jenny mccarthy wants your kid to get measles: autism, vaccines, and stupid idiots

It's not freaking contagious! (I know you know but ANOTHER thing here is people kind of act like it is?)

I suppose I mean: it is not communicable from one person to another.

I know everyone knows this.

I mean did no one read THE VELVETEEN RABBIT? (I know that was Scarlet Fever but still that is the saddest death of a peripheral character ever.)

http://www.blacktriangle.org/blog/?page_id=1701

I found this pretty mind boggling. The original Wakefield paper in the Lancet contains this graph which is, as far as I can tell, deliberately misleading.
From what I remember (just having skim-read it again now) the graph that was "supposed" to show a rise in autism correlating with the start of MMR actually showed just a distribution of birth dates of people in the system (dept of developmental services).

Just one way in which anti-MMRs will do anything to distort the truth.

I may have been reading too much www.badscience.net but I really am beginning to think the media does have to have some responsibility in how it gives time and credibility to these people. There is a culture now of trusting the 'lone voice against the system' and no culture of simply asking 'prove it'.

Does anyone want to hire me to do a show about overlooked glaring truths with funny enactments of peer-reviewed medical journal articles? I could throw in some Olbermann-style bellowing & paper-throwing if anyone wants.

Hey - hope I didn't make you mad posting at the start but I saw this thread and thought immediately of you!

No way I was so glad! I was like "oh man thank god bcz my opinions are STRONG and I wanted them to be noted and E did it for me high fives." :D

My earlier comment was genuine.

I'm 200 posts too late but I already heard/read about her crazy theory. I've yet to encounter someone here who has this mad opinion.

Chickenpox is nasty and way more dangerous if you have it as an adult. Also as a woman (if you want to conceive) it's better to be immune: if you catch it during pregnancy it can be harmful to the foetus. (Ophelia had it when I was pregnant with Elisabeth. Not being entirely sure whether I was immune to it, I did a check-up.)

even if vaccines do cause autism that knowledge won't help parents teach a disabled young person how to negotiate the world

I wonder if she didn't see the signs he was autistic beforehand? Maybe because he grew older and the signs were clearer? DOes that make any sense? I realize autism can be detected early on but sometimes, if it's mild, you can only tell when the kid is older. I hope he is "cured".

You can't cure autism though

Well, science can't, but Jenni McCarthy can

It's probably worth noting also that a lot of people on the autistic spectrum do not consider themselves disabled.

Going back to the whole 'scientific proof' thing, the problem is that to appease the MMR haters, you need to prove a negative, ie. that MMR does not cause autism. This hasn't been done. However, one of my links above was to a study of Japanese children after they stopped using MMR and went for single vaccines there. If there was a link between MMR and autism, you would expect the incidence of autism to fall when this change was made, but in fact it fell.

I do wish all the people on this thread who are paraphrasing something they have read somewhere, or beginning their arguments with "it seems to me" would link to a credible scientific source to back up what they're saying.

Those who are anti-vaccine in general would do well to remember that any medicine has its risks and they are only on the market if the benefits have been judged to outweigh those risks.

you would expect the incidence of autism to fall when this change was made, but in fact it fell rose.

Argh, ffs.

Clearly your typo is a rogue side-effect of the MMR vaccine.

Someone needs to invent a vaccination against autism just to fuck with the anti-vaccine brigade.

lolz

Researchers Retract a Study Linking Autism To Vaccination
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR

Ten of the 13 scientists who produced a 1998 study linking a childhood vaccine to several cases of autism retracted their conclusion yesterday.

In a statement to be published in the March 6 issue of The Lancet, a British medical journal, the researchers conceded that they did not have enough evidence at the time to tie the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, known as MMR, to the autism cases. The study has been blamed for a sharp drop in the number of British children being vaccinated and for outbreaks of measles.

''We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient,'' the researchers said in the retraction. ''However, the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications.''

The study came under fierce criticism last month when the editor of the Lancet said that the lead author of the report, Dr. Andrew Wakefield had failed to reveal that he had a conflict of interest when he conducted the research. At the time, the journal editors said, Dr. Wakefield was also gathering information for lawyers representing parents who suspected their children had developed autism because of the vaccine.

In a statement published on the Lancet's Web site on Feb. 23, Dr. Richard Horton, the journal's editor, wrote: ''We regret that aspects of funding for parallel and related work and the existence of ongoing litigation that had been known during clinical evaluation of the children reported in the 1998 Lancet paper were not disclosed to editors.''

After the 1998 study appeared, British health officials pleaded with parents to continue vaccinating their children, and a number of other studies were unable to confirm a link between autism and the MMR vaccine.

Dr. Wakefield, who could not be immediately reached for comment, hired a lawyer to demand an apology from the Lancet after the journal released its statement last month, said Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, a colleague.

Dr. Bradstreet, director of the International Child Development Resource Center in Florida, said that Dr. Wakefield had not become involved with the lawyers representing the parents until after the study had essentially been finished. ''This has been blown way out of proportion,'' he said.

In the statement released yesterday, the researchers said that they could not reach one author of the study to ask if he wished to participate in the retraction. Two other authors, including Dr. Wakefield, did not sign the statement, according to the Lancet.

They recanted: good.

That it took them eleven years to do so: bad.

That Wakefield even did that in the first place: wtf people.

You know, though, that is what I love about good scientists: their humility. I mean, can you imagine a religion or a politician coming back 11 years later and being like, "oops lol that was wrong, sorry"?

Dr. Wakefield is probably Jessica's son.

Let us not forget these brave men and women who held their ground against relentless Illuminazi pressure for eleven years.

Some sanity returns:

Thousands of parents who claimed that childhood vaccines had caused their children to develop autism are wrong and not entitled to federal compensation, a special court ruled today in three decisions with far-reaching implications for a bitterly fought medical controversy.

The long-awaited decision on three test cases is a severe blow to a grass-roots movement that has argued -- predominantly through books, magazines and the Internet -- that children's shots have been responsible for the surge in autism diagnoses in the United States in recent decades. The vast majority of the scientific establishment, backed by federal health agencies, has strenuously argued there is no link between vaccines and autism, and warned that scaring parents away from vaccinating their youngsters places children at risk for a host of serious childhood diseases.

The decision by three independent special masters is especially telling because the special court's rules did not require plaintiffs to prove their cases with scientific certainty -- all the parents needed to show was that a preponderance of the evidence, or "50 percent and a hair," supported their claims. The vaccine court effectively said today that the thousands of pending claims represented by the three test cases are on extremely shaky ground.

Awesome

Problem is that it won't necessarily change much in the believers' minds, at least. Vehemently held paranoid beliefs tend not to be arrived at thru rational thought, and as such tend not to be changed by such minor things like facts or actual reality.

In other words, it ain't gunna change the folks who call into Coast to Coast AM about this.

it'll just intensify their persecution complex, probs :(

Oh, no question -- it'll all be seen as part of the 'conspiracy' or whatever. But something like this is still good to see.

conspiracy theories are gonna abound now

xp

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/safeminds-response-to-autism-omnibus-court-decision.html

Ugh I was reading a women's mag the other day and it had this several-page article on young up and coming slebs doing good work, charity etc. Amongst people working with the UN and whatnot was this fucking cow, with an article going on about her work against vaccines "due to an additive in them that is believed to cause autism".

The fact these falsehoods get so casually spread about in the general media and lauded as someone doing good is so disappointing.

that comments section is filled with straight up RETARDS

/pipecock

"yes, i am doing my part by ruining science and the health of children in general"

i hope this particular conspiracy theory is more 9/11 truthers and less jfk w/r/t how much it permeates mainstream opinion

I think having actual findings out there that are like 'srsly this will not curb autism, it will just help your kids get deadly diseases' will stop people who were on the fence about it & maybe make the crazies seem like they are indeed crazies.

oh goody comments! there weren't any when i posted that

Wow, I'm generally jaded about net.cranks but the ageofautism.com commenters really do makes the Above Top Secret forums look like William F. Buckley

Oh the temptation to go there and post "dont come crying to anyone when your child dies of a measles complication". So... want ... to.

Do we trust them now to take care of our kids? PLUEEZ.

PLUEEZ

Where does this "surge in autism" come from anyway? I dont know *anyone* with autistic kids, but I know plenty of self-diagnosed geek twits telling anyone who'll listen that they're aspie.

Age o' Fautuism

trayce i doubt that comment would get past their mod police, i imagine they only allow certain types to get past (imo)

i.e. ones that support their opinion

haha if you posted an antagonistic comment i'm sure you'd get an email in reply saying "YOUR I.P ADDRESS HAS BEEN LOGGED!!!!!"

There is no surge in autism, I believe there is a general rise in cases but this does not coincide with the introduction of MMR.

and your field of expertise is....

Blog reading!

The Internet, M.D.