Scientific Link to Autism Identified

[tenar]

Inanna, just a quickie because indeed I have had enough of this thread for today: I wasn't referring to your decision when I commented earlier and it certainly seems that given the medical situation of your kids, your choice not to vaccinate might have been well made (I don't know enough about the details to comment further, obviously). It is absolutely clear from your writing that you are intelligent and passionate about this subject and that you have done a lot of reading about it.

In my opinion, the fact that some people cannot safely be vaccinated makes it all the more important that the majority of people are. Such individuals have no protection other than herd immunity, so herd immunity is much more important for their safety than it is for the rest of us. That's actually one of the reasons why my husband and I are vaccinated and why we are vaccinating our daughter, even for some things that she has no great risk of getting. My husband and I believe that we have a social responsibility to do that.

[Nelle]

Tenar, on this last point - I agree with you absolutely that herd immunity is so vital for people those who are likely to react to vaccinations. The main problem seems to be that currently we're not able to predict who is who. I am another who is all for more research, particularly research not funded by a pharmaceutical company (or any body linked to one).

[tenar]

Don't get me started about the general lack of funding for scientific research in this country... it's a sad fact that in many industries, the only way for researchers to access funding is through the large corporations with an interest in the research. It's true all over, from mining to materials technology to pharmeceuticals. Not an ideal state of affairs, by any means.

[paradise lost]

The lack of funding for the reasearch we need instead of the research large pharma companies want is why i don't give money to Cancer Research UK - they give money to support research for new drugs, which is great, but the companies then license the drugs to make generics difficult and so the poorer people in the world die for the lack of $$$ rather than an available treatment. Horrible.

Re: Tenar's post which i found myself strongly agreeing to - i guess because of my literal mind i didn't find it offensive. When i saw "wrong" i didn't think it was a judgement call, just that given the evidence KNOWN it is a very illogical decision. Of course, not everyone relies on logic in their decisions (parenting or otherwise), but if you do it's really hard to understand why other people seem to be dong incredibly illogical things, y/k? I don't actually know if tenar is a scientist but when you have a mind like that you are taught NOT to think emotively or use anecdotal evidence when making certain decisions. Lots of times we see posts over on Relationships or similar where people are making utterly illogical emotive decisions which may end up being to their own detriment and people tell them so. The topic of vaccination is close to some hearts and the topic of ASD's also, but logically does that exempt them from the same logical examination and critique? Unfotunately when you have a logical mind it isn't only when other people want to hear it, it's all the time.

I believe what you have written Innana, about your children, i believe what all of you have written about YOUR children. But it would be completely illogical for me to make decisions on vaccination based on that. I do not have your children, i have MY child. I cannot stand upon your opinion, based on YOUR child, and make a decision, to me it feels like building castles on sand. I must make my own decision, i can only believe scientific evidence (and my criteria, like tenar's i think, is very strict, as to what is scientifically valid and what isn't). And so far the scientific evidence tells me it is safer to vax than not. DD is already showing autistic traits, some of which i have seen in her personality since pregnancy (sensitivity to sound being one - she would literally jump in the womb if a loud noise happened nearby). Besides my own personal preference not to try to avoid or cure that part of her, i simply cannot find evidene that vaccines could have or did bring that about. I see a lot of evidence in my family for hereditary factors being relevant for us, and for ME and MY child it makes no logcal sense that her parent and grandparent are autistic, but she only is because of vaccines. Any more than it makes sense for me to say my great-granddad, my gran and my dad have curly hair but *I* only have it because of vaccines.

In regard to the towers/cancers story, i remember a huge fuss being made a few years ago at my dad's work because there were clusters of childhood leukemia around large powerstations and high voltage cable-paths (my dad was an engineer at a power company). When the studies (which confirmed the increased prevalence of childhood leukemia's) were completed they found one common factor to the regions of higher-incidence...influx of population. There were people, families, living right UNDER the lines in some remote areas who had suffered nothing. The company who build the stations and erected the lines to take the power onto the grid used 4 or 5 labour companies based in Eastern European countries, and those areas where the stations and lines had gone up had had an influx of people from those areas living and working in them. Eventually an apparent link was found - unfamiliar infection, very common in those countries, but utterly unfamiliar to the local kids immune systems, seemed to be causing a mutation in SOME children which later led to childhood leukemia. By the time the science had shown this there were already annual demonstrations to take down the stations and lines (which continue still) because people believe it is the power station itself which is causing the effect. Science says it probably isn't but it's hard to get funding to go on. Several studies on clusters of childhood cancers have foun similar things - that certain outbreaks of infection seem to be a strong factor. One day perhaps there will be a vaccine to help protect children against those certain kinds of infection which can cause leukemia.

From a personal (and of course, logical, it's me after all!) POV i think it's for the best that some parents do not vaccinate. As i have said before, i have no interest in trying to prevent autism. To each there own on that one. For my child to be protected by vaccines the infections need to remain relatively stable (that is, not mutate to form new strains which might be more dangerous and would need more vaccines). For the status quo to remain some children need to get ill. Likewise for the majority of children to stay well and to prevent hundreds or thousands of deaths from these illnesses, as there were in the past, there needs to be some herd immunity. I guess for me it is sad that some children die of vaccine reactions, and it is sad that some die of these preventable diseases, but either way your kid might die. I have chosen what science and logic tells me is the less risky risk, which gives my child the smaller chance of death. Other people with other children will have different levels of risk to examine.

[Lulu]

Well of course you wouldn't make a decision based on one persons experience, and that's the thing, Deb isn't the only one to experience this there are many, many parents that believe/know what happened with their own children. Lots of them from the medical field themselves.
I can't dismiss this. I don't understand why it's not logical to take in more than just scientific evidence.

No one is saying vaccines soley cause Autism and it quite clear in your case (as with MANY) that it's simply a family trait/s.
And you know that the spectrum is broad - how would you feel if dd (or yourself) were on the furthest end of the Autism scale? It's probably easier for you to say you wouldn't change a thing about dd than it would be for a parent whose child is locked in the far end or close to it?

Completely OT - Bec your recent posts are confusing the crap outta me! It seems you think you can only think in a logical fashion when so many post of yours over the years have been so passionate and emotive...and they also elicit such an emotive response from those that read them, touchy emotional subject and the like...ah I dunno - maybe I'm being simplistic or maybe it because you haven't been around for awhile, maybe I'm remembering it wrong...I'm going back to bed

[Lulu]

Ok, ok, ok I tried...but it's still not sitting well.

Bec your post is offensive in about 8 million ways and you know it. I think the main one is that you think it's ok to speak like this because you "have a logical mind".

[brownie]

Oh Please! start showing a bit of respect. It does not matter one squirt if you think vaccination is the best thing ever and is your social responsibility to have your children vaccinated to the hilt. What matters is that you should be able to agree to disagree because the parents who have taken the path to not vaccinate, or to delay vaccinating have chosen to do so because of their own individual and unique situation and as a fellow parent you should respect that decision even if you don't understand it or agree with it.

Not one single person who agrees with what was in the OP sees this as definative and conclusive proof that there is a link, only that this is the starting point and if further research was to be done that one day there could be a proven link found. It doesn't even mean that having definite proof will make a difference because you simply cannot know which child will have a reaction that will put them on the spectrum. But it will probably give some comfort to the parents of children who have been affected by it and prove that they weren't just ill-educated crazy people for all these years

I myself do think that the link is weak at best, and there needs to be a hell of a lot of research done to prove it either way, but would I show complete disrespect to parents who did think that there was a link? Not on your life because I am a better person than that. I truly believe these parents 100% when they say that they think their child's ASD is directly related to having vaccinations. And if you don't, then thats fine too but please do not call them ill-educated or tell them that they are wrong and their children are more likely to die.

[maz]

then thats fine too but please do not call them ill-educated or tell them that they are wrong and their children are more likely to die - that is just sick and you should be ashamed.

Here here
Im over people using their 'ways' as an excuse to attack and belittle other's parenting choices!

Try sitting back and reading and trying to understand why those are not in agreeance with your rather then attack their 'logical' thinking. SO if someone isnt agreeance with a certain way then you are a brainless, selfish fart! Come on...please try and understand people's reason and be respectful in the process!!!!

You might just actually learn something, like I have!!!

[tenar]

I am a scientist. I'm a physicist. I've spent the last 15 or so years of my life doing science research and this is why I have a good understanding of the research process.

I can understand that people find it confronting to know that if they choose not to vaccinate their children are more likely to catch the disease they aren't vaccinating against. I can understand that they will find it doubly confronting to know that their children are more likely to die (or have any other serious complication) of that disease. But this fact is not in doubt. Should we not say it, even though it is undoubtedly true, just because it bothers people? It is possible to take the whole "don't say anything that might offend someone else" too far. I think it's going too far when it becomes impossible to even try to teach someone something that they didn't already know, for fear of offending them.

If someone commented that children who don't wear seatbelts are more likely to suffer serious injury or to die in an accident would that be similarly confronting? Should they therefore not say it? There are people out there that don't belt their kids in the car, fearing seatbelt-caused injuries. Is that OK because it's their parenting choice? I don't think so. I see it the same way as I see people who don't vaccinate. They are choosing a more dangerous course for their kids.

We all need to bear in mind the responsibility we have here not just to those people who are posting in this thread, but to all those who are reading it.

(Disclaimer: I'm talking here about average healthy kids. Obviously there are some people who can't be safely vaccinated, and I'm not talking about them. They are part of the reason it's important for the rest of us to vaccinate.)

[Sammiejane]

I have come in late in the 'discussion' i know...

We stopped vaccinating just before the MMR...

I am confused over this comment though...

As i have said before, i have no interest in trying to prevent autism.

But you are trying to prevent Measles, mumps rubella, chicken pox etc etc etc...
As Maz said earlier in a PP Autism is life long, there is no cure and it wont go away.
Chicken pox, i had that as a kid, 2 weeks of scratching and not feeling so well, rubella the same... all cause a bit of suffering SHORT TERM, but i have no long term consequences from catching these illnesses.

I know the reason that most immunise is to prevent against the serious cases, but how prevalent is that??? I know loads and loads and loads of people that got chicken pox, in fact i think my whole class got it (there was no immunisation then) and not one of them died or suffers long term effects from it.

On the flip side, a friend has an autistic child (i have no idea if she immunised or if she blames it, its not something we discuss) but i do know that both he and the whole family suffer from it on a daily basis...

So, i am wondering WHY would you want to protect against short term suffering, yet risk long term struggles with a child on the spectrum???

ETA: i have also cared for adults and children that have been immunised, but the immunisations are ineffective... imagine that frustration... immunisations are not absolute, i have been immunised against TB yet a mantoux tests will show you that i have no protection!

[Bumperstump Cummerbund]

Oh, HUGE ditto to you Trillian!

A friend of mine has a little boy in preschool. A little while ago, all the kids in the class had their whooping cough vax EXCEPT my little friend. The result? Every child in the class got whooping cough, vaxed or not. The difference was, while the other kids had it pretty badly, with some even ending up in hospital for a few days, my little friend had a very mild case that only lasted a week. No other symptoms apart from that lovely cough.

How does that fit in with the statement that vaccination's decrease the severity of the disease in healthy children?

For what its worth, I don't have children. I am researching vax now, and will possibly get some vaccines if I feel they are worth the risk, but will not get the ones I don't agree with, and it doesn't matter how many people call me a chicken spanking hippy who likes to play russian roulette with her children - because there is risk EITHER way, and it is up to the parent what they want to live with. The parent and NOBODY else!

[Lulu]

Tenar, what's the % chance of dying from chicken pox or measles (eg)?

My unvacced children had both caught mild cases of both measles and mumps - I'm not trying to avoid either or rely on herd immunity. They were both fine and didn't suffer badly - like I didn't either.

I just wanted to make a point that some people don't vacc for some things because they don't consider them life threatening and have faith in the body's own natural healing responses.

[tenar]

Seriously Tenar, would you like to be told that something you are doing will more than likely kill your child? Are you really that one-sided about this to think that the parents who choose not to vaccinate are all running around with their long flowing hair with flowers in it, smoking weed and living in communes? Get a grip on reality would you! Not one single parent who chooses not to vaccination makes the decision lightly and every parent who does decide not to is fully aware of any consquences that can happen if their child does catch the disease they are not vaccinated for. But to actually tell someone what you did is just plain rude and sick. You are treading such a fine line here and a little respect goes a long way.

OK, now I'm actually getting really upset, Trillian.

I have never said, nor would I ever say, that not vaccinating would "more than likely kill" a child. I have not said anything remotely like that. It would be a completely incorrect comment, for starters, and yes it would be offensive and rude to say. I am angry and upset to the point of tears to have someone misrepresenting my comments so horribly. Please go back, read what I have written, and edit your post to rephrase it more accurately.

What I have said many times, because it is true, is that not vaccinating a child for a particular disease makes it more likely that that child will catch that disease. Therefore that child is more likely to suffer complications from that disease. Some of the diseases we vaccinate against can kill. That is fact. That is not in doubt, and I don't think that even you would deny me that (if you do deny it, just google for how many children have died of whooping cough in Australia this season, and how many people have died from the resurgence of measles in the UK since vaccination rates dropped, and then get back to me).

I have also recently commented that people who don't vaccinate are actually better educated than the average (and also more internet-connected than average, I believe). Nope, I do not think many of you are running around in flowers (anyway,what's wrong with that? ).

Please have some respect for those of us here who are making an honest effort to help people make their decision about vaccination based on facts and research, rather than anecdote and hearsay.

[maz]

I am a scientist. I'm a physicist. I've spent the last 15 or so years of my life doing science research and this is why I have a good understanding of the research process.

And even EXPERTS like you are WRONG!!!!!!!!!

My little man had put EXPERT'S and KNOW ALL'S on their arses with their research, studies and methods. If I would have listened to them all, my little man would be DEAD!!!!! Yes DEAD but because I thought with my head, (oh dear I do have a brain you know) he lived and has astonded the medical community to why he is at the developemental stage he is.

YOur only seeing things from your own point of view and quiet obviously your word is GOD because you just arent hearing what others are saying. I find THAT rude. We have all listened to you could you try and return it.

. But to actually tell someone what you did is just plain rude and sick. You are treading such a fine line here and a little respect goes a long way.

Friggen here here

[Rouge]

I didn't vacc my DS for CP because I didn't see it as a threat.

I think these discussions are great for everyone and especially those that are considering what they should do with their unborn child(ren). However I do ask that we all please think about how we are talking to each other. This is an emotive topic and I understand that, and applying science or logic to what is already an emotive topic is not always going to help, just as getting upset at perceived logic isn't going to help either. So before hitting "Submit" please think about how your post is going to be received.

[maz]

Tenar hon.....

Your decision about this vaccination appears to be that you are prepared to risk your children dying of chickenpox rather than risking them getting a mild rash or fever. Clearly the rash is much more common, but death is rather more drastic. I think your decision is very obviously the wrong one.

you said what?

I have never said, nor would I ever say, that not vaccinating would "more than likely kill" a child. I have not said anything remotely like that.

[tenar]

Tenar, what's the % chance of dying from chicken pox or measles (eg)?

The chance is really low. I don't know what the actual numbers are (and indeed it keeps changing, depending on whether a particular disease is or is not endemic in a country, for starters). First someone would have to catch a disease and then they would have to be one of the unlucky ones that has a serious complication from it, despite the moder medicine we have access to in this country.

We are all in more danger crossing the road, and certainly in more danger playing most kinds of sport. I've said that before It's something that's definitely worth remembering.

[tenar]

Maz, hon, risk is not the same thing as certainty. My statement was and is accurate. Maybe I need to explain it better because it seems that people have misunderstood it. but you know what, I'm fed up with this thread now it's turned into what feels like a "let's all gang up on tenar" session. So I'm going to leave it stand.