- advertisement -

Vaccines: Discredited Theory Thrown Out

Discussion in 'Other Hot Topics' started by sooz, Jun 2, 2010.

  1. sooz

    sooz Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,330
    I posted this article because I know many people are interested in the link between D and vaccines. Here is what Great Britain thinks of the theory in regards to Autism.


    Discredited Autism Theory Thrown Out

    from the Seattle Times as read in the Pasadena Star News
    http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/editorial/ci_15197759 6/1/10


    THE long, sordid and destructive tale of Andrew Wakefield continues. The discredited British physician and autism researcher has been banned from practicing medicine in Britain.

    One can hardly overstate the heartache and turmoil his unsubstantiated rants against the childhood vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella have caused. His sloppy work and loose talk raised fears about a link between the vaccine and autism. Wakefield frightened legions of parents away from rudimentary protection against entirely preventable illnesses.

    Wakefield fled his practice in Britain in 2004 and landed at an alternative-medicine research center in Texas. He was still under investigation back home, and the lengthy review ended in January. The General Medical Council announced its decision on Monday.

    Wakefield thrived by exploitation of the raw emotions of parents with children diagnosed with autism, and by inflating the fears of millions more who were worried about what might happen.

    Parents crave information on which to make informed decisions for their infants and toddlers as vaccination cycles begin. Wakefield's reckless behavior continues to haunt concerned families.

    Science is not on the side of the doctor or those who mouth his theories.

    Wakefield is most thoroughly repudiated by generations of healthy children and their families who have not suffered the pain, inconvenience and expense of 14 childhood diseases prevented by timely immunizations
     
  2. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    This was posted in the Vaccines thread as well.
     
  3. SueM

    SueM Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    380

    Well, that's one person's opinion. :D

    A Letter to the Editor from someone doesn't exactly tell the whole story. I'm ok with people who are critical of Wakefield, but I do hope that people know that there are two sides to the story.
     
  4. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    That is not to say there are two "accurate" sides to the story. :D
     
  5. SueM

    SueM Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    380
    Whatever that means. Is there one side that is more accurate than the other? Ah, yeah... my side is ALWAYS more accurate than yours. ;)

    FWIW, Just kidding there... We all have our own perspectives here. That's what makes the world go round...
     
  6. Flutterby

    Flutterby Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,623
    I don't think vaccines, particularly the MMR is completely responsible for autism.. I think autism is way more complicated that we all know right now.. I think there are kids that have are 'predisposed' to it (like our kids who develop type 1) and something triggers it.. that trigger could be anything, and in some cases probably IS a vaccine.. but that doesn't mean 100% of the kids out there that are autistic because of the vaccines they had.

    I've seen some fasinating video of babies (taken before they even got most vaccines,if they were even vaccinated) that have autistic tendencies, and who do turn out to be diagnosed as autistic later on in life.
     
  7. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Having worked briefly both with autistic children and children with ADHD, I personally feel there is a connection there. And there is a recent report about organophosphates and ADHD with some pretty striking numbers. Seems to me that most processed foods are going to have pretty high levels of organophosphates, so I'm tending to suspect in that direction since pre-packaged foods are such a big part of most of our lives and school cafeterias have to pretty much live on boxed and reheated these days. I wouldn't be surprised if the drastic rise in autism had something to do with the fact that millions of children are entering school much earlier than they ever did before and often eating both breakfast and lunch in the cafeteria, then two prepackaged snacks during the day.

    Is my theory. You saw it here first. :rolleyes:
     
  8. jilmarie

    jilmarie Approved members

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    773
    Organophosphates are in pesticides not pre-packaged foods. Maybe kids are getting too many fruits and vegetables ;)
     
  9. sooz

    sooz Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,330
    I saw that after I posted it and couldnt figure out how to delete it.

    I dont think this was a letter to the editor... it was a report about how he was thrown out of practicing medicine in Great Britain. Perhaps it was also an opinion piece however. My feeling is, it takes quite a lot to get thrown out of practicing medicine.....Im sure everyone can draw their own conclusions...
     
  10. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Pesticides are going to be used on grains, which most pre-packaged foods have in high concentrations. :eek: If there is residue on the wheat or corn my lay guess would be that a kid would get a lot more pesticide in a bite of nabisco than a whole bag of washed apples. . . .:confused:
     
  11. joshualevy

    joshualevy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    654
    Rather than argue about opinions, you might want to look at some research. I searched through all the research I could find on humans which was published in peer-reviewed index journals. (I do think people with specialized tools might be able to find more research, so if you find any more studies on people, please tell me about them.) Below is a cut-n-paste summaries from each of the 14 or so studies that I found.

    These studies included data for type-1 diabetes, only! Obviously, there are more an different studies covering other diseases: austism, ADD, etc. but since this is a forum on diabetes, I thought it might be interested to look at that.

    Someday I hope to edit this mass of data into a blog posting, but until then, you can look at the raw data.

    All of the text below this point is quoted from the various studies, except for the titles and URLs for those studies. As you read it, remember that a relative risk of 1 means exactly the same (so vaccinated result is exactly the same as non-vaccinated), and that a relative risks between about .5 and 2 are considered normal (ie. nothing to fear). For comparison, the relative risk of smoking is 20 (higher in some studies), but that is an extreme case of risk.

    This data is too long to fit in one posting, so I'll put it in two.

    [r1] Childhood Vaccination and Type 1 Diabetes (2004)

    http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/350/14/1398

    Results Type 1 diabetes was diagnosed in 681 children during 4,720,517 person-years of follow-up. The rate ratio for type 1 diabetes among children who received at least one dose of vaccine, as compared with unvaccinated children, was 0.91 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.12) for Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine; 1.02 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.37) for diphtheria, tetanus, and inactivated poliovirus vaccine; 0.96 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.71 to 1.30) for diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, and inactivated poliovirus vaccine; 1.06 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.80 to 1.40) for whole-cell pertussis vaccine; 1.14 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.45) for measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine; and 1.08 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.57) for oral poliovirus vaccine. The development of type 1 diabetes in genetically predisposed children (defined as those who had siblings with type 1 diabetes) was not significantly associated with vaccination. Furthermore, there was no evidence of any clustering of cases two to four years after vaccination with any vaccine.

    Conclusions These results do not support a causal relation between childhood vaccination and type 1 diabetes.

    [r2] Childhood Vaccinations, Vaccination Timing, and Risk of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (2001)

    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/108/6/e112

    Conclusions. In this large, population-based, case-control study, we did not find an increased risk of type 1 diabetes associated with any of the routinely recommended childhood vaccines. Our study adds to previous research by providing data on newer vaccines, including hepatitis B, acellular pertussis, and varicella vaccines. For the older vaccines, our results are generally in agreement with previous studies in not finding any increased risks. Ours is the first epidemiologic study to evaluate the possibility that timing of vaccination is related to risk of clinical diabetes in children. Our results on hepatitis B vaccine do not support the hypothesis; risk of type 1 diabetes was not different between infants vaccinated at birth and those who received their first vaccination later in life. The results of our study and the preponderance of epidemiologic evidence do not support an association between any of the recommended childhood vaccines and an increased risk of type 1 diabetes. Suggestions that diabetes risk in humans may be altered by changes in the timing of vaccinations also are unfounded.

    [r3] Decline of mumps antibodies in Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetic children and a plateau in the rising incidence of Type 1 diabetes after introduction of the mumps-measles-rubella vaccine in Finland (1993)

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/x530044032g39280/

    The results suggest that the elimination of natural mumps by mumps-measles-rubella vaccination may have decreased the risk for Type 1 diabetes in Finland; a possible causal relationship is substantiated by the observed concomitant decrease in mumps antibody levels in diabetic children.

    [r4] Association between type 1 diabetes and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination: birth cohort study (1999)

    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/318/7192/1169

    Results: No statistically significant difference was found at any time during the 10 year follow up in the risk of type 1 diabetes between the children born before the vaccination period and those vaccinated at the age of 24 months only (relative risk 1.01). The difference in the risk between the cohort vaccinated first at the age of 3 months and the cohort vaccinated at the age of 24 months only was not statistically significant either (1.06).


    Conclusion: It is unlikely that H influenzae type b vaccination or its timing cause type 1 diabetes in children.


    [rc] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12482192?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_SingleItemSupl.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

    RESULTS: The difference in cumulative incidence between those receiving 4 doses and those receiving 0 doses is 54 cases of IDDM/100,000 (P = 0.026) at 7 years, (relative risk = 1.26).


    [r5] Clustering of cases of type 1 diabetes mellitus occurring 2-4 years after vaccination is consistent with clustering after infections and progression to type 1 diabetes mellitus in autoantibody positive individuals. (2003)
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12793601

    [Note: this abstract did not include any numeric results from this research.]

    [r6] The Swedish childhood diabetes study (1991)
    http://www.springerlink.com/content/m7j8j541414urn4r/

    In conclusion, a protective effect of measles vaccination for Type 1 diabetes in childhood is indicated as well as a possible causal relationship between the onset of the disease and the total load of recent infections.

    [r7] No major association of breast-feeding, vaccinations, and childhood viral diseases with early islet autoimmunity in the German BABYDIAB Study.(2000)
    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/23/7/969.abstract

    RESULTS: In offspring from mothers with type 1 diabetes, duration of exclusive and total breast-feeding did not differ between islet antibody-positive and -negative children, regardless of HLA genotype, and breast-feeding of 3 months or longer was not associated with protection from antibody development or diabetes onset. In offspring from diabetic fathers, non-statistically significant reductions in exclusive and total breast-feeding times were observed in the antibody-positive cohort. Neither type nor quantity of vaccinations (including Bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccine; haemophilus influenzae vaccine; diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine; tick-born encephalitis vaccine; or measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine) were associated with the development of islet antibodies and diabetes. Measles, mumps, and rubella were not reported in children with islet antibodies or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no evidence that proposed environmental factors affect islet antibody development in the first 2 years of life in offspring from parents with type 1 diabetes.

    [r8] Lack of association between early childhood immunizations and beta-cell autoimmunity. ()
    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/22/10/1694.abstract
    RESULTS: There was no difference between cases and control subjects in the proportion receiving hepatitis B (HBV), Haemophilus influenzae b (Hib), polio, or diphtheria tetanus pertussis (DTP) vaccines before 9 months of age; in the proportion receiving HBV at birth rather than later; or in the median age at first HBV, Hib, polio, or DTP vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that changing the early childhood immunization schedule would not affect the risk of developing beta-cell autoimmunity or type 1 diabetes.

    Joshua Levy
     
  12. joshualevy

    joshualevy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    654
    Here is the second part of the posting:

    [r9] Lack of association between receipt of conjugate Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (HbOC) in infancy and risk of type 1 (juvenile onset) diabetes: long term follow-up of the HbOC efficacy trial cohort (2002)
    http://journals.lww.com/pidj/Citati...ociation_between_receipt_of_conjugate.18.aspx

    [r10] Cumulative incidence of childhood-onset IDDM is unaffected by pertussis immunization. (1997)
    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/20/2/173.short

    RESULTS: No difference in cumulative incidence rate of IDDM up to the age of 12 years was found when the birth cohorts for 1978 and 1979 with high DTP vaccination coverage were compared with the cohorts of 1980 and 1981 with low pertussis vaccination coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of the cumulative incidence of IDDM, up to the age of 12 years, in birth cohorts with high and low exposure to pertussis vaccine does not support the hypothesis that pertussis could induce autoimmunity to the beta-cell that may lead to IDDM.


    [r11] Previous Exposure to Measles, Mumps, and Rubella but Not Vaccination During Adolescence Correlates to the Prevalence of Pancreatic and Thyroid Autoantibodies (1990)
    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/104/1/e12

    Results. The vaccination changed neither the prevalence nor the level of autoantibodies. Children with rubella antibodies before vaccination had higher levels of ICA than did the rubella seronegative children. In contrast, thyroid autoantibody levels and prevalence were lower in children with antibodies against measles, mumps, or both before vaccination than in children without those antibodies.


    Conclusions. Previous natural infection or vaccination against measles, mumps, or both seemed to have an inhibitory effect on the development of thyroid autoantibodies. In contrast, children with previous exposure to rubella had higher levels of ICA. No evidence was found that MMR vaccination during adolescence may trigger autoimmunity.


    [r12] Vaccination and autoimmune disease: what is the evidence? (2003) Review Paper

    http://image.thelancet.com/extras/02art9340web.pdf


    Diabetes
    Over the past few decades, there has been a regular increase in the incidence of type 1 diabetes in most countries of the world. That childhood vaccines have been identified as a potential trigger event for this disease is, therefore, not surprising. This possibility has been assessed in a few epidemiological studies. Results of a case-control study done in Sweden in the mid-1980s did not indicate any great effect of vaccination against tuberculosis, smallpox, tetanus, pertussis, or rubella on risk of diabetes.61
    However, one group has suggested that the timing of vaccination could be of importance, and that certain vaccines?eg, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)?might increase the risk of type 1 diabetes if given at age 2 months or older.62,63 This theory was not confirmed by a 10-year follow-up study of more than 100 000 Finnish children involved in a clinical trial of the Hib vaccine.64 In this study, there was no increased risk of diabetes when
    children who had received four doses of vaccine at age 3, 4, 6, and 14?18 months were compared with those who received only one dose at age 2 years. Furthermore, the risk of diabetes did not differ between children in the
    latter two cohorts and those in a non-concurrent unvaccinated group.

    Additionally, findings of a study undertaken in four large health-maintenance organisations in the USA did not suggest an association between administration of routine childhood vaccines and increased risk of type 1 diabetes, irrespective of the timing of Hib or hepatitis B vaccination.65 Therefore, at this time, there are no serious indications of any great effect of childhood vaccines on the occurrence of type 1 diabetes.


    [r13] Risk factors for type I diabetes mellitus in children in Austria (1999)

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/nvp8w4tp6d4ww438/

    Conclusion In our study, the development of type 1 diabetes mellitus was associated with higher paternal age and neonatal jaundice. No correlation could be found with dietary intake of cow's milk products in early infancy, vaccination and other environmental factors.

    [r14] No evidence that vaccines cause insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (1998) Meta Analysis
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1756616/pdf/v052p00674.pdf

    We conclude that at present there is no evidence of a link between IDDM and vaccination in humans.


    [r15]
    http://www.ima.org.il/imaj/ar04jul-12.pdf (duplicate)

    Joshua Levy
     
  13. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    While I won't argue the point one way or the other I can say that there is absolutely no basis for your assumption. There are MANY things you don't/won't know in order to assume this.

    Application rate of pesticides of grains vs fruits.
    Absorption rate of pesticides of grains vs fruits.
    Systemic vs surface accumulation.
    Application of waxes on fruit preventing washing off of pesticides.
    Whole grain vs refined grain - does pesticides get removed during refining.
    Which pesticides are used in grains vs fruit.

    Your lay guess may very well be correct but only because you guessed correctly on a flip of a coin. I kinda feel I have an idea about many of the parameters in that question but I still feel your guess would be as good as mine.
     
  14. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    Oh, Joshua ....
     
  15. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Does it help if I have used commercial pesticides, filled out EPA and OSHA forms on their use? Lived in an ag area and worked with small farmers who explained a lot to me about the necessity of heavier spraying where monocultures are grown?

    Nah?


    Organophosphates are used on wheat. Don't know if they are used on corn or sugar.

    I do get your point, but I would caution that while I "get" the danger of amateurs guessing wildly and acting on hunches in areas where the truth is often counterintuitive, surely you can see the danger of a society where only "experts" are allowed to form opinions on almost every subject, with "expert" being defined by a government regulated and self-protecting educational system and where moral and ethical systems have been broken down to the point where said experts are no longer held to the standard of honesty?

    How do you solve that problem?
     
  16. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    I have a good story for you.

    My boss at a commercial greenhouse had a problem with some chemical or other, can't remember which. He said if he sprayed X pesticide he had to suit up all the way, full horror movie dress, but that once it was sprayed he could enter the greenhouse 12 hours later without any protection at all. On the other hand, if he sprayed Y pesticide, he only needed gloves and a face cover, but couldn't enter the greenhouse for 24 hours after spraying. He considered that an example of how ludicrous EPA regs were. After all, if X were so dangerous, how come the shorter span? His "instincts" told him that was contradictory.

    This from the guy who used acid all the time -- you know, that if you touch it can burn through your hand but as soon as it's done reacting it's perfectly harmless?

    So I get it that even bright people well trained can get things wrong when going from the gut, usually because there's some piece missing that they don't even know is missing.

    But lists of studies doesn't do it for me any more than my boss does. Both tendencies smack a little too much of not knowing what you don't know.
     
  17. wilf

    wilf Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    9,652
    Joshua, Thanks for this exhaustive overview of studies demonstrating the non-relationship between vaccinations and Type 1 D. This is above and beyond the call - thank you! :)
     
  18. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    Ew, ew, ew -- here's a study! Looks like from this mostly it's apples and produce that will get a kid organophosphatized, but the processed food will get you with the malathion version.

    http://www.nature.com/jes/journal/v12/n1/full/7500197a.html

    Of course, it's a study of 15 kids . But, it's a study! :D
     
  19. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    Oh ... so it wasn't exactly a "lay guess" after all? Nice trap. ;)

    In any event you took that way, WAY past where I was going with it. My point was supposed to convey that it's not always obvious where contaminants are hiding - that a bag of washed apples might be a "wolf in sheep's clothing".

    That's all - I wasn't trying to quantify nor ridicule your "lay".
     
  20. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,544
    Which Lisa P. am I talking to now? :eek: That was ... sort of my point - bag of washed apples might not be your friend.
     

Share This Page

- advertisement -

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice