network, along with many other shows Mr. Null has posted on that website related to vaccines. http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-gary-null-show-wnye/
Good question. The study was reviewed by six experts - four of them said the paper was poorly done and should not be published in The Lancet. But The Lancet's editor, Richard Horton, decided to publish anyway because the study was "provocative."
Studies are conducted all over the world, and not just by drug companies. The science regarding vaccines and autism overwhelmingly shows no association between vaccines and autism.
No kidding, Trish. Wakefield loaded the gun with his fraudulent study, but lazy, uninformed reporters pulled the trigger.
Tre, there is no evidence that Hep B, or any vaccine, is associated with autism.
"There were 31,553 reported adverse reactions to vaccines in 2010"
And most of them are minor - swelling at injection site, fever, redness, soreness. VAERS is a voluntary reporting system. You could report that vaccines made you walk backwards and speak with an Australian accent. A little skepticism, please.
Thank you Diane for revisiting this topic. I don't understand why there has not been Government or University studies on the incidence of Autism among children who have NOT been immunized.
I have found only one study by a family Doctor; Dr. Mayer Eisenstein.
http://healthfreedoms.org/2009/10/23/children-who-are-not-vaccinated-nev...
I have a child with Autism (for life) and I would GLADLY take back ALL of his vaccinations and instead take the risk of him contracting a childhood disease (mostly non-fatal) that the vaccinations are to prevent. I compare 1 out of 150 autism risk to the risks of the childhood diseases from the CDC, which is miniscule.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6003md.htm?s_cid=mm6003md_w
My life and his life is HELL!!!
Ken Reibel wrote:
"There were 31,553 reported adverse reactions to vaccines in 2010"
From VAERS:
"Underreporting" is one of the main limitations of passive surveillance systems, including VAERS. The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small fraction of actual adverse events. The degree of underreporting varies widely. As an example, a great many of the millions of vaccinations administered each year by injection cause soreness, but relatively few of these episodes lead to a VAERS report. Physicians and patients understand that minor side effects of vaccinations often include this kind of discomfort, as well as low fevers. On the other hand, more serious and unexpected medical events are probably more likely to be reported than minor ones, especially when they occur soon after vaccination, even if they may be coincidental and related to other causes.
One issue this terribly unfair interview has slipped past us: While they stated they were only speaking about the objective evidence to support vaccination, the real truth is that this interview, and the panelists who gave it, are ALL supporters not just of vaccination, but of MANDATORY vaccination policies. Even if they state otherwise: They ALL participate with local health agencies and state their own local medical practices which are increasingly supporting MANDATORY vaccinations, and using shame tactics and dumping of patients who make an informed choice to do otherwise. IF YOU THINK VACCINATIONS ARE SO GREAT-- GO GET THEM! Why on earth do you feel it necessary to harass those of us who have reviewed the science, found it lacking, and have chosen NOT to vaccinate ourselves or our children? We should have every right to make an informed choice not to vaccinate, and yet you use platforms where you 'claim' you are only talking about one flawed study, but you immediately launch into a criticism of ALL who choose not to vaccinate. If you don't like our vehement rebuttal of your condescending and WRONG conclusions, you should NOT have used this interview as a platform to criticize all who don't vaccinate. We are informed, we are conscious, and we care for our children more than YOU ever WILL. Your comments were offensive and derogatory to MANY parents all over this country.
As a long-time listener of The Diane Rehm Show, I was surprised that only one view seemed to be represented on this program. For example, where were the voices of those who advocate following the current vaccination schedules of countries such as Sweden, Finland, and Iceland (their schedules are about half as aggressive as that of the United States)? I'm disappointed that an "all-or-nothing" false dichotomy is being presented instead of a discussion that also includes moderates who might prefer the vaccination schedules of other healthy, Western industrialized nations.
Diane, thank you so much for this show. I have honestly been concerned with some of the shows recently, where it seemed the guests invited were there to keep up the same old "false equivalence" arguments that are far too common in the media today. This show should be a template for future controversial subjects discussed on the Diane Rehm show, where there is no tolerance for conspiracy theories, bunk evidence, pseudo-science, or pandering to the ignorant. This show was REAL journalism, finding facts, presenting logical arguments, and ignoring the cranks who just want to derail any intelligent debate. To those who complain about the show being one-sided, well, maybe you should actually listen to guests instead of complaining that they don't parrot your talking points. ALL of us want to find a cause and hopefully a cure for autism, but we will not find it by beating the dead horse of blaming vaccines over and over. It's a tough row to hoe when you have an autistic child, but as the one caller made clear, an autistic child is better than a dead child. If you want to know why everyone MUST be vaccinated, google "herd immunity." If you worry about scary-sounding ingredients, remember: the dose makes the poison. Anti-vaccine scare tactics include making you worry about trace formaldehyde in a vaccine, when your own body makes more formaldehyde in one day than in all the vaccines combined. Again, thank you Diane for a rational and fact-based show.
I would be good to see some actual truth here but from the first sentence, this is nothing but re-hashed tabloid media inaccuracies.
The Lancet paper did not link autism and the MMR, it linked autism and a higher prevalence of bowel disease. Yes, say it with me....bowel disease. Please read it for yourself and do your own homework:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9500320
It was the parents and then the media hype that followed that made a connection to the MMR.
But the vaccine label of the Sanofi Pasteur Tripedia makes the autism/vaccine connection on page 11.
Read it for yourself and then make your own vaccine decision with facts and not media hype:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedPro...
"Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, *AUTISM,* convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea."
And did you know that in the "safe" Rotateq vaccine you get the PCV1 and PVC2 pig virus contaminants at no additional charge? That's right! No additional charge! Read all about it:
http://www.pediatricsupersite.com/view.aspx?rid=64151
This is not true, the Tripedia vaccine label does list autism as potential side effect. So you need to stop repeating untrue information.
page 11 scroll down, lots of side effects to get through.....
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedPro...
What 'science?' The epidemiological junk science from Denmark and Finland? Countries that have completely different vaccine schedules than we have in the USA? Denmark and Finland have no where NEAR the amount of vaccines that are listed on our CDC recommended schedule.
Apples and zebras....lol
True that! Thank you!
Most people that don't vaccinate do so out of fear. They have no memory of diseases of the recent past (polio, bacterial meningitis, invasive pneumococcal disease etc.) and are willing to believe that these diseases magically disappeared without the use of vaccines. They are poor risk evaluators. There are about four million new babies born every year and the risk of receiving a vaccine does not approach the risks of driving your child to soccer practice. We live in a contaminated world. Our food supplies are contaminated with pollutants and pesticides. We give antibiotics to the chickens we eat and consume vast quantities of high fat foods and sugary drinks. We wear clothing saturated with flame retardants that can be measured in our children's blood ... but we refuse to vaccinate. People that don't vaccinate are self-centered. They want everyone else to take what they perceive as "great risk" so their child doesn't have to. Vaccinate your child so you can save your neighbor's child from pertussis. Do you not value his life?
God created the measles virus as well as your baby. Vaccines are God's gift to our fallen world.
How does someone "save" their neighbors child from pertussis when the recent outbreak in CA is among those who have been vaccinated? Vaccine does not = immunity. In fact the live viruses deem their recipients contagious for a period of time. Nice way to keep illnesses spreading around.
The ingredient labels tell the whole story, but drs don't want us to read them. Vaccines are not "safe" as the inserts say the Carcinogenic and mutagenic effects have not been evaluated. Nor the potential to impair fertility. No one can "know" how our human DNA mutates over time with Chicken embryo cells, bovine fetal calf serum or African green monkey kidney cells.
OR if in the the long term, risks for cancer is increased. Read the labels and be informed, you wouldn't want to drink this poison:
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm0...
You "save" you neighbor's baby by increasing the overall immunity of the community against the disease. It works. It is how we have reduced or illiminated many diseases from polio to smallpox. Undeniable.
Pertusis is a bacterial disease, not viral, and it cannot be given or gotten from the vaccine. Some of the babies that died from Pertusis got the disease before they could be completely vaccinated (three doses in the first 6 months). Not their parent's choice. Non-vaccinated children and adults in their community contributed to their deaths by lowering the overall immunity of the community which increased the chances of them getting that disease. No man is an island, we do not live alone. Every choice we make affects others. You vaccinate yourself, even though pertussis is not a serious adult disease ... yes, to "save" your neighbor's baby. What mother wouldn't take that "risk".
Until this show, I was a HUGE FAN of Diane Rhem. But the fact that this show painted those of us who question the safety of vaccines as "Birthers" without any correction by Ms Rhem is beyond offensive. She did, at least, ask (though in a perplexed voice) "why it is the highly educated who express the most doubt about the safety of vaccines despite all the 'evidence' to the contrary?" And what about all the "evidence of harm" the panel IGNORED? (Obviously she has not read David Kirby's excellent book of the same name.) German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said 200 years ago, "Truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally it is widely accepted as self evident." There may be many causes of regressive autism--including and _other than_ vaccines (pollution exposure is another prime suspect, peutossin too), but this show was incredibly biased and never even mentioned KNOWN vaccine side effects/risks! Another show needs to be devoted to the many respected doctors and scientists who disagree with these 3 panelists (all of whom are of the same mind). I agree & paraphrase drjonathan's comments: the VAST majority of commenters were similarly aware of Ms. Rehm's obvious biased and less-than-credible reporting... WELL DONE LISTENERS! Ms. Rehm just gave a free commercial to the vaccine industry.. and you REFUSED to let her get away with it! ... NPR Ombudsman: This is NOT fair reporting to your listeners...ignoring THOUSANDS of MD's, scientists who question vaccine safety is 'Vaccine Propaganda.' I request that you email me and explain to me why you feel this biased reporting is in keeping with NPR's standards for fair journalism. You should NOT have broadcast (much less REBROADCAST!) this insipid effort to shame MILLIONS of concerned parents, nearly all of whom have very rational and real concerns about vaccines and NO PROFIT MOTIVE for our conclusions.